Would the clouds of a several nuclear bombs set off by Iran cause a dust umbrella in the upper atmospher that would cool the earth enough to end Al Gores global warming. Perhaps the cloud of dust and radiation would carry over to most Muslim countrys and we would have a second benefit of no more terroistist. If this is the case do we need to thank that nut job in Iran?
2007-02-06 07:28:08 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment
When I read responses like Martha's who really believes she is well read on the subject, it genuinely saddens me. They apparently don't have enough experience to doubt the motives of some scientists. Clearly politics plays into this. I believe it was Carl Sagan that pushed the idiocy of Nuclear Winters. That was back when global cooling was more in vogue. Although I have heard people defend Sagan's scientific credentials, in fact he was a political hack in my opinion and would be on the Global Warming bandwagon if he were alive. I find your question kind of funny because it incorporates two contradictory issues which scientists have tried to scare the unwitting and uninformed for political purposes or sometimes just plain ignorance.
2007-02-06 07:54:35 · answer #1 · answered by JimZ 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
PERFECT idea, let get Bush to drop 20 or so nuks on the middle east, that aprt of the world is to hot anyway, mabey all that heat from the middle east is cuasing global warming. nuking iran and other trouble spots in that area would not onlt take out the terrorists, but stop global warming
WAKE UP, GOOD GOD
2007-02-06 09:33:19 · answer #2 · answered by darkpheonix262 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
All that is no more than fiction. the ONLY thing that can "stop" global warming is the stupid governments of all around the world to stop the gas emisions. or at least put freaking filters, so the damage is less.... but again.. that would make the economies to go as down as ever in History, so once again, the whole matter is money and greed. filters would be able only to delay the disaster... the only way to stop it is to stop the carbon dioxide emisions. Al Gore is totally right, and for once, i agree with a politician... plus, a nuclear winter cant be controlled, and even if it could, it would only cause more damage to earth after its gone, because the repercusions could be seen all over the world with lots of ecosystems destroyed (DNAs modified, plant and animals dont survive), whole species dead.. that would make the animals that ate those lost especies to starve, and the alimentary chain would be broken... that would cause the extermination of basically everything on earth.. including humans......... also, the species that didnt die would get all kinds of diseases (which would be passed on to those who ate them), and many would be born deformed.. :S:S)
humans are destroying our only place to live in.... and all because a few greedy men dont wanna risk their f***ing moeny.... it gets me so mad only thinking about it. grrrr
~~to read the following, read the next answer first (from jim z) ~~
okay, jim z.. here is the thing. i do not "believe i am well read" on the subject. i AM well read on the subject, and u are not whom to tell how much ive read. second, it is ppl like you who somehow dont care about the planet, and not even a whole college career and a hundreth masters and doctorates are worth if you cant simply SEE what is going on. i live in spain, and here we are having absolutely no snow..... this hadnt happened in history EVER. same with all these inundations and cracks underwater, and snow in warm places and the ice caps melting........ but noooooo..... that is not real....... all that is made up by Al Gore... yeah.. because he is such a bad politician, and he makes all up to scare ppl and get votes. you see.. his documentary might be done mainly to get votes, but noone (and much less YOU) can say that all that is not true.... cuz now we can SEE it on the news (or dont u watch the news at home every day??? at least i read .. u see.. and i watch them.. so i know what happens in this world.. if u dont read, or dont watch the news, dude, u cant answer the qtn of 123, and much less u can critisize any answer given to him). sorry dto say this, but with people like jim z who only move for economic and politic matters, the world is definately going down.
2007-02-06 07:43:09 · answer #3 · answered by martiña 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes, it would stop global warming. In fact, the only thing that will stop global warming is some sort of catastrophic event. What we need is a controlled nuclear winter.
2007-02-06 07:32:19 · answer #4 · answered by Big D 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Trying to fix global warming by offsetting one man made gigantic disruption with another in the opposite direction, is a very risky idea. The difficulties in getting it "right" are enormous. It would be far better to simply stop messing with the climate and let nature handle it. We can do that.
2016-05-24 00:23:43 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would stop global warming (for a few years anyways) but it would also cut sunlight from reaching the earth. This would then stop plants from growing and up the food chain humans would starve.
2007-02-06 07:36:33 · answer #6 · answered by Joe 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It is a very good possibility,but to be effective it needs to kill about 3 billion on a long term bases.
2007-02-06 11:01:21 · answer #7 · answered by JOHNNIE B 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
no ...... a nuclear winter wouldn't stop global warming
cause the hole in the atmosphere wouldn't be closed up
2007-02-06 08:03:58 · answer #8 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
This would worsen it. There would not only be more particles in the air, they would be radioactive and toxic. That would make the situation ten times worse
2007-02-06 07:34:39 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
You don't sound like you can count any further than 3.
2007-02-06 09:52:25 · answer #10 · answered by Caveman 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋