General Discussion

Generic Other

(29,082 posts)

55. I get it that we need to maintain a skeptical attitude

Fri Jan 24, 2014, 11:03 AM

Jan 2014

but the amount of ridicule heaped on anyone posting any information related to Fukushima around here reminds me of the concerted efforts to squelch discussion of BP's effect on the Gulf.

Rather than always using ridicule, sarcasm and snark to attack posters with legitimate concerns, maybe the DU experts should post what they consider valid information about the possible effects of Fukushima. Seems fair.

I don't think serious discussion of all possibilities hurts any of us -- not half as much as a pig pile of mean comments meant only to stir shit and scare off people who would like to monitor the potential effects of Fukushima on the West Coast of the US.

Maybe the conclusions are wrong. But people posting snark are not the ones that have proven this is the case.

Like you said Octafish it is as though DU's resident experts on all things scientific have decided the world is flat and will listen to no other discussion period end of story. That's just my perception. I am not a scientist, but I am very concerned. And it makes me sad that even posting concerns/questions for discussion on DU makes one the subject of ridicule. If that is the scientific method at work, I can see how such cavalier attitudes have helped put our planet in the precarious environmental state it is in today.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

199 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Starfish dying in the NW Pacific [View all] RobertEarl Jan 2014 OP

Happening in the Atlantic as well and also happened in the 80's. Bonobo Jan 2014 #1

I guess you missed his post about Fukushima zappaman Jan 2014 #3

First weapons testing, then Chernobyl, now Fukushima RobertEarl Jan 2014 #32

Point being it is adding up, this radiation RobertEarl Jan 2014 #33

I noticed that too DFW Jan 2014 #54

How many times are you going to post this NONSENSE? zappaman Jan 2014 #2

Bobby Brown goes down. nt Bonobo Jan 2014 #5

Flakes. Nt zappaman Jan 2014 #7

Jumbo go away. nt Bonobo Jan 2014 #14

Dumb All Over. zappaman Jan 2014 #16

You won (this time). nt Bonobo Jan 2014 #27

I know you guys think you are clever Generic Other Jan 2014 #49

Except that's not the claim RobertEarl was making. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #58

"scientists can�t rule out nuclear pollution..." Generic Other Jan 2014 #61

Fukushima radiation is not the sole cause of the starfish die off. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #65

Could starfish immune systems be compromised by radiation? Generic Other Jan 2014 #68

Honestly, I'm not well-versed enough in marine biology or radiation to say. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #76

of course immune systems are compromised by radiation questionseverything Jan 2014 #77

It's also technically impossible to rule out alien attacks on our starfish. Yo_Mama Jan 2014 #98

Interesting RobertEarl Jan 2014 #103

If you believe it's nonsense, then either post arguments that prove that it's nonsense, rhett o rick Jan 2014 #83

" I think I can tell nonsense with out their help." zappaman Jan 2014 #86

So now you've lowered yourself to stating that I "need help". You seem certain that you know the rhett o rick Jan 2014 #109

Again and again and again Brother Buzz Jan 2014 #4

Like clockwork... bhikkhu Jan 2014 #13

Indeed, one needs to respond to nonsense Brother Buzz Jan 2014 #19

At this point, it's spamming. zappaman Jan 2014 #23

Starfish wasting predates Fukushima and is happening in other oceans besides the Pacific. Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #6

The starfish die-off started well before Fukushima, and has happened fairly regularly bhikkhu Jan 2014 #8

"Unless one believes there is a massive multi-national conspiracy to cover up the evidence." Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #10

Apparently so bhikkhu Jan 2014 #17

People think 6 dump truck loads of thermite were snuck into each WTC tower. Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #20

DoE testing found Plutonium in Mussels RobertEarl Jan 2014 #9

ENEnews again, eh? zappaman Jan 2014 #11

LOLOLOLOL Berlum Jan 2014 #40

Maybe chemtrails are killing the starfish... SidDithers Jan 2014 #56

Is this your main souirce for your persistence on this issue? passiveporcupine Feb 2016 #194

Don't read it today RobertEarl Feb 2016 #195

You are the one who shouldn't be reading it. passiveporcupine Feb 2016 #197

Sorry to bother you. RobertEarl Feb 2016 #198

This message was self-deleted by its author Journeyman Jan 2014 #12

It's a disease that's killing them off. Vashta Nerada Jan 2014 #15

Starfish facts RobertEarl Jan 2014 #18

Robert ... Fukushima is a terrible ongoing accident ... we all agree on that point ... MindMover Jan 2014 #21

It's no use with this guy. longship Jan 2014 #35

Newest report of Fukushima contamination in the Pacific RobertEarl Jan 2014 #22

From a counter opinion site RobertEarl Jan 2014 #24

you know, I live in the NW Pacific and nobody, absolutely nobody here is talking about this at all Douglas Carpenter Jan 2014 #25

The ocean ecologists are alarmed RobertEarl Jan 2014 #26

They are alarmed. Although not for the same reasons you are. Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #28

those articles do not even mention Fukushima - they maintain a virus is killing them Douglas Carpenter Jan 2014 #29

Hilarious, since UC Santa Cruz mentions fukushima like zero times nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #104

Yep RobertEarl Jan 2014 #106

Really? Claiming persecution? NuclearDem Jan 2014 #118

Funny thing is, the absence of evidence of such persecution will be seen as evidence that it exists. X_Digger Jan 2014 #119

Fish tank RobertEarl Jan 2014 #120

Care to address the time-travelling, ocean-hopping "cause" in post #115? X_Digger Jan 2014 #121

With you? Why? RobertEarl Jan 2014 #124

Lol, can't quote that entire para, can you? X_Digger Jan 2014 #125

Here's another theory RobertEarl Jan 2014 #126

Bull. Union Scribe Jan 2014 #133

Still no response, eh? X_Digger Jan 2014 #134

Are you just pissed off you don't have one? zappaman Jan 2014 #136

Maybe it's chronoton radiation, that travels back in time.. X_Digger Jan 2014 #143

No problem RobertEarl Jan 2014 #137

So.. before Fukushima, therefore.. work with me here.. fukushima can't be the cause, right? X_Digger Jan 2014 #142

You call that logic? RobertEarl Jan 2014 #150

A precedes B, therefore B can't cause A. X_Digger Jan 2014 #151

Why is my user name relevant? NuclearDem Jan 2014 #123

I guess the folks at UC Santa Cruz are part of a huge conspiracy then nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #141

From your link passiveporcupine Feb 2016 #196

It was reported by the local TV news in November Generic Other Jan 2014 #43

Check the studies from UC Santa Cruz nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #105

That is where I checked Generic Other Jan 2014 #117

Deep Sea News says the same RobertEarl Jan 2014 #122

Yes, they had the same problem back in the 80s nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #140

I tend to think you are correct Generic Other Jan 2014 #144

And that is where bioconcentration with migratory nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #146

Wrong on both, nadine RobertEarl Jan 2014 #153

Please, quit spreading falsehoods. nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #154

They don't know what is causing it RobertEarl Jan 2014 #156

Let's see if you finally get it, latest update nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #161

You telling me to stop? RobertEarl Jan 2014 #163

As I expected, you got personal nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #165

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha! longship Jan 2014 #30

I thought that was how one defended one's arguments on a DU Generic Other Jan 2014 #47

Sometimes ridicule is the only appropriate response. longship Jan 2014 #62

It is to the point that I will save the UCSC statement on this nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #167

Yup! There is plenty of science on this. longship Jan 2014 #170

And we both worry about the actual science of this nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #172

;-) longship Jan 2014 #175

Fukushima-related radioactive materials measured across entire Northern Hemisphere RobertEarl Jan 2014 #31

How Quickly Did Fukushima Radiation Reach North America, And When Will It Peak? passiveporcupine Feb 2016 #199

This belongs in the woo forum. hobbit709 Jan 2014 #34

I blame Nazi metadata Orrex Jan 2014 #36

Wow... SidDithers Jan 2014 #37

Well, it's obvious what's happening here. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #38

. Berlum Jan 2014 #39

I'll see your 'drippy thing' and raise you a 'Starro the Conqueror'. randome Jan 2014 #42

OK. I'll see your Starro, and call you. Lay your melted stars on the table? Berlum Jan 2014 #44

I fold. randome Jan 2014 #46

Thanks for posting, RobertEarl. Octafish Jan 2014 #41

The reason it's being mocked is because it's just plain wrong. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #45

Really? Octafish Jan 2014 #48

Are you serious right now? NuclearDem Jan 2014 #50

... Vashta Nerada Jan 2014 #53

Oh good god. Vashta Nerada Jan 2014 #51

I get it that we need to maintain a skeptical attitude Generic Other Jan 2014 #55

... NuclearDem Jan 2014 #60

Again I would rather discuss why some claims are "ludicrous" Generic Other Jan 2014 #64

The only legitimate response to PRATT has to be ridicule. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #66

Do you reply to all the spam email you get? Union Scribe Jan 2014 #74

I used to post articles too Generic Other Jan 2014 #78

Sometimes people get tired responding to the same debunked claims. longship Jan 2014 #67

I dont think you appreciate the gift of certainty of those knowing what is right vs. what is wrong. rhett o rick Jan 2014 #85

I would hope you realize that sometimes "right or wrong" is subjective and open for rhett o rick Jan 2014 #82

Right or wrong is not subjective in this case. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #88

+1000 zappaman Jan 2014 #90

In my OP it cleary states RobertEarl Jan 2014 #91

No, your OP implies that it is plutonium from Fukushima that is responsible. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #93

No you haven't RobertEarl Jan 2014 #95

All you've been able to do is cite ENENews, NuclearDem Jan 2014 #97

Thanks for the sanity Yo_Mama Jan 2014 #100

" there is no "subjective" in scientific claims. " You dont seem to know much about rhett o rick Jan 2014 #107

First of all, "hypothesis", not "theory." NuclearDem Jan 2014 #110

A simple calendar proves the hypothesis wrong. X_Digger Jan 2014 #111

That is simple and I guess that's your criteria. nm rhett o rick Jan 2014 #114

Does tepco's radiation move backward through time?!? X_Digger Jan 2014 #115

That's more damning of Robert's hypothesis than anything else. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #116

Even the UCSC study that ironically Earl cited as evidence nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #145

BS RobertEarl Jan 2014 #155

If there's one thing you're an expert on, it's BS. hobbit709 Jan 2014 #157

Grow up. RobertEarl Jan 2014 #158

I'm not the one indulging in childish make believe hobbit709 Jan 2014 #159

I wonder if he "checks out the chicks"? zappaman Jan 2014 #162

I will repeat this again so you can understand this nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #160

You go tell this to the folks telling you star fish are not dying due nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #193

When a poster keeps posting the same bullshit over and over and keeps being told why they are wrong zappaman Jan 2014 #89

I am not surprised that you try to justify your mocking and ridicule. You never do it rhett o rick Jan 2014 #113

Thanks Octafish RobertEarl Jan 2014 #70

shocking you like this post. n-t Logical Jan 2014 #75

Especially the folks doing the research on the matter nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #171

Let's not forget the sardine die off.... Bennyboy Jan 2014 #52

You, personally, are making a mockery of the fukushima event. NCTraveler Jan 2014 #57

Yes they are, but it has nothing to do with Fukushima. MineralMan Jan 2014 #59

Very nice, mm RobertEarl Jan 2014 #79

Why thanks! MineralMan Jan 2014 #80

Shallow advice RobertEarl Jan 2014 #81

Not this shit again.. X_Digger Jan 2014 #63

There's no scientific evidence of your claim alarimer Jan 2014 #69

Plutonium found in mussels RobertEarl Jan 2014 #71

.000000000004 Ci/kg in some mussels Union Scribe Jan 2014 #132

For fuck sake! longship Jan 2014 #164

Thanks for the kick RobertEarl Jan 2014 #166

When all your kicks ridicule your post I will bet you still won't stop. longship Jan 2014 #168

I say we see this exact same post for the 6th time within 10 days. zappaman Jan 2014 #169

No way, my friend. longship Jan 2014 #173

Yup! It's a double down. longship Jan 2014 #192

I personally am not going to worry about Fukushima Blue_In_AK Jan 2014 #72

That's understood RobertEarl Jan 2014 #73

I think that this is an interesting theory but I would have to see proof before rhett o rick Jan 2014 #84

Thanks RobertEarl Jan 2014 #87

Those in their denial bubbles are afraid of the truth. There and many reactors rhett o rick Jan 2014 #135

That's the problem RobertEarl Jan 2014 #138

Oh for God's sake. A single reactor at Three Mile Island suffered a partial meltdown. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #139

I would not quite say zero instances nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #147

I don't see any conclusive evidence that TMI's radiation caused cancer. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #148

There have been a few nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #149

Will this ridiculous meme ever die? Yo_Mama Jan 2014 #92

You are in denial? RobertEarl Jan 2014 #94

The DEFINITIVE link....Not going to copy/paste it, beware those on dial-up uppityperson Jan 2014 #96

LOVE IT. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #99

Get a bowl and a bottle of milk because these claims are Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs. nt longship Jan 2014 #101

Thanks for the information. democratisphere Jan 2014 #102

Thank you, democratisphere RobertEarl Jan 2014 #108

The government, like many here, won't even acknowledge the possibility of radiation contamination. democratisphere Jan 2014 #112

Living in the Tampa Bay area we have this discussion often with experts in the field of Harmony Blue Jan 2014 #127

Yes. Worth their salt. Good term RobertEarl Jan 2014 #128

+1 Absolutely Harmony Blue Jan 2014 #129

Or rising sea temperatures. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #130

Rising sea temperatures isn't likely Harmony Blue Jan 2014 #174

Except rising sea temperatures have been the cause of previous starfish die offs. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #176

Something seems off this time around Harmony Blue Jan 2014 #180

Here's another discussion idea RobertEarl Jan 2014 #131

Yup nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #179

YiKes gopiscrap Jan 2014 #152

List of my posts in thread: Starfish dying in NW Pacific RobertEarl Jan 2014 #177

As promised nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #178

Octafish post, Thanks Octafish RobertEarl Jan 2014 #181

From the idiots doing the research nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #182

Oh my God, this thread just never stops! NuclearDem Jan 2014 #184

I think he believes that if he keeps repeating it in spite of being disproven, it'll stick. X_Digger Jan 2014 #191

Summary RobertEarl Jan 2014 #183

From the clueless folks ACTUALLY DOING THE RESEARCH nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #185

It's really cool how the radiation went backward in time to make the sea stars sick. LeftyMom Jan 2014 #186

I am working on a fictional FTL drive nadinbrzezinski Jan 2014 #190

You're really planting your flag on this one, aren't you? NuclearDem Jan 2014 #188

This thread should be in creative speculation... SidDithers Jan 2014 #187

Arrrrrgh!!!!!!! longship Jan 2014 #189