BlakeyNoFlakey
Brownlow Medallist
I can't believe Bolt is saying that the scare about Chernobyl radiation is what killed people and it's just like the scare about climate change. This guy is a total moron.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I can't believe Bolt is saying that the scare about Chernobyl radiation is what killed people and it's just like the scare about climate change. This guy is a total moron.
Are you sure?OK I've read it. Where does it say 'It was just a minor accident'?
I can't believe Bolt is saying that the scare about Chernobyl radiation is what killed people and it's just like the scare about climate change. This guy is a total moron.
This is the problem with someone posting a photograph of a newspaper article. You are not quoting directly from the article and countering it.
Let's break this down
i) how many died as a result of the Chernobyl incident?
The simple answer is 'it's disputed'. I'm going to go with about 100 in the short term then go with epidemiologist Elisabeth Cardis for the total number of fatal cancers attributable directly to radiation received as a result of the explosion - ranging from around 9,000 to 15,000.The human drama of Chernobyl - Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
In this interview, journalist Adam Higginbotham reveals some of the most common misconceptions and myths about the world’s worst nuclear accident, and why he still views nuclear energy as a potential weapon against climate change.thebulletin.org
ii) did the scare kill people?
Bolt is quoting Associate Professor, David Wigg, director of Clinical Radiology at the Royal Adelaide Hospital. He estimated 56 people died from the blast but because of radiation phobia there had been an estimated 1,250 suicides and between 100,000 and 200,000 elective abortions in Western Europe.
iii) did the show sensationalise the deaths and sickness from the incident?
Yes. The 'bridge of death' is a myth. Firemen with bloody hands, and radiation sickness victims with pizza faces is a fiction. The helicopter crash happened much later and was not due to radiation. Remember those guys who waded into the water to turn the valves? They had no long term effects from the radiation.
iii) should the Chernobyl incident deter us from investing in nuclear power?
I'll leave this open.
This is the problem with someone posting a photograph of a newspaper article. You are not quoting directly from the article and countering it.
Let's break this down
i) how many died as a result of the Chernobyl incident?
The simple answer is 'it's disputed'. I'm going to go with about 100 in the short term then go with epidemiologist Elisabeth Cardis for the total number of fatal cancers attributable directly to radiation received as a result of the explosion - ranging from around 9,000 to 15,000.The human drama of Chernobyl - Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
In this interview, journalist Adam Higginbotham reveals some of the most common misconceptions and myths about the world’s worst nuclear accident, and why he still views nuclear energy as a potential weapon against climate change.thebulletin.org
ii) did the scare kill people?
Bolt is quoting Associate Professor, David Wigg, director of Clinical Radiology at the Royal Adelaide Hospital. He estimated 56 people died from the blast but because of radiation phobia there had been an estimated 1,250 suicides and between 100,000 and 200,000 elective abortions in Western Europe.
iii) did the show sensationalise the deaths and sickness from the incident?
Yes. The 'bridge of death' is a myth. Firemen with bloody hands, and radiation sickness victims with pizza faces is a fiction. The helicopter crash happened much later and was not due to radiation. Remember those guys who waded into the water to turn the valves? They had no long term effects from the radiation.
iii) should the Chernobyl incident deter us from investing in nuclear power?
I'll leave this open.
I suppose it depends on what you term a disaster.
Believing the soviets cover ups is truly baffling. Bolt and his conservative brethren’s would lead you to believe that communism is the root of all evil and never to believed about anything.
Except it seems, when it’s convenient with your own narrative about something else
You know you can be honest about Chernobyl and be pro nuclear as this article shows https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...ear-power-safe-clean-vital-column/1409096001/
*I personally think communism isn’t a great idea and a nuclear accident probably wouldn’t happen like this again, but at the same time can’t see much point in investing more in nuclear when we are making such large strides in renewables.
It's a bit tin foil hat to think that the UN Scientific Committee on the Affects of Atomic Radiation; Wade Allison, Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Oxford; and Associate Professor; David Wigg, director of Clinical Radiology at the Royal Adelaide Hospital are all in on this Soviet conspiracy.
And congrats for falsely attributing an anti-nuclear quote from the pro-nuclear article that you posted. Here's a real quote from the article.
Nuclear energy is our future
The good news is that a whole new crop of nuclear innovators and entrepreneurs are reimagining how we use this technology, with more than 70 advanced nuclear reactor projects underway in the United States. These designs use new types of fuel or coolant that cannot melt down. They are smaller and can provide electricity in hard to reach places, like remote Alaskan villages, which now rely on generators fueled by oil trucked in over dangerous ice roads. And they are flexible — because the wind doesn’t always blow nor the sun always shine, these advanced reactors can fill in the gaps.
I was 18 in 1986 and remember this well...tbh the secrecy was frightening when it happened the week afterwards...no one in the West really knew anything
Err I wasn't quoting the article, I was writing my opinion, not quoting the article.
I posted that article to show its possible to have a point of view about something and not be a dick about it.
You and Bolt deliberately cherry pick data. Those figures of 53 deaths or whatever their claiming, are the ones they directly attribute to the disaster. Meaning anyone who got cancer and died months/years later aren't counted to the figures. For example, a quarter of the 10000 miners were dead before they turned 40, but they are not claimed in any official figures from the Soviets or attributed to directly dying because of Chernobyl.
My wife's wasn't born yet but her mum tells the story that apparently on French news the cloud miraculously stopped at the German border and never entered France.I was 18 in 1986 and remember this well...tbh the secrecy was frightening when it happened the week afterwards...no one in the West really knew anything