Atomic Bomb Research Presentation Planning Worksheet Assignment- Due 2/24/19

Article Citation

Historical Context of Publication Date

Impact of Historical Context on Author’s Thesis

Lubofsky, E. (2017) "Back to bikini: scientists study lingering radioactivity at 'ground zero' for nuclear weapons testing after World War II." Oceanus. 52(2). 32. Retrieved from http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A503310005/AONE?u=nhc_main&sid=AONE&xid=ca92ab96

This article was written about two years ago and 72 years after the bombings. The article was written during the year where a new president is elected to office and America seems to be divided. The US also issues a military strike on Syria in response to their chemical weapon's attack that killed many civilians including children. Also that same year the US deadliest mass shooting happened in Las Vegas. Furthermore, the ongoing threat from North Korea in regards to their missile testing.

Although the article was written after 72 years after the atomic bombings, I would not be surprised if it had an impact on the author’s thesis. With the lingering threats from North Korea and Russia, the author points out how after 72 years the bombings of 1945 still affects people today and the environment.

Malloy, S. L. (2012). ‘A very pleasant way to die’: Radiation effects and the decision to use the atomic bomb against Japan. Diplomatic History, 36(3), 515–545. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=asn&AN=74547716&site=eds-live&scope=site

The article was written about 67 years after the atomic bombings. People have been studying the aftermath and the bombings effects since then from different perspectives such as health, environmental, military and economic, etc. In 2012 there were also many, shootings that occurred such as the movie theater mass shooting in Colorado, Wisconsin Sikh temple mass shooting and the Sandy Hook school shooting. As well as the Benghazi attack.

What the author article does is examine people’s knowledge of the consequence of the bombing before they happened. She is trying to question whether the attacks were necessary and if the people who made the decisions to use the atomic bombs would have chosen otherwise if they had been provided more information.

Reynolds, M. L., & Lynch, F. X. (1955). Atomic bomb injuries among survivors in Hiroshima. Public Health Reports, 70(3), 261–270. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/4589041

The article was written about ten years after the atomic bombings. The events are probably still fresh in people’s minds. At this point, research has already been done for the past ten years, and there is perhaps much conflicting information out there without the scientific and technological advancements that we have today. The Cold war was also going on, so the atomic bombs of 1945 were still in many people’s minds, including the author.

As the article was written only ten years after the bombing, and during a time where the Cold War was still happening I'm sure it had an impact on the author’s thesis. The data seems to be vague. The publication pretty much points out to the fact that the closer to the bomb people was, the probability of survival were slim. And goes and discuss what type of injuries others received depending on their distance from the attacks