The above post provides another opportunity to cite my anti-nuke IQ test:

Suppose I have a given amount of radioactive material; "X" Bq of radioactivity and the following cases:

A) I take 1 gallon of water from the ocean and dissolve the "X" Bq in it; and dump it back into the ocean.

B) I take 100 gallons of water from the ocean and dissolve the "X" Bq in it; and dump it back into the ocean.

C) I take 10,000 gallons of water from the ocean and dissolve the "X" Bq in it; and dump it back into the ocean.

D) I take 1,000,000 gallons of water from the ocean and dissolve the "X" Bq in it; and dump it back into the ocean.

Now for the anti-nuke IQ Test; which of the above cases is the worst; ( or are they all the same ).

The answer to that question will give one an indication of the IQ of the anti-nuke.

The anti-nukes just LOVE to quote how many gallons of water; but for some reason, they shy away from telling the ACTUAL AMOUNT of radioactivity. I "wonder" why that is? (NOT!!)

PamW

Suppose I have a given amount of radioactive material; "X" Bq of radioactivity and the following cases:

A) I take 1 gallon of water from the ocean and dissolve the "X" Bq in it; and dump it back into the ocean.
Do this every day since the disaster happened (at present, that is 1011 days)
So now we're at X*1011 Bq

B) I take 100 gallons of water from the ocean and dissolve the "X*1011" Bq in it; and dump it back into the ocean.

C) I take 10,000 gallons of water from the ocean and dissolve the "X*1011" Bq in it; and dump it back into the ocean.

D) I take 1,000,000 gallons of water from the ocean and dissolve the "X*1011" Bq in it; and dump it back into the ocean.

Now for the pro-nuke IQ Test; how many Bq will you have dumped into the ocean tomorrow? next week? next month? next year? next decade?

Bonus questions: how many Bq will find their way into biological organisms, which become part of the food chain and are subject to bio-concentration? what are the differences between an assumed even dilution, vs. local concentrations? what happened to the corium in reactors 1, 2 and 3 -- and what effects could those have on the groundwater in Japan?

The answer to these questions will give one an indication of the IQ of the pro-nuke.

ljm2002,

The anti-nuke IQ test is perfectly well-posed and answerable INDEPENDENT of the value of "X".

The above pro-nuke IQ test is ILL POSED. The answer depends on the ACTUAL VALUE of "X", which was NOT specified.

Before parroting a post; please THINK next time, and attempt to answer the question you pose.

There's a reason it is called an IQ Test.

ILL POSED IQ test problem REJECTED

PamW

...a simple additive problem: your question assumes X Bq but does not address the continuing addition of X Bq each and every day. My re-posing does not question your assertion that the # of gallons of water is immaterial to the amount of radiation contained in it; however, it does bring to the forefront the FACT that there is another X Bq EACH AND EVERY DAY from this ongoing disaster.

And of course, the effects of locally higher radiation concentrations, and the uptake of radioactive particles by organisms, are also highly relevant factors in how this radiation can affect life.

But you go ahead and REJECT the test. That will be recorded as a FAIL, 0 score!

ljm2002,

Evidently you don't understand that "X" is the TOTAL amount of Fukushima radioactivity which is NOT increasing.

The Fukushima nuclear fuel has melted and is no longer held in the proper geometric lattice that it needs to sustain a crititicality.

Therefore Fukishima can no longer make additional radioactive material; the amount of radioactivity there now is the amount that will be there in the future minus the amount that decays.

ljm2002; you are NOT a scientist and therefore have ZERO credentials in teaching / making tests; so any scores "recorded" by you are MEANINGLESS.

I'm a scientist with the credentials to teach at the University level.

PamW

Deadly Force Is Authorized
http://www.democraticunderground.com/112761458