| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/25 |
| 2005/9/22-23 [Science/Physics] UID:39827 Activity:high |
9/22 What are the downsides to using a nuclear bomb to disperse forming
Islamic extremists? I'm pretty sure the cost of the bomb would be
offset by the money saved in devastation (100+ billion in a major city
anyone?).
\_ 9/23 reply: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/rita_wishful_thinking
\_ if you use a neutron bomb, nothing (well other than a bunch of
annoying anti-bomb peacenicks protesting in the streets and
annoying anti-bomb peaceniks protesting in the streets and
making the morning commute that much worse)
\_ Does the US even possess neutron weapons anymore? I thought
those were only deployed for a brief time during the '80s as
a buffer against a Russian tank invasion of Europe?
\_ Possibly. They have a short shelf life, and we aren't
making anymore AFAIK. We might be refurbishing them
though.
\_ Do you really think the government is dumb enough to
get rid of something like the neutron bomb (regardless
of what the official peacenik friendly story is)?
\_ Do you really think the government is dumb enough to get
rid of something like the neutron bomb (the official
story is probably just a cover to keep the peaceniks
happy)
\_ Assuming this is a serious question, (a) the islamic extremists
that threaten anyone don't "form" per se, (b) we'd blow up a lot
of innocent people and their infrastructure which we're at least
not supposed to do, (c) we have always had a policy since the end
of WWII of never using nukes first, and (d) nobody would ever ever
talk to the US again. Go sit in a corner. -John
\_ re (b), best reason to use a neutron bomb, the infrastructure
remains intact, some collateral human damage will occur, but
in war that can't be helped.
re (c), the no first strike policy has been "reviewed" by the
current admin and may be rescinded if the situation was dire
enough - therefore this policy is presently not a barrier to
the use of "nucular" weapons
re (d), the US is not well liked overseas, it is not likely
that further degradation of international opinion is a major
concern to the decision makers - armed retaliation may be a
concern but currently no nation can field a force sufficient
to make retaliation a sufficient threat to avoid first strike.
\_ neutron bombs are still atomic bombs ; they are just optimized
for radiation output vs. explosive blast power. If you want
to kill people and not infrastructure biological and chemical
weapons are the way to go. There's significant political
costs to their use, however...
\_ As opposed to less significant costs for normal atomic
bombs? |
| 5/25 |
|
| news.yahoo.com/s/ap/rita_wishful_thinking AP Scientists Dispute Hurricane Blaster Idea By JOSEPH B VERRENGIA, AP Science Writer 2 hours, 49 minutes ago DENVER - It sounds like a great idea: Let's just blast hurricanes like Ri ta and Katrina out of the sky before they hurt more people. Or, at least weaken the storms and steer them away from cities. Click Here Atmospheric scientists say it's wishful thinking that we could destroy or even influence something as huge and powerful as a hurricane. They aban doned such a quest years ago after more than two decades of inconclusive government-sponsored research. Private companies have conducted tests on a much smaller scale, but have made little progress despite initially claiming to erase storm clouds fr om the atmosphere. "It would be like trying to move a car with a pea shooter," said hydromet eorologist Matthew Kelsch of the National Center for Atmospheric Researc h in Boulder. "The amount of energy involved in a hurricane is far great er that anything we're going to impart to it." The federal government's hurricane modification program was called Projec t Stormfury. The idea was raised during the Eisenhower administration af ter several major storms hit the East Coast in the mid-1950s, killing 74 9 people and causing billions in damages. But it wasn't until 1961 that initial tests were conducted on Hurricane E sther with a Navy plane releasing silver iodide crystals. Some reports i ndicate winds were reduced by 10 percent to 30 percent. During Stormfury, scientists also seeded hurricanes in 1963, 1969 and 197 1 over the open Atlantic Ocean far from land. Researchers dropped silver iodide, a substance that serves as an effectiv e ice nuclei, into clouds just outside of the hurricane's eyewall. The i dea was that a new ring of clouds would form around the artificial ice n uclei. The new clouds were supposed to change rain patterns and form a n ew eyewall that would collapse the old one. The reformed hurricane would spin more slowly and be less dangerous. Hurricane Debbie in 1969 was seeded twice over four days by several aircraft. Researchers noted that its intensity waxed and waned by up to 30 percent. For cloud seeding to be successful, clouds must contain sufficient superc ooled water that is still liquid even though it is below 32 degrees Fahr enheit. Raindrops form when the artificial nuclei and the supercooled wa ter combine. But scientists also learned that hurricanes contain less supercooled wate r than other storm clouds, so seeding was unreliable. And, hurricanes gr ow and dissipate all on their own, even forming new walls of clouds call ed "concentric eyewall circles." This made it impossible to determine whether storm reductions were the re sult of human intervention. Project Stormfury was abandoned in the 1980s after spending hundreds of millions of dollars. Other storm modification methods that have been suggested include cooling the tropical ocean with icebergs and spreading particles or films over the ocean surface to inhibit storms from evaporating heat from the sea. Occasionally, somebody suggests detonating a nuclear weapon to shatter a storm. For example, Hurric ane Rita measures about 400 miles across. According to the center for atmospheric research, the heat energy release d by a hurricane equals 50 to 200 trillion watts or about the same amoun t of energy released by exploding a 10-megaton nuclear bomb every 20 min utes. The informati on contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewr itten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associ ated Press. |