It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by XPLodER
when you hear this you will understand my depression
nuclear power has ruined the world for thousands of years
this is what nuclear power has brought to your planet
the people who set up this disaster did so years ago
problem is this will effect the earth for thousands of years
this is why there is a news blackout in japan
this is orders of magnatude worse that you have been told
one pound of plutonium can kill every human on earth if each person
gets one particle
this is intended to inform and is not health advice
please consult your doctor for health advice
if nuclear power was stopped now the earth would still be poluted for thousands of years
carbon is not even a problem plutonium can kill at 1000th of a gram and does not need to be radioactive to kill
this is mega death and were are being told nothing
NOTHING about what is really happening
i pray that this message is allowed to get through
stop all nuclear power production now these reactors are going to destroy the world before carbon even heats the earth a few degrees.
i risk alot to bring you the truth as i see it
but to allow the lies to continue means i am no better than the "leaders" who would rather allow the world to die.
this may be my last post so please spread this message as it proberly means i am now a target for censorship or worse.
edit to add source
edit on 23-4-2011 by XPLodER because: add source
Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
reply to post by XPLodER
I hate to point this out, but did I beat you to the post?
Former ORNL researchers J. P. McBride, R. E. Moore, J. P. Witherspoon, and R. E. Blanco made this point in their article "Radiological Impact of Airborne Effluents of Coal and Nuclear Plants" in the December 8, 1978, issue of Science magazine. They concluded that Americans living near coal-fired power plants are exposed to higher radiation doses than those living near nuclear power plants that meet government regulations. This ironic situation remains true today and is addressed in this article.
Using these data, the releases of radioactive materials per typical plant can be calculated for any year. For the year 1982, assuming coal contains uranium and thorium concentrations of 1.3 ppm and 3.2 ppm, respectively, each typical plant released 5.2 tons of uranium (containing 74 pounds of uranium-235) and 12.8 tons of thorium that year. Total U.S. releases in 1982 (from 154 typical plants) amounted to 801 tons of uranium (containing 11,371 pounds of uranium-235) and 1971 tons of thorium. These figures account for only 74% of releases from combustion of coal from all sources. Releases in 1982 from worldwide combustion of 2800 million tons of coal totaled 3640 tons of uranium (containing 51,700 pounds of uranium-235) and 8960 tons of thorium.
Although trace quantities of radioactive heavy metals are not nearly as likely to produce adverse health effects as the vast array of chemical by-products from coal combustion, the accumulated quantities of these isotopes over 150 or 250 years could pose a significant future ecological burden and potentially produce adverse health effects, especially if they are locally accumulated. Because coal is predicted to be the primary energy source for electric power production in the foreseeable future, the potential impact of long-term accumulation of by-products in the biosphere should be considered.
We tend to think of solar energy as “green energy,” or clean energy. Figure E20.12.4
shows cost comparisons of various energy strategies.(267) Solar energy appears a worse
choice than nuclear energy. Nuclear energy appears to be one of the least dangerous ways
to generate energy.
In the study, the backup for times that solar energy is offline was assumed to be a coalfired
power plant, which is the most hazardous of the alternatives. This contributes much
of the hazard risk for photovoltaic energy. If nuclear energy or gas were used instead, the
risk would be significantly lower.
It also should be noted that if cadmium is used in the solar cells, the risk increased
dramatically. Cohen estimates that the risk is 1.4 deaths in the first 500 years after
installation—higher than nuclear, less than from coal. However, if a total perspective
(hundreds of thousands of years), there would be 80 deaths from solar cells as against 70
One variety of Reptilian crossbreed is particularly negative and dangerous. This variety, who work with the Draco... do not 'eat' in the same way humans do. These hive-like beings use synthetically produced substances, mixed with blood. Thus slurry is sometimes mixed with Hydrogen Peroxide, which kills the foreign bacteria and viruses. They may also be feeding off the "life essence energy" of the substances. They also seem to 'feed' off nuclear energy, and have manipulated humans into developing sources of nuclear power that emit radiation. Nuclear methods involved use of neutrons to create radiation. Methods that use positrons emit no radiation.
This claim is totally absurd. To share that amount of plutonium among the world's population would yield a dose of less than one tenth of a microgram of plutonium per person. Then it would have to be carefully delivered to every individual. That such an idea could have any currency at all rests on the discredited "hot-particle theory" where a single speck of plutonium lodged in the lung was supposed to eventually produce a cancerous lesion. Such a cancer, if initiated, would show up later in life in competition with those caused by cigarette smoking and air pollution. A more damning rebuttal of this claim stems from the nuclear weapon tests conducted in the atmosphere prior to the Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty of 1963. Before that ban came into effect the explosions of atomic and hydrogen bombs released somewhere between three and eight tonnes of plutonium into the atmosphere in the finely divided form demanded by the hotparticle theory. Noting that life expectancies across most of the globe have not fallen dramatically since 1963 suggests that ten thousand times half a kilogram of plutonium is still not enough to produce the dire effect predicted. An American expert on risk analysis, Professor Bernard Cohen, has publicly challenged anti-nuclear activist Ralph Nader that he, Cohen, will eat as much plutonium as Nader will eat pure caffeine, a substance that is comparably dangerous. The unaccepted challenge is now (2005) nearly three decades old. Cohen complains that he has written Nader and his supporter Senator Ribicoff personal letters without any reply from either of them. Another scientist outraged by the specious claims about plutonium was Dr Eric Voice, who worked at British nuclear facilities at Dounreay and Harwell. A firm believer in nuclear power generation, he determined to prove in a most dramatic way that Nader was wrong. In his seventies, Dr Voice volunteered to be a human guinea pig and was injected with plutonium-237, a more active isotope than plutonium-239. He died in 2004 at the age of 80 of motor neurone disease – not radiation induced cancer.