Why don't we try to destroy tropical cyclones by nuking them? | Hacker News Reader

Why don't we try to destroy tropical cyclones by nuking them?

aoml.noaa.gov

37 pointsOsiris3035 comments

Do they have FAQ on salter sinks too?

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2011/04/hurricane-suppression-...

This seems like a relatively cheap hypothesis to test

Sure, let's try to control the weather by nuking our clouds. That won't have any effect on our atmosphere, oceans, and water.

Nope.

None at all.

Also, we're not getting warmer. Climate change isn't real. The fires in the Amazon and Siberia are fake news.

Move along. Move along.

Also, I find it hilarious and sad that people apparently always "bring up the option of..." nuking hurricanes.

Why? Most people, and most politicians stop science as soon as they're allowed - so don't get past a high school level.

If you have no concept of the physics and energy differentials between the two, it seems a reasonable question - nukes are powerful and destructive, hurricanes are powerful and destructive. Why not destroy one with the other?

All that matters is any politician asking the question has an adviser or researcher able to explain why it's a poor idea...

lol wow I got downvoted _fast_.

Well, the fires in Amazonia are fake news, in the sense that unlike what social media tells you, it's not out of control but done purposefully by Brazil, it's not record but just like last year and the year before, and the whole "20% oxygen" meme is bullshit. :).

I think most of the hype is about the current state of affairs, but the genuine concern is about the political policy of burning rainforest for crop lands. While it has short-term economic benefits for the people of Brazil, it has the _potential_ to impact others around the world significantly. The fact that it is done on purpose it what is at odds, not the scale of it in a given timeframe.

That I agree with. It's an environmental disaster, but the true causes and scope are completely drowned under the bullshit reporting comparing it to Notre Dame (Q: why there aren't millionaires donating money to firefighting? A: because it's not an uncontrolled fire, but purposeful action) or talking about "lungs of Earth" and running out of oxygen.

The true story is about whether sovereignty of Brazil should be violated to protect the rainforest.

What’s your source on it being the same as last year and the year before? From https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-49433767:

> The National Institute for Space Research (Inpe) says its satellite data shows an 85% increase on the same period in 2018.

> The official figures show more than 75,000 forest fires were recorded in Brazil in the first eight months of the year - the highest number since 2013. That compares with 40,000 in the same period in 2018.

> Roraima saw a 141% increase, Acre 138%, Rondônia 115% and Amazonas 81%. Mato Grosso do Sul, further south, saw a 114% increase.

perhaps https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/24/world/america...

From https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-49415973:

> Meanwhile, US space agency Nasa said that overall fire activity in the Amazon basin was slightly below average this year.

> The agency said that while activity had increased in Amazonas and Rondonia, it had decreased in the states of Mato Grosso and Pará.

Also this chart:

https://twitter.com/valmasdel/status/1165295012709634048

EDIT:

The link from 'mikedilger in a parallel reply is even better. It seems that if you include data from previous decade, and not just since 2012, then current fires are nothing special.

I didn't downvote you, but my guess is that some of the downvotes were because of the boring sarcasm.

Sometimes sarcasm works, but it is a tricky thing to get right. As someone prone to sarcasm myself, I have learned the hard way that it rarely helps me get any point across.

Your sarcasm was too brilliant for HN - they couldn't handle it here.

A lot of species are getting extinct right now. When it comes the time for butterflies to get extinct too, the tropical cyclone problem will be solved.

For context Trump allegedly asked if it was an option.

https://www.axios.com/trump-nuclear-bombs-hurricanes-97231f3...

Is Axios a reputable source?

Very.

It was founded by politico people and manipulated Wikipedia articles about them.

Axios is absolutely reputable.

And is it really inconceivable to think Trump would ask this ?

Randall's response to this article: https://what-if.xkcd.com/23/

There's no way to hotlink it directly so just search for "hurricane" in the page.

That whole page is worth reading, unsurprisingly given the source :)

His response is a link that is the same as TFA.

I mean... Maybe we should try it

Reply on news.ycombinator.com