To: RadioAstronomer
Remenber your rules of 7 when caclulating fallout. First 7 hours is the worst, then 2 days later 1/10th, two weeks after that, 1/10th and 14 weeks later, again 1/10th. So after 14 weeks a 6000 r/hr is only 6 r/hr. And these levels would only be near G-zero. Assuming no second strikes or followup waves of targeting after an initial flight of ICBMs, then a discharge of submarine or other ocean-going vessels as they move within firing range, followed by last-ditch single or multiple aircraft raids on secondary or tertiary targets deserving of additional treatment.
And, of course, possible local contamination from fratricide of incoming missiles, or targeting of commercial nuclear reactor facilities.
-archy-/-
57 posted on
01/07/2002 4:10:06 PM PST by
archy
To: archy
Not disagreeing with you at all. I was strictly referring to the 11 nukes in Canada! :) In an all out war with thousands of warheads and second-strike capability, we would be in a bit of a mess.
To: archy;radio astronomer
,,, the French have been taking people out of French Polynesia to Paris for cancer treatment for years now. They knew their bombs worked but continued testing, smashing atolls and poisoning fish and people. Consequently, I won't do Tahiti, New Caledonia or anywhere in the Pacific as a holiday destination, even though they're just a few hours away.
To: archy
You have freep mail.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson