Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Radiation Spikes at Chernobyl

zetter.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 141 posts

Re: Radiation Spikes at Chernobyl

#31

Post by cf141q5325 »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #28
cf141q5325 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You dont really need a blackout. How many people can actually tell you the size and location of the contamination? Even the official limits of the exclusion zone are nonsense dating back to Soviet Bureaucracy. Wind meant there are contaminated areas outside and harmless areas inside. Also like the article stated, they are unlikely to have experienced any negative impact themselves. Also, the Greenpeace statement ment…

exactly, I know the pyramids exist, but would you actually fund them on google maps without using the search bar?

You can tell by the signs.

The point is the camp site was fine from a health and safety perspective. There are more heavily contaminated areas outside and it saw little impact due to the weather back then.

Which leaves either damage to roads that might not have seen much use before (doubtful, they have police driving around to catch real life Stalkers), lost Russians or the fires Greenpeace mentioned.

Some context for the heightened readings would be nice. Especially in comparison to the fires in March and 2020. They seem to be an obvious cause.

edit: Vehicle impact sounds quite likely https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/unprotected-russian-sol...

Maybe dont drive tanks through the red forest.

Re: Radiation Spikes at Chernobyl

#32

Post by tguvot »

jncfhnb wrote: post #2

> The IAEA sent experts to do a radiological survey in the CEZ in April, but their focus wasn’t on determining the cause of the spikes. Investigators instead wanted to determine if Russian soldiers who dug trenches in a small section of the CEZ had released dangerous levels of radiation in that area that could have sickened the soldiers or anyone else who passed through that area. (The IAEA determined the radiation l…

>The dumbasses digging radioactive dirt probably didn’t even know about Chernobyl to begin with.

Not probably. Definitely. Saw a couple of interviews with people who worked there while Russians took over the place. They said that most of the had no idea where they are (i.e. what Chernobyl is, what happened there, etc)

Re: Radiation Spikes at Chernobyl

#33

Post by [deleted] »

jncfhnb wrote: post #2

> The IAEA sent experts to do a radiological survey in the CEZ in April, but their focus wasn’t on determining the cause of the spikes. Investigators instead wanted to determine if Russian soldiers who dug trenches in a small section of the CEZ had released dangerous levels of radiation in that area that could have sickened the soldiers or anyone else who passed through that area. (The IAEA determined the radiation l…

[deleted]

Re: Radiation Spikes at Chernobyl

#34

Post by [deleted] »

h2odragon wrote: post #22

suspecting the sensors or collection network has been subverted; does it make sense to presume the normal looking signal is the true signal and the abnormal one is false data? would the opposite assumption have testable traces? just letting paranoia run free, if theres some later "dirty bomb" whose signatures match chernobyl debris, can that now be tied to either party or has reasonable doubt been established, anyone…

[deleted]

Re: Radiation Spikes at Chernobyl

#35

Post by sbierwagen »

jychang wrote: post #18
eindiran wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tend to agree with your overall point, but the comparison is not a particularly good one; you are comparing knowledge of a black site decommissioned in the 1960s to one of the most famous events in human history.

I think "most famous events in human history" is probably overstating it, and even then it wouldn't be well known anyways. Outside of the HN bubble, the average 18 year old person (even in america, as opposed to russians) would not be very informed about Chernobyl. I'd say Chernobyl is a lot less famous than WWII or 9/11 or events of that sort. And even for big historical events... if you go to a Taylor Swift concert…

Around the time the Shuttle program was ending, I made a casual reference to Soyuz to a Russian national. "Huh? «Union?»" No man. Soyuz, the space rocket. Literally the only way to get to the ISS right now. Your country's manned space program. That Soyuz? "If you say so."

Amazing they even kept it going! We've over here twisting ourselves in knots in embarrassment that we let our only spaceflight system sunset and are reduced to begging rides from Putin, but his citizens don't even notice.

Re: Radiation Spikes at Chernobyl

#36

Post by grogenaut »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #28
cf141q5325 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You dont really need a blackout. How many people can actually tell you the size and location of the contamination? Even the official limits of the exclusion zone are nonsense dating back to Soviet Bureaucracy. Wind meant there are contaminated areas outside and harmless areas inside. Also like the article stated, they are unlikely to have experienced any negative impact themselves. Also, the Greenpeace statement ment…

exactly, I know the pyramids exist, but would you actually fund them on google maps without using the search bar?

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.9717687,31.1322225,620m/data...

I knew they were outside of cairo, which means close to the river generally. and was just going to walk the nile but "sphinx cafe" showed up when I got close. You can seem the ok from sattelite view no the top right half.

I was just going to look for giza but I found them before I saw giza pop up. I didn't search I scrolled from north america.

Re: Radiation Spikes at Chernobyl

#37

Post by drewcoo »

eindiran wrote: post #16
cafard wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many Americans, younger or not, would raise an eyebrow if invited to go camping around Hanford? The Russian soldiers might have heard about Chernobyl, but had no idea a) that they were there or b) how far the contaminated zones extended.

I tend to agree with your overall point, but the comparison is not a particularly good one; you are comparing knowledge of a black site decommissioned in the 1960s to one of the most famous events in human history.

> a black site decommissioned in the 1960s

That's a bit dismissive for possibly the most radioactively contaminated area in the western hemisphere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanford_Site

https://thatoregonlife.com/2021/10/hanford-washington-nuclea...

Re: Radiation Spikes at Chernobyl

#38

Post by basementcat »

cafard wrote: post #15
dylan604 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being from the West, it is very difficult to think that information black out can be achieved at such a level that younger generations would know nothing of a disaster on the level of Chernobyl.

How many Americans, younger or not, would raise an eyebrow if invited to go camping around Hanford? The Russian soldiers might have heard about Chernobyl, but had no idea a) that they were there or b) how far the contaminated zones extended.

The US National Park Service hosts free tours to the B Reactor at Hanford! https://manhattanprojectbreactor.hanford.gov/

Re: Radiation Spikes at Chernobyl

#39

Post by cedws »

jncfhnb wrote: post #2

> The IAEA sent experts to do a radiological survey in the CEZ in April, but their focus wasn’t on determining the cause of the spikes. Investigators instead wanted to determine if Russian soldiers who dug trenches in a small section of the CEZ had released dangerous levels of radiation in that area that could have sickened the soldiers or anyone else who passed through that area. (The IAEA determined the radiation l…

The story of Russians digging holes and getting radiation poisoning was propaganda, just like Ghost of Kiev. The levels of radiation in the soil are not high enough to cause radiation poisoning, except for very few hotspots that they'd have to go looking for. It's mostly alpha radiation left which is dangerous only if radioactive particles are inhaled.

I'm more inclined to believe the IAEA. Also,

>They concluded that the radiation levels where the soldiers camped were three times what the IAEA reported

Three times more is not much when talking about radiation. Flying in a plane exposes you to about that much more radiation compared with being on the ground at sea level.

Re: Radiation Spikes at Chernobyl

#40

Post by chokolad »

renegade-otter wrote: post #24
myth_drannon wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone knows about Chernobyl. Most likely what they didn't know was where they are. I saw too many videos of soldiers asking locals for directions in the first days of war.

You underestimate Russia's induced ignorance about Chernobyl. Most of these 20-year-olds were from remote, shit-poor areas of Russia, and even if they went to school of some sort, it didn't matter much. You think those textbooks mentioned the incident? No. To this day, Chernobyl is a pain point for Russia - f--k knows why because it didn't even happen there . When HBO's Chernobyl came out, Moscow went into a full-blo…

> So, no - they didn't know. That's 100% plausible.

No, it's not plausible. Stop making shit up.

Post reply on HN