The four places on earth, Chernobyl, Fukushima, Hiroshima and Nagasaki with, likely, very high levels of radiation show no danger to mammals.
Below is a link to a Daily Mail article:
(wolf in Chernobyl pictured)
The idea that these nuclear contaminated areas are dangerous, clearly, needs further investigation. I'm not suggesting radiation doesn't have a half-life, just that you'd probably need to eat contaminated material for there to be a health issue. Clearly, if Chenobyl is contaminated and detrimental to life, then someone should have informed the vegetation and animals alike who seem to be thriving.
If you search YouTube for 'nuclear bomb hoax' you'll be presented with any number of 'conspiracy theorists', but we don't need to believe them, we just need to take another look at the evidence on the ground.
If any of this is true then we must conclude that Governments around the world are colluding to keep the general public scared and fearful. They know that a fearful person is more prone to propaganda and more willing to conform to their narrative.
Maybe it is time to 'let go of fear' and allow ourselves domain over our own perception. If we are not prepared to do this, someone or organisation will happily provide us with this service.
One of my favourite films for understanding consciousness and illustrating how to 'let go of fear' is by Director Guy Richie (who also co-wrote it) called 'Revolver' 2005.
"Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration."
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Without seeing how much radiation is being released or present, mrads, rads, rem, it's hard to know how long someone could be in the environment without it doing harm. In the states the are guidelines for how long people can be exposed to different types of radiation, who is considered an occupational worker, etc.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Have you given any consideration to my blog. Why is Chernobyl thriving? That is the question, not USA guidelines from Government which I was asking you to question in the first place.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I did give consideration to it. I was stating that there are different levels of radiation and there are different guidelines for amount of levels that people can safely be exposed to. The guidelines are based from the records and data that has been kept by different people in the different areas that were exposed to different levels of radiation. The bulk of those records came from Japan because they had before and after records of the atomic bombs.
With the initial comment I was going add the above to it but got distracted and posted what I had. I also was going to include that's great that nature is coming back to those areas but I don't see anything about how much radiation is present. Without some measurement or data it's hard to gauge how safe it is. You can measure how much radiation is being released. I use to work with moisture density gauges that have two radioactive sources. Companies that utilizes the gauges are required to measure the radiation levels in their buildings, the storage area, surrounding offices and sometimes employees have to wear a badge that indicates how much radiation is be released. I think in year I could not exceed 3rem because the general population is exposed to 5rem a year (it might be rads, I can't recall off the top of my head). If I got to 3, I no longer had to use the gauge for the remainder of the year but I think the highest most people get is 1.5 or 2 while using the gauges. You would literally have to take the beta radiation source out and play with it to do any damage.
I apologize that I didn't finish my initial comment.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
No worries, I'm grateful you bothered to reply :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I realise you're answering with great knowledge and integrity. The question remains, why is it the people who refuse to move from their homes around Fukushima and Chernobyl are not dropping dead but seeming to be no worse the wear, just like the other mammals who appear to be thriving? You obviously know the numbers, inside and out, but the question is, can we trust the numbers?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
To answer your first question, it depends on the levels and type of radiation. Organisms can with stand lots of alpha radiation for different reasons, hair, skin, sweat. Beta radiation can penetrate through hair and skin but not get down into the innards. Gamma goes all the way through. Depending on how strong the source is and the type is how long you can be exposed. The are some good articles about K-19, a Soviet sub that had a leak and hiw it took time for the radiation sickness to take effect.
To contribute to your thought about the government creating fear, the pawns, media and entertainment, do plenty of fearmongering . Most of our fears come from almost propaganda grade movies and TV shows. My opinion is the Simpsons did a good job of making sure that people are afraid of nuclear power and the radiation.
Edit:
My apologies for answers more technical than philosophical, I have been trouble shooting issues since Friday and I took the wrong approach to your blog.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit