Replies

There was and IS plenty of evidence to show there was a meltdown.

I am not going to argue this..I think anyone and I mean ANYONE who thinks TEPCO hasn’t been lying is a flat out fool.

They have shown over and over and over and over again that they have a history of cover up. There is also a history of dubious activity by the government.

There is PLENTY of evidence that shows TEPCO has not been forthright.

Just keep being a fool and trusting everything they say.

I was right..and will continue to be right about this.

Well, let’s see the next bombshell to drop...

“Data taken at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant on the night of March 11 showing a high level of radiation at a reactor building suggest the possibility that key facilities there may have been damaged by the quake itself that day rather than tsunami-caused power loss that failed the reactor’s cooling function, a utility source said Saturday.”

http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2011/05/91122.html

Surely TEPCO would have told everyone if this was true..since this data was taken March 11th!!!!!!!

I realise that you are not accepting much of what is coming out officially. But here is an example how the same facts that you have are interpreted much differently by others within the nuclear power industry:

Japan's nuclear safety agency has suggested that significant damage to fuel at Fukushima Daiichi 1 means that filling the reactor containment vessel with water may be meaningless. The agency's Hidehiko Nishiyama said on Friday that melted fuel rods at the bottom of reactor 1 are being cooled by a small amount of water. He said he doubts that it is necessary to flood the containment vessel entirely, as workers have been trying to do. Tokyo Electric Power Co. said on Thursday that most of the fuel rods in the reactor are believed to be damaged and are at the bottom of the reactor's pressure vessel. Based on the temperature of the reactor vessel surface temperature, the company says the fuel apparently has cooled.

In other words, the fact the the rods all melted down to the bottom of the containment isn't seen as a horrible thing -- it just means the procedure to handle it is different. No need filling up the reactor, if all the fuel is at the bottom. There isn't any indication that the fuel being melted to the bottom is a catastrophe, or causing new problems, or indicates a risk of further melting.

Is it true? Well, now we have to argue over sources. I'm not going to argue sources with you. I am going to just say that if you assume one thing, or another, and argue it as fact, you won't be "right", because the truth is not known yet.