Dr. Chivers: could you please comment on the spike to 100 cpm on radnata data 4/2?
Dr. Chivers, could you please take a look at the radnet data website for the cities Scramento, San Francisco, Los Angles, San Diego. They all had a spike to 100 cpm on 4/2 from an average of 50 CPM before.
http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/rert/radnet-sacramento-bg.html
4/2 was the day that I saw that black/silver thick cloud over the peninsula in San Francicso. If there was plutonium in that cloud would the radnet monitor even pick up the alpha emissions? The spike along the coast of Californie on the same day 4/2 cannot be a conincidence, meaning, there was another fallout that day of more particles? Again, that cloud appeared like something filled with particles and it is curious tht there is a spike on 4/2 that day on the radnet data.
Stop the Silly Questions!!
Some of these questions are just ridiculous. Let UCB do their job and report what they are able to interpret. These comments that ask to interpret a bump in CPM are absolutely ridiculous and take time away from much more important questions. Please go to a forum where others can help you answer this, but let these amazing people at UCB do their job and stop asking questions that are nearly impossible to answer.
Cmon at least post numbers for air.
Berkeley isn't posting work, they are offline. Divergence from the established posting of updates is concerning. Going on 5 days of no data or dialogue . Perhaps they are overextending themselves? Time to limit exposure and head to east coast.
listen, I asked about the
listen, I asked about the spike to 100 CPM on radnet, what is invalid to ask about that?
did you even check the radnet graph????????
I wonder whether you even checked to confirm my observations on radnet?????
Industry Science has been caught in the act here with BRAWM.
If they could they would just erase this from the memory banks but they can't. It happened in public view and they were caught in public view.
Now there will likely be a number of different attempts to 'spin' this event just as with Fukushima. The main thing industry wants is for people not to understand that this is all 'Industry Managed'.
NRC Attorneys have likely been frequenting this forum since it's creation. They are collecting data and 'examples of scientific arguments' for upcoming court cases. The 'Airplane Analogy' was the 'cornerstone' of their case, along with 'Hormesis'.
That is likely why BRAWM cannot withdraw defense of the 'Airplane Analogy'. The Airplane Analogy is 'Industry Owned Science'. Only the owners can make that call. The order has to come from 'On High'.
The BRAWM Team are just cogs in a wheel- they are no more allowed to practice 'Reality Based Science' than they are allowed to criticize the hand that feeds them. There is a much bigger picture here.
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/5141