Many baby seals dying of leukemia-linked disorder along California coast

Source of chart above

Link to the source of info above

DIC “is a pathological process characterized by the widespread activation of the clotting cascade that results in the formation of blood clots in the small blood vessels throughout the body… and can ultimately lead to multiple organ damage… severe bleeding can occur from various sites. DIC does not occur by itself but only as a complicating factor from another underlying condition, usually in those with a critical illness… DIC can lead to multiorgan failure and widespread bleeding… Causes — DIC can occur in the following conditions: Solid tumors and blood cancers (particularly acute promyelocytic leukemia)… Sepsis or severe infection… Severe allergic or toxic reactions… Giant hemangiomas (Kasabach-Merritt syndrome) [and] Large aortic aneurysms.”
Link to article

The following quote from a poster on enenews about the above information expresses my thoughts fairly well:

Well, what do you know….ionizing radiation can bring about Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation. That's an interesting fact. At least they didn't say they are puzzled or mystified. This scenario is exactly what people have been saying….radiation is such an assault on living creatures that, even if it doesn't kill them right away, it lowers their resistance so other serious/fatal conditions can take hold. We need to know exactly what we are eating, drinking and breathing as far as radiation is concerned. Our government's head-in-the-sand approach is unacceptable.
Link to quote

This is the first really solid link I know of between Fukushima and the death of the Pacific Ocean. It's still quite inconclusive in terms of it being ideal evidence but we're getting closer. One sad thing about all this is that even after we have conclusive proof, it probably will not be given anywhere near the attention that it should be by the governments and media of the world. I covered that issue in another thread:

Proof that "The Matrix" concept is our true reality?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

On an individual basis there are things we can do about this. Moving to the southern hemisphere due to Fukushima is one thing people have been talking about for a long time. The theory is that most of the radiation from Fukushima is circulating in the northern hemisphere and it will only enter into the southern hemisphere very slowly and with great difficulty (supposedly). It seems that while that theory may be true scientifically, the problem I have is that most of the governments of the countries located in the southern hemisphere don't seem trustworthy at all.

I'm going to be proactive here just in case anyone wants to claim that the amount of radiation emanating from the three melted cores at Fukushima Daiichi isn't enough to KILL EVERY LIVING THING on earth, watch the video below. Arnie Gundersen is world-renowned as a nuclear expert.


www.youtube.com...

Quoting from the video above (starting at about 4:35):

"Viewers keep asking Fairwinds about the difference between the meltdown at Chernobyl in the Ukraine and the triple meltdown at Fukushima Daiichi in Japan. The major difference right now is that the nuclear core at Chernobyl never came in contact with groundwater. Here's a picture of the core taken in 1987, one year after the Chernobyl disaster. It's called 'the elephant's foot.' Today, almost thirty years later, if people stood in a room with 'the elephant's foot' melted core, everyone would die in eight minutes."

According to my research, all three of the melted cores at Fukushima Daiichi are at least twice the size of the melted nuclear core at Chernobyl. Not to mention the fact that one of the melted cores at Fukushima Daiichi, reactor 3, has MOX fuel. I'll leave you with the following video. Anyone playing this down is just brain-dead.


www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Profusion

Are there beaches in all these cities listed? Not according to Google.

I notice the "adapted from" notation at the bottom of the chart in the OP.

If true, this is horrendously impactful for all oceanic life.

No. The radiation will harmlessly disperse
It's just like when you mix a drink.

a reply to: NewzNose

# 495

so what is the common factor between us and our seal friends that makes the blood sick ?

...and anyone within the blast-zone of one of the thousands of nuclear bombs dropped on the planet over the decades would be vaporized, yet we're all still around. Do you know how many of those were tested in the oceans?

Who's the brain dead one again?

My god this just keeps getting more and more ridiculous.

BTW, bothered to watch the video. There's ABSOLUTELY nothing in the video that remotely talks of all life dying out, or anything of the sort.

Quit the fear-mongering nonsense, it's bad enough as is.

Isn't there deadly algae in the area too? I read it somewhere ... it's growing along the West Coast , to Alaska I believe, and where else I don't recall. I will check and see if I can find the thread or article online and post it.

Sea life is dying because of it is all I remember. May or may not be related to the OP but then again I have no idea whats going on.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
...and anyone within the blast-zone of one of the thousands of nuclear bombs dropped on the planet over the decades would be vaporized, yet we're all still around. Do you know how many of those were tested in the oceans?

Who's the brain dead one again?

My god this just keeps getting more and more ridiculous.

BTW, bothered to watch the video. There's ABSOLUTELY nothing in the video that remotely talks of all life dying out, or anything of the sort.

Quit the fear-mongering nonsense, it's bad enough as is.

Somebody isn't understanding the difference between a short-lived nuclear blast vs a long-term steady nuclear meltdown with regards to bioaccumulation...

Short-lived isotopes in an instant vs long-lived isotopes steadily flowing out.

140 pounds of radioactive material in an instant (Nagasaki's Little Boy) vs 50,000 pounds of radioactive waste per annum (Fukushima).



... but go ahead, keep telling yourself that a nuclear bomb and a nuclear plant meltdown are the same thing.

originally posted by: CranialSponge


Somebody isn't understanding the difference between a short-lived nuclear blast vs a long-term steady nuclear meltdown with regards to bioaccumulation...

Short-lived isotopes in an instant vs long-lived isotopes steadily flowing out.

Of course there's multiple differences, I'm trying to bring perspective. The science illiterate OP is fearmongering based on a snippet that if people are within a contained environment, they die within 8 minutes. That's why I brought up the blast zone. One is land based, one is water. Do you catch my drift?

140 pounds of radioactive material in an instant (Nagasaki's Little Boy) vs 50,000 pounds of radioactive waste per annum (Fukushima).

Either you're ignorant as well, else are consciously trying to deceive. The 140lbs is of actual radioactive particles, vs water which contains a given concentration of radioactive material.

Please tell me you're just ignorant, and not trying to fear monger as well.


Let me give out a dozen or so examples to prove just how ridiculous this is:

if I put my head in an oven, it burns.
if I turn that oven off and keep my head directly outside the oven until it cools down into the surrounding air, i will simply be bored.

if i drink a gallon of whisky in an hr, i will choke on my vomit unconsciously.
if i drink a gallon of beer in an hr, i will slap ass and get in a bar fight.
if i drop 12oz of whisky in a 3liter of coca-cola and drink it in an hr, i will slap ass and get in a bar fight.

if i piss on the life-guard outside a public swimming pool, she may enjoy it (i doubt it).
if i piss in an olympic swimming pool while staring at a life guard, he may think i'm gay (but i won't get outed!).

if tens of thousands of times the radiation of fukushima currently exists within the ocean, then a drop of blue dye in a red-dye bucket will cause no perceptible difference.

how the hell are so many people so damned lost on perspective? i know this is complex, hell i brought out a source in an earlier thread that makes this issue 100% case-closed, but few seem to be able to interpret the facts provided. so the ignorance continues on. guess you can't fix stupidity.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

First you said:

Of course there's multiple differences, I'm trying to bring perspective. The science illiterate OP

Then you said:

Let me give out a dozen or so examples to prove just how ridiculous this is:

if I put my head in an oven, it burns.
if I turn that oven off and keep my head directly outside the oven until it cools down into the surrounding air, i will simply be bored.

if i drink a gallon of whisky in an hr, i will choke on my vomit unconsciously.
if i drink a gallon of beer in an hr, i will slap ass and get in a bar fight.
if i drop 12oz of whisky in a 3liter of coca-cola and drink it in an hr, i will slap ass and get in a bar fight.

if i piss on the life-guard outside a public swimming pool, she may enjoy it (i doubt it).
if i piss in an olympic swimming pool while staring at a life guard, he may think i'm gay (but i won't get outed!).

Wow, those were some epic scientific analogies.

How about your stellar knowledge on oceanography? Such as the North Pacific Gyre ?
How about your knowledge regarding marine life, habitats and fisheries?
Na, you know nothing but the intoxication of your own ignorance. It mixes like a drink eh? (face palm)

a reply to: FlySolo

Anyone who still believes this nonsense is obviously scientifically illiterate. It's already been proven that if you bring the science to the ignorant, they will keep barking.

So I'm trying to work on a much lower level. If you'd like to refute what I've been saying in these last several threads, then please go at it.

I challenge you, the OP, and any other member on this site to show me the radioactive material flooding into the worlds oceans is any more than a minute fraction compared to what already exists.

Put up or shut up about this absolutely ridiculous ELE nonsense.

originally posted by: TheWhiteKnight
No. The radiation will harmlessly disperse
It's just like when you mix a drink.
a reply to: NewzNose
# 495

And when you consume that drink, or whatever consumed it, you STILL get all that radiation!

How much Fukashima radiation Do You want to drink?

Troll on nightdude

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: FlySolo

Anyone who still believes this nonsense is obviously scientifically illiterate. It's already been proven that if you bring the science to the ignorant, they will keep barking.

So I'm trying to work on a much lower level. If you'd like to refute what I've been saying in these last several threads, then please go at it.

I challenge you to show me the radioactive material flooding into the worlds oceans is any more than a minute fraction compared to what already exists.

I challenge you to show me it isn't. Where has it been proven mate? Bring it because I can guarantee you there isn't and you'll have to spend the rest of your time rebuilding your nonthingness on ATS. And cut the crap about trying to work on a lower level so us "pea brains" can understand your "pathetic" attempts at analogies.

I'll give you proof. It's called the effin North Pacific Gyre.

The North Pacific Gyre, located in the northern Pacific Ocean, is one of the five major oceanic gyres. This gyre covers most of the northern Pacific Ocean. It is the largest ecosystem on Earth, located between the equator and 50° N latitude, and comprising 20 million square kilometers.[1] The gyre has a clockwise circular pattern and is formed by four prevailing ocean currents: the North Pacific Current to the north, the California Current to the east, the North Equatorial Current to the south, and the Kuroshio Current to the west. It is the site of an unusually intense collection of man-made marine debris, known as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.

And it doesn't mix like a drink. All that Tsunami debris? Yeah, that's right, it's got a hitchhiker and its called radiation. FFS

Cesium detected off Canada. And don't let the low levels fool you seeing you like to lower your intellectual standards
www.theguardian.com...
So now you put up or shut the F up.

a reply to: FlySolo

I already did, time and time again. The onus is on you. It's up to you to care enough to look back on my posts.

Oh, but you won't.

Go figure, ignoramus.

You fools have fun with your fear mongering nonsense.

This is like trying to cure an addict by telling them to stop. I'm not going to participate in your addiction any longer.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: FlySolo

I already did, time and time again. The onus is on you. It's up to you to care enough to look back on my posts.

Oh, but you won't.

Go figure, ignoramus.

You fools have fun with your fear mongering nonsense.

This is like trying to cure an addict by telling them to stop. I'm not going to participate in your addiction any longer.

You did not! And now I know you know you have been OWNED. Now one more time. Prove it here and now in OUR debate right effin now or stop posting period!

ahaa!

This is like trying to cure an addict by telling them to stop. I'm not going to participate in your addiction any longer.

OWNED brother. You have lost. You have nothing and if I ever see you post your garbage again about this on ATS, I will be all over you. Don't forget. Now have a nice day.

a reply to: FlySolo

I most certainly did.

Nautral Radiation

41 EBq of Uranium in the oceans, and that's just one isotope.

Now go through all the work I did a few years ago to come up with a rough estimate for the low and high figures of total radioactive isotopes of each, and come up with a rough figure for how many doses lethal doses exist when digested acutely.

Again, I challenge you to do your own damned homework. Come back at me with the science. If you dare to be honest and do the work, you can publicly forgive me and educate the rest.

Thanks.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

Got brick for brains I see. WTF did I just tell you about the currents? Huh? Selective effing listening or what is your problem?

eta: pfft you wrote that eh? Credentials? May I get SO to confirm your identity? I pick my battles and you're on my # list.

a reply to: FlySolo

No, you're choosing to ignore the data, like I said would happen.

There doesn't exist enough radioactive material at the plant site to make much a difference to what's already in the world's oceans.

That's the bottom line. Don't change the goal posts.

You've been pwned and don't even realize it, that's how dense you are!

a reply to: pl3bscheese

there were 4 full meltdowns. You're apathy towards this fact is highly suspect. You are a fool to trust yourself. Now answer my effing question. What about the currents smart guy.

a reply to: FlySolo

Understood, you are unwilling to do the work, and are retorting to emotional appeals.

I have won. No more to bother with you.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

LMAO. Let let the jury of our peers decide that. Now again, I ask.

1. Permission to verify who you are
2. Your response to my question about the North Pacific Gyre.


If you can't provide proof you did the work linked to the Idaho State University as you claim to have. Then I believe that would violate T&C as plagiarism or possibly a hoax.