Radioactive dust from Fukushima plant hit N. America soon after meltdown: researchers

reply to post by muzzleflash

# 2) Comparing the type of particles emitted from Fukushima (a nuclear reactor), to the types of particles that disperse from a nuclear bomb explosion is totally inaccurate and out of context.

They are two totally separate different beasts altogether.

The fallout from nuclear weapon blasts is far far less dangerous than the types of fallout that come from nuclear reactor melts. Huge difference.

My mistake. You are correct about that. It is not my intention to mislead or deny the fact that radiation is hitting North America. But as I said, you can provide an analysis if you are well-versed on the subject. I retract that comparison.

Originally posted by dreamingawake Arnie Gundersen has said that Fukushima is the worst industrial accident in history.

Oh really?

The Bhopal disaster also known as Bhopal Gas Tragedy was one of the world's worst industrial catastrophes. It occurred on the night of December 2–3, 1984 at the Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) pesticide plant in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India. A leak of methyl isocyanate gas and other chemicals from the plant resulted in the exposure of hundreds of thousands of people. Estimates vary on the death toll. The official immediate death toll was 2,259 and the government of Madhya Pradesh has confirmed a total of 3,787 deaths related to the gas release.[1] Others estimate 3,000 died within weeks and another 8,000 have since died from gas-related diseases.[2][3] A government affidavit in 2006 stated the leak caused 558,125 injuries including 38,478 temporary partial and approximately 3,900 severely and permanently disabling injuries.[/b[[4]

Like I've been saying this whole time, Gunderson is a retard.

Originally posted by miniatus

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by muzzleflash

I don't believe in sources. That's for people who cannot think about things and need others to think for them.

 

Neither does all news web .com or the like.....

Sometimes sources are required.. ATS is a source.. a lot of it is false and paranoid but it's still a source.. without "sources" you wouldn't even know an event took place in Japan most likely.

Yes exactly.

"Sources" are basically the "Barn full of hay stacks".

The "Truth" is the "Needle" we are trying to find.

That's why I said people shouldn't believe in sources like it's the Bible or something.
They need to think for themselves so they can figure out what the needle looks like so that they can finally find it.

reply to post by muzzleflash

Sorry I was saying to Stop Believing and start thinking critically about the situation. Use your brain to determine reality. But supply reasoning for these thoughts.

There is nothing that I have posted that should lead you to think that I blindly believe anyone. I post information I find, and have not made much commentary on the Japan crisis besides picking apart some of the people fear mongering the situation (In other threads).

I will not subject myself to innuendo or lies on either side of the fence. Either there is a threat of radiation or there is not. I have no control over it. If it happened it happened, if it hasn't it hasn't.

I am skeptical on both sides, it just so happens that the side of fear mongering shows up in these forums more often. If someone were to come on and deny that radiation hit North America, I would show evidence that it has.

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by muzzleflash

# 2) Comparing the type of particles emitted from Fukushima (a nuclear reactor), to the types of particles that disperse from a nuclear bomb explosion is totally inaccurate and out of context.

They are two totally separate different beasts altogether.

The fallout from nuclear weapon blasts is far far less dangerous than the types of fallout that come from nuclear reactor melts. Huge difference.

 

My mistake. You are correct about that. It is not my intention to mislead or deny the fact that radiation is hitting North America. But as I said, you can provide an analysis if you are well-versed on the subject. I retract that comparison.

The only thing I can really offer anyone is advice on Nutrition.

Google around a bit, there are specific types of nutrients (vitamins minerals etc), that can aid your body in repairing the damage that radioactive particles can cause.

Basically your DNA molecules are falling apart and when attempting to rebuild them it causes cancerous growths sometimes. By bombarding yourself with a very healthy diet, you will increase the amount of "building blocks" your body has to work with of various types. This will aid your body in rebuilding correctly and can mitigate the affects of cancer etc.

So just eat healthy, eat some vitamins or something. Exercise a bit.

There is no where to run away to. The entire Earth is affected directly here.

Just stay where ever you are, and improve diet / exercise.

In my personal assessment this should be good enough because it's frankly one of the only viable options to take at this time.

reply to post by muzzleflash

"Sources" are basically the "Barn full of hay stacks". The "Truth" is the "Needle" we are trying to find.

You don't find truth without evidence. Sorry to burst your bubble but evidence and source are related. If you have a evidence, that is your source.

Originally posted by dreamingawake
I've been very concerned about this. The article presents more information about radiation that was and is not talked much of since April. The third source link, nuclear expert Arnie Gundersen say Seattle,WA residents breathed in an average of five "hot particles" per day after the disaster. Great to know now!

edit on 23-6-2011 by dreamingawake because: fixed

Yeah great to know now since I live here in Seattle... Everyone thought I was crazy to worry about my 4 yr old son going out when it was raining now I hear this... its like yeaaaaaaaaaaaah... I just hope they get it under control soon... and stop lying to everyone about how serious this really is...

I think there a many uninformed people relating to this.

This type of radiation is far different and far more deadly than a ground burst nuclear weapon. Nuclear weapons use almost all of the nuclear fuel in the reaction. The fallout dust while deadly contains far different isotopes That have been broken down from the nuclear fuel.

Nuke plants on the other hand are exploding raw plutonium and uranium fuel. A very deadly difference. The fuel thats light enough to travel in the wind is 10 micron down to 1 micron in size and disappears into the normal background radiation from the sun and space, to the point it can't be measured with survey meters at all and can only be measured with a Geiger counter when removed to an enclosed lab since the Geiger counters rezero themselves, and the particle size is so small with so much distance between them they are undetectable unless captured on a hepa filter that has had constant suction applied.


I see a lot of ignoramuses post that its no different than the radon in your basement and have to wonder if they even have two brain cells left. Those idiots are usually only a danger to themselves until they post on the web and people believe them.

I have to agree beforeitsnews....I check the links and facts on all their items.

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by muzzleflash

"Sources" are basically the "Barn full of hay stacks". The "Truth" is the "Needle" we are trying to find.

 

You don't find truth without evidence. Sorry to burst your bubble but evidence and source are related. If you have a evidence, that is your source.

edit on 23-6-2011 by boncho because: (no reason given)

Evidence is the hay stack still.

You can "Interpret" evidence in many various ways.
Only one of them is the truth, the others are off mark a bit.

For example, we have tons of 'evidence' that JFK was murdered.
However, we still don't know the "Truth" about it yet I am afraid.

reply to post by Shadowalker

I have to agree beforeitsnews....I check the links and facts on all their items.

So you know they are quoting Arnie Gunderson then, right...

Gundersen operates a for-profit anti-nuclear consulting business. Anti-nuclear groups have paid him to give testimony and write papers that favor their viewpoints. He has a vested financial interest in making nuclear power appear dangerous.

Gundersen is frequently introduced as the “Chief Engineer” of Fairewinds Associates, an energy consulting company. It’s a meaningless title that Gundersen bestowed upon himself. Fairewinds Associates is a company that consists of only two people: Gundersen and his wife.

1

The homepage for the two person company.

It's considered non-profit according to the webpage. Yet, he is listed as an expert witness in many anti-nuclear lobby cases. Meaning he does get paid, or his group gets paid.

More

More

I don't trust Arnie, or beforeitisnews.com

Beforeitisnews has a horrible track record. If they do come out with an article that doesn't have dubious sources, I'll take it in. Arnie on the other hand...

reply to post by muzzleflash

Evidence is the hay stack still.

You can "Interpret" evidence in many various ways.
Only one of them is the truth, the others are off mark a bit.

For example, we have tons of 'evidence' that JFK was murdered.
However, we still don't know the "Truth" about it yet I am afraid.

These are Apples.

These are Oranges.

I can easily compare apples and oranges.

They are both Fruit.
They both grow on Trees.
Both bear seeds.
They are organic.
Both are about the size of my fist.
They both taste great.
ETC ETC ETC

Maybe a better saying is "You are comparing Apples and Rusty Nails!" Since those are a lot harder to compare.

Also: You are saying that someone cannot ever be trusted if they make money.
So basically you cannot trust anyone now since almost everyone happens to have a job doing something, therefore is automatically guilty of working for an agenda.

I find it funny that people will always attack the "Alternative Media" as being out for $$$ and fame.
But the Mainstream Media plays commercials all day, admits they are a profit-business, and people still believe them.

It just seems like an illogical use of disbelief due to arbitrary or abstract reasoning.

Yes we should be weary and suspicious of those who are making money doing what they do, but at the same time we have to use critical thinking to determine if they are just spouting ignorant crap in favor of their paycheck, or if they are giving genuine good information.

Asking questions helps reveal the intentions of someone, also it helps you gauge if they even know what they are talking about in the first place.

Now that the rant is over

There are specific things you can do If you live in Seattle or L.A. or Portland or Paris or Geneva. Cut your risk factors because you know the contaminants are in very fine powdery dust, that comes inside every time you open a door or window. Its on the clothes you wear outside as well.

There are two main risks. Ingestion and inhalation. You can cut 75% of your risk factor by keeping clean and spotless in your home and yourself.

In the car:
1. close your vents. Don't allow dust into the car.
2. clean the inside and outside more often. get rid of the dust.

At home:
1. use a hepa vacuum on your carpets.
2. keep doors and windows closed.
3. candle your doors and windows. seal up drafts.
4. take your shoes off outside the house.
5. mop your floors twice a week.
6. keep dishes and cooking items put away so they cant collect dust.
7. by a swiffer or similar dusting product that collects dust. dust every thing you own weekly.
8. wear fresh clothing outside each day. Immediately after its removed, collect that clothing and keep the washing machine running.
9. wash far more often to keep road dirt off your skin.
10. stay hydrated enough so that you can blow your nose easily and often.
11. rinse and spit if you have a dusty taste in your mouth.

At this point if you haven't been wearing a mask every day you could start now and have people think your a whacko. but remember you will probably be wearing it for the next two years.

Originally posted by boncho

It's considered non-profit according to the webpage. Yet, he is listed as an expert witness in many anti-nuclear lobby cases. Meaning he does get paid, or his group gets paid.

The Red Cross is called non-profit also.

But all they do is get paid all day long! People just send them money!

It's nuts I know. But that's how the system works.

It doesn't automatically mean that the Red Cross is just pilfering the money for personal extravagances. We have to check the book keeping closer to determine that.

If you open their books and it says 8% overhead costs, that sounds pretty good and I would have to say most of the money goes to the people it's intended for. But if it says 25-40% or something goes to overhead, than we know it's a front organization for criminals who are putting their hands into the cookie pot.

reply to post by boncho


I'm not certain from your argument/counterpoint that you even tie your own shoes.

Lets try to focus here. What are the exact scientific facts that you dispute and your methods of disproving them.

I don't like Arnie isn't going to cut it. Neither are cointelpro tactics to force your point.


Specific scientific points, and your methods to disprove them.

reply to post by boncho


I'm not certain from your argument/counterpoint that you even tie your own shoes.

Lets try to focus here. What are the exact scientific facts that you dispute and your methods of disproving them.

I don't like Arnie isn't going to cut it. Neither are cointelpro tactics to force your point.


Specific scientific points, and your methods to disprove them.

reply to post by boncho


I'm not certain from your argument/counterpoint that you even tie your own shoes.

Lets try to focus here. What are the exact scientific facts that you dispute and your methods of disproving them.

I don't like Arnie isn't going to cut it. Neither are cointelpro tactics to force your point.


Specific scientific points, and your methods to disprove them.

Originally posted by SirMike

Originally posted by dreamingawake Arnie Gundersen has said that Fukushima is the worst industrial accident in history.

Oh really?

The Bhopal disaster also known as Bhopal Gas Tragedy was one of the world's worst industrial catastrophes. It occurred on the night of December 2–3, 1984 at the Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) pesticide plant in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India. A leak of methyl isocyanate gas and other chemicals from the plant resulted in the exposure of hundreds of thousands of people. Estimates vary on the death toll. The official immediate death toll was 2,259 and the government of Madhya Pradesh has confirmed a total of 3,787 deaths related to the gas release.[1] Others estimate 3,000 died within weeks and another 8,000 have since died from gas-related diseases.[2][3] A government affidavit in 2006 stated the leak caused 558,125 injuries including 38,478 temporary partial and approximately 3,900 severely and permanently disabling injuries.[/b[[4]

Like I've been saying this whole time, Gunderson is a retard.

edit on 23-6-2011 by SirMike because: (no reason given)

The problem I have with this argument (SirMIke) is we haven't counted the number of cancer deaths(and other illnesses) yet because they take time to show up, they are NOT instantaneous like a (non-nuclear) industrial accident. And the radioactive contamination isn't a one-time event, it keeps circling the globe, or sitting in the soil for thousands of years.

reply to post by muzzleflash

I find it funny that people will always attack the "Alternative Media" as being out for $$$ and fame. But the Mainstream Media plays commercials all day, admits they are a profit-business, and people still believe them.

admits they are a profit-business



Also, please quote me where I said I believed the mainstream media. Thanks.

Originally posted by Shadowalker
reply to post by boncho

 

I'm not certain from your argument/counterpoint that you even tie your own shoes.

Lets try to focus here. What are the exact scientific facts that you dispute and your methods of disproving them.

I don't like Arnie isn't going to cut it. Neither are cointelpro tactics to force your point.


Specific scientific points, and your methods to disprove them.

What scientific paper, or in-depth information has Arnie provided to base his foundation on? If he has come to this conclusion, surely he can provide the evidence that lead him to the conclusion.