The U.S. Conducted Atomic Weapons Tests On Beer

Surely this does mean a nuclear bomb is beer-able.

Well duh how else do you think they make Nuka-Cola?

Oh, I am so sorry. I did not mean to call the writer of this article, Surely! My bad, oops, lol.

Soon Israel will tests it's own on scum. Will see how that taste very soon.

Beer would be safer to drink than water if you find yourself in a nuclear wasteland.

Way back then we were in the hunt for holy grail radiation resistant organics just like now, coupled with the fact that alcohol in all it's forms tend to make great catalysts for foodstuffs and other products. In any nuclear exchange scenario, civil defense prudence in maximizing our homeland supplies is critical. Now consider the troop on the ground going in someplace. Does he drink that bottle of beer or not? There are a lot of reasons for this research.

MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction.
Perhaps not so mad after all, since assured destruction is not so assured, which leads to a greater possibility of nuclear war and troops continued fighting, with available food stores still being useful.

Well, if we didn’t have enough problems with some irrational religious groups justify suicide in war, which is contrary to MAD, we all have the concept that nuclear war and war afterwards is very possible.

nuclear bombs will be used however i sincerely doubt it will be as bad as everyone really believes it will be. we might obliterate africa or parts of asia but in the end the world keeps moving and nature will find a way. Mutually Assured Destruction is actually kind of cozy when you figure that out there in space is an entire asteroid made solely out of anti matter. this asteroid is silent and most likely traveling at an appreciable speed of light, and here's the kicker, it'd only have to be as big as a bowling ball to splatter what was once earth and humanity into another accretion disk surrounding the sun minus one bowling ball...

to mars or bust!

Nukes are both more and less frightening than most people think. The default propoganda has been to make them out to be more frightening to discourage their use (both for and against us). That, by the way, is a good thing.

The more frightening part is that they are not all that frightening, and once a few get off the chain, there will be a slippery slope to their increased use in way (not on civilian targets, apocalypse style, but smaller and more often on targets like airports, energy structre, and hard targets).

The destruction of the blast from Nukes CAN be reproduced conventionally, but only with multiple and larger ordinence being used. This means that in the short term, they are still a temptation for general warfare use.

The radiation threat is generally shortlived, with generational issues being negligible within less than a century of signifigance.

So, nuclear war can be destructive to society, but its greater risk if the fact that it won't necessarly destroy society.

If nukes were used every four months on population centers with a casuality rate of 20 million per attack (more than twice the population of NYC), the world's population would continue to INCREASE (our current rate of growth, which is rather low historically, is at around 1%).

If nukes were all fired, nuclear winter set in, and 94.7% of the population died, we would still have more people than we did 1,000 years ago.

Again, the most frightening things about nukes are how not frightening they truely are.

Ba-da-bing, ba-da-kaboom!

Oh!
Click!
Ptisssss...
Gulp, gulp, gulp.
Ahhhhhh....

(This is the point of this article?)

Post-bomb tip of the day: the food stuff in sealed containers will be just fine from a radiation viewpoint (only neutron activation can cause it to change and there are damn few neutrons at a distance from the blast). Recommend wiping down the outside, however, as fall-out could get on the container.
As for the beer's taste: you think the US Government used the good stuff for this test? Nah. And it would have been desert warm - yuck!

Of course, canned foods would swell from the head and buldge. Others would be compromized.

So, from the row of attractively bulging cans, can you pick out the one that has a tasty dose of botulism in it? Feeling lucky?

Oakspar: If you are saying that the radiation would cause the can to bulge, this is unlikely unless it was in the blast area where there are extremely high levels of radiation and heat, and, in this case, it is more than likely the can would be destroyed. Note too that high levels of radiation are used to irradiate food stuff and other sealed products to prevent the rise of botulism as is also the much more common process of heating the sealed can. And no, I would not choose a bulging can because it is likely the can was not heated properly during canning. We have all experienced that freezing and excessive heat can also cause a can to bulge and in both cases, the food inside is usually ruined.

비극의 시작이라고 봅니다. 인간의 역사에서 필요했지만, 더 큰 재앙의 시작이었죠...