maybe just a limited nuclear war what then?
Posted by: riverhousebill ()
Date: August 10, 2017 02:07PM
Some of the Dumps people stated north korea ONLY has about 17 18 war heads well that still means the end of Raw food! read on Carl Sagan
But what if nuclear wars can be contained, and much less than 5000 megatons is detonated?
Perhaps the greatest surprise in our work was that even small nuclear wars can have
devastating climatic effects. We considered a war in which a mere 100 megatons were
exploded, less than one percent of the world arsenals, and only in low-yield airbursts over
cities. This scenario, we found, would ignite thousands of fires, and the smoke from these fires
alone would be enough to generate an epoch of cold and dark almost as severe as in the 5000
megaton case. The threshold for what Richard Turco has called The Nuclear Winter is very low.
Could we have overlooked some important effect? The carrying of dust and soot from the
Northern to the Southern Hemisphere (as well as more local atmospheric circulation) will
certainly thin the clouds out over the Northern Hemisphere. But, in many cases, this thinning
would be insufficient to render the climatic consequences tolerable -- and every time it got
better in the Northern Hemisphere, it would get worse in the Southern.
Our results have been carefully scrutinized by more than 100 scientists in the United States,
Europe and the Soviet Union. There are still arguments on points of detail. But the overall
conclusion seems to be agreed upon: There are severe and previously unanticipated global
consequences of nuclear war-subfreezing temperatures in a twilit radioactive gloom lasting for
months or longer.
Scientists initially underestimated the effects of fallout, were amazed that nuclear explosions in
space disabled distant satellites, had no idea that the fireballs from high-yield thermonuclear
explosions could deplete the ozone layer and missed altogether the possible climatic effects of
nuclear dust and smoke. What else have we overlooked?
Nuclear war is a problem that can be treated only theoretically. It is not amenable to
experimentation. Conceivably, we have left something important out of our analysis, and the
effects are more modest than we calculate. On the other hand, it is also possible-and, from
previous experience, even likely-that there are further adverse effects that no one has yet been
wise enough to recognize. With billions of lives at stake, where does conservatism lie-in
assuming that the results will be better than we calculate, or worse?
Many biologists, considering the nuclear winter that these calculations describe, believe they
carry somber implications for life on Earth. Many species of plants and animals would become
extinct. Vast numbers of surviving humans would starve to death. The delicate ecological
relations that bind together organisms on Earth in a fabric of mutual dependency would be
torn, perhaps irreparably. There is little question that our global civilization would be
destroyed. The human population would be reduced to prehistoric levels, or less. Life for any
survivors would be extremely hard. And there seems to be a real possibility of the extinction
of the human species.
It is now almost 40 years since the invention of nuclear weapons. We have not yet experienced
a global thermonuclear war -- although on more than one occasion we have come
tremulously close. I do not think our luck can hold forever. Men and machines are fallible, as
recent events remind us. Fools and madmen do exist, and sometimes rise to power.
Concentrating always on the near future, we have ignored the long-term consequences of our
actions. We have placed our civilization and our species in jeopardy.
Fortunately, it is not yet too late. We can safeguard the planetary civilization and the human
family if we so choose. ccccccccccc
For this reason I became a life member of The Alliance Of Atomic Veterans and why I am proud to have been arrested over 20 times by the Whackinhuts at Test Site Mercury in the State of Neveada. On sacred land stolen from the Western Shoshonies by the DOD and DOE I know as Sagan stated above-There is no more important or more urgent issue. be active or radioactive you have a voice.
Re: maybe just a limited nuclear war what then?
Posted by: Anon 102 ()
Date: August 11, 2017 06:58PM
An old man is a great lover of life.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.