[ RadSafe ] "Enriched Uranium" weapons
C.Busby at ulster.ac.uk
Fri Oct 28 09:00:31 CDT 2011
Yes. That was a possibility. Some enriched uranium from Saddam. I agree. We thought about that. But that does not explain the enriched Uranium in the Lebanon bomb crater. And it doesnt explain the congenital illnesses and cancer. And why the sex ratio changed after 2004. The explanation is nanoparticles of uranium being inhaled and bypassing the gut transfer mechanisms. But we are not exactly sure what the explanation is: it just seemed to us that rthe explanations we gave were most likely. That it is an artifact is not an explanation. It is there. We have to explain how it got there. We have to include the genetic effects in the population and also in the USA veterans. Hard to see how Saddam caused those.
From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Ahmad Al-Ani
Sent: Fri 28/10/2011 10:57
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] "Enriched Uranium" weapons
Your political argument is futile, particularly for a scientific forum like RADSAFE. Accordingly, I will refrain from offering a counter statement.
For your NORM question from oil well burning, the level of NORM resulted from burning the wells is not much different from that is coming from the exhaust pipes of cars. NORM becomes hazardous when it is concentrated over long periods of time due to the production and refining processes. Add to that the prevailing wind direction in Kuwait takes the smoke in a direction away from Iraq.
>From: Glenn R. Marshall <GRMarshall at philotechnics.com>
>To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
>Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 6:13 AM
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] "Enriched Uranium" weapons
>Are people really having convulsions over a U-238/U235 ratio that is slightly less than the normally accepted mean value of 138 for natural uranium? Looks like it's all probably less than 1% U-235, if the values presented are even accurate. That's certainly within the error bar and probably within natural variance. Looks like several samples have no ratio calculated, or at least none recorded. Hmmm....can't help wondering why. I also cannot help wondering if other samples were collected and analyzed but were not included in the report because, well, you know.
>So Iraq, which was ruled by a dictator for 30 years who gassed and murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people, started his own nuclear weapons program, had at least one nuclear reactor blown up by Israel, and performed God-only-knows what kinds of research in the vastness of the desert, has a couple spots of increased levels of (probably) natural uranium. Yes! This must be the result of some new, super-secret US or British enriched uranium weapon! There is simply no other logical explanation! We've got to warn everyone!
>Here is the table excerpted from the famous report:
>Can any of you petroleum HPs guess how much NORM was released from the dozens of oil wells that were intentionally set ablaze?
>OK, enough of this. Back to work.
>Glenn Marshall, CHP
>You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
More information about the RadSafe