主题：【讨论】日本核灾难最新更新 -- 井底望天

太平洋彼岸的常见大型海生哺乳动物大批量死于日本核泄漏！如此2012级的信息， 大多数地球人民竟“不知有汉”？ 还是科学家，政府都是阴谋的核心，真理掌握在少数人文关怀者的手里？？？

楼上的新闻摘要来自mail online (AKA dailymail.co.uk). What is mail online？ 该报网站没有About us, 只有Contact us, 在那里得到的信息除了出版商名称和地址以外，就只有：Registered in England and Wales with company number 84121. Google 一下，还不错，有自己的wikipedia介绍。介绍非常简短，只有220个字。但重点非常突出，没有历史沿革，直指网页流量数据：

“The website is very popular, reaching 78,994,874 unique web browsers in October 2011 (up from 66m in March 2011[1]) according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations, making it the most popular UK newspaper website ahead of guardian.co.uk”

“Globally it is the second most visited newspaper website according to ComScore, whose methodology gave the site 39.6m unique visitors for March 2011, putting it ahead of the Huffington Post and behind only The New York Times' website which received 44.8m visitors in the same month.[4]”

这里的数据，引文，煞有介事，不过是用2011年某月的某数据得出其为英国最热门（领先于卫报网站），和全球第二大 （仅次于纽约时报网站）新闻报刊网站的结论。“我不管你信不信，反正俺信了”

该维基网页上还有这么一句莫名其妙的话：“The search engine on the Daily Mail website is also widely used, being one of Internet Explorer 7's default web searches, alongside names such as Google, Yahoo! and eBay.” Ebay什么时候和search engine有半毛钱关系了？见识过央视中文台不着边际，东拉西扯，毫无逻辑的涂鸦式2011新闻年鉴后，俺对这种天花乱坠式拉虎皮作大旗很淡定

回到新闻本身，楼上给出的链接值得一观，尤其是新闻下面的读者评论以及他们各自的“花”“草”纪录。摘录几个，祝大家新年笑口常开

If the lab results are not back yet, why was this article published? What you going to do when the results come back with zero attribution to radioactivity? This article seems to be geared towards spreading unwarranted speculation from the anti-nuclear people or those who are simply very uninformed about radiation in the environment - and immune systems. Any animal with that amount of bleeding and hair loss to have had anything to do with radioactivity would have had to be sitting on top of a very intense source of radiation. Not possible in the oceans. Journalist has zero science training. Publisher ditto.

- Caroline, Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, 31/12/2011 01:32 （花0 草3）

_________________________________________________

what a ridiculous article full of speculation with no facts at all to back up their claims. The cause is not known so why would any ethical journalist put out this garbage report with nothing to back it up.? This isn't news it is simply a blatant anti nuclear opinion piece trying to disguise itself as something else. This kind of obvious fear mongering should be illegal and the authors should be ashamed. I'm disgusted.

- nuke roadie, usa, 31/12/2011 00:35 （花0 草2）

_________________________________________________

We humans have a lot to answer for.

- Annabel, London, England, 29/12/2011 18:50 （花22 草0）

_________________________________________________

The web sites Enenews and EX-SKF have daily updates on the situation, as well as Arnie Gundersen from Fairewinds Associates. The main stream media and governments are not covering this because it's so serious they are afraid of panic (and being blamed...). The commenter who thinks that there was no radiation leak needs to become educated on this. Those seals are obviously suffering from radiation injuries.

- signalfire, Myrtle Creek, Oregon , 28/12/2011 23:33（花46 草0）