<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fukushima: Where Do Aliens Store Their Spent Fuel Rods?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dirtyhippies.org/2011/03/23/fukushima-where-do-aliens-store-their-spent-fuel-rods/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dirtyhippies.org/2011/03/23/fukushima-where-do-aliens-store-their-spent-fuel-rods/</link>
	<description>Democracy. Unwashed.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Sep 2023 22:36:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mary Ellen Marucci</title>
		<link>http://dirtyhippies.org/2011/03/23/fukushima-where-do-aliens-store-their-spent-fuel-rods/#comment-401</link>
		<dc:creator>Mary Ellen Marucci</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Apr 2011 05:38:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dirtyhippies.org/?p=771#comment-401</guid>
		<description>I feel that the fact that long lived radioactive particles emit les radiation over a given amount of time than their more radioactive relatives, does not mean that they emit less over their radioactive lifetime..  In fact they might emit more over their lifetime.  

The problem is that these elements, most of which are not found in the environment from which we have evolved, mimic elements that our body needs and therefore become part of us and emit radiation in close proximity to our DNA and cells.

Low levels of ionizing radiation can an do cause more damage than expected becuase they ionize water, splitting it into hydroxyl and hydrogen ions, which then do damage to our cell membranes before bumping into another ion of opposite charge and become neutralized.  

We were tricked into thinking that the human body could take great assualts of radiation before death or cancers,Based on studies of survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts, and from those exposed to bomb tests.  These studies are based on acute exposure to intense radiation most of it gamma rays which either killed you or you survived and where the ionizing effect was not from an internalized source. 

I am afraid that untold damage has already occured from those tests and that background levels have already been increased to the point of affecting the development, physical and mental of future generations.  We need to stop making this stuff, and threatening each other with inialiation from it...both civilian dirty bombs of nuclear power plants and waste, and military weapons of destruction from depleted uranium to esoteric uses of the byproducts in medicine, lighting, and communications and energy distribution and of course nuclear wapons.

We also need to realize that nano technology, the microzzination of materials will also deliver a similar adverse effect on life, so there are technologies about to be unleashed that shouldnt!  It might be easier to stop nano tech than nuclear because of the mass and momentum of an ongoing technology but both need to be addressed.  Not much time left before our crust gives us the shake-off.  We ned to be ready for natural disasters and not make them worse from our poisonous technologies..  

We now know that it is not a direct correlation between exposure and disease, and that all that is certain is the amount it will take to kill. Unfortunatelky it loks like it takes even less than expected to have adverse effects, probably from the microzination of the radioactive particles but also because they mimic elements our boides use in metabolism, growth and repair.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I feel that the fact that long lived radioactive particles emit les radiation over a given amount of time than their more radioactive relatives, does not mean that they emit less over their radioactive lifetime..  In fact they might emit more over their lifetime.  </p>
<p>The problem is that these elements, most of which are not found in the environment from which we have evolved, mimic elements that our body needs and therefore become part of us and emit radiation in close proximity to our DNA and cells.</p>
<p>Low levels of ionizing radiation can an do cause more damage than expected becuase they ionize water, splitting it into hydroxyl and hydrogen ions, which then do damage to our cell membranes before bumping into another ion of opposite charge and become neutralized.  </p>
<p>We were tricked into thinking that the human body could take great assualts of radiation before death or cancers,Based on studies of survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts, and from those exposed to bomb tests.  These studies are based on acute exposure to intense radiation most of it gamma rays which either killed you or you survived and where the ionizing effect was not from an internalized source. </p>
<p>I am afraid that untold damage has already occured from those tests and that background levels have already been increased to the point of affecting the development, physical and mental of future generations.  We need to stop making this stuff, and threatening each other with inialiation from it&#8230;both civilian dirty bombs of nuclear power plants and waste, and military weapons of destruction from depleted uranium to esoteric uses of the byproducts in medicine, lighting, and communications and energy distribution and of course nuclear wapons.</p>
<p>We also need to realize that nano technology, the microzzination of materials will also deliver a similar adverse effect on life, so there are technologies about to be unleashed that shouldnt!  It might be easier to stop nano tech than nuclear because of the mass and momentum of an ongoing technology but both need to be addressed.  Not much time left before our crust gives us the shake-off.  We ned to be ready for natural disasters and not make them worse from our poisonous technologies..  </p>
<p>We now know that it is not a direct correlation between exposure and disease, and that all that is certain is the amount it will take to kill. Unfortunatelky it loks like it takes even less than expected to have adverse effects, probably from the microzination of the radioactive particles but also because they mimic elements our boides use in metabolism, growth and repair.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dvd Avins</title>
		<link>http://dirtyhippies.org/2011/03/23/fukushima-where-do-aliens-store-their-spent-fuel-rods/#comment-284</link>
		<dc:creator>Dvd Avins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Mar 2011 01:42:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dirtyhippies.org/?p=771#comment-284</guid>
		<description>The isotopes with very long half-lives are not the big problem. Long half-lives mean they decay so slowly that they don&#039;t noticeably heat up and don&#039;t give off very little radiation per time unit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The isotopes with very long half-lives are not the big problem. Long half-lives mean they decay so slowly that they don&#8217;t noticeably heat up and don&#8217;t give off very little radiation per time unit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
