Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Back in Tokyo after visiting disaster area

And what isn't objective about saying that plutonium in your Tamago kake gohan isn't a good thing?

In this case trust was particularly misplaced in a private company.... TEPCO is the owner of the plant, not the japanese government.
 
Zakaree Sandberg said:
March 31, 2011

"Japan finally conceded defeat in the battle to contain radiation at four of Fukushima's crippled reactors. They will now be shut down.
Details of how this will be done are yet to be revealed, but officials said it would mean switching off all power and abandoning attempts to keep the nuclear fuel rods cool.

The final move would involve pouring tonnes of concrete on the reactors to seal them in tombs and ensure radiation does not leak out.
The country's nuclear safety agency revealed levels of radiation in the ocean near the crippled Fukushima Daiichi plant had surged to 4,385 times the regulatory limit.

The dramatic announcement that the four reactors are out of control and will have to be decommissioned was made yesterday by the chairman of the electric company operating the Fukushima plant."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...a-plant-entombed-concrete-radiation-leak.html


Japanese government is telling people everything is ok..
we have radiation levels found in our dairy now, in the usa..

one thing history can teach you.. NEVER TRUST A GOVERNMENT..
shits real
Click to expand...


Oh heck...

1. In the UK the Daily Mail is widely known as the 'Daily Fail'; if there's a sensationalist spin, preferably pandering to populist fears & prejudices, that they can put on a story and headline, they'll do it. With knobs on. It's a serious newspaper, but not to be taken seriously!

2. This is NOT news and certainly not 'conceding defeat'; from the moment they first used sea water to cool the reactors, it's been known and widely reported they would never run again. You put sea water in a reactor, you get corrosion, that's game over; reactor is finished.

Certainly be suspicious of governments - but NEVER trust the bloody Daily Mail!

Mike
 
Zakaree Sandberg said:
We have radiation levels found in our dairy now, in the usa...
Click to expand...

Kind of. You would have to drink 506 liters of milk to get the same dosage as a single Banana. Better start drinkin! ;)


Mike 'Fireman' Ross said:
Certainly be suspicious of governments - but NEVER trust the bloody Daily Mail!

Mike
Click to expand...

Haha, certainly true. There is a pretty hillarious website out there that collects all the things that the Daily Mail claims causes/cures cancer (or both!) :D

http://kill-or-cure.heroku.com/
Kill or cure?
Help to make sense of the Daily Mail’s ongoing effort to classify every inanimate object into those that cause cancer and those that prevent it
Click to expand...
 
Ok.. heres more sources..

does the BBC work for you?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12783832

http://wallstreetpit.com/69189-fukushima-reactors-to-be-entombed-in-concrete

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/sp...e-to-be-entombed/story-fn7zkbgs-1226024759078

as for the milk.. first the gov said.. oh no.. nothing will be hitting usa.. then oh... just little bits...

even though FOX news propaganda company wants to tell you "radiation is good for you"
it is not good for you.

sorry i dont buy it.. I wont trust corporations or governments telling me that everything is ok... and radiation is good for me..
 
Zakaree Sandberg said:
as for the milk.. first the gov said.. oh no.. nothing will be hitting usa.. then oh... just little bits...
Click to expand...

Nobody has ever said Radiation won't be hitting the US. They've said and they are still saying "by the time it hits the US it will be so dispersed that it'll be practically non-existent."

I would say 1/600th of a banana per liter of milk is pretty much completely negligible. .000000001% increase in daily radiation isn't dangerous. It's within the margin of error probably of all but the very most sensitive instruments.
 
Mike im in agreement. I believe there is more to the story than the people of usa/japan are being led to believe.
I can quite honestly say, i believe SHIT HAS HIT THE FAN.. but were being given trace elements of the truth.
 
The problem is not really the government, the problem is when we can't draw a definite line between corporations and governments.

That's where we should start running to the hills and funding our own communities.
 
People are always excited to exclaim SH*T HAS HIT THE FAN. If the sh*t had really hit the fan as many times throughout history that people get themselves worked up over things, we wouldn't be here.

But I've read that fashioning hats out of tinfoil can actually block out all the radiation the government is bombarding us with, so at least there's that for a sigh of relief.

This thread is going to be so ridiculous in hindsight.
 
Last edited:
Vladimir Cassel said:
But I've read that fashioning hats out of tinfoil can actually block out all the radiation the government is bombarding us with, so at least there's that for a sigh of relief.
Click to expand...


yah your right.. radiation is just a conspiracy theory and im a nut...

ehhh moving on
 
Last edited:
How anyone can post definitively on this subject is absolutely beyond me.
 
The shit HAS hit the fan... in this topic.
 
I find this thread sickening with propaganda to be honest. From both sides.
Both sides of this are using a catastrophe that has killed tens of thousands of people to further your own goals, you should be ashamed.
 
Not content with little fish, I took it to George Monbitot and his disinformation today, on Counterpunch.

For those deluded enough to believe that "43" people died as a result of Chernobyl, I'll give you the short version. You should have read the report which you cite as your source:

"It is impossible to assess reliably, with any precision, numbers of fatal cancers caused by radiation exposure due to Chernobyl accident."
(IAEA, p.7)

"The international expert group predicts that among the 600 000 persons receiving more significant exposures... the possible increase in cancer mortality due to this radiation exposure might be up to a few per cent."
(IAEA, p.15)

"Some radiation-induced increases in fatal leukaemia, solid cancers and circulatory system diseases have been reported in Russian emergency and recovery operation workers."
(IAEA, p.16)

This goes for the not so expert "expert" linked to earlier in this thread on the BBC website as well.
 
Joe G. said:
Not content with little fish, I took it to George Monbitot and his disinformation today, on Counterpunch.

For those deluded enough to believe that "43" people died as a result of Chernobyl, I'll give you the short version. You should have read the report which you cite as your source:

"The international expert group predicts that among the 600 000 persons receiving more significant exposures... the possible increase in cancer mortality due to this radiation exposure might be up to a few per cent."
(IAEA, p.15).
Click to expand...

"600,000" up to a "few percent"

600,000 x (0.00 to 0.03) = 0 to 18,000
600,000 x (0.00 to 0.03) ≠ 985,000

Only about 5 million people received notable radiation from chernobyl. If lethality *even for that large group* was 3% then we would expect 150,000 people to die. Of the 5 million people in order to reach your 985,000 figure we would have to expect 20% of all people who even received radiation doses on average less than half the background radiation levels everybody reading this thread is exposed to every day to die from radiation instead of other causes. Seeing as the Ukraine sees about 20% of its mortality from cancer then we should expect 40% of people who were at all exposed to measurably elevated Radiation to die of cancer (as well as frequent fliers). And this is in a country with extremely high alcohol and tobacco consumption. If your figures are correct then flying frequently (and the radiation you receive) is more likely to cause cancer than poor diet, smoking and heavy drinking.

If you limit it to the people who were exposed to levels above your normal daily exposure then you only have 600,000 people. If radiation is as dangerous as it would have to be to reach your figures then people would be keeling over from living in a concrete or brick building.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs303/en/index.html

The world is irradiated. We have quite a bit of data on the dangers of ionizing radiation what with our medical applications and nuclear employees over the years. Your average radiologist would be a dysfunctional mess if the rates of cancer/poor health were as high as they would have to be to reach your 900,000 person figures.

Just because we don't know the exact numbers of impacted people doesn't mean it affects everybody. I can tell you I don't know how tall you are... but I can also say with pretty high confidence you are between 3' and 8' tall. My lack of knowledge of your height shouldn't lead me to conclude that you're 150' tall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top