Threadless

Cart Status
0 items
Cart Actions
view cart
Show search options
stubby43
stubby43 aka Phil is a 25.42 year old boy, has been a member since December 22, 2006, has scored 3,809 submissions, giving an average score of 2.65, helping 191 designs get printed.
URL: http://www.travellingcameraclub.com/
AIM: stubbyloves
We dont have enough nukes to destroy the world
How I Learnt To Stop Worrying And Love The Bomb (Kinda)

This article blew my mind.



I wasn’t expecting that. We only actually have 0.83% of what’s required to completely wipe out civilisation. We couldn’t do it if we wanted to.

10 years ago we had 32,512 nuclear weapons. That’s a much better 2.6%. God damn you Non Nuclear Proliferation Pact!

Ah but we all live in cities now

I tried to recover a eye-popping stat with another quick calc. 50% of us live in densely populated cities now. Maybe we could wipe out all city-dwelling humanity. YES!

Nope. Still no good.




Also i think I have a new favourite website.

staffell
   staffell on Apr 12 '10 at 5:56pm
I am dubious.
Malcolm Man
Malcolm Man on Apr 12 '10 at 5:59pm
I don't think that's accurate at all.
stubby43
stubby43 on Apr 12 '10 at 6:05pm
Well I think it depends on what your deffinition of destroy the world is, 10,227 is enough to bring down every goverment because all of them are located in key strategic cities, our atleast the heads of goverments are anyway.



That would cause a break down of pulic services and society but I think he's talking about completely whipeing out everyone, no one left and I'm inclined to believe him on that one.
SuperRyan
SuperRyan on Apr 12 '10 at 6:07pm
Does this take into account fallout?
tracerbullet
   tracerbullet on Apr 12 '10 at 6:08pm
all the same, i'd still prefer not to witness one
spacesick 2
spacesick 2 on Apr 12 '10 at 6:12pm
what is the % populated by Biebers?
Talking To The Ground
Talking To The Ground on Apr 12 '10 at 6:14pm
PSH! DID YOU GUYS EVEN PLAY MODERN WARFARE 2?!

EMPs ARE WHERE THE REAL DAMAGE IS!!!







MAKES IT SO YOU CAN'T USE COMPUTAS!
Polyester Jones
Polyester Jones on Apr 12 '10 at 7:14pm
UPDATE: Aug – I’m in the process of revising this diagram in light of all the comments (and flames!). Thanks all. If you can help me research the data, please email



if that was in August and he still hasn't updated, I'm guessing he didn't like the revision.



plus he only takes into account damage sustained in human lives/infrastructure and not environmental damage
Bio-bot 9000
Bio-bot 9000 on Apr 12 '10 at 7:36pm
who is "we"? the world? the U.S.? I heard on the news today (and maybe I misheard) that there is enough nuclear material worldwide to produce 100,000 nuclear warheads. Hence the nuclear security summit.



also, these figures seem to assume that humans are uniformly spread across the surface of the earth. a few warheads sent into Manila or Delhi or Mexico City would kill a whole lot more people per bomb than a missile dropped onto Sioux Falls, South Dakota.



Manila:

Population: 1,660,714

Area: 38.5 km²

pop density: 43,135 people /km²



Estimated death toll per bomb=Pop density x Blast radius = 43135 x 14.9 km² = 642,718 dead
You must be logged in to leave a comment.

My gallery photos

→ All of my 2 photos

All about me






Too Many Choices - Threadless, Best T-shirts Ever