[QUOTE=Shakma;49177204]Nuke nukes[/QUOTE]
Well that's what First strike capability is in a nutshell
[QUOTE=Novangel;49176605][media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug-DJtvHFE0[/media]
This is also a good watch[/QUOTE]
The facts are really good, but the message falls way short I feel. We live in an age of relative global peace(even though it may not look like it). MAD has ensured the world super powers stay out of any large scale conflicts and keep to low-key proxy wars, less deaths overall. I'd be wary of a world devoid of nukes as much as I'd be wary if another cold war kicked up.
[QUOTE=matt000024;49176555]yeah, but the content imo is kind of crappy and lacking. he said that people get radiation sickness, but then failed to go into detail what it means. it felt like he didn't even complete the video. he goes "who knows how long you would have to stay in" and then it seems was too lazy to actually do any research about estimates.[/QUOTE]
"Who knows how long you would have to stay in" your shelter? I'm not sure, but I would say indefinitely if your surrounding area is badly enough hit, because there is nuclear fallout scattered simply everywhere. Irradiated rubble that no one could possibly clean up.
If you want to know how much radiation you need to take in one standing, to die in the same day or even in the same hours, the amount of radiation you would need is off the charts, but not completely implausible.
For example in Chernobyl, in the vicinity of the reactor core, you would receive a fatal dose of radiation in only one minute. However, that fatal dose isn't going to kill you in one minute, rather in like one month or weeks after the fact. (Minus modern medicine&treatments which might help?)
Now, if you were to stay near a blown up reactor core like the one in Chernobyl for more than one minute, receiving around 300,000 mSv of radiation per minute, then I'm not sure how fast it could potentially kill you, because no one has ever been exposed to so much radiation and so fast, but it would take many hours, if not a full day showering in extreme radiation. (The first-response firefighters at Chernobyl all died within a month.)
Here's a pretty good related [URL="http://chernobylgallery.com/chernobyl-disaster/radiation-levels/"]website[/URL], it's not a nuclear bomb blast, but the [I]ionizing[/I] radiation destroys our cells all the same.
[QUOTE=matt000024;49176555]yeah, but the content imo is kind of crappy and lacking. he said that people get radiation sickness, but then failed to go into detail what it means. it felt like he didn't even complete the video. he goes "who knows how long you would have to stay in" and then it seems was too lazy to actually do any research about estimates.[/QUOTE]
It was super sponsored content extreme, all the time and effort went into the set.
[QUOTE=SuperDuperScoot;49175619]So am I. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base.
Close enough that if it gets nuked, I would see the flash and not really even have time to shit myself before I'd get vaporized.
So I guess no, I wouldn't be able to survive a fallout :v:[/QUOTE]
Oh hey, I just did a lunch delivery right next to there today :v:
We're both goners.
[editline]24th November 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Jake Nukem;49177684]The facts are really good, but the message falls way short I feel. We live in an age of relative global peace(even though it may not look like it). MAD has ensured the world super powers stay out of any large scale conflicts and keep to low-key proxy wars, less deaths overall. I'd be wary of a world devoid of nukes as much as I'd be wary if another cold war kicked up.[/QUOTE]
I think you kind of miss the point
He mentions that the most likely cause of global nuclear war isn't intentional breaking of peace, but accidents that cause people to think they are under attack.
And that was just the worst case scenario. The most likely scenario is the first example given, where two 2nd/3rd world countries engage in nuclear war via old/shitty bombs on the scale of hiroshima. Even in this situation, the global impact is huge.
Considering what people like ISIS are willing to do, and how unstable the middle east is, quite frankly nuclear proliferation is a huge risk still. Even if it isn't likely that the US and Russia will just start a nuclear war out of the blue (even if we were at active war), there are still huge risks we hold by having these bombs and the generalize risk of nuclear proliferation around the world. Though admittatly, there isn't much we could do to stop something like ISIS from getting nukes.
Whoa, so Vinny from Vinesauce really is Vsauce. :v:
That was very well done!
I can't imagine how I would react to nuclear destruction of my country.
On one hand I would want to survive, but at the same time is life really worth living at that point? I would hate to spend the rest of my life cowering underground.
i know this is nitpicking but 1 minute in and "nuke-u-lar"
[QUOTE=Penguiin;49179237]i know this is nitpicking but 1 minute in and "nuke-u-lar"[/QUOTE]
Believe it or not people pronounce it like that.
Including a certain Commander-In-Chief Shoe-Dodger.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
