[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Weird Stuff/Unexplained Title: Some thoughts on TSA scanning equipment, and its effects (Mother of all conspiracy theories Just a few facts that may or may not go together. I'd like to ask for help in understanding this combination of facts: We know that William Ayers, who appears to be one of Obama's mentors, planned for the killing of 25 million Americans. It may be that someone who accepted Ayer's mentorship might be willing to countenance such mass killings. Some believe that someone within the Obama administration is racist, as evinced, for example, by the administration's handling of the Black Panther voter intimidation case. If a racist wanted to kill 25 million people, and wanted to do so in a way that preferentially killed white people rather than black people, one way to do so might be to spread a disease which affects white people more than black people. Such a disease might be skin cancer, melanoma in particular. The US incidence rate for melanoma in whites is approximately 20 to 30 times the US incidence rate for melanoma in blacks. Another way to say this: black people are 20 to 30 times more resistant to whatever causes melanoma than are white people. Melanoma is generally thought to be caused by exposure to radiation. The Sun is, of course, one such source of radiation, but there are other sources. An intense exposure to radiation tuned to deposit its energy on the skin, for example, might be reasonably expected to increase the chance of melanoma among susceptible people so irradiated. Such an intense exposure might occur as a result of, say, an X- ray scanning device which has an overall low radiation output, but, for each pixel being scanned, has a very high radiation output. During any instant while such a scan is occurring, most of the area to be scanned won't be exposed to radiation at all, so the overall radiation output may appear low. The area corresponding to a given pixel being acquired during that instant, however, would be subject to intense radiation. To allay concerns about such a device, a measure, such as the air kerma, for the average radiation output of the device might be made public. Measures for the radiation intensity, such as the radiation flux, might be withheld. If such scanning devices actually existed, and were set up to scan passengers at airports, the devices would be far more likely to be encountered by white people rather than black people. My estimate, based on a lifetime of flying, is that only a few percent of the flying public is black. Thus, both because of racial differences in predisposition to melanoma, and because of racial differences in the amount of flying done, airport placement of such putative scanning devices would likely cause far more melanoma among white persons than among black persons. Focusing on children would make such devices even more effective at causing melanoma, since children are generally considered more susceptible to radiation damage than adults. If, say, these devices were set up to scan passengers at airports during a busy holiday travel time, when people are more likely to be flying with their children, the carcinogenic effects could be further expressed. There is an obvious, and quite monstrous, conclusion to all these observations. However, that obvious conclusion is not necessarily correct. Given the seriousness of the obvious conclusion, I believe that intense thought should be given to addressing alternate conclusions before accepting that the obvious conclusion is the right one. I'd like to request the input of intelligent people on this topic, and, frankly, to be proven wrong.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
This has to be some sort of a joke.
|
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|