Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (103414)	10/24/2013 6:32:41 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217764

Maybe the Caesium and Iodine from Fukushima are a problem. I suppose I'll have to lumber into gear and do an analysis as I did with the BP/Transocean accident in the Gulf of Mexico, which told me that it was a trivial event [compared with the mass hysteria thinking] and that the worst of it was the lives lost and investment lost. The Pacific Ocean is very big and Fukushima is very small. So I expect that as with the BP accident, it will be only a brief respite from the debacle that is Obamacare and the quadrillions of sloshing US$ in various forms waiting for Zimbabwe times. Don't forget that as animals eat the radioactive nuclides, they sink when dead and become part of the vast sedimentary layers on the bottom of the ocean, kilometres thick. The biosphere is very very active. That's my first guess. But then, when first guessing at the effect of lead in petrol, I thought it not a big deal, then read the scientific studies and concluded arrrgggghhhhh.... insane to put it in petrol. Mqurice

To: TobagoJack who wrote (103414)	10/24/2013 6:34:45 PM
From: Snowshoe	1 Recommendation Recommended By KyrosL Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217764

3. Along the Pacific coast of Canada and the Alaska coastline, the population of sockeye salmon is at a historic low. Many are blaming Fukushima. Good grief TJ, that article is one huge crap load of hysteria. For example, the author makes a false generalization about west coast salmon based on one particular run. In reality we had a pretty good year in Alaska. OK, maybe we caught all the Canadian fish... ;) Alaska salmon harvest breaks new record Published on 10 October, 2013 seafoodsource.com Alaska’s commercial salmon harvest has set an all-time record due primarily to large returns of pink salmon. The latest statewide total from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) puts this year’s salmon harvest at more than 269 million fish — shattering the previous record of 222 million fish landed in 2055. Of that, pink salmon made up the majority of the landings with 216 million fish. More than 84 million pinks were taken in the seine fisheries in Prince William Sound and another 47 million were taken in the southern Southeast seine fisheries with another 38 million taken in the northern Southeast seine fishery. The pink harvest in the Kodiak area was well over 28-million fish. This year’s statewide sockeye harvest totaled more than 29.5 million fish with more than 15.7 million sockeye taken in the Bristol Bay fishery.