this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2023
567 points (94.5% liked)

Memes

1155 readers
11 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 months ago (4 children)

A nuke destroys whole ecosystems...

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 months ago

Chernobyl is doing pretty well now that it's completely uninhabitable by humans...

[–] [email protected] 10 points 9 months ago

Plenty of things will survive it, and the removal of the humans in the area may be a net positive.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

So do we... at least the nuke stops killing new things after a bit.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Few months/years. The radioactive isotopes created in the explosion have a short half life. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki are thriving cities today.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki are thriving cities today.

That contradicts the whole point that a nuke will destroy humans but leave the environment intact. A bomb of any kind destroys ecosystems. If humans reclaim the cities, it's not a "net positive" for the environment, despite the cynicism that's in the statement.

"Land back" is a much better approach since land under indigenous jurisdiction has much more biodiversity than average and especially than bombed land.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Perhaps 1 minute?