Don't worry folks. 500% radiation levels on California beaches only red painted plastic forks.

reply to post by Panic2k11


It's not a truism. It was primarily meant to be applied toward mathematical and scientific theorems. It is not an irrefutable principle of logic or anything else. In most cases outside of universities it is used by lazy people to try and shift the burden of proof.

P.S. as you can see by my signature it's something of a pet peeve of mine the way people talk about Ockham's Razor like they know what they're talking about.

reply to post by Malynn


It is a truism, the path of less resistance is the optimal path, always to whatever system you apply it...

Aisling
reply to post by BlackJackal

 

The question is, if the radiation showing up has nothing to do with Fuku, then why in the hell are we seeing high rad counts in the snow out in Missouri? The person who took those readings has been testing since the very beginning, after everything happened.

Pardon me for asking but I live in Missouri. Southwest region. As you might imagine, I'm sensitive to what radiation readings are here and not for Fukushima. I'm more concerned with nuclear facilities within a 200 mile radius of where I'm sitting for 'small accidents' or 'leaks' they figure aren't important enough to mention.

I've not seen any elevated readings across Missouri in a way I'd alert to, beyond statistical variance and background ups and downs. Of course, I'm no expert, so I could well have missed a sensor set somewhere for a reading.

Can you be specific about where in Missouri you are reading about elevated radiation levels detected in snowfall? Thanks.

FlySolo

Health officials in California are now telling residents not to worry after a video uploaded to the internet last month seemed to show high levels of radiation at a Pacific Coast beach.

The video, “Fukushima radiation hits San Francisco,” has been viewed nearly half-a-million times since being uploaded to YouTube on Christmas Eve, and its contents have caused concern among residents who fear that nuclear waste from the March 2011 disaster in Japan may be arriving on their side of the Pacific Ocean.

Peterson told the Review he was “befuddled” over the ordeal, but suggested the culprit could be something not too sinister — such as red-painted eating utensils buried on the beach.

Well there you have it. Nothing to fear here and this should put an end to all the panic. I wish people would stop bringing their take out food to the beach leaving their red painted eating utensils laying around everywhere like cigarette butts. If you think burying them in the sand will hide your littering ways, you're wrong because hand held radiation detectors will find them. Anyway, it's safe to go back in water. Have a nice day.
rt.com...

I continue to be astounded that people on ATS take as "proof" some guy they never met holding a device he isn't trained to use measuring something he clearly does not understand. Deny ignorance indeed...

For the record, and I have posted this many times already, there is a National volunteer radiation monitoring network that ANYONE on here can join. It is updated by the minute. Stop repeating garbage some dolt on Youtube told you, put your money where your tinfoil conspiracy theory is, and join the network.

San Francisco beaches will collect all the natural accruing radioactive materials from the central valley and the mountains around the central valley as it washes down the Sacramento River.

Mercury levels are also high in the bay from the same sources.

Unless you have reactor by products you are looking at natural

I actually own a refurbished CDV-700 Geiger counter from the '60's. I live in Sacramento, CA and the last time it rained (November, I believe - it's been awhile) I calibrated it against a Cesium 137 check source, took baseline background readings inside, then went outside and stuck it in my rain gutter. I got readings about double the background rate, which - though measurable - is really pretty much negligible with regards to effects on human health. Hard to say really if it was even from Fukushima; hell Rancho Seco is less than a 100 miles away from me and Hanford is due north (one of the most heavily polluted radiation sites on the face of the earth).

I took it outside a few days after a reputed 'steam release event' last month, and also didn't see any kind of spike. So, at least as far as radiation in the atmosphere on the west coast, things seem OK so far here. I haven't had a chance to get down to the ocean yet but when I do I'll bring my little toy

Varhaard
I actually own a refurbished CDV-700 Geiger counter from the '60's. I live in Sacramento, CA and the last time it rained (November, I believe - it's been awhile) I calibrated it against a Cesium 137 check source, took baseline background readings inside, then went outside and stuck it in my rain gutter. I got readings about double the background rate, which - though measurable - is really pretty much negligible with regards to effects on human health. Hard to say really if it was even from Fukushima; hell Rancho Seco is less than a 100 miles away from me and Hanford is due north (one of the most heavily polluted radiation sites on the face of the earth).

I took it outside a few days after a reputed 'steam release event' last month, and also didn't see any kind of spike. So, at least as far as radiation in the atmosphere on the west coast, things seem OK so far here. I haven't had a chance to get down to the ocean yet but when I do I'll bring my little toy

Higher readings after rain is a pretty well documented effect, it happens the world over and happened prior to Fukushima or even Chernobyl. While I'm not certain of the cause I believe it mainly has to do with the waste from coal plants. Some of the ash released is radioactive, which then gets captured in the rain and brought back down to the ground. Oceanic radiation won't affect the rain because evaporation from the ocean is pure water, the radioactive particles stay in the ocean so while rain runoff can add more radioactive material to the ocean the process doesn't work in reverse.

Do we yet know the exact radiation levels flowing in to the sea from Fukushima?

If not then why?

If we can't trust TEPCO to tell the full truth then why has someone not piloted an unmanned Geiger counter enabled craft directly in to the Japanese waters at the base of the plant?

I mean its only the future of the ocean we are worrying about, nothing REALLY important eh.

As for the comment about "when the cars wash up", I didn't even know they had hands to hold a sponge....

But I jokingly digress.....What we need are facts and figures that are based upon the source ie Fukushima and then we can start worry about why there seems to be this huge level of radiation out there that is bugger all to do with the TEPCO plant.

Either way it seems we are in deep deep doo doo...

reply to post by Mclaneinc


Yes, we know the amount of Radiation in the Sea
as well as which Isotopes,
in what Concentrations and Ratio from the Reports
provided by Tepco
but also from a few other governmental Organizations!

Just today i got the Message that Tepco is opening their Gates
for more independent People and Institutes,
they can do their own Measurements!

Everything is coming with a Timeline
and now the Time of more Openess is coming!

reply to post by Aazadan


No, nothing to do with Coalplants but with a Radon-Washout:

Radon Washout occurs when naturally occurring Uranium and Thorium decay, at one point creating a gas called Radon. Radon is a short lived gas, quickly decaying into other radioactive materials. When it rains, radon and the decay products of radon fall upon the ground, similarly to how ash or dust can be removed from the air by rain. The result is a light coat of radioactive water on cars, streets, houses, etc. The radioactivity detected on the surface of objects exposed to the air diminishes over time due to the water evaporating, radioactive decay, absorption into the soil, etc.


Detection of Radon Washout

The exact cause of a source of unknown radiation cannot be positively identified without some sort of specialized testing, such as radio chemical or spectroscopy. Geiger counters can detect radon washout very effectively, especially on car hoods and other metallic surfaces. A Geiger counter can easily experience hundreds of click sounds per minute as a result of a fresh rainfall. A key attribute of Radon Washout is the time it takes for the affected sample to return to normal. If you test your car hood and find that it is more radioactive than it was before the rain, than wait for approximately three hours and test again and find that the radioactivity is reducing to normal levels, radon washout may be suspected (though not confirmed).

Source

I can't believe people are still on about this. The people perpetuating the radiation hoax are the least qualified to even comment on it and often the most paranoid.

knowyourmeme.com...
skeptoid.com...
www.snopes.com...

The Fukushima issue is local to Japan and the immediate surrounding area.

And also, this load of bull about the dead animals on the west coast:

www.metabunk.org...
deepseanews.com...

lol

Hes using an Alpha detector. Alpha is on everything

150 Counts per minute (CPM) isnt all that high. Plus when using one of those you must subtract the background contamination which on his meter appeared to be around 30 CPM.

Alpha below 1000 CPM is harmless.

Does anyone remember those green glass dishes they used to sell back in the day? Your grandparents probably have some. Those can range in the 1000s of CPM.

The contamination on this is probably the paint on the plastic. Paint can have a fairly high Alpha content.

You can shield from Alpha with a piece of paper ffs. Why would you need to though?


Nice try amateur Alpha detector guy.

Everyone else carry on with what you were doing.

reply to post by truthseeker84


Occam's Razor is the simplest conclusion and works for any question or problem for simple minds. in the real world things can get a little more complicated.

reply to post by Passnthru2


Then you don't understand it.

reply to post by truthseeker84


You do realize that if the "simplest answer" is proven to be wrong it isn't actually the simplest answer right???? You do understand your failure in logic concerning OC right?

reply to post by metaldemon2000


Unless, of course, it is inhaled or swallowed, in which case an alpha emitter is twenty times more injurious to tissue than gamma and Beta emitters swallowed or inhaled.

And those high counts on EPA filters are mostly gamma, not Alpha. Alpha is just hard to measure.
The most common radioactive substance most of us are exposed to is Radon gas, and for the most part, its progeny are formed more by alpha emission than by beta or gamma emission.