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.

 

Tepco Quietly Admits Reactor 3 Could Be Melting Down Now

page: 10
84
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 08:50 AM
link   

itsallgonenow
reply to post by jaffo
 


No they did not, we killed mostly civilians AFTER they have surrendered!


Baloney. Get your facts straight. Japan refused to surrender even after the first bomb was dropped. This is fact. Leaving this aside, I have to admit that I am pleased that this thread has led to a pretty good discussion of the issue at hand. Although I will respond to one individual who had waved all of this by saying that I am NOT stating that this is definitely happening right now. What I AM saying is that IF IT DOES HAPPEN, we are in a very, very bad situation which is likely going to be beyond our abilities to control. These things being said, I am disappointed that so many people continue to take it as gospel truth that there are high levels of radiation in the State right now because of this. That simply is not true, regardless of what ill-informed local weathermen might tell you. Because I think you guys will appreciate it and because I think it's a good thing to know about, here is a link to an all volunteer, reliable National radioactivity monitoring site. You can even join it if you want, to participate and confirm that the numbers are real. Trust me, uf radiation spikes, these guys will be telling EVERYBODY: radiationnetwork.com...




posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   
I did a Google search for more information on this one:

Nuclear Expert: Why Steam from Reactor 3 Matters


The Japanese government will soon be approving legislation, that would make the leaking of information about Fukushima a state offense, carrying a hefty criminal sentence.


Check out that... what the hell.

But this may be a hoax:

Fukishima Update


The page shows a photograph of Reactor 3 steaming vigorously to lend support to the contention above.

The problem? It is a photo from March 2011 right after the building blew up.

edit on 05amSun, 05 Jan 2014 09:31:50 -0600kbamkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 09:44 AM
link   
The only good thing that will come from this is that, hopefully people will realize that nuclear power is extremely deadly.

We should be focusing on investing in clean/renewable energy.

Shut down every nuclear power plant.



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 09:44 AM
link   

jaffo

grey580
reply to post by jaffo
 


Is there an "official" news source other than some blog?
I'd like to see this being reported officially


Unfortunately, no. The mainstream is completely ignoring this so they can talk about Duck Dynasty.


Or because (more likely) it's made-up, fairytale bollocks.



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 09:46 AM
link   

justreleased


Look at your history. I don't think China wants a 100,000,000 Japs.



A lot of people find the term 'Jap' racist and derogatory. I ask you change your post.



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 09:50 AM
link   

jhn7537
reply to post by vkey08
 


Maybe putting a nuclear power plant on the coast of your country, when you're prone to large EQ's and Tsunami's probably wasn't the wisest decision they've made either...


The whole of Japan is 'prone' to earthquakes.

All of it.

Where would you have them build one?



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Alekto
 


So true. You should have added, Duck Dynasty was so two weeks ago. No one is talking about that any more .



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Alekto

justreleased


Look at your history. I don't think China wants a 100,000,000 Japs.



A lot of people find the term 'Jap' racist and derogatory. I ask you change your post.


I have been called... in order (and yes this is slightly off topic) Chink, slanty, gook, vietcong, sliteyes every single time I wink and look back at the person and say if you wish to insult me, the proper racial slur is "nip" but in my case since I'm also French and PuertoRican, the term would be a Nippy-Spic Frog.....



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 10:07 AM
link   

justreleased
reply to post by jaffo
 


Wow the revenge of Japan. We nuke them and then "Fuku - shima" nukes everybody.

How ironic?




jaffo

Lol, for sure. Although Japan earned their nukings.




Are you guys have a competition who can make the most bad taste post of the day? This is really dreadful stuff.



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 10:08 AM
link   

rupertg

Shut down every nuclear power plant.


Enjoy living in the dark ages.



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by jaffo
 

www.netc.com...

www.epa.gov...

The EPA one just shows a graph of various Gamma energy ranges. Watch it when a westerly weather system goes over a tracking station.

While there levels of radiation are noticeably elevated, it does now mean it is completely unsafe. Regardless a measurable amount of fallout from Fukushima is found all over the Northern Hemisphere.

The situation is still serious.



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Alekto

jhn7537
reply to post by vkey08
 


Maybe putting a nuclear power plant on the coast of your country, when you're prone to large EQ's and Tsunami's probably wasn't the wisest decision they've made either...


The whole of Japan is 'prone' to earthquakes.

All of it.

Where would you have them build one?



I wouldn't have them build it then, if your country is so unstable to catastrophic disasters (ie EQ's and Tsunami's), you would think they would look at different energy sources that don't carry as much risk. Maybe wind energy, water, or solar energy would have been the better direction to go in... I'm not an expert on energy, but I know there is a great risk associated with nuclear energy and building plants in unstable locations just sounds like a recipe for disaster.

The more I learn about nuclear energy, the more I hate it, not just on Japan's coast, but all around the world. Even in my neck of the woods... If there's a "safer" source out there, I feel all countries should be using it, because the risks, IMO, far outweigh the reward we get from it.
edit on 5-1-2014 by jhn7537 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Why did they build a nuclear reactor on unstable ground?



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Mamatus
 


Death without destruction...Hmmm, Better than they got from us I guess.



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 12:26 PM
link   
I read the original report and this seems like fear mongering to me.



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Alekto

rupertg

Shut down every nuclear power plant.


Enjoy living in the dark ages.


We are.



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 01:32 PM
link   
I know that this will sound totally whacked but, I think we are being terraformed to change the place et to support an ecosystem more conducive to the Reptilian Alien, ala David Icke



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by jaffo
 


Where is the safest place to go!?



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Emerys
reply to post by jaffo
 


Where is the safest place to go!?


Ummm...The best and safest place...is the.............

Bathroom


YouSir



posted on Jan, 5 2014 @ 03:10 PM
link   

jhn7537
I wouldn't have them build it then, if your country is so unstable to catastrophic disasters (ie EQ's and Tsunami's), you would think they would look at different energy sources that don't carry as much risk. Maybe wind energy, water, or solar energy would have been the better direction to go in... I'm not an expert on energy, but I know there is a great risk associated with nuclear energy and building plants in unstable locations just sounds like a recipe for disaster.


Then maybe try educating yourself. Japan is in an excellent location for geothermal but that doesn't cover all of their power requirements. Wind and solar provide very little power, and both use up a lot of space. Something Japan simply doesn't have. You're talking about a country that sends it's high school students to special schools in other countries because they don't have enough space in their territory to actually construct a school. The location Fukushima was built in wasn't the best because it was vulnerable to a tsunami but the building survived the initial earthquake just fine exactly as it was engineered to do. It was the tsunami that messed everything up.


The more I learn about nuclear energy, the more I hate it, not just on Japan's coast, but all around the world. Even in my neck of the woods... If there's a "safer" source out there, I feel all countries should be using it, because the risks, IMO, far outweigh the reward we get from it.


How do you define safe? If you define it by the number of deaths and illnesses caused per X kilowatt hours, nuclear is by far the safest route. It's more than 10 times safer than the next closest options like solar and wind, 20 times safer than hydro, and more than 150 times safer than coal (which I'll point out releases far more radioactive material than nuclear). I couldn't find data on geothermal.



new topics

top topics



 
84
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join