Comments on Nuke Pro: Our Toxic Environment, Fake Food, And Chemicals Galore Are Creating A Spike in Cancers and Other Diseases

SwagBucks is an high paying get-paid-to site.

2016-10-08T01:45:26.100-07:00

SwagBucks is an high paying get-paid-to site.

Aloha HT, indeed, it is difficult to keep track of...

2016-09-28T05:46:26.773-07:00

Aloha HT, indeed, it is difficult to keep track of the good resources that we find, and be able to find them again. I have articles at Nukepro that even I have difficulty finding, LOL. The blogger search function is sometimes quite a joke.

Neither Jay Cullen nor Kenny Boy Buessler are &quo...

2016-09-28T05:44:49.249-07:00

Neither Jay Cullen nor Kenny Boy Buessler are "decent" people. They know better, and yet they accept their bribes to present the lies that their handlers want them to "find".

Yo Stock, subscribed to your feed today. Good work...

2016-09-26T11:26:46.974-07:00

Yo Stock, subscribed to your feed today. Good work documenting the issues. Your use of links to credible scientific work and peer-reviewed publications such as Elsevier is appreciated. Will be looking forward to reading the scientific articles. This is like a compendium of research. Good work. Reminds me a bit of Green Med Journal. You might want to subscribe to that. Might contribute there when I can find more time for research, and peers to write, edit with to make contributions. BTW, am archiving own research posts with the docs I'm finding to facilitate writing later. Glad to hear things are going well on the home front.
Cheers, HT

Yo haven't presented shite for proof of "...

2016-09-25T18:04:27.823-07:00

Yo haven't presented shite for proof of "forensic evidence".

All facts point to the nuclear type explosion, the runaway chain reaction, called Moderated Prompt Criticality.

Lying scientists deserve Nuremberg type trials. ...

2016-09-25T18:02:36.790-07:00

Lying scientists deserve Nuremberg type trials. To betray those who pay your salaries, is a horrible crime.

You can only go on what you can prove, not what yo...

2016-09-24T12:04:20.331-07:00

You can only go on what you can prove, not what you can imagine, claim as truth, without real proof. I dont disagree with your second paragraph. Yet if you or I get cancer without some massive acute,dose, you surely can not claim the source was due to nuclear energy from a specific plant. I was almost scalded to death from superheated nonnuclear steam at a powerplant i worked. I wasnt in the wrong place at the wrong time. Ask me what is more dangerous, id say superheated steam. I know how to protect myself from radiation. Doesnt mean im not going to get cancer. You might eat a Twinkie or beef jerky today, get cancer 30 years later. Doesnt mean it was from nuclear. You have to prove it was, as Hitchens Razor says the onus is in the person making the claim.

Frankly I just dont understand why a reasonable person would make shit up, and call it truth without evidence. You seem to be arguing on faith, or beliefs, not facts. This isnt a religious or ideological debate. Yet you seem to come from the ideology bent. As engineers, we go on facts, not beliefs on this matter. I outlined where there is no forensic evidence for your claims. 100% of these events (there have been 60 the past 60 years, the last one in 1999, and each one had the same tell tale evidence.

Are you saying a purposed prompt criticality at Fukushima should not have the same nuclear signs as the 60 other events? Those of us that study these accident scenarios professionally (so we can prevent/protect people) know the signs, not Gundersen.

On that note, why am I or anyone expected to be swayed by your claims when the signs of the other 60 criticalities are just not there.

I say you have a captive audience with the antinukes, but that doesnt make you or Gundersen an authority on the subject. Like i said before, any nuclear engineer knows the kinetics of the neutron chain reaction. However in reading his email to you, he conviently misses the most important features of these events.

Because he plays for the other side, and gets paid to generate fear and anger. The world doesnt need angry old men with a chip on their shoulder to influence the sheeple.

No. I support people living lawful lives. He was c...

2016-09-24T12:02:56.488-07:00

No. I support people living lawful lives. He was charged and convicted based on evidence. The goverment acted responsibly because someone acted irresponsibly. Antinukes can be antinukes. I live in a society of free expression. That freedom came at a price. It doesnt mean freedom of expression involves harassment, and the call for physical harm.

Even you agree he was over the top. The shame is on people that on the surface, want peace and harmony, tet on the other hand, act no different than those that want to silence those with a different and even professional scientists.

The issue here isnt antinuke or proponent. Its about someone that broke the law and what law-abiding society should do to prevent this criminal behavior.

Can he just live within the law? I read the courts conditions. It didn't say he had to silence his petty vendetta against nuclear.

He has,to live within the law, like all of us.

Can he do that without going off the deep end?

Vegas odds say he will not rehabilitate, and attack those that disagree with him

He isnt an antunuclear activist more so than a convicted criminal with a short leash.

Gloating? No. Im not gloating. I feel sorry for someone that feels compelled to let their passions get the best of them, to the point they call on doing harm to decent hard-working people.

You can only go on what you can prove, not what yo...

2016-09-24T11:49:33.103-07:00

So you support trumped up charges, of stalking? ...

2016-09-24T09:22:18.185-07:00

So you support trumped up charges, of stalking? Which he did not do?

I see, you support government overreach, and gloat that an anti-nuclear activist was "silenced", the shame is on you

Ah the old "you can't prove it" lie....

2016-09-24T09:14:50.528-07:00

Ah the old "you can't prove it" lie. epidemiological science can actually prove it, therefore you lie.

And no, just because you have a good immune system is no guaranteed that internal radiation won't cause a cancer anyway.

Durnford gets 3 yrs probation. He should have serv...

2016-09-23T17:35:30.868-07:00

Durnford gets 3 yrs probation. He should have served time. Menace 2 society.

It takes a long time to decay to lead. Its not as ...

2016-09-23T17:23:01.417-07:00

It takes a long time to decay to lead. Its not as plentiful as real lead. Look at the Uranium and Thorium decay chain.

What the fuck to radiotoxic materials decay into?....

2016-09-23T13:30:25.993-07:00

What the fuck to radiotoxic materials decay into?... heavy metals right?

Its an exponemtial growth rate since tbe end of WW...

2016-09-22T20:26:32.685-07:00

Its an exponemtial growth rate since tbe end of WW II, hence Baby Boomers and so on. Population is supercritical

You and I knoe a lot of people with cancer. Yet we both know that pinpointing the specific cause is impossible. At the end of the day, the ability to ward off cancer os in all of us. Its called an imune system for a reason.

Exponentially growing is what you see in the yeast...

2016-09-21T21:12:01.973-07:00

Exponentially growing is what you see in the yeast culture petri dish in junior high school, now tell me, how did that turn out?

A massive die off, followed by a minor regrowth, and then total death.

Got it now? It's a system approach. And the hail Mary, science can save us now passes, just make the end point even more brutal.

GMO foods with roundup to "feed the masses" how is that turning out?

It is not the "price of a modern age", it is the cost of succumbing to money and greed takeover of corporations, governments, science, and medicine.

Do you know a single person who doesn't know 2 or 3 people with cancer?

Of all the toxins listed, radiation is by far the ...

2016-09-21T20:37:21.295-07:00

Of all the toxins listed, radiation is by far the weakest. Our DNA has evolved to handle low LET radiation and low fluence particle interaction. The onslaught of inorganics, heavy metals, and air pollutants is more likely to cause cancer than any man made nuclear mishap. The food we eat is a big factor as well. Lots of preservatives linked to cancer. Price of the modern age.

Yet the human race is exponentially growing. So we are surviving as a species.