General Discussion

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)

84. Damn, I was so hoping you had something to say...

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:56 PM

Jun 2013

I am a Norwegian-Swedish-American, which has exactly jack shit to do with anything. You do not own the concept of Vikings or Norse mythology, so get over yourself.

Where the hell do you get off thinking I'm saying obey, obey, obey? I'm saying don't be a total prick to everyone around you for no reason other than irrational fears. I don't know, maybe you like selfish assholes willing to crap their pants to get their way.

I've agreed with you multiple times that the scanners are essential useless. Which you seem to be oblivious to. Maybe put down the bottle and get some sleep?

My point, which you have studiously avoided, is that if you are so damn afraid of the scanners, just tell them, rather than fucking up an entire airport with childish antics before hand.

Or try it the way you seem to prefer, fight your way through security...

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

137 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Opting out of the airport body scanner "cancer machine" [View all] Quantess Jun 2013 OP

You simply state it is a health concern davidpdx Jun 2013 #1

You're kidding right? I've always been forced to get a body search flamingdem Jun 2013 #27

Are you talking about them actually touching your body or waving a wand around you? davidpdx Jun 2013 #41

Oh I've been mauled by many tsa agents flamingdem Jun 2013 #43

If that happened I'd ask them to suspend the process and request a supervisor davidpdx Jun 2013 #46

I'm going to have to wear an ankle boot! flamingdem Jun 2013 #51

I'll sell you mine davidpdx Jun 2013 #61

Last time I went thru that RobertEarl Jun 2013 #55

Ha! davidpdx Jun 2013 #60

Fall on the ground? RobertEarl Jun 2013 #62

Lol, you haven't been keeping up with things. If you refuse, no matter how pleasantly, the TSA sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #104

So my question is.. davidpdx Jun 2013 #116

There have been reports of people being made to feel as if they are being sexually assaulted. sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #118

Ironic Major Nikon Jun 2013 #2

Science is not welcome here. Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #4

What are you talking about, that "science is not welcome here"? Quantess Jun 2013 #14

The dosage you receive from a backscatter machine is significantly less than from flying... Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #15

Apparently you didn't read the article, or even notice the quotation marks around "cancer machines". Quantess Jun 2013 #17

I never accused you of writing those words. Nice try though. Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #19

Weak! Quantess Jun 2013 #21

They've taken the Rapiscans out of the airports csziggy Jun 2013 #53

Thank you for the good news! Quantess Jun 2013 #64

This shit is allover the place Puzzledtraveller Jun 2013 #95

Did you read the report by scientists from UCSF on this? flamingdem Jun 2013 #26

You are going to have to link me to the report. Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #33

Here's the link, Colombia U did a similar study flamingdem Jun 2013 #40

That is not a study. You said UCSF did a study. Show it to me. Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #45

Show yourself. That tone leaves me cold nt flamingdem Jun 2013 #52

I'm just going to mark you down as not having it. Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #56

I'll give you an F for frickin ridiculous nt flamingdem Jun 2013 #73

I'm starting to think you confused a news article with a university study. Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #75

Too lazy to google, eh flamingdem Jun 2013 #78

It's sad that you think being required to post evidence of a claim... Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #80

Why would I bother with flamingdem Jun 2013 #81

How do you define "nuke lover?" Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #82

Here. It is not the original story, but NPR's report of it. Quantess Jun 2013 #120

We need something to back this up. Quantess Jun 2013 #38

Here's a link, Colombia did one too flamingdem Jun 2013 #39

But blind obedience to the expanding facist state apparently is. MotherPetrie Jun 2013 #126

You will notice downthread that I am against full body scanners. Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #127

I don't consider it drivel. As a 2x cancer survivor who has had waaay more x-rays and CT scans than MotherPetrie Jun 2013 #129

It is absolutely drivel. Backscatter machines do not give you cancer. Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #131

I suppose he could drive or take a bus, Ilsa Jun 2013 #9

How dare you make an appropriate assessment of risk... Thor_MN Jun 2013 #10

Knee jerk reacting to fear & TSA... Quantess Jun 2013 #16

Perhaps you meant to reply to MajorNikkon? Thor_MN Jun 2013 #18

No, I meant to reply to your statement. Quantess Jun 2013 #28

No, there is no reason, but to call them CANCER MACHINES is ridiculous... Thor_MN Jun 2013 #31

Did you notice that this was an article written by someone else, Quantess Jun 2013 #35

It might actually not be clear that I did not write the article, I don't know. Quantess Jun 2013 #37

By posting it, without comment, you appear to agree without reservation. Thor_MN Jun 2013 #50

No. Quantess Jun 2013 #54

Apparently, you agree wholeheartedly with the ass that wrote what you posted. Thor_MN Jun 2013 #57

That's a losing argument, if you are thinking about the bigger picture. Quantess Jun 2013 #59

My calling a selfish ass a selfish ass is a losing argument? Thor_MN Jun 2013 #63

Hey never mind what I said. you just come back here Quantess Jun 2013 #65

Really? Cause I'm not there, you are sitting in your own whiff... Thor_MN Jun 2013 #66

You are the lamest poser "viking" I have ever encountered. Quantess Jun 2013 #68

Really? You haven't said a thing other than desperate attempts to insult me... Thor_MN Jun 2013 #70

All anyone has to do is just read the thread. Quantess Jun 2013 #72

What is your particular defect? Increasingly attempting to insult my screen name is childish. Thor_MN Jun 2013 #76

Time to take a step back from the keyboard. Quantess Jun 2013 #83

Damn, I was so hoping you had something to say... Thor_MN Jun 2013 #84

Only in your imagination Quantess Jun 2013 #86

Sigh, I guess you can't read... Thor_MN Jun 2013 #87

Here ya go, genius. Quantess Jun 2013 #119

Wow, took a long time for you to sober up. Thor_MN Jun 2013 #121

I take it that you still are in favor of gratuitous radiation, in the name of security theater. Quantess Jun 2013 #122

You really are unable to read? Thor_MN Jun 2013 #123

Fine, Todd. You WIN! Quantess Jun 2013 #124

I told you that several posts back. Good to see that you finally understand. Thor_MN Jun 2013 #125

The problem is that many other people are reading this, and they don't all agree. Quantess Jun 2013 #128

Sorry Brainiac, you are the one arguing a pointless case. Try deflecting some more. Thor_MN Jun 2013 #130

I read post 50. Are you really this stupid? Quantess Jun 2013 #132

Do you have ANY point? Thor_MN Jun 2013 #133

Thanks, Todd, for kicking the thread. (no text) Quantess Jun 2013 #134

Let me see if I can sum up your position(s) Thor_MN Jun 2013 #135

My summary of your position Quantess Jun 2013 #136

I've proven you wrong so many times, it boggles the mind that you claim you got anything right. Thor_MN Jun 2013 #137

Oh, picky picky picky. (Thank you) uppityperson Jun 2013 #69

Considering the SI definition of a Sv, perhaps you can clear one thing up. Pholus Jun 2013 #77

Reflections never reflect back 100% of the light. Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #85

If transmission were domininant or even comparible to reflection. Pholus Jun 2013 #90

The dose rate is a function of how much energy is absorbed per Kg of mass Major Nikon Jun 2013 #88

Thanks for the definition. Pholus Jun 2013 #89

As mass goes up or down, the effective dose will remain constant Major Nikon Jun 2013 #101

So in order to understand this, you need the additional weighting factor for the particular organ. Pholus Jun 2013 #103

You can get it from Wiki - radiation effective dose Major Nikon Jun 2013 #105

So to get the skin dosage, Pholus Jun 2013 #106

No, the effective dose unit of measure has already done that for you Major Nikon Jun 2013 #107

Rephrase: Pholus Jun 2013 #108

I'm assuming you mean equivalent dose absorbed by the tissue in question Major Nikon Jun 2013 #109

You sure? Pholus Jun 2013 #110

This confuses dose penetration with imaging penetration Major Nikon Jun 2013 #111

Okay, so most of the radiation is not used usefully by the system. Pholus Jun 2013 #112

I'm not sure whom you mean by "them" Major Nikon Jun 2013 #113

Not ANSI, but the revolving door between DHS and the manufacturers for sure. nt Pholus Jun 2013 #115

The millimeter wavelength body scanners emit non-ionizing radiation and are not "cancer machines." Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #3

The TSA still uses x-ray machines Major Nikon Jun 2013 #5

Are backscatter's still being used? I haven't seen one in a long time. Although I don't travel much. Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #6

They moved the older backscatter machines to smaller airports Major Nikon Jun 2013 #7

Oh darn I thought they got rid of them all nt flamingdem Jun 2013 #24

I think the Millimeter's use radio waves nt flamingdem Jun 2013 #25

They do. Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #32

Radio waves are radiation (nt) Recursion Jun 2013 #44

Visible light is also radiation. What is your point? Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #47

I thought flamingdem was saying they are radio waves "as opposed to" radiation Recursion Jun 2013 #49

Sigh Berlum Jun 2013 #8

Couldn't they have used a picture of some who wasn't snooper2 Jun 2013 #30

I've never gone through one either, but snot Jun 2013 #11

Somehow I've missed out on the joyous experience of a "rapiscan". Quantess Jun 2013 #12

It's only a matter of time. Gormy Cuss Jun 2013 #13

when you deliberately create a delay at the security line MindPilot Jun 2013 #20

I bet you never read the studies of the harm the xray could do flamingdem Jun 2013 #23

Do you really think they were removed out of concern for OUR welfare? MindPilot Jun 2013 #96

There you go with gratuitous, baseless judgments. Quantess Jun 2013 #36

"Showdown at the Airport Body Scanner By NATHANIEL RICH " MindPilot Jun 2013 #94

They took away the rapiscan x-ray machines already flamingdem Jun 2013 #22

Good to know, thanks. Quantess Jun 2013 #34

I just say I prefer to be patted down wryter2000 Jun 2013 #29

*facepalm* To avoid radiation, he goes through higher-radiation metal detectors. Recursion Jun 2013 #42

Okay, now that sounds interesting. Quantess Jun 2013 #48

That's absolutely false. LisaL Jun 2013 #67

Metal detectors emit non-ionizing radiation Major Nikon Jun 2013 #71

Can you explain how metal detectors work? Pholus Jun 2013 #93

Magnetic field is radiation Recursion Jun 2013 #97

So I should avoid magnetic fields more than x-rays? Pholus Jun 2013 #99

If what you want is to avoid "radiation", yes Recursion Jun 2013 #100

Yes, but you have made a comparison. Pholus Jun 2013 #102

How can you not trust the machines that the nice Michael Chertoff sold to us? Ian David Jun 2013 #58

Mike looks radiated flamingdem Jun 2013 #74

Chertoff's cancer/porno-scanners are being phased out. Dawson Leery Jun 2013 #79

Breathing the huge amounts of spent jet fuel from the planes titaniumsalute Jun 2013 #91

The flight itself is much worse Major Nikon Jun 2013 #114

I opt out. It is not a big deal. roody Jun 2013 #92

"In May, TSA chief told Congress all Rapiscan full body scanners had been removed from US airports" ucrdem Jun 2013 #98

So if the airport scanners ARE a cancer machine, there might be something to the X-Ray WMD? FrodosPet Jun 2013 #117