Re:July was the hottest month ever recorded, according to Nasa
by CalRobert on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @09:38AM
(#12343589)
Well, the nuclear weapons could remove most of the carbon emitters, but that's morally challenging.
Re:July was the hottest month ever recorded, according to Nasa
by chr1 on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @11:58AM
(#12344752)
Alice: Looks like there is a wasp nest under the roof, we need to do something about it
Bob: Let's blow it up with dynamite!
When thinking about terraforming people tend to think of megaprojects that would "fix" everything at once, but that doesn't work.
There are much more predictable and safer ways to do terraforming, e.g. desalinating water, building canals, planting forests, ferilizing ocean in the worst case.
Re:July was the hottest month ever recorded, according to Nasa
by pyrale on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @11:05AM
(#12344293)
Volcanic dusts are naturally more radioactive than sedimentary dust, though. So I'm not sure the long term effects of a volcanic super-explosion would be much better without the nukes... :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcanic_winter
I was leaning towards using nuclear weapons to kick things off, but the potential side effects of such an event will probably be tricky enough, without the giant dust clouds soon to enshroud the Earth also being radioactive.
There may of course be other unforeseen consequences, but given the alternatives (which we see all too clearly) I ask: who's in?