Posts
On Dr Fisher, tuna, and many other things
We've had instances of journalists who should know better, such as the green, now pro-nuclear journalist, George Monbiot swallowing the lies of the WHO, that only 60 people died at Chernobyl, whereas the evidence from Dr. Alexei Yablokov is that up to a million people died.
People don't usually die instantaneously (and even there there are ways of hiding this, such as the case of Fukushima who die quietly at home off their shift), but also they don't come with cancers that carry a "made in Fukushima" label.
There are always ways of using science to obfuscate and take people away from the true picture.
One way is to confuse the masses by saying 'tritium is just hydrogen" - therefore it's not dangerous. Or saying you will get more radiation from an X- ray, or from 'background radiation' from atmospheric testing in the 50's (or from a banana).
Somehow these people have such a high opinion of themselves that they do not actually have to back up their ludicrous assertions with facts, or to explain how they reached their conclusions.
I can do no better than quote from Mimi German, who can express it better than I:
"These "experts" do not know for certain if their projections are going to become fact or not. But do they say that? No. They tell you in the VOICE OF AUTHORITY and the VOICE OF THE WHITE MAN, and this important, that they are the all-knowing regarding the future. The Great OZ. And yet, all they are doing is making a projection. They are only OZ going for a moment of EGO Masturbatory Projection on what we allow ourselves to listen to. We have become lulled into a deep deep sleep. A hypnotic state more of one similar to a hazy morphine like state of mind than an awakened state of being. When OZ speaks, the deeper we go into this hypnotic state. And even those who think they are challenging it, like Safecast in the article, are only promoting the propaganda that OZ wants all of you to hear."
Then these people ALWAYS see things in isolation. The more things can be separated the better!
If 10,000 birds drop out of the sky it is just a local phenomenon reported in some local newspaper somewhere. It has nothing, seemingly to do with birds dropping out of the sky somewhere else, let along with the deaths of starfish and seals.
The problem (Chris Busby quoting Alexei Yablokov) when 10 per cent of one species, and 11 per cent of another it has a disastrous effect on the whole ecosystem. Everything is connected with everything, and so eventually the whole lot 'goes down the toilet'
I salute those people who have collected all these individual stories of die-offs and collected them into a document that is 30 pages long.
Once you've seen that and combine that with seeing photos like the one below, you can't go back to swallowing the lies of the US government ,IAEA , Tepco or the WHO - or those that uncritically quote them.
I am so grateful there's nothing wrong with me - it's a pity I'm sick 24/7
There are other, more personal reasons why Dr Fisher has got to me.
When I hear him I hear the surgeon who told me (now he has removed the melanoma - discovered through my own vigilance) with a smile that there is nothing wrong with me.
They've done the tests and they're all OK.
What a pity doctor, that I still have symptoms of exhaustion, itchy skin, nausea, sufficient for me to give up all the activities that I used to enjoy - 24/7.
But that could be due to anything (except, if I'm so stupid as to raise the possibility, exposure to pesticides, or any other environmental toxin.
There's no humility - nobody saying, I don't know what is wrong, so we can't do anything for you (or 'we'll get to the bottom of this').
Instead, just the insinuation that somehow it's all in my mind.
So I can empathise with all those people who have been ridiculed by the mainstream medical system.
I think especially of those people in Japan living with the consequences of nuclear radiation who have been ridiculed by society and by their doctors.
A double burden.
I'm now (at the risk of becoming wandery, which is quite possible, in my quest to take contradictory facts and try to make sense of them) going to to return to Fukushima.
I think I'm possibly in good company because Chris Busby in this recent interview, expresses in his first sentence that he feels confused.
If I hold my nose and reluctantly accept Alex Jones into my auditory sphere for a while, Chris Busby provides the most clarity I have heard for a while on the whole question of Fukushima radiation and the Pacific.
I can recommend the interview (ignore the first 47 minutes of the clip - that is where Dr. Busby comes in.
Seemorerocks
Some days it just gets personal
I have just been listening to the the recent PRN interview in which Chuck McCune and Mimi German of Radcast take on Dr. Nicholas Fisher, who was the origin of the comments in the recent, infamous LA Times article.
Everything went quite quietly to begin with.
Dr.Fisher explained that they had found very low levels of radiation in bluefin tuna, even though this contradicts earlier reports. Levels of radiation were low and 'within safety levels' and insignificant compared with radiation from open-air nuclear testing and from Chernobyl.
Dr.Fisher explained that they had found very low levels of radiation in bluefin tuna, even though this contradicts earlier reports. Levels of radiation were low and 'within safety levels' and insignificant compared with radiation from open-air nuclear testing and from Chernobyl.
The problems started when Mimi started to ask some outrageous (sic) but pertinent questions such as how many tests had been done, where, when? I didn't really get to hear the questions because Dr. Fisher started to constantly interrupt and talk over Mimi.
Mimi did a brilliant job handling the government expert, but I couldn't help thinking that Helen Caldicott would have made mince meat of Dr Fisher. She would simply have had him for breakfast.
Unfortunately, the exchange ended far too early.
Unfortunately, the exchange ended far too early.
What can one say when a scientist contradicts facts such as the concentration of radioactivity as it travels up the food chain? - something Dr. Caldicott has made clear happens, and presents the most dangerous aspect of nuclear radiation.
Dr. Fisher opined that mercury was the only metal that travels up the food chain without breaking down.
Without the knowledge to push the point I suspect the esteemed doctor might have been engaging in some form of sophistry, such as saying that tritium is 'just' hydrogen.
None of us who is concerned about climate change and the perils of radiation from Fukushima are 'anti-science'. Most of us are quite rational and are trying our best to make sense of contradictory information because we know that the 'other' side - Tepco; both the Japanese and US governments; and most of the media is lying to us.
It comes down to WHOSE science.
When it comes down to this issue I know who I trust.
Arnie Gundersen, Helen Caldicott, Chris Busby are all scientists that have huge experiences in their respective fields. The only ax they have to grind is that they want as many people as possible to know the truth about nuclear power. They are clearly not motivated by financial reward.
They have all in some why either left, or been ejected from the mainstream.
Arnie Gundersen, Helen Caldicott, Chris Busby are all scientists that have huge experiences in their respective fields. The only ax they have to grind is that they want as many people as possible to know the truth about nuclear power. They are clearly not motivated by financial reward.
They have all in some why either left, or been ejected from the mainstream.
Either you run with the herd ('consensus') or you're ejected with the accusation of being 'anti-scientific'.
Dr.Fisher for me epitomises everything that is wrong with the mainstream. Apart from being a misogynist arsehole, I thought, you're a fat blob - when was the last time you were out in the field.
I can imagine it
"People out there are worried by all this"
"You just get out there and close all this down. I don't care how you do it - just do it!"
I've come across several examples of people who just swallow the mainstream narrative - even people I would have thought would know better.
For instance there is this from someone from Safecast:
Could it possibly be true that hazardous levels of Fukushima ocean radiation have reached North American Pacific shores? If this hasn’t happened yet, is it likely to happen in the future? The consensus among the many ocean scientists who have been monitoring the phenomenon is that Fukushima radiation is beginning to reach the Pacific coast, the levels will be so low they will only be measurable with extremely sensitive equipment, and that while the risks to people will not be zero, they will be “insignificant.”
We've had instances of journalists who should know better, such as the green, now pro-nuclear journalist, George Monbiot swallowing the lies of the WHO, that only 60 people died at Chernobyl, whereas the evidence from Dr. Alexei Yablokov is that up to a million people died.
People don't usually die instantaneously (and even there there are ways of hiding this, such as the case of Fukushima who die quietly at home off their shift), but also they don't come with cancers that carry a "made in Fukushima" label.
There are always ways of using science to obfuscate and take people away from the true picture.
One way is to confuse the masses by saying 'tritium is just hydrogen" - therefore it's not dangerous. Or saying you will get more radiation from an X- ray, or from 'background radiation' from atmospheric testing in the 50's (or from a banana).
Somehow these people have such a high opinion of themselves that they do not actually have to back up their ludicrous assertions with facts, or to explain how they reached their conclusions.
I can do no better than quote from Mimi German, who can express it better than I:
"These "experts" do not know for certain if their projections are going to become fact or not. But do they say that? No. They tell you in the VOICE OF AUTHORITY and the VOICE OF THE WHITE MAN, and this important, that they are the all-knowing regarding the future. The Great OZ. And yet, all they are doing is making a projection. They are only OZ going for a moment of EGO Masturbatory Projection on what we allow ourselves to listen to. We have become lulled into a deep deep sleep. A hypnotic state more of one similar to a hazy morphine like state of mind than an awakened state of being. When OZ speaks, the deeper we go into this hypnotic state. And even those who think they are challenging it, like Safecast in the article, are only promoting the propaganda that OZ wants all of you to hear."
Then these people ALWAYS see things in isolation. The more things can be separated the better!
If 10,000 birds drop out of the sky it is just a local phenomenon reported in some local newspaper somewhere. It has nothing, seemingly to do with birds dropping out of the sky somewhere else, let along with the deaths of starfish and seals.
The problem (Chris Busby quoting Alexei Yablokov) when 10 per cent of one species, and 11 per cent of another it has a disastrous effect on the whole ecosystem. Everything is connected with everything, and so eventually the whole lot 'goes down the toilet'
I salute those people who have collected all these individual stories of die-offs and collected them into a document that is 30 pages long.
Once you've seen that and combine that with seeing photos like the one below, you can't go back to swallowing the lies of the US government ,IAEA , Tepco or the WHO - or those that uncritically quote them.
There are other, more personal reasons why Dr Fisher has got to me.
When I hear him I hear the surgeon who told me (now he has removed the melanoma - discovered through my own vigilance) with a smile that there is nothing wrong with me.
They've done the tests and they're all OK.
What a pity doctor, that I still have symptoms of exhaustion, itchy skin, nausea, sufficient for me to give up all the activities that I used to enjoy - 24/7.
But that could be due to anything (except, if I'm so stupid as to raise the possibility, exposure to pesticides, or any other environmental toxin.
There's no humility - nobody saying, I don't know what is wrong, so we can't do anything for you (or 'we'll get to the bottom of this').
Instead, just the insinuation that somehow it's all in my mind.
So I can empathise with all those people who have been ridiculed by the mainstream medical system.
I think especially of those people in Japan living with the consequences of nuclear radiation who have been ridiculed by society and by their doctors.
A double burden.
I'm now (at the risk of becoming wandery, which is quite possible, in my quest to take contradictory facts and try to make sense of them) going to to return to Fukushima.
I think I'm possibly in good company because Chris Busby in this recent interview, expresses in his first sentence that he feels confused.
If I hold my nose and reluctantly accept Alex Jones into my auditory sphere for a while, Chris Busby provides the most clarity I have heard for a while on the whole question of Fukushima radiation and the Pacific.
I can recommend the interview (ignore the first 47 minutes of the clip - that is where Dr. Busby comes in.
The mainstream tells us that what radiation there is at a 'low-level' and 'within safety levels'
Who decides what is safe? Didn't Obama change the levels up to an extent that you could be standing next to a nuclear waste dump, and still be within the new criteria?
All the people who try t reassure us, say that 'low levels' are safe, that radiation becomes diluted (and therefore 'safe"). Dr. Fisher tells us (with a straight face) that the only metal that accumulates as it goes up the food chain.
Well, I don't have sufficient science to tell Dr Fisher that he's talking nonsense - but I do have people with all the qualifications to says so, that this is not the case, and radioactivity ingested is the most dangerous form for human health.
This is Dr. Helen Caldicott back in 2012
Chris Busby in the above interview says that what scares him most is the collapse of the ecosystem in the Pacific, something that, in theory at least, is not possible from the release of energy. Something else, he says, is going on, and part of the explanation he gives is hot particles.
Here Arnie Gundersen (someone who knows his nuclear science like no one else explains what hot particles are, and why they are so dangerous.
If you are still a bit doubtful and inclined to believe the authorities I suggest you watch this video from 'A Green Road', which discusses the link between low levels of radiation and birth defects (that are never acknowledged by the mainstream), both from Chernobyl and now Fukushima.
I still find myself only able to talk about one thing at a time.
How many cancers and birth defects will we witness (brushed under the proverbial rug) in coming generations?
Will we even be able to produce another generation?
And then what about the melting ice in the Arctic, the wandering Jet Stream, the non-ending drought in California and other places?
How long before we have harvest failures in several parts of the world simultaneously, before we can no longer make use of oil and our diminishing resources to mitigate the effects of climate collapse.
The answer to all this is I don't know.
But I can guess.
How many cancers and birth defects will we witness (brushed under the proverbial rug) in coming generations?
Will we even be able to produce another generation?
And then what about the melting ice in the Arctic, the wandering Jet Stream, the non-ending drought in California and other places?
How long before we have harvest failures in several parts of the world simultaneously, before we can no longer make use of oil and our diminishing resources to mitigate the effects of climate collapse.
The answer to all this is I don't know.
But I can guess.
Robin, among other things, a real eye-opener for me was when my first child was diagnosed with a "rare" form of cancer. She was in an "oncological emergency" by the time the stupid doctors figured out what was wrong, and for quite a while we lived with the everpresent fear that she would not survive. I learned then that the "system" doesn't care the least about what causes cancer. I was ridiculed by her doctors for even asking. There is no money or glorgy to be made in that. But the system laps up the treatments and cures for cancer! This can easily be expanded to the wider enviroment. And it explains a lot.
ReplyDelete