Talk:Chernobyl disaster/Archive 1

message: ===Common Polyn Made Bitter===
As discussed in name origin, the Ukrainian chornobyl means Common Polyn (known in English as mugwort), while wormwood in Ukrainian is actually Bitter Polyn. Revelations 8:11 says,
:And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.
The particularly striking phrases are:
* the third part of the waters became wormwood
* because they were made bitter.
There is no doubt that, poetically speaking, what once was "Common Polyn" was made "Bitter Polyn" because of the contamination. Perhaps the prophecy could be ruled false if Revelations read: the name of the city is called Wormwood because the city name Chornobyl clearly does not translate to Wormwood. However, the scripture does not say city--it says star. The Revelator could have been referring poetically to the bitterness of the event itself. Taken this way, it is doubtless true today that many people associate the star or explosion at Chornobyl with the word wormwood. The final decision is a matter of one's personal faith. -- Jeoff Wilks 11:30 AM, 04 Nov 2004 (EDT)
:I'd say the matter of personal ignorance. Chernobyl explosion didn't look like star at all. When I am drunk, I can come up with even more poetic associations. By the way, what did Revelations say about internet and wikipedia? "And sands will melt and spiders made of molten sand will entangle the meek and devour their souls" -- Mikkalai 20:59, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Being intolerant of another's view with less than solid sarcasm doesnt prove your point - sober or drunk. -- 192.85.47.2 10:15, 22 March 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Please don't drop bombs here. I am tolerant as long as someone doesn't try to impose them on me.  Also, please explain why "spiders made of molten sand" (you know, silicon for modern chips  is produced of sand, hence this is a 100% indication to internet that entangles our souls) is sarcasm? Or you don't like the word "drunk"? Are't you aware that there is a widespread perception that alcohol and drugs "frees" imagination, and that shamans and medicinemen use hallucinogens? -- Mikkalai 16:35, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This is encyclpedia, i.e., about facts, not views. For millenia gypsy fortunetellers could fascinate you about your fate in no less blurry, but cocnvincing words. -- Mikkalai 16:35, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Wormwood

message: As discussed in name origin, the Ukrainian chornobyl means Common Polyn (known in English as mugwort), while wormwood in Ukrainian is actually Bitter Polyn. Revelations 8:11 says,
:And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.
The particularly striking phrases are:
* the third part of the waters became wormwood
* because they were made bitter.
There is no doubt that, poetically speaking, what once was "Common Polyn" was made "Bitter Polyn" because of the contamination. Perhaps the prophecy could be ruled false if Revelations read: the name of the city is called Wormwood because the city name Chornobyl clearly does not translate to Wormwood. However, the scripture does not say city--it says star. The Revelator could have been referring poetically to the bitterness of the event itself. Taken this way, it is doubtless true today that many people associate the star or explosion at Chornobyl with the word wormwood. The final decision is a matter of one's personal faith. -- Jeoff Wilks 11:30 AM, 04 Nov 2004 (EDT)
:I'd say the matter of personal ignorance. Chernobyl explosion didn't look like star at all. When I am drunk, I can come up with even more poetic associations. By the way, what did Revelations say about internet and wikipedia? "And sands will melt and spiders made of molten sand will entangle the meek and devour their souls" -- Mikkalai 20:59, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Being intolerant of another's view with less than solid sarcasm doesnt prove your point - sober or drunk. -- 192.85.47.2 10:15, 22 March 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Please don't drop bombs here. I am tolerant as long as someone doesn't try to impose them on me.  Also, please explain why "spiders made of molten sand" (you know, silicon for modern chips  is produced of sand, hence this is a 100% indication to internet that entangles our souls) is sarcasm? Or you don't like the word "drunk"? Are't you aware that there is a widespread perception that alcohol and drugs "frees" imagination, and that shamans and medicinemen use hallucinogens? -- Mikkalai 16:35, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This is encyclpedia, i.e., about facts, not views. For millenia gypsy fortunetellers could fascinate you about your fate in no less blurry, but cocnvincing words. -- Mikkalai 16:35, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Common Polyn Made Bitter

message: :Right after the accident, the main health concern involved radioactive iodine, with a half-life of eight days. Today, in addition to radioactive iodine, there is concern about contamination of the soil with caesium-137, which has a half-life of about 30 years.
Is radioactive iodine really still a problem?  If its half-life really is only eight days, then it shouldn't be a concern unless it's a major decay product of something with a longer half-life. --Andrew 07:09, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)
:According to the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency 2002 Chernobyl Report, the primary remaining environmental contaminant is 137Cs, which is found in the hightest concentrations in the surface layers of the soil of the area. I can find no mention of radioactive iodine (131I) being a current concern (nor any mention of it being a decay product of known contaminants). -- 24.195.204.246 21:55, 3 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Iodine

message: I removed this: "(see World Health Organization, page 154; Ivanov, Tsyb Studies, page 159; European Commission Program, page 159; Ukrainian Studies, page 160; and Swiss-Belarussian Paper, page 162)." because I don't understand what the page numbers are refering to. Rmhermen 19:10, Apr 27, 2004 (UTC)
Just so folks know, this has been linked from /.  I am watching it and will revert any stupidity, if I happen to be online. -- Pakaran. 17:34, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation

message: ...When outside air contacted the graphite moderator of the core, the graphite began to burn. The fire dispersed most of the radioactive contamination.
...After part of the roof blew off, the inrush of oxygen combined with the extremely high temperature of the reactor fuel and graphite moderator sparked a graphite fire. This fire greatly contributed to the spread of radioactive material.
The above quote, from adjacent, paragraphs seems to say twice that the graphite burned when the air reached the hot graphite, which seems redundant to me. (But I don't know how to fix it).
And I don't think sparked is the right word, since no spark was involved.  How about 'caused' or 'ignited'? -- RJFJR 15:16, 24 December 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Redundancy

message: I realise the figure's contoversial and confused, but the estimated number of long term casualties at least warrants a decent sized discussion. Anyone? Psychobabble 08:14, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Casualties

message: There is a page here that has extensive technical details concerning the Chernobyl accident, that I for one find utterly engrossing.  I'd really like to include some of this information in the article; I'm a complete WikiNewbie (tm), so if I screw something up feel free to correct me. -- Ataru 23:04, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Detailed technical information

message: For those of us who arent physicists or nuclear reactor enthusiasts, this whole article seems like a foreign language. It would be greatly appreciated if a summary of the events could be given in a more simplified format for the general public to read and understand. -- 222.152.99.78 10:00, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Simpler explanation

message: Sorry, but is the idea that Chernobyl was the result of Western (and that means presumably American or British) sabotage given credence by anyone except conspiracy theorists?
Leaving aside any moral considerations for the moment, it would seem to be an incredibly risky act.  If proven (at least to the satisfaction of the court of public opinion) it would have queered any chance of warming relations, would have strengthened the Soviet government in response to a renewed external threat, and would have split NATO in two.  The political fallout would have brought down any Western government involved.  And for what?  Yes, the political consequences of Chernobyl were ultimately positive as far as the West was concerned, but it seems that Gorbachev was headed in that direction anyway.  Moreover, trying to predict the result of such actions is extremely difficult (witness the horribly mistaken geopolitical analysis that drove the Iraq war).  
So given the lack of plausibility behind the tale, and the lack of evidence presented here, is it actually taken at all seriously?  --Robert Merkel 00:57, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Firstly, our embassy page is actually here . To answer your question : no, certainly not. Never even heard of it. And I believe this to be the result of a certain western tendency to underestimate security on russian nuclear plants and army bases. That the warheads are somehow lying aroung, ready to be stolen or sold to someone for a bottle of vodka and so on and so forth. This is not true nowdays and certainly wasnt true 20 years ago, when anything goverment-related was taken gravely serious. And anyway, the picture of the accident is anything but sabotage. It is known that the accident happened as a result of a buildup of small human error mistakes (stupidity, actually), so it is very unlikely that the whole control room staff involved in the accident were actually western-paid saboteurs (I wonder how all those people came to work there and stayed in the first place, given that preceding Gorbachevs ascencion, 1984 and 1985 were filled of various KGB activity. So, the answer to your question is a most definite NO -- 83.237.192.204 05:59, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Oh, yeah, and I forgot. We had lots and lots of theories in newspapers in the beginning of 90s lik that Stalin was a zombie from outer space. And in those times you couldnt tell a reputable newspaper from a tabloid, because they were all basically the same, mixing accurate information with hoaxes, for commercial value. So, beware of early 90s russian sources and be very careful about what you believe ! (except for historical value, that is ;) -- 83.237.192.204 06:07, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Sabotage claims...