text:
Putting Flesh on Truthful Prayers of Confession: A Response to the Political Theology and Divine Violence Forum – By Ted A. Smith
Ted A. Smith responds to the Forum
The Marginalia Review of Books partnered with Political Theology Today in a joint forum on Ted Smith's Weird John Brown: Divine Violence and the Limits of Ethics.
Contributors included: E. Brooks Holifield, William Cavanaugh, Peter Ochs, Keri Day, and Andrew R. Murphy.
See the Forum's homepage here.
Ted A. Smith, Weird John Brown: Divine Violence and the Limits of Ethics, Stanford University Press, 2014, 224pp., $22.95
I am grateful for the charity and insight of William Cavanaugh, Keri Day, Brooks Holifield, Andrew Murphy, and Peter Ochs in reviewing Weird John Brown. I admire the work of each of these scholars. I had learned from them before I ever started to write the book. And I have learned even more from their responses to it. I appreciate their willingness to take time for this conversation.
Brooks Holifield rightly describes the book as "elusive" at key points in the argument. He offers the most charitable reading possible of this elusiveness. The book is trying to think theologically about history, and — just as Holifield says — some elusiveness "is ingredient in the subject matter whenever one tries to talk about transcendence in relation to history." The alternative is a theologically infused idealism that must omit or distort facts to fit a narrative. Such narratives can be clear. But they tend to become ideological, even mythological in the strict sense of the term. The risks of such mythologizing are especially high in discussions of violence. And so a measure of elusiveness is necessary.
Some of the elusiveness of the book's argument, though, comes simply from failures of intellect, courage, and rhetoric on my part. With those failings in mind, and in hopes of responding to the questions raised by these thoughtful reviews, it seems worth trying to state the argument of the book as clearly as I can.
The purpose of the book is to critique a constellation composed of a mode of reasoning and an arrangement of power. The mode of reasoning confines deliberations about violence within the bounds defined by universalizable norms (whether oriented to rules, consequences, or virtues) that operate within an immanent network of causes and effects. The arrangement of power centers on the state's monopoly on legitimate violence for political ends. This mode of reasoning and this arrangement of power have come to fit together in mutually reinforcing ways.
Each of the points in this constellation invites further comment. Reasoning about violence within the frame of an immanent ethics involves reasoning without reference to actions of God in history that demand a response. It is not that there could be no role for religion. God or some other divine source might give instruction or motivation before any human action, acting in a past that is always prior to every moment of decision. Or some divine power might act over the horizon of the future, providing a destination that serves as a distant goal. But in this age it is all up to us. As William Cavanaugh notes, there is "a despair hidden behind the notion that 'God has no hands but yours.'" This despair is born of misdirected hope, a trust only in ourselves that amounts to a kind of idolatry. This despair has consequences in the world. It distorts practices. And, as Cavanaugh sees so clearly, it "invites violence to bring the present into conformity with a higher standard."
No logical necessity connects this mode of reasoning with the state's monopoly on the legitimate means of violence. But the two arose together historically and fit together closely now. That fit is facilitated by the fact that the language of universalizable norms within an immanent frame has become the first language of the state. It is the language of law.
Because this mode of reasoning does so much to shape what we can imagine, and because it is now joined so tightly to the state's monopoly on violence, we struggle to find language to evaluate both the state's claim to violence and the meaning of violence beyond the sanction of the state. Ethics that works within an immanent frame offers few resources for this kind of deliberation. Indeed, the ways we usually think of ethics tend to presume and reinforce the state's monopoly on violence. The legitimacy of state violence becomes mystified in ways that make it very difficult to critique. This mystification is the real target of Weird John Brown.
There may be good reasons to give the state a monopoly on legitimate violence for political purposes; one could imagine this as a wise conclusion of practical reasoning. But it is difficult to deliberate about this question — even to see it — from within our usual ethical frames. Peter Ochs is right that I worry that the guild of religious ethics has been too captured by this worldview. There are important exceptions, of course. But too often we limit ourselves to the work of offering religious reasons for one policy or another that we presume would be implemented (and enforced) by the state. That kind of reasoning makes it difficult to deliberate about cases at the margins of a state violence that is continuing to expand under the cover of law.
But this deliberation is just the work we need to be doing now, in an age when terrorism and state responses to terrorism feed off one another in cycles of violence. It is the work we need to be doing at a time when violence by people charged with enforcing the law and responses to that violence raise again the question of the law's power to legitimate violence in a country whose laws have colluded with slavery and its legacies for centuries. It is the work we need to be doing in the wake of Ferguson and 9/11.
The wager of the book, as Keri Day sees, is that thinking about John Brown can open up some fresh perspectives on these questions. Brown has this power in part because he took up violence outside the law for explicitly theological reasons. He did the unthinkable. But Brown's story has the power to open our imaginations because he worked for a cause — the end of slavery — that almost everyone today would support and because he appealed to a religion — Christianity — that has long been the religion of a majority of people in the United States. Even more, Brown raises questions about the legacies of slavery that run so deep in the history of this country that they put pressure both on the limits of ethics and on the limits set by the state's monopoly on violence.
Brooks Holifield names these dynamics clearly, arguing that "any ethical reflection that remains within the limits of a this-worldly calculation of consequences or duties will find it hard to assess either the meaning of John Brown or the implications of his actions for the continuing American agony over race. John Brown illustrates the 'limits of ethics.'"
William Cavanaugh affirms the core argument of the book but raises pointed questions about the book's emphasis on negation. Cavanaugh is correct that I insist on negation in an attempt to avoid Carl Schmitt's "identification of divine power with a worldly power" (and, I'd add, in an attempt to make sense of the world as we experience it and of biblical understandings of the Reign of God). This accent on negation, Cavanaugh writes, "leaves me with questions about what positive work the book does … ." He worries that "[Walter] Benjamin's insistence that there be no organization based on divine power will end up relegating God's action to an interiorized 'different sort of consciousness' that nevertheless still must express itself through the state, because there is no other forum for politics." There is, Cavanaugh worries, "no ecclesiology in the book."
Andrew Murphy voices similar concerns in a different key. "Smith repeatedly calls for the development of modes of reasoning (and, presumably, concrete institutional facilitators of such deliberation)," he writes. "Where might those conversations take place? Where might we go to find, or more accurately to construct, 'a space in which practical reasoning about public goods can be developed and refined in conversation?'"
These are some of the most important questions to be asked of this book. Any project that draws heavily on Benjamin runs the risk of slipping into a "politics" that is nothing more than a new way of seeing the world, an individual mysticism that cannot connect in meaningful ways with other people or with movements for social change.
I do not think Benjamin's thought necessarily leads in those directions. But my purpose here is not to defend Benjamin but to clarify my own line of argument. I mean to avoid the consolations of a trippy solipsism by insisting on the determinate nature of the negation accomplished by the Reign of God. This determinate negation — this divine violence — does not perform an abstract negation of every kind of value. Instead it undoes the legitimacy of very particular social formations. Because the destruction is of legitimacy, it does not involve the shedding of blood (though we should not celebrate this too blithely, for bloodshed often comes before or after such divine violence as a result of human choices).
In the book I think about what it would mean to see Brown as a "Great Criminal" who did wrong but can still be read as a sign of a divine violence that breaks the hold of the slave system on social imaginations and so makes possible not just new ways of seeing the world, but new ways of acting, new ways of connecting with others, and new ways of deliberating together.
Because the negation of divine violence is a negation of some particular powers and principalities, the new forms of life it makes possible take particular forms. In breaking the hold of the slave system, divine violence does not unleash the kind of willy-nilly relativism that would flow from an abstract negation of every kind of value. It rather sets people free from particular powers and principalities. It makes possible a particular range of responses, including both the raid on Harpers Ferry and the daily relations of neighbors in North Elba. Both of these responses involved black and white people coming together in communities that worked for social change.
Andrew Murphy asks some very insightful questions about the relation between these two communities in Brown's life. In responding, I would say that North Elba was not just a stage along the way to Harpers Ferry; nor was Harpers Ferry a fall from the grace attained at North Elba. I would rather see the two as part of the range of responses that became possible once the spell of race-based slavery has been broken. That unraveling of legitimacy made possible a practical reasoning that might lead some to North Elba and some to Harpers Ferry. Both of these communities were still marked by the racism from which they had been delivered. But if neither of these communities lived into the perfection of its freedom, both of them represented new possibilities in history.
This story suggests both the Christology and the ecclesiology at work in Weird John Brown. The Christology depends on a Christian confession of Jesus as the one who fulfills the law (Matthew 5:17-2). I mean to stress the indicative, already-accomplished quality of that fulfillment — and to acknowledge the ways that no community, not even a church body, is simply identical with that fulfillment in this age. Instead, the indicative of fulfillment meets this age in negation. In his life, death, resurrection, and ascension, Jesus delivers history from the endings that the powers and principalities would write. In the language of Ephesians, he leads captivity captive and gives gifts to humankind (4:4). At the center of those gifts is the freedom to respond in love.
Free responses like those performed at North Elba and Harpers Ferry bear traces of the divine violence that made them possible, and so bear a kind of witness to it. If these testimonies do not "repeat the Gospel," in Michel de Certeau's words, "they would be impossible without the Gospel." Certeau develops these ideas with an account of the church as born in the wake of the Ascension (an argument I develop more fully in pp. 116-124 of Weird John Brown):
The Christian language begins with the disappearance of its "author." That is to say that Jesus effaces himself to give faithful witness to the Father who authorizes him, and to "give rise" to different but faithful communities which he makes possible. There is a close bond between the absence of Jesus (dead and not present) and the birth of the Christian language (objective and faithful testimony to his survival).
Following Certeau, I mean to say that the great indicative of reconciliation accomplished in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus undoes the power of sin and death over history. It opens a new and determinate space for free response. But it does not determine the response itself. As I argue in the book, "The messianic fulfillment of law makes every free and faithful response possible, and so permeates each and of them with a presence that is never simply identical to them." I mean to describe an ecclesiology marked by presence without identity.
Peter Ochs describes this way of seeing things as a "theocentric pragmatism," and I think there is much truth in that description. Ochs is a better judge than I of any affinities between my project and that of C.S. Peirce. But I would say that I mean to describe the significance of a practical reasoning that is framed within the theological account of history that I have tried to sketch above. It is a reasoning suited to this time between the times. This practical reasoning grows out of the determinate negation accomplished in the inauguration of the Reign of God, not an abstract skepticism about the impossibility of knowing or achieving the good. And the practical reasoning I want to describe cannot be reduced to a moralism that is defined by universalizable norms that operate within an immanent frame. These features would distinguish what I'm trying to do from some of what gets called pragmatism today. But I would be pleased if they fit with what Ochs means by theocentric pragmatism.
Several of the reviewers commented upon Weird John Brown's treatment of pardon. And the book's considerations of pardon can do much to display the kinds of reasoning I have been trying to develop here. Pardon moves beyond the limits of ethics, especially when it is defined as an exception to norms of justice rather an after-the-fact reconciliation of law and justice. The danger of such exceptions — a danger Carl Schmitt made plain on his pages and in his life — is that they can invite arational decisionism. They can also give license to some all-too-rational forms of self-interest, as Andrew Murphy notes in recalling Bill Clinton's pardon of financier Marc Rich. In the book I am trying to display a practical reasoning about pardon that can avoid both those pitfalls without becoming the kind of discourse that can be reduced to the application of universalizable norms. That is, I'm trying to engage in practical reasoning that cannot be reduced to "ethics" as the term is typically used today.
I try to do this by considering pardon in two different cases that end in two different conclusions. I argue for a pardon for John Brown, Shields Green, and the other raiders on Harpers Ferry. I do not argue that they should be pardoned because they were right, as David Reynolds does, for that would set a precedent that forgets the wrong of murder and licenses violence outside the law by anyone with a just cause. Instead I argue that pardon of the raiders would be fitting as part of the state's ongoing and unfinished repentance for its long establishment of race-based slavery and long support for the legacies of that system. Even then, though, the decision to pardon the raiders would be free, a little miracle that did not change the laws against murder but ratified them anew in declaring an exception to them.
Introducing the possibility of pardon as an exception to justice raises the question of a pardon for the crime of slavery. Keri Day and I agree about the reasons that pardon of slavery would be unjust: the magnitude of the crime, the fact that it still has not been acknowledged, and the fact that its legacies drag on in lethal ways only begin the endless list. "The past is still quite present," exactly as Day says. Justice would demand that truth-telling, reparations, and efforts to make government more fully representative of the descendants of the people who were enslaved all come before pardon. Pardon for slavery could never be just. But if one has a notion of pardon as an exception to justice — like the one I invoked in calling for the pardon of the raiders on Harpers Ferry — wouldn't pardon for slavery become possible?
The nature of pardon involves a word of forgiveness from the one who was harmed by the action to the one who did the harm. But the long history of legalized slavery followed by disenfranchisement, poll taxes, grandfather clauses, policing of "voter fraud," and other injustices mean that there is no political body in the United States that represents enslaved people and their descendants so well that it could offer a pardon in their names. Because of this lack of standing, any political pronunciation of pardon would not just be unjust. It would not be pardon at all. It would rather be what Dietrich Bonhoeffer called "cheap grace," the facsimile of pardon that one offers to oneself.
Here I share Andrew Murphy's worry about the lack of the kind of "organic connection between the American government and the American people" that is necessary for true pardon. That crisis of disconnection runs even deeper than voting rights, as Murphy knows. And it is especially acute in any case having to do with slavery and its legacies in the United States. Simply moving to the grassroots level would not necessarily solve the problem. Indeed, in places like Selma and Little Rock the federal government has been more fully representative of those most harmed by slavery than White Citizen Councils and other local bodies that had stronger claims to "grassroots" status.
If the state could not pardon slavery, could God? To ask such a question is one way into thinking about politics in light of the sovereignty of God rather than the state (a task Murphy is right to push me to do more clearly). In considering this question, I would not presume to deny the freedom of God. But the risk of such a pious claim is that it could be construed as offering no practical guidance — or even, in its silence, legitimating exactly the structures that are responsible for the crime. In hopes of defying those outcomes, I would tease out three implications.
First, as a white man, one who has benefited from the legacies of slavery in more ways than I know, I could not call for pardon or proclaim pardon, even in the name of God. I could at most offer confession. Confession is closer to what Keri Day calls a "first-order" act. And confession, by its nature, makes no demands on the one it addresses. It imposes no obligations on the one to whom confession is made. It simply tries to tell the truth about the crime that creates the need for pardon.
Second, even to hope for divine pardon for slavery is to commit oneself to the view that God would have the standing to offer such pardon — and so to a theology that holds that God, in God's own flesh, suffered the horrific violence of slavery. Such a claim would run all the way to the center of any theological worldview. Any answers to William Cavanaugh's questions about the book's understanding of Incarnation would need to begin here.
Third, I would argue that even divine pardon would appear in this age only as a sign of judgment. This is perhaps the best way to think about the duration of the world: it is a sign of God's grace that God continues not just to tolerate but also to sustain and bless the world. But if we understand this pardon rightly, we understand it as a sign of judgment on the very age that it sustains.
The denial of cheap grace should not lead to a cul-de-sac of guilt that is one more form of self-gratification. It should rather lead white Christians, as Day affirms, to a politics of penitence and repair. A politics of repair is necessarily piecemeal. That is, it makes real but partial moves to undo the crime of slavery and its legacies. Even if it includes reparations on a massive scale — which it should — it would not presume to drive toward some reconciled state that would no longer require a further leap, a further miracle, a pardon that defied justice.
Instead, such politics should seek to tell the truth about wrong, to take concrete actions to live into confessions of responsibility for those actions and structures, to do what can be done to repair the damage that has been done, and to prevent the extension of this damage through more generations. Any repairs would be piecemeal, partial, and (almost inevitably) full of unintended consequences. A politics of penitence and repair begins with recognizing that white Christians should not try to create a reconciliation that is not ours to create. The task for white Christians is rather to put flesh on truthful prayers of confession. This is the shape of politics in the wake of divine violence.
Features Forums Political Theology and Divine Violence
abolition abolitionist Andrew Murphy E. Brooks Holifield featured John Brown Keri Day Peter Ochs Political Theology politics racism reparations Ted A. Smith theology William Cavanaugh
Fear, Trembling, and Weird John Brown – By Andrew R. Murphy
Another Orphan – By Ana Schwartz


On September 28, 2007, at Perdu, Amsterdam, the new issue of the Belgian literary review DWB (vol. 152 no. 4, September 2007) is presented at Perdu, Amsterdam. The issue contains a special feature titled Jaap en de Bonenstaak ("Jack and the beanstalk"). The night is hosted by Arnoud van Adrichem and Elma van Haren. Astrid Lampe, Pol Hoste and Anneke Brassinga read texts. Miguel Declercq presents a graphic story. Musical compositions on original texts by Samuel Vriezen and Rozalie Hirs are performed by the Jackson Mac Low Band. Rozalie Hirs shows her concept of 'betekenisritme' ('signifying rhythm') using the typographic rhythms in her poem 'Vlinders gras', resulting in the composition Vlinders gras that is performed tonight. She wrote the poem at the request of Arnoud van Adrichem in reaction to the poem 'Houd jij dit maar uit elkaar?' by Lucas Hüsgen, part of the same DWB feature.


We are communications consultants specialising in B2B corporate communications.
Put simply, we help professional services companies get noticed through what they say, how they say it, to whom they say it and why they say it.
Our clients are predominantly in the creative and digital industries. We work with them to understand their high-level communications needs, and then help develop and implement a strategy to meet those needs. We focus primarily on media relations and PR, but also on branding, design and web, a bit like an out-sourced Marketing and Communications Director/Department.
We are strategic, results-oriented, hands-on professionals. We believe in a 'what you see is what you get' approach.
As a small business, we understand the environment, the needs and the constraints in which small businesses operate. We do our utmost to find a way of working that suits our clients and our partners.
We enjoy what we do. And we do what we do because we enjoy it.
rassami was founded in 2003, by Rassami Hök Ljungberg.


text:
Home / computer games / designs / digital lockers / gaming / GDPR / IP / more than just a game / MTJG / More Than Just a Game V - IP and the gaming industry
More Than Just a Game V - IP and the gaming industry
Rosie Burbidge Thursday, April 11, 2019 - computer games, designs, digital lockers, gaming, GDPR, IP, more than just a game, MTJG
Last week marked More Than Just a Game V - the London edition.
MTJG (as it is known by those in the know) is an international series of academic-led conferences on Games and Interactive Entertainment Law attracting an international network of researchers and legal professionals who are passionate about the most successful and fastest-growing of the Creative Industries.
Anne Rose (Mishcon de Reya) attended the conference and has provided this summary of some of the more IP relevant talks. Thanks Anne!
#QM_MTJG 2019 in review
More than Just a Game brings together stakeholders from the industry, legal profession and academia to discuss the emerging challenges and developments facing games and interactive entertainment. This year, the conference covered a number of issues including loot boxes & the risks of randomised monetisation; the impact of GDPR on artificial intelligence, and the importance of registered design rights in maintaining control of key game assets.
Loot boxes and the risks of randomised monetisation
Dr Gaetano Dimita and Professor Jon Festinger discussed "loot boxes" and its growth as a sub-category of micro-transactions in gaming. In particular, they examined how loot boxes are dealt with in a number of jurisdictions and considered the political, regulatory and legal environment. While the legal risk in some jurisdictions, such as the USA, is lower, applicable gambling laws in other jurisdictions may already cover loot boxes (for example, Poland).
In many jurisdictions, loot boxes are not only subject to an increased legal risk but also to a significant enforcement risk. Publishers and developers should therefore consider seeking advice from local counsel at the outset.
The impact of GDPR on Artificial Intelligence
A few speakers considered the impact of GDPR on the gaming and interactive industry. Willy Duhen of Activision Blizzard looked at the impact of inferred players' profiles created by big data, analytics and artificial intelligence.
Under Article 22 GDPR, in the absence of specific circumstances (such as where the individual has given their explicit consent), data subjects have a right not to be subject to decisions based solely on automated processing (including profiling) that produce legal effects concerning the individual.
Where automated decision making and/or profiling does occur, the fact that a video gamer's personal data is being used for such purposes must be disclosed to them together with information about the 'logic' involved and the intended results of processing (Article 13(2)(f) and 15(1)(g)). One issue raised was that it could result in publishers having to disclose their anti-cheat logic in a video game. Given that many video games now use machine learning in some form or other, it will be important to keep algorithms up to date and under review.
The importance of registered designs in maintaining control of key game assets
Rosie Burbidge, a Partner at Gunnercooke, reminded us of the importance of design rights and how useful they are for publishers and developers as a tool for protecting the appearance of different parts of a game from game characters through to the backgrounds in different gaming environments and potentially even some more functional aspects of gameplay.
In practice, the registration of designs in the industry has been fairly limited (with a few notable exceptions). The industry typically relies on a combination of copyright, trade marks and passing off but each of these rights has drawbacks for the industry not least for copyright which offers limited protection for clone games following Nova v Mazooma [2007] EWCA Civ 219 (on IPKat here).
Rosie reminds us that in the EU, a unregistered design right is automatic and lasts for 3 years from the date the design (e.g. a character in a video game) is first made available to the public. You can protect the appearance of the whole or a part of the character including its shape and texture as long as the design is 'new' and has 'individual character'. To extend protection, you can register the design within one year from the date it was first made available and obtain protection for up to a maximum 25 years. The fee for registering a design is relatively modest, there is no substantive examination and invalidity via the EUIPO or national courts is a very slow process. It will be interesting to see whether more companies will explore this often forgotten intellectual property right.
Overall, the More than Just a Game London conference provided a useful snapshot into some of the hottest topics in gaming law. The conference has now become a successful European series. Watch out for future editions in the Netherlands, Germany and Italy. It's not to be missed by anyone with an interest in games or gaming law.
More Than Just a Game V - IP and the gaming industry Reviewed by Rosie Burbidge on Thursday, April 11, 2019 Rating: 5
MTJG

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


During our most recent excursions, we obviously looked out for those colourful Afro-tropical migrants that typically arrive in June-July, moving north with the rains – think cuckoos, rollers, kingfishers, etc. We saw some of course, especially at Wassadou but even in the bone-dry landscapes of Gossas and Diourbel, where we had migrants such as Diederik Cuckoo and Grey Hornbills.
Less expected were a number of breeders from the Western Palearctic that are now supposed to be in full breeding mode, so I thought it would be interesting to review these here. Of course, numerous "WP" species that winter in Senegal can be seen here year-round, but these are mostly waterbirds such as Eurasian Spoonbill, Black-tailed Godwit, Audouin's Gull and other waders, gulls and terns. Many young birds of these species will actually remain in West Africa during their first summer, and from the end of June it's quite normal to see early returnees, particularly for waders that failed their breeding season and left Europe early.
A Western Marsh Harrier (Busard des roseaux), probably a young female, flew over the flock of Greater Flamingos and other waterbirds that we'd just been counting at Lac Mbeubeusse, one of the niayes wetlands on the Cap-Vert peninsula, then landed in a reedbed. Some summer observations are known from both Senegal ("a few birds summer", Morel & Morel) and Mauritania (June-August; Isenmann et al.), and Barlow & Wacher mention that occasional non-breeders are seen "during the rains" (a rather vague way to refer to summer, which doesn't really tell us whether the records were actually during summer or whether they refer to regular migrants in September & October!).
Also here on the same day (23.6) was at least one immature Purple Heron (Héron pourpré) which may be either an oversummering bird of European origin, or a wandering African bird – I'm yet to figure out whether the species breeds anywhere nearby, though it's clear that in potential breeding areas such as Technopole the species is absent during ~March to early August (further south, I have records from May-June, in Kolda and Toubacouta).
Still at Mbeubeusse – a decent birding site I'd never visited before despite being not far from Dakar! Never too late… – we also saw a winter-plumaged Knot (Bécasseau maubèche), feeding together with a group of Grey Plovers and a handful of Greenshanks and Redshanks. (Pluvier argenté, Chevaliers aboyeur et gambette). While the latter three species are more or less to be expected at this time in Senegal, the summer record of Calidris canutus may be noteworthy.
Two subadult Yellow-legged Gulls (prob. 3rd c.y.; Goéland leucophée) were at Lac Rose on 23.6, resting together with a group of some 500 Lesser Black-backed and 200 Audouin's Gulls (Goélands bruns et d'Audouin), several of which were ringed including a Portuguese bird that I'd already seen back in April at Technopole. Also in the group were two or three Kelp Gulls (Goéland dominicain). Yellow-legged Gull is rather scarce here at any time of the year so it was a nice surprise to see these; apparently the species has been "recorded in all seasons" in Senegambia (Barlow & Wacher). Both birds seemed to be typical nominate birds (i.e. from southern Europe) rather than atlantis birds from the Macaronesian islands.
A week earlier at Wassadou and along the road from Tambacounda to the Niokolo-Koba, we noted a good presence of Common & Pallid Swifts (Martinets noir et pâle), which appears to be not unusual at this time of the year since non-breeding birds are said to move north with the rains from their "wintering" grounds over the forest zone of West Africa. There are however few June records (e.g. Barlow & Wacher give a presence of Pallid Swift from July-September and November-January). Even more exciting was the presence of several Mottled Swifts (Martinet marbré) at Wassadou, the first June record of a "difficult" bird in the region – there appear to be less than 10 records for Senegal in total, all of which are from the Niokolo-Koba area. The one below was seen by my Swiss friends in the PNNK earlier this year.
Perhaps more surprisingly than the preceding species, two European Bee-eaters (Guêpier d'Europe) were feeding and flying around pretty much all afternoon on 23.6 in Almadies, Ngor, regularly calling in the process and as such giving away their presence above and near my house. I'd never seen the species before in Dakar (though I have seen them not far, along the Petite Côte in autumn), so this was a highly unexpected record. Paul Isenmann and colleagues mention that the species is present in Mauritania from July/August to October, and March to May/June, but I didn't find any references to summer records in Senegal or Gambia. Probably just a coincidence, but earlier the same day we saw our first Blue-cheeked Bee-eaters in the Dakar region, at Lac Rose (Guêpier de Perse). Perhaps these were birds en route to their breeding grounds in northern Senegal?
A single House Martin (Hirondelle de fenêtre) at Wassadou on 15 & 16.6 was also remarkable: a very late migrant, an oversummering bird, or a wanderer that decided not to bother going all the way to Europe? The species has been recorded Oct. – June and I've seen birds as late as 28/5 at Technopole, but it's clear that there are very few records from late June and July.
A few kilometres further north, Miguel and I observed a Western Olivaceous Warbler (Hypolaïs obscure) at Wassadou, feeding in bushes on the edge of the Gambia river, on 16.6. This is of course a common to very common winter visitor throughout the country, and there are records from all month, so maybe not as surprising as the previous species. Now often called Isabelline Warbler, it is also known to be summering at Nouakchott (June-July) with no noticeable break between pre- and postnuptial passages (spring: March – May/early June, autumn: July-October; Isenmann et al. 2010).
A couple of days later near Diourbel, we had a Woodchat Shrike (Pie-grièche à tête rousse), apparently a first-summer male: the forehead is extensively black and mantle seems mostly jet-black (both features indicative of males), while the moult limit between the adult-type dark wing feathers and juvenile brownish unmoulted primary coverts and flight feathers are typical of 2nd calendar year birds (more on ageing & sexing the species here, from Blasco-Zumeta & Heinze's excellent series on the topic). The presence of this species in Senegal is fairly similar to Western Olivaceous Warbler. An adult Great Spotted Cuckoo (Coucou-geai) earlier that day near Gossas was assumed to be an African rather than a northern migrant, though we can't be sure of course; the date is consistent with the arrival of this cuckoo on its Sahelian breeding grounds (a couple of weeks later I had another adult, actively calling, though a bit further east: along the Niger river near Niamey).
Voilà for now; for me it's time to migrate north for a couple of weeks (though no breeding for me this summer); I'll be back towards the end of the month. And maybe find some time to finish a few blog posts that have been dormant in my draft folder for a while now… Thanks for reading!
Another wonderful, in-depth blog. Thanks so much Bram. Wonderful photos too. Enjoy your holiday!


text:
« chew the future! download our FREE gumulon game for Stride | Main | Using technology for good »
Welcome to the Internet: 12th July
Grab it here.
Firstly a massive well done to Team Honda, as Hands is going from strength to strength. It's already hit the front page of Reddit and with 3.5m views in just over a week there's a lot for the team to feel proud of.
Another big VIRAL SMASH this week has been the release of a new trailer for Grand Theft Auto. Being still basically a fifteen year old boy, this has excited me very much. And apparently the rest of the Internet too, as it's racked up over 12m eyeballings in a few days.
People are still very much talking about Wimbledon and Katie Hopkins too – which featured in last week's report. There's still a lot of disgruntled people out there over Katie's 'views that she has for money' and with the Royal baby due immanently, my bets are on either Tyler or Charmaine as Kate's way of sticking it to the man.
Also this week has seen the birthday of the iOS app store and to celebrate Apple have put some of their most successful apps on offer for free. Take a look as there's certainly a bargain to be had.
Happy Friday everyone.
12 July 2013 | Permalink


text:
Tag: Fukushima radiation
Japan gov't proposes Fukushima water release to sea or air
The Associated Press, Tokyo – Monday, 23 December 2019
Japan's economy and industry ministry has proposed gradually releasing or allowing to evaporate massive amounts of treated but still radioactive water at the tsunami-wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant.
The proposal made Monday to a body of experts is the first time the ministry has narrowed down the options available to just releasing the water. It is meant to tackle a huge headache for the plant's operator as storage space runs out, despite fears of a backlash from the public.
Nearly nine years after the 2011 triple meltdowns at Fukushima Dai-ichi, the radioactive water is still accumulating as the water is needed to keep the cores cooled and minimize leaks from the damaged reactors.
For years, a government panel has been discussing ways to handle the crisis and to reassure fishermen and residents who fear potential health impacts from releasing the radioactive water as well as harm to the region's image.
In Monday's draft proposal, the ministry suggests a controlled release of the water into the Pacific, allowing the water to evaporate, or a combination of the two methods.
The ministry said a controlled release into the sea was the best option because it would "stably dilute and disperse" the water from the plant using a method endorsed by the United Nations' Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. It also would facilitate monitoring of radiation levels in the environment.
Releasing the entire amount of water over one year would only increase radiation levels to thousands of times less than the impact humans usually get from the natural environment.
In the proposal, the ministry noted that evaporation has been a tested and proven method following the 1979 core meltdown at Three Mile Island, where it took two years to get rid of 87,000 tons of tritium water.
The government and the plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co., have been unable to get rid of the more than 1 million tons of radioactive water that has been treated and stored due to opposition from local fishermen and residents fearing further damage to Fukushima's reputation and recovery. The utility has managed to cut down the volume of water by pumping up groundwater from upstream and installing a costly underground "ice wall" around the reactor buildings to keep the water from running into the area.
TEPCO says it has space to store only up to 1.37 million tons and only until the summer of 2022, raising speculation that the water may be released after the Tokyo Olympics next summer. TEPCO and experts say the tanks get in the way of decommissioning work and that they need to free up the space to build storage for debris removed and other radioactive materials. The tanks also could spill out their contents in a major earthquake, tsunami or flood.
Experts, including those at the International Atomic Energy Agency who have inspected the Fukushima plant, say the controlled release of the water into the ocean is the only realistic option, though it will take decades.
A government panel earlier compiled a report that listed five options, including releasing the water into the sea and evaporation. The three others included underground burial and an injection into offshore deep geological layers.
The panel has also discussed possibly storing the radioactive water in large industrial tanks outside the plant, but the ministry proposal ruled that out, citing risks of leakage in case of corrosion, tsunamis or other disasters and accidents, as well as the technical challenge of transporting the water elsewhere. (Click to Source)
Last Update: Monday, 23 December 2019 KSA 08:17 – GMT 05:17
100% FREE ONLINE RECOVERY PROGRAM to anyone who wants to fully recover. We are a Biblical Online Recovery Outreach Program that is life changing and empowering. Adult & Teen Challenge Certified Teachers and certified Life Coaches will be working with you, and your loved ones, by video conference and phone with 24/7 support by text, chat and email. Contact us today and receive our gift of recovery.
Japan: Radioactive Fukushima Water Release
By Strange Sounds – Nov 22, 2019
Japan doesn't want to share information about the release of Fukushima radioactive water in the Pacific Ocean.
And neighboring countries start to get really angry.
The Fukushima disaster is taking a new dimension, as Japan continues to hide important information about its plan of releasing radioactive water in the Pacific Ocean to neighboring countries.
The head of South Korea's nuclear safety agency said on Wednesday, this 'cover-up' behavior was hampering the efforts made by Japan's neighboring countries to minimize the impacts on their people and environement.
The owner of the Fukushima plant has been storing radioactive water in tanks at the site from the cooling pipes used to keep the fuel cores from melting since the meltdown in 2011. However, it will run out of storage space for the water in 2022.
The most probably consequence is that Japan will start dumping its radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean.
Fukushima Crisis and Nuclear Safety Concerns
Uhm Jae-sik, chairman of the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission, told Reuters: "We have been raising Japan's radioactive water issue to the international community to minimize the impact … but as Japan hasn't disclosed any specific plan and process we would need more details to run simulations and study."
In addition to the Fukushima crisis, safety concerns about nuclear energy have increased in South Korea following a 2012 scandal over the supply of faulty reactors parts with forged documents, prompting a series of shutdowns of nuclear reactors.
South Korea, the world's fifth-largest user of nuclear power, operates 25 nuclear reactors, which produce about a third of the country's total electricity. Of the 25 reactors, 10 are offline for maintenance. [Reuters, KHNP] (Click to Source)
24/7, 365 access to a board certified medical doctor, by phone or video. One low monthly cost of $12.95 for an individual plan or $19.95 for a family plan. No extras! No added consult fees! All inclusive! Visits are anytime, day or night and holidays. Cancel anytime. No one should ever be without this plan and everyone can afford it. This special pricing is for my readers here.
Modern English Version Bible
Eight years after triple nuclear meltdown, Fukushima No. 1's water woes show no signs of ebbing
BY RYUSEI TAKAHASHI
OKUMA, FUKUSHIMA PREF. – Nearly a thousand storage tanks are scattered across the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, holding a staggering 1.1 million tons of treated water used to keep its melted reactor cores cool while they rust in the sun.
Plant manager Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc., or Tepco, plans to build more of the gigantic tanks to hold another 0.27 million tons, which is roughly the equivalent of 108 Olympic-size swimming pools. The new tanks are expected reach full capacity in four or five years.
Each tank takes seven to 10 days to fill and holds between 1,000 to 1,200 tons of liquid, Tepco officials told reporters during a tour in February organized by the Japan National Press Club. It's been eight years since Fukushima No. 1 suffered three core meltdowns triggered by tsunami following the Great East Japan Earthquake, but the situation with the tanks may be a sign Tepco has yet to get the facility under control.
"Space isn't a big issue at this point in time, but five or 10 years from now, after we've started removing the melted fuel debris, we're going to need facilities to store and preserve it," Akira Ono, president of Fukushima No. 1 Decontamination and Decommissioning Engineering Co., a Tepco unit overseeing the decommissioning process, said at a news conference in January.
The water issue is eating up both space and resources, but a solution is unlikely to emerge anytime soon.
Nearly 1,000 water tanks are scattered across the grounds of the Fukushima No. 1 power plant. Some are over 10 meters tall, hold 1,000 to 1,200 tons and take seven to 10 days to fill. | POOL / VIA TOKYO PRESS PHOTOGRAPHERS ASSOCIATION
The International Atomic Energy Agency published a report in November that said the physical constraints of the site "leave little room for additional tanks" beyond what Tepco has allocated.
The IAEA report went on to say it believes storing tainted water in "above ground tanks . . . can only be a temporary measure while a more sustainable solution is needed" and a "decision on the disposition path should be taken urgently."
Beyond 2020, Tepco has not allocated any additional space for holding treated water on the site and has no plans to do so at this time. The utility said the tanks will likely become a headache if they remain at the plant.
"At that point, we may need to rethink how we're using the space," Ono said.
Eight years ago when the monstrous tsunami hit, the entire plant lost power and reactors 1, 2 and 3 lost coolant, causing their cores to overheat. The fuel rods consequently melted, dripping molten fuel that burned through their pressure vessels and pooled in their primary containment vessels. Reactors 1, 3 and 4 then suffered hydrogen explosions.
Reporters look up at the pressure vessel from inside the primary containment vessel of a reactor at the Fukushima No. 2 power plant on Feb. 6. At the sister plant of Fukushima No. 1, which suffered three reactor core meltdowns in March 2011, molten fuel burned through the pressure vessels and dropped down into the PCVs. | POOL / VIA TOKYO PRESS PHOTOGRAPHERS ASSOCIATION
Tepco must inject water into the reactors indefinitely to keep the melted cores cool, but water tainted by contact with the fuel and associated debris has been leaking from the damaged containment vessels and into the basements of the reactor buildings, where tons of fresh groundwater flows in daily through holes in their damaged walls.
The contaminated water is pumped out and passed through a filtration device called the Advanced Liquid Processing System — which is supposed to remove every radionuclide except for tritium — and stored in the tanks.
Tepco has taken steps to limit the amount of groundwater seeping into the reactor buildings, including wells to intercept and divert it and an underground ice wall around the buildings to block any inflow.
According to Tepco, however, about 83 tons of water are seeping into the reactor buildings each day. Although this is an improvement from some 300 tons in previous years, Tepco must keep making more tanks.
At the moment, Tepco is waiting for a government panel's advice on what to do with the tritium-tainted water. The panel is considering five disposal methods: ground injection, sea discharge after diluting the tritium concentration, discharging it as steam, discharging it as hydrogen, and solidification followed by underground burial.
Tritium is a radioactive form of hydrogen that forms naturally and is a common byproduct of nuclear reactors. In large quantities, exposure can be dangerous, especially if ingested or inhaled. Processed adequately, however, tritium is believed to pose little to no health risk. For instance, tritium is present in regular tap water, but no ill effects have been confirmed, according to the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.
Discharging treated tritium water into the ocean is a common practice at nuclear power plants around the world.
Thus some experts, including Toyoshi Fuketa, who heads the Nuclear Regulation Authority, think this is the best option for Fukushima.
"Prolonging the storage of water in those tanks will make decommissioning the power plant that much more difficult for Tepco. Limited resources are being used to use these tanks as storage, not just money but other resources as well," Fuketa said at a news conference in September.
"The longer we store the water, the greater the influence it will have on the decommissioning of the Fukushima No. 1 power plant."
But there are concerns about the impact an ocean discharge may have on fisheries still trying to recover from the nuclear crisis.
Fishing in the area has resumed on a trial basis and workers still perform radiation checks before shipping their hauls to fish markets. The waters off Fukushima Prefecture are at the confluence of two ocean currents — the Oyashio from the north and Kuroshio from the south — which make for the good fishing grounds that have been a vital part of the agrarian prefecture's economy.
Eight years after the meltdowns, however, residents are still struggling to convince the world that fish from the area are safe to eat. Many believe public perception alone will cripple Fukushima's fishing industry anew if the tainted water is expelled into the ocean — even if the tritium has been reduced to below international standards.
A Tepco worker points a dosimeter at the walls of reactor 3 at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant on Feb. 5. | POOL / VIA TOKYO PRESS PHOTOGRAPHERS ASSOCIATION
Trust issues continue to plague Tepco after it claimed ALPS was filtering every radionuclide from the cooling water except tritium. Last August it came to light that the allegedly treated water still contained other dangerous contaminants, including iodine, cesium and strontium. Some of the concentrations were above current safety limits.
This has further angered Fukushima residents and made it harder to get their approval for dumping the water held by the tanks into the sea.
During a public hearing hosted by METI in August, participants urged the government and Tepco to consider finding an off-site location to store the water instead of discharging it into the ocean.
"Without a national debate and without the understanding of Japanese citizens or the countries importing our products, as a fisherman of Fukushima Prefecture, I strongly oppose the plan to discharge the treated water into the ocean," Tetsu Nozaki, chairman of the Fukushima Prefectural Federation of Fisheries Cooperative Association, told the hearing.
"To release the ALPS-treated water into the ocean, at this time, would deal a disastrous blow to the fishermen of Fukushima and rob them of their hard work and motivation," he said.
Thierry Charles, deputy director-general in charge of nuclear safety at the Radioprotection and Nuclear Safety Institute in France, admitted it is a difficult problem to address, given the volume of water concerned and the tritium content.
Charles believes a controlled release into the ocean would be viable "under conditions to be defined."
"In this respect, the societal acceptance of this solution should be based on the broad involvement of all stakeholders at the various stages of the process, by explaining the different options studied," he told The Japan Times.
Meanwhile, the crippled plant faces other serious challenges — including how to extract the molten fuel.
"How we remove the melted fuel debris from the reactors. That's the most important point. . . . The water tanks are not a big problem," said Hiroshi Miyano, a professor at Hosei University's Graduate School of Engineering and Design and chair of the decommissioning committee of the Atomic Energy Society of Japan.
Reporters visit the site where soil contaminated by radiation from the three core meltdowns at the Fukushima No. 1 power plant is sorted and distributed to a storage facility, on Feb. 7. | RYUSEI TAKAHASHI
In February, Tepco inserted a remote-controlled probe into reactor 2 to make contact with material inside the containment vessel believed to be melted fuel. The machine — equipped with a camera, thermometer and dosimeter — was designed to poke and gently lift sediment to test its physical properties.
This was the first time a machine had touched melted fuel debris inside any of the crippled reactors at Fukushima No. 1.
The removal process at the plant is slated to begin in 2021. Before that part begins, though, research from the site will be used to make various remote-controlled probes capable of navigating the unique scenarios in each unit. Reactor 3, for example, remains largely submerged and requires an aquatic probe.
Miyano said Tepco and the government — with the help of scientists, nuclear physicists and engineers from around the world — are inventing new technologies as they devise a way to remove the debris.
He added that no country has ever attempted to use remote-controlled robots to remove melted fuel from the inside of a crippled nuclear reactor.
"This is the first time, so there will be many challenges." (Click to Source)
Get online and get completely recovered! We are a Biblical Online Recovery Program that is life changing and empowering. We are Teen Challenge Certified Teachers and have integrated the world famous Teen Challenge PSNC curriculum for the most healing fusion of elements for your recovery. VRM is breaking the chains of addiction for a lifetime! Check us out!
Eight years on water woes threaten Fukushima cleanup with fish found around the waters of Hawaii and Alaska contaminated with cesium 134 the radioactive finger-print of Fukushima
The silence surrounding the Fukushima disaster recently has been deafening, it is one year in fact since any reliable information has been released from Tokyo Electric Power Co, the owners of the stricken plant.
Last year, Tokyo Electric Power Co said a system meant to purify contaminated water had failed to remove dangerous radioactive contaminants.
A report from Reuters today, claims most of that water – stored in 1,000 tanks around the plant – will need to be reprocessed before it is released into the ocean, the most likely scenario for disposal.
Reprocessing could take nearly two years and divert personnel and energy from dismantling the tsunami-wrecked reactors, a project that will take up to 40 years, (which is only an estimate as Tepco still haven't invented the technology to fix the problem, they could still be trying to fix the problem in 2060.)
It is unclear how much that would delay decommissioning. But any delay could be pricey; the government estimated in 2016 that the total cost of plant dismantling, decontamination of affected areas, and compensation, would amount to 21.5 trillion yen ($192.5 billion), roughly 20 per cent of the country's annual budget.
Tepco is already running out of space to store treated water. And should another big quake strike, (which is a question of when and NOT if), experts say tanks could crack, unleashing tainted liquid and washing highly radioactive debris into the ocean.
Exactly one year ago today, The Big Wobble released an article, claiming during the summer of 2017, 50,000 trillion Becquerel's of radiation leaked into the Pacific, however, Tepco continue to claim tritium poses little risk to human health and is quickly diluted by the ocean.
300 tons of radioactive water is leaking daily into the Pacific and there is no known technology to fix it.
In one of the world's worst nuclear disasters, the Nos. 1 to 3 units experienced fuel meltdowns while the No. 1, No. 3 and No. 4 units were also severely damaged by hydrogen explosions following a massive earthquake and tsunami in March 2011.
To prevent leakage of tainted water, Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) had installed a costly "ice wall" to keep groundwater from seeping into the stricken Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant, however, data from the operator shows, it had failed.
The aim was to freeze the soil into a solid mass that blocks groundwater flowing from the hills west of the plant to the coast.
However, the continuing seepage has created vast amounts of toxic water that Tepco must pump out, decontaminate and store in tanks at Fukushima that now number 1,000, holding 1 million tonnes, which will at some time be dumped into the Pacific.
Last July TEPCO released around 770,000 tons of highly radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean.
A study by the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa have revealed almost 50% of fish consumed on the islands of Hawai'i were contaminated with caesium 134 the radioactive finger-print of Fukushima.
The report also showed that migrating organisms can transport the Fukushima-signature (caesium 134) over significant distances as they showed detectable 134Cs (6.3±1.5 Bq/kg) in Pacific bluefin tuna caught off the California coast only a year after the incident.
Another study found caesium 134 in longfin tuna (Albacore) along the western coast of the US just one year after the Fukushima disaster.
It's another blow for the stricken nuclear plant with TEPCO claiming the clean-up of the site will take at least 40 years.
Last year The Big Wobble received an email from Bill Laughing Bear, our friend in Alaska who is monitoring the radiation in fish along the Alaskan coast.
Greetings, Gary!
The up-to-date and timely information your website delivers just brought a new topic to my mind: Fukushima. On your March 8, 2018, posting about another million tons of toxic waste to be dumped into the Pacific, the thought occurred to me 'how much more radiation would I be reading in this coming year's fish harvest than when the Fukushima nuclear disaster on March 11, 2011, changed our world forever?'
As a musher in Alaska, I have often been blessed from collecting numerous people's previous year's salmon catch as they cleaned out their freezers, making room for the current year's catch. I fed it to my dog team and I ate endless pounds of it myself. I also have enjoyed standing on the banks of some of our first class rivers while fishing for salmon with a pole which I no longer do.
When the Fukushima fiasco occurred, it was obvious to me that with the currents that come up the coast of Alaska from Japan, we were in trouble. I believed our fishing resources would become radioactive and because I love my dogs as most would love their family members, I knew I had to verify this food supply was safe.
Talking to anyone I could who was supposedly in the "know," I was assured there would be no problem. That did not ease my mind. I decided to invest in a radiation monitor of my own. Being a disabled veteran with a limited income, I set out to buy a meter of the best value I could with my minimal resources. I was told that the most common monitor being used in Japan that people living near the Fukushima area use is the Radex RD 1503. This meter is made in Moscow, Russia, by Quarta-Rad Limited.
The Russian people who had to deal with the monster, Chernobyl, manufactured a quality radiation monitor and I decided to order one. The meter cost me approximately $160.00 U.S. Funds. This monitor was designed for detection and evaluation of the level of ionizing radiation and for the evaluation of contamination levels of materials and products. Although a good monitor, it cannot be used for official conclusions about radiation, environment and fouling factors. The meter estimates the radiation environment in the magnitude of the ambient equivalent power of gamma radiation dose taking into account the pollution of objects by beta sources. The meter reads two ways: microSievert per hour or microRoentgen per hour.
Once obtaining the meter, I started taking readings of people's salmon. By the second year after the Fukushima incident, all salmon I scanned read radioactive. I have seen a steady increase in radiation levels of salmon through last year with not one salmon failing to register some contamination.
Last year I checked my first halibut which came from local waters. It, too, registered radiation. Since halibut are bottom feeders, I thought this might explain why, on my walks along the beach and seeing at various times dead crab, the occasional sea otter, and a couple of times more jellyfish than I could count, not to mention numerous birds.
In my attempts to find what constitutes safe levels of radiation, official agencies do not seem to be able to agree on just what those safety levels are. I will say that I have found an increase of over 27% of radiation levels since around 2012. So whether the data I have observed is minimal or should be alarming, it is definitely building every year.
Last year, a woman I know, who had just been released from the hospital after receiving numerous doses of radiation had me scan her body. It read lower than the salmon taken out of her freezer.
Three days ago I talked with a commercial fisherman whom I respect and I asked him what he had heard about radiation levels and salmon. He told me they have been told there is no radiation problem in salmon and they are healthy. I told him that I was finding constant radiation and I would come over and scan his salmon in his freezer if he wanted me to. He was visually shaken.
Many of us have chosen to no longer consume for ourselves or our dogs any seafood off the Pacific Coast. From what I understand, radiation can build up in one's system.
I have also been warned by my friends and numerous others whose fish I have scanned to be quiet about this because it might not go well with me. But ethically I feel I have a moral obligation to my fellow man and I am issuing a strong alert about the condition I have personally found with the salmon and halibut in Alaskan waters. I do not want anyone to suffer a "slow burn" with their health and life. (Click to Source)
That's it from Alaska for now.
Recovery Room 7 is a community of people with similar backgrounds, where people from all walks of drug & alcohol recovery can meet together, share, socialize, interact, join in fun activities, share meals, pray and learn. It's a place of joy and awakening to their true purpose in life. Jesus Christ is always present and ready to receive everyone in Recovery Room 7. We will be located in beautiful Northwest Montana. If you would like to donate to get Recovery Room 7 up and running, please go to our PayPal Donation Link here.
Hell Hole on Earth Discovered at Fukushima
By Dr. Mark Sircus
Dr.Sircus.com
Most people think they have to die to go to hell but that is not true anymore. Today, in the mainstream press, they announced the existence of a hell hole in Japan at the destroyed nuclear power station at Fukushima. We have a hot spot on our planet that has never been imagined before and in the face of it human technology is helpless.
At the levels of radiation now being found a Fukushima, a robot would be able to operate for less than two hours before it was destroyed. And Japan's National Institute of Radiological Sciences said medical professionals had never even thought about encountering this level of radiation in their work.
The accident is enormous in its medical implications. Through future years, too long to contemplate, we will witness an epidemic of cancer as people inhale the radioactive elements, eat radioactive vegetables, rice and meat, and drink radioactive milk and teas. Year by year, decade through relentless decade, the radiation will build up yet modern medicine does not seem concerned.
New readings at Fukushima have recorded the highest radiation levels seen since the triple core meltdown that occurred in 2011. Readings inside the containment vessel of reactor no. 2 are as high as 530 Sieverts per hour, a dosage that would be fatal dozens and dozens of times over if a human were to be exposed to it. The previous high was a still very fatal rate of 73 Sieverts per hour.
The blazing radiation reading was taken near the entrance to the space just below the pressure vessel, which contains the reactor core. The highest radiation levels ever measured at Chernobyl were 300 Sieverts per hour; an incomprehensibly high dose which can kill a man almost instantly.
The new record at Fukushima of 530 Sieverts per hour is 70% higher than that of Chernobyl. The 530 Sievert reading was recorded some distance from the melted fuel, so in reality it could be 10 times higher than recorded, said Hideyuki Ban, co-director of Citizens' Nuclear Information Center.
To put this in perspective, radiation is usually measured in thousandths of a Sievert, called millisieverts. For example, most people receive around 2.4 millisieverts per year from background radiation, or only 0.0002739726 per hour.
According to the Kyodo news agency, the institute estimates that exposure to one Sievert of radiation could lead to infertility, loss of hair and cataracts. One Sievert is enough to cause radiation sickness and nausea; 5 Sieverts would kill half those exposed to it within a month, and a single dose of 10 Sieverts would prove fatal within weeks.
How Come We Do Not Hear More about Fukushima?
It was just recently said that, "It is not every day that a U.S. president calls journalists among the most dishonest human beings on earth." This dishonesty is displayed in its full power with nuclear power issues and specifically with Fukushima where things are so bad it is basically prohibited to talk about it openly in the press. In fact, as I was reading the essays on Yahoo about the record amount of radiation the essays disappeared off the news summary list.
Most of this radiation is being washed out to sea and it is quite quickly destroying the Pacific Ocean and much of the life in it. We have no idea how much of the radiation is escaping into the atmosphere but we do know that during the first few weeks of the nuclear accident, because of the explosions, huge amounts of radiation were released into the atmosphere and it circled around the globe especially in the northern hemisphere.
There is no way for anyone to say that having a point of output of radiation of 530 Sieverts an hour is safe or how many decades it will take a radioactive output of this magnitude to badly pollute our precious world. None of this is good news for our children. Anyone who says nuclear power is safe is lying. Anyone who says nuclear radiation is not dangerous is lying.
They Don`t Want to Say Where These Clouds are Coming From
Researchers have discovered the existence of high-altitude "radiation clouds that can expose airplane passengers to high levels of radiation. These clouds were discovered as part of the NASA-funded Automated Radiation Measurements for Aerospace Safety (ARMAS) program.
It's widely known that radiation levels are generally higher in the upper atmosphere versus on the ground, simply due to the higher levels of cosmic rays. However, when studying these levels of radiation, researchers detected small pockets where radiation levels suddenly spiked, up to double the normal level. These spikes could not be explained by normal sources of radiation like cosmic rays. Frequent flyers, and first trimester fetuses may be at greater risk due to their longer exposure times or greater vulnerability.
How Come Doctors Don`t Say More About Radiation Dangers?
Because they are among the primary users of nuclear radiation, using it for all kinds of dangerous tests. A single CT scan of the chest is equal to about 350 standard chest X-rays. They are using radiation, a cause of cancer, to try to treat cancer and that usually does not turn out too well. Because they are not honest with themselves they cannot be honest with their patients, who should be told that many of the tests they are being given by doctors expose them to more dangerous radiation.
Like global warming, vaccines and now Islamic terrorism and immigration, there is no real discussion, no real science being sported in the news so the public is left completely in the dark about radiation exposures. The people with the real power in this world insist that we will always see and define the situation as safe, no need to worry or do anything like drink lots of iodine, sodium bicarbonate, magnesium and start off each day drinking a glass of ultra-pure edible clay. Edible clay is one of the most basic detoxification substances. It helps make sure absorbed radioactive particles pass through instead of into us. When was the last time you remember your doctor telling you to take magnesium or any of these other substances, or even sulfur to reduce the risk that our exposure to increasing levels of radiation do not lead to cancer.
RT Russian News reported, "Deadly radiation levels of up to 9.4 Sieverts per hour have been recorded at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant – enough to kill a person in less than an hour if directly exposed, local media reports. The mortal radiation reading was taken in a small room, using a remote-controlled robot. The reading of 9.4 Sieverts (Sv) per hour was taken during the September 4-25 checks. Immediate radiation exposure around the Fukushima nuclear power following the deadly incident reached 400 millisieverts (mSv) per hour in places. One millisievert is a thousandth of a sievert, therefore the new 9.4 Sv reading is 23.5 times higher than the radiation level recorded in March, 2011."
The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant says levels of radioactivity in underground tunnels have sharply risen. Tokyo Electric Power Company has detected 482,000 becquerels per liter of radioactive cesium in water samples taken from the tunnels on December 3rd. That's 4000 times higher than data taken in December last year.
Officials revealed that about 2 Trillion becquerels of Fukushima radioactive material flowed into the ocean every month during 2013 — "Deadly strontium" releases are now more than double cesium — "Strontium gets into your bones… it changes the equation." Strontium is a potentially lethal alkaline earth metal poses the biggest immediate concern, because, unlike cesium, it doesn't get trapped in soil and tends to accumulate in bones of fish and animals if ingested.
Everyone wants to forget all about Fukushima
Everyone wants to forget all about Fukushima for who wants to remember their worst nightmares? The Fukushima nuclear plant meltdown disaster "is not over and will never end," warns Dr. Helen Caldicott, Nobel Peace Prize nominee and holder of 21 honorary doctorate degrees.
It was reported by Andy Gunderson during the first year of the Fukushima meltdown that people on the west coast of the United States and Canada, Hawaii and Alaska were bearing some of the worst of the radiation and people then, and now, are not taking evasive action. Gunderson said in an exclusive interview with Chris Martenson that, "I am in touch with some scientists now who have been monitoring the air on the West Coast and in Seattle for instance, in April of 2011, the average person in Seattle breathed in 5-10 hot particles a day, depending on how active they are." This means even if Fukushima disappeared today we should already be treating ourselves and our children for exposure.
Dr. Brownstein writes, "If there is enough inorganic, non-radioactive iodine in our bodies, the radioactive fallout has nowhere to bind in our bodies. It will pass through us, leaving our bodies unharmed. It is important to ensure that we have adequate iodine levels BEFORE this fallout hits."
Everyone should be making sure that they are taking enough minerals because radioactive substances mimic their non-radioactive mineral substances. Strontium mimics calcium, for example, making it extremely dangerous to all life forms once it is absorbed. The toxic substances such as Tritium, Cesium, Plutonium and Strontium are being carried everywhere by winds, rain and ocean currents, entering the food chain through seaweed and seafood, building up high levels of toxicity in the fish – and humans – at the top end of the consumption chain.
Fukushima is Japan's and the world's radiation nightmare that will not go away in our lifetimes nor our children's or grandchildren's. The Fukushima nuclear power plant is hemorrhaging radioactive toxic waste into the ocean and though we are told not to panic, nor even to be casually concerned, the situation is dangerous and critical to future life on earth. (Click to Source)
Thousands of Sharks, Other Sea Life Mysteriously Die in San Francisco Bay
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife isn't dedicating any funding toward determining the cause, says resources are needed elsewhere
As many as 2,000 leopard sharks have mysteriously died in the San Francisco Bay over the past few months. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife says determining the cause is not a priority for the state since the sharks are not threatened or endangered, however, scientists say additional research and resources are crucial since the threat is now believed to be preying on other marine life.
"This year is unusual in that there has been a large number of other species that have also been dying," said Dr. Mark Okihiro, a research scientist with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. "This pathogen can tackle a variety of different species … we've had a much more diverse group of fish that have been found dead in the San Francisco Bay."
At least 500 bat rays, hundreds of striped bass, 50 smooth-hound sharks and about 100 halibut died in the bay between February and July, according to Okihiro's estimates.
Tiny Organism Blamed for Massive Shark Die-Off
Similar shark deaths in the area date back 50 years and have gone unexplained. Okihiro, however, now believes a parasite may be behind the mysterious die-off that has plagued the Bay Area.
"We're pretty confident at this point," Okihiro said. "It's called Miamiensis avidus … it's a small single celled organism. It's very similar to the common amoeba."
Okihiro regularly performs necropsies on stranded sharks found along the bay and says researchers at UC San Francisco helped him identify parasite DNA in a large number of those shark samples.
Humans who swim in the Bay or eat infected sea life are unlikely to become infected.
Parasite Eats Away at the Brain
The deadly pathogen sneaks in through the shark's nose and slowly eats away at the brain, Okihiro says, oftentimes causing sharks to beach themselves or swim in circles. A leopard shark, exhibiting that very behavior, was spotted just outside the ballpark during a recent San Francisco Giants game and was likely in the process of dying.
Okihiro estimates 1,000 to 2,000 leopard sharks have died in the bay so far this year, however, he concedes the death toll could actually be higher.
"The sharks you see on shore are just a small fraction of the sharks that are actually dying in the bay," he said.
Sharks are not naturally buoyant. Unless they are actively swimming, their bodies sink. As a result, infected sharks that die in deep water may never actually wash up on shore.
Several sharks and a bat ray photographed after washing up dead in the San Francisco Bay (April 26, 2017)
Photo credit: California Dept. of Fish and Wildlife
Bay Area Death Toll Likely More Grim
"I think it's almost certain that the number of sharks that have died are much higher," said Dr. Andrew Nosal, a marine biologist at UC San Diego and a top expert on leopard sharks, the main species that has washed up dead in the bay. "We have to find out what's killing these sharks."
Nosal's ongoing research centers on the migration patterns of leopard sharks. He says it is crucial the state dedicate resources towards investigating the cause of the sharks' mysterious demise.
"If we don't find out, then there's nothing we can do about it," he said.
The NBC Bay Area Investigative Unit recently joined Nosal and his colleague on their research boat off the coast of San Diego's La Jolla Cove, a known leopard shark hotspot.
"If you remove leopard sharks from the population, it is going to have a chain reaction," Nosal said. "They're eating other things and other things are eating them."
Investigative Reporter Bigad Shaban joined researchers Dr. Andrew Nozal (middle) and Michael Doane (right) aboard a shark research expedition of the coast of La Jolla, California (August 16, 2017).
Photo credit: NBC Bay Area
While Nosal says he is concerned that other species are now dying, he also fears the threat could spread to other ecosystems along the West Coast.
"It's isolated in San Francisco [Bay], but are we going to start seeing this up and down the coast of California?"
For now, no one knows for certain.
"I think that's what the scariest part is," Nosal said.
Dr. Andrew Nosal, a marine biologist at the University of California San Diego, captures a leopard shark off the coast of La Jolla, California as part of research on the shark migration patterns (August 16, 2017).
Researching Shark Tissue In His Dining Room
Researching the cause of the die-off isn't actually Dr. Mark Okihiro's job. He is officially in charge of assessing the health of white sea bass for the California Department of Fish and Wildilfe, but he's been researching shark deaths from home in his spare time.
He performs necropsies on the dead sharks on his patio, studies bacteria samples in his kitchen, and examples tissue samples in his living room.
"We'll probably have to wash this [table] cloth before thanksgiving," Okihiro joked while giving the Investigative Unit a tour of makeshift lab in Southern California.
Dr. Mark Okihiro, a senior fish pathologist at the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, examines shark tissue samples, at his home in southern California (August 15, 2017).
'You Work With What you Have'
Field work on sharks is relatively rare. Okihiro, however, says additional research and resources are needed to definitely determine the cause of the die-off.
"In Fish and Wildlife we're spread pretty thin," Okihiro said. "You know, you work with what you have."
Through phone calls and email, the NBC Bay Area Investigative Unit requested an interview with the department's director, Charlton Bonham, to discuss the "leopard shark die-off" and the "agency's overall involvement in the issue, including funding."
However, the department's public relations manager, Deputy Director Jordan Traverso, said Gabe Tiffany, Deputy Director of Administration, would be the best person to answer those questions.
Gabe Tiffany is Deputy Director of Administration for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, overseeing the budget and accounting (September 20, 2017).
State Snubs Shark Research, Prioritizes Funding to Higher-Risk Wildlife
"We have a lot of constraints on how our programs are funded," Tiffany said.
During the interview, Tiffany could not answer how much money the department currently allocates towards researching the recent die-off, nor could he answer specific questions about the state's involvement in the research effort.
Following the interview, the department confirmed it is not currently providing any funding towards investigating the shark deaths.
While federal dollars pay the bulk of Okihiro's salary, benefits, and operating expenses, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife funds about 25 percent, totaling $35,925.
"None of this is explicitly for, or directed at, disease or pathogen analysis of sharks and rays," Traverso noted in an email to the Investigative Unit.
"Because of Dr. Okihiro's knowledge and experience with marine fish diseases, he is occasionally called in to analyze acute disease or pathogen events for other wild, marine fish species, including species of sharks and rays. But again, this is not explicitly part of his job," Traverso said.
While the state Legislature and governor could approve additional funds for shark research in the future, Traverso said the California Department of Fish and Wildlife will continue to dedicate its current resources to higher-risk wildlife.
"Some of the current priorities include implementing the Marine Life Protection Act and establishing and monitoring Marine Protected Areas, rebuilding impacted fisheries (Chinook salmon in-river and the ocean, red urchin, red abalone), addressing the kelp die-off along the north-central and north coast, and implementing a different water management scheme to provide healthier fish populations in the Central Valley rivers, Delta, and San Francisco Bay," Traverso said in a statement."
A leopard shark is released off the San Diego coast after being tagged by researchers (August 16, 2017).
'A Canary in the Coal Mine'
Leopard sharks are not a threatened or endangered species. In fact, they are some of the most abundant sharks off the California coast. However, Nosal said that makes them canaries in a sort of Bay Area coal mine since their abundant population appears to be making them especially vulnerable.
"When they die and wash ashore, it's pretty obvious," he said. "We see it. But what about all the other species that, perhaps, are getting sick and dying and simply sinking to the bottom that we just don't know about? There's a lot more at stake here than just leopard sharks." (Click to Site)
Fukushima Radiation Has Contaminated The Entire Pacific Ocean	– And It's Going To Get Worse
The nuclear disaster has contaminated the world's largest ocean in only five years and it's still leaking 300 tons of radioactive waste every day.
What was the most dangerous nuclear disaster in world history? Most people would say the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in Ukraine, but they'd be wrong. In 2011, an earthquake, believed to be an aftershock of the 2010 earthquake in Chile, created a tsunami that caused a meltdown at the TEPCO nuclear power plant in Fukushima, Japan. Three nuclear reactors melted down and what happened next was the largest release of radiation into the water in the history of the world. Over the next three months, radioactive chemicals, some in even greater quantities than Chernobyl, leaked into the Pacific Ocean. However, the numbers may actually be much higher as Japanese official estimates have been proven by several scientists to be flawed in recent years.
It should come as no surprise, then, that Fukushima has contaminated the entire Pacific Ocean in just five years. This could easily be the worst environmental disaster in human history and it is almost never talked about by politicians, establishment scientists, or the news. It is interesting to note that TEPCO is a subsidiary of General Electric (also known as GE), one of the largest companies in the world, which has considerable control over numerous news corporations and politicians alike. Could this possibly explain the lack of news coverage Fukushima has received in the last five years? There is also evidence that GE knew about the poor condition of the Fukushima reactors for decades and did nothing. This led 1,400 Japanese citizens to sue GE for their role in the Fukushima nuclear disaster.If that weren't bad enough, Fukushima continues to leak an astounding 300 tons of radioactive waste into the Pacific Ocean every day. It will continue do so indefinitely as the source of the leak cannot be sealed as it is inaccessible to both humans and robots due to extremely high temperatures.
Even if we can't see the radiation itself, some parts of North America's western coast have been feeling the effects for years. Not long after Fukushima, fish in Canada began bleeding from their gills, mouths, and eyeballs. This "disease" has been ignored by the government and has decimated native fish populations, including the North Pacific herring. Elsewhere in Western Canada, independent scientists have measured a 300% increase in the level of radiation. According to them, the amount of radiation in the Pacific Ocean is increasing every year. Why is this being ignored by the mainstream media? It might have something to do with the fact that the US and Canadian governments have banned their citizens from talking about Fukushima so "people don't panic." (Click to Article)
152 'Mass Death Events' In First 108 Days Of 2017 – Does 'Deagel Intentional Population Destruction' Map Show The Results Of Fukushima Radiation Decimating The Northern Hemisphere?
In this April 3rd story by Amy Goodrich over at Natural News she reported that there is a massive, ongoing academic cover-up concealing the near-total collapse of our ocean food chains, specifically in the Pacific Ocean, and mass deaths to humans will surely follow. Warning within her story that "each day more signs are emerging that our ocean and world is slowly dying" and "we're living in perilous, unstable times that may affect every living thing on our planet", we're not the least bit surprised that the mainstream media and governments "don't see any harm in remaining surprisingly silent".
Almost as if 'intentional population destruction' was 'the plan', we take a look within this story at some of the most recent signs and stories from around the world that show we better be prepared for the danger ahead by looking at the danger that's already here.
We also take another look at the map seen below created by ANP reader 'Proud' and this ANP story from April 14th in which we asked "Does This Map Show The Planned Destruction Of 90% Of The World's Population?" from the viewpoint of Fukushima's radiation blanketing much of the Northern hemisphere. Finally we'll take a look below videos at the most recent SQAlert in which he shares with us why the wise will continue to prepare for the end of life as we know it, as if there might not be a 'tomorrow' to do so, and as if we were now living in the 'Days of Noah'.
The February 1st, 2017 story from ENENews reported Fukushima-derived radioiodine and radiocaesium has been identified across the entire Northern hemisphere. Dr. Shuzo Takemoto, professor of the Department of Geophysics, Graduate School of Science, Kyoto University warned back in 2016 our planet now faces a 'global catastrophe' while warning our planet Earth is still susceptible to an even more dreadful scenario should Fukushima #2 be completely destroyed.
On April 14th, ANP published the map above showing the percentages of expected population change by 2024 according to Deagel.com, a website which uses the 'deep state' as its sources. For those new to Deagel, please take a look here, here, here and here for several more details. As Deagel and the map shows, the biggest areas of expected population loss in the future are largely in the Northern hemisphere and largely 'western' nations.
As we've been reporting on ANP for the last few years and as has been extensively documented by the website End Times Prophecy, 'mass animal death events' have been happening across the Pacific Ocean region, the West coast of the US and the northern hemisphere unlike anything any of us have ever seen before in our lifetimes.
Do we think that we are somehow 'immune'? It's long been warned, "whatever we do to our planet, we do to ourselves". In the first video below our videographer reports the reasons why many believe that Fukushima will be an 'extinction level event' for large regions as our food supply is poisoned and our sources for sustenance are rapidly taken away. From this March 13th story on ANP detailing the mass animal deaths since Fukushima.
As nuclear expert Dr. Helen Caldicott recently stated of Fukushima, "highly radioactive water is still pouring into the ocean every day and will likelycontinue doing so until the end of time". Calling the hopes of cleaning up the mess that's been made 'a fantasy', the stories and videos we examine in this ANP story prove to us we're sleepwalking towards extinction. The 'mass animal deaths' painstakingly kept track of by End Times Prophecy continue with at least '117 known mass animal death events' in 43 countries in 2017 alone.
According to End Times Prophecy, the year 2016 brought 556 KNOWN 'mass death events' spread over 81 countries. In 2015 there were 828 known 'mass death events' spread over 96 countries. In 2014 there were 651 known 'mass death events' spread over 76 countries. In 2013 there were 798 known mass death events in 93 countries. In 2012 there were 465 'mass death events' documented across 67 countries while in 2011, the year of the disaster, hundreds of mass death events also happened across the planet. (Click to Article)
Number of U.S. sailors damaged by Fukushima radiation continues to rise
(NaturalNews) Sailors aboard the USS Ronald Reagan, one of the nation's most modern aircraft carriers, were the first to respond to the stricken nuclear power station at Fukushima, Japan, in March 2011, following a devastating earthquake and tsunami which struck the site and heavily damaged three of the plant's six nuclear reactors.
Now, months and years later, an increasing number of them are becoming sick and disabled with conditions that they are blaming on above-average exposures to radiation leaking from the reactors hit hardest by the massive wave. As reported by theInternational Business Times (IBT):
An alarming number of US Navy sailors have now started coming out to publicly air their grievances against what happened to their health as they conducted their jobs while in Japan waters three years ago.
Close to 100 U.S. sailors with ailments such as thyroid cancer, brain tumors and leukemia have filed a lawsuit against the Tokyo Electric Power Company. But its progress has been stalled because many more sailors want to join into the lawsuit, according to Bay area lawyer Charles Bonner.
The number of affected sailors continues to grow. According to a report by EcoWatch, an organization that has been monitoring the after-effects of the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl, Arnie Gunderson, a nuclear expert with Fairewinds Energy Education, says, "The health effects of the Reagan crew are real. There's no denying that these brave men and women were exposed to high levels of radiation."
He went on to say this about radiation sickness: "At high levels you wind up with hair loss, vomiting, diarrhea – all of those experiences were experienced by the sailors on the USS Reagan."
Did TEPCO withhold information about the release of radioactivity?
Bonner says that, because of the continuous influx of sailors who are experiencing symptoms indicative of radiation poisoning, it has become necessary to delay filing the suit until early next month. He says sailors from other U.S. warships are also joining.
According to the suit – which Gunderson says sailors may not have standing to file, simply because they were performing a military duty on behalf of the U.S. – TEPCO, the crippled plant's operator, is alleged to have purposely withheld information regarding the release of a radioactive plume. It says that U.S. sailors could have had a chance to avoid it and that their ships could have escaped the deadly cloud had the Japanese power company warned higher authorities.
One female sailor, Lindsay Cooper, is claiming that she now has a damaged thyroid, a disrupted menstrual cycle and highly fluctuating body weight, among other symptoms. "It's ruined me," she told IBT.
A naval officer from Maryland, Steve Simmons – once very active in sports and fitness – told the local CBS affiliate, WUSA, that he has lost use of both of his legs (he is now in a wheelchair). Also, he says he experiences fevers and has swelling in his lymph nodes because of his exposure.
"You're starting to run fevers, your lymph nodes start swelling, you're having night sweats, you're getting spastic and you're losing sensation in your legs, and you can't feel your legs when you're getting second-degree burns on them, and how do you explain those things?" said Simmons, adding that his symptoms began about eight months after returning to the U.S. from Japan.
Ship so radioactive it couldn't dock in many ports
Sailors involved in the suit say they were drenched in radioactive fallout on the very first day atFukushima. They say they noticed a cloud of air with a metallic taste wash over the aircraft carrier.
More from IBT:
They thought it was a snow storm. Responding U.S. Navy sailors disregarded it and continued working and helping and rescuing. Some worked 18-hour shifts in the open air throughout a four-day mission, re-fueling and repairing helicopters, loading them with vital supplies and much more. Some even jumped into the ocean just offshore to pull victims to safety.
Worse, all drank and bathed in waters that although had been desalinated, were surely greatly contaminated by radioactive fallout and runoff.
They described the cloud as warm, which is odd, given that it also reminded them of "radioactive snow," which is something they joked about. However, what is no joke is that, when the USS Ronald Reaganleft Fukushima, it was found to be so radioactive that Japanese, South Korean and Guamanian ports refused to allow it entry.
http://enenews.com
http://www.wusa9.com
http://au.ibtimes.com
http://science.naturalnews.com
Click to http://www.naturalnews.com/043595_US_sailors_radiation_damage_Fukushima.html
TeshuvahRoad
International marine science organization releases report on radiation in Pacific Ocean
(NaturalNews) If you've heard about Fukushima radiation spreading to the Pacific Coast of North America but were "corrected" by sources both official and expert that this was based more on rumor than reality, then consider the information presented at the October 2013 North Pacific Marine Science Organization (PICES) annual meeting.
Researchers from Fisheries and Oceans Canada confirmed that the radioactive plume from Fukushima is indeed reaching the shores of Canada and the United States – and was detected at least six months ago – carried both in the ocean surface water and the atmosphere on similar but slightly different courses.
In a presentation titled "Communicating the forecasts, uncertainty and consequences of ecosystem change," (read here: http://www.pices.int) the Canadian researchers gave evidence that the bulk of radioactivity from Fukushima is shifting almost entirely from the western portion of the North Pacific (Japan) to the eastern portion (North America) over the course of the next five years. As of 2012, it had already reached the central region of the Pacific Ocean, and a previously unpublished map shows that, as of 2013, it had reached the shores of Alaska and British Columbia, with the most intense area of the plume yet to arrive.
The Fall 2013 discussion centered around competing calculations of the severity of effects from cesium-137, based around two differing models of the radiation's trajectory. The first, published by German researcher Erik Behrens and his colleagues at the Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research in 2012, drastically understates the potential dangers, predicting only modest levels of 2 becquerels per cubic meter (Bq/m^3) by 2015 for the 49th parallel near British Columbia and Washington state – scarcely above the background levels from the continued fallout of Chernobyl.
Meanwhile, the second, published by Vincent Rossi and other colleagues from the Climate Change Research Centre in 2013, presents a much more consequential picture. It predicts alarming maximum levels reaching 25 Bq/m^3 at their monitoring station in British Columbia by 2015 and peaks above 30 Bq/m^3. Cesium levels at the 30th parallel – reaching Baja California in Mexico – wouldn't peak until about 2019, though projected maximum levels would reach only about 15-20 Bq/m^3.
The amount of atmospheric cesium being transported across the ocean via winds remains the unknown yet potentially greater factor. It partially explains the drastic difference in projections, as there are no monitoring stations for airborne radiation in the Pacific and no reliable methods of predicting the scale of its effects. Further, it has only recently been publicly admitted that 300-400 tons of contaminated water have been pouring into the Pacific per day since the meltdown began in March 2011.
The fact is that the initial findings of radioactivity from Fukushima on the shores of Alaska, British Columbia, California and Mexico – confirmed privately within the scientific community months ago – are just the beginning. They are consistent with previous predictions of cesium-137 hitting the West Coast of the continental United States in late 2013 and early 2014. Scientists have acknowledged that it will continue to spread into the Arctic Ocean, reaching eastern Russia and eventually pouring into the Atlantic Ocean.
All models point to increased radiation from here on out. Just how bad it will get remains to be seen, but red flags were raised last week when health officials dismissed concerns about readings taken in San Francisco and posted on the Internet that showed levels as high as 150 counts-per-minute – about five times higher than normal background radiation levels.
Though public authorities continue to ignore warning signs – and refuse to inform the public about the scientific findings in order to quell panic – these radioactive nucleotides bioaccumulate in the food web, and in the human body, and should not be so handily dismissed.
Above normal levels were already detected in milk from the West Coast two years ago, tipping off the scientific community to the fact that rainwater, dairy, produce and meat supplies were already being hit with cesium-137, iodine-131 and possibly strontium-90. Bioaccumulation can greatly concentrate the amounts of radiation present in the environment, such that exposure to cesium through milk or meat – which aggregates the total amounts of radiation present in the water, grass, hay etc. consumed by the cow – could reach dangerous levels in humans.
http://www.turnerradionetwork.com
http://www.pices.int
http://iopscience.iop.org
http://www.sciencedirect.com
http://rt.com
http://www.enviroreporter.com
Click to http://www.naturalnews.com/043585_Fukushima_radiation_Pacific_Ocean_marine_science_organization.html