this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2023
306 points (98.1% liked)
Fake History Porn
4384 readers
1 users here now
Welcome to /c/[email protected] , where fake history is made. Find a historically significant photo, come up with a fake history title, post it, laugh.
The name is a reference to the fact that the pictures should be worth marveling at. This is NOT a place for hardcore pornography. Tasteful nudity is fine as long as it fits within the context of the post (please mark it as NSFW).
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No; that photo is from 1996 (a decade after the incident) where the vast majority of short lived fission products are well into their decay chains.
It's not safe to be around it for a long period now (and it still wasn't then), but it'd take at least a few minutes of getting up close and personal with it to see any short term effects.
FWIW NYT interviewed him in 2014. He may have since passed (I didn't look it up) but certainly not as a result of acute radiation exposure.
Fun fact: the film had to be exposed for several seconds for each of the images in this series due to the low light levels, which contributes to the amount of radiation 'fuzz' in the images. Think 1800s camera levels of staying still for a photo, just in front of a giant radioactive chunk of corium.
Why didn't they just bring bigger lights I wonder? Space constraints? Is this sitting inside a collapsed basement?