New Fukushima Leak Patched with Plastic Tape, Radiation Readings Soar

Pic: Accuweather (C)

Pic: Accuweather (C)

Why hasn’t the Invisible Hand of the Market fixed this yet?  Via Common Dreams:

Radiated water leaking from tanks at Japan’s crippled Fukushima nuclear plant is 18 times more dangerous than had been previously reported.

The Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), which owns the Dai-Ichi Fukushima plant, originally said the radiation emitted by the leaking water was 100 millisieverts an hour.

Now, the company admits, the testing equipment used in the previously announced August 22nd testing could only read measurements of up to a maximum of 100 millisieverts.

Saturday’s test, using a more accurate device, showed a level of 1,800 millisieverts an hour, a level that Reuters says is “enough to kill an exposed person in four hours.”

In addition, TEPCO announced Sunday that it has discovered a leak on another pipe emitting radiation levels of 230 millisieverts an hour. TEPCO said it halted the leak from a pipe connecting two water storage tanks by patching it with plastic tape just hours after stumbling upon the potentially lethal radioactive hot spot.

Japan Times reports Sunday:

The pipe, which was leaking a drop about every 90 seconds, was sealed using absorption material and plastic tape. A puddle of giving off 230 millisieverts per hour was found below it, TEPCO said.

“We have to suspect that the high radiation levels were caused by the toxic water oozing from the flange connections,” a TEPCO spokesman said, adding that no conclusions had been reached.

, , ,

  • bobbiethejean

    First BP spills several metric fucktons of oil into the ocean then this happened. There’s also the continent’s worth of plastic floating around in the Pacific. I think the lesson here is fuck the oceans! We don’t really need them. Except that we kinda really do, a lot.

    • kowalityjesus

      wake up, Fukushima will never affect the lives of Americans, or anyone else outside Japan.

      The pacific ocean is too damn huge to be affected by one point source of radiation. the waters off the west coast will have radiation levels increase 10-30 becquerels per/m^3 but that is 100-400 times weaker than the radiation an average human experiences from the potassium they contain in their bodies (4 kilobecquerels). This is a nonsense conspiracy.

      Revision: it can be a small or big problem given the potential for bioaccumulation.

      • bobbiethejean

        You really don’t think it’s a problem that a metric fuckton of radiation is leaking into the ocean? Really? You know, a lot of people think similar things about the planet in general. They think the planet is too big for us to really affect it. That’s obvious bullshit but people still believe it.

    • kowalityjesus

      Revision to my previous position:

      Fuckashima can be a small or big problem given the potential for dissolution, metabolisation, and bioaccumulation in human-consumed predators of strontium 90 (of which there is comparatively little compared to Chernobyl) and caesium 137 (which may or may not actually bioaccumulate) in ocean currents. Thank you everyone for bringing the reality of the scenario outside of disinfo, misinfo, and total paranoia. But it will probably not really effect nature itself that much.

      • atlanticus

        “And if it’s true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm:
        the earth plus plastic. The earth doesn’t share our prejudice toward
        plastic. Plastic came out of the earth. The earth probably sees
        plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason
        the earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place. It
        wanted plastic for itself. Didn’t know how to make it. Needed us.
        Could be the answer to our age-old egocentric philosophical question, “Why are we here?”

        Plastic… asshole.”

        - George Carlin

        But seriously, radiation / pollution / etc. is still bad for US and our environment NOW, whether or not the earth does heal itself in the long-term…

        “wake up, Fukushima will never affect the lives of Americans, or anyone else outside Japan.”

        Whether or not you give a shit about the Japanese, I know some people in Japan and I’d rather they did not become cancerous mutants, because they were very, very nice and didn’t even say anything about how much they hated my gift and poor song choice at the karaoke…

        Furthermore, I don’t know if you are aware of this, but there are also such things as “Japanese-Americans” who may also be affected.

        • kowalityjesus

          yeah, well the reason why I made a giant stink is because people in every forum I have ever visited had all sorts of unscientific and irrational things they feared about fukushima. I hope the Japanese can handle the mess, it was extremely unfortunate that this should happen to them. It would be nice if Americans were not distracted by nonsense issues like a totally unnecessary war in Syria and dumb television/movies that they would help one of our closest allies who has nothing to export except culture and electronics. I have always admired that about the Japanese, very few natural resources, not much land area, devastated by frequent earthquakes, one of the worlds leading powers. In the USA most of what we export is corn and fiat currency. : ( but then there’s this guy who is awesome: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9N-IuBhRuA

  • BuzzCoastin

    THEY may have screwed up with nuclear power
    but I totally trust They when it comes to GMO food
    and rely on their integrity to keep me from harm
    said Joe Sixpak

  • Cortacespedes

    So, how do you go about “fixing” a deadly leak from a highly technical thermal power station? Kitty litter and duct tape!

  • kowalityjesus

    I don’t know who is promoting this story, but it seems like a big nothing. Does anyone remember atmospheric nuclear testing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_Test_Ban_Treaty

    I’ve heard so much shit about Fuckasshima, and none of it ever amounts to a bucket of donkey jizz. This is a big fat disinformation campaign to give jerk-off conspiracy theorists something to jerk off about. Its a problem locally, but will NEVER EVER EVER be a problem for anyone else. prove me wrong.

    • Andrew

      Thanks for reminding me why I don’t trust Christians.

      • kowalityjesus

        prove me wrong, what will happen in Fukushima that will EVER impact the life of anyone outside of Japan.

        • Andrew
          • kowalityjesus

            haha no I’m not. The first link you gave says that ‘radiation levels in the water off the Canadian/American coast north of Oregon will increase by 10-30 becquerels per cubic meter from 2014-2020.’ Unfortunately you forgot to look up how hilariously small a becquerel is:

            “Like any SI unit, Bq can be prefixed; commonly used multiples are kBq (kilobecquerel, 103 Bq), MBq (megabecquerel, 106 Bq), GBq (gigabecquerel, 109 Bq), TBq (terabecquerel, 1012 Bq), and PBq (petabecquerel, 1015 Bq). For practical application, 1 Bq is a small unit; therefore, the prefixes are common. For example, natural potassium (40K) in a typical human body produces 4,000 disintegrations per second, 4 kBq of activity.”
            -wikipedia
            Yes that, is how *ridiculously* blown out of proportion the language is in that article. It says a radiation level is dangerous that is 133-400 times weaker than the radiation released by potassium inside the human body…in sea water off the coast…per cubic meter……

            The second link was scarce for meaningful data except for also gravely warning us that the radiation off the west coast would increase by a catastrophic 10 becquerels! It also presented some scary graphs of ocean currents, one of which actually showed the projected radiation plume in the ocean over a period of 18 years but despite its ominous appearance failed to provide any units by which to ascertain any meaningful information.

            On the third link, though the claims are scarier, I was failing to find substantiated (i.e. correctly cited) facts so I followed the links they are using as citations at the bottom of the page. In its entirety, these are 1)”washingtonsblog” (once again, the second link you gave me), 2)the “forbidden knowledge network” which claims:

            “People on the west coast of the United States and even in Arizona are reporting a metallic taste in their mouths – an indication of radioactive particles in the air as in Japan.”

            And 3)”collapsenet .com” who seems to be the source of the widely cited scary numbers. When I followed the citation for the scary numbers, they all pointed to an interview with Jeff Ruch on March 17 2011, (less than a week after the tsunami occurred). Jeff Ruch is the head of PEER (public employees for environmental responsibility), but there is no reference to these numbers on PEER’s website nor any reference to this interview on google.

            If my notion of ‘how dramatic people can be about something quite negligible’ was fading, this research has revived it to a new pinnacle. Its like when everybody put on their tinfoil hat, they suddenly forgot about how goddamned big the Pacific Ocean is, or that 100 open air nuclear bombs were set off in Nevada between 1951 and 1963. QED

          • Andrew

            I should’ve expected that kind of laboriously myopic denial. Go take a long swim in the Gulf of Mexico, and eat plenty of fish while you’re there.

          • kowalityjesus

            look at that critical avatar, as though he’s carefully considering the things that I’ve said…poser

          • Andrew

            My avatar is indeed a picture of a poser, but I bet you don’t know who it is. Nonetheless, you’re right, I don’t take most of you write as valid, but rather as dangerously wrong.

          • kowalityjesus

            hmm, gosling. I always figured it was just you. Actors are posers. But I don’t have any kind words for people who can’t accept when they have lost an argument especially a scientific one. It is woefully immature.

          • Andrew

            Gosling as..?

            I don’t agree that I’ve lost the argument. You were the one that made the initial claim, that nobody outside Japan will ever be affected. That’s a rather extreme claim, made worse by capitalizing entire words, and focusing on becquerels in the water off the west coast of the U.S. doesn’t come close to proving it.

            Here’s some more recent info, which gives us even more reason for concern:

            http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/sep/01/fukushima-radiation-levels-higher-japan

            http://nationalreport.net/breaking-fukushima-crisis-escalates-tons-radioactive-waste-released-pacific-causes-ocean-boil/

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/02/fukushima-leaks_n_3855621.html

            You know what an ecosystem is, right? And how dependent we are on the oceans?

          • kowalityjesus

            I don’t really care, I don’t watch movies.

            You demonstrate an uncanny ability to link to articles without actually making any arguments and without actually picking articles that contradict my position. None of these articles posit that there is any threat to anywhere besides Japan. The “National Report” one claims that:

            “Almost two hours after today’s incident what’s being called the “Fukushima Plume of Death” is rapidly bearing down on Hawaii. It’s estimated once Hawaii is hit California will be hit about 90 minutes after. The effects of the nuclear plume are either unknown or being kept from the public. Neither the Japanese or American government has commented on what threat the plume may pose. Right now its anyone’s guess.”

            Are you kidding me, an OCEAN CURRENT will travel 2,400 miles in 90 minutes? That is mach 2.2! What?!

            Also, I have a minor in environmental studies, as if academic credentials would mean anything to an ‘internet intellectual.’ Probably the fact that humans cant fish in those waters will make it more like a wildlife preserve, like what happened surrounding Chernobyl.

          • Calypso_1

            The heat plume they are referring to is not a transmission of the current. It is thermal conduction through the current. Heat is conducted at the speed of sound which is ~4.5x faster in salt water than in air. That measure is straight line transmission & any conduction over distance will be reduced via angular momentum within the fluid dynamics.

          • kowalityjesus

            Well thank you for explain king this better than the article, but since when is thermal pollution the concern at hand? Water does not ‘absorb’ radioactivity it must have radioactive material dissolved or suspended in it, n’est pas

          • Calypso_1

            I am neither a hydrologist nor marine scientist so commenting in depth is out of my knowledge base. The article is rather sensational…but its media. Thermal pollution is real. It seriously affects ecosystems. It can cause huge algae blooms & die offs of other organisms affecting food chains. Increased kinetics of the water molecules are going to speed the distribution of any particulate mater in the current, radioactive or otherwise.
            I haven’t been actively studying Fukushima, but I would be very cautious in believing the effects will be negligible. Having personally experienced the BP oil spill I am well aware that it has not been a world ending event as some lamented. Nevertheless, there are new effects being discovered on a regular basis that don’t make MSM coverage.
            I think you are correct in suggesting nature has a resiliency greater than any one event or even mankind kind itself.

          • kowalityjesus

            The reason I am so visceral about this is because this is the first forum, of very, very many where the actual scientific effects of the disaster are being discussed (and only after I made a giant stink) instead of a series of emotionally potent overgeneralizations. I did some yard work for a guy who had been on disability (and therefore cooped up in his house) for a half year, and he had fallen into studying conspiracy theories. Among my disciplines, I am what I would call very well acquainted with conspiracy. He tried to barf out all sorts of amateur shit at me, and I had little basis to counter him in person (fukushima was his flagship doomsday).

            I called him up later to level points that I had researched to show him that he was so full of it, and to tell him not to waste time worrying about stuff that won’t matter even if its true because I have been there and its mentally deteriorating. He was clinging to his flimsy doomsday theories like an abusive husband. It was pathetic. Very short attention span, very proud demeanor, and very underdeveloped higher reasoning faculties. In my book, Fukushima is just a couple steps about Nibiru as far as alternative news content.

          • Calypso_1

            It can be a sobering experience to see the effects of conspiratorial thought systems on those who may be experiencing a deficit of thought process, whether brought about by isolation or more organic causes. It is best not to argue specifics in most cases. Someone cooped up in a house would be better served reconnecting with the outdoors & their immediate environment before attempting to parse their associations with the world at large.

          • Andrew

            All three of the articles I linked to give reason for concern. The leakage is larger than previously claimed, and there is no good plan to stop it.

            And if you have a minor in environmental studies, then no, I no longer value such credentials.

          • Jin The Ninja

            a- it’s ‘poseur’

            b- i am constantly torn whether you are a troll or just ignorant. i have a hard time believing that someone could crucially neglect that analogously the ocean and it’s currents function very much like a circulatory system of a body, and like a body-all natural processes are inherently linked and vital to maintaining the health of a system as a whole. not to mention we live in a globalised economy with diaspora groups existing around the world and a commodified food system that capitalises on the cultural and the ‘exotic.’

            van-city was the first city in north america to have a sushi restaurant, it is the 2nd highest sushi consuming population in N. America next to NYC (pretty good in population context). Therein exists the problem, all exported food stuffs are theoretically ‘tainted,’ all pacific ocean products are theoretically ‘tainted’ and the higher up the food chain you go the higher concentration of toxins are present. That is basic ecology.

            to say no one will be affected is so anti-intellectual, it almost is painful. almost. if i actually believed readers would take you seriously. which i do not.

          • kowalityjesus

            Wait sorry, I noticed the bottom part of your post had actual scientific content, besides ridiculous claims like making a position in an argument that no one can seem to dispel is “anti-intellectual.” It might be asinine (which its not), but its not “anti-intellectual.”
            Biological accumulation is indeed a problem with cesium, because it acts much like potassium in organisms. The question that I would challenge you to answer at this point is “How much of a problem will this present?” I doubt it will be much of a problem because diluting the ’330 tons of highly radioactive water’ into the Pacific would be negligible, since 1 ton of water is slightly less than a cubic meter, and there are 714,000,000,000 cubic meters of water in the Pacific ocean. Even with bioaccumulation, a factor of 0.5ppb of dilute radioactivity would I think still be fairly negligible.

          • Ted Heistman

            I think Nuclear power is fucked, But I agree that basically, why be more paranoid than you need to? I think, though this should be a wake up call to phase nuclear power out. A lot of activists do fudge and scare monger, though.

            The Ocean is polluted though, not just by radiation, but by plastic and mercury.

          • kowalityjesus

            yeah the Pacific is by far more polluted by plastic than radiation. This issue is a red herring, we should be getting rid of single-use plastic bags instead of worrying about common nuclear power plants (yes we should start decommissioning ones near fault lines), or invading another sovereign nation. Environmentalism can be a cause that unites America! It can be the War on Waste, not the War on Terror!

          • Ted Heistman

            I think we should decommission them all! and then get rid of all the Nukes! Then clean up the plastic!

          • kowalityjesus

            All of those things are a big deal that would take a lot of unity from a very conscious and concerned electorate…something that we currently woefully lack. Otherwise we could just submit to a VERY benevolent dictatorship. I nominate Matt Staggs for benevolent dictator.

          • Ted Heistman

            I doubt he wants the job. I on the other hand actually wouldn’t mind being a World Dictator! BWAHAHAHAHAH!!!!

          • kowalityjesus

            I will start a petition immediately.

          • Bluebird_of_Fastidiousness

            I would present a few scientific points which you may not have considered.

            Firstly, it is important to understand the difference between internal and external exposure. While it is true that those radioactive disintegrations are diluted per volume throughout the Pacific, the background emissions are not what concerns informed people. The isotopes themselves are dangerous on a molecular level. Certainly a few in one’s body present less of a chance of genetic damage and therefor cancer than a whole lot, but it doesn’t take very much to cause substantial harm. Unlike exposure to a single wave like a CAT scan, this stuff sticks around, continually damaging the surrounding cells, and their genetic material.

            There is NO safe level of exposure. This is well established in medical literature. There are varying degrees of risk depending on various factors, especially age. Children and the yet unborn are extremely vulnerable, as genetic damage done is extrapolated over the course of their development.

            There is a lot of misinformation on the topic. A lot of disinfomation as well. Some of it is chicken little, much of it is nepharious manipulation by authorities. No conspiracy is required, only converging interests. If we have no reason to be afraid, then the EPA should start atmospheric testing which it ceased in the weeks after the tsunami. What were they hiding? TEPCO has lied, bald faced, many times. If fish from the Pacific is to be considered safe, then there should be robust, statistically significant, and publicly available testing of that fish. Again, regulatory authorities refuse to test. Why?

          • kowalityjesus

            Wow, I wish 0.001% of material I read about Fukushima stated the facts that you just did. According to a quote in a National Geographic article, caesium is not very bioaccumulating, but according to an abstract on a research paper by Alva and Gobas from Nov 2011, caesium was 1000 times higher in orca than in salmon (their primary prey) and 13,000 times higher than in phytoplankton, which seems to imply that it does bioaccumulate.

            I cannot find anywhere that states the chemicals in which elemental caesium and strontium are leaving the reactor, but they are alkali and alkali earth metals respectively, which makes their behavior roughly analogous to calcium. Both of their oxides are soluble (settles that question) but not extremely soluble, which will mean that whatever doesn’t plop in the substrate outside the plant will move with the current and not sink (though I read in a “japantimes” article that caesium in water will sink, could just be “saving face”).

            Though it is extremely fishy that the EPA would stop tests at such a crucial moment, I don’t see how the atmosphere could currently have any appreciable concentration of radioactive elements. The overwhelmingly vast majority of it would have precipitated out in the weeks following the single hydrogen explosion of the reactor. I’ve read that there is no established safe level because scientists have a wide variety of individual cases where certain exposures to radiation turned out alternatively disastrous or inconsequential. I don’t think it is good to NOT do tests of the water and fish, (how is it ever good to be not sure when you could be sure?) but I don’t think that the concentrations of St90 and Cs137 entering ocean currents will be very significant, nor unprecedented considering the multiple nuclear bombs that went off in the south pacific during the last 60 years.

          • Bluebird_of_Fastidiousness

            Thanks for considering another point of view. It’s hard to find reliable information. My best source has perennially been Arnie Gunderson of Fairewinds. He’s a nuclear scientist and whistle-blower. He is legally and academically responsible and measured in his statements. He does a lot of interviews. Google him sometime if you want to learn more.

            I agree people probably blow this out of proportion, although when I say probably I actually mean hopefully because nuclear meltdowns are super scary and may be one of the worst things that can ever happen. I can’t believe people are insane enough to mess with nuclear technology. We need to shut them all down.

          • Jin The Ninja

            systems ecology is not science?

            i disagree.

            one can use holistic language (or pedestrian if you prefer) to describe scientific processes. it may not have the nuance and absolute-ness of cold hard numbers, but it is still valid. you may try reading literature on ethnobotany and related disciplines for a similar linguistic paradigm.

            but we all know your relationship to language is problematic, or shall i cite the last few engagements wherein you (problematically) decided to arbitrarily re-define words at your whim, incorrectly correct others’ grammatical ‘errors,’ and ultimately delete your own comments as they grew increasingly hysterical and expletive-laden?

            you cannot ignore either the economic or political implications of environmental destruction- they are both cause and effect.
            forces that grow and expedite the problem exponentially.

            west coast demographics, shipping lanes, food consumption patterns, currents, weather patterns- are all statistical in nature. while i didn’t cite the numbers specifically- they are very relevant to creating a full idea of the repercussions.

            there is no inquiry in myopia.

          • kowalityjesus

            I was waiting and waiting to find relevant content about the matter at hand in your comment, but alas I was ultimately disappointed. I will elaborate for anyone that cares about the one instance where I widened a definition of xenophobia to include religious hatred, which I quite think is well within the paradigmatic bounds of discretion, but I guess now according to Jin I just make up words. And yes I did delete my comments in an thread where false superlative and prejudiced over-emotionality about the legal concerns that effect marijuana descended into chaos. But I rest my case, that this comment has not even tried to disprove that Fuckasshima is nowhere near as disastrous as people keep crying about, mostly because the radiation was disperced into the vastness of the Pacific.

          • Jin The Ninja

            actually you widened a definition of ‘racism.’
            and you literally made up citations, anecdotes and within the space of those comments created a new legalism that neither corresponds to science, rationalism, or the law. and you were the one who did the name-calling- which needs to be clarified as you frame it as if you were victimised. people do take issue with bullshit.

            you have not yet addressed ANYTHING about systems ecology or the effect of globalisation on transporting tainted goods. in fact i used specific statistical groups to demonstrate that you are plainly ignoring the larger repercussions of the economy on human and environmental health. you can pretend i said nothing, but what i said was meaningful to the larger discussion.

            the pacific ocean is NOT infinite, it is also linked to other bodies of water through various meterological and oceanic processes, and is a rather arbitrary cartographical category. we utilise the oceans as a resource, we also pollute that same resource, and your claim is that we do not affect then that resource?

          • kowalityjesus

            As usual, instead of taking issue with your complaints about me and my comments as they occur, you wait until I am already under duress for taking a contradictory position to the majority and then you leverage your language to make me look as bad as you possibly can. I don’ t appreciate that and that is probably the primary reason I have called you names in the past. Its not scientific or discursive, its mean. Please stop brandishing your personal vendettas in the most public forae available.

            I appreciate your concern about worldwide health, but this is accessory to the actual issue of what specifically would cause this problem to begin with. Through collaboration with Mr Fastidious I have deduced that the problem is not airborne, and its not waterborne (except locally, see comments regarding infinitessimal increase of 30 becquerels on US west coast) its apex predator-borne due to bio accumulation, a concept that you first proposed, thank you! This is the indirect and intended product of making such challenging and provocative statements to begin with, and drawing lines on a map across the pacific to coastal cities in america doesn’t make a damn lick of sense when critically viewed in the context of this information.

          • Jin The Ninja

            i wasn’t aware that the catholic church was still beatifying martyrs.

        • Andrew

          Silly me, I just noticed how quickly you changed the goalpost. Initially you said Fukushima “will NEVER EVER EVER be a problem for anyone else.” Then you placed the onus on me to prove that it would. Perhaps you’d like me to provide the names of everyone who will be affected? What diseases they’ll get? What dates they’ll die, and what dates they would’ve died if they hadn’t been exposed?

          I think you should’ve taken more courses in logic.

          • Bluebird_of_Fastidiousness

            One of the most insidious features of this pollution is that no one will ever KNOW, for certain, that their disease was caused by some fatty tuna sashimi they ate 3 years ago. They will only know that life just got a lot harder. The epidemic of Japanese children with thyroid disorders are fairly straight forward, but those effected far away, will just be sad statistics lost in the static. Of course, on the level of demographics, the coming years will reveal in general how terrible the situation has become, but we will never know exactly and it’s a shame because the threat is real. How real? We can’t know.

          • kowalityjesus

            Yes indeed so the only real danger is cesium suspended in ocean water. However, how long will it stay suspended in gentle ocean currents, or will it actually dissolve?

          • Bluebird_of_Fastidiousness

            Don’t forget Strontium which mimics calcium. No more fish stew.

            There’s also Iodine isotopes, so short lived that most of the deniers discount the danger. It’s the only one that it’s easy to treat with the radio-hypochondriac’s panacea: potassium iodide. I bring it up because radioactive iodine only occurs when active fusion is going on, and there is still a lot of the stuff hemorrhaging out of the site.

            It seems that these contaminants will stay in the currents as long as the contamination continues, that is to say – in perpetuity.

          • Jin The Ninja

            strangely enough, anyone with a half decent catholic humanist education- should be pro efficient in logic and rhetoric. that’s a well-known catholic academic tradition…

          • kowalityjesus

            Please define pro-efficient.

          • Jin The Ninja

            please define ‘catholic humanist education.’

          • kowalityjesus

            How is asking you to prove your side of the argument moving the goalpost? You provided 2 sets of what I would deem very- sub par links and now you’ve given up even any semblance of an argument. I’ve seen fourth-graders that could make a better case for their side than you have exhibited.

          • Andrew

            This is getting pathetic. You were the one who made an absolute claim, and now you’re acting like I did. That’s moving the goalpost. I didn’t make an absolute claim, so the onus is on you. I merely demonstrated that there are potential exceptions to your claim, proving it untenable.

            You said nobody outside Japan will ever be affected. I’ve shown that others might be. Not will, might–that’s all I need to do. Unless you counter every single point in every single link, and then counter every single point the rest of your critics in these comments have been making, then you haven’t proven your claim.

            Also, your statement that I’ve “given up even any semblance of an argument” is a lie.

          • kowalityjesus

            I think you would have grounds to accuse me of not properly arguing if you were properly arguing, i.e. providing facts and sources, not farming off your work to shady links. If you can’t prove me wrong, then go jump in the lake.

          • Andrew

            I have proven you wrong. Not all my links were “shady,” and there may yet be effects outside Japan.

          • kowalityjesus

            Other people have collaborated with me to help me find out information that was woefully lacking in my understanding o the event and its implications, not to mention the links that you presented. But starting with your xenophobic comment, and ending with your false declaration of victory, you proved nothing other than you have no humility and very poor judgement of relevant content.

          • Andrew

            I don’t agree that my links were irrelevant, but I do acknowledge that most of the others here arguing “my” point have argued it better than I.

          • Andrew

            You know, my initial comment was more psychological projection on my part than xenophobia. I was raised Catholic, and Christianity has had profound influences on me both positive and negative. So you have my belated apology.

          • kowalityjesus

            Hey, its moments like these that you wish you were never insulting, like I was, via I guess turn the other cheek. It does sort of hurt when people insult me via Xianinity, and I should get with it and absorb the hate and radiate love. But there’s yet something to be said of frankly informing people of your position on them…Anyways apology accepted, dude, thank you. My apologies for insulting your judgement, as you do seem to be a wise person…

  • Anarchy Pony

    I already have a genetic predisposition for cancer, now I also get to be exposed to more unnatural radiation! Woo! I’ll be dead by 45!

    • gustave courbet

      Maybe a move east is in order

    • Monkey See Monkey Do

      Did you get one of those genetic tests to see if you had a predisposition? Don’t they cost about $1000?

      • Anarchy Pony

        No, but the last three men on my father’s side have all died of cancer.