English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

wouldnt there be a few survivors to keep the population going? even if there was a nuclear winter scientist say this would only last a few months if that, they have fallout shelters everywere to last more than the winter, people in the government and submarines have plans to survive this catastrophe, so why would it be the end of mankind? it might hinder civilization for awhile but not destroy it

2007-01-31 04:14:18 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

the hit list for 90% of nukes isnt the whole world just a few countries such as north america europe and russia, some countries would not even get a hit

2007-01-31 04:24:27 · update #1

the atoll islands are very inhabitable after several test were done there, the radiation levels does drop after years

2007-01-31 04:33:18 · update #2

13 answers

You are right.
The end comes only at the Judgment (Revelation 20)

2007-01-31 04:20:50 · answer #1 · answered by great gig in the sky 7 · 0 2

You have to think of this on a couple levels. For there to be an instantanious end to mankind the world would pretty much have to blow up, to be short. But you have to look at the long term effects of a nuclear war. One nuclear blast could flatten a country without a glimmer in one's eye. And just to put it into retrospect, as the years have past by so has the old technologies. The bombs that are used in present day are many more times powerful than the bomb that was used on Hiroshima over 50 years ago. So if there was a nuclear war, just imagine. If it were the US to be attacked, say D.C.. Then not only would the surrounding 100 miles be lost but more importantly would be the effects of the nuclear fallout. It might take over 50 years to even reinhabit the surrounding areas within 100 miles or so. The fallout although can effect thousands of square miles of land, making them inhabital for many, many years. But should we be opposed for our country carrying nuclear missles. NO. Do I think that it is right. No. But if we don't than we have no deturrant towards the countries with lesser values of life.

"We have the wolf by the ears and we can neither hold him nor let him go." Thomas Jefferson 1819 about the Missouri Compromise

2007-02-02 17:52:40 · answer #2 · answered by KAA 2 · 0 1

Nuclear winter from a total all out nuclear war might never end, science does not know for sure how long it will last. Two nukes were dropped during WWII. We are talking total nuclear war. Every missle that can be launched being launched, Many of these missles have multiple war heads aimed at different locations. Tens of thousand of nukes hundreds of times more powerful than Nagasaki.
First the Lucky ones are caught in the explosion and immediate fire ball and die. Then the radiation belt hits melting many burning many more and radiating those left. Then we have world wide fallout. This radiates most of the rest of us, the crops and animals. Now there isnt enough medical care available so it isnt given, they let you die a suffering death. Then we have nuclear winter, again, world wide. Those who do not eventually freeze will die from starvation. No sunlight for year so no plant growth. Animals who survive everything else, do not reproduce and will eventually starve.
Nuclear winter will last several years and possibly decades. Without any means of producing food the few remaining people will become cannibals and then also starve. There is no food supply anywhere in the world to feed survivors for the amount of time it would require for nuclear winter to end and a food source to be planted, grow and be harvested

Isn't Science a Wonderful thing?

2007-01-31 12:44:29 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

The reasoning is because we have enough nuclear weapons to destroy all life on earth many times over. Many of them can be fired from a submarine with little or no warning. Back in the Reagan era, a doctrine developed appropriately called MAD, or Mutually Assured Destruction. That's why many people believe that humanity wouldn't survive. Either the blast or the subsequent radiation would get us all.

2007-01-31 12:30:40 · answer #4 · answered by Paulie D 5 · 1 2

The us government along has enough nuclear weapons to completely destroy the entire Earth three times over. Russia and China probably have as many more. If them Damn Muslim countries get nuclear bombs hey that would be the ultimate sacrifice for them destroy the world it don't matter to the one pushing the button. Hell hes going to Heaven for destroying the infidels of the Earth. BB

2007-01-31 12:33:26 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

I guess most people think that once it starts, it won't stop until there are no more people to push the launch button.

Regardless, mankind will be hit very hard in a significant nuclear war (i.e. more than 10 bombs). Radiation would weaken us and our children for generations. Crops would fail or be unfit to eat. Water would be contaminated. These issues would cause the most problems and could easily eliminate all life.

2007-01-31 12:24:39 · answer #6 · answered by Phoenix, Wise Guru 7 · 0 3

Ah don't fret. There's a silver lining behind every nuclear cloud.

2007-01-31 12:21:31 · answer #7 · answered by Red neck 7 · 2 3

Humans would not go extinct. Most of us would be dead, but the species would survive.

2007-01-31 12:21:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Jesus will return to save the world from total self-destruction and to defeat Satan and his minions.

2007-01-31 12:23:21 · answer #9 · answered by Chef Bob 5 · 1 3

OK, you convinced me...just let Iran & the Islamic radicals have their Nukes if they want them.

NOT!

2007-01-31 12:24:11 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers