BajaNomad - Nuclear Fallout

Nuclear Fallout

jeremias - 3-15-2011 at 12:20 PM

Do you think the farmacias have any potassium iodide in stock?

Baja12valve - 3-15-2011 at 12:23 PM

Potassium iodine offers no protection from radiation.

Diver - 3-15-2011 at 12:30 PM

If you look at the wind/jet stream, you will see that so Cal and Baja should not see any radiation.
Northern Cal, Oregon, Washington and BC are getting the winds from Japan this time of year. The center of the jet stream is running right down the WA/OR border; probably going past my house as we speak. :no:

I just calculated that it will take 2-3 days for it to reach my house.
Some of it may already be here.

[Edited on 3-15-2011 by Diver]

Dave - 3-15-2011 at 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Baja12valve
Potassium iodine offers no protection from radiation.

That wasn't the question. However, I believe most well stocked pharmacies would have Potassium Iodide.

The key question is:

How would you know when to dose and how much?

mass hysteria!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

mtgoat666 - 3-15-2011 at 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jeremias
Do you think the farmacias have any potassium iodide in stock?

KI provides only limited protection of your thyroid gland from radioactive I.

If this is something that concerns you, use iodized table salt.

fyi, there are many more radionuclides besides I.

the very low levels you may see in north america from Japan are not a concern.

Heather - 3-15-2011 at 01:29 PM

they sell "KI" on the internet...look up NoRad!

mcfez - 3-15-2011 at 01:45 PM

http://www.amazon.com/iOSAT-Potassium-Iodide-Tablets-130/dp/...

Woooosh - 3-15-2011 at 01:53 PM

I'll trade yo your anti-radiation pills for my leftover anti-anthrax pills.

:saint:

IF you are concerned

djh - 3-15-2011 at 02:24 PM

about radioactive iodine impacting your thyroid (health). . . . don't drink milk! That is what experts have said in the past and again now.

Currently, the radioactive iodine dispersal is so diluted that it will likely not affect you in any way . . . unless you're drinking milk . . . from cows that have been grazing on downwind grasslands and accumulating and "condensing" it to a point that it might affect your health.

Besides, potassium iodine only protects your thyroid from radioactive iodine uptake....

And it has already been mentioned that the most serious radioactive "elements" that might be dispersed by a full meltdown (Cesium, for example) are not prevented in ANY way by potassium iodine - or most any other preventative action (other that leaving the area of contamination completely). All lessons learned at Chernobyl.

Meanwhile the iodine tablet frenzy is in full tilt boogie.....

Simple Nomad Solution ? ? ? Drink beer instead of milk....

Anyone with me on this ?

djh

Iflyfish - 3-15-2011 at 03:53 PM

djh, good one.

An excellent source of Iodine and Pottasium is Kelp, also called Nori.

The iodine binds to the sites in the thyroid where the radioactive iodine would bond.

The adult dose for KI is 130mg adults and 65mg children.

Dosage of Kelp for radiation exposure. 60grams = 2.12 oz. for someone weighing 154lbs.

Infants should have 1/2 child dose.

You must ingest the KI or Kelp at least 24 hours prior to exposure to bind the sites in the thyroid.

Pray to the goddess or to whom it may concern that we NEVER have to use this information.

IflyfishandhopeIdon'tglowinthedark!

Iflyfish - 3-15-2011 at 03:56 PM

Diver is right about the fallout pattern, ready to go amigo!!??

You guys down there can just sit back, pop a Tecate or Pacifico and watch us up here in the PNW light up. Or you can light up and watch us....er..you get the picture.

Iflyfishwithapieceonwordbubbleabovemyhead

wessongroup - 3-15-2011 at 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dave

Quote:

Originally posted by Baja12valve
Potassium iodine offers no protection from radiation.

That wasn't the question. However, I believe most well stocked pharmacies would have Potassium Iodide.

The key question is:

How would you know when to dose and how much?

Just remember how much your mom used to give you.... :lol:

Hook - 3-15-2011 at 04:39 PM

Geez, might be time to skip the farmed sushi from Japan.

Cypress - 3-15-2011 at 04:44 PM

Why am I not worried about this? The media has morphed into the modern version of "Chicken Little". If the eco-nuts are against something it has to have some good points. How many people have died as a result of accidents etc. at nuclear power plants?

Iflyfish - 3-16-2011 at 09:23 AM

Cypress:

The World Health Organization estimates 4,000 deaths from the Chernobyl meltdown. Now these figures are from the WHO and not Glenn Beck so they are of course suspect.

http://tinyurl.com/37kton

Eco nuts??? Worries about safety of nuclear power plants is nuts? Ever heard of Chernobyl, the death of 430 infants in the wake of Three Mile Island, or the deaths at other nuclear facilities http://www.lutins.org/nukes.html you do the counting.

All of this is well documented. Stop listening to Glen Beck.

IflyfishshakingmyheadathowbrainwashedthosewholistentoFOXreallyare http://tinyurl.com/6rrny6

Baja12valve - 3-16-2011 at 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dave

Quote:

Originally posted by Baja12valve
Potassium iodine offers no protection from radiation.

That wasn't the question. However, I believe most well stocked pharmacies would have Potassium Iodide.

So as I read through the posts, you tell me, is it iodine or iodide?

wessongroup - 3-16-2011 at 09:29 AM

Or perhaps... "greed within the worldwide nuclear industry"

http://tinyurl.com/4jcgxoy

Cypress - 3-16-2011 at 09:54 AM

Iflyfish;
Well documented? Like the documentation for Anthropogenic Global Warming? We'll see how this all plays out.

Woooosh - 3-16-2011 at 09:59 AM

My GE stock is getting nuked. Just my luck GE designed that place and the GE scientists quit at the time over the bad design. MY 401K never gets a break.

David K - 3-16-2011 at 10:08 AM

Considering the number of deaths from coal fired power plants and coal mining... and the only nuclear deaths were from a Soviet plant that was being mis-operated by communist party officers, and there was no containment building over it... Nuclear power is far safer. It powers many of our navy ships and subs, as well.

Find a better source of energy, and that would be great... until then, nuclear and coal and oil must supplement the energy we get from hydro-electric plants at dams and the tiny drip of power from solar and wind we get. I am a fan of tide and wave energy... Mexico could be a great exporter of power if a tide generated facility were built in the upper Gulf of California with one of the world's biggest tides... near the delta.

[Edited on 3-16-2011 by David K]

mtgoat666 - 3-16-2011 at 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Considering the number of deaths from coal fired power plants and coal mining... and the only nuclear deaths were from a Soviet plant that was being mis-operated by communist party officers, and there was no containment building over it... Nuclear power is far safer. It powers many of our navy ships and subs, as well.

Find a better source of energy, and that would be great... until then, nuclear and coal and oil must supplement the energy we get from hydro-electric plants at dams and the tiny drip of power from solar and wind we get. I am a fan of tide and wave energy... Mexico could be a great exporter of power if a tide generated facility were built in the upper Gulf of Califorina with one of the world's biggest tides... near the delta.

DK:
coal, oil, wind, solar, tide "fuels" generally have low toxicity, and are easy to handle, and don't present particularly high hazards in event of catastrophic release.
fisionable materials are very hard to handle, and present have very high toxiciity/hazards. ya, nuclear fuel can be inexpensive relative to fossil fuels, but hazards and effects of catastrophic release are way worse with with nuclear fuels.

don't you live in north county?
i hope you use sense and flee when the "big one" hits so cal -- wouldn't be prudent to hang around san o and put your faith in it surviving the "big one."

[Edited on 3-16-2011 by mtgoat666]

mcfez - 3-16-2011 at 10:33 AM

Quote:

I being 57 years old, have never heard of The Gulf of California.
The Gulf of California is also known as the Sea of Cortez. Geeze....I thought you gone nutz there for a minute David....I learn something new here every week!

Baby it's cold outside...

wessongroup - 3-16-2011 at 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cypress
Iflyfish;
Well documented? Like the documentation for Anthropogenic Global Warming? We'll see how this all plays out.

If one is looking for "documentation"...

Did a search at the National Academy of Science using Anthropogenic, found 10,208 peer reviewed "scientific reports" on the topic...

http://tinyurl.com/4sthd98

Have at it... as there is documented support.. available .. if one wishes to look and read... what is available..... on this topic..

To dismiss, a body of scientific evidence based on _________ is a bit troubling ...

[Edited on 3-16-2011 by wessongroup]

mtgoat666 - 3-16-2011 at 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
the only nuclear deaths were from a Soviet plant

this statement is wrong. heck, just this week a couple people died in Japan from hydrogen gas explosions associated with a fuel melt down,... and I suspect a few people will die shortly from radiation burns.

[Edited on 3-16-2011 by mtgoat666]

mcfez - 3-16-2011 at 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mtgoat666

Quote:

DK:
coal, oil, wind, solar, tide "fuels" generally have low toxicity, and are easy to handle, and don't present particularly high hazards in event of catastrophic release.

[Edited on 3-16-2011 by mtgoat666]

Oil is highly toxic. What are you talking about :lol:

wessongroup - 3-16-2011 at 10:45 AM

It is funny how these decisions are made on "safety" to the human population..

Had a bit of experience in that area .... setting tolerance for DAI for pesticides..

One in a million was deemed acceptable.. and still is used...

My only problem... in some cases I found myself "looking" and obtaining "statements" from people with cancer and were dying.. and alleged that pesticides were the causative agent to their medical condition.. and too many cases their deaths..

I became a bit more conservative on my calls.. as I would always put myself as the one in the million, which we so casually tossed around in a room with a bunch of folks that were never going to be "really" exposed.. to the levels.. that most farm workers, growers and the population receive... via soil, air and water...

mcfez - 3-16-2011 at 10:50 AM

All reports are very accurate and time tested.

Look what the reports said about low tar cigarettes 35 years ago. I smoked "Trues" because of the low risk of chemical damage the reports claimed.

Well....the reports were rigged so I found out 30 years later.

Cypress - 3-16-2011 at 10:57 AM

In a trial by jury, if the prosecution fabricates/falsifies evidence the case is tossed out. Some of the so-called scientists, not all, but some, hid evidence that went against AGW claims. They flatout cooked the books. Remember the infamous "hockey stick" graph, the medieval warming period, etc. Many of the stations where the data is gathered are now surrounded by cement and steel in urban settings which are always warmer than rural areas with trees and other vegetation.

mtgoat666 - 3-16-2011 at 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mcfez
Oil is highly toxic. What are you talking about :lol:

relative to high doses of high energy gamma rays?

i suppose it all depends on your perspective (or lack of perspective, as the case may be).

JESSE - 3-16-2011 at 11:01 AM

wessongroup - 3-16-2011 at 11:18 AM

mcfez... think about the time frame..

You are spot on about the fraudulent "data" supplied by manufactures..

And is another reason the EPA was created.. Standardized registration of products, and part of that process was submission of all data which supported registration of products.. and a "review" by both the Fed and State on all products.

Being from the Valley, you should remember a few Ag Chemicals that lost registration for "fraudulent" registration .. (data submitted did not justify registration) and many that were found just to hazardous to apply ... 2,4-D in the spring... with grapes and bud break..

The number of "hazardous" materials which have been removed and/or exposure reduced through based line blood work and many other regulations designed to protect Human Health and the Environment.. is quite large and has taken almost 35-40 years to squeeze them out of the "pipe".. but, not the "environment"...

Yes, some industrial players... lost ... but, from where I look.. they deserved it.. to submit fraudulent data to support a chemicals registration for use by humans and to be applied to food crops which had significant human and/or environmental impact is not excusable..

Does the name Shell Chemical Company.. Lathrop ring a bell.. along with the DBPC we all drink in our water... as there now exists a tolerance for it... cuz, it can't be removed... EVER...

By the way, did you ask for DBCP to be in you're drinking water...

And BP will do exactly what Shell did... sell the assets.. but, not the liability to another "actor" in the chemical game.. and that Chemical game is run by who... check out the big players.. ya, want to talk about old wealth and power.. how about Germany and Switzerland and the Chemical Companies ... how about BASF, DOW (formerly Union Carbide of Bophal India fame) Bayer, et al..

Greed is greed... and when coupled without regard to human health and the environment... I lose a little concern for those who "acted with full knowledge" in what was going on... to the detriment of our Country and people..

mcfez - 3-16-2011 at 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mtgoat666

Quote:

Originally posted by mcfez
Oil is highly toxic. What are you talking about :lol:

relative to high doses of high energy gamma rays?

i suppose it all depends on your perspective (or lack of perspective, as the case may be).

Maybe do some scuba in the gulf. While down there...grab some dead lobster for dinner......since that spill wasnt a problem

[Edited on 3-16-2011 by mcfez]

oil_fire.jpg - 29kB

mtgoat666 - 3-16-2011 at 12:47 PM

mcpez:
all things considered, i would prefer to be 2,000 from a burning refinery, and 2,000,000 feet from a breached reactor during meltdown, and
i would eat a teaspoon of fuel oil before i would eat a teaspoon of uranium fuel pellets.

you and DK may think diferently :lol:

mcfez - 3-16-2011 at 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mtgoat666
mcpez:
all things considered, i would prefer to be 2,000 from a burning refinery, and 2,000,000 feet from a breached reactor during meltdown, and
i would eat a teaspoon of fuel oil before i would eat a teaspoon of uranium fuel pellets.

you and DK may think diferently :lol:

......"i would prefer to be 2,000 from a burning refinery".
Miles?

Oh oh oh.....now it's only a teaspoon of oil. Anything greater is a major risk.

......." Flip flop drop....sound of you tripping on your own words

Where you come up with some of these crazy remarks of yours? From crisX ?

David K - 3-16-2011 at 01:36 PM

Facts are the liberals worst nightmare.

Iflyfish - 3-16-2011 at 01:44 PM

DK, hate to repeat myself:

http://tinyurl.com/6rrny6

Facts are not the enemy it is those who create lies that are our enemy.

Lets all do a Cumbia for Corporate concern for the health and safety of their employees and the general public! Let's do away with the EPA, FDA, and OSHA while we are at it, they all interfere with Business interests and we all know that they are what is important. Great Job there Brownie!! There is no negative result in the Gulf from the failproof blow out valves that BP reported. Cumbia!!

Have a good one.

Iflyfishshakingmyheadatthedittoheads

Iflyfish

David K - 3-16-2011 at 01:59 PM

Compare the number of deaths from the 444 nuclear power plants in the world to deaths at all other power plants... Nuclear remains the one of the safest forms of energy production, does it not?

You could even add the reactor in the Soviet Union, housed in a factory building (not a containment building like all the others are in) that blew up because the communist party officials were messing with it, doing things that there weren't supposed to, had a small amount of casualties considering everything about it and where it was.

Now, it is probably a given that this will end the advancement of safe nuclear power... So, what do you suggest to get us to the next phase of power creation (fusion or dilithium crystals)? Let us extract the oil we have in the U.S. so we are not dependant on the hostile nations of the world to hold us over while science develops something that really works.

Iflyfish - 3-16-2011 at 02:19 PM

Actually David I am with Obama on the notion that we should develop safe nuclear power plants in safe locations. I am glad to hear that you agree with him also.

President Carter warned us of dependance upon foreign oil, put a solar panel on the White House. Reagan, once the spokesperson for GE, who built the plant currently spewing in Japan tore down the solar panel and increased our reliance on fossil fuels.

Europe, particularly Northern Europe is way ahead of us in the development of alternative energy sources. We decided to "drill baby drill"
As a consequence we may never catch up to Europe in the manufacture of renewable energy technology. Words have meaning and decisions have consequences. The US auto industry battled both increased fuel efficiency standards and safety requirements. This at a time when Japan ate our lunch in building more efficient, safer cars. Thank the goddess that Obama saved the Auto Industry, GM is now in the red, or we would have lost another option for us to compete in producing less polluting automobiles.

My post to you had to do with lies, you stating that truth is the Liberal nightmare. I posted a link to this site regarding your favorite source of "truth" and "fair and balanced" reporting. http://tinyurl.com/6rrny6

Iflyfishinthecompanyofbrainwashedpeoplewholistentofox

jeremias - 3-16-2011 at 03:50 PM

So, potassium iodide, in stock at your local farmacia? or........

Iflyfish - 3-16-2011 at 04:56 PM

Kelp jeremias, think kelp. Probably won't need it but good to have as precaution. There has been a huge run on KI so you probably won't find it.

Iflyfish

David K - 3-16-2011 at 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Iflyfish

My post to you had to do with lies, you stating that truth is the Liberal nightmare.

Thanks Mr. Fish, but...

I said "facts" , and that's the truth! :light:

Have a nice day!

Bajatripper - 3-16-2011 at 07:04 PM

Here's an article that may be of some interest at the moment. It concerns the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, built about a mile from a fault line on the coast in central California.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/16/california-nuclear-...

Few things have been lied about as much as the issues concerning the safety of nuclear energy. On the most basic level, spent nuclear fuel remains dangerously radioactive for thousands of years, yet we have no clue how to dispose of the stuff safely (remember the fiasco that is the nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada?).
The fact is that ALL of the waste from nuclear power plants that has been generated during the life of the nuclear energy age is still being maintained in TEMPORARY storage ponds while we wait for science to discover a way to dispose of the it in a safe, responsible manner. Yet, to date, nobody has come up with a solution, over fifty years into the "program."
If that doesn't give one reason to pause before supporting such an industry, then I guess some people must like to live with their heads burried really, really deep in the sand.

I'm sure there are those who would argue that "our" nuclear power plants are operated in a safe, efficient manner and what we are seeing now in that third world, underdeveloped nation that is Japan could never, ever happen in the good old USA. Dream on and just hope it doesn't happen at home during your lifetime, because happen, it will, the only question is when.

[Edited on 3-17-2011 by Bajatripper]

Iflyfish - 3-17-2011 at 10:04 AM

DK

You stated “Facts are the liberals worst nightmare.”

You cannot know facts if the source of your information are lies. There is a saying in the Computer World and it goes “Garbage in and Garbage out”.

FOX daily distorts its observations, data and viewpoint. FOX has an agenda that is to distort the days “news” with its political agenda. If you watch the linked video you will hear FOX employees describe how they were told to report “news” based upon the daily “talking points”.
http://tinyurl.com/6rrny6

People who get their “news” from FOX are the least informed people in the country.
http://tinyurl.com/29dd8pl

Lies are not the basis of facts they are the basis of the Liberals worst nightmare. The American public is being lied to on a daily basis by FOX “news”. The fact that FOX is the major source of “news” for most Americas accounts for much of the ignorance that one finds when talking with Americans.
http://tinyurl.com/2vmhxq6

I have converted the links into tiny links so you can easily find the facts.

Iflyfishinaseaorignorance

Pompano - 3-17-2011 at 05:13 PM

Surely someone can devise a little 'test' on how the various news networks report the same story? We could start it as of Now...

It should be relatively simple..if one keeps it factual. :rolleyes:

Why does that seem impossible on Nomads?

tripledigitken - 3-17-2011 at 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pompano
Surely someone can devise a little 'test' on how the various news networks report the same story? We could start it as of Now...

It should be relatively simple..if one keeps it factual. :rolleyes:

Why does that seem impossible on Nomads?

Why waste the energy on that, just watch CNN, & MSNBC as they have no talking points.

:rolleyes:

mcfez - 3-17-2011 at 05:37 PM

What...dont any one here listen to NPR?
No radio? Try this www.npr.org/
You just may like em.

The rest of these newscasters are no comparison to ol Walter Cronkite.

"And that's the way it is".

Pompano - 3-17-2011 at 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tripledigitken

Quote:

Why does that seem impossible on Nomads?

Why waste the energy on that, just watch CNN, & MSNBC as they have no talking points.

:rolleyes:

Thanks, Ken..for proving my point. :rolleyes:

But I think you may have missed..or ignored.... the idea of being purely 'factual' and unbiased. Right?

Is this test truly impossible to do on Nomads? If so, it speaks volumes about the forum. :wow:

tripledigitken - 3-18-2011 at 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pompano

Quote:

Originally posted by tripledigitken

Quote:

Why does that seem impossible on Nomads?

Why waste the energy on that, just watch CNN, & MSNBC as they have no talking points.

:rolleyes:

Thanks, Ken..for proving my point. :rolleyes:

But I think you may have missed..or ignored.... the idea of being purely 'factual' and unbiased. Right?

Is this test truly impossible to do on Nomads? If so, it speaks volumes about the forum. :wow:

Didn't miss or ignore Roger. Unbiased, purely unbiased doesn't exist in news or history books. The forum isn't any different than anywhere else, IMO.

Ken

Pompano - 3-18-2011 at 04:09 AM

Too bad, Ken...I had hoped we could have a good debate. We all lose something in that case.

Ah well, I went fishing...and caught nothing.

tripledigitken - 3-18-2011 at 04:40 AM

Have the debate, but I'd rather go fishing.

Cypress - 3-18-2011 at 04:58 AM

Quote:

Why does that seem impossible on Nomads?

In many cases it's not "how" the various networks report a story, but "if" they report the story at all. If a news story supports their agenda, and they do have agendas, they'll report it, if not they won't report it or barely touch on it.

Pompano - 3-18-2011 at 05:29 AM

Indeed, Cyprus..we have all noticed the lack of reporting on certain events that do not follow a network's 'agenda'...and that's part of what I mean about stating one's factual observations on this topic.

Strict rules of debate: schoolchildren can do it...cavemen probably did it...Nomads should be able to do it, but I fear we'll need a moderator with a stiff ruler to smack some noggins. :rolleyes:

Anyhoo..you guys kick this can around the block.

Gotta run...We're burning daylight here... time to head out to sea.

Tally ho, Watson..the games afoot!

David K - 3-18-2011 at 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Iflyfish
DK

You stated “Facts are the liberals worst nightmare.”

You cannot know facts if the source of your information are lies. There is a saying in the Computer World and it goes “Garbage in and Garbage out”.

FOX daily distorts its observations, data and viewpoint. FOX has an agenda that is to distort the days “news” with its political agenda. If you watch the linked video you will hear FOX employees describe how they were told to report “news” based upon the daily “talking points”.
http://tinyurl.com/6rrny6

People who get their “news” from FOX are the least informed people in the country.
http://tinyurl.com/29dd8pl

Lies are not the basis of facts they are the basis of the Liberals worst nightmare. The American public is being lied to on a daily basis by FOX “news”. The fact that FOX is the major source of “news” for most Americas accounts for much of the ignorance that one finds when talking with Americans.
http://tinyurl.com/2vmhxq6

I have converted the links into tiny links so you can easily find the facts.

Iflyfishinaseaorignorance

Mr. Fish, why are you using this to bring up your hate of Fox News? Did I ever bring up Fox News? Seems the left is really scared that the most watched TV News is no longer their puppet networks... all of them repeat the same lines handed to them from the DNC.

You guys had it all, the House, the Senate and the Presidency... why complain...? The smokescreen has cleared, the people got a taste of socialism and they spit it out.

Now, back to the topic...
Anyone else hear that the radiation leaks are not coming from the nuclear reactors at all, but instead from the storage facilities for the spent fuel rods, that were still being stored on-site...? Seems the water covering them is what dropped. This was brodcast a couple days ago...? :?:

mtgoat666 - 3-18-2011 at 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K

Quote:

dk:

crikey! you are so biased you have lost any sense of reason (if you ever had it).

Iflyfish - 3-18-2011 at 08:48 AM

Pomp:

These guys do a pretty good job of fact checking.

http://www.politifact.com/

Iflyfishinaseaofdistortionandhype

Iflyfish - 3-18-2011 at 08:56 AM

DK

I brought up FOX "news" because it is the primary source of "information" for most Americans and they lie, do not tell the truth, promote a political agenda and that my friend is propaganda. An informed populace is neccessary for the success of a democracy.

When the Fairness Doctrine was done away with in the media this circus began. Remember Walter Cronkite? Remember who news used to be presented with all sides represented?

The Free Press is one of the balancing mechanisms of our society, its corruption and use as propaganda has dummied down and polarized America and it's political dialogue, reduced it to platitudes and name calling.

Do we get a clear picture of Mexico in the American Press. No, if one were to accept the image of Mexico now seen in American Media then none of us would ever venture south.

http://tinyurl.com/6rrny6

BajaGringo - 3-18-2011 at 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tripledigitken

Quote:

Originally posted by Pompano

Quote:

Originally posted by tripledigitken

Quote:

Why does that seem impossible on Nomads?

Why waste the energy on that, just watch CNN, & MSNBC as they have no talking points.

:rolleyes:

Thanks, Ken..for proving my point. :rolleyes:

But I think you may have missed..or ignored.... the idea of being purely 'factual' and unbiased. Right?

Is this test truly impossible to do on Nomads? If so, it speaks volumes about the forum. :wow:

Didn't miss or ignore Roger. Unbiased, purely unbiased doesn't exist in news or history books. The forum isn't any different than anywhere else, IMO.

Ken

I totally agree Ken.

Skipjack Joe - 3-18-2011 at 11:53 AM

Purely unbiased news and history may not exist but truth does exist. This statement seems to me to be a license to accept falsehood as a norm. And we shouldn't let ourselves get off the hook like that.

Regarding history - it takes time. Sometimes hundreds of years and sometimes even more. Time allows a detachment of vested interest that allows the truth to be accepted. That's why no president is correctly rated for several decades after his presidency ends. Our view of the Roman Empire now is probably as close we're going to get to it's merits and vices. Our view of the Third Reich, however, is still too recent and will change with time.

I'm pretty much in agreement with everything flyfish has said as it's well thought out. David is, as usual, out in left field somewhere (or is it right field).

I had a funny thought about FOX news. Now that we are dealing with Japan again I'm hoping that Obama, this time, doesn't bow too deeply during his visit. Or another 2 weeks of FOX news will be devoted to it and it's significance.

Bajatripper - 3-18-2011 at 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pompano

Is this test truly impossible to do on Nomads? If so, it speaks volumes about the forum. :wow:

I think "speaks volumes about human nature" would be more appropriate. While I know we're all special around here, we're not all that different.

wessongroup - 3-18-2011 at 04:20 PM

Speaking of Nuclear Fallout, saw it has been detected in Sacramento or at least it was reported as being detected ....

elbeau - 3-18-2011 at 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Facts are the liberals worst nightmare.

I used to be a conservative until they changed the definition...but I do agree that nuke power is the safest form of power that we have. Wow, in this thread, I have this strange sense of comraderie with mcfez...wierd.

My grandmother was a downwinder with multiple forms of cancer that are very statistically related to our nuke tests. It's not like I don't know what can happen from radiation...but mcfez and DK are right, you can't just look at the horrors of radiation poisoning and ignore the deaths from other forms of power and still think you're being objective about it.

BTW, how many people died from the clean, renewable energy dam that burst during the quake?

Bajahowodd - 3-18-2011 at 04:39 PM

The major news sources, including cable, long ago abrogated the mission to provide unbiased and factual information to the public. The continual merging and corporate acquisition process has produced a hybrid industry that is dedicated to maximizing profit from advertisers.

Pity is that so many of the alternative sources on the internet are often not subject to fact checking, and become opinion driven, let alone subject to disseminating misinformation.

Many of you who either live in Baja, or who travel there often are probably familiar with CNN-International. Not quite the same as the US CNN. Consider also BBC. And although I know it will cause some blow back, Al Jazeera English is another amazingly unbiased source that covers way more than police chases on the LA freeways and pimping for the reality shows on the entertainment network that owns the news source.

wessongroup - 3-18-2011 at 04:55 PM

Skipjack... and excellent point on "history"... time does make a difference...

Dave - 3-18-2011 at 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bajahowodd
Al Jazeera English is another amazingly unbiased source

Except when they are amazingly biased. For example, like when they're not broadcasting in English. :rolleyes:

mcfez - 3-18-2011 at 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wessongroup
Speaking of Nuclear Fallout, saw it has been detected in Sacramento or at least it was reported as being detected ....

Hey.....we are packed and ready. What's your address wessongroup? I'll take room next to the frig

tripledigitken - 3-18-2011 at 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Iflyfish
DK

Do we get a clear picture of Mexico in the American Press. No, if one were to accept the image of Mexico now seen in American Media then none of us would ever venture south.

http://tinyurl.com/6rrny6

If you would look at the Mexican Press you would think the US Press is sugar coating it. Daily pictures of severed heads, shot up little children just a few days ago in Acapulco, on and on and on. The real story can be very illusive. No side has a corner on unbiased reporting. When you continue to bash Fox and only Fox you look like a fool.

Ken

Iflyfish - 3-19-2011 at 08:24 AM

tipledigitken

I appreciate your comment and desire for a balanced perspective, which we all well need.

I have only bashed FOX because it is the most watched source of information for those who watch "news" in America. I know full well that MSNBC has it's own Liberal Bias, that the Wall Street Journal is now also owned by Rupert Murdock, the Australian conservative who owns FOX. The bias of FOX is also well documented as you can see by the citations in my prior posts. I chose FOX because the talking points I was hearing seemed to have their source in that network. http://tinyurl.com/6rrny6

Because FOX has the highest viewership it has the most infuence on public opinion. FOX ginned up the Iraq/Afghanistan War that has cost us THOUSANDS of our best men and women, FOR NOTHING. FOX cost us the chance to have Universal Coverage, which leaves us with the most expensive health care system in the world, leaving us to have lower life expectancy than many European countries that have chosen to see medical care as a right and not as a source of PROFIT. FOX has ginned up the death of the American Labor Movement, the only countervailing force against Corporate greed. I could go on but these are the headlines for me.

I use multiple sources of information that shape my perspective on American politics. Those sources include Google, which anyone can use. It provides links to other sources of information on each article posted. I also read, subscribing to magazines that provide in depth analysis of current events and issues. Those publications include Harpers. I love Harpers Index, a great source of data: http://www.harpers.org/archive/2011/01/page/0013
I appreciate the depth of analysis one finds in the Atlantic Monthly:
Here is an example of an article for Atlantic Monthly related to the new media as a source of news:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/04/learning...
I find that Rolling Stones magazine has some amazing journalism including exclusive interviews: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-runaway-genera...

I watch NPR and CNN as well as Al Jazeera, BBC and CBC in addition to MSNBC and FOX.

I use Google News as my primary source of information on a daily basis. Google News has links to other sources for each article it posts, sometimes hundreds of articles and citations are posted under on article. Here is a link that lists some of their sources for articles: http://www.google.com/Top/News/

For fact checking I like Politifact: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/
and Media Matters: http://mediamatters.org/

Iflyfishwithmynomadbuddies

wessongroup - 3-19-2011 at 08:29 AM

It all helps...

Cypress - 3-19-2011 at 08:34 AM

Iflyfish, Fox news is the root of most of the USA/worlds problems. :light:

Who'd of thunk it? :?:

Thanks for the enlightenment.

wessongroup - 3-19-2011 at 08:42 AM

Anyone recall Rancho Seco .... gee, something about water and loss of power

vandenberg - 3-19-2011 at 08:42 AM

Agree with Rich about Google news being a great source of information. Each article has several sources mentioned, so you can pick the one that most suits your fancy. :biggrin:

toneart - 3-19-2011 at 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Iflyfish
tipledigitken

I appreciate your comment and desire for a balanced perspective, which we all well need.

I have only bashed FOX because it is the most watched source of information for those who watch "news" in America. I know full well that MSNBC has it's own Liberal Bias, that the Wall Street Journal is now also owned by Rupert Murdock, the Australian conservative who owns FOX. The bias of FOX is also well documented as you can see by the citations in my prior posts. I chose FOX because the talking points I was hearing seemed to have their source in that network. http://tinyurl.com/6rrny6

Because FOX has the highest viewership it has the most infuence on public opinion. FOX ginned up the Iraq/Afghanistan War that has cost us THOUSANDS of our best men and women, FOR NOTHING. FOX cost us the chance to have Universal Coverage, which leaves us with the most expensive health care system in the world, leaving us to have lower life expectancy than many European countries that have chosen to see medical care as a right and not as a source of PROFIT. FOX has ginned up the death of the American Labor Movement, the only countervailing force against Corporate greed. I could go on but these are the headlines for me.

I use multiple sources of information that shape my perspective on American politics. Those sources include Google, which anyone can use. It provides links to other sources of information on each article posted. I also read, subscribing to magazines that provide in depth analysis of current events and issues. Those publications include Harpers. I love Harpers Index, a great source of data: http://www.harpers.org/archive/2011/01/page/0013
I appreciate the depth of analysis one finds in the Atlantic Monthly:
Here is an example of an article for Atlantic Monthly related to the new media as a source of news:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/04/learning...
I find that Rolling Stones magazine has some amazing journalism including exclusive interviews: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-runaway-genera...

I watch NPR and CNN as well as Al Jazeera, BBC and CBC in addition to MSNBC and FOX.

I use Google News as my primary source of information on a daily basis. Google News has links to other sources for each article it posts, sometimes hundreds of articles and citations are posted under on article. Here is a link that lists some of their sources for articles: http://www.google.com/Top/News/

For fact checking I like Politifact: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/
and Media Matters: http://mediamatters.org/

Iflyfishwithmynomadbuddies

Add to these sources...The Nation. They really dig, in depth, to find the truth. The truth may run counter to the Faux News- Murdock ideology, but they thoroughly explain and support their positions. :light:

wessongroup - 3-19-2011 at 09:07 AM

Think the "nuclear" issue may have over shadowed the other event to some degree

found these before for and after shots on the Tsunami from the NY Times .. would think the number of deaths have been way, way under estimated, based on these photo's...

http://tinyurl.com/4pexsqb

Iflyfish - 3-19-2011 at 12:13 PM

Stunning images wessongroup.

I toured the South Coast of the US two years after Katrina and learned that it is IMPOSSIBLE to comprehend the extent of a catastrophe like this from images. These events are of a magnitude that is hard to get one's head around.

This is the sort of event that no doubt took out the city of Atlantis, which they may have found under the sea off southern Spain near Gibraltar.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42072469/ns/technology_and_scien...

Thanks for posting these astounding images.

Iflyfishconminomadamigos

Cypress - 3-19-2011 at 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Iflyfish
Stunning images wessongroup.

I toured the South Coast of the US two years after Katrina and learned that it is IMPOSSIBLE to comprehend the extent of a catastrophe like this from images. These events are of a magnitude that is hard to get one's head around.

This is the sort of event that no doubt took out the city of Atlantis, which they may have found under the sea off southern Spain near Gibraltar.

Very true! My family lives down on the MS Gulf Coast, have waterfront property. Mother nature can deal some misery. TV images can't convey the true horror of a major natural disaster.

Radioactive Wildschwein On The Loose In Germany

mcfez - 3-19-2011 at 10:35 PM

My wife, which is a German citizen ...was telling me of a story earlier today. About radioactive boars on the loose. I thought she'd lost her mind with this story. Looking it up on the net....and there it is!

A story to think about when they say a little wee bit of radioactive fall out aint too harmful.....as I keep in hearing on the news.
__________________________________
We often present what we call cute critter stories on this program. This isn't one of them. Rather, this is about radioactive wild pigs in Germany. These wild boars eat mushrooms contaminated by the radioactive fallout from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster of a quarter century ago.

More....
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1290087...

[Edited on 3-20-2011 by mcfez]

acadist - 3-20-2011 at 06:55 AM

Sooooo, if I got this right, put table salt in my beer?

Quote:

Originally posted by djh
about radioactive iodine impacting your thyroid (health). . . . don't drink milk! That is what experts have said in the past and again now.

Currently, the radioactive iodine dispersal is so diluted that it will likely not affect you in any way . . . unless you're drinking milk . . . from cows that have been grazing on downwind grasslands and accumulating and "condensing" it to a point that it might affect your health.

Besides, potassium iodine only protects your thyroid from radioactive iodine uptake....

And it has already been mentioned that the most serious radioactive "elements" that might be dispersed by a full meltdown (Cesium, for example) are not prevented in ANY way by potassium iodine - or most any other preventative action (other that leaving the area of contamination completely). All lessons learned at Chernobyl.

Meanwhile the iodine tablet frenzy is in full tilt boogie.....

Simple Nomad Solution ? ? ? Drink beer instead of milk....

Anyone with me on this ?

djh