Radiation, you and nature

There are a million post pointing every which way about radiation dangers and it may be a little hard to ferret out what and whom to believe and where to turn to for answers.

It is clear that the Nuclear industry has a long standing first response policy of non-transparency until the obvious can no longer be hidden , and at that point the policy seems to endorse "massaging" public opinion with overly re-assuring , at best optimistic and at worst dis-information.

How are we to know when and where the truth and the spin separate?

Obviously the cost of millions of radiation lawsuits would end the atomic energy companies as we know them, and by extension upset a lot of governments trying to find places for "surplus" weapons grade plutonium, so information directly from them simply cannot be trusted even if the two did not have a questionable relationship and provable history.

But racing down the corridor into hysteria and mis or under informed fear is absolutely no answer either, so what is one to do ?

Since most of the radioactive problems ( radiant energy and radioactive particles ) are not normally ( or in some cases ever) found in nature I would suggest that if you have radiation fears in your area look to nature first.

For example if this German website is showing you a radioactive cloud that covers almost the whole US and this even more drastic 'projected fall-out' map shows this dire scene:


Should they be believed over the say fox news, that Radiation is good for you ( a new low even for them )?


One can say I don't' have a Geiger counter and if I did I wouldn't know when where or what were dangerous readings, but as these events are not exactly natural by nature (ha cough ha) we can take a page from the coal miners hand book and look to birds:

Birds can see the Earth's magnetic field. The earth magnetic field is not very strong , being about 100 times less powerful than a refrigerator magnet so airborn radiation will cause localized magnetic effects ( messes up the field) large enough for birds to be able to sense.

You have certainly heard the old expression 'canary in a coal mine' that is because birds are also particularly sensitive to extremely small levels of poison gas and radiation:

in '86 birds were 1 more warning sign telling what nuclear tech does

EMF RADIATION – Affect on CANARY'S

( birds have learned to survive with radiation after years at Chernobyl , but thesmaller brain size may have something to do with it )

So it's a good bet that birds will avoid clouds of radioactive material. Granted, levels that would kill them offer less of a problem to humans, but if the animals have fled one might want to re-consider going for a jog until they come back.

For example I live in Wisconsin and it is a beautiful sunny Spring day, normally I would have so many birds of so many types here there and everywhere I couldn't hear my self think, but today when the sound of cars quiets down it is SILENT, DEATHLY SILENT as quiet as a tomb in fact...and I will listen to that silence way before the hot puss from Ann the INES, Tepco, or the EPA

..but that' just me tell me what you guys think

I have'nt heard of any new mass bird die offs since the meltdown. Does'nt mean it did'nt or isn't happeneing .

The one's that died,to the best of knowledge,are not clairvoyient.

Your point about FOX is well taken...but since when did Ann Coulter speak for all information supplied by FOX News.. Yeah they're sketchy...
But so is ATS.

Most of us are smart enought to seperate B.S. from facts......until proven otherwise.

Really good points you make though.. I'll flag it.

reply to post by niceguybob




I am not saying that this will cause mass bird deaths...

What I am saying is that birds will fly away from radiation clouds, because they are much more sensitive to them than we are , ergo;

If you normally have birds everywhere and you suddenly have few or none you may want to investigate about why they are choosing to be somewhere else...

On that matter I would bet that even the seagulls are staying away from fukushima and honshu right now:

A cautious but careful study [ref] in northern Sweden polluted by Caesium and Uranium fuel particles showed cancer increased by 11% in the ten years following the accident. The level of fallout in that part of Sweden was 0.1 kBq MBq/m2. If we assume that cancer increases linearly with the level of fallout, the areas of Japan affected at 0.9 MBq/m2 may experience increases of 90%. We recommend that the public within 150km should leave the area immediately.

and

Fukushima 70 kilometre contamination levels twice as high as Chernobyl Permanent Control Zone. Honshu should be evacuated. The IAEA website yesterday revealed beta-gamma contamination measurements taken between 35 and 68 km from Fukushima. The results ranged from 0.08 to 0.9 MegaBecquerels per square metre (MBq/m2). The Chernobyl Permanent Control Zone was contaminated up to 0.55 MBq/m2. The highest level of contamination classified after Chernobyl was greater than 1.48 MBq/m2. The data for Chernobyl were for Caesium and the same is probably true for the Fukushima data. All official agencies are conspicuously silent about the alpha-emitters Plutonium and Uranium. We remain deeply concerned about this lack of information.

from www.llrc.org

And I think fox news is EXTREMELY irresponsible at best for even putting unsubstantiated garbage like 'radiation is good for ' on the air at all, let alone letting her go on about it at length, and his rebuttal is weak.

At least ATS doesn't pretend to be anything else but sketchy ;-)

So Ann it's been a couple of years where are these "stunning number of physicists" whom are commenting on MEDICAL REACTIONS TO RADIATION??. You do know that a P.H.D. in physics is not the same as a P.H.D. in medicine ...er, right....or is that infotainment channel you work for trying to make all 'reality assessment' into a daytime soap where little things like knowledge and facts are transmutable and interchangeable like magic or alchemy?

And how come you are not in Japan rolling around in the dirty topsoil that is being thrown just a little farther off the roads?

And seriously O'Rielly "...glowing and radiation ..haha...haha...good, good....", no wonder Madddox sent you no more tears shampoo when your first book didn't sell for # ( and you blamed the public for being stupid ), you live in a giant metaphysical bounce tent.

so both of you the next few times you sit down to dine on the MOST TRANSIENT ,thus most exposed, flying foul perhaps you could put a geiger counter on them ast the dinner table to see how that bio accumulation is coming along