SRS131EMTFF

Oh without a doubt the entire world will be exposed to some sort of increased level of atmospheric radiation thanks to this event. The question now is how much and for how long? The answers to these questions will determine what level of exposure we are dealing with, we know already that it is bad enough in Japan to give radiation sickness to dozens of workers and contaminate two US Navy ships out at sea. As you said, no radiation is safe, the key determination for danger is the exposure. Part of my problem with the reporting of this crisis is they say it is x above normal or they found y levels above normal but they are not giving context or actual figures. I think I would feel more secure in my safety if I knew the exact levels so I could actually see how bad the problem is and how it might affect us. I would not worry about it contaminating water or the food chain, for the amount that could/is going into the atmosphere, it will obvious cycle but it will also decrease in concentration as it spreads across the entire globe. Obviously the levels will be highest around the plant but will they be above background concentration values half way across the world is a completely different question. It should be noted that in your existence is much more radioactive than you think, from your cell phone, to your basement, to the bricks in your home/office, to your drinking water etc etc etc all contain radioactive isotopes in different forms and concentrations all with various health effects. Depending on the scale of the disaster when it is all said and done the risk to most people will most likely be very minimal when compared potentially to say the Radon found in your basement which eventual decays to Pb in your lungs.

I believe that we are more prepared than we realize. We have plans, resources, mechanisms etc etc of handling disasters and incidents that many countries do not have. Taking the tsunami example, if an earthquake occurred at the Mid-Atlantic Trench causing a tsunami, even if it was traveling 500 miles per hour, it would not reach the US shores for at least 2 hours. We can reach people via TV, internet, radio, newspaper, telephone, cell phone, text message etc etc using these new methods of communication we can inform the public at risk what to do and how to prepare for this disaster. In that two hours I do not think we could evacuate major population centers or low lying areas but we could at least mobilize and activate vast amounts of resources. I would be willing to bet that within 6 hours of the notification of a impending natural disaster we as a country could mobilize enough resources between first responders, the military, private industry and government this side of the mississippi to handle the first stage of the incident. I have nothing to base my theory on nor am I commenting on its effectiveness, but I do believe we could be prepared if we had enough pre-warning.

The manor in which I answered the question was instead of asking are we prepared, I pointed out the likelihood of it occurring in the first place. We dont prepare for monsoons because we dont get any, we dont prepare for sand storms because we dont get any. So instead of answering what we would do if one happened, a question I don't have the answer to, I answered whether it could occur in the first place. If someone had asked is the East Coast prepared for monsoon season my answers would have been the same, yes it is possible but the odds of it occurring are small enough that we dont actually prepare for it beyond what would be done for a hurricane. (I am open to debate my terminology because the difference between a monsoon and hurricane is mostly geographical.) Another question that would have had the same type of answer is are we prepared to deal with a zombie apocalypse? Is it possible yes, but no we are not prepared. The reasons for my answer are all the same, before considering are we prepared, we should be considering if it can even happen.

While I certainly cannot disagree with anything you say I can say this, we have been monitoring earthquakes and volcanos for hundreds of years and yes we are better at predicting eruptions than earthquakes. However, depending on your opinion, education and point of view one can argue that the dynamics of earthquakes are much better understood because of its relationship to physics where as volcanos are much more dynamic systems that are much more unique and varied. While I can describe the relative motion of each tectonic plate, I can not describe, model and understand all of the forces at work in a volcano as I can for a tectonic motion. Although let me admit that my geologic training is not in the field volcanology, my training and research focuses much more on environmental, geomorphological and mineral geology. And with this I fear we have lost most of the membership of the Bravo, although please continue if you wish......

I stand corrected. Unfortunately I dont have a chance to read much non-fiction these days. Between my readings on stable isotope mechanics and Global tectonics I have no free time for my reads. In fact most of my information here comes from the "bible" of planetary motion "Global Tectonics" written by a personal friend, mentor and professor Dr. Keith Klepeis. Its a good read if you can stomach an entire book on geophysics and its relation to the relative motion of crustal bodies. Additionally, after doing so reading into Cumbre Vieja there is some reason to believe that the threat is overblown. There has been substantial evidence that some of the energy tied up the formation that would be released if the formation failed is being released in many smaller events that mirror what the actually event would look like but do not match the amount of energy that would actually have to be released to create a disaster of that magnitude. To say there is a split would accurate.

I believe you are referring to Krakatoa in the South Pacific and in that case the entire island blew apart killing about 37,000 people with the blast, tsunami and dust. Literally entire islands were washed away never to be seen again. And while I can not comment on the opinions of the scientific community in this regard, I can say that the anomalous volcanic regions that exist (Canary Islands, Hawaii, Yellowstone etc) provide an excellent example as to no matter what we think we know about natural systems, nature always and I mean always finds away to make what we thought was a simple system infinitely more complex. What happened there, and what ever will happen during these events was unpredictable and unknown, which is the polar opposite of what happened in Japan. What happened in Japan not only had warning signs, but was not unexpected. The amount of energy bound up in tectonic forces is unbelievable. I have seen with my own two eyes a 100 mile by 100 mile layer of rock that was original laid flat that was then twisted, turned, folded, refolded and then refolded so that now it better resembles a roller coaster than layer of sand pressed together for millions of years.

I think you may have missed my point or I missed yours but I was saying that NY has a history of earthquakes, in-fact one that occurred several years ago was equal in magnitude to the twin towers falling on 9/11 only one came up and the other came down (two very different occurrences when looking at a seismograph). These obviously do pose a threat. I was not saying that earthquakes don't happen, they do, but it is the tsunami that was in question. You can have earthquakes, even earthquakes out at sea that do not form tsunamis, it all depends on the depth in the crust relative to the mantel that the earthquake occurs. There are the risk of super-tsunamis, just like there is the risk of the super tornado, super hurricane, super volcano. There is a much greater risk of the Super-volcano under Yellowstone (yes it is real and yes it is a major when, not if) blowing its lid then tsunami affecting the East Coast. Additionally, Tsunamis have hit the east coast, Atlantic City NJ has had two in the last 100 years but they do not have the same forces at work that would allow for a major tsunami like threatens the west coast. The super-tsunami you describe actually can not be reliably or accurately described by seismology, instead it falls into the field of study of volcanology, a much more fledgling and developing science. While the conclusions are no less valid, the fact of the mater is we are not be to accurately study these so called super storms, while we can use models to predict, they are rarely, if ever accurate of what the true effects would be. One final point, if you are concerned about this, then you should be doubly concerned with the melting and degradation of continental ice sheets because if a large enough chunk of ice breaks off and falls into the ocean creating your 200ft tsunami wave. The rate that the climate is shifting and warming up is significantly higher than the rate that the Canary Islands are exploding since humans came along.

Honestly, I liked the last one more. It was easier to navigate and it was also easier to see all of the deliveries from all of the years so you could see some of the innovations that were put on trucks this year and in years past.

One thing I would like to add is part of our foreign aid budget is used to try to win the "hearts and minds" of those people who would originally see us as a threat/challenge. American government investments in infrastructure, education, health care and the environment in foreign countries has been used to portray America in a good light as opposed to a bad light. That way maybe we can avoid radicalism/extremism from abroad directed at the US. Indoneisa is a good example of foreign aid being used to moderate the temperament of a potentially radical country in favor of US interests and security.

In a word, yes but there is a much larger risk of an Earthquake under New York City than a tsunami ever hitting the East Coast. Without going to deep into the geophysics and geology of the issue, the tectonic plate that comprises the entire East Coast and all the US upto California is moving away from its boardering plates. This creates a rift valley (the mid-atlantic trench). The rift valley is fairly stable because that is where the new oceanic crust is formed from the magma bellow. Where this earthquake, creating the tsunami occurred is at a subduction zone, where one plate flows under another. These are significantly less stable, especially in Japan where a heavier oceanic crust is flowing under a lighter continental crust. The rift valley that is forming in the atlantic is where two oceanic crusts with similar densities are splitting apart. Basically, there are significantly different geologic processes occurring in the Atlantic vs. the Pacific. This crustal movement is why we find different types of fossils on different continents, essentially where the land masses are currently is not where they were 100 million years ago, which is not where they were 500 million years ago, which is not where they were 1 billion years ago, which is not where they where 4 billion years ago. While you can not say that it will never happen, the planetary forces that are at work, and have been at work since the dawn of time make it very, very unlikely, but not impossible. If anyone wants my sources or links or any further info PM me because I really do not want to get too in-depth with the science here because it really is very technical and unless you really do know what is being discussed, it will not make any sense to you and actually confuse you more. The only reason I commented is because this is one aspect of a larger topic my advisor and professors have been studying for 30 years.

If I could rep/like this more I would......Thank you

I was using that as a metaphor for the loss of an America hegemony but point taken and I stand corrected. I still maintain that we need to invest in our education, at the cost of other more swollen and inefficient programs, where ever they may be. This will be the only way we stand a chance to be competitive and dominant in the global economy. We obviously have different priorities in our lives and I respect that, thankfully in this country your vote is worth exactly as much as mine (although the electoral college can throw some curve balls) and we are allowed to exercise that right. Stay Safe.

21+ years ago that may have been an issue, but it is just that a past issue. Call me crazy but I am far more afraid of the the loss of American global dominance than some terrorist or communist threat. And I would be willing to bet that affects you too more than any communist or terror threat. We live in a time of economic crisis, not military crisis, we can't forget that.

No one agrees more than me that schools waste a massive amount of money but I firmly believe we should be paying teachers enough to get the job done effectively and with sufficient results. If we successfully funded our education system the way we successfully funded our military, we would be innovating, inventing, and engineering our way out of this recession instead of floundering with 10% unemployment, 2 foreign wars, a crashing housing market, constant assaults on public workers and a surging foreign investment pool. Education is 1/10th the Defense budget if you look it up (70 billion vs. 700 billion). Imagine the good you could do if you halved the defense budget and invested that back into Americas workers, education system and infrastructure (not that this should actually be done but hopefully you get the point, its a lot cash spent no matter how you slice/justify it).

Geez, I leave for three days and suddenly the bravo goes from SOP to GOP, who would have guessed. There is a bumpersticker out there somewhere that reads something like "it will be a great day when our schools get all the money they need and the air force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber." The comments about over paid teachers made me think of that.

My proctors said to do all 105 regardless of the directions, and I did not sign up for the NRFD test. I guess that is what you get when you hire Latisha and Shaquanda to proctor your exams. The only person I saw that had any idea of what to do or what was going on was some woman who was floating around from room to room. I don't know the methods in which they grade the tests but since it is a computer read scantron sheet that is only programmed to read the answers to questions that it is programmed to read, I doubt that it would realize you answered to many question and I doubt an actual person would be looking to see if you answered to many, but that is just my quess. I doubt the gov't has enough money to check whether you did 60 vs.105. Unless there is any proof that it is an automatic failure I would not listen to the fear-mongers and just wait for the results in 6 months. And I did notice that too when the entire class looked up and moved their head exactly 45 degrees in unison when L-32 drove by code 3.

x2, and calculator free I might add. Regardless, it was a learning experience and if I do say so, actually kind of fun.

if traffic was any worse I think they would have had to start using ICS to figure out all of the logistics of getting to the exam. That being said, unsatisfactorily easy would be my words to describe it.

Its not just her, almost every adult in the entire extended family is a lawyer. They have openly said that anyone you attacks them or their speech will face a very very difficult time dealing with their law suits. A beating takes a day, a lawsuit takes years.

Boehner is a bonehead. This like the 9/11 bill is just an extension of the GOP continuing to tell America's Hero's that their sacrifice is not great enough.

Sir, I have given this post some thought and I do not aim to stir the pot but I do have this to say. Even working in emergency services and paying taxes you do not use the fire department or EMS everyday. Sure your taxes go to them and you live within certain health and safety codes, it is not everyday that your house catches fire, you crash your car or need to go to the ER. However, every citizen, resident and individual must always abide by the laws that govern the land all day everyday. Even within the confined of your own home, the law, and law enforcement follows you inside. If your house is on fire, or you need to go to the ER, these are choices we make where no one says you must call EMS or you must have the fire department, we follow what our desires at the time are. This is not the same for laws, we must follow all laws and regulations where ever we go, we can not choose which laws we want to follow and which ones we don't. With this in mind, individuals need to know their rights, the laws and the limits of powers of those in authority positions if we are to continue to live in a harmonious society. While you can choose to ignore the topics on this board and in real life that deal with fire fighting or EMS, that is your choice. With that being said, I can not ignore the topics of law and order or else I am going to thrown in jail. Laws are not always fair and they are not always right, but I still must follow them, and if I must follow them well then I need to know how to use them, how to protect myself from them and how they will be used against me. I am not claiming to be a law enforcement officer or a lawyer, or even a legal expert, but I do claim to have a working knowledge of the law. This working knowledge allows me to both use the powers of law to my advantage and to protect myself behind them. If your house catches fire you can claim ignorance of firefighting, but if I steal a car I can not claim ignorance of the law. What I am saying, if I was not clear is that the law is around us at every turn, it governs where we live, where we walk, how we interact with people it is part of our daily lives that we all have a part in, other topics are not this way. Firefighting and EMS does not touch everyone in the same way that laws and their enforcement do. This is just a musing, it is not to incite conflict and I am not trying to insult or demean anyone. I am just pointing out that there are two very different topics that impact people in very different ways. It would be totally natural to me to have an opinion on this matter even if I was not qualified to have one simply because the law affects me day in and day out in the same way that it affects you, I am not totally sure you can say that same thing about firefighting.

Any other point to note, is they, being SCOTUS, chose to take and consider this case. The Supreme Court gets to decide which cases it takes on, and which ones it does not. Simply by taking the case the supreme court gave the Westboro Baptist Church another soap box to spew hate from. I think the ruling in this case was a given from the get go, I do not think anyone, including myself would have even for one minute ignoring or rejecting this groups right to free speech. Had the supreme court not taken this case, the ruling would have been the same since they were essentially upholding and reaffirming lower appellate courts ruling but would not have given the "church" the satisfaction of winning a SCOTUS ruling. While my opinion of the Roberts Court is somewhat less than stellar to say the least, I think the worst decision they made in this case was not actually their ruling but even considering to hear the case in the first place.

What you are quoting me on was a question, not really that much of a statement given the question mark, aside from the fact that I misspelled and (add), It should have been phrased more as, is it potentially illegal to surveil someone when it can as be construed as harassment. And I got my answer. I am sorry for the confusion. Additionally, the violation of the 8th would have been in the form of detention. Again sorry for the confusion, clearly my wording was off.

Ok but she wasn't charged, barely even interviewed, Sir I understand we approach this from two very different prospectives but how would the accused be controlled or monitored without violating her right against illegal search and seizure, right to due process and right against cruel and unusual punishment? Following her is one thing (add potentially illegal as well, harassment?) but since there was not enough evidence at the time to make an arrest, what options did Law enforcement have do anything? You can't hold her indefinitely until you create a case, and clearly 48-72 hours did not cut it because 48-72 hours after the fire she was still in the country and not charged. It maybe inexcusable but what realistically could else have be done?

Summed up perfectly. She was "injured" during the fire (read emotionally distressed), so she was taken to the hospital for treatment so she was unable to be interviewed by the fire marshall. Since she was not charged with any wrong doing so was free to go, as would be the right of anyone. It was only after the investigation so she charged. Read the Firehouse.com article, it the chief fire marshall had some interesting comments along the line of there was no reason to suspect her of any wrong doing until it was too late. It seemed to me that while the investigators may have gotten played, its not like they could hold her without any real evidence pointing to the contrary. And I am sure that someone will chime in, while they didn't actually need a reason to detain her, they could have anyway, but I was not there, I do not know but I can sure tell you that her lawyer was there from day one running interference between the client and the investigators.