-
Comment -
what kind of asshole gets his news from the daily mailComment -
Los Angeles Times
Bill Patzert, a climatologist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in La Cañada Flintridge, contrasted the problems at Fukushima with the Chernobyl disaster in 1986 in the Ukraine, where a massive blast drove radioactive debris into the air and around the globe.
"If we had multiple Chernobyl-type failures and it did go five to eight miles into the atmosphere and get into the jet stream, it could definitely impact the West Coast of the United States and Canada,"Comment -
we're doomed! nice to know you are spending your last minutes on Earth posting at sbr.Originally Posted by Emily_Haines
Here's another guy that can't get down on his knees fast enough to worship anything the government says.
Jesus Christ 600,000 radioactive rods blown sky high! Fukushima 3 containment vessel has a huge crack leaking plutonium directly into the atmosphere. The other three plants have blown up and are melting down. Low levels off radioactivity has already reached the Pacific coast and the bad stuff is not even here yet. Not even mention the land area within 100 miles of the plant has been destroyed forever. Cancers will increase 100 fold all over the planet. And you think its all an over reaction.Comment -
the more i hear about gook land (really hard to avoid it as i thought i was reading a sports forum) the more i want to go over there and finish the job.
do not get me wrong, this whole thing has made me smile but sick of hearing about it. karma sure is a bitch aint it japan?Comment -
Any person with the slightest amount of common sense would realize when they see a Nuclear plant explode and a mushroom cloud develop, Nuclear Plants completely leveled to the ground, white smoke pouring out of the burning reactor that there probably are going to be some health risks. Hell even our own Navy turned around and high tailed the fuk out of there. You want to believe this is just a minor issue be my guest. Gotta feeling we wont be seeing you around much longer.Comment -
are they all out yet?Comment -
1) It is not physically possible for a nuclear reactor to produce a "mushroom cloud". This is not a matter for common sense. Just science. The only danger, and I don't want to down play it is that the nuclear fuel (primarily Uranium and Caesium) melts reaching such a high temperature that it breaches the containment vessel.
2) You stated that "cancer would increase 100 fold all over the planet". This is complete and utter nonsense.
It is a major issue for the area surrounding Fukushima, that is for sure. It is absolutely NOT a global issue however. If you are outside an area of 30-40 miles you will receive more radaition from sunlight in a day than you could from that power station.Comment -
hahaa...so besides the fact that there has never and never will be any proof that such a thing as a "god" exist, its things such as earthquakes and tsunamis that make you leery?
but i see your point and know where you are coming from...not trying to argue...i just think of that complete idiot on youtube from last week that was ranting about "this is gods way of letting us know he is here" it cracked me the fukk up how crazy the kid got.
carry on friendly pawn believer...i, for one, will never let a thought such as "why does god let bad things happen to good people" enter my mind...Comment -
someplace, somewhere, an unknowing country, is going to get a lot of idiot drivers.Comment -
Chernobyl has killed 1,000,000 and the halocaust in Japan is far worse
NEW YORK, New York, – Nearly one million people around the world died from exposure to radiation released by the 1986 nuclear disaster at the Chernobyl reactor, finds a new book from the New York Academy of Sciences published today on the 24th anniversary of the meltdown at the Soviet facility.
The book, “Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment,” was compiled by authors Alexey Yablokov of the Center for Russian Environmental Policy in Moscow, and Vassily Nesterenko and Alexey Nesterenko of the Institute of Radiation Safety, in Minsk, Belarus.
The authors examined more than 5,000 published articles and studies, most written in Slavic languages and never before available in English.
The authors said, “For the past 23 years, it has been clear that there is a danger greater than nuclear weapons concealed within nuclear power. Emissions from this one reactor exceeded a hundred-fold the radioactive contamination of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”
“No citizen of any country can be assured that he or she can be protected from radioactive contamination. One nuclear reactor can pollute half the globe,” they said. “Chernobyl fallout covers the entire Northern Hemisphere.”
The Chernobyl nuclear reactor was destroyed by an explosion and fire April 26, 1986. (Photo issued by Soviet authorities)
Their findings are in contrast to estimates by the World Health Organization and the International Atomic Energy Agency that initially said only 31 people had died among the “liquidators,” those approximately 830,000 people who were in charge of extinguishing the fire at the Chernobyl reactor and deactivation and cleanup of the site.
The book finds that by 2005, between 112,000 and 125,000 liquidators had died.
“On this 24th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, we now realize that the consequences were far worse than many researchers had believed,” says Janette Sherman, MD, the physician and toxicologist who edited the book.
Drawing upon extensive data, the authors estimate the number of deaths worldwide due to Chernobyl fallout from 1986 through 2004 was 985,000, a number that has since increased.Comment -
I will take the World Health Organisation as being slightly more authoritive than some random article on theendisnigh.com or wherever you dig up this stuff.
Quite aside from that more than 9 million people a year die of cancer worldwide. The 40,000 or so per year suggested in your fantasy article would still 'only' be a less than 0.5% increase which is quite a long way from 100-fold.
There are so many differences between Chernobyl and Fukushima that I am not going to waste my time listing them all.Last edited by FourLengthsClear; 03-17-11, 06:48 PM.Comment -
The WHO... lol...I hope you got your flu shots and h1n1 vaccination.I will take the World Health Organisation as being slightly more authoritive than some random article on theendisnigh.com or wherever you dig up this stuff.
Quite aside from that more than 9 million people a year die of cancer worldwide. The 40,000 or so per year suggested in your fantasy article would still 'only' be a less than 0.5% increase which is quite a long way from 100-fold.
There are so many differences between Chernobyl and Fukushima that I am not going to waste my time listing them all.
Comment
