Gregory's Server
I think Greenpeace is already losing ground - their success in this field was based in the anti-nuclear movements based on Cold War threat of global nuclear war.
The generation of our parents was literally scared to death of the idea of a “total nuclear holocaust” and it was welcoming any kind of anti-scientific bullshit as long as it matched these fears. I can see the generation of my kids simply doesn’t get it and their thinking is much more based in reality - “so nuclear is low-carbon? and just two serious incidents over half century? oh ok, let’s have more of it”.
Even people who were initially biased by anti-nuclear propaganda, when you show them electricitymap.org, they just open their eyes and see they have been lied to. Which left Greenpeace, an organisation based on private donations driven by hype and PR, with only die-hard anti-nuclear and anti-GMO fanatics, since everyone who had something to do with science left Greenpeace long ago.
@kravietz @drq there were lists of targets for nukes, and i think they'd be followed if nuclear war actually broke out.
The consequences of nuclear war, even ignoring radation, just the areas of cities leveled, burned can be calculated.. https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/ (probably the W53 a good guess, "moderate" blast damage says "most buildings collapse" ftr, it's ~500Ă— Hiroshima..)