User Controls
ACQUITTED FOREVER
-
2020-02-11 at 7:23 AM UTCCancers are never going to stop humanity from thriving. Actually, it helps us thrive by some measures, keeping the pensioner population down.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-02-11 at 7:26 AM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker LOOL From what you "hear". Tell me, where did you "hear" this. Tell me and i'll tell you what I heard about John Wayne,
John Wayne, Susan Hayward, and 90 other people developed cancer after filming “The Conqueror” near a nuclear testing site
https://www.thevintagenews.com/2018/02/19/the-conqueror-film/ -
2020-02-11 at 7:39 AM UTC
-
2020-02-11 at 9:23 AM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny just because deers cant say they've got stage 4 cancers.
peeps and animals getting cancers everywhere, what's your point?
There has never been any dead zone around chernobyl, radiation and nuclear bombs are not the apocalypse that they are made out to be, that was my point.
. -
2020-02-11 at 9:33 AM UTC
Originally posted by Narc peeps and animals getting cancers everywhere, what's your point?
There has never been any dead zone around chernobyl, radiation and nuclear bombs are not the apocalypse that they are made out to be, that was my point.
.
There was for a few months after the accident. That's what the red forest was. -
2020-02-11 at 10:39 AM UTC
Originally posted by Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country There was for a few months after the accident. That's what the red forest was.
Animals around the area still have major radiation issues and the red forest thinned out after the blast. The people who live there get cancer easily.
Idk how you could think its 'not that bad'. -
2020-02-11 at 11:26 AM UTC
-
2020-02-11 at 12:47 PM UTC
-
2020-02-11 at 2:45 PM UTC
Originally posted by Narc Its worth noting that flora and fauna around Chernobyl is thriving perfectly well, always has been.
.
It is actually thriving better now than it did before. There have been several documentaries made on this very subject. They believe that the absence of man is the main reason for the current abundance, -
2020-02-11 at 2:49 PM UTC
Originally posted by MexicanMasterRace Animals around the area still have major radiation issues and the red forest thinned out after the blast. The people who live there get cancer easily.
Idk how you could think its 'not that bad'.
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny ok, go ahead and live there.
My argument isn't 'its not that bad'. My argument is that nuclear bombs and the radiation they produce isn't the total disaster that they are made out to be by scaremongering media and politicians.As humans were evacuated from the area in 1986, animals moved in despite the radiation. The flora and fauna of the Red Forest have been dramatically affected by the accident. It seems that the biodiversity of the Red Forest has increased in the years following the disaster.[6] There are reports of some stunted plants in the area. Wild boar multiplied eightfold between 1986 and 1988.[1]
The site of the Red Forest remains one of the most contaminated areas in the world.[3] However, it has proved to be an astonishingly fertile habitat for many endangered species. The evacuation of the area surrounding the nuclear reactor has created a lush and unique wildlife refuge. In the 1996 BBC Horizon documentary "Inside Chernobyl's Sarcophagus", birds are seen flying in and out of large holes in the structure of the former nuclear reactor. The long-term impact of the fallout on the flora and fauna of the region is not fully known, as plants and animals have significantly different and varying radiologic tolerance. Some birds are reported with stunted tail feathers (which interferes with breeding). Storks, wolves, beavers, deer, and eagles have been reported in the area.[7][8]
The nature of the area seems to have not only survived, but flourished due to significant reduction of human impact. The zone has become a "Radiological Reserve", a classic example of an involuntary park. Currently, there is concern about contamination of the soil with strontium-90 and caesium-137, which have half-lives of about 30 years. The highest levels of caesium-137 are found in the surface layers of the soil where they are absorbed by plants, and insects living there today. Some scientists fear that radioactivity will affect the land for the next several generations.[10][11]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Forest
. -
2020-02-11 at 3:30 PM UTC
Originally posted by Splam Cancers are never going to stop humanity from thriving. Actually, it helps us thrive by some measures, keeping the pensioner population down.
Same can be said about every other fucking sign. Cancers I've been fairly cool..can only one cancer I never got along with but she is dead and buried so there is that. -
2020-02-11 at 4:50 PM UTC
-
2020-02-11 at 11:55 PM UTC
Originally posted by MexicanMasterRace Animals around the area still have major radiation issues and the red forest thinned out after the blast. The people who live there get cancer easily.
Idk how you could think its 'not that bad'.
Simple. The alternative is to run out of energy which would trigger a post apocalyptic dystopian society where everybody's fending for themselves and surviving on what little resources they have.
Either that or tolerate and accept a few nuclear accidents here and there, and learn from it. Within 100 years all our tractors will be running on batteries charged from nuclear power plants. Or we ditch nuclear and run out of the energy required to produce food. Then something 'bad' happens. -
2020-02-12 at 12:10 AM UTC
Originally posted by Splam Simple. The alternative is to run out of energy which would trigger a post apocalyptic dystopian society where everybody's fending for themselves and surviving on what little resources they have.
Either that or tolerate and accept a few nuclear accidents here and there, and learn from it. Within 100 years all our tractors will be running on batteries charged from nuclear power plants. Or we ditch nuclear and run out of the energy required to produce food. Then something 'bad' happens.
Won't even be able to eat the fat people, because they'll all be irradiated well beyond safe-to-consume levels. -
2020-02-12 at 12:24 AM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL Won't even be able to eat the fat people, because they'll all be irradiated well beyond safe-to-consume levels.
Beyond safe if you wish to live to 100 sure. If Living long enough to raise on generation is your goal you'll be fine. Even then it's not a certain thing - perhaps nuclear power technology is at the point where we'll never have another disaster at the scale of chernobyl ever again.
Either that or 90% of world's population dies due to energy shortage once we run out of fossil fuels. -
2020-02-12 at 12:41 AM UTCAs soon as the power grids go down permanently, because the New World Order goons will shut them all off, to force people to submit, society as we know it collapses.
-
2020-02-12 at 5 AM UTC
Originally posted by Narc My argument isn't 'its not that bad'. My argument is that nuclear bombs and the radiation they produce isn't the total disaster that they are made out to be by scaremongering media and politicians.
idk about you but im not a wild boar and dont identify as one.
anything thats not good for humans = not good. no point in having radioactive reserve and having those animals that cant be harvested for food.
its like having daughters and not being able to harvest them for personal gain, and pleasure. -
2020-02-12 at 12:18 PM UTC
-
2020-02-12 at 12:46 PM UTC
-
2020-02-12 at 12:55 PM UTCAnyway, in that situation you'd be advised to sticking to eating rabbits and other ground burrowing animals for food as they would have much less exposure to the radiation. Also eat root vegetables like potatoes, carrots, parsnips, etc, for the same reason. And find fast flowing streams for water to drink from. after 12 days in your shelter it would be safe to come out for a normal working day, 8 hours a day, then spend the rest of the time in the shelter. After 3 months you can increase that to 16 hours per day outside the shelter but best advised to limit it where possible. The less time you spend out of the shelter is still less time exposed to the fallout that will still be in the area after the blast.
.
