Reply #21: And there's the fearmongering on your part. [View All]

[darkstar3]

Your first link shows a clear table which gives us the following information:

If you were to drink 134 LITERS of rainwater that came straight from the sky on March 23rd, and then add up the cumulative amount of radiation your body would be exposed to due to that ingestion (not contact, INGESTION), you would have been exposed to the same exact amount of radiation that you would get from a flight that took off in San Francisco and landed in Washington D.C. And March 23rd is the day that the HIGHEST level of I-131 was found. By March 28th, five days later, that level of I-131 had fallen so much lower that you would need to drink 1,734 LITERS of water for the same amount of exposure.

Let's assume (safely) that the amount of rainwater ingested directly by a child is somewhere below 1 Liter. That would mean that a flight from San Francisco to Washington D.C. would be 134 times more dangerous in your book than that rainwater. And yet you treat the findings as if I-131 qualifies as some sort of bogeyman.

You need a lesson in staying on topic, and another lesson in scientific comprehension. I have the inclination to give you neither, but I will continue to easily debunk fearmongering bullshit.