Goble: Lunar nemesis orbits through crosshairs
I’ve thought about the concept of moon destruction before, and frankly, I’m all for it.
By Corban Goble (Contact)
Wednesday, March 12th, 2008
A couple weeks back, the military launched a missile into space to destroy an aging weather satellite. While many world leaders viewed this aggressive decision as a military statement to China, hence flexing our muscles (via missile) and exploring our military capabilities (by exploding), I saw what was really going on here. The whole scheme is an elaborate tune-up.
A tune-up for America’s eventual mission — blowing up the moon.
I’ve thought about the concept of moon destruction before, and frankly, I’m all for it. Heck, my audition column to get a position on the Kansan was about this very topic. The only reason you haven’t seen it is because the idea was stifled by my viewing of an old “Mr. Show” clip where they farcically advocated blowing up the moon.
Naturally, I sued the producers for traveling through time and stealing my idea. The case never gained much leverage. But given recent current events, my opinions have been resurrected.
Good reasons exist to nuke the moon, and most of them will bring mirth to adults and students alike.
Why nuke the moon? We don’t need it. Simply put, it’s man’s ultimate menace. Constantly looming, haranguing our attempts at greatness, providing scant reflective light but not enough to save us money on light bulbs, the moon needs to go.
We already blew a weather satellite out of the sky, and isn’t the moon just Earth’s most elderly satellite, devoid of any real function?
Sure, the entire country trembled at the edges of their LA-Z-BOYS when Neil Armstrong first strutted across the moon’s dusty surface. Subsequent trips were also revelatory, specifically about the nature of the moon and its terrain.
However, we got bored with it. Once, astronauts even brought golf clubs and a moon cart up there and worked on their short game.
The moon—the galaxy’s easiest hole-in-one!
If obliterating the moon isn’t exciting enough, we could easily enhance the whole project with America’s most across-the-board passion — fireworks.
If my assumptions are correct, and they usually are, considering my mind works through only the most logical and efficient processes, it would be easy to embark on several prerequisite trips to fill the moon’s craters up with Black Cats, Smoke Bombs and those annoying tanks that look like they’ll do something cool, really, but will just flame out in about two seconds. That would make an already awesome explosion extra astounding.
Now, I know the conservatives out there are going to raise a big hullabaloo about my proposal. But I can defend this idea on an economic basis as well. I am an economics major. Yeah, that’s right. I’m legit.
In my economics coursework, we have often discussed the concept of a positive externality, or a benefit received from a good, product, or service that is not reflected in the price of the good. Since everyone around the globe would see the destruction of the moon for free, nuking the moon symbolizes the epitome of a positive externality.
So when would I propose to do this?
July 4, the greatest day in American (and therefore world) history. You saw “Independence Day,” right? Now you’re with me.
The moon has always been inferior to the sun, the New York Mets of the cosmos. Let’s give it one last hurrah, a way of celebrating how many times it has ruined our depth perception, brought in hordes of jellyfish to beaches during vacation and watched us taking a shower (the moon is the universe’s most notorious peeping Tom).
We’ll figure something out to replace its minimal presence in our lives, possibly a new washing machine, a new throw rug or maybe just a candle.
Candles smell better anyway.
Goble is a Mission Hills senior in English and Economics.
Discussion
All comments are moderated by Kansan.com staff. For our full user policy, click here.
When will the UN need a new Secretary General? You should run for that.
Share your 2¢
Requires free registration.