[quote=@FacePunch]
[@Willy Vereb] 

[img]https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/17ir4te4ol75ejpg.jpg[/img]

According to this webside here:[url]http://web.net/~cnanw/a3.htm[/url] and the image posted above, there are more than enough nuclear weapons on the earth to destroy it. Russia alone, if it was in the mood, could wipe out multiple continents with its nuclear stockpile.
[/quote]Oh yeah.
And how many Tzar Bombas exist in the world? None.
Megaton yield stockpiles are also relatively small.
Besides, that "calculation" is deeply flawed because it uses the near total fatalities assumption of 5 PSI blastwave...which is completely useless for actually destroying anything in note.
That's the maximum range where a nuclear blastwave can potentially still ruin houses. Using it as an absolute measure is rather incorrect.
The geography of the Earth alone would work like a natural shelter against far-reaching blasts like that.
Or hell, just a house-sized hill.
The row of houses in your street would effectively absorb this pressure and leave only a fraction of this to the next row of houses. Especially if we count for the inverse square law.
This just further proves how exaggerated the fear of nukes had become.
We cannot literally destroy ourselves with them.
Maybe we can mess up the planet to be damn annoying to live in and destroy the population centers but anything further is just mere fantasy.
For the record we can barely use our nuclear stockpiles to defend ourselves against an average asteroid impact or comet that can land on Earth, even if we ignore the issue with the range of our missiles.
KT Impact which supposedly killed the dinosaurs? We'd be still fucked.