The location of a doomsday dwelling depends on many factors. In this Lame Cherry matter anti matter exclusive, I will address situations never previously ever discussed.
No one ever contemplates the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile for what it is, in it is a straight line delivery system of a mulitude of nuclear warheads.
This may sound obvious, but in reality where those warheads fall is a matter of concern. My assessment has always been the hope that the Eurasian missiles were accurate as having them not hit their targets of population and military areas, would mean they were hitting rural areas with people who had no value to be destroyed.
In aritillary the shells actually are rounds that hit targets, but a percentage of them are fliers. This means they over shoot a target or they fall short. Sometimes shells are affected by powder burn, sometimes it is air currents and sometimes who knows what happens in things going wrong and shells bomb areas they are not intended for.
For nuclear warheads this is a real factor also, as what happens if a nuclear warhead fell short or went long over target? Obviously the target would not be destoyed, but what areas would be destroyed are then of interest to doomsday survivors.
If one examines the trajectory of nuclear warheads from Eurasia, a reality starts coming clear as is posted in the above diagram. Nuclear warheads fly over the North Pole and then drop onto American areas. If one examines those trajgectories, one starts to glean an understanding of the target mechanism, as the missiles do not fly on a north south line, but instead there is a distinct pattern of diagonals which form.
Taking Minot North Dakota as a reality point, one can assess that the patterns run in northeast and northwestly routes. Most would even in Russia be from Siberian routes, meaning the missiles would fly northwest to southeast. This Lame Cherry exlcusive vital in those missiles then would mean that people living northwest and southeast of target areas would be in short and long missile drops of danger zones, while those in the northeast and southwest vectors would be in safer zones.
As distance progresses the angle is more pronunced and as one factors in a 50 mile "miss" zone to a fall short zone of almost all of Canada if a detonation starts interupting all incoming missiles a reality os safe zones is quite possible or there are areas which show in a Minot target that Minnesota and Saskatchewan could be danger zones, as much as Minot being in the Strategic Air Command structure.
One can factor in a heavy hydrogen warhead at a primary target devastating all things in a 100 mile radius to 150, meaning a Russian could strike Minot and disrupt Fargo Doncha Know and other areas into Winnepeg, but not completely destory them.
Likewise in a gird logic would take out the Twin Cities in performing a circle pattern of desolation, but in those non overlaid areas, those would be the doomsday zones which would stand the greatest chance of being uneffected.
That would include hot zone snows or rains from upwind weather systems as Denver being blasted and the fallout falling in a western Minnesota area might take place, but just as readily, an area in Nebraska might be a hot zone from a rain or snow fall.
It is a system of chances and probabilities as a hot rain would be worse than a direct nuclear blast by an atomic weapon as the concentration would be greater in the rain or snow fall.
It is all about the angles and selecting those best angled spots, increases ones ability to live. In all fields of fire, there are always dead zones or zones where fire has a zero probability of ever striking.
Everything is variable in this too, as what was once a northwest southwest prevailiong wind in America, has changed when it could not possible switch. A person could lament living next to an atomic bomb site, but if that bomb detonated, and a wind happened to carry the fallout away, literally it would be one of the safest locations on the planet in living in a target zone, because the population would be voided and the mindset would be of roaming survivors to stay away from that area.
Factored into that, is of course the angle, because in those sweet spots which should be in a degree west up from the strike zones, there are pockets where life would be literally untouched.
I am aware of all of the propaganda about how bad nuclear strikes are, but the American military used to also speak of the benefits. Yes benefits of atomic bombs gong off, actually increase the necessary fertilizers plants require and the flora has bursts of growth.
Those huge atomic bombs in the sky expose you to doses of radiation constantly in stars. That reality is the human in survivable doses of radiation does not become sick nor develop cancers.
The reality is in even strike zones that the radiation does become liveable in 2 weeks. Radiation also does not like 90 degree angles and will not enter in doors or windows protected by such turns. In knowing realities of what nuclear material is, and that bombs require certain land structures to be workable, the greater threat in numerous cases is the fallout, and in factoring in angular strikes with wind shift fallout, distinct areas of survival do appear.
Areas such as the leeward side of the Sierra Nevadas which would have fallout on the mountains in hot rains or snows, but leaving the eastern slopes viable are a beginning.
There are numerous pockets in the Rockies and further areas when one gets into Big Sky Country and again the Plains starting with Minot. The reality is that if one is away from strike zones, factors in the angles, looks at wind patterns, that percentages increase and drop as one moves east.
One has a far worse odds from fall out and bomb zones east of the Mississippi than in west. It might sound strange, but northern California would be one of the better viable options as large nukes would wipe out the southern population, the populations in coastal Oregon and Washington, with no real angle strikes of long or short to deal with, and a westerly or northerly wind, and that rough scrub area of north California is a starting point of areas common understanding would never look at.
As I am not being funded enough to do all the work in donations from the richtards, I will leave that enticement at that. It is regretable that I have become the only viable nuclear expert ever explaining about these bombs, their use and the factors of their effectiveness.
The nuclear sweet spots do exist and if one invested the effort in trajectories, wind, probabilities one could find quite large acreages which would be safe and if next to a hot zone, it would make a nice watchdog in killing all the roaming bands to save your ammunition.
That though is another Lame Cherry matter anti matter exclusive as I really do love atomic bombs and warfare as I understand the bomb and how to deal with them.
nuff said
agtG
