Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,525 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,593,084
Pageviews Today: 2,072,125Threads Today: 457Posts Today: 8,113
02:09 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 44672508
Germany
11/15/2013 02:20 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
not high enough

is this thread

yoda
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49955806


"this thread is" is correct
Citizenperth
FUKUSHIMA, GLPTARD 24/7/365

User ID: 49108311
Australia
11/15/2013 02:23 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
not high enough

is this thread

yoda
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49955806


"this thread is" is correct
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44672508


yes but not in a yoda voice ... GRIN.....

BTW, i posted but am a different time frame... i'm glad someone else put this up... it's long, but well worth it.....

[edit], or i found it through you OP?... either way... a good watch for anyone that's interested....


bump

Last Edited by Citizenperth on 11/15/2013 02:25 AM
It's life as we know it, but only just.
My Fukushima Site:
[link to citizenperth.wordpress.com]
sic ut vos es vos should exsisto , denego alius vicis facio vos change , exsisto youself , proprie

GLP's best Fuku thread: Thread: *** Fukushima *** and other nuclear-----updates and links
twitter: @citizenperth
“If I had an hour to solve a problem and my life depended on it, I would use the first 55 minutes determining the proper question to ask, for once I knew the proper question, I could solve the problem in less than five minutes.”
- Albert Einstein
calx
inexorably bound

User ID: 50006593
United States
11/15/2013 02:26 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
Thanks I've favorited it for later.
[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

Watch "The Money Masters" and read "The Creature From Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin to unveil the true enemy.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 49955806
United States
11/15/2013 02:44 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
It is insane to think such an enormous catastrophe could even attempted to be covered up.

Just insane.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1506083
Canada
11/15/2013 02:53 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
[edit], or i found it through you OP?... either way... a good watch for anyone that's interested....
 Quoting: Citizenperth


Thanks Citizenperth, one more asset to a list of truth exposing tools to help awaken the sleeping masses.

Your threads are always top-notch info, thought you'd like this documentary.

Now if we can only go back in time and stop mad scientists from smashing the atom and get our planet back.

It's a train-wreck now, can't believe this is happening it's like mad science fiction but sadly reality.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 47854458
United States
11/15/2013 02:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
I saw Pandora's Promise.

It is actually factually correct. I know this is not popular here, but we have nuclear power and it is safe and clean.

Coat cranks out more radioactive particles into the atmosphere each year than what Fukushima, by far, and kills many more people.

The UN recently estimated that in China alone, coal plants are significantly shortening the life span of over a 100,000,000 people.

So you fantasy of a nuc free world is killing people. Won't happen. People would rather be warm and breath clean air, than cold and get black lung.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 44672508
Germany
11/15/2013 03:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
I saw Pandora's Promise.

It is actually factually correct. I know this is not popular here, but we have nuclear power and it is safe and clean.

Coat cranks out more radioactive particles into the atmosphere each year than what Fukushima, by far, and kills many more people.

The UN recently estimated that in China alone, coal plants are significantly shortening the life span of over a 100,000,000 people.

So you fantasy of a nuc free world is killing people. Won't happen. People would rather be warm and breath clean air, than cold and get black lung.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47854458


it s not "clean" energy, if the by-products it creates are higly toxic and radiating for a million years... and that after the shutdown of a plant, you have to cool the cores for another five years in order to cool them enough to not start a chemical fire that will be unextinguishable... clean , my ass
YouAreDreaming (OP)

User ID: 1506083
Canada
11/15/2013 03:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
I saw Pandora's Promise.

It is actually factually correct. I know this is not popular here, but we have nuclear power and it is safe and clean.

Coat cranks out more radioactive particles into the atmosphere each year than what Fukushima, by far, and kills many more people.

The UN recently estimated that in China alone, coal plants are significantly shortening the life span of over a 100,000,000 people.

So you fantasy of a nuc free world is killing people. Won't happen. People would rather be warm and breath clean air, than cold and get black lung.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47854458


Great now you can watch this video and scratch your head over all the people shown in that video dying because of your clean nuclear energy.

Gotta love the lies. Fact vs propaganda vs reality.
YouAreDreaming (OP)

User ID: 1506083
Canada
11/15/2013 03:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
[link to www.medicalnewstoday.com]

According to French researchers, the incidence of cancer is expected to increase by more than 75% by the year 2030 in developed countries, and over 90% in developing nations. The study is published Online First in the Lancet Oncology.

"Cancer is already the leading cause of death in many high-income countries and is set to become a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the next decades in every region of the world; this study serves as an important reference point in drawing attention to the need for global action to reduce the increasing burden of cancer."

-- And I expect those numbers to be even higher.

I remember when Terry Fox had cancer and it was one of those diseases back then you hardly knew anything about. It was no where near the epidemic plague that it is today.

Our chances are almost 50% that we will have cancer in our lifetime. That's 1 in 2 people will develop cancer.

My x-wife just had cancer removed. My brother and father both had a type of skin cancer. My cousin had a large portion of her tounge removed. My grandfather had it. My great grandmother died from it. My x-wife's mother died from it. My friends wife's parents are both dying from terminal cancer.

I know not one person who has AIDS or has died of it, but cancer... it's everywhere now.

Terry Fox certainly did run; but now we are all running the risks of this disease and I feel with out doubt that the nuclear energy unleashed on humanity throughout the ages is the number one cause of Cancer period.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 49955806
United States
11/15/2013 03:24 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
I implore all of you to shower more karma upon YouAreDreaming...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 49213559
Canada
11/15/2013 03:25 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
cancer is DIRECTLY from the "food" you eat. Period.
Quit being a fear monger, seriously. Cupcakes for cancer anyone? Don't forget the "sodas." meh.

"FOOD."
TruthBard

User ID: 49955806
United States
11/15/2013 03:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
cancer is DIRECTLY from the "food" you eat. Period.
Quit being a fear monger, seriously. Cupcakes for cancer anyone? Don't forget the "sodas." meh.

"FOOD."
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49213559


NO. Actually the leading cause of cancer is cigarettes and second hand smoke.

You see, if nuclear radiation were really that bad for you, the government would tell you.

The government REALLY cares about you, think about all the time and effort they take to educate you about cigarettes.

So if you get cancer, blame your neighbor and his stinky cigarette habit. Not the nuclear industry.

Cigarettes are not a smoke screen to mask the cancer caused by other industries.

Oh no.

That would be preposterous.

Last Edited by TruthBard on 11/15/2013 03:33 AM
YouAreDreaming (OP)

User ID: 1506083
Canada
11/15/2013 03:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
cancer is DIRECTLY from the "food" you eat. Period.
Quit being a fear monger, seriously. Cupcakes for cancer anyone? Don't forget the "sodas." meh.

"FOOD."
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49213559


Educate yourself. Not that I won't disagree that cancer is also caused by other additives et al but come on... tobacco is cancerous because of the pulonium.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]
Up to 10% of invasive cancers are related to radiation exposure, including both ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation.[1] Additionally, the vast majority of non-invasive cancers are non-melanoma skin cancers caused by non-ionizing ultraviolet radiation. Ultraviolet's position on the electromagnetic spectrum is on the boundary between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation. Non-ionizing radio frequency radiation from mobile phones, electric power transmission, and other similar sources have been described as a possible carcinogen by the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer, but the link remains unproven

Nuclear accidents can have dramatic consequences to their surroundings, but their global impact on cancer is less than that of natural and medical exposures.

The most severe nuclear accident is probably the Chernobyl disaster. In addition to conventional fatalities and acute radiation syndrome fatalities, nine children died of thyroid cancer), and it is estimated that there may be up to 4,000 excess cancer deaths among the approximately 600,000 most highly exposed people.[46][47] Of the 100 million curies (4 exabecquerels) of radioactive material, the short lived radioactive isotopes such as 131I Chernobyl released were initially the most dangerous. Due to their short half-lives of 5 and 8 days they have now decayed, leaving the more long-lived 137Cs (with a half-life of 30.07 years) and 90Sr (with a half-life of 28.78 years) as main dangers.

-----

If you watch the video you will find the number of people affected by cancer in Chernobyl to be far higher than what is on Wiki and the cover-up and lies of the IAEA and those protecting big nuclear for profit over our health.

Radiation, especially hot-particles are killer causes of cancer period and there is a lot of that floating around now than there was say 80 years ago?

Or is that factually incorrect and all this new radioactive isotopes which we are all now exposed to simply too safe and clean to worry about.

Can't be the cause? Look at how cancer spiked 20 years after they stopped nuclear testing and just connect the dots. Not hard to see the link unless you are totally stupid or in denial.
Citizenperth
FUKUSHIMA, GLPTARD 24/7/365

User ID: 49108311
Australia
11/15/2013 03:33 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
cancer is DIRECTLY from the "food" you eat. Period.
Quit being a fear monger, seriously. Cupcakes for cancer anyone? Don't forget the "sodas." meh.

"FOOD."
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49213559


NO. Actually the leading cause of cancer is cigarettes and second hand smoke.

You see, if nuclear radiation were really that bad for you, the government would tell you.

The government REALLY cares about you, think about all the time and effort they take to educate you about cigarettes.

So if you get cancer, blame your neighbor and his stinky cigarette habit. Not the nuclear industry.
 Quoting: TruthBard


I see what you did there...

chuckle
It's life as we know it, but only just.
My Fukushima Site:
[link to citizenperth.wordpress.com]
sic ut vos es vos should exsisto , denego alius vicis facio vos change , exsisto youself , proprie

GLP's best Fuku thread: Thread: *** Fukushima *** and other nuclear-----updates and links
twitter: @citizenperth
“If I had an hour to solve a problem and my life depended on it, I would use the first 55 minutes determining the proper question to ask, for once I knew the proper question, I could solve the problem in less than five minutes.”
- Albert Einstein
LadyK74

User ID: 19330420
United States
11/15/2013 03:40 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
Thanks for posting OP~

bump
NotaNonviolentNegro

User ID: 43920905
United States
11/15/2013 03:43 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
how about Thorium?
TruthBard

User ID: 49955806
United States
11/15/2013 03:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
how about Thorium?
 Quoting: NotaNonviolentNegro


One word Thorium, why don't we use it????
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49909515


[link to fairewinds.org]

According to questions we have received, proponents claim that thorium reactors produce less waste and its half-life is “only” a few hundred years rather than thousands. That still means hundreds of years of waste. However, contrary to proponent’s claims

If the spent fuel is not reprocessed, thorium-232 is very long lived (half-life: 14 billion years) and its decay products will build up over time in the spent fuel. This will make the spent fuel quite radiotoxic, in addition to all the fission products in it. It should also be noted that inhalation of a unit of radioactivity of thorium-232 or thorium-228 (which is also present as a decay product of thorium-232) produces a far higher dose, especially to certain organs, than the inhalation of uranium containing the same amount of radioactivity. For instance, the bone surface dose from breathing an amount (mass) of insoluble thorium is about 200 times that of breathing the same mass of uranium. 1

And there is still no geologic repository for the waste in the USA and most of the world, and even if there was, the encapsulation process designed to hold the waste has recently been shown to last only 100 years.

On the question of safety, here is how the Union of Concerned Scientists in its Statement on Thorium Fueled Reactors, answers:

Some people believe that liquid fluoride thorium reactors, which would use a high-temperature liquid fuel made of molten salt, would be significantly safer than current-generation reactors. However, such reactors have major flaws. There are serious safety issues associated with the retention of fission products in the fuel, and it is not clear these problems can be effectively resolved. Such reactors also present proliferation and nuclear terrorism risks because they involve the continuous separation, or “reprocessing,” of the fuel to remove fission products and to efficiently produce U-233, which is a nuclear weapon-usable material. Moreover, disposal of the used fuel has turned out to be a major challenge. Stabilization and disposal of the remains of the very small “Molten Salt Reactor Experiment” that operated at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the 1960s has turned into the most technically challenging cleanup problem that Oak Ridge has faced, and the site has still not been cleaned up. 2

Another claim thorium proponents make is that a thorium reactor is nearer to closing the nuclear fuel cycle. In an interview discussing that topic, Arnie Gundersen said,

The French, and actually the Japanese bought into this. No one has really what we call closed the nuclear fuel cycle. The Japanese tried for years and spent trillions of yen or hundreds of billions of dollars in trying to reprocess fuel and it failed every time. My point is if we had spent that money on alternative energy sources, we would be much more likely to have a solution right at hand that is really cheap. And instead we put all our money on the wrong horse in this race.3

Following a review, even the U. S. Department of Energy has concluded placed Thorium Reactors in the same category as all other nuclear power reactors.

The choice between uranium-based fuel and thorium-based fuel is seen basically as one of preference, with no fundamental difference in addressing the nuclear power issues [of waste management, proliferation risk, safety, security, economics, and sustainability]. Since no infrastructure currently exists in the U.S. for thorium-based fuels, and the processing of thorium-based fuels is at a lower level of technical maturity when compared to processing of uranium-based fuels, costs and RD&D [research, development and deployment] requirements for using thorium are anticipated to be higher. 4

Thorium 232 is not fissile, that means it can’t split and create power. Thorium 232 needs a uranium reactor to get it started by sending out neutrons that the thorium 232 can absorb. When that happens, the thorium 232 changes to U233, which is fissile. So behind every thorium reactor there still is uranium and plutonium that must be disposed of.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49955806
TruthBard

User ID: 49955806
United States
11/15/2013 03:47 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
I would urge you all to give YouAreDreaming all the karma you can, so that he may pin this fine thread to the top once again after its pin time has expired...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1278422
Netherlands
11/15/2013 03:50 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
what is this second page silliness...

to the top i say...

hear hear
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49955806


Nice job!
Citizenperth
FUKUSHIMA, GLPTARD 24/7/365

User ID: 49108311
Australia
11/15/2013 03:50 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
how about Thorium?
 Quoting: NotaNonviolentNegro


One word Thorium, why don't we use it????
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49909515


[link to fairewinds.org]

According to questions we have received, proponents claim that thorium reactors produce less waste and its half-life is “only” a few hundred years rather than thousands. That still means hundreds of years of waste. However, contrary to proponent’s claims

If the spent fuel is not reprocessed, thorium-232 is very long lived (half-life: 14 billion years) and its decay products will build up over time in the spent fuel. This will make the spent fuel quite radiotoxic, in addition to all the fission products in it. It should also be noted that inhalation of a unit of radioactivity of thorium-232 or thorium-228 (which is also present as a decay product of thorium-232) produces a far higher dose, especially to certain organs, than the inhalation of uranium containing the same amount of radioactivity. For instance, the bone surface dose from breathing an amount (mass) of insoluble thorium is about 200 times that of breathing the same mass of uranium. 1

And there is still no geologic repository for the waste in the USA and most of the world, and even if there was, the encapsulation process designed to hold the waste has recently been shown to last only 100 years.

On the question of safety, here is how the Union of Concerned Scientists in its Statement on Thorium Fueled Reactors, answers:

Some people believe that liquid fluoride thorium reactors, which would use a high-temperature liquid fuel made of molten salt, would be significantly safer than current-generation reactors. However, such reactors have major flaws. There are serious safety issues associated with the retention of fission products in the fuel, and it is not clear these problems can be effectively resolved. Such reactors also present proliferation and nuclear terrorism risks because they involve the continuous separation, or “reprocessing,” of the fuel to remove fission products and to efficiently produce U-233, which is a nuclear weapon-usable material. Moreover, disposal of the used fuel has turned out to be a major challenge. Stabilization and disposal of the remains of the very small “Molten Salt Reactor Experiment” that operated at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the 1960s has turned into the most technically challenging cleanup problem that Oak Ridge has faced, and the site has still not been cleaned up. 2

Another claim thorium proponents make is that a thorium reactor is nearer to closing the nuclear fuel cycle. In an interview discussing that topic, Arnie Gundersen said,

The French, and actually the Japanese bought into this. No one has really what we call closed the nuclear fuel cycle. The Japanese tried for years and spent trillions of yen or hundreds of billions of dollars in trying to reprocess fuel and it failed every time. My point is if we had spent that money on alternative energy sources, we would be much more likely to have a solution right at hand that is really cheap. And instead we put all our money on the wrong horse in this race.3

Following a review, even the U. S. Department of Energy has concluded placed Thorium Reactors in the same category as all other nuclear power reactors.

The choice between uranium-based fuel and thorium-based fuel is seen basically as one of preference, with no fundamental difference in addressing the nuclear power issues [of waste management, proliferation risk, safety, security, economics, and sustainability]. Since no infrastructure currently exists in the U.S. for thorium-based fuels, and the processing of thorium-based fuels is at a lower level of technical maturity when compared to processing of uranium-based fuels, costs and RD&D [research, development and deployment] requirements for using thorium are anticipated to be higher. 4

Thorium 232 is not fissile, that means it can’t split and create power. Thorium 232 needs a uranium reactor to get it started by sending out neutrons that the thorium 232 can absorb. When that happens, the thorium 232 changes to U233, which is fissile. So behind every thorium reactor there still is uranium and plutonium that must be disposed of.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49955806

 Quoting: TruthBard


thanks for that.. almost as sneaky as the rhetoric behind fast-breeders.....
It's life as we know it, but only just.
My Fukushima Site:
[link to citizenperth.wordpress.com]
sic ut vos es vos should exsisto , denego alius vicis facio vos change , exsisto youself , proprie

GLP's best Fuku thread: Thread: *** Fukushima *** and other nuclear-----updates and links
twitter: @citizenperth
“If I had an hour to solve a problem and my life depended on it, I would use the first 55 minutes determining the proper question to ask, for once I knew the proper question, I could solve the problem in less than five minutes.”
- Albert Einstein
TruthBard

User ID: 49955806
United States
11/15/2013 03:53 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
what is this second page silliness...

to the top i say...

hear hear
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49955806


Nice job!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1278422


Why thank you, I have forgone my cowardly moniker and chosen a more noble title.

I am TruthBard.

A nuclear warrior.
NotaNonviolentNegro

User ID: 43920905
United States
11/15/2013 03:54 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
how about Thorium?
 Quoting: NotaNonviolentNegro


One word Thorium, why don't we use it????
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49909515


[link to fairewinds.org]

According to questions we have received, proponents claim that thorium reactors produce less waste and its half-life is “only” a few hundred years rather than thousands. That still means hundreds of years of waste. However, contrary to proponent’s claims

If the spent fuel is not reprocessed, thorium-232 is very long lived (half-life: 14 billion years) and its decay products will build up over time in the spent fuel. This will make the spent fuel quite radiotoxic, in addition to all the fission products in it. It should also be noted that inhalation of a unit of radioactivity of thorium-232 or thorium-228 (which is also present as a decay product of thorium-232) produces a far higher dose, especially to certain organs, than the inhalation of uranium containing the same amount of radioactivity. For instance, the bone surface dose from breathing an amount (mass) of insoluble thorium is about 200 times that of breathing the same mass of uranium. 1

And there is still no geologic repository for the waste in the USA and most of the world, and even if there was, the encapsulation process designed to hold the waste has recently been shown to last only 100 years.

On the question of safety, here is how the Union of Concerned Scientists in its Statement on Thorium Fueled Reactors, answers:

Some people believe that liquid fluoride thorium reactors, which would use a high-temperature liquid fuel made of molten salt, would be significantly safer than current-generation reactors. However, such reactors have major flaws. There are serious safety issues associated with the retention of fission products in the fuel, and it is not clear these problems can be effectively resolved. Such reactors also present proliferation and nuclear terrorism risks because they involve the continuous separation, or “reprocessing,” of the fuel to remove fission products and to efficiently produce U-233, which is a nuclear weapon-usable material. Moreover, disposal of the used fuel has turned out to be a major challenge. Stabilization and disposal of the remains of the very small “Molten Salt Reactor Experiment” that operated at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the 1960s has turned into the most technically challenging cleanup problem that Oak Ridge has faced, and the site has still not been cleaned up. 2

Another claim thorium proponents make is that a thorium reactor is nearer to closing the nuclear fuel cycle. In an interview discussing that topic, Arnie Gundersen said,

The French, and actually the Japanese bought into this. No one has really what we call closed the nuclear fuel cycle. The Japanese tried for years and spent trillions of yen or hundreds of billions of dollars in trying to reprocess fuel and it failed every time. My point is if we had spent that money on alternative energy sources, we would be much more likely to have a solution right at hand that is really cheap. And instead we put all our money on the wrong horse in this race.3

Following a review, even the U. S. Department of Energy has concluded placed Thorium Reactors in the same category as all other nuclear power reactors.

The choice between uranium-based fuel and thorium-based fuel is seen basically as one of preference, with no fundamental difference in addressing the nuclear power issues [of waste management, proliferation risk, safety, security, economics, and sustainability]. Since no infrastructure currently exists in the U.S. for thorium-based fuels, and the processing of thorium-based fuels is at a lower level of technical maturity when compared to processing of uranium-based fuels, costs and RD&D [research, development and deployment] requirements for using thorium are anticipated to be higher. 4

Thorium 232 is not fissile, that means it can’t split and create power. Thorium 232 needs a uranium reactor to get it started by sending out neutrons that the thorium 232 can absorb. When that happens, the thorium 232 changes to U233, which is fissile. So behind every thorium reactor there still is uranium and plutonium that must be disposed of.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49955806

 Quoting: TruthBard


i HEARD THE CHINESE STOLE THE PLANS AND BUYING ALL THE RARE EATH And starting build reactors! sorry for caps I heard we can run our cars for a 100 years wit this stuff! and there plenty of it

Last Edited by NotaNonviolentNegro on 11/15/2013 03:56 AM
NotaNonviolentNegro

User ID: 43920905
United States
11/15/2013 03:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.

TruthBard

User ID: 49955806
United States
11/15/2013 03:59 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
i HEARD THE CHINESE STOLE THE PLANS AND BUYING ALL THE RARE EATH And starting build reactors! sorry for caps I heard we can run our cars for a 100 years wit this stuff! and there plenty of it
 Quoting: NotaNonviolentNegro


hmmm if hollywood has taught me anything its that the chinese love stealing various plans and technology for nefarious purposes

Citizenperth
FUKUSHIMA, GLPTARD 24/7/365

User ID: 49108311
Australia
11/15/2013 04:01 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.

 Quoting: NotaNonviolentNegro


cool... thorium man can drive it then......
It's life as we know it, but only just.
My Fukushima Site:
[link to citizenperth.wordpress.com]
sic ut vos es vos should exsisto , denego alius vicis facio vos change , exsisto youself , proprie

GLP's best Fuku thread: Thread: *** Fukushima *** and other nuclear-----updates and links
twitter: @citizenperth
“If I had an hour to solve a problem and my life depended on it, I would use the first 55 minutes determining the proper question to ask, for once I knew the proper question, I could solve the problem in less than five minutes.”
- Albert Einstein
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 49989795
Japan
11/15/2013 04:02 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
[link to www.medicalnewstoday.com]

According to French researchers, the incidence of cancer is expected to increase by more than 75% by the year 2030 in developed countries, and over 90% in developing nations. The study is published Online First in the Lancet Oncology.

"Cancer is already the leading cause of death in many high-income countries and is set to become a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the next decades in every region of the world; this study serves as an important reference point in drawing attention to the need for global action to reduce the increasing burden of cancer."

-- And I expect those numbers to be even higher.

I remember when Terry Fox had cancer and it was one of those diseases back then you hardly knew anything about. It was no where near the epidemic plague that it is today.

Our chances are almost 50% that we will have cancer in our lifetime. That's 1 in 2 people will develop cancer.

My x-wife just had cancer removed. My brother and father both had a type of skin cancer. My cousin had a large portion of her tounge removed. My grandfather had it. My great grandmother died from it. My x-wife's mother died from it. My friends wife's parents are both dying from terminal cancer.

I know not one person who has AIDS or has died of it, but cancer... it's everywhere now.

Terry Fox certainly did run; but now we are all running the risks of this disease and I feel with out doubt that the nuclear energy unleashed on humanity throughout the ages is the number one cause of Cancer period.
 Quoting: YouAreDreaming


Cancer kills more people because it is one of the very few ailments that cannot be cured or managed long-term.

years ago people used to die from typhus, mumps, syphilis, smallpox, rubella, etc etc...the list goes on...humanity (at least in the developed world) has basically cured or found ways to prevent all of these. This leaves a greater "window of opportunity" for dying by cancer or heart disease: the two big unsolvabkes left.

So now you die of cancer at age 75 instead of dying of whooping cough at age 60.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 19514744
Australia
11/15/2013 04:04 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
hiding
Citizenperth
FUKUSHIMA, GLPTARD 24/7/365

User ID: 49108311
Australia
11/15/2013 04:04 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
[link to www.medicalnewstoday.com]

According to French researchers, the incidence of cancer is expected to increase by more than 75% by the year 2030 in developed countries, and over 90% in developing nations. The study is published Online First in the Lancet Oncology.

"Cancer is already the leading cause of death in many high-income countries and is set to become a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the next decades in every region of the world; this study serves as an important reference point in drawing attention to the need for global action to reduce the increasing burden of cancer."

-- And I expect those numbers to be even higher.

I remember when Terry Fox had cancer and it was one of those diseases back then you hardly knew anything about. It was no where near the epidemic plague that it is today.

Our chances are almost 50% that we will have cancer in our lifetime. That's 1 in 2 people will develop cancer.

My x-wife just had cancer removed. My brother and father both had a type of skin cancer. My cousin had a large portion of her tounge removed. My grandfather had it. My great grandmother died from it. My x-wife's mother died from it. My friends wife's parents are both dying from terminal cancer.

I know not one person who has AIDS or has died of it, but cancer... it's everywhere now.

Terry Fox certainly did run; but now we are all running the risks of this disease and I feel with out doubt that the nuclear energy unleashed on humanity throughout the ages is the number one cause of Cancer period.
 Quoting: YouAreDreaming


Cancer kills more people because it is one of the very few ailments that cannot be cured or managed long-term.

years ago people used to die from typhus, mumps, syphilis, smallpox, rubella, etc etc...the list goes on...humanity (at least in the developed world) has basically cured or found ways to prevent all of these. This leaves a greater "window of opportunity" for dying by cancer or heart disease: the two big unsolvabkes left.

So now you die of cancer at age 75 instead of dying of whooping cough at age 60.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 49989795


you won't die of cancer if you smile
It's life as we know it, but only just.
My Fukushima Site:
[link to citizenperth.wordpress.com]
sic ut vos es vos should exsisto , denego alius vicis facio vos change , exsisto youself , proprie

GLP's best Fuku thread: Thread: *** Fukushima *** and other nuclear-----updates and links
twitter: @citizenperth
“If I had an hour to solve a problem and my life depended on it, I would use the first 55 minutes determining the proper question to ask, for once I knew the proper question, I could solve the problem in less than five minutes.”
- Albert Einstein
TruthBard

User ID: 49955806
United States
11/15/2013 04:06 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.

 Quoting: NotaNonviolentNegro


lol @ these gullible fucks
TruthBard

User ID: 49955806
United States
11/15/2013 04:10 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Nuclear Exodus: Pandora's Promise Was a Lie - Must see documentary.
you won't die of cancer if you smile
 Quoting: Citizenperth


Or not if you die from heart disease, or anyone of a number of other radiation related illnesses which could take you out first.

Looks good on a UN report that's for sure. "Oh no they all died from heart disease, we don't recognize that as a radiation related illness. Please fuck off and die."

Last Edited by TruthBard on 11/15/2013 04:10 AM

News








We're dropping truth bombs like it's the end of days!