Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5  [ show all ]
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
All The Facts On The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster
    #18857380 - 09/18/13 10:37 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)



The Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan is a highly complicated situation. It can be difficult to find information about it, and even harder to understand the implications. I have researched this event for years, trying to find out everything I could. In the process I accumulated this database of articles, news stories, and other information resources.

I have posted it here for the convenience of anyone who is interested. Although some of these have been posted in the megathread in C&C, they were spread out through 36 pages and far too difficult to find. So for ease of reading I have compiled them here. This thread contains no opinions of my own, just straight research and sources with citations and links.

This event continues to unfold, and as it does I will continue to update this thread, not with my own ideas or beliefs, but simply with the news and research I come across. The list of sources below is semi-chronological, so the more recent research is at the top and older stuff is at the bottom.


:cheers:

Latest Radioactive Leak at Fukushima: How Is It Different?

In the latest crisis to strike the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan, operator Tokyo Electric Power (TEPCO) has discovered that 300 tons (nearly 72,000 gallons) of highly radioactive water has leaked from a holding tank into the ground over the past month.

The development comes on top of TEPCO's admission last month that an estimated 300 tons of radioactive groundwater, which picks up small amounts of contamination when it flows through the damaged reactor buildings, has been leaking into the Pacific Ocean every day.

he water from the leaking tank is so heavily contaminated with strontium-90, cesium-137, and other radioactive substances that a person standing less than two feet away would receive, in an hour's time, a radiation dose equivalent to five times the acceptable exposure for nuclear workers, Reuters reported. Within ten hours, the exposed person would develop radiation sickness, with symptoms such as nausea and a drop in white blood cells.

The Japanese government's Nuclear Regulation Authority is calling the leak a "serious accident" and wants to raise the official threat level from 1 to 3 on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale—the highest level since the level 7 rating given when the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami severely damaged the facility.

This leak is very serious," said Dr. Janette Sherman, an Alexandria, Virginia-based physician who specializes in radioactive and toxic exposure. Dr. Sherman, who edited an in-depth study of health effects on cleanup workers in the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster in the former Soviet Union, said she is concerned that the cleanup crew at Fukushima Daiichi may face long-term health risks. She also raised the prospect of the radiation's as-yet unknown effects on fish and other marine life in the Pacific.

Buesseler said he was concerned that the high level of radiation from the leaking tank might just be a harbinger of what is to come if more of the other temporary tanks begin to fail.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/08/130821-fukushima-latest-leak-how-is-it-different/

TEPCO finds high radiation in Fukushima groundwater

two days after Tokyo won the bid to host the 2020 Olympics, plant operator TEPCO announced samples taken from a well at the site showed the presence of radioactive substances, including strontium, a known carcinogen.

Experts say, if consumed, strontium accumulates in bones and can cause cancer.

The continuing nuclear catastrophe at Fukushima has come under the international spotlight in recent weeks as Tokyo fought off challenges from Madrid and Istanbul for the right to host the 2020 Games.
UN watchdog the International Atomic Energy Agency has said it will send a special mission to Japan, calling the waste water crisis "a matter of high priority that needs to be addressed urgently."

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/09/10/tepco-finds-high-radiation-in-fukushima-groundwater/#ixzz2fGFofzcE


Fukushima Leaks Prompt Government to ‘Emergency Measures’


More than two years after the March 2011 nuclear disaster, Tokyo Electric’s recovery effort has taken a turn for the worse.

a storage tank leaked 300 metric tons of highly radioactive water, which Japan’s nuclear regulator labeled a “serious incident” in its worst assessment of the problems at Fukushima since the earthquake and tsunami of 2011 caused reactors to melt down.

It’s now up to the government to lead management of the contaminated water building up in tanks at the plant at a rate of 400 tons a day, and leaking from underground tunnels into the ocean, Motegi said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-26/fukushima-filter-shutdown-adds-to-tepco-water-management-woes.html

Fukushima radiation leaks reach deadly new high

The crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant has radiation leaks strong enough to deliver a fatal dose within hours, Japanese authorities have revealed.

On Wednesday the country's nuclear regulation authority said radiation readings near water storage tanks at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant have increased to a new high, with emissions above the ground near one group of tanks were as high as 2,200 millisieverts [mSv] per hour – a rise of 20% from the previous high

An unprotected person standing close to the contaminated areas would, within hours, receive a deadly radiation dose.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/sep/04/fukushima-radiation-deadly-new-high

Fukushima Leak Is Far Worse Than Japan Is Letting On, Nuclear Experts Warn

"This is far worse than what the general public are perceiving."

"He blames the situation on the Japanese Government and Tepco who, he said, are refusing to accept the increasing severity of the issue. "


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/09/04/fukushima-leak-nuclear-experts-warn_n_3865678.html


Why Fukushima is worse than you think

" The situation could still get a lot worse. A massive spent fuel fire would likely dwarf the current dimensions of the catastrophe and could exceed the radioactivity releases of Chernobyl dozens of times. First, the pool walls could leak beyond the capacity to deliver cooling water or a reactor building could collapse following one of the hundreds of aftershocks. Then, the fuel cladding could ignite spontaneously releasing its entire radioactive inventory."

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/30/why-fukushima-is-worse-than-you-think/

Fukushima nuclear plant facing new disaster


Tokyo Electric Power Co. says about 300,000 litres of contaminated water leaked from one of the tanks, possibly through a seam. The leak is the fifth, and worst, since last year involving tanks of the same design at the wrecked Fukushima Dai-ichi plant, raising concerns that contaminated water could begin leaking from storage tanks one after another.

"That's what we fear the most. We must remain alert. We should assume that what has happened once could happen again, and prepare for more," Nuclear Regulation Authority chairman Shunichi Tanaka told a news conference. "We are in a situation where there is no time to waste."

"During the meeting, officials also revealed that plant workers apparently have overlooked several signs of leaks, suggesting their twice-daily patrols were largely just a walk. They have not monitored water levels inside tanks, obviously missed a puddle forming at the bottom of the tank earlier, and kept open a valve on an anti-leakage barrier around the tanks."

"Contaminated water that TEPCO has been unable to contain continues to enter the Pacific Ocean at a rate of hundreds of tons per day. Much of that is ground water that has mixed with untreated radioactive water at the plant."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/fukushima-nuclear-plant-facing-new-disaster-1.1317461

Fukushima open air fission?


Christopher Busby is an expert on the health effects of ionizing radiation and Scientific Secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk

" I think many people are going to die as a result of this just like liquidators died after Chernobyl. They were dying over the next ten years or so. "

"his is not a local affair. This is an international affair. I could not say why it has not. I think they are all hoping that nothing will happen, hoping that this will all go away and keeping their fingers crossed. But from the beginning it was quite clear that it was very serious and that there is no way in which this is not going to go very bad. "

http://rt.com/op-edge/fukushima-radiation-threat-level-288/

TEPCO Official: Fukushima is Out of Control


Statement contradicts assurances of Japanese PM, comes as fresh steam is spotted billowing from reactor



"I’m sorry, but we consider the situation is not under control."

Those were the words of Kazuhiko Yama#a, executive-level fellow for Fukushima plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company when he was pressed by the opposition Democratic Party of Japan.

His statements directly contradict the claims of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzō Abe, who assured the International Olympic Committee meeting in Buenos Aires Saturday that the situation is under control.


http://www.mining.com/japan-redoubles-efforts-to-end-leaks-at-fukushima-plant-34682/

Japan is stumbling helplessly from one crisis to the next as it battles the ongoing disaster at the Fukushima nuclear power plant. US nuclear inspector Dale Klein is demanding the intervention of foreign experts, but a quick solution is unlikely.

This week, the chief nuclear officers of around 100 American nuclear power plant reactors are taking a field trip. They are travelling to Japan and then taking a bus to Fukushima. There, dressed in protective suits, they will walk through the ruins left behind by the earthquake of the century, the tsunami of the century and the resulting triple nuclear reactor meltdown that occurred in March 2011.

"I can assure you when they get back from this trip, all of these chief nuclear officers will double their safety precautions," says Dale Klein, who has made the same trip and describes it as "very sobering." Klein, who was head of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission until 2009, now serves as chair of the Nuclear Reform Monitoring Committee, which advises Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), the company that once ran the Fukushima power plant and is now responsible for cleaning up the site. In the eyes of industry experts and the Japanese public alike, the company has proved one thing unequivocally -- that it is in far over its head in trying to handle the aftermath of the disaster.

Klein is generally a polite man, but he recently announced in public exactly what he thinks of the company that hired him. "You do not know what you're doing," Klein told company president Naomi Hirose in person. "You do not have a plan."

In accordance with Japanese custom, the company head, thus chastised, inclined his head and replied, "I apologize for not being able to live up to your expectations."

TEPCO has been stumbling "from crisis to crisis," Klein says. And with no improvement in sight, it had recently become clear that Japan would find itself, out of necessity, doing something that is generally considered very un-Japanese: asking for foreign help. Klein said there were signs that the government was planning on inviting experts from Europe and the US in to help. And on Tuesday, TEPCO took what might be a first step in this direction, announcing in a statement that it had hired Lake Barrett, the former head of the US Department of Energy's Office of Civilian Nuclear Waste Management to advise it on decommissioning the plant and dealing with contaminated water on the site. Barrett was also involved in clean-up efforts at the Three Mile Island plant, which suffered a partial meltdown in 1979.

Situation Still 'Tenuous' at Fukushima

Japan had thus far taken the view that it didn't need any help -- certainly not from abroad -- and that TEPCO would take care of things. This is despite the fact that the company is an energy provider, with little more experience in complex disaster management than a commensurate energy company in Germany would have.

Accordingly, the situation at Fukushima two and a half years after the nuclear meltdown can at best be described as tenuous. Rather than implementing a clearly thought-out disaster management plan, TEPCO's approach has been a haphazard patchwork.

Perhaps the most bizarre malfunction in recent months occurred when a rat got into a switchbox and caused a short circuit. This immediately caused the makeshift cooling system for all four spent fuel pools to fail. For almost 30 hours, temperatures rose in these pools, which hold over 8,800 spent fuel rods that TEPCO hopes eventually to be able to store safely. Charred remains were all that was left of the rat.

Every day, TEPCO pumps 400 tons of contaminated cooling water and groundwater out of the radioactive wreckage of Fukushima. This water is too heavily contaminated with cesium, strontium and tritium to be emptied into the ocean. Instead, TEPCO stores the liquid in numerous tanks, the largest of which are 12 meters (40 feet) across and 11 meters high, hastily riveted together rather than welded.

Satellite images show how these behemoths have proliferated at the Fukushima site, with a few dozen of them in mid-2011, then several hundred by mid-2012. Currently, there are over 1,000 such tanks, with plans for over 2,000 of them by 2015. TEPCO is veritably drowning in contaminated water.

Contaminated Water Seeping Out

When one of these makeshift containers recently sprang a leak, it apparently took weeks before the company's two-person foot-patrol passed by and noticed it, by which time 300 tons of highly contaminated water had seeped out of the tank. This event ranks as a level three "serious incident" on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES). In comparison, the catastrophe at Chernobyl and the 2011 Fukushima triple meltdown are both classified at the maximum level, seven.

There's little question that more of these tanks will develop leaks, with a number of them approaching their expiration dates and only some of the tanks outfitted with sensors to provide early warning of leakage. "These are the wrong containers in the wrong place, made of the wrong material and built in the wrong way," declares nuclear expert Mycle Schneider, one of the lead authors of the World Nuclear Industry Status Report.

Malfunctions, bungling and cluelessness seem to be ongoing themes at Fukushima. Sometimes it's a radioactive cloud of steam rising from the ruined reactors; another time it's a leak plugged with nothing more than a bit of tape. Then there is the radioactive water -- it's difficult to gauge just how much -- that has already entered the groundwater and flowed into the ocean, something TEPCO until recently insistently denied. TEPCO president Hirose has now also apologized for the radiation that has affected fish off the coast near Fukushima.

"The day-to-day catastrophes are so serious that TEPCO never gets a chance to turn its attention to its actual plan," says Michael Maqua at the Society for Plant and Reactor Safety (GRS), in Cologne, Germany. He too is appalled by TEPCO's handling of the situation. "If this were a school and I were in charge of giving them a grade, they would be in danger of failing," he says.

Now, the Japanese government is providing funding for a number of more creative measures meant to turn things around at Fukushima. One plan involves a steel barrier erected between the plant and the ocean to stop radioactive water from flowing into the sea.

'We Can't Assume it will Work'

TEPCO also plans, by 2015, to freeze the ground around the entire reactor complex, creating a subterranean ring of permafrost with a circumference of 1.4 kilometers (0.9 miles) to prevent groundwater near the surface from seeping into the ruined complex and becoming contaminated, as it currently does. This technology has been used in mining, but has never been applied on this scale or as a long-term measure meant to last for years. "We can't assume that it will work," Maqua says. Another German engineer working in the industry criticizes the plan, saying that this sort of permafrost ring will fail to work as a barrier to water if it is not also sealed from below.

As for the contents of the 1,000 radioactive storage tanks, there is only one long-term solution -- the contaminated water must be cleaned, and then emptied into the ocean. It is possible to a large extent to filter out the cesium and strontium. The tritium, although somewhat less of a concern, can't be filtered out. Little by little, the Japanese public is being prepared for the coming release of this water -- much to the horror of fishermen.

TEPCO recently completed a large filtration facility, but even that did little to increase confidence in the company's crisis management abilities -- hardly had the facility gone into operation before it was off-line again, having begun to rust and spring leaks.

Nuclear Reform Monitoring Committee chair Dale Klein will travel to Japan again this week to meet with TEPCO's managers, who have not rejected Klein's help, despite his previous harsh comments. But it's unlikely they will be particularly happy with what Klein has to say to them this time either -- he says Japan should form a new company to apply knowledge from international experts to the cleanup efforts. TEPCO, he believes, is simply not capable of handling the extremely difficult water issue, a problem that, he says, they will be dealing with "for the next decade."



http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-16/typhoon-man-yi-hits-japan2c-raising-fukushima-fears/4960034

Japanese government officials admitted last month that radioactive water has been leaking into the ocean everyday—at least 300 tons in recent months. Most of the water is being used to prevent overheating at the crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant.
To add to the plant’s woes, a new tank leak announced two weeks ago spilled another 300 tons of radioactive water into the ground. The leak, along with rising contamination levels, is particularly concerning as Tokyo is set to host the 2020 Olympics.

Water stored in the tanks has been treated to remove cesium, one of the most dangerous of the radioactive elements. Even so, Junko Ogura of CNN reported last week that radiation readings near tanks holding toxic water have jumped to a new high, from 1,800 millisieverts  on Saturday to 2,200 millisieverts on Tuesday. The Nuclear Regulation Authority said this week that recent high radiation readings have raised suspicions of more leaks from other water containers.

But the bigger issue is the untreated contaminated water that has made its way into the ocean since the 2011 earthquake and tsunami knocked out the plant's power and cooling functions, leading to nuclear meltdowns and the release of radioactive materials.

The 300 tons of water come from two sources: The plant pumps 400 tons of water onto the crippled reactors each day to prevent overheating, which results in highly contaminated water. The toxic water collects in the reactor basement, and while some of it is pumped out and treated, much escapes through cracks into the surrounding earth and groundwater. Another 1,000 tons of underground water flows into the plant from the mountains, some of which gets contaminated before entering the sea, according to Japan's Agency for Natural Resources and Energy.
The main health concern is that high cesium levels in fish could potentially harm the people who eat them. Cesium levels in fish have been high since the 2011 disaster, further evidence that contaminated water has been leaking into the sea all along. Fisheries off Fukushima are currently closed.

Critics point out plant operator TEPCO has repeatedly lagged in attempts to tackle leakage problems. As a precautionary step, TEPCO created chemical blockades in the ground along the coast to stop any possible leaks, but experts question their effectiveness. After a nearly two-year delay, the company has started the construction of an offshore steel wall designed to contain contaminated water.
The Japanese government announced earlier this month it would contribute $470 million to build an underground ice wall around the reactor and turbine buildings and to develop an advanced water treatment system, but that won’t be ready before 2015. Even if steel or ice walls could be implemented sooner, the efficacy of such measures is still questionable.

“Any contamination in the groundwater would eventually flow into the ocean,” said Ken Buesseler, a marine chemist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts. “That is very difficult to stop even with barriers.”



http://www.worldmag.com/2013/09/fukushima_radioactive_leaks_impossible_to_stop



The crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant has radiation leaks strong enough to deliver a fatal dose within hours, Japanese authorities have revealed, as the government prepares to step in to help contain leaks of highly toxic water at the site.

On Wednesday the country's nuclear regulation authority said radiation readings near water storage tanks at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant have increased to a new high, with emissions above the ground near one group of tanks were as high as 2,200 millisieverts [mSv] per hour – a rise of 20% from the previous high.

Earlier this week the plant's operator, Tepco, said workers had measured radiation at 1,800 mSv an hour near a storage tank.

That was the previous highest reading since Tepco began installing tanks to store huge quantities of contaminated water that have built up at the plant.

An unprotected person standing close to the contaminated areas would, within hours, receive a deadly radiation dose.
www.theguardian.com...


Fukushima Nuclear Crisis Escalates To Worst Level In 2 Years

Tanks of radioactive water tower over workers at the disabled Fukushima nuclear plant in March 2013. Tokyo Electric Power admits contaminated water has long been leaking into the Pacific Ocean, defying containment efforts. Japan's government views the situation as "urgent."

National Geographic Source
The government now says it is clear that 300 tons (71,895 gallons/272,152 liters) are pouring into the sea each day, enough to fill an Olympic-size swimming pool every eight days.


Fukushima nuclear plant operator Tepco Electric’s response to the world’s worst atomic disaster in a quarter century.......a massive earthquake and tsunami caused triple meltdowns, spewing radiation and forcing some 160,000 residents to flee their homes.


A radioactive plume of water in the Pacific Ocean from Japan's Fukushima nuclear plant, which was crippled in the 2011 earthquake and tsunami, will likely reach U.S. coastal waters starting in 2014, according to a new study.


Fukushima leak is 'much worse than we were led to believe'

New health concerns
The storage problems are compounded by the ingress of ground water, running down from the surrounding hills. It mixes with radioactive water leaking out of the basements of the reactors and then some of it leaches into the sea, despite the best efforts of Tepco to stem the flow.

Some of the radioactive elements like caesium that are contained in the water can be filtered by the earth. Others are managing to get through and this worries watching experts.

"Our biggest concern right now is if some of the other isotopes such as strontium 90 which tend to be more mobile, get through these sediments in the ground water," said Dr Buesseler.

"They are entering the oceans at levels that then will accumulate in seafood and will cause new health concerns."

Could this be the greatest disaster that continues and threatens the eco-system of the world?
Radiation Levels Will Concentrate in Pockets In Baja California and Other West Coast Locations

Last year, scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory and 3 scientists from the GEOMAR Research Center for Marine Geosciences showed that radiation on the West Coast of North America could end up being 10 times higher than in Japan

http://fukushimaupdate.com/japan-ponders-fukushima-options-but-tepco-too-big-to-fail/

Report: U.S. West Coast to be hard-hit by Fukushima ocean contamination — North Pacific Gyre transporting radioactive material to America


Scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA)Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory and 3 scientists from the GEOMAR Research Center for Marine Geosciences show that radiation on US West Coast could end up being 10 times higher than in Japan. [...]

http://m.iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/7/3/034004/article?v_showaffiliations=yes


Model simulations on the long-term dispersal of 137Cs released into the Pacific Ocean off Fukushima



http://nodisinfo.com/Home/holy-fukushima-radiation-from-japan-is-already-killing-north-americans/

If you live on the west coast of Canada or the United States, you’re pretty much already screwed at this point thanks to the Japanese earthquake and tsunami of 2011.  Radiation levels are already increasing in the food and water, babies born with thyroid issues linked to radiation are rising quickly and governments in Canada and the United States are raising the “acceptable levels” of certain toxic substances in the food being shipped in from Japan. This isn’t a conspiracy theory, this is happening and it’s happening right now.

If you live on the west coast of Canada or the United States, you’re pretty much already screwed at this point thanks to the Japanese earthquake and tsunami of 2011.  Radiation levels are already increasing in the food and water, babies born with thyroid issues linked to radiation are rising quickly and governments in Canada and the United States are raising the “acceptable levels” of certain toxic substances in the food being shipped in from Japan. This isn’t a conspiracy theory, this is happening and it’s happening right now. The fancy little picture at the top of the article isn’t showing you the flow of happy fun time thoughts from Japan back in March of 2012, it’s showing you the flow of radiation from the Fukushima nuclear plant after the devastating earthquake and tsunami of 2011.

Yes, that sharp pain you just felt in your chest is the sudden realization that the image shows the radiation reaching almost past Hawaii more than a year ago. Do the math – If that radiation screamed across the Pacific Ocean that far in one year, just how far do you think it has gotten since then?  Look at what World Truth TV is saying and then you decide.
Samples of milk taken across the United States have shown radiation at levels 2000 percent higher than EPA maximums.  The reason that milk is so significant is that it is representative of the entire food supply.

According to an article published on Natural News, “Cows consume grass and are exposed to the same elements as food crops and water supplies. In other words, when cows’ milk starts testing positive for high levels of radioactive elements, this is indicative of radioactive contamination of the entire food supply.” The  Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Deception Protection Agency, instead of refusing to prohibit the sale of tainted foods and mandatory testing of foods produced and harvested from the Pacific Coast, have simply raised the “acceptable levels”  of radioactive material in foods.

If that doesn’t scare the ever-living crap out of you, then take a look at the list of foods you are now supposed to be wary of, you know, for only the next 30,000 years.

How can we protect ourselves? First, be aware of what items are likely to be highly tainted.
1.)  SEAFOOD:  Question the origin of ALL seafood.  Fish and crustaceans from the Pacific Ocean should all be considered to be poisoned with radiation.

2.)  WATER:  The rainfall and snowfall are all radiated.  Do not drink any water that has not been filtered.  The tap water that flows from your faucet has NOT been treated to rid it of radioactive particles. A recent report from the NY Times stated, “A rooftop water monitoring program managed by UC Berkeley’s Department of Nuclear Engineering detected substantial spikes in rain-borne iodine-131 during torrential downpours …

3.) DAIRY PRODUCTS:  Milk and milk products from the West Coast states currently have the highest levels of radiation in North America.

4.)  PRODUCE:  Leafy Vegetables, Wines, Tomatoes, Strawberries….all produce from California or any other West Coast State are also likely to be tainted.

5.)  MEAT:  If an animal eats any leafy vegetable all along the West Coast, that animal has consumed radiation and is poisoned.  This is any animal from cows, pigs, goats, sheep to wild deer and other game. If you eat the above foods from areas with high radiation levels, you are eating radiation and feeding it to your children. Slowly the radiation levels within your body will build up.

This is PERMANENT. Infant mortality rates across the United States have increased by more than 35% since the nuclear disaster, according to a court statement by Dr. Sherman with independent scientist Leuren Moret, MA, PhD.  A study published in The International Journal of Medicine indicates that more than 20,000 deaths right here in North America can be directly attributed to the release of radioactive material from Fukushima. Radioactive isotopes of the type released from Fukushima have a half-life of 30,000 years.  This means that we must permanently change the way we prepare our food.

Wash your food with a natural type soap (Ecover or vegetable sulfate) and rinse it in filtered water.
Be aware of the origins of your vegetables, fish, game and seafood.
Keep abreast of radiation levels to help monitor where your food is acquired.
Use only filtered water for drinking, cooking and ice.

Cleansing fruit and vegetables does make a difference. Studies in Chernobyl contaminated regions have determined that three soaks of the vegetables in distilled water reduced the levels of radionuclides significantly, up to 90%.

Fukushima is causing devastation of the health of the people all over the world, but the main victims are those in Hawaii, Alaska, BC, Washington State, Oregon, California, and, of course, Japan.

Regarding radionuclides these are as a consequence of the explosion of a nuclear reactor rather than mere radioactive waves, particles. Upon ingestion, these particles pose a danger from auto-radiation. This has been demonstrated in monkey studies, where a mere few particles are enough to cause lung scarification and, ultimately, cancer.

Surveys have demonstrated an increase in the incidence of thyroid disorders, including thyroid cancer, globally, as a result of the increased radiation load. There is a great danger to the people of this earth, since radiation is continuously leaking into the Pacific Ocean and through mist and rain water, therefore, recontaminates the globe.

It is a real issue, which is cause subtle yet definitive damage and increased risk for certain diseases, especially in those areas most subject to the increases in radiation exposure.

Learn also about the fruit and vegetable soak with activated bentonite and more. Such activated bentonite in a spice oil base will reduce the levels of metallic radionuclides in the food. Bentonite binds irreversibly to these noxious, energetic, destructive metallic ions, reducing and/or eliminating their toxicity.

Additional data:

From ENEWS.com, a Japanese local and  his fairly recent measurements:

A very small portion of the sample have been sent to a certain laboratory for analysis. [...]

On 6 Apr 2013, I measured radiation in front of a temple of Onoda area, Namie town of Fukushima prefecture Japan.

I monitored 7.97 micro Sievert per hour in air at chest hight standing on the grass.

I measured 86.09 micro Sievert per hour 1cm from road side dust. [...]

The monitoring place is 10km (corrected from 17 km) from Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear power plant. [...]

RE: thyroid cyst/adenoma rates being assessed near Fukushima -

Rates of thyroid problems in children near the nuclear plant are high

[...] Last December, the eldest of the two was diagnosed with adenoidal cysts, the prelude to a type of cancer that often strikes the salivary glands. “I was told by the doctor that it’s very rare,” [Yoji Fujimoto] says. [...]

“I’m convinced this is because of the Fukushima accident.” [...]

[Steve Wing, an epidemiologist at the University of North Carolina] says that parents like Mr Fujimoto do have reason to worry. “We know that doses to populations are both unquantified by the official agencies, that evidence suggests relatively high doses, and that children and women are more vulnerable to radiation. So the questions and deep concerns for the people in Fukushima will continue for the rest of their lives.” [...]

“I expect a growth in the numbers of thyroid cancers in Japan from next year,” [Dr Alexey Yablokov, a Russian biologist] said. [...]

Parents accuse government scientists of making their minds up before the [thyroid] survey began – Professor Suzuki’s team said last July that their aim was “to calm the anxiety of the population”

http://agriculturedefensecoalition.org/sites/default/files/file/nuclear_japan/114B_4_2011_Japan_Stricken_Fuel_Cooling_Pools_Danger_for_the_Long_Term_March_14_2011_NYTimes.pdf

concerns are growing that nearby pools holding spent fuel rods
could pose an even greater danger

Experts now fear that the pool containing those rods from the fourth reactor has run dry,
allowing the rods to overheat and catch fire. That could spread radioactive materials far and
wide in dangerous clouds

http://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.proxy1.lib.umanitoba.ca/pmc/articles/PMC3103932/

Fukushima, Japan: An apocalypse in the making?

http://www.bmj.com.proxy1.lib.umanitoba.ca/content/342/bmj.d1845?ijkey=xsmHzm92sZxFQz2&keytype=ref

“Europe’s energy commissioner Guenther Oettinger said Tokyo had almost lost control of the situation at Fukushima. ‘There is talk of an apocalypse and I think the word is particularly well chosen,’ he told the European Parliament"

http://wearechangetoronto.org/2011/03/22/nuclear-apocalypse-in-japan-lifting-the-veil-of-nuclear-catastrophe-and-cover-up/

Nuclear Apocalypse in Japan Lifting the Veil of Nuclear Catastrophe and cover-up


Humanity now faces a deadly serious challenge coming out of Japan — the epicenter of radiation. Intentional efforts to downplay or dismiss this catastrophe reveal the immaturity of western civilization and some of our most acute human pathologies, including our worship of technology and our psychopathology of denial.

four of six Fukushima nuclear reactor sites are irradiating the earth, that the fire is burning out of control at Reactor No. 4′s pool of spent nuclear fuel, that there are six spent fuel pools at risk all told, and that the sites are too hot to deal with. On March 16 Plumes of White Vapor began pouring from crippled Reactor No. 3 where the spent fuel pool may already be lost.

Reactors No. 4, 5, and 6 at Fukushima were shutdown when the earthquake struck. After the water drained and the spent fuel became exposed, the pool at reactor No. 4 caught fire, and continues to burn, as of Thursday March 17, releasing massive amounts of radiation into the environment

The Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) did the math: If Fukushima’s Reactor No. 4 operated for 35 years and produced 30 tons of irradiated fuel per year and each ton is equivalent to 24 times the amount of cesium-137 produced by the Hiroshima bomb, then each fuel pool could contain on the order of 24,000 times the amount of cesium-137 produced by the Hiroshima bomb, if all the produced irradiated fuel remains in the fuel pool.

One fact is certain: we have already been massively lied to about a massive and still unfolding nuclear disaster.



“Radiation levels are extremely high,” proclaims NRC chief Dr. Gregory B. Jaczko. The spent fuel pools are dry. Secondary containment at the reactor [No. 3] has been breached, but Tokyo is denying this.”

Nuclear Energy: Technology from Hell

http://lokayat.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Nuclear_Energy-Technology_From_Hell.pdf


With hydrogen explosions ripping off the roofs of reactor
buildings, three reactor cores spewing radiation unabated, one spent
fuel pool on fire, another spent fuel pool suffering an explosion that
scattered its fuel rods for miles, water poured in to cool the reactors
flowing out from the bottom due to damaged pressure vessels and
containments, millions of litres of radioactive water accumulating in
the basement of the plant and draining out into the ocean, radiation
levels in the Pacific Ocean spiking to unheard of levels, Reactor 4 of
the plant tipping due to softening of the ground and threatening to
collapse, groundwater in danger of getting contaminated, extremely
dangerous MOX fuel in Reactor 3, fallout from Fukushima detected
as far away as North America and Europe within a week of the accident
... the Fukushima accident is in an apocalyptic downward spiral.

Clearly, the Fukushima accident is worse than Chernobyl. The
Chernobyl accident involved a single reactor. The Fukushima accident
involves three reactor cores (of Units 1, 2 and 3) and four spent fuel
pools (of Units 1, 2, 3 and 4). Each spent fuel pool has fuel rods
equivalent to several cores each. In all, that’s the equivalent of as many
as twenty reactor cores!
Fukushima is clearly the biggest industrial
catastrophe in the history of mankind.

the situation at the spent fuel ponds of Reactor units 1 to 4 is also
very bad. Indications are that at least in one of the pools (or if not
there, then in the reactor core of Unit 3), the fuel is reaching criticality.


In Reactor 4, the big problem is that the building housing the
spent fuel pool has partially sunk and is threatening to collapse

But what if the building housing Reactor 4 collapses before the
fuel is shifted into canisters? Gundersen, a kind of living legend in the
field of nuclear engineering, recommends that if this reactor topples
due to an earthquake or some other reason, the people of Tokyo should
simply get on a plane and get out of there.

BIGGER THAN CHERNOBYL
Reality—Level 8 Accident

Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency now admits (in its June
6 press release) that the Fukushima nuclear plant, in just the first week
after the accident, released 770,000 trillion becquerels of radiation,

Furthermore, this figure does not include the
radiation released into the ocean, which is probably as much.

he calculated that the total
radiation releases from the Fukushima plant are so high that they
amount to three INES 7 accidents!


By the end of May, many nuclear engineers were saying that
Fukushima had gone way beyond the scope of the Chernobyl accident
and called upon the IAEA to revamp its INES scale and create a new
level—Level 8—to categorise it!

Radiation from the Fukushima plant has spread to all across the globe.
Not only countries near Japan, like South Korea, the Philippines,
Vietnam, China and Russia, but also countries far away, across the
Pacific Ocean, from Canada to the USA and Mexico, and even
Switzerland, Iceland and France,

In the US, tests have detected elevated levels of radioactive iodine
and cesium in milk and vegetables produced in California; elevated
levels of radioactivity have been found in drinking water in numerous
municipalities from Los Angeles to Philadelphia; radiation has also
been detected in milk in Arizona, Arkansas, Hawaii, Vermont and
Washington.
Cesium-137 has been found in rainwater samples from
Boise, Idaho and Montpelier, Vermont.

Americium, which is more
toxic than plutonium, has been found in New England (a region in
the northeastern corner of America).

Probably the worst impact of the Fukushima accident on life on Planet
Earth is going to be its contamination of the oceans. Millions of litres
of highly radioactive water from the crippled Fukushima plant has
leaked or been deliberately released into the Pacific Ocean; scientists
have discovered that its radioactive impact far outstrips the Chernobyl
disaster.



The Fukushima accident is actually so huge that even the INES
scale does not capture its true magnitude—the accident is far bigger
than the worst accident imagined by the IAEA.


http://rt.com/news/fukushima-fuel-cleanup-operation-522/

"The operation, to remove 400 tons of highly irradiated spent fuel beneath the plant’s damaged Reactor No. 4, could set off a catastrophe greater than any we have ever seen, independent experts warn."

"An uncontrolled leak of nuclear fuel could cause more radiation than the March 2011 disaster or the 1986 Chernobyl catastrophe, say consultants Mycle Schneider and Antony Froggatt. "Full release from the Unit-4 spent fuel pool, without any containment or control, could cause by far the most serious radiological disaster to date," the scientists say in their World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2013.  "

"Here’s what needs to be done: more than 1,300 used fuel rod assemblies, packing radiation 14,000 times the equivalent of the Hiroshima nuclear bomb,"

"It has to be done manually so there is a high risk that they will drop and break one of the fuel rods," he said. "

"This situation is not made easier by the fact that Japan is a seismically active island. Earthquakes keep striking at random, and even a small tremor could set in motion a catastrophic chain of events. "

http://www.globalresearch.ca/fukushima-uncontainable/5345754

"by far the worst environmental disaster in history. It’s multiples worse than Chernobyl. It’s an unprecedented catastrophe."

"“If present trends continue, the air we breathe, the food we eat, and the water we drink will soon be contaminated with enough radioactive pollutants to pose a potential health hazard far greater than any plague humanity has ever experienced.”

http://www.salon.com/2013/08/14/fukushima_cleanup_could_cause_biggest_disaster_to_date/

"Containing radiation equivalent to 14,000 times the amount released in the atomic bomb attack on Hiroshima 68 years ago, more than 1,300 used fuel rod assemblies packed tightly together need to be removed from a building that is vulnerable to collapse"

http://www.newsreview.com/chico/fukushimas-nightmare/content?oid=11013234

"could send those rods tumbling to the ground, where they would ignite in the open air. The consequences would make Chernobyl look like a tea party.

Fukushima is no longer just a Japanese problem. It’s a global disaster"


http://rt.com/op-edge/tepco-fukushima-sea-water-reactor-194/

"Fukushima is a nightmare disaster area, and no one has the slightest idea what to do. The game is to prevent the crippled nuclear plant from turning into an “open-air super reactor spectacular” which would result in a hazardous, melted catastrophe."

"What we have here in Fukushima is very deadly and certainly worse than Chernobyl "

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/07/25/fukushima-continues-to-spew-its-darkness/

"But there’s no doubt that a pool containing many tons of highly radioactive used fuel is suspended 100 feet in the air, with little left to support the structure. There’s a high likelihood the fuel rods could catch fire.

In such an event, the radioactive emissions could be catastrophic.  Intensely lethal emissions could spew for a very long time, eventually circling the globe many times, wrecking untold havoc"


http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-192461-Nuclear-darkness

"Its most profound threat to the global ecology – a spent fuel fire – is still very much with us. "


http://enenews.com/reuters-corrosion-from-salt-has-weakened-fukushima-no-4-fuel-pool-concern-quake-to-topple-building-14000-hiroshima-bombs-worth-of-cesium-137-inside

"Corrosion is weakening Fukushima Unit No. 4 — Concern quake to ‘topple’ bulging structure — Holds 14,000 Hiroshima bombs worth of cesium-137"

http://rt.com/news/fukushima-apocalypse-fuel-removal-598/
Fukushima apocalypse: Years of ‘duct tape fixes’ could result in ‘millions of deaths’
Even the tiniest mistake during an operation to extract over 1,300 fuel rods at the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan could lead to a series of cascading failures with an apocalyptic outcome, fallout researcher Christina Consolo told RT.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Edited by Moonshoe (09/18/13 12:42 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinehidenseek1
Its got all the dinks.
Registered: 12/22/12
Posts: 5,423
Loc: poop
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18857396 - 09/18/13 10:43 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

this is why coal is still the way to go

edit: too bad it isnt like sim city(snes) id always put the nuclear plant on an island because i knew that it would melt down and ruin the land, water wasnt an issue in that game


--------------------
You can drink at 7 A.M., because the Beastie Boys fought for that right
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
pons asinorum
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
lsd and the vietnam war changed music forever


Edited by hidenseek1 (09/18/13 10:44 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: hidenseek1] * 1
    #18857402 - 09/18/13 10:45 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Nuclear power is still far safer than coal.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Mage
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,796
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe] * 1
    #18857405 - 09/18/13 10:45 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Its the biggest disaster in the history of mankind. The dying is diffuse and will take place spread out around the world and over more than a thousand years so there is no sense of an acute concentrated disaster but we'd better find a way to cure it cause the global weather forecast for the next millennium is cancer, and considerably more of it.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblethe mad machinest
Medicine Man
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/18/13
Posts: 4,249
Loc: parallel universe #420
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18857409 - 09/18/13 10:47 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

TL;dr I will skim through it later as this is an interesting topic,

make sure to eat iodized salt y'all!!!


--------------------
:hummer:

:trees::trees:

:aweyeah::trippinbawelz::awecid:
.         



         
             
             
                                              :redneck::tentjump:                         :hole:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleChinChiller
Male


Registered: 07/03/10
Posts: 3,270
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18857411 - 09/18/13 10:47 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
Nuclear power is still far safer than coal.



Especially with coal that is so high in sulfur, ive experienced this first hand in the northeast, courtesy of the Koch brothers...

But are ecosystems in the west feeling the effects of this radiation?
have we seen any bioaccumulation of radioactive isotopes in the salt water ecosystems?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Asante] * 3
    #18857417 - 09/18/13 10:49 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Wiccan_Seeker said:
Its the biggest disaster in the history of mankind. The dying is diffuse and will take place spread out around the world and over more than a thousand years so there is no sense of an acute concentrated disaster but we'd better find a way to cure it cause the global weather forecast for the next millennium is cancer, and considerably more of it.



So far, no one has died from it.  A Stanford study estimates that about 130 people are likely to die from it eventually. 

Overall, the Bhopal disaster was far worse.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinehidenseek1
Its got all the dinks.
Registered: 12/22/12
Posts: 5,423
Loc: poop
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: ChinChiller]
    #18857419 - 09/18/13 10:49 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Errolscool said:
Quote:

Enlil said:
Nuclear power is still far safer than coal.



Especially with coal that is so high in sulfur, ive experienced this first hand in the northeast, courtesy of the Koch brothers...





i did not know this, i thought the only negative aspect of coal, was carbon emissions
:themoreyouknow:


--------------------
You can drink at 7 A.M., because the Beastie Boys fought for that right
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
pons asinorum
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
lsd and the vietnam war changed music forever


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Mage
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,796
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: ChinChiller]
    #18857434 - 09/18/13 10:58 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Errolscool said:

But are ecosystems in the west feeling the effects of this radiation?
have we seen any bioaccumulation of radioactive isotopes in the salt water ecosystems?





All that is consolidating as highly radioactive radioisotopes continue to escape in the environment, at a trickle and with sudden extreme bursts.

Its getting more and more out of hand and we cant stop it. Theres areas so radioactive you cant even send robots because the screaming radiation induces random currents in the chips. There have been small nuclear explosions (criticality events) where a chain reaction started and spun out of control until an explosion the scale of a lightning strike blew the material apart, spurting lethal doses of neutrons into areas several hundred yards across.  Theres TONS of material of a radioactivity sufficient to assure a million people cancer per gram and all that is leaking, melting burning, dissolving, fuming..

TL:DR

Its really very fucking bad.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Mage
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,796
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18857451 - 09/18/13 11:04 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:

So far, no one has died from it.  A Stanford study estimates that about 130 people are likely to die from it eventually. 

Overall, the Bhopal disaster was far worse.





Unless you have an acutely lethal dose of radiation, a contamination with radioisotopes can take 5-50 years to kill you by cancer.

The Stanford study is misinformed, and Bhopal is tiny compared to this.  Methyl isocyanate disperses in hours ands biodegrades in weeks, the most dangerous isotopes take years, decades, centuries to degrade.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Asante] * 1
    #18857461 - 09/18/13 11:06 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

On the bright side, now we have something to point to whenever the Japanese start pissing and moaning about Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  Before, we really could only complain about Nanking and Nissans.

Quote:

Wiccan_Seeker said:
The Stanford study is misinformed



I'm sure you're far more informed. :facepalm:


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18857494 - 09/18/13 11:16 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

you've got that radioisotope in you, you're GOING TO DIE.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Mage
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,796
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil] * 1
    #18857503 - 09/18/13 11:17 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:

Quote:

Wiccan_Seeker said:
The Stanford study is misinformed



I'm sure you're far more informed. :facepalm:





I'm a hell of a lot better informed and so can you be if you look into the situation a bit better.

The Stanford Report was from July 2012, even if it was a correct assessment then its now utterly obsolete because of subsequent events.

Read some of the more recent information Moonshoe posted up for us and if it needs be, brush up on your knowledge of radioactivity, radiotoxicity and similar topics.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAWS
Working For MCA

Registered: 08/11/13
Posts: 537
Loc: Cookieverse
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Asante]
    #18857514 - 09/18/13 11:20 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

I am not reading shit from abovetopsecret.com, got any real sources?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineNotTheDevil
Transhuman


Registered: 01/08/13
Posts: 5,436
Loc: US Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Asante]
    #18857517 - 09/18/13 11:20 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Nuclear power is normally quite safe however this does teach us an obvious lesson keep nuclear power plants away from areas prone to natural disaster, i.e don't put them by the coast, on a fault line or in an area prone to tornadoes.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAsante
Mage
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,796
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: AWS]
    #18857523 - 09/18/13 11:24 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

AWS said:
I am not reading shit from abovetopsecret.com, got any real sources?





Did you read the starting post? Real information from real sources the world over. If information is referenced by valid sources it could be hosted by TOTSE for all I care.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
higher knowledge starts here


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: NotTheDevil]
    #18857533 - 09/18/13 11:26 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

all of sudden media should be a trust worthy source of lies, because, DANGER DANGER WE'RE ALL DOOMED, IT'S WORSE THEN YO THINK DANGER DANGER!1

just because some guy got invited to speak about shit, or some dude said something that was inserted into an article, doesn't mean it's true. these sources are balls.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinempd
Lammen Gorthaur
Male User Gallery


Registered: 10/22/12
Posts: 9,660
Loc: Mostly at home... Mostly....
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: akira_akuma]
    #18857590 - 09/18/13 11:36 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

tl;dr and don't give a fuck.  The Japanese will sort this out with their typical efficiency and attention to detail.

Next story.


--------------------
There is no truer calling for mankind than that of true conservatism.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Asante]
    #18857821 - 09/18/13 12:31 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Wiccan_Seeker said:
Quote:

Enlil said:

Quote:

Wiccan_Seeker said:
The Stanford study is misinformed



I'm sure you're far more informed. :facepalm:







The Stanford Report was from July 2012, even if it was a correct assessment then its now utterly obsolete because of subsequent events




This. A hell of a lot has changed since that study was published, as the articles in the OP clearly show.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Edited by Moonshoe (09/18/13 12:32 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: AWS]
    #18857837 - 09/18/13 12:36 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

AWS said:
I am not reading shit from abovetopsecret.com, got any real sources?





I don't think any of the sources in the OP are from ATS. Actually there was one, accidentally, but it was just a link to a scientific article hosted there. It has been removed now.

The sources listed include National Geographic, CBC, CNN, FOX news, Huffington post, the London times, the Japan times, the Guardian and a variety of other academic databases, scientific articles and news sources.

I would say most if not all of them are real sources, so if you are looking for real sources you have come to the right place!


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Edited by Moonshoe (09/18/13 12:44 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: akira_akuma]
    #18857851 - 09/18/13 12:40 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

akira_akuma said:
all of sudden media should be a trust worthy source of lies, because, DANGER DANGER WE'RE ALL DOOMED, IT'S WORSE THEN YO THINK DANGER DANGER!1

just because some guy got invited to speak about shit, or some dude said something that was inserted into an article, doesn't mean it's true. these sources are balls.




Where do you go for your information? This is a very wide assortment of sources from a wide variety of academic and news outlets, both mainstream and underground. Why do you assume they are all invalid? On what grounds? And if you don't pay any attention to the media or academic databases, where do you turn for the truth?


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: mpd]
    #18857869 - 09/18/13 12:46 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

mpd said:
tl;dr and don't give a fuck.  The Japanese will sort this out with their typical efficiency and attention to detail.

Next story.




When the disaster first occurred I hoped this as well. However the general consensus has been that the actions of TEPCO and the Japanese over the past 2 years have been an incredible string of incompetence, inaction and blunders, totally inadequate to the task at hand. Many of the articles in the OP explain this and give examples.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18857902 - 09/18/13 12:54 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
Quote:

Wiccan_Seeker said:
Its the biggest disaster in the history of mankind. The dying is diffuse and will take place spread out around the world and over more than a thousand years so there is no sense of an acute concentrated disaster but we'd better find a way to cure it cause the global weather forecast for the next millennium is cancer, and considerably more of it.



So far, no one has died from it.  A Stanford study estimates that about 130 people are likely to die from it eventually. 

Overall, the Bhopal disaster was far worse.




This source contradicts you

"Medical Journal Article: 14,000 U.S. Deaths Tied to Fukushima Reactor Disaster Fallout"


www.radiation.org/press/pressrelease111219FukushimaReactorFallout.html

WASHINGTON, D.C. – December 19, 2011 --  An estimated 14,000 excess deaths in the United States are linked to the radioactive fallout from the disaster at the Fukushima nuclear reactors in Japan, according to a major new article in the December 2011 edition of the International Journal of Health Services.  This is the first peer-reviewed study published in a medical journal documenting the health hazards of Fukushima.

Authors  Joseph Mangano and Janette Sherman note that their estimate of 14,000 excess U.S. deaths in the 14 weeks after the Fukushima meltdowns is comparable to the 16,500 excess deaths in the 17 weeks after the Chernobyl meltdown in 1986.  The rise in reported deaths after Fukushima was largest among U.S. infants under age one.  The 2010-2011 increase for infant deaths in the spring was 1.8 percent, compared to a decrease of 8.37 percent in the preceding 14 weeks.

The IJHS article will be published Tuesday and will be available online as of 11 a.m. EST at http://www.radiation.org.

Found here: http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/15539766


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Edited by Moonshoe (09/18/13 12:59 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAWS
Working For MCA

Registered: 08/11/13
Posts: 537
Loc: Cookieverse
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18857914 - 09/18/13 12:57 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Summarize it for me. How fucked am I on a scale of 1 - 10? I live in the midwest US.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKremrBigSikter
Spränger Språnger
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/23/11
Posts: 3,918
Last seen: 8 years, 3 months
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: AWS] * 1
    #18857922 - 09/18/13 12:58 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Can I avert the disaster by eating different herbs and reishi, and meditating a lot?


--------------------
I have pneumonia :pm:



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: KremrBigSikter]
    #18857934 - 09/18/13 01:01 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

KremrBigSikter said:
Can I avert the disaster by eating different herbs and reishi, and meditating a lot?




From my research, I have gathered that the following things may be helpful:

Reishi, Spirulina, Chlorella, Potassium iodide tincture on the skin, bentonite clay, rosemary, cilantro, miso, melatonin, distilled and reverse osmosis water.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18857951 - 09/18/13 01:04 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)



--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18857975 - 09/18/13 01:07 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

I also found this interesting:

Fukushima evacuation has killed more than earthquake and tsunami, survey says

More people have now died because of the Fukushima evacuation process than were killed in the region by the 2011 Japanese earthquake and tsunami which caused the displacement, a survey said.

Some 300,000 people evacuated their homes in the prefecture after the disaster caused multiple meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, according to Red Cross figures.

A survey by popular Japanese newspaper Mainichi Shimbun said Monday that deaths relating to this displacement – around 1,600 – have surpassed the number killed in the region in the original disaster.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/10/20420833-fukushima-evacuation-has-killed-more-than-earthquake-and-tsunami-survey-says?lite


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18857978 - 09/18/13 01:08 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
That article has been widely discredited:




What a surprise!


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18858050 - 09/18/13 01:24 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

*yawn*

Quote:

Moonshoe said:
Quote:

akira_akuma said:
all of sudden media should be a trust worthy source of lies, because, DANGER DANGER WE'RE ALL DOOMED, IT'S WORSE THEN YO THINK DANGER DANGER!1

just because some guy got invited to speak about shit, or some dude said something that was inserted into an article, doesn't mean it's true. these sources are balls.




Where do you go for your information? This is a very wide assortment of sources from a wide variety of academic and news outlets, both mainstream and underground. Why do you assume they are all invalid? On what grounds? And if you don't pay any attention to the media or academic databases, where do you turn for the truth?



i don't trust anyone to give me the truth.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: akira_akuma]
    #18858075 - 09/18/13 01:29 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

akira_akuma said:
*yawn*

Quote:

Moonshoe said:
Quote:

akira_akuma said:
all of sudden media should be a trust worthy source of lies, because, DANGER DANGER WE'RE ALL DOOMED, IT'S WORSE THEN YO THINK DANGER DANGER!1

just because some guy got invited to speak about shit, or some dude said something that was inserted into an article, doesn't mean it's true. these sources are balls.




Where do you go for your information? This is a very wide assortment of sources from a wide variety of academic and news outlets, both mainstream and underground. Why do you assume they are all invalid? On what grounds? And if you don't pay any attention to the media or academic databases, where do you turn for the truth?



i don't trust anyone to give me the truth.




Then on what basis do you form your opinions about things you have not experienced first hand?


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18858117 - 09/18/13 01:38 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

i don't.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: akira_akuma]
    #18858122 - 09/18/13 01:40 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

akira_akuma said:
i don't.




Then why did you keep accusing me of bullshit? You admit you dont know, or even try to know, one way or another.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18858178 - 09/18/13 01:50 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

because it is bullshit.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineConstantine
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
I'm a teapot


Registered: 05/01/11
Posts: 4,643
Loc: Flag
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: KremrBigSikter]
    #18858182 - 09/18/13 01:51 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

KremrBigSikter said:
Can I avert the disaster by eating different herbs and reishi, and meditating a lot?




Absolutely, just don't forget to wear your chakra stone at night.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: akira_akuma]
    #18858205 - 09/18/13 01:54 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

akira_akuma said:
because it is bullshit.




I am stating to see how this works

:lol:


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Constantine]
    #18858208 - 09/18/13 01:55 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Constantine said:
Quote:

KremrBigSikter said:
Can I avert the disaster by eating different herbs and reishi, and meditating a lot?




Absolutely, just don't forget to wear your chakra stone at night.




Apparently in Japan they government is actually advising people that smiling will protect them from radiation.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe] * 1
    #18858209 - 09/18/13 01:55 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

like your sig says, everything you post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18858212 - 09/18/13 01:56 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Moonshoe said:
Quote:

Constantine said:
Quote:

KremrBigSikter said:
Can I avert the disaster by eating different herbs and reishi, and meditating a lot?




Absolutely, just don't forget to wear your chakra stone at night.




Apparently in Japan they government is actually advising people that smiling will protect them from radiation.



why not? it's probably gonna help stem the tide of people going nuts about a possible future calamity of deaths, from radiation.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? *DELETED* [Re: akira_akuma]
    #18858216 - 09/18/13 01:57 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Post deleted by Moonshoe

Reason for deletion: fix



--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18858222 - 09/18/13 01:57 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

not really, dude.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: akira_akuma]
    #18858238 - 09/18/13 02:00 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

akira_akuma said:
like your sig says, everything you post is fiction.




That only applies to things I write myself, not things I copy and paste from external sources.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: akira_akuma]
    #18858240 - 09/18/13 02:01 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

akira_akuma said:
not really, dude.




Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18858246 - 09/18/13 02:01 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Then you should have used the word "written" or "authored" instead of "post."


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18858253 - 09/18/13 02:03 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

especially when one constantly asserts that because someone said something in a news articles, or on a news report, or in a book; that they're automatically truthful about what they claim.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18858258 - 09/18/13 02:04 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Well, as I am sure everyone can easily understand that disclaimer in my signature is a legal precaution and has no real bearing on the subject at hand.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18858264 - 09/18/13 02:05 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

It also has no real legal implications, either.  It certainly doesn't provide you any protection.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18858266 - 09/18/13 02:06 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

it does make a perfect disclaimer, though.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18858274 - 09/18/13 02:07 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
It also has no real legal implications, either.  It certainly doesn't provide you any protection.




That is OK, I don`t really need any.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: akira_akuma]
    #18858279 - 09/18/13 02:08 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

akira_akuma said:
it does make a perfect disclaimer, though.



For your friends, maybe.  It wouldn't help, however, if one were posting about a grow op they have, and the cops used those posts to find and convict you.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineomegafaust
mycofarmer
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/29/12
Posts: 1,227
Last seen: 7 years, 8 months
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18858310 - 09/18/13 02:14 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Don't go giving the fuzz ideas now Enlil :p


--------------------
The Universe has an interesting sense of irony, in that you are the universe experiencing itself.  All you are is a thought.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18858321 - 09/18/13 02:15 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

When did you retire from practicing law Enlil?


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18858370 - 09/18/13 02:26 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Lol, I didn't.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18858382 - 09/18/13 02:27 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

You still practice law?

How are you able to spend so much time on the shroomery on weekdays?

:confused:


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18858394 - 09/18/13 02:29 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

I have been winding down my work with the PD for the last 6 months...accepting no new clients and finishing off the ones I had.  All of this is in preparation for my move to California where I am planning on opening a solo practice.  I'll be moving as soon as I can sell my house.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleChinChiller
Male


Registered: 07/03/10
Posts: 3,270
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18862678 - 09/19/13 11:43 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
I have been winding down my work with the PD for the last 6 months...accepting no new clients and finishing off the ones I had.  All of this is in preparation for my move to California where I am planning on opening a solo practice.  I'll be moving as soon as I can sell my house.



Where in California?
Maybe I will hire you as my new lawyer


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: ChinChiller]
    #18862731 - 09/19/13 11:59 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Los Angeles


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18862753 - 09/19/13 12:03 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Always when I notice a title along the lines of "all the facts about..." I can't help but wonder what agenda is being pushed this time.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: koraks]
    #18862771 - 09/19/13 12:08 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

I changed the title from how bad is it really to all the facts about just because, well, all the thread was is a compilation of research sources.

I wasn't sure what was best to call it but Facts about Fukushima has an alliteration thing going on.

My only real agenda is to inform people who are interested about Fukushima by providing them the sources I have found and to save people the trouble of tracking down the research themselves (as it took me a lot of hours to find and read them all and cut out some of the important parts).


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18862815 - 09/19/13 12:17 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Yeah, but you're really only choosing sources that comport with your view.  Anything that doesn't is omitted.  That's pretty much exactly the kind of agenda pushing that Koraks is talking about.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18862825 - 09/19/13 12:21 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Yeah, the alliteration is kind of cool, I gotta admit that. Nothing wrong either with trying to inform people. It's a complex issue though. It's definitely a bad situation that has been handled pretty abominably from the start, but even then it's hard to tell how bad things really are.

And in a situation like that, it's all too easy to get conjecture mixed up in real information, making it hard to separate the two and get a grip on what's really going on. Take for example the criticality accidents mentioned by Wiccan_Seeker; there has been speculation that one has been observed, but no firm evidence that it actually happened even once, let alone several times. It is little things that make it very difficult to distinguish between how bad the situation is and how bad it could be or have been.

Also, Enlil has a point concerning the selection of sources. Bias is not always in the information itself; it is usually present even more in the selection that is offered.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: koraks]
    #18862844 - 09/19/13 12:26 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

a big disaster sells.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: akira_akuma]
    #18862855 - 09/19/13 12:28 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Hey, look on the bright side: radiation is the pretty much the only slow killer that really makes the news consistently. All the other ones that claim many more lives are mostly ignored by the mass media.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18862876 - 09/19/13 12:34 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
Yeah, but you're really only choosing sources that comport with your view.  Anything that doesn't is omitted.  That's pretty much exactly the kind of agenda pushing that Koraks is talking about.




I am being completely honest when I say that in the course of 2 years of researching this subject, I found virtually zero sources that were encouraging in any way or that made any kind of reasonable case that this is not the worst industrial disaster in human history.

I did see maybe 2-4 articles that took a comforting tone, but they were totally insignificant by comparison to the endless amount of consistency in the other more ominous reports. There is a total consensus in the media now about what is happening in Japan. There really is no legitimate alternative view. This is not a matter of opinion but a matter of hard facts. We objectively know how many fuel rods are stored there, how many reactors melted down, how many tons of radioactive water are being dumped into the pacific daily, how many risks are present in the clean up operation, how many becquerrels of radiation are being emitted and have been emitted, etc.

The facts and numbers are all known. Fukushima is what it is, and we have now learned what it is.


This quote probably best sums up the reality of the situation, which is simply not in any legitimate dispute any more.

"With hydrogen explosions ripping off the roofs of reactor
buildings, three reactor cores spewing radiation unabated, one spent
fuel pool on fire, another spent fuel pool suffering an explosion that
scattered its fuel rods for miles, water poured in to cool the reactors
flowing out from the bottom due to damaged pressure vessels and
containments, millions of litres of radioactive water accumulating in
the basement of the plant and draining out into the ocean, radiation
levels in the Pacific Ocean spiking to unheard of levels, Reactor 4 of
the plant tipping due to softening of the ground and threatening to
collapse, groundwater in danger of getting contaminated, extremely
dangerous MOX fuel in Reactor 3, fallout from Fukushima detected
as far away as North America and Europe within a week of the accident
... the Fukushima accident is in an apocalyptic downward spiral.

Clearly, the Fukushima accident is worse than Chernobyl. The
Chernobyl accident involved a single reactor. The Fukushima accident
involves three reactor cores (of Units 1, 2 and 3) and four spent fuel
pools (of Units 1, 2, 3 and 4). Each spent fuel pool has fuel rods
equivalent to several cores each. In all, that’s the equivalent of as many
as twenty reactor cores!
Fukushima is clearly the biggest industrial
catastrophe in the history of mankind.

the situation at the spent fuel ponds of Reactor units 1 to 4 is also
very bad. Indications are that at least in one of the pools (or if not
there, then in the reactor core of Unit 3), the fuel is reaching criticality.


In Reactor 4, the big problem is that the building housing the
spent fuel pool has partially sunk and is threatening to collapse

But what if the building housing Reactor 4 collapses before the
fuel is shifted into canisters? Gundersen, a kind of living legend in the
field of nuclear engineering, recommends that if this reactor topples
due to an earthquake or some other reason, the people of Tokyo should
simply get on a plane and get out of there.

BIGGER THAN CHERNOBYL
Reality—Level 8 Accident

Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency now admits (in its June
6 press release) that the Fukushima nuclear plant, in just the first week
after the accident, released 770,000 trillion becquerels of radiation,

Furthermore, this figure does not include the
radiation released into the ocean, which is probably as much.

he calculated that the total
radiation releases from the Fukushima plant are so high that they
amount to three INES 7 accidents!


By the end of May, many nuclear engineers were saying that
Fukushima had gone way beyond the scope of the Chernobyl accident
and called upon the IAEA to revamp its INES scale and create a new
level—Level 8—to categorise it!

Radiation from the Fukushima plant has spread to all across the globe.
Not only countries near Japan, like South Korea, the Philippines,
Vietnam, China and Russia, but also countries far away, across the
Pacific Ocean, from Canada to the USA and Mexico, and even
Switzerland, Iceland and France,

In the US, tests have detected elevated levels of radioactive iodine
and cesium in milk and vegetables produced in California; elevated
levels of radioactivity have been found in drinking water in numerous
municipalities from Los Angeles to Philadelphia; radiation has also
been detected in milk in Arizona, Arkansas, Hawaii, Vermont and
Washington.
Cesium-137 has been found in rainwater samples from
Boise, Idaho and Montpelier, Vermont.

Americium, which is more
toxic than plutonium, has been found in New England (a region in
the northeastern corner of America).

Probably the worst impact of the Fukushima accident on life on Planet
Earth is going to be its contamination of the oceans. Millions of litres
of highly radioactive water from the crippled Fukushima plant has
leaked or been deliberately released into the Pacific Ocean; scientists
have discovered that its radioactive impact far outstrips the Chernobyl
disaster.



The Fukushima accident is actually so huge that even the INES
scale does not capture its true magnitude—the accident is far bigger
than the worst accident imagined by the IAEA."


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18862885 - 09/19/13 12:37 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

I linked the WHO report for you, which pretty much says that there won't be significant casualties outside of Japan, and you didn't put it among your "facts"...that sounds like cherry picking to me.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18862901 - 09/19/13 12:41 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Moonshoe said:
This quote probably best sums up the reality of the situation, which is simply not in any legitimate dispute any more.



I don't think it's a very good quote, actually. It looks very specific and objective at first glance, until you actually read it and notice that no specific data are offered anywhere. Moreover, the formulation is such as to emphasize the drama of the event, which makes it a really poor source of information (but an impressive read if you're looking for something to fuel fear or anger at the situation). There are actually very few sources that really make an attempt to convey facts in an unbiased as possible manner. The quote you offered clearly isn't one.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18862909 - 09/19/13 12:44 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

I posted my own compilation of research, which I had in a word file. It doesn't include your sources, because I didn't find them when doing my research. Please feel free to post any additional sources of your own in this thread. That goes for everybody else to.

And I don't deny that I intentionally extracted quotes about the severity of the problem, because that is what I was looking for and that is what I consider most relevant. However I linked the sources if anyone wants to read the entire articles. I just extracted the most interesting and important quotes because I knew people wouldn't read it otherwise and it would be way too long.

As I said though, anyone who researches this topic will see that the quotes in the OP are totally confirmed and represent the majority of available information. There is a  consensus about the key facts on this issue.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18862924 - 09/19/13 12:47 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Moonshoe said:
And I don't deny that I intentionally extracted quotes about the severity of the problem, because that is what I was looking for and that is what I consider most relevant./quote]
So you're not so much trying to inform, but trying to convey the severity of the situation. That's legitimate too (pushing an agenda can be legitimate, after all), but then call it that and don't pass it off as a collection of facts. But you edited out that bit already


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18862943 - 09/19/13 12:52 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

In the OP, you said:

"This event continues to unfold, and as it does I will continue to update this thread, not with my own ideas or beliefs, but simply with the news and research I come across"

Yet, when you came across a 200 page report written about it by the WHO, you didn't add it to the OP...Why?  Because it contradicts your thesis about how serious the situation is.

It's all rhetoric, dude.  I don't have a problem with rhetoric, but don't pretend you're not advocating a position.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: koraks]
    #18862946 - 09/19/13 12:52 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

I am trying to inform about the severity of the situation. It is a collection of facts, just a collection of facts selected and organized according to a theme, that of "how bad is it really" (which was the original title of the thread).

It couldn't be any other way, if the facts were not selected according to some criteria it would be a huge and useless post about anything and everything most of which would have been irrelevant and boring.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18862951 - 09/19/13 12:54 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

You assume he didn't find the WHO report. It is entirely possible that he overlooked it. In that case it's not so much a sign of selective quoting, but of really poor research. Either way, the selection of sources that he offers is unnecessarily biased in the end - whether intentionally or not.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: koraks]
    #18862953 - 09/19/13 12:54 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

it's boring, alright.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18862955 - 09/19/13 12:55 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
In the OP, you said:

"This event continues to unfold, and as it does I will continue to update this thread, not with my own ideas or beliefs, but simply with the news and research I come across"

Yet, when you came across a 200 page report written about it by the WHO, you didn't add it to the OP...Why?  Because it contradicts your thesis about how serious the situation is.

It's all rhetoric, dude.  I don't have a problem with rhetoric, but don't pretend you're not advocating a position.




The OP contains none of my own words, just facts I came across in my research.

As I already explained the reason your report wasnt in the OP is because I compiled that list in a word document some time ago and it was only my own research, I didn't add anyone elses.

As you may notice I have not yet added any additional sources to this thread (although I plan to) so don't take it personally.

again, whats stopping you from posting it here yourself?

I am not advocating a position, I am providing evidence to support a conclusion, which was not my own to begin with. Simply that this is the greatest industrial disaster in human history. That is a conclusion I read in the course of my research, and the OP shows the factual evidence.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: koraks]
    #18862963 - 09/19/13 12:56 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

koraks said:
You assume he didn't find the WHO report. It is entirely possible that he overlooked it. In that case it's not so much a sign of selective quoting, but of really poor research. Either way, the selection of sources that he offers is unnecessarily biased in the end - whether intentionally or not.




Anyone who thinks my research is selective and biased has an obvious task- simply find all the evidence that Fukushima is not as bad as my research suggests, quote the relevant parts and link the sources.

If the research in the OP is wrong, prove it.

Post the contradictory evidence.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: koraks]
    #18862965 - 09/19/13 12:58 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

koraks said:
You assume he didn't find the WHO report. It is entirely possible that he overlooked it. In that case it's not so much a sign of selective quoting, but of really poor research. Either way, the selection of sources that he offers is unnecessarily biased in the end - whether intentionally or not.



No, koraks..I specifically linked him the report, and some quotes in it.  He even responded to that post by quoting my link to the report.  He clearly saw it and chose to omit it.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18862966 - 09/19/13 12:58 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Moonshoe said:
I am trying to inform about the severity of the situation. It is a collection of facts, just a collection of facts selected and organized according to a theme, that of "how bad is it really" (which was the original title of the thread).




Selected using what criteria? Organized how? Look, I can't blame you for having poor research skills; not everyone is a professional researcher. Just be aware of the possibility that you might be incredibly biased yourself and that it shows in the collection of information that you offer. Also try to distinguish between 'facts' and 'information'; the latter involves interpretation, while the former doesn't. It's an important difference in this instance.

Again, I'm not contesting the severity of the situation; I just think that it is best served by an objective (as far as possible) and well-balanced supply of information.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: koraks]
    #18862972 - 09/19/13 12:59 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:

http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/78218/1/9789241505130_eng.pdf

"No acute effects of radiation exposure such as acute radiation syndrome or skin injuries have been observed among the general population" - page 66

"To date, no radiation injuries have been observed among Fukushima Daiichi NPP emergency workers as a result of the accident (i.e. no cases of acute radiation syndrome or skin injuries). None of the seven reported deaths among emergency workers is attributableto radiation exposure." - page 67

"This health risk assessment concludes that no discernible increase in health risks from the Fukushima event is expected outside Japan. With respect to Japan, this assessment estimates that the lifetime risk for some cancers may be somewhat elevated above baseline rates in certain age and sex groups that were in the areas most affected." - Page 9




--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: koraks]
    #18862985 - 09/19/13 01:02 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

koraks said:
Quote:

Moonshoe said:
I am trying to inform about the severity of the situation. It is a collection of facts, just a collection of facts selected and organized according to a theme, that of "how bad is it really" (which was the original title of the thread).




Selected using what criteria? Organized how? Look, I can't blame you for having poor research skills; not everyone is a professional researcher. Just be aware of the possibility that you might be incredibly biased yourself and that it shows in the collection of information that you offer. Also try to distinguish between 'facts' and 'information'; the latter involves interpretation, while the former doesn't. It's an important difference in this instance.

Again, I'm not contesting the severity of the situation; I just think that it is best served by an objective (as far as possible) and well-balanced supply of information.




Selected according to the criteria of relevance to answering the question "how bad is Fukushima"

Organized by extracting from each article the most relevant parts and posting them in a condensed compilation.

I actually am a professional researcher, amusingly enough. I am quite literally a professional researcher. Of course I do not polish my posts on the shroomery the way I do my academic or professional work, I spend far too much time doing these side projects as it is.

As I said, if you feel my research is not representative or accurate, the onus is on you to show this by posting the contradictory sources that you can find.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Edited by Moonshoe (09/19/13 01:04 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18863006 - 09/19/13 01:08 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Moonshoe said:
Selected to according to the criteria of relevance to answering the question "how bad is Fukushima"



How did you determine to what extent each source answered that question and what the quality of the answer was?

Quote:

Organized by extracting from each article the most relevant parts and posting them in a condensed compilation.



What did you base your selection on? The appeal the quotes had on you personally?

Quote:

I actually am a professional researcher, amusingly enough. I am quite literally a professional researcher.



Then you should know what I'm talking about and be very forthcoming in acknowledging that you gave us a pretty biased account of matters and you were way too eager to pass off emotional interpretations of web journalists as facts.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18863009 - 09/19/13 01:09 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Thanks for posting your source Enlil. Its not so hard to do now is it?

In relation to the significance of the study you posted showing a low estimate of deaths from Fukushima, a few comments are relevant:


"The japanese rely heavily on sea food, and you can't restrict fish from entering contaminated areas, so the japanese are going to be accumulating contaminants. Over time, we are going to be seeing some major reproductive issues. Fukushima hasn't even happened yet; it's happening."

"it takes 5 years for a thyroid tumor to develop and 15 or more for other cancers to develop. the world health organization is not allowed by law to investigate the Chernobyl disaster or any other involving the nrc. even if they were allowed to investigate, it would be very hard to prove the cause of death, therefore we are relying on privately funded correlative statistical research. "



This. It is incredibly hard to detect radiation caused cancers because of the high background rates of cancer from other causes. If someone in Japan or America gets cancer, how do we know if fukushima was the cause? Its an incredibly hard, almost impossible task to establish, especially because cancer can take years to develop.The dea that no one will die from this based on that out dated study saying 150 deaths is totally meaningless.

We simply cant begin to estimate the deaths for decades at least, but that doesn't mean their wont be any. You cant insist on pretending Fukushima was a discreet event whose impact can be assessed when it obviously cant because it is ongoing and the long terms implications change every day as a result (and have been dramatically worsening ever since that article was published).

This isnt a car accident where you just count the bodies right away. This is a long term, ongoing, constantly changing disaster where the ecosphere is slowly but steadily being contaminated with highly carcinogenic radioactive particles.

Short term thinking is blinding when there have since been further leaks of contamination so severe as to recieve their own IAEA disaster ratings which were not even factored in to that projection!

We have learned a lot about How bad fukushima is since that article was published.

The reason there are not more reported deaths is because the people who will die wont do so for years or decades, combined with the fact that Japan, TEPCO and the nuclear industry are desperately trying to downplay the severity of this disaster and scientists are being prevented from doing adequate research on what is happening. Japan is especially likely to cover up deaths from radiation because they are now the leading bid to host the 2020 Olympics! They know that bid will be jeapordized if someone reports deaths or cancers from Fukushima, or the severity of the ongoing risk there, and they have a huge and obvious vested interest in covering it up. Furthermore they know if the world realizes how bad the leakage of radiation is they will likely block imports of food and other products from Japan, which could tank Japan's economy badly.



Unless in case a worst case scenario plays out in which case quick deaths from radiation poisoning (instead of slow deaths from cancer) are very likely.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18863025 - 09/19/13 01:13 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Moonshoe said:
We have learned a lot about How bad fukushima is since that article was published.




No, we haven't. By your own logic, the effects are going to play out in the long term and will be incredibly difficult to measure against the background of cancer instances. As you well know, it is impossible to identify the cause of a specific case of cancer; all you can do is make an educated guess based on contextual factors and genomics. You damn well know this, and yet, you use this flawed logic to pass off your reading of various sources as more accurate than someone who just offers a source and attaches little or no interpretation to it.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: koraks]
    #18863039 - 09/19/13 01:16 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

koraks said:
Quote:

Moonshoe said:
Selected to according to the criteria of relevance to answering the question "how bad is Fukushima"



How did you determine to what extent each source answered that question and what the quality of the answer was?

Quote:

Organized by extracting from each article the most relevant parts and posting them in a condensed compilation.



What did you base your selection on? The appeal the quotes had on you personally?

Quote:

I actually am a professional researcher, amusingly enough. I am quite literally a professional researcher.



Then you should know what I'm talking about and be very forthcoming in acknowledging that you gave us a pretty biased account of matters and you were way too eager to pass off emotional interpretations of web journalists as facts.




I used my judgment to determine the value of the sources posted, just as I would in any other research project or research essay.

The answer to your second question is the same. I used my judgment to choose my selections. The things I found most interesting and relevant I chose to share on the assumption that others would likely feel the same.

You say I passed off emotional interpretations of web journalists as facts, but that statement is completely absurd. First, there was zero interpretation in the OP. Zero.  I intentionally put in no commentary, interpretation or any of my own words in the OP. I let the sources speak for themselves.

As any academic learns in first year methodology, there is no such thing as unbiased research or unbiased researchers. That is a simple fact, and we are taught it in school. Every research and every researcher has goals and intentions. There is nothing wrong with that, and I never pretended I was not a human being with my own values.

Furthermore the sources posted are not simply "web journalists" they include many mainstream and reputable news sources as well as many sources from academic databases.

I am not denying my selection of sources is biased, every possible selection of sources and every possible piece of writing has a bias. I am simply saying that this info is the most important, relevant and interesting. And that is my bias, to provide the information that is most important, relevant and interesting for the readers.

Again, all I did was post the sources and quotes. I left the interpretation up to the readers. You can read the same sources that I did, and come to your own conclusions.

Basically all I have done is hand you a dossier of facts, so accusing me of an agenda or bias is kind of missing the point. I have compiled information into a convenient location for the benefit of others who may share my interest in this subject.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Edited by Moonshoe (09/19/13 01:20 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: koraks]
    #18863048 - 09/19/13 01:19 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

koraks said:
Quote:

Moonshoe said:
We have learned a lot about How bad fukushima is since that article was published.




No, we haven't. By your own logic, the effects are going to play out in the long term and will be incredibly difficult to measure against the background of cancer instances. As you well know, it is impossible to identify the cause of a specific case of cancer; all you can do is make an educated guess based on contextual factors and genomics. You damn well know this, and yet, you use this flawed logic to pass off your reading of various sources as more accurate than someone who just offers a source and attaches little or no interpretation to it.




Your losing me. Yes I know how hard it is to identify the specific cause of a cancer and I specifically said that in this thread already, so I don't know why you are parroting it back to me. But we have learned a lot more about how bad Fukushima is since that article was published. The sources in the OP show this, the string of continuing leaks and problems, some of which happened literally only a few days ago, long after Enlil's source was published. Those new releases are not taken into account in the study Enlil referenced, and therefore it is out of date and no longer valid until those new releases are factored in and the study is revised.

The final thing you say is the most confusing of all:

"pass off your reading of various sources as more accurate than someone who just offers a source and attaches little or no interpretation to it"

I literally have no idea what you are trying to say.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Edited by Moonshoe (09/19/13 01:22 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18863070 - 09/19/13 01:23 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

*rips hair out*

:rant: *seethes*


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: akira_akuma]
    #18863119 - 09/19/13 01:36 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

akira_akuma said:
*rips hair out*

:rant: *seethes*




:lol:

Breathe deep, seek peace.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18863261 - 09/19/13 02:13 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

yes, peace in violence!1 violent peace@!1


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinenoonesomeone
Stranger
Registered: 10/07/12
Posts: 10
Last seen: 10 years, 3 months
Re: All The Facts On The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18864567 - 09/19/13 07:11 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

wow


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesomething super extreme
NIGGA YOU A FUCK NIGGA!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/29/12
Posts: 17,397
Loc: TURNT UP!
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: koraks]
    #18864789 - 09/19/13 07:51 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

koraks said:
Always when I notice a title along the lines of "all the facts about..." I can't help but wonder what agenda is being pushed this time.




:asianofapproval:
I miss koraks as mod. You were always my favourite to get a warning from.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18866033 - 09/20/13 01:40 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Moonshoe said:
I literally have no idea what you are trying to say.



It just irks me that you tried to pass off your subjective reading of the selection that you made on your own, implicit criteria as facts. But we've gone over that many times now; I made my point.

You know what? It's alright. I don't doubt your intentions and definitely put in effort. The fact that you tend towards the subjective and that your posts on this issue come across as fear mongering to me, well, that is just a reflection of how we differ. And it's fine. Carry on, and if I feel like it, I might balance the things you say on the Fukushima thing once in a while if it appears you missed a vital piece of information.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinerodfarva
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=====-----=-=-=-=-I
Male


Registered: 07/31/07
Posts: 4,982
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18866150 - 09/20/13 03:25 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Im scared of what really could happen with this. Its a basic reaction I have to any situation where so much info-bias exists that legitimate scientists are calculating the odds of this wiping out humanity.  That being said, Im more scared for the people their, than I am for myself. It seems pretty devastating.

Quote:

Enlil said:
I have been winding down my work with the PD for the last 6 months...accepting no new clients and finishing off the ones I had.  All of this is in preparation for my move to California where I am planning on opening a solo practice.  I'll be moving as soon as I can sell my house.




gona just drop in and pass the Cali bar? Good luck, that shit is brutal.
Better do it before 2015 when they add CivPro to the MBE.
Start drilling secured transactions hypos now to get ahead of the fallout quarantine.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinerodfarva
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=====-----=-=-=-=-I
Male


Registered: 07/31/07
Posts: 4,982
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: rodfarva]
    #18866159 - 09/20/13 03:35 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)



--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: rodfarva]
    #18866215 - 09/20/13 04:43 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

rodfarva said:
gona just drop in and pass the Cali bar?



I took the Cali bar in 2011 and passed it without any issues.  I didn't find it to be a particularly hard test.  The performance tests were tedious but not difficult.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMoonshoe
Blue Mantis
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/28/04
Posts: 27,202
Loc: Iceland
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: koraks]
    #18866971 - 09/20/13 10:05 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

koraks said:
Quote:

Moonshoe said:
I literally have no idea what you are trying to say.



It just irks me that you tried to pass off your subjective reading of the selection that you made on your own, implicit criteria as facts. But we've gone over that many times now; I made my point.






I am so baffled when you say I am trying to pass off my subjective reading of the selection as facts... I didn't make any subjective reading ! I specifically and intentionally put NONE OF MY OWN WORDS in the op!

All i did was present the facts from the primary sources, cut and pasted, with links to the articles! I quoted directly from the sources with no commentary of any kind!

I expressed no opinions in the OP, made no comments, did nothing but cut and paste the sections exactly as they appeared!

:confused:

Also, I just want to point out that as part of my week long preparation for my upcoming ayahuasca ceremony, I need to follow a mental fast from any disturbing or inharmonious mental material, and that includes Fukushima related topics and internet arguments.

So I will not be checking back on this thread until October 1st.

My hope is that those who are interested will simply read the primary sources in the OP, educate themselves and form their own opinions.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18866983 - 09/20/13 10:07 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

use the ignore function, or just ... stop assessing things for people. like saying "educate yourselves" as if, anyone needs to be told that; and like anyone doesn't already know what you know. you're assuming these things. it's not so bad, believe me.

but it's a consistent affair.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,505
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #18867027 - 09/20/13 10:23 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Moonshoe said:
I specifically and intentionally put NONE OF MY OWN WORDS in the op!




Why are you lying?  Are these not your words?

Quote:


The Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan is a highly complicated situation. It can be difficult to find information about it, and even harder to understand the implications. I have researched this event for years, trying to find out everything I could. In the process I accumulated this database of articles, news stories, and other information resources.

I have posted it here for the convenience of anyone who is interested. Although some of these have been posted in the megathread in C&C, they were spread out through 36 pages and far too difficult to find. So for ease of reading I have compiled them here. This thread contains no opinions of my own, just straight research and sources with citations and links.

This event continues to unfold, and as it does I will continue to update this thread, not with my own ideas or beliefs, but simply with the news and research I come across. The list of sources below is semi-chronological, so the more recent research is at the top and older stuff is at the bottom.




--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblekoraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,672
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: Enlil]
    #18867281 - 09/20/13 11:33 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

I give up. He doesn't get the concept of bias and is apparently unaware of how far the information he posted is removed from observable facts. Like I said, he means well and that's nice.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineakira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: koraks]
    #18867311 - 09/20/13 11:40 AM (10 years, 4 months ago)

and everyone else is the "bad guy".


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineomegafaust
mycofarmer
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/29/12
Posts: 1,227
Last seen: 7 years, 8 months
Re: The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- How bad is it, really? [Re: akira_akuma]
    #18867954 - 09/20/13 02:14 PM (10 years, 4 months ago)

Maybe he just can't admit fhat focusing his sources and information on biased accounts makes his whole objection biased.

And that earthquake had like no effect, so it must not be as bad as he has depicted.


--------------------
The Universe has an interesting sense of irony, in that you are the universe experiencing itself.  All you are is a thought.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5  [ show all ]

Shop: Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* fukushima reactor
( 1 2 all )
Enthrall 1,556 31 03/14/11 03:00 AM
by Enjoywho
* Possible Fukushima Fallout GGTBod 2,690 16 03/15/11 09:49 AM
by JesusGoneRogue
* The Continuing Fukushima saga. (you thought it was safe now.)
( 1 2 3 4 all )
PassiveAgressive 4,917 66 08/18/11 08:19 AM
by pothead_bob
* Chernobyl Disaster
( 1 2 all )
ivi 2,492 29 04/25/06 08:08 PM
by Cubenisseur
* Kick ass Chernobyl (Nuclear victim ghost town) photo journal (bit old)
( 1 2 all )
PyroBurns 4,952 20 03/30/09 04:38 PM
by Phish_Dude
* TEPCO admits nuclear meltdown occurred at Fukushima reactor 16 hours after quake henk600 693 11 05/17/11 11:14 AM
by Rectangle 3D
* Motorcyle Ride through Chernobyl cybrbeast 1,198 9 06/26/06 02:55 PM
by deryl
* Street art at Chernobyl disaster site BLAST_420 920 7 04/30/06 07:54 PM
by BLAST_420

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Entire Staff
5,482 topic views. 3 members, 46 guests and 35 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.061 seconds spending 0.012 seconds on 14 queries.