Pompeii or Chernobyl: Which one is the unluckiest city?

[heavens-champion 1,905]

Pompeii and Chernobyl are two cities that have suffered terrible disasters. Which one do you think had the worst luck?

[boiteporte 591]

1500 remains were found at Pompeii. As for Chernobyl, the death toll is estimated to be about 4000. Not many direct deaths but a lot of cancer caused by radioactive fallout.

[Sir Xarthas VI 470]

Well, Pompeii was destroyed from a natural disaster, but Chernobyl was 'destroyed' from an artificial disaster. Citizens in Pompeii were literally melting in lava, while citizens in Chernobyl were melting from radiation (so to speak). They both have their different points of cruelty, but I think they both tied in regards to 'unlucky-ness'. The city of Pompeii was built next to an active volcano, so I mean you couldn't have thought that they were gonna last long anyway. And Chernobyl... Well, they could've lasted a while, but I'm sure it was going to happen at some point. As with all man-made things, it's not 100% stable.

1500 remains were found at Pompeii. As for Chernobyl, the death toll is estimated to be about 4000. Not many direct deaths but a lot of cancer caused by radioactive fallout.

1500 confirmed remains. That doesn't include the ones that were burned down completely.

[boiteporte 591]

 

 

but I'm sure it was going to happen at some point.

 

The Chernobyl accident purely happened because of human stupidity. It wouldn't have happened if they had been smart about it. 

[Invincible 2,091]

I think Chernobyl and the surroundings had it worse. Even if you survived being hit with radiation, you and quite possibly your lineage will most likely face malignant mutations and cancer.

[cmarston1 5,959]

Probably Chernobyl had the worst luck.

[Castle Bleck 19,362]

Pompeii technically got it worse; that one was natural (and thus inevitable).

While Chernobyl would've been fine if not for human error.

Edited August 21, 2020 by Anti-Villain

[Luna the Great of all the Russias 2,985]

At least it's possible to live in Pompeii. Pripyat will remain uninhabitable by humans for centuries.

[Anneal 2,197]

Pompeii was caused by natural disaster. Chernobyl was caused by human stupidity. So yeah, Chernobyl. 

[An Unknown Pony. 370]

Chernobyl is unluckier.Nuff' said

[Malinter 3,064]

Chernobyl had survivors. Pompei had none.

 

Radiation sickness is far more survivable than taking a Pyroclastic Flow to the face.

[Luminance 2,186]

Definitively Chernobyl. It's effects long term are far worse to people than Pompeii's natural cause. Plus, it looks eerie and creepy as an abandoned nuclear town.

[ARagY 1,152]

Chernobyl. Belarus and Ukraine still have effects to this day. Area is still awful. Belarus's economy also just loves despite (probable) tourism for that reason alone, currency still flops as the country tries to find ways to recover damages and pay for all the expenses and ambitions that it already can't afford. For quite a long stretch of land, it's RIP agriculture.

 

Edited June 29, 2016 by ARagY

[Dreambiscuit 9,810]

I guess I'd say Pompeii got the worst of it. Chernobyl was awful and there's nothing good to be said about suffering to death from radiation poisoning. And it being due to human carelessness doesn't help the natural outrage that one would feel in his/her last moments. 

But Pompeii didn't have much chance to even realize what was hitting them when Vesuvius erupted. Granted, they should have known that building at the foot of an active volcano was probably not the wisest choice of locations, but let's face it, nobody really thinks about these things until it's too late. The fact is, Pompeii residents didn't even have time to prepare themselves or their loved ones for what came. With Chernobyl, at least some of the victims were able to say their last goodbyes and get their affairs in order before the end came.  

Edited June 29, 2016 by Dreambiscuit

[cuteycindyhoney 13,307]

Chernobyl was caused by man's folly. I think that makes it much worse.

[Scrubbed user 3,416]

Pompeii was a single volcanic eruption that destroyed a city. We're gonna be feeling the effects of Chernobyl for a very, very long time.

[Justin_Case001 4,891]

Seems like the consensus view is that Chernobyl had it worse.  I agree, but for a different reason than most have brought up--I'm pretty sure the victims of Pompeii felt nothing.  According to all of the archaeological evidence, they never saw it coming, and were killed instantly.  Although I'm shaky on the details of Chernobyl, I'm pretty sure there was a lot more pain and suffering.  Probably.  Hell, I don't really know.  I never learned much about it.  But it sounds reasonable.  I'd rather die instantly from a pyroclastic flow than slowly from radiation.  Hence, Pompeii was luckier.

[Ashen Pathfinder 16,161]

Chernobyl was more a result of human stupidity and/or ignorance; whereas Pompeii (and Herculaneum) was part of a society and culture that didn't properly understand volcanic activity in general and were thus ill-prepared for the volcanic fallout. If we're talking about pure luck or lack of luck; I'd have to go with Pompeii (and Herculaneum).

 

Pompeii was a single volcanic eruption that destroyed a city. We're gonna be feeling the effects of Chernobyl for a very, very long time.

 

Two cities if you count Herculaneum.

[Nsxile 26,964]

I'd say Pompeii was more unlucky, as at least in Chernobyl they weren't horrifically burned alive by pyroclastic flow. Also 1,500 people died in Pompeii vs the 52 that died in the initial explosion (although more died later on due to radiation poisoning and other effects).

[Treeglow Flicker 13,675]

I'd say they were both just flat out unlucky. I can't really put one above the other in regards to which was more unlucky. It would be like trying to decide which is worse: Being stabbed with a closed pair of scissors or an open pair of scissors. In that situation, I doubt I'd be crying out "Argh! I wish I had been stabbed with them closed/open!" It's just a flat out horrible experience with nothing more to add regardless of the situation. All sense of logic and debate sort of just gets drowned out by the "Argh! This is horrible!" sense of reality. Regardless if I'm in the disaster or a witness to it.

[Aurora Wolf 2,354]

Both disasters were bad, but I think Pompeii was worse.

I watched a National Geographic DVD about Volcanoes narrated by Stacy Keach, and he mentioned that almost no one in Pompeii or Herculaneum  knew Mount Vesuvius was a volcano, and those who did know thought the two cities were out of it's danger zone. That's what the real tragedy is.

The gases caused by the raining ashes and pyroclastic surges can be as hot as 2000 degrees Fahrenheit.

[Will Guide 21,360]

Never heard of Chernobyl before today. I know Pomeii was destroyed by a volcano with some media making references as to how Mount Vesuvius blew its top. Merlock the evil sorceror caused its eruption in Ducktales Treasure of the Lost Lamp and Cosmo from Fairly Odd Parents idiotically made Pompeii "warmer" with it.

What is Chenobyl's problem? 

[Pentium100 2,123]

5 minutes ago, Will Guide said:

What is Chenobyl's problem? 

A nuclear power plant exploded in 1986 releasing a lot of radioactive material. 

I'd say that Pompeii had it worse - few people died as a result of the explosion in Chernobyl and while a lot of people were exposed to radiation and probably died sooner than they would have, they still lived much longer than the people who lived in Pompeii.

[Pastel Heart 6,466]

Both incidents were pretty bad, but atleast Pompeii was quick and painless... Chernobyl was and still is cursed by radiation. Lots of trauma I imagine for survivors.

[Solar Blaze 47]

I think Chernobyl was the worst because first of all it was an nuclear explosion. Then all the familys lost their homes and also got infected with radiation. and there's still radiation (yes even in my Country in Germany) which needs millions of years to go away.