HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » So it turns out that nad...

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 07:51 AM

So it turns out that nadinbrzezinski was correct re Fukushima

Unit one did suffer a complete meltdown in 2011
http://www.pennenergy.com/articles/pe/2015/03/tepco-fukushima-nuclear-unit-1-did-melt-down-in-2011-accident.html
<snip>
TEPCO released results from a three-day study in February of the Unit 1 reactor building jointly with the International Research Institute for Nuclear Decommissioning. The two companies collected data until March 10. The project used cosmic rays to inspect the interior of the building. By analyzing the flow of muons, which are subatomic particles generated when cosmic rays collide with the atmosphere, TEPCO was able to generate X-ray like images of the interior of the reactor. Muons can pass through concrete and iron, but they are blocked and change direction when they hit high-density substances such as plutonium and uranium, creating a “shadow.”

TEPCO said the fuel had melted because there were no shadows around the reactor’s core, and the fuel had likely melted and fallen to the bottom of the building into a containment vessel. The operator also said there was no accumulation of water in the core of the reactor pressure vessel.

TEPCO said the results confirmed previous assumptions of a meltdown. The utility plans to continue measurement until it gains enough data to conduct a statistical analysis, and said the data gained will help it work out a plan to remove the debris, most likely by robots due to the high amounts of radiation in the reactor.

----------------------
Let's call it what it was and is - a global coverup. There are folks who don't want you to know and some of them post here.

480 replies, 54349 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 480 replies Author Time Post
Reply So it turns out that nadinbrzezinski was correct re Fukushima (Original post)
malaise Mar 2015 OP
peacebird Mar 2015 #1
Helen Borg Mar 2015 #4
Scootaloo Mar 2015 #10
Joe Chi Minh Mar 2015 #19
Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #108
Joe Chi Minh Mar 2015 #182
Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #184
Joe Chi Minh Mar 2015 #185
Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #189
Octafish Mar 2015 #337
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #339
Octafish Mar 2015 #341
zappaman Mar 2015 #343
Octafish Mar 2015 #354
zappaman Mar 2015 #356
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #344
Octafish Mar 2015 #355
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #357
Octafish Mar 2015 #358
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #360
Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #342
Octafish Mar 2015 #346
Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #347
Octafish Mar 2015 #351
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #137
FBaggins Mar 2015 #191
Helen Borg Mar 2015 #353
Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #349
hopemountain Mar 2015 #61
stevenleser Mar 2015 #216
daleanime Mar 2015 #2
bananas Mar 2015 #3
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #138
RobertEarl Mar 2015 #139
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #145
RobertEarl Mar 2015 #152
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #154
RobertEarl Mar 2015 #155
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #159
delrem Mar 2015 #171
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #174
snooper2 Mar 2015 #192
delrem Mar 2015 #289
Capt. Obvious Mar 2015 #250
Veilex Mar 2015 #251
RobertEarl Mar 2015 #255
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #472
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #475
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #476
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #477
FBaggins Mar 2015 #478
FBaggins Mar 2015 #194
Demeter Mar 2015 #5
Rex Mar 2015 #106
villager Mar 2015 #115
FBaggins Mar 2015 #197
Bonobo Mar 2015 #6
Orrex Mar 2015 #7
malaise Mar 2015 #8
snooper2 Mar 2015 #195
uberblonde Mar 2015 #13
mercuryblues Mar 2015 #21
Hekate Mar 2015 #84
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #128
RobertEarl Mar 2015 #144
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #149
Hekate Mar 2015 #156
Joe Chi Minh Mar 2015 #183
LanternWaste Mar 2015 #270
FBaggins Mar 2015 #274
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #275
FBaggins Mar 2015 #277
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #278
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #177
Joe Chi Minh Mar 2015 #186
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #190
Joe Chi Minh Mar 2015 #335
FBaggins Mar 2015 #211
pintobean Mar 2015 #9
lonestarnot Mar 2015 #29
LineLineLineReply !
pintobean Mar 2015 #32
WilliamPitt Mar 2015 #50
pintobean Mar 2015 #56
Rex Mar 2015 #95
Rex Mar 2015 #94
pintobean Mar 2015 #97
Rex Mar 2015 #100
Hekate Mar 2015 #80
PeaceNikki Mar 2015 #83
PeaceNikki Mar 2015 #85
pintobean Mar 2015 #86
PeaceNikki Mar 2015 #88
pintobean Mar 2015 #89
PeaceNikki Mar 2015 #91
pintobean Mar 2015 #92
truebrit71 Mar 2015 #122
pintobean Mar 2015 #124
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #147
freshwest Mar 2015 #173
snooper2 Mar 2015 #202
Octafish Mar 2015 #394
truebrit71 Mar 2015 #120
PeaceNikki Mar 2015 #127
ChisolmTrailDem Mar 2015 #196
pintobean Mar 2015 #205
ChisolmTrailDem Mar 2015 #206
pintobean Mar 2015 #208
ChisolmTrailDem Mar 2015 #209
pintobean Mar 2015 #210
ChisolmTrailDem Mar 2015 #213
pintobean Mar 2015 #214
PeaceNikki Mar 2015 #217
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #294
ChisolmTrailDem Mar 2015 #193
chervilant Mar 2015 #11
Buzz Clik Mar 2015 #109
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #150
chervilant Mar 2015 #175
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #176
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #187
chervilant Mar 2015 #222
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #266
chervilant Mar 2015 #269
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #272
G_j Mar 2015 #298
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #300
G_j Mar 2015 #303
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #304
wordpix Mar 2015 #281
chervilant Mar 2015 #292
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #301
paleotn Mar 2015 #12
cstanleytech Mar 2015 #16
paleotn Mar 2015 #20
cstanleytech Mar 2015 #55
alfredo Mar 2015 #51
paleotn Mar 2015 #77
alfredo Mar 2015 #111
herding cats Mar 2015 #90
wordpix Mar 2015 #282
Brother Buzz Mar 2015 #285
NaturalHigh Mar 2015 #14
mopinko Mar 2015 #15
malaise Mar 2015 #18
elleng Mar 2015 #35
marym625 Mar 2015 #17
Holly_Hobby Mar 2015 #22
NickB79 Mar 2015 #23
bananas Mar 2015 #28
NickB79 Mar 2015 #54
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #133
FBaggins Mar 2015 #215
pintobean Mar 2015 #218
FBaggins Mar 2015 #224
Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #53
FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #24
pintobean Mar 2015 #25
stevenleser Mar 2015 #198
FBaggins Mar 2015 #221
stevenleser Mar 2015 #241
TheKentuckian Mar 2015 #26
Cleita Mar 2015 #27
bananas Mar 2015 #31
malaise Mar 2015 #180
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #474
treestar Mar 2015 #30
lonestarnot Mar 2015 #33
treestar Mar 2015 #36
lonestarnot Mar 2015 #39
treestar Mar 2015 #76
stevenleser Mar 2015 #199
lonestarnot Mar 2015 #309
FBaggins Mar 2015 #316
lonestarnot Mar 2015 #364
FBaggins Mar 2015 #369
stevenleser Mar 2015 #329
lonestarnot Mar 2015 #365
bananas Mar 2015 #34
treestar Mar 2015 #37
ScreamingMeemie Mar 2015 #38
pintobean Mar 2015 #47
darkangel218 Mar 2015 #58
pintobean Mar 2015 #62
darkangel218 Mar 2015 #64
darkangel218 Mar 2015 #67
Rex Mar 2015 #101
darkangel218 Mar 2015 #107
Rex Mar 2015 #98
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply !
pintobean Mar 2015 #102
Rex Mar 2015 #103
pintobean Mar 2015 #132
G_j Mar 2015 #57
treestar Mar 2015 #73
darkangel218 Mar 2015 #78
bravenak Mar 2015 #87
ChisolmTrailDem Mar 2015 #461
Post removed Mar 2015 #41
cwydro Mar 2015 #46
Cleita Mar 2015 #49
darkangel218 Mar 2015 #59
ChisolmTrailDem Mar 2015 #463
Cleita Mar 2015 #465
cui bono Mar 2015 #140
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #161
treestar Mar 2015 #170
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #231
treestar Mar 2015 #324
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #330
stevenleser Mar 2015 #200
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #232
stevenleser Mar 2015 #240
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #259
Warren Stupidity Mar 2015 #179
ChisolmTrailDem Mar 2015 #464
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #473
FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #44
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #134
Brickbat Mar 2015 #136
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #295
stevenleser Mar 2015 #296
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #299
stevenleser Mar 2015 #302
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #306
FBaggins Mar 2015 #312
stevenleser Mar 2015 #328
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #331
stevenleser Mar 2015 #333
pintobean Mar 2015 #336
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #359
ScreamingMeemie Mar 2015 #297
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #307
FBaggins Mar 2015 #314
Post removed Mar 2015 #96
LordGlenconner Mar 2015 #220
treestar Mar 2015 #325
SidDithers Mar 2015 #40
bananas Mar 2015 #42
ProdigalJunkMail Mar 2015 #113
HuckleB Mar 2015 #43
tammywammy Mar 2015 #48
Cleita Mar 2015 #68
LordGlenconner Mar 2015 #219
Cleita Mar 2015 #223
LordGlenconner Mar 2015 #225
FBaggins Mar 2015 #228
Cleita Mar 2015 #230
FBaggins Mar 2015 #234
Cleita Mar 2015 #239
FBaggins Mar 2015 #256
Cleita Mar 2015 #261
FBaggins Mar 2015 #264
Cleita Mar 2015 #265
FBaggins Mar 2015 #271
Cleita Mar 2015 #273
FBaggins Mar 2015 #276
LordGlenconner Mar 2015 #290
Cleita Mar 2015 #293
wordpix Mar 2015 #284
FBaggins Mar 2015 #286
wordpix Mar 2015 #457
FBaggins Mar 2015 #459
wordpix Mar 2015 #283
SidDithers Mar 2015 #235
zappaman Mar 2015 #242
Cleita Mar 2015 #243
zappaman Mar 2015 #246
Brother Buzz Mar 2015 #248
zappaman Mar 2015 #252
treestar Mar 2015 #326
Cleita Mar 2015 #345
Rex Mar 2015 #105
RobertEarl Mar 2015 #114
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #126
RobertEarl Mar 2015 #130
snooper2 Mar 2015 #204
Cleita Mar 2015 #244
cui bono Mar 2015 #168
stevenleser Mar 2015 #201
RobertEarl Mar 2015 #45
darkangel218 Mar 2015 #60
bvar22 Mar 2015 #52
darkangel218 Mar 2015 #63
bvar22 Mar 2015 #66
PCIntern Mar 2015 #69
darkangel218 Mar 2015 #70
Zorra Mar 2015 #74
malaise Mar 2015 #79
MisterP Mar 2015 #65
newthinking Mar 2015 #71
G_j Mar 2015 #72
malaise Mar 2015 #75
G_j Mar 2015 #82
malaise Mar 2015 #93
Logical Mar 2015 #116
Agschmid Mar 2015 #160
Hekate Mar 2015 #81
PCIntern Mar 2015 #112
libodem Mar 2015 #279
SixString Mar 2015 #99
Rex Mar 2015 #104
malaise Mar 2015 #118
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #135
blackspade Mar 2015 #110
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #142
blackspade Mar 2015 #237
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #247
blackspade Mar 2015 #253
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #257
mike_c Mar 2015 #117
RobertEarl Mar 2015 #129
cui bono Mar 2015 #148
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #163
cui bono Mar 2015 #167
stevenleser Mar 2015 #207
G_j Mar 2015 #263
G_j Mar 2015 #254
DemoTex Mar 2015 #119
malaise Mar 2015 #121
Phlem Mar 2015 #125
LineLineLineReply .
Agschmid Mar 2015 #158
Phlem Mar 2015 #172
Phlem Mar 2015 #141
Phlem Mar 2015 #123
wildbilln864 Mar 2015 #131
WillyT Mar 2015 #143
OilemFirchen Mar 2015 #146
SidDithers Mar 2015 #151
RobertEarl Mar 2015 #153
PosterChild Mar 2015 #157
RobertEarl Mar 2015 #164
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #169
PosterChild Apr 2015 #480
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #162
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #165
AtheistCrusader Mar 2015 #166
marym625 Mar 2015 #178
stevenleser Mar 2015 #203
Joe Chi Minh Mar 2015 #181
stevenleser Mar 2015 #212
Joe Chi Minh Mar 2015 #334
Octafish Mar 2015 #188
CountAllVotes Mar 2015 #226
calimary Mar 2015 #308
chervilant Mar 2015 #227
FBaggins Mar 2015 #229
chervilant Mar 2015 #233
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #236
LordGlenconner Mar 2015 #291
FBaggins Mar 2015 #238
Cleita Mar 2015 #245
Octafish Mar 2015 #249
chervilant Mar 2015 #262
Octafish Mar 2015 #268
malaise Mar 2015 #267
Gothmog Mar 2015 #258
Android3.14 Mar 2015 #260
wordpix Mar 2015 #280
FBaggins Mar 2015 #288
Octafish Mar 2015 #321
stevenleser Mar 2015 #338
Octafish Mar 2015 #340
stevenleser Mar 2015 #366
Octafish Mar 2015 #374
FBaggins Mar 2015 #370
Octafish Mar 2015 #375
FBaggins Mar 2015 #433
Octafish Mar 2015 #435
FBaggins Mar 2015 #437
Octafish Mar 2015 #441
FBaggins Mar 2015 #445
FBaggins Mar 2015 #447
Octafish Mar 2015 #452
stevenleser Mar 2015 #379
Octafish Mar 2015 #381
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #382
SidDithers Mar 2015 #383
Octafish Mar 2015 #386
SidDithers Mar 2015 #389
Octafish Mar 2015 #390
pintobean Mar 2015 #391
Octafish Mar 2015 #393
Octafish Mar 2015 #384
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #385
Octafish Mar 2015 #387
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #388
Octafish Mar 2015 #392
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #399
Octafish Mar 2015 #403
Octafish Mar 2015 #397
SidDithers Mar 2015 #395
Octafish Mar 2015 #396
SidDithers Mar 2015 #398
Octafish Mar 2015 #401
SidDithers Mar 2015 #409
Octafish Mar 2015 #410
SidDithers Mar 2015 #412
Octafish Mar 2015 #415
SidDithers Mar 2015 #417
Octafish Mar 2015 #419
SidDithers Mar 2015 #420
Octafish Mar 2015 #421
SidDithers Mar 2015 #423
Octafish Mar 2015 #424
SidDithers Mar 2015 #425
Octafish Mar 2015 #426
SidDithers Mar 2015 #427
Octafish Mar 2015 #431
zappaman Mar 2015 #432
Octafish Mar 2015 #434
zappaman Mar 2015 #458
SidDithers Mar 2015 #438
tammywammy Mar 2015 #442
Octafish Mar 2015 #453
tammywammy Mar 2015 #460
Octafish Mar 2015 #462
Octafish Mar 2015 #479
FBaggins Mar 2015 #439
SidDithers Mar 2015 #436
stevenleser Mar 2015 #402
Octafish Mar 2015 #404
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #405
Octafish Mar 2015 #407
NuclearDem Mar 2015 #411
Octafish Mar 2015 #413
stevenleser Mar 2015 #406
Octafish Mar 2015 #408
stevenleser Mar 2015 #414
Octafish Mar 2015 #416
stevenleser Mar 2015 #418
Octafish Mar 2015 #422
FBaggins Mar 2015 #440
Octafish Mar 2015 #444
FBaggins Mar 2015 #446
Octafish Mar 2015 #448
FBaggins Mar 2015 #450
Octafish Mar 2015 #454
FBaggins Mar 2015 #455
FBaggins Mar 2015 #449
FBaggins Mar 2015 #466
hrmjustin Mar 2015 #287
tkmorris Mar 2015 #305
pintobean Mar 2015 #310
joshcryer Mar 2015 #313
FBaggins Mar 2015 #315
pintobean Mar 2015 #317
SidDithers Mar 2015 #320
pintobean Mar 2015 #322
Brickbat Mar 2015 #319
joshcryer Mar 2015 #311
FSogol Mar 2015 #318
treestar Mar 2015 #323
tammywammy Mar 2015 #327
stevenleser Mar 2015 #332
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #348
stevenleser Mar 2015 #350
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #361
stevenleser Mar 2015 #363
pintobean Mar 2015 #352
malaise Mar 2015 #368
FBaggins Mar 2015 #371
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #373
stevenleser Mar 2015 #378
hrmjustin Mar 2015 #362
Gothmog Mar 2015 #380
hrmjustin Mar 2015 #400
Gothmog Mar 2015 #428
hrmjustin Mar 2015 #429
ChisolmTrailDem Mar 2015 #467
hrmjustin Mar 2015 #468
ChisolmTrailDem Mar 2015 #469
Bonobo Mar 2015 #367
FBaggins Mar 2015 #372
leveymg Mar 2015 #376
FBaggins Mar 2015 #443
leveymg Mar 2015 #470
FBaggins Mar 2015 #471
JEB Mar 2015 #377
LineReply .
randome Mar 2015 #430
Jamastiene Mar 2015 #451
FBaggins Mar 2015 #456

Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 07:55 AM

1. Wonder what the radiation level of the ocean is over there?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to peacebird (Reply #1)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:32 AM

4. Could that be why my Akami burned my tongue recently?

Last edited Tue Mar 24, 2015, 03:02 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #4)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:54 AM

10. Was the tuna caught in those waters?

 

You know that using a Japanese word for the cut of fish doesn't mean that's where the fish is from, of course...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #10)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:03 AM

19. I haven't eaten fish

for a long time. And I live in Scotland.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joe Chi Minh (Reply #19)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 06:42 PM

108. Your decision not to eat is based on what?

 

Are you under the impression that local fish in Scotland is contaminated by Fukushima radiation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #108)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 07:45 AM

182. I won't quote the official figure for the spike of radiation

gas near Tokyo, which extended across the whole of the northern hemisphere soon after 3/11. I'd prefer you think me a scaremonger than be one.

The oceans are not hermetically sealed, by the way. Or do you think the stricken creatures in the Pacific still alive, have just been hit by some very, very mysterious viruses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joe Chi Minh (Reply #182)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 07:51 AM

184. Fish breathe from the atmosphere?

 

Not eating fish because of radiation from Japan is not well founded.

However, given the history of dumping radioactive waste into the Atlantic by European countries...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #184)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 07:55 AM

185. See the addenda in my post above. eom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joe Chi Minh (Reply #185)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:12 AM

189. I read it. It makes no sense to me.

 

Don't worry about it. I'm moving on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #184)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 12:04 PM

337. From 2014: More radiation in some Oregon tuna following Fukushima



My problem isn't that the tuna is not safe to eat (Ha! What's a little plutonium between friends, eh?). The problem lies in the lack of research published since March 11, 2011 on just how much radiation has been released, is getting released, is reaching where, and is of what type, for starters. Considering how three atomic reactors in full meltdown is unprecedented in history, and its effects are global, it should attract a little bit of scientific curiousity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #337)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 12:22 PM

339. Plutonium and cesium are not the same thing.

 

And from your own link:

Still, those levels were a thousand times lower than the maximum safe level set by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

"You can't say there is absolutely zero risk because any radiation is assumed to carry at least some small risk," said the study's lead author, Delvan Neville, a graduate research assistant in OSU's Department of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Health Physics. "But these trace levels are too small to be a realistic concern."


So I have no idea where you're getting "not safe to eat."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #339)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 01:13 PM

341. Feel free to enjoy the sea's bounty.

Here's Helen Caldicott on the differences between cesium and plutonium:



The impact of the nuclear crisis on global health

by Helen Caldicott on May 1, 2014 in Uncategorized
By Helen Caldicott, Volume 4, Issue 2 2014, Australian Medical Student Journal

1 May 2014

Due to my personal concerns regarding the ignorance of the world’s media and politicians about radiation biology after the dreadful accident at Fukushima in Japan, I organized a 2 day symposium at the NY Academy of Medicine on March 11 and 12, 2013, titled ‘The Medical and Ecological Consequences of Fukushima,’ which was addressed by some of the world’s leading scientists, epidemiologists, physicists and physicians who presented their latest data and findings on Fukushima. (10

Helen CaldicottBackground

The Great Eastern earthquake, measuring 9.0 on the Richter scale, and the ensuing massive tsunami on the east coast of Japan induced the meltdown of three nuclear reactors within several days. During the quake the external power supply was lost to the reactor complex and the pumps, which circulate up to one million gallons of water per minute to cool each reactor core, ceased to function. Emergency diesel generators situated below the plants kicked in but these were soon swamped by the tsunami. Without cooling, the radioactive cores in units 1, 2 and 3 began to melt within hours. Over the next few days, all three cores (each weighing more than 100 tonnes) melted their way through six inches of steel at the bottom of their reactor vessels and oozed their way onto the concrete floor of the containment buildings. At the same time the zirconium cladding covering thousands of uranium fuel rods reacted with water, creating hydrogen, which initiated hydrogen explosions in units 1, 2, 3 and 4.

Massive quantities of radiation escaped into the air and water – three times more noble gases (argon, xenon and krypton) than were released at Chernobyl, together with huge amounts of other volatile and non-volatile radioactive elements, including cesium, tritium, iodine, strontium, silver, plutonium, americium and rubinium. Eventually sea water was – and is still – utilized to cool the molten reactors.

Fukushima is now described as the greatest industrial accident in history.

The Japanese government was so concerned that they were considering plans to evacuate 35 million people from Tokyo, as other reactors including Fukushima Daiini on the east coast were also at risk. Thousands of people fleeing from the smoldering reactors were not notified where the radioactive plumes were travelling, despite the fact that there was a system in place to track the plumes. As a result, people fled directly into regions with the highest radiation concentrations, where they were exposed to high levels of whole-body external gamma radiation being emitted by the radioactive elements, inhaling radioactive air and swallowing radioactive elements. (2) Unfortunately, inert potassium iodide was not supplied, which would have blocked the uptake of radioactive iodine by their thyroid glands, except in the town of Miharu. Prophylactic iodine was eventually distributed to the staff of Fukushima Medical University in the days after the accident, after extremely high levels of radioactive iodine – 1.9 million becquerels/kg were found in leafy vegetables near the University. (3) Iodine contamination was widespread in leafy vegetables and milk, whilst other isotopic contamination from substances such as caesium is widespread in vegetables, fruit, meat, milk, rice and tea in many areas of Japan. (4)

The Fukushima meltdown disaster is not over and will never end. The radioactive fallout which remains toxic for hundreds to thousands of years covers large swathes of Japan and will never be “cleaned up.” It will contaminate food, humans and animals virtually forever. I predict that the three reactors which experienced total meltdowns will never be dissembled or decommissioned. TEPCO (Tokyo Electric Power Company) – says it will take at least 30 to 40 years and the International Atomic Energy Agency predicts at least 40 years before they can make any progress because of the extremely high levels of radiation at these damaged reactors.

This accident is enormous in its medical implications. It will induce an epidemic of cancer as people inhale the radioactive elements, eat radioactive food and drink radioactive beverages. In 1986, a single meltdown and explosion at Chernobyl covered 40% of the European land mass with radioactive elements. Already, according to a 2009 report published by the New York Academy of Sciences, over one million people have already perished as a direct result of this catastrophe. This is just the tip of the iceberg, because large parts of Europe and the food grown there will remain radioactive for hundreds of years. (5)

Medical Implications of Radiation

Fact number one

No dose of radiation is safe. Each dose received by the body is cumulative and adds to the risk of developing malignancy or genetic disease.

Fact number two

Children are ten to twenty times more vulnerable to the carcinogenic effects of radiation than adults. Females tend to be more sensitive compared to males, whilst foetuses and immuno-compromised patients are also extremely sensitive.

Fact number three

High doses of radiation received from a nuclear meltdown or from a nuclear weapon explosion can cause acute radiation sickness, with alopecia, severe nausea, diarrhea and thrombocytopenia. Reports of such illnesses, particularly in children, appeared within the first few months after the Fukushima accident.

Fact number four

Ionizing radiation from radioactive elements and radiation emitted from X-ray machines and CT scanners can be carcinogenic. The latent period of carcinogenesis for leukemia is 5-10 years and solid cancers 15-80 years. It has been shown that all modes of cancer can be induced by radiation, as well as over 6000 genetic diseases now described in the medical literature.

But, as we increase the level of background radiation in our environment from medical procedures, X-ray scanning machines at airports, or radioactive materials continually escaping from nuclear reactors and nuclear waste dumps, we will inevitably increase the incidence of cancer as well as the incidence of genetic disease in future generations.

Types of ionizing radiation

X-rays are electromagnetic, and cause mutations the instant they pass through the body.
Similarly, gamma radiation is also electromagnetic, being emitted by radioactive materials generated in nuclear reactors and from some naturally occurring radioactive elements in the soil.

Alpha radiation is particulate and is composed of two protons and two neutrons emitted from uranium atoms and other dangerous elements generated in reactors (such as plutonium, americium, curium, einsteinium, etc – all which are known as alpha emitters and have an atomic weight greater than uranium). Alpha particles travel a very short distance in the human body. They cannot penetrate the layers of dead skin in the epidermis to damage living skin cells. But when these radioactive elements enter the lung, liver, bone or other organs, they transfer a large dose of radiation over a long period of time to a very small volume of cells. Most of these cells are killed; however, some on the edge of the radiation field remain viable to be mutated, and cancer may later develop. Alpha emitters are among the most carcinogenic materials known.

Beta radiation, like alpha radiation, is also particulate. It is a charged electron emitted from radioactive elements such as strontium 90, cesium 137 and iodine 131. The beta particle is light in mass, travels further than an alpha particle and is also mutagenic.

Neutron radiation is released during the fission process in a reactor or a bomb. Reactor 1 at Fukushima has been periodically emitting neutron radiation as sections of the molten core become intermittently critical. Neutrons are large radioactive particles that travel many kilometers, and they pass through everything including concrete and steel. There is no way to hide from them and they are extremely mutagenic.


So, let’s describe just five of the radioactive elements that are continually being released into the air and water at Fukushima.

Remember, though, there are over 200 such elements each with its own half-life, biological characteristic and pathway in the food chain
and the human body. Most have never had their biological pathways examined. They are invisible, tasteless and odourless. When the cancer manifests it is impossible to determine its aetiology, but there is a large body of literature proving that radiation causes cancer, including the data from Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

1. Tritium is radioactive hydrogen H3 and there is no way to separate tritium from contaminated water as it combines with oxygen to form H3O. There is no material that can prevent the escape of tritium except gold, so all reactors continuously emit tritium into the air and cooling water as they operate. It concentrates in aquatic organisms, including algae, seaweed, crustaceans and fish, and also in terrestrial food. Like all radioactive elements, it is tasteless, odorless and invisible, and will therefore inevitably be ingested in food, including seafood, for many decades. It passes unhindered through the skin if a person is immersed in fog containing tritiated water near a reactor, and also enters the body via inhalation and ingestion. It causes brain tumors, birth deformities and cancers of many organs.

2. Cesium 137 is a beta and gamma emitter with a half-life of 30 years. That means in 30 years only half of its radioactive energy has decayed, so it is detectable as a radioactive hazard for over 300 years. Cesium, like all radioactive elements, bio-concentrates at each level of the food chain. The human body stands atop the food chain. As an analogue of potassium, cesium becomes ubiquitous in all cells. It concentrates in the myocardium where it induces cardiac irregularities, and in the endocrine organs where it can cause diabetes, hypothyroidism and thyroid cancer. It can also induce brain cancer, rhabdomyosarcomas, ovarian or testicular cancer and genetic disease.

3. Strontium 90 is a high-energy beta emitter with a half-life of 28 years. As a calcium analogue, it is a bone-seeker. It concentrates in the food chain, specifically milk (including breast milk), and is laid down in bones and teeth in the human body. It can lead to carcinomas of the bone and leukaemia.

4. Radioactive iodine 131 is a beta and gamma emitter. It has a half-life of eight days and is hazardous for ten weeks. It bio-concentrates in the food chain, in vegetables and milk, then in the the human thyroid gland where it is a potent carcinogen, inducing thyroid disease and/or thyroid cancer. It is important to note that of 174,376 children under the age of 18 that have been examined by thyroid ultrasound in the Fukushima Prefecture, 12 have been definitively diagnosed with thyroid cancer and 15 more are suspected to have the disease. Almost 200,000 more children are yet to be examined. Of these 174,367 children, 43.2% have either thyroid cysts and/or nodules.

In Chernobyl, thyroid cancers were not diagnosed until four years post-accident. This early presentation indicates that these Japanese children almost certainly received a high dose of radioactive iodine. High doses of other radioactive elements released during the meltdowns were received by the exposed population so the rate of cancer is almost certain to rise.

5. Plutonium, one of the most deadly radioactive substances, is an alpha emitter. It is highly toxic, and one millionth of a gram will induce cancer if inhaled into the lung. As an iron analogue, it combines with transferrin. It causes liver cancer, bone cancer, leukemia, or multiple myeloma. It concentrates in the testicles and ovaries where it can induce testicular or ovarian cancer, or genetic diseases in future generations. It also crosses the placenta where it is teratogenic, like thalidomide. There are medical homes near Chernobyl full of grossly deformed children, the deformities of which have never before been seen in the history of medicine.

The half-life of plutonium is 24,400 years, and thus it is radioactive for 250,000 years. It will induce cancers, congenital deformities, and genetic diseases for virtually the rest of time.

Plutonium is also fuel for atomic bombs. Five kilos is fuel for a weapon which would vaporize a city. Each reactor makes 250 kg of plutonium a year. It is postulated that less than one kilo of plutonium, if adequately distributed, could induce lung cancer in every person on earth.


Conclusion

In summary, the radioactive contamination and fallout from nuclear power plant accidents will have medical ramifications that will never cease, because the food will continue to concentrate the radioactive elements for hundreds to thousands of years. This will induce epidemics of cancer, leukemia and genetic disease. Already we are seeing such pathology and abnormalities in birds and insects, and because they reproduce very fast it is possible to observe disease caused by radiation over many generations within a relatively short space of time.

Pioneering research conducted by Dr Tim Mousseau, an evolutionary biologist, has demonstrated high rates of tumors, cataracts, genetic mutations, sterility and reduced brain size amongst birds in the exclusion zones of both Chernobyl and Fukushima. What happens to animals will happen to human beings. (7)

The Japanese government is desperately trying to “clean up” radioactive contamination. But in reality all that can be done is collect it, place it in containers and transfer it to another location. It cannot be made neutral and it cannot be prevented from spreading in the future. Some contractors have allowed their workers to empty radioactive debris, soil and leaves into streams and other illegal places. The main question becomes: Where can they place the contaminated material to be stored safely away from the environment for thousands of years? There is no safe place in Japan for this to happen, let alone to store thousands of tons of high level radioactive waste which rests precariously at the 54 Japanese nuclear reactors.

Last but not least, Australian uranium fuelled the Fukushima reactors. Australia exports uranium for use in nuclear power plants to 12 countries, including the US, Japan, France, Britain, Finland, Sweden, South Korea, China, Belgium, Spain, Canada and Taiwan. 270,000 metric tons of deadly radioactive waste exists in the world today, with 12,000 metric tons being added yearly. (Each reactor manufactures 30 tons per year and there are over 400 reactors globally.)

This high-level waste must be isolated from the environment for one million years – but no container lasts longer than 100 years. The isotopes will inevitably leak, contaminating the food chain, inducing epidemics of cancer, leukemia, congenital deformities and genetic diseases for the rest of time.

This, then, is the legacy we leave to future generations so that we can turn on our lights and computers or make nuclear weapons. It was Einstein who said “the splitting of the atom changed everything save mans’ mode of thinking, thus we drift towards unparalleled catastrophe.”

The question now is: Have we, the human species, the ability to mature psychologically in time to avert these catastrophes, or, is it in fact, too late?

Disclaimer: The views, opinions and perspectives presented in this article are those of the author alone and does not reflect the views of the Australian Medical Student Journal. The accuracy, completeness and validity of any statements made within this article are not guaranteed. We accept no liability for any errors or omissions.

References

(1) Caldicott H. Helen Caldicott Foundation’s Fukushima Symposium. 2013; Available from: http://www.helencaldicott.com/2012/12/helen-caldicott-foundations-fukushima-symposium/.

(2) Japan sat on U.S. radiation maps showing immediate fallout from nuke crisis. The Japan Times. 2012.

(3) Bagge E, Bjelle A, Eden S, Svanborg A. Osteoarthritis in the elderly: clinical and radiological findings in 79 and 85 year olds. Ann Rheum Dis. 1991;50(8):535-9. Epub 1991/08/01.

(4) Tests find cesium 172 times the limit in Miyagi Yacon tea. The Asahi Shimbun. 2012.

(5) Yablokov AV, Nesterenko VB, Nesterenko AV, Sherman-Nevinger JD. Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment: Wiley. com; 2010.

(6) Fukushima Health Management. Proceedings of the 11th Prefectural Oversight Committee Meeting for Fukushima Health Management Survey. Fukushima, Japan2013.

(7) Møller AP, Mousseau TA. The effects of low-dose radiation: Soviet science, the nuclear industry – and independence? Significance. 2013;10(1):14-9.


Originally published: http://www.amsj.org/archives/3487

SOURCE: http://www.helencaldicott.com/the-impact-of-the-nuclear-crisis-on-global-health/



I'll take her word over the nuclear industry's any day. Just going by history, that's the smart thing to do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #341)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 01:24 PM

343. I had sushi last night!

The scallops were particularly great and they weren't even glowing!
Next time you come out to California, my friend, I'm buying!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #343)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 03:09 PM

354. Live Long and Prosper.

I hope to take you up on your offer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #354)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 03:11 PM

356. Back at ya!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #341)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 01:51 PM

344. "Just going by history, that's the smart thing to do."

 

You and I must be thinking of two different Helen Caldicott's. The one I know published an editorial in the NYT pushing a repeatedly-debunked study attributing nearly a million deaths to Chernobyl, falsely attributing the study to the NYAS, and had said editorial subsequently retracted by the NYT when all of this came to light.

Why you insist that that woman is in anyway trustworthy confounds me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #344)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 03:11 PM

355. Glad you understand, then.

You didn't have to, though, for me to wish that I hope you never suffer ill effects from the radiation from Fukushima.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #355)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 03:28 PM

357. Understand what exactly? That Helen Caldicott is utterly untrustworthy?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #357)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 04:26 PM

358. No, you are wrong on that. Caldicott has dedicated her life to healing.

Helen Caldicott, MD

PHYSICIAN - AUTHOR - SPEAKER

The single most articulate and passionate advocate of citizen action to remedy the nuclear and environmental crises, Dr Helen Caldicott, has devoted the last forty two years to an international campaign to educate the public about the medical hazards of the nuclear age and the necessary changes in human behavior to stop environmental destruction.

Born in Melbourne, Australia in 1938, Dr Caldicott received her medical degree from the University of Adelaide Medical School in 1961. She founded the Cystic Fibrosis Clinic at the Adelaide Children’s Hospital in 1975 and subsequently was an instructor in pediatrics at Harvard Medical School and on the staff of the Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Boston, Mass., until 1980 when she resigned to work full time on the prevention of nuclear war.

In 1971, Dr Caldicott played a major role in Australia’s opposition to French atmospheric nuclear testing in the Pacific; in 1975 she worked with the Australian trade unions to educate their members about the medical dangers of the nuclear fuel cycle, with particular reference to uranium mining.

While living in the United States from 1977 to 1986, she played a major role in re-invigorating as President, Physicians for Social Responsibility, an organization of 23,000 doctors committed to educating their colleagues about the dangers of nuclear power, nuclear weapons and nuclear war. On trips abroad she helped start similar medical organizations in many other countries. The international umbrella group (International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War) won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985. She also founded the Women’s Action for Nuclear Disarmament (WAND) in the US in 1980.

Returning to Australia in 1987, Dr Caldicott ran for Federal Parliament as an independent. Defeating Charles Blunt, leader of the National Party, through preferential voting she ultimately lost the election by 600 votes out of 70,000 cast.

She moved back to the United States in 1995, where she lectured at the New School for Social Research on the Media, Global Politics and the Environment; hosted a weekly radio talk show on WBAI (Pacifica)in New York; and was the Founding President of the STAR (Standing for Truth About Radiation) Foundation on Long Island.

Dr Caldicott has received many prizes and awards for her work, including the Lannan Foundation’s 2003 Prize for Cultural Freedom and twenty one honorary doctoral degrees. She was personally nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by Linus Pauling – himself a Nobel Laureate. The Smithsonian has named Dr Caldicott as one of the most influential women of the 20th Century. She has written for numerous publications and has authored seven books, Nuclear Madness (1978 and 1994 WW Norton) , Missile Envy (1984 William Morrow, 1985 Bantam, 1986 Bantam) , If You Love This Planet: A Plan to Heal the Earth (1992, W.W. Norton); A Desperate Passion: An Autobiography (1996, W.W. Norton; published as A Passionate Life in Australia by Random House);The New Nuclear Danger: George Bush’s Military Industrial Complex (2001, The New Press in the US, UK and UK; Scribe Publishing in Australia and New Zealand; Lemniscaat Publishers in The Netherlands; and Hugendubel Verlag in Germany); Nuclear Power is Not the Answer (2006, The New Press in the US, UK and UK; Melbourne University Press in Australia) War In Heaven (The New Press 2007); revised and updated If You Love This Planet (March 2009); and Loving This Planet (The New Press; 2013).

She also has been the subject of several films, including Eight Minutes to Midnight, nominated for an Academy Award in 1981, If You Love This Planet, which won the Academy Award for best documentary in 1982, and Helen’s War: Portrait of a Dissident, recipient of the Australian Film Institute Awards for Best Direction (Documentary) 2004, and the Sydney Film Festival Dendy Award for Best Documentary in 2004.

Dr Caldicott currently divides her time between Australia and the US where she lectures widely. In year 2001, she founded the US-based Nuclear Policy Research Institute (NPRI), which became Beyond Nuclear. Currently, Dr Caldicott is President of The Helen CaldicottFoundation/NuclearFreePlanet.org, which initiates symposiums and other educational projects to inform the public and the media of the dangers of nuclear power and weapons. The mission of the Foundation is education to action, and the promotion of a nuclear-energy and weapons-free, renewable energy powered, world.

The Foundation’s most recent symposium, co-sponsored by Physicians for Social Responsibility was held at the New York Academy of Medicine in March 2013, 2013. It was entitled The Medical and Environmental Consequences of Fukushima helencaldicottfoundation.org, download at http://www.totalwebcasting.com/view/?id=hcf.

A book – Crisis Without End — emanating from the conference proceedings and edited by Dr. Caldicott will be published by The New Press in the Spring of 2014.

From 2010 to 2013 Dr Caldicott hosted a weekly radio show If You Love This Planet which aired on many community and other public radio stations internationally. From 2007 to 2009 she was also a member of the International Scientific Advisory Board convened by José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, the then Prime Minister of Spain.

SOURCE w/ links and CV: http://www.helencaldicott.com/about/

Gee, an MD who's accomplished all that. As I've just a lowly BA, I admire her accomplishments. What's your degree in, NuclearDem?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #358)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 04:38 PM

360. Her MD didn't stop her from falsely attributing a bogus study to the NYAS.

 

I'm not saying she doesn't deserve credit for her work as a doctor, but her statements on nuclear power and radiation have been ridiculously inaccurate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #337)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 01:21 PM

342. There are more than 1,000 articles concerning Fukushima radiation in the scientific literature.

 

These articles cover every conceivable topic.

If you have no way of accessing scientific journals, I would be glad to help. What specifically interests you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #342)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 02:35 PM

346. Please do. News coverage of Fukushima disaster has minimized health risks to general population.

Science Daily reported a new analysis finds that U.S. news media coverage of the Fukushima disaster largely minimized health risks to the general population. Researchers analyzed more than 2,000 news articles from four major U.S. outlets.



Here's more:



News Coverage of Fukushima Disaster Found Lacking

American University sociologist’s new research finds few reports identified health risks to public

By Rebecca Basu
American University, March 10, 2015

Four years after the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, the disaster no longer dominates U.S. news headlines, though the disabled plant continues to pour three tons of radioactive water into the ocean each day. Homes, schools and businesses in the Japanese prefecture are uninhabitable, and will likely be so forever. Yet the U.S. media has dropped the story while public risks remain.

A new analysis by American University sociology professor Celine Marie Pascale finds that U.S. news media coverage of the disaster largely minimized health risks to the general population. Pascale analyzed more than 2,000 news articles from four major U.S. outlets following the disaster's occurrence March 11, 2011 through the second anniversary on March 11, 2013. [font color="green"]Only 6 percent of the coverage—129 articles—focused on health risks to the public in Japan or elsewhere. Human risks were framed, instead, in terms of workers in the disabled nuclear plant.[/font color]

Disproportionate access

"It's shocking to see how few articles discussed risk to the general population, and when they did, they typically characterized risk as low," said Pascale, who studies the social construction of risk and meanings of risk in the 21st century. "We see articles in prestigious news outlets claiming that radioactivity from cosmic rays and rocks is more dangerous than the radiation emanating from the collapsing Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant."

Pascale studied news articles, editorials, and letters from two newspapers, The Washington Postand The New York Times, and two nationally prominent online news sites, Politico and The Huffington Post. These four media outlets are not only among the most prominent in the United States, they are also among the most cited by television news and talk shows, by other newspapers and blogs and are often taken up in social media, Pascale said. In this sense, she added, understanding how risk is constructed in media gives insight into how national concerns and conversations get framed.

Pascale's analysis identified three primary ways in which the news outlets minimized the risk posed by radioactive contamination to the general population. Articles made comparisons to mundane, low-level forms of radiation;defined the risks as unknowable, given the lack of long-term studies; and largely excluded concerns expressed by experts and residents who challenged the dominant narrative.

[font color="green"]The research shows that corporations and government agencies had disproportionate access to framing the event in the media, Pascale says. Even years after the disaster, government and corporate spokespersons constituted the majority of voices published. News accounts about local impact—for example, parents organizing to protect their children from radiation in school lunches—were also scarce. [/font color]

Globalization of risk

Pascale says her findings show the need for the public to be critical consumers of news; expert knowledge can be used to create misinformation and uncertainty—especially in the information vacuums that arise during disasters.

"The mainstream media—in print and online—did little to report on health risks to the general population or to challenge the narratives of public officials and their experts," Pascale said. "Discourses of the risks surrounding disasters are political struggles to control the presence and meaning of events and their consequences. How knowledge about disasters is reported can have more to do with relations of power than it does with the material consequences to people's lives."

While it is clear that the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear meltdown was a consequence of an earthquake and tsunami, like all disasters, it was also the result of political, economic and social choices that created or exacerbated broad-scale risks. In the 21st century, there's an increasing "globalization of risk," Pascale argues. Major disasters have potentially large-scale and long-term consequences for people, environments, and economies.

[font color="green"]"People's understanding of disasters will continue to be constructed by media. How media members frame the presence of risk and the nature of disaster matters," she said.[/font color]

SOURCE with Links: http://www.american.edu/media/news/20150310-Fukushima.cfm



Almost should just bold and make green the entire article, seeing how Rupert Murdoch and the rest of CIABCNNBCBSFixedNoiseNutworks won't do their jobs. That's why I post on DU, you know, to share the news.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026367729

Please feel free to post all you can on Fukushima, Buzz Clik. I look forward to learning what's missing from the corporate owned news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #346)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 02:39 PM

347. I'm not posting 1200 articles.

 

However, I'd be happy to provide access to a bunch of articles on specific subjects (none of which deal with new coverage of Fukushima).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #347)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 02:53 PM

351. Content Analysis helps us understand the news coverage.

Which is sorely lacking for those interested in Fukushima and its impact on their lives, families, nations and planet.



Fukushima vs. Chernobyl: Coverage of the Nuclear Disasters by American and Canadian Media

Ivan Katchanovski
University of Ottawa

2012

APSA 2012 Annual Meeting Paper

Abstract:
This study compares the American and Canadian television coverage of the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan with that of the Chernobyl (Chornobyl) accident in Ukraine. These two disasters were the biggest accidents involving nuclear plants in the world. The first research question is whether political factors, such as Japan, in contrast to Ukraine, being an ally of the United States and Canada, affected the coverage of these accidents by American and Canadian television networks. The second question is whether the U.S.-Canada differences in the coverage of the Fukushima and Chernobyl disasters reflected differences in the American and Canadian political cultures. Previous studies generally have focused on the media coverage of a single nuclear accident, and they typically were limited to the media reporting in one country. This paper uses content analysis of television news reports concerning the Fukushima and Chernobyl disasters for more than one year since the beginning of the nuclear accident in Japan in March 2011. It analyzes more than 250 references, comparing the two disasters in news programs of the most popular TV networks in the U.S. (ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox) and Canada (CBC and CTV). Specific news reports are identified with the help of keyword searches of transcripts of the television programs in the LexisNexis database. The content analysis involves both a general comparison of the Fukushima and Chernobyl nuclear accidents and a comparison of specific aspects, such as causes of the accidents, radiation release, liquidation of disasters, and health consequences. The study shows the importance of political factors in the media coverage of the nuclear disasters. [font color="green"]It offers support for the indexing model and finds significant differences in the coverage by ideological orientation in the U.S. and public versus private networks in Canada. Convergence in the coverage outweighs political culture differences between the U.S. and Canada.[/font color]

Number of Pages in PDF File: 28

Keywords: Fukushima, Chernobyl, nuclear disasters, political communication, Canada, United States, media

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2108667


I look forward to learning from you Buzz Clik. If you're too busy to post, though, I understand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #4)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:01 PM

137. If you encountered enough radioactive material in your food to burn your tongue on contact,

you would not be here posting about it now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #137)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:16 AM

191. It's probably the wasabi

It's a whole 'nother world when Westerners get the real stuff by mistake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #191)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 03:03 PM

353. There was some greenish paste on the side...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #4)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 02:41 PM

349. Might have bitten into a spent fuel rod. They can be warmish.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to peacebird (Reply #1)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:06 PM

61. and let us remember -

the radiation levels potentially harmful to lifeforms were re-designated shortly thereafter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to peacebird (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:29 AM

216. Depending what you mean by "over there" a few hundred miles away its pretty low

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:01 AM

2. Kick....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:21 AM

3. They still don't know where the core went

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/03/20/national/tepco-confirms-nearly-fuel-melted-sank-vessel-fukushima-1-unit/

However, the scan — based on tomography imaging that made use of elementary particles called muons — did not look at the bottom part of the reactor, where the molten fuel would have pooled. So some experts suggested that it was not possible to tell whether the fuel had indeed been contained.

<snip>

“We presume that despite the meltdown, the fuel is still in the containment vessel,” said Tomohisa Ito, a spokesman for the International Research Institute for Nuclear Decommissioning, a special research unit involved in dismantling the troubled plant.

“But we still need to directly check the situation one day using remote-controlled robots,” he said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Reply #3)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:02 PM

138. It's in the containment. Because unless it teleported away, it sure hasn't been found

outside the containment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #138)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:07 PM

139. It is not contained...Duh!

 

If it was contained there would be none in the air or in the ocean.

Surprised you still are using TEPCO false assertions. I thought you had been educated? Guess not?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #139)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:19 PM

145. I said the Core. Which is now corium.

Or rather, bannas said "core".

Corium radiates .... RADIATION. There's also plenty of particulate matter carried by the cooling water, which is also radioactive.

The corium is, as I said, inside reactor 1. If it was outside, you'd know. The 'containment' is leaking water, yes. Lots of it. The torus was admitted to be damaged in the explosion. The core isn't in the torus. It's in the catchment at the bottom of the containment. It probably burned a ways into the catchment. Anywhere from 60-90 centimeters into it. About 35 inches. The fucking slab is 299 inches thick. (Tepco says 70cm, but the data has been opined on by independent experts, and a range of 60-90cm is the general consensus.)

It's Leaking. Oh fuck yes, the hydrogen explosion blew, likely, large holes in the torus. Water is coming out. Yes indeed. It's a fucking mess. But that ~300-inch thick catchment floor? Intact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #145)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:33 PM

152. Intact?

 

And you know this, how? You don't. Not at all.

In fact, you even admit your magical containment is leaking water, but here's your real magic: Leaking water, but not leaking hot corium which was so hot it melted the steel?

What is your agenda? And how many times are you going to embarrass yourself regarding Fukushima?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #152)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:38 PM

154. I said the catchment.

You keep attempting to change what I said to introduce vulnerabilities. I was very specific. The containment is leaking. The catchment floor is intact. Not only has the corium not burned its way to the water table, throwing massive geysers of radioactive steam into the sky, but there are also no known forces that could have acted on that ~300 inch thick steel plated layer of concrete, that could have broken it.

The water is coming out the sides, specifically at the torus, and probably at a few of the places in the containment where pipes go in/come out to carry steam and coolant. Places damaged by the hydrogen-fueled explosion. The Torus is most certainly broken.

Catchment floor? No. Charred, undoubably. Pitted, eaten into by the corium, concensus is, about 30-40 inches into it. That's it.

Until there is evidence otherwise, there is no reason to think the core was hot enough to burrow through the catchment, but then just mysteriously stop before hitting the water table.

There are also elemental traces of various kinds that we could sample from the grounds around the foundation, to know if the core burrowed through. Again, no evidence that it has.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #154)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:54 PM

155. There have been a number of steam events

 

Last edited Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:26 PM - Edit history (1)

The cameras on site videoed those events.

TEPCO has been pumping water into the buildings thereby covering the corium in an attempt to limit reactive explosive steam events. But, as recorded on the videos, steam events have occurred.

And they admit that groundwater is seeping into the area you describe as catchment. So, even they admit that your catchment is not containing the corium. You don't know where the mass of corium actually is, besides that which is already in the environment, and no one knows, not even TEPCO where the mass is, so why do you pretend to be the expert?

ETA: you can have the last word, I do hate beating dead horses.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #155)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:10 PM

159. There was a plan, not too long back, to possibly dispose of radioactive waste by glomming it into a

ball and letting it burrow its way to the earth's mantle, using its own decay heat.

Those 'steam events' have nothing whatsoever to do with the core hitting the water table. If the corium was under the building, you'd fucking know.

You have confused water seeping into the BASEMENT with radioactive water coming out of the containment. The catchment is underwater, inside. The bottom surface of the containment.

"So, even they admit that your catchment is not containing the corium."


No, they don't. You are fully misconstruing what they said. They are quite specific that, to the best of their data, it's 70cm into the surface of the catchment. Some independent experts have said as much as 90cm. That means just under seven HUNDRED centimeters of reinforced concrete to go.

I have in no way pretended to be an expert. I have re-iterated what TEPCO and other, non-TEPCO beholden experts have said, based on multiple types of evidence.

France has actually been working to thicken the base of Unit 1 of the Fessenheim reactor to bring it up to the standards we see in Fukushima. Fukushima Dai-ichi reactor 1 has a basement AND a containment/catchment. They are going to dig under the reactor vessel of Fessnheim unit 1 and build the sort of thick catchment Fuku-1 has, because all Fessenhem-1 has is a basement/foundation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #159)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:22 AM

171. That sounds like a fabulous plan! I hope they try it!

I like radiation.
I got bit by a radioactive spider, once, and now I have super powers.
Everybody should just chill out and wait for their turn to be bit by a radioactive spider. It'll happen sure enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #171)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:06 AM

174. In all seriousness, France should decommission that ancient piece of crap.

It was their very first production reactor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #171)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:20 AM

192. right on time LOL

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Reply #192)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 05:31 PM

289. Oh good, I've got a follower!

I'm glad you share my sense of humor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #152)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:19 PM

250. AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

On Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:04 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Intact?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6401652

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Arguments should be presented without all the personal attacks. It's rude, disruptive and inappropriate. This poster has a reputation for being conspiratorial and abusive to those who question his conspiracies. This really makes DU suck.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:10 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Personal attack isn't necessary.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: From Wiki's random article generator:

The Northern Ireland civil rights movement dates to the early 1960s, when a number of initiatives emerged which challenged inequality and discrimination in Northern Ireland. The Campaign for Social Justice (CSJ) was founded by Conn McCluskey and his wife, Patricia. Conn was a doctor, and Patricia was a social worker who had worked in Glasgow for a period, and who had a background in housing activism. Both were involved in the Homeless Citizens League, an organisation founded after Catholic women occupied disused social housing. The HCL evolved into the CSJ, focusing on lobbying, research and publicising discrimination. The campaign for Derry University was another mid-1960s campaign.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is a back and forth, I'm inclined to leave it

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #152)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:20 PM

251. Alert results

 

I was one of the leave-it-alone voters.

On Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:04 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Intact?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6401652

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Arguments should be presented without all the personal attacks. It's rude, disruptive and inappropriate. This poster has a reputation for being conspiratorial and abusive to those who question his conspiracies. This really makes DU suck.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:10 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Personal attack isn't necessary.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: From Wiki's random article generator:

The Northern Ireland civil rights movement dates to the early 1960s, when a number of initiatives emerged which challenged inequality and discrimination in Northern Ireland. The Campaign for Social Justice (CSJ) was founded by Conn McCluskey and his wife, Patricia. Conn was a doctor, and Patricia was a social worker who had worked in Glasgow for a period, and who had a background in housing activism. Both were involved in the Homeless Citizens League, an organisation founded after Catholic women occupied disused social housing. The HCL evolved into the CSJ, focusing on lobbying, research and publicising discrimination. The campaign for Derry University was another mid-1960s campaign.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is a back and forth, I'm inclined to leave it

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Veilex (Reply #251)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:30 PM

255. Thanks to both of you

 

Gives me some faith in the whole jury idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #138)

Fri Mar 27, 2015, 10:24 AM

472. So you conclude that since "they can't find it" it's has to be still in the containment?

 

Yet they have been unable to prove it's still in the containment. And if it burned thru the containment and melted into the ground beneath, I don't know of any method to "find it". Do you have any sources that indicate that they know it's still in the containment?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #472)

Fri Mar 27, 2015, 10:46 AM

475. If it melted into the ground under the plant, even 20 feet, the radioactive steam plume would

still be circling the planet on the trade winds. It would have hit the ground water table right under the plant.

It's still inside. It undoubtedly damaged the catchment, but it went less than 1/10th of the way through it, best guess based on the known energy involved. Same known quantity of energy that TEPCO used to calculate and inform the world that yes, in fact, the fuel payload HAD fully melted through the RPV back in June 2011, which was confirmed in this finding linked in the OP. (They went back and forth a couple times, in October they re-ran the numbers and thought it might still be in the six inch thick carbon steel RPV, but cooler heads prevailed, it melted through and landed in the catchment of the containment.)

Even the evidence that Gunderson over at 'fairewinds' posted showed no corium outside the containment, rather, radioactive sediment being washed out by the leaking coolant water, and settling in the torus room.

That's bad, but it's not 'ball of molten corium burrowing into the earth' bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #475)

Fri Mar 27, 2015, 11:01 AM

476. I agree there is no proof that it's left the containment. I would like to find

 

a scientist or engineer, not on the payroll of Japan that would explain how the containment can hold the molten corium and how long it will hold it. I assume the containment is concrete. Is the corum being cooled? If so wouldn't the cooling water be turned into steam? Where can I get this information other than from the Japanese government?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #476)

Fri Mar 27, 2015, 11:20 AM

477. It is being cooled, actively.

And tepco is struggling to filter the radioactive sediment out of the coolant water. That's part of the problem of the buildup of radioactive water at the site, they can only recycle the water so many times.

Some steam is coming from the building at times, but the core is only giving off decay heat now. Hot by our standards, but not hot enough to continue to chew through the floor. If the corium mass went critical again, then it could generate enough heat to do so, but the catchment is designed with criticality posions, and to geometrically separate the corium blob in such a way as it cannot achieve criticality again.

If it was hot enough to escape the RPV it was hot enough to burrow somewhat into the catchment floor, but only so far. The same margin of safety is being built into the first French reactor built, because that reactor was built without a containment at all...
That aspect of the design can probably be considered proven at this point, even if everything ELSE did apparently completely fail.

(This is why, while I am generally positive about the idea of nuclear power, I don't trust corporations and governments to implement it anymore.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #476)

Fri Mar 27, 2015, 04:22 PM

478. Some things to consider

What you've asked for necessarily involves taking the words of experts, who pretty much universally agree with the posters that you view as biased toward nuclear power - and thus may dismiss them.

So let's begin with things unrelated to Fukushima that you can confirm for yourself. Go ahead and do a search for "corium" and "Chernobyl" and look at the photos. Most of the photos that will rise to the top of the search were taken within the first year after the disaster.

Ask yourself "what stopped that core?"

Things to consider:
* The Fukushima reactors were shut down roughly an hour before power was lost, so the core was producing somewhere around 2% of the heat that it produced at full power.
* By comparison, Chernobyl's design flaws caused the core to power UP. As it melted down, it was actually producing much more heat than at full power. This means that the corium was producing scores of times as much heat (available for burning through concrete) as at Fukushima
* They had trouble keeping water on the core at Fukushima... but at Chernobyl the core exploded and then burned in the open air. They tried to dump sand/water from helicopters, but that was necessarily less effective.
* There was no ongoing water spray (and possibly ground water) reaching the core (obvious from the photos). Yet somehow the corium failed to burn through the foundation or remain molten.

So perhaps the better question would be "on what basis would anyone think that the cores at Fukushima would continue to burn their way through much more concrete?"

If so wouldn't the cooling water be turned into steam?

The amount of heat produced by the corium is a knowable (and continually declining) figure (certainly within a reasonable margin of error). At this point (as with Chernobyl's corium), the heat produced is likely below that which would be carried away by air circulation at temperatures well below the boiling point of water. Thus even if they weren't spraying water, it would be unlikely to be able to flash water to steam. There just isn't enough heat. With the water spray, the temperature on the surface of the corium is probably quite warm to the touch, but not "hot".

how the containment can hold the molten corium and how long it will hold it.

The easiest answer is that it's precisely what it was designed to do. Note that from early on, there were retired experts who claimed that this design couldn't contain a total loss of cooling accident because the core would melt down so quickly that it would still be producing too much heat when it reached the bottom of the primary containment... so the corium would remain too liquid and (rather than burning through the base of the containment) would spread to the outer edges of the upside-down metal "bulb" and burn through the sides and into the torus room.

Those concerns were one of the main reasons that the design was replaced with better containment options in later reactors... but the folks who continued to claim from this that the Mk1 design "couldn't" contain the corium missed the critical distinction that Fukushima did not have that absolute loss of cooling accident while running. The hour of cooling plus decay of short-half-life elements made a huge difference... and it's why the cores tool many hours to melt down.

Where can I get this information other than from the Japanese government?

Old NRC reports and design reviews. Nuclear physics and reactor textbooks. Decay heat curves, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Reply #3)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:21 AM

194. A ridiculously disingenuous post

You want people to believe that there's a possibility that the core burned it's way through the primary containment vessel and is now somewhere deep in the ground under the buildings.

This, of course, is total nonsense. There is doubt what percentage of the fuel is still above the fuel plates (if any), what percentage is at the bottom of the RPV, and what percentage is sitting at the bottom of the PCV. There's even some doubt as to how many centimeters into the concrete the corium was able to burn...

... but there's no rational thought that says that it's well outside of those options (which "they don't know where it went" strongly implies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:38 AM

5. Another one for the reviled "conspiracy theorists"--IT's a Conspiracy (fact), not a theory!

 

The dungeons are full of ideas imprisoned for their Political Incorrectness....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 06:20 PM

106. YEP. The gatekeepers have DU just the way they like it.

 

Binary thinking with no speculation on any topic. It's why so many have fled this site. Critical thinking skills get mocked by the gatekeepers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #106)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 07:23 PM

115. Snark and mockery are how you help transform an "underground" into a site....

 

...that just rehashes status quo POVs. Especially when that snark is aimed at anything that dares question that status quo...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Reply #5)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:24 AM

197. It isn't even "one"... let alone "another one"

Note how to OP strongly implies that nadinbrzezinski claimed that unit one suffered a meltdown and naysayers denied that (and specifically that TEPCO hid that fact)...

None of that is true. It was clear from the start that there was a meltdown and the current data is consistent with what TEPCO has said for years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:39 AM

6. She also said half a million would die.

So not so much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #6)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:41 AM

7. More than half a million if you count starfish.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #6)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:42 AM

8. Immediately? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #8)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:22 AM

195. Well, around 56 million people die every year...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #6)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 09:21 AM

13. That depends on how long you wait.

And of course officials will "explain" they're not from the meltdown, just like they did after Three Mile Island. One way to limit the results is to use a short latency period for the evaluation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident_health_effects

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uberblonde (Reply #13)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:00 AM

21. exactly

The survivors from that area are now scattered into different regions. It will be easy enough to hide the uptick of various cancers and other deaths as a result of this. By the time the dots are connected it will be too late. Of course the company will fund various "science research" that will say these illnesses and deaths are the result of anything from poor diet to genetics. Anything but massive radiation exposure. Just google Occidental Petroleum and Suzie B Komen for the template.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #6)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:52 PM

84. Eventually. Cancer doesn't kill overnight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hekate (Reply #84)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:24 PM

128. But half a million is still a ridiculous overestimate.

 

Chernobyl, which was by all accounts far worse, is only expected to be responsible for 4,000 cases.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2005/pr38/en/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #128)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:14 PM

144. You have a ridiculous underestimate

 

Chernobyl was one reactor, Fukushima was at least three and numerous old fuel pools.

Russia at the time was an oppressed country with no freedom of press, so the story was suppressed. Now Japan is suppressing the press in Japan like Russia did about Chernobyl.

But... Gorbachev did state that one reason the USSR collapsed was because of Chernobyl. And the population [strike]death rate[/strike] of the former USSR is going down. Greenpeace has studies detailing almost a million deaths from Chernobyl.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #144)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:22 PM

149. On top of all that, Chernobyl turned me into a newt.

 

And ruined Christmas for everybody.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #149)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:55 PM

156. It certainly ruined Xmas for the residents of a rather large region...

...as well as those in the town who were grossly exposed.

Whether you now resemble Gingrich is open to debate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #149)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 07:48 AM

183. There are some wonderful families in Scotland who

hosted a little holiday for young Russian children whose health was badly affected by the Chernobyl radiation. Whether any of the children are still alive or in better or worse health, I don't know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #149)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:24 PM

270. No doubt. Chernobyl too, was simply a minor error...

No doubt. Chernobyl too, was simply a minor error with few long-lasting effects or victims, and ruined Christmas for no one person. (I'm guessing petulant banality is best answered in kind... however, please feel free to move the goal-posts should the desire arise to better maintain a thin veneer of relevance to the topic)



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #270)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:34 PM

274. Chernobyl was no minor error

Serious design flaws (graphite in the core... no real containment... a dangerously high positive void coefficient... we could go on) caused a "minor error" to turn into a disaster. But the triggering event was entirely manmade, not an unprecedented natural disaster.

Now... it's reasonable to look back and find people who were worried about tsunamis predictions or small design differences with other reactors that would have avoided the meltdowns, but that's really an entirely different class of error.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #270)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:35 PM

275. Not what I said at all.

 

Chernobyl was a catastrophe. Thousands of people will get thyroid cancer as a result, and it's rendered part of Ukraine uninhabitable.

What my post was in response to was a poster citing an oft-debunked study claiming the Chernobyl disaster was responsible for a million deaths. Even if every single one of the cancer cases is fatal, that number is off by 99.996%. The Chernobyl hysteria is fraught with nonsense like that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #275)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:43 PM

277. Your math is off

While a million is ridiculous, there were clearly more than 40 deaths from Chernobyl. That's just the number who died in the immediate aftermath from radiation sickness.

It's reasonable to assume that estimates in the thousands are likely accurate given the number of full-sievert+ doses that so many liquidators received.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #277)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:54 PM

278. Point taken.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #144)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 05:17 AM

177. "Chernobyl was one reactor, Fukushima was at least three and numerous old fuel pools."

So fucking what. The mode of failure is so spectacularly different the comparison is ridiculous. Fukushima was bad, but WITH 3 reactors plus fuel pools, plus a fourth fuel pool, it still didn't release as much radiation as Chernobyl did. WITH ALL THAT; still a smaller disaster.

Best estimates, Chernobyl threw 5,200 PBq of radiation into the sky. Fukushima's estimates have risen from somewhere between 340 to 800 PBq, now revised up to 900PBq.

That single RBMK reactor threw more than 5x the burning, radioactive shit, into the sky, as we can figure came out of Fukushima. The vast bulk of the mass of the RBMK core came out to say hello to the world.

Fukushima has a contaminated groundwater/seep into the ocean problem that is difficult to estimate, and difficult to control, which doesn't apply to the Chernobyl site, but there's still an order of magnitude difference between the two industrial disasters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #177)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 08:01 AM

186. Horlicks! Absolute rubbish.

The spike in gas radiation starting near Tokyo and extending across the northern hemisphere soon after 3/11 was astronomically higher than normal. I don't use the term, 'astronomically' lightly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joe Chi Minh (Reply #186)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:15 AM

190. I'm trying to figure out what this is supposed to be an objection to.

Post 144 expressed incredulity that Chernobyl could be worse, based on the fact that Fukushima had 3 reactors and 4 fuel pools in the incident.

That's a ridiculous metric. One should compare total radiation release, which, I gave the numbers to Fukushima as best understood at this time. Astronomically higher than normal is within the parameters I gave. Fukushima WAS BAD, yes. On it's own, it's the second worst disaster of its type.

But as I said, it was not as bad as Chernobyl itself. Multiply Fukushima Dai-Ichi 1-3 by five, and you still exist within the margin of error between the two estimates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #190)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 11:14 AM

335. No.

Feb 13, 2015 ... The peak β radioactivities… are 11.0 and 92.4 times larger than their local average ..... Fukushima is thousands of times worse than Chernobyl:.
enenews.com/magazine-fukushima-catastrophe-changed-world-worst-nuclear -accident-history-like-having-chernobyls-poisoned-entire-landscape...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #177)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:02 AM

211. Keep in mind that there's more to it than that...

It's likely that Fukushima released more bq's of noble gas (and we can even agree that it's because there were three reactor meltdowns rather than one), but those can safely be ignored from a dose perspective.

The larger difference is that Chernobyl's "containment" (sic) exploded and the core burned in the open air. A higher percentage of Fukushima's release was in shorter-lived isotopes, while Chernobyl released far more in the way of longer-lived isotopes.

It would be reasonable to discuss a measure of "becquerel/years" - by which measure Chernobyl was almost certainly far more than ten times worse (perhaps 100 times).

Then, of course, almost all of Chernobyl's release ended up over populated land areas while the vast majority of Fukushima's ended up in the sea (or groundwater around the plant). Those same Bqs aren't as available to theoretically damage human tissue.

Penultimately, for all their flaws in communication, Japan's response was many times better than Russia's. They almost certainly avoided low-hundreds of thyroid cancer cases by timely evacuation and temporary food bans while the radioiodine dissapeared.

Lastly, for all the nonsensical talk of "hot particles" that the lunatic fringe used to harp about... Chernobyl very likely did produce some (because of the explosion and fire) - while Fukushima didn't

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:43 AM

9. This OP sure looks like it could be hers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #9)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:14 PM

29. Whut?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #29)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:17 PM

32. !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #9)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 03:09 PM

50. Heh.

 

Yeah, malaise has spent 127,000+ posts lulling us all into a false sense of security that she's not actually nadinbrzezinski.

This place cracks me the fuck up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Reply #50)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 03:49 PM

56. Original Post



One would assume that you would know by now that "OP" can mean two different things. Context can be a clue...

... never mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #56)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 06:00 PM

95. pintobean...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Reply #50)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 06:00 PM

94. Good catch, now he is backtracking like mad.

 

He meant the OP! Which of course is what you meant. I swear I have no idea why anyone would fall for something so obvious. Cuz you know OP can have to different meaning etc.. don't ask for an explanation, he backed himself into a corner so NM is the best you will get from that one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #94)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 06:05 PM

97. So nice of you to grace us with your brilliant observations.

I wonder who could have alerted on that post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #97)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 06:07 PM

100. pintobean...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #9)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:50 PM

80. Why? Because she turned out to be right after all? PS: Not the same person. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #9)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:52 PM

83. There is a jury out on this reply.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #9)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:56 PM

85. Jury is back.

On Sun Mar 22, 2015, 01:43 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

This OP sure looks like it could be hers.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6398390

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

If you've got something to say, say it. If not STFU...

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Mar 22, 2015, 01:54 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: What a horrid alert. The poster merely said the OP sounds like it could be one of Nadin's. You don't like pintobean? The line forms to the right, but this alert is silly and the comments amplify that.

I hope this goes 0-7 so that the alerter steps away from the button for at least a short while.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I agree with the alerter, in that pintobean has something more to say, as he always has regarding nadine. There has NEVER been a post either about nadine or posted by nadine, that this guy hasn't shown up to harass and attack. He's a bully and should have been tossed from this site long ago, unfortunately, this particular post doesn't meet the guidelines for hiding.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #85)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 05:00 PM

86. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #86)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 05:02 PM

88. I was #2. Shitty alert.

I don't always agree with you, but that was a stupid and spiteful alert.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #88)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 05:07 PM

89. I thought it was funny.

The alerter didn't have the guts to say it in the thread for fear of an alert, so s/he alerted to say it. The things that happen here sometimes...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #89)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 05:15 PM

91. He/she knows full well that sometimes juries are vindictive assholes and will hide because they

don't like the alertee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #91)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 05:19 PM

92. Oh yeah, the shot in the dark alert.

It happens often.

I like Malaise. I wasn't taking a shot at her. I just made an observation. I think that was obvious, but I guess the alerter was hoping it wasn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #92)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 07:58 PM

122. I'm the alerter. You're a grave-dancing bully.

 

I hope you feel really proud of yourself.

Alert away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebrit71 (Reply #122)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:07 PM

124. Looks like we were spot on.

BTW... who died?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebrit71 (Reply #122)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:21 PM

147. Can you explain what you're going on about here?

Some of us have no idea what you're referring to.

I've looked back, looks like most of my vitriolic threads on this issue didn't involve Nada at all, so some background would be helpful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebrit71 (Reply #122)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:05 AM

173. Sincerely, are you talking about Nadin? She is still active, her last post was March 6th.

I think she'll be back, if that is who you think is gone. I never understood why some people gave her a hard time, though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebrit71 (Reply #122)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:27 AM

202. It isn't grave dancing if she wasn't canned LOL...words mean stuff

 

She kind of posted (as noted below) on March 6th...

But deleted it, I guess that doesn't count? I think she forgot that she didn't post here anymore

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Reply #202)

Thu Mar 26, 2015, 08:54 AM

394. Perhaps ''Bullying'' is a better word for what you are thinking of.

Grave Dancing is a great phrase to describe a certain type of Bully.

Words do mean stuff, snooper2. Like "Beating a Dead Horse."

Sometimes words can express much more than their mere meanings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #88)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 07:57 PM

120. As opposed to the stupid and spiteful post?

 

Got it. Bullying is okay by you. Good to know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebrit71 (Reply #120)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:19 PM

127. Um, let's review:

"This OP sure looks like it could be hers."

vs

"If you've got something to say, say it. If not STFU... "

One of these statements, in my opinion, demonstrates bully-like behavior and one does not.

I think you and I disagree on which.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #85)


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #196)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:39 AM

205. The suspension came because you kept attacking DUers

A bit ironic, don't you think?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #205)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:42 AM

206. Indeed I did. Bully DUers, who apparently can't take what they dish out. Oh, and btw, I

 

have no hides now and those same bullies will have a severely difficult time suspending me again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #206)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:46 AM

208. I don't see anyone else whining

but, you didn't bully anyone, you just think you did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #208)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:49 AM

209. It's clear you're my #1 fan. I wasn't back from suspension for 2 seconds before you

 

were all over me.

Shot in the dark alerts? Uh-huh....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #209)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:02 AM

210. Ha. Bullshit

Your imagination doesn't match reality. I had no idea when you were off suspension, nor do I care.
Funny, you replied to, and about, me in this thread, but in your mind, I'm stalking you. And, you admitted to trying to bully me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #210)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:10 AM

213. Where did I say I was trying to bully you? Are you part of the crew I was referring to? Also,

 

I wasn't trying to bully anyone. I was CALLING OUT their (your?) bullying of nadin. Also, you say you didn't know I was off suspension and you don't care, but you were certainly there as soon as I began posting again.

I'm placing you on ignore. You won't get me suspended again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #213)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:25 AM

214. Lol. Maybe you should re-read this sub-thread.

Last edited Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:35 PM - Edit history (1)

The only person to get you suspended was you. Ignoring me can't fix that.

Edit to add - you self deleted your reply to the jury results where you said you agreed with the juror comment that I was a bully. That's about as cheesy as it gets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #196)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:29 AM

217. There seem to be a LOT of people who think it's cool to cry bully while bullying themselves.

In addition, nadin gave as good as she got. Actually, often first. Often worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #217)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 08:30 PM

294. Yes the rationalization to blame the victim. Even if you are right and I don't

 

believe you are right, "she started it" isn't reason to bully. And that's what it's called especially when 5 or 6 pile on with the ridicule and mocking in post after post. It looked to me like she was trying to stand up to the bullies and I would hope you would respect that. But the bullies won.

Nadin did fight back but there were others that didn't and just left. I am sure you have a rationalization as to why we don't want them here. As I see it the worst thing one can do is try to fight them on their playing field. IMO Nadin made that mistake. The other mistake is to run away as others have here, and let the bullies win. The best way to fight the bullies is to ignore them. Or just respond to them politely and on subject. They hate that.

Funny thing about those here that deny this is happening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #9)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:20 AM

193. Stupidest thing I've read all day...so far. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 09:07 AM

11. These pathetic TEPCO minions

need to watch The Battle of Chernobyl to understand just how difficult and deadly will be this cleanup.

And, I am sure all those who belittled us for being concerned should watch it, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #11)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 06:48 PM

109. LOL! I think they know it will be hard....

 

... without referring to pop culture.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #11)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:28 PM

150. Um, no. Not in the slightest.

Chernobyl exploded, you know that right? Not just 'blew up'. Fukushima Dai-ichi certainly suffered explosions as well. But Chernobyl's core went north of 33gw thermal output, before the instrumentation failed, and stopped recording, and fully exploded. No containment. When the lid flipped over, that's it yo. That was the bare, naked, burning core thrown INTO THE SKY. Probably around 80% of the entire mass of the core burned, or was flung out of the housing. Fully naked. No containment.

Reactor 1 in the Dai-ichi complex is the worst of the 3, and its core is sitting there, in the catchment, inside the containment housing that Chernobyl's RBMK's doesn't even have. That generation RBMK has no containment at all. Do you understand that? No containment. I feel compelled to say it several more times.

Fukushima had containments. They scrammed the cores. And yes, they cooked when the cooling failed, and melted through the RPV, but they didn't get through the containment that Chernobyl didn't even have. The hydrogen explosions just made a fuckawful mess out of everything. That's it. Spread contamination. They didn't huck the cores, burning, INTO THE SKY. There's a slight difference in scope and scale here.

Chernobyl reactor 3's bitumen roof caught fire when pieces of the core from reactor four, fuel and graphite, landed on it. Slightly different.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #150)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:11 AM

175. Oh, goodie.

Someone who takes pleasure in condescension, negation and derogation! What fun! NOT!!

I know what happened at Chernobyl AND I know what happened at Fukushima. I have been an anti-nuke activist for 42 years.

I also know that this kind of post is your MO. In the recent past, I have considered putting you on my IL for precisely this type of snarky bs. Obviously, it's past time. Buh-bye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #175)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 03:34 AM

176. Yeah, because your post 11 had none of that. Later.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #175)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 09:01 AM

187. Well, which is it?

 

I know what happened at Chernobyl AND I know what happened at Fukushima. I have been an anti-nuke activist for 42 years.


Do you know what happened at Fukushima or Chernobyl, or are you a veteran anti-nuclear activist?

Because to be honest, most anti-nuclear activists I've known are among the least informed about nuclear power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #187)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:54 AM

222. Which is it?!?

Do you understand the conjunction I used? Shall I clarify for you? I know what happened at Chernobyl. I ALSO know what happened at Fukushima. I have made it a point to do the research necessary to understand nuclear power, and to understand both of the catastrophes.

I get the impression that you are a pro-nuke individual. If this is so, we will have to agree to disagree, because--"to be honest"--I've learned that pro-nukes will gnaw on their "nuclear power is great!" bone until the cows come home.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #222)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:13 PM

266. Woosh.

 

What I meant was that anti-nuclear advocates tend to:

* Grossly exaggerate the effects of Chernobyl/TMI/Fukushima. Whether it's Fukushima "frying the West Coast" or a million dead from Chernobyl, those exaggerations are in no way supported by evidence.

* Understand very little about radiation or nuclear power systems at all. The most common things here involve dosages, effects of radiation on the body, and containment systems.

* Conflate nuclear weapons with nuclear power. It's a ridiculous appeal to emotion based on people's completely rational fears of nuclear war.

And yes, I am pro-nuclear, though much more in favor of fusion's potential over fission.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #266)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:17 PM

269. Woosh?

I get it. You think you're the most erudite, informed pro-nuker on the planet, and you want everyone to see how handily you can rebuke/insult anti-nuke activists.

Yawn...



(You've progressed from sophomoric drivel to insupportable accusations. Get thee away to my IL, where you belong.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #269)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:29 PM

272. That was a bit unnecessary.

 

You think you're the most erudite, informed pro-nuker on the planet,


Hardly. I consider myself capable of having a conversation without overreacting and throwing a tantrum.

and you want everyone to see how handily you can rebuke/insult anti-nuke activists.


I insulted no one. I put out an observation about the anti-nuclear movement, and so far, you're working very hard to support that observation.

You've progressed from sophomoric drivel to insupportable accusations. Get thee away to my IL, where you belong.


I can certainly go all the anti-nuclear literature and find plenty of evidence supporting those accusations. But hey, if you just want to plug your ears and go LA LA LA instead, knock yourself out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #266)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 08:55 PM

298. nonsense

how arrogant

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Reply #298)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 09:17 PM

300. Bring nonsense to a discussion about real issues and science,

 

you can expect to get your feelings hurt a little.

Call it arrogance if you wish, but every single time a discussion comes up in GD about nuclear power, I see at a minimum two of those points brought up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #300)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 09:59 PM

303. I'll call it what is

You broad rushed "anti-nuclear" people as being misinformed and stupid, to put it simply. Taking on an air of authority, doesn't make one the authority. I've been seeing that approach quite often around here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Reply #303)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:05 PM

304. I'm not claiming any authority.

 

I stated an observation about the anti-nuclear movement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #11)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 03:09 PM

281. I"m betting Tepco will drag its feet until 2 generations later

most will forget and the radioactive mess will be covered over with a tangle of invasive vines

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #281)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 07:13 PM

292. Have you seen the naysayers herein?

Belittling my posts and those of other anti-nuke activists, like we don't know diddly about nuclear energy and catastrophes like Chernobyl, and Fukushima. I am appalled at the number of pro-nukers who resort to personal attacks, and derogate those of us who are (and have long been) concerned about the dangers of nuclear energy.

Also, I think you are right. TEPCO seems unwilling to expend the time and money required to address this disaster. It will take decades to "clean up" this mess, and -- as with Chernobyl -- there will be a significant portion of Fukushima that will remain uninhabitable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #292)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 09:21 PM

301. Your posts are being "belittled" not because you're an anti-nuclear poster

 

but because you're either making ridiculous statements conflating nuclear weapons with nuclear power, or behaving petulantly and refusing to have any sort of discussion.

Exhibit A: The fact that you won't see this post, because I'm on your ignore list.

So, please spare us the persecution complex nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 09:18 AM

12. And do these supposed "clean up robots" currently exist?

it's not easy hardening electronics against the kind of ionizing radiation likely to be encountered in Unit 1. Or were they developed already and are just stored somewhere, awaiting the inevitable? I find that hard to believe.

Then, of course, where is the core? Probably at the bottom of the containment vessel, but may have melted through the concrete floor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to paleotn (Reply #12)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 09:35 AM

16. Well lets see, the article said "most likely by robots" so I lean towards "not yet".

Could they be built to work in such conditions? probably.
After all if some can built to work on Mars I dont see why some cant built to work for a while to help clean up nuclear waste though long term disposal is going to be a pita.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cstanleytech (Reply #16)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:16 AM

20. I might be wrong....

....but Unit 1, with a melted core somewhere inside (or not), is a much more energetic environment than traveling to Mars or rolling around on the martian surface for a few years. They can be built, but when? A year from now? 5 years? Then what? Like you mentioned, what do we do with the huge amounts of radioactive pieces parts?

This just reiterates what I've said for years....granted the chances of a significant failure are small, but by the very nature of nuclear power, if it does happen ( And it will. It's just a matter of time.) it will be catastrophic beyond anything we can imagine and completely out of our control. Thus, Fukushima.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to paleotn (Reply #20)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 03:45 PM

55. No idea on the time period it could be a year or it could be ten years from now

but the biggest problem IMO is going to be finding a safe enough location to store the waste whenever they do manage to get them built.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to paleotn (Reply #12)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 03:16 PM

51. A good robot

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alfredo (Reply #51)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:45 PM

77. Ha! Hey, kamichi...whatever your name is...We've got a job for you. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to paleotn (Reply #77)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 07:14 PM

111. Retirement package?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to paleotn (Reply #12)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 05:13 PM

90. An 'octopus' robot with eight limbs developed to clear rubble in Fukushima, Japan

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to paleotn (Reply #12)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 03:12 PM

282. and who will clean up robots & where will the radioactive materials go?

something that in this country the geniuses in Congress have never dealt with except for our trillion$ sunk into the NV hole that was never used

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #282)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 03:25 PM

285. We could just toss it into the ocean and forget it like we used to do



From 1946 to 1970, the sea around the Farallones was used as a nuclear dumping site for radioactive waste under the authority of the Atomic Energy Commission at a site known as the Farallon Island Nuclear Waste Dump. Most of the dumping took place before 1960, and all dumping of radioactive wastes by the United States was terminated in 1970. By then, 47,500 55 gallon steel drum containers had been dumped in the vicinity, with a total estimated radioactive activity of 14,500 Ci. The materials dumped were mostly laboratory materials containing traces of contamination. Much of the radioactivity had decayed by 1980.

44,000 containers were dumped at 37°37′N 123°17′W, and another 3,500 at 37°38′N 123°08′W.

Location shown on graphic does not match the lat and lon given for the two dumping sites. Lat and lon actually are further west by about 9 nm which places both sites off the continental shelf. This significantly changes the potential effects on the fishery and makes any mapping and recovery effort much harder.

The exact location of the containers and the potential hazard the containers pose to the environment are unknown. Attempts to remove the barrels would likely produce greater risk than leaving them undisturbed.

Waste containers were shipped to Hunters Point Shipyard, then loaded onto barges for transportation to the Farallones. Containers were weighted with concrete. Those that floated were sometimes shot with rifles to sink them.

In January 1951, the highly radioactive hull of USS Independence was scuttled in the area.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farallon_Islands#Nuclear_waste_dump

Do I really need to add that sarcasm smiley thingy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 09:30 AM

14. I think we're a long way from knowing...

just how bad this really is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 09:31 AM

15. once again we had the story here first.

that's why i love this place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mopinko (Reply #15)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 09:52 AM

18. Ditto

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mopinko (Reply #15)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:25 PM

35. Yes, and a great DUer

who has since 'withdrawn.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 09:43 AM

17. K&R!

Thank you for this

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:12 AM

22. Yep. Thanks for this n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:15 AM

23. As I recall, the debate was whether or not the core melted THROUGH the containment vessel

And these results show that, in fact, it likely did not penetrate the containment vessel:

the fuel had likely melted and fallen to the bottom of the building into a containment vessel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #23)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:14 PM

28. No, the idiot pro-nukes kept claiming a meltdown was impossible, even after it already happened.

See, for example, http://www.democraticunderground.com/11277017

Thu Feb 16, 2012
One year on, Fukushima is still spinning
Jim Green

The first anniversary of the Fukushima disaster is fast approaching and it promises to be another silly-season for Australia's pro-nuclear zealots.

They have form. While the crisis was unfolding in March last year, Ziggy Switkowski advised that "the best place to be whenever there's an earthquake is at the perimeter of a nuclear plant because they are designed so well."

Switkowski wants dozens of nuclear power plants built in Australia - dozens of places to shelter from earthquakes.

Even as nuclear fuel meltdown was in full swing at Fukushima, Adelaide University's Professor Barry Brook reassured us that:
"There is no credible risk of a serious accident... Those spreading FUD at the moment will be the ones left with egg on their faces. I am happy to be quoted forever after on the above if I am wrong ... but I won't be."

...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Reply #28)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 03:37 PM

54. I was referring to the debates here on DU, between DU posters

Within a few weeks of the earthquake, even most of the ardent pro-nuke DU'ers pretty much accepted that a melt-down had in fact taken place.

What then occurred was months and months of arguments here about where the corium went, and if the concrete containment vessel under the reactors was breeched. Anyone can search DU for the phrase "corium" to see thread upon thread about it.

For example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x308671

Do you remember the claims by Gunderson about unstoppable corium melting down into groundwater and bedrock formations?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #54)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 09:39 PM

133. HYDROVOLCANIC EXPLOSIONS!

Reactor Pressure Vessel integrity was assumed to be shit when it wouldn't hold water anymore. Pretty clear clue some or all of the fuel melted through the bottom of the RPV and landed in the catchment.

Most of the remaining argument was actually around whether the cerium would melt through the containment and escape. Gunderson, etc sure seemed confident it would, would encounter groundwater, and explode, throwing huge radioactive steam clouds.

Which, obviously, has not happened. The corium is hot as hell, no doubt, but it can't bore through the containment. So, we've just got to deal with the bits of highly radioactive material coming out of the cores, carried by water, since the steam condenser torus, and other parts of the containment aren't water tight anymore. (blown to crap with the hydrogen explosions)


I don't see the debate getting any better either, because a lot of the people commenting have no idea what RPV and containment actually constitutes.

Everyone was convinced of the meltdown within a couple weeks. Sucks, but it seems the coolant was knocked out by the quake, reactors scrammed and melting, before the tsunami even arrived.

Edit: Here's one of the ridiculous threads.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php/http/images/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x637239

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Reply #28)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:28 AM

215. Can you back that up?

Citations from DU regulars would be nice.

You linked to a then-year-old out-of-context quote from another source... and though he was among the most optomistic in the first couple days of the incident and did make mistakes - though nothing even approacing those of Busby, Caldicott, Gundersen (who continues to claim that there was a nuclear explosion), or Nadin - even he never said that a meltdown was impossible.

Don't worry... I won't be holding my breath.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #215)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:33 AM

218. That member can't reply due to a hidden post. /nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #218)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:58 AM

224. Hadn't gotten down to that... oh well.

I'm sure that at least ONE of the anti-nuke fringe here can back up the claims of the thread with at least ONE example?

You know... something she claimed that others here disputed... and she turned out to be right? Something to go on apart from the claim?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #23)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 03:21 PM

53. That excerpt sounds like a hopeful guess to me.

Not a 'this is what we know' sort of statement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:30 AM

24. TEPCO admitted there was a meltdown as early as May 2011

For example:

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/05/fukushima-update-tepco-admits.html

13:27 24 May 2011
Andy Coghlan, reporter

Owners of the nuclear plant at Fukushima crippled by the earthquake and tsunami admitted today that two more of the six reactor units at the facility probably underwent meltdowns soon after the disaster on 11 March.

TEPCO acknowledged last week that fuel rods in reactor unit 1 probably melted down within as little as 16 hours of the quake.

Today, the company said that there were probably meltdowns in reactor units 2 and 3 as well, after the tsunami destroyed cooling systems needed to prevent meltdown through overheating of fuel rods.

Unit 3 probably melted down first, on 13 March, followed next day by Unit 2, after water levels fell below those needed to keep fuel cool enough to avoid meltdown. A day later, on 15 March, faulty valve systems led to an explosion in unit 2 which led to leakage of radioactive water into the sea.


The only thing that changed is for the fact they've conducted their study to use technologies to prove what they already knew.



I'm not a fan of nuclear power nor TEPCO's response, but this is not what I would call a "global cover-up".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FLPanhandle (Reply #24)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:49 AM

25. Minor detail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FLPanhandle (Reply #24)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:24 AM

198. In other words, no cover up, and Nadin was repeating readily available information

 

I'm also not a fan of nuclear power and I think TEPCO's response to the crisis has been criminal.

But like you said, no "global cover up".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FLPanhandle (Reply #24)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:44 AM

221. It was long before that

They (and the Japanese government) were saying that a meltdown was likely by the second day after the incident began. It was confirmed as a full meltdown within a couple months (a week or two prior to your example)

Of course that's hardly the only reason to believe that the OP is nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #221)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:54 PM

241. Unfortunately, those that really need to take this in and internalize it will not do so.

 

Many folks seem enthralled by the idea of a conspiracy that they have "discovered" and are "in the know" about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:54 AM

26. Many now conflate facts with official propaganda from industry and the state entities

under their thrall.

Anything out of alignment with the propaganda from those that make out hand over fist as a result of their lies is deemed to be a conspiracy theory to shut down discussion that might lead away from padding pockets and the accumulation of power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #26)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:10 PM

27. Propaganda is the only thing the nuclear energy industry has and it's very

effective. I live downwind from the El Diablo Canyon nuclear plant. PG & E, who operates the plant has been very effective in promoting their BS. I find myself talking to a brick wall every time I try to engage a resident in a conversation about the real dangers of the plant because the residents here have been so effectively brainwashed. The plant has hired it's own scientists to peddle their palaver that is opposite what non-aligned scientists are saying. They contribute to civic projects and schools so that it further erodes any opposition.

Yet, it sits on three earthquake faults in a state famous for earthquakes and the frackers are making progress in trying to move in by buying Tea Bagger politicians in local government offices. The plant is not built to withstand an 8 magnitude quake, yet it sit right next to the Pacific Ocean and less than a hundred miles from the bread basket of Americq, the San Joaquin Valley.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #27)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:16 PM

31. I'm astonished at the reckless propaganda and spin.

Astonished and amazed.
Speechless, sometimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #26)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 07:07 AM

180. Couldn't say it better

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #26)

Fri Mar 27, 2015, 10:35 AM

474. Right. The denier's try to bully discussions but screeming conspiracy theory

 

as if that will shut up those seeking the truth. They don't want the truth, they can't deal with the truth. They live on propaganda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:15 PM

30. That will be great for her ego

She'll be even more insufferable!

And how many people have windmills killed in the past month?!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #30)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:19 PM

33. Why are you so into her ego?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #33)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:29 PM

36. lol

the OP is about her rightness!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #36)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:47 PM

39. And you are dissatisfied that the possibility that she may have been correct may create a large ego?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #39)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:43 PM

76. She had that already.

She was always right, and opposing her was "bullying." Local news doesn't go in GD was one thing, and she kept putting it up to boast of being a journalist. Then she got some pushback on the relative obscurity of her publication. And some wild claims. I was always amused at the tone which was as if she had discovered some great big news story - this is going to be big folks kind of stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #39)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:25 AM

199. See #24. She was repeating readily available information that was not covered up. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #199)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 02:36 AM

309. So for that she was banned or whatthefuckever?

 

This place is getting to suck. I mean really suck. It is not a fun place much any more. And yes you contribute to the atmosphere of whatever conformity it is you expect from presence of internet personalities that have things to contribute that you do not approve of in your judgments of them. Deterioration of this site is almost intolerable. All the good writers have disappeared. I have foregone posting much anymore. Am no longer addicted to this place. Have fun in all your glory of condemning those that apparently aren't here anymore to defend themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #309)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 05:27 AM

316. She was in no sense banned

She decided that if the other kids were unwilling to play by her rules... She would take her ball and go home...

...only to find that it wasn't her ball.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #316)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 11:09 PM

364. So in your response you refer to a ball, she had 1 ball, but it wasn't hers, so what the fuck is

 

that really?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #364)

Wed Mar 25, 2015, 01:26 PM

369. Was the analogy really that difficult to understand?

The point is that she wasn't in a position to tell Skinner how to run his site (i.e., take the ball away from others who were using it).

Her behaviour was unacceptable and she wasn't willing to accept that judgement from the community standards process of DU... so she appealed to the site owner to change the system - and couldn't take that she needed to look in the mirror for the source of her problems here. So she left... nobody banned her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #309)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 10:07 AM

329. She's not banned. She posted as recently as a few weeks ago.

 

She didn't like the feedback she got from some folks so instead of modifying her behavior she decided not to post anymore.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1259&pid=2641

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #329)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 11:15 PM

365. As a yellow fucking dog democratic, some refer to me as my way or the highway here, and lock or mock

 

everything I post too. What's a gal to do, put up with that shit or fight every visit here. Certainly not fun putting up with that, this place is really different than it was when I first came here seeking camaraderie from fellow democrats. We used to stick together here as democrats, but I see all kinds of other types of shit going on here that is not that any more. Maybe not posting is a good idea. But I plan to continue to post whatever until I get banned for saying something someone doesn't like, but will continue to vocally support democrats. End of that fucking story. See you stevenleser.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #30)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:19 PM

34. It will be awful for the turdblossoms who attacked her!

Except on DU, where Skinner, Elad, and Earlg could have stopped the cyber-bullying,
instead, they encouraged it by their absence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Reply #34)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:31 PM

37. I don't think she was bullied.

Probably how she characterized push-back of any kind. She claimed to be an expert on anything when someone tried to argue and attacked the other person for their not having her experience in the field.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #37)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:44 PM

38. I was not close to her, and I have no allegiances to anyone in this ridiculous battle...

but, yes, she was bullied. Characterized by posts about her in GD that weren't even started by her. By the relentless protected-by-the-anonymity-given-by-a-computer-screen loud people who only wish to draw attention to themselves. It's one of the reasons I participate less and less on DU and limit my "experience" to only those posts I am truly interested in and keep the majority of DUers at far-arm's length. People DO bully those they disagree with here and continue to poke sticks and keep notebooks, etc. It's one of the sucky things about DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ScreamingMeemie (Reply #38)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 01:45 PM

47. I agree, maybe with the exceptions

of Obamanaught/bikeman and Sad-Cafe. They gave her shit no matter what she posted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #47)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 03:58 PM

58. And yet you befriend him on DI. Lol.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to darkangel218 (Reply #58)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:08 PM

62. That's total bullshit.

Not unexpected, though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #62)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:11 PM

64. Is it??

 

I wont link to DI, but you know it is absolutely true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #47)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:19 PM

67. And lets forget for a moment about how other posters treated her.

 

Were you nice to Nadin? How did you personally treat her?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to darkangel218 (Reply #67)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 06:09 PM

101. Oh shit! Tell me you are being sarcastic.

 

If not, big hint...everyone in this thread that all the sudden seems to be defending the nuclear industry, stalked her without mercy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #101)


Response to pintobean (Reply #47)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 06:07 PM

98. LOL! And you were soooo nice to her too!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to pintobean (Reply #102)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 06:11 PM

103. So you are skinner now!?!

 

And didn't stalk her relentlessly? Okay, nice distraction there. You are such a huge hypocrite pretending you are not one of her main stalkers!

It's like you expect people to forget the years and years here!

pintobean...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #103)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 09:29 PM

132. Somebody had a little boo-boo

oopsie

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ScreamingMeemie (Reply #38)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 03:51 PM

57. agreed

I saw that too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ScreamingMeemie (Reply #38)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:39 PM

73. She could be pretty acidic herself

That I recall - I don't picture her as a delicate flower. She made her own high profile here. I know she put me on ignore because she thought that my Queen Elizabeth avatar meant I was an authoritarian. She and another poster were talking about me, which is pretty rude. I think I tangentially disagreed with her on something. So her crying bully seemed to be a bit of a posture.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #73)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:46 PM

78. "So her crying bully seemed to be a bit of a posture"??

 

Whow...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ScreamingMeemie (Reply #38)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 05:01 PM

87. I agree.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ScreamingMeemie (Reply #38)

Thu Mar 26, 2015, 03:24 PM

461. The notebook keepers are really creepy, keeping tabs on posters and then pulling out links

 

to threads and comments made weeks, months, and a decade+ ago.

That shit creeps me out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #37)


Response to treestar (Reply #37)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 01:29 PM

46. I agree with you . nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #37)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 03:05 PM

49. She was mercilessly bullied.

I followed her posts and the posters who bullied her from post to post. Yet, alerting was useless because often the juries would rule in favor of the bully, who would move on to her next post. If you had seen the overall crap thrown at her for many months, you would not say that. Some of the bullies have been finally handed their pizza, but many are still here attempting to undermine other posters who put up posts of substance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #49)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 03:59 PM

59. +1

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #49)

Thu Mar 26, 2015, 03:29 PM

463. Most, if not all, of the bullies are right here in this thread, doing their thang and

 

getting away with it all day long, every day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #463)

Thu Mar 26, 2015, 03:39 PM

465. Now they are all in one place.

Bookmark this thread for reference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #37)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 10:08 PM

140. She absolutely was bullied.

I barely saw any of it, but I saw enough because every time she posted it seemed someone jumped in with no point to make other than to ridicule her. Sometimes she was OTT to me as well, but so are a lot of people on here and they never get the same treatment she did.

I would hope all those who participated have grown up. We all seem to condemn it when we hear stories about it, and yet some of us engage in it ourselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #37)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:12 PM

161. There was way more than "push-back". Ridicule and mockery

 

from a core group that always seem to show up in her threads. They justified their mockery by saying she was exaggerating and therefore deserved to be mocked and bullied. I have seen a number of good people leave because of the bullying. One of them just recently came back only to find that she was mocked for leaving and coming back. They couldn't just leave her alone. And what surprises me is that those that I've seen get bullied are all females. That's not what surprises me, but I notice that they don't get any help from those that should be helping.

Some people apologize for the bullies because they rationalize that the victims "deserved it". That's always the bullies' justification. "She deserved to be bullied because she was ____________ (fill in the blank)".

Anonymous message boards are heaven for bullies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #161)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:20 AM

170. She was a bully herself

This posturing is absurd.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #170)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:24 PM

231. Exactly. We live in a bully culture. It's everywhere and there is always the justification

 

that "the victim deserved it". Especially when people try to fight back. That is used for further justification. And let's talk about numbers. You say she was a bully and apparently that's the justification for the group attacks of mockery and ridicule. I bet you can find mockery and ridicule in this thread. There is never an excuse for mockery and ridicule, especially by a group of people aimed at one person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #231)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 09:32 AM

324. She did earn some mockery

Always posting in this fashion like she'd just discovered something that was really big. And making wild claims and getting mad when other posters showed there was nothing to them.

She put me on ignore for bringing up a point and then posted about me for a few exchanges with another poster. That's bullying. I'm sure I would have come up for more had she not put me on ignore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #324)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 10:22 AM

330. The is a message board for "politically liberal" posters. "Wild claims", IMO, are not only

 

expected, they are welcome. Of course we can counter the "wild claims" or ignore them, but should only censor when they violate the TOS and/or CS. We, as political liberals, should never belittle or put people down because of their "wild claims". But some seem to think it's their self-righteous duty to smite those with "wild claims", and that all tools are justified including mockery and ridicule. This is absurd for posters that are politically liberal. It is expected behavior from conservative authoritarians.

The point isn't whether someone "earns mockery" but whether we lower ourselves to using it as a tool to belittle someone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #161)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:26 AM

200. Given the facts and link of post #24 above, criticism seems warranted. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #200)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:30 PM

232. Of course disagreements are appropriate, and maybe criticism of someone's stand on an issue,

 

but it's never appropriate to gang up on someone and ridicule them.

"Self-righteousness is the devil's masterpiece to make us think well of ourselves." Thomas Adams.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #232)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:53 PM

240. "It's never appropriate to gang up on someone and ridicule them" - Define that for me...

 

... I have never seen you jump in and defend someone who posts an OP saying they think Hillary is the only and best choice and then is promptly "ganged up on and ridiculed". And there has been and will be plenty of opportunity for you to do that. I don't see you doing it.

Is it OK to gang up on and ridicule someone if they post racism or homophobia or sexism?

For better or for worse, DU does not have a civility requirement in the TOS. I wish it did. I would be happy to conform to it.

The reality is that just about everyone here reserves the right to be tough on people they disagree with. If you upset a large portion of the DU community, the reaction is going to seem like ganging up and ridiculing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #240)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:45 PM

259. "Is it OK to gang up on and ridicule someone if they post racism or homophobia or sexism? "

 

In different words, "Is it ok to bully someone if you are on the side of goodness." Of course not. What a great excuse to bully someone if you think they are a racist.

If the person violates the TOS or CS, we have means of dealing with them. Self-Righteous bullying is not needed.

"Self-righteousness is the devil's masterpiece to make us think well of ourselves." Thomas Adams





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #37)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 06:39 AM

179. Oh she was bullied. Every damn post of hers was sent to the hosts forum

 

as inappropriate for gd. She had a crew of obsessive stalkers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #179)

Thu Mar 26, 2015, 03:32 PM

464. And they're all right here in this thread, attracted no doubt by the sweet

 

nectar of the nick "nadinbrzezinski".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #464)

Fri Mar 27, 2015, 10:31 AM

473. She ruined their fun when she stopped posting.

 

They still bad-mouth her but it's no fun if she doesn't fight back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Reply #34)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 01:20 PM

44. What exactly was she right about anyway?

The reactor melted down? TEPCO said that just months after the tsunami.

What exactly was this grand prediction that came true?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Reply #34)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 09:43 PM

134. It's not bullying to say 'you're wrong' when you're wrong, or 'you're blowing this out of proportion

' when doing that, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #134)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 09:51 PM

136. This.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #134)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 08:44 PM

295. Well of course not. No one said it was. Typical strawman argument.

 

Bullying is bullying. It's obvious. But the self-righteous believe that ok to bully for goodness. Nadin made some strange claims. And it is perfectly acceptable on a message board where people claim to be "politically liberal" to call her on her claims and refute them. But some get a perverse pleasure at ganging up on someone that is viewed as "wrong" or weak and ridiculing and mocking that person. It's especially brave in unanimity and in groups.

You say it's "blowing it out of proportion" because you don't want to believe it happens. Nadin isn't the only person that has been the victim of self-righteous bullying. She is the one that fought back. Others simply have left.

I would hope that "politically liberal" posters here in DU would have empathy. Something missing in conservatives.

"Self-righteousness is the devil's masterpiece to make us think well of ourselves." Thomas Adams

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #295)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 08:48 PM

296. It's not a strawman. That is what happened. People disagreed with her and her interpretations.

 

She did not take disagreement well.

People continued to disagree with her and how she saw things. She suggested bullying was taking place. She appealed to Skinner. Skinner examined the situation and basically said the problem was that Nadin did not figure out how to get along with fellow DUers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #296)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 09:12 PM

299. I guess you think that rationalization is the key to happiness. Many of us saw what happened.

 

All of DU saw the bullying. You can deny it, but it was obvious. Maybe Nadin didn't respond properly but it was sickening to see the gang ups. Multiple bullies would, as you put it, "continued to disagree with her" (code for ridicule), over and over and over. Shame on those people that were getting some kind of jollies from their self-righteous bullying. Even if she was wrong she didn't deserve that. And your rationalization is sad to say the least. And let me remind you, especially you, that Nadin isn't the only one subjected to the abuse that you somehow rationalize as ok. One female I remember a few months ago came back after she left with a bitter farewell. The bullies couldn't react fast enough to attack her, criticizing that she left in a huff.

Bullies are cowards and have to work in groups.

"Self-righteousness is the devil's masterpiece to make us think well of ourselves." Thomas Adams

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #299)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 09:26 PM

302. Nope. My opinion is backed up by the person who can see all posts/alerts/etc.

 

She posted a lot of stuff, it had very strident opinions and attracted a lot of criticism. The same folks who object to the way she says things and her generalized bent tended to have objections.

This is nothing new on DU. The folks who tend to disagree with me show up in most of my OPs to criticize me, and they show up to disagree with most of my comments. The same folks over and over. That doesn't mean they are bullying me. They simply don't like the way I see things. And Nadin had some personality characteristics that made it worse, someone else under this OP called it egotism, I think she had a greatly exaggerated opinion of herself and that came out in her posts and how she talked to people, particularly those with whom she disagreed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #302)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:30 PM

306. Good grief. "My opinion is backed up by the person who can see all posts/alerts/etc."

 

Wow. How exactly are your opinions backed by the admins? Do you have super powers here in DU? If you think that, that explains a lot. The ultimate self-righteousness, "My opinion is backed by the person who can see all posts/alerts/etc." Wow, it must be either God or Skinner. I had no idea. Well I guess if you speak for Skinner, then there is nothing more to say. Your behavior is blessed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #306)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 05:08 AM

312. "God or Skinner" Lol.

It was Skinner (though for DU purposes there isn't much difference) and no-one needs to "speak for him"because he spoke for himself (linked elsewhere on this thread).

She whined that she was being set upon and he told her that she was the problem... not all the people she imagined were out to get her.

"See all alerts" is relevant, because it means that he's in a position to know whether they represented a concerted effort to game the system against her... or just a clear reflection of her ongoing violations of community standards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #306)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 10:06 AM

328. Yep. You didn't read all the posts under this OP, did ya?

 

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1259&pid=2641

Skinner
1. I'm going to be blunt.

The problem here isn't the jury system. The problem is you. Sometimes it takes a while, but eventually most DUers figure out how to get along with other DUers. My suggestion is that you try to do it too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #328)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 10:38 AM

331. And you see that as vindication for her treatment. You missed the point by a mile.

 

My point isn't whether or not she behaved badly or not. That's for hosts, juries and Skinner to decide. My point is that just because you think she is misbehaving or even if Skinner thinks she is, is not justification for mocking and ridiculing. Instead of leaving her alone, some saw an opportunity to push her further and felt they had goodness on their side.

The bullying behavior hasn't been limited to Nadin. She fought back which was used for further bullying. But others have been bullied to the point of leaving. Some think it's their duty to keep DU cleansed of people that don't fit, others see it as good fun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #331)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 10:42 AM

333. See posts #305, #310 and my #332 below nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #331)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 11:16 AM

336. I've never seen you defend anyone else.

Nadin is an intelligent adult, but many of her defenders treat her like a child. Why the white knight treatment for her?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Reply #336)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 04:27 PM

359. Your post insinuates that you've been in all the threads that include

 

bullying. I find that particularly interesting. And I hope you recognize that logically the fact that you've never seen me defend anyone else does not mean that it's a fact. In fact it would make no sense that I only defend Nadin. I've had to defend myself a few times and have defend a few others most of whom have left DU.

A couple of weeks ago, one of DU's most liked and prolific posters posted and without thinking used a source that the bullies think is an excuse to attack. Even pointing out to the bullies that the same story was posted elsewhere, didn't slow down the attacks. I think it's like blood in the water. I messaged the poster and they were close to leaving. Pointing out that they didn't need the harassment.

"but many of her defenders treat her like a child. " So you agree that she has many defenders? Doesn't that imply that there is a reason she needs defending? Her defenders are not defending her stands on issues but defending her against the gang-up bullying that is really ugly when done to anyone. It seems you admit that bullying happens, you just think it's justified. Bullies always blame the victim. "I didn't want to do it, but they made me." I think it would be obvious that it's the bullies not the victims that bring DU down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #295)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 08:54 PM

297. That is my "thing" with these things. Like the continuation of "used car salesman" stuff.

In threads where it wasn't even mentioned. That, and not simply telling someone they are wrong, is where the idiotic, juvenile behavior comes in. And to see posters claim innocence right before they go back to it is depressing and certainly not empathetic.

"Gave as good as she/he got" is a shit statement.

It's like the stupid, fucking "Better Believe It" Shit. Grow the hell up, people. I couldn't stand Better Believe, but I'm a grownup.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ScreamingMeemie (Reply #297)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:40 PM

307. If a female wears a mini-skirt and goes into a bar in a bad neighborhood and gets harassed,

 

who should we blame. In DU the bullies would say that she asked for it. They blame the victim and then rationalize how it's the victim's fault. Most of the time, the victim of bullying here in DU are females. I would think that they would get understanding from the females that post here.

Nadin fought back and that infuriates the bullies. But it gives them justification for continued attacks. She dared to fight back but there have been others that didn't fight back but decided to just leave. What a shame.

Why the bullies have so much power here is something I don't understand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #307)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 05:18 AM

314. That's a nonsensical and false analogy

The more accurate analogy would be a drunk female walking into a bar and hitting both male and female patrons... then complaining when they defended themselves that it was really them harassing her because she was a female (despite the fact that many of the victims of her abuse were themselves female)...

... Then she complains to the police and gets enraged when they review video of the incident and tell her that she was the offender.

For the record.Nadin and I clashed mite than once... and I think this thread is the first time I knew that she was female.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #30)


Response to treestar (Reply #30)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:40 AM

220. To be fair it was rouge wind turbines

 

Causing cancer clusters etc.

That one was a personal favorite. Repeated as fact by her and defended to the death by her many sycophants here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LordGlenconner (Reply #220)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 09:35 AM

325. That one was pretty strange.

What was it called, "The East County News?" That made her a "journalist."

Now I remember another one. There was a Comics Convention in San Diego. She identified a couple of men who were there in uniform as from the CIA or the NSA or something. There was this big debate and of course many posters thought they were just ordinary security guards. That got her really mad. You weren't supposed to ever try to minimize her wild claims.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:49 PM

40. nadin said lots of things about Fukushima...

the vast majority of which were complete horseshit.

That she, maybe, got something right among her myriad bits of nonsense, does not make her "correct re Fukushima".

She's the proverbial blind squirrel.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #40)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:54 PM

42. Bully apologists defend their bullying.

Their was no attempt by the bullies (aka assholes) to a meeting of minds or agree to disagree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Reply #42)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 07:20 PM

113. horsehockey...

on more than one occasion i held out an olive branch only to be thrashed with it... she wasn't fond of having her errors pointed out and contradicted with facts. if you disagreed with her, even when you presented it in a logical and factually based manner, you were still a bully in her eyes and the eyes of her supporters.

so, i gave up trying to be nice. i simply pointed out her failures where they were and when i agreed with her on something, i would speak up as well... but i guess i was on her iggy-list.

sP

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #40)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:54 PM

43. Thanks for bringing honest, evidence based perspective to this topic and to DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #40)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 02:29 PM

48. +1 n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #40)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:20 PM

68. You can't say that unless you are an expert on how the nuclear energy

industry operates and then lies about how they operate. I don't think you know much about it to offer an opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #68)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:37 AM

219. I doubt "Nadin of Arc" is an expert either

 

And yet it didn't stop her from spraying nonsense all over this forum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LordGlenconner (Reply #219)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:54 AM

223. Nadin lives close to the Onofre nuclear plant which fortunately has been

shut down. I live close to the El Diablo nuclear plant which is still operating. Due to proximity, we are both pretty knowledgeable about the dangers and the numerous lies the industry promotes world wide. No, we are not experts in the narrow sense of the word, but betcha both of us know a helluva lot more on how these plants operate and the dangers they present than you do. Fukushima was the reality lit large of all the misgivings we had about the industry prior to the meltdown. They are not telling the whole truth, but it's not hard to deduce from the evidence we do have as to what is going on. Nadin had the courage to write about it. Now go away and learn something about this before you accuse anyone of shit you know nothing about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #223)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 11:59 AM

225. And I live close to an area with many earthquakes

 

Therefore I am an expert on earthquakes.

Self proclaimed, of course.

Just like Nadin.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #223)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:13 PM

228. How on earth did that make sense to you?

Seriously (and please don't pretend that you're being bullied)... the fact that you live close to a reactor somehow adds even one iota of credibility?

Now go away and learn something about this before you accuse anyone of shit you know nothing about.

Wow... the irony of that post is palpable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #228)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:21 PM

230. Excuse me, but...

I'm an activist with a group of scientists and other concerned citizens who do everything we can to learn about the real danger these plants present. We have so much empirical evidence that is being ignored that it's staggering. The industry is very effective in spreading their propaganda and lies. So you can make fun of me if you like but the facts can't be ignored no matter how much the industry tries to put lipstick on that pig.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #230)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:31 PM

234. Sorry... I can't do that.

You haven't provided such evidence at any point in the past when we've communicated here. You just make stuff up and declare that it's true (or repeat others who have done the same). As, for instance, with your ridiculous claim that large earthquakes neccessarily create dangerous tsunamis and that Diablo Canyon is thus at risk for same.

This clearly evidencing ignorance of both tsunmis/earthquakes and the specifics of that plant.

And please... save us all the waste of time and don't repost the ridiculous photo of sand dunes while claiming that they're actually tsunami damage. It's not quite as dishonest at the "Australian Radiation Service" map that that Caldicott continues to use, but it's certainly up there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #234)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:50 PM

239. I don't bother to address people who have their minds already made up and that

would be you. I and others are working on gathering data, which I may or may not post on DU in the future. More important to me and my associates is getting the attention of our elected reps to shut down the plant. We are fighting the powers of PG & E, Duke Energy and other players but you can wallow in your little pool of delusion all you want. The fact that you have drank the El Diablo propaganda KoolAid is disturbing. I know they have scientists on the payroll that claim all is well in the kingdom, but they are omitting facts on the danger of a tsunami. However that is not my main concern but the contamination with radiation of our fisheries and agricultural land.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #239)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:31 PM

256. How ironic

Good thing most others don't have that standard. Wouldn't you get lonely?

I and others are working on gathering data

You're "working on gathering data" are you? This because living next to a fault line also makes you a seismologist?

I've got news for you. You aren't gathering data... you're getting played. There are legitimate reasons for some people to oppose nuclear power, but the Caldicotts/Busbys/Gundersens of the world can't make enough money pitching just to the reasonable opponents. They will manufacture "expert" "reports" saying whatever you like... because that's how they make their living (selling to the irrationally fearful and then using that manufactured "evidence" to scare more innocent people in the hopes that they can convince them to chip in financially.

No doubt the data gaterng is to try to refute the recetly-released report that even a 10,000-year quake that crosses over to multiple faults in the area... doesn't endanger the plant.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/PG-E-Diablo-Canyon-nuclear-plant-can-withstand-6131396.php

However that is not my main concern but the contamination with radiation of our fisheries and agricultural land.

You think that Diablo Canyon has done that? Hmmm... go ahead and try to shut them down (only to watch PG&E replace the generation with natural gas which actually HAS killed people (not long before Fukushima)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #256)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:50 PM

261. I don't have to be a seismologist because there are seismologists already on the

job. Here's what PG & E's own, hired for pay, seismologist has to say about it.



Ancedotally, Cal Tech seismologists, although reluctant to say so in public, have said off the record to a local radio newsperson that El Diablo won't share what they have found with Cal-Tech that runs the foremost seismological lab in the state and perhaps the country. Why all the secrecy if things are so safe?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #261)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:06 PM

264. What an incredibly deceptive hatchet job of a video.

You get to claim that he's talking about whatever you want to claim he's talking about. How much more convenient can you get?

Let's take a look at some larger quotes:

The new information has shown us that the assumptions and models used in the 1970s to develop the current design spectrum overestimated how strong the ground would shake compared to what we know now. The research confirms that the plant is designed to withstand seismic events and that the safety -related equipment and systems can perform their function during and after a major earthquake.


Did you note the bit they didn't cut out that talks about that data being due in a couple months? Here's a more recent video where he talks about how the data reduced the uncertainty... though nothing I can likely say to someone without a science/statistics background about "uncertainty" not meaning what you think it does will make much difference..

Note that the presentation is to a group of independant seismologists acting as peer review. So much for secrecy, eh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #264)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:10 PM

265. Sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #265)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:27 PM

271. Thank you for proving my point

Nadin (and apparently you) too frequently took a "don't confuse me with the facts, I've already made up my mind"... all while acting as though it's you who prefers not to deal with people who are not open to new information and others who can't fight fair while debating.

No rational person could watch that video and conclude that it was a product of reasonable minds who just let the facts say what they say.

For the record... there were several such peer review meetings, yet

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #271)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:29 PM

273. No. Thank you for proving my point that none of you Nuke jocks are interested in

a real discussion. As for the meetings you mention, they are all on YouTube. I just couldn't be bothered to waste my time spoon feeding them to you, but you can go look at your leisure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #273)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:36 PM

276. Sorry... we may never know

You have yet to present a "real discussion".

As for the meetings you mention, they are all on YouTube. I just couldn't be bothered to waste my time spoon feeding them to you, but you can go look at your leisure.

"Sure"

So when you claimed that they weren't sharing any data with other seismologists... you now admit that you were being intentionally deceptive?

I don't see a third possibility.

Hint - There is nobody at A4NR who would respond with "Oh... that's ok then" to any amount of data - no matter how conclusive. Until they cease with the obviously dishonest "wasn't designed for" BS... they are unworthy of your attention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #273)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 06:04 PM

290. "Nuje jocks"

 

Oh that's an all-timer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LordGlenconner (Reply #290)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 07:28 PM

293. Never mind. Mobile device changes the spelling of words, but you know what I mean.

Now why don't you go make fun of the Freepers who really can't spell

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #234)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 03:18 PM

284. you should educate yourself - start here with Nuclear Roulette

http://www.amazon.com/Nuclear-Roulette-Dangerous-Energy-Source/dp/160358434X

I read it and the case against nuclear power is staggering

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #284)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 03:39 PM

286. What an interesting spelling error

You obviously intended to say "entertain" and it came out as "educate".

Spellcheck on a smartphone?

Are you Alex Jones ? I'm not sure that anyone else finds Gar credible (with good reason)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #286)

Thu Mar 26, 2015, 02:50 PM

457. I know, FB, reading is such a chore, especially when it comes with footnotes

from experts, which you clearly are not

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #457)

Thu Mar 26, 2015, 02:59 PM

459. The footnotes are actually the funniest part

I mean... along with the notion that he (and obviously you) consider them to be experts.

Hint... the majority of the footnotes that I've reviewed might as well be enenews links.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #230)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 03:15 PM

283. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #228)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:36 PM

235. I live near a Ford automotive manufacturing facility...

I think that makes me a mechanic.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #223)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:56 PM

242. I live within 30 miles of San Onofre!

Now I know...I'm an expert!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #242)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 12:58 PM

243. Of course not because you don't care to learn about it.

I have bothered to learn about it. That's the difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #243)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:03 PM

246. Oh noes!

Why you got to rain on my parade?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #242)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:07 PM

248. If you're such an authority on San Onofre, perhaps you can refute this:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Brother Buzz (Reply #248)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:21 PM

252. Yes it was all removed and placed into starfish breeding grounds.

That's why they are melting.
Duh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #223)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 09:36 AM

326. I live relatively close to Three Mile Island

and even closer to Salem Nuclear Plant, which is operating.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #326)

Tue Mar 24, 2015, 02:15 PM

345. Then you should be concerned.

It only takes one accident to contaminate a place for 50,000 years. There are no fixes after an event.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #40)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 06:16 PM

105. Sid...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #40)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 07:21 PM

114. Sid said lots of things about Fukushima

 

Which he was totally wrong about.

And some people here think sid a science major? Bwahahaha!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #114)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:18 PM

126. Speaking of being wrong on Fukushima.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #126)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:38 PM

130. Yes, you too, wrong

 

You are just embarrassing yourself now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #130)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:32 AM

204. this coming from somebody who said the ocean is "dead"

 




Shit, duck, they chemtrailing my fucking building again!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #114)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:00 PM

244. Now he's claiming to be an auto mechanic in mocking me.

Unfortunately, he's succeeded in mocking himself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #40)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:43 PM

168. And some people say lots of nothing in a vast majority of their posts. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #40)

Mon Mar 23, 2015, 10:27 AM

201. And if you see post #24 above, crediting her with getting this &