Oh I was also a little skeptical of the “this could make most of Europe uninhabitable” claim and it appears that was not accurate. I take umbrage mostly with the dialogue that goes “millions will die” “hundreds of thousands will get cancer” etc. Again, might be what they thought at the time, but the result is it makes the audience think this the actual case
If that's what they thought at the time, do you expect the production crew to dial it back for... what? Entertainment purposes? Ideological?
My gripe is mostly ideological. It’s never corrected, so much of the audience is just going to take it as scary, scary fact.
My original statement was, show is good, the risk is overblown. I stand by that.
Do I think the producers have a responsibility to make sure audiences come away with an accurate interpretation of the actual impact to health and life? That’s a different question entirely
Not to be combative but how so?
Listening to podcast goal of the show is to depict the events as they happened. There doesn't appear to be any ideological intent on the part of the show makers and I say that as someone who very much believes that fission (and hopefully eventually fusion) have to be part of the long term answer to carbon emissions.
+5
Options
HonkHonk is this poster.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
And for the divers for instance - sending them chest high water that has leaked down through an open reactor. How could you not assume they would die very quickly from that situation. I wouldn’t go near that.
I totally agree that the screenwriters & producers have a responsibility to accurately portray the risks. But I'm also willing to (provisionally) give them the benefit of the doubt - there are several episodes left, and it's unfair to say this early on that the errors are "never corrected" rather than "they haven't been corrected yet."
If we get to the end of the show without learning, for example, that the engineers who drained the water pipes lived for decades later or that the reactor ended up burning itself out (rendering most of the emergency countermeasures and personal sacrifices unnecessary), then I will agree that they've misportrayed the events. (I also hope that they don't cheap out and just do a text "where are they now?" epilogue.)
They could also stand to do a little more expository dialogue on the RBMK reactor design - for example, how there was no analogous design outside of communist bloc nations because all other nations rejected reactor designs with high positive void coefficients. They've brought it up already; and they've also mentioned how the Communist Party covered up the risks of the high positive void coefficient design. If they're true to history, the fact that Chernobyl was using a uniquely dangerous design in the first place (and poorly maintained to boot) will come up in dialogue several more times before the show is over.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
+5
Options
y2jake215certified Flat Birther theoristthe Last Good Boy onlineRegistered Userregular
I totally agree that the screenwriters & producers have a responsibility to accurately portray the risks. But I'm also willing to (provisionally) give them the benefit of the doubt - there are several episodes left, and it's unfair to say this early on that the errors are "never corrected" rather than "they haven't been corrected yet."
If we get to the end of the show without learning, for example, that the engineers who drained the water pipes lived for decades later or that the reactor ended up burning itself out (rendering most of the emergency countermeasures and personal sacrifices unnecessary), then I will agree that they've misportrayed the events. (I also hope that they don't cheap out and just do a text "where are they now?" epilogue.)
They could also stand to do a little more expository dialogue on the RBMK reactor design - for example, how there was no analogous design outside of communist bloc nations because all other nations rejected reactor designs with high positive void coefficients. They've brought it up already; and they've also mentioned how the Communist Party covered up the risks of the high positive void coefficient design. If they're true to history, the fact that Chernobyl was using a uniquely dangerous design in the first place (and poorly maintained to boot) will come up in dialogue several more times before the show is over.
To the last point - I think it perhaps will, since Legasov will be testifying in both a trial and in front of the IAEA, so plenty of time for exposition.
To the first ones, we’ll have to see. It looks like there’s only one episode left. I’m hoping they correct them as well.
Oh I was also a little skeptical of the “this could make most of Europe uninhabitable” claim and it appears that was not accurate. I take umbrage mostly with the dialogue that goes “millions will die” “hundreds of thousands will get cancer” etc. Again, might be what they thought at the time, but the result is it makes the audience think this the actual case
If that's what they thought at the time, do you expect the production crew to dial it back for... what? Entertainment purposes? Ideological?
My gripe is mostly ideological. It’s never corrected, so much of the audience is just going to take it as scary, scary fact.
My original statement was, show is good, the risk is overblown. I stand by that.
Do I think the producers have a responsibility to make sure audiences come away with an accurate interpretation of the actual impact to health and life? That’s a different question entirely
Not to be combative but how so?
Listening to podcast goal of the show is to depict the events as they happened. There doesn't appear to be any ideological intent on the part of the show makers and I say that as someone who very much believes that fission (and hopefully eventually fusion) have to be part of the long term answer to carbon emissions.
A big one is Legasov repeatedly stating he and Shcherbina have killed themselves simply by being there. An increase in cancer risk, even a substantial one, is not a guarantee, and it’s an implication that seems to carry throughout the series
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
0
Options
y2jake215certified Flat Birther theoristthe Last Good Boy onlineRegistered Userregular
Based on this
Ars asked Mazin how he viewed modern nuclear power in the context of researching the 1986 disaster. His response? "I’m pro nuclear power, I think that nuclear power is essential to combat climate change, and I want people to understand just why [the Chernobyl disaster] happened.”
I have some optimism he will find a way to correct the misconceptions
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
A big one is Legasov repeatedly stating he and Shcherbina have killed themselves simply by being there. An increase in cancer risk, even a substantial one, is not a guarantee, and it’s an implication that seems to carry throughout the series
But he did develop something terminal. We see signs of it in the very first scene of this series.
A big one is Legasov repeatedly stating he and Shcherbina have killed themselves simply by being there. An increase in cancer risk, even a substantial one, is not a guarantee, and it’s an implication that seems to carry throughout the series
But he did develop something terminal. We see signs of it in the very first scene of this series.
I can’t find any evidence that that isn’t just creative license. Not saying it is. But I can’t find it.
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
My bad, I thought there was more than 1 episode left.
I did too but honestly I'm really glad that they were able to say five episodes is what they need and be done (pending on what the last episode ends up of course)
If the final episode maintains the quality I can't wait to see what the creator tackles next because this has been fantastic on practically every level.
HappylilElf on
+3
Options
y2jake215certified Flat Birther theoristthe Last Good Boy onlineRegistered Userregular
My bad, I thought there was more than 1 episode left.
I did too but honestly I'm really glad that they were able to say five episodes is what they need and be done (pending on what the last episode ends up of course)
If the final episode maintains the quality I can't wait to see what the creator tackles next because this has been fantastic on practically every level.
I do not disagree
After next week with it, Barry and GOT done, what have you got left for me HBO
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
My bad, I thought there was more than 1 episode left.
I did too but honestly I'm really glad that they were able to say five episodes is what they need and be done (pending on what the last episode ends up of course)
If the final episode maintains the quality I can't wait to see what the creator tackles next because this has been fantastic on practically every level.
I do not disagree
After next week with it, Barry and GOT done, what have you got left for me HBO
For me it's access to a pretty large library of utterly fantastic shows.
Also the Deadwood movie comes out next week which I'm absolutely going to watch after a rewatch of Deadwood.
Also, like, dying of cancer over a couple dozen years may not be a movie monster death, but it is still a horrible thing that people are going to be rightly afraid of.
Saying “this is a death sentence” when the reality is “this has shortened your lifespan by 20-30 years” is broadly accurate.
Winky on
+22
Options
y2jake215certified Flat Birther theoristthe Last Good Boy onlineRegistered Userregular
Also, like, dying of cancer over a couple dozen years may not be a movie monster death, but it is still a horrible thing that people are going to be rightly afraid of.
Saying “this is a death sentence” when the reality is “this has shortened your lifespan by 20-30 years” is broadly accurate.
That’s not really how it works though. However I couldn’t give you an estimated increased cancer risk without knowing the dose rates down there
y2jake215 on
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
the issue might be you're watching this show, which is a dramatization, as a documentary
+3
Options
y2jake215certified Flat Birther theoristthe Last Good Boy onlineRegistered Userregular
the issue might be you're watching this show, which is a dramatization, as a documentary
Well when the stated purpose is to get people to “understand why Chernobyl happened” and is insanely accurate about even tiny period details, this dialogue from people presented as authorities stand out. However, this article says “at the end of Chernobyl, we get a lot of information about what’s happened to these people and what’s happened since this took place,” so I’m guessing some of this gets cleared up.
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
I've read some concern about Chernobyl being a negative portrayal of the risks of nuclear energy at a time when selling the public on alternatives to fossil fuels is of such paramount importance.
I've read some concern about Chernobyl being a negative portrayal of the risks of nuclear energy at a time when selling the public on alternatives to fossil fuels is of such paramount importance.
I feel like 3 mile island had more of an impact, largely due to how secretive the USSR was about it (while that made the whole thing worse, people only found out later).
I'd say Chernobyl is more of a warning towards not fucking up nuclear programs through laziness, cowardliness and incompetence, all of which played a much larger role in the disaster than the fact that they were splitting atoms.
Also, like, dying of cancer over a couple dozen years may not be a movie monster death, but it is still a horrible thing that people are going to be rightly afraid of.
Saying “this is a death sentence” when the reality is “this has shortened your lifespan by 20-30 years” is broadly accurate.
That’s not really how it works though. However I couldn’t give you an estimated increased cancer risk without knowing the dose rates down there
Well it's not quite that simple, there isn't just a danger of radiation absorption, there's also tons of Uranium Dioxide everywhere which is easily absorbed by the body and since no one is wearing masks everyone is just breathing it in. So yeah, it's safe to say that hanging out in the city was a death sentence.
+1
Options
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
edited May 2019
There are more Swedes in this than I expected. Some of them I could identify with my eyes closed. Even the director is Swedish but I only knew him through his artist name of "Stakka Bo". This is stellar so far.
Absalon on
+1
Options
y2jake215certified Flat Birther theoristthe Last Good Boy onlineRegistered Userregular
There are more Swedes in this than I expected. Some of them I could identify with my eyes closed. Even the director is Swedish but I only knew him through his artist name of "Stakka Bo". This is stellar so far.
No, that was Stellan
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
If anything, maybe this will make people want to make Thorium reactors?
Thor is hot right now.
something something Dad Bod.
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
I'm catching up but I lost track of 2 characters that are probably dead but I can't remember if we saw for sure
two people went down to turn on the water tanks or something, where one of them apologized basically saying they must have fucked something up. did we actually see them die? I can't recall for some reason. and the two people they said to stay behind
I was admittedly looking at my computer here and there but I watched a very good chunk of it without looking away, and rewatched certain parts as well, and I cannot remember. oh I guess one of them ends up being the person they make go to the roof? shit!
if anyone knows I appreciate it otherwise if it's not referenced again I'll go back for it.
I'm catching up but I lost track of 2 characters that are probably dead but I can't remember if we saw for sure
two people went down to turn on the water tanks or something, where one of them apologized basically saying they must have fucked something up. did we actually see them die? I can't recall for some reason. and the two people they said to stay behind
I was admittedly looking at my computer here and there but I watched a very good chunk of it without looking away, and rewatched certain parts as well, and I cannot remember. oh I guess one of them ends up being the person they make go to the roof? shit!
if anyone knows I appreciate it otherwise if it's not referenced again I'll go back for it.
Were they the two operators at the control panel when it happened? Those two died in hospital beds after they gave info to the female nuclear physicist investigating.
+4
Options
Donkey KongPutting Nintendo out of business with AI nipsRegistered Userregular
Also, like, dying of cancer over a couple dozen years may not be a movie monster death, but it is still a horrible thing that people are going to be rightly afraid of.
Saying “this is a death sentence” when the reality is “this has shortened your lifespan by 20-30 years” is broadly accurate.
That’s not really how it works though. However I couldn’t give you an estimated increased cancer risk without knowing the dose rates down there
Well it's not quite that simple, there isn't just a danger of radiation absorption, there's also tons of Uranium Dioxide everywhere which is easily absorbed by the body and since no one is wearing masks everyone is just breathing it in. So yeah, it's safe to say that hanging out in the city was a death sentence.
of the people who hung out there the longest, there was a noticeable spike in cancer rates, statistically significant, but from the books like Voices of Chernobyl, we see that many of the people who stayed in the city the longest are still alive. Available statistics of the liquidators who spent the most time in the city, only 10% of them were dead in 2006, 20 years on from the disaster. The stats on cancer deaths of deaths attributable to radiation are very cloudy the the point of useless, but I mean, 10% dead after 20 full years, counting all types of death, is not consistent with the level of danger implied by the show.
That's not to say the show isn't repeating faithfully what people believed at the time it's just that the effects were significantly less than feared. I don't think this makes the show less good or less important or less impactful. Nor does it diminish its core message. I just think it's important to note while watching it.
Donkey Kong on
Thousands of hot, local singles are waiting to play at bubbulon.com.
+6
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
The danger as presented is if they don't do anything to fix it. But they do, so danger goes down.
Even danger set at maximum is random, two people could get identical massive doses and it's a toss up if one, both or neither will die. Like that one guy that got burned holding the door open, looked fatal as heck, he survived IIRC.
Oh brilliant
+2
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
Yeah a lot of it was "if we sit on our thumbs and do nothing here is all the dire thinking's that will happen". And then the USSR spent a bunch of lives and money and time putting in the work to not make it happen, and it contributed to their eventual break up anyway.
The danger as presented is if they don't do anything to fix it. But they do, so danger goes down.
Even danger set at maximum is random, two people could get identical massive doses and it's a toss up if one, both or neither will die. Like that one guy that got burned holding the door open, looked fatal as heck, he survived IIRC.
Dyatlov absorbed a fair lifetime worth of radiation BEFORE Chernobyl from a reactor on a Nuclear sub, and then went on to live until 2005. His son ended up dying from leukaemia however. The writer stated that they aren't going to go into it in the show, so it can't be considered a spoiler (insomuch as spoilers on real-life events can exist?), but yeah, the bodies reaction to radiation can be finicky as hell.
Also the the guy who held the door open was Alexander Yuvchenko, who survived after many many surgeries but still suffers from radiation poisoning to this day (duh). FUN FACT: He is voicing himself in an upcoming video game called Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant due out sometime in 2021???
Also, like, dying of cancer over a couple dozen years may not be a movie monster death, but it is still a horrible thing that people are going to be rightly afraid of.
Saying “this is a death sentence” when the reality is “this has shortened your lifespan by 20-30 years” is broadly accurate.
That’s not really how it works though. However I couldn’t give you an estimated increased cancer risk without knowing the dose rates down there
Well it's not quite that simple, there isn't just a danger of radiation absorption, there's also tons of Uranium Dioxide everywhere which is easily absorbed by the body and since no one is wearing masks everyone is just breathing it in. So yeah, it's safe to say that hanging out in the city was a death sentence.
of the people who hung out there the longest, there was a noticeable spike in cancer rates, statistically significant, but from the books like Voices of Chernobyl, we see that many of the people who stayed in the city the longest are still alive. Available statistics of the liquidators who spent the most time in the city, only 10% of them were dead in 2006, 20 years on from the disaster. The stats on cancer deaths of deaths attributable to radiation are very cloudy the the point of useless, but I mean, 10% dead after 20 full years, counting all types of death, is not consistent with the level of danger implied by the show.
That's not to say the show isn't repeating faithfully what people believed at the time it's just that the effects were significantly less than feared. I don't think this makes the show less good or less important or less impactful. Nor does it diminish its core message. I just think it's important to note while watching it.
Is that liquidators generally, or the 3500 odd who went on the roof?
In the podcast I think it’s stated that 1/3 (1/2?) of the miners later died to radiation related illnesses.
Effectively what the people are describing when they describe the catastrophe level events here are the most serious event that has like a 10% or greater chance of happening. The fire WAS extinguished by the sand and boron, and if they had just poured water on it would have been far worse. The bubble tanks COULD have exploded, maybe they wouldn't have done, maybe they would. If they HAD exploded, it would have been a cataclysm, and so they had to behave as if they might.
Chernobyl was awful. People are indeed a bit hardier to low level radiation than they thought at the time, but, if they had done nothing the exclusion zone would be 100x larger and 10x more deadly.
"That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
+5
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
No but see everything worked out which means they were retroactively wrong for worrying and therefore we shouldn’t ever worry about safety issues surrounding nuclear power
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
No but see everything worked out which means they were retroactively wrong for worrying and therefore we shouldn’t ever worry about safety issues surrounding nuclear power
...yeah, kind of
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
No but see everything worked out which means they were retroactively wrong for worrying and therefore we shouldn’t ever worry about safety issues surrounding nuclear power
...yeah, kind of
You know
I understand modern reactors are much safer
But this idea that nuclear fission is fine and there are no real side-effects is silly. Fissile material and fission byproducts are some of the nastiest materials on the face of the earth, only outdone by some real corkers of manmade chemicals.
Shit is dangerous and requires huge amounts of safety.
No but see everything worked out which means they were retroactively wrong for worrying and therefore we shouldn’t ever worry about safety issues surrounding nuclear power
...yeah, kind of
You know
I understand modern reactors are much safer
But this idea that nuclear fission is fine and there are no real side-effects is silly. Fissile material and fission byproducts are some of the nastiest materials on the face of the earth, only outdone by some real corkers of manmade chemicals.
Shit is dangerous and requires huge amounts of safety.
I think the ultimate goal/message of the show will end up being "Don't fuck around with nuclear power generation. No, seriously, don't fuck around with it"
+3
Options
HonkHonk is this poster.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Friends, I was reading on wikipedia and learned that there are mercury cooled nuclear reactors.
It seems like a submarine thing, not pressurized and size efficient.
Posts
Not to be combative but how so?
Listening to podcast goal of the show is to depict the events as they happened. There doesn't appear to be any ideological intent on the part of the show makers and I say that as someone who very much believes that fission (and hopefully eventually fusion) have to be part of the long term answer to carbon emissions.
If we get to the end of the show without learning, for example, that the engineers who drained the water pipes lived for decades later or that the reactor ended up burning itself out (rendering most of the emergency countermeasures and personal sacrifices unnecessary), then I will agree that they've misportrayed the events. (I also hope that they don't cheap out and just do a text "where are they now?" epilogue.)
They could also stand to do a little more expository dialogue on the RBMK reactor design - for example, how there was no analogous design outside of communist bloc nations because all other nations rejected reactor designs with high positive void coefficients. They've brought it up already; and they've also mentioned how the Communist Party covered up the risks of the high positive void coefficient design. If they're true to history, the fact that Chernobyl was using a uniquely dangerous design in the first place (and poorly maintained to boot) will come up in dialogue several more times before the show is over.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
To the last point - I think it perhaps will, since Legasov will be testifying in both a trial and in front of the IAEA, so plenty of time for exposition.
To the first ones, we’ll have to see. It looks like there’s only one episode left. I’m hoping they correct them as well.
A big one is Legasov repeatedly stating he and Shcherbina have killed themselves simply by being there. An increase in cancer risk, even a substantial one, is not a guarantee, and it’s an implication that seems to carry throughout the series
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
I have some optimism he will find a way to correct the misconceptions
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
But he did develop something terminal. We see signs of it in the very first scene of this series.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I can’t find any evidence that that isn’t just creative license. Not saying it is. But I can’t find it.
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
I did too but honestly I'm really glad that they were able to say five episodes is what they need and be done (pending on what the last episode ends up of course)
If the final episode maintains the quality I can't wait to see what the creator tackles next because this has been fantastic on practically every level.
I do not disagree
After next week with it, Barry and GOT done, what have you got left for me HBO
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
For me it's access to a pretty large library of utterly fantastic shows.
Also the Deadwood movie comes out next week which I'm absolutely going to watch after a rewatch of Deadwood.
Saying “this is a death sentence” when the reality is “this has shortened your lifespan by 20-30 years” is broadly accurate.
That’s not really how it works though. However I couldn’t give you an estimated increased cancer risk without knowing the dose rates down there
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
Well when the stated purpose is to get people to “understand why Chernobyl happened” and is insanely accurate about even tiny period details, this dialogue from people presented as authorities stand out. However, this article says “at the end of Chernobyl, we get a lot of information about what’s happened to these people and what’s happened since this took place,” so I’m guessing some of this gets cleared up.
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
I was more affected by the dread of the implied awful stuff than the actual sight of it. Episode 3 was a much harder watch for me.
I feel like 3 mile island had more of an impact, largely due to how secretive the USSR was about it (while that made the whole thing worse, people only found out later).
Well it's not quite that simple, there isn't just a danger of radiation absorption, there's also tons of Uranium Dioxide everywhere which is easily absorbed by the body and since no one is wearing masks everyone is just breathing it in. So yeah, it's safe to say that hanging out in the city was a death sentence.
No, that was Stellan
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
Thor is hot right now.
something something Dad Bod.
two people went down to turn on the water tanks or something, where one of them apologized basically saying they must have fucked something up. did we actually see them die? I can't recall for some reason. and the two people they said to stay behind
I was admittedly looking at my computer here and there but I watched a very good chunk of it without looking away, and rewatched certain parts as well, and I cannot remember. oh I guess one of them ends up being the person they make go to the roof? shit!
if anyone knows I appreciate it otherwise if it's not referenced again I'll go back for it.
of the people who hung out there the longest, there was a noticeable spike in cancer rates, statistically significant, but from the books like Voices of Chernobyl, we see that many of the people who stayed in the city the longest are still alive. Available statistics of the liquidators who spent the most time in the city, only 10% of them were dead in 2006, 20 years on from the disaster. The stats on cancer deaths of deaths attributable to radiation are very cloudy the the point of useless, but I mean, 10% dead after 20 full years, counting all types of death, is not consistent with the level of danger implied by the show.
That's not to say the show isn't repeating faithfully what people believed at the time it's just that the effects were significantly less than feared. I don't think this makes the show less good or less important or less impactful. Nor does it diminish its core message. I just think it's important to note while watching it.
Even danger set at maximum is random, two people could get identical massive doses and it's a toss up if one, both or neither will die. Like that one guy that got burned holding the door open, looked fatal as heck, he survived IIRC.
Dyatlov absorbed a fair lifetime worth of radiation BEFORE Chernobyl from a reactor on a Nuclear sub, and then went on to live until 2005. His son ended up dying from leukaemia however. The writer stated that they aren't going to go into it in the show, so it can't be considered a spoiler (insomuch as spoilers on real-life events can exist?), but yeah, the bodies reaction to radiation can be finicky as hell.
Is that liquidators generally, or the 3500 odd who went on the roof?
In the podcast I think it’s stated that 1/3 (1/2?) of the miners later died to radiation related illnesses.
Chernobyl was awful. People are indeed a bit hardier to low level radiation than they thought at the time, but, if they had done nothing the exclusion zone would be 100x larger and 10x more deadly.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
...yeah, kind of
You know
I understand modern reactors are much safer
But this idea that nuclear fission is fine and there are no real side-effects is silly. Fissile material and fission byproducts are some of the nastiest materials on the face of the earth, only outdone by some real corkers of manmade chemicals.
Shit is dangerous and requires huge amounts of safety.
I think the ultimate goal/message of the show will end up being "Don't fuck around with nuclear power generation. No, seriously, don't fuck around with it"
It seems like a submarine thing, not pressurized and size efficient.
But yo, mercury cooled nuclear reactors. Radioactive mercury, wow wow wow