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.

 

There's a new species taking over at Chernobyl

page: 1
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   
I am posting this in response to the other thread about the exclusion zone around Fukushima.


What happens when humans abandon 1,600 square miles because of radioactivity? Wildlife runs rampant, apparently. A new study on animals in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone shows what once looked something like a wasteland is now packed with elk, roe deer, red deer, wild boar, and wolves.

Researchers conducted aerial surveys in the zone during winter months between 1987—a year after the Chernobyl disaster—and 1997 and estimated animal populations based on tracks in the snow, reports the Guardian.

They found the number of animals in the area was actually on par with those in four uncontaminated nature reserves nearby; but the number of wolves was more than seven times greater than in reserves.

Now I'm not saying that radiation is good for life, but maybe these exclusion zones are a bit too big.

On the other hand, good news for the wildlife if man isn't going to use these areas anymore.

Source




posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: bonsaihorn
I am posting this in response to the other thread about the exclusion zone around Fukushima.


What happens when humans abandon 1,600 square miles because of radioactivity? Wildlife runs rampant, apparently. A new study on animals in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone shows what once looked something like a wasteland is now packed with elk, roe deer, red deer, wild boar, and wolves.

Researchers conducted aerial surveys in the zone during winter months between 1987—a year after the Chernobyl disaster—and 1997 and estimated animal populations based on tracks in the snow, reports the Guardian.

They found the number of animals in the area was actually on par with those in four uncontaminated nature reserves nearby; but the number of wolves was more than seven times greater than in reserves.

Now I'm not saying that radiation is good for life, but maybe these exclusion zones are a bit too big.

On the other hand, good news for the wildlife if man isn't going to use these areas anymore.

Source


I think the real trouble will be if these animals are able to get out of the containment zone and are hunted and eaten by those nearby.

Interesting story...thanks!



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe


I think the real trouble will be if these animals are able to get out of the containment zone and are hunted and eaten by those nearby.


Not only that, but think of the mutations that may occur with those animals that are spreading their (mutated) gene pool to non contaminated animals..



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

or they mutate into horrendous beasts . . .

which would be awesome.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Horrible monsters seem a bit unlikely, but health concerns for people who may hunt and eat said critters might be an issue, I suppose it depends on how much of the contamination passes over. (Cooking food came to be for a reason)



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Chernobyl is not in Japan.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: ISawItFirst
Chernobyl is not in Japan.


Not what the OP was getting at I think, I think it was a comparison of the two situations.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: sycomix

It is, however, in the "Japan" forum.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 02:06 PM
link   
1987 has long come and gone. The animals have long been procreating. It would be interesting to catch some of the wildlife and take some DNA samples to see specifically how they are affected. Thousands of people in surrounding areas got thyroid cancer after Chernobyl.

Here's a good 5 min video on Huffington Post if you can watch it. www.huffingtonpost.com...

Fewer species in hot zones and more tumors and abnormalities in those that are there. Some birds may be adapting though. Cut trees show an abrupt color in their rings exactly in 1986 - much paler and less pigment. And don't eat the shrooms for crying out loud. They are HOT.

They also noted spider webs not normal design in Fukushima so they went to Chernobyl and photographed spider webs of same species in HOT and COLD areas to see if there was any difference. Didn't give any report on that though. In HOT zones, bugs had abnormal markings which weren't happening in COLD areas.

Another site:


Chernobyl's unprecedented disaster has accidentally created an ecological laboratory where scientists can see the real-world effects of radiation exposure. For this study, researchers took blood and feather samples from 152 birds from 16 different species at eight sites around the Chernobyl exclusion zone — something that could never be replicated in a confined laboratory.

What the researchers discovered can prove to be key in understanding the effects of radiation exposure on living organisms. For instance, they found that birds with more melanin in their feathers were in poorer health. The production of pheomelanin, a type of melanin, was using up all the antioxidants in the birds' bodies, which should have been used to fight ionizing radiation.

While the two species that produce a lot of pink pigment in their feathers — the great tit (Parus major) and the barn swallow (Hirundo rustica) — failed to adapt well to their surroundings, the other 14 species did not waste their antioxidants on melanin and evolved to absorb and fight radiation in a more effective way.
mic.com...



edit on 7-10-2015 by StoutBroux because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: donktheclown
a reply to: Vasa Croe


I think the real trouble will be if these animals are able to get out of the containment zone and are hunted and eaten by those nearby.


Not only that, but think of the mutations that may occur with those animals that are spreading their (mutated) gene pool to non contaminated animals..



According to movies and such that's what happens, but in real life, the animals are not showing any signs of external mutations...no extra legs, heads or eyes apparently, according to an article i read recently anyway.

Their reproductive systems, usually quite sensitive to environmental changes, are obviously unaffected to any large degree either...as they're breeding and multiplying quite readily and apparently normally. I'd imagine they will not make old bones though, and will probably die of cancers and so on at much younger ages than would be normal for their species.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 02:11 PM
link   

There's a new species taking over at Chernobyl


What new species?

They make it sound like radioactivity spawned a new type of creature.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 02:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: StoutBroux
1987 has long come and gone. The animals have long been procreating. It would be interesting to catch some of the wildlife and take some DNA samples to see specifically how they are affected. Thousands of people in surrounding areas got thyroid cancer after Chernobyl.



I think I read somewhere that most of the thyroid cancer patients are children that drank contaminated milk.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: StoutBroux
1986 you mean. As to the OP, "new species". what animal has mutated enough to be considered a "new species" which your title suggests.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tiamat384
a reply to: StoutBroux
1986 you mean. As to the OP, "new species". what animal has mutated enough to be considered a "new species" which your title suggests.


Nah, I meant 1987, one year later. They wouldn't have been able to determine reproduction rates and species deviation much earlier.

And agree, no new species but birds have some slight variation of their beaks. There is change, some species obvious some not much. They are still in recovery mode.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: bonsaihorn

Was just about to post about this in the Fuku thread. Yes apparently radiation is only harmful to humans? Everything else loves it. Remove humanity from the equation and the planet heals itself rather quickly. Something to think about.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 02:51 PM
link   
The thing is I have read a lot recently about Chernobyl that says the people who didn't relocate have turned out to be fine and cancer rates, including thyroid are within normal limits. The spike in thyroid cancers turned out to be earlier in the timeline, from the meltdown, than made sense ...maybe it was something else that caused it? I think I understand this source to say thyroid and other cancers were normal or even below other areas of the world with naturally occurring radiation.

www.21stcenturysciencetech.com...

The thing is though many environmental activist sites say differently or seem to leave the information open ended...

www.greenfacts.org...

It seems the actual outcome is not what we were led to believe it could be. I guess it makes sense that they really did not know! You would think by now the official narrative, if things were not really as bad as science expected, would be pretty well documented and understood by the world.

Edit :The world sure loved the disaster story and we ALL know how horrible it was, stuff of nightmares. I guess the world just might not want to hear a happy ending?

edit on 3104Wed, 07 Oct 2015 15:04:03 -0500America/Chicago072015fWednesday20152015 by tiredoflooking because: spellingggg again

edit on 3106Wed, 07 Oct 2015 15:06:49 -0500America/Chicago072015fWednesday20152015 by tiredoflooking because: additional thought



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 03:02 PM
link   
This is an article about the thriving wildlife. Some species are now three generations from the accident and going strong. One would think there would be more in depth research available after all this time...

www.usatoday.com...

The thing that makes me curious is WHY if these accidents are much less damaging than originally thought would we not be hearing more about it? Makes one wonder if there is some reason, more then embarrassment, for keeping positive results -like tangible scientific results- out of the public mainstream, maybe it's just that people refuse to believe after all we have been fed?



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 03:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: donktheclown
a reply to: Vasa Croe


I think the real trouble will be if these animals are able to get out of the containment zone and are hunted and eaten by those nearby.


Not only that, but think of the mutations that may occur with those animals that are spreading their (mutated) gene pool to non contaminated animals..



Here's a great video that you may or may not have seen before.
They're hunting radioactive wild boar with machine guns in Chernobyl.




posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: NowWhat

But how do they really know they are radioactive? I guess I should watch and see.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Jeremy Wade spent some time there.



Then there is this.


Found this but have not seen it.

edit on 7-10-2015 by deadeyedick because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join