tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3786783108846468976.post1854323832600420794..comments2024-03-03T02:40:44.015-06:00Comments on The Hemlock Tea Room and Ladies' Emporium: ICE WALL AND ROBOTS FAIL AT FUKUSHIMAUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3786783108846468976.post-68789146528506101702018-03-11T17:49:11.629-05:002018-03-11T17:49:11.629-05:00https://web.archive.org/web/20160321045953/http://...https://web.archive.org/web/20160321045953/http://www.newsminer.com/news/local_news/fairbanks-council-passes-resolution-about-radiation-concern/article_1fcb6d02-a9bc-11e3-a8c1-0017a43b2370.html <br />Fairbanks city council unanimously passes Fukushima monitoring resolution: Alaska and west coast of N. America in danger — “No safe levels of radiation… constitutes grave risk” — Alaska Senator: “We need to be vigilant”<br /><br /> OTHER PAST HEADLINES NOW ONLY AVAILABLE BY USING THE WAYBACK MACHINE ARCHIVES: <br />Governmentt kept worst-case Fukushima scenario secret from public — “Possibility of radiation exceeding safe levels for thyroid doses in Alaska” February 7, 2012 <br /><br />FOUR MORE: <br />1.Kansas air filters had Iodine-131 above highest levels detected in California by UC Berkeley November 9, 2011<br />2.Radioactive iodine detected by Tampa-area nuclear plant — “Iodine travels through the air very easily” March 26, 2011<br />3.40,000,000 Bq of iodine-131 in a single bed of kelp off Southern California — Amount most likely larger March 30, 2012<br />4.Radioactive sulfur in California spiked to highest levels ever detected: University researchers August 15, 2011<br />DID ANYONE READ THOSE? <br />MOST WERE NOT HEADLINED IN OUR MAINSTREAM MEDIA.<br />WHY NOT? <br /><br /><br />Waninahihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05714851314831283910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3786783108846468976.post-29842884667254003412018-03-11T17:25:43.392-05:002018-03-11T17:25:43.392-05:00THE NY TIMES TOOK SOME HEAT OVER THE ORIGINAL HEAD...THE NY TIMES TOOK SOME HEAT OVER THE ORIGINAL HEADLINE OF THIS ARTICLE AND "CORRECTED' IT THE FOLLOWING DAY.<br />https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/17/world/asia/concerns-over-measurement-of-fukushima-fallout.html<br />NEW YOR TIMES, MARCH 16, 2014 <br />Michio Aoyama’s initial findings were more startling than most. As a senior scientist at the Japanese government’s Meteorological Research Institute, he said levels of radioactive cesium 137 in the surface water of the Pacific Ocean could be 10,000 times as high as contamination after Chernobyl, the world’s worst nuclear accident.<br />Two months later, as Mr. Aoyama prepared to publish his findings in a short, nonpeer-reviewed article for Nature, the director general of the institute called with an unusual demand — that Mr. Aoyama remove his own name from the paper.<br />“He said there were points he didn’t understand, or want to understand,” the researcher recalled. “I was later told that he did not want to say that Fukushima radioactivity was worse than Chernobyl.” The head of the institute, who has since retired, declined to comment for this article. Mr. Aoyama asked for his name to be removed, he said, and the article was not published. <br />“There are so many issues in our community,” he said. “The key phrase is ‘don’t cause panic.”’<br />Ken Buesseler, a senior scientist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution’s department of marine chemistry and geochemistry, in Massachusetts, who has worked with Mr. Aoyama, said, "Researchers are told not to talk to the press, or they don’t feel comfortable about talking to the press without permission,” <br />Much of the government funding for academic research in Japan is funneled through either the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science or the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. Proposals are screened by government officials and reviewed by an academic committee.<br />Professors, meanwhile, say that rather than simply defend what is a piecemeal approach to studying the disaster, the government should take the lead in creating a large, publicly financed project.<br />“If we’ve ever going to make any headway into the environmental impact of these disasters, statistical power, scientific power, is what counts,” said Mr. Mousseau of the University of South Carolina. “We get at it with massive replication, by going to hundreds of locations. That costs money.”<br /><br />Correction: March 17, 2014 <br />An earlier version of the headline with this article misstated the actions of the Japanese government. There are deep differences over how to determine the health impact of the Fukushima disaster. The authorities are not ‘‘squelching” efforts to measure the effects of the accident. Waninahihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05714851314831283910noreply@blogger.com