Hiroshima nowadays
For commemorating the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki two links to recent comments, which I left on the blog Azimuth. One link is to a comment to the new scientist article article “The carbon cost of Germany’s nuclear ‘Nein danke!’ ” where I try to explain why the authors arguments that Germany’s renunciation of commercial nuclear power generation leads to more carbon output are flawed.
A second comment is related to the Manhattan project itself but also to the dangers of biotechnology.
posted by nad
on Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 8:44 am // economy, japan, physics.
// RSS 2.0 feed
skip to the end and leave a response // pinging is currently not allowed //
The below box is for leaving comments. Interesting comments in german, french and russian will eventually be translated into english. If you write a comment you consent to our data protection practices as specified
If your comment text is not too rude and if your URL is not clearly SPAM then both will be published after moderation. Your email adress will not be published. Moderation is done by hand and might take up to a couple of days.
August 21st, 2017 at 11:12 am
I recommend the new data visualization by Neil Halloran called the The shadow piece, Part 1 -The nuclear threat which illustrates the threats of nuclear warfare and illustrates some of the implications of a third (nuclear) world war. By the way do you have any idea why there were no western European targets in Southern France, Spain and Italy etc. on the nuclear target list? (Around minute 5:20)
August 23rd, 2017 at 9:26 pm
No I don’t know. The information on targets in Western Europe doesn’t seem to be among the data sources he is linking to on the webpage. The link Ira Helfand and Lachlan Forrow contains russian targets in the US. And the post on the Future of Life Institute shows the US targets in Europe in 1956 like for example the 10 nuclear bomb targets on greater Berlin. It doesn’t show how many nuclear bombs the Russians intended to throw then on Berlin and also not what was planned for Western Europe. May be it is in the “Scott Sagan and Jane Esberg” data source which is not linked.
August 25th, 2017 at 7:57 am
10 nuclear bomb targets on greater Berlin sounds already enough to wipe the city out. Do you really think that the russians would have directed yet some more nuclear missiles onto Berlin? By the way are there still some nuclear missiles pointed twowards Berlin? Do you know?
August 25th, 2017 at 5:38 pm
I forgot to ask: how does it feel if you are targeted like that?
October 27th, 2018 at 10:02 am
One should mention that those nuclear warheads were part of the Balance of terror that is they were intended to guarantee peace in Europe.
It should in particular be mentioned that german anxieties and their accompanying factors played already a key role in the development of World War I, itself a key in the Cold war conflict. The Guardian has made a very instructive interactive documentation about The first world war. From the spoken text by Stephen Moss, Jay Winter (hope I understood everything correctly) about Germany and its role for the origins of WWI (part 1):
The following sentences clarify were this uneasyness might have come from – at least to some extend :
November 2nd, 2018 at 9:11 am
@History Enthusiast
thanks or pointing out this interesting documentary.
So the germans were alread by then megalomanic and their fear was to get not enough of the pi.
November 11th, 2018 at 3:55 pm
Sort of I guess. Did you look at the documentary? They continue with an explanation:
but the germans were apparently rather paranoic in finding “their best way”. That is the documentary then continues:
July 26th, 2019 at 6:49 pm
History Enthusiast cited:
There seem to be different opinions about sacredness, see debate
about telescopes