Re:Crater under Greenland points to climate-altering impact ...
by JdeBP on Thursday November 15, 2018 @07:56AM
(#18458867)
The use of "nuclear" unnecessarily makes this a two-step relationship, too: an equivalence to the energy of a nuclear explosion that is itself being equated to a TNT explosion.
"The resulting explosion packed the energy of a 700-megaton bomb"
Re:Crater under Greenland points to climate-altering impact ...
by jon_richards on Thursday November 15, 2018 @07:38AM
(#18458751)
Most people don't realize how variable a nuclear bomb is, so they want a soundbite that makes people think "a lot of nuclear bombs".
For context, nukes range from about .000001 to 50 megatons. If you combine all the nukes ever detonated, I don't think it would top 700 megatons.
Re:Crater under Greenland points to climate-altering impact ...
by arethuza on Thursday November 15, 2018 @07:48AM
(#18458813)
Total appears to be 635 megatons - 545 Mt atmospheric and 90 underground Mt. Quite a bit more than I would have expected!
Re:Crater under Greenland points to climate-altering impact ...
by mabbo on Thursday November 15, 2018 @08:54AM
(#18459208)
As a species, we really enjoy blowing things up.
Re:Crater under Greenland points to climate-altering impact ...
by thanosnose on Thursday November 15, 2018 @10:00AM
(#18459706)
It's a bit unfair to blame the entire species when 2 countries are responsible for most of the nuclear tests.
Re:Crater under Greenland points to climate-altering impact ...
by marssaxman on Thursday November 15, 2018 @05:35PM
(#18464122)
I have never been responsible for a nuclear test, but as a member of the human species, I can confirm that I really enjoy blowing things up.
Re:Crater under Greenland points to climate-altering impact ...
by strictnein on Thursday November 15, 2018 @10:12AM
(#18459821)
How weird that countries that develop a new technology would test it far more than others who simply copied their work...
Re:Crater under Greenland points to climate-altering impact ...
by russh on Thursday November 15, 2018 @05:14PM
(#18463968)
Because it was not 1 nuclears, but 700 nuclears! 700 nuclears AT ONCE!
Re:Crater under Greenland points to climate-altering impact ...
by dboreham on Thursday November 15, 2018 @07:31AM
(#18458705)
Readers are likely much more familiar with the destructive power of a 1MT detonation (e.g. they can go watch one set off on YouTube). Nobody alive has seen a 700MT explosion.
While not strictly on-topic, this wording is just weird, what's wrong with simply "700-megaton"?