Just wanted to share an article
Now, again considering my perspective and my firm belief that nuclear issues are almost exclusively exaggerated, why should I believe this one source who claims that the entire planet is conspiring to downplay it? What's the motive to downplay it? What nuclear lobby exists in countries where there is no lobby?The mainstream media, world governments, nuclear agencies, health organizations, weather reporters, and the health care industry has completely ignored three ongoing triple meltdowns that have never been contained’
An obvious attempt to downplay this disaster and its consequences have been repeated over and over again from ‘experts’ in the nuclear industry [...]
Over 300 mainstream news outlets worldwide ran the erroneous ‘cold shutdown’ story repeatedly, which couldn’t be further from the truth…[it was] yet another lie that was spun by TEPCO to placate the public, and perpetuated endlessly by the media and nuclear lobby.
Loosewire,The other place ,they say 20,000 years before its livable , makes you think about time lines reported.
Good to see better spoken and more prudent people than myself agree with me . If you want to post your other link, I promise to go gentle. I already got the hulk out of my system. Sorry for that.to keep order, I'll just point to another forum where a more civil discussion seems to be going on
I actually meant to post a more credible article but got my links mixed up. The error produced some interesting results!
Are you referring to this?Strantor,
That's a nice blog, has some standards of evidence besides any old web page. Someone over there stated Christina's credentials.
Christina Consolo is formally trained as an opthamologist and has no relevant education or job experience in health physics, epidemiology, reactor operations, environmental remediation, or engineering. She knows as much about radiation safety as I do about prescribing eyeglasses.
For reasons that could be construed as political, there are plenty of examples. American industry has really stepped up its safety game, because it has become profitable to do so. My father lost his arm on the job in the early '80s. The company didn't give him anything except his job back when he had to go back to work still with bloody bandages because he spent his meager life savings at the hospital. If that happened to him today, he could make millions off it. It is in companies best interest to maintain at least the OSHA required level of safety. In my line of work, I am exposed to the inner workings of lots of companies in various industries, and my observation has been that there are more companies who go above and beyond OSHA requirements than those who fail to comply. Things are turning around. Companies are taking the initiative to ensure their workers are safe.To me it is never about technology, but management of it. Many technologies have great potential to be clean and safe, but they have to be well managed. Can anyone provide an example where private or public company put safety before profit? This is where the topic gets political, so I will stop.
V.
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
L | Fukushima petition | Off-Topic | 6 |
Similar threads |
---|
Fukushima petition |