US Military Tested the Effects of a Nuclear Holocaust On Beer

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Military Tested the Effects of a Nuclear Holocaust On Beer

Posted by samzenpus on Thursday September 20, 2012 @11:50AM from the money-well-spent dept.

pigrabbitbear writes "Is bottled beer nuclear bombproof? The United States government conducted a couple tests in the 1950s to find out—it exploded nuclear bombs with 'packaged commercial beverages' deposited at varying distances from the blast center to see if beer and soda would be safe to drink afterwards. The finding? Yep, surviving bottled and canned drinks can be consumed in the event of a nuclear holocaust, without major health risks."

215 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by xevioso · 2012-09-20 11:52 · Score: 5, Funny

in the refrigerator. Searching for beer!
1. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by Razgorov+Prikazka · 2012-09-20 12:02 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  In the microwave. Searching for nuked beer!
  
  --
  rm -rf --no-preserve-root / ...and let /dev/null sort them out...
2. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by Grayhand · 2012-09-20 12:42 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  in the refrigerator. Searching for beer!
  After reading the script I would have been searching for a beer too.
3. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by Dragonslicer · 2012-09-20 14:33 · Score: 1
  
  in the refrigerator. Searching for beer!
  After reading the script I would have been searching for tequila too.
  Fixed that for you.
4. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by mfnickster · 2012-09-20 16:34 · Score: 1
  
  Raiders of the Lost Artesian
  "Throw me the Budweiser, I throw you the whip!"
  
  --
  "Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
5. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by davester666 · 2012-09-20 17:44 · Score: 2
  
  More like "If you throw me a Budweiser, I will whip you"
  
  --
  Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
6. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by jd · 2012-09-20 19:50 · Score: 1
  
  Indiana Jones, in the Refrigerator, with the beer.
  Cludo will never be the same.
  
  --
  It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
7. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by rts008 · 2012-09-20 19:56 · Score: 1
  
  Amen!
  I figured there was a reason for keeping all those Clydesdales around besides pulling wagons. ;-)
  "Ahhh, Budweiser, the beer that has real Horsepower in it!"
  
  --
  Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
8. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 20:38 · Score: 1
  
  This discussion was about beer, not Budweiser
9. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by cffrost · 2012-09-20 22:06 · Score: 2
  
  "Throw me the Budweiser, I throw you the whip!"
  "Budweiser... Why'd it have to be Budweiser?"
  
  --
  Thank you, Edward Snowden.
  
  "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
10. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by cffrost · 2012-09-20 23:06 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Amen!
  I figured there was a reason for keeping all those Clydesdales around besides pulling wagons. ;-)
  "Ahhh, Budweiser, the beer that has real Horsepower in it!"
  "[...] Although the human body maintains a mean power expenditure of some 100 watts, power excursions as high as 742 watts have been observed, chiefly drawn by the endocrine system and the smooth muscles of the stomach and esophagus, as the body's immunologic and adrenal responses take over to expel the deadly Budweiser from the patient's system. The bulk of retrograde Budweiser flow occurs via the mouth; however, the added cross-sectional area afforded by the nostrils is typically utilized, expediting removal of the vile fluid by several percentage points versus solely oral expulsions; the evolutionary advantage realized by this improvement are evident to those who've been attendant to the toll this foul poison may take on the human body and psyche."
  —"Acute Budweiser Poisoning: Bio-kinetic Response in Humans," NEJM, 1934
  
  --
  Thank you, Edward Snowden.
  
  "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
11. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by craigminah · 2012-09-21 00:29 · Score: 1
  
  According to the bartender in the "Three Amigos" tequila is like beer.
12. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by MachineShedFred · 2012-09-21 01:54 · Score: 1
  
  The writers had already found it. That's why we got the screenplay we did.
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
13. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-21 06:36 · Score: 0
  
  and urine too!
14. Re:Aha! so that's what Indiana Jones was doing... by DirtyLiar · 2012-09-21 13:47 · Score: 1
  
  This discussion was about beer, not Budweiser
  There's a BIG difference! ;)
  
  --
  THINK! It's patriotic
But what about Nuka Cola? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 11:53 · Score: 0

Too bad they didn't test Nuka Cola as well.
1. Re:But what about Nuka Cola? by myowntrueself · 2012-09-20 11:59 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Too bad they didn't test Nuka Cola as well.
  This is how you MAKE Nuka Cola.
  
  --
  In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
2. Re:But what about Nuka Cola? by kiriath · 2012-09-20 13:15 · Score: 2
  
  I have already started my bottle cap collection... when the big one hits, I'll be a billionaire.
3. Re:But what about Nuka Cola? by Billlagr · 2012-09-20 13:30 · Score: 1
  
  Quantum, all the way. Sunset Sarsparilla just isn't the same.
4. Re:But what about Nuka Cola? by Immerman · 2012-09-20 14:17 · Score: 1
  
  You can keep your Cola, I'll take Roentgen Rum - the clear bottle lets it double as a dim lantern if you get stuck in an abandoned vault someplace.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
5. Re:But what about Nuka Cola? by jimmydevice · 2012-09-20 14:29 · Score: 1
  
  Is that a reference to papa Yolk?
6. Re:But what about Nuka Cola? by Darinbob · 2012-09-20 15:05 · Score: 1
  
  The Sunset Sarsparilla is for when you don't want a buzz from Nuka Cola.
7. Re:But what about Nuka Cola? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 15:13 · Score: 0
  
  I have already started my bottle cap collection... when the big one hits, I'll be a billionaire.
  Except in the 22nd century when they're worthless, a guy named Micky will get left in a dry well.
  And it was actually all your fault.
8. Re:But what about Nuka Cola? by jtownatpunk.net · 2012-09-20 21:12 · Score: 1
  
  Heh. That reminds me of a time maybe ten years ago when a coworker made the offhand comment that he was glad the vending machine had root beer. "Why's that?" "Well, I drink caffeinated stuff all morning and I get jittery if I drink caffeine all day." "Barq's has caffeine." "That would explain a lot."
9. Re:But what about Nuka Cola? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-21 00:36 · Score: 0
  
  pssst! Fallout video game series! Nuka Cola caps are legal tender in the dirty future.
10. Re:But what about Nuka Cola? by AtomicBison · 2012-09-21 01:12 · Score: 1
  
  Nuka Cola was my first thought while reading this as well. I suppose we can also set up the market for Gamma Gulp as well.
11. Re:But what about Nuka Cola? by Jonner · 2012-09-21 19:11 · Score: 1
  
  Too bad they didn't test Nuka Cola as well.
  This is how you MAKE Nuka Cola.
  No, it's how you make irradiated Nuka Cola. The regular stuff was made before the bombs fell.
Waste of money by girlintraining · 2012-09-20 11:54 · Score: -1

First, beer surviving the holocaust is not something I see as a useful way to spend my tax dollars. Preventing the holocaust is. Second... duh? We irradiate our food to ensure its safety. Radiation is not a threat to food... at least not once its been picked or killed. Radioactive material is, of course.

--
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
1. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:00 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Were you paying taxes in 1955?
2. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:02 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  From the summary: "The United States government conducted a couple tests in the 1950s to find out". Testing this was probably very relevant under the threat of the cold war to know what food and drink would be safe to consume.
3. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:16 · Score: 1
  
  Well I am paying the interest and principle on money borrowed in 1955.
4. Re:Waste of money by edxwelch · 2012-09-20 12:17 · Score: 1
  
  > Radiation is not a threat to food.
  It is if it's irradiated with enough neutrons
5. Re:Waste of money by Maho+Shoujo · 2012-09-20 12:18 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The cost of throwing a few cases of cheap beer a round and then testing them is practically infinitesimal to the cost of setting of a nuclear weapon. It's not as if they blew the thing up just to test the drinks.
  
  We irradiate our food to ensure its safety. Radiation is not a threat to food... at least not once its been picked or killed. Radioactive material is, of course.
  That's a whole 'nother level. The radiation food is exposed to is also almost nothing compared to the radiation released in a nuke. Plus, in a nuclear blast, you have all sorts of particles flying around that are radioactive, but not the same high frequency beams used in industrial purposes.
6. Re:Waste of money by demonbug · 2012-09-20 12:21 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  How do you think we learned it is safe? Besides, I'm sure this wasn't a central reason for the testing, more like an add-on since they were setting off the nukes anyway.
7. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:21 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Radiation is not a threat to food... at least not once its been picked or killed. Radioactive material is, of course.
  Perfect example of historian's fallacy.
  Unless you know something about time travel that I don't, the reason we know it's safe now is because in the 50s they did not know, and did the tests to find out.
8. Re:Waste of money by Pseudonym+Authority · 2012-09-20 12:23 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Money borrowed in 1955 would have been paid off in 1985. Unless you want to claim that you still are because the debt was rolled over, at which point you need to start complaining about the horrible debts that were racked up putting down the Whiskey Rebellion by Washington too.
9. Re:Waste of money by Seumas · 2012-09-20 12:23 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The world (especially voters and politicians) believe in nutjob armageddon/rapture bullshit and are hell-bent on making sure it happens as soon as possible. I, for one, would love to know that beer will be safe to drink if I happen to be fortunate enough to still be alive after all the crazies have self-fulfilled their insane prophecies.
10. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:23 · Score: 0
  
  Why is this community so full of ...(input your own derogatory remark) they did a test on a whole town and the beer was part of the test you can test a whole pile of things at once with a nuke. but i can see the effects are just hitting a lot of slashdoties now.
11. Re:Waste of money by The+Grim+Reefer · 2012-09-20 12:24 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  First, beer surviving the holocaust is not something I see as a useful way to spend my tax dollars.
  I have to disagree with you. It was a rather important first step to decide if it's even worthwhile trying to survive the holocaust.
12. Re:Waste of money by ktappe · 2012-09-20 12:24 · Score: 1
  
  Well I am paying the interest and principle on money borrowed in 1955.
  The money spent in 1955 has long since been paid off. So...no you're not.
  
  --
  "We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
13. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:29 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  In the immediate aftermath of a nuclear holocaust, surviving still-sealed drinks would likely be the only available clean water not heavily contaminated with radioactivity. This would in fact be quite important before any efforts to cleanse contaminated water could get underway, which would take longer than one can survive without water intake to establish on any significant scale. In any case, I really doubt the "spending" on this went beyond some guy laying out drinks in a line away from another test and checking them afterwards.
  That being said, glass and water don't suffer lasting neutron activation and we knew that even in 1955. That's why water can be used in nuke cooling loops and sodium is used in experimental FBRs so yes it's kind of superflous.
14. Re:Waste of money by PPH · 2012-09-20 12:35 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Radiation is not a threat to food... at least not once its been picked or killed. Radioactive material is, of course.
  Perfect example of historian's fallacy.
  Unless you know something about time travel that I don't, the reason we know it's safe now is because in the 50s they did not know, and did the tests to find out.
  But we don't know that, in spite of the testing done in the 1950s. By 'we', I include all the paranoid crybabies that get their panties in a bunch every time the FDA considers allowing irradiation as a food preservation method.
  
  --
  Have gnu, will travel.
15. Re:Waste of money by Anne_Nonymous · 2012-09-20 12:49 · Score: 1
  
  >> not something I see as a useful way to spend my tax dollars
  No shit. If they'd wanted to see the effects of a Holocaust on Beer, they could have just gone over to my brother-in-law's place on any Sunday afternoon during football season.
16. Re:Waste of money by Greyfox · 2012-09-20 13:01 · Score: 1
  
  They tested a lot of foodstuffs, not just beer. They wanted to make sure any survivors would be able to feed themselves for a while. They probably tested cigarettes, too. Those were viewed as "Healthy" back then.
  
  --
  I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
17. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 13:05 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  The United State's national debt was completely paid off in January 1835. It only lasted a year though.
  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_public_debt#Early_history
18. Re:Waste of money by Quiet_Desperation · 2012-09-20 13:06 · Score: 1
  
  First, beer surviving the holocaust is not something I see as a useful way to spend my tax dollars.
  Speak for yourself, toots!
  I demand a new round of testing for whiskey, desserts and snacks! Having a post apocalypse campfire interrupted by the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man would be a total bummer!
  And hookers! Together we can construct bomb proof, radiation proof, 200 proof hookers!
19. Re:Waste of money by Martin+Blank · 2012-09-20 13:19 · Score: 1
  
  By the mid-1950s, it was becoming common knowledge that smokers had a far higher chance of developing lung cancer. Within the scientific community, that had been known for a couple of decades. The tobacco companies fought it, of course, playing up the calming effects of smoking, but even their own researchers were starting to confirm the health hazards by then.
  
  --
  You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
20. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 13:23 · Score: 0
  
  Think of it this way: the world was just blown up. You'll need a beer after that. It would suck if it was poisoned.
21. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 13:26 · Score: 0
  
  Radiation is not a threat to food
  No, but fallout is.
22. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 13:46 · Score: 1
  
  Ever hear of not putting all your eggs in one basket? They did prevent a holocaust. But that's in hindsight. At the time surviving a potential holocaust was pretty high on the list. We irradiate our food today, they likely had little understanding of the effects of this in the times of the testing.
  
  But I'm glad that you have all the answers in 2012. I'm sure they would have loved your insights circa 1955.
23. Re:Waste of money by artor3 · 2012-09-20 13:54 · Score: 2
  
  But if George Washington hadn't spent $100 of the national treasury on fake teeth and cherry trees, the country would have been $100 further in the black in 1835. And when we went back in debt, our debts would have been $100 less, all the way up until today, not accounting for interest & inflation.
  The point is, it's silly to complain about relatively small expenditures from a long time ago.
24. Re:Waste of money by lightknight · 2012-09-20 14:19 · Score: 2
  
  Typically, being stuck with the bill from an earlier generation is reason to complain. But, if we have enough good left in us, we can pay off the bill so our children / successors do not.
  
  --
  I am John Hurt.
25. Re:Waste of money by sjames · 2012-09-20 14:26 · Score: 2
  
  Preventing the holocaust is, naturally a top priority, but don't you think a plan B might be in order? Things like determining what can and cannot be consumed afterwards for survival for example.
  
  Second... duh? We irradiate our food to ensure its safety. Radiation is not a threat to food... at least not once its been picked or killed.
  And we know all about that because....(drum roll please) ...... the military researched it in the 1950's by irradiating foods and seeing what happened!
26. Re:Waste of money by JBMcB · 2012-09-20 14:28 · Score: 1
  
  at which point you need to start complaining about the horrible debts that were racked up putting down the Whiskey Rebellion by Washington too.
  Federal debt was completely eliminated in 1835.
  
  --
  My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
27. Re:Waste of money by mister_playboy · 2012-09-20 14:32 · Score: 1
  
  As long as we have a debt-based economy, the idea we can just "pay all our bills" is a fallacy.
  
  --
  Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
28. Re:Waste of money by Immerman · 2012-09-20 14:35 · Score: 2
  
  Not all radiation is created equal - anything close to a nuclear blast will be subjected to high levels of both ionizing and neutron radiation, think sticking it within the shielding of a nuclear reactor for several days or weeks. Ionizing radiation is probably not directly a problem - just wait for the ionization to neutralize, but it could conceivably initiate chemical reactions that would make previously harmless food toxic - one of those things that's good to test. Neutron radiation on the other hand could be a real problem - anything exposed to it may undergo transmutation to become radioactive in its own right, with sufficient exposure this becomes the stuff we call low-level nuclear waste - you're typically safe enough handling it with some minimal shielding, but you probably don't want to eat it which incorporates the radioactive atoms directly into your tissues where they can do serious damage (think the Fukushima radioactive iodine scare)
  Moreover this test was done back before we irradiated food - you can bet if they had found some horrible effects the whole irradiated food movement wouldn't have gotten off the ground.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
29. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 14:49 · Score: 0
  
  First, beer surviving the holocaust is not something I see as a useful way to spend my tax dollars.
  Shut yer whore mouth. Beer is vitally important after a nuclear holocaust. If I'm going to survive getting radiated, I definitely want a drink afterwards.
30. Re:Waste of money by onyxruby · 2012-09-20 15:24 · Score: 2
  
  Beer = sealed unit that is covered to keep radioactive dust out. Water would have been exposed and open to radioactive dust. Radioactive dust is the biggest concern outside the immediate blast zone. I sincerely doubted the exploded a nuke just to test it's effect on beer. Probably a case of next nuke, throw a few cases downwind to see how they do.
  The cost would be trivial and the knowledge would have been practical. Living in fear of a nuclear attack was quite real in those days. Remember this was back in the days of performing drills to duck and cover under desks in case of nuclear attack.
  Using beer when water wasn't safe to drink is a tradition going back centuries. If you really want to get down to it, the founding of Plymouth was because the Pilgrims ran out of beer and needed to make more. The pilgrims were notable puritans of course. It actually makes a lot of sense to test it. I would imagine they also probably tested bottles of soda for the same reasons.
  /besides, you know somebody enjoyed the opportunity to get drunk on the governments dime
31. Re:Waste of money by AK+Marc · 2012-09-20 15:30 · Score: 1
  
  How is it a fallacy that I can pay all outstanding debts on the first of the month?
  
  --
  Learn to love Alaska
32. Re:Waste of money by Martin+Blank · 2012-09-20 16:21 · Score: 1
  
  Most people can't pay off their entire mortgage on the first of the month.
  
  --
  You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
33. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 16:33 · Score: 0
  
  I'm sure they would have loved your insights circa 1955.
  Actually they'd have told her to shut the fuck up and get back in the kitchen. Might have made a comment about her unusually prominent Adam's apple to their friends.
34. Re:Waste of money by riverat1 · 2012-09-20 16:37 · Score: 1
  
  They didn't set off the bomb test just to see if beer would be affected by it. They just used the opportunity of the test. A six-pack of beer was less than a dollar back then so it didn't cost much. I imagine they tested a lot more things than beer to see how radiation affected it.
35. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 16:40 · Score: 0
  
  unfortanly despite all the hype over the debt is a necessary evil. if you where to pay it tommrow the usd would become worthless.witch in turn would super inflate the economy and will it all comes crashing down. of course at this point in time with all the crap there doing to keep it from crashing now without fixing the problems its gonna happen anyways.
36. Re:Waste of money by deimtee · 2012-09-20 16:58 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Modern economies have been constructed so that there simply isn't enough money to pay off the debt. Individuals may be debt free, but in total, the debt can not be paid back.
  Eg, in the USA, the Fed creates the money, and it is immediately loaned and begins earning interest. That interest doesn't have currency in the system to cover it, hence money has to be borrowed from the Fed to pay the interest owed to the Fed. Vicious cycle ensues, borrowing money to pay the interest on the borrowed money.
  No way out except to default, or nationalise the Fed.
  
  --
  I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
37. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 17:25 · Score: 0
  
  Talking about nationalising the Federal Reserve is what got JFK ventilated.
38. Re:Waste of money by AK+Marc · 2012-09-20 17:32 · Score: 1
  
  You are wrong. I pay my debt, then the bank has less debt, more cash, and with inflation, cash is a liability, so they pay off some of their debt, and so on, shrinking the money in exactly the same way it multiplied in the first place. There's not enough money to cover all existing debt, but most debt is on borrowed money, so there's no need to, either to make it, as they did, or pay it back.
  
  --
  Learn to love Alaska
39. Re:Waste of money by Neil+Boekend · 2012-09-20 17:34 · Score: 1
  
  And when they tested the cigarettes extensively after irradiating them they found out the irradiated cigarettes caused cancer!
  
  --
  Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
40. Re:Waste of money by AK+Marc · 2012-09-20 17:34 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  I've paid off three mortgages so far. Eventually they do get paid off for most people.
  
  --
  Learn to love Alaska
41. Re:Waste of money by Neil+Boekend · 2012-09-20 17:36 · Score: 1
  
  Which doesn't touch the beer if the bottle is still sealed.
  
  --
  Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
42. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 18:18 · Score: 0
  
  Don't you ever confuse governments controlled by mentally ill madmen with "the world".
  Most of that is religious schizophrenia. Then there is a lot of stupidity-caused anti-social short-term thinking, like greed and the like. And the rest is people damaged in the effects of the former two.
  Get some education and self-thinking going, and the stupidity-caused things fade away. Then because life is better, people don't have to flee into delusions about "gods" either, to explain and accept reality.
  The only problem: Who will do that, if most people are already dumber than canned bread?
43. Re:Waste of money by able1234au · 2012-09-20 18:28 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  So you are on wife number 4?
44. Re:Waste of money by gshegosh · 2012-09-20 18:57 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe he didn't pay taxes then, but he sure pays taxes for the national debt generated by previous generation.
45. Re:Waste of money by deimtee · 2012-09-20 18:59 · Score: 2
  
  Excluding the production by the Fed and currency that is physically lost or destroyed the money supply is a zero-sum system. This means that there is only one possible way to produce the money to pay the interest owed to the Fed, and that is the Fed loaning sufficient money at negative interest to cancel the interest they are already owed. Not likely.
  You can at maximum pay back the capital. Inflation can reduce the value of what is owed, but not the numerical amount. The interest debt is unpayable within the current system.
  
  --
  I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
46. Re:Waste of money by Artifakt · 2012-09-20 19:03 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Glass and water, yes, but bottle tops are thin steel, and cans are aluminum. Starting from the most common isotope of Iron (which is about 90% of all the iron in the normal environment), one extra neutron captured gives an isotope with a half-life of roughly a couple of days. For aluminum, having the most stable isotope capture either 1 or 2 neutrons gives it a half-life of respectively 2 or 6 minutes. Military exposure recommendations are to assume aluminum in fallouts will be back to close to background rates in less than three days. That's a lot of half-lives at 6 min each, so Al will initially be a major source of the total radiation dose, but it's contribution will fall off much faster than the fallout overall becomes non-radioactive. You can take the proportionate decay rates and conclude that Iron won't contribute 1/1000th of the dose in the same quantities, but won't get back to near background level dose for thousands of times as long. So, for the first 37.8 hours, you should drink from bottles, and after that, switch to cans. *
  * This is not a real recommendation. Real fallout will not just include neutron activated metals found naturally in whatever got nuked, but bomb material daughter products, and some of these may be very exotic isotopes, so real fallout should (but won't) come with a YMMV warning. If you are in a real fallout zone, knowing whether the soil of the target area was Al dominant minerals or not will probably not be of any use to you.
  
  --
  Who is John Cabal?
47. Re:Waste of money by Hognoxious · 2012-09-20 19:19 · Score: 1
  
  Well I am paying the interest and principle on money borrowed in 1955.
  At least they didn't waste any on trying to educate you.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
48. Re:Waste of money by bickerdyke · 2012-09-20 19:35 · Score: 1
  
  They probably found that out with those experiments. SIXTY YEARS AGO!
  
  --
  bickerdyke
49. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 19:54 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah self-education is great and all but will it cure being a self-righteous prick? I think not.
50. Re:Waste of money by cold+fjord · 2012-09-20 20:16 · Score: 2
  
  The world (especially voters and politicians) believe in nutjob armageddon/rapture bullshit and are hell-bent on making sure it happens as soon as possible
  Let me help you out there -
  The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, AKA the Soviet Union, governed by the religion suppressing atheistic Communist Party of the Soviet Union, in a "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" operated according to the "scientific principles" of Marxist-Leninism, built an actual Doomsday weapon, that is still active: Soviet Doomsday Device Still Armed and Ready and Inside the Apocalyptic Soviet Doomsday Machine.. Apparently secular socialist progressive totalitarians are just as crazy as anyone else. Salud.
  Related: Moscow arms against nuclear attack
  
  Nearly 5,000 new emergency bomb shelters will be built in Moscow by 2012 to save people in case of potential attacks.
  Out of sight but not out of mind
  
  William Burrows’ classic 1986 book about satellite reconnaissance, Deep Black, opened with a vivid scene of retired US Air Force Major General George Keegan recounting how in the early 1970s he had become obsessed with Soviet civil defense preparedness. As head of Air Force intelligence, Keegan had ordered his junior officers to gather all the satellite photography that they could of Soviet underground shelter building. Eventually he compiled a massive amount of data indicating—he claimed—that virtually every large apartment building erected in the Soviet Union since 1955 included a fallout shelter, factories had underground bunkers, and there were “seventy-five huge underground command posts.” A few of these underground facilities housed command centers for the Strategic Rocket Forces and were buried in the Ural Mountains. In particular, Yamantau Mountain (“Evil Mountain” in the local Bashkir language) and Kosvinsky Mountain were considered to be the Soviet equivalents to Cheyenne Mountain in Colorado, home to NORAD (not to mention the W.O.P.R. and the Stargate).
  Shelters part of long-term civil defense plan - Shanghai leaders stress the date of 2012 is purely a coincidence
  Assessing PLA Underground Air Basing Capability
  Bunkers for all
  
  Switzerland is unique in having enough nuclear fallout shelters to accommodate its entire population, should they ever be needed.
  IKEA in Hell - The interior design of Sweden’s giant nuclear bunker.
  Israeli leaders spend day in 'Nation's Tunnel' nuclear bunker
  The frightening truth of why Iran wants a bomb
  
  According to Shia lore, the Imam is a messianic figure who, although in hiding, remains the true Sovereign of the World. In every generation, the Imam chooses 36 men, (and, for obvious reasons, no women) naming them the owtad or "nails", whose presence, hammered into mankind's existence, prevents the universe from "falling off". Although the "nails" are not known to common mortals, it is, at
  
  --
  much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
51. Re:Waste of money by simoncpu+was+here · 2012-09-20 20:19 · Score: 2
  
  2012 - 1835 = 177 years
  
  Formula for computing the future value (FV) of an investment's present value (PV) accruing at a fixed interest rate (i) for n periods:
  
  FV = PV*(1 + i)^n
  
  Computing...
  
  FV = 100 * (1 + 0.06)^177
  FV = 3013964.63322
  
  Assuming that you deposited it at a bank that gives you 6% annual interest, your $100 in 1835 would have grown to $3,013,964.63 by now.
52. Re:Waste of money by jd · 2012-09-20 20:19 · Score: 2
  
  Yeah, but you need to consider that most lagers are just coloured heavy water.
  
  --
  It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
53. Re:Waste of money by jd · 2012-09-20 20:25 · Score: 2
  
  You also need to consider that irradiated food has to be labeled as such and has generally been rejected by the consumer as unsafe. (Whereas, presumably, they'd have eaten food irradiated by far harder radiation, then smothered in radioactive particles of assorted deadly kinds, and regarded it as safe.) Most supermarket food is NOT irradiated, the market opted to go the GM route because people were more willing to buy something that produced its own toxic pesticides.
  
  --
  It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
54. Re:Waste of money by jd · 2012-09-20 20:27 · Score: 2
  
  Don't you ever confuse governments with the mentally ill. The more I compare modern politicians with the script for "Quatermas II", the more concerned I become. Look for strange purple blotches around the face or neck. That can be a warning sign of aliens.
  
  --
  It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
55. Re:Waste of money by jd · 2012-09-20 20:30 · Score: 2
  
  I dunno, you can brew beer. And after the holocaust, I'd consider beer brewed the Old Egyptian way (it actually contains high levels of antibiotics) rather than by "modern" methods to be rather more useful for containing outbreaks of disease. That would make starting over on the beer production a more practical approach.
  
  --
  It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
56. Re:Waste of money by AK+Marc · 2012-09-20 20:32 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  Nope, wife 1. Though I didn't mention that most of them were paid off when I sold them (and shortly took out a new one for another house). But right now, I own two free and clear, one rented out.
  
  --
  Learn to love Alaska
57. Re:Waste of money by jd · 2012-09-20 20:37 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, no. In the 1950s, they had few means of identifying low levels of toxic chemicals that might result from radiation exposure (ionising radiation does interesting things to chemistry). Secondly, the radiation source used for food (caesium) produces radiation with VERY different characteristics (the frequency of the x-rays and gamma rays matters and, because you're talking specific quanta having specific effects, you can't simply say X times the frequency equals X times the effect, the effects have to be treated as utterly unrelated).
  Most of the food research was being done by biochemists and inorganic biochemists in the 1970s and 80s, particularly the inorganic biochemists.
  
  --
  It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
58. Re:Waste of money by able1234au · 2012-09-20 20:37 · Score: 1
  
  i see that humour just wooshed right on over....
59. Re:Waste of money by AK+Marc · 2012-09-20 20:48 · Score: 0
  
  But there was a large amount of cash before that started. If there only existed $10 on the planet, and I offered to lend it to you if you paid me back $11 tomorrow, why would either of us do that? No, there were millions of dollars in circulation, so lending someone $10 isn't that big of a deal. And nothing you've said indicates that the loans plus interest is more than the available cash.
  
  --
  Learn to love Alaska
60. Re:Waste of money by AK+Marc · 2012-09-20 20:50 · Score: 0
  
  Oh, I hoped that was an offer. I'll pay you to take her. Please.
  
  --
  Learn to love Alaska
61. Re:Waste of money by sjames · 2012-09-20 20:54 · Score: 1
  
  The tests were limited, so they did it by actually eating the food. Followup studies continued after that, but it most certainly DID begin with tests in the '50s. I have no doubt we'll have much more sophisticated testing in 2112, so does that mean the tests we do today are just a waste of money? Do you think we should just wait?
  I presume the answer is no. It was the same answer in the 1950s when they did the testing in TFA.
62. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 20:56 · Score: 0
  
  True, but you make it sound alarming. It's completely benign.
  Here's a less alarming narrative: the Fed lends money to the industry in the hopes it will be put to good use. It requires a repayment with interest and prints enough money for the interest repayment. It then hides this newly created cash in the economy and the market goes for an easter egg hunt.
  That's not a vicious cycle. That's the cogs of the economy turning.
63. Re:Waste of money by itsdapead · 2012-09-20 21:30 · Score: 1
  
  You also need to consider that irradiated food has to be labeled as such and has generally been rejected by the consumer as unsafe.
  I think in the post-nuclear world the choice would be between drinking fallout-laced groundwater or canned/bottled drinks. That sounds like a paper for the International Journal of Urso-Sylvanian Scatology to me.
  Meanwhile, is it safe to eat the old dead guy with the floppy hat and the whip? Looks like he died of suffocation and internal injuries rather than radiation.
  
  --
  In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
64. Re:Waste of money by rednip · 2012-09-20 23:37 · Score: 1
  
  Considering that the longest government note is 30 years, by your apparent standards all of Reagan's debt will be paid off in a couple of years. Conservatives should be happy that St Reagan has finally 'balanced his budget'.
  
  --
  The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
65. Re:Waste of money by FridgeFreezer · 2012-09-20 23:43 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly, go back and read the stuff about the nuclear tests, they had everything they could find lined up around every blast - from live animals strapped to the decks of target ships to food, drink, etc., plus of course all the scientists and soldiers stationed about the place to observe & report. As someone above said, the cost of setting off the nuke is the big thing, so you may as well stack as much stuff around the place to gather data on.
  
  --
  There is no music - home taping killed it.
66. Re:Waste of money by drinkypoo · 2012-09-21 00:07 · Score: 1
  
  Meanwhile, is it safe to eat the old dead guy with the floppy hat and the whip? Looks like he died of suffocation and internal injuries rather than radiation.
  Depends, how fat is he? Radioactives seem to congregate in fats and in organs, so as long as he's skinny and you stick with muscle you should at least minimize your risk...
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
67. Re:Waste of money by drinkypoo · 2012-09-21 00:09 · Score: 1
  
  The more I compare modern politicians with the script for "Quatermas II", the more concerned I become.
  I figure The Arrival is actually a better fit for current events...
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
68. Re:Waste of money by drinkypoo · 2012-09-21 00:10 · Score: 1
  
  after the holocaust, I'd consider beer brewed the Old Egyptian way (it actually contains high levels of antibiotics) rather than by "modern" methods
  That's got more to do with ingredients than anything else.
  I wonder what the health effects of drinking chicha are.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
69. Re:Waste of money by drinkypoo · 2012-09-21 00:18 · Score: 1
  
  the paranoid crybabies that get their panties in a bunch every time the FDA considers allowing irradiation as a food preservation method.
  These people are merely a vocal minority. The majority have accepted radiation of food, they perform it regularly in their kitchen. (OK, so it's different. Neither one is going to cause you cancer, so they might as well be equivalent for the purposes of this comment.)
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
70. Re:Waste of money by nedlohs · 2012-09-21 01:25 · Score: 1
  
  He's not referring to the money multiplier of banks loaning money. He is referring to the initial money creation by the Fed in which the Fed buys treasuries with newly printed money. That adds money to the system but it also means the Fed is getting the interest form those treasuries.
  For example (with arbitrary numbers for convenience), the Fed "prints" $100 to do this it buys $100 worth of treasuries and pays with that new $100. But by the time the treasury expires the Fed has to collect $101 due to interest on the treasuries (1% for convenience again). That means $101 is removed from the system. But only $100 was added so that won't work unless the Fed "prints" more money to loads that via buying treasuries again.
  Of course that simplistic view isn't actually how it works in reality. Since the Fed also pays interest to banks on their reserves and it pays a dividend to the US government. And of course these days a no-doc, no-money-down mortgage on a house in the middle of the desert is as good as a treasury for collateral, OK I exaggerate significantly on that last one.
71. Re:Waste of money by MachineShedFred · 2012-09-21 01:59 · Score: 1
  
  All radiation is not equal.
  Some types of radiation cause neutron capture, which causes the capturing material to become radioactive.
  Besides, they're already lighting one of these firecrackers off - no reason not to get a little secondary data at the same time.
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
72. Re:Waste of money by PPH · 2012-09-21 03:55 · Score: 2
  
  These people are merely a vocal minority.
  But vocal enough to affect FDA (or EU) decision making.
  
  The majority have accepted radiation of food,
  But you don't see the FDA mandating "ionizing radiation" warning labels on microwave ovens or cast iron skillets.
  We need an FDA-mandated "crazy" label that we can tattoo on these peoples' foreheads.
  
  --
  Have gnu, will travel.
73. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-21 04:37 · Score: 0
  
  I agree with this, but then I think it brings up the question of why they are only telling us the results of the test now.
74. Re:Waste of money by doccus · 2012-09-21 05:56 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, er.. there *is* one way out.. although i am guessing it wouldn't be a very popular move, to the top 1% (assuming that only 1% of the population are seriously wealthy, which I am not sure about).. and that is to outlaw offshore accounts and tax shelters.. It's not simply these unpaid taxes that these super-rich are guilty of, but worse, is that they keep taking multiple billions out of circulation , effectively choking the economy...
75. Re:Waste of money by Martin+Blank · 2012-09-26 06:00 · Score: 1
  
  Eventually, yes. But your statement was paying off all outstanding debts on the first of the month. Making a mortgage payment does not absolve you of the remaining debt unless it happens to be your final payment.
  
  --
  You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Now if I survived nuclear blast, by AbhiTheOne · 2012-09-20 11:55 · Score: 1

I know how to celebrate it :-)
AH !! TWINKIES AND BEER !! WHAT A LIFE !! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 11:58 · Score: 0

Bring on nuclear armaggedon !! I shall walk the silver tightrope, and like it !!
That's a relief. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 11:59 · Score: 0

Now I know I can have a prewar beer in The Mojave.
1. Re:That's a relief. by tnk1 · 2012-09-20 13:33 · Score: 2
  
  Since the beers were made in 2077, and you're in the Mojave in 2281, your biggest problem is going to be the born-on date.
  And in the Mojave Wasteland, when they talk about skunky beer, they mean it has giant, two-headed, cybernetically enhanced, armor plated skunks... with lasers.
Research for Nerds. by TaoPhoenix · 2012-09-20 11:59 · Score: 1, Offtopic

This might be a record, tests from the 1950s !?

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
See? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 11:59 · Score: 0

Apocalypse averted.
Devil's Advocate here..... by Cute+and+Cuddly · 2012-09-20 12:00 · Score: -1, Flamebait

So, an organization that has as main purpose to kill people, that has been known to conduct illegal operations in numerous countries (And therefore does not have a moral leg to stand on) is telling us that something can be consumed with "no major health risks"? Have they defined what a "major health risk" is? Do respectable doctors agree with that definition? Does any respectable government agrees with that definition?
1. Re:Devil's Advocate here..... by khallow · 2012-09-20 12:39 · Score: 1
  
  an organization that has as main purpose to kill people
  Your initial premise has yet to be satisfied.
2. Re:Devil's Advocate here..... by Martin+Blank · 2012-09-20 13:21 · Score: 2
  
  It's an organization that has as its main purpose defending the nation. Back then, there was a lot of concern about nuclear holocaust and most people were certain that it was just a matter of time until one side or the other lit the fuse. Knowing what would be usable afterward and what would be dangerous was critical knowledge if society was to rebuild itself.
  
  --
  You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
3. Re:Devil's Advocate here..... by b4dc0d3r · 2012-09-20 13:34 · Score: 2
  
  If you're going for Devil's Advocate, you should understand that it means taking a position you don't necessarily agree with. I'm pretty sure you meant something else, so keep looking.
  And the better way to be the whatever it was you hoped to be, is the normal nerdly way. We don't even have a published scientific report, and it's hardly peer reviewed. At best we have a "finding" which has yet to be validated and verified. It is not proof, nor does it pretend to be. As with most of the science that hits any news paper/aggregator/site.
  Oh, I know what you were being. A troll. Cute and Cuddly Troll. Or person who spouts conspiracy theories for no real purpose. Cute and Cuddly and irrelevant. Either way, the answer to both is "no" and your post serves no purpose.
4. Re:Devil's Advocate here..... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 15:27 · Score: 0
  
  So, an organization that has as main purpose to kill people, that has been known to conduct illegal operations in numerous countries (And therefore does not have a moral leg to stand on) is telling us that something can be consumed with "no major health risks"? Have they defined what a "major health risk" is? Do respectable doctors agree with that definition? Does any respectable government agrees with that definition?
  
  To play Devil's Advocate: in the event of a USA/USSR nuclear exchange, it was in the best interest of the US military and the US government to tell US citizens which foodstuffs, post-exchange, could be consumed with "no major health risks", where "major health risk" was defined in the context of the survivors of a nuclear exchange between superpowers.
  Drinking beer out of sealed bottles that might have a little fallout on them does pose "no major health risks" compared to the risks of, say, drinking water. (Pathogens from the decomposition of millions of corpses upstream from your watering hole is the biggest risk, followed by radiological hazards whose effects probably won't show up until 10-20 years later. Because modern medicine will probably not be restored within that timeframe, you blow the dust off the beer, and have a drink. If there's no beer, you sterilize/boil the water and drink that. You'll die of a broken leg, infected wound, heart attack, pneumonia, cholera, or some other condition that was easily-treatable in prewar civilization, long before you get cancer from drinking lightly-contaminated water. Or don't drink the water and die of dehydration within 72 hours.)
5. Re:Devil's Advocate here..... by AK+Marc · 2012-09-20 15:50 · Score: 2
  
  If you're going for Devil's Advocate, you should understand that it means taking a position you don't necessarily agree with.
  
  No, Devil's Advocate on Slashdot is not just taking a position you don't normally believe in (lying), but deliberately taking the most absurd counterpoint to not only argue against something but do so in a manner that makes both people look dumber for trying. "The War Department, paid to kill people, suggests food near a nuclear blast is safe." So should we take that to mean that it's safe, or that the War Department wants us to try and die?
  
  --
  Learn to love Alaska
6. Re:Devil's Advocate here..... by drinkypoo · 2012-09-21 00:12 · Score: 1
  
  Your initial premise has yet to be satisfied.
  A soldier's job is to kill, which is why current systems demand that civilians decide who dies. Separation of the power of will and the power of death...
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
7. Re:Devil's Advocate here..... by khallow · 2012-09-21 13:41 · Score: 1
  
  A soldier's job is to kill
  A soldier has many jobs. And a lot of them go their entire career without trying to kill anyone. Their most important task is simply to act as a deterrent to anyone else with a military force.
old by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:01 · Score: 0

We have known this. You just can't drink too much or you need the RadAway. I'm gonna start saving cola's in clear bottles now just in case there are actually benefits.
1. Re:old by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:28 · Score: 0
  
  You mean like using them as a light source in those dimly lit powerless fallout shelters within which your quest for the lostech needed to keep your own vault operating? :D
Fallout by iive · 2012-09-20 12:02 · Score: 3, Funny

Who would want normal beer, when you can drink Nuka-Cola. Keep the caps.
1. Re:Fallout by crazedmaniac · 2012-09-20 16:15 · Score: 1
  
  I think the entire Fallout needs a new patch to reflect this updated information.
2. Re:Fallout by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-21 02:05 · Score: 0
  
  I prefer the name Chernobyl-Brew.
Scary secret side effects by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:03 · Score: 0

Once exposed to the radiation the American piss lagers turned into very complex high abv Belgium quads. And the pretzels became self aware and super-intelligent and are now secretly running the federal reserve.
1. Re:Scary secret side effects by snspdaarf · 2012-09-20 12:17 · Score: 1
  
  Once exposed to the radiation the American piss lagers turned into very complex high abv Belgium quads. And the pretzels became self aware and super-intelligent and are now secretly running the federal reserve.
  Boy, are you asking a lot from radiation! Although, it does explain the M&M ads lately...
  
  --
  Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
Well, works for me by Gazzonyx · 2012-09-20 12:03 · Score: 1

Looks like I'm going to be enjoying beer and Twinkies if we ever have a nuclear war. No worries; it's sustained me thus far.

--
If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.
1. Re:Well, works for me by jbeaupre · 2012-09-20 12:19 · Score: 1
  
  We often ran stuff through a Co-60 irradiation system to sterilize it. I considered hiding a Twinkie in amongst the other stuff. But the danger to the universe from rupturing time and space didn't seem worth it.
  
  --
  The world is made by those who show up for the job.
Good to know by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:06 · Score: 0

Where you taxes are going.
1. Re:Good to know by dpidcoe · 2012-09-20 12:31 · Score: 1
  
  I'm pretty sure that beer was just one of the many many different kinds of foods, clothes, bombshelters, vehicles, houses, and god knows what else they also placed around the test site to evaluate the effects of a nuke on them.
  source:
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nop3tfseBqU
2. Re:Good to know by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 13:06 · Score: 0
  
  hey you taxes, where you going!
Mmmmmmm..... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:08 · Score: 0

Nucular Beer.
Feeeewwwww by stevenfuzz · 2012-09-20 12:08 · Score: 2

Thank god, that's been keeping me up at night.
1. Re:Feeeewwwww by aliquis · 2012-09-20 13:37 · Score: 1
  
  Duck and drink.
That's nice by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:12 · Score: 0

I'm more interested in knowing what would be *unsafe* to drink / eat. Water? Milk? Juice? Juice boxes? Wine? Macaroni and cheese?
1. Re:That's nice by Black+Parrot · 2012-09-20 15:56 · Score: 1
  
  I'm more interested in knowing what would be *unsafe* to drink / eat. Water? Milk? Juice? Juice boxes? Wine? Macaroni and cheese?
  A can of Spam turned into a giant monster that ravaged Tokyo for a few days.
  
  --
  Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Premature by WinstonWolfIT · 2012-09-20 12:12 · Score: 1

How would Twinkies fare?
1. Re:Premature by rubycodez · 2012-09-20 13:38 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Twinkies, which last on the order of geological time, have these few main threats against their long term shelf life: 1. subduction under an adjacent tectonic plate 2. expansion of sun into red dwarf, though as the sun becomes less dense the earth and unconsumed twinkies may survive by increasing orbital axis 3. collision of earth with another major major astronomical body, eastimated to be on the order of every five billion years for event sufficient to destroy most or all twinkies 4. proton decay and/or quantum tunneling, 10^100 years or more
2. Re:Premature by Black+Parrot · 2012-09-20 15:58 · Score: 1
  
  Twinkies, which last on the order of geological time, have these few main threats against their long term shelf life: 1. subduction under an adjacent tectonic plate 2. expansion of sun into red dwarf, though as the sun becomes less dense the earth and unconsumed twinkies may survive by increasing orbital axis 3. collision of earth with another major major astronomical body, eastimated to be on the order of every five billion years for event sufficient to destroy most or all twinkies 4. proton decay and/or quantum tunneling, 10^100 years or more
  I notice that being digested isn't on the list...
  
  --
  Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
3. Re:Premature by Anarchduke · 2012-09-20 16:03 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Thats a myth. Twinkies have a shelf life of approximately 25 days. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinkie#Shelf_life
  
  --
  who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
4. Re:Premature by drinkypoo · 2012-09-21 00:03 · Score: 1
  
  Who are you going to believe, Wikipedia, or a slashdotter?
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
5. Re:Premature by rubycodez · 2012-09-21 02:26 · Score: 1
  
  when someone talks about a cream stuffed spongecake being threatened by the decay of all baryonic particles (which might take only 10^40 years) into leptons and photons over a timescale that will evaporate the biggest black holes (10^100 years), your exaggeration and humor detectors should have tripped, and you might want to consider recalibrating them.
Great news! by UltraZelda64 · 2012-09-20 12:28 · Score: 1

Now I'm just waiting for a nuclear war. Anyone with me?
While I'm waiting, I think I'll go get a six-pack of craft beer.
One word: by valentinas · 2012-09-20 12:30 · Score: 1

Nuka-Cola
So that's how we make American beer! by Penurious+Penguin · 2012-09-20 12:32 · Score: 1

I'd always wondered how something so simple as water, barley and hops could be subverted into such a horrendous fluid. Hell, now I know; just place some decent ale an appropriate distance from a few megatons of atomic fury, filter out everything but the alcohol, add some dye, diacetyl and propylene glycol, slap a label on it, print and distribute images of healthy men consuming it without immediately dying, airbrush in a few half naked women appearing to appreciate the situation, and behold the most mysterious industry in the universe unveiled!

Thankfully, some far-seeing Teutonic king thought of Reinheitsgebot, a law which prohibits the use of atomic warfare on beer.

--
Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
1. Re:So that's how we make American beer! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:58 · Score: 0
  
  Reinheitsgebot? You mean the law designed to keep bread prices low by limiting brewers to barley that has since become the biggest marketing farce this side of Heineken's "green glass is better for freshness!"? You mean the one that many German manufacturers still claim on Weisse beers? Don't even get me started on the German habit of pouring anything they can find into their beer (orange soda!?) then complaining about shandies.
  - Homebrewer with a German spouse
2. Re:So that's how we make American beer! by pancake_lover · 2012-09-20 14:15 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  The Reinheitsgebot isn't necessarily a good thing to follow. Many great British, Belgian, and American craft beers do not meet the sometimes odd rules of the Reinheitsgebot.
  The list of "11 Reasons why the Reinheitsgebot is bollocks" explains it pretty well: http://patto1ro.home.xs4all.nl/reinheit.htm
  
  --
  Homer no function beer well without.
3. Re:So that's how we make American beer! by HornWumpus · 2012-09-20 14:36 · Score: 1
  
  I've heard that conspiracy theory but it doesn't hold water. There was/is no rule that prevented wheat beer production or sale. They just couldn't call it beer.
  That said; nobody in their right mind would drink beer with wheat, corn or rice in it, if they had a good alternative. Most beer with added flavors in America is wheat beer, which is so sour it is improved by most things. Which isn't really a positive about wheat beer IMHO. It puts it in a class with Corona (lime to cover the flavor).
  At least its better then yeast infected beer (Heffe). You've got to have some nasty beer if leaving the yeast in it makes it taste _better_.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
4. Re:So that's how we make American beer! by Penurious+Penguin · 2012-09-20 14:48 · Score: 1
  
  That's a finely written, very interesting article and it really does make some compelling points; but I think it a little harsh. Of course, it is obviously written by someone unscathed by the bemired talons of a certain Anheuser eagle, so I reserve my right to bitterness (no pun intended) and really do enjoy most Reinheitsgebot beers. However, while such a law may to some extent protect innocent Germans from the wrath of Natty Ice and the likes, I wouldn't argue that it sets the standard for all beers. Also, you must consider the jovial and novel value of the law to Americans; while some Presidents have been spotted wielding feisty pens at executive orders, we don't often get laws by decree of Kings around here.
  
  --
  Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
Fallout by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:36 · Score: 0

So then Nuke Cola would be alright to drink, excellent.
AHA! The Ultimate in WTF Research! by johnwerneken · 2012-09-20 12:36 · Score: 0

ROTFFLMFAO. Amazing what can be done with public money!
already storing large amounts in our bomb shelters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 12:37 · Score: 0

thanks, but we're way ahead of ya. when there's a hurricane, the beer is the first thing to vanish. why should nuclear holocaust be any different? we're stockpiled with at least 4 months worth of budweiser ready to drink, plus we got brewing supplies in stock as well.
A massive sigh of relief by Grayhand · 2012-09-20 12:41 · Score: 4, Funny

At least we know now the Irish can survive a nuclear attack
1. Re:A massive sigh of relief by Penurious+Penguin · 2012-09-20 12:54 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Sorry mate; it only works on American beer. Try that shit on Guinness and not only will you defile it beyond repair, you'll infuriate a bunch of micks and be pullin' bits o' shoe and clover out yer teeth for a good long while too ;) Blighted taters is one thing, but don't mess with the drink.
  
  --
  Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
2. Re:A massive sigh of relief by Immerman · 2012-09-20 14:46 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  On the plus side Guinness is dense enough to block even high-energy neutron radiation, so only the first row of bottles will be ruined. As an added bonus the irradiated beer can still be distilled into a potent scotch that will give you superhuman alcohol consumption abilities, not that anyone will notice.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
3. Re:A massive sigh of relief by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 16:37 · Score: 0
  
  Aye, Guinness is so dense that it floats on top of most lagers.
4. Re:A massive sigh of relief by GoodNewsJimDotCom · 2012-09-20 16:42 · Score: 1
  
  You're probably right, but people from the UK would probably be delighted they don't need to put in effort to warm their beer.
  
  --
  God spoke to me
5. Re:A massive sigh of relief by Penurious+Penguin · 2012-09-20 17:57 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Reminds me of the time I was visiting Bristol (England) and walked into a pub for a beer. The bartender and I had been chatting when some grumpy chap at the far end of the bar ordered a beer. After he got his beer, we resumed chatting. Moments later I heard all sorts of grumbling and complaining. The guy's beer was cold, and he wasn't having anything to do with it. The bartender pleaded with him, saying "it's cellar temperature sir!" and finally got him another pint. Well, the second one was just as cold and the grumpy fellow threw a verbal fit. Perhaps suspecting I was from the US, he wanted to illustrate something; I'll never know. But it sure was a show. I can still remember the spitting contempt in his voice when he said, "cowld be'eh?" and as if just figuring it all out, finished with deliberate punctuation "Oi, cain't, drink, cowld, be eh. ...Pifff .....Cowld be'eh." as he shook his head in confused revulsion. Maybe it was the weather.
  
  --
  Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
6. Re:A massive sigh of relief by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 19:54 · Score: 1
  
  sigh. you drink Ale cool/warm to bring out the flavour. cold beer is lager, it's that horrible stuff you drink. please don't visit again
7. Re:A massive sigh of relief by Type44Q · 2012-09-20 20:45 · Score: 1
  
  Try that shit on Guinness and not only will you defile it beyond repair
  You mean even worse than drinking it warm? ;)
8. Re:A massive sigh of relief by L4t3r4lu5 · 2012-09-20 22:00 · Score: 2
  
  "Cellar temperature" is 57f. If the cellarman was particularly useless, or it was a trendy wine bar which serves mainly lagers and spirits, they might turn it down further to keep the lager drinkers happy. They should have secondary chillers for the lager lines, though; Running the chillers to cool the whole cellar to lager temperatures is really expensive.
  
  Ale barman and cellarman for 10 years.
  
  --
  Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
9. Re:A massive sigh of relief by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-21 04:01 · Score: 0
  
  As you said it's 'American beer' - Garbage in, Garbage out
10. Re:A massive sigh of relief by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-21 04:20 · Score: 0
  
  Normally it would sink, but it has integrity.
11. Re:A massive sigh of relief by mcgrew · 2012-09-21 04:23 · Score: 1
  
  Most American beer is pilsner rather than lager. Even if the bottle's brown and the label says lager, the recipes are for pilsner beer.
  Actually, I've drank beer from all over the world (ever had Japanes beer?) and there are only a few I don't like. Miller Lite is #1 on the "eew" list. I prefer Bass, but they don't sell it in many places, D'Arcy's has another Irish brand that is almost as good. But D'Arcy's is always packed and it takes an hour to get a seat (not because of the beer, because of the food).
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
More info needed by ghelmer · 2012-09-20 13:23 · Score: 2

From the '50s, beer would have been in rugged steel cans. How about today's thin aluminum cans?
it's nice how everyone by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 13:34 · Score: 0

it's nice how everyone in the US got radiated by their own government, that was nice...
yup, everyone.
QFT! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 13:43 · Score: 1

Well I am paying the interest and principle on money borrowed in 1955.
The money spent in 1955 has long since been paid off. So...no you're not.
Preach it! It's exactly like what will happen after 15 years when my interest-only mortgage is up. I will pay off the principal by taking out another interest-only mortgage, thus retiring that debt!
Or just like when I retire my credit card debt balance by rolling it over to a new credit card! That debt is now paid in full, hooray!
Seriously, man, rolling over debt isnt the same as paying it off. You can't argue that with a straight face. The debt has been increasing enormously, and deficits are surpassing inflation, so it's not really that unreasonable to say that at least some substantial portion of the debt was never paid off.
Who gives a shit? by GodfatherofSoul · 2012-09-20 14:08 · Score: 1

Really, if I see a mushroom cloud and a 6-pack, the last thing on my mind will be "oh, I hope that's not irradiated." I'm getting WASTED!

--
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
1. Re:Who gives a shit? by magpie · 2012-09-21 00:36 · Score: 1
  
  Really, if I see a mushroom cloud and a 6-pack, the last thing on my mind will be "oh, I hope that's not irradiated." I'm getting WASTED!
  Funny, in that situation my first though would be to get as wasted as possible (the odds are your dead anyway before long so why in gods name would you not get wasted?)
All right! by rush,overlord,rush! · 2012-09-20 14:09 · Score: 0

Next time we'll try neutron bombs! A refrigerator won't save you.
Nice to know the important things are safe. by cvtan · 2012-09-20 14:11 · Score: 1

After we all die in the nuclear furnace, the surviving cockroaches will be able to drink our beer in perfect safety. If they can get the tops off the bottles! Suck it roaches!!!!

--
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
Rugged is Archaic by Penurious+Penguin · 2012-09-20 14:12 · Score: 4, Funny

Bahh. That was back in the day when "beer" meant beer. The strength of the old steel can was intended to compliment the beer with a sense of substance -- and it was built to last. This newfangled bubbling pansy fuddle is put into aluminium for morale. The poor excuse for men who feebly molest the frail cans of today need the extra confidence that the lightness of aluminium provides; it makes them feel strong and capable, like their ancestors. These modern milksop piss-containers couldn't survive fallout from a wet cherry-bomb.

--
Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
1. Re:Rugged is Archaic by drinkypoo · 2012-09-20 23:57 · Score: 1
  
  FWIW you can now get beer (as opposed to urine) in cans in and from the USA, e.g. 21st amendment. And actually, I've had Shiner Bock, and while it's worth nowhere near what they're charging for it today, it's fairly credible. And then there's Guinness, is that still available in cans? The thinking man's toobin' supply.
  WTF is up with the price of Shiner anyway? Is that a hipster thing now, like Corona? Anyone who pays more than $1/bottle for Corona is an asshole.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
2. Re:Rugged is Archaic by Penurious+Penguin · 2012-09-21 04:10 · Score: 1
  
  WTF is up with the price of Shiner anyway? Is that a hipster thing now, like Corona? Anyone who pays more than $1/bottle for Corona is an asshole.
  There does appear to be an epidemic of mediocre beer with tall prices. I went into an ABC Liquor recently and observed common domestics such as Bud, Miller, etc., at just a few cents less than many imports or micro-brews. I actually went on a rant in front of the manager. I said something along the lines of "Eight dollars for a sixpack of sparkling snot! Creative. Why not just make it twenty instead? That way it'll be completely obvious that you're ridiculing the customers!." So to answer your question, I don't know. Maybe they're hording supplies in fear of Persia.
  
  --
  Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
Power Vacuum by fragMasterFlash · 2012-09-20 14:13 · Score: 3, Funny

The world will be dearly in need of leadership after a nuclear war. I think these tests need to be repeated with politicians to see how they fare.
1. Re:Power Vacuum by rts008 · 2012-09-20 20:08 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, and do sell tickets to the process of canning and bottling them!
  
  --
  Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
Re:already storing large amounts in our bomb shelt by HornWumpus · 2012-09-20 14:38 · Score: 2

Sorry you couldn't find any beer.

--
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I am appalled by Guru80 · 2012-09-20 15:17 · Score: 1

...there are plenty of test monkeys and humans around to be testing your nuclear fallout on. For all that is holy, don't mess with the damn beer
1. Re:I am appalled by mcgrew · 2012-09-21 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  there are plenty of test monkeys and humans around to be testing your nuclear fallout on.
  They used those test monkeys and test humans. Actually I was one of those test humans -- one of their Nevada tests carried fallout over Missouri and Illinois, and it happened to snow heavily that night. Ever see thundersnow? If you ever see lightning during a snowstorm, somebody probably set off a nuke. Anyway, we got two feet pf snow and parents were cautioned to not let their kids play in it because it was radioactuve.
  Yeah, right, like you're going to keep kids from playing in the snow. Later they collected our baby teeth to measure strontium 90.
  As to the monkeys, I'm pretty sure there were apes and monkey on the Bikini Islands that we blew up over and over.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
finally by circletimessquare · 2012-09-20 15:23 · Score: 1

valuable scientific research

--
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Define "safe" by erice · 2012-09-20 15:30 · Score: 1

The article did not report how they determined that the drinks were safe or in what quantities.
Chemical/biological issues from one or two bottles is probably going to be minimal.
Radioactivity from drinking nothing but nuked beer for months could be problem.
Beer.... by Brad1138 · 2012-09-20 15:47 · Score: 1

Is there anything it can't do?

--
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
The real question ... by sgunhouse · 2012-09-20 15:52 · Score: 1

Of course now we need to find out if it will be safe after the zombie apocalypse!
1. Re:The real question ... by luther349 · 2012-09-20 16:43 · Score: 1
  
  unless the zombies drink it of course it would be.
No harm to really good beer! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 16:22 · Score: 0

As a retired nuclear qualified attack pilot (A-4M) and a fanatic for domestic double/triple/imperial IPA's, I'm relieved to know that had I been called upon to visit such horrendous destruction on humanity, I wouldn't have harmed really good beer. :D
"This is perfectly safe"... by Tastecicles · 2012-09-20 16:22 · Score: 1

...proclaimed the professor as an arm sprouted out of his forehead...
By this logic, it would be perfectly safe to drink out of a spring post-holocaust (I'm thinking not; a tapwell, maybe, but not an open spring - hard radiation would likely not penetrate deep enough to contaminate a water table, but between it and fallout, surface sources would be rendered unusable).

--
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
1. Re:"This is perfectly safe"... by drinkypoo · 2012-09-21 00:01 · Score: 1
  
  If by an "open spring" you mean a pond or pool, that's true whether there's a spring at the bottom of it or not. However, heavy metals settle to the bottom in most contexts, so after a time such sources should be "safe" if the spring is not under surface influence.
  Springs are characterized as either being under surface influence or not. When they are they're powered by a nearby aquifer higher than they are. Water runs into them, and it runs out again after a relatively short trip. The ones that aren't can come from far away — some of the water flows actually cross entire states.
  Surface influence determines what comes out of the spring.
  You won't be able to know whether a spring is safe by just looking.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Voters and politicians by Andy+Prough · 2012-09-20 16:32 · Score: 0

Are you referring to the 9 voting members of the Chinese Politboro Standing Committee? Because otherwise, I think that saying "voters" believe in nutjob bullshit casts a pretty wide net.
1. Re:Voters and politicians by jamstar7 · 2012-09-20 17:56 · Score: 1
  
  Sounds like you've missed 99% of the election coverage here in the US.
  
  Lucky you.
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
Re:Twinkies by TaoPhoenix · 2012-09-20 16:41 · Score: 1

Ssh, you're threatening 15 years worth of urban legends with facts. Obviously the urban legends generate more ad revenue. I leave the conclusions to you. (Satire)

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Re:Tax Dollars by TaoPhoenix · 2012-09-20 16:44 · Score: 1

Someone's been power-modding this entire super-thread down. 3/4 of the registered guys are at 0.
Including my comment that the work was from the 1950's hence it's dubious that you were paying taxes then. Your parents were, to be sure.
But still, this whole thread has been un-naturally down-modded.

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
There's contamination, and then there's... by hyades1 · 2012-09-20 17:05 · Score: 1

An Australian beer called "Black Swan" would probably survive atomic bombardment as well as any other beer. On the other hand, its effects on the digestive system are such that anybody stuck in a fallout shelter with somebody who had been drinking it would willingly go outside to frolic in the radioactive ash and breathe less contaminated air.

--
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Fallout 3 by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 18:23 · Score: 0

If you have played Fallout3 you already know this!
Samzenpus you ass, this is two levels of trash by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 19:03 · Score: 0

First off, Fool, you apparently have no idea what a holocaust is. Pray that you don't experience one (and you might, thanks to the islamist-in-chief, Barak Hussein Obama giving the Iranians the bomb).
Furthermote, while gamma rays are harmless to most objects, heavy radioactive ions imbedded in your drink might not be that healthy after all. Care for some bioaccumulated cesium-sparked leukemia with that beer?
Iran by michelcolman · 2012-09-20 19:14 · Score: 1

The people of Iran will be extremely glad with this good news.
Holocaust by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 19:27 · Score: 0

Why am I the first one to complain about the poor use of the word? I'm sure they didn't kill the majority of a kind of people (with a nuke) to see what impact that has on beer. Show some respect to our history, or be doomed to repeat it!
1. Re:Holocaust by gl4ss · 2012-09-20 20:19 · Score: 1
  
  "holokaustos" meaning "completely burnt".
  there's even a wikipedia article on nuclear holocaust. so it refers to more than just burning a certain people in certain ovens - apparently that use for the word started being used in '70s.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Ha! by Hognoxious · 2012-09-20 19:34 · Score: 1

I'm sure somewhere in Iran a swivel eyed ayatollah is shrugging his shoulders and saying, "Well I guess there's no point now, we might as well shut down the reactor. Curse those decadent western peegs!".

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
They did the test on hookers by SmallFurryCreature · 2012-09-20 20:08 · Score: 1

They tested the effects off the nuclear holocaust on women by exposing girlintrainings mom. The result is girlintraining. They call it a the nuclear holocaust for a reason. That which has been seen cannot be unseen. Man was not meant to tamper with the forces of nature.

--

MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I ordered some Twinkies from the US just to see by SmallFurryCreature · 2012-09-20 20:11 · Score: 5, Funny

I ordered a box of Twinkies at an insane price from the US, just to finally taste this product of American culture so often mentioned in movies. It says on the box that they can only be kept for a short time, so I decided to taste this over a long period. 1 year and still going. Taste? Still the same. GODDAMN AWFUL! Next month I will try another one. I am thinking of turning myself in for unethical testing on a dumb animal.

--

MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
1. Re:I ordered some Twinkies from the US just to see by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-21 00:46 · Score: 0
  
  That product of American culture is almost always the punchline to a joke. The things are terrible, why would you do this?
Now thats a SuperBowl Commercial... by Genda · 2012-09-20 20:36 · Score: 1

Less filling, taste great, make you grow three heads!!!
As if it was intentional... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 21:34 · Score: 0

I'm calling BULLSHIT
General: Private Pyle, where'd you leave the beer?
Private Gomer Pyle: Ummm, outside by that big tower we put up...
General: Gunny, calibrate this private!
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Do you think I'm cute, Private Pyle? Do you think I'm funny?
Private Gomer Pyle: Sir, no, sir!
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Then wipe that disgusting grin off your face.
Private Gomer Pyle: Sir, yes, sir.
[tries to stop smiling]
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Well, any fucking time, sweetheart!
Private Gomer Pyle: Sir, I'm trying, sir.
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Private Pyle I'm gonna give you three seconds; exactly three-fucking-seconds to wipe that stupid looking grin off your face or I will gouge out your eyeballs and skull-fuck you! ONE! TWO! THREE!
Private Gomer Pyle: Sir, I can't help it, sir.
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Bullshit! Get on your knees scumbag!
[Pyle drops down to his knees]
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Now choke yourself.
[Pyle wraps his own hands around his throat]
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Goddamn it, with MY hand, numb-nuts!
[Pyle reaches for Hartman's hand]
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Don't pull my fucking hand over there! I said choke yourself; now lean forward and choke yourself!
[Pyle does so]
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Are you through grinning?
Private Gomer Pyle: [gagging] Sir, yes, sir.
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Bullshit, I can't hear you!
Private Gomer Pyle: [louder] Sir, yes, sir.
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Bullshit, I STILL can't hear you! Sound off like you've got a pair!
Private Gomer Pyle: SIR, YES, SIR!
Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: That's enough! Get on your feet. Private Pyle you had best square your ass away and start shitting me Tiffany cufflinks or I will definitely fuck you up!
Private Gomer Pyle: Sir, yes, sir.
Nuke Cola by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 22:12 · Score: 0

So I wont get as many rads as I would drinking Nuke Cola? Seems sensible rather than to drink out the toilet and eat Radroach meat
Test idea by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-20 23:15 · Score: 0

They should test me on beer I reckon.
US beer is best by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-21 00:17 · Score: 0

The number of microbreweries started in the last thirty years is mind boggling and all of their products are at least interesting, most are good. Combined with the fact that tied houses are illegal in the U.S. and you get a larger variety at most pubs than you could hope for in the UK and the Irish apparently think there is only one kind of beer. Belgium makes amazingly good beer, but even their pubs still don't have anywhere close to the choice of a typical US one which will include those same amazing Belgian beers, the British beers from five or more different pub chains, some good German stuff, and the vast juggernaut of US microbrews in their swarming hundreds. Yes most US folks like bland pilsners, but so do most people in Europe as well.
Because I wanted to see another great american ico by SmallFurryCreature · 2012-09-21 01:11 · Score: 1

I just wanted to see what an icon of American Culture really tasted like. I mean, American has shared some great tastes with the world like... eh... oooh Coca Cola... oh wait, Coca Cola in the rest of the world actually tastes very different from American Coca Cola thanks to the use of real sugar vs corn syrup. But there is ...
What have the yanks ever done for us anyway?
I also bought some Mountain Dew from the same candy importer... US crimes against dumb gullible dutch people just keeps piling up.

--

MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Re:Because I wanted to see another great american by Urza9814 · 2012-09-21 02:51 · Score: 1

There's a reason that, when you go into the more high-end grocery stores in the US, you'll find a pretty decent selection of imported sodas. As well as a good selection of sodas that use real sugar, like Jones (although I think the company is Canadian so those _could_ be imported too...but I doubt it.) People drink that crap because it's _cheap_, not because it's good. And it's cheap because the government heavily taxes sugar in order to boost domestic corn production (which they give subsidies to)...
You'd be better off getting sodas imported from Mexico like we do ;)
Re:Because I wanted to see another great american by tibman · 2012-09-21 02:57 · Score: 1

Bourbon : )

--
http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
container structure by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-21 03:07 · Score: 0

in 1950 we didnt have plastic bottles, would they also allow the contents to survive?
Narrgh, Hulk Smashed! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-21 03:51 · Score: 0

I can see the microbreweries lining up for Marvel tie-ins.
Re:Because I wanted to see another great american by kaatochacha · 2012-09-21 04:13 · Score: 1

Name some really popular culturally relevant foodstuff/drink from from where you're from. I can bet if I drank/ate it, I'd be disgusted, or find it weird.
These things are always bizarre. It's why people miss them: they get them as a kid and have fond memories for them.
Look at Vegemite, for example. Unless you're Australian: if that's true I rest my case.
Good to know by McFortner · 2012-09-21 10:56 · Score: 1

Hey, after you get bombed, you can get bombed!

--
Beware of Sales Reps bearing gifts.
Radioactivity and Food; A pair made in *Heaven? by DirtyLiar · 2012-09-21 14:20 · Score: 1

*Nuclear Heaven

"Is bottled beer nuclear bombproof?... Yep... [you can drink it] without major health risks."
Yes, most people do not understand radioactivity, and believe it is contagious.
Radioactivity is only 'contagious' in the sense that radioactive dust can be breathed in or transferred from person to person and object to object. (Though a nuclear explosion creates a LOT of radioactive dust.)
Being irradiated (exposed to radiation) does not make you radioactive any more than being exposed to the sun does, it just causes cellular damage (just as being exposed to the sun does, only worse). (Breathing in radioactive dust, on the other hand, leaves that dust in your lungs, making you potentially deadly to yourself, and somewhat radioactive to others.) That is why some food companies want to use radiation to sterilize food. It will kill anything living on or in the food, but not cause the food to be radioactive. There are drawbacks though, the cellular damage cannot be limited to bacteria, viruses and parasites, so the cells of the food will be damaged too. Causing a drop in important vitamins and minerals, and thus a drop in the nutritional value of the food.

--
THINK! It's patriotic
i read this correctly? by KingBenny · 2012-09-23 19:39 · Score: 1

they're safe to drink if the area where they were stored isnt irradiated ? it does make sense somehow

--
Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
Re:Because I wanted to see another great american by drkoemans · 2012-09-24 09:05 · Score: 1

Jones soda is brewed, bottled and headquartered in Seattle, at least, it used to be.
Re:Because I wanted to see another great american by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-25 04:15 · Score: 0

American food is not so easily defined. There are some famous products such as Mountain Dew but for the most part that's only because of aggresive advertising or regional preferences. Many of us here can't stand that swill or view twinkies as a "heartattack in a box".
American food is more of a fusion and variation on other existing styles, mainly because of ingredients initially available here rather than where the cuisine originated. Here, there's a number of foods associated regionally. Southern food is virtually all deep fried, mexican-influenced areas tend to be spicier, but America isn't a uniform area.
Tex-mex food comes to mind as something that I'd define as American, Cajun food as well. Buffalo wings may count, as that's more of they were simply invented in Buffalo, New York. Anything that originates from the Native American peoples as well.
It's not nearly so cut and dried as you suggest.