Uranium. Why in US ordnance?

[Back]

Anyone in the military want to explain why highly radioactive uranium is used in bullets, shells, missles etc?

[Edited on 1-30-2005 by Backlash]

[Ravenstorm]

Are you talking about depleted uranium? It's very dense and has more penetrating power. There's thought that it's a contributory cause to Gulf War Syndrome.

Raven

[Artha]

Depleted uranium? It's hardly highly radioactive. In fact, it's what's left over after the most radioactive isotopes are removed and is 40% less radioactive than normal uranium. It's probably used because it's a well performing alloy which can be made from the by-product of enriched uranium.


Actually, this bit from fas.org (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/du.htm) is probably better at explaining why it's used.

In military applications, when alloyed, Depleted Uranium [DU] is ideal for use in armor penetrators. These solid metal projectiles have the speed, mass and physical properties to perform exceptionally well against armored targets. DU provides a substantial performance advantage, well above other competing materials. This allows DU penetrators to defeat an armored target at a significantly greater distance. Also, DU's density and physical properties make it ideal for use as armor plate. DU has been used in weapon systems for many years in both applications.

[Edited on 1-30-2005 by Artha]

[Back]

Dunno Artha. Found this article (http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/180333p-156685c.html) that suggests it is. It also explains its prefered because its heavier than lead. It is in essence “dirty bomb” ammo thats going to affect quite a few generations. That is if those affected live long enough to try to conceive.

[Ravenstorm]

It's not that it's highly radioactive that makes it dangerous. When it enters the body though...

Raven

[peam]

The danger isn't due to radioactivity. Uranium is a heavy metal, I think. It's dangerous in the same ways as lead or mercury.

[Sean]

Originally posted by Backlash
Dunno Artha. Found this article (http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/180333p-156685c.html) that suggests it is. It also explains its prefered because its heavier than lead. It is in essence “dirty bomb” ammo thats going to affect quite a few generations. That is if those affected live long enough to try to conceive.

I don't know anyone who lives in or around NY that reads the daily news for good infromation.

[Ravenstorm]

Lots and lots about DU (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/europe/2001/depleted_uranium/default.stm)

Raven

It's not highly radioactive.

[Back]

Life Photo Essay (http://www.life.com/Life/essay/gulfwar/gulf02.html)

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Originally posted by Backlash
Life Photo Essay (http://www.life.com/Life/essay/gulfwar/gulf02.html)

Maybe chemical warfare was used on them. My nephew is autistic, and his daddy grew up next to an airbase, so should I blame the airbase? Maybe it was his vaccines? Maybe it was the aliens.

Point is, who knows what caused it.

[Back]

Originally posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Originally posted by Backlash
Life Photo Essay (http://www.life.com/Life/essay/gulfwar/gulf02.html)

Maybe chemical warfare was used on them. My nephew is autistic, and his daddy grew up next to an airbase, so should I blame the airbase? Maybe it was his vaccines? Maybe it was the aliens.

Point is, who knows what caused it.

The point is that what is causing this is being swept under the rug right before our eyes. Its radiation from uranium that creates subatomic particles that cut through DNA.

Aliens. Yeah, lets blame someone else for everything.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

In YOUR opinion, it's being swept under the rug. In my opinion, we don't know what caused it.

Originally posted by Backlash

Originally posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Originally posted by Backlash
Life Photo Essay (http://www.life.com/Life/essay/gulfwar/gulf02.html)

Maybe chemical warfare was used on them. My nephew is autistic, and his daddy grew up next to an airbase, so should I blame the airbase? Maybe it was his vaccines? Maybe it was the aliens.

Point is, who knows what caused it.

The point is that what is causing this is being swept under the rug right before our eyes. Its radiation from uranium that creates subatomic particles that cut through DNA.

Aliens. Yeah, lets blame someone else for everything.

I didn't know you were a Nuclear Chemist... I learn something new every day. Perhaps you should not try to make your beliefs fact when they are far far outside your expertise.

[Back]

Originally posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage
In YOUR opinion, it's being swept under the rug. In my opinion, we don't know what caused it.

Its my opinion that its obvious. Its your opinion that its aliens.

Who is crazy now?

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Well you are of course, because you can't tell sarcasm from a statement. Maybe that's why it's your opinion that it's obvious, because you can't distinguish fact from non-fact?

I think I'm on to something.

[Back]

Originally posted by Dave
I didn't know you were a Nuclear Chemist... I learn something new every day. Perhaps you should not try to make your beliefs fact when they are far far outside your expertise.

Google. Radiation Poison. First hit (http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/gen99/gen99584.htm).

Dave... you’re slacking man.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Dave
I didn't know you were a Nuclear Chemist... I learn something new every day. Perhaps you should not try to make your beliefs fact when they are far far outside your expertise.

The only thing required is a working comprehension of chemistry ... that you obviously lack.

You understand what half-life means don't you?

Uranium, depleted, that is used in shells etc; contains u-238 in all probability. I say u-238 because it's the most stable, it isn't practical for fission (hence depleted), and the ordinance isn't labeled thorium.

U-238 causes major activity on a Geiger despite being stable. This is due to being in a constant state of alpha-decay.

Since the half-life of u-238 is about 4.5 million years, it is very safe to assume that DU ordinance contain a hefty amount of radioactive material ... since u-238 is indeed radioactive. More so that Radon, much more so than Radon, excessively more than radon. And we know that Radon is a huge home health risk.

You can buy into military claims of DU being safe, science says it isn't. Science says it’s radioactive. Science says it has the potential to kill you, cause cancer, cause infertility, and cause genetic defects in your sperm/ovum that will cause defects in offspring.

Guess which one isn't lying.

You can also find the same science that says the exact opposite.

[Miss X]

You can find the odd bit of research that claims smoking is 100% safe and has no effect on your lungs, it doesn't mean its true.

What Tsa'ah was saying is evidence based research, it's not like the world of scientists are making it up to brianwash you against the government, its fact.

the sites that Bachlash or whomever posted earlier from the BBC had multiple stories saying that it was safe as well as unsafe.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Dave
You can also find the same science that says the exact opposite.

Find it cowboy.

Make sure it's credible.

[Scott]

<<<You can find the odd bit of research that claims smoking is 100% safe and has no effect on your lungs, it doesn't mean its true. >>>

The same can be said for this arguement.......

[Back]

Originally posted by Scott
<<<You can find the odd bit of research that claims smoking is 100% safe and has no effect on your lungs, it doesn't mean its true. >>>

The same can be said for this arguement.......

Well, hell, the birth defects (born without eyes, organs, limbs) just popped up out of nowhere. Fucking aliens.

Truth of it is, no one wants to believe or admit the truth.

[StrayRogue]

Originally posted by Scott
<<<You can find the odd bit of research that claims smoking is 100% safe and has no effect on your lungs, it doesn't mean its true. >>>

The same can be said for this arguement.......

Yay for denial.

[Scott]

Originally posted by StrayRogue

Originally posted by Scott
<<<You can find the odd bit of research that claims smoking is 100% safe and has no effect on your lungs, it doesn't mean its true. >>>

The same can be said for this arguement.......

Yay for denial.

Denial? About what?

I have no clue what DU does to people. I haven't done any research, nor do I plan to bother looking for anything. I never once stated that one side is wrong or another side is right. All I said was that just because you find a "research" that states one side, doesn't mean that it's automatically right.

[Back]

Anyone have a guess to how many tons of this stuff has been dropped? Yeah, TONS. And you want to think that has no effect at all on anyone.

Aside, of course, from the initial destruction of the impact, the stuff vaporizes.

[HarmNone]

And, in its vaporized state, travels for rather impressive distances...

Originally posted by Tsa`ah

Originally posted by Dave
You can also find the same science that says the exact opposite.

Find it cowboy.

Make sure it's credible.

Going off of Backlashes post

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1205632.stm


Yehaw?

[Edited on 1-30-2005 by Dave]

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Scott
Denial? About what?

I have no clue what DU does to people. I haven't done any research, nor do I plan to bother looking for anything. I never once stated that one side is wrong or another side is right. All I said was that just because you find a "research" that states one side, doesn't mean that it's automatically right.

What isn't right about proven research? You're saying that beta and alpha decay, thus radioactive emissions, does not damage genetic code? The hundreds of thousands, if not millions of hours of observation, study, and pedigree are wrong?

There's valid research based on the empirical, and there's piss poor research that relies on anecdotal ... learn the difference.

[GSTamral]

<<<
Uranium, depleted, that is used in shells etc; contains u-238 in all probability. I say u-238 because it's the most stable, it isn't practical for fission (hence depleted), and the ordinance isn't labeled thorium.

U-238 causes major activity on a Geiger despite being stable. This is due to being in a constant state of alpha-decay.

Since the half-life of u-238 is about 4.5 million years, it is very safe to assume that DU ordinance contain a hefty amount of radioactive material ... since u-238 is indeed radioactive. More so that Radon, much more so than Radon, excessively more than radon. And we know that Radon is a huge home health risk.

You can buy into military claims of DU being safe, science says it isn't. Science says it’s radioactive. Science says it has the potential to kill you, cause cancer, cause infertility, and cause genetic defects in your sperm/ovum that will cause defects in offspring.

Guess which one isn't lying.
>>>

Who the fuck did this research? I'd suggest you do it again.

Depleted Uranium contains very little radioactive uranium. "Depleted Uranium" is U-238 and lead, the material uranium 235 breaks down into, you stupid sack of shit. Secondly, U-238 does not cause "major" activity on a geiger meter. U-238 has a less than one active PPB/S of alpha decay. It measures only slightly more radioactive than sunlight. In terms of danger, alpha particle decay is not harmful to humans, or most other life forms.

In order to be classified as depleted, the radiation levels measured x number of meters from the center has to be below 5 rads, or the scientifically accepted safe level of radiation.

As for Tsa'ah's babble, the human body does not contain any plutonium-239, uranium 233, or Thorium 232 that could react to the slow nuetron bombardment of alpha particles, which are, for all intensive purposes, inert.

The actual problem with depleted uranium is that once the level of U-235 reaches a certain point (from 3.5-4.0% in an enriched fissionable state) to around .03% (or about 1/20th of the level found in natural uranium), it is considered to be depleted. However, in this state, there are still depleting stages of uranium 235 (such as Thorium 229) all the way down to its final inert stage, lead. Those isotopes are unstable, and while they do not have enough energy to keep a reaction going, there is a constant release of beta, alpha and gamma particles that can harm the body.

5 rads is not enough to cause any major damage for someone who walks by it, or even spends 15 minutes with it a day. But put the stuff in your pocket, where the exposure is nearly direct, and keep it there for a significant time, and yes, there is most certainly a risk. Nuclear waste such as depleted uranium is like any other danger, in that it can be very dangerous, possibly even deadly, if not handled correctly.

[Tsa`ah]

Hey Tam, stick with math. Science isn't your thing apparently.

Do me a favor use google this once.

Google Uranium and half-life.

[Tsa`ah]

Here ... I'll do it for you.

http://education.jlab.org/itselemental/ele092.html


Uranium's most stable isotope, uranium-238, has a half-life of about 4,468,000,000 years. It decays into thorium-234 through alpha decay or decays through spontaneous fission.

http://www.ccnr.org/decay_U238.html

http://www.britannica.com/nobel/micro/614_15.html

Maybe next time you'll do some research before you pop off like a moron.

[Edited on 1-30-2005 by Tsa`ah]

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Dave
Going off of Backlashes post

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1205632.stm


Yehaw?


Yeeee HAAA! You stepped in something.

Research, not anecdotal articles.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Fertilizers are typically radioactive. Anyone with a green lawn needs to be shot with a uranium depleted bullet, clearly.

[Warriorbird]

Eh. DU does good work. Soldiers know what they're getting into.

[GSTamral]

See, dumbass, the problem here, is that you googled this one without knowing what it means.

Please attempt to understand the fission process first before making such asinine statements. I'll explain it for your stupid ass, but just this once.

The process of alpha decay is the process by which 2 nuetrons and 2 protons AND 2 electrons are released from an atom, yielding the inert Helium gas. Radioactive decay consisting of the emission of alpha particles. Alpha radiation is therefore not truly radiation, but a stream of particles. Because of their relatively large size, alpha radiation is not penetrating and relatively inert.

Heavy Water, otherwise known as Tritium or Deuterium water, has a natural rate of alpha decay of less than 4.5 billion years. It is both naturally occuring and naturally forming. OMG OMG OMG Ocean Water is radioactive!!! help us help us!!!!

fucking dumbass.

[Tsa`ah]

Yep, I'm the dumbass.

So Radon isn't a hazard either right? Radon goes through alpha decay.

What you fail to understand is that while alpha particles can be deflected by a sheet of ordinary paper, they can be inhaled and that is the danger.

Take your degrees and start using them for something other than toilet paper genius.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by GSTamral
Heavy Water, otherwise known as Tritium or Deuterium water, has a natural rate of alpha decay of less than 4.5 billion years. It is both naturally occuring and naturally forming. OMG OMG OMG Ocean Water is radioactive!!! help us help us!!!!

fucking dumbass.

This one had me rolling.

Due me a favor and go drink some cluster fuck.

[GSTamral]

Bzzzt! I'm sorry, that's incorrect again! Tell us what the parting gifts are for the loser! A one way trip back to google because obviously he doesn't get it!!!!

Now you're comparing it to Radon, something that has a half life of 4 days. That's just great you babbling pile of vomit. By that reasoning, sugar is not harmful to the body, but I am sure if you ate 75 lbs of it in one sitting, it might be harmful.

Alpha decay is helium. Forget the paper. Human skin blocks it. In fact, alpha decay is nothing more than helium at 1s1-1p1, which quickly degenerates to 1s2, giving off a slight amount of heat, thus why naturally occurring plutonium is naturally warm.

Now you want to talk about breathing in helium? You never took in a balloon to talk funny as a kid? Yes, helium in great amounts is indeed dangerous, and radon decay is more dangerous from the heat emitted from the loss of electron state in the helium than it is from the actual helium.

But either way, now you want to bring in an example of how something that decays in days is threatening, therefore something that decays in 4.5 billion years is equally threatening?

Go back to google. Read the whole articles and attempt to get an understanding of the process before you come back and spew more shit. Because that's all thats coming out right now.

You should try not to stick with science.

[Edited on 1-30-2005 by HarmNone]

[Warriorbird]

Ocean water != heavy water. Just for the record.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by GSTamral
Bzzzt! I'm sorry, that's incorrect again! Tell us what the parting gifts are for the loser! A one way trip back to google because obviously he doesn't get it!!!!

Making you look like a moron. It's not really a prize, more of a side-effect.


Now you're comparing it to Radon, something that has a half life of 4 days. That's just great you babbling pile of vomit. By that reasoning, sugar is not harmful to the body, but I am sure if you ate 75 lbs of it in one sitting, it might be harmful.

BAM. Right there you stupid fuck. We're talking about TONS of DU.

In trace amounts there's not much to worry about. Every home has trace amounts of Radon. Without proper venting, radon builds and thus the hazard.

DU shells disintegrate on impact. We're not talking a soluble substance like sugar, we're talking about radio active particles of metals going through alpha decay. (Yes alpha decay ... bone up chuckles, you're slipping)

The skin does not block it. Your skin breaths. Your skin absorbs. These particles settle in the hair, the nose, and the lungs.


Alpha decay is helium. Forget the paper. Human skin blocks it. In fact, alpha decay is nothing more than helium at 1s1-1p1, which quickly degenerates to 1s2, giving off a slight amount of heat, thus why naturally occurring plutonium is naturally warm.

So you're saying that u-238 doesn't go through alpha decay? Man ... all those physicists ... wrong. How will they cope with your new laws of science?

And you're still standing on uranium decaying to lead ... are we correct in this?

Anything else you wish to be wrong about?


Now you want to talk about breathing in helium? You never took in a balloon to talk funny as a kid? Yes, helium in great amounts is indeed dangerous, and radon decay is more dangerous from the heat emitted from the loss of electron state in the helium than it is from the actual helium.

No, you're talking about the fission process and not the waste. We're talking about DU ... u-238; not helium isotopes. You knew this right ... or is this another one your tangent rants.

We moving on to Israel next? Let me know.


But either way, now you want to bring in an example of how something that decays in days is threatening, therefore something that decays in 4.5 billion years is equally threatening?

And right there displays that you know nothing of half-life.

Uranium, most everything in fact, is in a state of atomic decay. We can't predict when the decay occurs, buy we can measure a sample weight containing millions, if not billions ... trillions, or particles.

Obviously man kind has not been on this planet for millions of years Tammy; and at our earliest stages of existence we didn't have the comprehension of decay, let alone fire.

Simply put. You take a pound of u-238 and let it sit in a container with limited outside environmental influences.

And you measure, you weight it, you gauge it's displacement, you gauge it's mass, it's volume ... everything a good scientist will do. You determine the changes. With enough charted decay one can project the amount of time it will take for HALF of any measurable substance to decay, thus becoming another substance.

Hint ... uranium does not become lead. That would take some MASSIVE and UNNATURAL decay.


Go back to google. Read the whole articles and attempt to get an understanding of the process before you come back and spew more shit. Because that's all thats coming out right now.

Do me a favor, go back to college, those degrees aren't working for you at all.

Are they science degrees? How many semesters of Chem did you take?

Wanna compare dicks? I bet mines bigger.

You sir are a dip shit of the highest magnitude.

[Edited on 1-30-2005 by Tsa`ah]

[Edited on 1-30-2005 by HarmNone]

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Haha, the compare dicks line cracked me up.

[GSTamral]

allright, this will take some time to address all the crap.

As for not being able to tell when it will decay? Did you ever take intro chemistry? There is an EXACT rate of decay, of which, at any precise second, you can calculate. It all doesnt go off at once you stupid fuck.

<<
So you're saying that u-238 doesn't go through alpha decay? Man ... all those physicists ... wrong. How will they cope with your new laws of science?

And you're still standing on uranium decaying to lead ... are we correct in this?
>>>

Uranium-238 goes through a very slow process of alpha decay. Alpha decay is the emission of a helium particle. NOTHING MORE. Go read on it, mr wizard.
Helium is NOT dangerous when absorbed through skin in minute quantities mr. wizard. Have you ever taken a science class in your life? EVER? Did you pass said class?

Naturally occurring Uranium is around 99% U-238, less than .75% U-235 (the dangerous uranium), and .25% or so other isotopes, such as U-233 (the really tricky bastard).

This uranium is neither dangerous nor reactive. To make it reactive, the amount of U-235 is enriched to 3.5-4%. Then it becomes reactive. When bombarded with fast nuetrons, U-235 begins a chain reaction by which it deteriorates to Pb-205, otherwise known as lead. U-238 is not harmful standing on its own. That is scientific fact, fuckface. The dangerous elements of depleted uranium is in the partially degraded states of Uranium, or those atoms which have undergone some decay from U-235, but are not yet at the final state. At the time the reaction ends, there is still some of this substance, which is unstable, but not unstable enough to cause any kind of violent reaction.

<<
No, you're talking about the fission process and not the waste. We're talking about DU ... u-238; not helium isotopes. You knew this right ... or is this another one your tangent rants.
>>

God damn you are a stupid fuck who knows nothing about science other than what some google article is telling you. And you are only reading a small part of it. I suggest you read up on ALPHA decay again.

Alpha decay is not some violent fission reaction. Plutonium-239 undergoes natural alpha decay as well, and at a much higher rate. You can hold it in your hands, and it simply feels warm to the touch. Alpha decay, I repeat again, and let me find a source for you one this one, since you won't believe it from here, in fact, I'll find a bunch, because this is just too easy, you dumbass shitstained asshat.

1) alpha decay. Alpha particles (excited helium isotopes) cannot penetrate a piece of paper or even the thin
layer of dead skin that coats us all.>>

From
hypertextbook.com/physics/modern/decay/

2.
For example, an atom of uranium-238 can undergo alpha decay, leaving behind ... radiation
can be halted by a piece of paper and can scarcely penetrate the dead layer of skin that surrounds our body

www.llnl.gov/saer/saer01/01pdfs/mv-apD.pdf

3.
Thus for instance, the alpha decay of (uranium 238) lead to ... They are unable to penetrate
any solid material, such as paper or skin, to any significant depth ...

www.hbcumi.cau.edu/tqp/451/ 451%20Module%20I/451-02/451-02.html

4.
... Travels 1-3 inches in air. Does not penetrate unbroken skin. ... Example of Alpha Decay.
Characteristics. ... Example Half-lives - Natural. Uranium-238 (In soil

www.tech.kent.edu/.../ Nature%20of%20Radiation%202004.PPT

This is just too easy here shithead. You can find the rest yourself. There are literally thousands of these pages to sift through..

If you still cannot understand that alpha "radiation" is nothing more than helium, then perhaps you need to go back to high school and take some introductory classes.

<<<
And you measure, you weight it, you gauge it's displacement, you gauge it's mass, it's volume ... everything a good scientist will do. You determine the changes. With enough charted decay one can project the amount of time it will take for HALF of any measurable substance to decay, thus becoming another substance.>>>

You win the stupid fuck of the day award!!!! Read any single one of the above articles, and you will see there there is an EXACT measurable rate of decay!!! It's not some random thing that occurs when you can just say half is gone you dumbass sack of fucking useless vomit. There is an exact, exponential rate of decay from second to second. This rate is scientifically known, dumbass.

<<<
DU shells disintegrate on impact. We're not talking a soluble substance like sugar, we're talking about radio active particles of metals going through alpha decay.
>>>

If they penetrate the skin on impact, then yes, they are dangerous. Slightly more dangerous than lead. Disintigrating on impact does not make them any more prone to spontaneous radioactive alpha decay. Had you understood a lick of science, you'd know that. U-238 does not become unstable lightly. Slow nuetron bombardment may turn it into the more unstable Plutonium 239, but that requires a particle accelerator, or gaseous tritium with an extremely explosive inward force. Blowing up when it hits a target doesn't do shit.


<
Uranium, most everything in fact, is in a state of atomic decay. We can't predict when the decay occurs, buy we can measure a sample weight containing millions, if not billions ... trillions, or particles.

Obviously man kind has not been on this planet for millions of years Tammy; and at our earliest stages of existence we didn't have the comprehension of decay, let alone fire.
>>

Actually we do know when. We know the rate. We know the locations, or point defects, that will be created in the crystalline structure when it happens. We even know at what point the hex-close packed U-238 will become the Body Centered Cubic structure of Th-234. You may not, because this is way over your head, but science does indeed know.


<
You sir are a dip shit of the highest magnitude.
>>

I'd rather be a dip shit than wake up one day being as stupid as you are.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<The hundreds of thousands, if not millions of hours of observation, study, and pedigree are wrong?>>

Maybe I'm crazy, but I wouldn't exactly trust what anyone in 1890 said about uranium.

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by Backlash
The point is that what is causing this is being swept under the rug right before our eyes. Its radiation from uranium that creates subatomic particles that cut through DNA.

Aliens. Yeah, lets blame someone else for everything.

The Life article points to a number of other toxins the troops encountered that had nothing to do with Uranium.


Richard, who had fathered two healthy children before he went to war, was working for Lockheed in the Gulf. But he bunked in the desert with the troops--and that meant swallowing, inhaling and otherwise absorbing some very dicey stuff. According to a 1994 report by the General Accounting Office, American soldiers were exposed to 21 potential "reproductive toxicants," any of which might have harmed them as well as their future children. They used diesel fuel to keep down sand. They marched through smoke from burning oil wells. They doused themselves with bug sprays. They handled a toxic nerve-gas decontaminant, ethylene glycol monomethyl ether. They fired shells tipped with depleted uranium. Other teratogens--materials that cause birth defects--may have been present too. One possibility is that desert winds bore traces of Iraqi poison gas.

[Edited on 1-30-2005 by Hulkein]

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah

Originally posted by Dave
Going off of Backlashes post

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1205632.stm


Yehaw?


Yeeee HAAA! You stepped in something.

Research, not anecdotal articles.

The article is based on research, chief.


Depleted uranium (DU) used in Nato weapons in the Balkans has no detectable effect on human health, according a European Union panel of experts.

The European Commission ordered the investigations after claims that veterans of peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and Kosovo had developed illnesses, particularly cancer, after being exposed to depleted uranium used in armour-piercing weapons

[Edited on 1-30-2005 by Hulkein]

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by Hulkein
The article is based on research, chief.

Back in 2001.

But in 2003... (http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3627)

Conclusion: no one can really say for certain but it's obvious more research needs to be done. Another conclusion is that it is certainly possible that DU can be deadly or at least extremely dmaging under some circumstances.

Raven

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I love it that Tamral and Tsa`ah, both of whom I deem inteligent, can't debate without the vicious insults. Comic genius. Please continue!

[Hulkein]

I agree Raven.

I'm just saying that what Dave posted wasn't just an anecdotal article.

It was based on a decision that a panel of experts made after investigation.

[StrayRogue]

For once I agree with Hulkein as well.

It's okay Hulekin, no matter what I post to Tsa'ah it will be wrong. Even if it is the exact same thing he is saying.

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage
I love it that Tamral and Tsa`ah, both of whom I deem inteligent, can't debate without the vicious insults. Comic genius. Please continue!

Heh. I was tempted to ask Ravenstorm where, in his post, were the references to "asshats", "dick-sucking", and other such intellectual taunts. ;)

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

See, you saw through my sarcasm Harmnone, now I'll have to be more obscure :(

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by GSTamral
allright, this will take some time to address all the crap.

As for not being able to tell when it will decay? Did you ever take intro chemistry? There is an EXACT rate of decay, of which, at any precise second, you can calculate. It all doesnt go off at once you stupid fuck.

It's obvious you have no clue what you're talking about. The exact rate of decay is just that ... the rate any given sample will decay. There is no way to accurately predict when a single atom will release particles, thus you have to determine the rate of decay via a sampling of a mass of said atoms. Measuring the physical aspects, weight volume .... you get the drift; gives you a rate of decay with some margin of error. At this point in time, it is not feasible, let alone possible, to predict exactly when any given atom will decay. It's chaotic. Only through measuring a sample repeatedly and methodically can you determine a rate of decay.

Please, for the love of science, take a fucking class.


Uranium-238 goes through a very slow process of alpha decay. Alpha decay is the emission of a helium particle. NOTHING MORE. Go read on it, mr wizard.
Helium is NOT dangerous when absorbed through skin in minute quantities mr. wizard. Have you ever taken a science class in your life? EVER? Did you pass said class?

I passed 6 semesters of various chem classes with a 4.0, did you?

That's neither hear nor there however, what is apparently in question is your understanding of basic chemistry.

Please do read this.

http://education.jlab.org/glossary/alphadecay.html

Please do click the link labeled alpha particle.

Please understand that an alpha particle is not simply He, it is not inert as stable He is; it lacks electrons, it has a positive charge. This makes it a far cry from "harmless".

You knew that right?


Naturally occurring Uranium is around 99% U-238, less than .75% U-235 (the dangerous uranium), and .25% or so other isotopes, such as U-233 (the really tricky bastard).

You are ignoring the topic. DU. DU is not naturally occuring. Tons of alpha particles emitting DU are not naturally occurring.


This uranium is neither dangerous nor reactive. To make it reactive, the amount of U-235 is enriched to 3.5-4%. Then it becomes reactive. When bombarded with fast nuetrons, U-235 begins a chain reaction by which it deteriorates to Pb-205, otherwise known as lead. U-238 is not harmful standing on its own. That is scientific fact, fuckface. The dangerous elements of depleted uranium is in the partially degraded states of Uranium, or those atoms which have undergone some decay from U-235, but are not yet at the final state. At the time the reaction ends, there is still some of this substance, which is unstable, but not unstable enough to cause any kind of violent reaction.

Nice google pull there champ.

Many things are non reactive. Decay happens naturally. This isn't in question. We're talking concentration. You seem to side step that.

Like your side stepping uranium decaying into lead. Heavy water not being dangerous.

I just love to watch you dig holes.


God damn you are a stupid fuck who knows nothing about science other than what some google article is telling you. And you are only reading a small part of it. I suggest you read up on ALPHA decay again.

Talk about the pot ...

I understand what alpha decay is. Please read for yourself. It is apparent you don't comprehend what a POSITIVELY CHARGED helium particle is. Just as you fail to comprehend how the body respirates.


Alpha decay is not some violent fission reaction. Plutonium-239 undergoes natural alpha decay as well, and at a much higher rate. You can hold it in your hands, and it simply feels warm to the touch. Alpha decay, I repeat again, and let me find a source for you one this one, since you won't believe it from here, in fact, I'll find a bunch, because this is just too easy, you dumbass shitstained asshat.

Just brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.

Your prior google inspire post pointed out alpha decay during fission. Unnatural decay.

Have you read up on alpha decay yet ... please do so.




alpha decay. Alpha particles (excited helium isotopes) cannot penetrate a piece of paper or even the thin
layer of dead skin that coats us all.

Really? So tell me genius ... How is water and oxygen absorbed through the dermis? Both easily dwarf a single alpha particle. Both can be absorbed through the skin.

Ah, but that is the key. Pass through and absorb. Go figure.


2.
For example, an atom of uranium-238 can undergo alpha decay, leaving behind ... radiation
can be halted by a piece of paper and can scarcely penetrate the dead layer of skin that surrounds our body

Guess that means you should hold your breath when within hundred miles of the battle field.

Let me fill you in on something. The human body is constantly shedding the outer dermis. We don't do this in the manner of reptiles. It flakes off. There fore there are patches of unprotected living skin at any given second of any given minute of any given hour .... you get the drift .. I hope.

Look up transdermal absorption.




blah blah :blah:

Again see absorption, ingestion, respiration.


You win the stupid fuck of the day award!!!! Read any single one of the above articles, and you will see there there is an EXACT measurable rate of decay!!! It's not some random thing that occurs when you can just say half is gone you dumbass sack of fucking useless vomit. There is an exact, exponential rate of decay from second to second. This rate is scientifically known, dumbass.

You are an idiot aren't you. Sad that.

Dare I explain this at the 5 year old level?

What don't you understand? Did your google findings have too many big words?

Truly truly astonishing. Please tell me you were home schooled. That would explain it.


If they penetrate the skin on impact, then yes, they are dangerous. Slightly more dangerous than lead. Disintigrating on impact does not make them any more prone to spontaneous radioactive alpha decay. Had you understood a lick of science, you'd know that. U-238 does not become unstable lightly. Slow nuetron bombardment may turn it into the more unstable Plutonium 239, but that requires a particle accelerator, or gaseous tritium with an extremely explosive inward force. Blowing up when it hits a target doesn't do shit.

Respiration. Please ... look it up.
Ingestion. Please ... look it up.
Breathing. Please stop doing it.




Actually we do know when.

No, we can predict when any given sample will decay and to what extent. We do not know, again I say this ... maybe it will stick this time, when any specific atom will decay. It is a chaotic event.


We know the rate.

Of course, I explained it. Please don't make me add you to the comprehension list.


We know the locations, or point defects, that will be created in the crystalline structure when it happens.

No we don't. Only through testing a sample can we determine this. Where and when are unknowns in any given circumstance with today's technology.


We even know at what point the hex-close packed U-238 will become the Body Centered Cubic structure of Th-234. You may not, because this is way over your head, but science does indeed know.

If controlled fission is the setting … sure. In controlled decay ... yes. In natural decay ... No.

Understand yet or is it back to google with you?


I'd rather be a dip shit than wake up one day being as stupid as you are.

Sir, you could only hope to be as stupid as I am considering your current display of ignorance.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Hulkein
The article is based on research, chief.


Partial research. They sampled the earth and water ... umm ... Whoop!

It was an investigation that was nothing more that some guys taking a break from the lab to wear the cool field suits and take some samples.

The big lacking factor here is a count on the air contaminants. Since no one has bothered, or has been permitted to, sample the air during the use of DU, it becomes rather unscientific to visit years later when the dust has settled.

[Edited on 1-31-2005 by Tsa`ah]

[Tsa`ah]

To answer the question "Uranium. Why in US ordnance?"

Cheap disposal and genetic pacification.

[Edited on 1-30-2005 by Tsa`ah]

[GSTamral]

<<
I passed 6 semesters of various chem classes with a 4.0, did you?
>>

I took many more a class more relevant to this type of issue.

Most any dumb fuck can count chem 1, chem 2, and 2 semesters of organic chem to have some relative meaning to this, but it doesn't. And yes, I've taken all 4.

I've also taken such classes as:
Physical Chemistry
Physics
Physics E&M
Thermodynamics
Mechanics of Solids
Fluid Dynamics
Physical Analysis of Materials
Biomedical Materials
Biomedical Chemistry (which actually covers this exact topic, mr wizard)

And yes, mr wizard, in a more relavant class, natural decay is not the most difficult to predict, because there are no point hyperactivity states. It is useless to continue arguing with something who not only has no clue what they are talking about, but refuses to simply admit it.

I've been inside a nuclear power plant and seen emission diagrams and statistical crystalline diagrams. Have you?
Yes, I know, I know, none of those articles from respected university professors and researchers explaining alpha decay had any idea what they were talking about. And yes, I know, nuclear engineers know nothing about alpha decay either, unless they agree what is inside the tiny little brain of Tsa'ah.

[GSTamral]

<<


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
alpha decay. Alpha particles (excited helium isotopes) cannot penetrate a piece of paper or even the thin
layer of dead skin that coats us all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Really? So tell me genius ... How is water and oxygen absorbed through the dermis? Both easily dwarf a single alpha particle. Both can be absorbed through the skin.

Ah, but that is the key. Pass through and absorb. Go figure.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.
For example, an atom of uranium-238 can undergo alpha decay, leaving behind ... radiation
can be halted by a piece of paper and can scarcely penetrate the dead layer of skin that surrounds our body
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Guess that means you should hold your breath when within hundred miles of the battle field.
>>>


I posted links in which those statements were made. Read them you massively ignorant fuck.

[Vad]

"Uranium. Why in US ordnance?"

Simple. Ever seen footage of a depleted uranium shell punching through one side and out the other of an outdated Soviet tank full of Afghans? In some cases, the force is great enough to suck the occupants out of the shell's exit breach, normally a hole less than 10 inches in diameter. Gross, but effective.

Harmful to your health? I don't know, possibly.. maybe if you constantly come in contact with the munitions and unintentionally ingest particles (eating afterwards without washing your hands, smoking a cigarette with particles on your hands, etc). As far as plain ol' radiation exposure is concerned, I doubt it. ALARA regs require extensive thermoluminescent dosimter testing of any radioactive substance before military personnel are subjected to its presence in a working environment. You can work around W-80 warheads for years without ever experiencing overexposure. Maybe DU ammo is different - I have no personal experience with it.

-V

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by GSTamral
I posted links in which those statements were made. Read them you massively ignorant fuck.

Just when you think stupidity has reached it's limit ....

:rolleyes:

[Hulkein]

... You go ahead and post that as a response.

[GSTamral]

<<<
Guess that means you should hold your breath when within hundred miles of the battle field.
>>>

This single statement sums up your ignorance in a capsule. Had you actually understood anything from your chemistry classes (of which this type of actual reaction was probably never even covered), or understood anything in your googling, you would know that alpha particles cease to exist within centimeters of their source, and become the inert 1s2 configuration of helium-4.

Hundreds of miles? Are you really this stupid? I mean, is it even possible to google this much and not understand a word of the process? God damn.

[Tsa`ah]

I've no problem posting that as a response.

Tammy is arguing points he's clueless on, let's not forget the ignored fuck ups on his part.

~Uranium decaying into lead.
~The harmless alpha particle ... AKA He isotope (lacking electrons)
~Safe consumption of heavy waters .... AKA deuterium and tritium.
~Ignoring concentration arguments
~Complete ignorance pertaining to atomic decay

We could expand the argument if he would like. Say, include the gamma emission and additional alpha emission when thorium-234 decays (half life of 24-25 days) and just work the long list down until we finally come to a stable atom of lead.

(Watch him jump on that as justification)

Either way you cut it, Tams just saw me post on something he had no understanding of and just googled himself into a hole he can't possibly pull his large ass out of.



[Edited on 1-31-2005 by HarmNone]

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by GSTamral
<<<
Guess that means you should hold your breath when within hundred miles of the battle field.
>>>

This single statement sums up your ignorance in a capsule. Had you actually understood anything from your chemistry classes (of which this type of actual reaction was probably never even covered), or understood anything in your googling, you would know that alpha particles cease to exist within centimeters of their source, and become the inert 1s2 configuration of helium-4.

Hundreds of miles? Are you really this stupid? I mean, is it even possible to google this much and not understand a word of the process? God damn.

You just can't think your way out of a paper sack can you.

What emits the alpha particle Tammy? I believe we're talking about DU ... u-238.

What are the results when a high velocity DU ordinance impacts armor, hard stone, sand ... most dense surfaces?

It disintegrates, or enough of it does depending on the material and the impact.

Now you have u-238 blowing around in the atmosphere. (something tells me I've tried explaining this to the dullard already) What happens when you inhale Tams? Air flows through either the mouth or nose and into the lungs. Air containing DU particles. DU isn't something the body digests. It settles ... it decays. Alpha particles don't have very far to travel now do they?

Do you comprehend this, or do I have to get the grown up to 5 year old translation book out for you.

Better yet ... I'll start drawing pictures ... there is a slight chance you may comprehend those.

[Vad]

<- ooo. Tritium bottles are warm in teh hand~. Feel fuzzy.

-V

[Neildo]

Uh oh, geek fights!

:laser: :wedgie:

- N

[Valthissa]

Originally posted by Vad
"Uranium. Why in US ordnance?"

Simple. Ever seen footage of a depleted uranium shell punching through one side and out the other of an outdated Soviet tank full of Afghans? In some cases, the force is great enough to suck the occupants out of the shell's exit breach, normally a hole less than 10 inches in diameter. Gross, but effective.

Harmful to your health? I don't know, possibly.. maybe if you constantly come in contact with the munitions and unintentionally ingest particles (eating afterwards without washing your hands, smoking a cigarette with particles on your hands, etc). As far as plain ol' radiation exposure is concerned, I doubt it. ALARA regs require extensive thermoluminescent dosimter testing of any radioactive substance before military personnel are subjected to its presence in a working environment. You can work around W-80 warheads for years without ever experiencing overexposure. Maybe DU ammo is different - I have no personal experience with it.

-V

we have a winner.

f=ma

depleted uranium has the most commercially available mass.

Companies like ATK-GASL (a former division of my company) are working the acceleration factor so that the ordnance could be a iron based and deliver the same (or more) force.

As to radiation, while it seems unlikely to me, I don't really know. I'll ask around and see if any of my more knowledgable friends can provide some information.

on a side note, I am enjoying the food fight.

C/Valth

[GSTamral]

<<<
~Uranium decaying into lead.
~The harmless alpha particle ... AKA He isotope (lacking electrons)
~Safe consumption of heavy waters .... AKA deuterium and tritium.
~Ignoring concentration arguments
~Complete ignorance pertaining to atomic decay
>>>

Uranium 235, at 3.5-4% (enriched) is the nuclear "fuel" at a power plant, or within a uranium atomic bomb dumbass. DO YOUR RESEARCH. You are so incomprehensibly stupid as to not even understand the basic reaction.

U-235 decays into lead.
U-238 decays into Thorium-234,
To state that Thorium 234 emits gamma rays is just stupid, and it illustrates how fucking stupid you are.
It decays slowly, via 2 beta emissions, to create the stable U-234.
Those beta emissions cannot penetrate a thin sheet of aluminum, and have a radioactive basis of less than a foot. OOOOOOO, major nuclear meltdown here! everyone run for cover!!!!!!

2) I have posted, for your own reading several scientific links, written by people much smarter than you (I can find plenty of them on the street, but I chose actual scientific sources for your benefit) that clearly explain how harmful alpha particles are.

3) Deuterium and Tritium are naturally occuring isotopes of water. One gallon of normal water has a significant presence of deuterium, and trace elements of tritium. Ever wear a rolex? Yeah, dumb fuck, there is tritium in just about any expensive non-digital watch. I don't see people wearing rolexes dying by the dozens...

4) Ignoring concentration arguments? It's not my fault that you are too stupid to take a seminar in nuclear chem, or have any exposure to it beyond google when you comment. Natural decay is extremely predictable, to the point defects created in the crystalline structure. Nowhere did I say atoms. I said crystalline structure, you completely stupid fuckface. If you actually knew anything about anything, you would understand how those stresses of changes in structure create the stress and energy required to continue such a reaction in a more controlled setting. Otherwise, particle accelerators wouldn't fucking work, shithead.

5) Again, I've taken actual classes pertaining to this reaction. Have you? I've sat through demonstrations of the process. Have you? Do you actually know anything about the topic?

1/0n + 235U = cool.

That's barium and galium chain reaction with one neutron left over, right?

Or is it krypton?

[Edited on 1-31-2005 by Stanley Burrell]

[Edited on 1-31-2005 by Stanley Burrell]

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Neildo
Uh oh, geek fights!

:laser: :wedgie:

- N

LMAO.. I was just going to post that. I thought this was a script from "Revenge of the Chemistry Nerds"

[Back]

The Uranium Medical Research Center (http://www.umrc.net/default.aspx) details what Tam and Tsa’ah were arguing about.

Thats actually an old site. The updated new site is here (http://www.umrc.net/os/).

[Edited on 2-1-2005 by Backlash]

Find it cowboy.

Make sure it's credible.

^

I'll give it a go. I hope the EU is credible enough for your tastes.

http://www.europarl.eu.int/stoa/publi/pdf/stoa100_en.pdf

Originally posted by RangerD1
Find it cowboy.

Make sure it's credible.

^

I'll give it a go. I hope the EU is credible enough for your tastes.

http://www.europarl.eu.int/stoa/publi/pdf/stoa100_en.pdf

Not going to convince him, he is never wrong, especialy when it is in a argument with me.

[Warriorbird]

Hi pot, I'm kettle!

[Back]

Originally posted by RangerD1
Find it cowboy.

Make sure it's credible.

^

I'll give it a go. I hope the EU is credible enough for your tastes.

http://www.europarl.eu.int/stoa/publi/pdf/stoa100_en.pdf

That confirms that inhalation is dangerous. It was also published in 2002. Much more research has been done since then. Check out that site I linked above. UMRC has up to date research.

[Edited on 2-1-2005 by Backlash]

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by GSTamral
Uranium 235, at 3.5-4% (enriched) is the nuclear "fuel" at a power plant, or within a uranium atomic bomb dumbass. DO YOUR RESEARCH. You are so incomprehensibly stupid as to not even understand the basic reaction.

U-235 decays into lead.
U-238 decays into Thorium-234,
To state that Thorium 234 emits gamma rays is just stupid, and it illustrates how fucking stupid you are.
It decays slowly, via 2 beta emissions, to create the stable U-234.
Those beta emissions cannot penetrate a thin sheet of aluminum, and have a radioactive basis of less than a foot. OOOOOOO, major nuclear meltdown here! everyone run for cover!!!!!!

Wrong again.

Pb is toward the end of the decay series each and every time. In every U variant isotope, thorium (Th) is the next in the series. The difference is in the isotope. U-235->Th-231/U-238->Th-234.

http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/rup.html#USERIES

Perhaps you should check your degrees out. Return the shit stained documents to your Alma Matre and ask for a refund ... or request the classes again ... and this time keep your hand out of your pants.


2) I have posted, for your own reading several scientific links, written by people much smarter than you (I can find plenty of them on the street, but I chose actual scientific sources for your benefit) that clearly explain how harmful alpha particles are.

Yet your just doing that ... posting links and not understanding. The one time you decide to back up a statement with references ... you botch it by not understanding and showing it.

Like links? Here we go.

EPA on uranium. Read exposure and health effects .... several times.

http://www.epa.gov/radiation/radionuclides/uranium.htm

Atomic decay. Hell I'll quote what you just don't get.


If you were looking at an individual americium-241 atom, it would be impossible to predict when it would throw off an alpha particle. However, if you have a large collection of americium atoms, then the rate of decay becomes quite predictable.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/nuclear2.htm

Hey ... since alpha particles are so harmless ... let's look at what the experts say. Again; this is ingesting and respiration.

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=9642

Radon is a perfect example.

http://www.fbr.org/swksweb/radon.html


Alpha particle radiation is the major source of natural radiation in our environment. It is derived from the radioactive decay of the colorless, tasteless, inert gas, radon (222Rn) and is second only to smoking as the leading cause of lung cancer in the US.


3) Deuterium and Tritium are naturally occuring isotopes of water. One gallon of normal water has a significant presence of deuterium, and trace elements of tritium. Ever wear a rolex? Yeah, dumb fuck, there is tritium in just about any expensive non-digital watch. I don't see people wearing rolexes dying by the dozens...

The bolded displays what you have no clue about.

1:6600 is the ratio you're thinking about as significant for deuterium.

And I am aware that either are consumed daily ... in small insignificant ratios while drinking water. In pure form, significant consumption or exposure is hazardous.

Go do some research on the rulings against manufacturers that utilized tritium up to the early 70's without providing their employees with protection. Be sure to carefully examine the astounding number of cancer and digestive disorders.

A point you made, that again ignores the concentration point, about the Rolex watch. Not that I care for such extravagance. Timex, Rolex, glow in the dark quarter ball … up until the rulings made in the 70’s against manufacturers utilizing tritium … the employees were being killed off via cancer, the children were born with defects; nasty list that. Bad example for you to use.


4) Ignoring concentration arguments? It's not my fault that you are too stupid to take a seminar in nuclear chem, or have any exposure to it beyond google when you comment. Natural decay is extremely predictable, to the point defects created in the crystalline structure. Nowhere did I say atoms. I said crystalline structure, you completely stupid fuckface. If you actually knew anything about anything, you would understand how those stresses of changes in structure create the stress and energy required to continue such a reaction in a more controlled setting. Otherwise, particle accelerators wouldn't fucking work, shithead.

How many more obscenities can you post in one statement?

Predictable in a sample (as in rate of decay). You indicated total predictability ... and that is incorrect in every conceivable notion of the term.


5) Again, I've taken actual classes pertaining to this reaction. Have you? I've sat through demonstrations of the process. Have you? Do you actually know anything about the topic?

I know chemistry Tams. I paid attention ... it is apparent that you did not.

I hate to think about the money wasted on your behalf. Were I the person that paid for you waste ... I'd come to you for a refund.

Stick to mathematics ... you seem at least adequate in that measure.

Inhaltion of alot of substances is dangerous. That hardly makes it radioactive. Notice how people who still have shrapnel in their body have had no adverse side effects. You'd think they'd suffer from radiation poisoning, no?

[Back]

From what I’ve read its inhaling the tiny particles thats the danger.

Facts and Fictions (http://www.umrc.net/os/factsAndFictions.asp) from the UMRC.

[GSTamral]

<<
1:6600 is the ratio you're thinking about as significant for deuterium.
>>

Dueterium, while having a relatively permanent half life on its own, does not have one when exposed to higher temperatures (above 145 celsius), or when exposed to oxides.

Considering when exposed to other oxides, it has a half life on the order of 30 hours, we can conclude, you stupid pile of fuck, that one in 6600 particles (which by the way is on the order of 10 to the 19th power per mol) has a much much much much much much much higher rate of decay than Uranium 238 in its purest form.

It's funny how no matter what any articles say, no matter what the EU says, Tsa'ah is always right... in his own mind. That is why he is the eternal fuckstain douchebag that he is, and why he no longer is gainfully employed. His ethical dispute was that he was wrong for the 1700th time in the day and refused to admit it.

[GSTamral]

<<
Predictable in a sample (as in rate of decay). You indicated total predictability ... and that is incorrect in every conceivable notion of the term.
>>

This statement is like a fourth grader from the 16th century telling a doctorate in math today that gravity is measured in velocity. Don't comment on what you obviously don't understand.

The rates, point concentrations, eutectoid strain points, crystalline defect points and structural integrity vs time are exact science.

Arguing with you is pointless. You have a doctorate in how to use google, but you don't even have a middle school diploma in how to properly research topics you wish to bullshit on.

From what I’ve read its inhaling the tiny particles thats the danger.

^

Which means you would have to be directly exposed to an explosion involving DU munitions and a hard metal object, which If is the case is probably the least of your concerns.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by RangerD1
Which means you would have to be directly exposed to an explosion involving DU munitions and a hard metal object, which If is the case is probably the least of your concerns.

And that's the argument.

How big and how many shells are fired from a tank or BMFG?

What's the rate of fire on your personal arms? That's the direct effect.

In the home, here ... there is none. In battle and for a time there after, yes ... it's a hazard.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by GSTamral
<<
1:6600 is the ratio you're thinking about as significant for deuterium.
>>

Dueterium, while having a relatively permanent half life on its own, does not have one when exposed to higher temperatures (above 145 celsius), or when exposed to oxides.

Considering when exposed to other oxides, it has a half life on the order of 30 hours, we can conclude, you stupid pile of fuck, that one in 6600 particles (which by the way is on the order of 10 to the 19th power per mol) has a much much much much much much much higher rate of decay than Uranium 238 in its purest form.

It's funny how no matter what any articles say, no matter what the EU says, Tsa'ah is always right... in his own mind. That is why he is the eternal fuckstain douchebag that he is, and why he no longer is gainfully employed. His ethical dispute was that he was wrong for the 1700th time in the day and refused to admit it.

Perfect example of one of your tangents.

You have not even addressed the incorrect statements you made, yet you come back to the heavy water like it's your key note in the debate. You brought it up and you noted how not hazardous it was, yet when I point out that in pure form ... it's pretty damned lethal; you run back to natural occurrence.

Natural occurrence isn't the debate, concentration is.

No where did I indicate our drinking water was a hazard. My argument has been, and still is (aside from you being a moron that doesn't know when he's been proven an idiot) concentration is the hazard. Alpha particles, in concentration, emitted from ingested materials (water, air, food) are the hazard.

Again, you brought up fission and went on tangents that had no relevance to the debate, and expounded on "facts" that were (and are) incorrect.

So. Back to the beginning with your false statements.

1. U-xxx does not decay into lead.
2. Alpha particles are a hazard.
3. Not touched upon, but since you brought it up. Gamma emissions are very detectible in Th decay ... and most atomic decay.
4. Deuterium and tritium are indeed hazardous materials in concentration.
5. Decay is only predictable as a rate. The instance and location ... is not.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by GSTamral
<<
Predictable in a sample (as in rate of decay). You indicated total predictability ... and that is incorrect in every conceivable notion of the term.
>>

This statement is like a fourth grader from the 16th century telling a doctorate in math today that gravity is measured in velocity. Don't comment on what you obviously don't understand.

The rates, point concentrations, eutectoid strain points, crystalline defect points and structural integrity vs time are exact science.

Arguing with you is pointless. You have a doctorate in how to use google, but you don't even have a middle school diploma in how to properly research topics you wish to bullshit on.

Nice of you to ignore the factual links posted.

Go back to your hole and think of some more BS you can argue about google whore.

And that's the argument.

How big and how many shells are fired from a tank or BMFG?

What's the rate of fire on your personal arms? That's the direct effect.

In the home, here ... there is none. In battle and for a time there after, yes ... it's a hazard.

^

First of all, DU is not used in personal arms. Far as I know the only platforms to use it are the M1, M3 Bradley and A-10 Warthog.

Second of all, the original contention was that the US uses radioactive materials in its weapons.

You asked for credible scientific evidence that stated that it wasn't. I posted the findings of the EU that states that people with DU still imbedded in their bodies are suffering no additional adverse effects from it.

If you want to argue that warfare is dangerous for those intimately exposed to it, then go ahead. Whatever weapons are used will pose an immediate hazard to the people on the other side of the barrel regardless of the material used.

I'd be a little concerned if it presented a long term environmental hazard, ala Land mines, but the jury is still out on wether or not it does.

[Tsa`ah]

Second of all, the original contention was that the US uses radioactive materials in its weapons.

And that has been proven beyond all contention to the contrary.


You asked for credible scientific evidence that stated that it wasn't. I posted the findings of the EU that states that people with DU still imbedded in their bodies are suffering no additional adverse effects from it.

The study you posted actually outlines the dangers rather well.

I would actually have to dig into the sources, but gut reaction and reading Backlash's link would suggest my initial response to the BBC article. Field trip ... but we know where our money comes from.

Too many Gulf War vets and those coming out of the Balkans have developed leukemia, respiratory and circulatory diseases (cancer), and neurological disorders for DU to be off the suspect list. It is the most likely culprit, even to those who claim there are no adverse effects, yet practical testing has always been stonewalled.

Let's look at history, specifically Viet Nam and agent orange. How long did the military, administration, and government sponsored researchers stonewall research into agent orange? They knew it contained TCDD, they knew this as much as 20 years before, they knew the effects before usage, and still they used it and denied for over 2 decades until the folks at the CDC confirmed that a relevant study was cancelled in 79 (42 mill worth) because of pressure from the white house.


If you want to argue that warfare is dangerous for those intimately exposed to it, then go ahead. Whatever weapons are used will pose an immediate hazard to the people on the other side of the barrel regardless of the material used.

A soldier should not be endangered by the government it serves and is served by.

The danger to you, the soldier, should not come from the ordinance utilized. Just like usage of agent orange proved to be a greater danger than the enemy in the late 60's to 71, DU will prove to be the killer of many of our troops well after the fighting has stopped.


I'd be a little concerned if it presented a long term environmental hazard, ala Land mines, but the jury is still out on wether or not it does.

Unfortunately, the long term doesn't become evident until the long term has come and gone. Common sense should tell you that just because we can survive with 1 part per billion and whatever without adverse effect, doubling, tripling ... multiply it by a thousand ... whatever, does not mean higher concentrations will not have adverse effects. Concentration and exposure has proved time and time again to be a killer.

[Keller]

I think it's time for one of SHM's love-ins. We can smoke pot, hold hands, and sing campfire songs.


Quit the name calling and just argue the facts. It's obvious you're both smart guys -- neither being a moron/fuckstain.