On 18/05/2021 17:05, Fredxx wrote:
On 18/05/2021 16:30, Robin wrote:
On 18/05/2021 13:20, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 18/05/2021 11:49, Robin wrote:

I know the basics of atom bomb making.Â* But a plutonium RDD avoids
all that.Â* Use it above a major city centre.Â* Then sit back to watch
to the panic over hours & days, the economic impact over months and
years, and the health impact over decades.

Why would there be ANY?. Plutonium is so un-radioactive that there is
more danger from e.g. inhaling lead dust than plutonium dust., Its
very heavy, so it hits the ground early.



Can you cite research to show a government could truthfully say after
plutonium has been dispersed in a city it will cause /no/ deaths?Â* And
that's what's needed.Â* If all you can truthfully tell the public is
that the excess deaths will be lost in the noise of the usual deaths
from cancer many (if not most) of the public will stay away until you
decontaminate.Â* And some (possibly many) will stay away even after
decontamination.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium#Toxicity

Suggests that the effects may be overstated, especially its toxicity.

This article may be of interest but will attract less scrutiny than a
wiki page:
http://ecolo.org/documents/documents...ard-cohen.html


Indeed. But AFAICS neither allows a clear and simple "Nothing to worry
about, it can't kill you." And leaders have to work with the
populations they have, most of whom won't give a toss that earnest
scientists tell them they're more likely to die from lightning than the
the plutonium.



--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid