One subject I would love for you to address, as it deals with modeling, is the model that predicts a Nuclear Winter event with as few as 100 cities targeted.
The reason I'm interested in your take is this - we did an actual 1:1 scale test of this theory when the Allied powers firebombed 77 cities across Germany and Japan in WW2 between 44…
One subject I would love for you to address, as it deals with modeling, is the model that predicts a Nuclear Winter event with as few as 100 cities targeted.
The reason I'm interested in your take is this - we did an actual 1:1 scale test of this theory when the Allied powers firebombed 77 cities across Germany and Japan in WW2 between 44 and 45. To the best of my knowledge, the late 40's early 50's were not remembered for large scale climate catastrophe that the Nuclear Winter theorists say should happen when firestorms rage through that many cities. I did ask one of the scientists involved about this, and he said it was something they were aware of and looking at, but I never heard anything about this since.
My concern is the whole Nuclear Winter theory is something that is taboo to try to think about critically: You are a monster to suggest it's not real, because if you think it's not real then you are in favor of nuclear warfare, or at least want to make nuclear warfare less taboo to engage in. Who wants to be that monster? Certainly not me... but at the same time, this seems like such a glaring dataset ommission to account for, it makes the science behind it suspect.
I do believe in Climate Science, I do believe in Human Caused Climate Change... but Nuclear Winter I'm giving the side eye to.
One subject I would love for you to address, as it deals with modeling, is the model that predicts a Nuclear Winter event with as few as 100 cities targeted.
The reason I'm interested in your take is this - we did an actual 1:1 scale test of this theory when the Allied powers firebombed 77 cities across Germany and Japan in WW2 between 44 and 45. To the best of my knowledge, the late 40's early 50's were not remembered for large scale climate catastrophe that the Nuclear Winter theorists say should happen when firestorms rage through that many cities. I did ask one of the scientists involved about this, and he said it was something they were aware of and looking at, but I never heard anything about this since.
My concern is the whole Nuclear Winter theory is something that is taboo to try to think about critically: You are a monster to suggest it's not real, because if you think it's not real then you are in favor of nuclear warfare, or at least want to make nuclear warfare less taboo to engage in. Who wants to be that monster? Certainly not me... but at the same time, this seems like such a glaring dataset ommission to account for, it makes the science behind it suspect.
I do believe in Climate Science, I do believe in Human Caused Climate Change... but Nuclear Winter I'm giving the side eye to.