General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: 150,000 SQ.KM of Pacific with Fukushima nuclear material - ‘Remarkable’ amount released in ocean [View all]FBaggins
(28,774 posts)But that doesn't mean that any imaginary "not well" that you come up with is suddenly rational.
Look at your picture. It shows an elevated sea surface temperature around Honshu, by Fukushima.
"By Honshu"? You mean... the main island of Japan? Now we're imagining that Fukushima is responsible for any heat anywhere around the country? How much wilder can you get?
The spot on the map that is right next to Fukushima is colder than the area farther out to sea. There isn't any way to explain that other than the heat doesn't originate there.
You want me to say it's due to the normal deviations that happen everywhere? If so, it would happen and go away, like in other parts of the world
You literally have no idea what you're talking about. Your entire experience on the matter is five weeks of weekly datapoints. These things happen all the time. Sometimes they're gone quickly, sometimes they last for months/years. You're in no position to declare "what would happen if". For heaven's sake... they've got years and years worth of weekly data that you can just pull up... why do you make such ridiculous comments without even checking to see whether you're making a fool of yourself? If, for instance, you looked at winter 2008 into spring 2009... you would see months and months of the same kind of patter NE of Honshu... with nary a reactor meltdown in sight.
Even the five weeks you've seen directly contradicts your woo. There are several spots that didn't "happen and go away" that are clearly "normal deviations".