There are several pesky problems just continually plaguing us in the world today: militant Islamist jihadism and terrorism; countries killing their own citizens in endless massacres within their own cities; over-population; belligerent communist states; nuclear proliferation; and “man-made climate change.”
Don’t be fooled, gang, climate change IS REAL!!! I live in a small town in western Oklahoma, and I’ve got to tell you, the weather around here this spring has been absolutely crazy! We’ve been having these massively huge and powerful thunderstorms like we’ve never seen before. There have been sooo many tornadoes this year, it’s, like, totally unprecedented. The summers have been incredibly hot (the summer of 2011 was the hottest EVER . . . since 1980) and we’ve had some really nasty cold (the winter of 2010-’11 was the coldest EVER . . . since the 1940s) winters with – yes! – SNOW! The climate has become so crazy that we’ve had these wacky extremes getting ever more and more extreme EVERY YEAR for the last, like, 5 or 10 years. We’ve totally never seen anything like this before. Not counting the times in the past just like it, or worse.
Yes, we’ve had a lot of strong thunderstorms and several tornadoes this year, but living in “Tornado Alley,” this is certainly nothing new, though it’s in no way related to “man-made climate change,” since springs have been like this in Oklahoma for far longer than the 37 years I’ve been alive. Summers have always been hot and winters have always had the potential for being incredibly cold. There’s clearly sort of a cycle or pattern in all this. But as one of our favorite bovine trolls will happily point out, I’m not a climatologist, so I’m completely and utterly unqualified to look at the facts and the data to notice patterns like this.
So anyway, ”climate change” is supposedly real and “settled” science. Except that it isn’t. It is quite clearly still up for debate, especially in light of reports such as this one and letters like this one from nearly 50 NASA luminaries to NASA Chief Administrator Charles Bolden asking that both NASA and the Goddard Institute For Space Studies use more restraint in publishing positions on carbon dioxide and climate change.
But hey, take heart. Whether “climate change” is settled or not, I have a solution. Two words:
That’s right, I’m proposing a medium-scale use of nuclear weapons by a few countries against select targets in an effort to kick up enough dirt and clouds and whatnot to create sufficient global cloud cover to reduce worldwide temperatures by 10 degrees Celsius or more! (I personally can’t predict how much, because, you know, I’m not a climatologist or nuclear weapons expert.) “Global warming,” or “climate change,” as we “know” it can be reversed with only a few massive multi-megaton explosions!
Good news, though: the reversal of “climate change” is not the only benefit of my plan!
The first obvious benefit is the reduction of nuclear weapon stockpiles in participating countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia and even Israel. If we use the weapons for a constructive purpose (Constructive destruction? Love it!), there will be fewer weapons sitting around decaying and/or ready to be used aggressively.
Another benefit, both immediate and gradual, would be a reduction in the earth’s population by, say, perhaps a billion people or more. This is beneficial because the CO2 produced by all of those people breathing, plus the industries needed to support them (i.e. water purification, farming, electricity generation, etc.) would no longer be necessary. So the nuclear winter effect would only be an additional positive impact caused by the almost immediate eradication of a portion of worldwide CO2 output thanks to the reduction in population.
But wait, there’s still MORE good news!
You’re probably wondering by now exactly where we would be exploding these warheads, and that’s a fair question. Obviously, most targets would be remote and uninhabited: islands in the south Pacific, Indian, and Atlantic Oceans and portions of the Sahara, Kalahari, Gobi, and Atacama deserts. Other areas . . . well, that’s where we solve some of those other “problems.”
In the name of world peace and stability, and for the grand cause of the restoration of global climate norms, we would necessarily target a few select populated areas for annihilation. Yes, folks, it’s time to just be done with Iran, Syria, North Korea, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia (maybe Venezuela) and other problem areas of Africa and Asia.
What are the benefits? Well, first and foremost we would obviously be removing politically unstable groups from the world scene. Also, these targets represent the heart of militant jihadism as well as one of the last, most repressive and most dangerous communist regimes still in existence.
This is not to say that every person in those countries is a militant jihadist or a Communist oppressor – most assuredly that is not the case. However, these people must understand that the sacrifice we are asking them to make and to “share” is for the benefit of those who live on afterward in a cooling, restored planet whose resources are considerably less taxed. This is clearly an instance where the needs of the many outweigh the needs – and even the rights – of the few.
Won’t you join me in pushing forward this call for a Global Solution?
Harass me on Twitter @JasonDibler