4 ms·
The models justifying the "nuclear winter" scenario are wrong, and "nuclear winter" relies on politically motivated rhetoric to push a social agenda that is at
by ghostcluster 9y ago
The models justifying the "nuclear winter" scenario are wrong, and "nuclear winter" relies on politically motivated rhetoric to push a social agenda that is at odds with similar events in magnitude. The Kuwaiti Oil fires are a great example, as are events where forests the size of nation-states have burned, and caused no signifiacant cooling.
It's hyped exaggeration using rhetoric for political effect.
- jfoutz 9y agoI don’t know why you are getting downvotes. Odds are you are right. People are getting emotionally attached to nuclear winter I guess.
- ghostcluster 9y agoI provided a link from the NYTimes with the scientists from the original 1983 Nuclear Winter paper retracting their original prediction as well. Well done, HN.
- pjc50 9y agoI suspect its your use of the phrase "social agenda", as if nuclear war might be a thing that it was unreasonable to be against.
- ghostcluster 9y agoIt is unreasonable to make up fake models and rhetoric, and then push it in the media under the auspices of science. How can you be trusted in the future?
- eadmund 9y ago> … as if nuclear war might be a thing that it was unreasonable to be against. When a nuclear war is less bad than the alternatives, then it is unreasonable to be against it. A lot of Western anti-nuclear sentiment was simply manufactured by KGB manipulation of useful idiots. It's sad: if not for fifty years of anti-nuclear propaganda, we might be off of coal and safely generating energy for the next couple of centuries while we work on environmentally-friendly ways to produce solar cells. Instead, we're belching forth pollution — to include radioactive pollution — at an unprecedented rate, decades after the fall of the Soviet Union, whose security the anti-nuclear propaganda was intended to ensure.