Salmon: In Search of the Lost Chord?

Cosmic Idiot Redux wrote:

You call questioning dubious, evacuations, track records, enviromental marginal efforts as NUCLEAR FEAR PARANOIA? I call it using your brain .

If you only had a brain...

I have no problems with questions and concerns but when the concerns are not in line with the risks, that is the very definition of irrational fear.

Planes crash and people get attacked by sharks and yet I can't imagine even you are stupid enough to attempt to argue that it is impossible for some people to have irrational fears about those risks.

But go on creating strawman arguments and patting yourself on the back for it if it makes you feel smarter than your cat.

"If you only had a brain..."
Ewe'd look up the actual definitions of words ewe (mis) use
AGAIN- The P word means to have an UNreasonable fear of PERSONAL doom, and it's a relatively unusual mental psych diagnosis.
So what's THAT got to do with the MANY who have researched the truth about Nukedom and have perfectly REASONABLE prudent concerns about what could be the Doom of US ALL?!?

----------
"Planes crash and people get attacked by sharks"

the 10 Best Airplane crash movies
http://www.mademan.com/mm/10-best-airplane-cr...

and the 'Jaws' movies certainly made $$

But so did 'The China Syndrome'

Hmmm, Of all the very risky things has proven to be able to kill LOTS, is there one that can kill a whole lot due to one single incident, say like ONE MILLION people-
Oh right- NUCLEAR ENERGY
(Chernobyl's true deathcount)

although I suppose if we include Big Pharma with its dangerous drugs and vaccines and the way doctors push them--that's certainly killed more than Nukedom, so far, that is until the next meltdowns and/or we find out Fuktupshita Japan turns out to be much worse than told so far, as in the Pacific ocean and anyone living by it getting high radtastic levels and cancers and a couple billion people having to move.
A really bad drug or vaccine causing many to die before it's pulled still only kills those people, not messing up whole regions making them uninhabitable.

Alex wrote:

as in the Pacific ocean and anyone living by it getting high radtastic levels and cancers and a couple billion people having to move.

You are industrial strength stupid.

Carry on.

After (Nuclear) Industrial Strength Rads start killing Many Yet Again as it did in Chernobyl, Nuketards want Nukedom to be able to still 'Carry on'
-THAT'S Atomic Strength Stupid!!


They LIED! Reactor 4 FULL Of Fuel - Pacific Ocean May Be Lost
http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/01/nuclear-fu...

Industrial (Nuclear) Strength Rads!
'Fukushima Radiation Way Up After Being Declared 'Safe''
UK daily Mail Feb 3
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-20961...

(the impending)
'Collapse Of Reactor 4 Bldg Would Be Worse Than 3 Meltdowns'
http://enenews.com/ap-reactor-4-building-majo...

'Two Sieverts/hr From Just One Liter Of Leaked Water'
http://enenews.com/nikkei-sievertshr-beta-rad...

Hey.

I am practical I see how the little oops in Japan has affected markets , this is not a question , this is a fact .

Tainted, stigmatized objects .... for how long I can't say . Who wants to take a chance ? Lets be serious. Remember the ford Pinto? Yo lets get one and see if we can incinerate outselves!.........

A fact . A fact that is not spoken about too loudly because of the reprussions. By the by I am not talkings cars either.

Tell me why anyone, would expect this horrifying situation won't happen here .

To many it is not if but when .

The plant is old. Facts . Entergy less than forthright . If this was a brand new state of the art facility i'd say well take a chance although I still would feel concerned .

This , this is a plant with a track record of wishy washy events.Their evacuations plans are not even worthy of belief, In itself a mindboggling concern .

Katrina on steroids. We wouldn't be able to stand on our roofs begging for rescue.

Even I have been taken aback by the rumors I have heard what people think .The perception many have of this plant is noone's fault but the plant. If they can't even, manage to communicate to their neighbors, why should we think they can run the plant?

Cosmic wrote:

Hey.
I am practical I see how the little oops in Japan has affected markets , this is not a question , this is a fact ....
Tell me why anyone, would expect this horrifying situation won't happen here .
To many it is not if but when .
If they can't even, manage to communicate to their neighbors, why should we think they can run the plant?

Now while I somewhat agree that the plant might not seem the most open when it comes to all aspects of power production, you are isolating a single department or two when you speak of actually running the plant.

As for as the "japanese situation" happening here, please tell me a scenario that would fit into this?

Cause the accident was a organization centric event, not earthquake or equipment...many organizational insanities.

Mike Mulligan wrote:

Cause the accident was a organization centric event, not earthquake or equipment...many organizational insanities.

Lets be realistic mike. The effects of the crisis could have been perpetuated because of the orgainazition but not the cause.

Naw, the earthquake and Tsunami was the trigger...the cause was a deceptive lying organization to everyone outside and to their selves.

Burnsie from KilltheFish NY sez:
"As for as the "japanese situation" happening here, please tell me a scenario that would fit into this?"

We've gone thru this over and over yet ewe pretend the facts haven't been presented.
Fu*k Ewe Burnsie
Ewe know damn well that...

'A Fukushima-type accident could happen here'->
http://www.commonsnews.org/site/site02/story....
^that's according to a Nuclear Engineer who ran a nuke. His name is Paul Blanch, and ewe hate him cuz ewe can't deny it but also can't claim that he 'got fired from' some co. or that he 'makes money from with the antis' as ewe've done with Gundersen.
-------
"My awareness of the importance of instabilities as threats to the safe operation of power equipment was developed during my work on non-
nuclear power plants. I assumed that safety would also be a major concern of reactor developers. It turned out that the AEC and its contractors,
supported by the powerful Joint Committee of Congress, wanted to get on with building reactors, ignoring questions of safety, or bad economics."
- from "My Nuclear Career" by A. Stanley Thompson:
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/CoNP/2engine...

N U C L E A R P O W E R K I L L S
by A. Stanley Thompson
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/CoNP/1NPkill...

^"I spent 17 years as an engineer studying nuclear reactors for power.
During the following 34-years I continued thinking about reactors.
I concluded that they are a threat to all life.
What follows is my attempt to explain that the processes by which nuclear reactors generate power put the whole world at risk."