My Unexpected Journey Down a Western NY Rabbit Hole

page: 3
58
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Komodo
they're pockets are deep and so are they friends


This is true and some of that is in the information I gathered but did not want to overwhelm the OP with and did not include.

The known owners of the Solar Technology Park is evident, Montante Developers. But they do have ties to Uniland somehow as mentioned in Tom Montante's professional bio. Honestly I have not had the time yet to run that connection down or dive too much into the business end of all this except to find that all solar technology installed at the Solar Park is provided by a company owned by his sons.


The Seaway parcel is part owned by a company called Benderson Development (proven by the 2014 Seaway Fact Sheet by the Army Corps). From what I understand they are a nationwide firm with extremely deep pockets. As for the owners of other parcels a trip to the land record office is needed, perhaps the Tonawanda library will have that as well, we'll see. However, while my internet search is still underway, it is evident that I need to get my feet on the ground and see what I can find outside the interwebz.

Thanks for giving us your thoughts on the issue!




posted on May, 16 2014 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: PeaceVindicator
She had her thyroid removed when she was 15 and takes ridiculous amounts of medication daily for her health problems caused by the radiation in the area, Praxair, the Coke plant, etc.


You know, until I started this whole thing a couple of weeks ago I had not connected the personal stories I have heard of since being here of thyroid issues with any potential cause from being exposed to what we are in this area. Those stories all kind of fell into place when I ran across the medical study I linked in a response to Kali in this thread that stated in their conclusion that there is indeed a higher incidence of endocrine system malfunctions in the study areas in Niagara and Erie counties.


I thank God that I've since been able to help get her out of that neighborhood.


Good on you! I am glad you were able to as well and I'm glad she followed your advice. Kudos!



It's definitely worth researching the history of where you live. If the rumors that our government raised acceptable radiation levels to accommodate the Fukushima fallout are true, that about sums it up.


I had not even heard of that rumor until now. If able to prove, that would be a nice little fact to include in my research indeed!

Thanks for relating your story and for another thing to think about!



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: bonaire
a reply to: MyMindIsMyOwn

I have passed the Ashland stink-zone refinery ever since I was a kid.

And stink it does, literally! I touched on the fact that we and our friends actually went out to the Solar Park site and walked around the FedEx campus recently. When we left the Solar Park on our way to dinner to discuss everything, we took a ride around other parts of the Solar Park and the closer we got to the 5335 River Road parcel (known now as the Riverview Industrial Park) that butts directly up to the Solar Park property the odor was just almost unbearable. This odor is not from refuse (trash), this odor was coming from the soil disturbance. The jersey barriers across the road prevented us from going any further, but the odor alone would have been enough to make us turn back.


Modern disposal in Ransomville has one of the only truly hazardous waste reclaimation sites in the area.

Modern's Landfill in Lewiston is no prize either. Jaynkeel mentioned the LOOW site in Lewiston and if my suspicions are correct that site sits right next to the Modern Landfill in Lewiston on Pletcher Road. This is only a suspicion though until I can start digging into that.




Keep digging into this area. It is worth at least publishing your story in the Niagara Falls Reporter, the local rag, which exposes issues like this.


Oh, believe me what I have presented here really only begins to scratch the surface of the issue. I will keep digging and presenting for as long as possible, until I get under the skin of someone who either tries to shut me up or REALLY gets of their duff to do something of substance about it (meaning agencies that have the ability to).

As for the Niagara Falls Reporter, how I would just love to have something I have done appear in actual print or have something I have done be a small part in bringing this to a wider audience. But this is an issue that I am finding really is old news for the citizens of this area who are now weary of even trying anymore, and who can blame them. Certainly not I. Not to mention my writing skills are in no way shape or form 'print worthy'. I thought about contacting the Investigative Post to see if they might be interested until I found a blog by their 'eco' writer who sung to high heaven the praises of the Solar Tech Park, which really IS a fantastic idea, totally ignoring what was going on around it or under it.

At any rate, glad to hear from you and your opinion on the OP!
edit on 16-5-2014 by MyMindIsMyOwn because: (no reason given)
edit on 16-5-2014 by MyMindIsMyOwn because: spelling



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: MyMindIsMyOwn

The LOOW site extends all the way to Balmer Rd by CWM ( chemical waste management) and runs directly behind Lew-Port school complex. There is also an out flow creek that runs down pletcher rd to the Niagara river by Stella Niagara which has been known to run different colors during heavy rains, full of contaminate. The old army weekend warrior base on Blamer and Lutts Rd is also on shady ground. Coming down Lewiston hill back in the day up until the late 90's you could see a couple of huge silos next to modern landfill, that was where a lot of radioactive animals, train and even gold was stored from experiments during the manhatten project.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:49 PM
link   
A really nice piece of research, as you've been told many times so far. I'm sure it took hours and hours to research, plus hours to write up. But I have a couple of concerns. They are not so much to say, "This is not a problem," but along the lines of how you are communicating it. It's really is a straight-forward research paper, neutral if not academic in tone, that sets forth your argument, gradually building to what you are really talking about.

1) It could really use an "Executive Summary" at the top which lists the main points of your research. You just start out with no foundation at all talking about the issue, then suddenly "she has a concern" and I wonder, "Oh, what concern is that?" because so far you haven't given your audience a clue as to what this is all about. You're jumping into the middle of the pool without any sort of preparation for your reader. As in most research papers of this sort, the general pattern is to 1) Say what you are going to say, 2) Say it, 3) Tell us what you said. You jump into the middle of (2) where we have to guess what your major concern is.

2) Your tone is completely academic, then suddenly we get something like this: “This site was once a very bad place but is no longer. We have evidence of fairies, unicorns and trace elements of rainbow dust. All is well." Now I know you are just trying to be sarcastic here, and the sentences themselves are very witty. You ought to be proud you can turn a phrase such as that. But it is COMPLETELY out of place and your credibility suffers as a result. This is not the place to show yourself off. The report didn't say that. You lied for the sake of sarcasm. What did the report REALLY say? Quote the actual quote. Footnote it. Document it. This is a serious issue and you're making fun of it. When you do stuff like that (and this isn't the only place) you go from sounding like an objective observer laying down the facts to a person with a grudge, just another ranter at the city council meetings who won't shut up and thinks it's all about him. What you absolutely must do here is save your stints of creative writing for something else and play it straight here.

3) You really haven't defined what this stuff is or where it came from very well. You mention "Hanford tailings." What does that even mean? There are no "Hanford tailings." "Tailings" are what is left over when you are mining. There was no mining at Hanford. It's a big flat space in the desert where they built some buildings and did research. Yeah, there is/was radioactive stuff there, but it didn't "come from" Hanford; it was "shipped to" Hanford. If you intend to lay the foundation for what this stuff is, you need to say WHAT it is, specifically, and WHERE it came from, specifically, and WHY its dangerous, specifically. You can certainly establish that it was USED at Hanford, but to say it is "Hanford Tailings" is misleading at best.

You then launch into the "chemical dumping site" issue kind of as an afterthought, but once more with few details. WHAT chemicals? WHERE are they from? And so forth. This is a very weak part of your paper, and the thing is, critics will jump on your weakest points to emphasize. A lawyer told me once, "If you have five arguments, with two being really good and three being so-so, don't even bring up the three so-so arguments because your opponent will use those three arguments against you. You need to nail this stuff down so it is unassailable--or leave it out. As they stand, they are weak because of the paucity of detail. It SOUNDS like you are saying, "And, oh, by the way, some bad guys dumped some chemicals here once." The reader is left somewhat confused, which is deadly to your cause.

4) So far you're really only banking on fear. You make fun of "them" saying, in essence, "everything is peachy," with your rainbows statement, but that's as far as you go. What if it is "peachy"? What if the half-life of this radioactive stuff is to the point where you can't tell the difference between it and background radiation? What exactly IS it now? How do you measure it? If they say it is OK, on what basis do they do so? What is the reading? What is a "safe" reading? Who says that? Greenpeace? PETA? You don't deal with that well. Your argument appears to be, "Everyone knows radioactivity is bad. They dumped some radioactive stuff here a long time ago, therefore everyone should abandon the region unless they clean it up. And, by the way, they dumped some chemicals here, too, and everyone knows chemicals are bad, so...."

It kind of reminds me of the kid who urinated in a water reservoir in Oregon and got caught. What did the authorities do? They dumped millions of gallons of fresh water to "clean out" this reservoir from this horrible urine. The thing is, when dissipated through these millions of gallons the urine itself would be undetectable. It posed no health hazard. The same reservoir had birds crapping in it and dying in it every day, but the public freaked out so they dumped a fortune in water to mollify their unfounded fears. Is this what you are doing? If not, prove it. So far you have not.

5) Your documentation isn't very good. It hardly exists at all. You say several times that you "can't cite this" because of the nature of the research and the set up of the search engine you used to produce a report, but it's much more than that. Not only can you do a better job of citing the sources, but you make many claims outside your primary "citations" that also need to be documented. Take a look at Turabian's Manual of Style (University of Chicago) to investigate the proper way to make citations. If you don't do this, your paper is more or less a matter of your own opinion. Not that your opinion isn't "valid" in your own mind or that of your supporters, but the argument as a whole is much, much weaker if you don't pay attention to this.

6) Right now your motivation appears to be because one friend is about to "move in" to this complex and this one friend "has a concern." Well, what's the easiest solution to that? If your friend "has a concern," then don't move in. It's not going to get better any time soon. So if there is all this concern, then the solution is to not go there. Problem (for her) solved. With all this evidence, in fact, how could anyone in their right mind "move in" at all? Therefore, in formulating your introduction and summaries, the overall health of the region and its populace must be the motivating factor--not your friend. You can certainly mention in passing that the "concerns of an acquaintance" fueled your interest, but that simply cannot be your motivation for this research.

7) I REALLY hope ATS is not your sole venue for this. That's a whole lot of work to dump into the ATS Black Hole. You've got a few people here who are familiar with your issue, and a few more that will cheer you on because this is a typical, "Here's what the bad guys did" story, but there are maybe two or three times in the history of ATS where the MSM in any form whatsoever picked up on an ATS issue, and then, as likely as not, ATS was described as a "cranky conspiracy site," in other words, not really worthy of serious notice. So if you want this to "catch fire" or "go viral!" then this isn't the place to do it. It might be a good place to refine your issues, but it's not an acceptable publisher for anything serious.
(continued)
edit on 5/16/2014 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Ran out of space. In summary, your paper has some serious issues that affect its perceived veracity. You need to cut out the flippant tone, even though it's very creative. You need to document much more thoroughly what you are saying. You need to prove the dangers here using industry-accepted standards rather than a "Gee, this must be bad" standard of proof. You need to provide a more global motivation for your research. You need some systemic revisions for context so that the paper flows from point to point in a more cohesive manner, and you need to question whether "publication" on ATS is the best place to promote what you are trying to achieve.

Good luck. It's a great start!
edit on 5/16/2014 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: jaynkeel

Hey jay are you familiar with the PCB landfill they have at Modern on Pletcher road.They have been bringing in truckloads of pcb's from out of state for a couple of years now. We found out from our friend who lives on Pletcher. He also told us about the radioactives that were landfilled across from the hydroponic tomato farm on Pletcher.We haven't gotten over there with our geiger counter yet,but we will.

As far as the weekend warrior site behind modern, I'm sure if nothing else they have a lead problem there, as sitting on my friends deck on weekends we have heard all kinds of ordinance being fired there. Have heard 50 cal m2s being fired there several times.There is also a small site on harolds road where there used to be exercises there by various divisions of homeland security.Don't know which division as there were no insignia on the uniforms. they were not friendly when I stopped to ask what was going on there and a sniper on a small hill pointed his weapon at me so I left rather quickly.

Haven't seen them there in a while now. Heard that they plowed up the area to make brems to stop bullets and discovered the site was contaminated. Been over a year since I've seen them there.Before they plowed up the site they were there every weekend when the weather was good.

edit on 5/16/2014 by lonegurkha because: misfiring brain cell



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: lonegurkha

Yes the radioactive area across from the tomato farm is for sure. While 4 wheeling throughout Lutts rd Balmer rd and next to the old LOOW site we actually had blackhawk helio's overhead one night, this was many yrs ago. Back in those woods there are clay mines with huge ponds and old building basements where they used to do the ordinance work. Aside from the potential hazards of chemical exposure it really is a neat place to 4 wheel and explore. What the previous generations did to the land though is utterly shameful. Not to mention building a school on contaminated ground. I keep remembering things just when I am about to hit enter!!! The walleye rearing ponds are right in the middle of bad ground as well. Fwiw.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: MyMindIsMyOwn

It is really a great little town and years ago it was our dream home, now it is becoming a dark cloud over our family. We are effectively stuck here until all the different agencies and politicians decide our future...
Not a good feeling at all.

It really is a constant balancing act of how bad it is, how sure are you of the information being given to you and if even if you could sell, why would anyone want to buy?



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Meanwhile on CNN they are shouting, but somewhere the ice is melting.

Thanks for working the pollution here and now, ATS. Its a welcome relief.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   
LOL, in all honesty I was wondering when or if you would enter the thread. While I'm sure your tone was not meant to be as insulting as it is, the criticism is actually appreciated. I would love to have you close enough to review the work prior to publishing if I were presenting it to an agency, newspaper or consideration to an academic board in order to polish it's rough edges making it more palatable for the more cerebrial. However, this is ATS and I am just an average poster that felt the need to share my anger and frustration over the issue and to perhaps spark the need for others to jump in and start their own journey.


originally posted by: schuyler

1) It could really use an "Executive Summary" at the top which lists the main points of your research.

Yes, again if I were using this as an academic paper or something along those lines that would be an necessary element.




2) Your tone is completely academic, then suddenly we get something like this: “This site was once a very bad place but is no longer. We have evidence of fairies, unicorns and trace elements of rainbow dust. All is well." Now I know you are just trying to be sarcastic here, and the sentences themselves are very witty. You ought to be proud you can turn a phrase such as that. But it is COMPLETELY out of place and your credibility suffers as a result.

You are correct, my apologies. Point well taken. However, again, it is quite obvious that I am just an average citizen and not a professional and I never laid any claim to be such.


What you absolutely must do here is save your stints of creative writing for something else and play it straight here.

Quite right. Again, my apologies.



3) You can certainly establish that it was USED at Hanford, but to say it is "Hanford Tailings" is misleading at best.

Ok. I've no beef with that. However, if you want to get right down to it you accuse me of using specifically "Hanford tailings" and I did no such thing. I am new to this issue, I will make mistakes (which you have done quiet a good job of pointing out) which I don't have a problem in owning and correcting when needed. However, I will in my defense here say that the trail of what came from where and who produced it and where, is a hard trail to follow. So thank you for correcting me on that point. Moving forward I will be sure to be more specific and clear on this point.


WHAT chemicals? WHERE are they from? And so forth.

With regards to this I take issue. When available I provided that. Please see the specific site code sections where it is detailed. As to WHERE they came from, if you can track what old chemical plant produced what and then dumped it in the areas that I discussed I would ask for every mod on here to award you applause for that information alone.


This is a very weak part of your paper, and the thing is, critics will jump on your weakest points to emphasize.

LOL, so I can see.


A lawyer told me once, "If you have five arguments, with two being really good and three being so-so, don't even bring up the three so-so arguments because your opponent will use those three arguments against you.

Sage advice. In future threads I am hoping to put to ATS for consideration on this issue I will be sure to button up any and all areas of weakness.



4) So far you're really only banking on fear.

Nonsense. I am not fear mongering here and I don't think that I even presented it in a way that would lead someone to believe that. If you picked up on a sense of fear in my writing I would not be surprised because I am scared as are a great many others.


You make fun of "them" saying, in essence, "everything is peachy," with your rainbows statement, but that's as far as you go. What if it is "peachy"?

A point I even made in my OP. Actually I am hoping someone on here with a little knowledge of the situation could provide some insight on that very thing. Outside of that happening one of the next steps, for me, is to seek out someone here locally (Univ. of Buffalo perhaps?) who once I have a better handle on what questions to ask I can go to for answers.



It kind of reminds me of the kid who urinated in a water reservoir in Oregon and got caught. What did the authorities do? They dumped millions of gallons of fresh water to "clean out" this reservoir from this horrible urine.

Ugh, that nonsense. Sorry to hear my bit of research brought that to your mind.



5) Your documentation isn't very good. It hardly exists at all. You say several times that you "can't cite this" because of the nature of the research and the set up of the search engine you used to produce a report, but it's much more than that.


Horse pucky...and how dare you (sorry, you really hit a nerve here and that just plain hurt). I've presented what I have to date with much of what I cite from Government sources on the issue at hand. As for the inability to link specific site code reports that is of no fault of mine, address it with the DEC website developers. I did the best I could at that point by providing the main report generation page and the information needed to populate the necessary fields so that for those who cared enough to look, could see specifically what I was looking at. The bullet points under those are directly from the DEC reports aside from sarcastic personal opinions which are obvious.
CONTINUED


6) Right now your motivation appears to be because one friend is about to "move in" to this complex and this one friend "has a concern."

Well, that was infact the initial motivation, so your statement there is spot on. It's from this initial concern that now my scope has widened to a great degree. I've done what I can for our friend in giving her even more information than she already knew of, so while this may sound insensitive, her next move is purely her own. I take pride in knowing that I have at least provided her and her co-workers with information not previously given to them so that whatever their next step may be will be one made in a more informed fashion. However, MY next step is to focus on my backyard, literally, which is an area where my involvement may have some benefit and after that who knows. Maybe if I can get some folks together locally to tackle this we can take on the whole of western NY, wouldn't that be great!



7) I REALLY hope ATS is not your sole venue for this.

Thank you for acknowledgment of the work I have put into this already, much appreciated. Unfortunately, ATS is the only platform to present this information available to me at this point. If you or anyone else has any ideas, then I would love to hear them. Honestly, I would. I think this issue deserves more attention than it is getting. For me, it's almost like playing the game of 'Hot Potato"... now I've got it, to whom do I throw it?


Again, I do appreciate your observations and constructive criticism on this no matter how stinging it was. I am sure that taking your excellent points into consideration in writing up my next thread, they will make it all the better for reading. I cannot however guarantee there will not be one or 2 snarky bits included, it's just who I am.

I do have one question for you. Taking your professional experience in the library sciences into consideration do you think a good place to start looking for information outside the internet is the local library? If so, what questions should I be asking the librarian to direct me to the correct information? Any ideas on local agencies that may be able to help? Lastly, aside from the tips on actual write up, can you point me in any other direction that may prove fruitful?



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: jaynkeel

Very interesting I didn't know about the basements,clay mines,and ponds.I'll tell my friend about them and see if he knows.What the previous generations did as far as dumping came about before the environmental laws were in place. Since WNY was one of the places where the chemical industry was born(Newark NJ is another)there was a lot of dumping going on here.The cheap power provided by the niagara power project spawned the chemical industry here due to the cheap power.

What bothers me is that the agencies responsible for the documentation of these sites and the cleanup seem to not be doing their jobs properly.While we were doing this research (we're still not done and MMIMO did most of it) we discovered that there are documents missing. We also discovered that the solar site on river road was purchased by a company which split it up between various subsidary companies. I personally think this was done on purpose to keep anyone from finding the reports on that particular site.Without the name of that original parcel of land, there is no way to track any EPA or DEC reports on it.Seems like a coverup to me.

Now I remember when I was growing up in Tonawanda that that particular site had a station for filling chemical tank trucks.It may have been a part of the Ashland refinery,or a company that was affiliated with it.There were several large storage tanks there to hold the chemicals for the trucks. That's all gone now,but I remember it well.We used to ride our bikes down to the river near there to go fishing.Much of what used to be located along river road is long gone now.Mostly only old folks like me remember what was once there.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler
Continued from previous post...

Horse pucky. That cut to the quick and hurt. I presented all of the information I had available to me and what I could not directly link, I provided information for the reader to use in order to reach it.


6) Right now your motivation appears to be because one friend is about to "move in" to this complex and this one friend "has a concern."

Well, that was infact the initial motivation, so your statement there is spot on. It's from this initial concern that now my scope has widened to a great degree. I've done what I can for our friend in giving her even more information than she already knew of, so while this may sound insensitive, her next move is purely her own. I take pride in knowing that I have at least provided her and her co-workers with information not previously given to them so that whatever their next step may be will be one made in a more informed fashion. However, MY next step is to focus on my backyard, literally, which is an area where my involvement may have some benefit and after that who knows. Maybe if I can get some folks together locally to tackle this we can take on the whole of western NY, wouldn't that be great!



7) I REALLY hope ATS is not your sole venue for this.

Thank you for acknowledgment of the work I have put into this already, much appreciated. Unfortunately, ATS is the only platform to present this information available to me at this point. If you or anyone else has any ideas, then I would love to hear them. Honestly, I would. I think this issue deserves more attention than it is getting. For me, it's almost like playing the game of 'Hot Potato"... now I've got it, to whom do I throw it?


Again, I do appreciate your observations and constructive criticism on this no matter how stinging it was. I am sure that taking your excellent points into consideration in writing up my next thread, they will make it all the better for reading. I cannot however guarantee there will not be one or 2 snarky bits included, it's just who I am.

I do have some questions for you. Taking your professional experience in the library sciences into consideration do you think a good place to start looking for information outside the internet is the local library? If so, what questions should I be asking the librarian to direct me to the correct information? Any ideas on local agencies that may be able to help? Lastly, aside from the tips on actual write up, can you point me in any other direction that may prove fruitful?
edit on 16-5-2014 by MyMindIsMyOwn because: (no reason given)
edit on 16-5-2014 by MyMindIsMyOwn because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: lynn112

From your clue I know which town you are in.It is a very nice little town and when I was searching for a house a few years back I actually looked at a couple of houses there as I thought it was a very nice place.I won't name the plant for your anomonity,but anyone who lives around this area will know which one it is.I looked into this plant and talked to some people after seeing a house that I liked. What I discovered made me back off that house. Pretty much what I was told was that anything down wind of that plant is contaminated due to spills and accidental releases over the years. Back a little over a year ago the company that monitors that site was being changed to the company that does it now.

As I was looking for a job at the time and was previously a chemical operator (see my first post in this thread)I was contacted to see if I would be interested in working for them.They are out of California I would have to look at my email from the recruiter to find the company name I think that it was Parsons.They took me on a tour of the site and I was suprised at what I saw.There is much bad about that site.The stuff that is still manufactured there is very nasty. The stuff that was previously made there was even nastier.There are spills and dumps all over the site and I suspect that from the monitoring that they are doing there that things are migrating off the site.Anyway I didn't get the job cause my certification has gone out of date.What I saw there,due to my experience, made my hair stand on end.

I would advise that you and your family stay away from the creek that runs through the site as there are still things in the water there at times.They are doing what they can to treat the outgoing water but when there is a lot of precipitation there are some releases as they just can't keep up with the volume.The guys who were interviewing me were kind of evasive when I asked certian questions about exactly what was on site.

edit on 5/16/2014 by lonegurkha because: edit to add
edit on 5/16/2014 by lonegurkha because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: lonegurkha

Thank you so much for that information & this thread in general.

It is a discussion that has been needed for some time. It is just so sad to see how much damage has been done to WNY and unfortunately, I doubt any amount of "after the fact" cleanup can correct that.

Regarding my own little slice of hell... My property is not in the latest map of affected properties, but was part of the larger one that was issued before that. You see, my property has a drainage ditch that borders it, one that is full of run-off from the affected area potentially turning my back yard into a little toxic waste dump.

All they really focus on is the arsenic levels, but I know that there is much worse. Ever so often we get these cheery community bulletins sent to us, sponsored by the plant of course, and literally 3 pages of it is back-patting on how much the plant does for the community followed by a small section on the back with some actual facts.

I don't say a word, just read anything I can find and hope they one day they offer to buy me out because my life savings is tied up in this house. It will be a mixed bag, I love this town, but not enough to let it kill my family.

edit on 16/5/2014 by lynn112 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 05:19 PM
link   
They, the PTB, keep it up. They might as well extend the fence around Niagara Falls, Love Canal, around most of Western New York. Rochester was the site of a release of radioactive particles from a downtown building, to measure possible, real time fall out spread. Western New York was a real dynamo of the War Effort, from ammunition to the Manhattan Project.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 06:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: MyMindIsMyOwn
LOL, in all honesty I was wondering when or if you would enter the thread. While I'm sure your tone was not meant to be as insulting as it is, the criticism is actually appreciated.


Sigh. Well, I hope it is obvious that I meant this as constructive. You can agree with me or not. It took me a long time. If it's useful to you, great. Unlike the majority of people at ATS, I don't see my role simply to affirm what a good person you are and tell you what a good job you have done. Ignorant people will do that because they don't know any better. You are naive if you believe that kind of affirmation. I try to help you do a better job. I'm not inclined to argue with you over the points you take issue with. You'll either see the wisdom of what I'm telling you, or you will proclaim yourself better suited and more knowledgeable than I am. I've had a lot of students like you. They are just so damned smart and can't understand why they still get "C"s. They're usual route is to complain to their Daddy.

I am not really an antagonistic critic of yours at all. I am sympathetic to the cause. That you have chosen to respond as you have is telling. You will be unable to be as pedantic as you are with me with a real critic. Because a true critic, one who believes you are a complete idiot spewing nonsense and who is dedicated to the other side, will tear your thesis apart and make it look like week-old confetti in the rain. The things I have said that you take issue with will be pounced upon with all fours by someone intent on belittling you. If I see it, they will, too, so pay attention. They're not going to care one whit what you think because their object is to destroy your credibility completely. You can spew about it all the way home as you slowly realize that your effort has been futile.

I've been there, and I've experienced what I'm talking about. But if you're the smartest guy in the world, there's no talking to you. It's not really my fight, and the one thing you have done is make me regret I spent as much time on this as I did. On the other hand, you didn't ask me to, so thanks for the lesson.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

Interesting you seem to think that this is some kind of acedemic paper Hmmm.This search was begun because of the concerns of a very good friend who was concerned about being forced to move to a work location located in a chemical waste site.The primary concern was that there were radioactives at the site.We disproved this with a visit to the site with a geiger counter.However after some very difficult digging at the EPA,NYDEC, and Army Corps of Engineer sites,we discovered that the information that we sought had been buried by the breakup of the original parcel of land by the present owner. They divided up the parcel among their own subsidary companies,so without the original name for the parcel of land, there was no way to find out any study of the site,or any remedial action taken there.

So you see there is no way to make this into some kind of scientific paper. The evidence has been very effectively buried.
What is presented here is what we discovered about the remaining sites adjacent to the site we were interested in.

That information is somewhat fragmented as this is what they want it to be.I know information about these sites from having grown up very near these sites.I have personally known people who worked at them.I know what they told me about what is in those sites.I have seen first hand what was once there.




Right now your motivation appears to be because one friend is about to "move in" to this complex and this one friend "has a concern." Well, what's the easiest solution to that? If your friend "has a concern," then don't move in. It's not going to get better any time soon. So if there is all this concern, then the solution is to not go there. Problem (for her) solved. With all this evidence, in fact, how could anyone in their right mind "move in" at all? Therefore, in formulating your introduction and summaries, the overall health of the region and its populace must be the motivating factor--not your friend. You can certainly mention in passing that the "concerns of an acquaintance" fueled your interest, but that simply cannot be your motivation for this research.


So basically your solution to our good friends problem is to just walk away from her job of 20 years and give it up in bad economic times in an economically depressed area just short of her retirement......sounds like a plan doesn't it.Perhaps you don't care for your friends,but that doesn't extend to us.This woman is married to my best friend of 50 years. They are like family to us.

While your critisism is appreciated and would be very helpful if this were actually a scientific paper,it's not a paper.It's a thread on ATS.We were hoping to perhaps find somebody from this area who could provide some information so that we could continue our search for the actual truth about this specific site.

During this search we turned up some interesting information about other sites in this area, which we thought we would share.My brilliant wife has worked very hard digging up what we presented here.I helped as much as I was able due to having to work for a living.This was presented to share some of what we discovered for the information of ATS members who may live in the WNY area and who may not know about these sites, also to encourage others to do the same for the area where they live.The fact of the matter is what we found is that governments are taking hazardous waste sites and getting them recertified for industrial and business use.Sound like a good idea to you. For the government and the businesses it's a win win. For the folks working there, not so much.The governments are offering the businesses all kinds of tax breaks and other types of financial incentives to build in these sites and the saftey of the people working there be damned.

While I'm sure that your motivation was intended as helpful you really didn't come off as helpful. You came off as insulting.It's not so much what you said, it's how you said it.




I've been there, and I've experienced what I'm talking about. But if you're the smartest guy in the world, there's no talking to you. It's not really my fight, and the one thing you have done is make me regret I spent as much time on this as I did. On the other hand, you didn't ask me to, so thanks for the lesson.


Well first off she's not a guy, and while we are both fairly intelligent, we are well aware that we don't know everything.I have actually been wondering why you spent so much time giving a completely offtopic critique of this thread. Seems petty to me.But then i'm old and tend to think that way.

edit on 5/16/2014 by lonegurkha because: misspelling due to dementia



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 08:17 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

Really, Schuyler? Honestly, if that is what you took from my response to you then you did not read it at all. The very fact that you took the time to write as much as you did is the very reason why I addressed every point you made in some fashion or another. It was actually me trying to give you some respect and acknowledgement of the effort. If you took it as anything other than that, then that's your issue, not mine. I have apologized enough for my apparent lack of due diligence in your eyes and the fact you threw it back in my face says a lot about you as well. I could have just as easily not even bothered to respond or dismiss you with a couple of tersley worded sentences. What you see as hubris on my part could not be further from the truth. Now, I am done explaining myself to you.

As for the topic of the thread any insight you wish to give is and would be appreciated. In fact, if you care to take a look I asked for guidance in searching for outlets to further my own research and education on this topic. The only one I know of as of right now is the local libraries that I understand have a repository of information not found on the internet. Do you have any suggestions? You are a smart person, Schuyler, which is why I sought your assistance in that area.
edit on 16-5-2014 by MyMindIsMyOwn because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:11 PM
link   
I hope I can lighten the mood here and get us back on topic by stating that my buddy's father owns the Niagara Falls Reporter. I reached out to my friend tonight in hopes of a response regarding the history of his family covering the OP topic. He's been difficult to get a hold of since he began traveling, and while I'm doubtful that I can turn this ATS post into a newspaper article, I've seen far stranger things happen. Mr. Parlato's pen is feared in Niagara County, and from what I gather, it's not in his blood to be weary regarding a matter of value.
edit on 16-5-2014 by PeaceVindicator because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join