Britain's nuclear warheads could be triggered .......

[SUBMAN1]

Are we even having a serious discussion about this? 1 in 2.4 billion? On top of that, you will only get a partial detonation (Impossible to achieve a real thermonuclear detonation, this would just be a fizzle and very small and insignificant). And to top it off - you need to be standing near the trucks to get your 10 sieverts.

So lets analyze this statistically. You have a few shipments/transports each year would mean we all have to be alive for approximately 800,000,000 years with current road and plane transportation before something statistically might even happen!

So, lets get off the anti nuke demostrators hype, and get on with a real conversation.

-S

PS. Lets talk about antimatter bombs (a real weapon) since nukes suck and are puny anyway.

[SUBMAN1]

One more thing - if we aren't safely sending our puny nukes through matter transporters in 800 million years time, we deserve to get a fizzle to maybe knock us on the head and get on with some real science.

-S

PS. THe point is, if our tech hasn't advanced enough to have us leave the planet - we are already in the stone age and not going anywhere anyway.

[Godalmighty83]

sounds like a lot of 'ifs' and 'coulds' and 'mays' to me.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Godalmighty83

sounds like a lot of 'ifs' and 'coulds' and 'mays' to me.

I think a proper definition would be a statistical impossibility, hyped up by the anti nuke left.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

One more thought just popped into my mind - Before we have our first theoretical accidental fizzle from a transported nuke in the UK (Approximately 800 million years from now based on 2.4 billion to one odds), it is a gurantee that our earth will be hit with a world devastating asteroid first and there will be no more nukes left to worry about.

Current estimates for our next collision (it may miss us by 40 miles - which is nothing, but that is unlikely) is April the 13th, 2029 (And yes, it is a Friday the 13th). That day, there is a very real chance that life as we know it on this Earth may not exist. I think it is time we start worrying about a real threat.

-S

PS. Nukes are not going to help us on this one - they may only make a deadly threat worse by breaking it up into many smaller peices that are already on a collision course. Something must be done to counter this threat right now!

PPS. Current data shows that it may miss us! By 18,000 miles! Still, what about the next one? This is just one pepple on the beach. We still need a defense.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2...ay_2004mn4.htm

[scandium]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

I think a proper definition would be a statistical impossibility, hyped up by the anti nuke left.

-S

Without getting into the merits of the article itself, its worth mentioning that it is based on a forthcoming report to be published in the New Scientist, not on 'hype' from the "anti nuke left".

This is a common theme in your postings, and I'm not sure why you feel the need to attribute everything you see as bad in the world, or that you disagree with, to the "left" (outside of your technology posts, which often make for good reading as you seem to be both knowledgeable and a fellow enthusiast). Granted there have certainly been some bad ideas to spring forth from this political sphere, but they are really not responsible for everything that is wrong with the world.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by scandium

Without getting into the merits of the article itself, its worth mentioning that it is based on a forthcoming report to be published in the New Scientist, not on 'hype' from the "anti nuke left".

This is a common theme in your postings, and I'm not sure why you feel the need to attribute everything you see as bad in the world, or that you disagree with, to the "left" (outside of your technology posts, which often make for good reading as you seem to be both knowledgeable and a fellow enthusiast). Granted there have certainly been some bad ideas to spring forth from this political sphere, but they are really not responsible for everything that is wrong with the world.

No offense, but if you understand the difference between left and right and liberal and conservative, this issue is a left wing whacko (Not left wing normal) type approach. A right wing whacko however is much different and also a whacko just as much as the guys on the very far left. Middle ground is the most sane ground of all. Left wing whackos are very anti weapon and this falls in that line of reasoning.

I have no agenda against left wing whackos that are any worse than any agenda against right wing whackos. All whackos are whackos - period. Are we clear?

The reason I bring this up is the author of the new scientist article must then be a left wing whacko to try and bring up a discussion about a statistical impossibility. That is the biggest buch of BS I have ever heard. Lets freak out the public about something that might happen every 800 million years if transportation systems advance no further than they do today. As transportation systems advance - say 50 years from now, this statistic will go to 1 in 10 billion years or higher!

Just trying to put things into perspective - and yes, many of the world problems are irrationally based and brought on by some whacko! :p

-S

PS. You aren't some whacko are you? I might have to get ugly on you is you are! :p

[bradclark1]

I also read somewhere that when someone on a plane flushes the commode someone on the ground might be hit by flying s#!t.
You have to think about these possibilities when you leave home.
Thats why I hardly ever leave home. I don't want to be hit by flying
s#it. If some fell from 13,000 feet it would be frozen enough to go through your head and out your butt.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

No offense, but if you understand the difference between left and right and liberal and conservative, this issue is a left wing whacko (Not left wing normal) type approach.

None taken, and I do understand the differences between these political orientations.

A right wing whacko however is much different and also a whacko just as much as the guys on the very far left. Middle ground is the most sane ground of all. Left wing whackos are very anti weapon and this falls in that line of reasoning.

Again, fair enough and I don't disagree.

I have no agenda against left wing whackos that are any worse than any agenda against right wing whackos. All whackos are whackos - period. Are we clear?

As daylight.

The reason I bring this up is the author of the new scientist article must then be a left wing whacko to try and bring up a discussion about a statistical impossibility. That is the biggest buch of BS I have ever heard. Lets freak out the public about something that might happen every 800 million years if transportation systems advance no further than they do today. As transportation systems advance - say 50 years from now, this statistic will go to 1 in 10 billion years or higher!

Just trying to put things into perspective - and yes, many of the world problems are irrationally based and brought on by some whacko! :p

Sometimes. Sometimes the World's problems are created by those who are too rational and whose very rationality either prevent them from recognizing the problem (Chamberlain with the threat posed by Hitler) or from being creative enough to think outside the box in finding a solution (the succession of well-meaning politicians who've unsuccessfully tried to find a solution on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict) - but perhaps this is neither here nor there.

PS. You aren't some whacko are you? I might have to get ugly on you is you are! :p

No worries there, though my personal politics are left-oriented they are not that extreme and I am quite rational (though were I completely insane I would probably not myself know it).