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.
Originally posted by Helmkat
reply to post by MichiganSwampBuck
Really?
No safe levels?
You do realize you are bombarded with radiation all the time...
Originally posted by MichiganSwampBuck
There is no safe radiation levels period! This one has pushed me over the edge. I'm not sitting on the fence anymore, just waiting for the right opportunity now. The EPA is my enemy, along with Monsanto and many others. No more playing nice. Lets rub their faces in their new standards, make them eat the seafood and wash it down with reactor water. I want to be on their list because they are on mine now.
Originally posted by Dinogur
i think god will have to make a special place in hell for these bastards
Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by Vitchilo
"ALL ABOOOOOOAAAAAARRRRRRRRRDDDDDD!!
Oh, no ticket sir? It's fine, you're with the EPA. Free ticket to hell right here for you. You can go sit with the majority of congress and the FDA, and have a nice trip. Please be sure to visit the TSA checkpoint before boarding, of course."
I try to normally be a loving and forgiving person, but I really think some among us deserve to burn in the lower levels.edit on 3/29/2011 by Praetorius because: Typo, as usual
Originally posted by Phenomium
Originally posted by MichiganSwampBuck
There is no safe radiation levels period! This one has pushed me over the edge. I'm not sitting on the fence anymore, just waiting for the right opportunity now. The EPA is my enemy, along with Monsanto and many others. No more playing nice. Lets rub their faces in their new standards, make them eat the seafood and wash it down with reactor water. I want to be on their list because they are on mine now.
Dude, you have to watch what you say man. Any abrasive words at all against the government will have the FBI knocking at your door quick.
Less than a decade after introducing the 1992 Protective Action Guides, which are used in the enforcement of various environmental laws, the EPA has decided to amend their original figures for acceptable levels of radiation exposure through food, water and the air.
Originally posted by 00nunya00
You should know that per PEER's website release on the issue, they have been opposing this move for years now----at least since 2009. All of these emails were obtained via FOIA and lawsuits, and it's not a move in response to Japan.
I'm not saying it's a good or safe thing, only that it's not the EPA's response to the Fukushima issue. I doubt they will actually implement this now, or at least soon after Japan, as it would be horribly obvious. But if they do, then yeah----that would be uncool.
Originally posted by mikepopy
And here we have our first pacifier
YahooNews
Lets suck on this for a beginning...
PLUTONIUM FOUND AT FUKUSHIMA!!
Probably from old weapons tests thousands of miles away, but hey, let's wet ourselves anyway.
There has also been heavy reporting in the press regarding the discovery of very small amounts of plutonium isotopes at the site – producing less than one Becquerel of radioactivity per kilo of soil. (For context the human body naturally emits radiation around 50 Bq/kg).
This is utterly insignificant in a health context but is possibly indicative of fuel damage in the cores – if the isotopes did in fact come from the cores.
The levels in three of the five samples are so low, and of such isotopes, that [color=limegreen]it is quite possible they result from long-ago nuclear weapons tests in the Pacific. Two other samples contain some plutonium-238, a clue that they may be from the no 3 reactor which had plutonium in its fuel.
"[Those two samples] could possibly come from the accident," TEPCO spokespersons told World Nuclear News.
Often these facts have been reported in such a way as to suggest that the Fukushima events have led to contamination levels similar to those following nuclear weapons tests, ]which is utterly untrue.
The new radiation guidance would also allow long-term cleanup standards thousands of times more lax than anything EPA has ever before accepted, permitting doses to the public that EPA itself estimates would cause a cancer in as much as every fourth person exposed, the group says.