It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Evidence - Fukishima Poisoning & Killing

page: 5
27
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 30 2014 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheWetCoast
At the moment we are NOT seeing 108,000 people killed per day(39,420,000 for one year) because the radiation is spread over a very large area. Unfortunately the situation is only going to get worse and there is NO WAY to stop it from degrading further. I'll try to get more recent information so I can reassess the situation and I will provide more details in the near future as to why I believe my numbers are accurate.


Wow... thank you so much for all that - it is amazing how well you put it all together. And - unfortunately- you're probably right in the analysis... I've always figured cancer will climb but won't be associated with Fukushima, will just be 'cancer' like everybody gets... except more people will be getting it - soon... and animals.




posted on May, 30 2014 @ 08:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Amanda5

Hi, it appears you've missed the video I shared where Ivan, the man you've based this whole thread on, discusses over fishing in the area.

Which contradicts your claim that it's entirely because of Fukushima.

Yes, Fukushima has and will play a part in some of the decline, but so will over fishing.

You dismissed it before due to the source, so you can't ignore it now coming out of his own mouth.



posted on May, 30 2014 @ 08:02 PM
link   
A response to 'Wishes' opinion of TEPCO's estimates:

No, they are worthless nonsense, as would be the results of ANY calculations utilizing deliberate misinformation.


edit on -05:0024145082014-05-30T20:08:24-05:00 by Psynic because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2014 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: TheWetCoast

You can't convert bequerels into sieverts.

Becquerels don't measure dosage at all, it measures the activity of the radioactive source.

Maybe this graphic will help you understand..




posted on May, 30 2014 @ 08:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: wishes

originally posted by: Psynic
Any estimates based on statements from TEPCO are worthless.


I wouldn't agree they're worthless, just grossly underestimated - can pretty much assume that whatever they've admitted to is far less than the reality... and at least gives a 'basic' jump off point...


Not only worthless but evil.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 30 2014 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: wishes

originally posted by: Psynic
Any estimates based on statements from TEPCO are worthless.


I wouldn't agree they're worthless, just grossly underestimated - can pretty much assume that whatever they've admitted to is far less than the reality... and at least gives a 'basic' jump off point...


Not only worthless but evil.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Let me clarify - is Tepco worthless? Yes - absolutely worthless, I agree. What I was trying to say is what Tepco is forced to admit to, as far as radiation leakage 'information', is not totally worthless information because at least it gives the bottom/base minimal amount of radiation let loose to start figuring out the real numbers - like by taking what Tepco says and multiply it by 10 or 100 or 1000. They admit to nothing they don't 'have' to so what they 'do' actually admit to has to be the minimum problem (and not the reality of the situation) - we can always assume there's far more being released than they admit to. About all you can rely on Tepco for is to give you nothing they don't have to and what they will give is grossly underestimated.



posted on May, 30 2014 @ 10:12 PM
link   
If Obama lived in Fukushima it would have been cleaned up already.



posted on May, 30 2014 @ 10:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: wishes

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: wishes

originally posted by: Psynic
Any estimates based on statements from TEPCO are worthless.


I wouldn't agree they're worthless, just grossly underestimated - can pretty much assume that whatever they've admitted to is far less than the reality... and at least gives a 'basic' jump off point...


Not only worthless but evil.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Let me clarify - is Tepco worthless? Yes - absolutely worthless, I agree. What I was trying to say is what Tepco is forced to admit to, as far as radiation leakage 'information', is not totally worthless information because at least it gives the bottom/base minimal amount of radiation let loose to start figuring out the real numbers - like by taking what Tepco says and multiply it by 10 or 100 or 1000. They admit to nothing they don't 'have' to so what they 'do' actually admit to has to be the minimum problem (and not the reality of the situation) - we can always assume there's far more being released than they admit to. About all you can rely on Tepco for is to give you nothing they don't have to and what they will give is grossly underestimated.


I can't understand your logic.

Are you saying that there is some calculable rate of un-truth to TEPCO figures that allows you to accept them as partially true?

We only know they are liars.

In a court of law, ALL testimony from a proven perjurer is INVALID.
edit on -05:0011145292014-05-30T22:29:11-05:00 by Psynic because: typo



posted on May, 30 2014 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Psynic

What I'm saying is if a known thief and a liar admits to stealing 2 cupcakes, you can assume the number is much greater than just '2' whether it could be 3 cupcakes or 30 would depend on how much of a thief and liar they are.

If Tepco admits to "x" release of radiation, you can assume the actual amount is much greater than the 'x' amount they admitted to - but what they admit to is always the minimum amount they 'have to' - so whatever they 'say' is being released we have to take that and multiply it by some number to get a realistic picture - so their confessions, albeit underestimated - provide the very minimum information. They're not going to lie and say more radiation is being released than actual numbers, they're going to lie and say less radiation is released than actual numbers. Therein lies their only value as a starting point of their lie - from that we have to multiply and guess upwards.

The only truth to their lies is that they never overestimate, only underestimate, so whatever number they do give out gives us a minimum to start with. Calculating how much of a lie is not possible, is guesswork, but if they say "x" is being released we know for sure it's not less than "x", likely more - by how much is guess work... 10 x? 100 x? Don't know...

edit on 30-5-2014 by wishes because: (no reason given)



edit on 30-5-2014 by wishes because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2014 @ 11:44 PM
link   
a reply to: wishes

Remember where we started.

A calculation saying 4 billion people are about to die from Fukushima.

A calculation based on erroneous information.

And a calculation that can't possibly allow for another earthquake tomorrow.

What it actually amounts to is pointless obfuscation.



posted on May, 31 2014 @ 12:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Psynic
a reply to: wishes

Remember where we started.

A calculation saying 4 billion people are about to die from Fukushima.

A calculation based on erroneous information.

And a calculation that can't possibly allow for another earthquake tomorrow.

What it actually amounts to is pointless obfuscation.



It was a calculation based on what was admitted to by Tepco. Likely/probably Tepco 'lied' so the calculations are likely/probably underestimated too. But they are not overestimated because it was calculated on what Tepco admitted to. We get what they give us and have to estimate based on their "low" numbers is all I'm saying. We don't know "how low" we just know they're not forthcoming with true amounts and whatever they do admit to is a bottom line - it's certainly not radiating 'less' than what they admit to.

I totally appreciate the effort and tracking Wet Coast did to come up with the figures. Could it be under? yes. Could it be over? yes. But it's a ballpark based on real 'admitted' information. Could the situation get worse? Absolutely. Could the situation get better? Not likely.

Not sure why this is so difficult - is not really important, was not intended as anything other than a comment as it being a starting point to estimate how bad it really is which is the only worth Tepco's numbers have.



posted on May, 31 2014 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlphaHawk
a reply to: TheWetCoast

You can't convert bequerels into sieverts.

Becquerels don't measure dosage at all, it measures the activity of the radioactive source.

Maybe this graphic will help you understand..

You can if you have the right formula(which is different for every isotope)



posted on May, 31 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   
We might not be able to trust TEPCO but we can still work with facts. Reactor 1 contained 400 fuel assemblies(69 tons) and 392 assemblies in the SFP(67 tons). Reactor 2 contained 548 fuel assemblies(94 tons) and 615 assemblies in the SFP(106 tons). Reactor 3 contained 548 fuel assemblies(94 tons) and 566 assemblies in the SFP(97 tons). The SFP in Reactor 4 contains 533 fuel assemblies(about 91 tons). The Common SFP contains 6375 fuel assemblies(1101 tons).



posted on May, 31 2014 @ 02:55 PM
link   
The main concern here should be the Corium from Reactor 3. If the core of this reactor melted into a large mass it could be VERY BAD! If that core contains enough Uranium-238, the Uranium-238 will turn into Plutonium-239. A 11Kg sphere of Plutonium-239 WILL GO CRITICAL! The explosion from JUST the 94 tons of material in Reactor 3 would be like getting hit with a 1-2 mile wide asteroid.



posted on May, 31 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheWetCoast
The main concern here should be the Corium from Reactor 3. If the core of this reactor melted into a large mass it could be VERY BAD! If that core contains enough Uranium-238, the Uranium-238 will turn into Plutonium-239. A 11Kg sphere of Plutonium-239 WILL GO CRITICAL! The explosion from JUST the 94 tons of material in Reactor 3 would be like getting hit with a 1-2 mile wide asteroid.


That would really throw a wrench into your calculations now wouldn't it?



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 02:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: TheWetCoast
The main concern here should be the Corium from Reactor 3. If the core of this reactor melted into a large mass it could be VERY BAD! If that core contains enough Uranium-238, the Uranium-238 will turn into Plutonium-239. A 11Kg sphere of Plutonium-239 WILL GO CRITICAL! The explosion from JUST the 94 tons of material in Reactor 3 would be like getting hit with a 1-2 mile wide asteroid.


That would really throw a wrench into your calculations now wouldn't it?
I know that Uranium-238 has turned up in more than a few of the samples taken in Japan and I know that Uranium-238 is used to make MOX fuel. The BIG question is "How Much?". We can only speculate because we don't know what happened to the core of Reactor 3(but I think we can assume that it melted into a giant blob and breached containment).



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   
So the japanese government is "encouraging" evacuees to return to the 'Exclusion Zone', and Brian Cranston is telling us there's nothing unsafe about the 'Exclusion Zone' in GODzilla.

Now an MIT study says we really don't need 'Exclusion Zones' at all.
www.youtube.com...

Imagine if that "Exclusion Zone" happened to be NYC or LA. Trying to force 20 or 30 million ARMED Americans back into an 'Exclusion Zone' would result in anarchy and societal collapse.

So to pre-empt such a panic we have this Public Service Announcement from MIT telling us 'Exclusion Zones' are over-rated.

No wonder the government is so desperate to claw back the 2nd Amendment that they resort to staged mass shootings.



posted on Jun, 10 2014 @ 12:19 PM
link   
After doing a whole lot of research I think I have a better understanding of what WILL happen to reactor #3. When the core of Reactor #3 melted into a blob the control rods got mixed into the corium and that will delay the outcome of the following reaction(but I do not know for how long). The composition of the MOX fuel is: 4-5% Uranium-235,about 5% Plutonium-239, and the rest IS Uranium-238. The Uranium-238 will absorb neutrons from the Uranium-235 and will turn into Uranium-239 which then turns into Plutonium-239 through two successive beta decays(this happens very quickly). If the core of Reactor #3 melted into a blob then it created an incredibly massive nuclear bomb with a molecular decay detonator. The same IS true for reactors #1 and #2 but the MOX fuel used in Reactor #3 has a higher Plutonium-239 content so it would most likely be the first to go BOOM! I REALLY hope that I am wrong because if I'm not the consequences will be absolutely horrendous.



posted on Jun, 10 2014 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheWetCoast
After doing a whole lot of research I think I have a better understanding of what WILL happen to reactor #3. When the core of Reactor #3 melted into a blob the control rods got mixed into the corium and that will delay the outcome of the following reaction(but I do not know for how long). The composition of the MOX fuel is: 4-5% Uranium-235,about 5% Plutonium-239, and the rest IS Uranium-238. The Uranium-238 will absorb neutrons from the Uranium-235 and will turn into Uranium-239 which then turns into Plutonium-239 through two successive beta decays(this happens very quickly). If the core of Reactor #3 melted into a blob then it created an incredibly massive nuclear bomb with a molecular decay detonator. The same IS true for reactors #1 and #2 but the MOX fuel used in Reactor #3 has a higher Plutonium-239 content so it would most likely be the first to go BOOM! I REALLY hope that I am wrong because if I'm not the consequences will be absolutely horrendous.


Should we be hoping that the Core in #3 'blew up' back in 2011 and not even 'there' so to speak? I thought someone has speculated that the cores from all three had essentially gone up in the explosions(s)...? Thoughts?



posted on Jun, 10 2014 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: wishes The spent fuel pool(s) caused the explosions in Reactors #1 and #3. I'm not really sure what happened inside of Reactor #2. Most of the SFPs from Reactors 1 and 3 got blasted into the air as large chunks; If the material had been vaporized most of North America would be a wasteland by now.




top topics



 
27
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join