butch@drutx.UUCP (FreemanS) (12/13/84)
Except for fools and madmen, everyone knows that nuclear war would
be a human catastrophe unknown in the entire hisory of mankind. The
main problem with this issue is that no one understands the
seriousness of it. In a 2-megaton explosion over a fairly large
city buildingswould be vaporized, people vaporized, outlying
structures blown away, to say nothing of the fires that would spread
uncontrolled. If a bomb was exploded on the ground, an enormous
crater like those on the moon would be seen. There are more than
50,000 nuclear weapons with a 13,000 megaton yield in the arsenals
of the U.S.A and the U.S.S.R, no to mention other nuclear powers.
There are enough weapons to oblitheate a million hiroshimas. With
only 3000 cities on earth with a population of 100,000 or more this
is a tremendous overkill. Even if all the missles do not get off
the ground, just 20% would be enough to destroy every major city.
Some people think that a nuclear war could be contained, but a
number of detailed war games run by the D.O.D and the Soviets
indicate that a containment is more than could be hoped for.
The world health organization in a recent study run by Sune K.
Bergstrom (1982 Nobel Laureate) concludes that 1.1 billion people
would be killed outright in such a nuclear war, mainly in the
U.S.,U.S.S.R, Europe, China, and Japan. An additional 1.1 billion
people would suffer serious injuries and radiation sickness, for
which medical help would be unavailable. So it is possible that 2
billion people would be killed immeadiately following a nuclear
war.
In the bravo test in March 1954 a 15-megaton explosion over bikini
atoll had double the yield expected and with a last minuste shift in
wind radioactive fallout fell over Ronegelap mre than 200 miles
away. Almost all the children developed longterm medical problems
such as thyroid nodules and lesions due to radioactive fallout. In
1973 it was discovered that high yield air bursts will chemically
burn the nitrogen in the upper air, converting it into oxides of nitrogen
wich will destroy the protective ozone layer. This layer protects
the earth from deadly UV radiation. The Mariner 9 spacecarft which
orbited Mars in 1971 arrived when the planet was enveloped in a
global dust storm and the temperature changes were recorded. What
was analyzed was that the Mars temperature recorded was actuallyonly
a few percent of normal. Studies made of an allout nuclear war
indicated that except for narrow strips of coastline temperatures
dropped to minus 25 degrees celsius (minus 13 fahrenheit) and stayed
that way for months. The oceans a tremendous heat resevoir would'nt
freeze and a ice age woudn't be triggered, but virtually all crops
and farm animals would die. Also varieties of unculivated and
undomesticated food supplies would be wiped out and the human
survivors would starve. This would make the starvation in Ethiopia
look like a picnic. If the subsequnet radiation fallout didn't kill
you then the the solar ultraviolet flux due to the
greatly reduced ozone layer might get you. Immunity to
disease would decline. Epidemics and pandemics would be rampant,
especially after a billion or so unburied bodies began to thaw.
This would make the plague look like the flu.
So you can see that nuclear war is a horror that only fools think
can be survived by alarge proportion of mankind. Many scientists
think that a such a srain on the environment would cause mankind to
cease to exist and become just a dim dim memory.
S. Freeman
"Into the eternal darkness, into fire, into ice."
-Dante, The Infernorohn@randvax.UUCP (Laurinda Rohn) (12/14/84)
> from S. Freeman > ... > So you can see that nuclear war is a horror that only fools think > can be survived by alarge proportion of mankind. Many scientists > think that a such a srain on the environment would cause mankind to > cease to exist and become just a dim dim memory. One of the major problems is that there is so much we don't know about the non-biological effects of nuclear weapons. There has been a lot published on the biological effects of radiation from studies in Japan, Nevada/Utah, and the Pacific atolls. But to a large extent, scientists can only guess at many other things. Such studies as the TTAPS Nuclear Winter study are useful in that they point out things that scientists might not have thought of before. Without doing lots of testing, which is an attrocious idea, it is virtually impossible to know what kind of things will happen to the environment. I don't think that anyone would argue that things would get better. The effects would definitely be adverse. But how adverse? Would NW really occur? If so, would it be gradual, or is there a critical exploded megatonnage which, when passed, would plunge us into NW? No one really knows for sure. Hopefully, they never will. > Some people think that a nuclear war could be contained, but a > number of detailed war games run by the D.O.D and the Soviets > indicate that a containment is more than could be hoped for. There are problems with simulated war games. If joint war games were held with NATO playing the NATO side and the Warsaw Pact playing the Warsaw Pact side, the chances are that neither side would perform as they really would in a war because they wouldn't want to let the other side know their tactics, secrets, etc. Most war games here are played with the US playing both sides. These obviously may not mirror reality. The way the US plays the Soviets is based on its understanding of their tactics and on its estimation of what the USSR would do under certain cir- cumstances. These estimations may be totally wrong, partially wrong, or entirely correct. There's really no way to tell. The results might therefore be inaccurate. In most of the war games that I've heard about, both sides have been very, VERY reluctant to use nuclear weapons, and when they have used them, have done so at a minimum level and have stopped as soon as possible. I find this encouraging. Lauri rohn@rand-unix.ARPA ..decvax!randvax!rohn "You can't push on a rope." NOTE: The opinions expressed above are not necessarily those of the Rand Corporation or of the author, for that matter.
matthews@harvard.ARPA (Jim Matthews) (12/16/84)
> Except for fools and madmen, everyone knows that nuclear war would > be a human catastrophe unknown in the entire hisory of mankind. > There are more than > 50,000 nuclear weapons with a 13,000 megaton yield in the arsenals > of the U.S.A and the U.S.S.R, no to mention other nuclear powers. > There are enough weapons to oblitheate a million hiroshimas. True, but nearly irrelevant. Most of the nuclear weapons in this world are of a tactical nature -- we use nukes for everything from torpedo warheads to land mines. The vast majority would not be used in a nuclear war, for lack of time, delivery systems, or because they were destroyed in an initial exchange. Barring a planned, massive attack, I doubt that more than a couple thousand warheads would go off (like the entire Minuteman arsenal). > So you can see that nuclear war is a horror that only fools think > can be survived by alarge proportion of mankind. Many scientists > think that a such a srain on the environment would cause mankind to > cease to exist and become just a dim dim memory. > > S. Freeman > > "Into the eternal darkness, into fire, into ice." > -Dante, The Inferno So what's a large proportion? The southern hemisphere will get off pretty easy -- a year of crop failure and famine, high rates of disease, the world economy destroyed and political conflict rife -- all in all, not much different from post-plague Europe. There won't be life in Kansas for a while, but the natives of South America, Australia, etc. *will* survive. As for your "Many scientists," I would ask them this: how will nuclear war kill the dictator of Indonesia? The nuclear winter? He's got a lot of oil, and there's enough food in Jakarta's grocery stores to last him a while. Remember, he's got a the standard police-state army to make sure that the urban mobs don't keep him from necessary resources. The destruction of the ozone? All the dust that's keeping the sun from coming out will also keep ultra-violet rays from frying his highness's skin. Besides, most studies show that the effect would be short-lived in the Southern Hemisphere, esp. when the destruction of ozone-damaging industry is considered. Plagues will be a problem, but the corpses of North America are far away, and medicine has advanced since 1348, especially for people like this dictator who can pay for the best. So how is nuclear war going to keep this man from re-populating the planet? James Matthews matthews@harvard