Since you have not specifically said so, I have to assume that you agree with me that nuclear fission can increase the kinetic energy of the surroundings.

From information on this web site: https://www.webelements.com/carbon/isotopes.html
There seems to be seven radioactive carbon isotopes that have a half life decay time ranging from .127 seconds to 5715 years.

Quote from:
https://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=BRIxl4QmebYC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=man+made+radioactive+carbon+isotopes&ots=G_rYJ3upCp&sig=_mCxKZKApEO2dylb4BFz65T3T9U#v=onepage&q=man%20made%20radioactive%20carbon%20isotopes&f=false

“At present, we have identified something like 2600 nuclides: 260 stable nuclides, 25 very long-lived naturally occurring radionuclides, and more than 2300 man-made radionuclides.”

I also agree with you that pollution of the atmosphere by carbon based gasses can affect the temperature of the atmosphere. My only concern is that no one seems to be investigating the effects that these radioactive contaminates, that have been spread over the whole planet over many years, is doing to the environment.
I have yet to find information, even a scientific estimate, of the total quantity of radioactive carbon isotopes or man-made radionuclides in the atmosphere. I know that you say it ranges from nonexistent to miniscule and you can find pie charts that enforce your belief.

So; I am going to abandon my quest in this area for the time being. Have a good day and keep away from the pollution. (It may fry your brain further.)

First you imply that the people that monitor radiation levels have a “weak grasp of the science,”

No, I said the people you linked to had a weak grasp of the science…

then you imply that even if the background radiation increased by more than 600 percent all over the world it has no effect on anything.

I never said anything of the sort- I said it would not come within MANY orders of magnitude of the effect you claim it has.

However, this is all moot because they do not back up the claim of 600% increase with any real data…

Next you imply that the fission process does not cause any heating effect on its surroundings.

Never once did I say that- nor would I ever say that- you seem to be hallucinating about what I wrote…

Human contribution to the background radiation is minuscule:

Fallout from nuclear tests:
http://www.doh.wa.gov/portals/1/Documents/Pubs/320-063_bkvsman_fs.pdf

Nuclear weapons derive their explosive power from the uncontrolled radioactive break-up of plutonium and uranium. This yields a large number of radioactive daughter products that are blown high into the atmosphere and are carried around the earth. These radioactive elements gradually fall back (fall-out) to earth over a period of many years. During the 1950s and early 1960s, many test explosions were carried out in the atmosphere. In 1963 an Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty was signed and most subsequent tests have been conducted underground. The peak year for radioactive fallout was 1963 and levels have been declining since then. Levels of fallout are now less than ten percent of what they were at peak. We each receive approximately 1 mrem from this source each year

Nuclear Power Plants:

Nuclear power reactors, which use uranium, supply the United States with about 20 percent of its electricity. Our ability to produce power using radioactive materials reduces our reliance on fossil fuels. Nuclear power plant operations account for less than a hundredth of a percent of the average American’s total radiation exposure.

The largest single contribution to the background is natural Radon.

Radiation levels have been falling since the Earth was formed
http://www.irpa.net/irpa9/cdrom/VOL.2/V2_69.PDF

Why do you respond to my posts?

I respond because personal delusion pretending to be science is offensive and harmful.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/04/09/your-radiation-this-week-no-51/

It has no bearing on your claims.

Get therapy, and then get an education… discussion is pointless until you do.

http://www.agreenroadjournal.com/2014/03/background-radiation-has-increased-600.html

The weather underground has lots of historical data you could look at…it took all of 5 minutes to find the data and plot it.

http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/?cmpid=%3Dsocialflow-facebook-business

Here are two sets of atmospheric pressure data for Washington DC, each 400 days long.
One was taken 80 years ago, one last year… the 13 month average for each differs by ~1 part in 1000- can you tell which is pre-atomic age and which is present day?

This counter-factual obsession you have is really tiresome.