We warned mere days after the Japanese earthquake that the West Coast of North America could be hit with radiation.
Our concerns – unfortunately – have been validated. See this and this.
The peer-reviewed scientific journal Science of the Total Environment reports:
Massive amounts of anthropogenic radionuclides were released from the nuclear reactors located in Fukushima (northeastern Japan) between 12 and 16 March 2011 following the earthquake and tsunami. Ground level air radioactivity was monitored around the globe immediately after the Fukushima accident. This global effort provided a unique opportunity to trace the surface air mass movement at different sites in the Northern Hemisphere.
***
The analysis of the air mass forward movements during 12th -16th March showed that the air mass was displaced eastward from the Fukushima area and bifurcated into a northern and a southern branch outside of Japan (Fig. 3). This eastward bifurcation of air masses is in agreement with the simulation of the potential dispersion of the radioactive cloud after the nuclear accident of Fukushima (Weather OnlineWebsite of United Kingdom, UK, 2012).
***
This work clearly demonstrates how little dissipation occurred during this time due to the nature of the rapid global air circulation system, and the Fukushima radioactive plume contaminated the entire Northern Hemisphere during a relatively short period of time.
Note: The West Coast of North America is also at risk from ocean radiation.
The Department of Homeland Security and National Nuclear Security Administration recently sent low-flying helicopters over the San Francisco Bay Area to test for radiation. But they almost certainly will not make their findings public.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Engineers Charge Government Coverup: Reactor Meltdown “Absolute Certainty” If Dam Fails … 100s of Times More Likely than Tsunami that Hit Fukushima
Numerous American nuclear reactors are built within flood zones:
As one example, on the following map (showing U.S. nuclear power plants built within earthquake zones), the red lines indicate the Mississippi and Missouri rivers:
Reactors in Nebraska and elsewhere were flooded by swollen rivers and almost melted down. See this, this, this and this.
No wonder, nuclear expert Arnie Gundersen said:
Sandbags and nuclear power shouldn’t be put in the same sentence.
And the Huntsville Times wrote in an editorial last year:
A tornado or a ravaging flood could just as easily be like the tsunami that unleashed the final blow [at Fukushima as an earthquake].
The Hill notes today:
An engineer with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) says the agency has withheld documents showing reactor sites downstream of dams are vulnerable to flooding, and an elevated risk to the public’s safety.
Richard Perkins, an NRC reliability and risk engineer, was the lead author on a July 2011 NRC report detailing flood preparedness. He said the NRC blocked information from the public regarding the potential for upstream dam failures to damage nuclear sites.
Perkins, in a letter submitted Friday with the NRC Office of Inspector General, said that the NRC “intentionally mischaracterized relevant and noteworthy safety information as sensitive, security information in an effort to conceal the information from the public.” The Huffington Post first obtained the letter.
He added the NRC “may be motivated to prevent the disclosure of this safety information to the public because it will embarrass the agency.” He claimed redacted documents in a response to a Freedom of Information Act request showed the NRC possessed “relevant, notable, and derogatory safety information for an extended period but failed to properly act on it.”
The report in question was completed four months after … Fukushima.
The report concluded that, “Failure of one or more dams upstream from a nuclear power plant may result in flood levels at a site that render essential safety systems inoperable.”
Eliot Brenner, an NRC spokesman, told The Hill on Monday that the flooding report has been rolled into the agency’s “very robust” body of work on lessons learned post-Fukushima. He declined to comment directly on the letter.
“We cannot discuss the reasons for the redactions,” Brenner said. “The NRC coordinated with the Department of Homeland Security, the Army Corps of Engineers and FERC on the necessary redactions.”
Huffington Post reported:
In a letter submitted Friday afternoon to internal investigators at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a whistleblower engineer within the agency accused regulators of deliberately covering up information relating to the vulnerability of U.S. nuclear power facilities that sit downstream from large dams and reservoirs.
***
These charges were echoed in separate conversations with another risk engineer inside the agency who suggested that the vulnerability at one plant in particular — the three-reactor Oconee Nuclear Station near Seneca, S.C. — put it at risk of a flood and subsequent systems failure, should an upstream dam completely fail, that would be similar to the tsunami that hobbled the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear facility in Japan last year.
***
The engineer is among several nuclear experts who remain particularly concerned about the Oconee plant in South Carolina, which sits on Lake Keowee, 11 miles downstream from the Jocassee Reservoir. Among the redacted findings in the July 2011 report — and what has been known at the NRC for years, the engineer said — is that the Oconee facility, which is operated by Duke Energy, would suffer almost certain core damage if the Jocassee dam were to fail. And the odds of it failing sometime over the next 20 years, the engineer said, are far greater than the odds of a freak tsunami taking out the defenses of a nuclear plant in Japan.
“The probability of Jocassee Dam catastrophically failing is hundreds of times greater than a 51 foot wall of water hitting Fukushima Daiichi,” the engineer said. “And, like the tsunami in Japan, the man?made ‘tsunami’ resulting from the failure of the Jocassee Dam will –- with absolute certainty –- result in the failure of three reactor plants along with their containment structures.
“Although it is not a given that Jocassee Dam will fail in the next 20 years,” the engineer added, “it is a given that if it does fail, the three reactor plants will melt down and release their radionuclides into the environment.”
***
In the letter, a copy of which was obtained by The Huffington Post, Richard H. Perkins, a reliability and risk engineer with the agency’s division of risk analysis, alleged that NRC officials falsely invoked security concerns in redacting large portions of a report detailing the agency’s preliminary investigation into the potential for dangerous and damaging flooding at U.S. nuclear power plants due to upstream dam failure.
Perkins, along with at least one other employee inside NRC, also an engineer, suggested that the real motive for redacting certain information was to prevent the public from learning the full extent of these vulnerabilities, and to obscure just how much the NRC has known about the problem, and for how long.
“What I’ve seen,” Perkins said in a phone call, “is that the NRC is really struggling to come up with logic that allows this information to be withheld.”
Russia Dumped 19 Radioactive Ships Plus 14 Nuclear Reactors Into the Ocean
Government Dumping of Nuclear Waste Still Poses a Threat … Decades Later
Governments – including both Russia and the United States – have been covering up nuclear meltdowns for 50 years and covering up the dangers of radiation for 67 years.
Governments have also covered up dumping of nuclear waste in the ocean. As the International Atomic Energy Agency notes, 13 countries used ocean dumping to “dispose” of radioactive waste between 1946 and 1993.
Since 1993, ocean disposal has been banned by agreement through a number of international treaties, including the London Convention of 1972, the Basel Convention, and MARPOL 73/78.
Wikipedia notes:
According to the United Nations, some companies have been dumping radioactive waste and other hazardous materials into the coastal waters of Somalia [well after the treaties were signed], taking advantage of the fact that the country has had no functioning government from the early 1990s onwards. This has caused health problems for locals in the coastal region and poses a significant danger to Somalia’s fishing industry and local marine life.
Wikipedia also provides a breakdown by region:
[North Atlantic] 78% of dumping at Atlantic Ocean is done by UK (35,088TBq), followed by Switzerland (4,419TBq), USA (2,924TBq) and Belgium (2,120TBq). Sunken USSR nuclear submarines are not included.
***
137 x 103 tones were dumped by 8 European countries. USA did not report tonnage nor volume of 34,282 containers.
***
[Pacific Ocean] USSR 874TBq [i.e. terabecquerels], USA 554 TBq, Japan 15.1TBq, New Zealand 1+TBq and unknown figure by South Korea. 751×103m3 were dumped by Japan and USSR. USA did not report tonnage nor volume of 56,261 containers.
[Sea of Japan] USSR dumped 749TBq in the Sea of Japan, Japan dumped 15.1TBq south of main island. South Korea dumped 45 tones (unknown radio activity value) in the Sea of Japan.
As the Norwegian environmental group Bellona Fondation reported last month, Russia has just admitted that it dumped 19 radioactive ships plus 14 nuclear reactors – some of them containing fissible material – into the ocean:
The catalogue of waste dumped at sea by the Soviets, according to documents seen by Bellona, and which were today released by the Norwegian daily Aftenposten, includes some 17,000 containers of radioactive waste, 19 ships containing radioactive waste, 14 nuclear reactors, including five that still contain spent nuclear fuel; 735 other pieces of radioactively contaminated heavy machinery, and the K-27 nuclear submarine with its two reactors loaded with nuclear fuel.
***
Per Strand of the Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority told Aftenposten that the information on the radioactive waste had come from the Russian authorities gradually.
“No one can guarantee that this outline we have received is complete,” he said.
He added that Russia has set up a special commission to undertake the task of mapping the waste, the paper reported.
A Norwegian-Russian Expert Group will this week start an expedition in areas of the Kara Sea, which the report released by Russia says was used as a radioactive dump until the early 1990s
***
Bellona’s Igor Kurdrik, an expert on Russian naval nuclear waste, said that, “We know that the Russians have an interest in oil exploration in this area. They therefore want to know were the radioactive waste is so they can clean it up before they beging oil recovery operations.”
He cautiously praised the openness of the Russian report given to Norway and that Norway would be taking part in the waste charting expedition.
Bellona thinks that Russia has passed its report to Norway as a veiled cry for help, as the exent of the problem is far too great for Moscow to handle on its own.
***
Kudrik said that one of the most critical pieces of information missing from the report released to the Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority was the presence of the K-27 nuclear submarine, which was scuttled in 50 meters of water with its two reactors filled with spent nuclear fuel in in Stepovogo Bay in the Kara Sea in 1981.
Information that the reactors about the K-27 could reachieve criticality and explode was released at the Bellona-Rosatom seminar in February.
“This danger had previously been unknown, and is very important information. When they search and map these reactors, they must be the first priority,” said Kudrik.
Researchers will now evaluate whether it is possible to raise the submarine, and attempt to determine if it is leaking radioactivity into the sea.
(Here is a slideshow of one of Bellona’s earlier expeditions to research Russian nuclear ocean dumping in the same region.)
Wikipedia provides details of nuclear submarine accidents, including the K-27:
Eight nuclear submarines have sunk as a consequence of either accident or extensive damage: two from the United States Navy, four from the Soviet Navy, and two from the Russian Navy.
***
K-27: The only Project 645 submarine, equipped with a liquid metal cooled reactor, was irreparably damaged by a reactor accident (control rod failure) on May 24, 1968. 9 were killed in the reactor accident. After shutting down the reactor and sealing the compartment, the Soviet Navy scuttled her in shallow water of the Kara Sea on September 6, 1982, contrary to the recommendation of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Nuclear scientists might defend previous ocean dumping by saying “we thought it was safe”. And this may be true.
But a previously-secret 1955 U.S. government report found that the ocean may not adequately “dilute” nuclear materials.
Blah blah blah FAITH blah blah blah FAITH
Shut the fuck up already and let the adults do the thinking for you.
Fucking stupid religious nuts will be the end of us all.
Adults recognize that f**k is a verb, not a modifier. That's why we don't use it as such (or, like me, don't use it at all).
Fuck, if you give a fuck, fucking wikipedia's fuck load of info says fucking otherwise...fuck! The word probably came from the Germans' language, and they just love to keep words short and simple...
You're also disappointing George Carlin, though I'm not sure you or he care.
You should familiarize yourself with this, it will be useful because now we actually nuked the whales, fiat money is the religion of the day, and "who knows who is going to start world war III?"
The "word" as you call it is actually an acronym. But only adults would know that.
I read many of the wealthier Japanese have moved out of Japan to Hainan Island, Australia or hawaii to escape the radiation. The ones on Hainan Island may have an interesting road ahead for them. These right wing politicians (like the fanatic Tokyo mayor) are making it very tough on the average worker there and may make it very dangerous for those japanese living abroad in China.
Japan's aggressive move is the lower road to follow. Continued peaceful negotiation is almost always the better road, espcially when every country (not just Japan and China) are facing substantial internal problems (ex, look at daily riots in MENA, greece, france, and so on).
I think it is precisely due to those internal problems that we are seeing so much belligerence, state-sponsored xenophobia and warmongering.
What matters is not the fact that the earth will be scorched on all sides, but rather that the 0.001% be protected from the consequences of their systemic fraud and abuse at home...
I am beginning to believe that the biggest threat to our survival as a species is radiation. It's insidious and evil when it goes rogue and it kills slowly, damaging DNA for future generations. With all the reactors on the planet, subject to increasingly extreme weather and seizmic events plus human error, it's only a matter of time before we find ourselves awash in an invisibly poisoned atmosphere that will eventually wipe us from the planet. And we will have done it to ourselves. Even the elite are not immune to this type of sickness. It's almost like we don't care about future generations at all anymore. Who would have thought?
Thanks GW for keeping this issue in the forefront.
That’s what he wants you to believe. Well, at least in this article. In another article he’ll have another bogeyman that’s going to kill you and yours sooner than most people think.
GW: “I won’t rest easily until you can’t rest easily”
Number 62 (d) (i)
I think GW is really Jane Fonda.
Number 5 is in da house!
Spare me, GW. I've picked apart you selective sourcing enough times to reveal your 'sky is falling' agenda. I'm just playing interloper today.
Of course, just look at the first paper. It merely states that particles dissipated around the world (no shit, Sherlock!).
But GW says the work "confirms" his alarmist crap (in one of the linked posts he said radioactive particle dissipation polluted the world so much that a person in Seattle was exposed just as she was in Tokyo).
LOL. GW is full of (radioactive) shite.
Moving on to 2, 5 and 7! Well played, sir, well played ...
When you start with "Scientific Paper", it has all the markings of Lucy van Pelt's "Signed Document".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDycV0IWPfI&feature=fvwrel
Rant on, GW. I'm looking forward to your next post about the veritable occupiers.
Edit: You are very easy to knock off topic.
Go back to church, I'm sure the answers are all there.
I never left. I'm always there, because "church" is not a place.
I know Jane Fonda and GW is no Jane Fonda. :)
<GW couldn't fill Jane Fonda's bra. And I hope GW's wife never catches him trying.>
George, speaking of living longer, I'm anxiously waiting for Miku and Hegatsu to arrive:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvKug5TgOLE
The more you order, the cheaper it is ...so you live much longer. And they are made light and flexible for seniors and those with disabilities --- they think of everything!
http://www.orient-doll.com/gallery/index.html#all
Plus, you'll be 'stimulating' japan's depressed economy by buying a couple.
That reminds me ...
Mrs. Cog will be very pleased to hear this. :)
<Honey.....I'm home real early.>
"When things get serious you have to lie" has been changed to "Lie, lie, lie until the radioactive cows come home".
Thanks for the updates and addendums GW.
And those cows be glowing in the dark..
"Dirtbags and nuclear power shouldn't be put in the same sentence." But it's pretty obvious in the nuclear power industry you have the rot starting at the top.
My Physics professor said he was apposed to nuclear power not because of what
he knew about physics, but because of what he knew about human nature.
Maybe this is why Simon Black moved to Chile...
Maybe this is why you should stop taking your family back and forth to Japan.
http://ifyoulovethisplanet.org/?p=6431
http://fukushimavoice-eng.blogspot.com/2012/09/excerpts-from-fukushima-c...
Ah! My tail popped up to follow me through the forest of ZH threads. How do you do? Your concern for my family is quite touching but I assure you they are fine, safely ensconced 300 miles upwind of Fukushima's seaward breeze. I've EVEN taken a geiger counter to our environs and occasional food supply and have only received standard background readings. I would let you know if anything changed, but I'm sure you'll be the first to tell us. I do appreciate that you're taking the effort to branch out from ENENews. I did want to point out that in the prefectural medical report detailing cysts in unusual demographic proportion (an alarming fact to be sure), the observing medical doctors recommended that zero out of 23,000 cases were serious enough to warrant a secondary examination. Now they could be wrong, but if they are, it would be the mother of all malpractice suits.
What you don't seem to understand is the enenews is a news aggregator. Both of those links came via enenews.
You also don't seem to think that those four reactors aren't still speweing? Wishful thinking on your part.
You think radiation stops at municipal and prefecture borders? You will always be upwind and therefore safe? Bad meteorology on your part.
You seem to think that radioactive bio-accumulation doesn't spread throughout the food chain and adds up? Bad math on your part.
Or that another sizeable EQ won't bring what's left of those four reactor buildings still loaded with damaged and spent fuel down to the ground without notice? Bad parenting on your part.
And because it doesn't happen overnight or is seemingly far away or not in "your" part of Japan, there are no problems?
JapGov and Tepco are buring radioactive debris from FUKU all over Japan...to make certain everybody shares the burden.
It can take a decade...or more...or less..for the horrific nature of contamination to become apparent.
Chernobyl Narrated Photo Essay of photos of children take in late 1990s
http://www.thenation.com/blog/167593/legacy-chernobyl
He notes that the deformities and illness made them appear to be...a different race of people...
http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/
http://fukushima-diary.com/
http://simplyinfo.org/
Plenty of news to read...much from English speaking Japanese sources.
Good luck with all that.
The planet needs a million year hiatus from humans to heal itself. It may get it--rather soon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw
"God wants plastic." -- G. Carlin.
I can't reconcile these two greenie beliefs:
1) The planet's ability to sustain life is diminishing
2) The planet's population is expanding too rapidly
Can you help?
The combined impact of increasing population numbers, levels of affluence, and technology lead to ecological impacts that diminish the planet's ability to sustain life. There is no contradiction there; you are just conflating increasing human population with the ability of the Earth to sustain all life.
While you're googling population overshoot, also take a look at the "sixth extinction."
obviously you have never taken a train in India
http://leisure.ezinemark.com/trains-overcrowded-with-passengers-in-india-7736575143ae.html
Google: "Population Overshoot"
It was a theology question, not a mathematical one. Libs have a way of creating paradoxes that only they fail to see.
"It was a theology question, not a mathematical one." Using the same methods as federal reserve banking I see...
So you are saying God will save us?
No, I'm saying the earth-worshipping theology advances a paradoxical belief system. On one hand, we're told that the earth is being depleted by the propagation of humans. Yet, the depletion does not seem to be hampering that propagation (in other words, she seems plenty capable of handling it).
When you pull back the veil of all of the supposed empiricism, the green agenda is nothing more than dogma aimed at redistribution. But the sponsors don't see that and never will. They are too concerned with what others have of which those others need to be dispossessed.
mayhem_korner said "On one hand, we're told that the earth is being depleted by the propagation of humans. Yet, the depletion does not seem to be hampering that propagation (in other words, she seems plenty capable of handling it)"
With all the careless, short term thinking going on it would be very easy to past the point of no return on numerous fronts while still having
resources to exploit for expansion.
"in other words, she seems plenty capable of handling it"
Stop whistling past what may be your own graveyard.
"Yet, the depletion does not seem to be hampering that propagation (in other words, she seems plenty capable of handling it)."
That's not a paradox at all. The reason for that is that we have temporarily converted the (one-time-only) energy of fossil fuels into more food and more humans. Technology briefly cheated Malthus, but Malthus will be proven right in the end. Pollution of all kinds just adds misery and increased risk of birth defects and pestilence to the dilemma of famine. Most of the other species have seen large reductions in their populations, meaning more and more of the Earth's biomass (something like 44% currently) is dedicated directly or indirectly to human survivial. We are now approaching the point where the negative feedback of a variety of limits is starting to kick-in, and the population will adjust accordingly over the coming years. There is virtually a zero chance of the world population doubling from here.
As for portraying this position as Earth worship or some kind of agenda, it comes right out of the book The Limits to Growth, from 1972, and so far things are progressing close to their standard model predictions. The main feedback is food production, which is highly dependent on fossil fuels and abundant groundwater, both of which are being rapidly depleted. While their model is certainly up for debate, it is based on energy and material flows that can be verified in the real world, a big difference compared to pronouncements from the pope, or fantastic claims derived from biblical scripture. So in that sense, they are not dogma as much as predictions of the future based on evidence and the known laws of energy and material transport flows.
In my opinion, due to system inertia, we're already past the point of no return and that nothing coherent will be done about anything other than further enriching the already rich. That's the only agenda that matters to the people running the show.
Give up your energy depleting, earth destroying lifestyle, hypocrite.
Nobody's stopping you.
If you don't think the earth-worshippers have an agenda, I would suggest you study this well researched and articulated site:
http://www.green-agenda.com/
Fossil fuels are not original sources of energy. They are stores of original sources of energy. Thus the form of fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas, coke) is not a constraint to the overall available energy, even if it is a constraint on the amount of readily usable energy. But no one used fossil fuels until the last 200 years or so (how'd they get by before???).
Likewise, the volume of available water on the planet is not depleting. It changes form and the degree to which it needs to be treated for potability, but to say it is being depleted is dependent upon a false construct.
It's truly entertaining seeing the conviction you all display of the talking points. But thanks for confirming that the agend in fact is about allocation among us humans.
"Thus the form of fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas, coke) is not a constraint to the overall available energy, even if it is a constraint on the amount of readily usable energy."
The form makes a difference (solids: power plants, liquids: transportation), but don't let those facts interfere with your belief system. The constraint will be liquids. Oil in particular.
As to depleting groundwater, I was referring to the Ogallala aquifer, which is being rapidly depleted. Once it is gone, the midwest will return to plains, and most living there will likely die.
One question: I'm curious what "redistribution" or "reallocation" you think I've implied in my posts. I don't see it, but obviously it's freaking you out that I care about the environment, and I'm curious to hear how I'm going to redistribute anything away from you.
geekgirl
It is difficult to argue with one thing only---that whatever depletion, destruction, and devastation of the mutual habitat of all species has come from a single, mindless, and self-detruction one: homo sapiens.
The denial of this by the same species touches upon idiocy, but is also the sign of great illness. I don't know what else to call it, but it does seem to me from all that I read a nd have to listen to in bars and restaurants, that us 'white folk' from the good ol' us of a are the most ignorant and arrogant members of said species.
It is just plain tiresome to read this same old shit over and over---even as a young man, a redneck, working class stiff, from the south I noticed the lunacy of 'da white man' and that is why I left that ragged-edged region as soon as I could hitch hike out of there at 16 years of age.
I came to south america to escape these clowns, but I'll be damned if they and their military didn't show up after about ten years of peace and sanity---now, they overrunning the continent like so many lemmings
There, I'm finished----rant over except for fuck all of you that believe one species deserves all of the attention
oldman-signing-off
Ah, there's your problem right there. It's not a theological problem or a mathematical one, it's a matter of the amplification of bad ideas through technology that alter the ecology. It's an epistemological problem. Fukushima is a class A exhibit.
Your comment brought to mind a quote from a Gregory Bateson essay:
"If you put God outside and set him vis-a-vis his creation and if you have the idea that you are created in his image, you will logically and naturally see yourself as outside and against the things around you. And as you arrogate all mind to yourself, you will see the world around you as mindless and therefore not entitled to moral or ethical consideration. The environment will seem to be yours to exploit. Your survival unit will be you and your folks or conspecifics against the environment of other social units, other races and the brutes and vegetables.
If this is your estimate of your relation to nature and you have an advanced technology, your likelihood of survival will be that of a snowball in hell. You will die either of the toxic by-products of your own hate, or, simply, of over-population and overgrazing. The raw materials of the world are finite.
If I am right, the whole of our thinking about what we are and what other people are has got to be restructured. This is not funny, and I do not know how long we have to do it in. If we continue to operate on the premises that were fashionable in the prescybernetic era, and which were especially underlined and strengthened during the Industrial Revolution, which seemed to validate the Darwinian unit of survival, we may have twenty or thirty years before the logical reductio ad absurdum of our old positions destroy us. Nobody knows how long we have, under the present system, before some disaster strikes us, more serious than the destruction of any group of nations."
Bateson saw that most of our problems stem from faulty ideas about our relationship to nature and our place in it. He was a bit ahead of his time, as the above was written in 1970.
If you put God outside and set him vis-a-vis his creation and if you have the idea that you are created in his image
The Bible does not say we were created in God's image. It says that Adam was. Post-fall, all descendents of Adam are created in likeness of Adam (fallen, that is). We have the physical likeness, but not the spiritual likeness & holiness, of the Father. We are separated him by our fallen nature, which is why a redeemer was sent to ransom the fallen.
So the premise of your entire thought is off-base from the start. I suggest that instead of taking out of context what you haven't read or understood, maybe spend some time reading it.
Here's a quote that was ahead of its time: "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" (circa 29)
OK, having a hard time following the dogmatic gibberish, but you can connect this to something real at some point?
Environmentalism is a false religion that is a veil for redistribution of economic resources. The religion is based on sleight-of-hand demonization of wealth accumulation of any kind as an assault on the earth, which in the religion of environmentalists, is the deity. But it is all a ruse of false accusations by those who simply envy others. The construct of the environmentalists arguments are similar to those who label others as "anti-choice" but would never admit themselves to being "for abortion."
So the sawdust/plank quote is simply pointing out the hypocrisy.
And these posts about "the species" are actually directed at other members of the species than the poster him or herself.
You will never see the duality and paradox in what you say because you have been brainwashed into believing things that aren't so.
Where is all this redistribution you speak of?