Nukes vs. Climate Change?

So Putin has been prancing around in public lately with Russia's equivalent of the nuclear "football". This kind of activity was rarely observed in public until recently. These actions are seen as saber rattling over things like the conflict in Ukraine, among other things. Recently, this past Thursday, Putin showed up in China with his 'football of doom' in tow, presumably as another show of force.

Just over a week ago, Hamas launched a major attack on Israel. Since then, the US has dispatched naval ships, and Iran has been talking smack. This just ups the stakes.

Back in March 2023, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Putin for allegedly orchestrating the abduction of children to be used as hostages in the Ukraine conflict. Putin, for his part, has stated this warrant amounts to a threat on his life, and thus a threat to Russia as a whole, thereby (in Putin's opinion) authorizing the use of nukes. In response to the warrant for Putin's arrest, the Kremlin has now threatened to withdraw from the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.

So, this brings us all up to today. Now, I seriously doubt Putin would be foolish enough to nuke someone anytime soon, but withdrawal from the CNTBT presents a little different perspective. My suspicions are, while Putin may show some restraint from actually nuking someone, he probably won't show a whole lot of restraint (at all) from a massive display of force...aka, a nuke test blast, and possibly a big one, to get everyone's attention. So, now to my question here on 'Fragile Earth'. ...

Suppose Putin does decide to nuke a few holes in the ozone layer, what happens to the whole 'Climate Change' discussion then?? Does algore stroke out and his head explodes, or does he just raise everyone's carbon footprint tax even more? Okay, that question was a bit rhetorical, but how about this one...what happens to the whole climate change debate when people start lighting off nukes? Does it go away?

Note - I am not asking about political ramifications as a result of such actions here, I am merely asking what happens to the climate change discussion when nukes are being detonated?

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

It ends. There. Climate will forever change. Nothing for us then to discuss. Lordy..stay good Fcd✌️

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

My guess, it goes away.

Diabetes seems a lot less scary if one finds out they have brain cancer. But you still have diabetes too.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I can tell you right now that you needn't worry about "nukes" ever being used.

Putin, on the other hand, is a wild card. He is a WEF disciple, yet says many things that hint toward him knowing certain truths about the true order of the world and being diametrically opposed to the NWO.

Of course, logic would seem to dictate that his opposition is a facade and he is complicit in moving pieces around the grand chessboard for the benefit of the evil ones.

Hard to tell.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I think it really becomes a moot point when people start lobbing spicy hotdogs around the globe.

But, I would bargain to say, that there would still be those out there saying that we need to do our part to counteract the affects that said hotdogs have on the climate. There will always be those that fall to their echo chambers and narratives over everything else in the world.

Well, if they start tossing nukes around enough people will die off to cancel half of the climate problem. I would say the world population will go down to half within a couple of years. Especially in this country, the vast majority of people could not survive here if all of the stores were not available. They would starve and a lot would commit suicide.

Do you mean an above-ground test? that's got to be unlikely, isn't it? Possibly an underground one but even then what does that prove.

We all know they have the capability and the last two years show he might be crazy enough to do it.

Makes me wonder if he heard Janet Yellen's declaration America can afford both wars in Ukraine and Israel.

I've always wondered why little is ever said about one of the greatest climate dangers we face; volcanic eruptions.

There are currently 46 volcanoes actively erupting across the globe. I guess since we can't do anything to mitigate the damage they cause we should just leave that information out of the equation and focus on the information that can further enrich the elite system.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

If Russia feels the need to withdraw from the Test Treaty, regardless of its stated reasoning, we can probably read that as Russia's admission that it No longer has Confidence in the Viability of its Nuclear Arsenal.


Blowing holes in the ozone layer, by itself, wouldn't affect the rate of climate change very much. It would tend to make the life on the planet, especially Human life more difficult. The ozone layer blocks UV radiation; which, although it doesn't directly affect weather and climate, does affect animal and plant life by causing cell mutations that can, and often do, result in cancer(s).


Hurricanes are far more powerful than nuclear bombs, compared head-to-head.


And, since we can't do anything to mitigate the environmental impact of erupting volcanos, directly...

The best we [I]can do, indirectly, is try to minimize our impact on the environment as much as possible, to compensate for the impact of the volcanos.


Not the fun answer anyone wants to hear.

Nothing happens if he tests a nuke assuming it’s a test.

It would just change the tally of atmospheric nuclear detonations from 528 to 529. The earth keeps spinning, the ozone remains intact and we don’t get a nuclear winter.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

It ends. There. Climate will forever change. Nothing for us then to discuss. Lordy..stay good Fcd✌️

I don't think so. Thousands of nuclear weapons have been detonated since WWII, hundreds of them above ground. One more isn't going to be that big of a deal for the climate.

a reply to: Mantiss2021

Hopefully I can get back in here by responding to myself from a new version of an old me?


In regards to the OP, if the current track of world affairs continues, we may find out just what effect above ground testing actually has on the environment.

a reply to: watchitburn

It won't be just one: my point. You know that.

Cattle mutilations observations correlated to nuke testing, and your point.

We exploded so much under ground...I'm guessing black choppers and mutilated animals...is us cking the evolving damage from the tests.

Remove soft tissue for "RAD" indicators damage has been done to Earth already.