Date: August 6, 2012 (anniversary of 1945 "Little Boy" Hiroshima bomb)
Video Description
Please reupload to your channel by pushing the remix button &
publish. You can then title it what you like and fill in the
description box and tags. Be sure to save changes :) Thank you.
Link to the petition here: http://nuclearjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Petition-ANY-Environment...
http://nuclearjustice.org/?p=50
It follows that if new evidence has appeared about the potential consequences of the EURATOM Basic Safety Directive, Under Article 20 (in the original 1996 version Article 6) all practices involving radiation exposure have to be re-justified. It is a legal requirement. What is proposed, therefore, is that all individuals resident in or citizens of a EU member state country, and all NGOs based in such countries, petition the European Parliament to require a re-justification of all radiation producing practices covered by the Euratom Basic Safety Standards Directive in any of its forms in the light of the new scientific evidence of health risks.
This new evidence is appended to the Petition as an Appendix and petitioners may ask for the evidence to be presented in any scientific discussion by members of the European Committee on Radiation Risk www.euradcom.org , or the International Committee on Nuclear Justice www.nuclearjustice.org .
Published on Aug 6, 2012 by junebloke
Pr Busby #Nuclear #Radiation in Euro #Fukushima /EU Parliament
Pr C.Busby on the EU Parliament Petition for EURATOM Justification
* radioactivebsrさんが 2012/08/06 に公開
http://www.nuclearjustice.org
* ECRR-MODEL VS. ICRP *
The existentiality of the lawfuly acceptable amount of radio nuclides in the environment is the core question for all life on Earth. This question is scientifically formulated as the intellectual battle between two scientific models on the risk of the radioactivity, the acceptable levels of radio nuclides in the environment. The presently by the governments used ICRP-model, by the experts of this website is found guilty to be the cause of ongoing genocidal annihilation of all life forms as it underestimates the risks thousands of times. The ECRR-model is suggested to be used.
ECRR-model http://www.euradcom.org
Recommendations of the ECRR http://www.euradcom.org/2011/ecrr2010.pdf
ICRP-model http://www.icrp.org
Analyses of the ICRP model http://irpa11.irpa.net/pdfs/3a35.pdf
Enjoy the scientific batttle of both directors of the two Radiation Risk models -- J. Valentin and C. Busby, 22.03.2009, Stockholm
The recently resigned Scientific Secretary of the ICRP, Dr Jack Valentin , concedes to Pr. Chris Busby (ECRR) that the ICRP model can not be used to predict the health effects of exposures and that for certain internal exposures it is insecure by up to two orders of magnitude.
He also says that as he was no longer employed by ICRP he could agree that the ICRP and the United Nations committee on radiation protection (UNSCEAR) had been wrong in not examining the evidence from the Chernobyl accident and other evidence which shows large errors in the ICRP risk model.
Link to the petition here: http://nuclearjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Petition-ANY-Environment...
http://nuclearjustice.org/?p=50
It follows that if new evidence has appeared about the potential consequences of the EURATOM Basic Safety Directive, Under Article 20 (in the original 1996 version Article 6) all practices involving radiation exposure have to be re-justified. It is a legal requirement. What is proposed, therefore, is that all individuals resident in or citizens of a EU member state country, and all NGOs based in such countries, petition the European Parliament to require a re-justification of all radiation producing practices covered by the Euratom Basic Safety Standards Directive in any of its forms in the light of the new scientific evidence of health risks.
This new evidence is appended to the Petition as an Appendix and petitioners may ask for the evidence to be presented in any scientific discussion by members of the European Committee on Radiation Risk www.euradcom.org , or the International Committee on Nuclear Justice www.nuclearjustice.org .
Published on Aug 6, 2012 by junebloke
Pr Busby #Nuclear #Radiation in Euro #Fukushima /EU Parliament
Pr C.Busby on the EU Parliament Petition for EURATOM Justification
* radioactivebsrさんが 2012/08/06 に公開
http://www.nuclearjustice.org
* ECRR-MODEL VS. ICRP *
The existentiality of the lawfuly acceptable amount of radio nuclides in the environment is the core question for all life on Earth. This question is scientifically formulated as the intellectual battle between two scientific models on the risk of the radioactivity, the acceptable levels of radio nuclides in the environment. The presently by the governments used ICRP-model, by the experts of this website is found guilty to be the cause of ongoing genocidal annihilation of all life forms as it underestimates the risks thousands of times. The ECRR-model is suggested to be used.
ECRR-model http://www.euradcom.org
Recommendations of the ECRR http://www.euradcom.org/2011/ecrr2010.pdf
ICRP-model http://www.icrp.org
Analyses of the ICRP model http://irpa11.irpa.net/pdfs/3a35.pdf
Enjoy the scientific batttle of both directors of the two Radiation Risk models -- J. Valentin and C. Busby, 22.03.2009, Stockholm
The recently resigned Scientific Secretary of the ICRP, Dr Jack Valentin , concedes to Pr. Chris Busby (ECRR) that the ICRP model can not be used to predict the health effects of exposures and that for certain internal exposures it is insecure by up to two orders of magnitude.
He also says that as he was no longer employed by ICRP he could agree that the ICRP and the United Nations committee on radiation protection (UNSCEAR) had been wrong in not examining the evidence from the Chernobyl accident and other evidence which shows large errors in the ICRP risk model.
No comments:
Post a Comment