Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
No, I said that Clayton was exaggerating the event in the OP and we should leave the sciencing to the scientists
Fukishima Radiation The News Keeps Getting Worse
- Thread starter ClaytonBigsby
- Start date
mysunnyboy
Well-Known Member
we're fucked IMVHO 
mysunnyboy
Well-Known Member
is "sciencing" even a word?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i really hope you're trolling.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
again, i really hope you're just trolling.
TigerClock
Well-Known Member
I am a scientist. Nuclear waste is the ocean is not good.
ClaytonBigsby
Well-Known Member
I'm not trolling, I quoted a couple of articles I just read, one from Reuters, and asked that we discuss it.
Pad came in acting like I said we are all going to die a horrible, painful radioactive death,....next week. He's the extremist. And for him to state that there is NO danger is even more stupid.
I imagine it is a very real discussion in places like Alaska's fishing community, and I;d love to hear the thoughts of those so close to the after effects. Slow, tell us what you know, if you are comfortable.
Anyone who thinks the gov't gives us the straight dope is a nitwit. Especially when it concerns a major health problem, for which those entrusted to do the investigating and punishing, are being paid off by the perpetrators of the crimes.
Hey Pad, do you think BP's oil spill in the Gulf was no big deal?
Pad came in acting like I said we are all going to die a horrible, painful radioactive death,....next week. He's the extremist. And for him to state that there is NO danger is even more stupid.
I imagine it is a very real discussion in places like Alaska's fishing community, and I;d love to hear the thoughts of those so close to the after effects. Slow, tell us what you know, if you are comfortable.
Anyone who thinks the gov't gives us the straight dope is a nitwit. Especially when it concerns a major health problem, for which those entrusted to do the investigating and punishing, are being paid off by the perpetrators of the crimes.
Hey Pad, do you think BP's oil spill in the Gulf was no big deal?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
the comments section of yahoo news and an article from the half-baked retards at counterpunch?
you're aware that fukushima is a drop in the bucket next to the testing of atomic bombs they did for decades, right? you're aware that no credible person anywhere believes that fukushima is causing weather changes, right?
the only people in any sort of danger are those near the meltdown, that's it.
i'd advise you to check on your sources a little better next time.
ClaytonBigsby
Well-Known Member
I regurgitated info from a Reuter's article, and later, from some of the comments. I included another article for the "discussion" I asked people to have. ("Let's sort out the truth from the hype, shall we? What do you know?" were my exact words in the OP)
By your argument, Chernobyl was a drop in the bucket compared to all of the testing of atomic bombs, look how well that turned out. To downplay Fukushima is a disservice to humanity.
I said the article was blaming weather problems on Fukushima. I did not state it as my opinion, and hoped to have an intelligent discourse on the matter. Apparently you are a weather and radiation expert and have announced the idea as ludicrous. I'll note your position. I also said in another post those closest are in the most danger.
I'd advice you to read posts more thoroughly. I know you folks in the politics section only see things from your point of view and anyone who links an article is bound to it like they wrote it themselves, but this is TnT, where I would hope people have a little more civility, and sense.
Maybe stay over there where you folks like to argue for argument's sake. When I am ready to argue without looking at ALL of the facts, or entertaining the other side's position, I will join you there.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
moving beyond that weather nonsense and bombing us out of orbit tripe, you know they have tested the sea food, right?
care to register a guess about the results?
before you speak of civility and sense, i would go back and read your own comments in this thread. not a lot of either in there.
ClaytonBigsby
Well-Known Member
I've read a couple of things regarding the seafood testing, and it depends largely on who is doing the testing, and where. Apparently you know the only results that matter, as you didn;t care enough to provide a link.
Regarding my civility in this thread, I love that Pad comes around and attacks without knowing what the hell he's talking about, get's his nose rubbed in it, and his friends come to try to do damage control. Seen it several times. Sad.
I do not like Pad, and think he is a moron who fancies himself intellectually superior to everyone, regardless of his actual formal education, or lack thereof. You know me, I have no problem calling people out when they attack me and put words in my mouth.
Now, do you have anything to add to the conversation I actually tried to initiate, or was your appearance strictly to defend the honor of a man with none?
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
ClaytonBigsby
Well-Known Member
LOL, that's you!
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i thought it was pretty clear that i was here to mock your sources and their conclusions, put some perspective into here, and ask if you knew what the actual consequences were for us over here far away from the meltdown.
don't think i've mentioned your buddy pada yet.
ClaytonBigsby
Well-Known Member
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/05/30/153925233/nuclear-tuna-is-hot-news-but-not-because-its-going-to-make-you-sick
i know you'd need to eat about 5000-8000 pounds of contaminated tuna before you had any worries.
the mercury is much more dangerous.
ClaytonBigsby
Well-Known Member
An interesting read, with links
etwas seltsam
June 3, 2012 at 4:07 PM
Seals, walruses, bears with lesions similar to those described by the CDC of Cutaneous Radiation Injury:
http://www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/newsreleases/2011/umedeclaration2011.htm
“Since mid-July, more than 60 dead and 75 diseased seals, most of them ringed seals, have been reported in Alaska, with reports continuing to come in. During their fall survey, scientists with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service also identified diseased and dead walruses at the annual mass haul-out at Point Lay.
Seals and walruses suffering from this disease have skin sores, usually on the hind flippers or face, and patchy hair loss. Some of the diseased mammals have exhibited labored breathing and appear lethargic. Scientists have not yet identified a single cause for this disease, though tests indicate a virus is not the cause.
Necropsies and laboratory tests to date have found skin lesions in most cases, as well as fluid in the lungs, white spots on the liver, and abnormal growths in the brain. Some seals and walruses have undersized lymph nodes, which may indicate compromised immune systems.
Walruses and ringed seals in Russia, and ringed seals in Canada, have reportedly suffered similar symptoms. While it is not clear if the disease events are related, the timing and location of the disease suggests the possibility of transmission between the populations, or shared exposure to an environmental cause.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/06/us-polarbears-idUSBRE8350MX20120406
“Nine polar bears from the Beaufort Sea region near Barrow were found with patchy hair loss and oozing sores on their skin, similar to conditions found in diseased seals and walruses, the agency said in a statement.”
CRI- http://www.bt.cdc.gov/radiation/criphysicianfactsheet.asp
“Unlike the skin lesions caused by chemical or thermal damage, the lesions caused by radiation exposures do not appear for hours to days following exposure, and burns and other skin effects tend to appear in cycles.
Late effects (months to years postexposure; threshold dose ~10 Gy or 1000 rads)—Symptoms can vary from slight dermal atrophy (or thinning of dermis layer) to constant ulcer recurrence, dermal necrosis, and deformity. Possible effects include occlusion of small blood vessels with subsequent disturbances in the blood supply (telangiectasia); destruction of the lymphatic network; regional lymphostasis; and increasing invasive fibrosis, keratosis, vasculitis, and subcutaneous sclerosis of the connective tissue. Pigmentary changes and pain are often present. Skin cancer is possible in subsequent years.”
As to “no harm or injury” from Fukushima (which I do not believe is contained, controlled, or by any means over):
http://www.bristol.ac.uk/spais/research/workingpapers/wpspaisfiles/john-downer-07-12.pdf
“Radiation has been linked to a wide range of maladies: intestinal problems, heart and circulation problems, respiratory problems, endocrine problems and impairment of the immune system, all of which can prove fatal.
The LNT holds that all levels of radiation pose a risk to human health to a degree
that is directly proportional to dose, such that exposure cumulates over a lifetime, with many small doses being equivalent to fewer larger doses (NRC 2006).
LNT implies a much broader area – with diminishing risks but an increasing number
of potential victims as the area widens.
So let us simply conclude that Fukushima’s dangers are deeply ambiguous, and that accounts of the accident can exploit this ambiguity to duck questions about the credibility of prior risk assessments –
pulling favorable numbers from the fact-figure crossfire as evidence that the wider risks of nuclear power are still within the bounds that regulators calculated.”
The tuna is all yours. With all sincerity, may you (and future generations) enjoy it in good health.
With all sincerity, I wish more than anything that no harm comes from Fukushima- or any other energy-industry accident, for that matter.
All energy solutions at this point have pretty horrific consequences and risks, and I have no solutions to these problems; if the rival industries would collaborate (openly) rather than compete (myopically) … ideas with integrity might result.
Yeah, yeah, slim fat chance, I know.
etwas seltsam
June 3, 2012 at 4:07 PM
Seals, walruses, bears with lesions similar to those described by the CDC of Cutaneous Radiation Injury:
http://www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/newsreleases/2011/umedeclaration2011.htm
“Since mid-July, more than 60 dead and 75 diseased seals, most of them ringed seals, have been reported in Alaska, with reports continuing to come in. During their fall survey, scientists with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service also identified diseased and dead walruses at the annual mass haul-out at Point Lay.
Seals and walruses suffering from this disease have skin sores, usually on the hind flippers or face, and patchy hair loss. Some of the diseased mammals have exhibited labored breathing and appear lethargic. Scientists have not yet identified a single cause for this disease, though tests indicate a virus is not the cause.
Necropsies and laboratory tests to date have found skin lesions in most cases, as well as fluid in the lungs, white spots on the liver, and abnormal growths in the brain. Some seals and walruses have undersized lymph nodes, which may indicate compromised immune systems.
Walruses and ringed seals in Russia, and ringed seals in Canada, have reportedly suffered similar symptoms. While it is not clear if the disease events are related, the timing and location of the disease suggests the possibility of transmission between the populations, or shared exposure to an environmental cause.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/06/us-polarbears-idUSBRE8350MX20120406
“Nine polar bears from the Beaufort Sea region near Barrow were found with patchy hair loss and oozing sores on their skin, similar to conditions found in diseased seals and walruses, the agency said in a statement.”
CRI- http://www.bt.cdc.gov/radiation/criphysicianfactsheet.asp
“Unlike the skin lesions caused by chemical or thermal damage, the lesions caused by radiation exposures do not appear for hours to days following exposure, and burns and other skin effects tend to appear in cycles.
Late effects (months to years postexposure; threshold dose ~10 Gy or 1000 rads)—Symptoms can vary from slight dermal atrophy (or thinning of dermis layer) to constant ulcer recurrence, dermal necrosis, and deformity. Possible effects include occlusion of small blood vessels with subsequent disturbances in the blood supply (telangiectasia); destruction of the lymphatic network; regional lymphostasis; and increasing invasive fibrosis, keratosis, vasculitis, and subcutaneous sclerosis of the connective tissue. Pigmentary changes and pain are often present. Skin cancer is possible in subsequent years.”
As to “no harm or injury” from Fukushima (which I do not believe is contained, controlled, or by any means over):
http://www.bristol.ac.uk/spais/research/workingpapers/wpspaisfiles/john-downer-07-12.pdf
“Radiation has been linked to a wide range of maladies: intestinal problems, heart and circulation problems, respiratory problems, endocrine problems and impairment of the immune system, all of which can prove fatal.
The LNT holds that all levels of radiation pose a risk to human health to a degree
that is directly proportional to dose, such that exposure cumulates over a lifetime, with many small doses being equivalent to fewer larger doses (NRC 2006).
LNT implies a much broader area – with diminishing risks but an increasing number
of potential victims as the area widens.
So let us simply conclude that Fukushima’s dangers are deeply ambiguous, and that accounts of the accident can exploit this ambiguity to duck questions about the credibility of prior risk assessments –
pulling favorable numbers from the fact-figure crossfire as evidence that the wider risks of nuclear power are still within the bounds that regulators calculated.”
The tuna is all yours. With all sincerity, may you (and future generations) enjoy it in good health.
With all sincerity, I wish more than anything that no harm comes from Fukushima- or any other energy-industry accident, for that matter.
All energy solutions at this point have pretty horrific consequences and risks, and I have no solutions to these problems; if the rival industries would collaborate (openly) rather than compete (myopically) … ideas with integrity might result.
Yeah, yeah, slim fat chance, I know.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Holy shit you're right! That does sound worse than 2 nuclear weapons............... Dead seals, no fuckin' way!
neosapien
Well-Known Member
That article is from almost 2 years ago. Which makes the tests older than that. I wonder what levels new tests would find?