New concept to me: This site is run by someone I guess you could call a nuclear truther—a person who thinks we're being lied to re: how bad a nuclear attack might be http://www.nukefallout.com/
Show this thread
-
Here's the tricky thing, though. Many of the documents his posts ARE interesting and useful. And he is right that most people DO devalue Civil Defense more than they ought to. So it is one extreme of this, and the "nukes kill everyone instantly" is perhaps another extreme.
In my work on Reinventing Civil Defense, I have been trying to find some kind of helpful medium, something that acknowledges that the popular notions are wrong (and largely unhelpful) but doesn't completely drink the "nukes are really no problem" Kool-Aid.
-
-
That is a really tough line to walk. Do the “nukes are survivable” ppl have an underlying political commitment?
-
(If they are Americans, are they hawks who want us to be less afraid of conflict, for example)
-
Yes, they tend to be hawks of one sort or another. They think tactical nuclear weapons are great, etc. They are basically rehashing a hawkish 1980s position. They tend to make things look way rosier than they would be, and put undue faith in hawkish think-tank estimates.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yes, it’s not unlike the extreme bomber fear of the 30s vs the reality, which is why he took an interest in my research
-
Nevertheless I also ended up banning him, because he was a complete bore on the topic!
-
I have a secular prayer that I sometimes invoke whenever I think of him: "May all my detractors be so incoherent that they discredit themselves without me having to do anything."
End of conversation
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.