Am I mistaken in the belief that a nuclear plant is built on a fault in California? I seem to remember seeing a photo of this once. Just once.
We, as a nation, must learn from the experience of others and relocate our nuclear plants if necessary.
I'm all for safety. Put them in land. They need fresh water anyway. And Yep, The Palo Verde nuclear plant is on the San Andreas.Well, some of what she says are facts, but I don't believe Japan is worse than Chernobyl. If they entomb Fukushima as they did Chernobyl in a millions of tons of concrete tomb, then I'll consider that it might be. Not until.And No one was injured at 3 mile. No radiation escaped. The way she presents the material - to me - is the same way the junk science people present global warming. They throw in some facts, then make invisible leaps to conclusions that are absurd.
Kid, did you see my prior post? Fukushima has 10 times the amount of fuel that Chernobyl did. It seems the #3 plant with MOX fuel (Plutonium) BLEW UP, obliterating the spent fuel pool and throwing contents into the air. No wonder there is Plutonium in the soil. Please refute this woman's argument by directly contradicting her statements individually. Saying her statements are absurd is a feel-good exercise. I don't feel good anymore.
Honestly, ever since the first report came out about the nuclear situation in Japan I have thought that the media has been doing a huge song and dance to keep the general public from realizing the seriousness of the situation there. I tend to lean toward thinking that this lady is telling the truth...when you look at the amount of cancer, types of cancer, and serious health issues people have - even those who carefully guard the health, it makes you think that SOMETHING is just not right.If what she is saying is true....I don't know. I am just sitting here shaking my head...because it honestly leaves me speechless!
While it is the worst power plant disaster, it is not near the radiation levels that were released into the atmosphere on a regular basis through decades of above ground atomic testing.Never the less this is a dangerous situation. Cancer rates will likely be on the rise.
Opus, No I didn't. My apologies. Obviously, this is a bad situation, to the extent we will find out later, though there have been many examples of hype in the media since this started..Bottom line, you can't be too safe.Regards the fallout in the rain - It's been raining here in Cincinnati for a month. We are about to break the all time rainfall record that was made in Jan 1937... There are studies however that document people near such events but not receiving fatal doses of radiation becoming the most healthful of that local population. No cancer while many others outside the zone did get cancer in abundance. Ann Coulter's site will point to some of these studies.True?Applies here?Don't know.I recently read a story about a 90 yr old who survived Hiroshima, fled to Nagasaki and witnessed that bomb as well. Well, I doubt you're in the mood.I'll keep a good thought for you and all of us. What else could I do.
Post a Comment