Are there truly any Chernobyl mutations of the wildlife or people that were left behind? I see conflicting research constantly and photos that re most likely shooped.
>>17533799
Not very likely. Do I have any proof whatsoever? No, actually not.
The radiation is bearable. The place is still under lock and key from the amount of thought monsters the collective conscious has produced from the fear and horror of the event.
>>17533824
I get that it's still closed except for tours but what about the mutations? Surely all that radiation has caused some true oddities out there.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/oct/05/jamesmeek
Here, OP. This is what you're looking for.
http://www.nuclearflower.com/zone/zone08.html
>pic related
>..." In the early years after the disaster, some plants—like this spruce—displayed gigantism"....
There's tons of pictures of deformed shit around the area.
>>17533867
>forgets pic related
>>17533867
>>17533868
Wildlife in zone 1 is mainly wolf, foxes, badgers and raccoons. In Zone 2 lager animals such as horses and deer become prevalent. Zone 3 it's hogs, rabbits and more deer.
http://www.nuclearflower.com/zone/zone01.html
nothing freaky or mutant. the local wildlife and plants seem to be doing fine. people still work around the site daily so its not nearly as bad as some retards here would want to believe
>>17533799
No it's all myths and legends. Animals are actually better off living in Chernobyl then anywhere else in that region because of little to no human presence.
>>17533799
Yes mass migration.
>>17533799
Of course some Chernobyl mutants was and is, but there is unfortunately nothing such interesting as X-Men, in major part of cases.
>>17533799
Chernobyl's two head snake is amusing, but this mutation is not seems profitable in the Earth.
