View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Fri Feb 22, 2019 8:36 pm



Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 Posted on "All News Pipeline" today 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2014 2:42 pm
Posts: 9
Location: Sandy Valley, NV
"Something Very Strange Is Going On In California And New Mexico"

NETC was referenced:

http://www.allnewspipeline.com/Somethin ... ing_On.php


Sun Sep 21, 2014 9:18 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:51 pm
Posts: 743
Location: Arkansas
Here is the reply that I send:

Quote:
The data you quoted comes from the EPA radnet government webpage. Netc only reports the data it receives, no hacking, no modifying the data by Netc.com. If you read the EPA webpage you will learn that government takes down each station when unusual event occurs, like high radiation readings. The EPA takes out the filter from the station and sends it to the lab, to find out what type of radiation was detected. Then they install a new filter and turn the station back online. Each station is maintained by different groups like the Little Rock, AR unit is maintain by the Health Dept. and the Fort Smith, AR unit is maintain by the University of Arkansas. So maintenance will very at each station. Netc.com must live with the facts that it is not a perfect world and radiation moves like the rain storms that everyone knows about.
P.S. check the fact that the US Ronald Reagan Aircraft carrier came into San Diego Navy Port last week???? It could be the reason for the high radiation readings that EPA station received.

Quote the source of the 50, 100, 300 cpm levels, that information is wrong and Netc.com has never said anything like that.
Harlan


Sun Sep 21, 2014 12:28 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2014 2:42 pm
Posts: 9
Location: Sandy Valley, NV
Interesting. Thanks for the "reply" info. My opinion is they should have contacted you prior to posting that 'report" to get a better understanding of the NETC system and the EPA sites and the data it reports rather than what they did. It is good to see others pay attention to NETC though.


Sun Sep 21, 2014 3:12 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:51 pm
Posts: 743
Location: Arkansas
A year ago, I had the same type of reporting on one of the online newspapers, where they accuse me of "Crimes against humanity" for the alert levels on Netc and hiding the information. Most of the time, i just ignore them.


Sun Sep 21, 2014 3:19 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:41 am
Posts: 26
Location: Sandy Valley, NV
LOL. You know the old saying, no good deeds go unpunished.


Sun Sep 21, 2014 4:56 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 1:08 pm
Posts: 20
Question:

Is the Ronald Reagan "hot" enough to send the CPM count that high?
If that's the case we've got a problem here.......


Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:09 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:41 am
Posts: 26
Location: Sandy Valley, NV
After I read your post I did a quick search:

The answer in my opinion is yes.

"Senior Chief Michael Sebourn, a radiation-decontamination officer assigned to test the aircraft carrier, said that radiation levels measured 300 times higher than what was considered safe at one point."

http://ecowatch.com/2013/12/27/ronald-r ... radiation/


Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:58 am
Profile

Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 1:08 pm
Posts: 20
The ship was decontaminated in Bremerton Washington for a year and a half. So I would tend to think it would not emit that high of radiation just sitting at the dock. I would consider the posibility that it might have vented some radiation. It is a nuclear powered ship. I read somewhere that the NRC allows averaging of the numbers used to report releases of radioactive gases. For instance a nuclear power plant operator can realease a large amount of radiation once or twice a year and then divide it out by 365 days for a daily average that complies with the daily limits. I suppose the radiation could be from Japan as well. Didn't San Diego get hit pretty bad in March of 2011? I wouldn't be surpised if "fingers" of air currents carry higher amounts of contamination that is STILL spewing from the Fukushima area and travel long distances across the flat ocean surface. Why don't we just ask the EPA, I mean this is a free society and we do finance the EPA with our mandatory payroll deductions every week. Let's give 'em a call and I'm sure they'll be more than happy to answer all of our questions!


Wed Sep 24, 2014 11:02 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:41 am
Posts: 26
Location: Sandy Valley, NV
I don't know squat about the physics of nuclear material, but can't the ship's structure absorb the nuclear material in a way that it all can't be washed off?


Wed Sep 24, 2014 2:44 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 1:08 pm
Posts: 20
I read that a sailor claimed it was 300 times backround radiation on the ship during their time stationed off shore from Japan. So, with my G.c. I get an average count of about 40 cpm in L.A. \ 40x300=12,000cpm doesn't sound too good, does it?

But according to the Wiki page steel is the next best thing to lead to reflect radiation and I'm sure the ship is made from steel.

I think the major biological problem was inhaling the air and drinking the ship's water.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_protection


Thu Sep 25, 2014 10:53 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 13 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by STSoftware.