— 11 juli 2017 — My disclaimer still provides the same crystal clear answer: I edit and vanish content at will. So, correcto: It was *me myself and I*, again, who took a bunch of stuff down, just like this one will probably not be up for very long. But then again, if you see this, perhaps my mood swung back to the on-camp of the same “Whatever” sentiment, “who cares if they’re visible or not?“
Little classical in D Major…
Why “privatize” formerly public posts? “Why not?” Sometimes I prefer to leave my blog “on a happy note”, with pretty landscape photos and such, as the ever-evolving contemporary art installation that this blog is… (A phase in blog land titled, “Who knew sarcasm could be thát pretty” ? )
By now, after over half a decade of watching online radiation monitors, think I still care about what those monitors actually show?
The whole thing’s rigged to hide data when it matters most.
For every monitor that gives a hint of “something”, some blib, a spike,…, there’s a half dozen in the area with data gaps around the same time. Or ninja dots, or baseline adjustments, or forced-zero values, and so forth. There’s hundreds of blog posts that documented all this a-plenty.
-> Like that little short uptick in Nieuwdorp, The Netherlands (center 2-day graph in vertical composite of 3 graphs) Data gaps all around; two examples shown @ Vlissingen Haven and Heerenhoek’s.
A little refueling at the Borsele NPP? Just a natural rain-out?
Joost mag het weten…
Data gaps are possibly the better clue of ’em all for ‘fallout events’, though, and in some cases quite a bit of detections have coincided nicely with major data gaps (See, for example June 4, 2016‘s Anatomy of a Serbian Data Gap + RT: Fukushima Still Fissioning!), which will make “checking the monitors” really easy in the not-so-distant future…
“Nothing to see? Alright then… Must be bad.”
US EPA Radnet, showing Total gamma on a logarithmic y-axis, past 4 moths, just a few:
– Peace Out-