Over Reaction To Nukes? 💣 w/ Neil deGrasse Tyson (Credits: Real Time With Bill Maher)

[DJ_Force]

To be fair, those were fission bombs. Hydrogen bombs are far more destructive.

[Johnson_]

Its more the shock and awe effect when it comes to those. The idea that a single bomb can accomplish the equivalent of a raid that is the scary part.

[KozelPraiseGOELRO]

We are not overreacting to nukes, we are underreacting to wars.

[npip]

He said "out of proportion", not "overreaction". Saying there's an underreaction to traditional warefare is itself a resolution to "out of proportion". Neil chose his words carefully.

[Zulstin]

For the firebombing there were used hundred of planes and thousands of bombs. For Nagasaki and Hiroshima there was 1 plane and 1 bomb

[Adam-pccm]

This feels like less like an overreaction to nukes and more like an under reaction to traditional warfare.

[thecopercoper]

Hundreds of planes dropping thousands of bombs is scary. One plane dropping one bomb is terrifying.

[at]

One bomb from one plane. Now it’s multiple war heads from one rocket. We should be freaking out.

[rdaught]

No Neil, there’s no overreaction to Nukes. There’s an “under” reaction to the other bombings.

[Senwot]

“It was nuclear weapons and everyone is reacting” is a slick and morbid way of saying those people were vaporized 😂😂

[lejlej]

The yield of the current total nuclear arsenal in the world is nearly 100 000 times the combined yield of those two bombs. I think that is something that we can have cause to be scared of.

[joestarlight]

War is 2 politicians disagreeing, and the innocent must pay with their lives to settle their disputes

[pickle]

Conventional area bombing is genuinely a terrifying thing. My great-grandma lived through the Blitz, from the way she described it, people should be just as scared of conventional bombs as they should nukes.

[Noillintents]

The radioactive fallout is the scary part. And yes, there’s an under reaction to other bombs.

[ramiere]

i tell people this all the time. people in japan had air sucked from their lungs by the fire and jumped into rivers to escape and ended up boiled. some peopled ended up charred still standing. way worse than vaporization.

[johnblasiak]

Wow that’s fantastic news glad you cleared it up

[WanderingSkullkid]

People aren’t scared of what one nuke can do.. its not an overreaction. People are scared, having seen what weve learned to do with other bombs, of the future of using nukes. One or two bombs may be overlooked in the grand scale of warfare, but actual nuclear warfare between powerhouses is a whole other story.

[petesure]

The firebombs got no media coverage, thus people can't discuss what was not exposed.

[benplummer]

Neil degrasse Tyson and bill Maher are in my nightmare blunt rotation

[DefinitivelyNotCthulhu]

The bigger issue is the what the nukes did to the survivors. Surviving a nuke is not ideal unless you can avoid it all together. Even nukes that were only used for testing demonstrated these issues, Testings like Operation Crossroads which casually lead to the inhabitable state of Bikini Atoll or the events that followed the testing of Castle Bravo.
Also, comparing what an entire arsenal of fission bombs can do compared to two nuclear bombs does not mean it’s a over reaction to nuclear bombs.
Over the course of 3 years, around 400, 000 people died from the Bombings in Tokyo. In the span of 3 days, around 75, 000 would die in the blast then that same amount would die within the next few months from Radition sickness, burns, injuries, and compounded illness and malnutrition. These were the conservative estimates a.k.a. The low estimates. The survivors would face many future health risks such as leukemia and solid cancers.