The following is from the thread on Cecil’s piece from April 1 2011
That absurdity is actually a modern meme with some. It’s even presented as a ‘fact’ and the illogical reasoning behind it is presented with all the reassuring confidence of a con man selling you some Enron stock. It’s not unique to here of course. It’s widespread on internets.
A simple search on Google will show this to be true.
http://www.the5questions.com/unavoidable-fact-of-life-2-neither-is-anything-else-safe-that-is/
See? Amazing really.
Like the quoted post, the author has actually used rhetoric to convince you (they hope) that quite literally, there is no such thing as “safe”. The word is made to mean something else, through a verbal slight of hand the very word “safe” no longer means “safe”, it means “safer than something else”, but even that something else is not safe. Nothing is safe.
This is done to reassure you that one of the most dangerous devices known to man is actually really safe", or “not as dangerous as burning some coal”, or “much safer than walking down the street”. And the con artists might not even realize that is what they are doing. They are a true believer, they believe their own con.
It’s a powerful fallacy of course.
Then there is Cecil and
That is just so over the top it could be a “big lie”, which you should know about if you have two brain cellos left to rub together.
No, I am not going to respond in that thread, because I would break some rule or something. I couldn’t release the radioactivated Usenet spench bucket there.
Nor could the trolls respond in kind.
The worst case scenario, regarding Fukushima, would cause death and destruction at a level beyond anything in human history. Because it would involve the wind and rainfall going directly over Tokyo, then swinging around to dump radioactive material all over Japan, then into China and Asia as well, then North America and Europe.
If the damaged reactors and explosions caused all the fuel ponds to fail, dumping them into the melted cores, and eventually all the water exploded and steamed off, so they all burned, the amount of deadly material released onto japan, and then the world, would be of such a magnitude it would kill millions.
Many would die in the initial panic, 30 to 50 million people trying to flee from Japan would be the greatest panic disaster in history. Of course once the cloud covered other reactors, making them so deadly nobody could work there, those reactors would then fail, so that eventually 20 or 30 reactors (or more) would also be melting down, exploding and those fuel rods would then burn.
Just Fukushima alone has over 600 tons of plutonium in the spent fuel rods. But far more deadly are the fast decaying radioisotopes, and the strontium, cesium, cobalt and related products, including the plutonium created transition metals.
Cecil obviously wants to talk about a single reactor and a contained meltdown far from a large population center. Just the start of a meltdown of certain reactors would cause mass panic and so many people would die in just the chaos it would exceed war causalities.
Especially if we are talking a recent war. Haha
RichardSRussell never posted again in that thread. But he is wrong, and so is anyone else who promotes that ridiculous claim that “nothing is safe”, which is just pure bullshit of course. It’s like saying nothing is fun, only that some things are more fun than others, but nothing is really fun.
Shut the fuck up.