Attention: Starting December 14, 2019 Yahoo Groups will no longer host user created content on its sites. New content can no longer be uploaded after October 28, 2019. Sending/Receiving email functionality is not going away, you can continue to communicate via any email client with your group members. Learn More
- People are waking up to the risk of global heating. I just read a story about the dread consequences of a "small" nuclear war -- nuclear Winter!So, my modest proposal is that if global heating gets so bad people and forests are dying off, we could do some quick geo-engineering by having a very small nuclear war! (Less than 10 bombs. "Small" seems to be about 50 bombs.) Maybe Israel and Pakistan could each lob 5 bombs at the other! As an added advantage, a radioactive middle east could no longer be exploited for oil, which would reduce future global heating. :)The small "nuclear Winter" should offset heating for a few years. When the effect wears off, we just have another very small nuclear war! :)Note: if you like the idea of setting off the bombs but don't want anyone to die, the war isn't actually necessary. The bombs could be set off in uninhabited and desolate places and achieve the desired effect. Dr. Strangelove rides again!
Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964)
Slim Pickens in Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964)
What do you think? Should we add nukes to the geo-engineering "solutions" to the climate crisis? Hey, it is insane but no more so than deliberately polluting the atmosphere with toxic sulfur compounds -- which is a serious geo-engineering proposal!/sPeace,*L* - Probably not a good idea, and I LOVE nuclear power and weaponry!Still, if we have to I guess we could nuke the 50 most powerful nations/alliances/Unions capitals while their governments were in full session. The harm would be minimal and the benefits enormous - plus we might get some sweet nuclear winter too.Its win/win/mutate!DrC/BKB