This kinda sucks....
- Thread starter Dirtymaxx03
- Start date
yea i cant believe that, if it was true it would be plastered all over every single news channel on TV.
I'm willing to bet the radiation is there but nowhere near the levels that the article says.
I'm willing to bet the radiation is there but nowhere near the levels that the article says.
The scariest part is the fact that two years have not even past yet. And it's already way worse then I am cozy with lol
Would it be plastered on the news tho? Don't forget who really controls the media lol If this is in fact true I'm sure it would cause a lot of panic.
U kno your exposed to so much radiation a day its unreal a wrist watch has radiation so I would get your balls in a vice over it
x2.
Seems kind of silly. "dont drink any milk, fish, or tapwater, because its FILLED WITH RADIATION"??? Gimmie a freaking break.
Im curious what Fingers has to say about this, because im sure he is 1000x more knowledgeable on this subject than the paranoid/conspiracy-theorist idiots who wrote that article are.
ben
Cheezus this is america, not communist-russia or china, dont be ridiculous. If it was actually a problem, we would hear about it all over the real news, not the "pakalert press", whatever the hell that is.
I would love to here the real facts. By no means am I freaking out, I drink the shit out of tap water and eat a lot of meat and veggies from Cali lol I also wouldn't care if milk was radioactive, I'm drinking it.
Cheezus this is america, not communist-russia or china, dont be ridiculous. If it was actually a problem, we would hear about it all over the real news, not the "pakalert press", whatever the hell that is.
Forgot the lol Ben.
Wait did you not know the Iron curtain is coming back? :roflmao:
Because washing my food with soap is going to actually wash out the radiation...
The guy who wrote that article sounds like he's had a few to many radioactive sushi rolls.
The guy who wrote that article sounds like he's had a few to many radioactive sushi rolls.
That article is complete BS. They claim all sorts of sources, but don't actually cite them (or the links go to other conspiracy theorist sites, not any government/science sites).
For people wondering about radiation levels, this is a good chart to give a sense of scale: http://xkcd.com/radiation/
Not that I believe these numbers either, but they claim that a fish was caught RIGHT NEXT TO the plant that had radiation of 740k Bq/kg. For comparison, eating that fish is about the same as eating 5,000 bananas. So a lot, yes, but not exactly lethal. And that is right next to the plant. Another way of looking at that: it would give you about the same amount of radiation as getting 2 mammograms. Also, it is still less than the recommended yearly limit for radiation.
I can't to find exact measurements off the US coast right now, but it is a safe bet that they are still WELL within background limits.
Is the radiation a problem? Somewhat. But it is being managed and mitigated. That article is simply trying to freak people out to get page views (which means ad money).
In the future, a quick way to tell when an article is BS: if the first sentence is "You’re going to want to use every share button at the bottom of this article...", just stop reading.
For people wondering about radiation levels, this is a good chart to give a sense of scale: http://xkcd.com/radiation/
Not that I believe these numbers either, but they claim that a fish was caught RIGHT NEXT TO the plant that had radiation of 740k Bq/kg. For comparison, eating that fish is about the same as eating 5,000 bananas. So a lot, yes, but not exactly lethal. And that is right next to the plant. Another way of looking at that: it would give you about the same amount of radiation as getting 2 mammograms. Also, it is still less than the recommended yearly limit for radiation.
I can't to find exact measurements off the US coast right now, but it is a safe bet that they are still WELL within background limits.
Is the radiation a problem? Somewhat. But it is being managed and mitigated. That article is simply trying to freak people out to get page views (which means ad money).
In the future, a quick way to tell when an article is BS: if the first sentence is "You’re going to want to use every share button at the bottom of this article...", just stop reading.
saw it on the news just now and they said that it is so minor that the billions and billions of gallons of sea water far outweigh the amount of "radiation" and its so extremely diluted that it will probably never even make out of their own coast let alone all the way to our coast.
The japanese are beyond mentally ill for building a powerplant that close to the ocean.. Seriously
Seems to me if it had been more inland they wouldn't have been able to you ocean water to cool the reactors. I can only imagine what would have happened if that was the case.