FUKUSHIMA: Beyond comprehension. Part 1
The date is March 11, 2011, almost three years into the earthquake and tsunami devastating the nuclear reactors at Fukushima Japan. Finally there are some USA major newspapers starting to report-however political oriented-that all is going well and it is “tip through the tulips” with no concerns.
However there is a growing scientific community-also arguing back and forth and publishing thousands of papers about their conclusions. How do we, the general public decide what is what, and what to do, that is, if we can do anything?
I want to task you to become an intelligence analyst. This implies that you have to divorce your thinking from political and emotional fact gathering, and no matter how extreme the information is, or the very source of information, you collect data and then analyze a fact.
There are many reasons why the government models of information lean toward the support of nuclear energy. In the simplest view it means that if we do not have electrical energy and related nuclear by products we will regress into the stone age of economic development, and there will be no X-Boxes under the Christmas tree. To justify this position of promoting a world mega billion-dollar business is support by many different government agencies that sponsor this cause.
On the other end of the spectrum is the anti-nuclear community that promotes “green” energy and health.
There is evidence on both sides and currently at this writing the FUKUSHIMA meltdown becomes the test of what may happen in the years to come. Most noted is the decades of cleanup, millions of years of radioactive materials blowing all over the globe: in the oceans with economic decline.
This arguments will be going on for years to come; my position is evaluating both sides of the coin weighing what is the best for the “common good”, yet in reality there is nothing I personally can do but evaluate and consider the predictable consequences for our citizenry.
Below are referral links, up to date sciences arguments. Some support the government views; some oppose it; however, the opposition to nuclear dangers has valid points.
OK, now you have earned the title in the James Bond group as “M”. While reading these Tuber reports we begin to think, “Why are we not reading and hearing this horrendous story on commercial media?” The rule seems always to be” Don’t Rock the Boat- Ignorance is bliss etc.” Personally I believe in hounding my elected Senators and Rep’s about this; also hounding about other White House questionable plugs in the media such as “Benghazi.”
Next week Part 2 in this series will be about what you can do with the radiation drifting over your home and garden for the next two, or three years, before it escalates into more serious and deadly consequences. We also need to address social change and economic change.
Your thoughts are always encouraged.
God Bless us all.
COPYRIGHT: Back2theLand, 2013, Mark Steel. All rights reserved.