• Thank you for visiting the Cafe Rad Lab Forum
  • We present & discuss radiation health, science & news
  • To keep you informed about vital nuke information.
Hello There, Guest! Login Register


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
CRL's Mission: 530 Sieverts Conversation
#1
This conversation was taken from the 530 Sieverts thread and ensued after one of Horse's posts. At the bottom of this thread are my final thoughts on the following entries. 


rad radio said in response to Horse: 


Quote:Perhaps you don't realize how radioactive corium is, especially when fission is still occurring, the fresh I-131 still being detected is proof of that.

You mentioned the Elephant foot, but that was graphite moderated and had been solidified by liquid nitrogen, and it's still intensely radioactive.


The EPA's beta charts are a huge disappointment - I was relying on them to backup my own readings however they only confirmed my readings after the fact - they were even at their best delayed by at least 6 hours - I already had issued live over-the-air radiation warnings earlier in the day and the chart update would then show the spike I had already detected.

Since I knew they would start hiding the data (predicted it matter of fact) I was already taking my own readings and only using the Beta chart as a calibration tool.  After all PR is paramount to the nuclear industry.  Managing people's perception is more about what you don't tell them than what false assurances your agencies and revolving door NRC shills and other captured so-called 'regulatory' bodies (like the iaea) cook up.

Lying can only get the industry so far, it's easier to simply cut off the data - to keep the public in the dark while the corporate media blacksout the subject and pretends it never happened, isn't still ongoing and doesn't matter.



Sooner or later worry translates into action lest it simmer into confusion.

For example one can study nuclear physics and find out on their own how far Muon's penetrate, then realize the entire containment structure is transparent to such scans.   One figures this out by noting how deeply Neutrino detectors have to be underground to be shielded from Muons..

A person can note the differences in the composition of the reactor Chernobyl core and the 3 cores at Daiichi, the MOX is much  hotter and Graphite much more resilient.
   
The data is out there and those concerned have had 6 years to engage in a crash course in the field.


Quote:I'm staying inside as much as possible.

My advice is on perfectly clear days get 10-15 min of direct sunlight only around noon, and avoid all other exposure.


As far as Iodine 131, none of it makes it this far excepting the initial explosions - it's in the areas adjacent to the reactors where it continues to be detected, saturating your Thyroid is only meant as a temporary measure, and mainly for the young..

Re: Bromine

I'd consult the Environmental Working Group's data, and your jaw will drop when you see the true scope of the problem :

https://www.ewg.org/

Pull the MSDS's for everything you see and look the study data over real carefully to get a complete picture.


One subject that consistently escapes your attention and concern is AGW while more concern than is warranted (or supported by data) is directed to this disaster as the causation of these events.

https://robertscribbler.com/

   

There's only so much one can do online.  When people are worried yet refuse to educate themselves and follow the path of least effort while expecting to be spoon fed tales & data that are comforting...

For example while I have some skills and knowledge that go beyond the average person in the field, 6 years ago I was a complete newbie on the subject.


It's more a matter of determination, motivation and willpower.

Invention is 1 % inspiration, 99 % perspiration as Edison liked to say.


Everything I've looked up, read, tried and built - on zero budget - anyone can do likewise.

Reuse, recycle, re-purpose, reclaim.

volunteers can set up yet another radiation monitoring net, but what matters most are the individual actions of those concerned, which sad to say are very few and amounts to little.

When concern and worry leads to action a path of self-responsibility has begun.  Soon while walking this path a person realizes they're not  at the mercy of forces unseen or tales untold as they were first led to believe.  Eventually a mastery of the subject provides a sense of empowerment - you realize you don't have to quiver in the dark while life passes you by.  A person can point to the path and even provide road signs, but it's up to each individual to walk it, starting with wanting to.

It seems like a long way to walk, but even a journey of a thousand miles begins with that first step
the iron fistee

"new posts you make must be approved by a moderator before becoming visible."

my only interest is in removing them now Wink




 
Reply
#2
(02-09-2017, 05:28 AM)rad radio Wrote: One subject that consistently escapes your attention and concern is AGW while more concern than is warranted (or supported by data) is directed to this disaster as the causation of these events.

AGW doesn't escape me, it's covered in so many other forums.  I think solar energy drives Earth's climate not CO2.  If you include man's enormous input of the trace greenhouse gases krypton and xenon from nuclear activities destroying the ozone layer then yes, man has made things worse.  The holes formed above the poles, look where big changes are occurring.  Increased cosmic energy striking Earth forms more clouds and will increase rain; look, its flooding here leaving drought there.  Shifting weather patterns are cause for much concern; problems growing food.  Warming is not the problem, cooling is.  Crops grow in the summer, not winter.  We knew back in the 70's that we were headed for another ice age.  Global warming research gets funded to support a carbon tax scheme that won't stop a single emission.  The lack of sun spots indicates cooling trends are ahead.  We might look back fondly on the warming period and wonder how to recreate it; simple, if we made it with our fossil fuel economy. I've seen more adjusted data from the warming side than we get from TEPCO.  No point in arguing with the scientific consensus.  Wait and see.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#3
In CafeRadLab is a thread specifically about Krypton-85 which relates radiation factors that complicate the climate condition. 

Each of us has chosen to post what we are most interested in, because I'm an administrator I tend to be all over the forum, but, I am very thankful that Horse has focussed on and taken a leadership role in posting findings specific to webcam observations

There is great merit in sticking to our preferred subjects - consistency and regularity helps others understand the evolution of the events at Fukushima and about nuclear in general. I'd like to emphasize Lucas' note at the bottom of each page, on the left:

Users who maintain and participate on this platform foster a collegial atmosphere regardless of experience or intimate knowledge of the issues discussed.

Thank you all for all you do. 
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#4
Trying to get back on topic, the 530 Sievert reading has media stirred up.  Fukushima is only one in a string of nuclear problems; the current poster-child for a troubled industry.  It takes a little sensationalism to get people's attention.  Here's another report on how bad it is.  
Highest Fukushima Radioactivity since 2011 and its 'Unimaginable' Consequences
https://www.sott.net/article/342065-High...nsequences
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#5
Thanks for pointing to perspective.

As SimplyInfo pointed out - the 530 Sievert reading is not definitive, nor is it a historic marker, since no public data exists for before now to compare for that location. That said - media has taken the wrong path on how to report this"new" finding. 

Based on historic properties of nuclear physics - since 2011 the materials in each would have been emitting outrageously high amounts of radiation as it processes. 

The article Horse cites above makes the greatest admissions: https://www.sott.net/article/342065-High...nsequences

"The blind are leading the blind as never before have humans dealt with the enormity of this kind of problem. For six long years authorities have been clueless on how to stop the meltdown leakage and radioactive poisoning from spreading further, eventually to all corners of the earth. Literally hundreds if not thousands of tons of radioactive water have been leaking out daily into the Pacific Ocean (an estimated 400 from one account). And pretty much throughout the near six years, both TEPCO and the Japanese government have consistently lied to cover up the severity of the damage and danger to human health. Because they've never encountered a disaster of this sheer magnitude ever before, doctors also have no idea how to accurately measure and assess the health hazards that the soaring levels of radioactivity currently pose for the thousands of workers at the plant much less the severe threat to the nearby local populations."

That's the story.
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#6
In CafeRadLab is a thread specifically about Krypton-85 which relates radiation factors that complicate the climate condition. 

Each of us has chosen to post what we are most interested in, because I'm an administrator I tend to be all over the forum, but, I am very thankful that Horse has focussed on and taken a leadership role in posting findings specific to webcam observations

There is great merit in sticking to our preferred subjects - consistency and regularity helps others understand the evolution of the events at Fukushima and about nuclear in general. I'd like to emphasize Lucas' note at the bottom of each page, on the left:

Users who maintain and participate on this platform foster a collegial atmosphere regardless of experience or intimate knowledge of the issues discussed.

Thank you all for all you do. 
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#7
Wandering the forum myself, Pia. Was I in the radnet or the 530 Sievert thread, lost track, was watching fantastic webs on cam4 and spark bursts on cam1. I keep up with the View Today's Posts link at the bottom. I really should get back to that webcam thread.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#8
unfortunately with the amount of traffic and participation this forum actually gets, having a labyrinth of subforums has a dampening effect on coherent active discussion, the logs and membership list, specifically the number of posts and threads per member bear that out

I've set up forums myself and in one case I used forum software rather than blogging software just because it was easier to administrate.  So while it appeared to be a forum it was actually a blog.  Forums and blogs have different goals and often a blogger has different attitudes regarding comments.

For example instead of deleting the spam I simply moved it to a sub-forum called spam while editing hot links and using ROBOTS.TXT to try to keep search engines from indexing it.  95 % of my traffic was spam & bots and on Tor hidden services there's simply no way to reliably filter it.

- even when running 134 servers redirecting the bots across them (bots and spammers are interested in links not discussion).

Real content from actual people is precious I learned, that there's a great thirst for it in a virtual reality world filled with copy & paste

A blog however is typically one person's interest and all other contributions are simply comments below.

Often I skip the blog entry entirely and immediately scroll down to the comments because, for me, that's where the real action is.


The statistics here indicate a blog that only appears to be a forum - like I once ran


I never comment on blogs however because I've found the atmosphere/attitude of bloggers to be too structured, too restrictive - some have even said explicitly that they consider their blog to be their 'home' and proceed to apply various rules and expectations to the 'guests'


While a forum is like a speakeasy in an open public space, a community commons.


So blogs pretending to be forums are especially problematic for me
the iron fistee

"new posts you make must be approved by a moderator before becoming visible."

my only interest is in removing them now Wink




 
Reply
#9
Horse - I get lost now and then myself, so, I use the search function  Big Grin
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#10
Rad Radio: If you are not comfortable with the formatting and if you think this is a blog rather than a forum, I encourage you to help resolve issues. 
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#11
I'd pare the number of sub-forums way down, but also add a sub-forum called 'thunderdome' or whatever, where people can be confrontational

and as administrator I would only spend time administrating, dealing with spam and signing up new members. (none have in a week)

I'd restrict my own posts to my own set of sub-forums, much like a blog, and avoid micromanaging on other threads started by other people

And I'd avoid hiding behind other people who aren't present - aren't actively participating any longer, no matter who they are, and also avoid using bland vague platitudes as rules.


see the comments here as an example of what allowing people to be confrontational leads to - note the quality and depth of the discussion (and the timestamps), when people aren't afraid or restricted from speaking their mind :

https://ohtarzie.wordpress.com/2017/02/0.../#comments


this forum's statistics reveals all, use them as your guide
the iron fistee

"new posts you make must be approved by a moderator before becoming visible."

my only interest is in removing them now Wink




 
Reply
#12
(02-09-2017, 01:54 PM)rad radio Wrote: I'd pare the number of sub-forums way down, but also add a sub-forum called 'thunderdome' or whatever, where people can be confrontational

Cafe Rad Lab concentrates on scientific findings - because there are many "angles" involved with nuclear issues, there are many sub forums. The search engine works fine if anyone is confused. 

If a person wants confrontation, there are plenty of forums that offer that venue. We have plenty of observers who don't sign in or post, but who use the forum as a reliable resource. 


and as administrator I would only spend time administrating, dealing with spam and signing up new members. (none have in a week)

Cafe Rad Lab has had a lot of new members the past month or three, but, the majority of them were spammers. Recent technical changes have cut that garbage out.  

I'd restrict my own posts to my own set of sub-forums, much like a blog, and avoid micromanaging on other threads started by other people

Please provide examples of micromanaging. I don't care to do a blog as I have typing issues that limit my capacity.  

And I'd avoid hiding behind other people who aren't present - aren't actively participating any longer, no matter who they are, and also avoid using bland vague platitudes as rules.

What exactly do you mean? Please provide examples of your specific issues. 

see the comments here as an example of what allowing people to be confrontational leads to - note the quality and depth of the discussion (and the timestamps), when people aren't afraid or restricted from speaking their mind :

https://ohtarzie.wordpress.com/2017/02/0.../#comments

I see. You want to encourage confrontation over such things as nazi and liberal opinions, alienation, and infantilization... If that is what you desire, you obviously know where to go. 

There are journalists, scientists, academics, lawyers, government officials, and even nuclear industry professionals who visit Cafe Rad Lab and none of them have said they think Cafe Rad Lab should become anything other than what it is. 

I think I speak for all here in saying that Cafe Rad Lab as established by it's founder is doing just fine. 
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#13
as far as Tarzie's blog goes, it's about political issues so it's no surprise you'll find people having frank discussions about whatever is happening politically - I'm not referring to the actual subjects - I specifically pointed out the quality and depth of the discussions in the comments.   Skimming over them looking for dog whistles to condemn them isn't what I had in mind, for example you'd see that people are discussing punching nazi's, not supporting them..

Quote:Cafe Rad Lab concentrates on scientific findings - because there are many "angles" involved with..

AGW is very scientific with huge amounts of data supporting it, yet what people are seeing on here are issues with little to no data supporting them, all avoiding the issue of AGW, without any sub-forum or even thread addressing it.

- since the majority of people now accept AGW as fact not just an 'angle', being in the AGW denialist camp is a huge turn-off.

- few people even care about nuclear issues, we're in a tiny minority already.  So by placing this already marginalized subject within another minority,  means even fewer people will feel compelled to add their contributions.


the forum statistics paints a very disconcerting picture - that this forum is dead, and you're the reason why

it's not really a forum at all, it's your personal blog, and you like it that way


I just wanted to verify it

thank you for so eloquently doing so Wink
the iron fistee

"new posts you make must be approved by a moderator before becoming visible."

my only interest is in removing them now Wink




 
Reply
#14
AGW is not our focus and plenty of people visit this site on a daily basis. Your POV about the purpose of this site does not match mine nor the POV of others using CRL as a resource. 

If your hot potato is AGW, I highly recommend you go elsewhere because this site is all about nuclear.
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#15
AGW will lead to power grid failure, which will lead to multiple nuclear reactor meltdowns

Also, as part of the nuclear industry PR efforts, a narrative is that NPP's "don't emit CO2" along with ignoring all the CO2 that's emitted in mining, refining and processing the fuel, along with the concrete and steel the plants are constructed with, and then there's the issue of decommissioning and the CO2 emissions involved in containing and burying them.

So as we can see, AGW is intimately tied in with the subject of nuclear power every step of the way

- not to mention ALL the waste heat from ALL nuclear activities directly adds to AGW (nature doesn't operate nuclear power plants, WE do)

..this is where having one person post 99 % of all the posts leads to - a personal blog with only said person's views welcome


look not only at the posts but more revealingly the view count and lack of replies..


the forum's own statistics belie your claims, on several metrics


you get 90 % bot traffic as well.



which is fine for a blog I guess
the iron fistee

"new posts you make must be approved by a moderator before becoming visible."

my only interest is in removing them now Wink




 
Reply
#16
If you want to connect the dots about AGW and nuclear, I suggest you jump into the Krypton-85 thread.

If you want to insult the forum and me, I suggest you go elsewhere.

The founder of the board has not complained about forum stats or my performance. I'm not complaining about the stats. We are not here to gain fame or fortune or to encourage confrontation.
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#17
if administrating a dead forum as a vanity project run under an iron fist with no new active members, and no new threads or even posts or replies for weeks even months at a time, is your idea of a successful forum, you're welcome to it.


I'll just stay in PM like I have been since december..
the iron fistee

"new posts you make must be approved by a moderator before becoming visible."

my only interest is in removing them now Wink




 
Reply
#18
You do what you need to do.

The forum is open and available to all who wish to learn. Sucking it down into the AGW rabbit hole or giving it a confrontation theme are not what the founder has asked for. 

If the founder wishes to see changes, I will follow his lead.
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#19
For those interested in understanding the pattern of my activity in CRL - I have serious typing issues. So, my comments are brief and when I do engage in dialog for more than a few posts, my hand ends up in a lot of pain. If others wish to dialog, please, feel free to do so. Start new threads, post articles, discuss findings and ask questions about things not clear. But, please be respectful and don't spam.
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#20
The mission of Cafe Rad Lab (CRL) is to present nuclear news, science, technology, finance, policy and thoughts and questions about anything nuclear. There are forums where people post a lot and this forum just doesn't happen to be like that. Maybe it is because spamming, trolls and baiting won't be tolerated  - at least not for very long. 

In case you haven't seen it at the bottom left of each page, Lucas put in a nutshell what this forum is:

Users who maintain and participate on this platform foster a collegial atmosphere 
regardless of experience or intimate knowledge of the issues discussed.

An interesting conversation ensued last night in the 530 Sv thread which begins at the top of this section so as not to muddy up the dialog on 530 Sv. I see last night's conversation as an educational event which I hope others will appreciate as such. If people want to delve into debate about articles or findings, that is, of course, welcome. What I personally don't want to see in CRL are endless bouts that detract from critical information, which is what I believe our readers are here for. I don't want people to have to wade through posts to find what they seek. 

It doesn't really matter to me what people think about me - this forum is not about me, though I suppose it may appear that I am vain simply because I have a greater number of posts than others, though Horse is a strong contender. 

Because I have several disability issues, I have to measure out my activities (from typing to taking care of the gardens) and if I did not have daily pain in my messed up wrist, I would be posting even more. So, please, feel free to engage in dialog, post what you find important or curious in the appropriate forum/thread and ask questions. I've been told I am responsive and reasonable, though it's obvious that opinion is not across the board. 

You decide how you want to contribute - I'm not stopping anyone with the exception of spammers and trolls. And, anyone who chooses to perpetuate insults without answering questions seeking examples of the issues they cite, well, they may also get banned. CRL isn't about personalities, it's about content and quality of that content. 

I sincerely hope you understand that. I also hope it is understood that the measure of success varies from person to person. My view is that the people who care about nuclear issues are getting what they need from CRL, though they don't post - they are what I consider, silent partners. For me, that is success.

Not all forums are the same and CRL is different and valuable. That said, have at it.
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
  


Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)