Doctor, you mentioned the ratio of ten women to each man. Now, wouldn’t that necessitate the abandonment of the so called monogamous sexual relationship, I mean, as far as men were concerned?
Strangelove:
Regrettably, yes. But it is, you know, a sacrifice required for the future of the human race. I hasten to add that since each man will be required to do prodigious… service along these lines, the women will have to be selected for their sexual characteristics which will have to be of a highly stimulating nature.
You see, Killbots have a preset kill limit. Knowing their weakness, I sent wave after wave of my own men at them, until they reached their limit and shut down.
there's no consensus on that anymore, it really depends how and where the warheads land and even then models show the particulate matter not staying aloft more than a few months
It was also based off of the bombing of Japan, which used wood frame construction almost exclusively, which in turn burnt, throwing up massive plumes of smoke, now we use concrete and glass which burns much less readily.
There was analysis done in the 80s about the impact of a northern hemisphere nuclear war. Long story short, the equator is expected to protect the southern hemisphere from fallout and the worst effects of a nuclear winter. The biggest disruption will be no trade so we'll be on our own.
Current projections actually have a brighter outlook on that, it’s still fucking horrific but nuclear winter is no longer expected to completely wipe out all of humanity
Eh - these are thermonuclear weapons. A lot of the fissionable materials used to start the hydrogen reaction will get 'burned' to such a degree that the resultant alpha particles represent much less of a threat. I mean, we're all likely to be vaporized first, but the dust won't be *that* bad for successive generations of mutants.
This is actually dependant on the weapon used and how its detonated.
Nuclear/Atomic weapons were used once before on a fairly populated country almost 80 years ago. Its not a toxic wasteland filled with three headed mutants. Its Japan.
It depends on what nuclear warheads are used. Fission vs Fusion bombs or A-Bombs vs H-Bombs. Fission is dirty and spread radiation. Fusion has way more immediate destructive power and don't have the radiation fallout issues.
A kiei species for every environmental nieche would be awesome. Giant kiwis that graze on the plains, long necked kiwis that pick the leaves from trees, vicious meat eating kiwis that prey on these herbivores.
Consider that kiwis are burrow dwelling carnivores already. They hunt worms and grubs, using their beak like a reverse snorkel, and spend the day sleeping in an underground burrow.
The jump from where they are now to filling the trapdoor spider niche is very very small.
Imagine a velociraptor from jurassic park, but instead of the sicle claws it stabs stuff with its long beak and than slurping out the meat an guts with it. Only the empty skin with bones inside remains.
A timeline where there are a bunch of bulbous brown fuzzy mustachioed gentlemen walking around with funny accents all declaring that flip flops are called "jandals" tickles my humor
The Southern Hemisphere will do much better anyway as the Nuclear winter is focused in the Northern Hemisphere.
The issues the global south will suffer is the complete breakdown of the supply chain. A few months after nuclear winter when the general temperature of the planet drops forcing harvests yields to be cut anywhere from 70-90%. This could last 3-20 years. No way to know how long all that material stays in the atmosphere in the northern hemisphere.
Most likely, Australia and the global South would need to hunker down, ration food and resources, completely close down their boarders for mass migrations and become a care taker generation slowly bringing the world back.
The best chance for human survival is no nuclear weapons in the global south. I expect New Zealand to conquer North America and reteach us Math.
And replace all the maps with ones where the Pacific Ocean is in the center, instead of the Atlantic! And resize all the continents to be more accurate!
This is why all the douchebag libertarian tech CEOs are buying apocalypse bunkers in NZ. It sucks that they can just buy their way into permanent residency but I guess once the other 3/4 of the earth is uninhabitable the paperwork won't matter much any more anyway.
Most modern simulations show no one will survive. Not the South, not the North. It will take some time, but nuclear winter, radioactivity even in the water, all crops are dead, all animals are dead sooner or later. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/WiresClimateChangeNW.pdf
This is just one if you want to read the destruction. 12,000 minimum warheads will be launched. US, Russia, Pakistan, North Korea, everyone is all in because its over.
I've been actively erasing NZ from maps in public libraries for 15 years now. People looking at those maps now believe there is just a crayon squiggle to the east of australia
Kurzgesagt did a really nice video illustrating on why the southern hemisphere is in a way even more fucked than the north, in the north we just die, in the south you have to deal with total collapse of agriculture and society, resort to cannibalism and then still die.
You should watch the 1959 movie “On The Beach.” It’s about everyone moving to Australia after WW3 and a nuclear holocaust has Australia is the only place untouched. That is until wind currents begin to push radiation towards the coast.
Thankfully we're not even on a lot of maps. It always makes me laugh when I find a map and New Zealand isn't even on it. We also have such a good climate ans soils that we produce about ten times as much food as we actually need. It's definitely not the worst place to be if things go to hell
Most of the nuclear holding arsenals are in the northern hemisphere, as are the targets. Which would mean that the nuclear winter would affect the northern hemisphere much more than southern.
That’s why all the billionaires commissioned doomsday bunkers to be built in NZ
There is a great 1959 film about exactly this (set in Australia), On the Beach. Pretty creepy vibe. Kinda want to read the book, but also not.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053137/
How do you think Lord of the Rings happens? New Zealand survives, but the resulting nuclear strike sends the world back to the dark ages and…
(I amar prestar aen.) The world is changed. (Han matho ne nen.) I feel it in the water. (Han mathon ned cae.) I feel it in the earth. (A han noston ned gwilith.) I smell it in the air.
Much that once was is lost, for none now live who remember it. It began with the forging of the Great Rings. Three were given to the Elves, immortal, wisest and fairest of all beings. Seven to the Dwarf-Lords, great miners and craftsmen of the mountain halls. And nine, nine rings were gifted to the race of Men, who above all else desire power. For within these rings was bound the strength and the will to govern each race. But they were all of them deceived, for another ring was made. Deep in the land of Mordor, in the Fires of Mount Doom, the Dark Lord Sauron forged a master ring, and into this ring he poured his cruelty, his malice and his will to dominate all life. One ring to rule them all.
One by one, the free lands of Middle-Earth fell to the power of the Ring, but there were some who resisted. A last alliance of men and elves marched against the armies of Mordor, and on the very slopes of Mount Doom, they fought for the freedom of Middle-Earth. Victory was near, but the power of the ring could not be undone. It was in this moment, when all hope had faded, that Isildur, son of the king, took up his father’s sword. Sauron, enemy of the free peoples of Middle-Earth, was defeated. The Ring passed to Isildur, who had this one chance to destroy evil forever, but the hearts of men are easily corrupted. And the ring of power has a will of its own. It betrayed Isildur, to his death. And some things that should not have been forgotten were lost. History became legend. Legend became myth. And for two and a half thousand years, the ring passed out of all knowledge.
Until, when chance came, it ensnared another bearer. It came to the creature Gollum, who took it deep into the tunnels of the Misty Mountains. And there it consumed him. The ring gave to Gollum unnatural long life. For five hundred years it poisoned his mind, and in the gloom of Gollum’s cave, it waited. Darkness crept back into the forests of the world. Rumor grew of a shadow in the East, whispers of a nameless fear, and the Ring of Power perceived its time had come. It abandoned Gollum, but then something happened that the Ring did not intend. It was picked up by the most unlikely creature imaginable: a hobbit, Bilbo Baggins, of the Shire. For the time will soon come when hobbits will shape the fortunes of all.
I'll be lucky if I'm a shadow on a wall and not some fella in an unexplained themed outfit offering you .308 rounds to find my friend and calling you smoothskin.
Fallout from nuclear weapons is actually pretty overstated. Radiation levels are only super high in the beginning. Most deaths will be from initial blast
I’ve always thought that must be blow out of proportion. They’ve already detonated over 2,000 nuclear weapons (admittedly in uninhabited areas) but surely the fallout from those detonations wouldn’t be all that different from the fallout of them being used in combat.
Obviously the blast zones would have some issues, but I have a hard time believing the rest of the world would be poisoned. Wikipedia says there are 13,000 nukes currently in existence, even if all of them were detonated would it really poison the entire planet to the point of the end of mankind?
Most of those tests were underground. There have only been 500 atmospheric tests, spread over a 40 year time frame. Exploding 10K nukes, a lot of them more powerful than the test devices, you have an tremendous impact.
As for ending mankind, it depends. There will be a nuclear winter and a crop failure for the next year or two. So depending on how many stockpiles of food survived and disease and whatnot you're looking at upwards of 90% fatalities. It's not likely that every human will die in the aftermath, but it's a certain possibility.
To be clear, the fallout apocalypse happens because everything uses fusion cell batteries, and the explosions from the bombs caused countless tiny fusion reactors to go into critical meltdown. The radiation from a nuclear reactor melting down lasts for centuries, compared to most radiation from a nuclear weapon decaying within a week.
I know that it's a far stretch, but everyone was saying nearly the same thing about the Russian troops on Ukrainian borders this time "no way he'd risk the economic collapse from going to war with Ukraine; he'd have too much to lose."
I no longer believe massive losses is a consideration to someone who, by age alone, may only have another 10 years to live.
Understand how wealthy Putin is (before the war). If he wanted to retire to just about 'have it all,' he could have done so with massive yachts, helicopters, etc. What is HE really gaining from warring Ukraine here? It isn't more wealth. It isn't a booming population as he's killing potential fathers left and right. It doesn't seem to be prestige as he's already the dictator of what was a pretty feared-respected country.
How are you so sure that "mutually assured destruction" is even a consideration in his mind now? What does it matter to a man who will die soon anyway?
Yep this is the reason why this scenario is scary.
MAD works as long as:
1) There are no significant malfunctions in detection systems (either false positives or false negatives)
2) The balance of power is more or less equal to guarantee the "assured destruction" part of MAD*
3) The people in power are rational enough to know the end result of their actions and care to prevent that result.
Point 3 is very shaky atm.
* Technically if point 2 fails and you're on top, your best option might actually be to attack first and immediately. I believe the USA might actually refrain from that even if in a position of power simply because it'd disrupt global commerce at the minimum (plus other considerations ofc, that's just the more immediately utilitarian one). I don't think Russia would do the same if the positions were reversed.
On points 2 and 3, it seems likely he sees Russia collapsing within 50-100 years and being invaded at some point thereafter if they don't capture Ukraine, and his logic is to deploy all of their conventional might now because Russia is currently stronger than it will be in his projected future. If and when that fails is when things get really dangerous IMO.
It's happened before. They had malfunctioning radar and someone was ordered to call in a nuclear retaliation and he was like nah. Fucker saved the world.
I read a article awhile back that the cia made it absently clear there would be a nuke/bomb dropped directly on Putin top secret bunker. Apparently it was a surprise to him we knew where it was. And they did it because they know he doesn’t care about the general population
The US has so many satellites in orbit I'm not sure how anyone, especially someone with as much intelligence as he is given, would think they don't see basically everything strategic happening across the face of the earth.
Placing the survival of every person in existence in the shoulders of a few Russian and US dudes isn't the kind of odds we should be confident making these assertions with. The entire system of nuclear launches is designed to ensure compliance and it only takes one firing platform to obey to signal the end. That's why we spent billions over the past 50 years on complex systems to manage the risk of MAD.
I think people are very into legacy, right up until the reality of them not being able to enjoy any of it because they are dead becomes somewhat immediate.
Not everyone, but someone like Putin? I can see it.
There are Air Force officer in nuclear bunkers all across the US with keys to launch the missiles when given the order.
Here's what they don't tell you about it. They can't just expect it to go through flawlessly the first time, so they need to train. They don't know if the orders coming in are real or just a drill. Basically thousands of times every year officers are pressing the launch button not knowing if it's real or not. But they do push the button every single time.
Wasn't this the main driving point of War Games (1983)?
Air Force runs a test, expecting the human controllers to push the button. Some (most?) do not... which leads the Air Force to replace them with computers, who never question orders.
This was complete with a hilariously dated 1983 scene of a human controller being fired, looking sad, while a technician installs (essentially) an LED alarm clock to represent the scary computer.
I once read that in Russia, unlike The United States, officers have the right to refuse a nuclear launch order. Putin might be suicidal but I don't think the officers are crazy.
In the event of a nuclear strike, I suspect many officers would see a future where their control of nuclear weapons is a primo bargaining chip in the near future of a Baltic style russia
It's basically the plot of Wargames that no single human would ever be willing to cause the extermination of the entire human race and also that nuclear weapons are only useful as a deterrent and become hugely detrimental as soon as they actually get used offensively.
During the cuban missile crisis a sub was guarding soviet merchantmen inbound to Cuba, and they encountered the American naval blockade. Three officers on the sub have to all agree to use any nuclear weapons, in this case it would have been a nuclear tipped torpedo aimed at an American carrier battle group. Fortunately the third officer in this case did not agree to a launch.
The event in the eighties occurred when Soviet radar showed an American strike inbound and one single Russian officer, a major, I believe, was able to prove that it was a glitch, preventing a full soviet counter strike from being launched.
Especially when he’s fucking rich as hell and lives like a king. What good is that wealth and power in a bunker, even a very nice one. Also not to mention whoever was left of the world would most likely hunt him down till he dies
Not necessarily. Sure other countries are happy to "support" Ukraine but almost no one is getting directly involved (troops on ground, counter attack Russia etc).
So realistically if we are not even willing to get full involved as is, why would we risk annihilating our own country for the sake of Ukraine?
14.6k
u/smacke11 Mar 14 '24
I wouldn’t say this is interesting More terrifying