Fairewinds Associates: Are They A Creditable Source Concerning Radiation Fallout Over The US?

This thread is being started due to a member questioning the creditability of Fairewinds Associates.

I have been following the Fukushima desaster since day one. We have seen the US Government tell those of us in the US that we have nothing to fear concerning radiation fallout.

Fairewinds Associates has released data today providing a different story and the ending is one that may just affect your family.

You can find the data on this thread HERE

A poster on that thread is questioning the groups creditability.

This thread is for that discussion.

I have seen many interviews given by Mr. Gunderson to the MSM over the past several months. You can find many publications / reports concerning their nuclear expertise.

A wealth of information can be found on Youtube and Google.

You will also find those who attempt to discredit their information.

You can see their website here: Fairewinds

If there is information out there and some members would like to share with the ATS community what they have found concerning the creditability of Fairewinds please share it here and not the Data thread……..

Thank You.....

Originally posted by Cloudsinthesky
If there is information out there and some members would like to share with the ATS community what they have found concerning the creditability of Fairewinds please share it here and not the Data thread……..

And the reason for not addressing the credibility of the data in the thread where the data appear is?

I would have thought that's the logical place to address the data credibility, wherever the data is presented.

One reason for that is some data presented by Fairewinds may be more credible and well supported than other data they present. So I don't find it's particularly useful to talk in vague generalities.

Edit to add: OK I just read some of the other thread and the links provided.

Gunderson is somewhat biased anti-nuclear.

Some of the people bashing Gunderson are somewhat biased pro-nuclear.

The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle. As with anything, you have to read both sides of the argument and weigh the facts presented to decide where the credibility lies. And as I said, it varies by claim. I've been able to find independent confirmation of some of Gunderson's claims. Others, I haven't. But in the latter case I also haven't followed up with Gunderson to request clarfication/sources which I would need to do in a complete investigation of his credibility.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


You are correct in your assumption concerning Fairewinds..........

Fairewinds is not new to the nuclear game.............They have been voicing their opinion for some time.

My point is that there are many threads here on ATS concerning comments, interviews and analysis from Fairewinds………….

That thread is about the DATA…………

If you want to question Fairewinds creditability then do so……………..But on another thread like this one……….

I don’t recall any members questioning there credentials on any of the other threads back when you where catching Fairewinds on MSM……….

So why question it now on that thread………….

Like many posters on ATS…………A member has derailed the thread completely………….The data is not even being discussed and its implications…………..

After the Accident happened i was beaten up by the huge amount of Information,
from "The end of our Days" until "Daijobu/ No Problem" all was in the Pit.

I remember very well that i was very confused and in Panic,
we had left Tokyo in the morning of 03/15 because of the apocalyptic Feeling+ the Aftershocks
and i was watching the Catastrophe from a small and beautiful Island in Thailand (Koh Koot)

Surfing the Net that days was horrible
Until i got the Fairewind Link, Arnie Gunderson calmed me in a way down
because he told us Facts and do not spend (much) time for Speculations
like many other People done and still do!

Some People really think that we are already glowing here, but we don't

He served me exactly what i needed in that Weeks, to find a new approach for this whole Topic!

Even that he "is" a part of the Nuclear Complex do not reduced his credibility!
I am very thankful for his Uploads.

Originally posted by Human0815
Until i got the Fairewind Link, Arnie Gunderson calmed me in a way down

It's interesting to hear you say he calmed you down because some people are trying to portray him as a fear monger, but apparently he didn't instill fear in you. I've watched every one of his videos and I also wouldn't call him a fear monger.

If you want to know what a real fear monger looks like, this is it:

Leuren Moret
I can't really believe anything she says, so if they were attacking her for being a fear monger, I'd understand it. But I think the attacks on Arnie Gunderson are a little misplaced.

Gunderson did say Fukushima is the worst industrial accident ever, and people dispute that claim because of how few people have died so far. But I think they miss the point that the Fukushima death toll could take decades to materialize, so it might be 2050 or even later, before we can assess if Gunderson was right or wrong about that. The death toll is remarkably low so far though, but death toll aside, look at how much land has been rendered uninhabitable, and how much more land isn't suitable for farming anymore, so there are more measures than just a death toll.

Thing is US hot particle data has been independently released by a few groups now and they are mostly quite similar. And it doesn't look good.

Fairewinds is often the messenger, however they do get their own data sometimes. Arnie has been bang on about most things. Regarding the reactor #3 explosion, many in the fukushima megathread think a little different to Arnies' fuel pool theory. Lets face it, he only just released the high resolution pictures #3, which have been on cryptome for many months.

I have also been following the Fukushima disaster since day 1. I have found Arnie Gundersen to be the best resource out there!! He has been discussing things that would not benefit the money side of things, he has provided precise data WITH reasons why he says what he does...

such as describing a meltdown compared to just an explosion by showing a satelite or helicopter view and showing the broken rods inside the reactor.

He has been shut down by a few people, especially on some CNN interviews for one main reason: he does not have Big Energy money in mind; he is stating things in the guise of safety, planetary health, and openness.