tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post1863116430678104313..comments2023-11-05T02:15:15.513-08:00Comments on Majia's Blog: Denial of HarmMajia's Bloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04941091700194936591noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-53670323143506016072013-01-21T18:24:44.300-08:002013-01-21T18:24:44.300-08:00James, your thoughts express how I feel as well:
...James, your thoughts express how I feel as well:<br /><br />you say: I feel the problem with being dishonest about the levels is there can be no way to determine how bad things really are. Especially when the governments and their agencies who are tasked with protecting the public are denying the problem's existence. <br /><br />When you ignore a problem, it doesn't go away, it just doesn't get studied or solved.<br />[end]<br /><br />I agree and I feel that the problem is much bigger than Fukushima. The new research studies on epigenetics and proteomics scream our vulnerabilities to environmental toxins.<br /><br />After the BP oil spill I realized that governments and corporations are unresponsive to the massive challenges facing humanity.<br /><br />Our biggest efforts at reform end up being perverted by greed. <br /><br />I'm afraid we are stupid cannibals, destined for extinction.<br /><br /><br /><br />Majia's Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04941091700194936591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-30356855683143812692013-01-21T07:04:25.518-08:002013-01-21T07:04:25.518-08:00I've said it before, but I believe the coverup...I've said it before, but I believe the coverup of the extent of radiation exposure - both in Japan and the US, and to a lesser extent the rest of the world, are crimes against humanity.<br /><br />The Cesium, the strontium, the Iodine, the Xenon are all bad, but the Plutonium might be devastating - or, they all might not be all that bad, or something in between.<br /><br />I feel the problem with being dishonest about the levels is there can be no way to determine how bad things really are. Especially when the governments and their agencies who are tasked with protecting the public are denying the problem's existence. When you ignore a problem, it doesn't go away, it just doesn't get studied or solved. <br /><br />This is my ultimate disappointment with the Fukushima disaster. I guess my ultimate disappointment with mankind and life on earth. <br /><br />I admit to having gone full circle emotionally on the topic. At first when I studied what was happening and studied the blueprints of a reactor in detail, I was astonished at how unsafe they really are. What happened at Fukushima was not a fluke - it will happen again in some similar fashion from time to time if we keep running nuclear fission reactors. Then I got angry. I was angry at those who were actively covering things up. Then I got afraid - afraid for my family - my kids and grandkids, afraid for my extended family and neighbors, afraid for the people of Japan, afraid for mankind. Then I got depressed a bit. Then I got over it all and started enjoying life again. <br /><br />I know some people believed the same way passionately about manmade Global Warming, however I studied the actual data and determined that it simply didn't exist - it was made up by the scientists who made a living from it. So I was angry at those who were covering up the truth, but I wasn't afraid of the underlying problem - because there wasn't one. <br /><br />If I were in a position of authority, I know that I would have told the truth about what had happened - I'm just that way: brutally honest to a fault. Often insensitively honest. <br /><br />What I wonder, though, is whether that would have made things better or worse. I'm feeling it would have made things in the short term much worse, as populations would shift and economic turmoil would occur, and certainly there would be a great deal of blame and lawsuit action going around. The nuclear power industry would likely die a quick death. In the long term, however, mankind would be better off with less risk of ongoing disasters, less dangerous nuclear waste stacking up and we would be forced to move on to a new source of energy that works better. <br /><br />Thanks for writing the book Majia. I'm sure it will be a fair account. I admire your courage for pushing through on it, despite the obvious challenges with getting this kind of information out. <br /><br />JamesAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850795848027608997.post-48898460859642559512013-01-20T17:27:55.139-08:002013-01-20T17:27:55.139-08:00Radiation Spread in the Pacific, a good model
This... Radiation Spread in the Pacific, a good model<br />This model does self admit that they are completely ignoring the effects of bio accumulation, which would make things much worse. Looks like Hawaii is already seeing the ocean impact. <br /><br />The red zone is 1/1000 times less than the original dispersion in Japan. That doesn't sound all that great considering they just caught a fish with 2,500,000 Bq per kG at the Fukushima harbor. Anything above 100 Bq/kG is extremely bad. <br /><br />http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2013/01/radiation-spread-in-pacific-good-model.htmlStockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04516118374677265589noreply@blogger.com