Japanese earthquake / tsunami discussion

Coles

andrew wrote: »

You're being attacked for posting information, not about the situation itself (ie. what the water level is in the reactors, etc) but scaremongering articles.

Show me some examples, please. I have posted only informative articles. If you want to see nice pictures of butterflies and baby lambs then use Google. Are you sure this thread is for you?

You've posted nothing of interest. Nothing informative. Nothing new. Nothing but insults and bullsh*t. I assume that this response (as a moderator on this site) is an endorsement of the attack on me by Vibe666 where he stated that I would be happy that a worker had died at the power plant? Is that your position too? Shameful, childish, and deeply unfair.

Here's some good news about Fukushima: After being hit by a huge Tsunami one of the biggest earthquakes ever, and several powerful explosions, a 40 year old nuclear power station has held up sufficiently that nobody has died from radiation. In fact, only 2 people have suffered from doses high enough to warrant a hospital visit. I'd count that as good news. But news outlets tend not to write stories about how everything is ok, since it's not very interesting. And if they did, they'd probably be accused of 'downplaying' the disaster.

So everything is ok? Link please.

andrew

Coles wrote: »

Show me some examples, please.

You've posted nothing of interest. Nothing informative. Nothing new. Nothing but insults and bullsh*t.

Me? Link please. I've posted several links to informative updates about the reactor's status, and in backing up thing's I've said. And I havn't insulted you. In comparison, you constantly refer to pro nuclear people as having drank the 'Kool Aid,' which suggests that we're spas who can't think for ourselves, as well as variously calling people 'clowns' and fools, which is a bit rude.

These are the links you've posted in this thread which pertain to Fukushima:

One
Two
Three
four
five

Plus several Fairewinds videos.

Apart from number 4, every one of those links is basically OMG CANCER. While I do find the Fairewinds stuff good, there's also a definate bias there (unsuprising, given Arnie's current source of income). That's why I feel that you've been fearmongering; every one of your links has been about how, possibly, maybe, the radiation released could kill someone. And that's not even taking into consideration your other posts, which have argued that even tiny amounts of radiation well below legal levels are dangerous, when, factually, they're not (as I showed in that post about the babies and the milk).

So everything is ok? Link please.

Nowhere in that post did I say everything is ok. Again, you continually to misrepresent what I've said.

I assume that this response (as a moderator on this site) is an endorsement of the attack on me by Vibe666

I'm not a site mod, I mod the Economic forum. I'm just a regular user otherwise. If you have a problem with a post, report it.

vibe666

Coles wrote: »

Is this type of abuse tolerated on this site?

Shameful comment, but typical of someone who has run out of rope. And factually incorrect too.

i'm sorry, did it upset you that i've flipped round a term and used it against you that you yourself introduced to the thread and have used time and time again to post derogatory comments about anyone here who disagrees with your anti-nuclear stance? :rolleyes:

Coles wrote: »

All you do is attack me, insult me, slander me, act like asses, and make fools of yourselves.

its funny that you didn't seem to think that when the shoe was on the other foot a couple of weeks ago. didn't you get banned from AH and have to take a week off for doing exactly those things to other posters?

i honestly don't see anything anywhere near to the levels of abuse directed at you compared to what you have dished out to people here since you joined the thread, so why the high horse all of a sudden?

how about if you can manage to treat other poster with enough respect to stop referring to people as the 'kool-aid gang' when talking about pro-nuclear posters, maybe the 'cole-aid' gang won't catch on and we'll all be better off.

Coles

andrew wrote: »

These are the links you've posted in this thread which pertain to Fukushima:

One
Two
Three
four
five

Plus several Fairewinds videos.

Apart from number 4, every one of those links is basically OMG CANCER.

No, they're absolutely factual, and nowhere is there any mention of cancer. There's no point in ignoring the reality of this disaster because radiation causes cancer. We're all big boys here, no?

While I do find the Fairewinds stuff good, there's also a definate bias there (unsuprising, given Arnie's current source of income). That's why I feel that you've been fearmongering; every one of your links has been about how, possibly, maybe, the radiation released could kill someone.

And all your posts are saying that it won't cause fatalities. But EVERYBODY knows it will! It is absolutely inevitable. You can not release that much radiation on a continuing basis into a densely populated area and not cause fatalities. That's not scaremongering. It's reality.

And that's not even taking into consideration your other posts, which have argued that even tiny amounts of radiation well below legal levels are dangerous, when, factually, they're not (as I showed in that post about the babies and the milk).

I have argued that radiation in breast milk is potentially harmful. I have argued that having a radiation limit for tapwater and trying to apply it to breast milk is foolish. I have argued that pregnant women and infants should have been evacuated for the contaminated areas. Coincidently, this argument was echoed by Gundersen a week after we debated it. I have argued that radionuclides are dangerous when ingested or inhaled.

You have argued that radiation is not harmful and no one has died and anyway it doesn't matter because we're really far away.

Nice.:rolleyes:

If you have a problem with a post, report it.

Of course I reported it, and it's a shame that the comment still stands. I suppose it sets a new standard of abuse that we should all aim for in our exchanges.

vibe666

Coles wrote: »

I assume that this response (as a moderator on this site) is an endorsement of the attack on me by Vibe666 where he stated that I would be happy that a worker had died at the power plant? Is that your position too? Shameful, childish, and deeply unfair.

it wasn't an attack on you specifically, it was directed at the 3 or 4 posters in the thread that are in your 'gang' who have been clamouring for sensationalist news since this started 2 months ago and posting all the wildly inflammatory links from every crackpot conspiracy website going in the hope that something sticks.

Coles wrote: »

Of course I reported it, and it's a shame that the comment still stands. I suppose it sets a new standard of abuse that we should all aim for in our exchanges.

why is it that the people most guilty of abuse in these types of threads are always the ones who complain the most when it comes back to bite them on the backside?

since you have no problem labelling anyone who is pro-nuclear as the 'kool-aid gang' i figured you'd be happy for anyone anti-nuclear to fly the flag for the 'cole-aid gang'.

problem?

Coles

vibe666 wrote: »

i'm sorry, did it upset you that i've flipped round a term and used it against you that you yourself introduced to the thread... blah blah blah...

You stated that I was happy that the Japanese worker had died. Shameful and childish.

its funny that you didn't seem to think that when the shoe was on the other foot a couple of weeks ago. didn't you get banned from AH and have to take a week off for doing exactly those things to other posters?

I was banned because I responded to someone who, just like you, had nothing to offer this debate, and was only intent on derailing this thread by insulting me. I called him a fool. Instead of calling you a fool, I'll just ask for an apology.

i honestly don't see anything anywhere near to the levels of abuse directed at you compared to what you have dished out to people here since you joined the thread, so why the high horse all of a sudden?

I have a very low tolerance for bullsh!t. The only contributor I was dismissive towards clearly didn't have any understanding of the topic and was arguing from a position of absolute ignorance.

I have posted information that is backed up with either references or links. Why have you posted nothing but insults?

Coles

Now lets just leave it there (after I get my apology, of course). This is getting tedious and dull.

Post some good news stories!! With links!

Coles

Need more time?

Try google.

andrew

Coles wrote: »

No, they're absolutely factual, and nowhere is there any mention of cancer. There's no point in ignoring the reality of this disaster because radiation causes cancer. We're all big boys here, no?

Actually, the first link mentions cancer. And clearly radiation causes cancer, we're not debating that. My point has been that the radiation release doesn't significantly increase an individual's likelihood of getting cancer, and so isn't something to be worried about.

And all your posts are saying that it won't cause fatalities. But EVERYBODY knows it will! It is absolutely inevitable. You can not release that much radiation on a continuing basis into a densely populated area and not cause fatalities. That's not scaremongering. It's reality.

I have argued that radiation in breast milk is potentially harmful. I have argued that having a radiation limit for tapwater and trying to apply it to breast milk is foolish. I have argued that pregnant women and infants should have been evacuated for the contaminated areas. Coincidently, this argument was echoed by Gundersen a week after we debated it. I have argued that radionuclides are dangerous when ingested or inhaled.

Coles wrote: »

I have posted information that is backed up with either references or links. Why have you posted nothing but insults?

Nope, my posts just say that any individual's risk of getting cancer hasn't increased by much. This is probably the tenth time you've misrepresented what I've said. And I went through all your posts in this thread (procrastination is a helluva drug) and the only links you posted are the ones i mentioned, plus the fairewinds ones. So if perhaps you could back up your claims about the tapwater, that'd be nice. And references, other than Fairewinds, saying that the explosion at reactor 3 was a criticality? And references saying that TEPCO have been lying to people the entire time. And some estimates regarding the number of cancers this accident will cause.

You have argued that radiation is not harmful and no one has died and anyway it doesn't matter because we're really far away.

That's about the tenth time you've misrepresented me. I havn't argued radiation isn't harmful.

Of course I reported it, and it's a shame that the comment still stands. I suppose it sets a new standard of abuse that we should all aim for in our exchanges.

Look, you're just as guilty as anyone of insulting people on this thread, as well as misrepresenting me constantly. You were even banned for it. So, if there's a standard for abuse, you're the one who set it.

vibe666

Coles wrote: »

You stated that I was happy that the Japanese worker had died. Shameful and childish.
I was banned because I responded to someone who, just like you, had nothing to offer this debate, and was only intent on derailing this thread by insulting me. I called him a fool. Instead of calling you a fool, I'll just ask for an apology.

if/when you deserve an apology for something you'll get one, but don't hold your breath.

again, i'll copy/paste it a second time as you appear to have missed it the first time round.

vibe666 wrote: »

it wasn't an attack on you specifically, it was directed at the 3 or 4 posters in the thread that are in your 'gang' who have been clamouring for sensationalist news since this started 2 months ago and posting all the wildly inflammatory links from every crackpot conspiracy website going in the hope that something sticks.

Coles wrote: »

I have a very low tolerance for bullsh!t. The only contributor I was dismissive towards clearly didn't have any understanding of the topic and was arguing from a position of absolute ignorance.

that is actually a totally ridiculous and laughable comment. you have been nothing but dismissive and abusive to anyone and everyone who disagrees with you and you were banned for abusing one poster after several warnings for repeatedly abusing pretty much anyone in the thread who was pro-nuclear.

you toned it down for a while when you came back, but the kool-aid references are still there and the levels of abuse are rising again just as they did before.

Coles wrote: »

I have posted information that is backed up with either references or links. Why have you posted nothing but insults?

i've already posted 2 links about japan & fukushima on this page of the thread and i've posted many many links and information about the tsunami and earthquake in japan as well as fukushima in the past, but since you repeatedly keep dismissing anything and everything posted that disagrees with your viewpoint, and since neither i nor anyone here who isn't anti-nuclear share your viewpoint anything we post is going to be worthless in your eyes, just as the majority of what you post is worthless guff to the rest of us.

geetar

Coles wrote: »

Is this type of abuse tolerated on this site?

Shameful comment, but typical of someone who has run out of rope. And factually incorrect too.

Through out his thread I have presented sources of information that aren't available in the mainstream media. Everything that I have written has come to pass, while your sources - the nuclear industry - have been shown to have repeatedly lied about the true nature of this disaster.

So why are you attacking me?

ok, you for one got banned, so dont pretend to be mr-goody-two-shoes all of a sudden.

your guilty of a few things. mainly posting one sided arguments from the same scientist over and over again. try a different "expert" for once.

i dont think people have really too much of an issue with what you are saying, its the way you present your argument that gets people angry. placing this ---->:rolleyes: beside any counter arguments is quite stupid really.

there has been very few people here claiming that radiation isnt harmfull, but rather that the situation wasnt harming the population. you claim to have some holy source of information and an inside scoop on the whole situation, but infact all you are doing is relaying sensationalist exaggerated news and claiming it to be fact, with little cross reference to verify what your saying. that makes people lose faith in the validity of your argument.

the situation is not good in japan, who knows how it is going to play out in the coming months. one thing is for certain, very few people are up to date with what is actually unfolding. the majority of information is speculation and opinions. please try not to give these as facts, and get upset when we dont jump on the disaster doomsday bandwagon.....:rolleyes:

AskMyChocolate

Overheal wrote: »

Yes: TEPCO lied about the Full Meltdown "thing". So they had/have a full meltdown situation. Perhaps a couple. Idiotic thing for them to do. Impact globally? I still doubt it. Waters around Japan are probably not very friendly though. Still Pro-Nuclear? Yes, the statistics still show it far less harmful per capita than any other fuel source. Thats no comfort to the Japanese, but it's the truth. Coal, Oil and Gas have their own share of negative side effects.

I do suspect this will not be the last nuclear crisis but we cannot be afraid to keep innovating. I'd rather not spend the next 300 years relying on fossil fuels and strip mining. The Mk1 reactor designs have to be retired though, imo.

http://gizmodo.com/5801376/its-official-fukushima-was-hit-with-a-nuclear-meltdown

Cheers mate. Yeah, I rememder asking, about four thousand posts ago if there was a danger to the marine environment, as Japan relies heavily on fish (although they import a lot of it). Everybody seemed to think that there was no danger. Things seem to have got a lot worse since, although hopefully not to a level of endangering the whole marine eco-system. These people just can't seem to catch a break.:(

Coles

Here's a really excellent update on the situation at Fukushima. Well worth watching. There's so little good information available in the mainstream media now, and any discussion of the issues involved gets derailed by lunatics.

It's shocking how little good news is coming out of Fukushima.

gbee

Coles wrote: »

Here's a really excellent update on the situation .

This is worth reposting, I watched it after your post a couple of days ago.

"70R an hour, basically a few hours and you're dead"

Penfailed

Remember this thread - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056206691

The numbers are now in - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13388370 It seems that (as expected by most on that thread ^^^) the numbers were waaaaay off.

Run_to_da_hills

andrew wrote: »

Here's some good news about Fukushima: After being hit by a huge Tsunami one of the biggest earthquakes ever, and several powerful explosions, a 40 year old nuclear power station has held up sufficiently that nobody has died from radiation. In fact, only 2 people have suffered from doses high enough to warrant a hospital visit. I'd count that as good news. But news outlets tend not to write stories about how everything is ok, since it's not very interesting. And if they did, they'd probably be accused of 'downplaying' the disaster.

And here is the bad news about Fukushima, Nuclear related cancer illnesses do not appear over night and can linger on for generations to come. Not alone that any land within 30KM surrounding the power plant will be rendered a nuclear wasteland and no one in their right mind will want to live there.

Tepco to cover damaged Fukushima reactors with useless polyester tents.

"In a demonstration of the company's shocking ignorance concerning the nature of radioactive particles, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) has announced that it is going to place large polyester domes -- yes, you read that right -- around the damaged reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in an alleged attempt to help contain radioactive particles. The polyester domes will begin appearing next month, and all are expected to be in place by the end of the year, say reports"

http://www.naturalnews.com/032400_Fukushima_tents.html

I am not generally in favour of international or global organizations taking over in emergency situations but in this instance Tepco, need a kick in the ass and someone that knows what they are doing need to take over. The Russians 25 years ago did a better job at disclosing the seriousness of Chernobyl after it was exposed and then doing something about it.

andrew

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

And here is the bad news about Fukushima, Nuclear related cancer illnesses do not appear over night and can linger on for generations to come. Not alone that any land within 30KM surrounding the power plant will be rendered a nuclear wasteland and no one in their right mind will want to live there.

Well, obviously there's bad news. Nuclear wasteland? Got any proof for that? Or are you just assuming that any radiation release automatically turns a place into a nuclear wasteland?

Tepco to cover damaged Fukushima reactors with useless polyester tents.

"In a demonstration of the company's shocking ignorance concerning the nature of radioactive particles, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) has announced that it is going to place large polyester domes -- yes, you read that right -- around the damaged reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in an alleged attempt to help contain radioactive particles. The polyester domes will begin appearing next month, and all are expected to be in place by the end of the year, say reports"

http://www.naturalnews.com/032400_Fukushima_tents.html

Useless? Another assertion. That article just says they're useless without explaining why.

I am not generally in favour of international or global organizations taking over in emergency situations but in this instance Tepco, need a kick in the ass and someone that knows what they are doing need to take over. The Russians 25 years ago did a better job at disclosing the seriousness of Chernobyl after it was exposed and then doing something about it.

No they didn't. They told no one about it, and then begrudgingly disclosed information because it got a bit obvious that something was happening. In comparison, with this disaster you can find online the results of numerous radiation tests carried out on land, in the sea, and in food; there's a constant stream of information. So any comparison between the information released in this event and during Chernobyl is silly and ridiculous.

gbee

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The polyester domes will begin appearing The Russians 25 years ago did a better job at disclosing the seriousness of Chernobyl after it was exposed and then doing something about it.

I'd suggest it's just to cover the reactors so TV and other media won't be constantly reminded of the disaster.

Run_to_da_hills

gbee wrote: »

I'd suggest it's just to cover the reactors so TV and other media won't be constantly reminded of the disaster.

In otherwords a sticking plaster.

andrew

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

In otherwords a sticking plaster.

Is there anything that TEPCO could do, at this stage, that you'd think was positive?

Run_to_da_hills

andrew wrote: »

Is there anything that TEPCO could do, at this stage, that you'd think was positive?

Yes, admit their defeat on the situation and get some international body in to take over. Someone that can reveal the truth of the situation and not cover up issues.

andrew

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Yes, admit their defeat on the situation and get some international body in to take over. Someone that can reveal the truth of the situation and not cover up issues.

Which international body exactly?

Coles

andrew wrote: »

Which international body exactly?

How about an international body that has no financial interest in the outcome? What about an international response team that uses the resources, experience and expertise of Russia, China, the UK, France and the USA?

It's certainly getting a bit late in the day now, but there's no way of knowing how much more serious this crisis could get or how much longer it could go on for.

andrew

Coles wrote: »

How about an international body that has no financial interest in the outcome? What about an international response team that uses the resources, experience and expertise of Russia, China, the UK, France and the USA?

It's certainly getting a bit late in the day now, but there's no way of knowing how much more serious this crisis could get or how much longer it could go on for.

So you'll only be happy if an international non-partisan body qualified to handle the situation is conjured up, and TEPCO, the people who have the best information about the nuclear plant in question, are left completely out of the picture. Wishful thinking, no? Such a team could be a good thing, but you're wishing for something which is nearly impossible to create in practice. Most people who know a lot about nuclear energy tend to have some sort of financial link to nuclear energy. And what would this team do differently? It's not like there's a magic wand the japanese aren't using; if there was, they would've used it.

So in response to my question, you may as well have said 'nothing.' There's nothing TEPCO can do to satisfy you. You will automatically be critical of everything that is done.

Also, your view of financial incentives is hypocritical. You constantly post Fairewinds stuff, from someone who has a financial motive in litigating against nuclear accidents. Yet you demand a team to deal with this who has no financial interest in the outcome. When it suits you, you ignore the financial incentives under which people operate.

And since TEPCO are the only ones with a financial interest in getting this situation under control, aren't they the one's with the strongest incentive to clean up this accident? What's wrong with their financial incentive.

Coles

Good news! You Can Stop Worrying about a Radiation Release - Here's Why. -BusinessInsider (13th March 2011)
It would be comical if it wasn't so serious.


More good news! Japan Reactor Not to Release More Radiation, TEPCO says. (20th March 2011)

Tokyo Electric Power Corp (TEPCO), the operator of the plant in Fukushima, said it would not need to relieve the pressure of the containment vessel at reactor 3 at the plant, damaged by the March 11 earthquake and tsunami that rocked the region.

And why didn't they need to release the pressure? Because there was no pressure! There was already a hole in the containment vessel! Genius!


EneNews is becoming an excellent source for information about what's happening at Fukushima. Everything is referenced and linked to the source. Very up to date.


@Andrew. Stop trolling -it's boring.

Cuddlesworth

Coles wrote: »

@Andrew. Stop trolling -it's boring.

Well reasoned and logical arguments are not trolling. Implying they are is trolling.

andrew

Coles wrote: »

Good news! You Can Stop Worrying about a Radiation Release - Here's Why. -BusinessInsider (13th March 2011)
It would be comical if it wasn't so serious.


More good news! Japan Reactor Not to Release More Radiation, TEPCO says. (20th March 2011)

And why didn't they need to release the pressure? Because there was no pressure! There was already a hole in the containment vessel! Genius!


EneNews is becoming an excellent source for information about what's happening at Fukushima. Everything is referenced and linked to the source. Very up to date.


@Andrew. Stop trolling -it's boring.

As per the charter, if you think I'm trolling, report me to the mods. I assure you I'm not trolling. It would appear you've just run out of viable counter arguments is all, so you've resorted to thinking I'm trolling/accusing me of such, rather than accepting the truth in what I'm saying.

Coles

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Well reasoned and logical arguments are not trolling. Implying they are is trolling.

How about we stick to the topic? Post some relevant information or don't bother.

@Andrew. This thread is not about me. Stop attacking me and stay on topic.

Coles

Another excellent up-to-date source of information about the Fukushima disaster. The Ex-SKF Blog. Again everything is referenced and sources are linked.

Anyone else got any good sources? Post them up.

Coles

The TEPCO Press Room. Press releases etc. They're all there. Very interesting to read through the older ones, particularly with the information that is coming to light now.