It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Wal-Mart's glow-in-the-dark mystery

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 09:57 AM
Hi all,
the reason I posted the article is that it kind of 'hit home' for me when I first read it since I purchase those signs from time to time. We keep no stock of them due to their 10yr, 15yr and 20yr duration spec. ( cant sell a '10yr' sign if it sat in your warehouse for a year and a half) So they are bought to fill existing orders only. One missing sign would therefore result in an invoce from hell in my world.
The main influence there would be diligent business/accounting practice and hardly would incur any environmental or safety concern.
The simple math of the losses reveals that about 3.6 signs per Walmart location goes 'poof' and that lends credibility to negligible petty theft. It really is hard to imagine that all of the 15800 missing tritiums are all in one place, however the public really should have a clearer answer as to what happened.

The laws in Canada are definitely being reviewed concerning tritium movement and disposal. Some known disposal sites of this material are under major scrutiny since orbiting communities have shown radioactive traces in water supply that blow the roof of maximum allowed levels. The demand for these babies will drop in Canada as prices go up and disposal logistics get underlined.
They are mainly used in historic buildings where extra wiring is inadvisable and in environments where any possibility of sparks is a no-no. They contain no battery nor wiring - you just hang it like a picture. By law in order to get occupancy certificates for a building, exits need to be clearly marked and lit up in case of emergency.....

On a side note, I have one of these signs in my basement that I never actually purchased. As any buyer would tell you, manufacturer samples of anything are only a request away, and I do like glowy things. As far as a threat is concerned, man, I can rip it off the wall in 3 seconds and whack an intruder over the head with it with precision accuracy and in total darkness.
I would prefer to rely on something with a banana clip instead but that's another thread.
Thank you kindly for the amazing input.

[edit on 22-2-2009 by gypsychology909]

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 10:52 AM

And what about exposure from thousands of signs dumped near a source of drinking water, or packed with explosives in the back of a truck that has been driven into a crowded building?

(emphasis mine)

Someone stated why strip down thousands of signs when you could steal a canister from a company that say makes the signs. The above quote from the article explains it to me. You just blow up the signs as is..

And what better way to upset the "common" man than to use a product stolen from an American institution like Walmart.

Personally, I tend to believe they were stolen by employees for the cash..but then again why not something easier to steal. Who knows but certainly something to think about.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 10:54 AM
reply to post by mattifikation

20% of all exit signs is not what the article states. It states "20% of total inventory", which is nonsense. I highly doubt it could equate to 20% of all signage, and certainly exit signs make up 100% of all exit signs.

I stand by my position that this is possibly some sort of scapegoat being created. Either that, or I also like the theory proposed that the signs never actually existed, and the money simply went into someone's pocket.


<< 1   >>

log in