Radiation Watch 2012

page: 2
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 9 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Someone provided a link to this site shortly after Fukushima started:

radiationnetwork.com...

If you go to the bottom of the page, there are readings for other countries than the US although it's not as comprehensive.

Nuclear power doesn't have to be as dangerous as it is.

en.wikipedia.org...

Unfortunately, our present method(s) provide military grade plutonium which TPTB find to be a useful byproduct.




posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 07:21 AM
link   
I saw some videos on high rads in smoke alarms, so I tested ours.



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scalded Frog
Someone provided a link to this site shortly after Fukushima started:

radiationnetwork.com...

If you go to the bottom of the page, there are readings for other countries than the US although it's not as comprehensive.

Nuclear power doesn't have to be as dangerous as it is.

en.wikipedia.org...

Unfortunately, our present method(s) provide military grade plutonium which TPTB find to be a useful byproduct.


Greetings Scalded Frog:

Thank you for your time, consideration and participation.


Someone provided a link to this site shortly after Fukushima started: radiationnetwork.com...

Thank you for sharing.

We, too, have shared that link, actually a few days ago, highlighting (what we thought) readings that appear to be above the "alert" threshold.

Check this out:


OK, Alert Level = 100, seems simple enough.

So, what do these readings indicate from yesterday, enquiring minds want to know?
 

Radiation monitor setup in NE Longmont, Colorado, USA. radmon.stan4d.net...

Radiation Monitor
@LongmontRadMon
7h
174 CPM, 1.4129 uSv/h, 1.1404 AVG uSv/h, 4 time(s) over natural radiation

Radiation Monitor
@LongmontRadMon
8h
162 CPM, 1.3154 uSv/h, 0.9502 AVG uSv/h, 3 time(s) over natural radiation

Radiation Monitor
@LongmontRadMon
21h
150 CPM, 1.2180 uSv/h, 0.9166 AVG uSv/h, 3 time(s) over natural radiation

Radiation Monitor
@LongmontRadMon
23h
144 CPM, 1.1693 uSv/h, 0.8401 AVG uSv/h, 3 time(s) over natural radiation

Radiation Monitor
@LongmontRadMon
21 Jan
138 CPM, 1.1206 uSv/h, 0.8801 AVG uSv/h, 3 time(s) over natural radiation

Radiation Monitor
@LongmontRadMon
21 Jan
144 CPM, 1.1693 uSv/h, 0.8781 AVG uSv/h, 3 time(s) over natural radiation


And yet, these higher radiation readings raised nary an eyebrow as far as we could tell.

Here are more resources for your edification and enjoyment:

RadNet - USA EPA

Online Geiger Counter Nuclear Radiation Detector Map

Live Radiation Monitor - Santa Monica, CA

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, continued from previous post.

29 September 2011
Cesium nearly doubles over past month in Bay Area milk -- Now well above EPA's maximum contaminant level




22 September 2011

Dept. of Homeland Security-funded Study: Up to 430 pCi/liter of radioactive iodine found in N. California rain after Fukushima


21 April 2011

Almost half of Japanese women tested show radioactive iodine-131 in breast milk — Highest contamination found 150 miles from Fukushima




14,000 U.S. Deaths Tied to Fukushima Reactor Disaster Fallout


Impact Seen As Roughly Comparable to Radiation-Related Deaths After Chernobyl; Infants Are Hardest Hit, With Continuing Research Showing Even Higher Possible Death Count.

WASHINGTON, Dec. 19, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- An estimated 14,000 excess deaths in the United States are linked to the radioactive fallout from the disaster at the Fukushima nuclear reactors in Japan, according to a major new article in the December 2011 edition of the International Journal of Health Services...

Authors Mangano and Sherman note that their estimate of 14,000 excess U.S. deaths in the 14 weeks after the Fukushima meltdowns is comparable to the 16,500 excess deaths in the 17 weeks after the Chernobyl meltdown in 1986.

[color=FFF017]The rise in reported deaths after Fukushima was largest among U.S. infants under age one. The 2010-2011 increase for infant deaths in the spring was 1.8 percent, compared to a decrease of 8.37 percent in the preceding 14 weeks.


[color=Cyan]click stargate

Peace Love Light
tfw
[align=center][color=magenta]Liberty & Equality or Revolution[/align]



posted on Feb, 12 2012 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by thorfourwinds
 


Thank you for the additional links. This situation is so alarming yet there is little to no discussion on MSM, like anything relevant I suppose.



posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Today, 02/13/12 in Tokyo-setagaya





posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   












The earthquake triggered powerful tsunami waves that reached heights of up to 40.5 metres (133 ft) in Miyako in Tōhoku's Iwate Prefecture, and which, in the Sendai area, travelled up to 10 km (6 mi) inland. The earthquake moved Honshu 2.4 m (8 ft) east and shifted the Earth on its axis by estimates of between 10 cm (4 in) and 25 cm (10 in).

The tsunami caused a number of nuclear accidents, primarily the ongoing level 7 meltdowns at three reactors in the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant complex, and the associated evacuation zones affecting hundreds of thousands of residents.














































And here we have an interesting video that ignores the question: what about the ongoing worldwide radiation poisoning with the no-end-in-sight-elephant in the room?


Operation Tomodachi (トモダチ作戦 tomodachi sakusen?, lit. "Operation Friend(s)") is a United States Armed Forces assistance operation to support Japan in disaster relief following the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. As of March 22, 2011, twenty US naval ships, 140 aircraft, and 19,703 Marines and Sailors were involved in humanitarian assistance and disaster relief efforts in and around Japan. By 29 March 2011, the operation, including relief supplies provided to victims of the disaster, was expected to cost a total of $80 million.




Riddle us this:



As we have always recommended to virtually anyone who will listen, "join ATS instead of lurking to enjoy an almost ad-free viewing experience," we lurked a bit the other day before signing in to get the feel of a non-member’s experience.

In perusing one of our fabulous threads, we innocently clicked on “nuclear power,” fully expecting a link to Babcock & Wilcox, Westinghouse, even G.E.

Can someone please explain the reasoning behind this pairing of “nuclear power” and an “electric car?”

Or is it really the subliminal pairing of “nuclear power” and “Environmentally Friendly Solutions?”

Or is this merely a “random” pairing - a co-inkydink?

There are no co-inkydinks.




Mystery black substance has 1,000,000+ Bq/kg of cesium — Seen all over Minami Soma





The person who found it] says in his blog this substance is very light-weight and blows off easily. He is finding it all over Minami Soma. He has asked the construction workers if it is from asphalt used in roads. The workers say no.


Uhhh, here in the backwoods of mountain Georgia, we’all call that soot.

If we recall correctly, Arnie warned long ago against burning the debris and causing more fallout, significantly more concentrated by the burning process.

We, and they, were warned.

When is enough?

When will someone step in here and take control and attempt to solve this crisis instead of standing by the wayside and watch TEPCO, et al, blatantly rely on disinformation and obfuscation to blind the public to the true danger until something else happens to further call their hand?




16 February 2012
New docs show iodine-131 contamination was 350% of highest amount reported: 54,100 Bq/kg in spinach 100 km from Fukushima (FOIA)




20 January 2012
8 trillion becquerels of cesium found in pit of water at Reactor 2




10 January 2012
Jiji: 5 billion becquerels of beta radiation in 10 liters of decontaminated water — Includes strontium and cesium






[color=Cyan]click stargate

Peace Love Light
tfw
[align=center][color=magenta]Liberty & Equality or Revolution[/align]
edit on 16/2/2012 by thorfourwinds because: color
edit on 16/2/2012 by thorfourwinds because: color



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 04:06 AM
link   

Surface Radiation of our Air-Filter, Tokyo, 02-17.12







posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by thorfourwinds
 



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   
High numbers in England.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 01:48 AM
link   
In the last Days we has had some Snow here in Nihon,
after it was molten i checked a place where the Water sink down to the Ground,
it is relative high but the Roof is a few Square-meter big,
i do not know the Way for the right Calculation!




posted on Mar, 8 2012 @ 09:30 PM
link   
‎5 pm March 8th, Eastern Ontario, 420 ft rain wipe, check. Normal background is 0.13 micro-sieverts....so 1.04 is 8 times background. Somebody want to tell me this is raydon washout? Raydon washout can produce up to triple background on rare occasions. I did 3 tests. The first {4 pm} peaked at 0.96. The second {4:30} peaked at 0.85 micro-sieverts. This, the 3rd was the hottest.
‎8pm wet snow/freezing rain is falling. I checked it. Normal.....0.09 - 0.14. See? The plume has to intersect with the precipitation! And today they intersected for at least an hour over me.




posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   
One more, LA.



posted on Mar, 13 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   
Plane ride anyone?




posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   
It's March 24th. At noon we had some some rain, so I checked it twice. The same readings both times. Three to four times background. I usually don't upload a video until we hit 5 times background simply because I don't feel like arguing with idiots about raydon washout. At 5 to 10 times background, the idiots don't have a leg to stand on. 0.40 microsieverts is = to 100 CPM. That's the level where our governments are suppose to warn us. Anyway here is a screen cap of the rain at lunch time in eastern Ontario.



And 10 times background in South Korea. Mine was this high in November.


.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 01:33 PM
link   
I have also a few new ones, for example this one:


This Spot is ca. 125Km from Daiichi itself!



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Aircooled
 


Is your Calculation right?
Because i always calculated that 1 Microsievert is 100 Counts per Minute.

Originally posted by Aircooled
0.40 microsieverts is = to 100 CPM.


Have a look: radiation.fusionbureau.com...

edit on 24-3-2012 by Human0815 because: (no reason given)
edit on 24-3-2012 by Human0815 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   
OP: Your "4835 times normal" article is dated 31st March 2011
And reads…

The radiation level in the ocean near the Fukushima nuclear plant keeps rising. It is now 4,385 timesabove what is considered normal.
themostimportantnews.com...


Well duh! If you test right outside the power station of course it will be high. Especially if it’s 20 days after the accident when leaks where still taking place, and short lived isotopes had yet to decay.
What would be relevant is the radiation outside the 19 mile exclusion zone, or other areas where fishing actually takes place. Can you smell the fear? It smells just like hysteria!



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   
My Hot rain today/ March 28th, eastern Ontario, 420 ft. Don't mind the sniffles. I've had them since last April. I have no allergies. Probably nerves, right?
Oh I also checked my 130 year old stone basement for the raydon nay-sayers. Ok...normal...0.12 - 0.14 microsieverts.


Human, heres the problem. I know quite a few folks with inspectors. An inspector can read both micro-sieverts and CPM, so my friends can flip back and forth, ok? We have sat down and compared our readings to try and map out a ballpark conversion. It doesn't have to be perfect. Just close. Here's they problem. I've showed all of them your chart. This chart disagrees with all our findings. Every inspector owner that I know has found 100 CPM is = to between 0.35 and 0.40. Those are also the alert levels {100 CPM / 0.40 microsieverts}, so it makes sense.
So, we don't know what to think about this big difference? We are looking into it, and when I know more, I'll pass it along. We could be wrong, or misunderstanding somehow, but until I know more, I'll trust my friends findings over a chart for now. By my math this spiked over 300 CPM.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Aircooled
 


I think the best is when you use a "real Source" like a Gauging Office / Office for Weight and Standarts,
they mostly know what they are talking about!

Regards



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Human0815
 


A real source?... I'll stick with my friends and we'll figure it out. I'll tell you what I'll do? The next time I come across some videos with both, I'll post them and you can decide for yourself. The systems are way too confusing anyway. It's much more helpful to someone if I just call it 9 X background, or 6 times background. What ever it is on that test. It would be 6 times background in any system. Even friends who know nothing about this, catch on pretty quick that 9 times background is not normal.
How come you never do rain checks? Maybe take a drive to the downwind side of your nearest burning rubble stack?
Just a thought.





new topics
top topics
 
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join