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.

 

Nukes.. Who? When and Where? You might be Surprised.

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 10:29 PM
link   
Here is a video of places and countries that have used nuclear weapons all over the world. This is alarming, for both our Earth and its inhabitants.

"2053" - This is the number of nuclear explosions conducted in various parts of the globe from 1954-1998.
blip.tv...


Here's the thing, nuclear fallout just doesn't disappear. It's still there and if you were born in the northern hemisphere any time from 1960 to 1975 your genes most likely have some type of mutation from nuclear fallout. It's also being linked to Autism.





What you're looking at is a chart that measures any amount of gamma radiation in the air. Russia is right now experiencing a mass amount of wildfires and since July more than 10,000 acres have been burned. Here is a map of the fires and the contaminated soil.


Here is the site with more information on this subject.
idealist.ws...

This is very scary indeed. When we are faced with the possibility that many, and I mean many illnesses, and deterioration of certain otherwise plentiful areas, that are now faced with famine and unusual illness, that this could and probably is the culprit.

Peace, NRE.

BTW, I don't know how to post the pics properly, so sorry in advance.








edit on 11-9-2010 by NoRegretsEver because: To provide a better website for the information presented.




posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 11:11 PM
link   
Here is more information concerning this atrocious weapon and its effects on the planet and the people.

What is Idealist.ws?


Idealist is a grassroots organization that endeavors to slow and ultimately reverse the tide of global corporate and governmental suppression and cover-up of the environmental and health effects of human-made radiation that now contaminates every place on Earth.


"There are maps of the [radioactive] contamination, and there are maps of the fires. Anyone can put the two together. Why deny this information?"

- Greenpeace Russia

idealist.ws...


And some more info...

Nuclear Explosions in space

The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (predecessor to the Department of Energy) conducted several atomic and thermonuclear explosions in space and high-altitudes to test the effects of various forms of radiation bursts on Earth's upper atmosphere.
The atomic devices were detonated over the South Atlantic Ocean at between 200 and 540 kilometers (124 and 336 miles) above the Earth's surface and cumulatively generated a '60 mile blanket of beta particles that completely encircled the earth for days' (Under the Cloud, Miller, 1986). This great infusion into Earth's magnetic field of beta particles, comprising radioactive elements produced by the nuclear blast, created an 'artificial aurora,' or colorful streams of light in the night sky. This phenomenon was often witnessed following U.S and U.S.S.R. high-altitude nuclear tests in the 1950s and 1960s.

idealist.ws...


Australia's worst dust storm just got worse.

From September 22 to 24, 2009, Australia's worst dust storm in 70 years carried debris from the continent's interior into the coastal cities, including Sydney, and onwards, on Sept. 24-25, to New Zealand. The storm was about 1,000 km long and 500 km wide. A second dust storm hit Syndey early on September 25 and Brisbane by evening of September 26 - it was smaller than the first storm and measured about 200 km wide. The winds from both storms may have carried plutonium particles1 and there were speculations in the blogosphere that even other radioactive substances, like uranium from open mines and DU from military operations, were lofted from the interior. An article by news.com.au on Sept. 25 titled 'Are the dust storms radioactive? Australian scientists study Aussie dust from New Zealand' mentioned that a team of scientists had assembled to determine if uranium dust from South Australia's massive Olympic Dam uranium mine might have ended up in the red dust that coated the Australian east coast and New Zealand.

idealist.ws...


edit on 11-9-2010 by NoRegretsEver because: To add more information.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 11:15 PM
link   
Great post! I've always known that so many of today's health problems are completely self inflicted, whether purposely or not.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 01:46 AM
link   
reply to post by NoRegretsEver
 


That video kind of leaves you speechless. How could we do this to the mother earth we all love and are fully dependent upon like a baby in mothers womb. We do this to her most people dont really care.

To think it all started at a site we named Trinity.

We really need to wise up or the old girl will do a parasitic cleanse. :shk:



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by SinkingSun
 


Impacts of Nuclear Testing on health and life.

Here is some information concerning the effects on the health and welfare of those possibly contaminated, or even living in places that have been effected themselves.


Linus Pauling, who won the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to halt nuclear testing, calculated that the radioactive fallout from nuclear testing up to 1962 will cause 80,000 to 18,000,000 genetic defects in children and embryonic, neonatala and childhood deaths. He calculated that for every 10 megatons, 3,500 to 780,000 children will be born with gross physical or mental defects or enough damage to result in early death. According to this formula, from all atmospheric testing through the present between 154,000 to 34,320,000 children may be suffering early death or gross mental or physical defects. (The effects of long-lived fallout, like Carbon-14 and Strontium-90, which will be in our air, water and food supplies and cause genetic defects and physical harm and death for generations, were included in Sakharov and Pauling's calculations.)


On the rest of the page are the results of testing that was done by the NCI (National Cancer Institute), and the CDC (Center for Disease Control).
idealist.ws...

BTW, the reason for the info especially on this site idealist.ws, is due to the research Ive done on the matter and how most of the info had directed me to the same site. All of the information in one place, and then can be researched, and checked for accuracy, if interested.
Peace, NRE.


edit on 12-9-2010 by NoRegretsEver because: fix spelling



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Linus Pauling, who won the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to halt nuclear testing, calculated that the radioactive fallout from nuclear testing up to 1962 will cause 80,000 to 18,000,000 genetic defects in children and embryonic, neonatala and childhood deaths. He calculated that for every 10 megatons, 3,500 to 780,000 children will be born with gross physical or mental defects or enough damage to result in early death. According to this formula, from all atmospheric testing through the present between 154,000 to 34,320,000 children may be suffering early death or gross mental or physical defects. (The effects of long-lived fallout, like Carbon-14 and Strontium-90, which will be in our air, water and food supplies and cause genetic defects and physical harm and death for generations, were included in Sakharov and Pauling's calculations.)



If this were correct (which it is not) it would mean that:

    [1]We should ban energy efficient homes because they decrease in ventilation which leads to a buildup of naturally occurring radioactive radon gas.
    [2]We should tear down all masonry (and bricks) structures due to radioactive isotopes within them. We could use metal (like steel) for structures instead.
    [3]We should ban aircraft because higher altitudes increases radiation dose. We should use high speed electric trains.
    [4]We should stop nuclear medicine and diagnostic imaging (which saves lives) because they increase radiation dose.
    [5]We should all live at sea-level because living at high altitude increases radiation dose.
    [6]We should ban the Brazil nut, Lima bean, and the Banana because they are all radioactive.

Because all of those expose the public to more radiation than nuclear weapons testing does. Of course, I am not suggesting that nuclear weapons testing is OK - however the effects are massively overstated. Natural radon gas, for example, gives the public 50 times more radiation than nuclear weapons testing. Natural radiation in food gives you 20 times more radiation than nuclear weapons.


(total adds to 360mrem)
source

Of course, all of that as well as the notion that fallout from nuclear testing will cause a massively increased incidence of cancer and other anomalies is based on the controversial linear no-threshold model for the consequences of ionizing radiation that essentially extrapolates the harm extremely large doses of radiation does, linearly, to low doses. This does not make sense because life evolved during times where natural radiation doses were significantly higher than they are now: complex mechanisms have been evolved to combat radiation, including DNA repair, programmed cell death, and cell cycle arrest. There is increasing evidence that small doses of radiation activate natural protection which means that marginal increases in radiation may not increase cancer/birth defect risk linearly, or at all. There's also another theory that small doses of radiation activate protection leading to decreases cancer rates...:



(PROFAC = 0.25 means that 25% of the cancer cases (or cancer deaths) that would normally occur in the absence of radiation ANP would be prevented.)

source

Unreasonable fear of radiation causes more harm than good - because it prevents people from accessing medical imaging (that again, exposes public to far more radiation doses than nuclear weapons).(1mrem is 1mrem regardless of how it was caused - natural, or unnatural, from nuclear weapons, or natural radon gas, or diagnostic imaging). Additionally, after Chernobyl 100,000-200,000 abortions were performed because of the unreasonable fear, thus fear of radiation caused more death than the radiation itself. In conclusion, the radiation dose from nuclear weapons is extremely small in proportion to other things, and furthermore small doses of radiation may have little to no effect on cancer even if exposed to a large amount of people.


edit on 12/9/2010 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 


There is alot more information on this man and what was stated, since I can only past a small percentage, I was unable to finish the quote, but did leave a link to the rest of the research.

Peace, NRE.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 07:56 PM
link   
I was wondering if this will either worsen what is currently going on, can we "really" escape the outcome, and if what has already happened, can actually be recalculated and blamed for the contamination of the past, to reflect the future?

Peace, NRE.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join