EMP The Worst Case Senerio????

[JeffWard]

Pre-computer controlled truck... check
Plenty of fresh well-water supply... and a hand pump... check
Plenty of fish and wild pigs... check
Year-round temps over 40 (Florida Gulf Coast)... check

I'm good... bring it on.

Jeff

[zpo]

This thread needs more hugs.

[Clarkm]

If only Einstein had a Mauser, he could have shot it out with the Wehrmacht, instead of skipping the country.

[1776 Patriot]

Pre-computer controlled truck... check
Plenty of fresh well-water supply... and a hand pump... check
Plenty of fish and wild pigs... check
Year-round temps over 40 (Florida Gulf Coast)... check

I'm good... bring it on.

Jeff

I too am pretty well set. The only thing I need to address is finding the right hand pump for my deep well. So far the only ones I seem to always find are for 'shallow' wells. I guess i'll keep looking.....

[Heavy Metal]

Ok, no problem. I'm not going to try to debate this anymore as I obviously I can't compete with someone with a science degree. All jokes aside, your certainly intitled to believe your "experts", but i'll just believe my experts, you know the ones who were actually chosen for there expertise on EMP's and served on the actual EMP commission, as well as a little agency called the Defense Nuclear Agency and of course other little known agencys like the CIA, and the NIA. Have a great holiday!!

Yes, I am certainly entitled to my opinion. I also am entitled to make a point without resorting to an appeal to authority logical fallacy in the process. I also chose not to resort to making a work of fiction the centerpiece of my argument as well.

I suggest you seek out other points of view and try and keep a more open mind and not merely seek out those which confirm your pre-concieved notions and biases.

Here, let me help you:

Are the proposed nuclear EMP scenarios realistic?
What appears to be of particular concern to the EMP commission is the scepter of terrorist groups or so-called “rogue” nations carrying out such an attack. As outlined by Dr. Pry, one of the commissioners, before a 2005 Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security, “[a] nuclear missile concealed in the hold of a freighter would give Iran, or terrorists, the capability to perform an EMP attack against the United States homeland, without developing an ICBM, and with some prospect of remaining anonymous. Iran’s Shahab-3 medium-range missile… is a mobile missile, and small enough to be transported in the hold of a freighter.” However, as mentioned above, such missiles have a payload capacity of approximately 1,000 kilograms corresponding to a crude U-based warhead of ~1 kiloton yield [22]—if, and when, the Iranians eventually develop nuclear weapons. Even the North Koreans, who are much further along in their weapons program, have had great difficulty reaching even a ~5 kiloton yield from their Pu-based devices in carefully orchestrated ground-tests, and their 2009 test was likely a fizzle.

Thus, it is not at all a simple matter, even for countries with considerable resources and focused decades-long effort, to build such weapons, let alone pair them to reliable delivery systems. As carefully argued by John Mueller in his new book, Atomic Obsession, it is virtually impossible for a terrorist cell to obtain the raw materials needed for a nuclear device and assemble it correctly themselves [Ref 22, p. 172–198]. Even a “crude” U-type device is not all that “crude” and requires the concerted effort of skilled scientists and engineers. Any weapon produced by a terrorist cell would likely be a one of a kind and would have to remain untested. For a terrorist group to then mate this weapon to a ballistic missile and successfully carry out an EMP strike beggars belief. As John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org has said, “It is just very difficult to imagine how terrorists are going to be able to lay hands on a nuclear-tipped missile, and launch it and reprogram it in such a way that it would be a high-altitude burst like that.”

Dr. Philip Coyle, former Pentagon director of operational test and evaluation, has stated that the EMP commission’s report appeared to “extrapolate calculations of extreme weapons effects as if they were a proven fact, and further to puff up rogue nations and terrorists with the capabilities of giants.” The 2009 Strategic Posture Commission puts it more delicately by saying that “the Commission is divided over how imminent a threat this is…”

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1553/1

I suggest you read the entire article and go back and read part one.

Furthermore, a HEMP attack must use a relatively large warhead to be effective (perhaps on the order of one megaton), and new proliferators are unlikely to be able to construct such a device, much less make it small enough to be lofted to high altitude by a ballistic missile or space launcher.”

So much for your devistating low yield nuke hypothesis.

You keep on worrying about that Kaiser and his nasty Lasers. I'll worry about the sun.

[CarbonCycles]

The country will be just fine with an EMP attack. The computer systems used by the military for mission critical tasks have been RAD-hardened to withstand EMP attacks. Commercial example, computer systems experience "bit-flips" (random 0/1 flip caused by high-energy particles from space) with enough occurrence that the systems have become fairly robust to them. So, we will be able to respond; however, the social and economic collapse will definitely be a problem at first.

In all honesty, I seriously doubt the world will end if something like that happened - our forefathers managed w/out television, ipods, cellphones, etc, and Wallstreet's servers are probably thousands of miles offshore to be threatened by this.

[CarbonCycles]

One more thing, IMO the most pressing issue with radioactive material will be the use of "dirty" bombs. Low-grade nuclear material is a lot more abundant and much more accessible than one may think. Example - nuclear isotopes used in hospitals and research labs.

It doesn't take much to strap an IED with some low-grade nuclear material to turn a few city blocks into a clean-up nightmare...ugh.

[1776 Patriot]

I also chose not to resort to making a work of fiction the centerpiece of my argument as well.

I suggest you seek out other points of view and try and keep a more open mind and not merely seek out those which confirm your pre-concieved notions and biases.

Here, let me help you:



http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1553/1



So much for your devistating low yield nuke hypothesis.

You keep on worrying about that Kaiser and his nasty Lasers. I'll worry about the sun.

Wow, because someone mentioned 'One Second After' now that's my 'centerpiece'?? Your serious?? The facts speak for themselves. I laughed out loud when you linked that article by Yousaf Butt. He's a laughing stock in the EMP 'world' and his 'facts' have been discredited as nothing more then dribble. This man actually stated that the 1999 underground North Korean nuke test was a 'fizzle'. Well guess what? A low yield nuke underground test(as the Korean test was) would look EXACTLY like the 'fizzle' he says it was. IT'S DESIGNED that way. So you'll have to do better then some anti EMP 'hack' as some have called him over the years. Me, i'll believe those who actually have worked to bring the EMP issue to the forefront, the people mentioned above. Like I said, it's like any other issue. You can always find an "expert" who holds 'your' views. Me i'll take my dozen or so 'experts' who are actually trying bring this issue into the limelight to hopefully save a few lives. I won't be one of those 90%ers thank you very much......

[Weaver]

One more thing, IMO the most pressing issue with radioactive material will be the use of "dirty" bombs. Low-grade nuclear material is a lot more abundant and much more accessible than one may think. Example - nuclear isotopes used in hospitals and research labs.

It doesn't take much to strap an IED with some low-grade nuclear material to turn a few city blocks into a clean-up nightmare...ugh.

Dirty Bombs are a panic weapon rather than a casualty-producing weapon. There is no real need to be concerned about the bombs themselves - but likely a need to be concerned about the panic following one, especially with the media and the DHS refusing to provide good public education about them.

First of all, it's pretty hard to get decent dispersal of rad waste using explosives.

Then there's the actual risk factor with available radioactive elements - there simply isn't enough stuff available to cause direct radiation sickness. The most one would see is a slight increase in long-term cancer rates.

Unfortunately, bullshit advice from DHS in the post-9/11 panicky days led the populace to believe that these were effective, scary weapons, so if someone does manage to set one off, I expect the panic reaction will be pretty bad. But there isn't any real reason to be personally concerned about the weapons themselves, any more than there is to really be concerned about someone EMPing the US.

[Clarkm]

Box cutters -> lose 10% of freedom
Dirty bomb -> lose other 90%