Please watch the Galen Winsor Nuclear Scare Scam lectures

[observer]

Posted by Kimberley (here)
[....snip]
Observer, I need to jump in and support Target...Observer did you watch the whole Galen Winsor lecture? Did you listen to the other 2 Galen pieces that are posted in the Galen thread? One is another video and one is an audio where Galen is talking about what happened at Chernobyl in 1986 after the event.

Did you read the study Taget is referring to about the Taiwan apartment buildings ? Did you go through all 18 pages of a whole lot more supporting content that is posted in the 18 pages?

I would say that anyone that has gone through all of the information gathered in that thread would at the very least certainly have some questions raised in regard to what is the real truth in regard to nuclear power.

All is well!

I have reviewed enough of this topic to know the difference between bad science and common sense.

In another thread I have debated Mr. TargeT regarding the obscene proliferation of Depleted Uranium, a generally accepted crime against humanity. Mr. TargeT sees no consequence to littering the battlefields of the Middle East with dust that will adversely effect generations to come.

So, now we come to the subject of Thorium Reactors in every basement of our communities. I reiterate the question of, "what do we do with the waste"?

This question of radioactive waste has been at the core of nuclear proliferation since it was first proposed to use the atom for "peaceful purposes".

Within the home heating industry, the heat exchanger in the most expensive heat plants are guaranteed for no more than ten years. What happens to your private Thorium Reactor when the guarantee expires - let's be generous and say - in fifty years? Who are we going to call to replace the failed control valve? The local Plumber?

Where within our local communities do we pile-up all these worn-out and rotted Thorium Reactors? Do we trust our local scrap yards to properly dispose of them?

What happens to all these basement reactors when we have a Katrina-Sized weather event? Or, some other catastrophic natural event? Do we each become individually responaible for the proper disposal of these devices? Would you trust the crack addict down the street to be responsible for this?

What happens when this technology is applied to the transportation industry? Do we have junk yards of vehicles leaking Thorium for future generations to deal with?

Generating power from any radioactive material is a REALLY BAD IDEA. It makes no common sense.

The engineering concept of Fail-Safe has been thrown into the trash. The global elite want to reduce the population, and this is just one more road to that end.

What ever happened to:

• Wind Power?
• Solar Power?
• Developing more hydroelectric sources?
• Bio Fuels?
• Harvesting hydrogen from water?

Any one of these sources would solve the energy needs of humanity. Standing in the way of their development are the Global Elite with their strangle-hold on the petroleum industry.

I recall my old bumper sticker, "split wood - not atoms".

In another thread, witchy1 posted an article by Jim Stone that clearly defines the driving force behind the proliferation of nuclear waste - population reduction. That conclusion is all that can be interpreted when reviewing the evidence presented in Mr. Stone's report.

It is my greatest suspicion that these same Global Elite are behind this banter around the Galon Winsor phenomenon.

You are nothing more than a "useless feeder" to them.

[onawah]

Yes, I see that Target hasn't been following the Simon Parkes thread, but the reason I suggested that he take a look at it and ask Simon some questions about the nuclear issues is that Simon has given us some very unique perspectives on various issues that only a whistleblower with insider sources can offer.
This rabbit hole goes very deep, and since the nuclear issues are so complex, and ALL the information sources we have relied on may be suspect, insider information may be the only thing that could provide a new angle to pursue.
Target speaks from personal experience and long hours of research looking with a fresh eye at evidence that most people, like Observer, consider to be unquestionably accurate.
But for most of us, to get to that point where we can look at the evidence with a fresh eye is the real challenge.
I don't really know where to start, especially given that I just don't have a lot of time to devote to the search, or find the right questions to ask, and most others will likely just wonder if there really is even a reason to start questioning, or feel that the issue is just too complex.
But if an insider whistleblower who is right here on the forum were to give us his perspectives, it might give this controversy just the angle it needs to really get somewhere, instead of just going around and around in the same old circle.
I'm busy transcribing the Simon thread, and I don't have time to do the research that I would need to do just to be able to ask the right questions or provide the right context information, but Target would be the perfect person to do that.
Do you see?

[Bob]

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post761639 OnaWah, hi, that thread I think is a good place to start reading.. Pick that spot there and go backwards, I think your questions about technology would be answered. What I proposed doesn't leak as was suggested in the post above. There is no reason to turn "thorium micro-heat generators" into a "3-Mile Island" event pls.

Uranium technology is bomb mentality and has been a threat for political power uses, micro-thorium heaters are the equivalent of over-unity energy. That's quite a different mentality.

If one though lets big cabal get a hold of "micro-thorium heaters", and tie the concept into the "power grid" it will be a cheap way to have more profits for the cabal, at the expense of the people. The cabal will try to put thorium into massive gigawatt reactors, have billions of dollars tied up, preventing anyone smaller from breaking into the industry.

A micro-thorium heater gives POWER to the people literally, costs pennies really, and provides clean power virtually perpetually, with simple recycling spent modules are returned as are nicad or ni-metal-hydride batteries today. Think D-Cell DRY CELL battery sizes able to produce zero waste zero pollution and electricity and heat for a couple milligrams of low grade thorium that is abundant.

OnaWah: "But for most of us, to get to that point where we can look at the evidence with a fresh eye is the real challenge.

I totally understand, but unless your data is coming from a real technologist with experience, practical knowledge in the field, and has HEART (not your normal scientist), where is one going to get one's data? Hearsay?

I don't really know where to start, especially given that I just don't have a lot of time to devote to the search, or find the right questions to ask, and most others will likely just wonder if there really is even a reason to start questioning, or feel that the issue is just too complex."

I think you will see in that thread that I pointed out, there are questions asked, discussions and solutions shown, in plain and simple english - explained so that a lay person can understand. tnx.

[TargeT]

Posted by observer (here)

I have reviewed enough of this topic to know the difference between bad science and common sense.

In another thread I have debated Mr. TargeT regarding the obscene proliferation of Depleted Uranium, a generally accepted crime against humanity. Mr. TargeT sees no consequence to littering the battlefields of the Middle East with dust that will adversely effect generations to come.

If you believe in the no threshold, no exposure model, then yes I suppose it would seem that there will be an issue with DU and the small amount of dust it creates; however, since there are several threads on this forum covering the topic from how to heal your self with radiation (Hormesis), how we have been lied to about radiation and its effects and even sensable alternatives (linked above in Bobd's thread) and many other good threads, just search 'thorium".

Posted by observer (here)
So, now we come to the subject of Thorium Reactors in every basement of our communities. I reiterate the question of, "what do we do with the waste"?
This question of radioactive waste has been at the core of nuclear proliferation since it was first proposed to use the atom for "peaceful purposes".

Thorium has very little waste, there are methods (that have not been proven completely) to use 99.999% of radioactive isotopes from the thorium fuel cycle (you'd have to understand how the reaction works: since it's actually transmuting material the fuel changes property & becomes "posioned" (nuclear term) and will stop the reaction from happening, but it can be reused in another reactor that is built to react the "posioned" fuel which will then become inert and need to be put back into the original cycle... but that's besides the point) But even at current tech the "waste" is only slightly radioactive for 100 years, not 10,000+ like current waste. (and the levels are quite low)

Posted by observer (here)
Within the home heating industry, the heat exchanger in the most expensive heat plants are guaranteed for no more than ten years. What happens to your private Thorium Reactor when the guarantee expires - let's be generous and say - in fifty years? Who are we going to call to replace the failed control valve? The local Plumber?

Since an MSR (molten Salt Reactor) uses convection (natural heat properties) to move the salt around the reactor, there are no valves, no moving parts to replace, no "local plumbers" needed; even the safety mechanisim is ingenious, it's simply a run off drain to a storage tank that is cooled by power provided from the reactor, if the reactor ever runs too hot or power to the cooling of this section fails due to any issues the MSR solution will drain into the tank and all reaction stop. but this is all covered in depth by people more knowledgeable than myself.

Posted by observer (here)
Where within our local communities do we pile-up all these worn-out and rotted Thorium Reactors? Do we trust our local scrap yards to properly dispose of them?

What happens to all these basement reactors when we have a Katrina-Sized weather event? Or, some other catastrophic natural event? Do we each become individually responaible for the proper disposal of these devices? Would you trust the crack addict down the street to be responsible for this?

The "left over" is less dangerous than a lot of the chemical byproducts from industries ( Freon is a good example), and we handle that stuff fine.

Posted by observer (here)
What happens when this technology is applied to the transportation industry? Do we have junk yards of vehicles leaking Thorium for future generations to deal with?

most likely it would be, though in the form of electric vehicles with an advanced capacitor for power storage (something that is on the verge of discovery it seems) it's possible it could be converted to use in vehicles.. this "leaking thorium" you speak of however, is already everywhere, it's a very very common element in the very dirt we grow our veggies in, in the smoke detectors in your house (yes, right now you are probably no more than 20 feet from thorium!).

Posted by observer (here)
Generating power from any radioactive material is a REALLY BAD IDEA. It makes no common sense.

The engineering concept of Fail-Safe has been thrown into the trash. The global elite want to reduce the population, and this is just one more road to that end.

but a LFTR reactor has the very best fail-safe possible, better than any industry ever.. it's the principal of "common sense" actually; however you just were not aware of it so i guess i can understand your statement.

Posted by observer (here)
What ever happened to:
[*]Wind Power?[*]Solar Power?

terribly in-efficent, not viable due to inconsistancies on power production (read a bit about what 'renewables" are doing to power grids, its bad).

Posted by observer (here)
[*]Developing more hydroelectric sources?

Hydroelectric is usualy very high impact to ecological environments, not the best option.

Posted by observer (here)
[*]Bio Fuels?[*]Harvesting hydrogen from water?

these both take power, where will that power come from?

Posted by observer (here)
Any one of these sources would solve the energy needs of humanity. Standing in the way of their development are the Global Elite with their strangle-hold on the petroleum industry.

did you know the same petroleum industry is deeply tied into every single "green energy" initiative, the strangle hold continues, the hand just wears another glove now...

Posted by observer (here)
In another thread, witchy1 posted an article by Jim Stone that clearly defines the driving force behind the proliferation of nuclear waste - population reduction. That conclusion is all that can be interpreted when reviewing the evidence presented in Mr. Stone's report.

It is my greatest suspicion that these same Global Elite are behind this banter around the Galon Winsor phenomenon.

You are nothing more than a "useless feeder" to them.

we don't disagree about the current paradigm and its outcomes, but MSR/LFTR are NOT the current paradigm and Mr Stone is not talking about them at all, his concerns are mostly shared by myself, but not about the waste so much, I'm more concerned about where all that refined plutonium/uranium is going.. you know,, the weapons grade stuff that is a direct by product of every single modern nuclear "power plant" (which should be called refined uranium/plutonium plant... the plants technology is even refereed to as a "breeder" reactor, since it produces more refined fissile material) something Mr Winsor was VERY against...


Hopefully you can see how i question your approach and why I call caution to it, since it is also the approach of those same powers you are worried about (or do you actually think the nuclear regulatory agiencies that are funded/run by our government are there to be helpful and do something good for us "useless feeders (btw, I think they call us "useless eaters" not feeders?).

Hope that clears up a bit, I don't think we were quite on the same page.

[Bob]

Target - here is a link to my post that goes over the Thorium powered URANIUM waste reduction system - fantastic amount of clean power plus removal of the transuranic and uranic wastes (depleted uranium is a fuel for this machine..) This tech exists. It HAS to be implemented to remove the waste problems.

ZERO WASTES - gigawatts of ENERGY, clean, and eats up existing wastes.

It solves the need for the powers that have to make gigabux of money off people while at the same time cleaning up waste from old crappy reactors as used in most of the world today. IT IS a WIN for the powers that be plus the PEOPLE.

To even suggest to shut down a way which can put an end to the 10,000 years of existing waste problem is not doing humanity any good.

ref: https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post766464

[observer]

To both TargeT, and Bobd:

I guess you might just call me a crusty old dog when it comes to teaching new tricks.

I grew-up during the earliest days of the nuclear age, and I've watched these Reptoid Walk-in Global Elite pull every sort of trick when it comes to poisoning the Mass of Humanity with their "Atomic Poison Power".

I haven't really given this Thorium Alternative the research it deserves, nor do I have the energy to do so.

I will acquiesce to both of your expertise with regard to the use of thurium.

I would offer one caveat, however:
Don't minimize what the NATO forces have done to the Middle East regarding Depleted Uranium.

It is a crime against humanity, and should only be viewed by any compassionate entity as an obscenity....

[Bob]

Posted by observer (here)
To both TargeT, and Bobd:

I guess you might just call me a crusty old dog when it comes to teaching new tricks.

I grew-up during the earliest days of the nuclear age, and I've watched these Reptoid Walk-in Global Elite pull every sort of trick when it comes to poisoning the Mass of Humanity with their "Atomic Poison Power".

I haven't really given this Thorium Alternative the research it deserves, nor do I have the energy to do so.

I will acquiesce to both of your expertise with regard to the use of thurium.

I would offer one caveat, however:
Don't minimize what the NATO forces have done to the Middle East regarding Depleted Uranium.

It is a crime against humanity, and should only be viewed by any compassionate entity as an obscenity....

I'm close to your age Observer, right there with the Nam war and the rest of the nuclear terror.. Plutonium bomb mindset sux, no question.. Thorium Energy Multipliers are the way to clean up the mess from the past.. When cleaned completely, that suggestion is if industry and governments actually WANT to clean it up, it can be done in a 100 year time span.. Saving our children's children and the environment. Those thorium Energy Multipliers that consume the previous reactor's wastes are lower cost, and can be built off-site, and transported to where they need to be used to clean up the problems. (and provide vast amounts of useful electricity in the process). Zero emissions from the plant, no leaks.. 30 year life spans per drop in module.

I would gladly prefer over-unity zero-point if it was proven not to destroy or damage the space time fabric.. We don't know that yet. I proposed some excellent methods to get into that, but folks haven't quite grocked where to move with it yet, as it opens up "anti-gravity", "holographic replication of matter" and would put quite a chink in the powers that be economic slavery agenda for the planet..

The thorium Energy multiplier, is not a salt reactor, it is more of a closed system without the water leak issue..

Bob

Ed note - I added a little bit more on the thorium energy multiplier module above

[TargeT]

Posted by observer (here)
I would offer one caveat, however:
Don't minimize what the NATO forces have done to the Middle East regarding Depleted Uranium.

It is a crime against humanity, and should only be viewed by any compassionate entity as an obscenity....

I agree that every round of DU that was fired most probably ruined at least 1 persons life, it's an incredibly devastating kinetic weapon; but what has it done to the middle east other than that? yes there is a small amount of heavy metal dust (MICROgrams) produced when a sabot round hits a tank & heavy metal dust (like lead dust) is not the best for you definitely.

Depleted uranium is roughly 60% as radioactive as naturally occurring uranium; I have been wearing a polished piece of uranium ore around my neck for the last year or so...

Personally I think that the middle east should be THANKFUL that they have DU littered around their country, it will probably increase the general health of that region (something that is desperately needed). Though 60% weaker than natural uranium is a bit low, it'd be better if it was higher radiation, more like natural uranium.


now, I have looked into the DU situation since I was exposed myself twice (during my deployments I was in areas it was used in); if you look for actual studies and actual facts (not emotional fear porn) you'll find that there literally is NOTHING bad about DU rounds (aside from the heavy metal dust, but it's a very small amount) unless they are fired at you.

I understand your concern and your attachment to it, but its not based on good information; it's a part of the same misinfo that we suffer from en-mass.

Posted by observer (here)
I haven't really given this Thorium Alternative the research it deserves, nor do I have the energy to do so.

statements like this are very disheartening, when you don't empower yourself with information you give power to those you are trusting to tell you the "right" thing.. for all you know I could just be creating sentences that look like I know what I'm talking about, any source of information you don't research for your self could be.

As such, I do not think that we collectively should ever form an opinion on a topic that we have not done due diligence to, that we have not personally researched; I used to be afraid of any radioactive material, ANY level (which is quite ridiculous once you learn/realize you are being radiated all the time from various sources) because I did not research the topic myself and I fell for a logical fallacy "Appeal to authority" just because an authority tells you something, it does NOT mean it is true.... in fact, I've found that most things told to us by authorities are either completely false or false enough that they are not useful.

so, while I try to help spread what I have learned on topics to people, in reality I'm hopefully just giving you areas to research and verify yourself, I do not want to become an authority that takes power from you, I want to show you how to empower yourself by gaining your own understanding (and opinion) from raw data and fact.

[feltip]

in this vid Dr Mousseau states his thesis around minute 8-9 that says basically - low level radiation allows the specie to live, but also allows the low levels of radiation to form mutation over time in that specie and these mutations are passed on to next generation....didn't seem like a good thing to me.

I did not see this vid posted after I conducted a site search.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=-rAJnIxQgxU

[Kimberley]

Target WOW WOW WOW !!!

I love what you wrote to observer! I would like to add that your message is for all of us to remember. "Please do your own research" is the simple version.

As many already know, I/we am/are still finding out more on the Nuclear topic all the time. I realize that one can find information to back up any belief, however when it comes to this nuclear issue I/we just keep finding more and more substantiating information that supports what Galen was trying to tell the world.

If someone would have told me 2 years ago that I would become a proponent of Nuclear Energy I would have laughed in their face. Let me be clear I am NOT in any way shape or form a proponent of nuclear weapons. Because the two are very different.

For example I found this today in a search:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!ms...8/L9ui6IcDYl0J

I do not even know what this is or where it came from...I love the opening post and be sure to look at the comments...who knows?

I keep researching this and thank all others that are also finding new information all the time!!!

Oh and at some point Bill Ryan asked for this thread to change its title...I never responded because I still would really like Bill to take time to look through all that we have been gathering for over a year and a half...Although I have great respect that he or whomever chooses to follow or not to follow whatever they choose has that right.

For example there are really only a few topics that catch my eye here... I do not have time to follow everything and know that either does anyone else!

Obviously this topic keeps pulling at me...and I am glad it does. Thank you to all that keep plugging away on this!

Much love to us all!

[Hip Hipnotist]

I don't take the time to visit Avalon as much as I once did but I will say that this thread/topic was a major eye opener for me and others I shared it with.

It was kind'a like when you were told there's no such thing as Santa Claus. It took a lot of wind out of your sails.

In this case it took out a lot of fear, imagined or otherwise.

It was and still is a great thread.

[silvanelf]

Posted by TargeT (here)
This topic has been thoroughly discussed in other threads on this forum and the basic conclusion is this:

Low levels of radiation are healthy for you (just like low levels of about anything) after a certain point radiation ( like everything else) becomes toxic.

The linear no threshold model is completely incorrect and based on guesses that are backed by no data (the assumption is that because high level exposure is bad, it must be bad all the way down to zero exposure, thus a linear model).

Your statements are based on fairy tales. How do you know that the linear no-threshold model is completely incorrect? Because you say so?? Why do you claim that there are no data to support this model? Because you never saw these data? It is obvious that you have no clue about this topic. See below -- there is a quote in reference to that model.

Your claim that "This topic has been thoroughly discussed in other threads on this forum" is completely ridiculous. Here and in other threads some members made wide-eyed claims, but I have rarely seen any real discussion. Apparently most people are taking Galen Winsor's claims at face value.

The US advocacy group, Physicians for Social Responsiblity, recently criticised press reports implying there is a safe threshold for ionizing radiation exposure.

"As the crisis in Japan goes on, there are an increasing number of sources reporting that 100 mSv (millisieverts) is the lowest dose at which a person is at risk for cancer," says a statement from the organisation.

"Established research disproves this claim," the statement continues. "According to the National Academy of Sciences, there are no safe doses of radiation. Decades of research show clearly that any dose of radiation increases an individual's risk for the development of cancer."

Associate Professor Tilman Ruff of University of Melbourne's Nossal Institute for Global Health says there may be a threshold for some effects of radiation, but not for cancer.

"There is unfortunately a continuing tirade of statements by self-interested parties and some official agencies ... implying a threshold for radiation exposure below which there are no adverse consequences," says Ruff, who is also a member of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War.

https://www.abc.net.au/science/artic...31/3177889.htm