Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Three Mile Island at 29: Reactors and Infant Health
Today marks 29 years since the partial meltdown and radiation disaster at Three Mile Island (TMI) near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.News accounts noted the reactor's loss-of-coolant, fuel melting, multiple explosions, venting of radioactive gases, dumping of contaminated water and the buildup of explosive hydrogen inside the reactor vessel. The accident caused such a nationwide scare that the expansion of nuclear power ended in the United States.
Yet the environmental and health consequences of the TMI disaster aren't widely understood. Official cover-ups, industry propaganda, and ignorance of radiation-induced illnesses have led to present-day trivialization of TMI and a supposed revival of reactor construction. Any such revival is totally dependent on billions in federal subsidies included in the recent energy bill, because, as Forbes magazine blazoned across its cover: "The failure of the U.S. nuclear power program ranks as the largest managerial disaster in business history, a disaster on a monumental scale."
The nuclear industry's attempt to raise nuclear power from the dead involves denying the damage resulting from TMI itself and flies in the face of 25 years of science regarding the effects of low-dose radiation. One Wisconsin legislator said on the record last December, "Three Mile Island was a success of containment."
Things weren't much different in 1979. President Carter's Kemeny Commission hurriedly finished its report on the disaster issuing it in Oct. 1979. The commission did not consider any data on the effects of wind-borne radiation, although the wind blew 6-to-9 mph toward upstate New York and western Pennsylvania.
Over 10 million curies of radioactive noble gases including 43,000 curies of krypton-85 -- which stays in the environment for 100 years -- as well as 15-to-24 curies of radioactive iodine-131, were vented from the "containment" building. (A curie -- 37 billion disintegrations per second -- is a huge amount of radiation.) As the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) later noted, several "deliberate but uncontrolled releases" were used to vent radioactive gas. Official airborne release estimates are just guesses, because of the insufficient number of outside radiation monitors half weren't working, and a large number of them went off-scale.
On the third day of the venting of these gases, half the population within 15 miles -- 144,000 people -- fled the area. By this time the bulk of the accident's airborne radiation was already spewed and drifting on the wind.
In addition, approximately 400,000 gallons of radioactive cooling water that had leaked from the reactor were secretly dumped into the Susquehanna River, a source of drinking water for nearby communities. Later about 2.3 million gallons of radioactively contaminated cooling water were allowed to be "evaporated" into the atmosphere.
In 1980, Pennsylvania State Health Department authorities reported a sharp rise in hypothyroidism in newborn infants in the three counties downwind from the reactor. Late in 1979, four times as many infants as normal were born with the disease. The NRC said the increase was unrelated to radiation released by TMI. Upwind incidence of the disease had dropped to below the national average.
The same year, six workers entered the heavily contaminated reactor building. Five of the six later died of radiation-induced cancers. David Lochbaum of the Union of Concerned Scientists reports that UCS opposed license renewal for the surviving TMI units and demanded health studies for neighbors. The NRC refused.
In the county where TMI is located infant deaths soared 53.7 percent in the first month after the accident; 27 percent in the first year. As originally published, the federal government's own Monthly Vital Statistics Report shows a statistically significant rise in infant and over-all mortality rates shortly after the accident.
Studying 10 counties closest to TMI, Jay M. Gould, in his meticulously documented 1990 book Deadly Deceit, found that childhood cancers, other infant diseases, and deaths from birth defects were 15% to 35% higher than before the accident, and those from breast cancer 7% higher. These increases far exceeded those elsewhere in Pennsylvania.
Gould suggests that between 50,000 and 100,000 excess deaths occurred after the TMI accident. Joseph Mangano of the New York-based Radiation and Public Health Project (RPHP) says, "The NRC allows reactors to emit a certain level of radiation, but it does not do follow-up studies to see if there are excessive infant deaths, birth defects or cancers."
Leukemia deaths among kids fewer than 10 years of age (between 1980 and 1984) jumped almost 50 percent compared to the national rate.
Mangano reports that "between 1980 and 1984, death rates in the three nearest counties were considerably higher than 1970-74 (before the reactor opened) for leukemia, female breast, thyroid and bone and joint cancers."
The Spring 2000 edition of Environmental Epidemiology and Toxicology Mangano and Ernest Sternglass reported that in counties adjacent to nuclear reactors, infant mortality falls dramatically after the reactors close. The RPHP study found that in the first two years after the reactors were shuttered, infant death rates fell 15-to-20 percent. In communities near Big Rock Point in Michigan for example, the decrease in infant mortality rates was 54 percent; at Maine Yankee, the percentage decrease was 33.4 %.
The evidence of cancers caused by reactor operations brings to mind the words of Roger Mattson, former Director of NRC Division of Systems Safety, who said during the TMI meltdown, "I'm not sure why you are not moving people. I don't know what we are protecting at this point."
John LaForge is on the staff of Nukewatch, an environmental action group in Wisconsin, and edits its quarterly newsletter. His articles on nuclear power, weapons and waste have appeared in New Internationalist, Z Magazine, Earth Island Journal, The Progressive, the opinion page of the Minneapolis Star Tribune and elsewhere.



78 Comments so far
Show AllBeware of the linguistic tricks from President Bush.
I once heard him say that if we didn't support occupying the oil fields of Iraq with our military, then we would have to support nuclear energy in this country.
Maybe he should be spending a portion of the 12 billion a month he is spending in Iraq on the research and testing of sustainable energy sources so those won't be the only two options his speechwriters allow.
His energy language tricks are just like his standard "If you don't support the war, then you don't support the troops" linguistic trick.
No Mr. President, I can support the troops and clean energy while also opposing your corrupt goals and strategies.
Hopefully this timely article will spur interest in the very useful book cited by the writer. The full title is
"Deadly Deceit: Low-level Radiation, High-level Cover-up", by Dr. Jay M. Gould and Benjamin A. Goldman. It's available (used) on amazon.com, and is required reading for anyone involved with nuclear issues.
Aside from the fascinating case studies (of course including TMI), the book covers the basic science of low-level radiation. The key conclusion: "All four [scientists] concluded that the dose-response relationship was supralinear, which means that there is no level of radiation low enough to be deemed 'safe'".
"All four [scientists] concluded that the dose-response relationship was supralinear, which means that there is no level of radiation low enough to be deemed 'safe'".
Than you better find another universe to live in. We get exposed to naturally occurring radiation - which varies considerably from place to place, especially with altitude and local geology, every day.
And, please define the word "safe". Did you drive a car or cross a busy street today?
Exelon is submitting the license renewal for TMI Unit 1 this year. I believe its for 20 years. There apparently isn't a lot of local resistance, most of the neighbors figure it won't happen again.
Chernobyl Heart
http://www.chernobyl.typepad.com/
USAn: "Deadly Deceit" addresses natural radiation and defines safety through the well-known concept of "excess deaths". However, the point of my post was not to start a debate based on an excerpt, but to get people to read the book as a whole.
A great movie that involves the use of nuclear energy as the primary energy source of a society is "THX 1138".
Background radiation was at fairly low levels , varying by altitude and location all across the world, until the late '40s and all the Underground / atmospheric nuclear testing.. todays levels of background radiation is way way higher than it was previous to the testing.
If you think that is a lie that is your choice .. but the FACTS tell otherwise.
but of course some people still think the world is flat.
What is also not widely understood is that while the Chernoboyl Incident is contained and over, 3-Mile Island is still on-going, uncontained. Water must continuously be pumped onto the pile and periodically vented. This must continue for the next 10,000 years – or until the danger of full containment is finally faced. Nuclear power is hellishly dangerous and completely unnecessary.
One of my favorite people ever was from the TMI area. I met her when she came out to California to die. RIP JoAnne
That's sad ~Barks~. And she is just one of so many.
All three potential presidential candidates support more nuclear power. John Edwards was against it. Of course that's why he was 'selected' out of the race by a Big Money corporate supported/directed MSM. Follow the money and it becomes readily evident where this 'surge' toward more nuclear power comes from.
Those pushing this whole power power trip are some seriously sick people. Then again I guess they live on some other planet, or in another plane of existence (think Bizarro World). I guess they don't mind walking around in lead lined suits, and self-contained breathing apparatus, but normal people will.
Packages of $100 bills strapped around your body is not ample protection from some forms of radiation, and you can't eat them either. Let's get honest & real in these discussions on nuclear power, instead of secretive & devious. We're in this together (WITT), rather than you're on your own (YOYO).
My little sister was a student at a business school in Camp Hill, very near the TMI complex when the disaster hit. When we finally were able to speak to her, we suggested she head home immediately. She replied with the official line that there was only minimal, if any, danger. At that point I told her to get her butt home NOW! which she did.
She is a healthy, happy, successful and much loved member of the family and community. She is the mother of three outstanding boys, all Eagle Scouts. The two oldest boys returned to the farm after college and the youngest is a freshman in college. She and her husband operate an ogranic dairy, pork, and beef farm which converted to organic in 1981, pioneers in the movement. She is a Director for the Northeast Organic Farmers Association and her husband is one of twelve members of the National Organic Standards Board which advises the USDA on organic policy.
I don't want to think of the personal loss only, but the loss to sustainable agriculture and society if she had remained there while the situation was most critical, and had her health been negatively affected.
USAn wrote: "We get exposed to naturally occurring radiation - which varies considerably from place to place, especially with altitude and local geology, every day."
Yes, and statistically, we all get exposed to bullets every day. But if you make your home in Lancaster County, PA, you don't expect to be exposed to the same "bullet level" as Baghdad or Kabul. Neither do you expect to be exposed to the same level of "sub atomic bullets" as a resident of Quito or Denver.
FACT: there were "excess deaths" after TMI. These are people who, statistically speaking, would not have died had TMI not happened. Look at a chart of deaths over time -- especially infant deaths -- and you clearly see a blip. To those people and their grieving families, it matters naught that they might have been exposed to the same level of radiation had they lived in Denver. USAn, go explain to these people that their loved one would have died anyway -- statistically speaking -- had they lived in Denver. I hope you have good running shoes if you do.
This is such an annoying argument that the nuke apologists keep raising. It has no basis in reality. It is the worst sort of twisting science into propaganda. USAn, you should be ashamed.
New nukes, maybe dozens, are coming, or are at least in preliminary planning. Westinghouse claims it can get the cost down to $1bn/reactor if they have enough orders and are allowed to build standardized units. I forgot to check if the cooling towers are extra.
Local weather forecasters like to add in the "feels like" heat index, pollen count, ozone level, UV index... Maybe some day they will give the local background radiation count, Sr-90 and tritium count in the water... so we can all plan healthy outings!
The new financial deal is utilities plan on having customers pay for construction as it happens - before they ever get a single watt out of the project. Rates would decline after the plants are on line and making money. Hmmm.
We need to replace coal generation ASAP, but we actually have plans to build more. Nuclear generation is the most powerful and compact substitute, and will be part of the solution. The Philly brownouts stopped after they built Limerick. It can be done safely, but there can be no secrets, coverups or back room decisions, and the public has the right to know exactly what and how much of anything is getting into the environment.
Can nuclear power be made so safe that people living near a facility get more radiation exposure from sunlight, medical X-rays, radon in the basement, computer monitors, cell phones, cigarettes, the coal fired plant in the next state... than from their local nuke?
Background radiation levels around the world have been declining since the atomic bomb test ban treaties. TMI did make a little spike and Chernobyl dusted everyone pretty badly, but last I read levels are still declining as they clean up the mess from the WWII / Cold War bomb building and testing era. Lets keep it that way. As a baby boomer, I probably have more Strontium 90 in my bones than a twenty-something who grew up near TMI.
I don't know what to say about waste disposal. It should be possible to "burn" it in fast neutron reactors some day, leaving only short lived elements. That day isn't here yet. Using Yucca Mountain as a forever repository doesn't appeal to me, either, but we have to support our growing population and end GHG emissions. Its a tough choice.
Jan:
The exposure level to bullets in Lancaster County is pretty low, as long as you don't take a wrong turn off the Schuylkill Expressway and end up in West Philly!
Good post JAN, good for you. But he's right about west Philly.
We won't need any coal or nuke plants if we develop clean energy. The money we'd spend bulding nuclear power plats would be far better spent developing clean energy.
They'd better hurry it up, cause when the dome collapses at Cherry Noble, another huge cloud of radioactive dust will circle the globe. Of course it's not safe to be near there for workers for more than a few minutes, but they have lots of people.
Hi John--nice to come upon your work in Common Dreams! It is becoming harder and harder to remember the world we knew even 2 decades ago. Thanks for maintaining the necessary outrage that helps us to resist the oncoming disasters, or at least to recognize that there was an alternative. The amazing thing, to me, is the adaptability of human beings. We will persist even when we can no longer thrive. Is this a good thing? ---Jane
Gosh ~Bill~, do you mean there is more than one side to this coin? More than one study?
Funny, I watched a science program last month about "Cherry-Nobel" and there were thousands who died trying to straighten the mess up. There were miners digging under the site so they could pour in concrete and the miners could only work for 20 minutes until they'd recieved their maximun life dose of radiation.
Many died at an early age, I forget the number, but believe it was several thousand. I've read that the town there is still deserted, and on that program it showed a large deserted city. Of course that one was the worst but there have been so many others that came so close to being near as bad or even worse.
It will happen again somewhere, someday, and the nuclear experts will say, ___ "Oh my, this was unexpected, don't you just hate it when this happens". ____ How much land is unusable there near Cherry-Nobel now?
I bet that judge read the "official" government report Bill. Ya think?
Would someone tell Barack Obama, a supporter of nuclear power, about this?
thanks
On March 28, 1979 in the middle of Pennsylvania at a place called Three Mile Island an "accident" happened. Critical valves had illegally been closed. Some might call that sabotage.
Conveniently, at the same time The China Syndrome was released that fictionalized the ongoing event.
Coincidentally, FEMA, started it's first days of operation, and controlled all news, and did so in a fashion that created panic.
Nuclear power was thus discredited, allowing Anglo-American to begin a 30 year period of imperialism using oil, which they control, as the weapon against other nations who were required to obtain USD to buy oil.
Smells to me like a terror attack, staged by your leaders.
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=24841
Some might call it a conspiracy. They would be right.
Oil is not a fossil fuel, it is plentiful and some oil fields once depleted have been refilled by an upwelling of oil from the deep biosphere. The Russians and some scientists know this (read Thomas Golds The Deep Hot Biosphere), but Big Oil and our government suppressed the news, for obvious reasons.
When the myth of peak oil is exposed, as it must someday, then the fall back is Global Warming, which will be the excuse to bring on the carbon tax and reduce consumption of this carbon resource found in abundance. This then allows us to control access to nuclear power, which will not be taxed.
We control the access to the technology and much of the resources, and are already floating the myth of limited uranium supplies.
It is obvious people are happy to stay within their own reality. The so called left and right live in a reality that is an illusion, created by the leaders you on the left hate today, and who the right hated yesterday. They laugh at you as they divide and rule. They must be getting bored with the game, even with the internet most people do not dare go too far into the unknown, which is definitely not near mainstreet.
The next division will be you and them, they will not care if you are united against them, and will stop playing the deception game and just let you know the truth. And they do not care because they now control you, like it or not. If you don't like it, Cheney and his pals will shrug and say "So?" If you protest too much, they will crush you. You have after all given them the powers they need to do so.
1 dollar a watt solar is justa bout here, 1 dollar a watt wind power already is & continues to get cheaper. @ an quarter of time output energy production expectation, $12 billion/month = 3 gigawatts of clean power entered into the equation per month @ the cost of the irag war. & that output expectation is a bit on the low side, (we live off grid on this stuff ourselves & so argue not from ignorance). so I'll leave you to work out the rest of the math but for a whole lot less cost (in treasure, god help the lives)than the imbecilicly malignant & wholly criminal war, we'de need have no debate about nuclear power at all, just what to do with all those scrapped coal & anciently dangerous dinosaur nuclear plants right now.
\
seriously do the math
I have an eight year old.
It WOULD BE NICE TO THINK HE HAS SOME WORLD TO INHABIT WORTH LIVING IN!!!!
Your child and ours probably won't have much of a life. But have a little fun.
GOODLE ___ arctic methane gas ___ and then scroll down to the article,___ "Methane Burps, A Ticking Time bomb". ___ If one doesn't wish to believe it, ___ ignore it.
Guess that TV program was wrong ~Billy~, all of those people being interviewed and the Russian scientists and the nuclear plant workers must be delusional.
A thin pancake only has one side?
Guess that would be called a "Cheneycake".
yeah KEM I've seen all your posts. its just that real DOABLE solutions do exist, and, it is heartbreaking.
Kem check out the article in New Scientist that usually co2 rise is the RESULT OF warming not the cause. this basically means that all predictions fall short by at least half. the feedback is a lot, a WHOLE LOT, worse than has been model. methyl hyrdarzines (spelling?) & methane, plus a plenty more we don't even get yet.
still gloom'n'doom as I can be as the rest of ita all, IT REALLY PISSES ME OFF THAT THIS IS SOLVABLE, BUT.... UGLY SLIMY BLIND MORONS WOULD RATHER KILL US ALL FOR A QUICK BUCK!!!!!!.
that said I'll quit yelling & to all a good night
Oh, I understand that the Co2 in the atmosphere is creating the Greenhouse effect, which in turn is the cause of global warming. The Co2 in the atmospere has accelerated dramaticly in the past 200 years, ever since the industrial age began. That's proven beyond ANY doubt.
So, we can stop burning coal and use nuclear power, which is a better alternative. Or, we can use clean energy, which is "do-able" and would be far better than nuclear and is the flip side of a THIN pancake.______Or a coin.
GOOGLE ___ nuclear accidents. ___ Amazing.
And that is just the ones that were reported.
you're not listening dude.
ordinarily geologically the co2 rise came AFTER the temp rise
get it!
\
THat means if you look at models & they're always on the far side of the 'worst case scenarios' thats be cause the very rise in temp caused by the rise in co2 itself results in a further rise in c02 (BEYOND THAT RELEASED BY HUMAN ACTIVITY DIRECTLY) relateding to the correlating rise in temp. comprende' vous?
simply x=co2
temp rise= x*2
comprende' verde senor?
you know what Kem if you're that fatalistic why not just kill yourself & spare the rest of us your old fogy triumphantalism at the end of the worlds grief.
you seem to find perverse pleasure of the irredemable nature of our collective humanity in the face of just such a people as you represent.
hell you're already dead anyway 70 something so fuck on all us our families futures & so on who aren't. you'll just poo poo us with (OH FUCK, DU GOOGLE THAT & METHANE BURP GOOGLE THAT)_ YOU KNOW WHAT KEMMM WE'RE NOT ALL AS DEAD YET AS YOU'RE ARROGANT STUPID ASS HAS CHOSEN TO BE OH YEAH & GOOGLE F.U.S.A.B
say something that'll do something for us OR GET OUT OF OUR WAY!!! you morbid old turd.
~ZEPHYRNDINBURG~. I thought you wanted our government to do something productive to stop the pollution of the atmosphere and our oceans. ___ I'm on your side if that's so.
I do not want to die, or my wife to die. I do not wish my children, or their's to die, or any other's children to die. I post that GOOGLE arctic methane gas, and or DU and phytoplankton, becasue they are our most serious issues, and I want everyone to be aware of it that may not be. That's my only intent.
You remind me of the asshole king who kills the messenger. You also are giving me orders like a Cheney or a tough guy. ___ Fuck you.
BTW smart-ass, tough guy. I didn't say you were wrong about your warming and Co2 analysis. I just happen to trust the opinions of the scientsits and geologists who say the greenhouse effect is causing global warming and we humans are the cause of it.
Because of that, some powerful people want to start up the nuclear power carts again, and that's what this article is saying. I wish to see a massive effort initiated to have clean energy and I blog such and do as much as you are doing here about it. So shove your rudeness up your butt.
fine bit o pojection from you KEM
"Your child and ours probably won't have much of a life. But have a little fun."
Guess that TV program was wrong ~Billy~, all of those people being interviewed and the Russian scientists and the nuclear plant workers must be delusional.
A thin pancake only has one side?
Guess that would be called a "Cheneycake".
Oh, I understand that the Co2 in the atmosphere is creating the Greenhouse effect, which in turn is the cause of global warming. The Co2 in the atmospere has accelerated dramaticly in the past 200 years, ever since the industrial age began. That's proven beyond ANY doubt.
So, we can stop burning coal and use nuclear power, which is a better alternative. Or, we can use clean energy, which is "do-able" and would be far better than nuclear and is the flip side of a THIN pancake.______Or a coin
listen to yourself.
try answering other peoples questions for a change I wholly agree with most of your points, but I think I speak for everybody here we're all sick of the same ones over & over & over & over
a lot like cheney, or bush or cheney, or bush or cheney over & over du burp, burp du, over & over
you needn't be such a petty tyrant if you're really curiuos & wanting to understand our world you take a moment to look arund at it. at least every once in a while rather than just lording over all of us you suppose in need of education by your beknighted arrogance.
I have the same fatalism within myself. I think we all do don't you think it's time to start focusing on at least concecptual solutions rather than reval in our disillusionment?
I'm really sick of how easy it is to get totally fatalistic god knows I've gone there enough myself.
sorry about the pissed off SNAP
but you might have given a moment to consider that I'm not another idiot the info i was relating has NOT made it to mainstrem reporting yet, even in the enviroworld. rather pat stupidities reeking of ignorance & gloom... all too like my own
all be it very differently
the solutions exist look for them. Why dwell on our demise when the means that bring us that world we'de all choose to be a part of can be brought for all the world.
seems to me.
whats the freqency lord kemmeth?
tough guy?
lmfao
what was tough abough that mister "your kids are dead"?
Westinghouse claims it can get the cost down to $1bn/reactor if they have enough orders and are allowed to build standardized units.
The French proved that replicating a standard nuke plant design greatly reduces the costs in contrast to the US capitalists customizing each plant for the express purpose of gouging the taxpayer.
But the economy of replication need no proof. It is COMMON SENSE, which is systematically smashed in the "good ol USA" by capitalists.
Economy of replication is a natural feature of progressive policy for renewable/sustainable energy production at the local level. We don't need capitalist central planning to deliver that.
And we don't need nuke energy at all, especially after capitalist central planning neglected to solve its sourcing, security and waste disposal issues, deliberately gouged taxpayers, and abuses nuke energy and everything else it can abuse, to control, oppress and enslave the people.
KEM look dude, you're seriously confused, no offense. Read my last post for christs sake you got with tude. you don't seem to get that I'm not challengeing global warming I'm saying that it's a whole l;ot worse than people have any idea yet as bad as the idea already is. Look seriously every heard of flogging a dead horse? -
I'de like to think solutions exist & you're trying to lambast as a troll for pointing out that the dollars spent on iraq COULD HAVE CREARED # GIGAWATTS OF RENEWABLE ENERGY PER MONTH INSTEAD. stop.
yola
echo
tango
we bitch about the demise of this human civilazation of which we all very invested in,
instead
wouldn't it be better to find some SOLUTIONS??????????????
or you just wanna project on me
eh?
I'm aware that the scientist predictions are not even close, we are running out of time and if you wish to see what I wrote on the Anartic ice shelf, which has now broken off, that article in in last Tuesday's archives.
That is also what the article states in the methane gas article, we may have ten years or less, we may have fifty years and if that gigatons of methane blooms out into our atmosphere, it will kill almost all life on this panet and that's not my fault or desire.
I sent a five page letter to all three of the primary presidential candidates yesterday and a copy to Bill Clinton and a copy of the Anarticv ice shelf article. I make 500 copies of such articles and hand them out at coffee shops in three cities. I'm an old man and I do what I can. Fuck you again, you started this crap and now you want to say I did. It's all there for any who nay give a shit to see. __ Blow it out your ass.
Not to mention KEM that I POINTED OUT that we needn't coal or nuclear AT ALL to fulfill our energy needs & you try to label me troll because rather than " OH MY we're all going to die, THAT there ARE SOLUTIONS & you try to label ME a troll.
Tell me KEM WHERE? other than in your mind did I demonstrate that penchant for neoconism THAT YOU HAVE BY PICKING & CHOOSING MY STATEMENTS TO SUIT YOUR OWN AIMS>>> global wamimg is very real I mearly tryed to inform you of a gross underestimastion that GEOLOGICAL SCIENCE has reported in an highly repsected journal NEW SCIENTIST & you go over hill & dail of how I must be some how undermining you since i mearly point out the tired gloominess of your recitations. ANd sick I am of your tired sandwichboard, "yes we'll all die" I don't disagree I just think aftera certain point, well????
I might point out the magazine (NEW SCIENTIST) you flattly dismissed without bothering to GOOGLE it has tirelessly & FACTUALLY reported on global warming including it's sadly accurate GOODBYE MIAMI issue & does continue to. as is predictable the collapse of our ecosystem accelerates, as the article kem chose misinterpret clearly demonstrates climate change is a lot worse than expected even by those who thought they expected the worst
I never labeled you a TROLL, you must have a reading disability, besides being a rude jerk? You deny you started this crap by calling me a "morbid old turd and a stupid ass".
I had replied to you and was not rude about it. I said I understood differently about the cause of global warming. It's a most serious issue and the methane gas is the most serious and I blog that, __frequently,__ because these articles are buried in the archives in a couple of days. If you don't like it, I don't care.
I do care when people start rude, snotty remarks from the safety of their home computer and call me names. I respond to them and to you in like style. And you have disrupeted this forum. You may not be a troll, And I NEVER implied, or stated you are, but you are now acting like one, YOU start some shit and then pretend you didn't initiate a fight here. ___ Fuck you.
For anyone else, that "Anartic ice shelf breaking off" article is very important, it's a headline article and is in in last Wednesday's archives.
To all others who may care. I'm sorry that shit fight started, I hope it ends now. I don't start them. Any who know me, know I'm against nuclear and coal fired power plants and am fully awre that the scientists s are not correct with thrir time frame predictions and we must have some fast action or we, and more importantly, our chlldren and theirs are in big trouble.
wow isn't it nice how your implications are ignored every post ended with f u just like a.....
ah well kem
I hope you enjoy your space
its not like a publi... oh yeah fuh... fuh.. te duhbyuh\
WE'RE ALL already here & every body already knows everything
scary for you kem????? how you gonna controll us all if cant scare our pants off of them.
"uber alles uberleutenent"
vintyoone' voos agiinstuis inan innumee'
whose like cheney? google du, google methane burp
I'de add google (dioxin, byphenol,global fish stock,global fooc production, global population,global prosperity,individual survivability,global sustanability, ect.)
use your mind imagine your childrens happy futures &
smile
smile
smile
&
keep on smilin
:)
sorry kem I don't wanta bother with war with you I don't really have much respect for you, but those things don't matter much to me. you chose to see what you see. you tell me is that you, is that me?
I don't really care about your views. Time for a change. whata yuh say we try & go somewhere where all of us can luve togeher
sounds good to me !
whattayuh say?
zephyrndinburg...I've mentioned this to Kem in a number of dispatches, and despite being the elder fart you state he has made an effort to listen, and it shows.
What I told Kem was if he really wanted people to pay credence to what he was saying then write intelligently, meaning proper form. What this means is take the time to capitalize & puncuate properly, get your syntax correct, avoid fragmented sentences, and if unsure of how to spell a word by all means use your Google toolbar.
If something is poorly written people tend to believe the writer too lazy to take the time to learn how to write, and educated people will dismiss what is being said, even if the ideas trying to be expressed might be good & sound. Think about it, Kem has, and there is a noticable improvement in his form & clarity of expression since I first started seeing his posts.
Another thing to consider, and on this one you might find something of interest, Kem, is university studies have proven the people that people pay the most attention to what they are saying use the least profanity. There is a direct correlation, less profanity=more credibility. Something to consider, eh?
I have an extremely long day/weekend starting in about three hours, but will post regarding this article before it drops into the archives.
How you got it all going is still there Riverman. Your writing is identical.
I don't post my personal opinions on the issue of the methane gas, I cite and offer the highly qualified geologist, who wrote the books and articles on the very serious subject. All life was extinguished here on Earth twice in the past due to methane "burps". Some people are not aware of that clear and coming danger. I post it and have no regrets.
You post your comments about global warming and that's fine, but for some strange reason, I'm not supposed to do that in your opinion. If you wish to didagrre with me that's your perogitve and it's fine also. But don't come on me with your vulgarity and then later write and whine that I tell you to go fuck yourself. Your an asshole.
Well Paul, you and I are friends, but when any ever call you a stiupid ass, or an old morbid turd or such and start a stupid detrating pisding contest for no good reason, I believe you answer in tune. This guy is a detractor.
BTW, once being a professioal writer in the long ago past and having been a history teacher and all that long before I went legally blind and got into rather poor spelling here on this computer writng, I didn't need your advice on how to write. But I do apreciate your advice and always take constructive criticism, as long as it's civil. I don't sit and re-write several times here as done when writing a newspaper article or a book.
If you wish to offer such again, you can e-mail it to me, as I have done for you, and now you don't write long blogs in a single paragraph. Your comments are among the best here and now they are much easier to read.
And if you check it out, you were the first to use the "F" word here. This was a good thread until you started on me. I will not reply to you anymore. Okay. Good. Don't fuck with me either.
"Three Mile Island and Infant Health". I do believe we got off topic.