[Steely Tom]

One less thing, right?

— Forrest Gump

[Hot Tabasco]

I was always under the impression that a nuclear bomb would render the impact site and surrounding miles inhospitable for centuries........

Hiroshima and Nagasaki proved that wrong............

[DesertRhino]

Really the VERY short term is the rub....

[Vic S]

Yeehaw!

[BeauBo]

Hiroshima, more recently:

[lacrew]

Its been a loooong time since I studied this...but aren’t the Plutonium bombs of today different than the Uranium bomb of WWII? I.E. looking at the results of Hiroshima is really not an indicator for what a modern bomb would do?

[Jonty30]

I think it became obvious, as Japan’s cancer rates didn’t sky rocket despite having two bombs dropped on them.

[Bon mots]

Don't forget, some 1021 nukes were set off just outside of Las Vegas, at least 100 of which were above ground. People have lived there the entire time and they used to watch the mushroom clouds from Vegas hotels.

The Nevada Test Site is a United States Department of Energy reservation located in Nye County, Nevada, about 65 miles (105 km) northwest of the City of Las Vegas, near 37°07′N 116°03′W / 37.117, -116.05.

During the 1950s, the mushroom clouds from these tests could be seen for almost 100 miles in either direction, including the city of Las Vegas, where the tests became tourist attractions. Americans headed for Las Vegas to witness the distant mushroom clouds that could be seen from the downtown hotels.

Another myth is that our cities would be uninhabitable for hundreds of years. I disagree.

Hiroshima, Japan today.
Nearly 3 million people live in Hiroshima Prefecture, and over 1 million in the city itself.

Hiroshima took a direct hit not long ago.

[cartan]

It used to be an essential part of Soviet propaganda in the West to exaggerate greatly the dangers of nuclear attacks. Make everybody believe that a couple nukes would render the entire planet uninhabitable for ten thousand years. Hey, so let’s just disarm unilaterally! Only the Soviets should have nukes! Who cares? Better red than dead, right?

Traces of that thinking can still be found in many places today.

[ransomnote]

Sadly, the information in the OP is false.
Because Hiroshima data revealed the damaging effects of atomic bombs, the data itself was scrambled to the point that it nullified actual information and gave the appearance of little effect. People close to ground zero were blended with records of people far from grand zero and their original information detailing their exposure, captured in a code, was permanently deleted. Problem solved - now the atomic industry brags about the false data/comparisons. It’s creepy how methodical the nuke industry is...steadily erasing cold hard data and replacing it with worthless data. WHy would they go to such problems if the data did not reveal the problem?
In the following excerpt, the data for those exposed to the flash of the bombs was compared to the data for those not exposed - and there wasn’t much difference in mortality? The reason? Because both groups were equally harmed by the fallout so deaths from fallout related damage were comparable - and reported as “no effect from nuclear bomb”

“Here then was the confirmation of why the studies of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors had not revealed any effects on their children. Everywhere in Japan, mortality rates had gone up due to the fallout, so that there was little or no difference between those survivors exposed to the direct flash and those who received the fallout in their diet over the years that followed.” Secret Fallout

[Arm_Bears]

Kinda puts the lie to nuclear winter pronouncements, eh?

[stockpirate]

A lot of people contracted cancet east of the atomic test site
This spanned 30-40 years, this study is BS.

[2ndDivisionVet]

[Paradox]

This has been know for quite some time. Back when I was a moronic liberal in my early College years, I decided to write a research paper, for an english class taught by a liberal teacher that I really admired. So I went out and researched the dangers of Ionizing Radiation!! I wanted it to turn out so bad, that she would really like me.

Well the more I researched, the more I realized that the long term effects just could not be predicted, and in fact it looked like they effects were turning out to be LESS than feared. I turned in that paper and felt awful about it, but she gave me an "A" anyways, because it was well done. I admired her for things like that. There were some honest Liberals around.

What I found out writing that paper ended up being partially responsible for my turn away from Liberalism.

[fruser1]

And according to the surgeon general, there is no safe amount of cigarette smoke.

[Revel]

Yup... I trust those stats about as much as I trust the Government temperature stats The same propaganda comes for anything nuclear. In fact Radiation is now good for you.

[disndat]

Why don’t these people volunteer to move themselves and their families downwind of an atomic blast? Then they can observe the effects over a couple of generations.

[minnesota_bound]

This study was paid for by the Iranians........

[x]

Nuclear weapons: the Breakfast of Champions.

He tried to tell us.

Why didn't we listen?

[JimSEA]

The exaggeration and fear mongering actually served some good purpose in strengthening the MAD balance of the Cold War. It is, today, somewhat reminiscent of the climate change debate. I certainly don’t want to belittle the horrendous destruction a nuclear conflict would visit on us.