Radiation Watch, USA.

Tora said:

JayM, I'm afraid it is true. A lot of leakings are going on but covered up. But that's ok, it's all in the plan...to reduce population. Top officials have access to the underground cities. You & I are not needed. and you know what? When there is a crisis, FEMA will step in and you will not be able to escape from wherever you are living. They will restrict your movement. That's why there are so many plastic coffins dotted around the US.

Fukushima earthquake was artificially generated says former U.S. government official
http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/news/intrnational/2011/08/19/639.html I cannot say this is 100% but the fact is backed up by the lack of P wave. True earthquakes are supposed to come in 2 waves. Just FYI.

Click to expand...

I thought I would check out what is available online regarding FEMA - I specifically searched for documentaries on FEMA and found this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Klqv9t1zVww and wondered if you have viewed it already? The introductory five minutes consists of a video evidence sequence, followed by a close examination of various new laws, along with a comparison of each new law compared to the original law and intentions of the Founding Fathers in the Bill of Rights. At 15 minutes the Fema camps subject commences. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Klqv9t1zVww It is lengthy so best watched over a few days

Thankx JUPITERASC. I've not watche that one.
Did you mean 5 mins summary this --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xd9NX8dPE1I

Also, recent interview with Rockabella in Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW4p9N2Ocs8

The journalist who interviews him speak perfect Japanese and lives in Japan. He exposes that maffia IS involved which we knew anyway. Maffia has their hands in everything over there. It looks like, tsunami in Sumatra, Haiti & Japan were all caused by hahaharp. The story behind it is about money. Surprise, Surprise. 2 days before 311, Japan was given a choice to pay protection money or suffer the consequence. The rest is a repeated history.

Just been paying attention to this myself

Look the fact is, there are going to be a lot more birth defects and cancer

Anyone arguing the safety of nuclear power plants is crazy.

No matter how small the number of leaks or accidents are, each accident damages the entire environment and ecosystem of an area for thousands of years if not the globe.

Even if we were to make everything 100% maximum safety, to err is human.

Even if we were to make everything safe, earthquakes happen all over the world, not just in fault areas (remember we had a quake in NYC recently), and for anyone to argue the safety of a plant or waste area by how far away they are from the volcano or fault line is arguing with a false correlation. We can't predict quakes yet, and they are certainly not stoppable either.

So its not a matter of if, its a matter of when, and we as the human race need to measure the risk vs. the reward.

I don't care how much nuclear power saves us from global warming, because NOTHING NOTHING is more damaging to life than radiation. Temperature changes are NOTHING compared to poison that has no cure.

And I'm not talking about the stuff you measure with a geiger counter.

I'm talking about the radiation that builds up in the body, even 1 part per TRILLION of radioactive cesium can kill a human. Geiger counter won't measure that. And radiation DOESN'T EVER leave the body, or the soil or the water. And 1 part per trillion is enough to give you leukemia in 5 years. I'm not making this up.

It gets in the soil, than the animals eat it, and then other animals eat those animals etc... the higher up the food chain, the more concentrated the poision.

Anyone who is smart in Japan, is not going to be buying any meat or fish from 1000 miles of the disaster for the next 500 years.

I'm not talking out my a** here.

That is why we can't eat certain types of fish, because the mercury which is in the plankton is concentrated in the fish that eat the fish that eat the plankton. Same goes for radioactive elements, except the effects are MUCH WORSE.

This is a no win situation.

I know people like to argue rather than admit they are wrong, but we are talking about something that poisons all of life for thousands of years with NO REMEDY.

At least climate change theorists have ideas of how to solve it. Radiation has no cure. No little mirco-nanomachines to clean the air etc. . .

We are talking about something that poisons women's bodies so their children have a higher chance of being born without arms, legs, eyes or a brain. Hiroshima and Nagasaki STILL have higher cases of these birth defects. Effectively their local population has been sterilized by radiation. There are those that died in the blast, those that died of radiation poisoning, those that died and are still dying of cancer from the radiation poisoning and those that died or were never alive, from the birth defects. . . equaling to at least a million lives at this point. At least.

We are talking about meltdowns and spills that are inevitable as human error with radiation that leaks out one thousand times an atomic bomb. Do you want to worry weather you should risk having a child? Especially if they ever make abortion hard to get. .. .

Women in Falluja Iraq are basically being told by their local city council not to give birth, because of all the uranium radiation from the spent artillery shells has poisoned them.

I have a friend who is from Lebanon that told me no one can eat dates, olives, raisins and many other concentrated foods from Turkey due to the radiation that covered during the Chernobyl disaster over a half century ago. The prevailing winds sent the majority of radiation there. Turkey is still very very angry about this and it still affects their politics with Europe, since europe isn't buying their food either. This radiation has affected their food for the next thousand years. Dates were a very successful product for them, and now they aren't safe to eat.

So yeah, lets be real here people.

So, yeah, I'm not talking **** or doomsday, these are facts. There is nothing to fear, only to be understood.

I couldn't have agreed more but the fact is there are so many scientists for example proclaims that eating plutonium is fine.

I don't care how much nuclear power saves us from global warming, because NOTHING NOTHING is more damaging to life than radiation.

Click to expand...

The global warming is a LIE. It does not exist. For those of you who were conned, like me and many others who still believes, you should do some research.

I have a friend who is from Lebanon that told me no one can eat dates, olives, raisins and many other concentrated foods from Turkey due to the radiation that covered during the Chernobyl disaster over a half century ago.

Click to expand...

This is very true.

Useful information on detoxing yourself from radiation exposure...

http://proliberty.com/observer/20050826.htm

I've started checking where food I buy comes from. Rice, noodles, sea salt (now buying pink himalayan rock salt). I don't eat fish anyway but if I did, I'd be worried. I won't be buying any more kelp actually as I won't know which sea it came from.

Apart from that...what can you do? I feel for you guys on the west coast of USA. But I also know the winds and the tides will carry this everywhere on the planet, and maybe already has.

Some people have said that radiation, being high frequency energy, will help us to evolve spiritually. It's the only hopeful thought there is about it. Here's the story... I know this approach isn't going to help many people.

http://www.barefootjourneys.net/index.php/weblog/comments/japan-radiation-spiritual-emergence/
.

I think we're using the word "radiation" a bit loosely here. The number one source of radiation exposure on the surface of the Earth is (by far) the Sun. The radiation that makes it through the Earth's atmosphere is what life needs and expects to see (pun intended). Radiation that life does not expect to see (free neutrons, alpha particles, etc.) is the dangerous stuff. Most of the radiation's energy will be dissipated through the first few absorptions. The problems occur when you have so much radiation in a given area that the residue starts to get concentrated by life forms into dangerous amounts. As long as the radiation is a thin blanket over the land, humans shouldn't be particularly effected. Our food, however, does get effected.

The plants that get poisoned are doing exactly what they should do: functioning as a natural atmosphere-scrubber. They collect the free radiation and store it in their own bodies so that the radioactive particles end up deposited in the ground instead of bebopping about. This is a very good thing for coming generations of humans, but not so good for people that need to find something to eat now. (Humans are nature's filters too).

Also, I don't think the radiation is going to help anyone evolve spiritually. I know a guy who spent a few years as a nuke in the U.S. Navy, being exposed to a number of kinds of radiation on a daily basis. Some radiations don't even require sunblock. Others require protective suits. This particular guy didn't seem to evolve much from a spiritual perspective (said that he couldn't think of even a single reason good enough to sacrifice his own life).

Tora: If global warming is a lie, where are all the ice sheets going? Perhaps you mean to say that global warming has some cause other than what we've been told?

update on japan
http://enenews.com/govt-radioactive...t-contaminated-area-in-fukushima-test-results

The global warming is a LIE. It does not exist. For those of you who were conned, like me and many others who still believes, you should do some research.

Click to expand...

Would you be willing to share some of your credible sources/evidence that climate change is not happening?

Refute any of the masses and masses of evidence to the contrary plz?

1. Glaciers are melting all over the world. This is not fabricated. There is photographic evidence and scientific data spanning the entire globe from Greenland to Patagonia from amateurs and professionals in the field dating back over 100 years. What is making them melt then cooler temperatures? (WHUT?)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_glaciers_since_1850)

2. Global data depicting average sea temperatures increasing? Is this data fabricated?
(http://i32.tinypic.com/2jaiydh.png)

3. Global data depicting average land temperatures increasing? Is this fabricated as well?
Just look on google, there are so many tables. . . are they all fake? Fabricated by thousands of alien-possessed climatologists and researching undergraduates?

3. Desertification rampant in landlocked areas. Including the Gobi desert and Sahara with data spanning over a hundred years!
Again, just google that.

4. Sea levels rising, many mangrove forests are being flooded across the globe.
Again, on the googles.

5. Many farmers in fragile climate areas are not able to plant. Cash crops from the Americas like bananas and coffee are in critical condition due to their equatorial position.
Recent news I read today:
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/aug/27/coffee-threatened-beetles-warming)

OK so, you making a statement "do the research" on such a thing would be like me saying

the government is run by aliens you do the research!

The burden of proof is on you, if you are going to propose a theory that is so beyond the scientific consensus for the past 100 years. It would be like saying evolution is false.

I will say one more thing however, the effect of human beings on the earth in terms of the warming that our planet is may only be a smaller part of a warming period the earth is undergoing at this point from a natural eons long cycle. CO2 is aggravating it however.

Additionally, remember that Icelandic volcano that kept the EU airports closed for months last year? That's why some areas in the north experienced more snow and a cooler summer this year. Months-long volcanic eruptions of that magnitude act like nuclear bombs, they are global coolers. Krakatoa eruption (the worlds biggest in recent history) was responsible for two whole years of a mini-ice age in the 1800s causing famine and death in europe.

Ok, sorry, end of off topic rant, but seriously, prove to me different otherwise I'm not going to troll the internet cause I'm pretty sure all I'm going to find are conspiracies and right-wing anti-environmental websites. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE I would love there to be CREDIBLE doubt. And no, I don't count one scientist as credible. . . I know there was one but he was actually debunked not that long ago.

Thank you JupiterASC for your well-put response. I believe as well, that global warming may not be all man-made, however, there is a correlation between atmospheric CO2 and global temperature (discovered through measuring material found in glacial cores thousands of years old) But of course correlation does not equal causation.

But global warming IS happening.

Rushwing said:

Would you be willing to share some of your credible sources/evidence that climate change is not happening? Refute any of the masses and masses of evidence to the contrary plz? 1. Glaciers are melting all over the world. This is not fabricated. There is photographic evidence and scientific data spanning the entire globe from Greenland to Patagonia from amateurs and professionals in the field dating back over 100 years. What is making them melt then cooler temperatures? (WHUT?)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_glaciers_since_1850) 2. Global data depicting average sea temperatures increasing? Is this data fabricated?
(http://i32.tinypic.com/2jaiydh.png) 3. Global data depicting average land temperatures increasing? Is this fabricated as well?
Just look on google, there are so many tables. . . are they all fake? Fabricated by thousands of alien-possessed climatologists and researching undergraduates? 3. Desertification rampant in landlocked areas. Including the Gobi desert and Sahara with data spanning over a hundred years!
Again, just google that. 4. Sea levels rising, many mangrove forests are being flooded across the globe. Again, on the googles. 5. Many farmers in fragile climate areas are not able to plant. Cash crops from the Americas like bananas and coffee are in critical condition due to their equatorial position. Recent news I read today:
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/aug/27/coffee-threatened-beetles-warming) OK so, you making a statement "do the research" on such a thing would be like me saying the government is run by aliens you do the research! The burden of proof is on you, if you are going to propose a theory that is so beyond the scientific consensus for the past 100 years. It would be like saying evolution is false. I will say one more thing however, the effect of human beings on the earth in terms of the warming that our planet is may only be a smaller part of a warming period the earth is undergoing at this point from a natural eons long cycle. CO2 is aggravating it however. Additionally, remember that Icelandic volcano that kept the EU airports closed for months last year? That's why some areas in the north experienced more snow and a cooler summer this year. Months-long volcanic eruptions of that magnitude act like nuclear bombs, they are global coolers. Krakatoa eruption (the worlds biggest in recent history) was responsible for two whole years of a mini-ice age in the 1800s causing famine and death in europe. Ok, sorry, end of off topic rant, but seriously, prove to me different otherwise I'm not going to troll the internet cause I'm pretty sure all I'm going to find are conspiracies and right-wing anti-environmental websites. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE I would love there to be CREDIBLE doubt. And no, I don't count one scientist as credible. . . I know there was one but he was actually debunked not that long ago.

Click to expand...

In 2002, a team from the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, studied temperature change after all flights were grounded in the wake (triple-meaning pun!) of 9/11. They found that "the difference in daily high and nightly low temperatures in the absence of planes' contrails was more than 1c greater. Because in regions with crowded skies, the clouds formed by the planes' water vapour worked like cirrus clouds to prevent days from getting too hot and trapping the Earth's heat at night."

Air traffic across Europe was grounded for 48 hours in the wake of a volcanic eruption in Iceland. Meteorologists expect a similar effect. Although some caution that the ash the eruption has spewed into the atmosphere could counter the change.


source: http://gawker.com/5519615/grounded-flights-could-lead-to-immediate-rise-in-temperatures

Very cool. Wow. . . However small the eruption was compared to Mt. Pinatubo in 1991, although the article I've linked above argues the "eruption too small to have significant climate effect"

It still had an effect I believe, even if it wasn't "significant" I don't even know what that means sometimes. : D

The winter in europe was unusually cold last year. As well as in the pacific northwest (my hometown).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_2010%E2%80%932011_in_Europe

Rushwing said:

Very cool. Wow. . . However small the eruption was compared to Mt. Pinatubo in 1991, although the article I've linked above argues the "eruption too small to have significant climate effect"

It still had an effect I believe, even if it wasn't "significant" I don't even know what that means sometimes. : D

The winter in europe was unusually cold last year. As well as in the pacific northwest (my hometown).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_2010–2011_in_Europe

Click to expand...

There are so many variables Rushwing... just suppose that airplane traffic is actually keeping our planet cooler than it would otherwise be? The implications are interesting...

Yeah super cool. : D

(no pun intended)

there was a similar spike in co2 14,000 years ago when it is beleived there where no industrial societies.so this type of climate dynamic\can take place without the technical component.

rahu

That's correct rahu, I was not saying there were industrial societies then, I was talking about there being a correlation between atmospheric CO2 and temperature recorded in glacial cores and rock samples for all of earth's history. So CO2 does relate to temperature change. Exactly how is debatable.

C02 increases in the worlds atmosphere as of late have been linked to de-forestation (trees reduce c02) and the burning of coal and fossil fuels. These are man-made effects that may cause similar climate shifts which have been observed occurring thousands of times in millions of years of geological history.

Rushwing said:

That's correct rahu, I was not saying there were industrial societies then, I was talking about there being a correlation between atmospheric CO2 and temperature recorded in glacial cores and rock samples for all of earth's history. So CO2 does relate to temperature change. Exactly how is debatable.

C02 increases in the worlds atmosphere as of late have been linked to de-forestation (trees reduce c02) and the burning of coal and fossil fuels. These are man-made effects that may cause similar climate shifts which have been observed occurring thousands of times in millions of years of geological history.

Click to expand...

Planet Earth is two thirds covered with oceans and it is therefore the vast colonies of algae floating on the surfaces of oceans that are the greatest reducers of CO2. Pollution of oceans threatens algae

Trees also reduce CO2 however a perhaps arguably more important use for trees is that of their roots which hold the world's topsoil in place. Deforestation influences desertification.

In reference to Krakatoa, it actually wasn't as huge as was once thought, but it did effect mainland weather patterns. A better example would be the eruption (or complete destruction) of Tambora in 1815. It was the reason that 1816 was called "the year without a Summer." In New England, there was frost on the ground in July of 1816. It's one of the best examples we have of volcanic activity effecting global weather.

As to the ice cores, the ancient ones are interesting, but the recent ones are more telling. Given that ice layers are basically counted the way tree rings are counted, it's possible to look at recent times in high detail. The CO2 in Earth's atmosphere bounced around as it had for thousands of years until about the time of the American Civil War (1860's). Soon after, we start seeing the mark of industrialisation in the ice cores. Methane, however, began its spike a little before (20 to 50 years before) the CO2 did, depending on how you count. This seems to say that industrialisation may be responsible for increased CO2 levels, but methane seems to be going up on its own (maybe cattle-related?). The temperature, however, seems to be increasing to match the CO2 levels, not methane (obviously visible on a plotting of data points). It seems certain that a global temperature increase started about the time that industrialisation became widespread. So, my guess would be that methane, CO2, Milankovitch cycles, melting of ice caps (reflective white replaced by absorbent blue), and a few things we haven't even thought of yet are all effecting global temperature change. The CO2 is the one, however, that both seems to have had a major impact and is controllable by humans.

ppl

Volcano eruption will NOT increase temperature but will decrease temperature on earth .

T

Mark said:

In reference to Krakatoa, it actually wasn't as huge as was once thought, but it did effect mainland weather patterns. A better example would be the eruption (or complete destruction) of Tambora in 1815. It was the reason that 1816 was called "the year without a Summer." In New England, there was frost on the ground in July of 1816. It's one of the best examples we have of volcanic activity effecting global weather.

As to the ice cores, the ancient ones are interesting, but the recent ones are more telling. Given that ice layers are basically counted the way tree rings are counted, it's possible to look at recent times in high detail. The CO2 in Earth's atmosphere bounced around as it had for thousands of years until about the time of the American Civil War (1860's). Soon after, we start seeing the mark of industrialisation in the ice cores. Methane, however, began its spike a little before (20 to 50 years before) the CO2 did, depending on how you count. This seems to say that industrialisation may be responsible for increased CO2 levels, but methane seems to be going up on its own (maybe cattle-related?). The temperature, however, seems to be increasing to match the CO2 levels, not methane (obviously visible on a plotting of data points). It seems certain that a global temperature increase started about the time that industrialisation became widespread. So, my guess would be that methane, CO2, Milankovitch cycles, melting of ice caps (reflective white replaced by absorbent blue), and a few things we haven't even thought of yet are all effecting global temperature change. The CO2 is the one, however, that both seems to have had a major impact and is controllable by humans.

Click to expand...

Greed is the theoretically apparently (thus far) uncontrollable factor.

Otherwise investigate 'solar energy for everything possible' including solar cars and/or electric cars and other solutions such as wind energy, sea energy and/or buildings that utilise the natural heat stored in the Earth – even 'free energy'

All anathema to those with a vested interest in gas, electricity, oil, internal combustion engine vehicles, millions of cows et al

Did you know that Nikola Tesla was working on a method of distributing free power wirelessly over the whole of the Earth and Marconi stealing his work is what got his funding cut? If not for that hack Marconi (who used 17 of Tesla's patented inventions to achieve the first trans-Atlantic radio transmission), Tesla might have been able to produce something wonderful. However, once everyone figured out that you didn't have to transmit tons of free power in order to send sounds, pictures, and information, Tesla's dream of global free energy was shot down immediately. Tesla also called fossil fuels "dirty power" and, during the 1920's, spoke about the need to find a better fuel source.

**** Edison. **** Marconi. The two of them together weren't fit to tie Tesla's shoes.

[edited to eliminate swears due to several complaints - Moderator]
[edited by Mark]: Seriously? I used asterisks myself and left only the first letter obvious. Who complains about these things and why?