Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/7/84; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!medin
From: medin@ucbvax.ARPA (Milo Medin)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Nuclear War casualties
Message-ID: <2744@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 22-Oct-84 13:33:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.2744
Posted: Mon Oct 22 13:33:20 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 23-Oct-84 11:05:21 EDT
References: <394@wucs.UUCP> <90@whuxk.UUCP> <2730@ucbcad.UUCP>
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 45

The number 15000 was an arbitrary number, my point is thats its not
a constant.  Things are much more complicted than that.  I do not
take the ozone argument seriously.  I have talked to Teller about
this myself, and he mentioned that the ozone mechanism is a 
system in equilibrium, and that when stress is applied, it
will respond to remove that stress.  He said that ozone might
drop 30-40% but then rebound with time.  I have little respect
for J. Schell's fate of the earth science.  I want some hard
numbers.  Like a study conducted by RAND or LLNL or LBL, some
scientists who undertook a scientific study and got some supportable
results.  I have heard of no such study that talks about having
'enough to blow up the world 12 times over'.  Its a little like
arguments against reprocessing nuclear waste.  That theres enough
plutonium in there to kill everyone in the US.  Sure, but theres
no way you can distribute it like that.  The same is true about
nuclear weapons.  You just cant distribute blast to every person
in the countryside.  The laws of physics say thats impossible.

I would encourage you to read a book called 'The Effects of Nuclear
Weapons', published in '77 by ERDA.  Its full of facts, not fantasises.
And it has real weapons data from tests in it.  Now, I dare you
to show me how you can blow up the world from that.  Give me someone
respectable, I'll even take Dick Garwin, how about that? 

About Gen. Grahm.  I have talked to him and I know he doesnt
buy the blow up the world nonsense either.  You are quoting him
about sticking your head in the sand, bbut he was I believe talking
about the need for an ABM at the time.  But I will grant you, the US
will be virtually destroyed following a countervalue strike.  My
point is that the Soviet Union will not.  I'm not arguing for
a survivalist mentality, just trying to point out that for the
Soviets, winning a nuclear war, even if it required taking pop.
damage, it would still survive with a large majority of its people
surviving.

I am looking forward to your citing of REAL, HARD, DATA.


Hysteria is when people act without rationality or support from
reality.  Thats exactly what you are doing, tho I will grant you
you are by no means alone.


					Milo