• 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


Fukushima Tweet Storm August 11, 2018
#1
Hello! I'm a new poster at Cafe Rad Lab, and I'm initiating a Fukushima tweet storm for August 11, 2018 (New Moon in Leo partial solar eclipse).

Some fairly ridiculous subjects hit the "Trending" list on Twitter, so why can't we try to make Fukushima, a critical and life-or-death subject for this entire planet, a Twitter Trending subject?

On August 11, 2018, please tweet any Fukushima-related stories or facts you feel are pertinent under the hashtag #Fukushima, and keep tweeting throughout the day. Encourage your followers to share your tweets or to make tweets of their own. Please let people know about this Fuku Tweet Storm through your social media channels. Share on Facebook, as well.


Spread the word. See you on Twitter!

Willow's Web Astrology on Twitter: https://twitter.com/WillowsWebAstro


Willow
 
Reply
#2
I read Pia's tweets every day.
https://twitter.com/Cecalli_Helper

You should also check out her paper.
Your Nuclear Messenger
https://paper.li/Cecalli_Helper/1494769642#/
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#3
Yes, I write and research my own articles, so I'll be posting those, as well as research links and links to Dana Durnford's videos and site. And yes, I've directed people to Enenews, but I will add a link to CafeRadLab, as well.

This is my most recent article on Fuku: "Deconstructing the Worldwide Media Blackout on the Ongoing Fukushima Nuclear Disaster: California Wine is Just the Tip of This Radioactive Iceberg"  http://willowsweb.blogspot.com/2018/07/d...ckout.html

This is the post about the Tweet Storm: http://willowsweb.blogspot.com/2018/08/f...-2018.html

I would say - start with the basics and work up from there. Start with some basic facts about Fukushima that anyone could understand. Basic research. That someone could use if he/she were learning about this from scratch.

Tweets debunking the established lines will be helpful. The fact that there is no safe level of man-made radioactive isotopes to ingest, the difference between internal and external radiation, the dangers of even low-level radiation, etc.

Pointing out the flaws in testing sea water (Cullen, Buesseler, and gang) rather than testing sea life where the radioactivity accumulates.

Tweeting documented examples of Fukushima fallout being found in produce, fish, kelp, sand, etc. 

This is moreso an experimental solidarity exercise. It helps people to feel they aren't alone with this (or any conspiracy) subject. But if we can push Fuku onto the Trending Topics section, that would be very cool.

I would say it might be worth it to join Twitter just for this event! ;-)

Just FYI: I also just got a bunch of phony comments on my blog about the tweet storm. Every time I post on Reddit, I get Fuku trolls/establishment mouthpieces. That place is crawling with them.

One of them posted about the Enenews site being suspended this morning.
 
Reply
#4
Is everyone getting a message that the Enenews.com site has been suspended when they go to the site?
 
Reply
#5
I hope to see CafeRadLab posters and lurkers on Twitter for the Fukshima Tweet Storm August 11!

Let's have some fun.
 
Reply
#6
Big Grin 
Good job tweeters!   Smile

https://www.hashtags.org/analytics/fukushima/
   
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#7
You're probably right about the scientists; they won't be convinced until the scientific community adopts a new paradigm.  That won't happen until the money and power quits investing in and supporting nuclear power production.  Scientists of the ECRR have not been able to change the minds of the ICRP scientists.  Far slower and more agonizing is educating people to the hazards of ionizing radiation.  This has already created pushback against the pollution and waste problems created by the nuclear industry.  I agree that "one of the biggest things is proving that background radiation is not the same as nuke fallout."  Stated another way; water and gasoline are both liquids and the industry wants us to believe gasoline is just flavored water.  People will eventually learn the difference no matter what the industry says and we need to share that information with  others.  Native Americans have learned the difference the hard way from mining all that safe uranium and experiencing the terrible health consequences.  Some military veterans have learned that those safe DU munitions killed the enemy quickly but left them to die a slower death.  We can continue to educate the public and maybe save more lives from poor health and a shorter life.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#8
" There is no way for a layman to argue with those guys. It will make no dent."

That isn't true at all!!! And to be frank, this is one of the ideologies that really turned me off about interacting on ENEnews. That everyone has to be coming from an "establishment science" background or they don't know what they're talking about. (Anne comes to mind on that front...)

That is absolute garbage! Sorry to say, but it is.

The "establishment scientists" are the ones who don't have a clue about the real horrors and dangers of uranium...or if they do, they are lying about it. And this is the same perspective you think we have to come from to "beat them at their own game"? No. The opposite, I would say.

The "layman" can absolutely nullify what these guys are doing and saying. It's intuition and common sense; it's the ability to tell a manipulation when one comes into contact with one. All the clever talk and wordplay in the world can't overcome a person who intuitively knows the truth.

There are many simple ways to poke holes in what these guys are saying:

There is no safe level of man-made radioactivity/isotopes to ingest on a continual basis. They are finding the fallout themselves! And then declaring it "harmless." Human logic and common sense can tell that this is at the very least an over-statement, something they simply cannot declare. They do not know what the health ramifications are now or what they will be in future. This is an unprecedented situation.

So the very basis of their argument - "Fukushima fallout is no biggie!" - is false and is known to be false by human beings on an intuitive level. Humans would naturally reject food or drink they knew was radioactively contaminated. This is what all animals do - reject food that would make them sick. Again...very simple, fundamental, intuitive thing. You don't need a PhD for that.

These tiny doses and combinations of man-made isotopes bio-accumulate in the body becoming bigger doses over time. This is another simple thing for people to understand that can nullify these inane "Fuku fallout is harmless" arguments.

There is also a big difference between internal sources of irradiation (like from eating food, drinking water, breathing air) which are then absorbed by our bodies...and external sources, but these scientists are generally using things like X-rays and airplane rides and background levels to discount Fuku fallout.

There is also NO SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS that low-level radiation is harmless, as they are falsely putting forth. Many scientists and people in the health field believe just the opposite - that there is NO LEVEL of low-level radiation that is perfectly safe to be around, that it is having SOME effect on our biological systems at any level, and often not a good effect. Low-level radiation exposure can cause catastrophic health damage. It just can't often be correlated according to "scientific" standards.

Again, human intuition and understanding of the truth trumps all of it. ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL of it.

Also - it isn't just Natives who are mining uranium and suffering the consequences of nuclear. It's all of us! Uranium miners in Saskatchewan are mostly Caucasion. Turning it into a race-based thing is a mistake, as well.
 
Reply
#9
Yes, you did put them to shame. And the fact that you were blocked showed that. (Our double-teaming might have pushed him over the edge...)

But this is the point - it's quite simple to puncture their lies with even basic intuitive truths.

Pia has the background knowledge, for certain. She knows far more about the details than most people do. But even people who simply know the difference between a true/logical statement and a falsehood could nullify these guys.

You can heap all the data and "superiour intelligence" and PhDs and grand scientific pronouncements you want on people. The truth cuts through it all. What we intuitively know and then express in the face of these lies cuts through it all.

We can't forget that, and we can't be promoting the idea that laypeople don't have what it takes to take these guys on. That's exactly WHAT it takes - laypeople taking this on, educating themselves, speaking up, exposing and discrediting the people spreading falsehoods.

We're arming ourselves and others with information that can cut the crap on this subject and expose the web of silence and lies. And that's what the Tweet Storm was about. Circulating the information people need to put 2 and 2 together themselves. Because the official bodies, including those establishment scientists, certainly aren't going to do it for us.
 
Reply
#10
Yes, of course it has something to do with the combinations of specific man-made isotopes involved. That's why I said, "There is no safe level of man-made radioactivity/isotopes to ingest on a continual basis." But that, again, would be intuitive. All people have to do is think about it, and they will come to that conclusion.

We would not naturally be coming into contact with those combinations of man-made isotopes, nor would they be in those continual doses that are then being taken internally. It's all connected. I disagree that chronic doses + bio-accumulation in the body of MAN-MADE radioactive isotopes in combination are not key elements of the problem here.

There's a big difference between man-made and natural. Again...intuitively understood by people who have not allowed themselves to be severed from their own intuition or soul-level understanding of things.

I would argue that the lack of intuition in science is what has gotten us into this sickening, soulless mess we call "official establishment science."

And it's this "scientific" bias that is troubling to me with some of the ENEnews commenters, as well.

You want to believe none of this is happening just because establishment science (often with ties to pro-nuke agencies) is telling you that? Because they are providing the usual platitudes about a subject they simply do not understand, do not know, and cannot accurately make pronouncements about? You want to trust that these arrogant a-holes have it all figured out on Planet Earth?

I sure don't.

The current scientific paradigm is as sick as the Pacific Ocean at this time, if not sicker.

 
Reply
#11
Again, you are talking about natural radiation sources. I'm talking about combinations of man-made radioactive isotopes that our bodies would not come into contact with naturally. This is what Fukushima fallout is.

So yes, internal radiation and chronic doses of the combinations of man-made radioactive isotopes our bodies would not naturally come into contact with are a problem.

Whether "science" can explain that or not is not really of concern to me. The current scientific paradigm is incredibly limited and most often short-sighted, yet it's often held up as a paragon of truth and reality.

I would certainly trust a person whose honed intuition and bullshit-detecting I respect over an establishment scientist telling me Fukushima fallout is harmless, you bet I would.

I didn't need the snarky comments about intuition, and I'll give your lessons on humility a pass, too. (Giving those lessons unsolicited is certainly not a sign of the aforementioned humility, by the way.)

I will certainly stand behind my statements about the glaring faults and soul-sickness of establishment science, the misplaced trust in which has gotten us into the situation we are in today.

I would also ask you to reserve comment about how many facts my intuition is backed up with since you don't know me or my work.
 
Reply
#12
That's your opinion.

I think bioaccumulation, chronic exposure, and heavy metals toxicity ARE all elements of the problem. Maybe they're not the ENTIRE problem, but they're certainly elements of it.

Really, the overall point is: we don't have to explain all that. We know it. We see it in action in the Pacific Ocean. We see it in action in the USS Ronald Reagan soldiers. We see it in the infant death and thyroid cancer spikes.

We know it's something to be deeply concerned about because we feel it. We sense it. We know it in our bones.

And yes, that is valid, whether you and the scientific paradigm believe so or not.

If people are waiting around for science to explain why the Titanic is sinking, we're all going to the bottom of the sea.
 
Reply
#13
Code says - Scientists will argue...there is no difference in an electromagnetic frequency, whether its man made or naturally generated. You have to be able to explain what that difference is. The public will want to know.

But science does know there is differences in the interaction or effects of different electromagnetic frequencies. In addition, certain frequencies can act as signal carriers where frequencies higher or lower may not carry a certain signal. This may be key to understanding the qualitative difference between natural and man-made radionuclides. That they ignore the difference between different electromagnetic frequencies is not science but politics.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#14
Code - "I have found one paper that correlates frequency bands and their octaves to health effects.  That is still not a part of nuclear health science."

Yes, I know that different frequencies of RF and ionizing radiation could affect health on an intuitive level which leads me to look for the science behind it so I can understand how that is and convince others that's how it works.  Probably my training and work in electronics.  It's not just nuclear health science that is coming to grips with the electromagnetic nature of reality, physicists  and astrophysicists struggle to come up with words to explain electromagnetic effects in phenomena they observe.  Your research of establishment science has led to your observation that cancer is caused by a breakdown in intracellular communications.  I know of the chemical messaging and there are hints of electrical communications between cells like ionic messaging.  

A radio works by putting information, a signal frequency, onto a carrier frequency that travels longer distances.  Component changes can disrupt the signal or carrier frequencies and the radio goes out of tune and quits working.  I visualize radiation changing or damaging the components of our bodies that leads to failure of the bodies communication system.  Radioactive components are used in some electronic circuits to amplify current that non-radioactive components simply can't do without breaking down.  

Code - "Cellular biology is taking off into quantum effects. Electromagnetic aspects of biology have been studied for years but only rarely getting a foothold into mainstream.  These could be important factors in unraveling the radiation toxicity conundrum."

Thank you for that opening to the quantum level; let's me toss in some research that may or may not be related but that I find interesting.  Perhaps radiation affects the geometry of our cells; different elements have different sized atoms.  At the least, Dr. Huth's work shows the difficulty new science has in changing old paradigms.

A Modern Explanation for Light Interaction with the Retina of the Eye Based on Nanostructural Geometry: Rethinking the Vision Process
http://www.ghuth.com/
Quote:A bit poetically…..I believe that the retina of the eye should be visualized, as “a logically spaced array of the wave-to-particle transition sites shown to exist in this work moving through a sea of electromagnetic energy and geometrically extracting three specific wavelengths from that sea to form what we perceive as the visual image and the sensation of the hues of color…”

Finally, to your last comment, I think it has to do with the psychology of the psychopaths that we allow to rule over us.  With their greedy little hands they take everything they can from the Universe and they give back nothing; leaving destruction in their wake.  We need to learn to recognize them before they do so much damage and choose saner leadership.  There is a wave coming that will wash over us and either destroy us or we will learn enough to ride the wave to a better future.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
  


Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)