Ok that's ok as an aside point or humor (which was likely rosa rugosas point), but really to focus on the wording of the thread title and not the actual content posted, to get lost in a single sentence and to not be able read the whole for comprehension and the point being made. Maybe it's too mach twittering these days or something .... Maybe it's the radiation Even I noticed that someone could make a quip on the title after I posed it, so maybe the thread title was unwise, but whatever.

Now if people wanted to argue the actual risk, that's what I'm welcoming here and thanks to those who have engaged on such. Argue with me the risk those who raise the alarm on this raise is overblown. Or confirm it's scary as heck, and we could all get irradiated come November and see a massive carnage around us of cancer deaths even in the young either immediately or in a few years (that was the outcome of Hiroshima, although it was mostly localized), and that Fukushima is major threat that if things go wrong, could change the entire course of human history (perhaps by wiping out much of the Northern hemisphere as far as livability - so we can't even live in it anymore for the most part). Oh and "I don't know" is also a good answer. "I don't know" is usually alright with me, as the level of complexity of what we have to evaluate sometimes and all we don't know is often huge.

Because yes one could worry about every single possible threat out there, what if I get hit by lightening, what if, what? It might kill me! But we kind of already know both the odds and the effect of being hit by lightening and they aren't changing much. But the whole point of raising the topic was because the risk may be much more probable and much more deadly to many many more people than that and we DON'T know as well how to contextualize it.

If you actually fully visualize dying in a car crash every time you step in your car, if you actually spend every day on the verge of your mortality thinking: today I may die and it's not just an *intellectual* knowledge but it's completely emotionally real to you, ok you've reached an interesting state, either you're in the hospice passing your last hours right now (then why are you wasting them here and in a politics thread? ), or you've reached a highly evolved psychology long before your death date that few inhabit (enlightenment?), or else it's PTSD. I'm really not sure which. But most people live with a safety that is mostly false, thinking today will be much like yesterday, and tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow. There's a book called "The Denial of Death" that pretty much sums it up (he actually doesn't think people can deal with death directly without a spiritual and uncertain leap of faith - otherwise it's all denial or immortality projects).

But if someone wants to start a meditation on death as such, it should probably be a separate thread. Now Fukushima: how dangerous is it? I mean if the entire northern hemisphere even becomes "only" as poisoned with radiation as say parts of Iraq are with DU, that would be a BIG DEAL right? Major news right?