Radioactive forests - Survivalist Forum
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

Advertise Here
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Protecting livestock from fallout / radiation jrtatonka Nuclear, Biological and Chemical (NBC) Survival 22 11-27-2018 07:16 PM
In Case Of Nuclear Blast Uteguy Nuclear, Biological and Chemical (NBC) Survival 13 10-01-2017 12:55 PM
What am I missing? sisterpine Disaster Preparedness General Discussion 13 07-05-2017 01:09 PM
Obtaining Super Powers, Part 2 Ian Treloar Jokes, Humor & Music 8 04-03-2017 02:21 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-27-2018, 10:48 PM
TMcArthur's Avatar
TMcArthur TMcArthur is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 6,848
Thanks: 2,271
Thanked 8,792 Times in 3,503 Posts
Default Radioactive forests



Advertise Here

Remember how animal repopulated the Chernobyl site after the reactor melted down and leaked? The same thing is happening at Fukashima in japan.


Quick reply to this message
Old 09-27-2018, 11:08 PM
Aerindel's Avatar
Aerindel Aerindel is offline
Abnormality biased.
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Nuevo Alamo
Posts: 5,846
Thanks: 7,178
Thanked 13,836 Times in 4,465 Posts
Default

Fukushima contamination was very minor.

The Japanese reaction, an extreme overreaction. I'll have to hunt a little for the link but I read a very interesting article showing that far more people where killed in car crashes from the evacuation than would have died if they all stayed in place. (which would have been 0) and thousands are dying every year from their shift back to fossil fuels.

Either way, animals do better with a little radiation and no people than they do otherwise.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Aerindel For This Useful Post:
Old 09-28-2018, 01:55 AM
ajole ajole is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 10,183
Thanks: 8,137
Thanked 23,413 Times in 7,345 Posts
Default

The media blew Fukushima up FAR worse than the nuke plant did.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ajole For This Useful Post:
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 12-17-2018, 05:22 AM
Survivalour Survivalour is offline
Will run deep into forest
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 7
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

This is very sensitive topic. You should understand that we are not told truth about such disasters.

I could tell more but it's better to read an original source. PM me if you want.
Quick reply to this message
Old 12-18-2018, 05:28 PM
CONELRAD's Avatar
CONELRAD CONELRAD is online now
Emergency Planner
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Upper Midwest
Posts: 2,539
Thanks: 499
Thanked 4,095 Times in 1,642 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Survivalour View Post
This is very sensitive topic. You should understand that we are not told truth about such disasters.

I could tell more but it's better to read an original source. PM me if you want.
And if you believe the above, I have real estate to sell you in Montana.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CONELRAD For This Useful Post:
Old 12-18-2018, 07:21 PM
PalmettoTree PalmettoTree is online now
Survivor
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 13,604
Thanks: 2,780
Thanked 18,287 Times in 7,675 Posts
Default

Video not what I expected. Thanks

Note statistics used but scientist were careful not to draw conclusion with small sample sizes. The 65% decline in radioactivity was a surprise and good news to me given only 60 months had passed.

Long term life of the wildlife might me expected but the lack of defects and continued flourishing is also encouraging.

Given this was a very bad tragedy it is encouraging to note it does not hint at the end of nature as we know it.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to PalmettoTree For This Useful Post:
Old 12-18-2018, 08:43 PM
ajole ajole is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 10,183
Thanks: 8,137
Thanked 23,413 Times in 7,345 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PalmettoTree View Post
Video not what I expected. Thanks

Note statistics used but scientist were careful not to draw conclusion with small sample sizes. The 65% decline in radioactivity was a surprise and good news to me given only 60 months had passed.

Long term life of the wildlife might me expected but the lack of defects and continued flourishing is also encouraging.

Given this was a very bad tragedy it is encouraging to note it does not hint at the end of nature as we know it.
Most of the very bad tragedy was how the whole thing was reported, is still reported, and how people reacted to all of the BS pushed by the media.

The incident itself was just a disaster, and the man who sacrificed himself to check things out should never be considered a tragedy, though it was tragic.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to ajole For This Useful Post:
Old 06-18-2019, 08:43 PM
Checkmate616's Avatar
Checkmate616 Checkmate616 is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Ohio
Posts: 15
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Default

I read most of the problem with Fukashima was the fallout escaping into the water. Not land based. *shrug*
Quick reply to this message
Old 06-18-2019, 09:16 PM
Sinthor's Avatar
Sinthor Sinthor is offline
Cat and parrot whisperer
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Peoria, AZ
Posts: 1,145
Thanks: 1,000
Thanked 1,956 Times in 771 Posts
Default

Maybe it's like in the new Godzilla movie...everywhere the radiation goes, life BLOOMS up and incredibly quickly?
__________________
All you have to decide is what to do with the time given to you...
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Sinthor For This Useful Post:
Old 06-19-2019, 01:48 AM
charliemeyer007's Avatar
charliemeyer007 charliemeyer007 is online now
reluctant sinner
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Rent Free in your head
Posts: 14,576
Thanks: 33
Thanked 25,853 Times in 9,314 Posts
Default

Some people claim that the Soviet Union failed because of the inaction and delays getting people out and the truth of what happened revealed the lies. In college I did a directed study in radio-chemistry.

I tell the no nukes folks that radioactivity existed before we learned to split atoms. At the INEL (largest concentration of reactors on the planet) EBR-2 which I think is still operational, they have to keep the back up coal pile outside the fence or it sets of the rad alarms.

When Cher blew, the boys at the INEL were one of the first to state there was a reactor issue somewhere in the world - due to their high tech monitoring.

Some of the 3 mile island core is buried on the site. When they were looking to get the state permit for that specific location my buddy and I had some questions. They checked into the answers and moved then scheduled the re-containerization of the stuff like 20 years sooner than expected. Good for them for checking and doing something about it. I could tell you lots of stories about that place - but they would likely try and kill me again.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to charliemeyer007 For This Useful Post:
Old 06-20-2019, 10:37 AM
CONELRAD's Avatar
CONELRAD CONELRAD is online now
Emergency Planner
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Upper Midwest
Posts: 2,539
Thanks: 499
Thanked 4,095 Times in 1,642 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by charliemeyer007 View Post
When Cher blew, the boys at the INEL were one of the first to state there was a reactor issue somewhere in the world - due to their high tech monitoring.

Whoever told you that is full of it. It would have been weeks before fallout from Chernobyl reached Idaho. I’ll try running a simulation later to see how long it takes.

Our ICBM launch detection satellites picked up the explosion, which is how we found out about it. But as far as fallout detection, Sweden was the first non-Soviet country to sniff it out. They originally thought it was a problem with one of their plants because workers coming *into* their plants triggered a contamination alert.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CONELRAD For This Useful Post:
Old 12-24-2019, 05:07 AM
shogu2000 shogu2000 is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 5
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Maybe irradiated animals are too sick to move or those with big defects are already dead and tha's why they don't see them too often.
Quick reply to this message
Old 12-24-2019, 12:16 PM
CONELRAD's Avatar
CONELRAD CONELRAD is online now
Emergency Planner
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Upper Midwest
Posts: 2,539
Thanks: 499
Thanked 4,095 Times in 1,642 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shogu2000 View Post
Maybe irradiated animals are too sick to move or those with big defects are already dead and tha's why they don't see them too often.
Complete and utter nonsense.

Researchers and "tourists" have been crawling all over the exclusion zones (it's not all one contiguous area you know) for decades. There has been no evidence found of these "big defects" you're referring to. Some academic papers have claimed to have found evidence of germ cell mutations, but as far as stuff like mutated catfish, "two-headed cows", or deer running around with giant tumors... that's all fiction. The most often cited example is this exhibit of a piglet with dipygus.



The assumption that this mutation was due to radiation is nonsense. Dipygus has been documented in both humans and animals long before we ever split the atom. There is no way to look at a mutation, cancer, tumor, etc, and determine it was due to radiological causes.

What we do know is that the areas reverting back to untamed wilds had a far stronger impact on the growth of animal populations, than radioactive contamination has done to shrink it.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to CONELRAD For This Useful Post:
Old 12-26-2019, 06:24 PM
Thef1tter's Avatar
Thef1tter Thef1tter is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 11 Times in 5 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CONELRAD View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by shogu2000 View Post
Maybe irradiated animals are too sick to move or those with big defects are already dead and tha's why they don't see them too often.
Complete and utter nonsense.

Researchers and "tourists" have been crawling all over the exclusion zones (it's not all one contiguous area you know) for decades. There has been no evidence found of these "big defects" you're referring to. Some academic papers have claimed to have found evidence of germ cell mutations, but as far as stuff like mutated catfish, "two-headed cows", or deer running around with giant tumors... that's all fiction. The most often cited example is this exhibit of a piglet with dipygus.



The assumption that this mutation was due to radiation is nonsense. Dipygus has been documented in both humans and animals long before we ever split the atom. There is no way to look at a mutation, cancer, tumor, etc, and determine it was due to radiological causes.

What we do know is that the areas reverting back to untamed wilds had a far stronger impact on the growth of animal populations, than radioactive contamination has done to shrink it.
Spot on. Chernobyl has remained an active reactor for A few decades now. Your most common isotopes are Ceusium, and Strontium 90. Both with relatively short fallouts. Radiation is also far more common, and naturally occurring than people want to accept.

Radiation is something you have to dismiss and step away from the bias and do hard material research to understand. Nuclear regulatory workers are limited to 55,000 microsieverts of ionizing radiation a year, astronauts spending a year on the ISS ~80,000. Average smoker? ~150,000 a year. Yet a simple scan is 3 times your yearly limit.

The truth is we don’t understand what safe levels are, where it starts to cause genetic side effects. Because we thankfully don’t want to find out. We just know that exposure to 2 sieverts causes acute radiation sickness.

Please take everything including what I say with a grain of salt. Do your own research, but don’t expect to see random mutants around nuclear disasters. That level of radiation would not mutate, it would be a lethal dose guaranteeing a horrific death.

Best regards.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Thef1tter For This Useful Post:
Old 12-27-2019, 01:08 AM
Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
Central Scrutinizer Central Scrutinizer is online now
CULT DEPROGRAMMER
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 3,419
Thanks: 3,620
Thanked 3,205 Times in 1,747 Posts
Default

If you want something to worry about, count the number of medical X Rays and especially CAT Scan's you may have had over your lifetime. Guess what, your doctors are not keeping tabs.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Central Scrutinizer For This Useful Post:
Old 12-27-2019, 11:44 AM
Thef1tter's Avatar
Thef1tter Thef1tter is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 11 Times in 5 Posts
Default

But that’s a very minimal dose of radiation. You’re naturally exposed to it everywhere. You could spend the rest of your life sleeping 100ft from reactor #3 in Chernobyl and still not get the same dose as the average smoker gets in a year.

Again a good start for agreeing on radiation is a general consesus of what’s safe. None is not a standard because you’re naturally radioactive, and natural exposure to radiation could have helped certain parts of evolution.
Quick reply to this message
Reply

Bookmarks



Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net