Prestigious doctor: US nuclear 'Baby valley of death,' Millions to die

Originally posted by jadedANDcynical
reply to post by adeclerk

 

Documented manipulation of data by Berkeley

More regarding the shenanigans

More still

Nope, all explained here

4/13/2011: Major revision note: We just performed a major revision of our preliminary milk measurements. Our activity measurements for milk with a "best by" date after 4/4/2011 were accidentally calculated for the "best by" date itself, rather than an earlier date such as the purchase date. Since milk can be on the shelves starting almost 18 days before the "best by" date, our numbers after 4/4/2011 did not accurately reflect the maximum activity that the radioisotopes could have at the time of purchase. Incidentally, our first two milk measurements were not corrected at all and therefore reflect the activity at the time of measurement. The original numbers are at the bottom of the page for reference.

Seriously, you "nuclear truthers" are willing to grasp onto more straws than the chemtrailers and haarpies.

reply to post by thorfourwinds


Berkeley has been sampling air this whole time. Guess what they found?

reply to post by adeclerk

Seriously, you "nuclear truthers" are willing to grasp onto more straws than the chemtrailers and haarpies.

I am highly amused at your transparent tactic, and you've got to be barking (mad, if you're as unfamiliar with the reference as you seem to be with the dangers of nuclear technology) if you think I don't see through it.

To attempt to link me with an imaginary group whilst simultaneously belittling said group is a rather unstable base upon which to build the foundations of an argument upon.

You're the type of person at which the second statement in my signature is aimed.

I want to give you the benefit of the doubt because you sometimes seem like a bright person and then you resort to logical fallacies. If you're not doing it on purpose, I must presume that you are sorely uneducated.

Which of these facts do you dispute:

That there are three (3) molten blobs of nuclear lava (coruim) which are continually releasing unknown amounts of radionuclides into the atmosphere


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6f2897298d21.jpg[/atsimg]

Source: Earthquake and Tsunami In Japan on March 11, 2011 and Consequences for Fukushima And other Nuclear Power Plants

reply to post by jadedANDcynical


Check out how many radionuclides haven't been detected in the air since May 31st. But for weeks leading up to then the amounts were trace. They also have soil samples on the site that say just as much, and levels as of now are normal.

reply to post by adeclerk


Thank you for the link.

A little more looking at their site yields this:

The TEDE from a typical flight from San Francisco to Washington DC and back is approximately 5 millirem. In order to determine the number of liters one would have to drink to receive this same dose, the dose received for the roundtrip flight is divided by the TEDE per liter:

(5 millirem)/(8.61E-3 millirem/L) = 581 liters

Here is where they loose all credibility.

Not some.

All.

The type of radiation you experience on airline flights is external:

The immediate dose from cosmic radiation is largely from muons, neutrons, and electrons, and this dose varies in different parts of the world based largely on the geomagnetic field and altitude. This radiation is much more intense in the upper troposphere, around 10 km altitude, and is thus of particular concern for airline crews and frequent passengers, who spend many hours per year in this environment. During their flights airline crews typically get an extra dose on the order of 2.2mSv (220 mrem) per year.[19]]external

What one experiences when consuming contaminated food is internal ionizing radiation:

The biological effects of radiation are thought of in terms of their effects on living cells. For low levels of radiation, the biological effects are so small they may not be detected in epidemiological studies. The body repairs many types of radiation and chemical damage. Biological effects of radiation on living cells may result in a variety of outcomes, including:

Cells experience DNA damage and are able to detect and repair the damage.

Cells experience DNA damage and are unable to repair the damage. These cells may go through the process of programmed cell death, or apoptosis, thus eliminating the potential genetic damage from the larger tissue.

Cells experience a nonlethal DNA mutation that is passed on to subsequent cell divisions. This mutation may contribute to the formation of a cancer.

Cells experience "irreparable DNA damage." Low-level ionizing radiation may induce irreparable DNA damage (leading to replicational and transcriptional errors needed for neoplasia or may trigger viral interactions) leading to pre-mature aging and cancer.[13][14][15]

Remember that the inverse square law works both ways. The closer the emitter is, the more damaging it will be. I cannot imagine anything being closer than to be incorporated into one's body as food is consumed.

At least their head honcho seems to have a few clues, but is still beholden to the nuclear industry.

This little bit is quite informative:

– Current Current level of U S plant preparation to implement EDMGs is level of U.S. plant preparation to implement EDMGs is nonuniform

Meaning that U.S. plants do not have the same level of readiness throughout the country.

I am sure there are plants ready for similar circumstance and that there are also plants which are woefully under prepared for something similar.

Extensive Damage Mitigation Guidelines, by the way. (Safety plans if you need a translation)

Here he is in 2003:

Because of this efficient use of natural resources, compared to other energy technologies, nuclear energy is an important candidate for the long-term, sustainable production of electricity and hydrogen.2 But any major role for fission will require practical approaches to spent-fuel management with environmental and public health impacts comparable to, or lower than, those of other sustainable energy technologies.

Of the resources required to produce fission energy, repository sites are arguably the only resource that has proven to be scarce.

You don't say?

A repository if a place in which the waste products can be safely stored. And they need to do so for periods which extend into the future on far greater time scales than humans have been known to be in existence.


Then there is the fact many US plants have been leaking Tritium into the surrounding environment.

Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by jadedANDcynical

 

Somebody is doing testing. They would tell us if we were in danger. Everyone is not out to fool us. There are many who are just like us, they care. The sky is not falling.

Greetings from:


Thank you for your time, consideration and participation.

It is good to know that there are many who are just like us who care.

Too bad they are not in any position of power at the EPA.

Somebody is doing testing.

And just who do you think "somebody" is?

They would tell us if we were in danger.

And just who do you think "they" are?

Everyone is not out to fool us.

We're not talking about "everyone."

The EPS/USGOV in collusion with TEPCO/JAPGOV have been engaging in a massive cover-up of the true facts concerning the 24/7/365 bombardment of radioactive contaminates from Fukushima Dai-ichi.

The sky is not falling.

Prove it.

We did not say the sky is falling.

We did say that the radiation from Fuku is a serious threat to all life on the planet.

If you feel we are in error in this statement, please prove otherwise.

FYI:


Does the Jet Stream come anywhere near you in either season?

Would you not be affected by any airborne contaminates?

Can we agree that it is serious?

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

From the wayback machine for your viewing pleasure on this beautiful Sunday morning in the North Georgia mountains (hey there, destinyone, you up for coffee?)

19 June 2011
Japan Tsunami 2011-Deliveryman's Dashcam Video

This video is, IMHO, one of the best examples of "turn around, don’t drown," that we have yet to experience. Notice that the water is first seen in front of the delivery man’s POV, yet the first water to inundate the vehicle comes from behind it.

19 June 2011[/COLOR]
Fukushima Reactor Water May Be 144 Times As Radioactive As Anticipated — Almost 20 Times Total Chernobyl Release

(...) ... over 100,000 tonnes of highly-contaminated water at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant are estimated to contain 720,000 terabecquerels of radioactive materials.

If Kurion’s vessel absorbed enough radioactive materials in 5 hours and it should have taken 30 days, as I wrote in my previous post, the water was 144 times as radioactive as the system had anticipated.

If the water actually turns out to be 144 times as radioactive, the Fukushima accident would need a new INES category and should not be placed in the same category (Level 7) as the Chernobyl accident which released only 5.6 million terabecquerels of radioactive materials.

Maybe it should be simply called “Level Fukushima”.

Jump to the present-day headlines you may have missed on the MSM:

15 October 2011
Leaked TEPCO Report:
120 billion Becquerels of plutonium,
7.6 trillion Becquerels of neptunium released in first 100 hours
— Media concealed risk to public

Yokohama, Oct. 15 — Mochizuki of the Fukushima Diary website is reporting on a June 2011 document that has been “leaked on the internet” which reveals that Plutonium-238, -239, -240, and -241 were released “to the air” from Fukushima Daiichi during the first 100 hours after the earthquake.

[color=limegreen]The amount of Plutonium [color=limegreen]released is said to be 120 billion Becquerels.

It also states there was a release of 7.6 trillion Becquerels of Neptunium-239.

Mochizuki says this report was made by TEPCO for a press conference on June 6 and the media knew and “kept concealing the risk for 7 months and kept people exposed”.

The amount of plutonium released is said to be 120 billion Becquerels.

"Is said to be..."

So many different (and each larger than the previous) numbers have been thrown about that sometimes it becomes difficult to grasp the significance of all this.
Wait just a sec.

WTF?

Is it 7.6 or 76?

Yes, we see that it is differentiating between Plutonium and Neptunium, but the cooinkydink raised an eyebrow (the other one burnt off already by radioactive rain here in Georgia...)

Clarification, anyone?

Peace Love Light

tfw

Originally posted by jadedANDcynical
Here is where they loose all credibility.

Not some.

All.

The type of radiation you experience on airline flights is external:

Whoops, missed this part of your link, eh?
So the only way we can measure exposure is not accurate, even though you are making claims that there is a dangerous amount of material being released Look at the data again, it isn't in our skies.

What one experiences when consuming contaminated food is internal ionizing radiation:

Bolded for the parts you must not have read:

The biological effects of radiation are thought of in terms of their effects on living cells. For low levels of radiation, the biological effects are so small they may not be detected in epidemiological studies. The body repairs many types of radiation and chemical damage. Biological effects of radiation on living cells may result in a variety of outcomes, including:

Cells experience DNA damage and are able to detect and repair the damage.

Cells experience DNA damage and are unable to repair the damage. These cells may go through the process of programmed cell death, or apoptosis, thus eliminating the potential genetic damage from the larger tissue.

Cells experience a nonlethal DNA mutation that is passed on to subsequent cell divisions. This mutation may contribute to the formation of a cancer.

Cells experience "irreparable DNA damage." Low-level ionizing radiation may induce irreparable DNA damage (leading to replicational and transcriptional errors needed for neoplasia or may trigger viral interactions) leading to pre-mature aging and cancer.[13][14][15]

The last two would never be encountered in the US, from Fukushima.


You're still ignoring that berkeley's instruments have detected no radiation in months. Give it up, the fearmongering isn't worth it.

reply to post by adeclerk

internal , vs external, exposure vs. saturation level, retention vs. pass thru , time, rate and type ( as in em-burst or hot particle proximity) of exposure. ( one metaphor is like exposure to gasoline; did you just stand in front of it and smell it or did you drink it , and how much and how long?)

These are variables that must be ALL taken into account when determining the health hazards of radiation FREE in the environment. At Chernobyl the particulate release was much less over a vastly shorter period of time , yet today, over 25 years later , pigs in Germany are still off limits from contamination and sheep in Scotland, Wales and the U.K. were only cleared (as free from radioactive contaminants) for human consumption last year.

The military has done extensive testing on waste pools and cores to determine how , when and under what conditions they "atomize" ( become a particulate , aerosol, so fine that they are transported to the upper atmosphere at even moderate temperatures ) and what they found is that nuclear materials are about 90% volatilized into particles no bigger than 10microns (0.0003937 inches) , as any particle under about 15 microns is considered an aerosol ( travels in the air as if it was a gas ) then most if not ALL of the initial waste released areosolized and went high into the atmosphere given the extremely high temperatures. the militaries research estimates that around 10% of the material will remain in the air ( as an aerosol ) up to thirty years from the incident .

It is hard to imagine that a disaster spanning 8 months for (at least ) four reactors and SFP's could be so much less of a threat than Chernobyl which was a basically one reactor one explosion and fire one day event.

and certainly the jet stream from japan to California is not well known enough that the Japanese used it to float bombs on weather balloons across the Pacific successfully way back in 1933so they could use it in 1943, and balloons are about a million times larger and cooler than hot aerosol

reply to post by adeclerk


why do you not post in the hard to debunk theories threads and can you address the issues I am raising ?

Originally posted by Silverlok
reply to post by adeclerk

 

why do you not post in the hard to debunk theories threads and can you address the issues I am raising ?

That would require an honest effort to delve into complicated technical issues and look at all sides of the problem before making a tentative conclusion regarding the truth. The more juvenile mindset derives a false sense of superiority by going after easy targets, much the way a schoolyard bully will attack the weakest, most retarded kid.

Originally posted by Silverlok
reply to post by adeclerk

 

why do you not post in the hard to debunk theories threads and can you address the issues I am raising ?

It's difficult to debunk conspiracies that are unfalsifiable, and since the people are already believing an unfalsifiable thing...it's not really my business to get up in their beliefs or faith. Something like this topic is easy, it literally has no foundation.

The issues you are raising are moot, because as is shown by Berkeley's data, there is nothing currently in the air. Also no evidence of a coverup whatsoever.

reply to post by Mdv2


I need to share this. We were living in Toledo, Washington at the time and we stayed indoors for days of rain following the quake and accident. Our neighboors down the road couldn't because they have an organic farm there and had to tend to crops and animals. All of them got sick, we didn't. We moved out to Central Oregon shortly thereafter and are very glad we did.
I had an original reporting of the EPA's readouts and didn't save the page but saved the link. When I went back to the site they had changed the data to just the results that in their opinion the levels of ionizing radiation had not significantly increased. Very frustrating to have proof that they knew just slip away.

reply to post by adeclerk

Since you are not addressing it what is my point in your opinion?

?
You are relying on one data source < Berkely???, and my points are not moot , you have not adressed them , I did not mention cover-ups, or anything else only the very real science behind manufacture and transport of radioactive contaminants. And given the increasing data of how much particulate radiation is being discovered on Honshu it is fool hardy to think that ZERO percent is making it across the pacific .

interestingly Berkly was caught in a scandal early in this crises wherein they were caught doctoring the dates on milk samples ( using sample taken before the fall-out would have arrived and post dating ) to make it seem as if the situation much less than it is, when they where exposed they tried to edit the data without explanation and when they where called on that they came out with the lame excuse of mislabeling ( oddly consistent mislabeling ), so they are not the greatest single source data point , as their funding sources put into question their reliability , especially given their previous actions

but you cannot refute the air current between the Us and Japan , you cannot refute the military data on the propensity of nuclear materials to aerosolize , and you cannot refute three reactors and four spent fuel pools spewing for months on end yet , with your only one data source you are saying ther is NO chance of particulate matter in the U.S.

your assertion is simple bad science , poor scientific method , and just plain naive ( or worse , obfuscational ) and fails to live up to ATS's deny ignorance theme. Proving with a single negative is impossible as you say , but that is all you are offering as proof , a single group offering a negative as a proof, so by your own logic you have proven nothing.

this fellow might dis agree with Berkely

Greetings:

Hey there, Westcoast and other fine members out West and specifically in California, we have a question that needs an answer:

Has the [color=limegreen]never-ending life-altering radiation spewing 24/7/365 from the Fukushima disaster/fiasco/nightmare affected/tainted this year’s wine production?

Or were all the wine-producing grapes kept out of the radioactive rain?

We propose that the larger question looms on the horizon: does Cesium 137, Iodine-133 and Xenon-133 affect the intrinsic, unique flavors and leave that metallic taste in your mouth?

Just a reminder as to why we ask these questions... please notice that the fruit and wine-producing regions of California are specifically mentioned in the following graphic.


Perhaps your local Chamber of Commerce can get some free air time on CNN like this:

27 October 2011
CNN: ‘Why tourism in Fukushima makes more sense then ever’
— Reporter given all-expenses-paid trip to Japan
— “Life in much of Fukushima goes on as normal now”

Far from any scenes of devastation, Setogaro Gorge will reward hikers with unrivaled scenes of natural beauty and plenty of picturesque waterfalls.

(...)The northern limits are on the cusp of the government-mandated 30-kilometer evacuation zone around the [color=limegreen]beleaguered Fukushima nuclear reactors.

Virtually everything due north of Iwaki, all the way up to the city of Sendai, has been evacuated, abandoned or destroyed.

Pack up the kids and the dogs, Ma, sounds like a place to vacation on the cheap!

Life in this region of Japan will never be the same. The rice paddies, usually impeccably maintained, grow wild; a clear indication of abandonment and a sad reminder of a terrible day.

The entire Fukushima region of Japan runs the risk of forever bearing a nuclear stigma.

What follows has earned itself a place in the Quotable Hall of Wonderment:

But it is important to understand that although a nuclear disaster has stricken Fukushima and the immediate area around the blown-out reactors is off limits, the land is by no means some apocalyptic scene of nuclear winter.

[color=limegreen]]The people living there are not glowing a radioactive hue.

Prove it.

Fukushima remains one of the most beautiful and scenic prefectures in Japan, filled with good, honest, real people who continue to thrive on in the aftermath of an unprecedented disaster.

...people who continue to thrive on...

We sincerely question that statement.

Over 50% of seafood tested in eastern Japan contain radioactive cesium-134 and cesium-137.

Consumers have generally avoided products from the regions near the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant
(AFP/File, Richard A. Brooks)

As Japan insists it is safe for travelers (outside the nuclear evacuation zone, of course) and is enticing people to come and see what its like for themselves, Iwaki is poised to become the next hot destination for people wanting to witness post-March 11 Japan at the doorstep of ground zero.

Right..., but wait, there’s more.

For the more intrepid travelers, a visit to a city on the outskirts of the tsunami-ravaged nuclear no-man's land might be one of the most evocative and educational things to do while touring Japan.

We need these type of wordsmiths on our side...and the weight of the government behind us - oh, wait! The government is part of the problem!


Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the beat goes on:

People have accepted what they feel they cannot change.
DancedWithWolves

[color=orane]This attitude is not acceptable, as apathy will assure the end of all life on our planet.

For your consideration;

Biological concentration is coming up to human

Living in the land of death

Peace Love Light
tfw

Liberty & Equality or Revolution

Greetings:

Not that we would ever say, "we told you so," but ...

6 November 2011
Expert on Fukushima radiation in US: [color=3BB9FF]‘We know its going to impact public health’

• It’s more a matter of something happened that we didn’t want to happen.
•
• We know its going to impact public health.
•
[color=Cyan]• There’s not a whole lot you can do about it.
•
• Once you let the horse out of the barn, hell, the horse took the barn door with it.
•
• We’re stuck, this is an accident that should have been prevented. It’s hard to respond to it.

And now, for something completely different:

Japan TV host diagnosed with acute lymphocytic leukemia —
Had been eating Fukushima produce on show

You just can't make this stuff up folks...

And from April, a supercilious post that really attracted our attention to the apparent ignorance and insensitivity that blocks the sheeple's reality of [color=8AFB17]the true horror of the Fukushima multiple melt-through nuclear disaster/fiasco spewing life-altering radiation 24/7/365 [color=8AFB17]with no end or solution in sight.

[color=Salmon]And so what, the Japanese will have a few babies born limbless or with blotchy skin,
they will adapt to their environment.

You're joking, right?

My wife is Japanese, my in-laws are Japanese, and many of the surviving in-laws did time in Tehachapi and we do not appreciate your attempt at levity or derailment.

If you do not think anything is wrong, you eat the yellow snow and drink the milk.

[color=Salmon]Now just to clear the air, i do not like what is going on over there but we cannot help the situation playing keyboard tag with the mongering of fear.

Speak for yourself.

"Playing keyboard tag," as you call it, just might invigorate enough concerned citizens to get up off their lazy butts, turn off American Idol, Dancing With the Stars and Cupcake Wars and
question authority.

We certainly hope so. We are. OPERATION SURVIVAL is a working title for a project in bloom and a natural outgrowth of our Alliance roots. Stay tuned and you heard it here first.

As you can plainly see, dear reader, there is a lot of (re)education to be done to turn the tide in favor of life.

Meanwhile, the goalposts keep getting moved and acceptable collateral damage limits are steadily increased.

25 August 2011
Japan raising radiation limit to 20 millisieverts/year leads to 160,000 lifetime cancers per million people

In April, the Japanese government raised its maximum limit for children from one to 20 millisieverts per year, a level that leads to 2,270 cancers annually per million people (or 160,000 lifetime cancers per million), according to data in a landmark 2006 U.S. National Academy of Sciences report on radiation cancer risk.

A massive outcry later forced the government to reverse the move.

[color=8AFB17]About a fifth of the 1,600 schools in Fukushima prefecture were exposed to at least 20 milliseiverts of radiation this year, according to a Bloomberg story in July. [...]

The children already have a year's worth of radiation in 4 months at the 20 millisieverts per year!


Operation Survival

(How about the following for starters? (this is a work in progress - any input would be sincerely appreciated...)

We are a grassroots peace and environmental organization dedicated to sharing new ideas and vital information necessary for survival in this post 3/11 age.

We support converting our economy to safely fulfill human needs, creating a cleaner, safer and more humane world while working to make the connections between peace, social justice and environmental responsibility.

We think this foto says it all... these are the real OWS'ers (IMHO) and us 30 years ago at Diablo...they should have left sleeping dogs lie... will you join us?

###inappropriate image removed###

We are not alone:

Australian Cannonball Nuclear News

Peace Love Light
tfw[align=center][color=magenta]Liberty & Equality or Revolution[/align]

reply to post by getreadyalready


and our media talks about democracy ,while our democracy and safety is being destroyed at home for the commies and the corporates.

The hypocrisy .People from Texas will have to pay for the false flag disasters of US govt.

Originally posted by Silverlok

 

 

six stars and it's an editable meme,

Interesting,

In my opinion; ARE areas in California the " valley of death " , the answer is "yes". I support this concept based on my SCIENTIFIC analysis of the situation. It is not sensationalism ..perhaps for some , but not for me .. I don't give a flying fig about what 'people' think about what I say...it's my opinion agree or disagree , as you like, but I stand behind this now as I will in ten years , whom else is willing to say that.

Is the world in turmoil? Is the future uncertain? can one trust ANYONE whom rakes in million dollar salaries while the WORLD is polluted..