FukuGate: We've been conned

reply to post by moniesisfun

I think you're neglecting to mention the radiation from all the bomb testing done since the 1940's.

I wonder why you would do that? ?

I didn't omit it. I just lumped it into "background" for the sake of simplicity for the topic. The topic is Fukushima. You are correct however. There are numerous other sources for radioactivity in our environment. If you read the link I provided, down at the bottom it briefly covers the decay paths of nuclides like Plutonium into Radium, Radon and finally lead.

There are of course other radioactive products produced by nuclear technology. The most studied is radioactive iodine with a relatively short half-life. Strontium and cesium have been studied. Others may be equally significant but hard to study or pin down. Strontium was incorporated into the dental enamel of childrens' teeth during the time of atmospheric testing. Each test produced a detectable peak.

It is customary for nuclear physicists to speak in terms of half-life. However, when the whole decay pathway for say Plutonium 238 is examined - around 12 radioactive daughter products are produced including Radium and Radon. There is extensive documentation of biological effects of these. Biological effects can be expected from the whole decay pathway. [See Decay Simulation ]
www.animatedsoftware.com...

All the bombs in all the tests ever carried out add up to a fraction of the emissions produced by just one of the partially melted reactor cores or any of the spent fuel pools. Like comparing matches to forest fires. I know the direct info about all the exact numbers from the companies responsible and the MSM is down played or misleading, but that is the norm is it not? This is not fear mongering, it is shedding light on the truth. Carry on.

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by moniesisfun

 

I think you're neglecting to mention the radiation from all the bomb testing done since the 1940's.

All the bombs in all the tests ever carried out add up to a fraction of the emissions produced by just one of the partially melted reactor cores or any of the spent fuel pools. Like comparing matches to forest fires. I know the direct info about all the exact numbers from the companies responsible and the MSM is down played or misleading, but that is the norm is it not? This is not fear mongering, it is shedding light on the truth. Carry on.

That is HARDCORE BS.

You've been duped.

Originally posted by moniesisfun

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by moniesisfun

 

I think you're neglecting to mention the radiation from all the bomb testing done since the 1940's.

All the bombs in all the tests ever carried out add up to a fraction of the emissions produced by just one of the partially melted reactor cores or any of the spent fuel pools. Like comparing matches to forest fires. I know the direct info about all the exact numbers from the companies responsible and the MSM is down played or misleading, but that is the norm is it not? This is not fear mongering, it is shedding light on the truth. Carry on.

That is HARDCORE BS.

You've been duped.

edit on 26-10-2012 by moniesisfun because: (no reason given)

As I stated earlier, I think that this thread is interesting and informational. I am curious though - how has intrptr been "duped" as you put it?

I don't believe this; we got the Geiger out of the armory the other day and everything was normal background. We even used them outside just to make sure they were still correctly functioning. There are four, all of them checked normal and needed no calibration it seemed. ( I wasnt inspecting them, I was just near by ).

This was in Mississippi. Everything okay here.

reply to post by Rubicant13


He is pulling statistics out his bum. Likely from another fear-mongering source...probably a blog or youtube video.

I challenge him to prove his above statement.

He can't and won't.

Originally posted by OutonaLimb
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger

 

Thank you for your detailed response. I think you are closer to the mark than most,
but I still cannot shake the feelings expressed in my first post, especially in light of
all the things we see going on now in the world around us.
It is difficult to distill the truth from the BS, but any way you cut it, something extremely
dark is going on, especially concerning chemtrails. IMO.

The last link you provided in your response to me doesn't work btw.

if you mean the linked image
it's the big picture showing the lack of earthquake damage just before the tsunami hit

concerning the your concerns
it's all to do with the struggles between Life and Anti-Life

see my posts here [as it would be VERY off topic on this thread]:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


beware the darkside

reply to post by moniesisfun


You still at ATS? Man why dont you troll somewhere else, matter fact, why dont you go have a drink with your "elite" buddy who has a potion where he will never die and he can drink all the time and never gets drunk and he never had a license in his life.....troll on.

Fukushima is a serious issue and for you to discredit valid facts being made just because you and your "elite" buddies have a magic drink to live forever, doesn't mean us regular folk don't care about what were ingesting into our body that comes from the oceans that have been affected from the nuclear reactor meltdown.

reply to post by unknown known


I'm not trolling, and you're lying. Besides never having a license, I never said that. You're misrepresenting what i said. Your post is off topic. Stay on topic.

reply to post by thorfourwinds


Thanks for the information, and due to this, now I really have to build a high-powered cloud buster.

S&F for you bub.

Originally posted by moniesisfun
reply to post by intrptr

 

I think you're neglecting to mention the radiation from all the bomb testing done since the 1940's.

I wonder why you would do that? ?

You know what, screw it. I'm going to keep on.

Are you aware that plutonium and uranium are natural elements that are mined?? That often time in surrounding areas background radiation is higher than is around Fukushima, and that there are cities around...and people survive.

People are arguing on this thread from a state of ignorance. They're taking in fear-mongering, and spouting out that people who don't agree with them are ignorant. They're not giving credible information, and it's pathetic.

edit on 26-10-2012 by moniesisfun because: (no reason given)

umm not that i'm completely disagreeing but plutonium and weapons grade uranium are manufactured refined products

just like opium poppies can be found in nature but require refining to produce heroin
just saying

reply to post by intrptr

the MSM is down played or misleading...

umm dude if you think about it :

why is the MSM allowing the alternative press/conspiracy sites carry the fukushima psyops

so that at a later date the presstitutes [who's credibility and faking of news has been shown time and time again on this site alone] can say after "exposing" it as such:

"you see, you cant trust those alternative press/conspiracy site/bloggers. it's us [the experts] you have to believe for getting the news"

psyops are always multiple purpose, a single purpose psyop is to easy to expose, a multi-purpose is like a hydra: cut off one head and 2 or more will grow in its place.

reply to post by DerepentLEstranger


You make my point well.
Just as you can't get high from popey seeds, you can't get ill from a very small dose of radiation. Which is what we're seeing as fallout across the world, and as background in certain areas of the world.

Originally posted by intrptr
[

All the bombs in all the tests ever carried out add up to a fraction of the emissions produced by just one of the partially melted reactor cores or any of the spent fuel pools. Like comparing matches to forest fires.

Care to back that up with some actual evidence?

Just wondering where you got this information from?

At one point the radiation release from Fukushima was considered to be about 10% of that from Chernobyl - see here

they just had an article in the local paper today, really rare to be mentioned.."contaminated fish still found of japan"

the gist of the article is sea life could be tainted for decades so they installed a "silt fence" near the crippled nuclear plant at fuku. to help prevent contaminated water from spreading to the ocean.

found a link

www.straitstimes.com...

Have just had a quick read of a couple of articles on the internet. One suggests that only three days ago that certain readings in some American states were very high. There are sites with graphs showing the radiation readings.

Just look at other sites as well as Above Top Secret that is what I do - regularly - on a few occasions I have found more than one article that is completely the opposite of what posters on this site are stating.

There is radiation - it is going to have an impact on the health of many people - it is already having an impact on animals. There is no way that a nuclear plant, situated right on a coastline, leaking contaminated water, continually, is not going to have an impact on the environment.

Oceans have currents that create movement and the wind can move the 'invisible' radiation to who knows where. This situation needs common sense applied to it - as well as documented facts. With the mainstream media tightly controlling information it is so essential that everyone keeps their intellect alive.

Much Peace...to the Japanese people still living in the emergency shelters - my heart goes out to you and yours...

reply to post by moniesisfun

Thanks for asking me directly. Any way the info is wasted on you, that statement proves you don't care to read anything anyway. You just continue to claim "people pull things out their bum"?

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by intrptr
All the bombs in all the tests ever carried out add up to a fraction of the emissions produced by just one of the partially melted reactor cores or any of the spent fuel pools. Like comparing matches to forest fires.

Care to back that up with some actual evidence?

Just wondering where you got this information from?

At one point the radiation release from Fukushima was considered to be about 10% of that from Chernobyl - see here

You do remember this...

Aloyisius the Gaul, I am not trying to disrespect you or over dramatize the events of that explosion. The analysis that has been done on this single event alone fills volumes. I cannot bring it all here. Much of it has disappeared. My book mark section is a red zone of "removed by user" "account terminated" and "unable to open page". As time goes on, it will be more and more difficult to dig the truth up out of a miasma of static and disinformation.

What I do is try to extrapolate data based on other sources that don't directly relate. For instance there is about a ton of data on the size of nukes and their composition. Even that varies. About 15 kilograms(?) of Plutonium were used in the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima. Some of that was volatilized in the explosion and tons of it were volatilized in the Spent Fuel pool in FUKU #3 when it blew. There is a consensus for that. Since drifting down wind and falling out in the ocean and elsewhere these isotope cocktails of radioactive nuclides have been slowly "dispersing" their way around the planet. It takes tens, hundreds if not thousands of years for these fission by products to decay and become "harmless".

In that time a single atom of PU-239 can float in the ocean on a bit of seaweed, be evaporated inside a water molecule, rain down on a forest, be drawn into a redwood tree thru its roots. A thousand years later, a forest fire can burn down the tree and a flood wash the atom into a river bed that becomes fossilized for 10,000 years and when an earthquake dislodges it and the river washes it into the ocean where a plankton absorbs it and a Krill absorbs it, and fish absorbs that and your ancestors eat that fish. That single atom PU-239 can still give them cancer . That was only a part of one "half life" (24,000 years) of a single atom of a single MOX fuel rod in the belly of one of those four reactors.

I'll return in a bit with some more for those who want to dig...

Heres an archive of the work on the ATS FUKU thread up to a point...

I was a part of that ongoing work. One of my posts about forth coming data from Tepco and thermocouples "failing" is right below the archive post. There are a lot of good diggers over there (here), BTW.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by DerepentLEstranger

why is the MSM allowing the alternative press/conspiracy sites carry the fukushima psyops

As much as we believe we are widely read... and are "countering the BS", i think that conspiracy websites like ATS are not (ahem) Mainstream enough to influence that many a people.

Who quoted this? In any given nation at any given time for any given issue you will find that a third of the people are for it, a third against and a third don't care.

I also firmly believe that besides "denialists" and disinfo "specialists" there is a lot of silence from the main stream. When was the last time we heard FUKU in the News?

reply to post by intrptr


Well I read that as you're simply not up to the challenge.

You're acting as if mox is somehow special. It's not. It's simply mixed oxide fuel for reactors. Get these exact amounts of each nucleotide in each fuel rod and the exact amount of radioactive material dispersed in atomic testing over the decades. I already know the first is impossible to attain, so will cut you a break and settle for your best guess based on a variety of official reports.

Prove it or shut it.

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle

Originally posted by WoodSpirit

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle

Originally posted by WoodSpirit
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle

 

lung cancer? i think if you did some research you may find that lung cancer, as a result of radioactive fallout, is very minimal.

That poster never suggested that lung cancer is a result of radioactive fallout, another poster did.

Pay attention, instead of urging people to do research.

I'll await your reply to my posts where I debunk the notion that the results of your geiger counter research are indicative of a health threat.

the mere fact that you don't feel like doing any research on your own tells me you don't really care about the issue as much as you care about ridiculing people and that is sad.

Excuse me, but at least I did look for data and provided the links, showing that your claim that you measured 6-8 times background radiation is indicative of a health risk, is bogus, no matter how you look at it.

Choose to ignore it if you want.

What the hell do you mean ridiculing people. I am not the one on the high horse claiming he did "research" where others suppossedly didn't.

I'll be back later answering other comments directed at me.

Oh, and jeah, I obviously hate nature and mother Earth.

edit on 26-10-2012 by WoodSpirit because: (no reason given)

what i know is that you have no idea what you're talking about, it's painfully obvious, you are rude, your attitude is terrible, you're hypocrisy is astonishing and you joined yesterday.

i'll just go ahead and place you on the ignore list since i would do better that way.

Yet still no response to the fact that 6/8 times background radiation is nothing. This 6/8 times is what you base your fearmongering on right?

Ignore list, lol. Like an ostriche?

It seems you'd rather live in a make believe world where we will all die of radiation, than accepting the implications of your own measurements, namely that you haven't detected any noteworthy radiation.

Be my guest, be that delusional, unreasonable fearmongering person that tries to discredit people that are just showing you the facts.

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by WoodSpirit

 

Like you said... you are no expert. Give this at least a partial read if you would. The part about the particle of plutonium in living tissue should help you to understand radioactive contamination a little better.

www.animatedsoftware.com...

Yes, we all receive radiation during our lifetime. From the ground, the sun, the cosmos, mans ineptness, whatever. Xray, gamma rays, cosmic rays, whatever.

The difference between all that "background" and what we are experiencing from Fukushima is that the "radiation" from Fuku is actually radioactive contamination. That is, sources of "radiation" that if inhaled or ingested become lodged in our bodies and continuously irradiate nearby cells with "ionizing" radiation.

Whereas external radiation like x-rays pass thru us from an "outside our body source", these radioactive nuclides inside our bones and connective tissue are like swallowing a small X-ray machine that you can't turn off. In the case of PU-239, that will take at least 24,000 years and that is just a "half life" of that particular isotope.

If you have read this far, you have learned something about the complexity of radioactive contamination. A wee bit. Learn a little more from those who know before declaring an all clear.

I responded to the poster suggesting that 6-8 times background radiation is dangerous. It obviously isn't. You can't even deny that fact.

The particles that might be ingested or inhaled, are the same particles that are being measured by the geiger counter, and since they were not higher than 6-8 times the background radiation in that case, it doesn't even matter at all.

It's not like "swallowing an x-ray machine", as you pointed out so "eloquently" , because the particles he swallowed there, are of an insignificant radiation level.

I'm not giving an ALL clear, but based on his own measurements, there is nothing to worry about, where he is at.

Sorry for ruining your delusional party.

If we were to believe you, we are all inhaling heavily irradiated Fuku particles, all around the world, right now. So how are you protecting yourself?

How long before we all start developing tumors and dying off, you reckon?

Where is the proof, please show that vid of a geiger counter going beserk, show me that dangerous level of radiation and will believe you.

Until then, nothing but fearmongering.

And to think that you suggested that you are somehow more of an authority on this matter.