Japan Earthquake

Japan Earthquake | Page 54

Not sure if this was posted, says 4 pm no TZ..Greenpeace own readings
by VeenOui 3/26/2011 11:40:44 PM

www.greenpeace.org
by VeenOui 3/26/2011 11:40:47 PM

@Jim Carver : depending on the moderator, this Brita something censored everything.
by Matsuoko 3/26/2011 11:40:48 PM

@Matsuoko This is the first time I've been "allowed" to make any comments in this or any other Reuters forum. Frankly, I'm a little shocked.
by James Ward 3/26/2011 11:42:20 PM

just news from that day speak about this, i cant find the news vom nhk but hier is some from usa media www.youtube.com
by me 3/26/2011 11:42:26 PM

Opps....will post after compiling.sorryyy
by VeenOui 3/26/2011 11:42:29 PM

There is nowhere for these people to go, hence the reason northing is being said, with the amount of people homeless as it is, japan is strected to its limit. Would the world gov tell us if there was a huge problem, i dont think so, you just have to look to the last one to see the truth there, it was only because an outside source picked up the radation that it became real
by rob 3/26/2011 11:42:44 PM

@Miles : yep, blacked out by media.
by Matsuoko 3/26/2011 11:43:12 PM

@Andy I agree. What made me come back to the Reuters live blog was that it was moderated and stuck to newsflashes and educated opinions. Maybe it would be better if we started moderating, with many moderators as not to slow the pace down too much.
by kb 3/26/2011 11:43:20 PM

the plant #2 explosion was a surprise if I remember right.. they heard something but not similar to the other blasts.. it was reportedly in the suppression area
by Dean 3/26/2011 11:43:31 PM

time for dinner.. be back later. .
by Dean 3/26/2011 11:43:58 PM

Then with no news flashes to report, there would be no comments.
by Sinthia Domina 3/26/2011 11:44:34 PM

@kb who's to say if someone gives an "educated opinion" or not?
by Janis 3/26/2011 11:44:59 PM

@Andy : i don't see the problems in comparing fuku with cherno. speaking about the amount of radiation and the amount of fuel it is correct that fukushima will soon exceed chernobyl radiation. what's your problem in comparing it ?
by Matsuoko 3/26/2011 11:45:50 PM

I enjoy reading scientific facts here, as well as
by Janis 3/26/2011 11:45:56 PM

oops, the opinions, ideas or speculations of "average" people
by Janis 3/26/2011 11:46:18 PM

A THOUGHT: It was m experience over at Reuters, that I would find some info, it would not be approved b moderators, then Reuters would post the info as their own story. Did that happen to anyone else?
by Sinthia Domina 3/26/2011 11:46:40 PM

@Sinthia Domina - Worse. There is a major cover-up to avoid panic. But I'am understanding the japanese (and american) officials.
by Ben 3/26/2011 11:47:00 PM

@Janis Moderators, I guess. It's not an easy task, though.
by kb 3/26/2011 11:47:40 PM

That;s newspapers for you synthia
by Charlie 3/26/2011 11:47:49 PM

@Sin Very true for me, esp. with some moderators
by marie rich 3/26/2011 11:48:00 PM

I'm confident we can moderate these comments ourselves; we've been pretty much together on this thus far. Sure it's scary, and it's ok to be human.
by es 3/26/2011 11:48:12 PM

@Sin -- yes, it happened to me, but that was OK with me because my motive (I think) is helping communiicate facts rather than taking credit for being the smartest blogger!
by Alaskan 3/26/2011 11:48:13 PM

@Janis, same here sometimes i have knowledge to add, most of the time i listen (read the blog)
by WolfDK 3/26/2011 11:48:19 PM

Maybe it would make sense to have two discussion forums. One for people that want to talk about conspiracy theories, cover-ups, "media blackouts", and supernatural things and one for just news and scientific information. This way both groups would be happy.
by M 3/26/2011 11:48:20 PM

Glad it wasn't just me.
by Sinthia Domina 3/26/2011 11:48:32 PM

The only news I could find this evening was an update from the IAEA. Sounds like fresh water in multiple reactors. They said 2 was getting fresh water I also saw blog post referencing HNK (not in english) that 2 had a leak into the non-reactor water system and was spewing radioactive water out that way. If anyone can find actual evidence to back it up please post.
by Nancy 3/26/2011 11:48:37 PM

@kb It would be nice to have moderators and I understand why we can't have 100% moderation...it's tough! I live in upstate New York and I have my friends asking me if I have a dosimeter because they think the government is lying to us. It's ridiculous! No one wants to be logical about this and say "Okay, Chernobyl did not impact my life here in the U.S. in any significant way and that was more radiation than Fukushima." Instead, they want to THINK the government is lying and make others panic, too. It's upsetting. And my problem with comparing Chernobyl and Fukushima is this: do you see an explosion with fuel rod pieces flying around everywhere? Do you see people dying within days of exposure from Fukushima? I do not. As far as I know I heard on CNN yesterday that 60% of the amount of radiation that came from Chernobyl has come from Fukushima, OVER TWO WEEKS. This means that it is dissipating in the atmosphere and not making contact with most humans in the amount that it did at Chernobyl. That's why I don't like comparing. This is much slower, and though it may not be better than no radiation at all, it is dissipating far faster than the massive explosion at Chernobyl.
by Andy 3/26/2011 11:48:54 PM

Sorry for the lengthy response
by Andy 3/26/2011 11:49:50 PM

@James Ward : shocked by what ?
by Matsuoko 3/26/2011 11:50:04 PM

@Andy don't be your voicing your opinion and bringing balance
by George Gibb 3/26/2011 11:50:36 PM

I think a lot of people here, myself included were not inclined to be so suspicious of the media but watching how this has unfolded has made a lot of us lean more towards conspiracy.
by Sinthia Domina 3/26/2011 11:50:54 PM

@Andy, the difference is that most of the Fukushima fuel is still on-site and what isn't didn't get very far. Definitely not a risk to us here in the USA (and you live 2x as far from Fukushima as I do) but still very interesting to me to see the response or lack thereof. I get more exposure from my daily banana.
by Alaskan 3/26/2011 11:51:24 PM

@Sin did Dean resolve the situation on FB?
by marie rich 3/26/2011 11:52:29 PM

Here's a March 22nd interview I overlooked and it's straight science, not personal opinion or speculation: Comparisons with X-rays and CT scans “meaningless” — Inhaling particles increases radiation exposure by “a factor of a trillion” says expert - March 22nd, 2011 at 12:32 PM tinyurl.com
by James Ward 3/26/2011 11:53:07 PM

It's when it gets caught in rainclouds that it gets worse, that's why we still have the 3/4 million radioactive sheep here. It was concentrated in the clouds and then fell on the Cumbrian Moors.
by Charlie 3/26/2011 11:53:11 PM

@James Ward -- which is why indoor radon gas is a big risk in many parts of the USA
by Alaskan 3/26/2011 11:54:13 PM

AmbassadorRoos has been tweeting about KI being made available for American citizens in Japan but stresses that it is not needed at this time. He is now listing pick up points at hotels etc with times
by elainekirk 3/26/2011 11:54:35 PM

@Andy I would think that the current contamination is mostly iodine and cesium coming from the fuel rods, and not the nasty volatile stuff coming from the reactors. But since there has been no release of plutonium and alpha-emitter contamination numbers, we can only speculate.
by Bobby1 3/26/2011 11:54:41 PM

Based on that James why is radioactivity blamed as the 2nd biggest cause of lung cancer?
by Charlie 3/26/2011 11:54:47 PM

I'm picking up alpha today for the first time. Not a lot but it was there.
by Charlie 3/26/2011 11:56:07 PM

@James Ward Thats is why alpha-emitter information is crucial.
by Bobby1 3/26/2011 11:56:10 PM

@Andy check out these photos and tell me what you think
by George Gibb 3/26/2011 11:56:37 PM

www.dasgelbeforum.de.org
by George Gibb 3/26/2011 11:56:44 PM

@Bobby1 This is the type of speculation that I think is healthy...it's not implying doom upon the citizens of the Earth, it's just a simple scientific comment that contributes to the conversation. As for what you said, I'm not sure what that means but it sounds smart! What is alpha-emitter contamination numbers and why are those very important?
by Andy 3/26/2011 11:57:00 PM