The Myth That Nuclear Weapons Can Kill Everyone On Earth-many times over

The problem with that line of thought is the real danger from those meltdowns was the core reaching the water table and causing the water to convert to steam and blow tons of radioactive material into the air. Due to human efforts with the meltdowns that have occurred this event has never happened yet. However given a war with multiple us sites containing nuclear waste products that would exacerbate the explosion of a reactor actually blowing up the pollution level would be beyond insane estimates of poisonous. We won't have the manpower and resources to deal with multiple cores going into meltdown in multiple areas and we do not even know the full effects of a plant explosion. Nuclear warheads are made to detonate above ground and not blow dirt and debris upwards because fallout is worsened by that. This would be pressurized explosions deep underground.

The US, Canada, Europe, Russia, Asia, the middle east, Japan would all be coated in long term radioactive waste that would make Chernobyl and fukashima look really pleasant. That is just going to blow across the globe through water systems. The place that might be safe is Antarctica because it does not really snow that much there, and you would have frozen water. However, given such debris in the air and the nuclear fires burning along with many cities you are probably going to warm up enough to melt those caps and then currents could take the pollution there too.

The world will need time before it can support large animals through the ecosystem again. Life on the surface would probably go on in bacterial form. viuses and spores would probably stay around. Insects might be able to breed resistance quick enough to not be fully wiped out, but they would be hurting. Small plant life like molds and fungus probably will make it through. After the half life's get low enough the earth would probably have time to start another era but the life would probably have to evolve up again even more than when asteroids hit and wiped things out. However, if another sentient race ever did develop there would probably be some interesting fossils that they dig up.

 

What radiation and fallout?

You are totally clueless about the function and purpose of strategic nuclear warheads.

The primary function of a strategic nuclear warhead is to destroy or damage infrastructure, period.

The fact that people are killed during the destruction and damage of infrastructure is incidental to the primary function of the weapon.

The destruction and damage of infrastructure is primarily caused by over-pressure. In order to maximize the extent of the over-pressure, the weapon is detonated at altitude, resulting in an "air-burst." Overpressure is simply the difference in pressure between the blast wave and ambient air pressure. When a blast wave begins to interact with any object, high pressure is applied to the side of the object nearest to the detonated warhead. Since the side of the object away from the detonated warhead is still at ambient pressure, there is a temporary pressure difference, and this is where the first incidence of damage may occur. As the blast wave envelopes the object, the overpressure is applied to all sides, creating a crushing or squeezing effect, and this is where the second incidence of damage may occur.

An overpressure of 5 psi will extend out about 18 km for a 475 kt warhead, but only if you detonate it in an air-burst about 3-4 miles above the Earth's surface.

A 475 kt warhead produces 10 kt from the fission of the trigger, and 465 kt from the fusion of Hydrogen into Helium.

As anyone with half a brain knows, Helium is not radioactive, and being lighter than air, drifts up into the Mesosphere.

The only radioactive fall-out will be un-fissioned plutonium from the 10 kt fission trigger, plus fission products from Plutonium 239, which are primarily Zirconium and Xenon (a Noble Gas), but may also produce Tellurium 134 and Molybdenum 106, and to a lesser extent, Cesium 148 and Krypton 89.

The fusion of Hydrogen results in the release of a neutron, and some the released neutrons will interact with the Carbon nucleus in CO2 and produce Carbon 14.

Most people are ignorant about fall-out, because they don't understand the processes involved, and unfortunately, they usually point to the Castle Bravo test-shot as an example.

Yes, the US conducted the Castle Bravo Test Shot on the Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Island in 1954, and, yes, the test weapon's yield was far greater than the US anticipated at 15 Mt, and, yes, nuclear fall-out did affect the population living in the Marshall Islands causing radiation burns, and, yes, a Japanese fishing vessel was caught in the fall-out and crew members were injured (and I believe at least one died).

That's what most people know.

What most people don't know is that the radioactive fall-out resulted from the interaction of neutrons with Sodium in the seawater and with the Calcium Carbonate used to create an artificially constructed platform extending from the atoll itself. Both Sodium and Calcium can absorb neutrons altering their state from a stable nucleus to a less stable radio-nucleus.

US cities are not built on atolls made of Calcium Carbonate surrounded by seawater, and if targeted with a nuclear weapon, it will be air-burst to maximize damage, instead of being ground-burst.

Detonating a strategic nuclear weapon in a ground-burst, which is defined as any part of the resultant fire-ball touching the Earth, is totally stupid, unless your goal is to damage silo doors at an ICBM site.

Why are you fear-mongering?

Better yet, why are you incapable of comprehending reality?

Do you understand that stock-piled nuclear warheads have no delivery system?

Do you also understand that stock-piled nuclear weapons cannot be employed in any manner?

Do you understand that every single nuclear warhead has an inherent safe-guard system that prevents it from being detonated unless the sensors in the electronics package detect that the warhead has achieved a certain minimum altitude and is traveling at a certain minimum speed?

You can't just put a nuclear missile warhead or gravity bomb in your SUV and drive it somewhere to be detonated. Missile warheads and gravity bombs go through the final arming sequence in-flight on their way to the target. That is a safe-guard to prevent terrorists or others from using stolen or captured nuclear weapons against the US and others.

 

. . . . Says the man who says that nothing can be done about mass shootings. . . . Does your death wish include yourself or is it limited to others???

WHAT IS an acceptable number of casualties that would validate nuclear war???

 

Oh gosh, let's test your theory ...



Not.

 

The US will not be hit with 4,000 nuclear warheads, but keep fear-mongering if it suits you.

That situation would never occur in the US or Russia. You might want to avoid reading hypothetical nonsense like that.

You don't have 5,000 ready to go. The weapons in storage do not have delivery systems, so there's no possible way for them to be used in a war. The reason they are in storage is because their components are recycled and used to up-grade or modernize active nuclear warheads.

The Nuclear Winter Theory was debunked. Not only did Sagan recant his theory in his books, he was embarrassed on ABC's Nightline during the Gulf War when he claimed that the burning oil-wells in Kuwait and Iraq would produce a limited Nuclear Winter in that region.

It would have no effect on South America, Africa, Oceania, Australia/New Zealand or Southern and Southeast Asia.

When you say "us" you're really talking about the US, and only the US.

I can survive. It's not my fault you don't have survival skills and can't plan, organize, lead or conduct operations.

Air-bursts of strategic nuclear weapons don't produce firestorms. The threat of toxins from industrial centers is local, not global, and Nuclear Winter has been debunked. Scientists have even proven that the Toba Super-volcano Eruption Event 78,000 years ago wasn't that big of a deal.

 

Can you even read?

As of September 2015, the United States has a total of 4,571 warheads in its nuclear weapons stockpile, according to a State Department official. The United States has retired thousands of nuclear warheads that are removed from their delivery platform that are not included in this total, the official said, noting those warheads are not functional and are in a queue for dismantlement.

The "stockpile" refers to those still "unretired" When they are retired they are removed from their delivery platforms. Those 4500 unretired weapons in the "stockpile" are still mounted on their delivery systems.

Christ

 

Well with Trump and his current appointments in power we are very likely to have a real live test of if the world nukes can killed the human race.

We are just lucky to be living at the time when that question is likely to be settle one way or another.

 

And while an airburst produces "less" radioactive material than a surface burst , it is by no means not a serious danger

https://www.quora.com/Did-nuclear-w...s-the-bombs-dropped-on-Hiroshima-and-Nagasaki

The blast throws millions of tons of soil and blasted "stuff" up into there atmosphere and it get irradiated by that blast

This entire thread and subject is incredibly stupid

 

Here is his original post that you call stupid Lesh.

I do not believe you pointed out a single factual error. Therefore your claim it is stupid is flat wrong.

I have long studied the distance from epicenter nuclear bombs can destroy. Why did I do this? As a young man, then we got to see them live on TV as they exploded. Sure I had to get up early in the AM but it was worth getting up for. It led me to wonder why the world did not end when one of the bombs blew up. Later we were told by adults it would end the world. Even then it did not end the Atolls, nor did it end Nevada. A major H bomb could come very close to erasing an Atoll of the right size. But those are not enormous features as is the entire world.

If you call his post stupid, you call his link stupid. So what was stupid on any part of his post?

 

I did not read what you replied to but the way you treat me, I suspect you took the poster wrong.

And why do you suppose an airburst produces less radioactive material than a surface burst? Could it be that a bomb at surface level kicks up tons and tons of surface materials? And well above earth, there are gasses rather than your surface materials?

I wonder if you understand serious danger? If you burst an H bomb 93 million miles away is there no danger or how much?

 

We know EXACTLY what a nuclear warhead will do - we have the horror of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as exhibit A.

No, nuclear war might not end humanity, but it sure as hell would screw up your day. It gets a bit scary when NeoCons like Bolton start talking nuclear war as a serious possibility to deal with political disputes, just because negotiating is a difficult job.

 

Here is a US government study/book on the effects of nuclear weapons in details.

https://www.princeton.edu/~aglaser/lecture2007_weaponeffects.pdf

 

You know that the majority of people in both those cities survived don't you?

 

There are no "Tsar Bomba". It wasn't a useable weapon.

 

Bolton has no control over nukes.

 

If they are mounted on delivery systems then the U.S. is in violation of every arms control treaty in the last 30 years.

Wouldn't the Russians have made a big deal about this?

 

After reading your accurate link, and pondering it's wisdom, I see what you mean. We tend to not think in useful targets.

Is your local COSTCO store or the liquor store or the gas station useful targets?

Why waste nukes there? If you want to hurt a military, bomb the base. Bases ordinarily are not immense. They might not be tiny, but the dangerous part of the base is highly restricted and usually not enormous.

When I trained at Ft. Ord in CA, prior to it closing for good, we had an ammo dump. It was designed to try to prevent a lot of damage to the rest of the base. It was isolated for one thing. We had nukes at Schweinfurt Germany too but those were also isolated. They were also underground.

So if you want to win a war, damage the most vital things. If you later wish to take the area over, try to save as much as possible. Otherwise you just bought yourself a nuclear dump.

 

We do not have cities constructed as those were. We were scared out of our minds when we were children. Time for us to educate these younger people.

 

I'm not responsible for your posts here.

 

you're old and death is just a few years or months away.

I am only 41, Im not willing to throw my life away like you are

 

A time consuming process that couldn't possibly work in a large scale first strike launch detection scenario.

(sorry if duplicate, having internet issues)

 

I'm 50. Statistically I should live about 30 more years.

 

I am betting my life on this mans post. The alarmists believe man controls climate. I learned more than I had known prior upon reading first the OP in it's entirety then reading what Mircea is saying.

 

Now that I know you are younger than the bulk of my children, and just 9 years the senior to my youngest daughter, i am coming to grips with your anger.

Mircea and the OP go over accurate details of the way a nuclear war would work in real life. Not in movie life or in Democrats scare tactics, but the real world.

If you truly believe in mad men in control of the global weapons stockpiles, I wish you well since there is a clear case of paranoia going on.
Why destroy the entire world?
What do you have to come home to?

 

If you fear Trump, fear not. It is only a paranoia kicking in. I recall when democrats said this same thing when GW Bush was president. Nothing happened.