posted on May, 1 2012 @ 07:42 PM
Originally posted by disclosure
I wonder if the measurement/scale used to gauge the increase in radioactive isotopes is akin to the measurement of earthquake intensity by using the
Modified Mercalli or Shindo scale. Meaning the larger the output of radiation, the exponentially more lethal it becomes. Sort of like saying a 7.0
earthquake is only 7 times more powerful than a 1.0 earthquake. That might explain the discrepancy in the comparison.
That's the thing we humans don't really have a scale (at least to my knowledge) that truly takes into consideration all of the countless aspects you
have to process in situations like this.
The current nuclear disaster scale is incomplete and over-generalized, it doesn't really provide a catch all equation where we can just plug a few
numbers in and find a easy answer.
The media doesn't know what it's talking about, the scientists aren't providing us with simple short and easy charts/graphs that give all relevant
facts in correct context, etc.
I doubt the government officials or organizations really even have a good grip on any of this yet.
Remember we have only recently been messing with nuclear technology in the last century so we are actually just learning about how not to screw things
If we had a reasonable society that embraced academia and wanted to educate people, maybe we would have trustworthy systems of rating things like
this. But instead $$$ rules the day so no one trusts anyone.
But also in that educated society, I wouldn't need to look up a million and one facts about nuclear physics
in order to attempt to get a handle
on things in intricate detail because everyone is telling me totally different stories. Hell in that alternate universe humans would be wise and
prudent, and we could use nuclear tech safely and responsibly. It wouldn't even be a major issue.
edit on 1-5-2012 by muzzleflash because: (no