I Love Nuclear Bombs!

[mobrien_12]

In regards to radiation:

Alpha and Beta Radiation are relatively harmless, a newspaper sheet or clothing will stop it.

Gamma radiation is a bit nastier, but nothing that those aprons the doctors give you during X-rays couldn't handle.

If you want to know more, I reccomand you visit the RSICC

Alpha radiation is the easist to stop, true.  IT can be stopped by paper or a few inches of air will protect you.  However, it is the most destructive ionizing radiation per particle if there is no protection.  Easy to protect yourself, but devastating if you don't.  This is why you really don't want to have Radon gas in your basement.  You breathe this stuff in, and it releases alpha particles directly in your lungs.  

Beta is the next most damaging kind of radiation per particle if you don't protect yourself, and conversely the next easiest to shield yourself against.

[skyman8081]

I'm still not convinced, if there was a nuclear war the countries would make a hell of a load more neuclear weapons. Sure the world's entire neulear arsenal might not be big enough at the moment to destroy the world but  that might be a differant story after a neuclear arms race.

 Execpt that now you're adding a new unknown variable.

The CURRENT world nuclear arsenal won't destroy the earth.

And even if we used nukes to turn the earth into radioactive slag, life would still persist.  It's hardy that way.

There are becteria that are resistant to  radioactivity.

[skyman8081]

Alpha radiation is the easist to stop, true.  IT can be stopped by paper or a few inches of air will protect you.  However, it is the most destructive ionizing radiation per particle if there is no protection.  Easy to protect yourself, but devastating if you don't.  

Beta is the next nastiest kind of radiation per particle if you don't protect yourself, and conversely the next easiest to shield yourself against.

 Moral of the story?

Don't run naked in front of a nuclear explosion, wear layers.

[Calum]

it's not an argument of how much explosive power or even how high a level of dangerous radioactivity, it's more like the effect on the planet's ecological stability. The theory is that if a lot of nuclear bombs went off, then a lot of dust would get blown into the atmosphere, and would get between the sunlight and the earth. the dust particles would become part of the earth's upper atmosphere and would take a long time (years? decades?) to disperse, in the meantime, the surface of the earth would get colder and colder, and things that require sunlight to live would all die, in turn, the oxygen levels of the planet would drop, and the food levels for things that eat plants would plummet too. just throwing one thing out can have a domino effect on the whole system.

They thought this might happen when they dropped the first nucler bomb (probably not the one they used on hiroshima, i imagine test bombs would have been tried out, probably in mexico, first) but you know, truman decided, fuck it, he wanted to kill the japs more than he wanted to survive anyway, and the gods have a sense of humour because he got both in the end.

while we're on the subject read this review of a classic film about nuclear war: http://www.archive.org/details/DuckandC1951
and download the film (ten minutes long) here, look on the left of the page: http://www.military.com/Content/MoreContent1/?file=cw_cd_story
however in my opinion, you will get a lot more of worth on the subject from this book and the film that was made of it four years later: http://www.toonhound.com/briggswtwb.htm

[skyman8081]

There was also a fear that the first nuclear detonation would light the atmosphere on fire.

Nuclear Winter, with the CURRENT arsenal, is simply not a feasable scenario.  It's simply a fearmongering doomsday scenario, that is not likely to happen.

Read more here.

And Hiroshima was not the first Nuclear Detonation, that was the the 'Trinity' explosion at White Sands Missile Range, near Alamaguodo, NM.  It was detonated on July 16, 1945.

[Calum]

are you correcting me or agreeing with me?

i'm not convinced that it's possible to properly work out whether a nuclear winter, of whatever length, over whatever area is possible, probable or whatever, the weather's a complicated thing, they can't predict if it will rain over two days away, so how can they work that out?

just a thought.

[skyman8081]

Correcting you.  A nuclear winter scenario, is very a unlikely occurrance with todays arsenal.

[toadlife]

There was also a fear that the first nuclear detonation would light the atmosphere on fire.

Nuclear Winter, with the CURRENT arsenal, is simply not a feasable scenario. It's simply a fearmongering doomsday scenario, that is not likely to happen.

Read more here.

And Hiroshima was not the first Nuclear Detonation, that was the the 'Trinity' explosion at White Sands Missile Range, near Alamaguodo, NM. It was detonated on July 16, 1945.

That article is very interesting. It goes to show how slanted scientific studies can be when the scientists are looking for a particular answer.

[skyman8081]

This is a nuke:


The DoD experimented with this for when a building absolutely positively had to be radioactive slag by the next day, SADM.

[cahult]

But of course nature can up anything man can make. Volcanoes, earthquakes, meteorites, comets, supernovas. If Sirius, which is located 8 lightyears away from us should explode now we would have 8 years to prepare ourselves for the end. The radiation from a blast of that size would be enough to wipe out all life on earth, unless we run for shelter.

[skyman8081]

Mount Saint Helens was 350 MegaTons

Mount Tambroa was 24.5 GigaTons

I think we are safe from nukes.

In the event of a nuclear war, I would venture that most of the population would not be significantly effected by the ionising fallout radiation.

[toadlife]

Funny I was going to comment on how one good Volcano blast could probably dump more shit into our atmosphere than all of our nukes combined could -but I didn't have any nunbers to back it up.

If those numbers you quoted are correct then, yeah nukes aren't shit compared to Earth.





Humans: We need to be carefull- we might destroy the earth
Earth: Bring it on bitches!

[skyman8081]

I always try to substantiate my claims.

[piratePenguin]

So what, nuclear bombs probably can't destroy the earth? They can still kill alot of innocent people, and already have.
How would you feel if a nuclear bomb was dropped off somewhere tomorrow skyman?

The "freedom for fisson" thread was cool, this one is not.

[skyman8081]

I never said that nukes were happy fun joyous devices of cuddly kittens and sugar lollypops.

Simply that the fears of nuclear weapons are greatly overstated.

Infact, the fear of any kind of NBC warfare is greatly overblown.