chp2: nuclear catastrophe

2 files changed, 17 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/bibliography.bib b/bibliography.bib
index 62758b1..7836732 100644
--- a/bibliography.bib
+++ b/bibliography.bib
@@ -1,3 +1,11 @@
+@book{nuclear-disaster,
+    author={Stonier, Tom},
+    title={Nuclear Disaster},
+    date={1964},
+    publisher={World Publishing Company},
+    address={Cleveland},
+}
+
 @book{or-something-worse,
     author={Beuret, Nicholas},
     title={Or Something Worse},
diff --git a/chapter2.md b/chapter2.md
index adb458a..4989e32 100644
--- a/chapter2.md
+++ b/chapter2.md
@@ -20,7 +20,15 @@ divided by sudden cataclysmic events. [@oed-catastrophe]
 Anti-nuclear campaigners used the word 'catastrophe' to describe the effects of
 a nuclear war, echoing this model of geological time, suggesting that a nuclear
 war would have such severe, irreversible consequences that it would represent
-the next great cataclysm in geological time \[EVIDENCE\].
+the next great cataclysm in geological time. In 1964, Tom Stonier wrote that
+'even in a century marked by two "total" wars the totality of the catastrophe we
+face in the threat of thermonuclear war is barely imaginable'
+[@nuclear-disaster, p. 17], before going on to imagine just that, predicting not
+only massive death from shockwaves, firestorms and fallout, but also stark
+ecological imbalances leading to insect plagues, total destruction of plant life
+and soils in many places, and sudden collapses of existing glaciers followed by
+extremely cold weather which 'might initiate another ice age'
+[@nuclear-disaster, p. 136].
 
 Whether or not green rhetors explicitly use the word 'catastrophe,' they often
 imply a catastrophic model of the problems they present. When Extinction
@@ -253,6 +261,5 @@ desired outcomes.
 
 ## TODO
 
-- Explore and evidence: anti-nuclear rhetors echoed geological catastrophism
 - Find quotes & page numbers in @{cry-of-the-wild}, @{no-one-is-too-small}
 - Explore and evidence: death of politics idea