• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fukushima operator starts hazardous year-long fuel removal

I don't recall debating anyone so misinformed. Fukushima was built with and inadequate seawall in a place that had stone tsunami markers identifying previous tsunami levels. These were ignored by the engineering geniuses with the hugely safe design parameters and cost effectiveness mitigating factors. Translated. Screw the people. If it happens we'll claim it was an unforeseeable act of nature and laugh all the way to the bank. Remember the stone tsunami markers. There are no excuses here. Right now the molten coriums from the three reactors are in unknown locations somewhere beneath their original locations. Most likely will cook their way into the underground flowing water that will cool them and send their deadly mother lode into the Pacific, slowly and deadly. Hubris and arrogance combine with greed to engineer a disaster of cataclysmic proportions. Yeh, them nukes gotta be wonderful stuff.

You do know that around the would there are natural nuclear fission reactors that are completely uncontained right? They exist on almost every continent. In the US the nuclear fuel rods can be recycled, they are not due to regulations. When nuclear fuel is used it becomes depleted no longer highly radioactive. If it is highly radioactive it is not depleted and can be refined and used again.
 
That's simply false... On all three counts.

Which I could detail, but we all know your penchant for ignoring facts contrary to your opinions (like the link I provided saying there's already been a 28% surge in thyroid problems in north America that can be attributed to Fukushima.

Even TMI had a cancer cluster of those exposed that was 7 times higher than the expected rates in the area... But of course, and as I pointed out, since the cancer might not show up for years after exposure it's easy to gloss over and pretend that no harm was done.




One of three things happened:
1) Some blog told you about this paper, with the "28%" "in North America" "attributable to Fukushima" interpretation. You accepted this interpretation without question, but knew I would be skeptical about a blog so just posted the paper. Without reading it.
2) You did read the paper, or at least the abstract, and deliberately lied about it.
3) You did read the paper, or at least the abstract, and your reading comprehension is appallingly bad.

Tell me which one it is.

(this paper does not say what you think it says)
 
Last edited:
One of three things happened:
1) Some blog told you about this paper, with the "28%" "in North America" "attributable to Fukushima" interpretation. You accepted this interpretation without question, but knew I would be skeptical about a blog so just posted the paper. Without reading it.

1- you defend the charge that you ignore facts that do not suit your opinions by admitting that you ignored the paper.

An you were also wrong because it was an interview with the doctors involved in the study explaining their findings and discussing the paper that just got published in a journal of pediatrics.


2) You did read the paper, or at least the abstract, and deliberately lied about it.

Also false, had you even made it as far in your honest rebuttal to facts by even reading the one paragraph abstract, would have known that this is not a valid charge.


3) You did read the paper, or at least the abstract, and your reading comprehension is appallingly bad.

Tell me which one it is.

(this paper does not say what you think it says)

You didn't even read it, by your own admission.

Tell me, what is it that you think this paper is saying and tell me what I said that was wrong about it??

Oh and tell me, how many times greater than background levels was the exposure while you are at it?

Of course, as usual, you will come back with more nonsense to cover for your deliberate ignorance.
 
The problem scenario is the accumulation of deadly waste, tons and tons and tons. I think there are 400 tons at Fukushima alone. The agents responsible for the permanent handling of this waste are CORPORATIONS. Corporations are a legal entity designed to minimize liability for the Corporations owners. They are in this business because they are making a large profit. When the profits stop, so do Corporations. They file bankruptcy. At that point the waste belongs to you, me, Grandma and the dog. Not to worry because the waste is only going to be really dangerous for half a million years or so. But, alas, no more profit, screw you, the waste is yours. Already, Japan is financing lots of cleanup at Fukushima. Nuclear Power is a welfare Industry. It is not bankable and it is not insurable. Potential liability confirmed by actuarial tables keep the insurance companies away and also keeps bankers away. Ergo, these Nukes are always built with "public" or taxpayer monies, but the taxpayers don't get the profit. The taxpayers will get the waste when the Corporate bankruptcy is filed. Standard Operating Procedure in the USA. Privatize (give to corporations) the profits and Socialize (baptize the taxpayer) the liabilities. You are watching this scenario everyday with the "too big to fail" banks. You cannot ruin the planet's water and air and not take responsibility for those actions. That is what all Nukes are about.

LOL !!!!

Too big to fail ? It's those bug meanie corporations fault that everything is wrong with everything isn't it ? You bitch about "Too Big to Fail" but don't say a stinking word about the 5 and half TRILLION in debt we just took on by putting Fannie and Freddie in Conservatorship.
 
1- you defend the charge that you ignore facts that do not suit your opinions by admitting that you ignored the paper.

An you were also wrong because it was an interview with the doctors involved in the study explaining their findings and discussing the paper that just got published in a journal of pediatrics.




Also false, had you even made it as far in your honest rebuttal to facts by even reading the one paragraph abstract, would have known that this is not a valid charge.




You didn't even read it, by your own admission.

Tell me, what is it that you think this paper is saying and tell me what I said that was wrong about it??

Oh and tell me, how many times greater than background levels was the exposure while you are at it?

Of course, as usual, you will come back with more nonsense to cover for your deliberate ignorance.

That paper did not attribute a 28% increase in thyroid problems across North America to Fukushima. That's not what it says. I'm sorry, there's nothing more I can do for you if your reading comprehension is that bad.
 
LOL !!!!

Too big to fail ? It's those bug meanie corporations fault that everything is wrong with everything isn't it ? You bitch about "Too Big to Fail" but don't say a stinking word about the 5 and half TRILLION in debt we just took on by putting Fannie and Freddie in Conservatorship.

I just explained the Corporate legal structure, the reasons for it, and its' long and short term prognosis as related to profit. Where do you want your share of the nuclear waste delivered. Is your back yard OK? Keep in mind 99% reusable. It just can't be "too big to fail" eh? Get a little glow for your Corporate/Fascist/Industrial/Military/Nuclear cheerleaders. Free glow, even in the winter months and practically forever, from a human standpoint.
 
Also regarding Fukushima. The fuel rods are being removed from Unit number FOUR, and four did not have a meltdown and is the least contaminated of the four problem units. Units number 1, 2, and 3, suffered core meltdowns and are too hot to get near and they also have fuel storage pools. Gee, don't you wish I hadn't said that?
 
That paper did not attribute a 28% increase in thyroid problems across North America to Fukushima. That's not what it says. I'm sorry, there's nothing more I can do for you if your reading comprehension is that bad.

#1 What it said was that there's a surge in airborne beta waves in the WEST COAST.... Not as your strawman claiming it was the whole of the us.

2 they were examining trends in hyperthyroid in the wake of Fukushima.

3 in the west coast (the area I specified), I-131 concentrations increased by 211%

4- the areas of the west coast over the whole year studied was a 16% increase in the west coast compared to a 3% decrease in 36 other states compared to the rates of the previous year.

5 the greatest divergence was a 28% divergence over march- June 2011.

Now, I'm not sure what it was that you didn't read when you wrote this rebuttal, but it certainly wasn't the paper I had linked to...
 
#1 What it said was that there's a surge in airborne beta waves in the WEST COAST.... Not as your strawman claiming it was the whole of the us.

2 they were examining trends in hyperthyroid in the wake of Fukushima.

3 in the west coast (the area I specified), I-131 concentrations increased by 211%

4- the areas of the west coast over the whole year studied was a 16% increase in the west coast compared to a 3% decrease in 36 other states compared to the rates of the previous year.

5 the greatest divergence was a 28% divergence over march- June 2011.

Now, I'm not sure what it was that you didn't read when you wrote this rebuttal, but it certainly wasn't the paper I had linked to...

Um, Bman. You said North America.

like the link I provided saying there's already been a 28% surge in thyroid problems in north America that can be attributed to Fukushima.

The link doesn't say that. It doesn't even declare that any of the increase can be attributed to Fukushima. It says more research is required.

What you did was pick the largest deviation mentioned and suggest that all of it was attributable to Fukushima, and implied it was for all of the continent.

Funny that you didn't mention the states that had lower instances of thyroid problems.
 
Also regarding Fukushima. The fuel rods
are being removed from Unit number FOUR, and four did not have a meltdown and is the least contaminated of the four problem units. Units number 1, 2, and 3, suffered core meltdowns and are too hot to get near and they also have fuel storage pools. Gee, don't you wish I hadn't said that?


LOL !!

No I enjoy when you post generic anti-corprate nonsense.

It does wonders for your credibillity.

And there were core meltdowns at Fukishima ?

LOL !! SO ?!?

What do you think is at the bottom of those containment vessels ? A black hole ? Satan ? "Godrilla" ??

It's called CORIUM, and it's contained.

Those containment vessels are designed to DILUTE molten core material so it can be retrieved and or contained.

Just like at 3 mile Island and Chernobyl.

I'll tell you what, ypu keep posting exposing your ignorance, and I'll continue to be amused by your generic cororate drek and lack of knowledge.
 
LOL !!

No I enjoy when you post generic anti-corprate nonsense.

It does wonders for your credibillity.

And there were core meltdowns at Fukishima ?

LOL !! SO ?!?

What do you think is at the bottom of those containment vessels ? A black hole ? Satan ? "Godrilla" ??

It's called CORIUM, and it's contained.

Those containment vessels are designed to DILUTE molten core material so it can be retrieved and or contained.

Just like at 3 mile Island and Chernobyl.

I'll tell you what, ypu keep posting exposing your ignorance, and I'll continue to be amused by your generic cororate drek and lack of knowledge.

Limits to intelligence can be measured but obviously ignorance has no limits. The coriums melted through and all three in in unknown locations beneath their original containment vessels. The contaminants entering the ocean indicate that the concrete and steel foundations are breached and contaminated groundwater that has been in contact with fissile material is continuing to flow into the Pacific. You'll notice that at Chernobyl, it is referred to as a sarcophagus. The Russians had to burrow underneath and build a tunnel to capture the CORIUM and stop its' penetration into the Earth. At great loss of life, I might add.
 
Um, Bman. You said North America.



The link doesn't say that. It doesn't even declare that any of the increase can be attributed to Fukushima. It says more research is required.

What you did was pick the largest deviation mentioned and suggest that all of it was attributable to Fukushima, and implied it was for all of the continent.

Funny that you didn't mention the states that had lower instances of thyroid problems.

Doesn't change that you hadn't bothered to read or even try to correct what I said. That was that the surge in thyroid problems was in America as opposed to in Japan.

Especially considering how safe you claim, err, imply radiation is to people exposed.
 
Limits to intelligence can be measured but
obviously ignorance has no limits. The coriums melted through and all three in in unknown locations beneath their original containment vessels. The contaminants entering the ocean indicate that the concrete and steel foundations are breached and contaminated groundwater that has been in contact with fissile material is continuing to flow into the Pacific. You'll notice that at Chernobyl, it is referred to as a sarcophagus. The Russians had to burrow underneath and build a tunnel to capture the CORIUM and stop its' penetration into the Earth. At great loss of life, I might add.

Dont come in here and lie.

YOU have NO IDEA where Fukishima's Coriums is located. So stop with your "China Syndrome " nonsense.

Corium is not the "devil" or dark matter or a singularity thats going to swallow up our Universe.

It is a mix of core material and reactor sttucture and it COOLS as it dilutes as it makes it way down to the core containment.

You post made up scenarios and offer it up as "truth" and waste my time.

Chernobyl's Corium made it through the containment vessel and stopped in a basement.

Look back in this thread about 4 pages and find my pictures of the Russian Tecnician standing next to the DILUTED "elephants foot".

Chernobyl's core NEVER even made it out of the upper basement and the tunnel they built was never needed.

Educate yourself and stop making **** up.
 
Dont come in here and lie.

YOU have NO IDEA where Fukishima's Coriums is located. So stop with your "China Syndrome " nonsense.

Corium is not the "devil" or dark matter or a singularity thats going to swallow up our Universe.

It is a mix of core material and reactor sttucture and it COOLS as it dilutes as it makes it way down to the core containment.

You post made up scenarios and offer it up as "truth" and waste my time.

Chernobyl's Corium made it through the containment vessel and stopped in a basement.

Look back in this thread about 4 pages and find my pictures of the Russian Tecnician standing next to the DILUTED "elephants foot".

Chernobyl's core NEVER even made it out of the upper basement and the tunnel they built was never needed.

Educate yourself and stop making **** up.

I don't want to confuse you with facts, but you should call TEPCO of Fukushima fame and tell them where their cores are, because all they know is somewhere under their original locations. It's been to hot, radiation wise to even get robots to take peek a boo photos. Three meltdowns at Fukushima. That's a fact, Jack.
 
Dont come in here and lie.

YOU have NO IDEA where Fukishima's Coriums is located. So stop with your "China Syndrome " nonsense.

Corium is not the "devil" or dark matter or a singularity thats going to swallow up our Universe.

It is a mix of core material and reactor sttucture and it COOLS as it dilutes as it makes it way down to the core containment.

You post made up scenarios and offer it up as "truth" and waste my time.

Chernobyl's Corium made it through the containment vessel and stopped in a basement.

Look back in this thread about 4 pages and find my pictures of the Russian Tecnician standing next to the DILUTED "elephants foot".

Chernobyl's core NEVER even made it out of the upper basement and the tunnel they built was never needed.

Educate yourself and stop making **** up.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/special_report/1997/chernobyl/33005.stm

Here's the skinny on the Chernobyl elephant's foot.
It burned itself down into 6 feet of concrete and this is exposed.
The individual and the photographer of which you refer are likely a long time dead.
"Lava, glass and crystal flow discovered in the base of the reactor In December 1986, an intensely radioactive mass was discovered in the basement of Unit Four and scientists rigged up a crude wheeled camera to investigate. The mass was more than two metres across and weighed hundreds of tons. Because of its odd wrinkled shape, it was christened, “the elephant’s foot”. To approach it meant certain death. Analysis of the material showed that it was composed of sand, glass and nuclear fuel, and the proportion of sand suggested to scientists that a large amount of fuel had escaped from the reactor in this form. Underneath the reactor, the investigation team found steaming hot concrete and, draining into the basement, lava and spectacular unknown crystalline forms - Chernobylite."
 
Last edited:
BBC News | Chernobyl | Containing Chernobyl?

Here's the skinny on the Chernobyl elephant's foot.
It burned itself down into 6 feet of concrete and this is exposed.
The individual and the photographer of which you refer are likely a long time dead.
"Lava, glass and crystal flow discovered in the base of the reactor In December 1986, an intensely radioactive mass was discovered in the basement of Unit Four and scientists rigged up a crude wheeled camera to investigate. The mass was more than two metres across and weighed hundreds of tons. Because of its odd wrinkled shape, it was christened, “the elephant’s foot”. To approach it meant certain death. Analysis of the material showed that it was composed of sand, glass and nuclear fuel, and the proportion of sand suggested to scientists that a large amount of fuel had escaped from the reactor in this form. Underneath the reactor, the investigation team found steaming hot concrete and, draining into the basement, lava and spectacular unknown crystalline forms - Chernobylite."

NO, it is NOT EXPOSED. Jeesus why do you keep making s*** up ?

chernobyl-elephants-foot.jpg

There it is, and there's a technician standing next to it taking readings. OOOooohhh, I'm waiting for it to suck him in and spit him out, or morph into "Pizuzu", or Satan himself.

No, it burned through the containment vessel, was diluted by design and then it cooled.
 
NO, it is NOT EXPOSED. Jeesus why do you keep making s*** up ?

View attachment 67157314

There it is, and there's a technician standing next to it taking readings. OOOooohhh, I'm waiting for it to suck him in and spit him out, or morph into "Pizuzu", or Satan himself.

No, it burned through the containment vessel, was diluted by design and then it cooled.

I know you like the pretty pictures, but you should read the link, or get someone to read it to you. Disinformation and misinformation flow from you like water over Niagara Falls. Why do you think there is a huge concrete sarcophagus over the area at Chernobyl? What are they trying to protect you from?
 
Doesn't change that you hadn't bothered to read or even try to correct what I said. That was that the surge in thyroid problems was in America as opposed to in Japan.

Especially considering how safe you claim, err, imply radiation is to people exposed.

You grossly exaggerated what that supposed surge was, and completely fabricated its supposed attribution. The author of that paper does not say Fukushima is responsible. He suggests it's a possibility that requires further research.
 
You grossly exaggerated what that supposed surge was, and completely fabricated its supposed attribution. The author of that paper does not say Fukushima is responsible. He suggests it's a possibility that requires further research.

Hahaha! !

Well, you were saying that Fukushima was not an issue, nobody would be harmed... yet on the us side, where the radiation would be less of an issue, there's been a surge in thyroid issues in newborns.

I knew exactly the ways you would try to lie and minimize that fact, you are too predictable.

I knew you only read that further study was needed, and ignore the rest. You know that correlation is not causation, and the causative stydy would need to be done differently, but its really as predicted. Not by you, but by people that know what they're talking about, that the fallout would cause health problems in the us. Now this study comes out and you play these stupid games rather than concede the possibility that the risks are greater than you were saying.
 
Hahaha! !

Well, you were saying that Fukushima was not an issue, nobody would be harmed... yet on the us side, where the radiation would be less of an issue, there's been a surge in thyroid issues in newborns.

I knew exactly the ways you would try to lie and minimize that fact, you are too predictable.

I knew you only read that further study was needed, and ignore the rest. You know that correlation is not causation, and the causative stydy would need to be done differently, but its really as predicted. Not by you, but by people that know what they're talking about, that the fallout would cause health problems in the us. Now this study comes out and you play these stupid games rather than concede the possibility that the risks are greater than you were saying.

Why did you pick 28% and not -3%? Both numbers appeared in the abstract.
 
Last edited:
Why did you pick 28% and not -3%? Both numbers appeared in the abstract.

Because of the relevance of the numbers....

The 28% was the greatest divergence. 16% increase in west coast states and -3% in states NOT ON THE WEST COAST! !

But sure, let's play your game, not being exposed to I-131, and your chances of thyroid problems drops relative to those who are exposed.

Again, this is on the us side, where we are told that the exposure potential is within safe limits... and not in Japan where the risks are considerably greater.
 
Because of the relevance of the numbers....

The 28% was the greatest divergence. 16% increase in west coast states and -3% in states NOT ON THE WEST COAST! !

But sure, let's play your game, not being exposed to I-131, and your chances of thyroid problems drops relative to those who are exposed.

Again, this is on the us side, where we are told that the exposure potential is within safe limits... and not in Japan where the risks are considerably greater.

So you picked the outlier deliberately.
 
So you picked the outlier deliberately.

Where you would have used the -3% as the proof that I-131 is nutritious and delicious, in spite of the numbers not even being relevant.

Hell, you're so dishonest that I could have used the values from other states not impacted and you still would play this stupid game.

Some people just find safety in ignorance....
 
Where you would have used the -3% as the proof that I-131 is nutritious and delicious, in spite of the numbers not even being relevant.

Hell, you're so dishonest that I could have used the values from other states not impacted and you still would play this stupid game.

Some people just find safety in ignorance....

You picked the outlier deliberately and hoped nobody would notice.
 
You picked the outlier deliberately and hoped nobody would notice.

Whatever it takes for you to remain in denial of reality.

Look, the paper highlighted the period and scope of the greatest divergence relative to 30 other states studied.

What I said was just as valid as a 16% increase compared to the previous year in the western states.

Not like the papers you tend to push where they study the impact of 5+ times current levels of co2 to make a point...

Got any more games you want to play? Perhaps any papers that say how radioactive iodine is safe?

Btw, there's about a dozen more issues in the pacific that have already begun to be noted that I haven't had a chance to bring up thanks to your nonsense. Just those issues are not in published papers yet.

Ignorance is easy.
 
Back
Top Bottom