+ Reply to Thread
Page 21 of 21 FirstFirst 1 11 21
Results 401 to 420 of 420

Thread: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

  1. Link to Post #401
    Virgin Islands Avalon Member TargeT's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th June 2011
    Location
    St. Croix
    Age
    40
    Posts
    7,515
    Thanks
    21,385
    Thanked 39,705 times in 7,043 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    Not quite sure what point I am trying to make
    maths are fun?


    Quote "We're not in a clean energy revolution; we're in a clean energy crisis," says climate policy expert Michael Shellenberger. His surprising solution: nuclear. In this passionate talk, he explains why it's time to overcome longstanding fears of the technology, and why he and other environmentalists believe it's past time to embrace nuclear as a viable and desirable source of clean power.
    I don't buy the "global warming" angle, but it's funny that even the "global warmers" are supporting nuclear...
    Last edited by TargeT; 12th October 2016 at 12:39.
    Hard times create strong men, Strong men create good times, Good times create weak men, Weak men create hard times.
    Where are you?

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to TargeT For This Post:

    DNA (12th October 2016), Shannon (12th October 2016)

  3. Link to Post #402
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    8th May 2011
    Location
    Arizona
    Age
    46
    Posts
    3,931
    Thanks
    27,040
    Thanked 20,792 times in 3,642 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    I'm a fan of Galen Winsor, thanks for bumping this thread.

    The original Galen video is down, here is one that is still working.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEXG7h6kBOQ

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DNA For This Post:

    Cara (13th October 2016), Foxie Loxie (12th October 2016), TargeT (12th October 2016)

  5. Link to Post #403
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    71
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,143 times in 20,634 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    Not quite sure what point I am trying to make
    I read TargeT as saying that the per hour levels of radiation were incredibly lower than the per annum "safe" levels, and I read your post as calculating that they are about the same, once adjusted for the difference between an hour and a year.

    I agree with your post, araucaria, and almost made a similar post last night myself .
    Last edited by Paul; 12th October 2016 at 16:52.

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    animovado (12th October 2016), araucaria (12th October 2016), TargeT (12th October 2016)

  7. Link to Post #404
    Virgin Islands Avalon Member TargeT's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th June 2011
    Location
    St. Croix
    Age
    40
    Posts
    7,515
    Thanks
    21,385
    Thanked 39,705 times in 7,043 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    Not quite sure what point I am trying to make
    I read TargeT as saying that the per hour levels of radiation were incredibly lower than the per annum "safe" levels, and I read your post as calculating that they are about the same, once adjusted for the difference between an hour and a year.

    I agree with your post, araucaria, and almost made a similar post last night myself .
    Who ever wrote that article doesn't even understand it (the different measurements of radiation) very well, I didn't notice until araucaria's post who's findings are even more supportive to the idea that the regulatory limits are ridiculously low.

    What i learned: Don't sleep by bananas if you want to comply with government standards.
    Hard times create strong men, Strong men create good times, Good times create weak men, Weak men create hard times.
    Where are you?

  8. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to TargeT For This Post:

    animovado (12th October 2016), araucaria (12th October 2016), DNA (25th May 2017), Paul (12th October 2016)

  9. Link to Post #405
    France Avalon Member araucaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Posts
    5,017
    Thanks
    11,911
    Thanked 28,364 times in 4,630 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Quote Posted by TargeT (here)
    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    Not quite sure what point I am trying to make
    I read TargeT as saying that the per hour levels of radiation were incredibly lower than the per annum "safe" levels, and I read your post as calculating that they are about the same, once adjusted for the difference between an hour and a year.

    I agree with your post, araucaria, and almost made a similar post last night myself .
    Who ever wrote that article doesn't even understand it (the different measurements of radiation) very well, I didn't notice until araucaria's post who's findings are even more supportive to the idea that the regulatory limits are ridiculously low.

    What i learned: Don't sleep by bananas if you want to comply with government standards.
    Yes. On reflection, I think I was saying we are safely absorbing a heck of a lot more radiation than is supposed to be good for us. If bricks and bananas are at this level, presumably glass and potatoes, wood and tomatoes are at similar levels. We have nowhere to go, and yet life expectancy so far has does nothing but rise.
    Spoken as one who as a child was fairly closely downwind of the Winscale disaster, and more recently distantly downwind of the Chernobyl disaster, which French weather forecasters appeared to think would be stopped by border controls.


  10. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to araucaria For This Post:

    animovado (12th October 2016), Cara (13th October 2016), DNA (25th May 2017), fourty-two (25th May 2017), TargeT (12th October 2016)

  11. Link to Post #406
    Wales Avalon Member meat suit's Avatar
    Join Date
    1st January 2012
    Location
    on the coast
    Age
    53
    Posts
    726
    Thanks
    3,171
    Thanked 2,793 times in 648 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)


  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to meat suit For This Post:

    scanner (30th May 2019), silvanelf (30th May 2019)

  13. Link to Post #407
    Virgin Islands Avalon Member TargeT's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th June 2011
    Location
    St. Croix
    Age
    40
    Posts
    7,515
    Thanks
    21,385
    Thanked 39,705 times in 7,043 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Quote Posted by meat suit (here)
    an RT update on Fallujah....
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
    RT thinks we are stupid.

    There wasn't a single piece of data in that 4 min video, no links to references, just some scary words... Was there a single number in that (other than dates)?

    I won't stand for being spoon fed fallacious platitudes by news agencies anymore.
    Hard times create strong men, Strong men create good times, Good times create weak men, Weak men create hard times.
    Where are you?

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TargeT For This Post:

    Deux Corbeaux (30th May 2019), ljwheat (7th November 2016), scanner (30th May 2019)

  15. Link to Post #408
    Avalon Member ikkibu's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th September 2012
    Location
    on the move
    Posts
    18
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 102 times in 15 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Quote 48 of America’s nuclear power plants are leaking and there is no way to get rid of nuclear waste.
    Here is a very interesting man who has a lot of different things to say about the matter, i find him to be a honest and sincere man.

    A very interesting documentary for you guys


  16. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to ikkibu For This Post:

    Bruno (23rd May 2017), Deux Corbeaux (30th May 2019), DNA (25th May 2017), Foxie Loxie (24th May 2017), ktlight (23rd May 2017), Noelle (23rd May 2017), scanner (30th May 2019), TargeT (25th May 2017)

  17. Link to Post #409
    Denmark Avalon Member
    Join Date
    17th June 2011
    Posts
    331
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 1,193 times in 278 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Quote Posted by ikkibu (here)
    Quote 48 of America’s nuclear power plants are leaking and there is no way to get rid of nuclear waste.
    Here is a very interesting man who has a lot of different things to say about the matter, i find him to be a honest and sincere man.

    A very interesting documentary for you guys

    If radioactivity is so harmless, I wonder what Galen Winsor would have to say about "the radium girls":
    http://www.messynessychic.com/2015/0...e-toothepaste/

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to delfine For This Post:

    Foxie Loxie (24th May 2017), scanner (30th May 2019)

  19. Link to Post #410
    Avalon Member ikkibu's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th September 2012
    Location
    on the move
    Posts
    18
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 102 times in 15 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Quote If radioactivity is so harmless, I wonder what Galen Winsor would have to say about "the radium girls":
    http://www.messynessychic.com/2015/0...e-toothepaste/
    OK so why did he not get radiation sickness? the man swam and drank that water, please if there is any Avalon members with more insight please give us your take on it. I just feel my spidey senses tingling and something smells like Bull Sh¤¤, and heyyy what a bout the valuable end "HAZARDOUS WASTE" ... Maybe I am wrong? Then show me hard evidence, that's all i ask.

  20. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ikkibu For This Post:

    DNA (25th May 2017), Foxie Loxie (25th May 2017), TargeT (25th May 2017)

  21. Link to Post #411
    Virgin Islands Avalon Member TargeT's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th June 2011
    Location
    St. Croix
    Age
    40
    Posts
    7,515
    Thanks
    21,385
    Thanked 39,705 times in 7,043 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Quote Posted by delfine (here)
    If radioactivity is so harmless, I wonder what Galen Winsor would have to say about "the radium girls":
    No one is insinuating that it is harmless, we are saying that radiation is just like everything else, too much is bad, the right amount improves health, too little is bad... everything is like this.

    Quote Posted by ikkibu (here)
    Quote If radioactivity is so harmless, I wonder what Galen Winsor would have to say about "the radium girls":
    http://www.messynessychic.com/2015/0...e-toothepaste/
    OK so why did he not get radiation sickness? the man swam and drank that water, please if there is any Avalon members with more insight please give us your take on it. I just feel my spidey senses tingling and something smells like Bull Sh¤¤, and heyyy what a bout the valuable end "HAZARDOUS WASTE" ... Maybe I am wrong? Then show me hard evidence, that's all i ask.
    Read through the 22 pages here, we discuss this in great detail.

    From that radium girls link:


    These are sought after now, individuals following radiation hormesis use items like this still to this day with great results.
    Last edited by TargeT; 25th May 2017 at 14:13.
    Hard times create strong men, Strong men create good times, Good times create weak men, Weak men create hard times.
    Where are you?

  22. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TargeT For This Post:

    DNA (25th May 2017), Foxie Loxie (25th May 2017), ikkibu (27th May 2017)

  23. Link to Post #412
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    8th May 2011
    Location
    Arizona
    Age
    46
    Posts
    3,931
    Thanks
    27,040
    Thanked 20,792 times in 3,642 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Galen Windsor has caused me to re-evaluate how I view the nuclear paradigm.
    I'm not saying I believe Galen hook line and sinker 100%, but I certainly take his position into consideration.
    His points seem to make sense when looking at the bigger scenario.

    If one is up for challenging a life long paradigm I suggest hearing Galen out and considering his point of view on this topic.






    Quote Galen Winsor is a nuclear physicist of renown who worked at, and helped design, nuclear power plants in Hanford, WA; Oak Ridge, TN; Morris, IL, San Jose, CA; Wimington, NJ. Among his positions of expertise he was in charge of measuring and controlling the nuclear fuel inventory and storage.

    Galen Winsor has traveled and lectured all over America, spoken on national talk radio, and made several videos exposing the misunderstood issues of nuclear radiation. He shows that fear of radiation has been exaggerated to scare people … so a few powerful people can maintain total control of the world’s most valuable power resource. Filmed by Ben Williams in 1986.

    In the video, you can watch Galen lick a pile of highly radioactive uranium off the palm of his hand and ignite a chunk of plutonium into a shower of flaming dust. The guy also drank reactor cooling pool water for fun and liked to go swimming in the pool to relax. He also spiked the basement flooring of his own home with enough radioactive material to send any Geiger counter reading off the scale to disprove the fear mongering surrounding radon at the time.

    Galen surmises the regulations and fear mongering that surround radioactive materials are in place to prevent the widespread adoption of nuclear power in local small scale neighborhood/home based reactors. Galen also points out that hot nuclear “waste” can be effectively turned into a safe power source through thermionic conversion, which is how the U.S. submarine navigation network was powered. The heat it gives off can also be used to safely heat homes.

    He points out that nuclear “waste” is worth roughly $10 million (in 1986 dollars) a ton if it were to be reprocessed to collect its useful isotopes, so all of this talk about trying to bury it is a sham. He says the power companies are holding all the waste with the intent of playing the plutonium futures market. The “waste” could be stored above ground in already constructed buildings meeting all the regulatory requirements without the need to have these outrageous basalt mines dug into mountains. The only reason he can think of for these underground vaults is to hide bodies/evidence that the state doesn’t want uncovered.

    At its core, he says federal controls over nuclear material is about maintaining power and control over the masses through the denial of self-sufficient power sources. Obviously if one had a personal sized power source that was cheap and efficient, they wouldn’t need to be connected to the “grid” for anything. The power grid is the control grid our rulers use to keep us under their thumbs.

    He also says Three Mile Island was an intentionally created disaster, and that a core meltdown could not melt its way deep into the Earth.

  24. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DNA For This Post:

    Joe (3rd February 2019), TargeT (3rd February 2019), Zanshin (5th February 2019)

  25. Link to Post #413
    United States Avalon Member Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    27th February 2015
    Age
    48
    Posts
    263
    Thanks
    1,107
    Thanked 1,347 times in 240 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Here’s what Galen Windsor understood about safe levels of radiation. The most accurate models of human toxicology use a “threshold” limit to set safe levels of exposure.

    Which basically means our bodies have a natural ability of self-repairing and processing of toxic substances or damaged tissue. Anything below the threshold limit is safely processed by our bodies. Damage occurs only when the threshold is exceeded.

    Setting safe limits is problematic from a regulatory standpoint because everyone’s safe limit is different. For example an elderly person with a weak immune system has a much lower safe level of exposure to viruses than a healthy adult. The regulatory bodies in an abundance of caution used the most conservative, and inaccurate, linear model to establish radiation limits.

    One caveat that I would add is that developing fetuses are MUCH more sensitive to radiation exposure than all other human population groups. Therefore pregnant women need to be more careful about radiation exposure than others.

    Here are a couple of links explaining these models and how they were adopted for use in establishing regulatory limits:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_model

    Quote Threshold model

    In mathematical or statistical modeling a threshold model is any model where a threshold value, or set of threshold values, is used to distinguish ranges of values where the behaviour predicted by the model varies in some important way. A particularly important instance arises in toxicology, where the model for the effect of a drug may be that there is zero effect for a dose below a critical or threshold value, while an effect of some significance exists above that value. Certain types of regression model may include threshold effects...

    http://nuclearradiophobia.blogspot.c...nt-is.html?m=1

    Quote Linear No Threshold Model (LNT) Is Inaccurate

    The Linear No Threshold (LNT) model is a measurement of Radiation Dose vs Risk of Cancer. Because of research performed with the effects of radiation on Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors scientists were able to obtain data on high doses of radiation (>500 millisievert (mSv)). However it was uncertain what effect low doses of radiation had on people so the assumption was made that there was “no threshold” and all radiation levels were dangerous...
    Follow the link for the whole article.


    *=post update=* to give a tangible example of how contradictory radiation exposure limits can be, consider this: The annual “safe” radiation exposure limit is 1 mSv per year. However, a cancer patient receiving a “treatment” of radiation therapy is exposed to 50,000 mSv.
    Last edited by Joe; 3rd February 2019 at 05:45.

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to Joe For This Post:

    DNA (3rd February 2019)

  27. Link to Post #414
    Virgin Islands Avalon Member TargeT's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th June 2011
    Location
    St. Croix
    Age
    40
    Posts
    7,515
    Thanks
    21,385
    Thanked 39,705 times in 7,043 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Quote Posted by Joe (here)
    Here’s what Galen Windsor understood about safe levels of radiation. The most accurate models of human toxicology use a “threshold” limit to set safe levels of exposure.

    Which basically means our bodies have a natural ability of self-repairing and processing of toxic substances or damaged tissue. Anything below the threshold limit is safely processed by our bodies. Damage occurs only when the threshold is exceeded.
    This mindset completely ignores the health benefits of radiation (at low levels).

    I do not agree with it because those benefits are apparently so amazing (and I have personal anicdotal stories on this as well, as I wore a uranium ore neckless for 2 years and have not gotten an "annual sickness" like I used to for decades since).


    Hormesis is real, and lately it's becoming very accepted.
    Hard times create strong men, Strong men create good times, Good times create weak men, Weak men create hard times.
    Where are you?

  28. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TargeT For This Post:

    DNA (3rd February 2019), Joe (3rd February 2019), Zanshin (5th February 2019)

  29. Link to Post #415
    United States Avalon Member Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    27th February 2015
    Age
    48
    Posts
    263
    Thanks
    1,107
    Thanked 1,347 times in 240 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Quote Posted by TargeT (here)
    Quote Posted by Joe (here)
    Here’s what Galen Windsor understood about safe levels of radiation. The most accurate models of human toxicology use a “threshold” limit to set safe levels of exposure.

    Which basically means our bodies have a natural ability of self-repairing and processing of toxic substances or damaged tissue. Anything below the threshold limit is safely processed by our bodies. Damage occurs only when the threshold is exceeded.
    This mindset completely ignores the health benefits of radiation (at low levels).

    I do not agree with it because those benefits are apparently so amazing (and I have personal anicdotal stories on this as well, as I wore a uranium ore neckless for 2 years and have not gotten an "annual sickness" like I used to for decades since).


    Hormesis is real, and lately it's becoming very accepted.

    This threshold limit model, which is not used by regulatory bodies, supports or at least leaves room for the activity of hormesis.

    It is the linear model that was incorrectly used and is still used by nuclear regulatory bodies to extrapolate the “potential” for damage at low radiation levels.

    I was suggesting that Windsor began his work with nuclear fuel before the regulatory bodies established their incorrect limits; the scientists of his age had to know for themselves what safe levels of exposure were and were not.

    I think another part of what happened when limits were established, was during the 50’s & 60’s the Cold War was used to terrorize the population with air raid sirens, hiding under desks, nuclear bomb drills, and fallout shelters.

    The fear of radiation from nuclear weapons is actually unfounded. I think most people still do not understand radiation exposure levels from a nuclear bomb fallout are not all that dangerous.

    The radiation damage from 50,000 mSv to a cancer patient are very real and physically noticeable. The oncologists actually know very well the “threshold” limits of radiation. They push cancer patients to the limit of what their bodies can handle. When patients go beyond that level, the radiation effects to the body are noticeable.

    The regulatory limit of 1mSv of annual exposure is not harmful, and as you suggest may be beneficial with the effect of hormesis. The second article link goes into some detail about hormesis.

    http://nuclearradiophobia.blogspot.c...nt-is.html?m=1

    Quote Low Dose Radiation & Hormesis

    ...Some scientists believe small doses of radiation actually stimulate the activation of repair mechanisms in the human body that protect against disease (see Radiation Hormesis or the Reference page on this site). Studies were done shielding one group of mice from natural background radiation and another group exposed to natural background radiation. The group that were shielded from natural radiation died sooner than the other group. In 1963, the Atomic Energy Commission repeatedly confirmed lower mortality in guinea pigs, rats, and mice given low level radiation. In 1964, the cows exposed to about 150 rads after the Trinity A-bomb in 1946 were quietly euthanized because of extreme old age.

    There were apartments constructed in Taiwan in 1983 that accidently contained increased amounts of cobolt-60 which is radioactive. Occupants recieved a dose of 75mSv/y which is 5 times over the US recommended radiation dose. Over 16 years there were only 5 cases of cancer out of the 10,000 occupants of the apartments. According to the Taiwanese average cancer rate (with age considered) there should have been 170 cases of cancer, thats a 96% decrease in cancer rates.

    The waters of such European spas as Lourdes, Bath, and Bad Gastein, known for their beneficial health effects since Roman times, all have high radioactivity levels. Areas noted for high radiation backgrounds, such as the Caucasus, southwest England, northwest India, have high longevity and low cancer incidence.

    Indian, Canadian and British studies also found that workers in nuclear power plants had lower rates of cancer than the general population. British data on over 10,000 UK Atomic Energy Authority workers show cancer mortality to be 22% below the national average. For Canada the figure is 33% below the average...
    Last edited by Joe; 3rd February 2019 at 13:15.

  30. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Joe For This Post:

    DNA (3rd February 2019), Ivanhoe (30th May 2019), ljwheat (3rd February 2019), Paul (4th February 2019), TargeT (3rd February 2019), Zanshin (5th February 2019)

  31. Link to Post #416
    United States Avalon Member ljwheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    5th January 2012
    Location
    Cape Coral, Florida
    Age
    70
    Posts
    949
    Thanks
    5,306
    Thanked 4,468 times in 859 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Quick update, I drink the radiated water, wear the necklace, use the mudpack, 24/7 over the last 5 years, only health, no ill effects, and I do not glow in the dark, no fungus has a chance /within this low dose radiation bubble I live in. and I still believe in Donald J Trump.
    :thumb: Paintings that I have created over the last 35 years >Gallery http://projectavalon.net/forum4/album.php?albumid=587< or here at ACC http://www.ashtarcommandcrew.net/gro...-or-collection

  32. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ljwheat For This Post:

    DNA (3rd February 2019), TargeT (3rd February 2019), what is a name? (4th February 2019), Zanshin (5th February 2019)

  33. Link to Post #417
    United States Avalon Member Webz Libri's Avatar
    Join Date
    20th January 2019
    Location
    West Coast.. USA!
    Posts
    36
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 86 times in 19 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    All of this reminds me of when I was trained by the US Army NBC School (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) (any 54 Bravo's in here?) to test for this stuff at the live agent training facility in Alabama, we were up close and personal with radiac meters and testing radioactive items. When I was and NDT weld inspector, we were contracted to San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant to inspect some piping there... all the other guys were freaking out but I assured them that nothing there will kill them.
    My website: Mysteries Books

  34. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Webz Libri For This Post:

    Ivanhoe (30th May 2019), ljwheat (6th February 2019), TargeT (6th February 2019)

  35. Link to Post #418
    Madagascar Avalon Member silvanelf's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th May 2019
    Age
    59
    Posts
    134
    Thanks
    1,331
    Thanked 361 times in 111 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Marie Curie, who received the Nobel prize for pioneering research on radioactivity, died from exposure to radioactive substances. So much about your belief that "radioactivity is harmless."

    It should be obvious that Galen Winsor is nothing more than a government psyop.

    Quote Curie visited Poland for the last time in early 1934.[14][71] A few months later, on 4 July 1934, she died at the Sancellemoz sanatorium in Passy, Haute-Savoie, from aplastic anemia believed to have been contracted from her long-term exposure to radiation.[47][72]

    The damaging effects of ionising radiation were not known at the time of her work, which had been carried out without the safety measures later developed.[71] She had carried test tubes containing radioactive isotopes in her pocket,[73] and she stored them in her desk drawer, remarking on the faint light that the substances gave off in the dark.[74] Curie was also exposed to X-rays from unshielded equipment while serving as a radiologist in field hospitals during the war.[56] Although her many decades of exposure to radiation caused chronic illnesses (including near-blindness due to cataracts) and ultimately her death, she never really acknowledged the health risks of radiation exposure.[75]
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Curie#Death

  36. The Following User Says Thank You to silvanelf For This Post:

    onawah (30th May 2019)

  37. Link to Post #419
    Avalon Member scanner's Avatar
    Join Date
    18th March 2010
    Location
    Sea level UK ( I must move )
    Age
    43
    Posts
    436
    Thanks
    289
    Thanked 1,724 times in 324 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    I have a vested interest in this, I live a quarter mile from a nuclear power station/plant. I myself, would not swim in any pools of nuclear water. Imho, we don't need nuclear power any more. There are alternatives, Wind, Solar and other substances. I live near to the largest wind power generators in the World, allegedly, in Morecambe bay UK. The Power station has had problems in the past and shutdown one of its reactors.

    Nuclear power stations/plants, are just ticking time bombs, imho. If a natural, or man made disaster happens (War) etc, humans are in an ELLE event, because of greed and man's stupidity. Galen could be a psy-op and by the length of time his videos have been allowed to stay up, probably is. Stay calm swim in its pools is ok, message, doesn't hurt tptb messages. I recently watched a TV series of Chernobyl, well put together and well worth a watch, very scary, they are still dealing with the aftermath in Russia. Put the message out, through our positive energies, to wake up the greedy self servers of this Planet. If the plants go boom, no one survives not even them.
    Am I one of many or am I many of one ? interesting .

  38. The Following User Says Thank You to scanner For This Post:

    silvanelf (30th May 2019)

  39. Link to Post #420
    Madagascar Avalon Member silvanelf's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th May 2019
    Age
    59
    Posts
    134
    Thanks
    1,331
    Thanked 361 times in 111 posts

    Default Re: A video they won't want you to see (Galen Winsor: nuclear scare scam)

    Quote Posted by scanner (here)
    I recently watched a TV series of Chernobyl, well put together and well worth a watch, very scary, they are still dealing with the aftermath in Russia.
    The Soviet Union's Secret Nuclear Disaster in 1957

    Another nuclear waste disaster which is widely unknown. The second quote below says: "Within a few days, 300 of the village’s 5000 residents died of radiation poisoning." So much for the 'harmless' radioactive waste.

    Quote THE SOVIET authorities have released the first detailed account of a serious nuclear accident in 1957, at Kyshtym in the southern Urals, which followed an explosion in a huge concrete vessel containing high-level radioactive waste. The subsequent radioactive fallout contaminated 15 000 square kilometres of land and prompted the authorities to evacuate more than 10 000 people.

    Although Western intelligence agencies knew of the incident, it was shrouded in mystery until a Soviet biologist, Zhores Medvedev, described the aftermath of the catastrophe in an article in New Scientist 13 years ago (4 November 1976, p 264). The USSR did not acknowledge the accident officially until six months ago.
    https://www.newscientist.com/article...nuclear-blast/

    Quote On September 29, 1957, one of the Mayak plant’s cooling systems failed. No one noticed until it was too late. A waste tank exploded, sending a cloud of radioactive material into the air, which fell over an area of 20,000 square kilometers. Though 270,000 people lived there, only 11,000 were evacuated (and that took up to two years to accomplish). Those who remained were pressed into service to clean up the debris by destroying contaminated crops and livestock. They worked without protection from radiation, and then they went back to their homes.

    The Soviet reaction was a puzzle to many of the peasants who lived near the Mayak plant. In the village of Korabolka, farmers thought a global nuclear war had begun when they saw the explosion. Within a few days, 300 of the village’s 5000 residents died of radiation poisoning. An evacuation was planned, but only ethnic Russians were relocated. The remaining half of the village were ethnic Tatars, who were left in place. In the more than 50 years since, many villagers are convinced they were left as an experiment. The cancer rate for Korabolka, now called Tatarskaya Korabolka, is five times that of an uncontaminated village. Other villages around the region report elevated rates of cancer, genetic abnormalities, and other illness.
    http://mentalfloss.com/article/71026...ve-never-heard

    Quote Those who live along the river, they say, have cancer at rates 3.6 times higher than the national average, and suffer 25 times more from incidence of birth defects than in other places in the country. Miscarriages continue to climb, and children carried to term are born with malformed limbs and organs. Many of the remaining adults suffer from lymph node swelling so severe that their words are unintelligible to visiting physicians. The strontium 90 flowing through the river, the doctors have concluded, has settled into the population’s bones.
    https://bellona.org/news/nuclear-iss...-60th-birthday


+ Reply to Thread
Page 21 of 21 FirstFirst 1 11 21

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts