Did Germany just get a Massive Amount of Fukushima Fallout and “No One Noticed”? (A Eurdep-Nullschool investigation of the Nov. 16, 2014 radiation Upticks…)

Shortlink:  http://goo.gl/HKjQRW

OB-WL942_icellt_G_20130225061857Reporting for my imaginary Decentralized Intelligence HQ of “the Government of Absurdistan”, high up in the pink clouds above the majestic Colorado Rocky Mountains…

DISCLAIMER LAND – Saturday, January 24, 2015

Greetings fellow Earthlings,

For a list of my recent blog posts on NUCLEAR ISSUES, including investigating that “this never happened” Nov. 27, 2014 Zaporizhia nuclear accident from various angles, see my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive (Dec 2014 & Jan. 2015).

My recent spate of digging deep into radiation monitoring data has left me surfing waves of comfort-shattering concern for future generations, alternating with attempts at denial.  The implications of what I’m increasingly finding evidence for (namely that artificial (industrial fission-made) radioactive pollution is measurably on the increase) is that the oversight agencies in charge of informing, educating and warning the public have essentially been co-opted into a vast network for covering that up, rather than exposing it.  To put it bluntly:  We are in deep shit.  The big picture situation is extremely grave.

{ “Filler content” that was here in the first 24 hours of this blog post was deleted, with the intention to not pass along my attempts to distract myself unto you. }

The effects of Fukushima (as well as much more) can be seen on monitors, even leaving a signal on Gamma radiation monitors in Europe. (Beta radiation would be much more interesting data, but that’s mostly kept secret.) 

  • My recent 4-part mini-series makes it easier to see long-term effects on the EURDEP radiation monitors.   Hope this was helpful:

!-> See also the following blog post, which makes the case for ongoing nuclear criticalities (Jan. 31, 2015):  DATA of ‘Fallout Signatures’ on Radiation Monitors Suggest Fukushima Still Going Re-Critical Underground At Times. Airborne Fallout Continues To Come Down Across the Northern Hemisphere.


!–>  I noticed something on the European radiation monitors during my spate of recent through-the-night research (linked to above):  An unusually pronounced gamma radiation uptick, which seemed most visible across Germany, in Mid-November 2014.   The rest of this blogposts explores where that may have originated…

By studying my 4-part series, you’ll notice that this uptick is obviously not just a Germany-wide phenomenon.  Upticks can be seen on, before and after November 16, 2014 in what appears to be likely a transient (radioactive cloud) source.

I started out wondering if the Zaporizhia nuclear accident(s) was the ultimate cause.  Turns out that I couldn’t link those upticks to ZNPP at all.  If you’ve followed my blog’s Dec.-Jan. wanderings, you know I’ve come to the conclusion (based on solid data and too many “odd coincidences” and fitting context), that the Zaporizhia / Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) released an unusually large amount of radio-nuclides on Nov. 27, 2014 and possibly also the following days and weeks…  I started this blog post’s inquiry wondering if perhaps the ZNPP troubles started earlier, and if that was the cause of these Europe-wide upticks in Autumn 2014.  I used EURDEP data for gamma radiation dose rates, and NULLSCHOOL for planetary timely wind data at differing elevations.

A look at some of Germany’s radiation data, for perspective.

Although the EURDEP data has its most significant spikes likely redacted, when we look at Germany’s network (which is part of EURDEP), this short animated .gif of Germany’s monitor map does show what they would like us to believe is all due to natural fluctuations:  July 30, 2010 through February 2, 2011.

Check it out:  Nuclear tab (top banner) –>  Radiation Monitors –> Germany  (Not as good as it used to be anymore… ;-/ )–>  On the German site –> FAQ –> 1 year animation (Can’t pause it, and they only show that specific period.  The archive is no longer available.  ;-/  Click this image to go straight there:)

If you pluck the film2.gif to your desktop, you can look at individual frames.  You’ll see that it never gets past the 0.170 µSv/hr range on this daily values map.  And what was observed in the months after Fukushima?   Good one.   The nuclear utilities actually service these networks… Clearly, they don’t want us to see that the months after Fukushima showed almost nothing unusual.  That might rouse suspicion.  The cut-off for the animated .gif is February 2011.  Data gaps actually cut nearly all major spikes out in the next few months and beyond…  which makes March-April 2011 look less eventful than before Fukushima (!).  I guess they were a bit overzealous in redacting the data, ’cause now it turns out that the month March 12- April 12, 2011 actually shows THE LEAST violet and maroon (high gamma value) dots in Europe of the entire past decade.  Ha.  You only need to check a few dozen individual monitors to know why:  Data gaps everywhere = heavily redacted data.

Right now it looks like this (Jan. 21, 2015) on their “interpol” map:

Alright that was 2 days ago.  Obviously I’m getting tired of data crunching…  Here’s Jan. 23, 2015:

Looks pretty normal.  Now, back to EURDEP, where the same data is presented a little differently.   You can browse through the months on EURDEP yourself.   Tell me if I missed something, but I have not seen a Gamma-T-max week with  more pronounced elevated measurements, unless they were clearly calibrations (like an entire country or region turning maroon while all else remains normal looking).  This, below, shows what seems like a Gamma-T-max peak week in mostly Germany: 

November 13 through the 20th, 2014, with the spike somewhere near the 16th (?):

For comparison, this is right now, Gamma-T -max for this past week (Jan 15 – 22, 2015).  Still small upticks, for sure, but not like the week over Nov. 16, 2014, shown above.

So… :-D  Bedtime puzzle:   Where did it come from? 

The way I get started is by checking various monitors in the north, center, east, south, west, and see if I see any patterns.

Most of the time I just take mental notes.  Taking screenshots for a blog post makes it a much slower process.  In this case, and you see this best in the south, is that there are actually two events in this week.  They could be connected.  One is the pre-Nov. 16 uptick, the other the post-Nov. 17 uptick.  The later one is more pronounced to the east.  The earlier one seems to begin sooner to the south and west.   This suggests that perhaps the source is out west.  And then the landfall and lower-air currents caused the second upticks?   That sort of first impression is good enough of a hypothesis to get started from.  (Continued below this composite image:)

MidNovember2014_1weekprior_to_11.20.2014_1200noonUTC_All the way west in Portugal, a gap starts as early as in late Nov. 14.  Since gaps tend to correspond with spikes, it’s a possible clue.  Also, in Italy, the onset, for both bumps, starts about 12+ hours earlier compared to Germany.  So whatever this was came in from the southwest, making landfall over the Iberian Peninsula before heading north.

Now the challenge is to find “the onset” of the uptick.  Where did it happen first?   Are there any “glitch dots” (single or just a couple abnormally high measurements that seem to stand alone.  from studying the long-term patterns, those can be an indication of higher-altitude radioactive particles gravitating down, while the surface air by itself is not contaminated enough to cause a bump or spike on the ground monitor).   Checking monitors (looking both at “Standard Deviation” and “Maximum Value” to find the more interesting data)…

So in Southwestern Germany there’s this “glitch dot” (my old name for these, before I realized they generally aren’t “glitches”, they tend to be part of a long-term and long-distance fallout pattern), in Mössingen, Germany, which occurred a little before the spikes then moved through Germany, seen here at the end of Nov. 15, 2014:


For Germany, as part of that mid-November pattern, that appears to be one of the earlier “glitch dots”.  Further west, there’s signs of the onset on the 14th.  Hard to tell.  Anyways, I’m going to run with this dot.   So I navigate to Nullschool, change the date to Nov. 15, 21:00 UTC, head up to 700 hPa or even higher, 500 hPa, and follow the high speed wind line, upwind.

So.. I found that if I were to just keep following what appears to be “the line itself”, I’d come out in mid-Hokkaido, Northern Japan.  Hmm… That’s awfully close to Fukushima, relatively speaking.  Let’s see.  So I then decided to follow the downwind FROM Fukushima (starting there) and see were that higher wind would blow.

Turns out, after hugging the coast of Alaska, they turn back south and both seem to basically merge over far Northern Canada…   And end up in Europe from the south and indeed enter Germany and head north from there.   These two images below are just my initial “electronic scribbles”, with the red arrows following the wind lines UPWIND from Southwestern Germany on Nov. 15, 2014, to where they came from.  And the black arrows, going DOWNWIND from Fukushima-Daiichi on Nov. 15, to where those blow.

The first image below shows the wind that arrives in Germany; the one below it, the wind that blew over Fukushima-Daiichi.  They merge into roughly the same wind pattern around the time they reach Alaskan air space:

nullschool_jan22_investigation_a-1Nullschool_Jan22_investigation_B Hm… Really???    Fukushima?    In mid-November 2014?   Still? 

Of course I doubt myself.  “I must have made a mistake.”  (This is typical me; and sometimes I do figure that I actually was totally wrong.  So, let’s see…)

I’m going to entertain the possibility, and follow the wind from Fukushima-Daiichi, starting on Nov. 12, 2014 @ 12:00 noon local time (= 3 am UTC)  and see where that comes out, and jump +3 hours, again + 3 hours, + 6 hours, to reflect the time it actually would take for it to move (more-the-less, there’s a fair margin of error here, but it at least gives an idea).   This first image shows Fukushima-Daiichi, and the two images pasted on top of this one show the later times.  The wind speeds changed, but the pattern stayed pretty much put.  It ends just north of Alaska, where I had to turn the globe to keep looking where it would blow from there:


Just north of Northern Alaska (above), I pick it back up (below).   (Mind: this is all high up, not necessarily affecting the surface air.) Wind curves south, over Canada, and then slows down significantly over the Western USA, to continue onward at high speed over the Atlantic and arrive… over the western Mediterranean Sea… from where it heads north, including passing over Germany, where this higher wind layer is also seen slowing down significantly.  That might bring fallout down…  Seen it do that when tracking the Zaporizhia fallout.  This is 3 images in one; from the second to the third, you see that the wind pattern shifted south, so to “follow the fallout”, my arrows shift with the change:  the main direction is towards south of France and then north.  Part2_3+3_then+6__then+12_+till11.14

Hmm… Well, if the fallout isn’t coming from a source in the US, and all I’ve learned from studying the EURDEP data in combination with Nullschool holds any validity, then there would also have to be noticeable upticks measured over the western USA.  And these upticks should not be obvious all over the US.

So, curious as I can get, I went testing out my theory:  First by looking at Nullschool data to identify at least 2 spots where I would expect an uptick too (if the uptick in Germany actually came all the way from Japan), and 2 spots where I would not expect an uptick.   Then after that I’d go search for US EPA radiation monitors in or near those 4 spots and see what those would show for that period.  Time-consuming?  Ridiculously!

Here’s Nullschool data for 500 hPa for Nov. 13, 2014 @ 3:00 UTC (that would be 8pm on Nov. 12 in Denver, Colorado), comments below the image:

Nov13_2014_300UTC_USview_500hPa_annotSelecting sites to check on data:

  • Upticks?  In Alaska, both Anchorage and Fairbanks are possible uptick spots, although the air-slowdown isn’t really there over Alaska, at least not at 500 or 700 hPa hPa  Even if the higher air contained fallout, it could just blow over.   Bit more of a chance of vertical turbulence inland, I’d guess, so I’ll check on the monitor more inland: Fairbanks, Alaska.  There’s a few areas in Canada’s British Colombia and Alberta that would make for better locations to see data from, but Health Canada is even more secretive than the US EPA.  Just south of the Colombia gorge, especially closer to the coast is a small area with less wind and possible fallout coming from both the coast, as well as from the north (after its big bend over Alaska).  The best-fitting monitor for this area is likely Corvalis, Oregon, a bit south of Portland, closer to the Pacific.  If there’s no uptick here, then my theory hypothesis may be flawed.  If there is an uptick here, then the chances that this uptick would also be seen in far-Northern California is high.  If you watch the Nullschool data yourself (which is in motion), you’ll also easily see that if the wind path coming from Fukushima is a bit more on the southern end of the downwind-path, then this hypothesized F1 Mid-Nov. 2014 radioactive cloud would also blow over the ground monitor in Eureka, California.
  • After that, this 500 hPa higher air picks up speed again, directly downwind from Corvalis, OR would be the Salt Lake City, Utah monitor.  The air layers below are not aligned though, so the only thing I’d expect here are seemingly random “glitch dots”, at the most.
  • No Upticks?  As far as predicted ‘no upticks’ go, further south, such as Texas and Florida would make good candidates for this case-scenario.  I’ll just pick two:  Houston, Texas, and… how about even further:  San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Now, to check US EPA data for those locations, I navigate from my Online Radiation Monitors to those in the United States, and pick “https://cdxnode64.epa.gov/radnet-public/query.do” from the US EPA’s website labyrinth.  (For the map showing the monitors, see http://www.epa.gov/radnet/radnet-data/index.html). Okay, so… I need… 3 months for 4 EPA monitor locations, graphed, for Gamma – energy range 3 & 5 and Beta if they have it.   Upticks around Nov 12-13? Fairbanks, Alaska: Nope, clearly no uptick at that time AT ALL.  Side-note: Because the EPA designed their website so that it can’t show more that 400 data points at a time, if there are no data gaps, the graph won’t show the whole month. ;-/  Forgot about that.  Next graph I’ll make sure it shows the 3 months in full.  Here’s the data for Oct.(full)-Nov.(partial)-Dec.(partial), 2014 for Fairbanks, AK; target period marked in blue square: Fairbanks_Oct_Nov_Dec_2014_Gamma3_5_Beta

Other upticks seen here could, of course, still correspond with man-made causes, but I’d have to run separate queries for all those, which would add too much to my time tonight.  So, onward to my best guess for an uptick around that time, IF the cause of the uptick in Germany came from Fukushima, then Corvalis, Oregon would most likely reveal an uptick to0:

Corvalis, Oregon: I broke it up in two pieces.  Note that both the vertical and horizontal axis are not spaced the same (more time condensed into what looks visually like the same amount of time is not always the case.  Just check the dates!):

Corvalis_Oct_Nov21_2014_Gamma3_5_Beta-> the graph combo above shows all of October on the left, and up till November 21 on the right.  The next one starts at Nov. 18, you can see the overlapping data:Corvalis_midNov_Dec_2014_Gamma3_5_BetaSo, the time frame of interest, marked in blue dotted square (Nov 12-13) overlaps here with a data gap (Nov 11-12).

Dang:   So… for precisely the moment I hypothesized Fukushima fallout to show up on this monitor, using the Nullschool 500hPa wind data (for Nov. 13, 3 am UTC = Nov 12 @ 7 pm in Corvalis, local time), there’s a data gap within an uptick, most likely hiding the predicted spike.

Here’s a zoom-in, with the time of the Nullschool map marked:

COrvalis_Nov13_2014_3ooUTCincluded_datagap That’s a pretty damn close match, if you ask me.  What was going on in October (major data gap amidst elevated Beta, etc), I don’t know, but it’s possibly a hint of a fallout rain-out event, as well.

  • Quick look at Eureka, CA:  Yup, there you have it: data gaps right before, and during the predicted uptick time.  Beta-monitoring turned off (never a good sign):


  • Quick look at Salt Lake City, UT shows not even glitch dots”.   That adds to my impression that the wind speed higher up MUST be slowing for fallout to reach a ground monitor.  In this case the wind speed at 500 hPa was quickly increasing.  No data gap hiding a spike, nor a noteworthy uptick to be seen.  Although, and that’s never a good sign, again: Beta monitoring is not shared with the public (all values artificially reduced to zero) here either:

SLC_midNov2014_nadaSO, onward to the two locations I selected where I would not expect any related uptick on or right around Nov 12-13:

  • San Juan, Puerto Rico:  The predicted lack of an uptick holds true for Nov 12-13.   (What caused an uptick on Nov. 7, 2014 at this location is a good question.)   Anyways: as predicted, for the focus days at this location:


  • Houston, Texas:  No spike or data gap at the predicted time itself (Nov 12 @ 8-9 pm for Texas), but there is a brief data gap, on Nov. 13, 2014!   [The image’s text contradicts itself, should say “No uptick Nov 12, but a short data gap on Nov 13:]Houston_TX_midNov2014I went looking at Nullschool.  If you take the more southern wind path lines, the ones that go over Northern California at 500 hPa, then you can see that those do actually make a more southern-bound longer curved path, passing over Texas indeed.    Looking at wind at lower elevation, you see a wind-coming down high pressure pattern too.  So, when looking at the finer details, that a shorter and a tiny bit later whiff would reach down in this part of Texas… does actually fit.

The implication is, of course, that Fukushima-Daiichi is not only still leaking massive amounts water contaminated with various harmful radioisotopes into the Pacific Ocean, but off-and-on releasing massive amounts into the atmosphere as well.  The Western US and Germany apparently received an intense whiff of this radioactive mess in mid-November.  At least that’s my impression.

So, if it takes roughly only a day at 500 hPa barometric altitude for Fukushima’s radiation-spewing disaster to reach the US-Canada west coast, 1-2 days for the rest of the US  and 2-4 days for it to reach Europe, depending on the path it takes.  SO… I guess I could test out my hypothesis further.

I looked at the recent data for Juneau, AK‘s US EPA Radnet monitor, here showing Gamma range 3, 5 and Beta:

Juneau_AK_January2015_annotSo, I made two mistakes, from which I learned something:  First I didn’t scroll down the data table far enough and thought that January 16 was “the main spike”, rather than the 7th.  So I looked at Nullschool for the 16th first, but – second error, for 700 hPa, rather than the higher-speed higher 500 hPa air layer…

Well, here’s that one, first:

Jan16_2015_000UTC_It shows that air that passed over Fukushima at 700 hPa would fan out a bit before landfall, but the “direct hit” would clearly be further south.  Hm… maybe part of the reason for that small uptick, but… and then I noticed I had the date wrong, that the main spike happened on the 7th of January, not the 16th.  On the image I marked Jan. 6, as that corresponds with the Nullschool setting I checked: Jan 6, 2015 @ 12:00 UTC. Jan 7  is when that could cause a spike if it was a perfect match / direct hit.   I hadn’t realized yet I had the altitude at 700.  Here’s that:

Jan6_2015_1200UTC_700hPa-> The wind that blew over Fukushima at 700 hPa blew much further north when it arrived above the North-American shores.  And if I trace the 700 hPa air back from the Juneau, UK- monitor, it passed over Tokyo, rather than Fukushima.  Close, but not close enough, not a direct-hit match.  (I was getting tired…) Then I noticed I was at only 700 hPa, rather than 500 hPa.  The very hot gasses would likely shoot up higher right away and be carried at the 500 hPa elevation over great distances, faster.

Alright, up to 500 hPa for Jan 6, 2015 @ 12:00 UTC I went:

Jan6_2015_1200UTC_500hPaI drew several possible paths this time.  If the wind started just a little bit north of F1 (F1 = the Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Disaster Site), then it would end up way north, even possibly west of Alaska.   If the wind path starts just a tiny bit to the south, it would arrive more-the-less over northern Vancouver Island off the BC, Canada coast.  But a direct hit… sadly… that spike also, again, corresponds with a direct hit from Fukushima.  Uncanny.  For much of its journey across the Pacific it goes at top speed.  Fitting the hypothesis, the slow-down of the wind in its approach of the southern Alaskan coast (and by that time significantly temperature-cooled fallout), bringing the radioisotopes to ground level.  The direct hit does not get dispersed much horizontally, because, just as with the Latvian spikes after the Zaporizhia release at the end of Nov. 2014, the wind direction of the air layers 750 hPa and 850 hPa below it are in direction-alignment in the 500 hPa slow-down area, and véry slow.  Then just before the monitor, the surface air blows north, but at the monitor itself there is almost no wind, so the descending fallout reaches this monitor in what briefly is “a direct hit” – Bam: –  The monitor spikes some +500 CPM in Gamma energy range 3, and some +50 CPM in Gamma energy 5.

So, alright… I find that incredibly disturbing.  Not just the fact itself, but the massive cover-up and total media silence that accompanies this escalating disaster.

Thought of something else…  Remember that weird Cs-137 + I-131 spike on that Cyprus monitor in my Christmas 2014 blog post, “Radiation Spikes and Nuclear Reactor Refueling Operations… & Other Random Puzzle Pieces“?  I remembered the data, but not the date.   I recall I was looking into the ZNPP mystery.  The wind patterns reaching Cyprus that day did not trace back to ZNPP and I thought it was probably just a glitch.  A weird one, but… Look at it:  What day did that happen?  You got to be kidding me, right?  Nov. 16, 2014, EXACTLY when wind that left a massive radiation uptick over Germany entered European airspace from the Western Mediterranean.  Not too far-fetched that a whiff would have reached Cyprus, the only spot that at that time was sharing these (“unvalidated”)  radio-isotopes’ data:

IF… if those I-131 and Cs-137 values under 7 Bq/m^3 are from Europe’s refueling spills, etc., that would be pretty bad.  IF all of that is connected to Fukushima, that would be massively troubling.  Now, the uptick over much of Europe around Nov. 16, 2014 I already linked to Fukushima… so the idea that this is a real uptick and not a glitch is very plausible. What does 60 Bq/m^3 I-131 mean 19,000 kilometers downwind?

Compared to the CTBTO data that put the highest measurements in microBequerel… it’s more than 1,000 times worse than what was measured in spring 2011.  It also implies that re-criticalities are back in force…  meaning that FISSIONING may STILL be happening underground !!!   So if that data was factual, that’s what that means.  It’s the absolute worst case nightmare scenario, that’s what.

I’ll just assume it was just a glitch, resting assured they’ll never ‘validate’ that data anyways.   Lovely thought…  I’ll sleep better.

katzeteddy5 am.  Gute nacht…

Oh wait…  WHAT IF… this were actually FOR REAL ?    Can’t I come up with a way to get at least one more clue…?

I found this ‘pretty creative’ of myself:  I did a Google Trends search for 4 words (in German) associated with mild radiation sickness: nausea (krank), vomitting (erbrechen), metalic taste (metallischer Geschmack), and bloody nose (blutige Nase).   Upticks almost always correspond with some major newspaper headline that contained that word.   Except…  for November-December 2014, when all 4 words score high, yet there’s no headline to explain that:


GoogleTrends_FalloutRelatedIllnessWords_inDeutsch_Nah, you see that its trend is upward, so the chance it will be higher than before is almost a given.

nosebleed1Except for that bloody nose… that’s … an odd headline-unrelated uptick at the end of 2014…

Reminds me of.. Japan Times, May 20, 2014, “Ruckus over Fukushima Nosebleed comic”…  Oh right, that got pulled.  Here:  (Japan Trends, May 19, 2014):  Long-running manga “Oishinbo” censored over Fukushima series, suspended by publisher.

Anyways, just check the data yourself.  See if you can find evidence to further support it, or disprove it completely.  If you find more evidence, dear European friends (and fellow North-Americans for that matter) breathing that downwind air… you know what to do:  There are likely laws against criminal negligence and endangering public health.

— — — — — — — — —


If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it may be plagiarized.  Please let me know.   All content is copyright © Michaël Van Broekhoven, administrator of and sole writer for the Allegedly Apparent Blog.  Content cited, quoted etc. from other sources is under the respective rights of that content owner.  For more details, see my Disclaimer, Share Policy and Fair Use Notice  If you wish to reproduce any of this content in full or in more than a paragraph or quote, please contact me first to obtain permission.
[Except for minor edits: Last edited (non-investigation part redacted):   January 25, 2015 @ 12:21 am, Colorado]
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

32 Responses to Did Germany just get a Massive Amount of Fukushima Fallout and “No One Noticed”? (A Eurdep-Nullschool investigation of the Nov. 16, 2014 radiation Upticks…)

  1. pavewayiv@gmail.com says:

    Excellent analysis, Michael. Thanks for all the hard work and the presentation. If it payed minimum wage, you would probably be wealthy by now. I will keep you in mind when I make my first billion.

  2. Pingback: DATA of ‘Fallout Signatures’ on Radiation Monitors Suggest Fukushima Still Going Re-Critical Underground At Times. Airborne Fallout Continues To Come Down Across the Northern Hemisphere. | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  3. Pingback: SLV – Some Photos (Feb. 2, 2015) | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  4. Pingback: ‘Fallout signatures’ on radiation monitors suggest Fukushima is still going re-critical underground | Heal Fukushima

  5. cmk2wl says:

    FIY  Result of Google trend search

  6. Pingback: Some Recent Nuclear Blog Posts (March 1, 2015 overview) | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  7. Pingback: Geiger Counter Data from Airplane Flights: Denver -> Atlanta -> Amsterdam | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  8. Pingback: Fingerprints of an ongoing Cover-Up? EPA data makes Fukushima look over 1000% less serious than Chernobyl… | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  9. Pingback: F… F… Something with an F… (Not SUNPP, but much Further Upwind…) | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  10. Pingback: Spring Snow PHOTOS. And Why I’m Taking a Break from (Nuclear) Blogging | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  11. Pingback: Additions: Belarus Radiation Data, Satellite Image of Chernobyl Fire, EURDEP-Sweden goes silent, ESTONIA & LATVIA Radiation Graphs,… | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  12. Pingback: Bismuth-214 as a Fallout Indicator? Systematic Omissions: More Evidence of EURDEP Hiding Data when it Matters Most… | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  13. Pingback: Radon Spike in Italy: Highest since 2013 ; Cyprus blocks out Cs-137/I-131 data… (May 16, 2015, a snapshot of a few EURDEP monitors) | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  14. Pingback: Pink Unicorns beach themselves on the shores of Lake Dystopia | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  15. Pingback: Anyway… | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  16. Pingback: There Comes Another EURDEP-Data-Gap-Inducing Whiff… | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  17. Pingback: Radiation Monitor Page for Poland (Lublin Data) added. Some peculiar observations… | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  18. Pingback: Niepokojące dane monitora radiacji UMCS w Lublinie | 3obieg.pl - Serwis informacyjny dziennikarstwa obywatelskiego.

  19. Pingback: Nuclear News Links (@ Mid-August 2015) | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  20. Pingback: Data Gaps accross EURDEP, amidst Odd Spikes in Luxembourg and Greenland | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  21. Pingback: EURDEP Radiation Monitor Rigging through Systematic Omissions Continues… / + With 6 Years of Radiation Data graphed for Ritsem, Sweden / (NEW (Public) Record High reached in Sept 2015) | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  22. Pingback: Recap of Oct.-Nov. 2015 Major Radiation Event. Ongoing? | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  23. Pingback: Another Round of Looking into Recent Radiological Disturbaces. | Not All Alleged Is Apparent…

  24. Pingback: Rostock-Warnemünde, Germany: Bismuth-214 Data (2010-2016) | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  25. Pingback: HELSINKI, Finland: Data Confirms Something’s Up: Highest Cesium-137 Detections in Years | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  26. Pingback: Aberdeen Airport, SCOTLAND – May 2004 – Jan. 2016 Radiation Record: Recent Uptick Among Highest On Record | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  27. Pingback: Blah Blah Blah (a mix) | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  28. Pingback: Beautiful Weather… | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  29. Pingback: Some Recent Peculiarities at EURDEP’s ‘STATION 9’ in Northern Italy | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  30. Pingback: EURDEP Radiation Monitor Rigging through Systematic Omissions Continues… / + With 6 Years of Radiation Data graphed for Ritsem, Sweden / (NEW (Public) Record High reached in Sept 2015) | Allegedly Apparent Blog

Thank you for commenting. Your comment won't show until approved. Sometimes that can take awhile. - mvb

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.