This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Stoner, Adriana, Motegi

Jumkie said:
Kropo, I'd like to thank you for championing the voice of reason against this ludicrous perception that going to Motegi is unsafe.



The riders that have been so vocal about it show just how willing they are to put foot in mouth, and I suspect the people supporting their rider and suggesting that they have a point for concern is nothing more than mindless tribalism (or they are as dumb themselves). What is next, they are not going to race at Laguna Seca because we are over due for 'The Big One'? For those living in paranoia about Japanese government cover-up conspiracy believers, it may interest you to know 'The Big One' refers to the earthquake that those idiots (sarcasm) in the scientific community, the same type of morons, (sarcasm) saying Motegi is safe, saying its a mathematical certainty that California will be rocked by a catastrophic earthquake of Biblical proportion. Yes, there is uncertainty, ...., their plane might crash on their next trip to Motegi, but getting lethal radiation exposure at Motegi is about as much risk as spontaneously combusting from an afternoon suntan.
Click to expand...

So non-lethal exposure would be ok for you would it Jumkie? This is the lala land all pro-nuclear morons (sarcasm) seem to inhabit
<




The ".... happens" argument only works with things out of our control such as California disappearing into the ocean. With nuclear we are the ones setting ourselves up for new disasters with each nuclear plant built. Fukushima is just another tragic warning which will no doubt go unheeded.
 
lad said:
So non-lethal exposure would be ok for you would it Jumkie? This is the lala land all pro-nuclear morons (sarcasm) seem to inhabit
<




The ".... happens" argument only works with things out of our control such as California disappearing into the ocean. With nuclear we are the ones setting ourselves up for new disasters with each nuclear plant built. Fukushima is just another tragic warning which will no doubt go unheeded.
Click to expand...



Ok, exchange "lethal" with "harmful". Happy?



Btw, as far as human quest for energy, nuclear is safer! Add up the deaths and disaster from oil spills, mining accidents, effect of fossil fuel on environment and wars over oil and its no contest. I supoose u hav a fear of flying too? Though its rare for planes to crash, land transportation is more deadly. Fear of nuclear disaster is way over blown. I guess peeps just hav fear of what they dont or cant understand.
 
Jumkie said:
Ok, exchange "lethal" with "harmful". Happy?



Btw, as far as human quest for energy, nuclear is safer! Add up the deaths and disaster from oil spills, mining accidents, effect of fossil fuel on environment and wars over oil and its no contest. I supoose u hav a fear of flying too? Though its rare for planes to crash, land transportation is more deadly. Fear of nuclear disaster is way over blown. I guess peeps just hav fear of what they dont or cant understand.
Click to expand...

Well I'm actually a student pilot but yes there is and should be some fear to remind you to fly by the numbers and not to do anything stupid. Stupid like nuclear and you're right I don't or can't understand how these fuckwits managed to build a nuclear plant in an earthquake zone. Nuclear plants cannot be guaranteed power to keep the process stable - it's just fools playing with fire. The US Government (see Haliburton) has technology that removes the need for burning fossil fuel but the US Government is also Big Oil so that is the end of that.



small hijack but fluoride is another thing I can't or won't understand because I'm dealing with Government departments with no legal training trying to stop the WA State Government continuing to add this poison to the main water supply - so not only do you drink it all day long but it's in all the fruit & veg as they are grown with the same water. Take a look at the safety card for this lovely "safe" chemical: http://www.cdc.gov/n...g/neng1233.html we are drinking (1mg per litre) and tell me they should keep feeding it in small doses to our kids every day of their lives when fluoride only works topically if at all??? 1 in 3 teenagers in the US has fluorosis of the teeth from an over exposure to fluoride. I believe Britain also fluoridates it's water?.



sorry for the rant - carry on...
 
lad said:
Well I'm actually a student pilot but yes there is and should be some fear to remind you to fly by the numbers and not to do anything stupid. Stupid like nuclear and you're right I don't or can't understand how these fuckwits managed to build a nuclear plant in an earthquake zone. Nuclear plants cannot be guaranteed power to keep the process stable - it's just fools playing with fire. The US Government (see Haliburton) has technology that removes the need for burning fossil fuel but the US Government is also Big Oil so that is the end of that.



small hijack but fluoride is another thing I can't or won't understand because I'm dealing with Government departments with no legal training trying to stop the WA State Government continuing to add this poison to the main water supply - so not only do you drink it all day long but it's in all the fruit & veg as they are grown with the same water. Take a look at the safety card for this lovely "safe" chemical: http://www.cdc.gov/n...g/neng1233.html we are drinking (1mg per litre) and tell me they should keep feeding it in small doses to our kids every day of their lives when fluoride only works topically if at all??? 1 in 3 teenagers in the US has fluorosis of the teeth from an over exposure to fluoride. I believe Britain also fluoridates it's water?.



sorry for the rant - carry on...
Click to expand...

Maybe they had to build powerplants in that area for a good reason,but in that case,why don't they have a backup coolingsystem that is not powered by electricity?Like other,much safer countries(from earthquakes/tsunamis),like Sweden for instance.
 
lad said:
Well I'm actually a student pilot but yes there is and should be some fear to remind you to fly by the numbers and not to do anything stupid. Stupid like nuclear and you're right I don't or can't understand how these fuckwits managed to build a nuclear plant in an earthquake zone. Nuclear plants cannot be guaranteed power to keep the process stable - it's just fools playing with fire. The US Government (see Haliburton) has technology that removes the need for burning fossil fuel but the US Government is also Big Oil so that is the end of that.



small hijack but fluoride is another thing I can't or won't understand because I'm dealing with Government departments with no legal training trying to stop the WA State Government continuing to add this poison to the main water supply - so not only do you drink it all day long but it's in all the fruit & veg as they are grown with the same water. Take a look at the safety card for this lovely "safe" chemical: http://www.cdc.gov/n...g/neng1233.html we are drinking (1mg per litre) and tell me they should keep feeding it in small doses to our kids every day of their lives when fluoride only works topically if at all??? 1 in 3 teenagers in the US has fluorosis of the teeth from an over exposure to fluoride. I believe Britain also fluoridates it's water?.



sorry for the rant - carry on...
Click to expand...

I really hope you are right about alternatives to fossil fuels. One thing which is ignored by the critics of climate science and carbon taxes is that fossil fuels are called fossil fuels for a reason, and are not inexhaustible anyway, and hence alternatives should be promoted even apart from fossil fuel involvement in climate change.



I would not discount a conspiracy by big business by any means, the not I understand apocryphal story of auto companies buying up railways in the U.S. being an example. What alternatives are they hiding though? I have a friend and colleague who is a physicist who worked in solar energy for years and eventually concluded that it couldn't even go close to matching our current energy consumption, perhaps wherein partly lies your answer. Geothermal energy sounds promising from the point of view of my declining general knowledge of physics.



As far as sublethal radiation doses go, from my admittedly biased perspective even despite all else there is some level of radiation that you/one can't be concerned about given background radiation/radiation exposure in everyday life, particularly if you are a pilot, with commercial airline pilots receiving radiation doses similar to workers in medical imaging. Howard Hughes correctly thought bacteria could be dangerous, but trying to exclude himself from all bacterial exposure anywhere did not work so well for him in his later life.
 
michaelm said:
I really hope you are right about alternatives to fossil fuels. One thing which is ignored by the critics of climate science and carbon taxes is that fossil fuels are called fossil fuels for a reason, and are not inexhaustible anyway, and hence alternatives should be promoted even apart from fossil fuel involvement in climate change.



I would not discount a conspiracy by big business by any means, the not I understand apocryphal story of auto companies buying up railways in the U.S. being an example. What alternatives are they hiding though? I have a friend and colleague who is a physicist who worked in solar energy for years and eventually concluded that it couldn't even go close to matching our current energy consumption, perhaps wherein partly lies your answer. Geothermal energy sounds promising from the point of view of my declining general knowledge of physics.



As far as sublethal radiation doses go, from my admittedly biased perspective even despite all else there is some level of radiation that you/one can't be concerned about given background radiation/radiation exposure in everyday life, particularly if you are a pilot, with commercial airline pilots receiving radiation doses similar to workers in medical imaging. Howard Hughes correctly thought bacteria could be dangerous, but trying to exclude himself from all bacterial exposure anywhere did not work so well for him in his later life.
Click to expand...

Michael the former Canadian Defense Minister Paul Hellyer has this to say about what the US and other governments know about disclosure and technological advancements: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4YNbhtxFyM
 
lad said:
Well I'm actually a student pilot but yes there is and should be some fear to remind you to fly by the numbers and not to do anything stupid. Stupid like nuclear and you're right I don't or can't understand how these fuckwits managed to build a nuclear plant in an earthquake zone. Nuclear plants cannot be guaranteed power to keep the process stable - it's just fools playing with fire. The US Government (see Haliburton) has technology that removes the need for burning fossil fuel but the US Government is also Big Oil so that is the end of that.



small hijack but fluoride is another thing I can't or won't understand because I'm dealing with Government departments with no legal training trying to stop the WA State Government continuing to add this poison to the main water supply - so not only do you drink it all day long but it's in all the fruit & veg as they are grown with the same water. Take a look at the safety card for this lovely "safe" chemical: http://www.cdc.gov/n...g/neng1233.html we are drinking (1mg per litre) and tell me they should keep feeding it in small doses to our kids every day of their lives when fluoride only works topically if at all??? 1 in 3 teenagers in the US has fluorosis of the teeth from an over exposure to fluoride. I believe Britain also fluoridates it's water?.



sorry for the rant - carry on...
Click to expand...

Britain ?? England doesn't as a rule but in my local area it is being debated. I dont know about Scotland, N.Ireland or wales. They have different laws and parliments , it also depends on the water company and council's in any particular area.
 
michaelm said:
Helen Caldicott is a paediatrician who was working near 3 Mile Island when that accident occurred and has been a prominent anti-nuclear campaigner since. Her view is that nuclear energy is too dangerous, which may well be correct, but also that there has been a massive conspiracy to not only understate the dangers, but also to cover up the effects of nuclear accidents, and if accepted it is axiomatic that the authorities cannot be trusted on this matter, which seems to be where the riders at least were coming from. If there is a conspiracy in the scientific community (in terms of covering up the effects of nuclear accidents) I have been unable to penetrate it in 25 years, including when drinking with some of the people who would likely have to be involved, all of whom are relaxed about personal occupational exposures orders of magnitude greater than we are talking about here. Some of her evidence is frankly wacky, like attributing every case of cancer in Europe since the Chernobyl accident to that accident.
Click to expand...



Never stopped the anti-smoking fraternity claiming the same, plus all coronary incidents too. I appreciate smoking is not good for one's health, but to claim that the numbers of cancer and coronary etc issues would be dramatically reduced if smoking were banned (based on the theory that passive smoking causes all the non-smoker cancer, coronary etc issues) is equally mad. At the risk of ridicule from yourself, I look at the apparently healthy octagenarians in France who have spent all their lives driking a couple of carafes of red wine a night and smoking 40 unfiltered Gauloise a day. As you may have guessed I'm a red wine drinker and a smoker, (though not the unfiltered Galoise type
<
) and therefore have no objectivity!!



Sorry for the thread hijack
<
 
yamaka46 said:
Never stopped the anti-smoking fraternity claiming the same, plus all coronary incidents too. I appreciate smoking is not good for one's health, but to claim that the numbers of cancer and coronary etc issues would be dramatically reduced if smoking were banned (based on the theory that passive smoking causes all the non-smoker cancer, coronary etc issues) is equally mad. At the risk of ridicule from yourself, I look at the apparently healthy octagenarians in France who have spent all their lives driking a couple of carafes of red wine a night and smoking 40 unfiltered Gauloise a day. As you may have guessed I'm a red wine drinker and a smoker, (though not the unfiltered Galoise type
<
) and therefore have no objectivity!!



Sorry for the thread hijack
<
Click to expand...

Choosing the right grandparents has always been the most important thing for most health issues. There was some data once that smoking may not be an independent risk factor for coronary disease if you had a sufficiently (quite) low cholesterol. Pretty bad if you have a tendency to vascular disease though, and most surgeons are fairly unkeen for patients who have vascular surgery to keep smoking, and not for any reasons of commerce. I have never smoked a cigarette but don't mind a very occasional cigar, and am engaged in some personal research myself into the preventative effects against passive smoking and general health benefits of red wine consumption.
 
michaelm said:
Choosing the right grandparents has always been the most important thing for most health issues. There was some data once that smoking may not be an independent risk factor for coronary disease if you had a sufficiently (quite) low cholesterol. Pretty bad if you have a tendency to vascular disease though, and most surgeons are fairly unkeen for patients who have vascular surgery to keep smoking, and not for any reasons of commerce. I have never smoked a cigarette but don't mind a very occasional cigar, and am engaged in some personal research myself into the preventative effects against passive smoking and general health benefits of red wine consumption.
Click to expand...



How do you choose the right grandparents????

Or am I missing something
<
 
Just wondering when the flaming of the rest of the riders is going to begin. Spies, Hayden Rossi are all coming out now saying they do not want to go. They all say that the Dorna commissioned report is incomplete and does not answer their questions. Full report over on www.motomatters.com
 

Similar threads

#22
Valencia decimated by floods from storm Dana. Season finale in doubt.
Replies
97
Views
2K
mikesbytes
mikesbytes
#22
  • Sticky
The Golden Oldies Thread
Replies
37
Views
2K
#22
#22
Hollywood
Harley-Davison's New Association with MotoGP
Replies
17
Views
545
Keshav
Keshav
J
2025 MotoGP Schedule
Replies
4
Views
637
PRS717
P
#22
MotoGP in “advanced talks” to change its US TV broadcaster
Replies
25
Views
1K
Hollywood
Hollywood

Recent Discussions