goemaw.com

General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: mocat on January 02, 2014, 04:43:30 PM

Title: Japan meltdown stuff
Post by: mocat on January 02, 2014, 04:43:30 PM

i don't know what to make of this

http://asheepnomore.net/2014/01/02/36-signs-media-lying-radiation-fukushima-affecting-west-coast/ (http://asheepnomore.net/2014/01/02/36-signs-media-lying-radiation-fukushima-affecting-west-coast/)

Title: Re: Japan meltdown stuff
Post by: puniraptor on January 02, 2014, 04:59:45 PM

It's a major major ecological disaster with real consequences, but most of that is bullshit or totally unrelated.

I'm sure you could pick any other part of the world and find similar wildlife anecdotes.

The bald eagle thing has already been attributed to west nile virus (coverup, tho!?!?)

Title: Re: Japan meltdown stuff
Post by: puniraptor on January 02, 2014, 05:05:43 PM

Also: smell test. What incentive does the american media have to cover this up? When has the american media ever passed up a chance to sensationalize something?

Title: Re: Japan meltdown stuff
Post by: mocat on January 02, 2014, 05:26:14 PM

Quote from: puniraptor on January 02, 2014, 05:05:43 PM

Also: smell test. What incentive does the american media have to cover this up? When has the american media ever passed up a chance to sensationalize something?

That's what I was thinking

Title: Re: Japan meltdown stuff
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 02, 2014, 06:05:48 PM

I think Fukashima is a true ecological disaster, but I think it will be many years before we see any real affects.

As far as the cancer cases for sailors on the Reagan, 35 of the 5600 people on the ship contracting cancer in the last year is MUCH lower than the national average.

Title: Re: Japan meltdown stuff
Post by: 0.42 on January 02, 2014, 10:54:23 PM

this place isn't going to be the same without sanfranciscRustymichimichicat :frown:

Title: Re: Japan meltdown stuff
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 03, 2014, 12:05:43 AM

Quote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 02, 2014, 06:05:48 PM

I think Fukashima is a true ecological disaster, but I think it will be many years before we see any real affects.

As far as the cancer cases for sailors on the Reagan, 35 of the 5600 people on the ship contracting cancer in the last year is MUCH lower than the national average.

What is the national average for people that are in the same age range as the sailors on that ship?

Title: Re: Japan meltdown stuff
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 03, 2014, 12:57:45 AM

Quote from: Nuts Kicked on January 03, 2014, 12:05:43 AM

Quote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 02, 2014, 06:05:48 PM

I think Fukashima is a true ecological disaster, but I think it will be many years before we see any real affects.

As far as the cancer cases for sailors on the Reagan, 35 of the 5600 people on the ship contracting cancer in the last year is MUCH lower than the national average.

What is the national average for people that are in the same age range as the sailors on that ship?

Don't know, but we're talking about 5.1% national average and 0.6% on the ship. So, probably about the same.

Title: Re: Japan meltdown stuff
Post by: 8manpick on January 03, 2014, 07:42:56 AM

5.1% of people in the world get cancer every year? Interesting, if true.

Title: Re: Japan meltdown stuff
Post by: 8manpick on January 03, 2014, 07:47:52 AM

Mocat can check the math, but the American Cancer Society estimates about 1,650,000 new cancer cases in the US last year, which is roughly 5% of the population of Texas

Title: Re: Japan meltdown stuff
Post by: Cire on January 03, 2014, 08:18:22 AM

I know that when I look for hard hitting investigative journalism I turn to asheepnomore.net