|
Edited on Fri Apr-22-11 11:27 PM by SpoonFed
You say Djedi claimed some things and they are wrong:
> claimed that pool #4 was dry
We don't know. No one has sufficiently explained the uranium hitting the rest of the world just yet. Perhaps it ws dry and/or on fire. I certainly don't think they spent so much energy with helicopters and firefighters because it was full.
> bought the "thousands of degrees" nonsense (which is why this thread has my dander up)
We don't know. TEPCO sure as heck has not been forthcoming with data and what it has, it has repeatedly withdrawn and "corrected" due to all manner of reasons like bad translations, the equipment that had high readings were faulty, or simply saying "maybe" to everything.
So while I'm no world weary boiling water nuclear reactor engineer, at this point, I'm not sure anyone fully knows the state of the reactors and the pool do any degree of accuracy for the entire duration of this hellish nightmare.
> claimed they couldn't release steam and thus would be unable to contain the pressure.
We don't know. There were some claims if I recall correctly or at least speculation to that effect. Probably a result of the lack of fixed power or the draining dead of the batteries, and there was a battery fire too, IIRC.
> I thought those three guys who exposed their feet had received killing doses.
We don't know if they will die of some nuclear filth caused cancer later in life. If you take the media reports and TEPCO at face value, they received burns that required immediate medical attention but were not immediately life threatening when treated.
> I believed all the nonsense about active sustained fission going on in one or more cores (or a pool).
We don't know. It's been stated in various places by various experts that on one side it's completely impossible to the other side that it is happening as I write this, so you pardon me if I say that we don't all take your analysis at face value and believe it to be 100% correct since you have done nothing but downplay the severity of this radiological disaster from the beginning. You've even moved into complete nonsense territory now that things skated past TMI and probably well past Chornobyl at this point.
I read an interesting analysis in which the idea was that the more sea water they put on it (without neutron killing additives) the more they facilitated localized recriticality due to the moderating effect that water would have on unknown fuel geometry inside the destroyed reactor core. But hey, nobody's got a good look inside there, and that includes you.
> And you've been insufferably uncivil from day one.
And you? You see, some of us can actually see through the times when you are trying to keep a thinly veiled facade of civility and are not just the full-on all seeing and all knowing Teh Internets Nucular Expert Frodo Baggins Esquire (aka just being an arrogant know-it-all on a soap box)
Now... let me take a guess at why (despite you asking for one) the rest of us, who could compile an amusing list of your mistakes and awesome downplaying of the seriousness and consequences of this debacle since the very start, have not jumped at the opportunity to do so.
It centers around the fact that any newcomer can see the nonsense in your posting in whatever latest thread you have "contributed to" and probably doesn't need a sickening guided tour. Secondly, we've got better things to do than sieve the posts of the last month pulling out the gems of your contributions in much the same way that I don't want to go to the dog park and poke around the trash cans looking for a half-eaten sandwich. We're just not that hungry for it.
|