[Related: Arkansas Hit with Nuclear Accident AND Major Oil Spill]
Nuclear apologists pretend that people are exposed to more radiation from bananas than from Fukushima.
But the EPA explains:
The human body is born with potassium-40 [the type of radiation found in bananas] in its tissues and it is the most common radionuclide in human tissues and in food. We evolved in the presence of potassium-40 and our bodies have well-developed repair mechanisms to respond to its effects. The concentration of potassium-40 in the human body is constant and not affected by concentrations in the environment.
Wikipedia notes:
The amount of potassium (and therefore of 40K) in the human body is fairly constant because of homeostatsis, so that any excess absorbed from food is quickly compensated by the elimination of an equal amount.
It follows that the additional radiation exposure due to eating a banana lasts only for a few hours after ingestion, namely the time it takes for the normal potassium contents of the body to be restored by the kidneys.
BoingBoing reports:
A lot of things you might not suspect of being radioactive are, including Brazil nuts, and your own body. And this fact is sometimes used to downplay the impact of exposure to radiation via medical treatments or accidental intake.
***
I contacted Geoff Meggitt—a retired health physicist, and former editor of the Journal of Radiological Protection—to find out more.
Meggitt worked for the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority and its later commercial offshoots for 25 years. He says there’s an enormous variation in the risks associated with swallowing the same amount of different radioactive materials—and even some difference between the same dose, of the same material, but in different chemical forms.
It all depends on two factors:
1) The physical characteristics of the radioactivity—i.e, What’s its half-life? Is the radiation emitted alpha, beta or gamma?
2) The way the the radioactivity travels around and is taken up by the body—i.e., How much is absorbed by the blood stream?
What tissues does this specific isotope tend to accumulate in?
The Potassium-40 in bananas is a particularly poor model isotope to use, Meggitt says, because the potassium content of our bodies seems to be under homeostatic control. When you eat a banana, your body’s level of Potassium-40 doesn’t increase. You just get rid of some excess Potassium-40. The net dose of a banana is zero.
And that’s the difference between a useful educational tool and propaganda. (And I say this as somebody who is emphatically not against nuclear energy.) Bananas aren’t really going to give anyone “a more realistic assessment of actual risk”, they’re just going to further distort the picture.
Most “Background Radiation” Didn’t Exist Before Nuclear Weapons Testing and Nuclear Reactors
Nuclear apologists also pretend that we get a higher exposure from background radiation (when we fly, for example) and or x-rays then we get from nuclear accidents.
In fact, there was exactly zero background radioactive cesium or iodine before above-ground nuclear testing and nuclear accidents started.
Wikipedia provides some details on the distribution of cesium-137 due to human activities:
Small amounts of caesium-134 and caesium-137 were released into the environment during nearly all nuclear weapon tests and some nuclear accidents, most notably the Chernobyl disaster.
***
Caesium-137 is unique in that it is totally anthropogenic. Unlike most other radioisotopes, caesium-137 is not produced from its non-radioactive isotope, but from uranium. It did not occur in nature before nuclear weapons testing began. By observing the characteristic gamma rays emitted by this isotope, it is possible to determine whether the contents of a given sealed container were made before or after the advent of atomic bomb explosions. This procedure has been used by researchers to check the authenticity of certain rare wines, most notably the purported “Jefferson bottles”.
As the EPA notes:
Cesium-133 is the only naturally occurring isotope and is non-radioactive; all other isotopes, including cesium-137, are produced by human activity.
Similarly, iodine-131 is not a naturally occurring isotope. As the Encyclopedia Britannica notes:
The only naturally occurring isotope of iodine is stable iodine-127. An exceptionally useful radioactive isotope is iodine-131…
(Fukushima has spewed much more radioactive cesium and iodine than Chernobyl. The amount of radioactive cesium released by Fukushima was some 20-30 times higher than initially admitted. Japanese experts say that Fukushima is currently releasing up to 93 billion becquerels of radioactive cesium into the ocean each day. And the cesium levels hitting the west coast of North America will keep increasing for several years. Fukushima is still spewing radiation into the environment, and the amount of radioactive fuel at Fukushima dwarfs Chernobyl.)
As such, the concept of “background radiation” is largely a misnomer. Most of the radiation we encounter today – especially the most dangerous types – did not even exist in nature before we started tinkering with nuclear weapons and reactors. In a sense, we are all guinea pigs.
Mixing Apples (External) and Oranges (Internal)
Moreover, radioactive particles which end up inside of our lungs or gastrointestinal track, as opposed to radiation which comes to us from outside of our skin are much more dangerous than general exposures to radiation.
The National Research Council’s Committee to Assess the Scientific Information for the Radiation Exposure Screening and Education Program explains:
Radioactivity generates radiation by emitting particles. Radioactive materials outside the the body are called external emitters, and radioactive materials located within the body are called internal emitters.
Internal emitters are much more dangerous than external emitters. Specifically, one is only exposed to radiation as long as he or she is near the external emitter.
For example, when you get an x-ray, an external emitter is turned on for an instant, and then switched back off.
But internal emitters steadily and continuously emit radiation for as long as the particle remains radioactive, or until the person dies – whichever occurs first. As such, they are much more dangerous.
As the head of a Tokyo-area medical clinic – Dr. Junro Fuse, Internist and head of Kosugi Medical Clinic – said:
Risk from internal exposure is 200-600 times greater than risk from external exposure.
See this, this, this and this.
There are few natural high-dose internal emitters. Bananas, brazil nuts and some other foods contain radioactive potassium-40, but in extremely low doses. And – as explained above – our bodies have adapted to handle this type of radiation.
True, some parts of the country are at higher risk of exposure to naturally-occurring radium than others.
But the cesium which was scattered all over the place by above-ground nuclear tests and the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents has a much longer half life, and can easily contaminate food and water supplies. As the New York Times notes:
Over the long term, the big threat to human health is cesium-137, which has a half-life of 30 years.
At that rate of disintegration, John Emsley wrote in “Nature’s Building Blocks” (Oxford, 2001), “it takes over 200 years to reduce it to 1 percent of its former level.”
It is cesium-137 that still contaminates much of the land in Ukraine around the Chernobyl reactor.
***
Cesium-137 mixes easily with water and is chemically similar to potassium. It thus mimics how potassium gets metabolized in the body and can enter through many foods, including milk.
As the EPA notes in a discussion entitled ” What can I do to protect myself and my family from cesium-137?”:
Cesium-137 that is dispersed in the environment, like that from atmospheric testing, is impossible to avoid.
Radioactive iodine can also become a potent internal emitter. As the Times notes:
Iodine-131 has a half-life of eight days and is quite dangerous to human health. If absorbed through contaminated food, especially milk and milk products, it will accumulate in the thyroid and cause cancer.
(In addition to spewing massive amounts of radioactive iodine 131, Fukushima also pumped out huge amounts of radioactive iodine 129 – which has a half-life of 15.7 million years. Fukushima has also dumped up to 900 trillion becquerels of radioactive strontium-90 – which is a powerful internal emitter which mimics calcium and collects in our bones – into the ocean.).
The bottom line is that there is some naturally-occurring background radiation, which can – at times – pose a health hazard (especially in parts of the country with high levels of radioactive radon or radium).
But cesium-137 and radioactive iodine – the two main radioactive substances being spewed by the leaking Japanese nuclear plants – are not naturally-occurring substances, and can become powerful internal emitters which can cause tremendous damage to the health of people who are unfortunate enough to breathe in even a particle of the substances, or ingest them in food or water.
Unlike low-levels of radioactive potassium found in bananas – which our bodies have adapted to over many years – cesium-137 and iodine 131 are brand new, extremely dangerous substances.
And unlike naturally-occurring internal emitters like radon and radium – whose distribution is largely concentrated in certain areas of the country – radioactive cesium and iodine, as well as strontium and other dangerous radionuclides, are being distributed globally through weapons testing and nuclear accidents.
Cumulative and Synergistic Damage
A military briefing written by the U.S. Army for commanders in Iraq states:
Hazards from low level radiation are long-term, not acute effects… Every exposure increases risk of cancer.
(Military briefings for commanders often contain less propaganda than literature aimed at civilians, as the commanders have to know the basic facts to be able to assess risk to their soldiers.)
The briefing states that doses are cumulative: the more times someone is exposed, the greater the potential damage.
In addition, exposure to different radioactive particles may increase the damage. Specifically, the International Commissionon Radiological Protection notes:
It has been shown that in some cases a synergistic effect results when several organs of the body are irradiated simultaneously.
("Synergistic" means that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.)
Because different radionuclides accumulate in different parts of the body - e.g. iodine in the thyroid, cesium in the reproductive organs, and strontium in the bones -the exposure to many types of radiation may be more dangerous than exposure just to one or two types.
As such, adding new radioactive compounds like cesium and iodine into the environment may cause synergistic damage to our health.
The Bottom Line
Even though the nuclear industry and government has been covering up the dangers of radiation ever since nuclear weapons were invented, there is overwhelming scientific evidence that even low levels of radiation can damage our health.
Postscript: Any environmentalist who thinks that nuclear power is necessary to reduce greenhouse gasses has fallen prey to false propaganda from the nuclear industry.
The problem is not covering the debt with new technology. The problem, for the idiots in charge of creating the debt, is who will benefit. The lower the probability they will benefit, the greater control they seek, the more they print; repeat. and the majority haven't a clue.
I do hope for their sake that the gold bugs are right, that they can rest control from JPM, and become the next JPM. If History is any guide...they will ultimately cut each other's throats.
What babies!
Your great grandparents would be ashamed of you!
http://vintage-ads.livejournal.com/2997827.html
I don't understand....
The amount of potassium (and therefore of 40K) in the human body is fairly constant because of homeostatsis, so that any excess absorbed from food is quickly compensated by the elimination of an equal amount.
Cesium-137 mixes easily with water and is chemically similar to potassium. It thus mimics how potassium gets metabolized in the body and can enter through many foods, including milk.
So cesium-137 is eliminated by the body the same way of potassium, thus posing the same risk of a banana, after all...
There are problems with your arguments.
First is the concentration, since the dose makes the poison. I have a problem with anyone who uses Becquerels in that this is an absurdly small amount of radiation, so very large numbers in the millions are still harmless. You use obscure radiation levels without any reference to what is a harmful level. It is difficult to know from your articles how much of anything is harmful. Why don't you use Sieverts or REM?
How much is a minimum dosage? It seems, like most anti nuke alarmists, that a zero dose is. Laboratory evidence proves that this is untrue. Mammals (rodents) lived longest in three times normal background radiation and didn't revert to the same life span as at zero until 8 times normal background. How do you explain that Leadville, Colorado has no higher cancer rates than Los Angeles or a Florida beach town? This is despite a much higher radiation level. That would suggest that humans have some means of protecting themselves from radiation.
The low level radiation, as specified by that army manual, is thousands of times normal background radiation. You speak of increases of Cesium 137 on the US west coast but you don't say how much. A figure in billions of Becquerels spread across millions of square miles gives no indication of a radiation hazard.
Also, a very long half life in isotopes means a very low radiation exposure. Iodine 129 has so little radiation (at a half life of 15.7 million years) that it is little different from stable Iodine 127. Uranium 238 is only a little more radioactive than common lead, because it has a half life in the billions.
This is not to say that we can ignore radiation, just not panic over it.
You said "Most "Background Radiation" didn't exist before Nuclear weapons testing and Nuclear Reactors"
This is untrue. There were three naturally occurring reactors in South Africa.
Many igneous rocks, like Granite, are radioactive from the Uranium and Thorium inside. Part of the reason we should not live full time in caves is the Radon gas being put off by the breakdown of Uranium deep in the earth. Living down wind of a volcano, or a coal fired power plant, has radiation hazards. Even natural gas has a small amount of radon in it. It's just that the amounts of radiation are miniscule.
Before the industrial age, we died of famine, disease, privation and war. As late as a century ago most people died in their early fifties and we live into our eighties and ninties.
There are all kinds natural poisons worse than radioactive isotopes. The Romans experienced heavy metal poisoning from lead pipes. Some historians blame the decline of Rome on it. We need to protect ourselves with better technology, but we need to be practical. There are no techniques which don't have tradeoffs. You come off like a Luddite.
Are there nuclear reactors which do a good job of isolating its fission byproducts? Sure. The expended pellets from a Pebble Bed reactor only need to be isolated by a half inch of lead and twenty feet of earth. There is no way that the material would escape. Buried Arsenic or lead would be a greater environmental hazard. But, even this could be contained.
One of the safest nuclear waste disposal system is in Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors. First, it produces only a hundredth the waste of a conventional Light Water Reactor. Next, the waste products need only be stored for 300 years, not ten thousand. Many useful fission byproducts can be produced from it.
You are coming across as anti-science, George. All you have is supposition and hype. You have no balance. But, you are amusing. I keep on saying, "Aw Come on! You expect people to believe that?"
GW says specifically (correctly) that Cesium 137 and radiactive Iodine did not exist before above ground nuclear testing and accidents.
To pretend that these background radiations pose a very limited health risk is simply disingenuous... check with the folks in Chernobyl, Fukishima et. al. Also check the spikes in the incidence of childhood thyroid cancer in North America attributable to the radioactive iodine in the fallout from Russian nuclear testing in that era.
I'm afraid that your response is complete MSM whitewash bullshit.
"This is untrue. There were three naturally occurring reactors in South Africa."
I was curious about this... so I asked Mr Google.... It seems you are mistaken,,,,
"Oklo is the only known location for this in the world and consists of 16 sites at which self-sustaining nuclear fission reactions took place approximately 1.7 billion years ago, and ran for a few hundred thousand years, averaging 100 kW of power output during that time.[2][3]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=ancient-nuclear-reactor
"The word originally referred to a movement in England about 200 years ago, in which workers opposed new technology (large power looms) because so many of them were being thrown out of work by them, with their families starving while the business owners made huge profits. They weren't against new technology; they were against unemployment, poverty and starvation.
Now it seems "Luddite" has taken on another meaning. It seems to be a sort of universal pejorative to be tossed at anyone who opposes a change that someone else supports, or who prefers an older technology (usually CW and/or tubes) to a newer one. I've even seen it used to mean anyone who opposes change.
But is opposing change and preferring older technology really a bad thing? Is newer always better - or is that just a sales pitch and a way of avoiding a real discussion of the issues?
Should those who do pencil drawing, watercolors, oil painting, etc., be derided as Luddites because they don't use a computer application or a digital camera?
Should those who have fireplaces in their homes be derided as Luddites because they don't use the latest in heating technology?
Should those who oppose changes in things like zoning laws, building codes, etc., be derided as Luddites because they're trying to avoid change in their neighborhoods?
How about AM, SSB, FM, and FSK RTTY on the air? They're all very old modes, being first used from 60 to 100 years ago. Are hams who use such modes to be derided as Luddites?
For that matter, does the use of HF radio make one a Luddite, seeing as how most other radio services abandoned it years ago?
How about folks who stayed with Windows XP when Vista came out - are they Luddites? Or the folks who didn't like New Coke, cars that talk to you, digital speedometers, etc.?
The local public schools in my area still insist on teaching the kids how to do arithmetic without a computer or calculator, how to spell, punctuate and capitalize correctly without a computer, and much more that could be done by computer. Are they raising a new generation of Luddites?
What does one have to do not to be a Luddite in some way?"
Author: N2EY
Member73 de Jim, N2E Too late now. Worst case scenario is playing out before our eyes. HazMat suits are worn for a reason. The population will be Dropping like flies and not a world will be spoken about it. This is made possible by owning major news networks and every voice allowed to be heard on the airwaves. This catastrophic event has been obscured by the the investors who stand to lose fortunes should this industry be closed down. There is not a word you can say that will convince me those men have the strength of character to return to the suburbs before ending their miserable lives. Cashing in on the misery of others is a business that is thriving thanks to people who fail to consider the lives of the people directly impacted this gross negligence directly related to cost containment.
The Freedom to choose change or not is all that really matters, and the truth about it all can't be hidden in this Brave New World for very long whatever that truth may be.
Beware of decievers who steal the names of patriots and call themselves libertarians, but who then push the exact same agenda as the communist left.
Do you have anything to offer other than Name Calling? lol
Name calling is not part of a reasoned debate, it diminishes your argument and is intellectuality dishonest.
He described quite well what I've seen from George for three years. He claims to be non-partisan, even libertarian, but always bashes republicans and the military. He is completely ignorant of libertarian publications and politics, and has been called out on that repeatedly by me and many others. But one of the fundamental problems of blogs is that they have almost no institutional memory. Every day arrives as a new creation with the next load of spoiled Junior High Students.
George is a fraud and a shill for the fat fucks in Washington. He does nothing here except distract attention from real issues and real conspiracies. Ideas have consequences. So does hypocrisy.
Exactly.
The only consistency with George is hypocrisy.
Spotted this yesterday as did The Bad Science Blog...
But cesium-137 and radioactive iodine – the two main radioactive substances being spewed by the leaking Japanese nuclear plants – are not naturally-occurring substances, and can become powerful internal emitters which can cause tremendous damage to the health of people who are unfortunate enough to breathe in even a particle of the substances, or ingest them in food or water.
Unlike low-levels of radioactive potassium found in bananas – which our bodies have adapted to over many years – cesium-137 and iodine 131 are brand new, extremely dangerous substances.
But it seems those who are looking for it might not have any idea what they’re doing. The other night I was passively watching the History Channel’s television show “Modern Marvels” while doing some work. It was then that I saw an error so grotesque that after picking my jaw up off the ground I had to replay the program on the Tivo.
Here’s a the clip which I captured. Yes, yes, they did just identify most likely dirty bomb materials. And yes, yes they did just write it off as a “natural” material found in counter tops and tiles – which is not true at all. All I can say is that I hope this is either an editing trick, an actor portraying a port inspector, intentional disinformation or like that. If this is really a port inspectors then we’re in trouble.
http://depletedcranium.com/do-our-port-inspectors-know-cs-137-from-th-23...
There is science, and then there is 'scientism', the latter being a religious belief in the established orthodoxy of 'scientific concensus' (as if such a thing could really exist). Its important to distinguish between the two – since the Fuku accident, the scientists have pointed out the dangers and flaws inherent in nuclear power, and the scientism believers have spewed whatever half baked pesudo-science they want to make themeslves feel better about supporting a genocidal technology. Not much different from the rift between the Bernanke school of economics and the real one.
I had been racking my brains trying to guess what the wikileaks Project K release was going to be about. Maybe its going to be about radiation!!
http://rt.com/news/conference-wikileaks-april-washington-136/
Nukers lie out of gate
Good stuff here, exposing the lie of
"Baseline" is actually only about 20% of what they say it is.
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/p/baseline-is-just-one-of-lies.html
the ol "sleeping next to someone" is a high dose lie
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-old-sleeping-next-to-so...
Steve: Great stuff. Are you, in fact, a nuke professional?
George, usually you are pretty close to the mark, but in this case you were doing well until you veered at the very end. Couple of points to ponder: unless we decide to go agrarian, or unless we get an awful lot more rainfall so that we can quintuple our global hydro electric production (been to Lake Meade lately..), we must either use nukes or burn more fossil fuel, which has its own down sides (how much of a downside can be debated all day, but there is some effect - even with solar dimming, mini ice age avoidance, increased planetary solar gain etc - greenhouse effect is good science - just the magnitude of its effect and its life cycle impact is sprinkled with junk science). Every major nuke accident (3 mile, Chernobyl, Fukushima, Brits in the 50's, etc) was either graphite pile - pretty much gone now, or light water - good ol American know how....... however; about 10% of nuke power production is done with U238 heavy water units (Canucks, Indians, I think the Brits have some sort of system now as well) and these have actually turned out quite nicely - of course you can't militarize the spent fuel - unless you post enrich it like the Indians did, but you can do that with mined Uranium as well, and these units are about as failsafe as can be (nothing is completely failsafe - not even a nice walk across a flat field on a sunny day). And here is the problem - drain a light water unit and she goes hunting for China (or whatever is on the other side of the planet), but drain a deuterium unit and you've lost your moderator, so the reaction stops. Unless you blow a hole in the primary steam loop (which is a problem with any unit, including Thorium), you are mostly OK. I think the Canucks also use a vacuum building as a last resort - again - a high vacuum, ready to go, is about as fail safe as you can get. Yeah - this stuff is more expensive - but it beats our cheap and dirty systems hands down. Don't know how much better Gen 3 light water is - but it is short track record - so take your chances. And Thorium is another good nuke solution. So George - good dissertaton on radiation types, tolerances and sensitivities, but if you're going to ride the nukes; remember - they are not all alike - and we do need some unless we plan to go back to pre industial days.
we're not going back to "pre-industrial days" if we ditch the nukers. one of the stand out qualities of this economic collapse the the collapse in electricity prices. we "consume" far more than we need...and amazingly in fact use. that means only one thing to me and it ain't "we're going back to pre-industrial living." it means we're going forward into...
Sometimes I get down. I think about Fukushima, and the radiation that's pouring in to the Pacific ocean as I type this. Or the gulf oil blowout and all the corexit they poured in there to cover it up and kill it off. Or the hundreds of watersheds and acquifers that were ruined today by fracking fluids. I think of beautiful Alberta and how most of the province is being turned in to a big slag heap of toxic shit and poisoned watersheds to get at some low grade tar sand.
Then I think of the Permian extinction "The Great Dying." and I cheer up! I think "hey maybe it's not that bad?"
The Permian extinction killed off over 90% of all life on earth, and lasted for 21 million years. We might not actually fuck things up that bad? My eyes light up a bit when I think that by the time humans die off from their own pollution, the earth might recover in a couple million years versus over 20 million?
Some of those isotopes do have a really long half life though, buy hey we might get lucky, and plate tectonics will subduct them in to the earths mantle.
A fresh new planet in a few million years! That's the basis of my optimism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3YDxuIs-qk
Go existential!!! I'm all for it. The static earth crowd is pathetic. We are only here for a blink or two.
Entropy fan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egRgweL12Uc
Fake Science Alert; George Washington is typing again.
George Washington, you're missing a few bits of info that would frame your argument a little better. For example, how much Cs-137 is ACTUALLY reaching the west coast of North America? What it the concentration change over the past 3 years? 30 years? For today's level, you can bypass the gubbermint conspiracy theories by grabbing a sample of seawater yourself and having it analyzed at any accredited lab of your choosing. Grab some fish samples too, get those analyzed. How much dose would this represent to someone who surfed every day, ate that fish every day, etc etc.? You need to show just how high the risk is in order to get the public interested.
In-depth factual rebuttal ... textbook example, sir!
Underground Nuclear Weapons Test ( Declassified Footage HD )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xIzmVj6KUo (6:32)
You're missing the point, George. These are not simply Japanese Rads hitting us from across the sea. They are the new methods of health care radiation treatment for those who want to swim in the curative waters off the West Coast.
Jus thtinnk of how this will be promoted:
"Cures anything from obesity to arthritis ! Swim in the curative waters with the new species of Bald Sea Lions while your body absorbs the curative radiation imported from Japan. 10x times effective then Snake oil!""
This article is total disinformation.
Bullshit.
You want radiation? How about mutant garden?
Place radish seeds next to open cell phone for 15 mintues.
Hit and run ... well done, sir!
Some women glow thinking about bananas? Some are glowing because they are pissed off thinking about all pseudosciece that we have allowed to proliferate because rather than straining a little to understand it enough to challenge it, we have spent 200 years handing it all our money and kissing its ass while we play with the cool toys sciences tosses us.
How do you radiation hysterics explain that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are in better shape than Detroit?
Maybe the US Air Force should nuke Detroit.
This is the best question I have seen lately.
http://www.big-lies.org/NUKE-LIES/www.nukelies.com/forum/
The overwhelming consensus among radiation experts is that repeated exposure to low doses of radiation can cause cancer, genetic mutations, heart disease, stroke and other serious illness (and see this.)
And the top government radiation experts
– like Karl Morgan, John Goffman and Arthur Tamplin – and scientific
luminaries such as Ernest Sternglass and Alice Stewart, concluded that
low level radiation can cause serious health effects.
So who is the anti-scientific one here?
And a major new study
of atomic bomb data by the official joint U.S.-Japanese government
study of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors found that low dose
radiation causes cancer and genetic damage. More.
You were saying?
Repeated and daily exposure to Detroit is far more likely to be deadly in a shorter time than the 2 milli-sieverts or so of background radiation you get in a year.
Call your local radiation detection team today...
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-40LRgEf1LHA/TrqMwiXKKLI/AAAAAAAAAy0/LDskpkk8ce...
There appears to be a parallel between foolish "scientific" opinions being popularized, and foolish political opinions being popularized.
When one reads the writings of the American founding fathers, or in the relatively independent American newspapers for about 50 years after that, one finds considerable insight and wisdom. However, today, the level of political discourse appears to have been dumbed down.
A similar thing has apparently happened, even more rapidly, with respect to the way the dangers of radioactivity are presented. To me, one of the most significant examples of that was the way that Depleted Uranium weapons were considered too dangerous, up until the later 1990s, when, somehow, in some backroom way that I am not aware of, that policy was reversed.
There appears to have been political processes working to make us spiral around to become more ignorant about the dangers of radioactivity. Once upon a time, we knew nothing, and got seriously burned due to our ignorance of the dangers of radioactivity. However, after learning about those dangers, after several decades, somehow those facts have been subjected to bizarre public relations and propaganda transformations, which have done what this article above demonstrates has been done.
This fits into the overall pattern of us living inside a Bizarro Mirror World, almost totally dominated by triumphant runaway frauds. The foremost of those was the privatized ability to make "money" out of nothing, as debts, which has then funded all the rest. With that source of funding, all the rest of the funding of politics, and so too, the funding of "science," has become more and more insanely fraudulent. In the longer term, fraudulent "science" is probably the greatest danger we face!
Both metaphorically, and literally, we seem to have discovered a gate to hell:
http://news.discovery.com/history/archaeology/gate-to-hell-found-in-turk...
A “gate to hell” has emerged from ruins in southwestern Turkey, Italian archaeologists have announced. ... Known as Pluto's Gate -- Plutonium in Latin --
Speaking of the Bizarro Mirror World, where everything is backwards, the single simplest symbol of the general pattern of social facts is that pot is treated by the government like it is as bad as plutonium. Our society is so totally INSANE that hemp, which is the single best plant on the planet for people, for food, fiber, fun and medicine, and which has no fatal overdose, and so, has never killed anybody, is treated by the law as being "marijuana, which is almost as bad as murder."
In Canada, after the courts forced the government of Canada to create a medical marijuana program, that the government otherwise did not want to do, the literal situation that the government created was that their same security standards which were in place to handle plutonium were applied to pot! The "reefer madness" assertions, that cannabis was an addictive narcotic, which drove people criminally insane, before it killed them, WAS and STILL IS the basis for the laws. That the scientific facts were obviously completely the OPPOSITE has never yet made any significant difference to the marijuana laws. In North America, and around almost the whole world, the huge lie that "marijuana is almost as bad as murder" IS the basis for the laws.
Relatively more scientific studies, both in Canada and the USA, like the Le Dain report and the Shafer report, which concluded that the pot prohibition was far more harmful that the pot, were deliberately ignored, while the war against drugs, which is more than 75% against marijuana, continued to get worse and worse ... My point in saying that the government treats pot like it was plutonium, is just to emphasize the degree to which the history of the funding of the political processes (which were always a tiny fraction of 1% of the population totally dominating the funding of politics, while 99% paid for relatively nothing), has resulted in SYSTEMATIC SOCIAL INSANITIES! Things which are relatively harmless and useful are treated as if they are extremely harmful and dangerous, while, more and more, things which are very harmful, and therefore, worse than useless, are being promoted as good things to do. We routinely operate with grossly irrational risk analyses!
The whole world IS CONTROLLED BY LEGALIZED LIES, BACKED BY LEGALIZED VIOLENCE. Since the underlying problems of having a fundamentally fraudulent financial accounting system, as the backbone of the established systems, are NOT being fixed, but are getting worse, everything else is on the same path, since that fraudulent fiat "money" goes everywhere, into every social system, and thus, controls those. Absolutely everywhere one looks, one will see the same runaway social insanities of the triumphantly runaway, fraudulent money system looping around and around, through positive feedback loops in the funding of the political processes, to create laws which are even worse legalized lies, backed by more legalized violence.
OF COURSE, THE WORST OF ALL THOSE, THE SPEAR POINT OF ALL THE OTHER SOCIAL INSANITIES, IS THE WAY THAT ATOMIC ENERGY IS BEING DEVELOPED. Since everything in our Bizarro Mirror World is proportionately backwards, the way that atomic power and radioactivity are being promoted within the established systems is the most extremely backwards, and getting even more distorted and backwards!
In my opinion, we are not remotely close to fixing any of those runaway social insanity problems in the foreseeable future, because we are not remotely close to having a more thoroughly and deeply scientific understanding of human societies themselves. Fraudulent political science is at the heart of all the rest of the fraudulent science, which is rippling out, with worse and worse consequences, everywhere!
This is about the most truthfull i ever read,so somebody out there,has brain,love your input:
Congratulation.Can only give one point up,but you sould have a hundred,or more!
This about the 3rd reply that has not registered. Tyler---que pasa? Milestones
My bad--too quick out of the starting blocks. Milestones
This about the 3rd reply that has not registered. Tyler---que pasa? Milestones
This about the 3rd reply that has not registered. Tyler---que pasa? Milestones
Radical M. I have been reading your comments--they are quite coherent, sensible and on target. Congrats and welcome to ZH. Milestones
Impossible. Everyone knows that stoners are wholly and entirely incoherent. Sheesh, don't ZHers know nuthin? If we all smoke grass our leaders would lead us around by our noses and fill our heads with untruths. Can't have that. Now, about those weapons of mass destruction....
You are right about the level of political discourse today. A quick reading of the Federalist Papers reveals that many of the US founding fathers were actually educated, observant and capaable of intelligent debate. Now we have Faux News and CNN.... Things are not looking up.
That makes them terrorists ...
http://radiationnetwork.com/
Still not a peep from the F radiation.
A number of stations were down before and during the Fukushima disaster:
'Inspector General Faults EPA Radiation Monitoring'"Broken monitors, parts shortages, “relaxed quality controls” and a lack of volunteer operators left 25 of the EPA’s 124 stationary monitors out of service for an average of 130 days at the beginning of the Fukushima disaster, according to the OIG. Two monitors—in Harlingen, Texas and Raleigh, North Carolina—were out of service for more than a year."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2012/04/27/inspector-general-fau...
And now Obama wants the person in charge of this fiasco, Gina McCarthy, to be the head of the EPA.
Must.stop.monitoring.at.all.costs.
We will never, ever get honest numbers from the government.
Here's some very good home-grown information with some real die-hard daily testers:
http://enenews.com/forum-post-radiation-monitoring-data-april-30-2012-pr...
Disinfo site?
I'll take a reading around a storm sewer drain and see what I get. I wonder what those wild foraged black hedgehog mushrooms I ate on Saturday would have shown . . . too late now. Ooops: http://www.healwithfood.org/articles/mushrooms-radioactive-cesium-nuclear.php
If you have a good meter, especially a scintillator, test an older car air filter. That's what all of our lungs look like, never changed since 3/11 and never will be. We will just accumulate more - there is no cleansing of radioisotopes from our lung's soft tissue.