Japan Earthquake

Japan Earthquake | Page 43

Oh, Mars is about to dive in with both feet. On April Fools Day (no less) it enters Aries and into conjunction with Uranus. By the new moon on the 3rd there will be 6 planets in Aries. This is just the pre-ignition sequence now. (Been an astrologer for 40 years. This past three has taught me more about the granularity of it than the previous 37 years together. It's been textbook. We're in the end game now of an epic battle between the forces of the status quo, which we all know is fubar, and the forces of radical change. And we really have to be on the side of radical change. You see it in the revolutions in the Middle east, you saw it in BP--Deepwater Horizon fell on the last contact of this aspect last April.--we saw it in the economic meltdown that started this whole 3 year transit. I know believing in astrology moves me over the line for many, but I've watched it for too long not to. Oh. The metal of Uranus is, of course, uranium.
by radioguy 3/26/2011 8:29:06 PM

@Paul: Lol! nice to see a good sense of humour! we need it!
by nestor 3/26/2011 8:29:12 PM

"Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us." Jerry Garcia
by JPH 3/26/2011 8:30:13 PM

@NHK Listener oH , I just get it, it took me some time ,-) BTW, it's closer too to Areva, which sell the Mox, and japan will meet us before they meet 3 milles island . put [joking] or anything else in your comment, damned ;-)
by Future Isnow 3/26/2011 8:30:40 PM

@Tenzing It
by Janis 3/26/2011 8:30:47 PM

fukushim 5.00 am pointsSorry Max but the lackcope01.jp
by hans edited by George Gibb 3/26/2011 8:30:57 PM

@radioguy good post
by George Gibb 3/26/2011 8:31:01 PM

Sorry, it's really poignant to see how beautiful that area was before, and how normal life was.
by Janis 3/26/2011 8:31:15 PM

@radioguy This is true and I'm an Aries born in 1961 with 4 planets in Aries. Uranus moved into Aries on March 11, 2011. Gives a whole different perspective to GRAVITY.
by Tenzing 3/26/2011 8:31:33 PM

@Tenzing Agreed. At this point though what can be done to make nuclear reactors "safe"? Meaning no possibility of this happening again.
by Jojo 3/26/2011 8:31:38 PM

@Marie My feeling about "Le Monde" and "Liberation" Fukushima's cover. A lot of differences from 1986 and Chernobyl (you know when french government said that the contamination stopped at the french frontiers...). In fact "glasnost" is better BUT France is the most nuclear country in the world. The strangest is that some "incidents" (The Blayais power plant with diesel generators out of order in 1999 not by tsunami, only with wind and sea...) are now known (but denied a month ago). Sarkozy offers "french expertise " to Japan because "french reactors and EPR are the best..." as he offers french expertise to Tunisia last december... Le Monde has not an antinuclear position but it seems to me that they cover a lot the accident (on television it is now 20'). The fact is that french government and Areva (The Mox "dealer" around the world) want to save french nuclear the official communication don't know what to do ("Fukushima is not a problem" or "Fukushima is a problem but in France we have the solution with EPR"). All french analyses are pertubated with the 2012 presidential elections. "Official" press is now far from Fukushima (and near Libya with Sarkozy). Tomorow there are local elections in France and the "green" party did last sunday a very good 8.9% (I apologise about the 15% of National FronT Party...). Next monday I am sure that "french communication" will be under "order". Best regards
by Olivier 3/26/2011 8:32:13 PM

@Jojo I think it begins with the quality of construction of the site/plant according to the geographic environment.
by Tenzing 3/26/2011 8:32:48 PM

sorry, but are these recent personal chats really help this page - or the facts to be clarified?
by Max 3/26/2011 8:33:03 PM

@Tenzing exactly. Check that timing. Uranus enters the sign of war and rapid action on the same day the plant blows.
by radioguy 3/26/2011 8:33:40 PM

@Future Isnow Well yeah, there are different types of faults and while I'm not extremely up on the techtonics of that region, I know it was a strike-slip fault. Those are the most dangerous for earthquakes because they store up potential energy and then release it suddenly. Some faults just "creep" along and no problem. It actually has to do with the composition of the rock. Researchers in CA found that in areas where faults creep, there is a layer of talc that provides a lubricant. But the average displacement for these two types of faults can be the same.
by Jim Carver 3/26/2011 8:34:13 PM

@max I think there is room for Science and Humanity
by Tenzing 3/26/2011 8:34:15 PM

@Tenzing But the problem is how can you trust any engineering from the nuclear industry is "safe"? If Fukushima wasn't deemed safe, why was it allowed to remain operational? If Fukushima was deemed safe, how can future words of "safety" mean anything?
by Jojo 3/26/2011 8:35:22 PM

@JPH ... and I'll bet he's Grateful to be Dead right now! ;-)
by Paul (UK) 3/26/2011 8:35:27 PM

The salient point in my post on the astrology is that the status quo will, at this point in the cycle, do anything they can to hang on. Lying to protect their interests is the least of it. Anyone been watching politics for the past 3 years? Ever seen anything like it?
by radioguy 3/26/2011 8:35:48 PM

OK, accepted as there are no real news available so far - be them good or bad;-( I fear tomorrow I have to read some 20 pages of ..., ok, my problem
by Max 3/26/2011 8:36:48 PM

I mean, Fukushima was "safe", up until the minute it wasn't. How are all the reactors in the world safe from other kinds of natural disaster, or even terrorist attacks? Sabotage?
by Jojo 3/26/2011 8:37:03 PM

@jojo good question! So how do we make them safe?
by Tenzing 3/26/2011 8:37:47 PM

Yes... "Completely safe" until something goes wrong, then "Who could have expected?"
by radioguy 3/26/2011 8:38:05 PM

@Tenzing I don't think it's possible. Ergo...
by Jojo 3/26/2011 8:38:09 PM

@Jojo good point
by radioguy 3/26/2011 8:38:41 PM

There is room for humanities as well as science, people need both, fuku after all means well-being or good fortune, so hopefully fukushima will once again be an 'island of good fortune'
by andyjsha 3/26/2011 8:39:00 PM

@ Jojo: Haven't you learned even up to the latest news of every country: Every reactor is safe and was safe - until something unexpected happens. In that case we can still use the phrase "however".
by Max 3/26/2011 8:39:51 PM

@all Not sure if this has been posted - the BBC's current watering down of the threat of radiation: www.bbc.co.uk
by es 3/26/2011 8:40:16 PM

@olivier. Good summary. lemonde.fr still provides daily accounts on the nuclear crisis and also about the terrible situations people have to face in the norht.
by nestor 3/26/2011 8:40:29 PM

We'll need help from someone with lots better technology (maybe future us) to bring that picture to fruition for Fukushima. It's going to be damaged for a long time.
by radioguy 3/26/2011 8:40:43 PM

Terrorists watch TV, they must be licking their chops right now. Just think driving a truck bomb through the gates, crashing into a reactor, and detonating. I bet a lot of nuke plants don't even have gates.
by Jojo 3/26/2011 8:40:47 PM

But please don't post on here what terrorists could do to maximize damage. You get the point though.
by Jojo 3/26/2011 8:41:35 PM

@Jojo & radioguy we can always plan for the worst case scenario, humans by nature exaggerate almost from birth. Jojo If you truly believe that Nuclear Energy is unsafe and impossible to contain then what are you willing to do about your beliefs?
by Tenzing 3/26/2011 8:41:56 PM

@Jojo They're "designed to handle that... after all, they have to contain a nuclear reactor" Reassuring eh?
by radioguy 3/26/2011 8:41:59 PM

in austria we are circled of 20 nuklear plants, 4 without containment vessel. this is a really serious situation....pls turn off nuklear plants
by hans 3/26/2011 8:42:11 PM

@jojo, Not a problem with modern reactors, old ones on the other hand..
by WolfDK 3/26/2011 8:42:45 PM

@all so maybe we need to clean up our mess as in the old reactors.
by Tenzing 3/26/2011 8:43:34 PM

So there is fresh water now. This is a good new but ... for how long ? The capacity of US navy seems to me very little.
by Olivier 3/26/2011 8:44:03 PM

@Tenzing I can view the Fukushima accident and clearly see nuclear power is unsafe. How can you think it's safe, we'll only have a worldwide release of massive radioactive contamination every 20-30 years and that's ok?
by Jojo 3/26/2011 8:44:05 PM

@Tenzing, that would be a good start and seems to be what Germany is planing to do after the Fukushima accident
by WolfDK 3/26/2011 8:45:16 PM

this is the worst technik ever. energy is our death future
by hans 3/26/2011 8:45:17 PM

My hope out of this is that against all odds it is contained, the people are relocated somewhere safer, and we actually talk this over without sugar-coating the issues to sell a bad technology. If we use fission at all, it has to be treated like the snarling beast it actually is. Yes you can harness it, but don't ever lose control for a second. We've been a bit cavalier about our abilities to deal with disasters of our own making, obviously.
by radioguy 3/26/2011 8:45:46 PM

@WolfDK Right, so why aren't they shutting down these old reactors TODAY? Just roll the dice every day? And how do we KNOW these reactors are safe? You can't trust the nuclear companies that make them because they will always say they are safe.
by Jojo 3/26/2011 8:45:56 PM