2 ms·
No, it actually could've been much worse: https://www.businessinsider.com/chernobyl-volunteers-divers-nuclear-mission-2016-4?IR=T https://www.businessinsider.co
by klingonopera 7y ago
No, it actually could've been much worse: https://www.businessinsider.com/chernobyl-volunteers-divers-nuclear-mission-2016-4?IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/chernobyl-volunteers-divers-...
- macspoofing 7y agoI don't think so. I'm trying to find some sources, and it seems like all the clickbait articles reference a book by some guy named Andrew Leatherbarrow, "Chernobyl 01:23:40" (and Leatherbarrow is just some guy without any particular expertise). I can't find any justification for why there was a chance that millions would have died and half of Europe was almost rendered uninhabitable. It smells like clickbait bullshit.
- klingonopera 7y agoI actually agree with you that the article sounds click-baity, unfortunately, HBO has made it so much harder to get good information regarding Chernobyl on the Internet nowadays[0]. Just one of four reactors "melted down". I'm no expert, but I imagine the worst possible is all four reactors literally exploding simultaneously, or one after the other in a rapid chain reaction, or something like that. [0]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/05/09/the-reason-they-fictionalize-nuclear-disasters-like-chernobyl-is-because-they-kill-so-few-people/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/05/09...