7-15-06 Chernobyl

Twenty years ago, the Chernobyl disaster began. The effects of the radiation are still being debated...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/?feed=TopNews&article=UPI-1-20060418-11381200-bc-germany-chernobyl.xml

Was it only four to nine thousand or fifty to one hundred thousand people that were affected so adversely that their deaths can ultimately be attributed to the radiation from the meltdown of the reactor? It gives me great faith in "science" that the pro-nuke factions can come up with the small numbers and the anti-nuke factions can come up with the large numbers. It's all so "scientific", isn't it?

Here's a link to a documentary film on the subject...

http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/chernobylheart/index.html

The film is a "must see" for anyone who ever thought the Chernobyl disaster happened twenty years ago, and this is just history. The disaster is ongoing, and it's far from over.

And then there's this link, which describes a study done recently to find out whether Chernobyl radiation caused thyrdoid cancer...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/07/060714175324.htm

Gee, now this study really does appear to have finally applied some truly sober, objective science on this issue, doesn't it? It's so calm and low key, isn't it?

Pretending that there's no link (or even just a small, low key, underpublicized link) between exposure to various forms of radiation and various physical ills leads us to the present day use of "depleted uranium" in weaponry. As if the Chernobyl disaster isn't enough of a wakeup call for this civilization, the US military has been irradiating the areas of every military engagement they've had over the past several years. Not only are the natives of those countries getting sick and dying from radiation exposure as a result of the use of depleted uranium weaponry, our own soldiers are also getting sick and dying from this as well. It's a dirty little secret, so don't get too upset about it because your government certainly isn't worried about it.

The fact is that the world incidence of various forms of cancer have risen in direct proportion to the worldwide increase in ambient radiation, beginning with the end of World War II. This radiation increase was really small, because it was caused by only a couple thousand atomic and thermonuclear "test" explosions over the course of a couple decades after the war. The amount of radiation these tests added to the worldwide background radiation, or "ambient" radiation as I referred to it above, was considered insignificant. But isn't it an amazing coincidence that the same period of time showed a dramatic increase in the incidence of cancer, worldwide? Of course, this blatantly clear coincidence can't be verified "scientifically" because you'd have to repeat the experiment... Subsequently, we can add in Chernobyl and the US military use of depleted uranium in weaponry to this already blatant "coincidence" between radiation in the environment and illness.

What really bothers me the most about all of this is the politics of the whole thing. If you're in any way "anti-nuke", then you're supposedly also left-wing. And if you're "pro-nuke", then you're supposedly also right-wing. If you're the former, then you can spin the science to preach to the choir about the "anti-nuke" stance, such as the larger numbers of victims of Chernobyl. And if you're the latter, then you can spin the science about the "pro-nuke" stance, such as the smaller numbers of vicitims of Chernobyl.

What I want to know is, where's the REAL science?