Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: B.Hamilton@irl.cri.nz (Bruce Hamilton)
Subject: Re: In re: McCarthy v. Nader
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 16:05:17 GMT

af329@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (Scott Nudds) wrote:

>(Scott Nudds) writes:
>: >  Seat-belts, Air-bags, Collapsible steering columns, Crash worthiness.
>: >  Nader is responsible for saving more American lives than virtually any
>: >other living American.
I wrote
>: Please provide the specific evidence that Nader was solely or
>: significantly responsible for each quoted example.

[ Junk about John McCarty deleted  ]

>  We see yet another layer of dishonesty being shown here.  A
>fundamental double standard set up against what Nader.

Really?. I asked for you to provide evidence for your claim,
please do that - forget your vicious little vendetta, and try and
provide some information as I requested. If you haven't any
evidence for for your claim, just say so.

You see Scott, while Nader can take credit for publicising the
alleged Corvair instability, and a couple of other problems in "Unsafe
at any speed " ( not certain of the publication date but I believe
around mid 1960s ), the drive to make cars safer had already begun
before he came along. He rightly deserves credit for bringing
some safety issues to the public's attention, but that is more a
result of the stupid snooping that GM tried as he stridently
decried the Corvair, which resulted in a apology and $425,000
from GM.

Nader helped make the public more aware of safety features in
cars, and perhaps helped the US Govt get more involved in
monitoring safety issues, but there were also many other people
working to produce safer cars.  However, that does not mean
that Nader can claim significant credit for all the following
legislation, some of which was already being driven by other
concerned citizens and groups, and much of which was based
on earlier research.

In 1953-55 Cornell Aeronautical labs conducted a detailed study
of vehicle accidents, and as a result of that and other research,
automakers like GM designed  a series of features that they
incorporated in their 1959 "safety car" interior, including
padded dash, telescoping steering column, high penetration
resistant glass. GM first tested an airbag in1959, and the first
airbag patent had been filed in 1952. Some 20 of the 24 "features"
of the GM "safety car" interior are now taken-for-granted items,
according to a recent article on vehicle safety - which doesn't
even mention Nader (  " Safety and its progress " Automotive
Engineering. September 1993 p.33-35 ).

In 1960 GM had installed a crash decelerator sled at Wayne
State Univeristy to obtain information on occupant dynamics
and impact.  Many  of the safety concerns, combined with the
growing ability to measure and model crash forces, were already
being intensively investigated before Mr Nader appeared in
front of the public.

You see Scott, while Nader gets the credit for pointing out
the potential problems with the Corvair suspension ( note that
GM successfully defended many of the cases ), much of the
drive for safer vehicles was well underway and would have
appeared anyway - driven by other concerned people with
lower profiles and the manufacturers themselves as they
became more knowledgeable.

So Scott, where is the evidence for your claim?.

>  It appears that McCarthies hypocrisy is not unique among
>  conservatives.

Appearances can be deceptive, name calling doesn't
worry me, and just supply the requested information Scott.

               Bruce Hamilton