Environment & Energy

FogerRox

(13,211 posts)

57. Baggins is not saying Nukes are Ok Thats BUll crap.

Mon May 21, 2012, 04:48 PM

May 2012

What the study says is that at certain levels cellular repair is a fact. Above those levels may indeed be cancer and death.

JSHC this is 9th- 10th grade science in the early 70's taught here in the US, in public schools.

I'm anti nuke, wanna see 100% renewables with storage & HVDC supergrid. But JS on a stick, We need to be better than the pro nuke side, and that means getting the science right.

I dont have one college credit, but I do have an aptitude for science. If you dont have an aptitude for science then you might want to acknowledge that, at least in private, to your self. If you were going to be honest with your self.

Did you know that there are 97 fission nukes in the US generating 104 gigwat hrs? Did you know there 23 BWR's in the US?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

62 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Low-dose study finds no effects [View all] FBaggins May 2012 OP

I'd like to see this study . . . Richard D May 2012 #1

This is hardly the first with the same implications. FBaggins May 2012 #3

Ionizing radiation RE: cellular repair was taught in high schools in the 70's FogerRox May 2012 #9

And as NPR recently informed us (again, twice in 2 years) Jellyfish are good to eat. TalkingDog May 2012 #2

I've eaten jellyfish. Richard D May 2012 #4

Wait, wait... I got one more TalkingDog May 2012 #5

Ah, I see what you're trying to do there. Nice NickB79 May 2012 #7

Latest research from MIT PamW May 2012 #6

I think there are at least 2 legit models FogerRox May 2012 #10

Just as importantly... FBaggins May 2012 #11

The LBNL study pretty much blows away the no-threshold model PamW May 2012 #29

They watched it, thats really cool FogerRox May 2012 #38

"the absense of the genes" jpak May 2012 #8

And what case would that be? FBaggins May 2012 #12

A spelling error by the editor of a newspaper signifies what? nt NickB79 May 2012 #13

Toxic Sludge Is Good For You bananas May 2012 #14

This is a study done by MIT and published in a peer-reviewed journal, that replicated a previous one NickB79 May 2012 #15

The OP and post 6 kristopher May 2012 #16

WRONG!!! WRONG!!! WRONG!!! PamW May 2012 #43

Excellent! flamingdem May 2012 #27

Problem is RobertEarl May 2012 #17

I'm sure the study itself is neither compromised nor poorly done. kristopher May 2012 #19

You don't understand the paper... PamW May 2012 #30

Why not just do a study of the fallout zone of the 1950s Downwinder May 2012 #18

Or read this about TMI RobertEarl May 2012 #20

Even more fictional "reality", eh? FBaggins May 2012 #21

Semantics RobertEarl May 2012 #22

Semantics? FBaggins May 2012 #23

Eh? RobertEarl May 2012 #24

Yes. That's what I'm claiming. FBaggins May 2012 #25

Possible relevance? RobertEarl May 2012 #26

TMI - no significant radiation dose to the populace.. PamW May 2012 #28

Pam RobertEarl May 2012 #31

SCIENCE; not polls PamW May 2012 #32

Like i says RobertEarl May 2012 #33

Maybe you could over react some more FogerRox May 2012 #39

Thanks for your reply RobertEarl May 2012 #41

Releases ARE monitored PamW May 2012 #61

Yeah, sure, all releases are all monitored 100% RobertEarl May 2012 #62

Of course you remain mired in confusion. FBaggins May 2012 #34

Oh? RobertEarl May 2012 #35

That's a precarious perch you've set up for yourself. FBaggins May 2012 #36

Wrong again RobertEarl May 2012 #37

Then why dont flight attendants and pilots who fly long haul FogerRox May 2012 #40

WRONG!! PamW May 2012 #44

Perhaps you can explain then, Downwinder May 2012 #45

That's EASY PamW May 2012 #46

So where are the Scientific Studies Of the 1950s fallout? Downwinder May 2012 #47

"Dirty bombs" are "Weapons of Mass Distraction" PamW May 2012 #48

It has been half a century since the Nevada open air tests, long Downwinder May 2012 #49

Are you under the impression that there haven't been any? FBaggins May 2012 #50

Here is a TMI study from NIH.gov RobertEarl May 2012 #51

Have you read it? Are you thus admitting your error? FBaggins May 2012 #52

If you were honest RobertEarl May 2012 #53

Did you read the post at all? FBaggins May 2012 #54

If you were honest RobertEarl May 2012 #55

Baggins is not saying Nukes are Ok Thats BUll crap. FogerRox May 2012 #57

More like 104 nuclear units PamW May 2012 #59

Drat, I flipped the numbers, FogerRox May 2012 #60

Becasue Congress has ruled you are in 100% perfect health upon enlistment happyslug May 2012 #58

This is good news for space travel, I think. joshcryer May 2012 #42

Well, no FogerRox May 2012 #56