Originally Posted by 45nm
At this rate your posts keep downplaying the significance of the Fukushima Nuclear crisis
No, I'm fully admitting it's significant. It's not on the same level as Chernobyl in scale though.
and linking to the WHO is not a reliable source.
As opposed to you linking non-verifiable conjecture as your only evidence?
As far as I am aware of the classification of Fukushima on the same scale of Chernobyl says it all as to the significance. Duration of Chernobyl and Fukushima means that in it's infancy Fukushima hasn't surpassed Chernobyl (V.I.L Nuclear Power Plant) but as time goes on I have no doubt it will.
What you are refusing to understand is that there is no level 8. Anything worse than a level 6 is a level 7. The launch and detonation of the entire nuclear arsenal of the human race would still be a level 7 event. Fukushima is on the low end of that where it's 7 because it's worse than what's previously been designated a 6. That does not mean it's of comparable significance to Chernobyl, because every nuclear expert on the planet says it's not.
Let's also not forget about how the media has a blackout and disregards Fukushima as being news whereas Miley Cyrus 'twerking' is considered more newsworthy.
Media != news, Media = Entertainment. There's been no significant change in Fukushima since the original coverage died down. No one ever reported it was over. Repeating "nothing has changed" doesn't sell advertising, thus it doesn't make the news.
The WHO is not a reliable authority when it comes down to radiation sickness and health hazards. If this was about a potential virulent outbreak then we all know how much the WHO would be criticized for their fearmongering that they did during the so called 'Influenza' of 2009. Their credibility essentially dissipated during 2009 and I wouldn't consider them to be a reliable source for them downplaying Fukushima while overplaying certain strains.
You should really look at what you're using as evidence before you start criticizing other's. Then, once you've done that, consider that WHO isn't one person. That specialization in virus infections and specialization in radiation exposure rarely overlap. Then, realize that they're outright posting NUMBERS. Numbers that can easily be checked. Numbers that are being corroborated by every reputable medical and environmental agency on the planet.
Fukushima was bad. It was not catastrophic. It will not have noteworthy medical impact on the people outside of the quarantine zone. Tokyo is fine, Japan is fine, humanity is fine. Trying to say otherwise without concrete evidence is nothing more than fear mongering. We're in the internet age. If Fukushima was actually as bad as you say, it'd be plastered all over the internet. It's less than 50% of the event Chernobyl was, and Chernobyl hardly made the world stop turning. Using Fukushima to argue against nuclear energy is folly. Anyone even remotely objective about the situation can clearly see that the problem at Fukushima wasn't that it was a nuclear reactor. The problem was improper regulation of a energy plant due to greed, arrogance, and ignorance on the part of those capable of regulating it. Oh, and even with that, it took a freak natural disaster to trigger it.
Now, that's not to say Fukushima doesn't still have the ability to get worse. Specifically another 8+ earthquake in the area could spill reactor 4's containment pool or if a proper containment field is delayed too long the structure may collapse on itself. Reactor 4 spills and I'll be right there with you saying this is worse than Chernobyl. Because at that point, it would be. Exponentially so. But we're still looking at what Fukushima IS; not what it might become. Right now, Fukushima pales in comparison to Chernobyl and is unlikely to get worse than it already is. Yes, Japan is refusing aid from its neighbors. That's a product of Japanese culture, not a product of some conspiracy.
So yes, compared to you, I am downplaying the significance of Fukushima. That's because your position is so extreme and unsupported- not because I'm trying to say Fukushima was in any way trivial.Edited by -Apocalypse- - 9/18/13 at 9:15pm