digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at wired.com —

Nuclear Blasts Show Terrifying Power

wired.com — It was 63 years ago today that the United States detonated the very first atomic bomb. Three weeks later, the only two A-bombs dropped in warfare destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. Many nuclear -- and thermonuclear -- bombs have been tested since. Here are some images.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • MichaelBurner, on 07/16/2008, -1/+12Devastating destruction....pretty pictures. Well, some of them.
    • bosssmiley, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2All hail mighty Megaton!

      /Fallout 3
    • unreg, on 07/17/2008, -1/+7Where's the Fridge?
      • askantik, on 07/17/2008, -4/+1You mean the one Indiana Jones hid in?
    • StarDust13, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2If you want to see a Terrifying image look up the photos taken after the bombing of Japan, the image of the shadow of a person burnt forever into the concrete steps on which he had been sitting at the time of detonation seem pretty Terrifying to me.
  • japanesepagoda, on 07/16/2008, -6/+30I'm going to put it out there...This is one of the scariest series of pictures I have ever seen.

    • cawpin, on 07/17/2008, -20/+7If you haven't seen these pictures before you must be 7 years old.
      • Duositex, on 07/17/2008, -2/+9How is that relevant? He said they're the scariest he's seen. The "est" at the end of "scari" means that it doesn't matter how old he is or how many other pictures he's seen. I bury you for being a butthead.
    • Hanker, on 07/17/2008, -2/+3you should see the pictures of my penis
      • japanesepagoda, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Don't you worry, they're on my wall.
  • Cretius0, on 07/17/2008, -1/+6unreal... unbelievable display of power
    • lithera, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2If you think this was unreal. I recommend the documentary ""trinity and beyond" It follows the development of nuclear bombs from the Manhattan Project to somewhere early 80's. There is some awesome and very frightening footage in there.
    • curtisag, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Yes I agree. It's called 'Trinity and Beyond: The Atomic Bomb Movie'. You can download it on the pirate bay's site most likely. It shows the bomb in all it's glory and horror. I also recommend watching it while high. It will flip you out.
  • Warbick, on 07/17/2008, -7/+8Today's bombs put these to shame, these are still very frightening though.
    • zeusthemoose, on 07/17/2008, -0/+7Actually, gone are the days of the big bombs. Back in the 50's and 60's the idea was to use large payloads on the order of ~10 megaton output, but what we discovered was that this was terribly inefficient. Most of the energy went to waste. The largest bomb the US has in its stockpile is now 330Kt of output. The idea is to use around 8 devices and deliver them in a concentric circle with one in the middle to a target city. This greatly enhances the effect of the firestorm (which causes all of the destruction) and thus is a bigger bang for the buck.
      • nheels, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2Are you really sure you know what the US has in their stockpile?
      • Typhoon2009, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3While we may not know exactly, it IS known that we have MIRV'd missiles (what Zeusthemoose described). They supposedly have a lower energy output than the bombs of yore but are still effective. Because now we KNOW a missile can hit a target; back then they were huge in case the bomb missed.
      • djbon2112, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1"The largest bomb the US has in its stockpile is now 330Kt of output"

        They've got some ~1MT warheads. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B83_nuclear_bomb
      • zeusthemoose, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1I forgot about the UGM-133A Trident II D5 Mk 5 which has an output of 455Kt that is launched in a MIRV configuration of 6 warheads. I was wrong with my 8 per city figure, its really 6 for the SLBMs, woops XD. Should have gone and refreshed my memory before I posted. The LGM-118A Peacekeeper ICBM carried a maximum of 10 MIRVed W87/MK-21 RVs with an output of 300Kt per warhead, but this is not in the inventory anymore due to the START II treaty (the ICBM that is, the W87/MK-21 RVs are).

        Also, there is no active warhead with an output of ~1 MT.

        http://thebulletin.metapress.com/content/pr53n2702 ...

  • Fatherspirit, on 07/17/2008, -20/+7The Creation Of The Atomic Bomb Was This World's Saddest Day!
    • Azohko, on 07/17/2008, -3/+25I Capitalize Every Word In Every Sentence Too!
    • Scynet, on 07/17/2008, -2/+21Creation?

      We'll celebrate yet, for the science behind it has already proven invaluable, and no doubt will again. The saddest day was when the war started that made United States use the bomb.
    • seraph582, on 07/17/2008, -2/+5I'd say the first day one person's religion was forced upon another was this world's saddest day.
  • skoles, on 07/17/2008, -0/+17How confirmable is that shot of the Nagasaki blast at the moment of detonation? Like, how far away is it?

    Because that's a pant ***** moment if they were just taking a snapshot at that exact moment.
    • zeusthemoose, on 07/17/2008, -0/+7It wasn't the exact moment, seeing as there is no longer intense visual radiation (it would have caused the exposure to produce nothing but white, the detonation is brighter than the sun during energy release). The three people in the foreground probably didn't know what the hell was going on. Back then nobody could ever imagine that man could create such a device. The photo must have been tens of miles away as the radius of destruction was ~1 mile with primary blast effects going out another ~5 miles.
  • welliwonder, on 07/17/2008, -3/+5Kaboom!
  • Blitzwing84, on 07/17/2008, -2/+46All that power, yet they are helpless against a refrigerator.
    • cJw314, on 07/17/2008, -0/+9...only if you're wearing a fedora.
    • srodolff, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4Well, duh. Everyone knows that refrigerators in the 50's were lead lined.

      That was to keep those veggies fresh...
  • sethorama99, on 07/17/2008, -3/+14Mushroom-cloud laying *****, *****.
  • zip000, on 07/17/2008, -1/+5Wow, that bit about Elugelab was amazing - I hadn't realized that they (we) had completely destroyed an island - gone, no more island there.

    (makes me think of Lost...though it's too early in the morning for me to come up with anything witty to say about it)
  • vroom101, on 07/17/2008, -1/+27Spectacular photos...

    1. France, Licorne test, 2 July 1970: http://hypatia-lovers.com/images/Hydrogen_Bomb_Tor ...
    Mirror: http://img174.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hydrogenb ... (img174.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hydrogenbombtoroidalclonq2.jpg)
    Details: http://www.atomicforum.org/france/1970.html and http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/France/FranceOrigi ... (nuclearweaponarchive.org/France/FranceOrigin.html)
    Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8yvZ7pIZns and http://www.atomicforum.org/france/1970.html
    2. USA, Operation Castle, 26 March 1954: http://chamorrobible.org/images/photos/gpw-2005030 ... via 4 at http://chamorrobible.org/gpw/gpw-20050304.htm
    Video: http://www.archive.org/details/CastleCommandersRep ... (www.archive.org/details/CastleCommandersReport1954)

    3. USA, Operation Dominic (Truckee test), 9 June 1962: (A) http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/TruckeeB ... and (B) http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/TruckeeA ... via http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/Dominic. ... (nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/Dominic.html#Truckee)

    4. USA, Operation Plumbbob (STOKES Event), 7 August 1957: http://chamorrobible.org/images/photos/gpw-2005030 ... via 5 at http://chamorrobible.org/gpw/gpw-20050304.htm
    5. United Kingdom, Grapple X/Round C, 8 November 1957: (A) http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Uk/Grplxc1.jpg and (B) http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Uk/Grplxc2.jpg via http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Uk/UKTesting.html
    6. USA, 1,000-pound conventional warhead detonation, 1 April 1986: http://chamorrobible.org/images/photos/gpw-2005030 ... via 6 at http://chamorrobible.org/gpw/gpw-20050304.htm
    • Ty1erDurd3n, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1Vroom, you never fail to post this when there is a related article, and they never fail to impress me
    • seraph582, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Excellent post!
  • chait, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4unbelievable pics!
  • Enigmocracy, on 07/17/2008, -1/+5The pictures and videos of nukes being detonated underwater are the most amazing.

    And to think there are over 30,000 of these in the world today.
  • MrRoboto, on 07/17/2008, -1/+3All that power and destruction and yet the camera was not effected...one hell of a tripod.
  • Kazumato, on 07/17/2008, -6/+1Oh ****, that old lady that survived Hiroshima died on my 10th birthday.
    • Niightwitch, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4It all revolves around you, doesn't it?
  • IG64, on 07/17/2008, -3/+2Find a lead-lined fridge, quick!
  • JasonCox, on 07/17/2008, -6/+5I love nukes. Seriously.
    • cJw314, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2Gotta watch out for the overlords and observers, though.
  • BECoole, on 07/17/2008, -2/+9The bomb saved the lives of my family.

    God Bless Paul Tibbets!
  • AchaIemoipas, on 07/17/2008, -0/+8Remember kids, duck and cover.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0K_LZDXp0I
  • TyrannousDotNet, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4one thing that was never really explained to me except recently is what actually happens to you during a blast,
    first a wave of heat hits you like microwave frying everything, you can see it in the second picture on the first slide with all the black smoke, then a kinetic blast wave hits you from the actual explosion... i may not have it completely right but its far worse in two steps, gross...
  • Abomonog, on 07/17/2008, -9/+4There is a historical inaccuracy in the article. It wasn't the nukes that prompted Japan to surrender. It was the idea that they would be slaughtered to the last man if they didn't surrender that caused it. The destruction of the two cities didn't even make the Japanese commanders flinch. Since neither city was involved in war production at all (they were the Japanese equivalent of collage towns) the bombing did nothing to hurt the Japanese war machine. The Japanese only surrendered when the last hop for the Americans was the mainland.
    • Dcherub, on 07/17/2008, -0/+7... while the two cities weren't essential to japan - you dont think they were ***** scared that america had the power to wipe out whole cities in one go?

    • Clusterfrak, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4Wrong, the U.S. had already taken Okinawa before the bombs were dropped. They were already preparing their civilians including school children for suicide attacks. When the U.S. dropped the bombs the Japanese commanders realized they could not make the taking of mainland Japan as costly as they wanted. Their plan was to make the U.S. pay with lots of blood for every inch it took, in the hopes that it would break the American will to fight and they could negotiate a cease fire instead of a surrender.
    • belumaves, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4little more complicated, even after the bombing the military commanders and many members of the Japanese parliament were in favor of continuing. It was the intercession of the Emperor that ended the war, seeing the potential devastation of the entire country he asserted himself and agreed to the unconditional surrender. His radio address to the nation announcing that he had agreed to surrender was actually the first time most of the people had ever heard his voice, and the first official admission that the war was going far from well.
  • Loadedforbear, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2Great now I have Fishbone's song Party at Ground Zero in my head...
  • Rudegar, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2it's "the bomb"
  • celsdogg, on 07/17/2008, -0/+5if anyone is interested, there was a movie created about the United States' Nuclear weapon program called Trinity and Beyond. Very interesting movie and available via netflix.
  • DanBoodro, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4Who the hell built that house?
  • nastronomical, on 07/17/2008, -6/+8Yawn....we see this every year. In a few hours the liberal "OMFG" we could have won without dropping bombs because my prof said so crowd will descend and rewrite history as they see it.
    • fugazied, on 07/17/2008, -6/+5Its well documented that the bombs were dropped to test there effects on a city as much as anything. Ignore it if you want. You must be of the 'believe what my government tells me and ignore independent researchers' crowd.
      • geauxtig3rs, on 07/17/2008, -2/+6In all honesty, the nuclear bombs prevented an even greater loss of life, since a massive campaign (Operation Downfall) was in the works to attack mainland Japan. This operation would have dwarfed Operation Overlord in it's scope. The Japanese people were told to fight to the death against invaders. If that would have happened, we would have had an even bigger PR ***** for actively pointing guns at civilians and firing.

        Bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a gift to the larger population on Japan, simply due to the fact that many many more would have died in an invasion.
      • XenophobicAlien, on 07/17/2008, -3/+3Well that didn't take long.
      • JointVenture, on 07/17/2008, -5/+3*****.

        Why dont YOU think for yourself for once instead of regurgitating something your leftist prof/teacher told you.
      • fandyboy, on 07/17/2008, -4/+4Can you show me these so called "documents" then Fugazied? Rather than spouting leftist tripe.
      • Clusterfrak, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2The bombs were dropped for a number of reasons.
        1. To end the war quickly without the horrenous loss of life on both sides that would have come.
        2. to test the effects those weapons would have in a city and it's inhabitants. Remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki had two different types of bombs dropped on them.
        3. To scare the crap out of the Soviet Union. Stalin was expansionist minded and had plans drawn to explore the possibility of taking western Europe. While the Soviets had lost a quarter of its people they still had a large army and were in full war production mode. The U.S. had by spring of 45 with the war all but over allowed some factories to switch to civilian manufacturing.
        On a side note dropping the bombs was also a calcutated bluff. The U.S. only had two bombs and it would be months before more could be built and shipped. If this had failed to sway the Japanese high command invasion would have been imminent.
      • fugazied, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2If Japan didn't surrender, how many more nukes would they have dropped? 7, 8, enough until all of Japan was destroyed? We are talking about wholesale slaughter of men women and children with nuclear weapons. Civilians. Had another government done it, it would be called genocide or state sponsored terrorism. Think Saddam was a monster for gassing his own population? Hey at least he didn't nuke civilians.

        "Oh it was militarily necessary, the US would perform such an horrific and monstrous action unless they had to, forced into a corner with no other course of action?" Admiral William Leahy, Fleet Admiral Nimitz, General Dwight D. Eisenhower all called into question the wisdom and necessity of dropping nuclear weapons on CIVILIAN populations. Historians point to the Japan's military on its last legs and crushed by the soviets in Manchuria.

        Sure historians debate it, but ETHICALLY, nuking civilian populations is not something to be condoned. Do you have ethics and a sense of morality? Or you find it acceptable for your government to commit war crimes?

        The push to get it done came down from the president and white house strategists who had the forsight to notice that after the war, the spoils would be largely divided between Russia and English/US. They wanted to use it to intimidate other countries, showing their military dominance and staking their right to the pre-cold war spoils.

        Have you seen the photos of what it did? This is not something to be proud, yelling America ***** yeah etc.
    • hakluytbean, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Well.... I must say it's always interesting and challenging to come across those people who when they see a few similar opinions lined up against their own make the assumption that they come from the same song sheet and as such lack merit, yet when by admission their own opinion is shared by the majority they don't draw the same inference. Did I say interesting? Sorry, I meant completely ******* ******* .....
    • BabyWookie, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1Here's what one "liberal fag" had said on the matter:

      "In 1945 Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives."

      This "liberal fag" was Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower

      More quotes:

      "The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan." - Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz

      "The use of the atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender." - Admiral William D. Leahy

      "Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated." -The 1946 United States Strategic Bombing Survey

      There's plently more too.


  • geauxtig3rs, on 07/17/2008, -2/+5I have become death, the destroyer of worlds.

    --Robert Oppenheimer quoting Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita
    • dildoolielly, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1*****, Captain Marko Ramius said that! ;)
  • Knowltey, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3What, no picture of Tsar Bomba? How can you have a series of nuke pics without Tsar Bomba?
    • hexydes, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Looks like this was only US atomic bombs, not Soviet.

      Hopefully no one already said this...I haven't refreshed the page since I started reading, lol.
    • salamnder, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1I mean it was only 50+ megatons
      • rynvndrp, on 07/17/2008, -0/+0It was also tremendously stupid. I mean, yeah thats a lot of power, but the killing radius was really small. 6 330kt bombs, which is around what the U.S. uses now on each missle, has a larger killing radius. The only advantage to the Tsar Bomba?, you don't have to aim.
      • Knowltey, on 08/25/2008, -0/+0Well it was lead triggered instead of the usual Uraniam, and they aimed it upwards rather than the usual downwards. The original intention though was Uranium triggered 100 Megaton, but they deemed that it was too dangerous. Thank god, I'd hate to see the shockwave from that given that the 50 megaton lead version had a shockwave that was felt on it's third pass around the planet.
  • RRJackson, on 07/17/2008, -1/+3Oak Ridge did a document about surviving a nuclear exchange. I think it came out in the late 70's. It has a pretty interesting chapter about myths of nuclear warfare. I'm not saying there's no bias, but it's still an interesting read. It talks about how the blast areas in Japan weren't the cause of most of the destruction. The blast set off wildfires that ran through all the wood and paper structures unchecked. There were people fairly close to the blast that walked away, though. There's a photo from the late 50's of the Nagasaki site that shows a big sign that says something like, "This is the site of an atomic blast! It will forever be inhospitable to life!" And it's all surrounded by brush and trees and all the things that had grown since the blast.
    • belumaves, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1some of that was truth, although the assertions about livability was more to allay public fears. But the bombs that were dropped on Japan were comparatively small (16 kilotons if my memory serves me right) compared to a modern weapon who's blast alone would annihilate the whole city. In this case the use of wood and paper in the city combined with the common usage of charcoal stoves for heating and cooking lead to a far larger portion of the city being totallt devastated than what the bomb could destroy on it's own.
      • RRJackson, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1There's a lot of footage of American soldiers standing around in trenches a few hundred yards from test detonations. I've got 16mm footage of soldiers pointing and staring as the shockwave hits them. Now, I'm not going to argue that it was a good idea to put them there, but they walked away. They may well have suffered ill effects from their exposure to the fallout, but they walked away from the blast. The thing you never see in those films of the houses cooking is their proximity to the blast. To suffer that kind of heat and blast damage they had to be pretty close, but I've been through a ton of the footage and have yet to find any that shows just how close they were.
  • Brian48216, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2In all the videos of the house being torn apart, there seems to be a black smoke that the structure coughs up right before the shockwave hits it. Anybody know what's going on?
    • porkdanish, on 07/17/2008, -0/+5The wood starts to burn from the intense heat before the shockwave hits.
    • Skorme, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4Ahh, I get it. You're a "I only read books with pictures in them" type person. It was written in full detail what was going on in each photo of the slide.
    • einsteinxx, on 07/17/2008, -0/+0I remember reading somewhere that the for testing purposes, many of the buildings were painted white or with special paints and what you see causing (most of) that smoke is the paint vaporizing during the initial blast.
  • ansatsu29, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2Pictures are amazing especially the nagasaki detonation picture -- it really shows it all
  • bonds, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3Lamb of God + nuclear detonations - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfcGQTOPkdA
  • path317, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1they still dont got ***** on indiana jones.
  • musicmanryan, on 07/17/2008, -0/+6There is something about nuclear bombs that I find overwhelmingly scary, yet at the same time overwhelmingly fascinating. */shudders*
  • liuite, on 07/17/2008, -1/+5Einstein regretted writing to Roosevelt making recommendation that A-bombs be made. He only made the recommendation because he thought the Germans was going to be able to make A-bombs first. That being said, the US is still the only country to have used nuclear weapons on civilians in a war.
    • RRJackson, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2Yeah, but it's been over 60 years. We're getting out of practice.
    • Chode2235, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2The only country to ever use an atomic weapon in war. [period]
    • hexydes, on 07/17/2008, -2/+3You know what? Thank God we did use atomic weapons when we did. Aside from the fact that it swiftly ended the war without HUGE casualties on both sides (which it did, if you argue against that, then you're insane), but think about what would have happened 15-20 years after that if we had no example of how terrible atomic warfare could be? It is very likely that dropping the two atomic bombs on Japan not only saved lives at the end of World War II, but also saved millions, potentially BILLIONS of lives later on, as despite all the posturing, no one really wanted to get into a full-on nuclear war after seeing the terrible devastation it could render.
      • salamnder, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1The US firebombings of Tokyo killed more civilians then the nuke attacks....
      • BabyWookie, on 07/18/2008, -0/+2Thank God Al Quaeda destroyed the WTC and killed all those people! We got a good example of how terrible terrorism could be and it made us get off our asses and dismantle the Taliban, saving countless other lives in the long run!

        /sarc

        Try telling that ***** to one of the victim's families, buddy.
    • kaihh, on 07/17/2008, -0/+0The letter itself was pre-written by Oppenheimer, Einstein only signed it at his request.

      Oppenheimer was the one that first feared development of nazi nuclear capability, and realized its potential as a deterrent in war. He realized that the only way he could get the presidents attention, was to use someone who had the utmost credibility and intellectual authority; Einstein fit the bill perfectly.

      I suggest you dig further and read up on this, because it is quite fascinating.

  • Wujian01, on 07/17/2008, -6/+1The scariest history of human being..
    Until now, the victim are still suffer...
    Say NO to Nuclear weapon
  • dildoolielly, on 07/17/2008, -9/+8Only thing worse than a Christian with a gun, is a Christian with a bomb, a christian w/ nukes, Christians in control of the Executive branch, legislative branch and judiciary.....
    • justice7, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4Way to lump them all into one pit of self-destructive morons.
    • belumaves, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1do explain
  • TrevorBradley, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Correct me if I'm wrong, (and I know I'm being pedantic) but wasn't the very first nuke (at Trinity) simply detonated in place, not dropped?
    • salamnder, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2Yes "gadget" was hoisted to a tower and detonated. If my memory serves me right, it was about 100" up. If you find points of the trinity test, the tower was basically vaporised.
    • Artimusbill, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Correct.
  • zippe, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1duh?
  • bonesmile, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2Oh yeah...I'm sure anyone in the fridge in that house would have come out A-OK.
  • zenithmbr, on 07/17/2008, -1/+9first three millionths of a second of an atomic blast:
    http://www.yellowswordfish.com/257/1000000000th-of ...
  • srodolff, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3Where's the Kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom!

    Now where is that Illudium PU-36 Explosive Space Modulator?
  • bdbElysian, on 07/17/2008, -3/+1Wow, humanity is brilliant at destroying things and each other. Too bad curing ***** like cancer isn’t very high on the list of priorities. Probably due to money, only real god left...
    • rynvndrp, on 07/17/2008, -0/+0Lot more to do with the laws of nature. Its alot easier to disorder things then to reorder things. Even when you adjust for inflation, there has been a lot more money, man hours, and brilliance put into cancer research than nuclear weapons. However, its the plane-car analogy. Planes are safer but more people are afraid of them since the accidents are so widely reported. Weapons research funding is much less than cancer research, but the outcomes are more visible.
  • bpeacock22, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1#7 was just downright eerie with those people in the foreground.
  • bauezie, on 07/17/2008, -0/+0War is over.
  • muppetjones, on 07/18/2008, -0/+0Any idea who the photographer is? Any way of finding out?
  • djspawn, on 07/21/2008, -0/+0A big boomer, but great photos. How long do you think the photographers lived after they took those pictures?
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.