Science Writer: Science websites “actively contributed to biased misinformation” on Fukushima — Reporting leaves impression it’s over and under control — Public will only be “informed” in order to avoid panic

Published: March 13th, 2012 at 10:07 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
98 comments


Title: Japanese Nuclear Reactor Future: Another High Tech Sarcophagus?
Source: Science 2.0
Author: Sascha Vongehr
Date: March 11th 2012

[...] What is more relevant for our future is perhaps how the media deal with the one year anniversary of the Fukushima disaster. “The media” have been claimed early on to hype the dangers while instead it is now firmly established that the opposite was true yet again. The most severe lesson this time is that the internet, rather than helping to balance corporate media, has shown to be what defenders of newspapers always claimed: Unreliable, undigested misinformation. It was precisely many so called science sites and blogs that let themselves be fed and actively contributed to biased misinformation. Old school journalists were correct in that the main danger from the new media is their naivety about information sources, for example the plain shallowness of the blogging world in making this an “I have a PhD and know how to convert milli-Sievert into micro-Sievert” issue without the background questioning that good journalism is all about. Science blogs are in fact worse than traditional media when it comes to jumping on premature rumors – in fact it is how many a popular science blog stays ahead. If you think that such would be looked down upon especially among scientists – well, think again.

Now one year later, we witness what was expected across all media: The reporting is basically leaving the impression that everything is over and under control, while in fact we are simply accepting a new status quo. Much like with the oceans for example, as Daniel Pauly explains at Mission Blue, each time the baseline drops, we call it the new “normal.” Where is the limit; where do we stop readjusting downward?

[...] with what happened in the new media, it looks much like we only get more proud of our technology while not actually improving it.  [...]

Downplaying by politicians and the involved industries will happen. Leaks, whether they are oil ones or radioactive, will be kept secret again, monitors taken off line, the public will be as always only “informed” in order to avoid panic and any appearance of being not in full control. Evacuations and vital help like the distribution of Potassium Iodide for example will likely come too late. A growing minority among the public knows this, they know that they are cheated every time by withholding even lightly bad news that could help them to make informed decisions. Panic should not surprise anybody. It is simply being responsible for your family if you assume the worst. Since scientists are directly involved, the public trust in science drops along with that for politicians. [...]

Read the report here

Published: March 13th, 2012 at 10:07 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
98 comments

Related Posts

  1. Video: Japanese receiving biased information — Hundreds of thousands or more may die of cancer from Fukushima disaster — It’s all hidden from view October 14, 2012
  2. Japan Professor: Leaders of Fukushima City refused to evacuate population of 400,000 after being asked by gov’t — Media didn’t report this thinking it would cause panic March 11, 2013
  3. Japan’s First Astronaut: Gov’t lies about Fukushima disaster — Vital info on radiation risks kept from public to “maintain law and order” August 3, 2013
  4. Physician: U.N. whitewashing Fukushima catastrophe, yet their report reveals “more than 9,000 will die of cancers”… number likely much higher if correct data used — Professor: “It’s brainwashing… an infamous lie… an abuse of science… their own data contradicts their public conclusion” (VIDEO) August 5, 2014
  5. Japanese Professor: All the nuclear interests want to do is avoid making nuclear power a central election issue — Gundersen: Gov’t trying to frighten public September 6, 2012

98 comments to Science Writer: Science websites “actively contributed to biased misinformation” on Fukushima — Reporting leaves impression it’s over and under control — Public will only be “informed” in order to avoid panic

  • James2

    This is exactly right. The shills dominated nearly every other message board – from very early on.

    enenews is the only one with an active community that survived intact – and it has been a close call here too at times.


    Report comment

    • Radio VicFromOregon

      Close calls? James2, just because you accuse anyone who won't agree with you as being a nuclear shill doesn't make it real. Enenews provides an open forum for a plethora of opinions, ideas, science, speculation, rampant rumor, sound data, angst, hope, despair, MSM stories, pioneering individual journalism, links to everything and anything concerning nuclear energy, on and on. This openess is what has made it so strong. The creators and monitors of this site have fulfilled their mission and, I for one, will be forever in deep gratitude to them for their profound gift of letting us all on here and helping inform me so that I can make my own informed decisions.


      Report comment

      • ENENews

        @dka of course, Enformable (see below) and some others
        @Vic thanks for that, as I see it the only close calls related to the survival of this site and our community have come from server issues
        @StillJill: thanks, I'm forwarding that to some family :) lol
        @ my friends with the generous comments that follow, thank you


        Report comment

      • Kevin Kevin

        Well said Vic.

        @Admin. Good to hear that it was only server issues and not attacks or hacks!


        Report comment

  • farawayfan farawayfan

    "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance"….true then and now. We've lost most of those freedoms, but at least this site has some truth to it.


    Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    I REFUSE TO TWEET THIS BECAUSE IT'S A LIE. Serious as migraine, I SHANT. Grrr


    Report comment

  • aigeezer aigeezer

    Vongehr's arguments are surprisingly muddy, I think.

    "Now one year later, we witness what was expected across all media: The reporting is basically leaving the impression that everything is over and under control, while in fact we are simply accepting a new status quo."

    He writes in a new media venue that terrible things are happening in ALL media. His own piece contradicts this.

    He overgeneralizes.

    Had he said many mainstream media outlets did and do terrible things, and many new media outlets do also… then I would have no argument with him.

    In claiming that "all" media outlets are "leaving the impression that everything is over and under control" he is demonstrably wrong not only because we know that Enenews is not doing that, but also because his very own soapbox is not doing it either.


    Report comment

    • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

      @aigeezer: on the contrary! The man's completely correct in his assertions. There's little objective reporting within the 'alternative' internet news services. Other than enenews, I'm forced to hunt far-and-wide to find anything that-even closely resembles this site. The article's incisive and critical of those who'd pretend objectivity, but only spew party line analysis. He's spot on…


      Report comment

      • aigeezer aigeezer

        Aftershock, He said "all". He did not say "all but Enenews". He made no exceptions – none.


        Report comment

        • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

          @aigeezer: yes, he is generalizing as to who the culprits are. But that shouldn't distract from his core accusation…


          Report comment

          • aigeezer aigeezer

            Aftershock, his core accusation is right on target. We are in agreement on that part, for sure.

            My beef is that if anyone stumbled on his material they might take him at his word – that all media were complicit in the coverup – that the new/alternative media were no better than msm…. I really wish he had said something like "most new media were no better than most msm, except for a few shining lights such as Enenews and blah and blah."

            The Net is much more diverse than the msm pap but if Joe/Jane lunchbucket are told new media are just as bad, just as useless, as msm, then they are likely to remain in their torpor. I wish he had seized the moment to say there IS hope in new media, as long as you are willing to search out material, to critically assess the claims put in front of you, to think rather than to passively accept talking points… the very reasons we come to Enenews.

            Again, I am in complete agreement with his core accusation.

            I just fret about the consequences of his over-generalization. He has given his readers permission to ignore all media, msm and alternative, including Enenews. His net effect is yet another "ain't it awful" lament. Enenews readers already know it's awful. That's why we're here.

            Chances are his audience members are already Net-savvy and won't take him literally. I think I'm more worried about the potential for a new dumbing-down meme, namely "don't bother looking on the Net – it's all just the same as msm – governments lie – there's nothing you can do about it."

            There is an irony here. I tend to defend Arnie for "big picture" reasons, and I urge people not to focus on details where he might be wrong. This time around I seem to be fussing about the details while you remind me of the "big picture".


            Report comment

            • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

              @aigeezer: now that you've elaborated in greater detail with-what your objections are, I am in agreement with you. And I'm very supportive of those (like Gundersen) who make an overall effort at disclosing the truth. We must all remain measured in our words and refrain from being as intractable as those we'd like to change.

              I'd not worry at the general public's misinterpretation of the facts, as those who would swallow without question are beyond reflection, anyway.

              I also think it's a good idea to hold the 'alternative' media's feet to the fire. As more folks abandon MSM venues, we're likely to see more usurpation of this media, as a 'reliable' venue; what I call the "Drudge effect". We should all remain ever-vigilant against the smiling scum…


              Report comment

          • I thought he was, rather, particularizing: all science websites – minus all other websites.

            Now, is enenews.com a science website?

            It's more a discussion forum for nuclear energy, not a science website (like Nature.com or ScientificAmerican.com).

            Plus, science websites are not the only culprits.


            Report comment

            • aigeezer aigeezer

              Hi Pu239. He did particularize all science websites at one point. That bothered me, not because there weren't lots of science sites doing those bad things – there were, for sure – "all" is what bothered me. At risk of starting a squabble over what constitutes a good science site to refute his "all science sites" position, I'll offer the YouTube channel from "antiprotons" as a candidate:

              http://www.youtube.com/user/antiprotons?feature=watch

              I hope we can think of many mainstream science sites that did not participate in the Fukushima misinformation campaign, given a bit of time.

              He said "Science blogs are in fact worse than traditional media…" and once again I wish he had qualified it with "some" or "many" or even "most" – even if he had to cite his own as a counterexample.

              Later on, he dropped the "science" qualification altogether, with phrases like "we witness what was expected across all media" and others I've quoted in previous posts. He got carried away with his theme, I think, and unwisely attacked "all media" for the sins of many.

              I agree that Enenews is not a science website but it is in the category "all media", and its existence refutes his claim about "all media" that "the reporting is basically leaving the impression that everything is over and under control."

              Not to flog this to death, but I just wish he had done his rant about many or most media outlets, then used the opportunity to point out some exceptions. Enenews is such an exception. I hope we can list many other good exceptions also.

              It is definitely the case that many media outlets of all types, including major science sources, were (and are) involved in distorting the Fukushima story. The two you mention (Nature and SA) drew heavy criticism here for some of their recent material – appropriately, I think.


              Report comment

      • HoTaters HoTaters

        Enformable.com seems free of bias.


        Report comment

        • HoTaters HoTaters

          What I mean is facts reported w/o any emotional content added to persuade. Those running the site obviously don't have the "pro nuke" nothing that won't kill you right away is safe bias. (I'm overstating it a bit.)


          Report comment

        • ENENews

          I like the new Alexa description:

          Enformable is focused on providing critical information about energy related topics for readers around the world. The functional goal of the project is to provide a user-friendly public resource, complete with database of supporting research materials and data. Enformable is a comprehensive guide to global energy and nuclear news and information on the Internet. Articles and Editorials guide readers through investigative special looks at the hard facts, going beyond the speculation into the real data.


          Report comment

  • This is criminal. It is a crime against humanity. It is a travesty against all life as we know it.

    "…the public will be as always only “informed” in order to avoid panic and any appearance of being not in full control."

    "…(the kind of) news that could help them to make informed decisions. Panic should not surprise anybody."

    Being mad as a hornet shouldn't surprise anybody either!


    Report comment

    • James2

      I've gone from "Mad as a hornet" mode into "OK what am I going to do about it" mode.

      I can't decide if that means it's time to bow out of the conversation – or that means it's time to actually get into the conversation.

      As I said above – one of the things I think that happened to the nuke power industry is that they deluded themselves so long that they actually started believing the fiction as fact.


      Report comment

      • aigeezer aigeezer

        Your post resonates with me, James2. I'm at a similar juncture.

        As one of the NRC "experts" said in the FOIA transcripts – there were manuals for everything except for what to do when the things melt down.

        None of us has a manual for this situation, but here we all are.

        If anyone had told me a year ago that I would now own a geiger counter and that I would be regularly testing my food and staring at radmaps all day, I certainly would not have believed it.

        Lotsa noise. Lotsa chaos. Lotsa fear. Lotsa opinions. No manual. Nuke power takes its toll in all sorts of ways.

        Yes, I too think many in the industry believe their own propaganda. Propaganda's effects tend to linger long after the original reason for it is forgotten. They will have their "matrix moment" at some point, or perhaps never wake up – who knows?

        Hell of a way to boil water.


        Report comment

      • HoTaters HoTaters

        James2, I agree about the believing fiction as fact part. And with the part about going to the "what will I do about it" stage.

        Nothing in my life has ever kept me angry for an entire year. The outrage has been replaced with cold determination to do whatever is in my power to effect a change.

        Since I'm not politically well connected or wealthy, or famous, that will have to mean grassroots efforts and aligning with others to collectively effect change.


        Report comment

        • HoTaters HoTaters

          That is, i was angry for an entire year; outraged by the lies and coverup. It pretty much peaked last week when reading the latest round of NRC revelations obtained under FOIA. Since then it's been move forward, do something, and look not to the right nor the left ….


          Report comment

          • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

            Hi all, me too. First months was shock and the full horror, now it's a horror one starts to get used to in a strange way….that leaves room for action.
            Like HoTaters, I feel determined to do whatever I can to fight this deadly industry.
            As much as I miss the enenewsers, I decided to restrict my posting time and get stuff done in the real world.
            Anti-nuke meetings, lectures, meeting like-minded people and work towards a truly sustainable future.

            *peace all you great folks


            Report comment

      • mark_eric

        I'm in agreement with you here. I too think many in the pro-camp have managed to "believe the lie". If there was a hell though, I hope a special place would be reserved for those that know the truth yet spin the most outrageous lies to cover they're own asses at the expense of HUMANITY.

        Unfortunately my outrage has settled into a cynical waiting. One of our critics accused us of gleefully hoping for people to start dying just to prove ourselves right. While I disagree with the gleeful part, I do find myself waiting for the inevitable massive number of illnesses and death to start. Because it may be a few years, I'm afraid that people still will be able to deny the connection to nuclear

        That makes me crazy all over again.


        Report comment

  • blackbeer blackbeer

    Informing the masses is not on the agenda, controlling them is. This site is indeed unique because of it's high quality info and because of the respect that is shown by everyone. We are all responsible for that. If we learn nothing from all this other then to see the problems we all face on this planet then it is a good beggining. I just hope it's not to little to late……………

    Tom


    Report comment

  • InfoPest InfoPest

    I have been a very active in condemning the MSM for downplaying news about Fuku, or not reporting it at all. Lately though I have noticed a change. For instance last night I watched “Nuclear Meltdown” on CNBC and was pleasantly surprised by the reporting. They covered all aspects of the disaster and didn’t downplay anything. Knowing that CNBC is owned by GE made this all the more surprising.

    As for nuclear industry propaganda on the web. We just have to keep calling them out every step of the way until the truth is undeniable. The future will prove us right because Japan will never be as isolated as Russia was after Chernobyl.


    Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    #Fukushima: RightThisMinute: 3, 2, 1! The Demolition of Nuclear PP! http://shar.es/pm6AL


    Report comment

  • lam335 lam335

    He is absolutely correct in the following statement. It's less the "scientific" part of this disaster, than the sociological/psychological elements of it (both in the causes and in the response/aftermath) that have astonished, appalled, and educated me since last spring:

    "The science involved is not nuclear physics, but sociology, psychology, and ever repeating history. The next incident will come along, and it will be much the same again, just perhaps much less lucky. Downplaying by politicians and the involved industries will happen. Leaks, whether they are oil ones or radioactive, will be kept secret again, monitors taken off line, the public will be as always only "informed" in order to avoid panic and any appearance of being not in full control. Evacuations and vital help like the distribution of Potassium Iodide for example will likely come too late. A growing minority among the public knows this, they know that they are cheated every time by withholding even lightly bad news that could help them to make informed decisions. Panic should not surprise anybody. It is simply being responsible for your family if you assume the worst. Since scientists are directly involved, the public trust in science drops along with that for politicians."


    Report comment

    • aigeezer aigeezer

      Yes indeed, lam335. I'm in full agreement with that.

      My distress comes that he added bits like this one:

      "the internet, rather than helping to balance corporate media, has shown to be what defenders of newspapers always claimed: Unreliable, undigested misinformation."

      … when he might have said something like. "while the Internet is huge and diverse and speaks with many voices (unlike msm), nevertheless many curious, patient and thoughtful people used it to find out much more about what was going on at Fukushima than they could ever learn from msm.

      The Internet is immature and cluttered, but it is evolving into a reliably useful place to learn what is important in the world. Those who have a vested interest in preventing that will be working hard to keep the Internet from reaching its potential. For now, put up with the noise, persist with your searches, learn to think critically about what you find, blah blah. Mainstream media will tell you what to think. The Internet will make you think."

      Missed opportunity, rather than mischief, I imagine.

      Life goes on.


      Report comment

      • lam335 lam335

        Yes, good point. He should have been more precise there. You can find things of varying qualify an, reliability/trustworthiness on the web. It may be imperfect, but its the ONLY place for views that don't simply repeat the comforting mantras: minuscule, trace amounts, no (immediate) threat to human health, bananas, airplanes, might even be good for you …

        One has to be selective in deciding which sources to consider credible, but how much more would we all be kept in the dark without the internet?

        The internet is neither inherently good nor inherently bad. It's a tool, but it's a tool that cannot be so fully dominated by vested interests as major media outlets that are sponsored or owned by some of the major corporations with ties to the very stories that they are reporting on (Gulf spill, Fukushima, etc.)


        Report comment

  • bleep_hits_blades

    James2, Aigeezer, I hope you remain active on this website. Your analyses, dialogues, etc. have been very valuable to me. Those of us who don't have the patience and science background really benefit from your thinking and observations.

    InfoPest, re MSM reporting getting a little more accurate, I think that is part of the 'method'. As negative effects & consequences become increasingly apparent & impossible to ignore/'massage'/minimize/spin, etc., the lies will have to be 'updated' so to speak.

    A big part of the public opinion/response management program seems to be to 'break it to them gradually.' (Then, instead of being angry at the deception, we feel gratified and hopeful that 'they are finally telling us the truth'…)

    As always, managing US – the people, the sheeple, the dupes, the deep pockets – is of primary importance.

    Look at the insanities of the past century (the slaughters of the wars, for instance) that the bovine public has somehow been 'managed' to accept, bankroll – and participate in. You can hardly blame the elites for their contemptuous opinion of us (collectively). We, collectively, have been their dupes for so long now. ( Henry Kissinger, after Vietnam when our soldiers came homesick from Agent Orange: "Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used for foreign policy.")

    What you see is what you get. This is the way the elites have always been; this is the way the masses have always been. The 'thinking few' have always been just that – a few.

    Actually we – the 'thinking few' – are caught between two 'evils' as it were – the amoral elites who, it seems, are willing to risk destroying the world in their effort to own & control it (and to make a buck); and the 'herd animal' public, who, you might say, would find it a challenge to think their way out of the proverbial wet paper bag.


    Report comment

    • James2

      I'm not leaving – as I said just trying to figure out where to add something to the effort.


      Report comment

    • PoorDaddy PoorDaddy

      @ bleep….
      I would like to add that the US gov would admit nothing, and give nothing to "agent orange" affected vets until a few DAYS before Operation Iraqi Freedom, the beginning of the 1991 Iraq war. G Bush, Sr. needed to drum up support for that one, so he signed limited Agent Orange benefits at the time.
      Side trip: Saddam Hussein was told by US ambassador that if he attacked Kuwait, US would basically look the other way….the rest is history, as they say.


      Report comment

    • aigeezer aigeezer

      Thanks, bleep. The "how things work" goes back to Machiavellian times and probably long before. Your comment made me realize a deeper reason why I've been fussing about Vongehr's over-generalizations so much.

      To me, the Net and new media have been the only hope for changing "how things work". I cringe every time Enenews goes down for five minutes. I panic when I read about SOPA/PIPA. I keep mental score of industry pushback here as a measure of our anti-nuke effectiveness (the better we do, the uglier and noisier it can get). I worry when I see msm outlets buy up feisty Net portals to tame them. On and on… the Net is a Very Big Deal. It might be the only way to recover from the global crony-capitalism nightmare, other than societal/nuclear collapse.

      Thus I was ultra-wary of Vongehr's unqualified position: "the internet, rather than helping to balance corporate media, has shown to be what defenders of newspapers always claimed: Unreliable, undigested misinformation." It's the UNQUALIFIED part that alarms me. I want to say to him "Hey, what about Enenews?", for example.

      If "the people" lose control of the Internet, then "how things work" will remain business as usual. If the people keep control of the Net, then we might transform ourselves into a new crowd-sourced effective entity (or not).

      We are in the struggle of our lives. Some people play it one level deep, some two, some many. I worry always that a pro-nuke adversary may be playing one level deeper than I am – in which case I would never know until it was too late. It may already be over, thanks to Fukushima. If "they" know, they're not telling.


      Report comment

      • PhilipUpNorth philipupnorth

        Hey, aigeezer, "they" will lose (are losing) this war. Never fear. The pro-nuke team plays by the rules of science. Now, we know that science has been corrupted and co-opted by the pro-nuke forces. There is, however, enough integrity within the scientific community, to create the scientific analysis that defeats the case for nuclear energy. (Let's begin this process be proving nuke power harmful and dangerous right here, on ENEnews.)

        We, the anti-nuke majority, can use the very science they use to defend the continuation of nuclear power, to defeat the nuclear power industry in the USA, and around the world, for good. You pro-nukes require public tax money to build your nuke plants. We can work to deny the continued subsidy of nuclear power. You require public backing to limit your liability in case of an 'accident'. We can work to hold the nuclear industry, who profits from nuclear power, solely liable for any accidents. You require the NRC to approve your continued use of nuclear power plants. We will work to make sure that any continued use of nuclear power plants is on you, the nuclear industry, not on us, the public. (And we know that you will not accept the full ruinous liability of nuclear power.)

        So you lose, nuclear power. We will not allow you to continue to take the profits and socialize the losses. This ends now! Finance your own Fuku industry, without public subsidy. If you can't, or won't pay your own way, then perish! And, by the way, clean up your own waste at your expense, not ours!


        Report comment

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    We have the internet, so just keep typing away. And don't worry about the big news-outlets, people will figure it out.


    Report comment

    • aigeezer aigeezer

      I hope so, TheBigPicture. Those of us here tend to be fed up with the big news outlets, for sure.

      The Big Energy interests all have very sophisticated TV ads, but those tend to just fight to a draw (I think, I hope), as their conflicting messages play back to back like political ads.

      On another front, I am struck by how slithery-slick the nuke industry websites are now: http://www.energysolutions.com/

      My instinct is that an elegant Net site like that might be more dangerous because a person comes to it voluntarily, with some motivation or other, and might feel "welcome" and "at home" and "informed" – in contrast to having a TV ad interrupt his/her entertainment.

      I wonder how Marshall McLuhan would handle this stuff.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan

      TRUTH IS NOT THE FRIEND OF NUKE


      Report comment

  • bleep_hits_blades

    In a 'mo' bettah world,' so to speak, it COULD be different – better educational and child-rearing methods could bump the general level of intelligence (and emotional/psychological health) up several notches, and the more able and gifted would act more as stewards of the earth and of the less gifted – who all, potentially, do have something to offer, I believe – rather than its rapists and exploiters.


    Report comment

    • Whoopie Whoopie

      NoChildLeftBehind left children behind. Damn shame what has happened to us. Aren't we like 37th on the list of educated? something like that. To think Santorum called Obama a snob. No words can express MY DISLIKE for that guy. to me he's HITLER II


      Report comment

    • BreadAndButter BreadAndButter

      Hi bleep, I agree on your thoughts. I just read E.F. Schumacher's book "Small is beautiful – Economics as if people mattered" from 1973. It was like it was written today…..

      There must be a new way of organising this world bottom-up. I read recently about Hull House in Chicago as well as lots of "eco-social transformation"-stuff. So huuugely inspiring to see what we can achieve as "normal folks".
      One day I'll start my coop bakery – guess how I'll call it? Right.


      Report comment

  • bleep_hits_blades

    @PoorDaddy re Agent Orange…when just typing that, I realize that 'Agent Orange' sounds like an evil character in an action comic book… anyway, now so many vets are so sick from their DU exposure. But I have read that the Army and govt. just give them the usual royal run-around. They get medical (toxic mainstream AMA) medical care but as to the govt. admitting that their problems largely are the result of DU poisoning/contamination – forget it.

    I feel very sad when I meet some of these guys – slow economy, bad job market, some of these guys have so few employment options, so they decide to join the military… and for some of them, they are really sick for the rest of their (shortened) lives.

    BTW, I read recently – I think on Natural News – that Agent Orange – the main ingredient in it, so to speak, is now being manufactured as an agricultural chemical by Monsanto and applied to food crops (!) Anyone else heard anything about that?

    P.S. They really DO seem to want to shorten the lives of us 'useless eaters'…

    P.P.S. Wonder if they would consider adding a Nobel Prize category for that – 'most ingenious soft-kill innovation' or something like that…


    Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    Just popped up! New One at HP:
    RT @TheDoctorRAB This is why the GenIIIs have passive cooling Living with the Risk of Meltdowns http://t.co/NABpglIw via @addthis


    Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    Outnow just checked in at HP:
    "I detected a metallic taste in my mouth from Sulphur-35. That radionuclide was measured at Scripps Pier in La Jolla. UCSD published the results. Iodine and cesium were measured in milk.

    I did take kelp tablets after 3-15 to guard against Iodine 131. I chelated some heavy metals out and just hope that I didn't inhale enough hot particles to cause lung cancer. I avoided the rain whenever I could. I avoided food products from Japan.

    Take a HEPA filter and then run air through it. Your car is actually doing just that with its air filter. Expose the contents of the filter to photographic paper to see if you have hot particles because the photopgraphic paper will turn black in spots where hot particles lie in the filter. You can wipe off glass and expose photographic paper that way, too. You may also use a Geiger counter on what you wipe off. In areas where the is little or no naturally-occuring radon in the background, you should have some idea of the existence of the fallout. It comes down in precipitation and as dust. Spiders spin radioactive silver into their threads and pollen bioaccumulates, too.

    I don't expect the government to be totally candid. The damage is done and some people will become sick. It's just that simple"
    ++++++++++
    Anyone have that link to that video where they did just that? Photography paper…cant remember.


    Report comment

  • norbu norbu

    I am looking at the web cam from the south of the plant what is the white sheet looking object in the screen next to #2?


    Report comment

  • norbu norbu

    Enformable web cam


    Report comment

  • bleep_hits_blades

    @ Aigeezer, yes the internet is SO important that it is scary, just how important it is. Talk about having all of one's eggs in one basket.

    Vongehr, whoever he is, is obviously an establishment tool, brain-for-hire. He is dead wrong about the internet, of course – the internet is vital, alive, and shows us what intelligence and talent there is, in abundance, out among the ordinary people.

    THAT is what the elites DO NOT like about the internet, of course. I dread its being shut down.

    Of course the elites know all that; and I pretty much live in daily fear that they will take it down(on some trumped-up pretext/orchestrated 'emergency'). They know there would be outrage if they do. (question is how much outrage are the wimpy masses actually capable of… or even the smaller portion of them that actually still have a few firing brain cells for all save the auto-pilot functions…) I'd imagine TPTB have their think tanks working overtime on that one… calculating the response, and pretexts for doing it, shutting the net down or restricting it more.

    However… There is this fascinating book, SECRET SOCIETIES AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE… to be cont'd. next post, running out of space here… (perfecting my cliff-hanger method here…)

    The internet is the main thing that has enabled the spread of this info about what the elites are really up to, of course. I remember 'the old days' when I'd drive 30 miles or more to go to 'meetings' of a dozen or a couple dozen people, and we'd have printed hand-outs, and eagerly talk, and share info, and maybe go for coffee afterwards, (and joke about how there were probably more of us who were under-cover agents than genuine grass roots real people, etc.) and there were occasional lecturers who would come to town and sometimes draw a pretty good crowd. This was back in the early and mid-'90s. The 'movement' has grown a lot since then, and it is largely because of the internet, of course.


    Report comment

  • dosdos dosdos

    I think that one reason he targets the scientific sites is that many articles in MSM rely on these sites for information. And it's not particularly the scientists who are spreading misinformation in the sites. It's far more often the engineers who know the mechanics better than the theory.

    Keep in mind that there are many learned people with scientific backgrounds in nuclear physics who are staunchly against NPPs. So don't go pointing fingers at those who support you by being all inclusive.

    Where I find the biggest source of cover up babbling is with nuclear engineers and builders. I daresay that one in one hundred know anything sound about nuclear medicine and health. If they had any real idea of the consequences, they wouldn't be nuclear engineers or construction management. I have known my share who learned the hard way, having children born with Downs Syndrome or other DNA based defects. And they all stated that they had no idea that it was so dangerous until they were struck with the tragedy of exposure.

    True, there are a few with PhD's who didn't specialize in nuclear theory who think they know more than they do. But by and large, it's the applied side, not the theoretical side, who is spreading the misinformation.


    Report comment

    • Radio VicFromOregon

      dosdos, that has been my experience as well. Most nuclear industry folks believe they are doing good and helping society advance. The truth comes hard for them and usually only because it hit home in some tragic way. I think that modern technology is allowed to compartmentalize – different people work on their own particular part while no one works on the whole. Evil doers or a poorly designed system of implementing technologies then failing to oversee them, it may not matter. The outcome is the same. I agree with you and tend not to want to interpret what is in the hearts of scientists, nor engineers, but that the breakdown of safety, misinformation, compartmentalized and limited knowledge comes primarily from the engineering departments where the science is modified to fit the present needs and situation. Much can get lost in the re-engineering and bad decisions get made and poorly understood data gets repeated as fact.


      Report comment

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    I can appreciate this article to some degree.
    I see it is a member of 2.0..and I did see by site search that they are discussing Fukushima… somewhat.
    Now..I ask 2.0 to move from looking at the social/intellectual dynamics and engage in a conversation as to the physical condition of Fukushima Npp.
    2.0 touts itself ..as a composite of the brightest minds in science.
    Heart says…"bring it on"


    Report comment

  • bleep_hits_blades

    The 'Revelation of the Method' – SECRET SOCIETIES AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE… author Michael A. Hoffman II quotes his own earlier work, APOCALYPSE CULTURE…
    "… in the brilliant word-play of the (mythical) Masonic (figure) Dr. Syntax, we come to the current unfoldment in 'Must Be,' and alchemical (cant language code)term Mr. (James Shelby) Downard translates as "the Revelation of the Method." This alludes to the process wherein murderous deeds and hair-raising conspiracies involving wars, revolutions, decapitations, secret archaeo-astronomic deity cult-worship, and every manner of horror show are first buried beneath a cloak of secrecy… and then when finally accomplished and secured, slowly revealed to the unsuspecting populace, who watch … deep-frozen … as the hidden history is unveiled…In the circulation of…(anti-Academy) manuscripts…the revelation of the method is accomplished. Truth or consequences. Downard… is acutely aware that in exposing the conspirators , he is probably serving the final dictum(in their alchemical formula)…"

    Hoffman goes on to say – 'exposure itself does not defeat cryptocracy, because given the degraded and atrophied nature of modern man's perception and insights today, such revelations may only serve to strengthen the cryptocracy's mental hold. "

    Hoffman continues, pointing out that the 'revelations' never result in arrests, convictions, etc. of the high-level perps – which is very true. I mean – look at Fukushima. No arrests. Investigations, slaps on the wrist, clucking of tongues… but they are walking free…

    Hoffman point out that the revealed info 'only becomes further grist for the seemingly limitless public appetite for shock-titillation and passive voyeurism."


    Report comment

  • Radio VicFromOregon

    Yes, the author is overgeneralizing and committing some of the same journalistic no-no's he worries happens on the internet. Maybe's he having a bad week and feeling overwhelmed by the mountain of bad information that has found a home on the internet and makes it way to the MSM. Journalists are suppose to interview "experts". If "experts" are uncritically promoting misinformation claiming knowledge they don't really possess, this bad information can easily become taken as fact. So, the author is right to worried.

    The MSM journalists are simply asking the wrong people, the wrong "experts" who are very limited in their view of the bigger picture – they have no bigger picture yet are asked to expound on it, and on the internet, they do so in spades.

    I worry, too, when people reach this level of frustration and start to blame the plethora of information found on the internet rather than the journalistic selection process of not knowing who to really ask about something. But, his point is an intriguing one, if, I think, not a little misguided.


    Report comment

  • dear jones

    The young do not read news from MSM but from internet


    Report comment

  • Atomfritz Atomfritz

    Just to mention that the (in-)famous physicsforums.com and its owner "Scientific American" are owned by the strictly pro-nuke German Holtzbrinck media group.
    More detail here: http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2012/03/fukushima-i-nuke-plant-reactor-2-op.html?showComment=1330742870450#c2028813906466531236


    Report comment

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    ..not a great place to hang out..huh?.. Fritz…
    There are others trying to tell it ..and tell it all..like…Veterans Today.
    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/02/25/evacuate-tokyo-and-all-us-forces-from-japan/
    I encourage all to check the front page..
    They are fighting the good fight.


    Report comment

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    Ya..the bought and paid for brain(?) children at Physics Forum..heard from Heart..and they can continue their spew..
    But..I planted truth in their minds..and they will have to live with it…


    Report comment