🔒 Locked

scary..

Started by Jesper T Oct 8, 2003 at 12:05 PM 35 replies 1.1k views

Original Post

Oct 8, 2003 at 12:05 PM

WARNING: Not for the squeemish. clicky Any thoughts? Does anyone have alternate sources to confirm the facts they state? [edited by - Strife on October 8, 2003 2:43:24 PM]

krez

Oct 8, 2003 at 1:02 PM

those deformed babies are stock footage, although i cannot comment on the statistics given.

Stonicus

Oct 8, 2003 at 1:04 PM

That site is wrong, WWII was first nuclear war.

kordova

Oct 8, 2003 at 1:19 PM

quote:
Original post by Stonicus
That site is wrong, WWII was first nuclear war.

I think they meant a war in which nuclear weapons were used repeatedly and all throughout. World War II could be taken not as a nuclear war in that it was a threat that it would become a nuclear war if it continued. Then again I could just be a paralogist.

[paralogist] [Lisp is King] [Support Codesprout]
Part of the Lisp revolution since 03.30.03

[edited by - kordova on October 8, 2003 2:20:26 PM]

CoffeeMug

Oct 8, 2003 at 2:10 PM

While it is striking and hard to watch, I wouldn''t take any presentation seriously that doesn''t provide sources for the statistics they used. They might have made up the numbers and used completely unrelated pictures for all I know. I will research this though.

CoffeeMug

Oct 8, 2003 at 2:57 PM

Here is a link to a 300 page report by UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) regarding depleted uranium in Kosovo. According to the report no significant risks were found due to very low levels of contamination. The 3.5 billion half life is bullshit, the report suggests that whithin 35 years of the original contamination the risks effectively become nil.

Apparently all the depleted uranium talk is anti american propaganda that has no scientific grounds behind it.

Jesper T

Oct 8, 2003 at 3:11 PM

My physics table lists 5 isotopes of Uranium:

U232, half life: 68.9 yrs
U234, half life: 247000 yrs
U235, half life: 710000000 yrs
U236, half life: 23400000 yrs
U238, half life: 4500000000 yrs

I dont know which one of them is DU though.

Edit: The flash sayss 4.5 billion years, which is the same as U238

Edit2: half life, ok

[edited by - Jesper T on October 8, 2003 4:20:21 PM]

klems

Oct 8, 2003 at 3:15 PM

CoffeeMug, are you saying depleded uranium isn''t dangerous?

[language nazi mode]...and it''s called half life, not half time.

[/language nazi mode]

Bill Gates: Give us your money.
China: Global Thermonuclear Mayhem
- VertexNormal

capn_midnight

Oct 8, 2003 at 3:32 PM

Here is a link regarding uranium

depleted uranium is basically natural uranium in different proportions of u-238, u-235, and u-234.

However, I am confident that the military will elliminate the us of DU if it is definitevly determined that DU is dangerous to the enviroment. I mean, they elliminated lead, why wouldn''t they do the same for DU.

CoffeeMug

Oct 8, 2003 at 3:49 PM

quote:
Original post by Valderman
CoffeeMug, are you saying depleded uranium isn''t dangerous?

Read the report. They found that the concentrations of DU caused by military strikes are not significant to be a risk. According the report it certainly can''t cause the problems the presentation in OP suggested. The risks deminish to nil within 35 years.

If you''re interested, read the report. There are a few credible sources like WHO and UNEP that aren''t interested in anti-US propaganda and provide reasonable information.

Dungeon Master

Oct 8, 2003 at 4:09 PM

If the half-life of a radioactive piece of whatever is how long it takes to divide it''s radiation levels by half, wouldn''t that mean that it would NEVER become non radioactive? It''s levels would just be so small that it wouldn''t affect anything.

DakeDesu

Oct 8, 2003 at 4:17 PM

quote:
Original post by CoffeeMug
quote:
Original post by Valderman
CoffeeMug, are you saying depleded uranium isn''t dangerous?

Read the report. They found that the concentrations of DU caused by military strikes are not significant to be a risk. According the report it certainly can''t cause the problems the presentation in OP suggested. The risks deminish to nil within 35 years.

If you''re interested, read the report. There are a few credible sources like WHO and UNEP that aren''t interested in anti-US propaganda and provide reasonable information.

Remember something that went a little something like "duck and cover?"

Senses777

Oct 8, 2003 at 4:24 PM

quote:
Original post by Dungeon Master
If the half-life of a radioactive piece of whatever is how long it takes to divide it''s radiation levels by half, wouldn''t that mean that it would NEVER become non radioactive? It''s levels would just be so small that it wouldn''t affect anything.

Don''t be such a relativist.

A) It WILL eventually all dissipate, because there is a finite amount of it and half life works on statisticall averages, meaning it is not EXACT, just very likely to always be pretty close. Technically, by the current theory, all the uranium in the universe could dissipate all at once and turn into lead. Its just so unlikely that its not going to happen.

B) It doesn''t need to dissipate in order for it to become ineffective at harming the environment/people. It can simply sink into the ground very deep (it is heavier), and spread about. Once spread, the effects are pretty much null.

Some of those photos are from Harlequin fetuses, and I think I have seen them before, meaning, this could very well be bunk. Especially since I really doubt harlequin fetuses are a product of radiation.

Far too much time has passed
For us to lament that we were in love.

CoffeeMug

Oct 8, 2003 at 4:31 PM

quote:
Original post by DakeDesu
Remember something that went a little something like "duck and cover?"

griffenjam

Oct 8, 2003 at 4:45 PM

You don''t know "Duck and cover"!!!!!!

The US government used to send these videos to schools and TV stations to tell people what to do if we are attacked with nuclear weapons. They said we could survive a nuclear attack if we "Duck and cover" normally that meant hide under a desk or behind a wall or something.

dede

Oct 8, 2003 at 5:02 PM

Those babies are NOT attacked thru DU. Getting hit by a DU is prolly better for you than convential weapons.

Basically, DU punches a hole thru your tank about 2 inches around, and sucks everything out of that hole from the inside, including you. Rather gross, however, its better than being cooked alive in your tank, or being mostly, but not completely blown to pieces, and spending a few more minutes dying.

Although the aftermath is much grosser, my friends in Iraq I said they would rather use DU and kill people without them suffering.

As saying the Iraq was the first nuclear, yes, that is almost true, Iraq is the first place to use DU. Kind of a strech to go from nuclear to DU tho.

The babies look more like rigi-mortis has set in, and they''ve balooned up because of that, rather than radiation poisioning.

Of course, I''m not expert.

~~~~~
" I...went from hopeless to sucky in a relatively short time." - entivore.
Download and play Slime King I.

Raduprv

Oct 8, 2003 at 5:17 PM

quote:
Original post by dede
Basically, DU punches a hole thru your tank about 2 inches around, and sucks everything out of that hole from the inside, including you.

Explain that to me, I don''t get it.

Height Map Editor | Eternal Lands | Fast User Directory