Why Can People Live in Hiroshima and Nagasaki Now, But Not Chernobyl?
On August 6 and 9, 1945, U.S. airmen dropped the nuclear bombs Little Boy and Fat Man on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. On April 26, 1986, the number four reactor at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in the Ukraine exploded.
Today, over 1.6 million people live and seem to be thriving in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, yet the Chernobyl exclusion zone, a 30 square kilometer area surrounding the plant, remains relatively uninhabited. Here’s why.
Fat Man and Little Boy
Dropped by the Enola Gay on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, Little Boy was a uranium- fueled bomb about 10 feet long and just over two feet across, that held 140 pounds of uranium and weighed nearly 10,000 pounds.
When he exploded as planned nearly 2000 feet above Hiroshima, about two pounds of uranium underwent nuclear fission as it released nearly 16 kilotons of explosive force. Since Hiroshima was on a plain, Little Boy caused immense damage. Estimates vary but it is believed that approximately 70,000 people were killed and an equal number were injured on that day, and nearly 70% of the city’s buildings were destroyed. Since then, approximately 1,900 people, or about 0.5% of the post-bombing population, are believed to have died from cancers attributable to Little Boy’s radiation release.
Squat and round, Fat Man, so named for its resemblance to Kasper Gutman from The Maltese Falcon, was dropped three days later on the city of Nagasaki on August 9, 1945. About two pounds of Fat Man’s 14 pounds of plutonium fissioned when it detonated about 1,650 feet above Nagasaki, releasing 21 kilotons of explosive force. Because the bomb exploded in a valley, much of the city was protected from the blast. Nonetheless, it is estimated that between 45,000 and 70,000 died immediately, and another 75,000 were injured. No data on subsequent cancer deaths attributable to radiation exposure from the bomb is readily available.
Sadly, Chernobyl was likely preventable and, like other nuclear plant accidents, the result of decision-makers’ hubris and bad policy that encouraged shoddy practice.
The design of the reactors at Chernobyl was significantly flawed. First, it had a “built-in instability.” When it came, this instability created a vicious cycle, where the coolant would decrease while the reactions (and heat) increased; with less and less coolant, it became increasingly difficult to control the reactions. Second, rather than having a top-notch containment structure consisting of a steel liner plate and post-tensioning and conventional steel reinforced concrete, at Chernobyl they only used heavy concrete.
On April 26, 1986, engineers wanted to run a test of how long electrical turbines powered by the reactor would continue operating when the reactor was no longer producing power. To get the experiment to work, they had to disable many of the reactor’s safety systems. This included turning off most automatic safety controls and removing ever more control rods (which absorb neutrons and limit the reaction). In fact by the end of the test, only 6 of the reactor’s 205 control rods remained in the fuel.
As they ran the experiment, less cooling water entered the reactor, and what was there began to turn to steam. As less coolant was available, the reaction increased to dangerous levels. To counteract this, the operators tried to reinsert the remaining control rods. Sadly, the rods also had a design flaw in the graphite tips. This resulted in the displacement of the coolant before the reaction could be brought under control. In a nutshell, as these tips displaced the coolant, within seconds the reaction actually increased drastically due to the heat, creating even more steam, and thus getting rid of more coolant.
This might have not been so bad had the control rods been able to be inserted fully to perform their function of absorbing neutrons and thus slowing the reaction, except the heat became so intense, that some of the graphite rods fractured, jamming the rods at about one third of the way in.
So, in the end, when the nearly 200 graphite tips were inserted into the fuel, reactivity increased rapidly, rather than slowed as was supposed to happen, and the whole thing blew up. It is estimated that about seven to ten tons of nuclear fuel were released and at least 28 people died directly as a result of the explosion.
It is further estimated that over 90,000 square miles of land was seriously contaminated with the worst effects being felt in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. However, radiation quickly spread in the wind and affected wide swaths of the northern hemisphere and Europe, including England, Scotland and Wales.
Hard data on the number of people who died as a result of the radioactive release are difficult to find. It is known that of the 100 people exposed to super high radiation levels immediately after the accident, 47 are now deceased. Additionally, it has been reported that thyroid disease skyrocketed in those countries closest to Chernobyl; by 2005, 7,000 cases of thyroid cancer were recorded in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia.
Most experts agree that the areas in the 30 kilometer Chernobyl exclusion zone are terribly contaminated with radioactive isotopes like caesium-137, strontium-90 and iodine-131, and, therefore, are unsafe for human habitation. Yet neither Nagasaki nor Hiroshima suffer these conditions. This difference is attributable to three factors: (1) the Chernobyl reactor had a lot more nuclear fuel; (2) that was much more efficiently used in reactions; and (3) the whole mess exploded at ground level. Consider:
Little Boy had around 140 pounds of uranium, Fat Man contained about 14 pounds of plutonium and reactor number four had about 180 tons of nuclear fuel.
Only about two pounds of Little Boy’s uranium actually reacted. Likewise only about two pounds Fat Man’s plutonium underwent nuclear fission. However, at Chernobyl, at least seven tons of nuclear fuel escaped into the atmosphere; in addition, because the nuclear fuel melted, volatile radioisotopes were released including 100% of its xenon and krypton, 50% of its radioactive iodine and between 20-40% of its cesium.
Both Fat Man and Little Boy were detonated in mid-air, hundreds of feet above the Earth’s surface. As a result, the radioactive debris was taken aloft and dispersed by the mushroom cloud rather than being drilled into the earth. On the other hand, when reactor number four melted down at ground level, the soil underwent neutron activation, where the already active neutrons in the burning fuel reacted with the soil causing it to become radioactive.
Lately, some weird reports have been coming from the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone – wild animals have returned, and, for the most part, they seem fine. Moose, deer, beaver, wild boar, otter, badger, horses, elk, ducks, swans, storks and more are now being hunted by bears, lynx and packs of wolves, all of which look physically normal (but test high for radioactive contamination). In fact, even early effects of mutations in plants, including malformations and even glowing are now mostly limited to the five most-contaminated places.
Although not everyone is ready to agree that Chernobyl is proof that nature can heal herself, scientists agree that studying the unique ecosystem, and how certain species appear to be thriving, has produced data that will ultimately help our understanding of long term radiation effects. For example, wheat seeds taken from the site shortly after the accident produced mutations that continue to this day, yet soybeans grown near the reactor in 2009 seem to have adapted to the higher radiation. Similarly, migrant birds, like barn swallows, seem to struggle more with the radiation in the zone than resident species. As one expert explained, they’re studying the zone’s flora and fauna to learn the answer to a simple question: “Are we more like barn swallows or soybeans?”
If you liked this article, you might also enjoy our new popular podcast, The BrainFood Show (iTunes, Spotify, Google Play Music, Feed), as well as:
- When the U.S. Accidentally Dropped Nuclear Bombs on Spain
- The Man Who Survived Two Nuclear Bomb Attacks
- Cockroaches Would Not Survive an Extreme Nuclear Fallout
- The United States Once Planned on Nuking the Moon
- Bananas are Naturally Radioactive
- Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
- Atomic Bomb Versus Fukushima Nuclear Crisis
- Do Animals in Chernobyl’s Fallout Zone Glow?
- Fat Man
- Fat Man and Little Boy Bombs
- Little Boy
- Nuclear Reaction: Why Do Americans Fear Nuclear Power?
- Radiation Effects Research Foundation
- UNSCEAR Map of Chernobyl Contamination
|Share the Knowledge!|
graphite rods reduce reaction not encourage it
@none: Normally yes. But due to design flaws in the Soviet RBMK-1000 nuclear reactor, in the right circumstances, such as happened here, the opposite occurs. When the overheated controlling rods are lowered into water to cool, the resulting steam actually increases the reaction as the coolant is displaced, rather than reduces it, which creates a positive void coefficient, essentially, an ever increasing feedback loop. I’ll change the wording to make that more clear. Thanks for pointing out the ambiguity. 🙂
“On August 26, 1986, engineers wanted to run a test” – Wrong date.
@EditorAtLarge: Thanks for catching that. Fixed!
Did you just enfer that Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren’t preventable?
The way I read the article, the author pointed out that “Chernobyl was likely preventable” as a contrast to how people readers might think of the accident: a sudden, uncontrollable event—like a plane crash—not as a contrast to the bombing of Japan.
Yes, both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were preventable; however, the Japanese chose NOT to prevent them. After the first bombing, the Japanese again refused to surrender and end the war, thus, it was necessary to send the second bomb. Thankfully, after Nagasaki, the Japanese surrendered. because of the two atomic bombs, untold thousands of lives, American AND Japanese were saved because an invasion and ground war was avoided.
Are you nuts. You think after already exterminating 75,000 innocent people with a weapon of incredible inhumanity, that it was then acceptable to send in another one, because the Japanese government hadn’t surrendered. You are a bloody idiot. Dropping nukes on any one is never the answer to anything, and never will be.
Would you rather have millions of innocents die in a ground invasion that was avoided? Like it or not the atomic bombings was the lesser of two evils and saved countless lives in the long run. The Japanese would NEVER have surrendered to anything other than utter annihilation.
Not saying it’s not a bad thing that happened, just that it was the better option.
Ahh the American propaganda machine at its finest. You realise that all of Japan’s fleet had been wiped out. Supply-lines were cut off as America had japan surrounded. Furthermore they hardly had any planes left to defend themselves not counting the Russian invasion that had also occured. Then the Americans had the audacity to study the people affected in these areas and then hide what they had done.
You believe it was necessary because that is what American history states or as the American military at the time stated. ‘Bomb or a million American soldiers lives?’ Get a clue.
yeah their war ethic was mess….they both dont choose designate location to act war…choose to act war with area surrounded with civilian…they could prevent it if they assign that n make agreement win lose on war where only soldier determine protect their country decide the war…what do we do both leader chicken out…
Like killing a million innocent men women and children in Iraq, with Your Fuhrer ” George Bush at the helm. Stating we are here to protect the Iranians from Saddam Hussein. Of course this was after Bush SR. Previously Gave Saddam Hussein billions in Arms……More propaganda,…sounds like you would Vote Billary clinton, so we can send more jobs to Mexico…..
75,000 could sometimes be lesser than the number of deaths in a single battle during world war two though…
Any problem can b fixed with petrol n a match if not blow the fukers up they started a war they could never win and deserve everything they got and more and the US are now getting their just deserts with the twin towers im aussie we dont have wars here cause we are not greedy people you all need to wake up and smell the roses you shoot, someone shoots back an so the cycle goes someone needs be the bigger man and step back or take it on the chin if I could fly a plane you would be the first country I would stick my plane into you all lucky I cant fly lmfao
To say they started the war, is very misguided. They may have physically attacked first, but start the war they did not.
The US had complete air supremacy. they could have bombed japan into the stoneage. Absolutely no justification for nukes.
Japan was one of the most heavily defended islands in the pacific it was estimated 5 million americans would have died in a land invasion the entire japaneese populous would have been wiped out due to them not wanting to surrender trust me im a historian, the a bombs were the way to end it
Thousands of people were killed unnecessary. Moreover, the bombs should have been used on unpopulated areas or Japanese military targets … NOT civilians.
The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey group, assigned by President Truman to study the air attacks on Japan, produced a report in July of 1946 that concluded: Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped.
General (and later president) Dwight Eisenhower said: The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing. (Newsweek November 11, 1963).
The real explanation might be a political one. Truman wanted to demonstrate the new weapon of mass destruction to the Soviet Union and to limit Soviet expansion in Asia. The “Cold War” has begun.
That is the most refocus tripe I have heard in a long while. It’s easy to be self riteous when you are living today in relative comfort as a result of the actions of allied decision makers. What if you had endured years of war and hardship with your very way of life being threatened. Wake up to your pompous self.
What gets me about all the bleeding heart liberals on here who are anti-nuke make absolutely no sense at all because they conveniently let Japan off from its crimes. Remember, the US wasn’t even involved in WWII until Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. These liberals apparently don’t know history and that it was Japan who attacked at Pearl Harbor, what about those Americans who suffered at the hands of the Japanese at Pearl Harbor, do they matter? According Wiki this was the breakdown of casualties.
“Ninety minutes after it began, the attack was over, as 2,008 sailors were killed and 710 others were wounded; 218 soldiers and airmen (who were part of the Army) were killed and 364 others were wounded; 109 marines were killed and 69 others were wounded; and 68 civilians were killed and 35 others were wounded.” (Wikipedia) Available Online: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor
I have never commented on this site, but your comment ” Remember, the US wasn’t even involved in WWII until Japan attacked Pearl Harbor” is totally UNTRUE. The US did not declare war, until Japan attacked Pearl Harbor but US was definitely involved. You accuse others of not knowing history? You should look at history yourself. Just one of many examples of US involvement in WWII is something called, Lend Lease. You can look it up for yourself. US was profiteering from WWII until the attack at Pearl Harbor.
Didn’t the U.S have Japan blockaded before Pearl Harbor?
The Japanese started the war by invading China and other parts of Asia. My Uncle Dan was the military advisor for Chiang Kai-shek who were fighting against the Japanese. I noticed the bleeding hearts cried about the amount of civilians KILLED not murder in the A Bombs. He forgot the Rape of Nanjing where the Japanese MURDERED over 350000 Chinese and Americans. My Aunt Dotty they murdered in that city. As Sun Tzu bing-fa pointed out, the ONLY COURSE OF WAR IS VICTORY! (READ Art of War). Yes we had the lend lease, but the Japanese did not follow the dictates of the G Convention. They followed Bushido or the way of the warrior. By bombing we saved over 1 million lives
The US dropped the second nuke so japan can’t Deny that the US is drop the nuclear weapon on Japan
So actually your wrong “Bloody idiot” the Japense people where arming themselves with spears and even rifles which makes them 100% armed personal which means they weren’t innocent. Also lets focus on the fact that they didn’t surrender after the first A-bomb, that was their fault we already had taken the Ruler of Japan to see nuclear weapon testing and he still declined before the first A-Bomb was dropped. So we went through with the attack and again he refused to end the war with the United States so we dropped a second Atomic Weapon on them, and still they choose not to end the war and it wasn’t until we held Tokyo hostage with another atomic weapon hovering over them was it that he signed the surrender agreement aboard the U.S Iowa warship.
Peace through strength…..it works and has kept the world nuke free since 1946.
Saltwater wells in my eyes.
And what about Fukishima?
Fukushima is many times worse than Chernobyl
Fukushima was no where close to as bad as Chernobyl
Chernobyl was a ranked seven on the International Nuclear Event Scale, which is the highest class accident you can reach on that scale. In all of history only two places in the world have reached a seven on this scale.
Fukushima was the second place to reach this devastating number. However, we cannot clearly determine the total effects that Fukushima will have as most of the radiation leaked into water and is draining into the ocean. (That is NOT as good a thing as you probably think it is)
Lastly Fukushima was handled much better than Chernobyl. Chernobyl suffered a meltdown because of very poor maintenance and many died, while Fukushima was damaged because of a earthquake and following tsunami, only two workers died because of the accident and that was from drowning.
Can you provide the amount of uranium, plutonium, etc involved at Fukushima for comparison? I guess there is no way to know how much of these radioactive isotopes are going into the ocean.
Come on! Get it right. The graphite tips are moderators in this design. That means that the graghite slows the neutrons down so that they will have a higher probability of hitting a uranium atom and causing fission. If not moderated by graphite the neutrons travel too fast and will miss the uranium target. So the graphite tips were inserted and displaced both water and steam voids, causing the fission reaction to increase.
Dude is correct. However the control rods did not have a graphite tip. The control rods are made of a neutron absorbing substance that slows the reaction. The graphite was used to slow neutrons in order increase the chance of a uranium atom splitting. It wouldn’t make sense to have a control rod that both increases and decreases reactivity. And yes there were design flaws but the engineers who built it were not retarded. the biggest design flaw was using the graphite as a moderator because as graphite gets hotter it better slows the neutrons hence the more uranium split and the more heat released. Creating a positive feedback loop in the reactor.
Actually the Chernobyl reactor had graphite tipped control rods. Something to do with Xenon poisoning and startups I think, and very much an aggravating factor in the meltdown.
Note within article:
” Most experts agree that the areas in the 30 kilometer Chernobyl exclusion zone are terribly contaminated with radioactive isotopes like caesium-137, strontium-90 and iodine-131….”
The first two of these have a half life of approx. 30 years & 28 years respectively. However, the half-life of iodine-131 is about 8 days (and pretty much fully decayed after 80 days).
This does not answer the basic question of how people can be living in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Bikini Island, Australian outback etc when scientists say that nuclear bombs kill everything and make the place uninhabitable for thousands of years. This is clearly a false assumption.
People are not living in the Bikini atoll. Citizens from those islands (marshal islands) have been living in exile since 1946.
The main thing about it is radioactivity. The nagasaki and hiroshima exploded on air while chernobyl happened on the ground.
The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs exploded at altitudes of 600 meters and 503 meters, respectively, then formed huge fireballs that rose with the ascending air currents. About 10% of the nuclear material in the bombs underwent fission; the remaining 90% rose in the stratosphere with the fireball.
Subsequently, the material cooled down and some of it started to fall with rain (black rain) in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki areas, but probably most of the remaining uranium or plutonium was dispersed widely in the atmosphere.
you start your post with facts about Hiroshima and then move to Chernobyl and say it was sadly preventable.
I’m sure that Fat man and litle boy where preventable as well.
ask japan if pearl harbor was preventable
Pearl harbor was only on army guys but fat man& little boy was on normal people.No one can deny the differences between the extreme measures taken in pearl harbour
and in japan,they are just incomparable!!!
Sad to see all the attacks on this well-written article. Check the facts, yes and get it right. But it’s as if focusing in on the minute details and picking apart this message somehow negates the reality that over 100,000 people died, 75,000 injured, and 7,000 cases of thyroid cancer were ALL AVOIDABLE. Humans created this damage. You should be angry! But your attacks are misplaced. You choose to shoot the messenger instead of remember who the real enemy is. Are you really part of the solution with these kinds of comments?
Well said Michelle!
They should be part of the solution. The FINAL solution.
As you are well aware, many septic tanks are an intensely ignorant bunch.
The atomic bombs prevented nothing! Japan had already surrendered but your leaders wanted to trie those develish bombs on people.
Don’t say you prevented something, the Americans are the root of all evil on this world. Not the people but its leaders. You killed over 60 million native Americans to steal that country. You had slaves and still are treating black people like cattle in the US. Prescott Bush financed Hitler, you started the Iraq war over the petrodollar, you started a world war over a false flag 911.
Don’t state that you ever prevented anything!
Wow, [email protected] Perhaps you could talk with a WWII Vet or read some history to find out that ALL countries were originally inhabited by someone other than who lives there now. Including whatever country you live in. America funds the world – at least the 1% of it does. Show me a country where the black population has not ruined it. Look at the behavior of the blacks around the world and you will see there is no country better off with them – in fact far worse.
A country where the black population hasn’t ruined it? While I can agree to some extent on the social degeneracy of many in the African diaspora, it’s hard to tell which population of blacks you’re referring to. There are many more races of blacks than you seem to realize, each with their own behavioral predispositions. As for those in the Americas, many are hybridized with Europeans which even further deviates them from African genetic influence.
Anyway, I can agree with @Doug in that the United States and all of these so-called “white countries” are very hypocritical in many respects. You should face the fact that white’s are really just attempting to maintain control over the global economic machine. Japan is frequently demonized for its attempt to forcibly centralize eastern Asia and Oceania against Europeanization, but look at who’s actually taken most of the worlds resources. Also, the pacification of Japan and the west (US, Canada, et al) preventing their nuclear development is an obvious tactic to maintain their own global empire.
Hmm, Elarude your comments should very familiar. Yes, simply replace black with Jew and we’ve got Mein Kempf. Do we want to go down that road again?
You? Who is you? I wasn’t alive then and neither was he. I didn’t own a slave, (I have several black friends, we’re practically family) I didn’t drop a bomb on anyone and every country has taken over to get it to begin with for 1000s of years and several countries have had slaves, know wtf you’re talking about before u just repeat something you head in a media debate.
Now I’m assuming that you’ve prevented a war or something by the way you tell other people what to do, what they did or didn’t do and you must not have any Irish, Jewish, European, African, Australian etc. Ancestry because that would mean that your a hypocrite!!! (Oh no Americans are horrible because they’ve stepped in to help put an end to innocent people dieing) and because of a few people’s decisions America is a bad place? Why is America here to begin with smart one?
Deficiencies in the existing INES have emerged through comparisons between the 1986 Chernobyl disaster and 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster. Firstly, the scale is essentially a discrete qualitative ranking, not defined beyond event level 7. Secondly, it was designed as a public relations tool, not an objective scientific scale. Thirdly, its most serious shortcoming is that it conflates magnitude with intensity.
I was fortunate enough to visit Nagasaki last week (the end of April) and was immediately entranced by its springtime beauty Set in a series of valleys with a very deep water harbour it is incredible to believe that this was the site of such desolation and horror very nearly 70 years ago.
As I am 72 I was prepared, before visiting, to assume that every visible building would have been built within my lifetime but happily this is not the case. Due to the contours of the land much of the seaward side of the old city survives. Most importantly are the wooden buildings of the truly awesome Thomas Blake Glover’s garden complex which now receives over 2 million visitors a year.
Glover was a Scotsman who revolutionised Japanese industry in the 19th Cent.
How ironic that his birth place in Scotland was destroyed by WW2 bombing!
All of these post makes me see more of what my history looks like and on top of it i was in japan for three years, in Iwakuni. I think that because of this there will still be devastation because of this bombing. This bombing’s memorial, i went to and saw what was there and what was left over from the bombing. it was really sad to see people crying when you walk into the memorial because you can hear in the back ground everywhere in the memorial of what sounded like the bombings going off in the background. I don’t think people realize how important this is. I do! you can’t even step 100 feet from a still standing building left over from the bombing. The memorial has people from all over the world coming to this because they want to see what some of their history looked like…. I love japan
Nice and informative website, Daven! Do such websites really make sufficient money? Please share some insights. I am planning a similar website in a completely different, unique niche (so won’t compete for sure!) and therefore, would love to get some prior, firsthand information. Thank you!
bbc just stole this article and translated it into spanish, the same info.
So much of this discussion seems to be disproven, or at least seems to say that our fears of the longevity of nuclear fallout is overblown. There are people living in Chernobyl and they have been since shortly after the accident. They are alive and well, according to the documentary Pandora’s Promise.
In mid-October 1945 (about 60 days after the first A bomb was dropped) I flew over Hiroshima
at 500 ft. in a P-38 fighter aircraft. Ten years later my thyroid gland died. What are
the chances that there is a relationship between that flight and
the thyroid problem?
The reason why is because Nagaski/Hiroshimi is because the nukes detonated above ground and the nuclear level has gone down since the end of ww2 but Chernobyl was 30 years ago and it was on sea level
“…. This difference is attributable to three factors: (1) the Chernobyl reactor had a lot more nuclear fuel; (2) that was much more efficiently used in reactions; and (3) the whole mess exploded at ground level.”
At Chernobyl, the reactor “exploded” due to steam and then the fissionable material “melted down”.. it did not detonate in the same fashion as a nuclear weapon would (uncontrolled release of neutrons from super critical mass causing a chain reaction). This important distinction should have been elaborated on in the article. The differences between the detonation of a nuclear weapon and a reactor core melting down should be explained.
why were the bombs not both uranium or both plutonium?
It’s easier to make a single type bomb. It adds no extra power, most of the materials gets cast off (only a small amount fissions), the Americans only had enough for 3 bombs.
Also, more were killed in the firebombing of Tokyo (1 million) than Nagasaki and Hiroshima combined.
Also ‘only’ 30 million have been killed in US started or funded wars since 1945
that is comparable to what hitler did in 6 or Half what Stalin did in 20. Also half of those wars were against communist funded proxies (korea, vietcong) or were by unscrupulous mercs to harrass USSR (rebels in Middle East- including the group that would become the Taliban, or in columbia). Also before any of you accuse me of being american, im british, i have enough reason to dislike them. while people like to paint america as the big bad guy, they never tried to drive a country to the sea (most of the Middle East against Israel in the seven day war), militarily anexed a country (USSR in Eastern Europe and recently Russia in Ukraine). To be honest most countries have a problem but if anything it’s a hell of a lot nicer than when they kept to themselves and ignored several dictators try and take over eroupe (Napoleon, kaiser Whilhelm II and Hitler)
The animals life span is so short they don’t have time to succumb to the radiation.
WHY DOES EVERYONE KEEP REPEATING THE SAME ANSWER!?!?
Seriously it’s like every 3rd comment was copied and pasted!
Scientists don’t seem to understand that the animals that returned and now thriving on the protected Chernobyl’s area, are a danger for the ecosystem in general. And that because these animals are already, after several animal generations, mutated to withstand radiation. This happens due to natural selection which ensures that only the stronger and more adaptive organisms survive.
The animals that live now there, are the survivors.
These adapted animals now, are a danger for their ecosystem because they mate with other animals of their species who have not been exposed to radiation, and by doing so, they pass to their species ( through their descendants) the mutated genes. What the combination of mutated and not mutated genes will give as a result it is something that it is impossible for us to know. It is impossible also to know where the mutations might have spread as animals don’t necessarily mate in the same place they wander.
In other words don’t get surprised if you see any new species occur in the future. Nature is adaptive and makes no discriminations on the characteristics that its living creatures will have as long as they are able to survive.
Because it was carpet bombed under the order of the Jesuits of the Vatican, who control our government, who oversaw the entire false operation to infiltrate Japan. The lie goes much deeper than this. But be free on making fun over it.
I hope that humanity can learn from its mistakes. It could not have been a simple choice between nuking or invading Japan. The idea that there are only 2 choices, both bad, in any situation must be challenged. Options to make peace existed before August 6th. Next time our political leaders try to drag us into war, let us urge them to find the alternatives. Better still, let us try to become better at not giving power to such violent people. The bully, the psychopath, the sociopath need to be called out before they get to be leaders and instead be given jobs that are commensurate with other of their abilities. Trying to solve our problems by violence only creates more problems. And nuclear energy needs to be managed better if it is to play any part long-term in our energy supply: otherwise another Chernobyl or Fukushima is statistically inveitable. We only have one livable planet and our species’ survival on it is not guaranteed. Life would be better for millions if we put our resources and inventiveness into life-affirming activity rather than sowing the seeds of destruction.
Maybe, because actually they were not atomic bombs……
One of the reasons that Japan would have been hard to conquer with conventional warfare, is the invaders would have had to come from the sea, and this is the lowland the Japanese would have controlled all the highland, and the hills and mountains were filled with caves and fortifications, stocked with food and water, as any military man knows he who controls the highland controls the battle, the United States would have eventually prevailed but at great loss of life, bombing and strafing would have been of little benefit, so the actual loss of life from the bombs saved countless lives from both sides .
Maybe if there was an enforcible law forcing all countries who go to war have the children of their government representatives be in the first attacking battle group, there would be less an incentive to attack each other.
But then every country will just add a new requirement to become president/queen/ruler: must be childless…
Europe annexed Ukraine.. so your facts are a mixed up a bit there. Britain & America carved up the Middle East’s oil between them early on in their war plans. Let’s not forget Britain still has N. Ireland annexed too. Of course, English (Anglo-Saxon) and Americans are not native to their countries either..
I love how EVERYONE is saying that it was unnecessary to bomb Japan. Please tell me how the fuck you can think it is acceptable to send people onto their beaches to be set on fire or blown to bits. You think that allowing innocent children to starve to death is more humane while they watch their mothers and fathers force their siblings to commit suicide than giving people who are suffering because of their government’s decision any easier way out?! So it’s okay to allow everyone to die because what you don’t want to bomb an island because what? You think asking them nicely will make them stop. This is why I can’t stand weak people. Let me ask you something is it better for a woman in abusive relationship to began the person hitting her to stop or to fight back? I got news for you. The answer is the same as with Japan during World War II. No. You fight the fuck back!!! Because at the end of the day your whining and crying and begging will not stop anyone who attacks a country minding their own business or a woman for no reason. You may say it’s not the same but it is which is why when, not if, war breaks out and shit goes down I will be fighting back protecting my home.
It is interesting to see how a scientific statement about why Chernobyl is contaminated but Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not has been hijacked by arguments about the merits of dropping the bombs in the first place. In this regard, Falsman’s comment of 7 April 2015 providing a link to Global Research’s article is so valuable. It perfectly illustrates the weakness of the revisionist argument. Despite its assertion that the bombs were dropped to intimidate the Soviet Union, it can provide no written document, or even oral statement by any decision maker, that this was the reason. You would have thought something would have turned up by now if this were the case. The only basis of their conclusion is the natural assumption of America haters that the American Government must always have bad motives, and the conclusions of other people, with 20/20 hindsight, that the bombing was unnecessary. But even if this were correct, it doesn’t follow that that was how it was seen at the time. It should be noted, also, that nobody suggests that the purpose of making the bomb was to intimidate Russia. It was produced in order to shorten the war. The natural momentum of the war would ultimately lead to the super weapon being used unless something drastic – like the enemy’s surrender – intervened. You don’t need to look any further. I might add that Japan did not surrender after the first atomic bomb was dropped; it required a second bomb. This might suggest that, just perhaps, they were not as ready to surrender as 20/20 hindsight would infer.
You said Little Boy held 140 pounds of uranium, but only about two pounds (1.4%) of uranium underwent nuclear fission. And only about two pounds (14%) of Fat Man’s 14 pounds of plutonium fissioned when it detonated.
I’m not saying that I doubt your figures, but it’s the first time that I’ve seen them and I was wondering (1) how they figured out how much nuclear material actually fissioned, and (2) why so little of the fissionable material actually fissioned…if that’s even a word? Those are some pretty specific numbers, how do you even measure that after a bomb has gone off. It wasn’t like a controlled experiment with sensors and what not. I’m just curious and have never heard this before.