nuclear war

[Sekwo]

(20 July 2023, 14:39)bigpaul Wrote: Britain is too small an island to survive an all out nuclear attack, it would not take many missiles to cover the whole of the UK.
there is a list online of the well known targets, and nuclear winter will finish off anyone who survives outside of those blast zones.

Personally, I've encountered the types of people who were talking about a nuclear winter in the 1970s, and they are now the same people who are talking about "unstoppable" global
warming. These claims are entirely contradictory, yet the same people have made both and have told us that neither can be denied ... and they now even deny they made the claims about "impending ice-age". Indeed, they also claim that "global warming is unstoppable" ... having also said "a nuclear winter is inevitable".

To put it simply, the people who make the claims about global warming or nuclear winter, are not the most credible people and I would take everything they say with an enormous pinch of salt. Climate has been infiltrated by politicised campaign groups, and so much of what they say is based on political expedience and not science. (And Russian has both funded CND to fund anti-nuclear and push the "nuclear winter" meme as well as funding the green groups who push the global warming "we must end our oil - and rely on Russian oil and gas" nonsense).

From a scientific viewpoint, atmospheric dust does have a profound impact on global temperatures (as also do aeroplane vapour-trails - but strangely the environ-mentalists flying off on their COP holidays every year, never mention the impact of vapour trails).

But, I think we can reasonably say, the effect of the Russian weapons won't be anywhere as bad as the CND doomsayers claimed it will be, if for no other reason, than the Russians have very good atmospheric physicists who will be advising their military to ensure that the Russians do not do themselves too much damage. Which is another reason to think the Russians, will go for a lot of smaller nukes taking out specific military targets rather than a "blunderbuss" approach.

On the other hands, the US "climate scientists" as they call themselves ... are barmy ... would be my honest assessment.

Survival is a matter of dealing with each of the many things that could kill us off, and reducing the risk so that the overall result means we have a good chance of survival. The first problem is getting through the first seconds and then hours, ensuring we are fit enough to have a good chance of surviving the post-nuclear horrors. I'm rather focussed on that today.