posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 01:16 AM
Apart from my first post, I guess I'm still completely baffled as to why radioactivity should imply "blood" of anything..
Is blood normally radioactive in nature? Not really..
If drilling for oil was like tapping a vein of blood then we wouldn't have an energy crisis on our hands because we'd have a never-ending supply of
it. Oil deposits would always be self-replrenishing, like human blood is. The demand would always be met by the never-ending supply.
How do oil deposits reflect the complexity of the human circulatory system whatsoever? One deposit might eventually "connect" to another nearby but
at that point it would be a single deposit instead of two. But the same rule of thumb would still apply, which would be "Once the deposit is
depleted its gone forever". It takes so long to form naturally that the only way for oil to reappear is in the form of new deposits..
Also, I understand that radioactivity DOES exist in nature but geologically, on our planet at least, it doesn't exist in a form that can necessarily
be harmful to humans. Radioactive material within rock/mineral deposits have to be refined to be of any biological danger to human beings. There are
plenty other aspects of crude oil that make it toxic to biological organisms, none of them having anything to do with radiation.
Plus, if the all our oil were radioactive then pretty much everything made with said oil would be irradiated too. Everything right down to chapstick,
autmotive oil, gasoline, plastics, and everything else we make from fossil fuels.. (which is alot) And we know this isn't the case.
I'm also confused why Oil is being likened to "Gulf War Syndrome" in the title of the thread. Although we don't know all the real causes of the
"illness", we do know that alot went on that could potentially cause soldiers coming back from Gulf War 1 to have odd illnesses and side-effects.
For starters, neither government nor the military ever conduct long-term testing of new vaccines. Even I recieved all 6 Anthrax shots knowing
full-well that the government had no idea the long-term effects of it. Second, we know that depleted uranium could potentially be harmful to humans
but only if inhaled or otherwise directly ingested..
Although we are only one of a couple countries that still use depleted uranium as armor piercing slugs in some military ammunition we know that
depleted uranium is generally safe to handle and extremely unlikely to ever be ingested on the battlefield.. (I worked in Air Force munitions systems
for 6 years). Third, alot of soldiers could have breathed in toxic fumes either directly from the pooling oil from the Iraqi oil fields or the smoke
the burning oil gave off. IMO, the real "Gulf War Syndrome" was caused by a combination of different factors, none of which have anything to do
with radioactive oil..
Hell, if Oil were really that radioactive then most countries in the middle east would have a thorough arsenal of nuclear weapons by now. The
refinement process for fissile material would be alot easier too and could be easily fronted as an oil processing operation. This just isn't what
we're seeing in the real world.
I've made my views on depleted uranium, in particular, very clear in past threads and although I don't consider myself an expert on radioactivity in
general I did work with munitions on almost a daily basis for the entirety of my military career and I did handle weapons containing radioactive
We know that radiation exists in nature because we can refine it into fissile material but only in an artificially refined form is it any real danger
to human beings. Most , if not all, of the radioactive material that exists naturally on our our planet in the form of rock and mineral deposits has
such a low level of radiation that you could eat the stuff and not be affected whatsoever, not that you'd want to. I know this mainly because
radiation was an aspect of my job but also because I've read alot about it while researching depleted uranium, in particular, for ATS discussions.