There was a very odd news story this week.
Donald Trump was forced to deny news reports that he had suggested getting rid of problem hurricanes threatening the US by dropping nuclear bombs on them.
The idea that America could make use of its supply of nuclear bombs by dropping them on hurricanes was originally suggested in the 1950s.
Scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration responded to the news reports by advising against the idea. They said that given the huge energy of a hurricane, a nuclear bomb might not even alter its course. And of course the dangerous radiation of the bomb would be spread over a wide area.
Despite the complete opposition of scientists, and the obvious risks, the idea that Trump would support such an action seems perfectly believable. If you’ve got a potentially extremely dangerous situation developing which nobody understands very well, why not just drop a nuclear bomb on it and see what happens?
Is the idea of dropping a nuclear bomb on a hurricane any stranger than another of Trump’s recent ideas?: To deal with the climate-change crisis, don’t cut CO2 emissions. Just buy Greenland and, when America gets too hot, move the rich people to Greenland.
*
Ps. I wrote an article which was published in the Japan Times this Monday. Here is the link:
The subtleties that bedeviled St. Francis
No comments:
Post a Comment