4 ms·

I don't think even total nuclear war would actually estinguish humans down to the last one. Especially since a few people were prepared, with multi decade shelt

I don't think even total nuclear war would actually estinguish humans down to the last one. Especially since a few people were prepared, with multi decade shelters.

mikeash 10y ago
Further, a nuclear war in 1956 would have been far from total. The balance of nuclear forces was absurdly lopsided until maybe the late 1960s. For example, if the Cuban Missile Crisis had gone hot, the USSR would have been utterly destroyed, while the US might have lost a few major cities. Not something you ever want to happen, obviously, but it wouldn't even destroy the country, let alone the species. 1956 would have been even more lopsided. Hard information was difficult to come by, and it didn't help that the USSR worked hard to inflate perceptions of its own capabilities (e.g. Khrushchev saying that they were pumping out ICBMs like sausages, when they had almost none).
- ZanyProgrammer 10y ago
  I wish I could upvote this comment more. The nuclear OOB really, really favors the US for about a decade after this.
- arethuza 10y ago
  My understanding is that the US government and intelligence agencies had a pretty good understanding of the strategic capabilities of the Soviets but chose to overstate the threat for domestic political reasons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_gap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_gap
  - mikeash 10y ago
    There was definitely some of that. Kennedy using the "missile gap" as part of his campaign is a classic example. But I think a lot of it was legitimate misunderstanding too. This was before the age of satellites, so information was hard to come by, especially with the USSR being such a big place, and with the Soviets trying to make their forces look bigger than they were. For example, they'd fly the same airplanes past a crowd multiple times, to make it look like they had more than they did. I imagine there was also a great desire to err on the side of caution. If they underestimated Soviet strength, they'd be risking the survival of the nation. If they overestimated Soviet strength, they'd just be in a great position if war broke out.
TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
Modern humans are more culture than meat. Even a small nuclear war would be enough to extinguish human culture. Considering it's taken more than 300,000 years to grow this one, there's no guarantee anything equivalent would appear again.
- Retric 10y ago
  As long as we have access to high yield plants the climb would be a lot faster than you might think. Toss in just Highschool level math and germ theory could let us rebuild from a small surviving population (say 1 million) in under 1,000 years.

I don't think even total nuclear war would actually estinguish humans down to the last one. Especially since a few people were prepared, with multi decade shelters.

mikeash 10y ago

Further, a nuclear war in 1956 would have been far from total. The balance of nuclear forces was absurdly lopsided until maybe the late 1960s. For example, if the Cuban Missile Crisis had gone hot, the USSR would have been utterly destroyed, while the US might have lost a few major cities. Not something you ever want to happen, obviously, but it wouldn't even destroy the country, let alone the species. 1956 would have been even more lopsided. Hard information was difficult to come by, and it didn't help that the USSR worked hard to inflate perceptions of its own capabilities (e.g. Khrushchev saying that they were pumping out ICBMs like sausages, when they had almost none).

ZanyProgrammer 10y ago
I wish I could upvote this comment more. The nuclear OOB really, really favors the US for about a decade after this.
arethuza 10y ago
My understanding is that the US government and intelligence agencies had a pretty good understanding of the strategic capabilities of the Soviets but chose to overstate the threat for domestic political reasons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_gap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_gap
- mikeash 10y ago
  There was definitely some of that. Kennedy using the "missile gap" as part of his campaign is a classic example. But I think a lot of it was legitimate misunderstanding too. This was before the age of satellites, so information was hard to come by, especially with the USSR being such a big place, and with the Soviets trying to make their forces look bigger than they were. For example, they'd fly the same airplanes past a crowd multiple times, to make it look like they had more than they did. I imagine there was also a great desire to err on the side of caution. If they underestimated Soviet strength, they'd be risking the survival of the nation. If they overestimated Soviet strength, they'd just be in a great position if war broke out.

TheOtherHobbes 10y ago

Modern humans are more culture than meat. Even a small nuclear war would be enough to extinguish human culture. Considering it's taken more than 300,000 years to grow this one, there's no guarantee anything equivalent would appear again.

Retric 10y ago
As long as we have access to high yield plants the climb would be a lot faster than you might think. Toss in just Highschool level math and germ theory could let us rebuild from a small surviving population (say 1 million) in under 1,000 years.