In this article I will talk about the consequences of a nuclear strike, or, to be more precise, on the contrary, the absence of these consequences after a short amount of time.
A nuclear war is what most likely everyone fears to a greater or lesser extent, now, when most of the more or less developed states have such weapons.
When many people imagine a nuclear war, they think that this is the end of the world, since after the use of this weapon no one will supposedly survive, but is this really so?
Certainly, nuclear weapons are not weaker than the other, but in many respects are larger, but the "end of the world" in a nuclear war is unlikely and this can be understood by elementary comparisons.
Below you will see the city of Hiroshima after the 1945 explosion. In fact, there was nothing left but a few dilapidated houses.
Promotional video:
And this is how Hiroshima looks after some 50 years, which is a very small period of time. For some reason, life is in full swing, houses are standing, cars are driving and everything seems to be fine.
Another example can be cited, only of a slightly different kind. In Kazakhstan, in 1965, in January, after a thermonuclear explosion, a lake was formed, which is now called Chagan.
To this day, there is an overestimated radioactive background, only livestock and even shepherds continue to use water from this lake, as before. It's funny, but there were no irreversible consequences, let alone deaths, during this time, neither in animals nor in humans.
To this day, they go there and drink water, which means it is safe, at least, otherwise, no one would come near the lake.
And so you can go on for a long time, different states have tested nuclear weapons in lakes, in the fields, but as such there were practically no consequences.
What is all this for? To the fact that the "lethality" of nuclear weapons was imposed on people from the very beginning and it is quite likely that this was done on purpose, but this is not the case.
I am not saying that nuclear weapons are a toy and nothing will happen in such a war, but everything is too exaggerated.
And the essence of this article is that all over the Earth there are traces of the use of nuclear weapons, in the form of perfectly round lakes and ground craters, which were formed in the 18th century and earlier.
The fact that all these lakes in the world are few years old proves many facts and they were obviously not formed by themselves.
People often ask the question - "How do we live then, if recently, 200-300 years ago, there could have been a nuclear war?" I gave an example above, all because in 200-300 years, there will simply be no traces of visible consequences for the body, even 50-100 years will be enough for this.
In this article I will not argue that the war could have been in the past, since this is a separate topic, although there are many facts. The bottom line is that there are traces of the use of weapons in the recent past, but there are no consequences, but they should not be.