Fukushima Scientists: World’s Oceans Now Completely Uninhabitable

Fukushima scientists claims that world's oceans are now inhabitable

Scientists working on the cleanup operation at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant in Japan have revealed that most of the world’s oceans are now completely uninhabitable.

Since the nuclear meltdown, mainstream media and government’s around the world have colluded to completely downplay the impact of the disaster.

Despite reports claiming that humans may never consume fish from the ocean again due to radiation poisoning, the mainstream media has continued to lie by claiming that the cleanup operation has been a “complete success.”

TEPCO is the company responsible for monitoring and conveying the vital stats from the meltdown. They’ve not been shy in conceding that nuclear radiation is in fact, leaking into the ocean, but they are massively downplaying its severity. Around 300 to 450 tons of nuclear-contaminated materials is leaking from Fukushima on a daily basis.

Prepforthat.com reports:  Remember, it was only a month ago that TEPCO was stating it would be dumping all the radioactive material into our oceans.

Some of this ‘coverup’ is being played out by debates over science (imagine that). A scientist named Ken Buesseler claims that the radiation levels currently found in fish may not be at levels toxic to humans. But many scientists say there isn’t such a thing as “safe levels” of radioactive material consumption. Additionally, realize that Beusseler says “may not be toxic.” How many people are willing to roll the dice of health?

According to econewsmedia.com, the contaminated water contains traces of radioactive iodine, cesium, and strontium-89 and 90.

The situation is entirely too catastrophic in magnitude for humans to control it. Fishing industries in the region have been toppled by contamination reports ran on fish. And now there are even studies providing evidence that fish off the coast of the United States and Canada are adversely affected.

What’s likely most important, as things stand, is if this is largely turning into a coverup of epic proportions. Concealing the reality of this situation would be a global crime against humanity. Our oceans are one of our lifebloods, we need to understand how compromised they may or may not be.

Underwater Robot Finds Melted Nuclear Fuel In Lava-Like State

A recent robot probe captured what appears to be fall out from the 2011 meltdown. The image reveals what many believe to be melted nuclear fuel that deposited itself as a cover on the ocean floor.

This image captured by an underwater robot provided by International Research Institute for Nuclear Decommissioning on Saturday, July 22, 2017 shows heaps of solidified lava-like rocks believed to be nuclear fuel that had melted in the 2011 accident during a probe inside of the Unit 3 reactor at Japan’s tsunami-wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant in Okuma town, northeastern Japan.
This image captured by an underwater robot provided by International Research Institute for Nuclear Decommissioning on Saturday, July 22, 2017 shows heaps of solidified lava-like rocks believed to be nuclear fuel that had melted in the 2011 accident during a probe inside of the Unit 3 reactor at Japan’s tsunami-wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant in Okuma town, northeastern Japan.

Fukushima Radiation Levels Are “Astronomical” According To Washington Post

Back in February of 2011, the Washington Post reported that radiation levels being released were “astronomical.” TEPCO claimed the levels were at 530 sieverts per hour. Even a minuscule amount of exposure to this level of radiation could kill a human. We are also talking about infertility and hair loss and cancer. These recordings were taken from the reactor’s core, however, one must ask, where is this stuff being deposited?

But not to worry, the same article from the Washington Post cited an expert as saying that the Japanese people shouldn’t be alarmed by this. So truly, nothing to see here, right?

Here’s what Brown wrote on Safecast’s website:

It must be stressed that radiation in this area has not been measured before, and it was expected to be extremely high. While 530 Sv/hr is the highest measured so far at Fukushima Daiichi, it does not mean that levels there are rising, but that a previously unmeasurable high-radiation area has finally been measured. Similar remote investigations are being planned for Daiichi Units 1 and 3. We should not be surprised if even higher radiation levels are found there, but only actual measurements will tell.

Preppers And Nuclear Meltdown Scenarios

The fact is, nuclear reactors are all over countries worldwide, including the United States. Power grid compromises, human error and even acts of terrorism can cause a nuclear reactor to meltdown and inevitably put your life in danger.

  • monica

    Question: Pacific ocean fish are inedible, what about Atlantic or Gulf fish ?

    • Patrick J. Herbert

      Same ocean, just different regional names. I imagine in due time, depending on currents, all of it will be polluted with radiation in one way or another.

      This didn’t just begin with Fukushima, though. There has always been runoff from the atomic bombs dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

      • monica

        I believe you are correct, we are in deep trouble. Stay away from ocean seafood. Maybe lake & river fish are still safe (for now)

      • http://tasfastas.blogspot.pt/ José Pedro Gomes

        You guys are funny… https://youtu.be/I9lquok4Pdk

    • TheDudeofVoo

      That’s a statement, and it is false. All Pacific ocean fish are safe to eat (relative to Fukushima radiation) except for (maybe) fish caught within a a few miles of the Fukushima disaster itself.
      Odd are, the fish in the Irish Sea are more contaminated with Sellafield’s 137Cs than fish caught near Fukushima.

    • Mitch Mandell

      The gulf is dying too. Too much farm shit has sucked all the o2 from the surrounding Mississippi Delta.

    • rebecca allen

      Stay away from fish due to mercury levels, too.

  • Winding Way

    You mean the oceans are becoming UNinhabitable. Inhabitable means you CAN live in them. You should correct this!

    • Christian Thomas

      They should. But I want to see those underwater cities.

  • sandy daniels

    All the oceans are affected VIA fallout in the form of rain and furthermore the plankton that live in the sea provide over 1/2 of earths oxygen . Nuclear power is NOT CLEAN

    • TheDudeofVoo

      Okay, oceans are affected.
      What was the radioactivity of the oceans, say, in 1776? What is the radioactivity now? What is the percentage increase?

      • Mitch Mandell

        Busy work. You’re asking for busy work. Dumping radioactive material in the Pacific Ocean is bad for humanity. And doing it year after year is really really bad. That’s all you need to know.

        • TheDudeofVoo

          Not at all. You learn better when you look it up yourself.
          Just from two (naturally occurring) isotopes,
          210Polonium – 2000 mBq per litre of seawater
          40Potassium – 11000 mBq per litre
          that’s 13,000 mBq per litre.
          So, what is the added radioactivity from Fukushima? Well, aside from the bay at Fukushima, it amounts to about 5 mBq/litre … generally, a lot less.
          Compare 13,000 to 5

  • sandy daniels

    I have heard that fish from the north banks may still be edible. Personally I live where I can go to creeks that are 7-10 thousand feet up and catch 6 inch trout that are clean

  • Derrick Reed

    Is this actually true? I have a geiger counter and will check my fish in the future. However, if this isn’t true, you shouldn’t be falsely scaring people.

    • TheDudeofVoo

      Surprise! There are natural radioactive materials in the oceans, and they are two orders of magnitude larger than any trace of contamination from Fukushima.
      Before Mankind’s Atomic Age, natural uranium and potassium were (and still are) dissolved in the ocean water.
      Oceans hold natural 210Polonium at about 2000 mBq per litre of seawater.
      Oceans hold natural 40Potassium at about 11000 mBq per litre
      That’s 13,000 mBq per litre … go back to 1776 or 1492 and you will find HIGHER natural radiation levels than that.
      Aside from a few kilometres from Fukushima bay, the amount of radioactivity found in seawater now, adds about 5 mBq per litre more.
      Compare 5 to 13,000
      “Uncontaminated” fish will contain 210Polonium and 40Potassium, and Uranium, and 14Carbon …
      if your “geiger counter” is sensitive enough, you will (always) find radioactivity in fish. Always.

      • Dave McMahon

        Thank you!

        • Mark Pennell

          Isn’t it amazing when someone you don’t know spouts out a bunch of scientific data, that you know nothing about, and you believe him. The funniest part is where he states, without any way to prove it, that levels were higher a few hundred years ago. Must be a time traveler. So sad. Try doing your own research and you will find that the truth is almost always far different than some you tube commentor will swear is “The Truth”.

  • Michelle Grant

    ELE it is all over but the crying…. NAME YOUR DEAD post fukushima…………………

  • Michelle Grant

    waters connect, people.. use your head.. STOP EATING SEAFOOD or not..

  • Pat Montgomery

    Ban light water reactors go to molten salt design from the 50’s that uses all the fuel and garb and is Failsafe design!!! They buried this design

    • TheDudeofVoo

      Buried? Probably because molten sodium bursts in to flame on contact with air.

  • TheDudeofVoo

    Fukushima happened in 11March 2011
    This photo of dead whales was taken in 2009 or before. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/bfee020a3b6d7c3ed620f46f777363d812f55028a8fd51c85ae629581af88c23.jpg

  • Jay Dillon

    It’s amazing to me that news stories about Fukushima so seldom mention something called the “food chain” or “food web” which is the basis of all life on Earth. Everything eating everything else in a mad scramble for survival. All food gradually bioconcentrates radioactive isotopes. This drives the cancer and genetic mutation rate upward. FOOD CHAIN. FOOD WEB.

    • TheDudeofVoo

      Nope… there is such a thing as excretion I suggest you excrete, because you’re so full of sh!! it is coming out in your opinions.

    • rodentx2

      Plants are the foundation of the food chain. Without plants, no meat-eating humans could survive. “Everything eating everything else” needs to be clarified. You mean, humans devour everyone else. The lion may lie down with the lamb, but humans will devour them all.

  • Pablo BF

    So fake. No sources or verifiable references, just sensationalist fear mongering.
    If its content they are looking for, why not some constructive and
    factual criticism of why the problem isn’t being addressed more
    aggressively by the international community before it does become a
    global catastrophe.

    Here s some accurate info from real scientists:


    • Mitch Mandell

      It’s fake news, but not all fake news is false. Dumping nuclear waste into the Pacific Ocean is not good, and doing it for years is really not good.

      • TheDudeofVoo

        I would rather not dump any radioactive waste in the oceans … but, you have to consider … what percentage increase will it be? The oceans have always been radioactive … and, significantly so. 13,000 Bequrels per cubic metre. Go back 500 years, and the oceans where even more radioactive.

  • Believer

    Anyone for a plate full of three eyed sea bass? Mmmmmmmmm!

    • rodentx2

      Glad I’m vegan. Plant power rules. Spare the oceans.

  • rodentx2

    Humans responsible not only for overfishing the world’s oceans due to human overpopulation demands for fish consumption, but also humans responsible for polluting the oceans with toxic chemicals, organic waste, plastic, sunken junk, and radiation from nuclear plants. Are the world’s oceans, Nature, less important than human life? Are the other animals less important than human life? Is the planet, Nature, nonhuman life less important, less valuable, less beneficial, less divine than human life? NO! I think NOT! In this regard, I am in direct opposition to the “moral teachings” of a morally anachronistic, self-serving religious institution that has outlived its expiration date! https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ba21a8951b2a3e430abe129fcd1db0c02a2f6984ba77a8e1b286bed5f0eb62ea.jpg