Fukushima
Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2014 1:20 pm
Life in 19x19. Go, Weiqi, Baduk... Thats the life.
https://www.lifein19x19.com/
I thought that it was clear that I was referring to under-reporting by the MSM. Although I continue to read the New York Times on a daily basis--if for no other reason than to see the official establishment position or rifts in it--most of my non-scientific reading comes from non-MSM sources. As for Natural News, I keep a skeptical mind concerning its reporting--the same as for everything that I read.DrStraw wrote:It depends on what media you read as to whether it is under-reported or not. As I never watch the Main Stream Morons I don't notice the lack. Go to Startpage and type in "natural news" fukushima. You'll get plenty of information. And that is just one of the alternative sites which I thought of first. There are several others which produce reliable information.
You should keep a skeptical mind on everything you read. The best way to get good information is to triangulate from multiple points (heptangulate?) RT is a good source of information, but it is biased in the same way the USMSM is, but not as much so I think. However, I use it as a single data point, the same as Natural News. The only people who are not well-informed are those who are informed by a single source.Aidoneus wrote:I thought that it was clear that I was referring to under-reporting by the MSM. Although I continue to read the New York Times on a daily basis--if for no other reason than to see the official establishment position or rifts in it--most of my non-scientific reading comes from non-MSM sources. As for Natural News, I keep a skeptical mind concerning its reporting--the same as for everything that I read.DrStraw wrote:It depends on what media you read as to whether it is under-reported or not. As I never watch the Main Stream Morons I don't notice the lack. Go to Startpage and type in "natural news" fukushima. You'll get plenty of information. And that is just one of the alternative sites which I thought of first. There are several others which produce reliable information.
Having a quick mind, or a quick pen, is not always best, yes?DrStraw wrote:You should keep a skeptical mind on everything you read. The best way to get good information is to triangulate from multiple points (heptangulate?) RT is a good source of information, but it is biased in the same way the USMSM is, but not as much so I think. However, I use it as a single data point, the same as Natural News. The only people who are not well-informed are those who are informed by a single source.Aidoneus wrote:I thought that it was clear that I was referring to under-reporting by the MSM. Although I continue to read the New York Times on a daily basis--if for no other reason than to see the official establishment position or rifts in it--most of my non-scientific reading comes from non-MSM sources. As for Natural News, I keep a skeptical mind concerning its reporting--the same as for everything that I read.DrStraw wrote:It depends on what media you read as to whether it is under-reported or not. As I never watch the Main Stream Morons I don't notice the lack. Go to Startpage and type in "natural news" fukushima. You'll get plenty of information. And that is just one of the alternative sites which I thought of first. There are several others which produce reliable information.
Great idea. Sell ice cubes to terrorists.Aidoneus wrote:Proposal to freeze radioactive water: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/featur ... 76195.html
You expect replies in less than 9 minutes? I have only just seen your post.sybob wrote:Haha.
If the number of views is an indication, and/or the number of replies, then cats are more important to go players / forum members than the environment.
Well, I suppose they are .....