Nuclear Exchange

{Note: This post is #4 in a series of 12 where I review what Scientific American magazine has called the “12 Events That Will Change Everything”. See previous posts “Extra Terrestrial Intelligence”, “Extra Dimensions”, “Polar Meltdown” and “False Dichotomy” for more information.}

The Event: Two or more countries launch a series of nuclear weapons at each other, causing immediate devastation and a lasting impact on the rest of the planet.

The Impact: Depending on how many nuclear weapons are detonated, the results could be disastrous for the planet. Assuming two countries such as India and Pakistan each sent 50 weapons at each other, there would be an immediate loss of life of 20 million people.

The detonations would also throw up about 5 million metric tons of soot into our upper atmosphere. Within a week, these particles would circle the globe and within two months they would blanket the planet. This would block a significant amount of sunlight which would greatly reduce the ability of our planet to supply us with a sufficient amount of food. The resulting famine would lead to over a billion people starving to death during the 10 years or so it takes for the atmosphere to clear. Most of these people would be in countries that already have marginal food supplies.

The Science: Nuclear weapons have been a reality since World War II when the US dropped one on Hiroshima and one on Nagaski in 1945. The amount of devastation led to Japan to surrender to the allied forces six days later. Those two bombs were the only nuclear weapons used during war time, and none have been used since. Thousands of test detonations have occurred since then as numerous countries have developed nuclear technology, but these tests have been primarily underground or underwater so they have not generated any significant amount of soot in the atmosphere. However, nuclear technology has advanced such that the weapons we have today are much more powerful than the ones used in 1945.

Jac’s Analysis: I tend to agree with Scientific American magazine that it is highly unlikely that this event will occur. The primary reason behind this thinking is that the people who control these nuclear weapons fully comprehend the amount of destruction they could cause, and have no intentions to ever use them in an act of aggression. The small risk of this occurring lies with the countries that have both nuclear weapons and unstable governments. This is essentially what triggered the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the US and NATO forces. The world’s super powers (led by the US and the UK) keep close tabs on any country trying to develop nuclear weapons, and try to ensure they either stop developing them or if they have them that they join with NATO countries to restrict their quantity.

Our Reaction? Many movies and TV shows have been made around the threat of nuclear weapons. Most of these scenarios involve terrorists or rogue government officials who obtain one weapon and try to use it to start a war, typically with the US (watch “The Sum of All Fears”, “Broken Arrow”, “The Peacemaker”, or “True Lies” if you like action movies). But even in these fictional situations, a single detonation of a nuke does not lead to all out nuclear exchange. You’ll need to venture into the science fiction section to find movies about a post nuclear exchange world (such as the “Terminator” movies, or “On the Beach”). Most of us have lived our lives with the knowledge that nuclear weapons exist. (Surprisingly, when I was researching this topic, I stumbled upon several websites that claim nuclear weapons do not exist and the photos of Hiroshima and Nagaski were faked. I guess some people really want to believe these weapons don’t exist.) I think in some ways, since there hasn’t been a nuclear weapon used since 1945, we’ve almost forgotten they exist and have stopped worrying about them. (Perhaps you’re old enough to remember the construction of fallout shelters in the late ‘50s and early ‘60s.) But as Joel pointed out in his message a few weeks ago, being a “peacemaker” is an important role and one that can involve sacrifice. Therefore, we should support, in whatever way we can (especially in prayer) those people who are active in the peace-keeping / peace-making role as they try to keep our world safe.

I used to wonder if the devastation described in the Book of Revelation (see chapter 8) was a nuclear war. Phrases like

“there came hail and fire mixed with blood, and it was hurled down upon the earth. A third of the earth was burned up, a third of the trees were burned up, and all the green grass was burned up.”

- they sound quite similar to the effects of nuclear weapons. Today, I would doubt that God will use nukes to bring about the end of this world – as an all powerful God, He has abilities beyond nuclear weapons at His disposal, so why would He use something as crude as a nuclear weapon?

Questions and comments?

1. Do you worry about the possibility of a nuclear war? Can you remember “fallout shelters” and the “Cuban Missile Crisis”?
2. Do you think the devastation in the Book of Revelation is describing the effects of nuclear weapons?

Next week we look at the possibility of science creating life.

Jac