Incredibly Effective Protection from Fukushima Nuclear Radiation

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BobAthome

Does MOX actually stand for Mixture of X?,,X being a secret, as per Salt 2 Agreement.

No.
It stands for Mixed OXide.

that was rhetorical, but now that u have mentioned it,, says who? WHO or AEC or TEPCO?, who has confirmed the ingrediants contained within the core at #3?
confirmed by whom?

a reply to: BobAthome

MOX is plutonium and uranium.
What's your point?
www.nci.org...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BobAthome

MOX is plutonium and uranium.
What's your point?
www.nci.org...

my point is that it is now confirmed that "plutonium and uranium" was indeed ejected into our (world) enviroment because of FUKUSHIMA. And it has taken 3years.

"plutonium and uranium" so in your opinion this is not anything to be concernined with? is that your point?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BobAthome

MOX is plutonium and uranium.
What's your point?
www.nci.org...

ohh and by the way,,
www.abovetopsecret.com...

yaa thought the link was familiar,, lol

a reply to: BobAthome

my point is that it is now confirmed that "plutonium and uranium" was indeed ejected into our (world) enviroment because of FUKUSHIMA. And it has taken 3years.

Maybe you just heard about it but it's been known since very soon after the disaster.
www.newscientist.com...
www.smh.com.au...

"plutonium and uranium" so in your opinion this is not anything to be concernined with? is that your point?

No. That's not my point. You asked what MOX is. I told you. That's what my point was.

ohh and by the way,,

So, I see that you knew about it too. So why say "it is now confirmed?" Why say "it has taken 3 years?"

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BobAthome

my point is that it is now confirmed that "plutonium and uranium" was indeed ejected into our (world) enviroment because of FUKUSHIMA. And it has taken 3years.

Maybe you just heard about it but it's been known since very soon after the disaster.
www.newscientist.com...
www.smh.com.au...

"plutonium and uranium" so in your opinion this is not anything to be concernined with? is that your point?

No. That's not my point. You asked what MOX is. I told you. That's what my point was.

"You asked what MOX is." see "speculated on X" in above reply,,X being still an unknown, because TEPCO has not confirmed the make up of the CORE at #3.
And if TEPCO actually has confirmed this ,, then i am wrong. Please prove me wrong.

And i quote from YOUR link,, "Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency says it remains unkown which reactor is the source of the new plutonium."

see.

a reply to: BobAthome

Please prove me wrong.

Ok.
From the link I posted earlier:

The U.K. is shipping 8 MOX fuel assemblies to the Kansai Electric Power Company's Takahama 4 reactor. Approximately 32 fuel assemblies have been fabricated in Belgium for the Tokyo Electric Power Company's Fukushima 3 reactor.

www.nci.org...

And i quote from YOUR link,, "Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency says it remains unkown which reactor is the source of the new plutonium."

Maybe because nuclear reactors can create plutonium so the exact source of the plutonium was not known at the time.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BobAthome

Please prove me wrong.

Ok.
From the link I posted earlier:

The U.K. is shipping 8 MOX fuel assemblies to the Kansai Electric Power Company's Takahama 4 reactor. Approximately 32 fuel assemblies have been fabricated in Belgium for the Tokyo Electric Power Company's Fukushima 3 reactor.

www.nci.org...

" MOX fuel assemblies" yes and the only one we should be conserned about is the one that blew up, right,, so lets focus , a little, gee common, it blew up right, or is that still a question, after 3 years of intensive scientific investigation i guess i expected a LOT more from the scientific community.

a reply to: BobAthome

Well then, you should give them a good talking to and let them know they are not living up to your expectations.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BobAthome

Well then, you should give them a good talking to and let them know they are not living up to your expectations.

Im trying but alas deaf ears are slow minds, so say what? ,,

and i really have been trying,
posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:11 PM
link quote reply
It's called MOX fuel contains Plutonium,
- See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

notice the post date,,

posted on Mar, 14 2011,,

ya been yelling along time,,whats that i said back on Mar, 14 2011 "It's called MOX fuel contains Plutonium",, yaaa

a reply to: BobAthome

ya been yelling along time,,whats that i said back on Mar, 14 2011 "It's called MOX fuel contains Plutonium",, yaaa

Yeah, I know. It wasn't a secret.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BobAthome

ya been yelling along time,,whats that i said back on Mar, 14 2011 "It's called MOX fuel contains Plutonium",, yaaa

Yeah, I know. It wasn't a secret.

"Oct 24, 2013 - Japan prepares for new law to protect national secrets ... wide range of issues, including tensions with China and the Fukushima nuclear crisis."
yaa well it would be now. would it not?

a reply to: BobAthome
A bit late for the MOX "secret" but the law doesn't seem to apply to things like this:
enenews.com... d-tepco-says-officials-cause-of-seawater-spike-is

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BobAthome
A bit late for the MOX "secret" but the law doesn't seem to apply to things like this:
enenews.com... d-tepco-says-officials-cause-of-seawater-spike-is

which brings us back to just what was it that went boom,,and just what is the source of the ongoing energy being released,, if the Cores went bye, bye,,like it has now been put forward.
or is it to secret?

a reply to: intrptr

It doesnt matter if those rays are from the cosmos or from inside us, our bodies convert them into chemical problems where from there its a matter if the right chemistry is provided to deal with them. Eat more exotic / diverse fruit, and enjoy your time here, creatures of planet earth.

This chemical 'law' where we being of chemical origin, there's no magick to be found here outsiede of chemistry, other than perhaps our attitudes in life in all that we face. But hey, it kind of makes sense now, if you live on frozen TV dinners and fast food... perhaps pull on your hair while running down the street.

To imply that the most advanced beings in the known universe don't have inherent or adapted survival mechanisms in place to deal with the throes of the universe is akin to denying the existence of bacteria. If I'm wrong, please describe how it is not.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

To imply that the most advanced beings in the known universe don't have inherent or adapted survival mechanisms in place to deal with the throes of the universe is akin to denying the existence of bacteria. If I'm wrong, please describe how it is not.

Kind of "shields up", huh? Thats Hollywood. Biologic response to being shot thru by a machine gun is to die.

If what you said was inherently true then containment would have held. It didn't.

What does that say about the "smartest beings in the Universe"?

All that expensive assurances that we could contain the radioactivity inside the reactors was moot in light of what happened.

No matter how much we wish it so.

I'm not sure you studied just how fortress like that containment was constructed? It seems lost on some to describe the core, the reactor core vessel (RCV), the primary containment vessel (PCV), the concrete building with reenforced walls five feet thick, the primary coolant apparatus, the redundant back up systems; none of which mattered in the end.

All of these "systems" were the utmost man could devise to prevent what happened. It happened anyway. The notion that our frail bodies can stand up to the resulting spread of radioactive contamination as it spreads into the world is a belief, like religion. Just believe and you'll be fine, huh?

Explaining it further to people that don't understand the difference between flesh and bone and the nature of radioactive emissions from the tiniest particle embedded in our "biologics" is also moot.

Not that I don't want to try, just not with people who take an adversarial position from the get go, insisting they know something about it.

Not challenging your understanding of biology.

I just wanted to say re radiation protection - there are some things that can be helpful as suggested on this thread - but all the vitamins and nutrition in the world are not going to stop a bullet - that takes it out of the realm of chemistry. And when someone eats or breathes in hot particles and if they're lodge I don't see how nutrition is going to stop them from causing cancer with their perpetual bombardment.

I did acquire some food grade zeolite that is supposed to help remove things like this, but I don't see how that can help anything that is breathed in... we can take preventative measures and some remedies - in the end, if we're bombarded with hot particles (like being shot with bullets), chemistry becomes a moot point. Yes? No?

a reply to: wishes

Damn. That's bad news for these folks of Japan. Since they've all been gunned down with wounds that dont heal via biology (sophisticated chemistry), not only do they as a people face elevated cancer risks, they will all surely die of cancer (apparently sooner than later (all of them)).

Ironically, or something, solid chemicals propelled via chemical expansion do sort of fall under the realms of 'chemistry'. We could have a big debate over this in terms of how 'natural' these comparisons of if a human shot a gun at someone while sitting vs. if some knife fighting expert carved up an able-bodied person with a blade instead. Oh, and somehow the blunders of industrial exotic chemists fits into that discussion, you argue?

Forget the punchline, I'm dying to hear the intellectual buildup to how that talking point gets inserted into the debate...

a reply to: intrptr

Show me any 'wave' (not surfs up on the Pacific) that takes pieces out of people; leaves solid chunks of shrapnel inside them. Lasers dont count in this discussion.

Taking leaps from biological response systems to douchebags stockpiling whatever 'underneath' HOT HOT HOT reactors,in earthquake / tsunami prone geological regions, hmm I'm lost now.

Get real kid. Phage and I have challenged your viewpoint to break it down for us laymen these 'magical properties' of these "HOT particles" in light of the talking points of this discussion. We've challenged the fear-worthiness level of them. If you people are at all worthy of spreading FEAR based on them, you should be able to explain them in depth in terms that dont involve firearms, 'machine guns' etc. THATS HOLLYWOOD KID! Radiocarbon Commando The Series (the 'clips' dont run out (weak) guy).

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: wishes

Damn. That's bad news for these folks of Japan. Since they've all been gunned down with wounds that dont heal via biology (sophisticated chemistry), not only do they as a people face elevated cancer risks, they will all surely die of cancer (apparently sooner than later (all of them)).

Ironically, or something, solid chemicals propelled via chemical expansion do sort of fall under the realms of 'chemistry'. We could have a big debate over this in terms of how 'natural' these comparisons of if a human shot a gun at someone while sitting vs. if some knife fighting expert carved up an able-bodied person with a blade instead. Oh, and somehow the blunders of industrial exotic chemists fits into that discussion, you argue? Forget the punchline, I'm dying to hear the intellectual buildup to how that talking point gets inserted into the debate...

I was under the impression this is a 'discussion', not debate. The bullet analogy was an...analogy. You don't need to mock posters and there's no desire in me to debate anything or remotely find the topic deserving of a punchline. Obviously you believe Fukushima is alive and well and "not a problem", good for you - you're in the majority. I believe differently and don't need to have truckloads of chemistry under my belt to do so. I know what happened at Hiroshima, Chernobyl, nuclear testing, the ringworm children and I've listened to enough nuclear experts and understand the insidiousness of TPTB.

If you have an answer to deflect/cure radiation poisoning let's hear it. I've heard growing certain types of plants is beneficial, though it's not going to stop anyone from breathing in the kazillions of hot particles proven to be in our air in north america. So how does one 'not' have problems (like cancer developing from hot particles incessant bombardment for whatever life span it has) in their lungs oh wise one? Are YOU comfortable inhaling plutonium? uranium? cesium? Then breathe deep.