-1=e^ipi

Well i thought you wanted a response specifically to the video of the guy walking around on the Californian beach. I just gave it to you. Thunderf00t has actually done 5 videos in the past month on the topic of radiation alarmism, specifically Fukushima. There you go.

Thunderf00t did a refutation of Gost Hacked's favorite video. Enjoy:

Sure it can. Live in a lead box. So we have a 0.022% increase in the radioactivity of the pacific ocean (actually far less than this since most of the radioactive isotopes have sunk to the bottom of the ocean; and most of these isotopes have a short half-life) that occurred because of a magnitude 9 earthquake and a tsunami occurred near an outdated reactor and took out the backup generators, so we must now stop nuclear power generation? Seems unreasonable. Not to mention that when you mine uranium or other radioactive isotopes, aren't you reducing the natural background radiation in the locations where you have mines? Stop treating all types of nuclear power as the same thing. You seriously think some CANDU reactors in a location that' isn't very geologically active and is far from the ocean is comparable to some outdated light water reactors near the ocean along the ring of fire? This is silly. CANDU reactors are completely safe, even safer if they are in Pickering rather than Sendai. Furthermore, if the Japanese simply decided to go with CANDU reactors rather than the american designed light water reactors in the 70's, the Fukushima Daiichi issue might have been avoided. http://reviewcanada.ca/magazine/2011/09/no-candu/

Maybe, but my intention was to refer more specifically to its effects on humans (or other vertebrates) in the short run. In the case of a human, I think that humans would be better off in a K-40 free environment (less damage to cells so slower aging and longer life expectancy).

The rate of evolution argument I agree with, but it doesn't mean that an organism would perform better in a 120 ppm K-40 environment over a 0 ppm K-40 environment. Indeed life has evolved adaptations to deal with radiation levels, but that doesn't mean natural radation levels are beneficial. Similarly, life has evolved adaptations to deal with deadly viruses, but that doesn't mean deadly viruses are beneficial.

This is why it would be better if they were truthful from the beginning. Discussing this would probably require a seperate thread and would ultimately contain many generalizations. Also, there is a difference between lying / covering up problems for personal gain / corrupt reasons rather than reasons for society as a whole as well as a huge difference between individuals in positions of power and those that are subordinate.

Idk, they sort of lied about the severity of the situation right before and during the partial meltdowns of the reactor cores. http://rt.com/news/tepco-address-lying-governor-879/ It wasn't that they simply reported a scenario that they thought was accurate, but turned out false/inaccurate. The people at TEPCO intentionally lied to the public in order to keep 'social order'. With respect to the Japanese culture, I was refering to the fact in Japanese culture it is not uncommon to lie in order to not hurt someone's feelings and/or offend them and there is a strong emphasis on social order and conformity. It is not unreasonable in Japanese culture to not tell the truth about the reactors in order to maintain social order and not alarm anyone. However, in the context of Western culture, or even Korean culture such a scenario of lying to the public is less likely.

120 ppm isn't negligible. I'm unconvinced by the homeostasis arguement with respect to gamma ray radiation. If you want to convince me otherwise then you will need to provide more justification, preferably referencing some physiological processes that would either counteract or take advantage of this natural radiation. K-40 radiation is damaging to cells and to life, but given that life on this planet has to use potassium, it has no choice. If you were to raise a human in a 0 ppm K-40 environment it would be healthier and age slower than a human that is raised in a 120 ppm K-40 environment.

Alright. Whether you admit it or not, I think that I've informed you about radioactivity, so my job here is done. Some guy wondering around on the beach and finding some locations of slightly above average background radiation (as well as areas of slightly below average background radiation) isn't exactly convincing... Yeah TECPO lied. That is really, really unfortunate and it makes the entire nuclear industry look bad. Though I wonder how much this lying has to do with the japanese culture (like I'm doubtful a nuclear plant in say Canada or France would lie like TECPO did).

Lol, okay keep trying to tell the person with a physics degree your newly discovered knowledge. Cause clearly I had no idea there were different types of radiation. *sarcasm* How is your non-sense claim that K-40 emits alpha particles going? So a video where a guy goes to the beach and finds that the radiation levels are slightly above background (though he also found many places with below background radiation levels) is supposed to convince me? Background radiation varies from place to place. What were the radiation levels in 2010? You need something to compare what we have in 2013 to. Your approach as well as that guy in the video to fukushima isn't scientific it is dogmatic.

They all give off MeV gamma and beta radiation. Radiation is radiation, stop trying to pretend that radiation from K-40 is somehow special. Yeah, it's a 0.022% increase in radioactivity over background levels if you spread it over the surface of the pacific ocean. Though if you account for the fact that the majority of the Radioactive isotopes are at the bottom of the ocean then it is far less. Your refusal to simply acknowledge that it's just a question of 'how much radiation' is a joke.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_particle I'll convert that 1 gram of K-40 into Sieverts for you: 1 gram of K-40 contains 1.5055 x 10^22 atoms. These atoms have a half life of 1.248 billion years = 3.938 x 10^16 seconds. And average of 1.343 MeV = 2.152 x 10^-13 J of energy is released when an atom decays. Therefore, the radioactive decay power of 1 gram of K-40 is ln2*1.5055 x 10^22*2.152 x 10^-13 J/(3.938 x 10^16 s) = 5.70 x 10^-8 W. For a 60 kg adult, this is about 9.50 x 10^-10 Gy/s. Again, using a weighting factor of 20 for approximately 1 MeV energies we get 4.75 x 10^-11 Sv/s. Even if that K-40 is only in your system for a week and then 'passes through' (though more likely this will take longer than a day), you will still receive 2.87 x 10^-5 Sv of radiation, which is about 1% of the sieverts you receive from background sources in a year.

What? I thought it was the lefties that want to implement the draconian policies to prevent the warming. Edit: I'm pro warming.

I'm not sure, depends on the costs of implementation. Maybe without income splitting as I'm not married, so it would put greater tax burden on other people (jk). Depends on where you live. I'm sure it is a big deal for some people. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/common-law-couples-as-good-as-married-in-b-c-1.1413551 Doesn't this sort of violate freedom of religion though?

Yeah it will. I would definitely not eat that Banana. "Potassium is the eighth or ninth most common element by mass (0.2%) in the human body, so that a 60 kg adult contains a total of about 120 g of potassium." "Potassium-40 (40K) is a radioactive isotope of potassium which has a very long half-life of 1.248×109 years. It makes up 0.012% (120 ppm) of the total amount of potassium found in nature." So a 60 kg adult has about 14 milligrams of potassium 40 in their body. If you want to eat a gram of K-40 and increase the amount of potassium in your body by 70x then be my guest. Want me to convert that 1 gram into sievarts for you? Wrong. You body can take 1 atom of each of those with no issue.

You're not muslim

So you agree that polygamy shouldn't be illegal? I'm not familiar enough with that part of the tax code to give an informed opinion. I already answered this. Both families should have to pay the same tax. However with marriage income splitting a non-married family earning $0 + $80,000 will pay more than a married family earning $0 + $80,000. Introduce a flat tax and these issues disappear. If people don't consent to a marriage, they shouldn't be considered effectively married. Marriage should be about consent. This is a huge problem. It is discrimination. It is called price discrimination. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination If you want to say it is justified that is one thing, but to pretend it is not discrimination is Orwellian. So a mosque shouldn't be able to discriminate against non-muslims when hiring an imam? A university can't discriminate against creationists when hiring an evolutionary biologist? A film company can't discriminate against non-black people when looking for an actor to play a black person? The catholic church can't discriminate against gay priests?

This is silly. K-40 emits a 1.33 MeV electron 90% of the time and a 1.46 MeV photon 10% of the time. Cs-137 emits a 0.5120 MeV electron & 0.6617 MeV photon 95% of the time and a 1.174 MeV electron the other 5% of the time. They both emit gamma and beta radiation. Of course K-40 can be dangerous. It is just a matter of 'how much' as with any radioactive isotope. If you had a banana that in which all of the potassium was K-39 and another banana in which all of the potassium was K-40, which would you rather eat? The K-39 banana obviously. Heck even non-radioactive isotopes can kill you. If you drink enough heavy water, you will die. Why does the question of 'how much' never enter your mind? I threw a banana in the ocean a year ago, it's going to leak K-40 into the ocean and make the ocean radioactive. Why does the tonnage of water mater? That water could be highly radioactive or not that radioactive. If I take 1 ton of radioactive water and mix it with 1 ton of non-radioactive water, I now have 2 tons of radioactive water. Did I increase the amount of radioactive isotopes? No. Yes, that is radioactive. But when mixed into the entire Pacific Ocean, it isn't an issue. Yeah, and I've done some calculations for you. 0.02% increase in radiation compared to natural sources and that is not taking into account that most of it has sunk to the bottom of the ocean by now. Not to mention the radioactive isotopes of most concern have a short half life (2-30 years).

I give up. I do not think WWWTT is open to reason. GostHacked is in the thread about Fukushima Daiichi.

Why not be consistent and take a position that says marriage is fine as long as it involves consenting individuals? Your position seems to be 'we should do what the majority wants; consistency and morality be damned'. Which ones are those? You seem to be trying very hard to pretend that problems, which exist, do not exist.

Please tell me where it says K-40 emits alpha particles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium-40 And lol at overall not a concern. Just a while ago you were arguing that K-40 isn't as bad as Cs-137 cause K-40 emits alpha particles. Now suddenly it doesn't matter? Why don't you just stop with your dogmatic approach to this thread before you embarrass yourself more. You said that in response to me mentioning that heavy elements sink to the bottom of the ocean. I love how all your 'arguments' don't ever take into account the quantity of what is being leaked or the quantity of radiation. If it were a leak at a rate of 1 atom per second you would still probably complain.

@ GostHacked, do you retract your claim that K-40 emits alpha particles? No it doesn't take 40 years for stuff to sink the the bottom of the ocean.

I forgot to mention this earlier but heavy elements tend to sink to the bottom of the ocean. So my simplistic calculation vastly overstates the increase in radioactivity from Fukushima Daiichi compared to natural sources cause most of the radioactive isotopes are at the bottom of the ocean by now.

" About 89.28% of the time, it decays to calcium-40 (40Ca) with emission of a beta particle (β−, an electron) with a maximum energy of 1.33 MeV and anantineutrino. About 10.72% of the time it decays to argon-40 (40Ar) by electron capture, with the emission of a 1.460 MeV gamma ray and a neutrino." So it will either emit a 1.33 MeV electron or a 1.46 MeV photon. How is this alpha radiation?