Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

FBaggins

(28,706 posts)

1. Nope.

Reply to Demeter (Original post)

Mon Dec 23, 2013, 11:39 AM

Dec 2013

Not even close.

And again with this nonsensical comparison of just cesium - the primary lasting contaminant from reactor meltdowns, but scarce in nuclear bombs.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

52 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Radiation from Fukushima Will Be 10 Times Bigger than All Radiation from Nuclear Tests Combined [View all] Demeter Dec 2013 OP

Nope. FBaggins Dec 2013 #1

Should be required reading for everyone madokie Dec 2013 #2

He beat you to it Demeter Dec 2013 #3

Yup madokie Dec 2013 #4

Seriously? You found that "informative" FBaggins Dec 2013 #5

Whatever you say, Mr madokie Dec 2013 #6

It's not "whatever I say"... it's reality. FBaggins Dec 2013 #7

"its reality" darkangel218 Dec 2013 #22

Nope... not "as perceived by me" FBaggins Dec 2013 #26

I call BS. lol darkangel218 Dec 2013 #27

You can "call" whatever you like FBaggins Dec 2013 #32

Lulz!!! darkangel218 Dec 2013 #34

What difference does 3 miles vs. 50 miles make? NickB79 Dec 2013 #37

Huge difference. darkangel218 Dec 2013 #40

Interesting. The Chernobyl and Fukushima exclusion zones aren't as large as I thought NickB79 Dec 2013 #43

BTW, TEPCO dumped an incredible amount of irradiated water into the Pacific Ocean, darkangel218 Dec 2013 #50

The nearest nuclear power plant to me.. PamW Dec 2013 #46

STILL TRIVIAL PamW Dec 2013 #8

THERE you are! Demeter Dec 2013 #9

Lmao!!!! darkangel218 Dec 2013 #10

ooPS! Demeter Dec 2013 #12

- 1 million, Pam darkangel218 Dec 2013 #11

Whatever... PamW Dec 2013 #52

Talk about not knowing how to read... NNadir Dec 2013 #13

Welcome to the discussion! Demeter Dec 2013 #14

You and kristopher appear to be in agreement -- do you also have "a thing going on?" phantom power Dec 2013 #16

Not after he yelled at me Demeter Dec 2013 #17

I don't know if it's still running, but I think this thread needs a DUZY Demeter Dec 2013 #15

And the DUzy goes to the poster with the most Caps!!! darkangel218 Dec 2013 #18

Here's the thing about that. FBaggins Dec 2013 #19

FBaggings.. darkangel218 Dec 2013 #21

HOGWASH!!! PamW Dec 2013 #28

Pam, give it up. darkangel218 Dec 2013 #29

Seriously.. PamW Dec 2013 #35

lol.. darkangel218 Dec 2013 #36

Why get so upset over a change of font PamW Dec 2013 #39

Honey, im not only upset over the font, darkangel218 Dec 2013 #41

What's "not working" PamW Dec 2013 #44

"I really do NOT care if you learn anything." darkangel218 Dec 2013 #45

Well good! PamW Dec 2013 #47

Most of that OP is from a Woods Hole article, including the infographic kristopher Dec 2013 #23

Lol... except for... FBaggins Dec 2013 #24

So Pam is not the only one using bold heh darkangel218 Dec 2013 #25

Pam's rhetorical abuses are not that she uses bold FBaggins Dec 2013 #30

FBaggings.. darkangel218 Dec 2013 #33

WRONG Again PamW Dec 2013 #38

Bold again, Pam? darkangel218 Dec 2013 #42

Yes - bold. PamW Dec 2013 #48

"members of the target audience", eh? darkangel218 Dec 2013 #49

Which still leaves it head and shoulders above the content of ... kristopher Dec 2013 #31

See post 30 madokie Dec 2013 #51

This is a real jumble of factoids caraher Dec 2013 #20