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.

 

Fukushima radiation… what you need to know and why

page: 10
60
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by jrod
 


That is strange they worded it like that...hmmm

www.cnn.com...

The study from 2011 compared to 2012, "dropped by about half in those tunas." Nicholas Fischer, Marine Science Professor at Stony Brook University.

I know I've read other reports confirming this.




posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by game over man
 



game over man

...... all tuna fish are full of radiation, blah blah blah have all been debunked


Cs137 and Cs134 is present in all blue-fin tuna caught in the Northern Pacific.

Verified

edit on 17-1-2014 by jrod because: add quote fix quote



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by game over man
 


The information ripped out of the original research institutions articles is accurate. The only difference is the fluff has been eliminated and the raw facts put out there.

The people who get to study the environment are heavily vetted, so that the institutions who fund them know, they will not do anything to bite the hand that feeds them. They will put out the truth, but it will be disguised.

When you do further research, you learn to see through the smoke and mirrors.



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by jrod
 


Verified where? I want an actual PDF document please. How can you catch all bluefin tuna?? There are quotas...Do you think its a good idea to over fish bluefin tuna to find low unharmful levels of radiation?

Sure things coming into contact with Fukushima will most likely have radiation! Hello? What is your point or conspiracy other than causing panic that cancer is caused from sushi rolls and not cigarettes for example?

Hint hint...lobbying against the seafood industry. Hint hint anti-global warming, what else does all this madness mean??



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


What is your point? What is the bigger picture?

2nd line



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Human0815
 

Tepco lied.

Former Official in Fukushima: “This is a disaster of all humanity… the entire world” — “It’s on an international level, huge consequences” — “Now bigger than anything we can cope with” (VIDEO)
Friday, January 17, 2014
By Paul Martin
ENENews.com January 17th, 2014 Democracy Now on location in Japan, Jan. 17, 2014: At 37:30 in Katsutaka Idogawa, Futaba’s mayor during 3/11, the town where part of Fukushima Daiichi...


Former Prime Minister of Japan: We’ve been lied to, nuclear experts lying to us… They’ve been telling a pack of lies — Governor: Tepco needs to reveal who gave orders to lie about Fukushima meltdowns (VIDEO)
Thursday, January 16, 2014
By Paul Martin
ENENews.com January 16th, 2014 Asahi Shimbun, Jan. 12, 2014 (h/t Anonymous tip): ‘We’ve been lied to,’ said ex-Prime Minister Koizumi “This is not an interview,” the acquaintance stressed,... »


The whole clean up is being run by the Japanese Crime Bosses, who could care less for the little guy that will be ripped off by them and die in obscurity.
Just like 9/11, nothing gets done in NY with out the Mafia having a hand in the pie.

What they need to do is start pouring massive amounts of concrete, for starters to build a sea wall, what ever it takes to get containment. This is such a potential disaster that the whole World needs to stop their squabbling and take on this problem. Or else just start lobbing Nukes at each other and just get it over with, I'm sure the cock roaches will survive.

China needs to step up to the plate, as this is in their back yard and they have the know how , with the recent completion of the Three Gorges Dam.

I am not a doomest, but a realist, this is real people are so blind, that is part of the problem Humans are so stuid to rally believe what Politicians tell them.

Everyone for the most part is out for their self.


This is something I put on another thread.
"This something I just found on " Wiki ", I'm sure most of you are aware of the term " Wormwood ". Well I just got a connection to that word and Chernobyl .

Some[12] even point to the Chernobyl disaster as a possible fulfillment of this prophecy, as the name Chernobyl is said to translate to "wormwood.

I almost forgot, in the Japan disaster the 137 Cs is from Chernobyl, but Wormwood was to of turned 1/3 of the water bitter or unpalatable.

One more thing in Greek the term star, as Star Wormwood, star also means to spread in Greek.
edit on 17-1-2014 by OOOOOO because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by game over man
 


All blue-fin caught in the North Pacific tests positive for Cs137 and Cs134

Verified


I challenged someone to debunk that statement. The link game over man provided verified this claim.

When there is a sample size of hundreds of fish and they all test positive, then I think that claim is valid.



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by jrod
 


skeptoid.com...
doubtfulnews.com...
www.npr.org...


Fisher says they weren't actually worried about radioactive cesium as a health risk. They tested the flesh, "mostly just to see if it we could detect it, and we were quite surprised, I must say. We did not expect to see this radioactivity retained by the fish during their trans-Pacific voyage, which we estimates takes from three to four months."

Yes, radiation in seafood seems scary. But here's the catch (if you pardon the expression). Tuna, like every other food on the planet, already contains naturally occurring radiation. It has potassium-40 and polonium-210. It always has and it always will. In addition, seafood in general contains a trace of cesium-137 left over from nuclear weapons testing in the 1950s and 1960s.

So the question is, how much more radiation did these particular tuna fish contain? The answer is: A trivial amount. In fact, radiation from the cesium is 30 times less than the radiation that's already in the fish naturally in the form of potassium-40, according to the research paper. And the natural polonium-210 packs a radiation dose 200 times larger than the dose from the cesium.


newswatch.nationalgeographic.com...


When contacted about its testing of domestically caught seafood, an FDA spokesman responded in an email, saying that “the FDA is not aware of any evidence suggesting that the domestic seafood catch contains harmful levels of radiation.” He further referenced a 2012 study from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, which found levels of cesium-137 and cesium-134 in bluefin tuna to be, according to an email from the FDA, “roughly 300 times lower than levels that would prompt FDA to investigate further to determine if there were a health concern.”


www.pnas.org...
edit on 17-1-2014 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by raymundoko
 


If you have read my previous posts I linked the same information.

That does not change the fact that all blue fin Tuna in the North Pacific are contaminated with trace amounts Cs134 and Cs137.

That fact is pertinent information regarding the Fukushima melt-through.
edit on 17-1-2014 by jrod because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by jrod
 


Then you didn't read your own source material....

ALL FISH IN THE PACIFIC HAVE HAD CESIUM 137 SINCE NUCLEAR TESTING! THE FDA HAS ALWAYS MEASURED IT BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN KNOWN TO BE A PART OF OUR DIET FOR THE LAST 60 YEARS!

Your biggest problem, as with others here, is you think that NO RADIATION IS SAFE RADIATION! When you are literally bombarded with very high amounts of radiation every day...

In fact, you will get more radiation in a day of sun bathing than you would from eating a pound of tuna right now. Ever played in the rain? RADIATION! Ever made a snow angel? RADIATION! Ever swam in the Ocean? TONS OF RADIATION! Eat off ceramic plates? YOUR FOOD IS SITTING ON RADIATION!


In fact, the most widely-accepted model suggests that, in terms of affecting most people, low-level background radiation is the most hazardous source of radiation.


web.archive.org...://www.nap.edu/execsumm_pdf/11340.pdf
edit on 17-1-2014 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Also, there seems to be some confusion on what the FDA is doing and how test are being done. They have it all out there on public domain. Nothing is being hidden:

www.fda.gov...



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by raymundoko
 

pic credit universe explorers

Have spent few days trying to get a grip on what they do.
Post above for Codex international trade 1000 Bq/Kg Cs 137 in baby food is action level.
Under that would be listed as na or below action level.
Hope that's a good level for you, personally I'm still learning how they come up with the numbers.

edit on 17-1-2014 by donlashway because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by raymundoko
 


Ok. Cs137 levels went up as a result of Fukushima. It is also not found in nature.

Clearly you have not read my previous posts, though I have hundreds in the Japan forum. I am not one of those who thinks all radiation is bad. I heat up food in a microwave! I've even experienced numerous radiation burns, some blistering as a result of spending too much time in the sun. Heat is a form of radiation, we need radiation to survive. There are several types of radiation.

The biggest problem and why some many of us are worried is because we've been lied to from the beginning. It was apparent that a full meltdown was happening and that was not reported. I can go on, what happened on the USS Reagan gives us more reason to doubt any report coming from TEPCO, Japan, or the US government.



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 05:22 PM
link   

raymundoko
reply to post by jrod
 





Your biggest problem, as with others here, is you think that NO RADIATION IS SAFE RADIATION! When you are literally bombarded with very high amounts of radiation every day...



"In fact, the most widely-accepted model suggests that, in terms of affecting most people, low-level background radiation is the most hazardous source of radiation."



In fact, the most widely-accepted model suggests that, in terms of affecting most people, low-level background radiation is the most hazardous source of radiation.




That quote is one of the most Moronic, statements I have had the misfortune to read. But if you read it for what it's worth, in terms of affecting most people, yea low level radiation effects the most people, percentage wise, yea, that's a given the low level radiation is every where.
But I tell you what I'll take all the low level radiation I can get, you take the high dose, since you think the low level is worse. We can watch and see how long you last.

By the way the reason they call it X-rays, is X the unknown, they have only recently discovered that the radioactive decay of these material are effected by solar flares. So before you get your next x-ray, better check see what the sun is doing, so you don't fry your arse. Oh, that's right you think high dose ts better for you than low dose.

Maybe when in the future we live on radiation or when pigs fly.

I see you are new kinda, are you a dis-info guy, I mean you quoted the FDA, I mean give me a break the, government has been lying about this thing from the get go, so you would believe a government agency and one owned by big Pharm at that.
edit on 17-1-2014 by OOOOOO because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 05:54 PM
link   
To prevent thread drift, let start with what facts can be proven and what cannot proven, backed up by scientific data and not speculation or guesses by the expert of your choice.

When you boil it down to raw facts, most people would be shocked that after 3 years, most of the stuff at Fukushima is really unknown.


KNOWN FACTS:

1. The Pacific Ocean will not "dilute" the radiation coming out of Fukushima.
2. Fukushima is leaking radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean and into the atmosphere on a daily basis.
3. There is no current time frame for when the leaks at Fukushima will be stopped.
4. The radiation from Fukushima that goes into the Pacific Ocean will dissipate.

UNKNOWN FACTS:

1. Exactly how much radiation is coming out of Fukushima on a daily basis into the air and ocean?
2. What are the long term health effects for the radiation from Fukushima?
3. What will be the bio-accumulation from Fukushima?
4. How far spread will the bio accumulation from Fukushima be?
5. When will people be able to return to their homes in the exclusion area outside of Fukushima?
6. What is going to happen with the radioactive water stored in the tank farms at Fukushima?
7. How far did the radiation from the original meltdown spread?
8. What was the severity of the initial releases during the first days of the accident?
9. What is the long term effects going to be on the local fishermen around the Fukushima area?
10. How long can Tepco keep pumping money at Fukushima before it starts becoming an unbearable financial strain?
11. When will the Japanese government seize control of the Fukushima plant from Tepco?
12. How long before morale becomes a serious issue with the workers at the plant?

I could probably think of a dozen more unknowns, but I hope you are getting my point.

There are simply too many unknown factors about Fukushima to make a really sound logical decision on most of the stuff people discuss about Fukushima. People are going to debate their side of the issue and there is no stopping that, but that's a good thing... as long as people keep talking then Fukushima will never be pushed to the back burner.


edit on 17-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 06:31 PM
link   
I'm done posting in this thread unless the conversation turns useful. There seems to be a consistent pattern in the debate. Why its a debate? I blame American politics and media creating that type of conversation as the norm with society.

There is no conspiracy talked about in this thread. Just a bunch of egg throwing at bad media when actual scientific information is out there. I can understand it might be your first time hearing about science and seafood, but the two go hand in hand.

So for some of us, the companies or organizations presenting this information are considered reliable sources. Whereas the media's take on the subject typically is garbage reporting and ignorant speculation. If you are familiar with seafood and science you would notice the difference instantly, from NPR to Intra fish to CNN to seafood news.com and a multitude of others.

No one wants the Pacific Ocean to be toxic...for many reasons....

The conspiracy to put a ban on tuna consumption from just a bunch of crazy people online because no one in any of the articles is suggesting that is super annoying when it comes to Fukushima!

There has to be a much larger conspiracy than sashimi????!!! My goodness, the protest has a very political tone because it not only is based on ignorance but it also makes no alternative suggestion.

What are we supposed to eat?? How do we feed the planet? Whatever your answer is, is there a conspiracy preventing that as well??



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by RickinVa
 


I don't know why you keep trying to play word games with diluted. The scientific word for what happens is dilute...

e360.yale.edu...

So yes, the pacific ocean is diluting the radiation.



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 07:12 PM
link   

raymundoko
reply to post by RickinVa
 


I don't know why you keep trying to play word games with diluted. The scientific word for what happens is dilute...

e360.yale.edu...

So yes, the pacific ocean is diluting the radiation.



its apple and oranges... I am in the process emailing a few nuclear scientists to clarify this issue... If I get any replies from them, I will post that to this thread
edit on 17-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 07:25 PM
link   

RickinVa

raymundoko
reply to post by RickinVa
 


I don't know why you keep trying to play word games with diluted. The scientific word for what happens is dilute...

e360.yale.edu...

So yes, the pacific ocean is diluting the radiation.



The scientific word for what happens is dissipate,,,,,,,,,, you find one single nuclear scientist that will tell you that you can "dilute" a radioactive isoptope by mixing it with water, kool aid, tomato juice, etc.... you can't do it plain and simple.

I can pin down the smartest nuclear scientist on this planet with this argument because it is undeniable except to people who like to think that the ocean somehow has the capability to make a radioactive isotope weaker. Its simply impossible and people should use the word "dissipate" because that's exactly what happens when radioactive isotope go into water.


Feel free to find a single scientific paper that will support your claim that water will make a radioactive isotope weaker by somehow diluting it to be less radioactive.

I am confident I can check back in a week and you wont have one.... it just simply doesn't work that way.


Please please please find one scientist that will agree that by mixing an isotope of lets say... Strontium 90...... with water that the physical characteristics of the isotope and that the isotope has lost some of it's individual radioactivity because its in water.

Just one accepted mainstream nuclear scientist.




Attack the ball not the player.



edit on 17-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-1-2014 by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by RickinVa
 


It would seem that, in the known factors, that 1 and 4 four would be contradictions. As if it will not dilute then how would it dissipate. It's not just the 137Cs or 134Cs, but even the Iodine will not lose it's radioactive state in the presents of so much radiation, so anyone saying the presents of radioactive Iodine is no longer a threat are mistaken while it is still in the presents of highly radioactive materials. That Plutonium is some bad stuff, I have forgotten what the half life is but I know it's long time.

The other thing is that Tepco lied about melt down, now they are saying we think NO. 3 is also in melt down. As far as I know, we have never had a China Syndrome occur, which it could never occur in first place. But in theory it could melt down threw the Earth's crust, which maybe they should just let it do it's thing, like out of site out of mind. It would still be radioactive in that area, but they could use remote control machines to push stuff in the hole that would be created and then just push the machines in the hoke also.

They have no ideal how to get the molten core out of the hole plus if it is at critical mass they could cause a massive nuclear explosion if they mess with it to much.

They were in fear of this at Fermi One, in Michigan when they lost coolant and no one knew what too do, they dumped 50,000 gallons of water on it, to get control back. This one here is way past that, what will be interesting is if all three cores combine when it gets further down into the ground. Right now I'm sure the control rods are also melted into the jumbled mess they have going, if it does blow, I would guess Japan would only be half the size it is now.



KNOWN FACTS:

1. The Pacific Ocean will not "dilute" the radiation coming out of Fukushima.
2. Fukushima is leaking radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean and into the atmosphere on a daily basis.
3. There is no current time frame for when the leaks at Fukushima will be stopped.
4. The radiation from Fukushima that goes into the Pacific Ocean will dissipate.

UNKNOWN FACTS:

1. Exactly how much radiation is coming out of Fukushima on a daily basis into the air and ocean? Answer, way to muuch!!
2. What are the long term health effects for the radiation from Fukushima? Answer, bad in the least, very bad in the most.
3. What will be the bio-accumulation from Fukushima? Answer, again bad, cumulative, in all exposed.
4. How far spread will the bio accumulation from Fukushima be? Answer, catastropic in near future ,Northern hemisphere.
5. When will people be able to return to their homes in the exclusion area outside of Fukushima? Answer , Never.
6. What is going to happen with the radioactive water stored in the tank farms at Fukushima? Answer, dump in Ocean.
7. How far did the radiation from the original meltdown spread? Answer, Across Pacific, into Alantic threw Bering Straights,
8. What was the severity of the initial releases during the first days of the accident? Answer , Unknown as was lied about.
9. What is the long term effects going to be on the local fishermen around the Fukushima area? Answer, they are toast.
10. How long can Tepco keep pumping money at Fukushima before it starts becoming an unbearable financial strain? Answer, Tepco is, will try and spend the least amount possible, they must protect the share holders position.

11. When will the Japanese government seize control of the Fukushima plant from Tepco? Answer, I'm sure is in process now.
12. How long before morale becomes a serious issue with the workers at the plant? Answer, it already is, when you make one pass, and you can never be around this radiation again for the rest of your life, I'm sure these people know they are putting life on line and will die. Why are they putting out a call for workers 55 year of age, because they will be walking dead men.

edit on 17-1-2014 by OOOOOO because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join