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.

 

Swedish man caught trying to split atoms at home

page: 4
22
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


DU and NDU is chemical weapons, it was used in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Although Sweden is not in NATO, I was talking about general governments of the world, notice Swedish government is not the only one banning individual experiments.

Alcohol is allowed to kill thousands and thousands of people, but you don't see alcohol being banned. It just shows hypocrisy, they pretend to care, when in reality they only care for money aka GDP.
edit on 4-8-2011 by confreak because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by clintdelicious
reply to post by confreak
 


huh? drunk driving is illegal? Dont tell me its all a conspiracy or that the govt should ban people from drinking like they should be able to tell us whats best for us?!?!
edit on 02/02/1987 by clintdelicious because: (no reason given)


Banning drunk driving is like banning animals from being naked. Notice, even if animals were banned from being naked, you won't see animals lining up in cloth shops and buying cloths.

Why do you think even when drunk driving is banned, still thousands and thousands die in drunk driving car crashes?



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


It wasn't a bomb, it was a nuclear reactor.

According to your explanation, any science project involving explosives that goes wrong can be defined as a bomb. Like rockets, volcanoes, etc.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Freedom is a great thing, but when you start endangering your neighbors and possibly exposing them to dangerous radioisotopes, you are trampling their liberty and right to make their own personal health decisions for themselves.

Therefore all nuclear reactors should be shut down, especially those in someone's kitchen which has no safety mechanisms what-so-ever.

I don't think exposing neighbors to chemical hazards without their knowledge is cool or acceptable, I find it deplorable.

There are many other stories like this, and often times the people who consistently steal items with radioactive sources within them are trying to do things like this in their basement.

Freedom is great, but not when you destroy the freedom of others.
And building a mini-reactor in your house is destroying the freedom of other people to be healthy and to make their own health decisions.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 04:51 PM
link   
This is even more treacherous than putting fluoride in the water supply.

Here is why:

1) Those who put fluoride in the water supply advertise it to the greater public.
- This guy only advertised it on the internet, and I bet the next door neighbors didn't have a clue.

So at least I know the water is tainted, I can avoid it now and find non-fluoride water.

But if my next door neighbor is a major idiot, and thinks he can create a nuclear reactor in his basement, and has a meltdown of some sort - I may never find out. I wouldn't be able to move away from the hazard site because I had no knowledge of the incident in the first place, so I will remain exposed.

So I consider this type of stupidity as even more dangerous than wide-spread poisoning campaigns like water fluoridation, because they advertise their poison up front thankfully. Wanna-be nuclear physicists don't run very good advertising campaigns.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 



all smoke detectors have americanium in them, and anything that glows in the dark (watches) have a bit of radioactive material, but "URANIUM?" Where in the hell did he get that from. Not like it's in anything naturally, that I know of.

This story smells of b.s. A man intelligent enough to do this type of experimentation "calls the police" to see if it's
legal? I'm not buying it.



posted on Aug, 4 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by N34Li3Z
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 



all smoke detectors have americanium in them, and anything that glows in the dark (watches) have a bit of radioactive material, but "URANIUM?" Where in the hell did he get that from. Not like it's in anything naturally, that I know of.

This story smells of b.s. A man intelligent enough to do this type of experimentation "calls the police" to see if it's
legal? I'm not buying it.


This happens more than you think.

And this man was not intelligent at all, he made major idiot mistakes all the way through.

He had a meltdown in his kitchen, he didn't inform his neighbors of the situation, put them at risk etc.
Then he called the govt to check if it was legal AFTER he committed the act. It's idiotic, you are suppose to check BEFORE you commit the act, especially if it's of this nature.

Why didn't he inform hazmat of the meltdown issue? Doesn't he realize if that stuff drops through the foundation of the house and into the ground it could pollute the groundwater supply for thousands of years?

Humans are major idiots, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if this was all true. Maybe it's not true, but it very well could be.

Also you can buy Uranium online. Try a few Googles and watch your brain meltdown.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


yeah i almost remember watching the trailer to that movie back in the 80's. the movie was about some teenagers building a nuclear bomb. entertainment was more free er back then.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 03:36 AM
link   
You cannot build a fully critical nuclear reactor in your kitchen. You can however accumulate relatively small amounts of fissile materials, radioactive elements and fission products, but that's completely different to an actual, critical, nuclear reactor. Here's someone who did something similar in the USA, there is also a small description of how he did it. en.wikipedia.org...

And did he actually have a meltdown in his kitchen? No, at least not in the Fukushima or Three Mile Island sense. The media is simply using the wrong word to describe what happened.

reply to post by muzzleflash
 



Also you can buy Uranium online. Try a few Googles and watch your brain meltdown.

So what? You can buy plenty of slightly poisonous heavy metals online. Like Mercury. Or lead. Pretty harmless unless you're a dumbass and turn it into a dust and snort it in. If you want to be worried about radioactive elements being easily available, be more worried about Americium-241 in your smoke detector which later decays into Neptunium-237. Or perhaps >1 curie of tritium found in a battery-free exit sign.


Why didn't he inform hazmat of the meltdown issue? Doesn't he realize if that stuff drops through the foundation of the house and into the ground it could pollute the groundwater supply for thousands of years?

The meltdown issue? There is no way at home to create a substance that has that amount of decay heat (if it isn't obvious enough). And even if you could doing it would certainly kill you.

Here's a picture of what he did:



Here's what he said:

No, it not so dangerous. But I tried to cook Americium, Radium and Beryllium in 96% sulphuric-acid, to easier get them blended. But the whole thing exploded upp in the air...

ichaview.blogspot.com...

In other words, the media were idiots and called it the wrong thing. And I wish people were more skeptical of what the media says and doesn't take unspecific terms like "meltdown" at face value and assume it's a molten pile of radioactive debris melting its way through the floor.
edit on 5/8/11 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 


Yeah those photos are not of a meltdown. I hadn't seen them yet. But you can in theory create a meltdown anywhere you just need the right equipment.

However I am worried about you Cobzz, what is with the personal attacks? Couldn't you just had said "oh heres the pics the media lied about it"? Nah you really needed to get in at least 3 insults there.


I sense some major animosity from you lately. Calling me a fear-monger is way uncalled for.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 04:03 AM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 


The photo is a simple chemical reaction. I doubt it even actually exploded very much, the glass beaker is not even broken at all.

So it would have had to have been a very small explosion, barely pushing the material outside of the glass.

Very far cry from a 4000 degrees melting pile of goo.

Hey isn't that neat? I can change my point of view after reviewing new information that trumps old information. How quaint. Wouldn't it be awesome Cobzz if you tried that just once? Because I have never heard you admit you were wrong about anything.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


I apologize Muzzleflash. If I think your posts are fearmongering then I should go head to head on the facts, not just claims about being a fearmonger. Which, maybe, I will do now that I think about it.

I retracted the comment from the post above.
edit on 5/8/11 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 08:13 AM
link   
i'm no scientist, and not sure if this is the correct uranium, but it looks like amazon sells some. lol.

www.amazon.com...=sr_1_2?s=industrial&ie=UTF8&qid=1312549827&sr=1-2

maybe this is one of the places those people are getting it?roflmao



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Between 1995 and 2005 it's estimated over 200,000 people died in the US alone from coal power plants. It's estimated that up to 100,000 have died globally from the Chernobyl disaster.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
This is crazy, we need to ban this again.

Of course criminals don't obey the laws so next time this happens we will have to ban them thrice. That should put an end to this.


So using your logic, we should just legalize murder because people are going to murder anyway? Maybe we should just have roving vigilante death squads, or just use the Judge Dredd system. This activity needs to stay banned and individuals responsible should be punished appropriately.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by N34Li3Z
 


Uh that reminds me. ages ago we used to joke about how many smoke detectors it would take to be dangerous. we estimated probably 1000s.




top topics



 
22
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join