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

Nuclear Test Films Declassified and Uploaded

paleofuture.gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–89 of 89 posts

Re: Nuclear Test Films Declassified and Uploaded

#81

Post by digi_owl »

mysterypie wrote: post #60
quicklime wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more than just for the average westerner, but also for the average human, isn't it? According to this, the absolute number of war-related deaths around the world has been decreasing for decades now. This is especially amazing since we've been experiencing a massive population increase since WW1. https://ourworldindata.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Wars-L...

That's a fascinating chart. Yes, it shows that war deaths have been decreasing for decades, but it contradicts that great-grandparent's claim that "life for the average human today is more peaceful than at any point in recorded history". Looking at the red line, it seems that there have been many peaks and valleys in the last 600 years. We're in a local valley (more peaceful period) right now, but it doesn't suggest…

Also, deaths alone do not give the whole picture.

Sure, maybe fewer die. But what about the number of people displaced by war? And what about those that survive but are missing limbs etc?

Re: Nuclear Test Films Declassified and Uploaded

#82

Post by Houshalter »

mikeash wrote: post #79
Houshalter wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think of it in terms of probability per year. The fact that we haven't had a nuclear war yet suggests that this probability isn't super high. This is super misleading reasoning because of anthropic bias. There are many possible Earths. On all the ones were nuclear war happened, we wouldn't be here to observe it. You can only ever observe the "surprising" result that you continue to exist. So you can't use it as ev…

Nuclear war wouldn’t wipe out humanity. We, for dome value of “we,” would be around to talk about how it happened.

I doubt most of the people here would be alive and the population would be significantly reduced.

Re: Nuclear Test Films Declassified and Uploaded

#83

Post by Houshalter »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #70
mikeash wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't live through the drills, but they were pretty smart. The popular scorn towards "duck and cover" is completely undeserved. Those drills would have saved a lot of lives if war had actually broken out. The popular misconception of nuclear weapons is that there's a zone of total destruction and that's about it, but in reality there are huge areas where buildings would collapse or windows would shatter but people…

Which is very useful, but doesn't solve the problem that those people will almost certainly die of radiation exposure from fallout 2-4 weeks later, unless they get to a shelter within 15 minutes or so, and stay there for 2-4 weeks, at a minimum, without running out of supplies or going mad. Or that they'll die of starvation and disease 2-4 months later. Or of the effects of nuclear winter 2 to 4 years later. Or that…

First of all, "duck and cover" is from the 1950s. Before ICBMs existed, and before there were as many bombs as later on.

>those people will almost certainly die of radiation exposure from fallout 2-4 weeks later, unless they get to a shelter within 15 minutes or so, and stay there for 2-4 weeks, at a minimum, without running out of supplies or going mad.

Many people survived at Hiroshima. Not everyone is downwind of fallout. Even if you are, many of the projections I've seen show many expected survivors.

>Or that they'll die of starvation and disease 2-4 months later.

We wouldn't run out of food anywhere near that quickly. The US has vast supplies of stored food and unslaughtered animals. And radiation doesn't create disease.

>Or of the effects of nuclear winter 2 to 4 years later.

Nuclear winter has been greatly exaggerated. AT worst the growing season would be reduced and it would get a bit colder.

Re: Nuclear Test Films Declassified and Uploaded

#84

Post by Houshalter »

trhway wrote: post #77
Houshalter wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So? What's the worse that can happen? Some cities slowly get flooded and some storms become more frequent? The worst case of nuclear war is all cities get destroyed and humanity is sent back to the stone age. They aren't even comparable.

Roman Empire closed shop when grain production in Mediterranean basin became no more due to the warming up of the climate. At the same time the rest of Europe warmed up and dried up a bit so it stopped being a cold swamp, and it allowed for the European civilization to get started. During the peak of heat 1000 years ago the Mediterranean basin belonged to Caliphates - the world leading, at the time, in many respects…

Your theories on the rise and fall of civilizations is pretty speculative. I've heard dozens of theories of why Rome fell. Everyone and their brother has a pet theory.

But even if you are right, it's irrelevant. Yeah, ancient civilizations were sensitive to famines and climate. We are way past that. Some of our biggest cities are in regions that were near uninhabitable before air conditioning or insecticides. Our modern irrigiation technology give us the ability to grow crops in areas that used to be desolate. We produce several times more food than we actually need. If the absolute worst case scenarios of climate change happened, our civilization would easily continue.

Re: Nuclear Test Films Declassified and Uploaded

#85

Post by mikeash »

Houshalter wrote: post #82
mikeash wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear war wouldn’t wipe out humanity. We, for dome value of “we,” would be around to talk about how it happened.

I doubt most of the people here would be alive and the population would be significantly reduced.

Can we really apply the anthropic principle so narrowly? Are we to conclude that my risk of death when crossing the street could be really high, and I can’t tell anything from the fact that it hasn’t happened because I wouldn’t be around to think about it if it had?

Re: Nuclear Test Films Declassified and Uploaded

#86

Post by Houshalter »

mikeash wrote: post #85
Houshalter wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt most of the people here would be alive and the population would be significantly reduced.

Can we really apply the anthropic principle so narrowly? Are we to conclude that my risk of death when crossing the street could be really high, and I can’t tell anything from the fact that it hasn’t happened because I wouldn’t be around to think about it if it had?

You can look at how often other people are hit by cars. You can also look at "close calls" where you were almost hit but miraculously saved.

But if you have personally walked into traffic without looking hundreds of times, I'd think you are just lucky. And that using your survival as a single data point is just survivorship bias.

Re: Nuclear Test Films Declassified and Uploaded

#87

Post by trhway »

Houshalter wrote: post #84
trhway wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Roman Empire closed shop when grain production in Mediterranean basin became no more due to the warming up of the climate. At the same time the rest of Europe warmed up and dried up a bit so it stopped being a cold swamp, and it allowed for the European civilization to get started. During the peak of heat 1000 years ago the Mediterranean basin belonged to Caliphates - the world leading, at the time, in many respects…

Your theories on the rise and fall of civilizations is pretty speculative. I've heard dozens of theories of why Rome fell. Everyone and their brother has a pet theory. But even if you are right, it's irrelevant. Yeah, ancient civilizations were sensitive to famines and climate. We are way past that. Some of our biggest cities are in regions that were near uninhabitable before air conditioning or insecticides. Our mod…

> it's irrelevant. Yeah, ancient civilizations were sensitive to famines and climate. We are way past that. Some of our biggest cities are in regions that were near uninhabitable before air conditioning or insecticides. Our modern irrigiation technology give us the ability to grow crops in areas that used to be desolate. We produce several times more food than we actually need. If the absolute worst case scenarios of climate change happened, our civilization would easily continue. Our modern irrigiation technology give us the ability to grow crops in areas that used to be desolate. We produce several times more food than we actually need. If the absolute worst case scenarios of climate change happened, our civilization would easily continue.

tell those triumphal words of our civilization glory to the 800M people today who is officially live in hunger. Or to the next couple of billions who will quickly find themselves deep in the extreme poverty/hunger if economy gets noticeably worse, food price increase and/or some shortage of food/water/etc. happens.

I suppose that you, like me, is in the top 5-10% of the global Pareto distribution of our civilization goodies, and even if there are severe food/water/energy/etc. shortage and/or food prices increase even 10 times, we'd still not be going to bed hungry even though we'd possibly have to give up some of the less necessary things. So from our point of view "civilization would easily continue". Not so to the majority of the world population though.

Re: Nuclear Test Films Declassified and Uploaded

#88

Post by Houshalter »

trhway wrote: post #87
Houshalter wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your theories on the rise and fall of civilizations is pretty speculative. I've heard dozens of theories of why Rome fell. Everyone and their brother has a pet theory. But even if you are right, it's irrelevant. Yeah, ancient civilizations were sensitive to famines and climate. We are way past that. Some of our biggest cities are in regions that were near uninhabitable before air conditioning or insecticides. Our mod…

> it's irrelevant. Yeah, ancient civilizations were sensitive to famines and climate. We are way past that. Some of our biggest cities are in regions that were near uninhabitable before air conditioning or insecticides. Our modern irrigiation technology give us the ability to grow crops in areas that used to be desolate. We produce several times more food than we actually need. If the absolute worst case scenarios of…

First of all, you are arguing against a straw man. I never said "climate change wouldn't be bad". I said it wouldn't be anywhere near as bad as a full nuclear war. You can't even compare the two.

Anyway I'm sick of this meme that we should care about everything that happens to the third world. Look at Africa. Their population is growing exponentially. It's already far above of any reasonably sustainable size. And their economy is actually deindustrializing. They are going to suffer no matter what happens. Climate change is the least of their problems. And there is nothing we can do the help them.

Re: Nuclear Test Films Declassified and Uploaded

#89

Post by trhway »

Houshalter wrote: post #88
trhway wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's irrelevant. Yeah, ancient civilizations were sensitive to famines and climate. We are way past that. Some of our biggest cities are in regions that were near uninhabitable before air conditioning or insecticides. Our modern irrigiation technology give us the ability to grow crops in areas that used to be desolate. We produce several times more food than we actually need. If the absolute worst case scenarios of…

First of all, you are arguing against a straw man. I never said "climate change wouldn't be bad". I said it wouldn't be anywhere near as bad as a full nuclear war. You can't even compare the two. Anyway I'm sick of this meme that we should care about everything that happens to the third world. Look at Africa. Their population is growing exponentially. It's already far above of any reasonably sustainable size. And the…

>First of all, you are arguing against a straw man. I never said "climate change wouldn't be bad". I said it wouldn't be anywhere near as bad as a full nuclear war. You can't even compare the two.

my point is that nuclear war is a straw man while climate change presents clear and imminent planet-scale danger to our civilization.

>Anyway I'm sick of this meme that we should care about everything that happens to the third world.

Well, beside that caring about weak and less fortunate is our normal human trait, we brought the climate change upon the whole planet, so we should bear at least some responsibility. Anyway, hunger and poverty isn't limited to the third world - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_in_the_United_States

"Research from the USDA found that 14.9% of American households were food insecure during at least some of 2011, with 5.7% suffering from very low food security.[3] Journalists and charity workers have reported further increased demand for emergency food aid during 2012 and 2013."

>Look at Africa. Their population is growing exponentially. It's already far above of any reasonably sustainable size.

Africa is big and with a lot of resources. It can sustain much bigger population.

>And their economy is actually deindustrializing.

there is a bunch of very different countries with very different population, economy, society. Some countries have recently or currently have civil wars and as result are in chaos. The same is Syria which was pretty highly developed country just 7 years ago.

>Climate change is the least of their problems.

it is one of the major causes of the current (Arab Spring) and future civil (and may be between states) wars which would wreak havoc upon the involved countries/societies.

Post reply on HN