I have no problem that you assume that a photograph has been doctored but I can assure you that I deal only with scientist and experts that took part in weapons testing etc This photograph that was taken on Raymond Island was never intended as propaganda, totally the opposite, it was just used to show that the area was being used to fire live rounds or drop live bombs etc......if you look on the internet you will see in what context it was used with no mention of any part of it showing signs of uranium content...I and a couple of other people observed this photograph and realised it was not conventional.......having dealt with munitions over a long period of time and having other experts evaluate it we all came up to the same conclusion.....I by the way am ex military. I did not say that the ADF were definitely using DU I implied as some of the weapons used are known to contain components of uranium...such as GNU-28 that is carried by Oz F111 in one photograph I used......DU is used in so many ways both in civilian and military life and generally it remains low risk....it is when it gets heated and self ignites it then becomes a totally indiscrimate killer by why of the aerosol that are discharged into the atmosphere. What I will say to you is that normally in life if there is an element of doubt you become cautious and carry out extensive tests to prove one way or the other......with the effects of DU once inhaled this has never been done and all the authorities use the current ICRP out of date method.....in that context no DU should be allowed anywhere until this have been done. So believe it or not if I am right by the time you find out it will be too late because good old Oz will be nuked...if I am wrong then at least nuclear waste will remain where it is stored instead of being handed out free of charge to scatter around the world.....at the end of the day no level of uranium is safe.......I rest my case...Oh by the way the authorities and governments have said so many times that DU is not used in Afghanistan....I have evidence that it has been used....I have a picture of a stockpile of DU Penetrators being placed in a trench to be detonated by NATO forces....this is in violation of US military regulations....the stockpile was then detonated and the huge highly contaminated cloud then went on its way across international border and the world....guess who's camp was downwind of this explosion....you guessed right the Oz troops.....maybe the level of cancer in your troops will bring this to the surface. So who would you rather trust!....I hope I live long enough to send you an email in later life to say I told you so......oh and if you think DU is not being used by the US, UK NATO or your own ADF then go live next door to Lancelin, Delemere or Shoalwater Bay and raise your family in its pristine environment!!!
Mark any small or nanoparticle once in gets into the atmosphere will go wherever the wind takes it. This can be via the oringal explosion when particles ascend many thousands of feet by the force of the explosion or by convection current in the heat that is generated from that explosion. Alternatively an breeze, wind or gale will pick up such particles from the earths surface and tranmit them to another part of the continent. This is then called secondary contamination. If you relate to the two huge sand storms in Sydney then DU dust aerosols move in exactly the same way. As far as data that is very simple take any day and any time and if you are into aviation carry out the normal function of making up your flight plan......you look at weather charts, wind charts etc and work out the wind direction and strengths at what altitude you wish to fly....this is not rocket science just simply day to day routine that we who have been or continue to be in aviation use. I will also correct you on the Uranium Mining issue I myself gave no reference to the Tassie Devils..they were the words of Leuren Moret. On the issue of developing more Uranium Mines in Australia..that is fact and I myself have been in the Mining, Oil and Gas industry in Oz and certainly know what I am talking about. As your picture shows it may be better to continue to pick your nose rather than my brains!
What is "Depleted Uranium"? It is my understanding that U235 is the chemical name for uranium and the 235 denotes the number of years it takes for the material to deplete half of it's radioactivity (ie it's half life).
It then takes the same amount of time to deplete half of it's remaining radioactivity, ad infinitum.
If the uranium has been used in a nuclear reactor and it's radioactivity has been harvested artificially by an accelleration of it's release until the amount of radioactive release is no longer useful in a nuclear reactor, it might then be termed as "depleted uranium".
The only thing that is depleted is it's usefulness in a nuclear reactor, so the term "depleted uranium" is a misnomer. It is still radioactive and still harmful to most forms of life.
For man to then recycle the material in sophisticated weaponry it is then another example of man's inhumanity towards other men.
Knowing that the use of the material in this manner results in the break up of it into miniscule particles that will eventually be distributed around the world, and still using it in this way is sheer stupidity and demonstrates man's self destructive nature.
The issue is not whether it is used in Australia or not but that it is used anywhere in this manner.
Just when we thought the warmongers had given up the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) philosophy, they came up with a new, slower and more painful version of it.
God help us because we do not know how to help ourselves.
Man I had a top little sail in my land yacht today. I had to slow it down as it was getting so scary.
Heard Dr Karl talking about this yesterday and how much radioactive material comes out of coal fired power stations
www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/
So hard to read Peter Eyre's posts. I gave up. Paragraphs and carriage returns make it much easier to read.
i'm really sad to think that uranium could be depleted, someone reassure me about krptonite. 
A lot of the FUD in here is assuming that uranium is radioactive, therefore depleted uranium is radioactive, therefore a little bit of it will make a small nuclear explosion if you hit it really really hard.
This is not true.
Making a nuclear explosion is difficult. It's so fiendishly hard that it took the Germans, Americans and Russians years and years of dedicated effort before they managed to crack the secret of how to make it work. You need enriched (not depleted) nuclear material, you need it to be machined into a specific shape, you need a couple of kilos of it (this is where the phrase 'critical mass' came from), you need specially shaped explosives around this nuclear material, and lots more special design bits and pieces that are classified, just to get a small fission reaction to take place.
Hitting some depleted uranium with some more depleted uranium is about as effective at making a nuclear reaction as trying to make petrol by smashing water into water.
Like Mulder, some people just want to believe, and no amount of bashing them over the head with physics can convince them otherwise...
*sigh*
all the info on d.uranium here. my opinion gulf war syndrome is 80 percent depleted uranium + 20 percent the toxic vaccines.
www.informationliberation.com/
