Source: http://www.proxywhore.com/invboard/index.php?/topic/320201-my-commentary-on-the-latest-rensethe-nuclear-proctologist-interview/Dana Durnford
Free MP3 – Listen
Rense claimed that Durnford “put on a 24 hour live Fukushima feed over the Internet.” That was inaccurate.
Durnford claims that he lost his voice at the end of 10 hours. I listened to him at the end of the 10th hour and I didn’t hear a sign of that.
Durnford says, “I think we had 1,800 people join the stream.” I was reporting the numbers here for a while. The highest number of viewers I saw was 101.
I’m not saying that 1,800 total views is inaccurate but questionable for sure.
“And so, Fukushima, the only way to hold these people accountable is to get rid of corporate personhood.” – Dana Durnford
That quote is at about 20:40.
I think it’s a nonsensical statement. Consider this:
TEPCO EXECUTIVE RESIGNS AS NAVY LAWSUIT STEAMS AHEAD
Was that executive not held accountable (although corporate personhood still exists)?
Maybe you’ll say that losing your job isn’t enough, maybe. There is some room for subjectivity but I think losing your job is being held accountable in this situation.
With an absolute statement of truth, if one can prove that the statement is wrong once, then the entire statement is false.
You could label Durnford’s quote above a lie. He certainly isn’t taking all of the evidence into account.
“And so Fukushima, Japan, nobody can be held accountable, and so they do awful stuff.” – Dana Durnford
Durnford is totally ignoring the Navy lawsuit and the following:
Over 50 branches of Japan’s district courts are currently considering lawsuits from 12,539 people against the Japanese government and the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) over the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, according to local media.
That and the Navy suit are on-going. So, Durnford’s quote above is a misrepresentation at best. Some may call it a lie depending on your view of the TEPCO executive who quit (mentioned above).
I don’t know how people think that supporting Durnford is doing a good thing when he’s throwing those people suing the Japanese government and TEPCO under the bus and acting like they don’t exist.
This is really egregious. Why is Durnford throwing the people mentioned above under the bus by pretending they don’t exist?
To his supporters:
How do you defend that?
“It rains heavy in British Columbia, it rains constant out in British Columbia. And, you just wait five minutes for the weather to change.”
Is that just hyperbole or is it a lie?
It’s obviously hyperbole but when someone is lying or misrepresenting the facts constantly, well, using hyperbole like that does not help them. For instance, if I had to deal with someone like this in real life I wouldn’t believe a word they said.
Rense: There’s no end in sight, the technology doesn’t exist. They don’t even know how to go about beginning to design technology that would take care of the problem. It’s that bad.
Durnford: Cause we only send in the homeless and the destitute.
Around 8,000 workers are now assisting in the cleanup.
All 8,000 are “the homeless and the destitute”? Not likely. The following proves that Durnford was lying anyway:
Not all is going well, however. Engineers still have to locate the molten fuel, which seems to have melted through steel vessels. It remains so radioactive that no humans can enter the reactor buildings. Tepco has “no idea where and how much fuel debris is in the reactor now,” says nuclear engineer Tadahiro Katsuta of Meiji University. Last April, Tepco sent a robot into one of the buildings to photograph the damage, with mixed results, and it also intends to use robots to find and remove the globs of molten uranium, steel and other substances by 2021. According to METI, fully cleaning the site will require half a century, when most of the dangerous radionuclides will have decayed. Where the lethal debris will end up is unclear, however, because Japan has no permanent repository for nuclear waste.
The engineers working there are “the homeless and the destitute”? If this weren’t so serious, I’d be laughing.
“If we were force Harvard and Yale and Berkeley and Stanford and MIT and Oxford to go into Fukushima, then they would come up with solutions.”
I hope that’s the grand finale lie because I’m getting tired of this.
“The nuclear industry is, after all these of getting away with bananas, potato chips, and everything else is arrogant and it’s pompous and it has dropped its guard.”
What could he possibly be referring to? It’s on lock-down more than ever.
“I do read all day long. I am sitting in front of the camera all day long trying to produce material. And I don’t like doing what I’m doing, you know? But, I have the heart for it. I’ll keep doing it. And, I can put on that face, put on that smile and do it.”
The first two sentences are…hyperboles or lies? You decide.
“I can put on that face, put on that smile and do it” is a reference to lying. There’s no way around that.
Durnford: “Well, we killed the Pacific.
Rense: “It’s dead.”
Durnford: “You know people, I think this is the year where it will really strike people. Because there are effects for killing the Pacific.”
Here’s a tiny example of evidence that proves that’s a lie:
Rense: “You’re crazy, they’re still catching fish here and there, blah, blah, blah.”
Rense: “Yeah, that’s fine, there still are some fish left.”
Durnford: “One percent of one percent.”
That’s the whopper of a lie that Durnford has told before. That’s easily proven false, easily.
Rense: “One percent of one percent. That’s left in the ocean. That’s all that’s left.”
Durnford: “On the coastline. This is what we documented for anybody that’s not familiar with that. We’ve done 260 days, 15,000 miles of the coastline. We took up to two thousand to three thousand pictures a day.”
First, Durnford switched by first it definitely stating, “One percent of one percent.” in the entire ocean and changing that to “On the coastline.” So, one of them is a lie even if you take his word for it. Unless you think he has the magical ability to know what’s going on in places he has never seen.
Second, it’s not possible to “document” what he’s claiming. That’s not science, it’s nonsense.
Third, he’s claiming that “15,000 miles of the coastline” is enough to speak for the entire coastline and/or the entire ocean depending on how you want to take his claims.
“We showed the insects were gone. We showed all the birds, migratory, were gone.” – Dana Durnford.
“Done 200 miles of the coastline. That was significant. And now we understand the significance even though we didn’t understand it then. Scientists would have known that that was an extinction event. We didn’t need to do the whole coastline of Canada, just that two-hundred mile stretch. If everything was missing there, it was missing throughout the entire coastline. That was a default we didn’t understand.”
What is that nonsense? Lies, delusion, what?
I didn’t read this thread, I just skimmed over it.
It doesn’t matter. No one who’s serious (and unbiased) will take Durnford seriously after all these outrageous claims and obvious lies. I didn’t realize how bad it was until now.
I don’t know who he’s trying to fool. I’ve never used the term “fearmongering” as a description of Fukushima before but I think it fits this latest interview that Durnford did with Rense.