General Discussion

Octafish

(55,745 posts)

79. You side with TEPCO and you write about another DUer's credibility?

Reply to NickB79 (Reply #64)

Tue Oct 15, 2013, 05:44 PM

Oct 2013

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x760038

Very telling, indeed.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

84 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Fukushima radioactive waters to hit US any day now [View all] RobertEarl Oct 2013 OP

Cool, grab the hot dogs mindwalker_i Oct 2013 #1

I noticed you skipped an important part of the 1st sentence: But is likely to be harmless uppityperson Oct 2013 #2

Can't do scaremongering and say "likely to be harmless" at the same time...nt SidDithers Oct 2013 #3

When it comes to Plutonium, there can't be enough 'scaremongering.' Octafish Oct 2013 #32

Damn you BFEE!!...nt SidDithers Oct 2013 #33

Funny how you never find anything wrong with the BFEE, SidDithers. Octafish Oct 2013 #35

One could get the impression RobertEarl Oct 2013 #39

Good for you RobertEarl Oct 2013 #5

So we are supposed to believe your link, except it is asinine? Huh? uppityperson Oct 2013 #7

Yes the WHO is asinine RobertEarl Oct 2013 #8

Not attacking you, just trying to figure out what you mean. Your linked article says "harmless" and uppityperson Oct 2013 #9

The messenger intentionally mangled the message pintobean Oct 2013 #11

Hello. Would you please answer, seeking clarification here. I won't insult or attack, just uppityperson Oct 2013 #18

I answered you RobertEarl Oct 2013 #20

Thank you. Is the Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science WHO? uppityperson Oct 2013 #21

I think you have a point, that can be made by the "tainted Tuna" recall Johnny Ready Oct 2013 #22

Reality is.... RobertEarl Oct 2013 #23

And here's what Woods Hole has to say: muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #31

"close to 1000 different isotopes"? List them muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #29

Thanks for bringing that up RobertEarl Oct 2013 #34

There is no such thing as harmless radiation ..... oldhippie Oct 2013 #15

My old buddy the non-hippie RobertEarl Oct 2013 #17

Hi, Robert, good to see you again! oldhippie Oct 2013 #19

Have you noticed? RobertEarl Oct 2013 #25

That's why I miss you so much over there ...... oldhippie Oct 2013 #26

Well, I don't find you funny RobertEarl Oct 2013 #28

"He is so over-the-top about it that he has been banned from the Environment and Energy group." zappaman Oct 2013 #24

While it is likely to be mostly harmless, the thought of it is disgusting flamingdem Oct 2013 #4

Recent studies of Chernobyl have uncovered science squashing RobertEarl Oct 2013 #6

I am in agreement with you here. uppityperson Oct 2013 #10

So radium coated surf boards will light up a bit more than usual ...K00L L0oniX Oct 2013 #12

Not all ionizing radiation is the same. Alpha and beta particles are easily shielded against. Gravitycollapse Oct 2013 #13

Exactly RobertEarl Oct 2013 #14

I'm sure nobody has studied that yet ....... oldhippie Oct 2013 #16

Haven't seen any studies yet RobertEarl Oct 2013 #27

"over 1,000 elements"? muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #30

Perhaps the poster meant ''Isotopes.'' Octafish Oct 2013 #36

I made a mistake RobertEarl Oct 2013 #37

Did you see this on plutonium? Octafish Oct 2013 #56

I plead ignorance RobertEarl Oct 2013 #58

and 'isotopes' would be wrong too muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #38

True, I don't know much. I do know Fukushima's no laughing matter. Octafish Oct 2013 #41

What is it with you, mv? RobertEarl Oct 2013 #42

You haven't responded to #31 muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #44

You cover up well, mv RobertEarl Oct 2013 #48

The Woods Hole FAQ was last updated Aug 2013 muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #49

Updated in 2013? Links to west coast sampling? RobertEarl Oct 2013 #52

What I've read about the sea stars is local overpopulation leading to fast disease transmission, uppityperson Oct 2013 #53

is that a problem faced by Crown of Thorns? reddread Oct 2013 #73

I mean the ones up inside BC between Vancouver Isle and mainland that are uppityperson Oct 2013 #78

Again, you provide no links for your random claims muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #59

Actually I claim it is already here RobertEarl Oct 2013 #61

Your title: "to hit US any day now" muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #66

We have debris from Japan RobertEarl Oct 2013 #68

If you want some 'science': debris floats, so part of it is above the surface muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #71

Well said ...... oldhippie Oct 2013 #60

Again, oldie? RobertEarl Oct 2013 #62

I'm really sorry, but .... oldhippie Oct 2013 #63

You are no environmentalist, eh? RobertEarl Oct 2013 #65

Eh? oldhippie Oct 2013 #67

IDK about the releases from Fukushima... hootinholler Oct 2013 #40

That is a great app RobertEarl Oct 2013 #45

I'm not really sure about the radioactive water hootinholler Oct 2013 #50

Good questions, hoot RobertEarl Oct 2013 #54

Maybe the starfish deaths along the Northwest coast are related to it? Baitball Blogger Oct 2013 #43

We need real science RobertEarl Oct 2013 #46

You asking for real science is quite ironic. n/t zappaman Oct 2013 #47

Fukushima is here PROTESTS this weekend in SF Bennyboy Oct 2013 #51

Good to see, thanks bennyboy RobertEarl Oct 2013 #55

And it will be harmless. Thanks for the good news. nt. NCTraveler Oct 2013 #57

You mean it hasn't all boiled away yet from the radioactive heat? NickB79 Oct 2013 #64

OMG. You? Again? RobertEarl Oct 2013 #69

So, when one of the leading nuke critics on EE calls you a sockpuppet NickB79 Oct 2013 #70

Crushed!!... SidDithers Oct 2013 #74

Is that a fact? XemaSab Oct 2013 #75

Yes zappaman Oct 2013 #76

Well, maybe for a little while... SidDithers Oct 2013 #77

Look who is here, it's Xema RobertEarl Oct 2013 #80

Thank you for the links! zappaman Oct 2013 #72

You side with TEPCO and you write about another DUer's credibility? Octafish Oct 2013 #79

Was that response meant for me? NickB79 Oct 2013 #83

More bad news from the coast. RobertEarl Oct 2013 #81

I hope that the Canadian government flamingdem Oct 2013 #82

Do you really think this has to do with Fukushima? NickB79 Oct 2013 #84