That may have been true in the past but the major nuclear arsenals are much smaller, and the yields much lower, with the intent of incapacitating an enemy, not destroying the entire world.
I don't understand your comment at all. It doesn't seem to me that GP was suggesting more bombs, just suggesting more testing and letting bomb makers use all their available tools and funding on it.
I doubt you meant that literally, but just to illustrate the gap, let's consider what it would require for just one glassing.
World land area is ~149,000,000 km².
Acknowledged nuclear warheads are ~13,000.
So the average single warhead would somehow need to "glass"--however, thoroughly or deeply you choose to define that--over 11,000 km². For context, that's about one US state of Connecticut or the nation of Qatar.
... So you might say I'm a "glass is nowhere even close to half-full" kinda guy.
