4chin. . File . KB, 2333215. I Antony mans ' tfr. 14 It' and Invent what do fat? I; Anonmynous : 15 S) CO TIME Tro tyu' 28 remiss later u are Incorrect IR Ameri
Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

4chin

File . KB, 2333215.
I Antony mans ' tfr. 14
It' and Invent
what do fat?
I; Anonmynous : 15 S) CO
TIME Tro tyu'
28 remiss later
u are Incorrect IR America has an nukes In take dch' v. rt , or China; population
tthey have munsch to take nu: ’: land mass many war
WRONG YOU DUMB **** .
LEARN THE RADIUS OF AN ATOMIC HUME BEFORE YOU CLICK ON THAT ******* BUTTON
THE AVERAGE YIELD OF A NUCLEAR BOMB Bl THE CURRENT U. S ARSENAL IS Mt) Klat) ) NS
A 300 WOULD CREATE A WITH A RADIUS OF 3. 5 MILES WHICH IS ABOUT 5., 6 KILOMETERS
THIS GIVES US A AREA CF 93. 5 SQUARED
THE US CURRENTLY 5113 NUCLEAR WHICH MEANS A TOTAL DESTRUCTED AREA, F WARHEAD DID NOT
SEEM AT ALL. OF 5113 It 58. 5 = ABOUT ) SQUARED KILOMETER& WHICH IS HALF A MILLION.
CHINA HAS A LAND SEE OF ABOUT 9. 3 MILLION SSE .
THE TOTAL U. S ARSENAL CAN THEREFORE ONLY DESTROY = LESS THAN 5. 4%
LEARN 2 ******* MATHS FAGGOT
SCHOOL
I ] NOT WNW
N ******* WED
UNTOLD
H Anonymous ( No.
FEEL 493x367, 13(
op here
I' m and, WHAT THE **** : Is
HAPPENING IN THIS THREAD?
...
  • Recommend tagsx

Comments(102):

[ 102 comments ]

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Show:   Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#18 - traelos (07/23/2014) [+] (14 replies)
>He think the blast radius is equal to the destruction radius
>He think the blast radius is equal to the destruction radius
User avatar #7 - ahugefan (07/23/2014) [+] (10 replies)
to the commenter where ever he may be i ask this question, what if 90% of china's population was in that 5.4% land mass
User avatar #8 to #7 - faggotishshit ONLINE (07/23/2014) [-]
To the FunnyJunk commenter who asked a related question:

What if it wasn't?
#41 - akkere (07/23/2014) [+] (4 replies)
>Implying China's population is evenly divided across the land and not densely concentrated in metropolitan areas and even rural villages   
>Implying immediate blast radius is the only threat that a nuke has   
>Implying the US Arsenal isn't much larger than put on paper for obvious purposes   
>Implying the average is even applicable in that same sense   
   
Maths can't exactly help you a great deal if you don't know how to use it with the right logical basis.    
   
[ ] Honored   
[x] Dishonored   
[x] Disgraced   
[x] Disowned by family
>Implying China's population is evenly divided across the land and not densely concentrated in metropolitan areas and even rural villages
>Implying immediate blast radius is the only threat that a nuke has
>Implying the US Arsenal isn't much larger than put on paper for obvious purposes
>Implying the average is even applicable in that same sense

Maths can't exactly help you a great deal if you don't know how to use it with the right logical basis.

[ ] Honored
[x] Dishonored
[x] Disgraced
[x] Disowned by family
#6 - oletosaluar (07/23/2014) [-]
you only need one to be king of the jungle
you only need one to be king of the jungle
#3 - carlsaganrealness (07/23/2014) [+] (5 replies)
I need to see the rest of this thread
I need to see the rest of this thread
#28 - doctorprofessornv (07/23/2014) [+] (2 replies)
The fallout from such an event would render a good portion of the planet uninhabitable.
#23 - warlockrichard (07/23/2014) [+] (1 reply)
Comment Picture
#39 - wheresthefudge (07/23/2014) [-]
I applaud the guy's math and fact-checking, but I'm pretty sure that the population of China isn't uniformly distributed. Even if you're only taking out 2% of the landmass, you might still get a good majority of the population.
I applaud the guy's math and fact-checking, but I'm pretty sure that the population of China isn't uniformly distributed. Even if you're only taking out 2% of the landmass, you might still get a good majority of the population.
#80 - Byte (07/24/2014) [+] (1 reply)
More chin
#79 - Byte (07/24/2014) [+] (1 reply)
#78 - Byte (07/24/2014) [+] (1 reply)
#25 - usarmyexplain (07/23/2014) [-]
Everyone always talks about the fireball of a nuclear detonation, what people forget is the overpressure created that can kill or disable people for miles outside the fireball, not only that but the falling debris and radiation cooking everything down wind makes nukes a lot more devastating just their immediate blast radius.

Furthermore you would need to nuke the every square kilometer to destroy the country, you would just need to take out government facilities, infrastructure hubs, factories, and population centers.
User avatar #74 - spyisspy (07/24/2014) [-]
i need the entire thread
#31 - dezzka (07/23/2014) [+] (4 replies)
Not if you use Tsar bombas...

See the orange circle? That's the " **** your **** " zone of a Tsar Bomba.
#87 - furiousmarshmellow (07/24/2014) [-]
You guys sure do know quite a bit about atomic bombs...
#60 - thegrayfox ONLINE (07/24/2014) [-]
Oh god what a retard...   
   
First of all if the US did use a nuke (Minutemen III) with it's 300 kiloton yield:   
   
1. The Fireball would be only 0.6 km (1.12 square kilometers)   
2. The AIR BLAST RADIUS (total building collapse within it's radius) would be 5.35 km (90 square kilometers)   
So the idiot mixed up the fireball and air blast radius. What the retard also forgot was...   
   
3. Thermal radiation radius 7.14km (160 square kilometers)   
Within this radius, the body is burned to a crisp with 3rd degree burns, where survival is not very likely.   
   
If you were to throw ONE of these in the center of Beijing taking it's current population density, it would kill ~208 000 people.   
   
But then again... Human density isn't the same everywhere, also fallout.   
   
Conclusion... The guy is an idiot trying to sound smart by applying simple math to something as insane as a nuclear bomb.
Oh god what a retard...

First of all if the US did use a nuke (Minutemen III) with it's 300 kiloton yield:

1. The Fireball would be only 0.6 km (1.12 square kilometers)
2. The AIR BLAST RADIUS (total building collapse within it's radius) would be 5.35 km (90 square kilometers)
So the idiot mixed up the fireball and air blast radius. What the retard also forgot was...

3. Thermal radiation radius 7.14km (160 square kilometers)
Within this radius, the body is burned to a crisp with 3rd degree burns, where survival is not very likely.

If you were to throw ONE of these in the center of Beijing taking it's current population density, it would kill ~208 000 people.

But then again... Human density isn't the same everywhere, also fallout.

Conclusion... The guy is an idiot trying to sound smart by applying simple math to something as insane as a nuclear bomb.
User avatar #59 - amata (07/23/2014) [-]
Ah yes, because the population of China is evenly spread out over the entire country and radioactive fallout isn't harmful at all.
#50 - plumpbooty (07/23/2014) [-]
All those faggots will rightly go to hell for messing with that poor man's fap time.
[ 102 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)