this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
536 points (85.6% liked)

World News

39142 readers
2675 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

yes I know nuclear winter isn’t real

That's not a consensus view.

According to a peer-reviewed study published in the journal Nature Food in August 2022, a full-scale nuclear war between the United States and Russia, which together hold more than 90% of the world's nuclear weapons, would kill 360 million people directly and more than 5 billion indirectly by starvation during a nuclear winter.

Another paper published that year, from the Tohoku University Earth science scholar Kunio Kaiho, compared the impact of nuclear winter scenarios on marine and terrestrial animal life with that of historical extinction events. Kaiho estimated that a minor nuclear war (which he defined as a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan or an event of equivalent magnitude) would cause extinctions of 10–20% of species on its own, while a major nuclear war (defined as a nuclear exchange between United States and Russia) would cause the extinctions of 40–50% of animal species...

Wikipedia

[–] basmati@lemmus.org 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

There isn't currently a scientific consensus, as wikipedia should be pointing out, with studies differing massively depending mostly on what model of soil uptake and preservation in atmosphere is used.

We know that the majority of in air debris would not come from the explosion, which is designed to minimize fallout in all modern weapons and deployment models, but from the resulting fires. We also know from previous tests the resulting fires don't actually last long as they tend to burn through areas quickly.

In short it's not a sure thing, and if any cooling effect does occur it wouldn't start to touch the average heating we've introduced through climate change.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 month ago

That long Wikipedia article conveys quite well how there isn't consensus. We don't know how bad it would be, because our various best models give different results. But to say it's not a sure thing is different from saying "nuclear winter isn't real," which suggests a consensus that it won't happen.