InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 16
Posts 1503
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 05/03/2005

Re: oldberkeley post# 2281

Friday, 03/11/2011 9:39:18 PM

Friday, March 11, 2011 9:39:18 PM

Post# of 29406
ob,
i carefully omitted another 3 mile island as a possibility, however, there are literally many orders of magnitude difference (by several measures) between Chernobyl and three mile island. These have some reasonable comments regarding comparison:
http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/nuclear_disasters/nuclear_disasters.html
and http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=36046 (c.f. alchemy's note)

the reuter's article is an excellent example of why i greet most mass media reports of scientific topics with great disdain. There are huge differences between things not operating in a preferred or expected manner (current state of affairs for reactors in Japan), making a difficult to repair or unrepairable but non-catastrophic mess (~3MI), and a catastrophic, global disaster (chernobyl).

I have yet to hear a single 'news' person discuss the source(s) of released radiation from the japanese reactors. If you hear a news person mention the source and form of radiation, then that would be a person to pay attention to. If they start talking about curies, roentgens, or rem dosages, and at what distance from the reactor then you can be impressed.

as a side note to give perspective and demonstrate the power of societal senility: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windscale_fire

regards,
Charlie

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.