Well then you have shit for brains, or haven’t been reading, in either case your post is just trolling. Seriously, if it doesn’t add anything, not even a rant, to the collective database, why even post?
[QUOTE=Una Persson]
Isn’t he the one who claimed there were all sorts of workers dead from radiation in Japan? Or was that someone else?
[/QUOTE]
No, it was FXM all right. I’m not going to bother searching back through the thread (and it might have been in one of the other threads on this subject), but IIRC he was all full of dark hints about some mysterious deaths of some of the workers that was being covered up…or something. It was but one of myriad entertaining vectors of discussion with FXM on this subject.
[QUOTE=FXMastermind]
I’m immune to trolling. Did you forget that already?
[/QUOTE]
So, you are seriously accusing Una of trolling…you? YOU?? 
Gods, that is hilarious! But for gonzo I’d say you were 5 of the stupidest people it’s been my misfortune to meet, even virtually. Sadly, there is gonzomax, and Le Jac was no towering intellect either. I’d really have to flip a coin between you and Le Jac, but gonzo will always have you beat by a country mile…so, even that dubious honor will always elude you.
-XT
Zerial provided an example and substantiation, which you neglected to quote.
La-la-la-la I can’t hear you!
ETA: gonzo is smarter that FX: his arguments are better substantiated.
What the devil are you on about now? “I don’t know what exactly he’s referring to..” means “I’m not a motherfucking mind reader, but he might mean…” Doing your legwork for you is something I’ve done in a couple of threads now.
So I post cites which back you up, and I’m trolling you? Um yeah, contact a Moderator or something if you think you want to play that hand. :rolleyes:
From the vice president of the Fukushima Medical University, now in charge of the organization to conduct research on effects of radiation on the populations of Fukushima.
He told the people of Fukushima these facts.
-
Radiation doesn’t affect people who are smiling, but those who are worried.
-
Drinking may be bad for your health, but happy drinkers are less affected by radiation.
-
Laughter will remove your radiation-phobia.
-
100mSv/y is absolutely safe for pregnant women.
-
Adults over 20 years old have very little sensitivity to radiation. Almost zero.
-
Internal exposure has 10 times less health risk than external exposure.
What? You don’t believe? Here is transcript of Dr Yamashita, translated from Japanese, speaking to the residents of Fukushima city.
Before anyone asks why Linky Mac Linkophobe AGAIN refused categorically to post a link, I managed to find the source: Dr. Shunichi Yamashita, Radiation Advisor to Fukushima: "Fukusima Will Be World-Famous! It's Just Great!" | EXSKF
The only thing I’ll say is that translations are a touchy subject at best. I’d be interested in seeing if any Japanese-speaking Dopers have a better translation. I know I’ve had my works translated into Chinese, and had the result be nearly 180 degrees from what I intended to say. However, I’ve seen other informal translations of this which indicate that the translation on Democracy Now is pretty much accurate.
And if true, it’s pretty indefensible.
(transcript of video interview)
Yamashita would fit right in here on the threads about how harmless nuclear power is. All he would have to do is learn to talk mostly about the dangers of coal.
Nah, you are just a liar. Time showed that there wasn’t, isn’t a single serious thread about the worst nuclear disaster in history, which is still going on. The same thing has happened at all ‘pro nuke’ dominated boards. They simply pretend like it isn’t happening, even to the point of everybody patting each other on the back about it.
Pathetic.
So are you, but you are still posting in this thread.
Goddamn you are fucking stupid (or more likely a troll). You dig up a post of mine from OVER 3 MONTHS ago (now thats pathetic). Yeah, I am pretty damn sure 3 months ago Japan’s nuclear recent unpleasantness was being discussed in more than a thread or two here on the SDMB as well as elsewhere on the net.
But, I imagine YOUR peasized brain doesnt consider them serious threads if all other posters don’t agree with your shit for brains versions of “logic”, “science”, “facts”, and “cites”
PS. I watch my back if I were you. The powers that be around here seem to be cranking up the banhammer on trolls, one trick ponies, and general troublemakers. They even suspended the local golden boy.
Worst? This one’s at best 2nd, and (IAEA ratings nonwithstanding) is arguably 4th. Chernobyl was orders of magnitude worse, and Kyshtym and Windscale were both up there.
NHK news, of Japan just run a one hour special news program on Link TV about Fukushima. Part of the problem was " the nuclear safety myth", that the people ,government and TEPCO all bought. It made them casual about the potential dangers. They all are quite chastised now .So far 88,000 residents have been evacuated.
At some points, TEPCO and the regulators were reluctant to pull the trigger on some methods to save the plant. Venting was urged pretty early when pressure was building up. But no company had ever had to use such a drastic measure. It was releasing a lot of radioactive material into the atmosphere. They did not want to do it. Then the valves were electric so workers had to go in the reactor building and physically turn them. The building was very radioactive.
The fuel rods were melting down the first day, but TEPCO only admitted that much later.
At one point TEPCO asked permission to abandon the plant. The government sent in rescue workers with special trucks to get the water started. When the workers were close to the plant a reactor exploded. The workers had to be stripped and their bodies washed, 8 times to try and clean them.
There is a reason Chernobyl and Fukushima were both rated a 7 on the nuke danger ratings.
They can begin to remove the fuel rods in 10 years… maybe. No problems.
“For a successful technology,
reality must take precedence over public relations,
for nature cannot be fooled”
– Richard Feynman
Well, I agree with you there. It’s just that I consider your sort of selective hysteria to be part of the problem.
You want to tighten up nuclear regulation and even close a few plants? Hey, I’m sympathetic. But what I’m seeing here is sloganeering. Nuclear safety is a serious scientific concern, but so is global warming. At least the former is regulated: in most of the world including the US there is no penalty for emitting greenhouse gases (though some regs are finally coming into force in a few states). I happen to be skeptical of nuclear power, largely out of cost concerns. But to the extent that renewables are introduced, they should typically displace old coal plants, if we are to avoid some rather nasty climactic risks.
I fully support using solar, wind, and hydro to replace nasty coal plants. I’m also more interested in making nuclear safe, and getting rid of the very dangerous situation with spent fuel storage. If nuclear reactors were safe and cheap I would replace every last coal plant with one. The objections to nuclear power are based on science, and economics, both rational and scientific people have been against nuclear for a long time, as well as trying to get the people in charge to do something about the risks.
That all seems perfectly reasonable.
That being said, except for the spent fuel problem, the too hot rivers, and the social unrest, the French have done a great job of using nuclear reactors for power.
Well, here’s part of the rub. The safety of nukes presumably varies by plant. But existing nuclear power plants are fairly cheap (waste concerns notwithstanding). It’s the costs of construction and the interest on those loans which are expensive. Wall street isn’t especially sympathetic to nuclear power: there won’t be a large building program in the US absent substantially higher federal subsidies or a carbon tax north of $100/ton. I predict there will be a small building program though.
Interesting piece on reactors.