🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <344D506B.6FBA@mail.arc.nasa.gov>,
Russ Paielli  <rpaielli@mail.arc.nasa.gov> wrote:
>Kym Horsell wrote:
>Who said anything about ore trapped under km of rock? It was right out
>in the open. If you are interested in the truth about nuclear power, you
>will read the book mentioned above. If not, you won't. It's as simple as
>that.
>[goes on to talk about people being uninterested in the truth ;-) ]

I believe you must be indulging in some "reading between the lines"
to claim anything was "out in the open" for any significant time.

For verification, anyone can check the relevant web page about the 
actual research.
http://crpg.cnrs-nancy.fr/MODEL3D/oklo.html
(I haven't been there lately).

Somehow those poor French scientists, who not only know the name
of the structure we're talking about ;-), but have BEEN to Gabon,
_think_ the material was trapped in a region 10s of metres wide, under 
more than 1 km of rock for a substantial period (the geological
model page said, at end 1996,  around 1.5 km). ;-)

There should also be further references to "Oklo" under my own "radiation" 
pages at La Trobe. I'll be interested if you can come up with an opinion
about the relevant ores being "in the open" for even thousands of years.

But I'm sure these people will defer to you "judgment".

In the meantime, here's what I posted about what is described usually
as a "unique" phenomenon (but -- hey -- don't let that stop any "real 
scientist" HERE from generalising away ;-) earlier this year.  (There's 
no new topic under the sun, you see).

===
>From khorsell@ee.latrobe.edu.au Fri Feb 28 19:28:14 EST 1997
Newsgroups: sci.environment,talk.environment,aus.politics,aus.environment.conservation,aus.environment.misc,aus.general,alt.politics.economics,talk.politics.misc
Date: 28 Feb 1997 15:14:27 +1100

[someone talks about rad ore at Oklo being "out in the open"]

In the open? According to "other information" supplied by yourself -- one 
of the features of this phenomenon was that it was reportedly CONTAINED for
many 1000s of years. At that time, you were arguing it an example of
how underground nuclear testing could (or would) "work" perfectly.

David Attenborough did a little piece on Oklo a couple of years back, 
indicating much of the reaction mass had spent millions of years at depths 
of (as he said) "kilometers".

This is also consistent with the "Oklo" site on the Web, that models the
                           ************************ NOTE WELL
operation of what they describe as a "unique" natural nuclear reactor
"assuming a depth [the Fr deposit] of 1.5 km".
                                    *************** NOTE WELL
(see: http://crpg.cnrs-nancy.fr/MODEL3D/oklo.html).

According to the  model described, thermal disturbance was not 
expected further than around 40 m from the reactor site -- itself around 10 
m in diameter at the cited depth.

===
[OCT23.4]