Nuclear Weapons ?

Be like Nutella · 08-09-2011 4:11am

Lab_Mouse wrote: »

here's a clip off youtube of all the nuclear bombs(recorded ones I might add) that have gone off.

notice how opposing countries get in a nuke race with each other,they are just testing them mind you:)

and listen with the sound off too:)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY

Thank you very much for that.

That is an extraordinary presentation. I will have to look into it for verification, if you'll excuse that, because it would have taken over 2050 specific coordinates tied obviously to dates and countries. I'm not sure if that's available on one site or whatever so fair play to whoever put that together, it wasnt easy although I'm sure some smart ass will tell me it was.

A great illustration of how intense the testing was. I wish I knew enough about radiation and fallout concerning the surface, subterranean, atmospheric and marine testing that was carried out by all concerned to get a better relative appreciation for how bad Chernobyl and Fukushima were/is.
All I know is that the next test in North Korea is being prepared as we speak. Sat pics have identified the site. In short,I wish the bush administration had not ****ed that up... there's no other way to say it. John Bolton on HardTalk last night implied he thought there was a good chance Iran and N Korea are somewhat in cahoots when it comes to developing the bomb... and given how many listen to his opinions, that scares the **** out of me... it sounds like he chose that platform to begin what may be rhetoric which will snowball towards the argument for Hard strikes on Busheyr and maybe N Korean nuclear sites... anyone who thinks that's extreme should watch the interview.... John Bolton is a deadly serious 'Bleed on the flag' hawk, an ultra realist who sees the future of America in terms of proactive unilateral interest focused direct foreign policy... and there is a faction in Washington, while not necessarily classic neo conservative, who completely agrees with his logic... which as it turns out is difficult to pin down, and hard to counter. Problem is, he's an extremely intelligent person... his logic seems good. I don't agree with his way of thinking but maybe I'm just... as he'd put it... 'a classic European Liberal '

Now off I go to verify that presentation... which in terms if how much I've studied this area... is nothing short of jaw dropping... I mean I knew there was Approx 2000 tests carried out... but nobody ever condensed all that data into such a visually striking product like that... I thought : )

Cheers again.

jill_valentine · 08-09-2011 4:34am

I confess I don't know a whole lot about John Bolton's politics, but after his astonishingly logic-free performance in the aftermath of the Norway attacks, I'll never give him the time of day again. The man's out of his mind.

Be like Nutella · 08-09-2011 5:41am

jill_valentine wrote: »

I confess I don't know a whole lot about John Bolton's politics, but after his astonishingly logic-free performance in the aftermath of the Norway attacks, I'll never give him the time of day again. The man's out of his mind.

He's very cryptic actually... I think he may in fact be a robot : ) a very smart hyper realist heartless patriotic to the death robot... (who literally pussied outa Vietnam on the grounds that 'I thought we'd already lost.. I didn't plan on dying in a paddy field in Asia').... a lot of support though... People like to stand behind him... like standing behind a tank in a battle... but he's always been far too cold for leadership... I'd say he kisses his wife once a year... on her birthday... on the cheek!

Sakur got a serious lesson last night... but Bolton showed his cards a little too much and he'll realise that when he watches it back... which to him will equal a tactical error... he'll probably whip himself with barbed wire.

Lab_Mouse · 08-09-2011 8:01am

Be like Nutella wrote: »

That is an extraordinary presentation. I will have to look into it for verification,.

Yeah Im not too sure how accurate it is and how he compiled it all.If its correct thats a hell of a lot of nukes that have gone off.Alot more than i would of thought anyway

Be like Nutella · 08-09-2011 3:23pm

Lab_Mouse wrote: »

Be like Nutella wrote: »

That is an extraordinary presentation. I will have to look into it for verification,.

Yeah Im not too sure how accurate it is and how he compiled it all.If its correct thats a hell of a lot of nukes that have gone off.Alot more than i would of thought anyway

The US detonated 928 tests in Nevada 65 miles north west of Las Vegas in an area the size of Cork. 90% of their tests were carried out here.

North of Lake Balkash in Kazakhstan in an area the size of Wales this is where Russia detonated 456 of their 700+ tests. About 60% of their tests.

That's 1384 tests in two location.

The 2053 figure is actually correct... what's impressive is how the Japanese artist was able to pin point locate each test detonation and date it... I emailed him to see where he got his data... and also to compliment his presentation.

muppeteer · 08-09-2011 7:49pm

Many moons ago I read about what kind of effects a nuclear exchange would have on the wider world(where I can't remember, also many moons ago so my figures could be off slightly)

The jist of it was that with tactical battlefield nukes, countries can throw at each other all day with mostly local effects. Even the bigger thermonuclear devices only produce local/regional effects.
But the big problems came when the thermonuclear weapons were detonated over cities. Apparently the fires that would be started would fuel a huge updraft of fallout/dust/smoke that would be carried into the upper atmosphere where it gets spread out over vast distances and also takes years to come down again. I think as little as 50 cities going bang could produce the global nuclear winter scinario.

So it may not just take the big two, US and Russia, going at each other to screw things up for everyone. Maybe even just Pakistan and India.

Be like Nutella · 09-09-2011 7:07pm

That's actually quite interesting.. and the heat from the fires reflecting off the cement of cities into one giant updraft..... I'd like to see the physics or atmospherics or whatever you call it which explains why the dust would rise up into the higher atmosphere...and therefore spread over such a wide area because it takes so long to come back down...apart from the original mushroom cloud which can rise 20,000 feet or more. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are probably bad examples to study because the roads were probably not paved and the buildings were probably mostly not concrete and rebar like modern cities... The Nuclear winter theory is interesting as well.... The meteor which is theorised to have caused the end of the Dinosaurs did this didn't it?....sent such a huige amount of dust intot eh upper atmospphere as to lower world temperatures and cause a mini-ice age if I'm nt mistaken?

Whether 50 2-3 Megaton Nukes hitting concrete cities in two countries could cause a similar effect I'm not sure obviously...I'd need to study some of the thresholds involved in this kinda thing... if somebody said 200 or 300 nukes then I'd be more inclined to agree that such an amount of dust spreading through the stratosphere could really mess things up...

Anyway apparently nobody will use nukes because of the M.A.D. theory...yeah right.... I don't go along with that...and either did Henry Kissinger.

Be like Nutella · 10-09-2011 5:21pm

Lab_Mouse wrote: »

Be like Nutella wrote: »

That is an extraordinary presentation. I will have to look into it for verification,.

Yeah Im not too sure how accurate it is and how he compiled it all.If its correct thats a hell of a lot of nukes that have gone off.Alot more than i would of thought anyway

I asked that artist where he got the data.

Here's his email

Dear Phil,

Thank you for your mail.
I have made the piece on the data of SIPRI, Swedish peace institute.
If you google the homepage of SIPRI, i think you can find it,

Best
Isao

krissovo · 11-09-2011 6:30pm

In my first German posting as a combat engineer we supported 50 Missile Regiment RA who were based in Minden. These lads had tracked vehicles that carried Lance Nukes on the back and were fecking ugly things.

Our crash position for the crew of our AVRE come war with Russia was a large hardware store car park. We would have then had to drive through the store front and remove part of the roof for the Lance missile to exit.

Another part of our routine at the time was guarding the Nukes, that was called "site guard". Impressive place with motion sensors and towers every 100 meters.

Anyway Nukes always scared the crap out of me, the training we had at the time was poor to be fair but the movies they made us watch made us realize we had no chance at all. I mean we were trained to brush nuclear fallout from our chemical suits with ferns as if that would help:eek:

Maybe_Memories · 12-09-2011 12:34am

To be honest, technology is advancing every day. And in maybe a hundred years or so nukes will seem like fireworks in comparison to the weapons we'll have.
We have created anti-matter, and have the tech to make an anti-matter powered air/space craft, it just costs WAY too much to actually make enough of the stuff. Give it 50 years or so, we'll probably be able to make anti-matter weapons, and they'll be a hell of a lot more devastating than nukes.

Also, and I swear I'm not taking the piss when I say this, but Stephen Hawking is always going on about hostile creatures invading our planet, and in the event that did ever happen, nukes might be our only hope of survival. Granted they'ed do SFA do something capable of near faster than light travel, but better than nothing!

Be like Nutella · 16-09-2011 5:47pm

I don't think scientists predict anti-matter weapons will be around in 50 years time and I reckon the risks involved in nuclear weapons outweigh the possibility of fighting aliens...let alone as you say...aliens capable of interstellar travel.

But you bring up a good point...what weapons are predicted over say the next 50 years?

Nuclear Subs, Raptors and UAV's are probably the most advanced weapons today.

goldie fish · 16-09-2011 9:09pm

Be like Nutella wrote: »

I don't think scientists predict anti-matter weapons will be around in 50 years time and I reckon the risks involved in nuclear weapons outweigh the possibility of fighting aliens...let alone as you say...aliens capable of interstellar travel.

But you bring up a good point...what weapons are predicted over say the next 50 years?

Nuclear Subs, Raptors and UAV's are probably the most advanced weapons today.

I think einstein said he did not know what weapons would be used to fight the next world war, but sticks and stones would be used to fight the war after that.

Nuclear Weapons ?

Comments