tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post1591473909756486438..comments2023-12-23T05:14:34.273-05:00Comments on Wit's End: The Final PuffGail Zawackihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01800944469843206253noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-43986594065136169762012-10-04T18:19:11.068-04:002012-10-04T18:19:11.068-04:00Reader Phil has left the following comment, which ...Reader Phil has left the following comment, which got swallowed mysteriously by blogger, so I am posting it myself:<br /><br />"Warburg got the Nobel prize for proving cancer resulted from an oxygen starved acid environment.<br /><br />The present loss of oxygen in our acidic atmosphere undoubtedly compromises immune systems and<br />increases cancer rates. <br /><br />One must enhance one's immune system with additional oxygen and avoid all unnatural chemicals."Gail Zawackihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01800944469843206253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-32720707796068318702012-10-04T10:34:16.504-04:002012-10-04T10:34:16.504-04:00Personal responsibility. It's very important. ...Personal responsibility. It's very important. And it's always the other fellow's. <br /><br />"forest jihad"<br /><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/9585098/Al-Qaeda-blamed-for-Europe-wide-forest-fires.html" rel="nofollow">Al-Qaeda blamed for Europe-wide forest fires</a> <br />The Telegraph (UK) 03 Oct 2012<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-49182825728024885972012-10-04T07:46:53.428-04:002012-10-04T07:46:53.428-04:00Sorry Anon, I didn't mean to misinterpret. I ...Sorry Anon, I didn't mean to misinterpret. I skimmed through the links at the ccnr. and the chapter of The Petkau Effect but I'm not seeing any controlled studies with plants or trees and radiation. I read through Chapter 7: http://www.nuclearreader.info/chapter7.html<br /><br />I have (and had) no doubt that nuclear radiation has hideous effects on people on plants. What I question, absent evidence, is whether it has a role in the global decline of forets. The chapter I linked to, for instance, has photos of plants allegedly (and I believe correctly) with genetic mutations as a result of the TMI meltdown. However, that is very localized and more importantly, that is not the sort of widespread damage I have been recording on this blog since 2009, which has been reproduced in countless fumigation experiments with ozone.<br /><br />I'm against nuclear power, and nuclear weapons. I think it's too dangerous, because of the meltdowns, the potential for war obviously, and the impossibility of assuring safe storage for waste for thousands of years, an absurd notion.<br /><br />It's possible that low-level radiation plays a role in forest decline but it wouldn't surprise me if it is a factor only immediately downwind of large emissions - TMI, Chernobyl and Fukushima.<br /><br />Any more links would be appreciated - I haven't read everything yet but I'll keep at it.<br /><br />Thanks for your contributions, I really do appreciate it.Gail Zawackihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01800944469843206253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-48275012322516310022012-10-04T00:17:10.737-04:002012-10-04T00:17:10.737-04:00"But, blaming ONE industry is a rather conven..."But, blaming ONE industry is a rather convenient cop-out."<br /><br />I never blamed one industry. The scientific studies linked to in my posts examine the ways that nuclear radiation enhances the harms done by other industries.<br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-30946906413013464942012-10-03T19:21:35.302-04:002012-10-03T19:21:35.302-04:00Terrific post.
Whales and trees - perfect analo...Terrific post. <br /><br />Whales and trees - perfect analogies <br />Thanks...<br />I especially liked the same pine tree imaged in two different years. rpaulihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00016149709193595632noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-36527066148891147162012-10-03T19:20:04.621-04:002012-10-03T19:20:04.621-04:00Maggie, and Anon, thank you for your contributions...Maggie, and Anon, thank you for your contributions. It is going to turn into a fulltime job for me to follow up on all your references, which I appreciate.<br /><br />Just for background - when I was pregnant with first daughter, I was like a whale in the summer that 3 Mile Island happened. I could hardly roll out of bed so I just lay there, and listened to my local radio station that was giving constant, minute-by-minute updates. It terrified me to the point that when she was a toddler I dragged her to a rather wild protest at Picatinny Arsenal in NY to demonstrate against Reagan's insane nuclear armageddon Star Wars program.<br /><br />The point is, I share many of your well-founded fears about nuclear radiation, and have for decades.<br /><br />But, blaming ONE industry is a rather convenient cop-out. It isn't any one industry, it isn't any secretive cabal, it isn't HAARP radiation or a New World Order contrail conspiracy, convenient as all those might be.<br /><br />Sorry.<br /><br />It's US. You and me, our lights and cars, our planes and buying stuff from the other side of the world. It's having too many babies consuming too much stuff.Gail Zawackihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01800944469843206253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-52381816574479035312012-10-03T18:56:54.927-04:002012-10-03T18:56:54.927-04:00Another is the book that Aaron mentioned, Ralph Gr...Another is the book that Aaron mentioned, Ralph Graub’s, The Petkau Effect: The Devasting Effect of Nuclear Radiation on Human Health and the Environment OR The Petkau Effect: Nuclear Radiation, People and Trees<br /><br /><br />The following excerpt from The Petkau Effect explains why plants are so much more sensitive to air pollution than animals. Also look at photos of deformed plants from the Pennsylvania Three Mile Island nuclear power plant area in chapter 7. The plant deformities were observed after the nuclear accident there in 1979.<br /><br />“The decline of the forests has grown from a disturbing trend to a catastrophe of dramatic proportions. Hardly has one study on the subject been finished than it is surpassed by another bearing worse tidings. Not so long ago, the march of death was confined to certain species in certain locations - today it is a virtually global epidemic. Fruit trees are showing the same symptoms as those of the forest. 30 percent of the fruit trees in the Canton of Thurgovi in Switzerland are destroyed. Now they fear the vineyards will follow. <br />“We now have proof of the risk of interrupting the very basis of the life cycle of plants, animals and man - in brief, photosynthesis on Earth is endangered! <br />“There is a fundamental difference between plants and animals, and this determines why plants are so much more sensitive to air pollution. We animals need air for its oxygen, to burn our food so as to obtain energy. The plant, however, gets almost all of its nutrition in the form of carbon, which is contained in the air in the form of carbonic acid (C02) and is made available to the plant through the process of photosynthesis. The plant must take in MUCH more air than animals to get enough carbon.<br />“The prodigious aeration of the plants explains their tremendous sensitivity to air pollution. The toxic effects of airborn pollutants show up earlier in plants than in the human. <br />“Carbon 14 is produced by cosmic rays, bomb tests and nuclear power plants. By 1963, Carbon 14 in the Northern Hemisphere had increased by 100 percent, and by 1984, about one decade later, it had increased another 25 percent. An increase in radioactivity of only one percent eventually translates into a decline in tree growth of about 18 percent. It is interesting to note that a global increase of Carbon 14 - one such as has never before been seen - parallels the slowing growth and the endemic death of trees from Lebanon to the Himalayas. <br />“This is why we must give immediate priority to clarifying the influence of radioactivity in our environment.” <br /><br />http://www.nuclearreader.info/chapter3.html<br />maggie1435https://www.blogger.com/profile/04939633838961060333noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-28093728290815449612012-10-03T18:55:50.613-04:002012-10-03T18:55:50.613-04:00One place to start might be with Walter Russell’s ...One place to start might be with Walter Russell’s Atomic Suicide? (1957), he points out that one nuclear facility is worse than many bombs in its effects on our atmosphere.<br />http://www.atomicsuicide.net/<br /><br />The number of nuclear facilities has almost doubled since 1975 (not including military nuclear facilities, etc.) http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/mar/18/nuclear-reactors-power-stations-world-list-map<br /><br />Krypton-85 Releases from Nuclear Reprocessing Facilities as a Co-Factor in the Destruction of the Stratospheric Ozone Layer, with Wieland Giebel, Strahlentelex, Vol. 172-173, 1-8, March 3, 1994.<br />http://www.strahlentelex.de/Geschichte.htm<br /><br />“An article in a German journal Strahlentelex (March 3, 1994) explains that the nuclear industry is responsible for the ozone hole. The authors, Giebel and Sternglass explains that radioactive gases like krypton-85 from nuclear plants and from the nuclear fuel recycling plants go up to the stratosphere where they create water droplets from the moisture which in turn form ice crystals on the surface of which the destruction of the ozone by the fluorhydrocarbons is greatly accelerated.” (from link in post above)<br /><br /><br />A new compilation of the atmospheric 85krypton inventories from 1945 to 2000 and its evaluation in a global transport model.By: Winger, K.; Feichter, J.; Kalinowski, M.B.; Sartorius, H.; Schlosser, C. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity.Mar2005, Vol. 80 Issue 2, p183-215. 33p. Abstract: Abstract: This paper gives the yearly 85Kr emissions of all known reprocessing facilities, which are the main sources of 85Kr in the atmosphere since 1945, for the years 1945 until 2000. According to this inventory 10,600PBq (Peta=1015) of 85Kr have been globally emitted from the year 1945 until the end of 2000. The global atmospheric inventory at the end of the year 2000 amounts to 4800PBq. <br /><br />The global health effects of nuclear war<br />Published in Current Affairs Bulletin, Vol. 59, No. 7, December 1982, pp. 14-26<br />Brian Martin<br />http://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/82cab/index.html<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-13881599642298831572012-10-03T07:58:02.387-04:002012-10-03T07:58:02.387-04:00Thanks for the link to Sara Shannon's blog, I ...Thanks for the link to Sara Shannon's blog, I will follow up on that. It's very intriguing. Having said that, nuclear radiation as the primary driver for global forest decline doesn't quite fit the facts as I understand them. For one thing, by far the bulk of atmospheric nuclear testing occurred prior to the 1963 partial test ban was adopted. And yet, the visible impacts to annual foliage didn't become prevalent until 2009, which since then have rapidly become almost ubiquitous. The constant background level of zone, by contrast to nuclear fallout, has been inexorably increasing, particularly since the rise of Asian precursor emissions.<br /><br />Transport of precursors and Increasing levels of ozone have been conclusively demonstrated through satellite studies as well as monitoring on the ground. The characteristic damage to leaves has been documented in dozens of studies. There are some pretty good examples in this post:<br /><br />http://witsendnj.blogspot.com/2012/03/void-between-rhetoric-and-reality.html<br /><br />along with photos of what happens to potatoes in controlled fumigation experiments. Roots are known to shrink even before damage is registered on leaves or needles, so the fact that trees are dying isn't any surprise, given that it's almost impossible to find a leaf without some sort of injury.<br /><br />There could be some synergistic effect nuclear or or other types of radiation - typically ozone is formed, after all, by interactions between reactive nitrogen, volatile organic compounds, and UV radiation. So I am very interested to look into a possible connection. But I would like to see some links to scientific experiments comparing non-radiated plants with radiated plants at different exposures. I'll look for them - if you know of any, please send links.<br /><br />And as I pointed out at Bobby1's excellent blog - the precipitous decline in vegetative health predates the Fukushima tsunami and meltdown. So that leaves residuals from nuclear tests and fugitive emissions from power plants as the source. There are so many other toxic chemicals in the environment that are also known to cause autoimmune disorders and cancers, it would be hard to sort them out from radiation. Again, if you have any scientific basis for those assertions, please share them and meanwhile, I read up on what you have already provided.<br /><br />thanks for reading,<br /><br />Gail Gail Zawackihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01800944469843206253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-3207047080914857582012-10-03T01:39:27.906-04:002012-10-03T01:39:27.906-04:00Thanks for this impressive analysis. I especially ...Thanks for this impressive analysis. I especially like your use of Melville!<br /><br />Nuclear radiation is central to the death of the trees, this is reposted from Bobby1's blog. <br /><br />AN OVERVIEW<br /><br />HAZARDS OF LOW LEVEL RADIOACTIVITY<br /><br />by Sara Shannon<br /><br />Winter, 1998<br /><br />http://ratical.org/radiation/HoLLR.html<br /><br />(4) LOSS OF OXYGEN GLOBALLY<br />Walter Russell, a visionary artist and scientist, predicted in his book Atomic Suicide? published in 1957 that due to man-made radioactivity we would experience a loss of oxygen in the air that we breathe. In a similar way to the predictions of Andrei Sakharov in the 1950′s, Walter Russell’s foresight is now coming true. Our current oxygen resources are low. The percentage of oxygen in the air is down to about 19 percent. (BioTech News 1997) The expected amount is 21 percent oxygen. Some experts say that we may have originally evolved in an atmosphere of 38 percent oxygen. But now, due to the loss of forests and ocean plankton, our two sources of oxygen production, measurements of oxygen as low as 12 percent and 15 percent have been made in heavily industrialized areas. This oxygen-depleted condition is a contributing cause of the generalized lack of well-being that many are experiencing. And it does not look good for the future. We need oxygen to live!<br /><br />Trees and green plants provide about half, and plankton provide the other half of our oxygen. Phytoplankton, which are the base of the marine food chain, is declining. Various studies confirm this: plankton in parts of the Antarctic Ocean is declining up to 12 percent. (S. Weiler. Testimony to Senate Commerce Committee, November 15, 1991)<br /><br />Trees absorb radioactive carbon-14 in place of stable forms of carbon and in this way they are gradually killed. The book, The Petkau Effect, by Ralph Graeub tells how radioactivity has harmed trees and forests: “It is assumed that the decisive physiological damage resulting in current forest death must have begun during the 1950′s. This is depicted in a reduction in density and width of tree rings, and in reduced growth, which is true in the Northern Hemisphere and in the Himalayas…. Neither aging, location, nor climate can be considered as the possible sole cause of damage…. The growth ring of a tree shows exactly what effects the tree has experienced, both in terms of time and seriousness…. During the 1950′s and 1960′s, there must have been a global wave of air pollution which caused the initial damage.”<br /><br />The author speculates that it could not be just the usual chemicals which are so damaging the trees. And he explains that these trees are mainly within the 30th to 60th parallels of northern latitude. “This zone contains the most nuclear power plants — over 300 — and almost all nuclear reprocessing centers. Also, the vast majority of nuclear weapons tests occurred in this area.”<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-56679422199166033752012-10-02T14:48:25.024-04:002012-10-02T14:48:25.024-04:00Here in the middle of the continent it is marginal...Here in the middle of the continent it is marginally less dire. I've seen a few very local spots that have a reasonable approximation of fall color. The rub is that as soon as the leaves hit a bright yellow or red they start crisping at the edge and soon fall off. Color survives a few days. What reaches the ground does not make a pile of leaves, it just goes to dust. So there will never be a complete vista of color, the brightest spots are brown or bare before all the dull green starts a change.<br /><br />Reading this blog I get to see what our forests will look like in a month or two. When I started reading here two years ago it seemed NJ was possibly six months ahead of my backyard. Now it's much closer. Still there's a lag, not much.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-66308971167422953112012-10-02T13:56:34.616-04:002012-10-02T13:56:34.616-04:00Heh, Plovering you should check out Bobby1's b...Heh, Plovering you should check out Bobby1's blog about trees and radiation. He's got some new videos on this post:<br /><br />http://optimalprediction.com/wp/dying-trees/Gail Zawackihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01800944469843206253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-65817665127193231452012-10-02T13:12:37.144-04:002012-10-02T13:12:37.144-04:00Watching our trees die at alarming rates from atmo...Watching our trees die at alarming rates from atmospheric pollution caused by chemtrails, antennae radiation, and HAARP Geo-engineering, one<br />wonders cui bono, who benefits from this destruction. <br /><br />Well, thanks to Gail, we now know that one beneficiary is Drux Group Plc, the U.K.'s biggest coal-fired, energy generator who plans to burn wood instead. By 2017, Drux's annual fuel consumption will require the harvesting of 3 million acres. At an average 450 trees per acre, this runs to well over one billion trees. PLoveringhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04027992777731735792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5549306427964459740.post-77076896614431922022012-10-01T23:35:52.821-04:002012-10-01T23:35:52.821-04:00Yes, just drove the 89 highway through VT, and it&...Yes, just drove the 89 highway through VT, and it's rusty! Mossyhttp://www.gwenet.orgnoreply@blogger.com