U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-16-2013, 06:28 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,420,666 times
Reputation: 7641

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by legacy0133 View Post
Also, I am referring to studies of the danger of living in proximity to a nuclear plant not the safety of the actual building or the work being carried out...
This is something I have posed here NUMEROUS times and no-one, NOT ONE PESON can answer my questions:

France has 78% of their power generated from nuclear plants yet we don't see any abnormalities in their cancer statistics, why is that?

Their first reactor went online in 1964, almost 50 years of non-stop operations and nobody has gotten sick, explanation?

There are over 2.8 million people living within a 50 mile radius of 3 mile island nuclear plant, no sicknesses no increase in cancer rates since 1974... Explain?

Indian Point nuclear reactor on the Hudson river up from NYC, no sicknesses or cancer reported because of it since 1962, explanation?



Quote:
Have you done your research? Ever investigate Chernobyl? Thousands upon thousands died, there was EXTREME deception and knowledge kept in secret from the people for decades.
Lets look at FACTS (you do know what they are, right?), shall we:

How many people died as an immediate result of the accident?

The initial explosion resulted in the death of two workers. Twenty-eight of the firemen and emergency clean-up workers died in the first three months after the explosion from Acute Radiation Sickness and one of cardiac arrest.

Frequently Asked Chernobyl Questions

LMAO, thousands upon thousands huh?

The conspiracy forums are over there --------------------->

Quote:
Wow you really are oblivious to the corruption that lies in this country... Almost every single University has been sold out to corporations and or govt entities so the research being done is for their own agenda...

How about agent orange, DDT, PCB's etc...Flouride! Bisphenyl A

Oh, I have another one rBST OR rBGH look that up and enlighten yourself...fox news reporters investigated it only to be silenced --- they couldn't afford to lose their precious advertising dollars from Monsanto. Enjoy your GMO'S too, lol.
The conspiracy forums are over there --------------------->

Quote:
btw I am not part of any green conspiracy I care about the earth, having clean uncontaminated water and air as well as respect for organic farmers. I was born and raised 1 mile from a chemical plant that destroyed my health rendering me disabled... Chemicals kill and destroy they do nothing to promote society or the environment we inhabit. Our DNA was not manufactured! We were not born with the ability to withstand these manufactured toxins! Here is some RESEARCH FOR YOU
You do know what hijacking a thread is, right?

This is not about chemicals or chemical plants, that subject has been beaten to death in this forum numerous times....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-17-2013, 01:05 PM
 
Location: Cleveland
94 posts, read 557,912 times
Reputation: 104
guess it will be different when you're in the fryer...


you have your "facts" wrong good luck to you, pointless to argue with close minded ignorance

you do realize you are in the "Green Living" forum, you may want to head to the psychology forum where you are sure to fit in, obviously agent orange has affected your logical thought processes...

Last edited by legacy0133; 01-17-2013 at 01:16 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2013, 02:58 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
30,684 posts, read 49,455,573 times
Reputation: 19134
Quote:
Originally Posted by legacy0133 View Post
... Also, I am referring to studies of the danger of living in proximity to a nuclear plant not the safety of the actual building or the work being carried out...
For over 20 years, I spent 7 months per year living within 100 yards of a live nuclear reactor.

By 'living' I mean: sleeping, eating and working. Spending 24hrs/day confined in a large steel pipe that included a nuclear reactor inside with me. I am not talking about some office worker who goes home to his wife after an 8hr shift.

There are new studies done every year focusing on men who live with nuclear reactors.

Oh, did I mention that that I slept between nuclear warheads? I did.

Men have been doing this since 1954.

Nearly 60 years of men living in close proximity of nuclear reactors and nuclear warheads.

We have ran nuclear reactors for decades, until they became flat wore-out.

We have made over 200 of these nuclear reactors just on warships. PLUS we have also been making them on surface vessels [like aircraft carriers]. We are cranking out new nuclear reactors a couple every year.

Submariners are among the MOST closely inspected and studied men on earth.



Tell me again how there are no studies of the danger of living in proximity to a nuclear plant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2013, 03:04 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,420,666 times
Reputation: 7641
Quote:
Originally Posted by legacy0133 View Post
guess it will be different when you're in the fryer...


you have your "facts" wrong good luck to you, pointless to argue with close minded ignorance

you do realize you are in the "Green Living" forum, you may want to head to the psychology forum where you are sure to fit in, obviously agent orange has affected your logical thought processes...
As I have said before in this forum, I am for Green Living up to a point, the point where I stop is nodding my head in agreement at everything posted in this forum no matter how ludicrous and outrageous....

Your attitude confirms exactly what I said above, if it's posted here the Green Nodding Heads will accept it without question.....

Now, would you care to answer my questions?

France has 78% of their power generated from nuclear plants yet we don't see any abnormalities in their cancer statistics, why is that?

Their first reactor went online in 1964, almost 50 years of non-stop operations and nobody has gotten sick, explanation?

There are over 2.8 million people living within a 50 mile radius of 3 mile island nuclear plant, no sicknesses no increase in cancer rates since 1974... Explain?

Indian Point nuclear reactor on the Hudson river up from NYC, no sicknesses or cancer reported because of it since 1962, explanation?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 08:34 AM
 
217 posts, read 296,920 times
Reputation: 67
To some, living near a nuclear plant is like living at the base of a dam. They are tormented psychologically by allowing themselves to trust these human constructs which hold back deadly forces. Mental state is well linked to quality of life, so yes, to some nuclear plants cause ill.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 08:50 AM
 
Location: DC
6,528 posts, read 6,461,516 times
Reputation: 3137
Lots more danger living below a dam.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 09:26 AM
 
568 posts, read 824,559 times
Reputation: 1244
Quote:
Originally Posted by legacy0133 View Post
guess it will be different when you're in the fryer...


you have your "facts" wrong good luck to you, pointless to argue with close minded ignorance

you do realize you are in the "Green Living" forum, you may want to head to the psychology forum where you are sure to fit in, obviously agent orange has affected your logical thought processes...
!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2013, 02:11 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,420,666 times
Reputation: 7641
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick gar View Post
To some, living near a nuclear plant is like living at the base of a dam. They are tormented psychologically by allowing themselves to trust these human constructs which hold back deadly forces. Mental state is well linked to quality of life, so yes, to some nuclear plants cause ill.
Using this same logic:

~ some people are scared to death of driving on a freeway
~ some people are scared to death of open spaces
~ some people are scared to death of heights
~ some people are scared to death of flying
~ some people are scared to death of being out in the ocean

Yet I don't see anyone blaming the above for degrading peoples quality of life or making people ill....

Talk about ludicrous things to blame on nuclear power this one's a beaut.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2013, 03:44 PM
 
Location: Keosauqua, Iowa
9,182 posts, read 16,656,366 times
Reputation: 12331
What, you don't agree with Wilford Brimley?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Spindler
These guys are paintin' him as some kind of a looney. He wasn't a looney; he was the sanest man I ever knew in my life.

Wilford Brimley Characters - Ted Spindler - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2013, 12:45 PM
 
39,484 posts, read 40,796,345 times
Reputation: 16304
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever View Post
Lots more danger living below a dam.
Excellent point!

Lets not forget coal ash is more radioactive than nuclear waste.
Quote:
Coal Ash Is More Radioactive than Nuclear Waste: Scientific American

Editor's Note (posted 12/30/08): In response to some concerns raised by readers, a change has been made to this story. The sentence marked with an asterisk was changed from "In fact, fly ash—a by-product from burning coal for power—and other coal waste contains up to 100 times more radiation than nuclear waste" to "In fact, the fly ash emitted by a power plant—a by-product from burning coal for electricity—carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy." Our source for this statistic is Dana Christensen, an associate lab director for energy and engineering at Oak Ridge National Laboratory as well as 1978 paper in Science authored by J.P. McBride and colleagues, also of ORNL.

As a general clarification, ounce for ounce, coal ash released from a power plant delivers more radiation than nuclear waste shielded via water or dry cask storage.
And just so it's clear in the following graph coal ash falls under "other" as would exposure from a nuclear power plant:

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top