Fukushima Radiation hits San Franciso?

page: 2
23
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff
 


The thing is we are going to need to embrace nuclear power to even attempt at satisfying future energy requirements. There isn't going to be any kind of 'China syndrome' in Japan and that disaster isn't about to kill the worlds' oceans off. The energy companies are adept at peddling nonsense but so too are organisations like Greenpeace who prefer sensationalism over proper science. It is our responsibility to filter fact from fiction — whether that is what the corporations are telling us or environmental groups. Both peddle crap but it is down to us to discern the truths.




posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 06:02 PM
link   

LarryLove
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff
 


The thing is we are going to need to embrace nuclear power to even attempt at satisfying future energy requirements. There isn't going to be any kind of 'China syndrome' in Japan and that disaster isn't about to kill the worlds' oceans off. The energy companies are adept at peddling nonsense but so too are organisations like Greenpeace who prefer sensationalism over proper science. It is our responsibility to filter fact from fiction — whether that is what the corporations are telling us or environmental groups. Both peddle crap but it is down to us to discern the truths.


The only thing most of us can do to discern the truth of this is wait for both sides to be in agreement or wait for people to start dying.

Im not normally apathetic on anything but in this case its either choose apathy or choose stress over something that will either amount to nothing or basically destroy the planet.

As a hypothetical, if the doomporners are correct what can do other than buy ourselves some time by moving to geographical locations that are further from the radiation and then wait there till it catches up?



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff
 


People said Chernobyl would end the world and leave swathes of uninhabitable land and guess what, they were wrong. Nature reclaimed things quite quickly and shortly after residents were moving back in to their homes.



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 06:29 PM
link   

LarryLove
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff
 


People said Chernobyl would end the world and leave swathes of uninhabitable land and guess what, they were wrong. Nature reclaimed things quite quickly and shortly after residents were moving back in to their homes.


Excellent!!!!

Then I guess I have nothing to worry about and choosing to be ignorant is the right move



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 06:30 PM
link   

LarryLove
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff
 


People said Chernobyl would end the world and leave swathes of uninhabitable land and guess what, they were wrong. Nature reclaimed things quite quickly and shortly after residents were moving back in to their homes.
wrong, there are areas near the site no one goes, many, many people with effects from the meltdown and subsequent hydrogen explosion, but this is much bigger...3 uncontrolled cores in the water table RIGHT on the pacific ocean, anyone can say what they wish, go ahead, but this is just the start of this story and it will show more and more signs as days go forward......



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by teslahowitzer
 


It isn't going to happen and you are just supporting more kook environmental nonsense. As you say when this becomes the end of the world in a few days feel free to call me out, but right now you have nothing to worry about.

This is a thread about a guy talking a Geiger counter for a trip to the seaside and not understanding what background radiation is.



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Many of us from coast to coast protested Nuclear power in the 70's BEFORE Three Mile Island and Chernobyl.Its taken Fukisma to finally get it.As this thing will be continuing to pour its poison I wonder if an air strike could stop the flow. I have no idea how much radiation or how far would be spread.And before someone shoots down that idea I haven't heard a whole lot of other ideas.Or any for that matter.They can't keep this up without killing the Pacificand the west coast fold health.
edit on CSTSunpm0761 by TDawg61 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 06:59 PM
link   
The trail shown at the beginning of the video is located at Land's End in San Francisco. The trail is not on top of "a bluff" as shown later in the video. It's atop cliffs that offer something like a 75-foot drop to the rocks below.

All of the later scenes shot on the beach are indeed from Surfer's Beach... in Half Moon Bay. I don't know why the person who made the video chose to represent his "hot spots" as being in San Francisco, but this doesn't do much for his credibility as far as I'm concerned.
edit on 12/29/13 by BuzzCory because: Correction


From the video:



The same view from the Yelp article on Surfer's Beach, Half Moon Bay:



edit on 12/29/13 by BuzzCory because: (no reason given)
edit on 12/29/13 by BuzzCory because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Anyway, if you insist on buying a Geiger counter, here are some tips:

When using a Geiger counter like this, seeing spikes of two or three times normal background is not unusual, so don’t panic if it does this. Background radiation varies considerably from daylight to night time, so expect this. If you move the meter around, expect variation. I don’t know about this particular meter, but just the motion of moving the meter will swing the needle on some meters (geotropism) and give you a false reading. The detector should be facing up if you are measuring background airborne contamination such as we may get from Japan. However, areas with relatively high radon levels may cause deposition of radon daughter products on the detector causing elevated counts over time, so I put a piece of tissue over the detector (I lose alpha counts doing this). Be careful where you put the meter, you may be in a naturally “hot” area. Be careful what you bring around the meter, there are lots of things in our personal worlds that can cause elevated counts.

You can distinguish alpha, beta or gamma emissions by doing the following:
1) put a piece of tissue paper over the detector. If the counts drop dramatically you are measuring an alpha emitter. Side window detectors, such as seen on the old Civil Defense meters, won’t detect alpha particles. Even pancake detectors such as used by the Inspector above have a very low efficiency for alpha particle detection. So if you see a dramatic drop when you put tissue over the detector, you have a serious radiation problem.
2) Put a 3/8 inch piece of plastic or wood over the detector. If the counts drop dramatically you are measuring a beta emitter such I-131 (also a gamma emitter so it may be a little confusing). The pancake probe on the Inspector is typically about 30% efficient.
3) If the counts don’t drop much after doing the above, you are measuring a gamma emitter such as Cs-137. Most of your normal background counts are X-ray/gamma emissions from the sun and natural radioactive materials that are all around us.

If you spill something on the detector, don’t try to clean it yourself – guaranteed you will ruin the detector. Have the manufacturer replace it. If your Geiger counter has a cable for the detector, it is not unusual to see the cable go bad and it will peg your meter. Don’t stick your tongue to an attached cable – there is about 500-1000 volts running through it. The window on a pancake or end window detector is fragile – I had a stalk of stiff grass break one ( I won’t say how many I’ve broken).

How do you know your detector is calibrated properly? You won’t. However, if you can get hold of a source of radiation such as old, orange FiestaWare, you can see if there is any change in your detector over time. It is critical, if you do this trick, to make sure you maintain the same geometry each time, i.e. the exact same distance from meter to source and exact same location of source relative to detector. With a uranium source such as found in FiestaWare, you should see very, very little decrease in counts over a year or more.

The above are just a few things you need to understand when using a Geiger counter. If you do not get decent training on how to properly use a meter like this, I personally think you are wasting your money, but it is your money and I like most of the companies that make radiation detectors so be my guest. Proper training also includes a course on how radioactive atoms and radiation interact with matter and, by extension, the detector.


In other words: YouTube video person < grain of salt.



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff
 





Ive come to the conclusion that ignorance is bliss as far as Fuku, there is literally nothing we can do. Banks, governments, GMO foods we still have time but with Fuku we are literally helpless. Im hoping this whole thing is kinda like Ison and Nibiru and no one outside of sites like this pay any attention and it goes away, sadly I dont think this will be the case. Fuku is a big Fuk u to the whole world from the people who brought us "safe and clean" energy. I am now choosing to firmly and deeply bury my head in the sand on this issue like the good sheeple I am


Man you said a mouthful....I'm still laughing



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 08:54 PM
link   

LarryLove
reply to post by teslahowitzer
 


It isn't going to happen and you are just supporting more kook environmental nonsense.


Yes, the environmentalists have a monopoly on the word "kook", because things like Bhopal, Exxon Valdiz, BP Gulf spill, 3 Mile Island, Chernobyl, Love Canal, the Pacific Garbage Patch, Amoco Cadiz, Minimata disease were the result of SANE corporations that valued LIVES over PROFIT.

You need to stop deluding yourself buddy, you'll find no truth in the corporate controlled media about the corporatocracy in which we live, use logic and your own discernement.



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 


If you had bothered to read my other posts you would understand that I hold both environmentalists and corporate types guilty of peddling nonsense for their own gain. Greenpeace is run by a very slick media savvy individuals who left the world of real science long ago and now sensationalise everything. I am fully aware of what large corporations do too. But, as is often the case on ATS people grab and run with a quote and don't bother reading … 'buddy'.



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by BuzzCory
 


I've been to the half moon bay beach you show (whales and sea lions like to sun there). I don't see the similarity. The half moon bay cliff drop is a much steeper trail. He would have been doing zig zags to get down. Maybe I'm misunderstanding because if he is filming from two different beaches and splicing them together that's weird - would definitely see a loss of credibility. However - I don't see the beaches being the same one.

Maybe this isn't from Fukushima at all. If someone is noticing those readings I think instead of just posting on you tube they need to contact someone to tell them/ask. What is the safe limit? None has stated above 100 is safe and the site with the radiation map says it isn't. Northern California is usually between 20-40. It could be something simple that is naturally occurring but it would be nice to alert someone incase it isn't.



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Dianec
reply to post by BuzzCory
 


I've been to the half moon bay beach you show (whales and sea lions like to sun there). I don't see the similarity. The half moon bay cliff drop is a much steeper trail. He would have been doing zig zags to get down. Maybe I'm misunderstanding because if he is filming from two different beaches and splicing them together that's weird - would definitely see a loss of credibility. However - I don't see the beaches being the same one.

Maybe this isn't from Fukushima at all. If someone is noticing those readings I think instead of just posting on you tube they need to contact someone to tell them/ask. What is the safe limit? None has stated above 100 is safe and the site with the radiation map says it isn't. Northern California is usually between 20-40. It could be something simple that is naturally occurring but it would be nice to alert someone incase it isn't.


I'm not sure what you're trying to say about what I posted. My point was that he represented a clifftop trail in San Francisco as "the trail to Surfer's Beach" (a trail I know well, having walked it since 1977), then shifted to a video shot on a beach in Half Moon Bay.

At first I thought he was on SF's Ocean Beach, but the view to the North (in the pics in my post above) & to the South are not what you would see from anywhere on Ocean Beach. After searching for Surfer's Beach & finding a northerly view from there to match the video, I assumed that all of the beach video was shot there. I could be wrong, but that doesn't change the fact that he's representing the geiger counter readings from the beach as being in the San Francisco area, which simply isn't true.



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by BuzzCory
 


I understand better now. Maybe he said San Francisco because it's close enough and well known? It's a good observation by you for sure.

I know they are pretty good about putting signs up if something is hazardous. I think it's something natural. Although the winds are almost always easterly why would the radiation stop mid beach? I doubt the counter would pick up water radiation unless placed in the water. Maybe these things pick up on radon. If this video is legit albeit mis-titled he is picking up something that has probably always been there.



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 10:47 PM
link   
I try to be optimistic about life. With all the negative things our species has done and continues to do to this planet, being optimistic is insane. More of us need to wake up and see what is going wrong to this world.

With Fukushima, I was concerned from day 1. While there is a lot of doom and gloom here that is completely unfounded I think this is the exception. 3 total meltdowns, the cores have not been located, large amounts of dangerous radioactive water are dumped or leaked into the Pacific everyday. This is a much bigger event than Chernobyl, much more grave. Even the NavyTimes is reporting on the USS Reagan's crew who were exposed.

Every time someone posts something negative about the Fukushima, it seems like there are naysayers who quickly post to debunk what has been said. Sure this is really bad information out there, but all the info I can gather seems to suggest that Fukushima is still out of control, the situation is being covered up, and the West Coast of the US is not safe from the fallout. Because of this cover up, actual facts are very hard to find.

I just stumbled upon this website, thanks to a fellow ATS member. I think even the most die hard naysayers will have a tough time trying to debunk the stories it presents:

enenews.com...



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 10:52 PM
link   
Here is a map that shows 137Cs levels in the Pacific:
enenews.com...

Those levels will only to continue to increase and disperse until Fukushima is brought under control. That could take decades.



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by jrod
 

No map.
Broken link.
edit on 12/29/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 11:16 PM
link   
Works when I click on the link.

Here is the full link:
enenews.com... -scholar-one-imagine-effects-continued-flow-plant-will-sea-life-other-vid

That was as of October of 2013.

I hope I'm over reacting to doom news, but something tells me the worst has yet to come with Fuku.



posted on Dec, 29 2013 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by jrod
 

I still can't see it. But I can get the PICES report.

Fact is: radioactivity frightens people, almost always disproportionately to the actual threat: gouvernment must recognise this and provide sound, science based knowledge (and wisdom?) on human and environmental risks.

www.pices.int...


But when you say "as of October" it sounds like these are actual measurements. What is the source of those measurements?
edit on 12/29/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)





new topics
 
23
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join