As we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don’t even know we don’t know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country, and other free countries, it is the latter category – the unknown unknowns – that tend to be the difficult ones.
One example, and probably the most pressing, is the nuclear debate. At the crux of this issue in the public discussion are the unknowns; the known unknowns, such as what to do with the ever-mounting radioactive waste produced by the world’s nuclear energy and arms industries, which can neither be destroyed nor disposed of; but more importantly, unknown unknowns, such as the nuclear industry’s culture of secrecy. Still tight-lipped about the ongoing disaster at Fukushima, and the impending disaster in Miami, the industry continues to show its unwillingness to admit, much less manage, the real dangers inherent in nuclear experimentation.
The nuclear experiment
Let’s start with some information you might want to ignore; California was nuked in the fifties. The first (known) meltdown of a nuclear power generator in the U.S.A. occurred in July of 1959 at the Santa Susana Field Laboratories in Simi Valley, CA. Since this accident pre-dated any regulation of the nuclear industry, no one will ever know how much radioactivity was strewn around as a result. Reasonable people guess the released amount was comparable to what happened at Three Mile Island or Chernobyl.
The Simi Valley reactor was an experimental “fast-breeder” type, bizarrely cooled by liquefied metallic Sodium, a substance which will explode when doused with water, and burst into flame when exposed to air. Thousands of pounds of this laboratory curiosity remain unaccounted for. Obviously it has all long since oxidized, and remains somewhere in the biosphere as Sodium ions. Not the familiar table salt kind of Sodium course, but Sodium that has absorbed a fast-moving neutron from the fast-breeder reactor, turning it into radioactive Sodium 24, which in view of a half-life measured in hours, has long since decayed to the radio stable Magnesium 24.
This was an experiment so deadly that only a calculating government institution could justify it – and not surprisingly, it had disastrous results, experiencing partial meltdowns in 1959 and again in 1964. This failure was compounded by evidence of dangerous practices within the industry, exemplified by the “atomic cowboy” culture of the Santa Susana Laboratories that saw flammable materials routinely disposed of by placing them in barrels and dropping them into a pit, then igniting them by shooting them with rifles – a practice that continued, at least sporadically, into the 1990?s.
Whether it is nuclear power generation or nuclear detonation, all nuclear industry is experimental. All we know for sure is that radiation is dangerous and destructive to all biological beings on this planet. We know there is no diluting radioactive waste, there is only dispersal. We know that nuclear waste is virtually indestructible for millions of years. We know that no amount of energy is worth risking our existence. And we know that, scientifically speaking, the risk cycle of nuclear power generation cannot be validated as “safe” until waste can be permanently removed, stored and degraded, and potential impacts to human and environmental health entirely mitigated. And we know that, today, that is simply not the case – despite the industry rhetoric.
How can utility companies, industry regulators and nuclear zeolots claim that an appropriate level of control is exercised on wastes that will be dangerously radioactive for tens of thousands of years? In reality, the storage cycle for weaponry and fuel related nuclear waste is only beginning. We have reached year 69 of a million year long process. Our nuclear waste is a problem today, and is a mounting problem for countless generations yet to come.
I sure hope they can solve it. Today’s nuclear advocates won’t even admit the problem…
For these reasons and myriad others, nuclear can only be thought of by as an experiment. Every time a new discovery is made concerning nuclear experimentation, it is found to be a more dangerous practice than before, and far more insidious than ever portrayed by media and industry regulators.
The nuclear industry is based on lies; lies about how inexpensive it is, economically, environmentally, and for that matter, ethically. With hindsight, it is also undeniable that the industry obfuscates the truth. The works at Santa Susana laboratories didn’t advise those living downwind that there might be something problematic in the air. Major fires went unreported, as did the 1959 meltdown. Only after a similar meltdown at Three Mile Island was the extent of the Santa Susana experiment finally revealed. (Source)
This culture of cover up is not isolated; it has been adopted as “standard practice” by the nuclear industry for decades. Breaking rank following the 2011 Fukushima meltdown, Dr. Peter Karamoskos, a nuclear radiologist and a public representative on the radiation health committee of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency observed the following:
You have to hand it to the nuclear industry and its acolytes. In the middle of the second-worst nuclear power disaster in history at Fukushima, and with still no end in sight, you would think they would respond with contrition, humility and profuse mea culpas. Not on your life. The industry representatives and its acolytes came out swinging in full denial attire…
But more insidious and objectionable is the creeping misinformation that the nuclear industry has fed into the public sphere over the years… [through] a never-ending cabal of paid industry scientific ”consultants”…
The nuclear industry has always kept a whole crew of “scientists” around, manipulating facts to help them maneuvre it into social acceptance. One of the most dangerous pieces of propaganda that was seeded in the early days of the nuclear experiment was the idea of hormesis; the twisted notion that low level radiation exposure is in fact good for our health.
A good lie is always embedded in some truth.
The fact is that exposure to “low level” radiation does stimulates the immune system. Because your body is so deeply disturbed by radiation exposure, a physiological self-preservation response is triggered and the body works overtime to reinforce itself. But like any flight/fight mechanism, the “beneficial” result of the body’s survival response is short lived. The body cannot maintain the full-tilt immune function required to deal with regular or ongoing exposure. That’s when disease and death occurs. To suggest the human body benefits from nuclear radiation exposure is absurd. History and science both tell us different.
Despite the nuclear industry spin, “safe” and “clean” nuclear experimentation has already resulted in the destruction of a significant portions of Japan and Europe, The latest inevitable disaster, the ongoing Fukushima meltdown, continues to permanently and drastically alter our planet. Many other sites are operating above capacity, below standard, or with no viable means of even storing, much less disposing of, their waste. There have been over two thousand deliberate nuclear detonations, above and below ground, in the air and in the water. And while some areas have been devastated more than others, nowhere on the planet is untainted. (Source)
Meanwhile, our government leaders use the threat of nuclear warfare to increase their power over other nations, with no precedent and no real idea the extent of the global damage that ‘nuclear alternative’ would actually cause. Just another unknown and uncontrolled factor in the so-called “scientific” nuclear experiment.
The scholars of the status quo insist that the nuclear armament of the opposing forces in the cold war, pitted against each other, prevented those nuclear nations from going to war. The theory was that our mutually assured destruction would prevent us from using weapons of such devastation. And yet today we are faced with a widening number of nuclear nations, and an increasing numbers of nations as foes.
This all begs the question – do you trust these idiots with their finger on ‘the button’?
You are in an experiment
It appears that when countries embark on a nuclear power programme, the problem of the waste it will produce seems far away — but eventually the issue comes back to haunt them. ~ Paul Brown, Climate News Network.
Even without further war, and further meltdowns, the processes of “containment” and “disposal” of radioactive waste materials are actually impossible. It is deadly, and permanent, and it is mounting by the day. By simple deduction, we can see that nuclear experimentation promises devastating consequences to the future stability of life on the planet.
So who is benefiting? Really??
The time, energy and resources that have been invested into nuclear experimentation are likely incalculable. It is an industry of inhuman lies and practices, which avoids all consideration of clean air, clean water and healthy food – and all liability for destroying it.
The Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage was designed to protect US nuclear interests from liability in the (inevitable) event of an accident, and the U.S. Government lobbied for many years for it to be adopted internationally. In the United States today, it seems we can barely distinguish this kind of fascism from the actions of true democratic government.
Where would we be?
Where humanity would be today without nuclear experimentation is impossible to say, but without it the planet would surely be less toxic and polluted, and we would have heard fewer institutional lies.
If it were not for nuclear experimentation, and the oligarchs who build them, humanity would already have sustainable energy sources. There is little money to be made in sustainable energy; so why go green? We already know that sustainable energy alternatives exist, but ‘sustainable’ and ‘profitable’ are opposing concepts – while a sustainable energy model is built on consistency, and balance, economic models of profit are all based on the false premise that you can sustain infinite growth on a finite planet, with a finite population, using finite resources. The sick truth is: the nuclear industry fights so hard to preserve itself in the face of such obvious failure because it is as profitable as it is deadly. The heads of the oligarchy have eliminated (directly or otherwise) alternative power systems in favor of dangerous mineral concoctions. And by spouting false science as fact, the industry and its cronies have until now induced the public to accept the supposed benefits of this dangerous experiment.
It’s not like we don’t have alternatives. There are ocean currents, not far offshore of the East Coast of the United States, which could spin underwater ‘windmills’ and turbines to generate enormous amounts of power, without radioactive repercussions. Such a power facility would be ‘too cheap to meter’, a slogan from the early days of nuclear experimentation. And harnessing energy from natural currents is just scratching the surface. But, hell, why bother when you got “safe, clean” nuclear power?
Wind, wave, solar and water power sources instantly out-value nuclear experimentation, for they are safe, natural and endless. Imagine our energy situation now if we – humanity – had invested the same time and energy developing wind, solar and water technologies, as we have developing these disastrous nuclear experiments? But nuclear is an industry that omits truth. It is the industry that most frequently states “there is no immediate danger to the public” while being the industry that most frequently and extensively poses a danger. And not just to “the public” but to all life on Earth. And with this same twisted mindset, those highlighting the dangers of nuclear experimentation have been publicly belittled, while the benefits of nuclear experimentation have been wildly exaggerated.
When it comes to any subject, especially one as dynamic as nuclear experimentation, there are things we know and things we don’t know. And as is empirically obvious, the more dynamic and serious the subject, the more likely most people will not have all the information pertaining to it.
As I explained in my book, The Matrix of Four, The Philosophy of the Duality of Polarity, there are four types of information: known knowns, known unknowns, unknown unknowns, and unknown knowns. The fourth part is the most difficult to quantify, as these are intuitive or instinctual things, and secrets. This concept has been elaborated on by the likes of Socrates, and hinted at by the likes of Donald Rumsfeld. (Donald didn’t mention this fourth part, for he likely operated through secrets and the unknown knowns).
What unknown knowns does the nuclear experimentation industry possess that they are not sharing?
What of the unknown unknowns? What risks might further nuclear experimentation pose? How might our landscape be affected by another disaster?
At least the knowns of nuclear experimentation are clear; it has negative consequences to health and life and immeasurable cost to economy, environment and society. That alone is enough to demand we cease it everywhere.
Another noteworthy known known is that the EPA actually turned off public access to the radiation detection equipment on the United States’ west coast after the Fukushima meltdowns. In a desperate last-ditch act of concealment, operator TEPCO and the Japanese government closed ranks, initially refusing to admit there was even a danger to the public. As their failure became increasingly difficult to conceal, they progressively disclosed that there was an accident, then admitted there was a partial meltdown, later admitted that there were several meltdowns and – finally – admitted that multiple complete melt throughs had occurred. The E.P.A. then turned off the radiation detection equipment. (More info here and here.)
It is a fact that consideration of the local magnetic field is one of many things nuclear scientists have to consider when constructing these experiments. Their magnetic influence is so strong that it distort the magnetics in whatever locality they are built. Now consider the global nuclear experiment on the whole. What does the combination of approximately 430 plus nuclear reactor submarines do to the magnetic field of the planet? These are assumedly known unknowns; we know that we don’t know.
I am no particle physicist, but credible information is easily obtainable these days, and anyone with a little curiosity can easily discover that nuclear experimentation is a Pandora’s Box – and learn a little about quantum physics too.
Let’s consider the discovery of the Higgs Boson particle. In laymen’s terms, discovery of the Higgs Boson particle essentially means that of hundreds of different given particles there is only one that has any mass and weight. It’s another counterintuitive fact in quantum physics, just like the fact that there are particles sometimes behave as waves. Now if there is just one particle among many that has mass and weight, and it may behave like a wave at any given time, theoretically, if one is able to produce some sort of counter-wave one could harness a universal energy so intense it would make extremely heavy objects as light as air.
There are four forms of such power in the universe and my ignorant guess is that the counter-wave is of the electro-magnetic variety. I have a one in four chance of being right. So what if nuclear experimentation, and our addiction to frequency emitting devices, causes unknown destruction and disruption of the magnetic field of Earth resulting in conditions where implementation of the counter-wave is impossible? What if nuclear experimentation is, literally, preventing humanity from better understanding this thing known as the ‘god-particle’ and finding the counter-wave?
Such a wave is not so outlandish of an idea. Such questions are absolutely relevant amidst the planet-altering knowns of our society, and life-ending potentials of nuclear experimentation. In fact use of such a counter-wave is perhaps how one could explain the transportation of massive stones and the erection of monolithic stone objects, which remarkably, ancient cultures all over the world been able to do while modern technology still cannot duplicate it. How else are some of these structures and stones possibly explained?
A new path
I’ve always found the nuclear industry’s painted euphemisms ironic. In particular, I laugh when they call a mechanization that can render the planet lifeless “a plant”. A nuclear facility is not a “plant”; plants are an expression of life, a symbol of gradual nurturing and growth from small beginnings. Nuclear facilities are toxic experiments that ultimately end in tears.
The most pressing threat to our existence on Earth is that of nuclear experimentation. On our current path, we are risking the unknown, playing with an uncontainable fire, and foregoing development of sustainable energy technologies – the knowns – in the process.
But it is a symptom of a greater problem – the problem of our collective mind state. To change the external world, we need to change our thinking. We have to make a shift from being caught up in imposed beliefs and formalities, fighting one another every step of the way, to promoting truth and the wellbeing of Mother Earth and all living beings – as our first priority. If we don’t do it now, when will we do it? Do entire communities need to die first? Do we have to reach that ultimate crisis point?
It we continue to allow the institutional terrorism of our planet, humanity is in real danger.
Lucky for us, we can see it coming.
This is our opportunity. It may be our last opportunity.
Let’s start a little green revolution.
From Wake-Up World