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.

 

Canadian Divers check 120 Miles of Coastline and almost everything is dead

page: 3
30
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 08:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Regenstorm

Then kindly explain the largest Sockeye Salmon run, named the Adam's River run, in the Fraser River in recorded history.

In the last run four years ago, 4 million fish made it to the spawning grounds with an estimate of 25 million fish in that run.

This run, occurring as we speak, has a conservative estimate of 25 million to as high as 70 million Sockeye! Mind-warping numbers in both runs.

"Almost everything dead" seems a bit of an exaggeration, yes?


edit on 11-8-2014 by nwtrucker because: missing comma

edit on 11-8-2014 by nwtrucker because: grammar




posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

P.S. Salmon runs on the west coast are currently running well within the norms by Canadian and U.S. estimates.

These salmon require food. LOL. Apparently, there is no unusual shortage whatsoever.

Therefore, regarding this thread? YAWN...



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: nwtrucker

P.S. Salmon runs on the west coast are currently running well within the norms by Canadian and U.S. estimates.

These salmon require food. LOL. Apparently, there is no unusual shortage whatsoever.

Therefore, regarding this thread? YAWN...




Record catches of Salmon? Not according to this.

alexandramorton.typepad.com...< br />
Huge percentages of salmon being caught are filled with cancerous tumours.

You won't see me eating Pacific Salmon again in this brief lifetime.

The Canadian west coast Sardine fishery was cancelled this year after the fleet failed to catch a single sardine.

Might be a bit premature to "LOL".



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Psynic Hmmm, that IS interesting if true. Living right on the coast and at the border, in Blaine, Wa., we have both salmon and crab processing and am active on the local fishing sites as well as moving both canned and frozen fish to Canada via rail containers, I have a fair amount of contact with people in all levels of the industry, including native interests.

Zero on this. Nothing.

When one factors in the different species as competitors, there's quite a few exaggerations put forth. A couple of weeks ago, it was "don't eat the canned tuna, it's radioactive.

I'm not saying, it's impossible. What I AM saying is crying wolf often enough breeds skepticism to say the least. I need corroborative evidence to be convinced.

I also post this to point out, those that actively working in the industry, at all levels, right to this very minute, have zero on this.

Lastly, the thread goes from near zero life for a major proportion of Pacific ocean to "tumors" in fish with my point ignored with a "oh, yeah? What about the 'tumors' in the fish"?

Again, what scarcity? What tumors?

A little skepticism is a healthy thing, don't you think?



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Psynic



A little skepticism is a healthy thing, don't you think?




ABSOLUTELY!

Your civility is also appreciated.



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   
i think the fukushima disaster has, is and will continue to impact all life in the pacific.

and not in a good way.



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 12:19 PM
link   
So Cs137 levels ( Cs137 is the most common product of nuclear fission) Is about 1 Bq/M3 on the Pacific coast. This is 10,000 times smaller than is allowed in drinking water, Yet it is killing all of the sea life there?




Although the radioactivity concentrations remain extremely low – less than one becquerel per cubic metre of water – they have allowed the scientists to start to validate the two models that are being used to forecast the probable future progression of the plume.

One of these models anticipates a maximum concentration by mid-2015 of up to 27 becquerels per cubic metre of water; the other no more than about two becquerels per cubic metre of water.

Bedford’s Dr John Smith told BBC News that further measurements being taken in the ocean right now should give researchers a fair idea of which model is correct.

Water sample
Citizen science project ourradioactiveocean.org is collecting water samples
And he emphasised again: “These levels are still well below maximum permissible concentrations in drinking water in Canada for caesium-137 of 10,000 becquerels per cubic metre of water – so, it’s clearly not an environmental or human-health radiological threat.”

Dr Smith was speaking at the Ocean Sciences Meeting 2014 in Honolulu, Hawaii.

He was joined on a panel discussing Fukushima by Dr Ken Buesseler from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.


www.bbc.com...

And thats from an oceanographer Not just some man on you tube.


The background level of radiation in oceans and seas varies around the globe. WHOI


As this map shows there are places with much higher concentrations of Cs 137 like the Irish Sea which has 61x the amount that we are currently looking at on the Pacific coast. And all the sea life there is not dead. Mind you this is back in 2008 and it is saying that there was about the same concentration as they are finding now if not more back then.

edit on 11-8-2014 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Regenstorm

I have a multi-rotor RC w/ high def camera I'm trying to find a good use for. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I'm going to contact these fellows.



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Said it once and I will say it again.....


IF there was enough radiation leaking from Fukushima to kill the sea life on the west coast of the US.... IF.. I can promise you would have a whole lot worse problem than just dead sea life... there would be a crap load of dead humans too.

It's just not logically possible for this to happen. Most people conveniently choose to ignore that most of these mass die offs were occurring before 3/11/2011.




edit on R502014-08-11T13:50:36-05:00k508Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 02:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: BGTM90
I'm sorry but is he saying nuclear proctologist? A proctologist as in a one who studies the anus and rectum? If so that is not a real title and something he just made up.


Thsts what I thought. Proctologist?



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

Not to mention if that much destruction on the west coast of Canada, wouldn't the things be all that much worse on the other side moving up from Japan, along China's coast and so on? Far worse? Far sooner?

Trash binned...



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
Said it once and I will say it again.....


IF there was enough radiation leaking from Fukushima to kill the sea life on the west coast of the US.... IF.. I can promise you would have a whole lot worse problem than just dead sea life... there would be a crap load of dead humans too.

It's just not logically possible for this to happen. Most people conveniently choose to ignore that most of these mass die offs were occurring before 3/11/2011.





The first of the USN Sailors aboard CVNRonald Reagan has died from the cancer that developed from the radiation he and 80 other crew were exposed to and were/are suing TEPCO over.

There is an incubation period, currently taking place, that will soon break into the mass deaths you predict.

There has never been a Sea Star die off that spanned the dozen plus varieties we see affected now. This phenomenon has NO precedent in the nuclear age and CERTAINLY none from pre WWII.

The number of marine species currently experiencing massive die-offs has NEVER been seen before and includes whales, orcas, dolphins, sharks, swordfish, tuna, salmon, cod, halibut, herring, salmon, sardines, anchovies, sea lions, polar bears and sea birds, including pelicans and eagles.

That is the inconvenient truth you seem to be ignoring.



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 03:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Psynic

The first of the USN Sailors aboard CVNRonald Reagan has died from the cancer that developed from the radiation he and 80 other crew were exposed to and were/are suing TEPCO over.

There is an incubation period, currently taking place, that will soon break into the mass deaths you predict.


How does this have anything to do with sea animal die offs? These men where in the direct path of the airborne plume. Yes it is a horrible tragedy and yes people will get cancer from Fukushima but this does not mean that 1 Bq/m^3 is causing sea stars to die off.


There has never been a Sea Star die off that spanned the dozen plus varieties we see affected now. This phenomenon has NO precedent in the nuclear age and CERTAINLY none from pre WWII.

The number of marine species currently experiencing massive die-offs has NEVER been seen before and includes whales, orcas, dolphins, sharks, swordfish, tuna, salmon, cod, halibut, herring, salmon, sardines, anchovies, sea lions, polar bears and sea birds, including pelicans and eagles.

That is the inconvenient truth you seem to be ignoring.

Exactly and wouldn't you have expected to see massive sea star die offs during Nuclear weapons testing when Cs137 concentrations where even higher? You talk about skepticism being healthy yet you are only skeptic when it come to radiation not being the cause of something. Shouldn't you also hold skepticism when the nuclear proctologist or, Dr. Helen Coldicott or, Arnie Gunderson or any anti nuclear bias person says something? I hold Dr. Coldicott and Mr. Gunderson to high regards but I don't just blindly believe why they say. Why do you choose to believe them out right? Why no skepticism there?
edit on 11-8-2014 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 03:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: RickinVa

Not to mention if that much destruction on the west coast of Canada, wouldn't the things be all that much worseon the other side moving up from Japan, along China's coast and so on? Far worse? Far sooner?

Trash binned...



Things are "much worse" closer to Fukushima.

That's why they passed a law making it illegal to report Non-government of Japan approved news about the disaster.

But hey, the trash bin is next to the door. See ya.



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Psynic

Good point! Banning non-gov't approved news either hides the truth OR avoids vested interested parties fear-mongering either for personal profit or sheer doo-doo stirring malice.

The original post is Bull.

Negatives from this event is NOT!

Think...then opine. ...click.



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: boncho
All of you are really silly. There have been huge problems with the ocean long before Fukashima.


The FIRST thing you need to learn is how to spell 'Fukushima'.

The second is, there's NO PRECEDENT for the die-offs, beachings, collapsed fisheries, and species extinctions most likely happening because of the hundreds of tons of tritium DAILY thats been spewing, NON STOP for three and a half years into the Pacific Ocean.



Exactly, it is a big unknown and projections will be off due to the changes in weather also. It is possible for the plume to hold to currents without total disbursement.

Researchers find high cesium in some Pacific plankton


The researchers collected plankton at 10 points in the Pacific from off Hokkaido to Guam between January and February 2012.
They detected cesium-134 in plankton at all 10 points. The density of radioactive cesium was the highest at 8.2 to 10.5 becquerels per kilogram in samples collected


I have lived here on the West coast for 20 years and the tide pools full of creatures were always the same, now the tide pools have nothing living even the plants are gone mostly. We did see in hours of looking only a small snail in a shell, normally the starfish are everywhere and the sea anemones.

It seems that people want to say it is coincidence. The plume was predicted to arrive this year, this summer or around Mar-April was many of the reported time lines, since that I have seen no information. I don't know if it has arrived but I do know that the whole of the West coast survives only as long as tourists travel and unless people are instantly dying in the streets they will do nothing to scare them away.

We have to understand that the plankton and plants feed the larger animals which then are fed on by larger animals up the food chain, how will that turn out.



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Char-Lee

I have lived here on the West coast for 20 years and the tide pools full of creatures were always the same, now the tide pools have nothing living even the plants are gone mostly. We did see in hours of looking only a small snail in a shell, normally the starfish are everywhere and the sea anemones.


We have to understand that the plankton and plants feed the larger animals which then are fed on by larger animals up the food chain, how will that turn out.


Thanks CharLee for confirming the survey findings of Dana, the Nuclear Proctologist.

Never have I felt so sickened to be proved right.

Your closing remark about the disruption of the food chain, "how will that turn out" truly is THE question.



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Regenstorm




They only found 4 species of animals, all other have disappeared.


What a lot of nonsense, I live on the west coast and everything is just fine. Right now the salmon boats are out on the Fraser river hauling in part of what should be a record return, all beautiful healthy fish that have been feeding along the coast and in the Pacific for 4 years. Are the members of this forum all working for enenews now?



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 09:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: GaryN
a reply to: Regenstorm




They only found 4 species of animals, all other have disappeared.


What a lot of nonsense, I live on the west coast and everything is just fine. Right now the salmon boats are out on the Fraser river hauling in part of what should be a record return, all beautiful healthy fish that have been feeding along the coast and in the Pacific for 4 years. Are the members of this forum all working for enenews now?



Just out of curiosity, how much time do you spend on the water? I know this salmon run is expected to be massive but If a local resident of the sunshine coast is sounding an alarm, I would be inclined to listen.



posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 09:32 PM
link   
This is the follow up Q&A to Dana's earth shattering news that the the Intertidal Zone of BC's coastline is virtually devoid of life.

www.youtube.com...




top topics



 
30
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join