4 ms·
Should we bring back atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons?
Not frequently, but once every 10 years or so, should we just wipe an island off the map? Spend 9 years documenting everything we can about it, and then build a tower and carefully place a hydrogen bomb on the tower, and detonate it?
I keep hearing people worrying about another "great war" but it will not be a war remembered. There would be death on a scale that remakes evolutionary history. So, maybe we should make it more visceral for people. Worth it? 10 islands per century?
- hazz99 8y agoI don't think this is a good idea. Most people would watch it over video, and we can already do that.
- manelvalls 8y agoNo
- masonic 8y agoshould we just wipe an island off the map? Like, say, the one Johnny Depp owns?
- gitgud 8y agoSo it would be a ritual to scare people, rather than for scientific merit? Not sure that's a good enough reason...
- dangerface 8y agoI don't think people would care about a bit of destruction. In fact I think people crave it as long as its at a good safe distance like on the telly. Maybe every one in the world should be made to witness and feel the heat an atomic bomb in real life to make it feel more real. I think a more realistic solution would be something like in the star trek episode "A taste of Armageddon". Instead of fighting a real war they fight a virtual one. A computer randomly selects the people to die every day as part of the death toll of the "war".
- dasmoth 8y agoBefore sacrificing an island, you could always see if there’s somewhere that needs a harbour or the like. This has been considered before, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Chariot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Chariot
- globe1337 8y agoFor environmental reasons: No.