Fukushima kaboom?

[Taro Toporific]

NHK Expose Undisclosed Fukushima Nuclear Incident Report
japanCRUSH.com | November 18, 2012
...NHK, published on November 17, claims the existence of undisclosed reports, created at the time of the nuclear disaster, that show the radioactivity levels to be much higher than Tokyo Electric Power Company who own the power plants involved, have previously made public. This lends weight to the argument that the smoke seen emanating from the reactors of the Daiichi {No. 1} plant on March 15 and March 16 were not the consequence of a water-based hydrogen explosion, but may well have been a nuclear explosion, with experts saying that more detailed investigation is now necessary.
More...

rad_background.jpg

[Yokohammer]

Now where in the heck did Japan Crush get "may well have been a nuclear explosion"? I think it's pretty clear that they just made that part up, and have therefore lost all credibility in my eyes. It's certainly not in the original Japanese.

There may have been another hydrogen explosion, or a steam explosion, or some other kind of leak that has gone unreported (which in itself demands an investigation), but there's just no way it could have been a "nuclear explosion."

I can't tell you how much I hate this type of naive speculative "journalism," because it does real damage. Get a basic education, for chrissake.

[Coligny]

Hammerman... well done getting cought in irrelevant technicalities...

You get your panties in a twist over "nukular explosion" which in this disaster would be the "why" part of the interrogation...

But honestly... from a health and safety standpoint this is watered down cat piss... you don't really give a fuck about the source of the explosion, if tritium was used to improve the yield or whatever details DM would love to drown you with. That's bullshit that will matter for other plants or should have mattered during the conception/building phase of the plant. Big words loved by journalists to scare small people.

The -previously- wonderfully hidden gem would be more

that show the radioactivity levels to be much higher than Tokyo Electric Power Company who own the power plants involved, have previously made public.

This, was a clear and present threat to populations at the time of the accident, still relevant today because of the toxicity and as qualification of the level of coverups that they allow themselves to employ. BTW, i'm pretty sure hydrogen and nukular explosion have different seismic signature (maybe mostly because hydrogen will want to blow upward while nukaplosion with this design of containment might want to blown downward). Need the seismometer record graphs from all those explosions to see the disparities and which one is believed to be of which kind.

I can't tell you how much I hate this type of naive speculative "journalism," because it does real damage. Get a basic education, for chrissake.

Education won't do anything if Tepco continue lying throught their teeth aboot anything. They are DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for any misguided information released. That's what happen when you try to bullshit people but are not smart enough to do it and just ride a superiority complex expecting the layman to sheeplessly listen to them.
You want to see where the real damage is... It's not in the news reporting... It's from Tepco's press conference and the plant ruins themselves.


I wonder (but with no real hope) if the NHK is not seeing the Jimmy Saville from the BBC scandal as a huge warning/wake up call. You can fuck around... but one day or another it's coming back with a vengeance.

[Yokohammer]

I understand where the fundamental problem is, but at this point I consider that to be a known entity. Established fact. Tepco lied, the government lied, and both parties are probably still lying about stuff that's eventually going to come out and bite them in the ass. Again and again.

We know that. Done deal.
Expect more on that subject for years to come, but that's not what I'm talking about here.

In my post above I'm addressing the inability of certain news sources to deliver actual news in a factual and unbiased manner, and the damage that causes.

[Coligny]

If you consider miscategorisation of nukular versus hydrogen a bias... you are already one step too far in the political games of this crisis.

That would be like calling bias if a train accident is blamed on the brakes instead of a track failure. You don't care aboot this if the train is still burning.

And no, what you call and dismiss as "known entity" is not a done deal. Everytime the estimated amount released or the duration of the release change you basically have to go back to your weather/wind/topographic maps and update the estimated area of dispersal. It is as of today still much more damaging than the source of the explosion.

At the time-T of the explosion, knowing what the type was would have allowed a better estimation-forecast of the zone threatened and the nature of the threat. As of today, it's seems more threatening to property value/touristic income or shareholder stakes...

Basically, at
T-time: nature of explosion gives you what to expect (better hide the kind)
Today: nature of what you find can clue you into what the explosion was (better hide what you find and how much)
Tepco's policy: "Explosion ? what explosion ? oh, this smoke ? it's Tanaka making tea..."

[Yokohammer]

I'm not dismissing anything Coligny.
I get the underlying problem, and I understand it's not over, but that's not what I'm talking about here.

Quite simple.

You and I are talking about different things.

We can talk about what you want to talk about if you like. We have already done so at length, and will probably continue to do so at length. But right here, right now, I'm talking about bad journalism.

[Screwed-down Hairdo]

In my post above I'm addressing the inability of certain news sources to deliver actual news in a factual and unbiased manner, and the damage that causes.

I think overtly opinionated news coverage is already the norm in at least the English-speaking world and much of the Japanese language news coverage outside of the mainstream.
Presenting news is an extremely costly business and doing it with accuracy and integrity (there is always some bias involved...unbiased is impossible, if also unsifted) while covering costs is probably impossible.
You're absolutely right to say it's a damaging trend. But it's going to take realization of the damage this does before anything changes. I doubt it ever will. I question whether society has the will to adapt to what's needed. And I argue that the vast majority of society has no interest in news that doesn't affect them directly either immediately or threatens to do so imminently.
The outlook for society watchdogs is pretty bleak...

Sorry, probably off on the wrong tangent...

[Coligny]

Sorry, probably off on the wrong tangent...

also called "monday"

[Screwed-down Hairdo]

Sorry, probably off on the wrong tangent...

Allow me to qualify that I wrote this comment coincidentally before Hammer and Coligny continued their discussion.

It was directed in no way at either...just that I felt I may have lost the plot.

[Yokohammer]

And now, in a neat nested quote trick, you have succeeded in attributing that comment to moi!
Aaaargh! The injustice!

(No problem, really).

[Screwed-down Hairdo]

See how easy it is to manipulate?

(Just kidding....didn't even realize...)