PS folks who think 'mutually assured destruction' protected us from nuclear annihilation really need to read 'The doomsday machine' by nuclear strategist @DanielEllsberg. Our world was in the hands of reckless, immoral fools for decades.
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You're making the same mistake her fans are by making it about her. Scientists have been concerned about climate change for decades. And as for nuclear war, we came within a hair of it happening in 1962. We got lucky
-
I didn't say we shouldn't worry about climate change. I've consistently said that it's not an existential risk to humanity the way that global thermonuclear war is still an X-risk.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
false equivalence much? it wasn't blind luck that prevented GTW, it was the threat of mutually assured destruction, nuclear proliferation treaties, and cooler heads ultimately prevailing thus far in geopolitics. in other words, human behavior/action.
-
You should read 'The doomsday machine' by
@DanielEllsberg. We survived largely by blind luck, and there are many alternative timelines in which we are ash. - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Almost seems like two separate tweets put together.
-
Because I have mixed feelings rather than a simple takeaway.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
At the age of 16, I worried most about beating GoldenEye on the N64 at double 0 difficulty.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
At 14 got a book about how to survive a nuclear war. Made plans for a terrific fallout shelter in our basement that used sandbags for shielding. Seemed like something I could do on my own without drawing attention(!)...until I realized how many TONS of sand I needed. Never mind.pic.twitter.com/1uW9s4Kuf6
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Given the degree of consensus among experts on the likely scope and scale of the effects of climate change in the coming decades, this does come across as toweringly condescending. Just FYI.
-
I mean, I guess it's *meant* to be condescending. The point is, it seems to be wielding its condescension from a wholly unearned position of superior wisdom.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.