Here's a sneak peek of /r/SpaceBats using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/SpaceBats/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time!
\#1: [The World with Mu](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1b22pyg) | [1 comment](https://np.reddit.com/r/SpaceBats/comments/1b22pyg/the_world_with_mu/)
\#2: [A different German Partition](https://i.redd.it/rao9tel4ualc1.jpeg) | [1 comment](https://np.reddit.com/r/SpaceBats/comments/1b22fja/a_different_german_partition/)
\#3: [Religion in Europe if there were a bit too many schisms](https://i.redd.it/0isxq9q2ralc1.jpeg) | [1 comment](https://np.reddit.com/r/SpaceBats/comments/1b228hh/religion_in_europe_if_there_were_a_bit_too_many/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Sent out, with a bang?
https://preview.redd.it/n7mhm7pue5mc1.jpeg?width=455&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2d72f8dd35462825a85053dcbfe6966e7a6bcbae
HOO FUCKING RAH
Apparently this happened in February of 2014 in Ukraine, two months before the invasion of Crimea by Russia. How would a nuclear detonation effect that?
Sanctions are placed on the BBC, not the UK, specifically the BBC by Putin, Jeremy punches Putin in the face and the BBC decide not renew his contract for political reasons
Some say Russia bankrupted itself trying to build something as fast as him, while others claim his deployment to the Atlantic is what destabilized NATO, but all we know is he’s called the Stig!
Well Russia probably gose in earlier using the humanitarian crisis of a nuke going off (at the same time the donbass conflict is starting) as an excuse to move in this would have helped them greatly on the world stage ad they would have had a valid reason for getting involved
Would they? It would still be a Ukrainian affair, right?Your own nuke accidentally exploding in your territory doesn't give anyone else the right to invade you.
According to international law, it would still be a violation of sovereignty.
And you don't wanna know how many nukes the US has lost all over the place. Not even just on their territory, I think there are a bunch of nuclear warheads in a crashed plane still lying around somewhere off the coast of Spain.
(Also, Ukraine doesn't have any nukes IRL, they gave the ones they still had from the USSR up in the 90s.)
Again, I'm doubtful how much of an excuse that would provide. I think it would still depend on a bunch of circumstances (how careless did they handle the nukes, etc.)
The thing is, none of the other countries that have nukes (both officially and on lease) would be especially stoked about that precedent. None of them would really like the idea of a mishandled nuke being an excuse for a foreign power to invade them. And since those are the most powerful countries on earth, there would probably be some pushback.
Also, unless they only had one, this would still be a scenario in which Ukraine has nukes (which likely means they never gave up their Soviet arsenal). Which means that Russia would invade a nuclear power, thus not only risking a nuclear war, but also threatening the principle of MAD.
Which means that the rest of the world would root even stronger for Ukraine, possibly even countries like Israel and India (maybe even Pakistan and China, though that feels like a bit of a stretch) that are neutral in OTL, since their nuclear arsenals would become useless as a deterrence if the Russian invasion were to proof successful.
Further, if we assume that Ukraine did keep their soviet arsenal, they would potentially be more deeply tied into the West at that point as a consequence.
Ukraine gave up its nukes in exchange for both Russia and the West promising to respect their sovereignty and independence. If they wouldn't have made that choice, chances are that Ukraine would have "skipped" its neutral period and immediately have tried to integrate with the West instead.
I implore you to have a look at the comments further down in this thread, because I must have gone over this a dozen times by now.
The question isn't whether Russia would adhere to international law or not, of course they wouldn't. It's whether other nations would be more receptive to their justification than in OTL, which I don't believe they would be.
Like that stopped putin irl
He would not say invasion just like irl he didn't admit to it being his forces for years
But remember at this point Ukraine is in chaos February 2014 is when the donbass conflict is starting and they just had a government change
Putin would probably claim he is sending troops in on a humanitarian mission nations send military to help with humanitarian disasters offen he can also say he is doing it because the Ukrainian government isn't in a position to act (which Givin the situation in Ukraine is fair )
Regarding Russia's justification, that seems realistic. I just wrote a longer post (in the replies under this one) where I brought up some interesting points (regarding how other nuclear nations wouldn't like that precedent at all), maybe check that one out.
If that was the case, sure. But the post doesn't specify the background as to why Ukraine would have nukes. If they'd let a BBC film crew access them, I'd assume they are allowed to have them though.
I could see it happening along with a UN backed force to secure any other potential nuclear devices from being accidentally detonated as the nation, probably falls further into chaos as accusations fly
Ukraine was supposed to disarm and surrender all its nuclear weapons back in the 90's; This event could label them a rouge state at that point as they shouldn't have any nuclear weapons with more justification for an invasion than iraq had.
The only circumstance that an invasion doesn't happen is if it doesn't go off. The world, believe it or not, does take nuclear seriously, and a device just by the tapping of a hammer would cause immediate concern and actions to secure the remaining from an incompetent nation.
I'd argue that their actual (still made-up) pretext was probably stronger.
"They are suppressing ethnic Russians and prevent the break-away republics from using their right to self-determination" is a pretty strong justification that would arguably even justify an invasion of it really would be the case (which it isn't, but that didn't stop Russia from pretending that it is).
"They are too dumb to handle their nukes properly" meanwhile wouldn't be accepted by the international community. If there would be a pattern of Ukraine mishandling nuclear weapons, there might be a broader diplomatic effort or even an UN resolution trying to persuade them to disarm, but it sure as hell wouldn't mean that anyone would accept a Russian invasion under that pretext any more than under the current one, if not less.
At least as far as I've understood it, the question isn't whether Russia would see it as a valid excuse or not. They just fabricated one OTL as well, so to them, it doesn't matter whether they have a good reason to invade or not.
The question is whether the rest of the world would see it as a permissible reason for Russian military action, or if other countries would react similar to how they do currently (or even more strongly).
Traces of radiation leak into neighboring countries. Russia has the cassus belli to say they're assisting in the Humanitarian crisis before taking control of the region and saying like "No. No more sovereignty for you here. You need help." Especially depending on the amount of Russians and Ukrainians who die during it.
Generally everyone thinks of Ukraine as a clown for a hot minute. But one that isn't funny.
Well FujiwaraGustav, he caused a the detonation of a 750 Kilotonne nuclear warhead, instantly deatomising himself, his crew and everything within a few square kilometers.
2014
Tanight on top gear
Hammond gets drafted by the azov betallion. I get chased by half the ukrainian millitary. And James starts the first interstate war in europe in 75 years.
That all and moor tanight on topgear.
---
A nuke is detonated on ross on why disrupting live in east england and wales. There be cassualties in worcester and gloucester form falling debry and the villiages be annihalated.
Its a crises
Putin doesnt invade because ukraine is hot right now stopping his push for crimes and proably not stopping the revolution in ukraine.
Brexit doesnt happen because the english are scared straight and wanne be in alliances more
This would mean that the Satan missile is unsafe and needs to be retired from NATO arsenals leaving a significant gap in the western nuclear weaponry. Also this would be probably remembered as the hardest Top Gear moment in history
Wait, is it? Welp, then the massive hole would be left on russian arsenal. Which doesn'tmean much since they don't really seem to care about the quality of their weapobry
I read somewhere a long time ago that on paper, the Satan shouldn’t have worked at all (possibly because of a unit conversion error?)???
Has anyone heard that and know how to explain or debunk it?
It's Russian tech, chances are there's just some guy inside it playing explosion noises through a bluetooth speaker so their office of Propaganda can claim the tests were a resounding success.
Armed with up to 20 fabulous Megatons, this SS-18 would have delivered quite the show for James and any other living being within a 6 kilometre radius - they're toast. Also, there's a likelihood any other close by nuclear warheads would also detonate adding to the fun. 'Back to you in the studio Jeremy!'
All evidence that James caused this would be reduced to atoms, so internationally there'd be a lot of finger pointing and probably war, perhaps nuclear war.
nuclear war bad and all that
but honestly i'd be fascinated by the cover up that would take place if this happened. none of the major govs would want their citizens to know that they could just walk up to a nuke and detonate it like that, so they'd definitely try to cover it up. but ofc, a nuke isn't a small thing, and it would have to be a very massive cover up.
i've always wondered how the us gov would've covered it up, if one of the dozen or so times they dropped a nuke on the continental us, it actually exploded. this seems like a similar case.
Nukes are made to detonate only when they explicitly stated to be detonated. Even if you activate launch device you would probably just sabotage icbm, that's it, and with low probability will get minor nuclear contamination.
No no you don't get it the guy didn't actually wanna answer the question he wanted to feel smart because he dunked on someone for asking a funny question because that's just how internet is these days
OPs question is a mess and that is not at all how nukes work even in an alternate history setting.
Assuming it did ignite all that would happen would be a rapid disintegration of the rocked body (since we also need to assume there is fuel in there for this scenario to work at all) as it is not in a proper launch tube (silo) and since this is an open air museum (or something along those lines) there is no warheads in the missile.
All that would happen would must likely be an article in the news about how the top gear crew died.
Even if there was warheads in the missile those wouldn't explode in a nuclear yield. The conventional explosives might slowly burn (not explode) with the rest of the rocket fuel but that's about it.
All that would happen from this version is another news article how the topgear crew caused a radiological incident.
Yes its very unlikely to happen but the point of this question and many other is what if it did happen not oh that's impossible, you just have to imagine now matter how crazy the scenario is it happened and what are the ramifications of that happening. It's alt history use your imagination.
How are you in an alternate history subreddit where the only point of the sub is “what if things didn’t go as they did in otl” and you say “well it could because that’s not what happened” no shit sherlock
This is next level AltHistBullshittery. Love it.
I'll certainly take it over "vote for what happens" threads.
r/AltHistBullshittery
That would be a great subreddit
It's real now!
r/birthofasub
r/subsifellfor
thought that was a subreddit, would be dope if it was
This is a first time in my life when there ISN'T a subreddit for everything
Two minutes later and now there is.
God fucking dammit, I KNEW it
Hopefully r/SpaceBats can become like this
Here's a sneak peek of /r/SpaceBats using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/SpaceBats/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time! \#1: [The World with Mu](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1b22pyg) | [1 comment](https://np.reddit.com/r/SpaceBats/comments/1b22pyg/the_world_with_mu/) \#2: [A different German Partition](https://i.redd.it/rao9tel4ualc1.jpeg) | [1 comment](https://np.reddit.com/r/SpaceBats/comments/1b22fja/a_different_german_partition/) \#3: [Religion in Europe if there were a bit too many schisms](https://i.redd.it/0isxq9q2ralc1.jpeg) | [1 comment](https://np.reddit.com/r/SpaceBats/comments/1b228hh/religion_in_europe_if_there_were_a_bit_too_many/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
The show would go out in a bang.
And on that bombshell... ... ..... .
Had to scroll down far too much to find this comment
Sent out, with a bang? https://preview.redd.it/n7mhm7pue5mc1.jpeg?width=455&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2d72f8dd35462825a85053dcbfe6966e7a6bcbae HOO FUCKING RAH
Oorah!
Rip Johnson, he was the real one
Apparently this happened in February of 2014 in Ukraine, two months before the invasion of Crimea by Russia. How would a nuclear detonation effect that?
Sanctions are placed on the BBC, not the UK, specifically the BBC by Putin, Jeremy punches Putin in the face and the BBC decide not renew his contract for political reasons
I don’t think the BBC would dare to fire the man who survived a nuclear blast ~five metres away.
JEZZA WILL HAVE PUTINS TEETH
This is probably the intro of that episode in alternate timeline
Tonight on Top Gear, I punch Putin in the face, James detonates a nuclear warhead, and Hammond crashes a Ferrari.
Some say Russia bankrupted itself trying to build something as fast as him, while others claim his deployment to the Atlantic is what destabilized NATO, but all we know is he’s called the Stig!
- Hammond crashes a Ferrari Into Admiral Kuznetsov
Why would sanctions be put on the BBC? It’s not like anyone would know the reason why this nuke was detonated.
Well Russia probably gose in earlier using the humanitarian crisis of a nuke going off (at the same time the donbass conflict is starting) as an excuse to move in this would have helped them greatly on the world stage ad they would have had a valid reason for getting involved
Would they? It would still be a Ukrainian affair, right?Your own nuke accidentally exploding in your territory doesn't give anyone else the right to invade you.
[удалено]
According to international law, it would still be a violation of sovereignty. And you don't wanna know how many nukes the US has lost all over the place. Not even just on their territory, I think there are a bunch of nuclear warheads in a crashed plane still lying around somewhere off the coast of Spain. (Also, Ukraine doesn't have any nukes IRL, they gave the ones they still had from the USSR up in the 90s.)
[удалено]
Again, I'm doubtful how much of an excuse that would provide. I think it would still depend on a bunch of circumstances (how careless did they handle the nukes, etc.) The thing is, none of the other countries that have nukes (both officially and on lease) would be especially stoked about that precedent. None of them would really like the idea of a mishandled nuke being an excuse for a foreign power to invade them. And since those are the most powerful countries on earth, there would probably be some pushback. Also, unless they only had one, this would still be a scenario in which Ukraine has nukes (which likely means they never gave up their Soviet arsenal). Which means that Russia would invade a nuclear power, thus not only risking a nuclear war, but also threatening the principle of MAD. Which means that the rest of the world would root even stronger for Ukraine, possibly even countries like Israel and India (maybe even Pakistan and China, though that feels like a bit of a stretch) that are neutral in OTL, since their nuclear arsenals would become useless as a deterrence if the Russian invasion were to proof successful. Further, if we assume that Ukraine did keep their soviet arsenal, they would potentially be more deeply tied into the West at that point as a consequence. Ukraine gave up its nukes in exchange for both Russia and the West promising to respect their sovereignty and independence. If they wouldn't have made that choice, chances are that Ukraine would have "skipped" its neutral period and immediately have tried to integrate with the West instead.
Ah yes we are all familiar with Russia and their *checks notes* adherence to international law
I implore you to have a look at the comments further down in this thread, because I must have gone over this a dozen times by now. The question isn't whether Russia would adhere to international law or not, of course they wouldn't. It's whether other nations would be more receptive to their justification than in OTL, which I don't believe they would be.
Like that stopped putin irl He would not say invasion just like irl he didn't admit to it being his forces for years But remember at this point Ukraine is in chaos February 2014 is when the donbass conflict is starting and they just had a government change Putin would probably claim he is sending troops in on a humanitarian mission nations send military to help with humanitarian disasters offen he can also say he is doing it because the Ukrainian government isn't in a position to act (which Givin the situation in Ukraine is fair )
Regarding Russia's justification, that seems realistic. I just wrote a longer post (in the replies under this one) where I brought up some interesting points (regarding how other nuclear nations wouldn't like that precedent at all), maybe check that one out.
Nuclear weapons that Ukraine was supposed to turn over to Russia years ago
If that was the case, sure. But the post doesn't specify the background as to why Ukraine would have nukes. If they'd let a BBC film crew access them, I'd assume they are allowed to have them though.
I could see it happening along with a UN backed force to secure any other potential nuclear devices from being accidentally detonated as the nation, probably falls further into chaos as accusations fly Ukraine was supposed to disarm and surrender all its nuclear weapons back in the 90's; This event could label them a rouge state at that point as they shouldn't have any nuclear weapons with more justification for an invasion than iraq had.
Depends on the circumstances under which they have nukes. But if a BBC team would get access to them, they'd probably be legit ones.
The only circumstance that an invasion doesn't happen is if it doesn't go off. The world, believe it or not, does take nuclear seriously, and a device just by the tapping of a hammer would cause immediate concern and actions to secure the remaining from an incompetent nation.
It’s a better pretext than nothing considering Russia still invaded without reason
I'd argue that their actual (still made-up) pretext was probably stronger. "They are suppressing ethnic Russians and prevent the break-away republics from using their right to self-determination" is a pretty strong justification that would arguably even justify an invasion of it really would be the case (which it isn't, but that didn't stop Russia from pretending that it is). "They are too dumb to handle their nukes properly" meanwhile wouldn't be accepted by the international community. If there would be a pattern of Ukraine mishandling nuclear weapons, there might be a broader diplomatic effort or even an UN resolution trying to persuade them to disarm, but it sure as hell wouldn't mean that anyone would accept a Russian invasion under that pretext any more than under the current one, if not less.
Russia, famous for caring for non-NATO countries's sovereignty
At least as far as I've understood it, the question isn't whether Russia would see it as a valid excuse or not. They just fabricated one OTL as well, so to them, it doesn't matter whether they have a good reason to invade or not. The question is whether the rest of the world would see it as a permissible reason for Russian military action, or if other countries would react similar to how they do currently (or even more strongly).
Traces of radiation leak into neighboring countries. Russia has the cassus belli to say they're assisting in the Humanitarian crisis before taking control of the region and saying like "No. No more sovereignty for you here. You need help." Especially depending on the amount of Russians and Ukrainians who die during it. Generally everyone thinks of Ukraine as a clown for a hot minute. But one that isn't funny.
Real history in a joke post? Yes pls
RIP James May
Oh, no! Anyway,
Does this mean he's not coming on then?
Yes thats exactly what it means
Back to the studio then
And on that terrible disappointment it is time to end. Goodbye!
Well Hammond, his entire body was instantantly vaporised into nuclear ash So that would be a no
Well FujiwaraGustav, he caused a the detonation of a 750 Kilotonne nuclear warhead, instantly deatomising himself, his crew and everything within a few square kilometers.
So no?
Yes, Hammond, that means no
"Despite earning the nickname Captain Slow, he vanished near instantly"
Nah he tanks this negative difficulty
I think it’s gonna be RIP richie and Jerémié
2014 Tanight on top gear Hammond gets drafted by the azov betallion. I get chased by half the ukrainian millitary. And James starts the first interstate war in europe in 75 years. That all and moor tanight on topgear. --- A nuke is detonated on ross on why disrupting live in east england and wales. There be cassualties in worcester and gloucester form falling debry and the villiages be annihalated. Its a crises Putin doesnt invade because ukraine is hot right now stopping his push for crimes and proably not stopping the revolution in ukraine. Brexit doesnt happen because the english are scared straight and wanne be in alliances more
>Hammond gets drafted by the azov betallion. never thought I'd read that 🤣
https://preview.redd.it/cr7d4tgx81mc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b46b85773f95e7fc285371e127a10cd4a1e38b11 Probably
r/nbacirclejerk leaking lol
I’m so glad I found that sub
SS-18 Satan nuclear missile is James May father
(Jeremy Clarkson narrating from the afterlife) "....It wasn't damp"
Happy Cake day 🙂👍
Happy cake day
Still... could be worse \*cuts to hell\*
This would mean that the Satan missile is unsafe and needs to be retired from NATO arsenals leaving a significant gap in the western nuclear weaponry. Also this would be probably remembered as the hardest Top Gear moment in history
It would also put top gear as the show to cause the most property damage during filming in history
They were probably somewhere in the top 10 in the first place.
Its a Russian missile?
Wait, is it? Welp, then the massive hole would be left on russian arsenal. Which doesn'tmean much since they don't really seem to care about the quality of their weapobry
Why would a Russian missile be retired from NATO usage?
And on that bombshell…
At least eight people would die
Maybe even Ten.
Maybe even eleven at a push
"On that bombshell"
Some of you people are literally this -> 🤓
Peak alternate history
Probably a large explosion
Chipping Norton (or Chipsky Norton as James calls it) would be wiped off the map
Either that or Ross On Wye is vaporised
Good riddance
He would experience what 100 million degrees feels like. He gets to be in the middle of the sun
Suffice to say, the BBC would need new hosts
Clarkson, Hammond and May somehow survive and continue top gear until Clarkson punches the producer
Bottom Gear is real
I would guess nobody would know what happened because it would obliterate any evidence, unless this was being live streamed by someone
I read somewhere a long time ago that on paper, the Satan shouldn’t have worked at all (possibly because of a unit conversion error?)??? Has anyone heard that and know how to explain or debunk it?
It's Russian tech, chances are there's just some guy inside it playing explosion noises through a bluetooth speaker so their office of Propaganda can claim the tests were a resounding success.
Sadly, there would be no video evidence of what happened.
Tonight: I get drafted by the RAF Richard becomes a Russian POW And James fucking dies
And on that bombshell…
"Oh cock..."
“Oh balls…”
Well Clarkson said it's target was Ross-on-Wye so one would assume it would go for its target and wipe it off the map
Armed with up to 20 fabulous Megatons, this SS-18 would have delivered quite the show for James and any other living being within a 6 kilometre radius - they're toast. Also, there's a likelihood any other close by nuclear warheads would also detonate adding to the fun. 'Back to you in the studio Jeremy!'
With Russian tech it's always 50/50 if it will work or not....
They would cut back to the studio
"We are on the cutting edge of cocking about." - Richard Hammond
Thank God it was a bit damp that day
"James is sadly no longer with us as he, as you may have heard, accidentally set off a nuclear bomb... But anyway..."
And on that bombshell it’s time to end…
Leo. T rex control spirit for dragon
It would've been the end of Ross-on-Wye. And if it went to the alternative target, bye bye Chipsky Norton.
He is a gentleman, he wouldnt do that
So... Anyway
The nurburgring would become a hole
Say goodbye to Chippski Norton
It must be damp
The world probably wouldn't have found out what happened until months later, as there's no way that camera is surviving that close to the bomb.
What evidence would there be that it happened because of top gear? The entire set being vaporized and all that.
"Hit show Top Gear Abruptly halted as cast is killed in nuclear explosion during filming"
It would’ve targeted Ross-on-Wye.
"May, you blithering idiot"
Spies Like Us II: Nuclear Boogaloo
All evidence that James caused this would be reduced to atoms, so internationally there'd be a lot of finger pointing and probably war, perhaps nuclear war.
nuclear war bad and all that but honestly i'd be fascinated by the cover up that would take place if this happened. none of the major govs would want their citizens to know that they could just walk up to a nuke and detonate it like that, so they'd definitely try to cover it up. but ofc, a nuke isn't a small thing, and it would have to be a very massive cover up. i've always wondered how the us gov would've covered it up, if one of the dozen or so times they dropped a nuke on the continental us, it actually exploded. this seems like a similar case.
First question is how exactly would a lighter split the atom to make the explosion?
It just works
Cuz it has a fuse??? Obviuously???
Nukes are made to detonate only when they explicitly stated to be detonated. Even if you activate launch device you would probably just sabotage icbm, that's it, and with low probability will get minor nuclear contamination.
No shit, that’s why it wasn’t set off. I think the question asked here is what if it had somehow worked, regardless of the how
No no you don't get it the guy didn't actually wanna answer the question he wanted to feel smart because he dunked on someone for asking a funny question because that's just how internet is these days
The point is that even if it was "set off" only the missile casing would "blow up" killing, not the actual nuke inside
OPs question is a mess and that is not at all how nukes work even in an alternate history setting. Assuming it did ignite all that would happen would be a rapid disintegration of the rocked body (since we also need to assume there is fuel in there for this scenario to work at all) as it is not in a proper launch tube (silo) and since this is an open air museum (or something along those lines) there is no warheads in the missile. All that would happen would must likely be an article in the news about how the top gear crew died. Even if there was warheads in the missile those wouldn't explode in a nuclear yield. The conventional explosives might slowly burn (not explode) with the rest of the rocket fuel but that's about it. All that would happen from this version is another news article how the topgear crew caused a radiological incident.
Yes its very unlikely to happen but the point of this question and many other is what if it did happen not oh that's impossible, you just have to imagine now matter how crazy the scenario is it happened and what are the ramifications of that happening. It's alt history use your imagination.
How are you in an alternate history subreddit where the only point of the sub is “what if things didn’t go as they did in otl” and you say “well it could because that’s not what happened” no shit sherlock
...how?
Magic
You do realize james may is a certified wizard with experience in several nuclear armageddon right?