Atomic Winter

Doomsday Prepper Forums

Help Support Doomsday Prepper Forums:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Rainin: Very interesting, even in this very hard judgement of the riscs from SHTF the danger from all things except food-shortage stops around 1year. Toxic gases stops around 6months-1year. As you point out, this was before all kinds of computer-models and now konsensus is that it will be very much milder consecuenses. This is 6000Megatons so its pretty bad. You can make food from petroleum products with some chemistry, I dont know how far this chemistry is now but humans surviving will make food somehow, maybe nuclear reactors produce electricity and this is used for lighting in greenhouses that produce food. We are not helpless. Is make a print screen of this table. The risc pandemic is low because it will be low population density. You may go crazy but that is something you can fight. One thing is very important, if you beleive there will be an end to this, hope can carry you a very long time.
 
Here is someone that is very critic towards the old prognosis that Carl Sagan promoted. It sounds as if he does not beleive there will be any nuclear winter att all:
1648482023872.png
 
Here is someone that is very critic towards the old prognosis that Carl Sagan promoted. It sounds as if he does not beleive there will be any nuclear winter att all:
View attachment 15661
It's nice to see an article that agrees with me. Common sense just doesn't support nuclear winter IMO.. The dust that makes it into the stratosphere is from the initial hot air rising and pulling up what is around the heat source with it. A ground burst pushes this dust away, then sucks it back in straight toward the heat source and up it goes. An air burst cannot do that, nor can a forest fire. Besides, with an air burst, the radiation source is much further from the dirt and the dirt will be far less radioactive. For these reasons, I believe the fallout maps are over exaggerated as well. It is physics, but all people see is the fear mongering. Why else would the Civil Defense program be scrapped and fallout shelters abandoned? "Live in fear, but do not prepare" seems to be the government motto, so either they want people dead (which is bad for their bottom dollar, conspiracy theories aside) or they merely need the fear to support exactly what Candice Owens said in that twitter video about war...

Me personally, I will prepare to the best of my abilities with optimism and logic. If people want to act hysterically, that (however cruel this sounds) is to my eventual benefit.
 
Its very uppsetting that most people consider a large nukewar as something you can not survive, if this is wrong. We should be given the best data and models and told exactly what to do. We could have small commercial NOx-scrubbers in the retail for example. Many videos on youtube use the data from the 80-s and that is really crazy, they had almost no computing power at all.
 
@rolnor You might enjoy like reading Nuclear War Survival Skills by Cresson H Kearny. He was Biological & Chemical Program Manager for Navy SEAL Team 6. I got my copy (the red one on this page at Amazon) recently and he is adamant in his position a nuclear detonation is survival if you keep your head on straight. And he tells you exactly why (and how) anyone can do most of his recommendations. But more importantly, it is written in plain English so a 73 year old woman like me can UNDERSTAND the material he is presenting in the book. He leaves no stone unturned in is clear guide for coming out on the other side of a nuclear detonation.

Mike Adams of Natural News/Health Ranger blogs highly recommended it in a recent podcast and I'm so glad I bought got and read it. Before reading it, I, too, wsa one of those that thought survival was not very likely if detonation was within our country's borders. Only for those lucky enough to have access to underground sheltering. Before readiny Kearny, I'd only new what I had read in my Dad's military pamphlets on nuclear detonations and their effects. After reading Kearny, I no longer think this way. He also has lots of diagrams and photos to facilitate his recommendations for best chance of survival.
 
Last edited:
In the Intro of Kearny's 1987 edition, he says it is an updated version of the 1979 original Oak Ridge National Laboratory survival book to reflect changes in thinking since SINCE 1979. New topics addressed: info on current Russian warheads (size, accuracy, etc.), making and using survival items, refutes many myths about detonations and radiation, info on prepper supples in detail (advantages, disadvantages, prices, souces), best survival foods and most needed daily life preps, info on prophylactic potassium iodide to protect thyroid gland, info on low-cost DIY simple shelter building, how to recognize what type of detonation occurred from the visible & audible environmental evidence, radiation levels of each type of detonation and its slow diminuation over time, how to reduce risk if you are not at or near ground zero, how to reduce sickness, and simply how to deal with and reduce the emotional stress of it all for you and your family. It's too much to ever remember it all IMHO but it will be re-read so we can be sure we are ready as much as is possible with our current preps and keep it handy for aftermath guidance. Honestly, there isn't a topic he didn't address for me. It's a thorough, well-laid out presentation, yet still clearly compassionate about the human side of surviving a blast, whether it occurred at ground level, near ground level or detonated higher up in the admosphere.

My husband has only read the forward and first few pages and was very impressed. Plans to finish it soon.
 
Last edited:
I also believe it is survivable, and I think Sagan, while having good intentions, was a bit off.

However, I also believe that it will be impossible to foresee every consequence since it has never happened before and unfortunately, it will only take one mistake to be deadly. Luck, for instance, a high vs low pressure system coming through and the timing of that, will play into the individual outcomes to some extent.
 
@rolnor You might enjoy like reading Nuclear War Survival Skills by Cresson H Kearny. He was Biological & Chemical Program Manager for Navy SEAL Team 6. I got my copy (the red one on this page at Amazon) recently and he is adamant in his position a nuclear detonation is survival if you keep your head on straight. And he tells you exactly why (and how) anyone can do most of his recommendations. But more importantly, it is written in plain English so a 73 year old woman like me can UNDERSTAND the material he is presenting in the book. He leaves no stone unturned in is clear guide for coming out on the other side of a nuclear detonation.

Mike Adams of Natural News/Health Ranger blogs highly recommended it in a recent podcast and I'm so glad I bought got and read it. Before reading it, I, too, wsa one of those that thought survival was not very likely if detonation was within our country's borders. Only for those lucky enough to have access to underground sheltering. Before readiny Kearny, I'd only new what I had read in my Dad's military pamphlets on nuclear detonations and their effects. After reading Kearny, I no longer think this way. He also has lots of diagrams and photos to facilitate his recommendations for best chance of survival.
I will read it, thanx! I must say that the fact that you are 73years old does not mean that you are ignorant, just that you are "year-rich" as we say in Sweden(!).
 
survival will depend largely on where you live large cities like,, LA,,, SanFran,,,New York Denver, will have a small percentage of survivors those around Military Bases will not fair well I expect the East Coast to be a waste land after nuclear war,,, there will be millions die upon impact,, millions more during the next 3 to 6 months from radiation and still more from the colder than normal first winter after the nukes fall the US population will be cut at least in half in the first year

I am fairly safe should the worse happen
 
I am fairly safe should the worse happen

Well, if you're in the Ozarks, you're probably right! I read somewhere on the net last year all the big wigs in the military and others in the know felt the Ozarks in particular was the safest place to be when SHTF. So much so they are all buying land/homes there. I think they knew way ahead of the rest of us that something was coming and it wasn't going to be pretty.
 
Last edited:
survival will depend largely on where you live large cities like,, LA,,, SanFran,,,New York Denver, will have a small percentage of survivors those around Military Bases will not fair well I expect the East Coast to be a waste land after nuclear war,,, there will be millions die upon impact,, millions more during the next 3 to 6 months from radiation and still more from the colder than normal first winter after the nukes fall the US population will be cut at least in half in the first year

I am fairly safe should the worse happen
I dont think many will die from radiation, this will quckliy get weaker. If its manly air-detonations it will be even less. It does depend how many Mtons goes off offcourse. But yes, large cities in the US are targets. The consequences from a global nuke-war are debbated, some say nuke-winter lasts 1 year, som say 1-4years, some say (Carl Sagan) 10years. One thing that could be devastating is if we get Plutonium in the air, then I agree with you, internal radiation from that will kill many. I live in Sweden and we are not a prioritized target right now, if we are this would be terror-bombing, we are no large military threat. Bu we will apply for Nato-membership this summer and then we will be a target. I live in the country so I have a good chans to make the initial attack. But my foodsupply lasts one year and then I need more. Question is, will any animals survive? Maybe some insects.
 
I dont think many will die from radiation, this will quckliy get weaker. If its manly air-detonations it will be even less. It does depend how many Mtons goes off offcourse. But yes, large cities in the US are targets. The consequences from a global nuke-war are debbated, some say nuke-winter lasts 1 year, som say 1-4years, some say (Carl Sagan) 10years. One thing that could be devastating is if we get Plutonium in the air, then I agree with you, internal radiation from that will kill many. I live in Sweden and we are not a prioritized target right now, if we are this would be terror-bombing, we are no large military threat. Bu we will apply for Nato-membership this summer and then we will be a target. I live in the country so I have a good chans to make the initial attack. But my foodsupply lasts one year and then I need more. Question is, will any animals survive? Maybe some insects.
big city dwellers who survive the blast will be exposed to radiation,,, most likely a lethal dose,, those lucky enough to be well outside the blast zone should be safe if they remain indoors for a week or so,,, livestock may survive it's hard to say
 
Yes, I agree. I was thinking of persons who seeks shelter, 35cm of concrete will save you from fallout-radiation. Yes, nobody knows how bad the air will be. Carl Sagan and his peers thought the air will be full of lethal nitrogen oxides after a big war, this has been rejected in later years. I have particle-HEPA and activated carbon filters, I hope I never need to use them.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top