Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

abiggersociety.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–48 of 48 posts

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#41

Post by ddebernardy »

colechristensen wrote: post #34
ddebernardy wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be curious know how you'll revisit your opinion of "weapons of peace" when a nuclear nation is on the receiving end of a nuclear storm sent by some religious nut job.

I was referring to exactly this sort of FUD. If there are conflicts between the nations and cultures of the world, the casualties can rest no blame on technologies or weapons, but on the ignorant attitudes and behaviors of people. 'nuclear storm' and 'religious nut job' are meaningless phrases designed to illicit fear and agreement with your viewpoint, not legitimate arguments.

Err? Did I miss something, or has the US actually been waging a war against terrorists for the past 12 years, where "terrorist" is euphemism for "extremist muslim nut job"?

As for nuclear storm, it's hardly meaningless FUD phrase. It's a tactic that basically stands for: "flatten the area". It's tried and tested, too. Think Dresden.

Else yeah. It depends on ignorant attitudes and behaviors. Of which one people in particular (the US) seems to have plenty.

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#42

Post by eshvk »

dedward wrote: post #33
bluedino wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been 50 years since the US did a non-underground test. What do you think we use all these supercomputers for? Nuclear testing.

Yup. The test partial test ban treaty was signed in 1963 by all the nuclear powers at the time - everything after then, US or otherwise, has been underground, with the exception of, I believe, India, who was not a nuclear power when the treaty was drawn up - india set of a series of undersea tests late in the century. This was done specifically because they realized they would collectively make the planet uninhabitab…

> india set of a series of undersea tests late in the century.

underground. [1] [2]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pokhran-II

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smiling_Buddha

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#43

Post by mikeash »

skaevola wrote: post #39
mikeash wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the guy you're replying to, but I've seen a lot of misconceptions that make them seem much worse than they are (although they are still quite terrible). Common myth: any nuclear explosion causes total destruction for miles in every direction. Because of this, old drills like "duck and cover" were foolishness at best and cold-blooded ways to placate the populace at worse. Fact: the area of total destruction is…

Can you cite sources for these claims? I've found it's very hard to find good scientific sources for the effects, but all of the research I've done on the topic suggests that you are grossly underestimating the effects. Here is an example: http://www.amazon.com/Earth-Abolition-Stanford-Nuclear-Serie... And here is another terrifying account of the effects of a nuclear explosion: http://www.animatedsoftware.com/enviro…

I'm not sure what your first link says, but the other two generally seem to agree with me. The second one gets EMP wrong, as everyone does, but Wikipedia covers it well enough:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_electromagnetic_pulse

I'm rather confused as to why you think that map suggests that I'm grossly underestimating the effects. It lines up perfectly. For example, select a Topol and put it over downtown Manhattan. You see that the fireball covers a few blocks, the death-by-radiation zone covers most of downtown, as does the destroy-all-buildings zone, the destroy-residential-buildings zone reaches up to Central Park, parts of Brooklyn, and into New Jersey, and severe burns for exposed people and random fires started by the flash goes out to most of Manhattan, much of Brooklyn, and big chunks of New Jersey. The zone in which "duck and cover" would save lives (outside the death-by-radiation area, inside the death-by-collapsing-residential-buildings-and-flying-glass area) covers almost 100km^2 and probably a couple of million people.

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#44

Post by mikeash »

ddebernardy wrote: post #36
mikeash wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bigger nukes increase the area of total destruction but they also increase the area of partial destruction. Furthermore, the area of total destruction is still not going to be big enough to cover an entire metropolitan area unless you're talking about something along the lines of Tsar Bomba. The point remains that civil defense procedures like "duck and cover" would save many lives.

As would "run for underground shelters", admittedly. But then you're assuming reasonable and conscious plebes. Personally, I'd readily picture rednecks going "Meh, they won't finance these shelters on my dime lest it turn into yet another .gov fiasco, and I wouldn't budge anyway because .gov is just scaremongering us into living in rabit holes! I'm ME and I'm invincible. [Roar!]" Plus, your story doesn't say if whoev…

I'm not sure I understand your point here. It doesn't take a whole lot of reasonableness to take cover when you know you're about to be hit by a massive blast wave. As for digging out, many of the survivors will just be able to climb out from the rubble. Escaping death by fallout then becomes interesting for many, but that won't affect many others.

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#45

Post by droopybuns »

Edmond wrote: post #28
vezzy-fnord wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In addition, a lot of people have completely warped, fantastical and exaggerated perceptions of how powerful nuclear weapons are.

You are clearly someone who has never even been mugged much less dealt with war and violence in any real sense. Your post reflects an incredible naivety about what true death and destruction means. A weapon doesn't have to be able to break the planet apart in order for it to be terrifying. Sure, maybe media depictions of nuclear weapons are sensational, but that is hardly a reason to doubt their destructive power.

You are clearly the type of person who describes the ignorance of another person as a way to obviate all meaningful dialog.

Your tactic is so terrible that it renders your argument idle. Seriously, your brain is running, but you are moving no newtons. Please reevaluate your attempt at discussion.

I think you might have an interesting point somewhere in there, but your opening gambit is a shart. Nobody want to stick around for it when you open up insulting everyone who disagrees with you.

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#46

Post by windexh8er »

hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #31
sehugg wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory, yes, MAD and Nash Equilibrium and all that. In practice, people and government are irrational and make mistakes (most notably in 1983 when we almost destroyed the world due to a false alarm) -- and the cost of policing this theoretical balance of power costs a hell of a lot of resources that could be better spent doing more productive things.

> and the cost of policing this theoretical balance of power costs a hell of a lot of resources that could be better spent doing more productive things. I don't think there's more productive use of resources than maintaining peace between big nations.

It's not productive if it's a facade. The reality is that a nation-state will eventually go for broke and play the card. Just a matter of time and, as stated, irrational players.

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#47

Post by peterashford »

colechristensen wrote: post #10

I, for one, am not deeply unsettled by nuclear weapons. As weapons of peace, they have made war a strongly negative sum game between advanced nations. The only way to win is not to play. The drawback of nuclear weapons isn't the actual threat or consequences of war, but using the nature of the game by a government to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt amongst its own people to consolidate power. That, in itself, is…

You only need one mistake or rogue agent and nukes don't look so pretty

Re: A Deeply Unsettling Time Lapse Of Every Nuclear Explosion On Earth

#48

Post by Houshalter »

ddebernardy wrote: post #23
colechristensen wrote: post #10

I, for one, am not deeply unsettled by nuclear weapons. As weapons of peace, they have made war a strongly negative sum game between advanced nations. The only way to win is not to play. The drawback of nuclear weapons isn't the actual threat or consequences of war, but using the nature of the game by a government to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt amongst its own people to consolidate power. That, in itself, is…

I'd be curious know how you'll revisit your opinion of "weapons of peace" when a nuclear nation is on the receiving end of a nuclear storm sent by some religious nut job.

The point is that it hasn't happened and probably never will. No nuclear armed country has ever been invaded. Despite all predictions to the contrary, there was never a World War III and it doesn't seem like there ever will be.
Post reply on HN