Re:The world has warmed 1.5 °C, according to 300-year-old sp...
by StopTheTechies on Monday February 05, 2024 @07:05PM
(#39268965)
I don't believe any of this is true—it certainly smells a lot like Cold War propaganda from the 50s. I don't believe we currently have anywhere near the nukes produced to have this happen even if we tried to perfectly cover the surface of the earth with nuclear explosions. To block out the sun we'd need something more like the volcanic winter of 536, continually erupting.
Nuclear war is bad, but it's certainly not "end life on earth" bad, or even "end humanity" bad by itself, just "deeply fracture humanity and probably enter a new era of civilization" bad.
Re:The world has warmed 1.5 °C, according to 300-year-old sp...
by rainbowzootsuit on Monday February 05, 2024 @07:34PM
(#39269228)
Aircraft contrails have a measurable effect on surface temperature so you might don't need as much as one might think.
https://globalnews.ca/news/2934513/empty-skies-after-911-set...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2021/01/11/bill-gate...
I'm sure he won't be a Mr. Burns trying to sell more power when reducing the effect of solar panels.
Re:The world has warmed 1.5 °C, according to 300-year-old sp...
by foobarian on Monday February 05, 2024 @07:09PM
(#39269008)
I don't buy this particular flavor of thermonuclear war scare tactics because the math doesn't add up. World's entire nuclear arsenal adds up to a couple of gigatons, while the Mt. Tambora eruption in the 19th century alone was estimated to release 30 gigatons equivalent of energy.
The havoc a nuclear war would wreak on civilization is already bad enough merely through destroying infrastructure.
Re:The world has warmed 1.5 °C, according to 300-year-old sp...
by ben_w on Monday February 05, 2024 @07:33PM
(#39269212)
The mere energy wasn't the fear; the fear was nuking cities in particular would create the kind of dust that would get stuck at high altitudes, and put it at those high altitudes.
I think this is… no longer a widely held fear. Though I don't know if that change is for good reasons or bad reasons.
Then you say small? But how can we have small nuclear war? The effects of any nuclear exchange will be seen throughout the world (not in geopolitical sense).