PCFormat Forum Archive

Prime wrote:
Edit: And jee, I'm finding very little on the news to corroborate those links that Japan has experienced a meltdown.

You need to watch a better news service

http://www.ewn.co.za/articleprog.aspx?id=61598

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/ ... pic=enviro

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/ ... 4C20110312

If you go back in the bulletins, you will see the damage that they have suffered already. Granted it was not a full meltdown but they have people suffering from radiation already.

/edit - new explosion
http://saweatherobserver.blogspot.com/2 ... 8SAWDIS%29

http://saweatherobserver.blogspot.com/


And some other news

SAWDIS wrote:The Pentagon was expected to announce that the aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan, which is sailing in the Pacific, passed through a radioactive cloud from stricken nuclear reactors in Japan, causing crew members on deck to receive a month’s worth of radiation in about an hour, government officials said Sunday.

The officials added that American helicopters flying missions about 60 miles north of the damaged reactors became coated with particulate radiation that had to be washed off.

There was no indication that any of the military personnel had experienced ill effects from the exposure. (Everyone is exposed to a small amount of natural background radiation.)
...

Tribble wrote: Query: Why was Jesus born in 7BC and not 0AD? I thought AD meant after the birth of Christ. That is what we were taught at school and Church

Because some n00b worked out the whole calendar centuries ago according to the best evidence then available, but since then they figured out better dating methods. Rather than shifting the entire calendar and creating all sorts of confusion they just more precisely identified the actual year of Christ's birth. It's actually dated more commonly around 4BC. This is the first I've read of 7BC.

But if this continues let's take it to Not Easily Offended.

Yeah, nothing offends me more than discussion of the exact year Jesus was born in...
Gonna have to go practise some deep breathing exercises now to deal with my rage

Photos of Japan before and after

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011 ... mi.html?hp

Tribble wrote: You need to watch a better news service

jee's link was from the date of the first explosion. The information that the media gave then was that is wasnt a meltdown but just too much pressure. Even now it's unclear if it is a meltdown because they say its too hot too see. So unless her sources have psychic abilities they can't be taken too seriously.

Now the latest updates states that the uranium rods may have deformed. The sea water cooling system is also looking like it's not very effective.

As for the people with radiation. The pressure that caused the explosion is from the steam which was in contact with the uranium so it is therefor radioactive. They also noted that they believe the radioactive infected people are perhaps contaminated by some other source.

I got this all from the international news channels on DSTV. they may be unreliable but they are all reporting the same thing so there must be some =ground to their claims.

Tribble, like CNN? I checked ABC, CNN and sky

Siemens post summed up my response. You'd get a very different result from a partial or full meltdown.

Safe radiation levels don't take individual countries natural radiation into account. The average johannesburger gets an extra dose because of the granite and certain other rocks. given that Japan is on volcanic rock and give the long term affects of 2 atomic bombs, its highly probable Japan's radiation levels were elevated before they vented radioactive steam.

just some more info.
That nuclear plant was supposed to have gone offline feb this year because it is very ourdated. Not sure what the reason was to continue the use of the plant however they did state that was also one of the reasons why their systems failed.

I honestly think that this is going to end up as a meltdown simply because their last resort plans of pumpin in seawater obviously didnt help. What else can they do?

Siemens wrote:I honestly think that this is going to end up as a meltdown simply because their last resort plans of pumpin in seawater obviously didnt help. What else can they do?

Ship in a giant stock Intel cooler.

Stuart wrote:

Siemens wrote:I honestly think that this is going to end up as a meltdown simply because their last resort plans of pumpin in seawater obviously didnt help. What else can they do?

Ship in a giant stock Intel cooler.

The world will not come to an end until i have a grand child. this will roughly be in another... oh 30 years?

jee wrote:The world will not come to an end until i have a grand child. this will roughly be in another... oh 30 years?

I think hell might freeze over first

Prime wrote:

jee wrote:The world will not come to an end until i have a grand child. this will roughly be in another... oh 30 years?

I think a nuclear reactor might freeze over first

Fixed.

The quake they survived actually didnt they? All their structures were built in anticipation for such an event? It's just that they never expected or couldnt prepare for a tsunami and ofcoarse with nuclear power being the most eco clean (apart from nuclear waste) source of mass energy you cant plan for a tsunami, meteor storm, snap freeze ice age or anything like that.

Infact our current energy crisis isnt due to natural disasters. It's due to lack of foresight by an incompetant that depleted reserves and turned out all infrastructure funds.

So now what?

Prime wrote:
And jee, I'm finding very little on the news to corroborate those links that Japan has experienced a meltdown.

back to the 12th
http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/201103 ... s-meltdown

Sorry, had to go back to find that article again. I think you and I use different search engines, and read different blogs/sites
I must admit that I do look for reputable sources, instead of media hype. I do not watch TV often, and have not watched any of this via the "normal" sources. However, I have read some really interesting posts by Nuclear engineers, and simple descriptions of what really happens in a nuclear station, and what is happening at Fukushima

http://www.boingboing.net/2011/03/12/nu ... insid.html (i will leave some of the other links out... )

StarBound wrote:The quake they survived actually didnt they? All their structures were built in anticipation for such an event? It's just that they never expected or couldnt prepare for a tsunami and ofcoarse with nuclear power being the most eco clean (apart from nuclear waste) source of mass energy you cant plan for a tsunami, meteor storm, snap freeze ice age or anything like that.

If I may add something that I've heard on Skynews. Japan do have a lot of anti tsunami walling built around some areas of its coast. However they did say that nothing they could possibly do would have prevented this.

I can believe that. What can you build to stop a few million tons of water?

Do you think it's okay that I remove facebook friends who clearly has no moral fibre with regard to their insensitive status updates? My reason for wanting to remove them is because I do not want to be associated with them.

Siemens wrote:Do you think it's okay that I remove facebook friends who clearly has no moral fibre with regard to their insensitive status updates? My reason for wanting to remove them is because I do not want to be associated with them.

Why is removing people from FB such a sensitive issue?

An aftershock of 6.0 has just hit Japan. Those poor people

http://www.ewn.co.za/articleprog.aspx?id=61722

....................................

Siemens wrote:Do you think it's okay that I remove facebook friends who clearly has no moral fibre with regard to their insensitive status updates? My reason for wanting to remove them is because I do not want to be associated with them.

I think it's okay to unfriend someone because you don't like the way their parents spelled their middle name.

Then remove them

Remove them, but first post their facebook details on viagra sites.