Difference between revisions of "Nuclear winter"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(top: clean up & uniformity)
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
[[Fred Singer]] said:
 
[[Fred Singer]] said:
 
*I always considered "nuclear winter" to be a hoax and scientifically incorrect—and have said so in my Nightline debate with [[Carl Sagan]]. The data from the [[Kuwait]] oil fires support this view. Actually, nuclear explosions would create a strong [[greenhouse effect]] and cause warming rather than cooling. Let's hope we never have to find out. [http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=9551]
 
*I always considered "nuclear winter" to be a hoax and scientifically incorrect—and have said so in my Nightline debate with [[Carl Sagan]]. The data from the [[Kuwait]] oil fires support this view. Actually, nuclear explosions would create a strong [[greenhouse effect]] and cause warming rather than cooling. Let's hope we never have to find out. [http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=9551]
[[category:articles proposed for deletion]]
+
[[Category:Theories]]

Latest revision as of 16:50, July 13, 2016

Nuclear winter is the theory that large-scale nuclear war would cause a global cooling effect, because soot and smoke would block out the sun for a prolonged period of time.

Fred Singer said:

  • I always considered "nuclear winter" to be a hoax and scientifically incorrect—and have said so in my Nightline debate with Carl Sagan. The data from the Kuwait oil fires support this view. Actually, nuclear explosions would create a strong greenhouse effect and cause warming rather than cooling. Let's hope we never have to find out. [1]