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.

 

an 800microsievert Forrest!

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 8 2012 @ 01:53 AM
link   
Not sure if this is really fragile for Earth or more a cancer...


I follow a youtube movie-maker type person and their trips to radioactive lands.
She just went back to Chernobyl this week, and had a look at the red forrest!
youtube Link


armed with nothing but a beeper and a HD handycam she gets some impressive readings!

Its impressive but nothing compared to the 17000 MICROSIEVERT fragment she found a while back!
Youtube Link

edit on 8-10-2012 by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 8 2012 @ 05:09 AM
link   
Holy crap, you could kill somebody with that grain of sand! Imagine that!

Too bad it probably has the mass of about a million pounds... You know, that British money? The mass would be equivalent to the mass of about a million of those 1¥ coins... So if you dropped that into someone's glass, it would shatter the glass into about 5 1/2 pieces once it hit the bottom. Not to mention cause a tidal wave of beer that would be apocalyptic.



posted on Oct, 8 2012 @ 06:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 


Now look, you can complain about the folly of nuclear energy, but we need it!

Image


Do you have any idea how many people would be without electricity without nuclear plants?

Image

Sure, there are bound to be accidents, but necessity certainly outweighs the dangers.

Image

Okay, so some people might get radiation poisoning and get cold like symptoms, but that's all.

Image

After all is said an done, Nuclear energy is our friend.

Image

Jeez, Wikipedia lists only 34 radioactive waste repositories around the world. Some might think this is a lot. I don't.

I think it's INSANE!!!!

List Radioactive Waste Repositories



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Radioactivity is measured in Becquerels or Curies. Sieverts are a unit of radiation dose equivalent. Sieverts per hour would adequately describe the radiation dose something would get at a certain distance from an object, per unit of time, however Sieverts alone would not. Neither is a Sievert a unit of radioactivity.

Therefore, the statement that a rock is x amount of sievert simply doesn't make any sense.

Nice video though, I'd like to visit Chernobyl.


reply to post by jiggerj
 


Unfortunately (for you) pictures of deformities does not provide any information about the risks and benefits of nuclear power. Would you rather live with no idea than to live with the right idea?
edit on 11/10/12 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)

edit on 11/10/12 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics
 
6

log in

join