Climate scientists: it's time for 'Plan B'

[newspresenter]

An emergency "Plan B" using the latest technology is needed to save the world from dangerous climate change, according to a poll of leading scientists.

The collective international failure to curb the growing emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere has meant that an alternative to merely curbing emissions may become necessary.

The plan would involve highly controversial proposals to lower global temperatures artificially through daringly ambitious schemes that either reduce sunlight levels by man-made means or take CO2 out of the air. This "geoengineering" approach – including schemes such as fertilising the oceans with iron to stimulate algal blooms.
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change...-plan-b-1221092.html

Watchout, the Independent slows your pc down.

[killmicrosoft]

http://www.lowcarboneconomy.com/Resources/SiteImages/LowCarbonEconomy.gif
Scientists Back Plan B For Climate Change

http://www.lowcarboneconomy.com/community_content/_low_carbon_news/3792


Failure to make significant carbon emissions reductions could pave the way for a technological intervention, scientists have said.

A poll of several top climate change experts by the Independent has revealed that there is a growing consensus for a "Plan B".

http://www.lowcarboneconomy.com/Resources/NewsImages/Climate+change_1235_18952767_1_0_7003370_300320x32 0.jpg

This would involve using the latest geoengineering approaches in an attempt to limit CO2 emissions.

Possible schemes include creating low-level maritime clouds above the Earth's ocean to lower temperatures and planting iron filings in the sea to increase production of the carbon-absorbing underwater plant phytoplankton.

Professor James Lovelock, said he always doubted how successful the Kyoto agreement would prove.

The author of the Gaia hypothesis told the newspaper: "I am neither more nor less optimistic now about prospect of curbing CO2 compared to 10 years ago.

"I am, however, less optimistic now about the ability of the Earth's climate system to cope with expected increases in atmospheric carbon levels compared with ten years ago."

"I strongly agree that we now need a 'plan B' where a geoengineering strategy is drawn up in parallel with other measures to curb CO2 emissions."

[marpat]

Maybe they should just plant more trees.

[realfake]

"Injecting the air with particles to reflect sunlight" There you have it chaps. I knew this was about sunlight all along.

[steevo]

"Injecting the air with particles to reflect sunlight" There you have it chaps. I knew this was about sunlight all along.

Me too (I bet that they also use the chemtrails from other things too though).

This is a picture from the link in the opening post. I have seen alot of clouds resembling this over the past two years. :-

http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00108/pg-2-climate-alamy_108547a.jpg

[realfake]

The Sun is increasing in brightness and radiance. The concentration of light is also increasing and the mass spraying is an attempt to mitigate its beneficial effects.

[steevo]

The Sun is increasing in brightness and radiance. The concentration of light is also increasing and the mass spraying is an attempt to mitigate its beneficial effects.

Bastards!

That's why we gotta spread the info. Plant the seeds that will awaken people.

[realfake]

Bastards!

That's why we gotta spread the info. Plant the seeds that will awaken people. Many seeds lay dormant and do not germinate until an opening in the canopy allows them to receive sufficient light.. ;)

[steevo]

Many seeds do not germinate until an opening in the canopy allows them to receive sufficient light.. ;)

Well in that case, we are gonna have to lift that canopy just a little then :)

[endlessvista]

They have been caught! Now watch as the same Global Warming Fraudlent Scientists are wheeled out again to sell their souls, humanity and science down the river with another bout of fear mongering and the habitual morons in journalism just accept it fully without even investigating if what they are saying is true or not.

Too late me thinks. The game is up now.

I woke up this morning feeling that the tide had turned and humans are winning.

[endlessvista]

"Injecting the air with particles to reflect sunlight" There you have it chaps. I knew this was about sunlight all along.

I wonder what celebs will be wheeled out for this one....:rolleyes:

[endlessvista]

The Sun is increasing in brightness and radiance. The concentration of light is also increasing and the mass spraying is an attempt to mitigate its beneficial effects.


Its magnectic field has also nutralised to the point were there is no solar real magnetic poles at the moment.

Not that any journalist is interesting in printing this until Buffy or Madonna says so. Then it becomes "science" and is 'past the point of debate...' The humans use the net to do their own research now - hence why newspapers are going out of business. Being a journalist today is like being a canal bargey man or cooper. A job of the past.

Decent scientists are terrified to make public statements on the matter now as they are automatically viewed as kooks by the public and rightly so. The game is up. Al Gore failed, people are not longer paying attention to journalism as they know its propganda. The internet makes it too easy to expose kook or poltically connected scientists who jump on these bandwagons.

The NWO has to find a new scam. The humans were too intelligent to fall for the Man Made Global Warming lie. The elite always get too cocky and arrogant too soon and always trip themselves up. When they wheeled out Baby Rothschild in his hiking boots and a backpack going "hey dudes, global warming ain't cool...get chipped and give me money" it was instantly obvious what the real agenda was.

The NWO are finished. I woke up this morning and realised it. This is one more proof of how desparate they are becoming. We won. For now on we all have to start talking about the NWO and the Illuminati in the past tense.

[realfake]

They have been caught! Now watch as the same Global Warming Fraudlent Scientists are wheeled out again to sell their souls, humanity and science down the river with another bout of fear mongering and the habitual morons in journalism just accept it fully without even investigating if what they are saying is true or not.

Too late me thinks. The game is up now.

I woke up this morning feeling that the tide had turned and humans are winning. The whistle should have been blown when they felt the need to rebrand their scam. 'Global Warming' became 'Climate Change'

It is the amount of light that is responsible for the unseasonal flowering of plants and trees, not temperature.

[endlessvista]

The whistle should have been blown when they felt the need to rebrand their scam. 'Global Warming' became 'Climate Change'


They even tried to replace that with "Climate Flux" at one stage.

[realfake]

Its magnectic field has also nutralised to the point were there is no solar real magnetic poles at the moment.

Magnetic Portals Connect Sun and Earth.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/30oct_ftes.htm

During the time it takes you to read this article, something will happen high overhead that until recently many scientists didn't believe in. A magnetic portal will open, linking Earth to the sun 93 million miles away. Tons of high-energy particles may flow through the opening before it closes again, around the time you reach the end of the page.

"It's called a flux transfer event or 'FTE,'" says space physicist David Sibeck of the Goddard Space Flight Center. "Ten years ago I was pretty sure they didn't exist, but now the evidence is incontrovertible."

Indeed, today Sibeck is telling an international assembly of space physicists at the 2008 Plasma Workshop in Huntsville, Alabama, that FTEs are not just common, but possibly twice as common as anyone had ever imagined.

Researchers have long known that the Earth and sun must be connected. Earth's magnetosphere (the magnetic bubble that surrounds our planet) is filled with particles from the sun that arrive via the solar wind and penetrate the planet's magnetic defenses. They enter by following magnetic field lines that can be traced from terra firma all the way back to the sun's atmosphere.

"We used to think the connection was permanent and that solar wind could trickle into the near-Earth environment anytime the wind was active," says Sibeck. "We were wrong. The connections are not steady at all. They are often brief, bursty and very dynamic."

Several speakers at the Workshop have outlined how FTEs form: On the dayside of Earth (the side closest to the sun), Earth's magnetic field presses against the sun's magnetic field. Approximately every eight minutes, the two fields briefly merge or "reconnect," forming a portal through which particles can flow. The portal takes the form of a magnetic cylinder about as wide as Earth. The European Space Agency's fleet of four Cluster spacecraft and NASA's five THEMIS probes have flown through and surrounded these cylinders, measuring their dimensions and sensing the particles that shoot through. "They're real," says Sibeck.

Now that Cluster and THEMIS have directly sampled FTEs, theorists can use those measurements to simulate FTEs in their computers and predict how they might behave. Space physicist Jimmy Raeder of the University of New Hampshire presented one such simulation at the Workshop. He told his colleagues that the cylindrical portals tend to form above Earth's equator and then roll over Earth's winter pole. In December, FTEs roll over the north pole; in July they roll over the south pole.

Sibeck believes this is happening twice as often as previously thought. "I think there are two varieties of FTEs: active and passive." Active FTEs are magnetic cylinders that allow particles to flow through rather easily; they are important conduits of energy for Earth's magnetosphere. Passive FTEs are magnetic cylinders that offer more resistance; their internal structure does not admit such an easy flow of particles and fields. (For experts: Active FTEs form at equatorial latitudes when the IMF tips south; passive FTEs form at higher latitudes when the IMF tips north.) Sibeck has calculated the properties of passive FTEs and he is encouraging his colleagues to hunt for signs of them in data from THEMIS and Cluster. "Passive FTEs may not be very important, but until we know more about them we can't be sure."

There are many unanswered questions: Why do the portals form every 8 minutes? How do magnetic fields inside the cylinder twist and coil? "We're doing some heavy thinking about this at the Workshop," says Sibeck.

Meanwhile, high above your head, a new portal is opening, connecting your planet to the sun.

[endlessvista]

Isn't it amazing how NASA know all this shit - but only choose to stand beside Al Gore at bogus Global Warming events saying "he's smarter than NASA!"

[realfake]

Proof enough that they are serving the same agenda.

The earth’s atmosphere contains roughly 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, 1% argon, and approximately 0.04% carbon dioxide. Climatologists argue that from the beginning of the industrial revolution to the present time the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rose from about 0.025% to 0.0385% for a net increase of about 0.013%.

Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, but an essential airborne nutrient required for plant growth. Green plant leaves absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and in the process of photosynthesis release oxygen. The fact that the composition of the atmosphere has remained relatively constant, despite the claims of 'high levels' of carbon dioxide emission, would suggest there isn't a pressing need to lower our 'carbon footprint'.

Also over 30,000 scientists worldwide signed a report last year that debunked man-made global warming. More proof is the 30 year study just published that show the amount of global sea ice is the same as it was in 1979. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/08/020823062734.htm

Forget about their bogus science, and ask yourself what they are really trying to shield the planet from.. They're banking on you not finding out.

[steevo]

They have been chemtrailing here today bigtime today along the path that the sun goes. It's been a sunny day today, except for where the chemtrails have blocked it :mad:

[john connor]

They have been chemtrailing here today bigtime today along the path that the sun goes. It's been a sunny day today, except for where the chemtrails have blocked it :mad:

Your leaving yourself open mate, you mean contrails don't you?:rolleyes:

Have been in California the last 2 weeks with my wife, in the Bay Area, it's chemtrail central here, got loads of very odd pics to post when I get back to the UK next week, and I mean ODD

[realfake]

They have been chemtrailing here today bigtime today along the path that the sun goes. It's been a sunny day today, except for where the chemtrails have blocked it :mad: The intensity of the spraying will also increase as the sun shines higher in the sky during the summer months.

[realfake]

Experts are saying the Draconian anti-sun message needs to be altered.

The shift comes after new evidence that suggests too little sunshine leaves us deficient in a vital nutrient, vitamin D.

The move follows a change of policy in Australia and New Zealand, where scientists have decided that, without some sun on the skin, the population will be seriously deficient in vitamin D and may be at risk of developing other cancers later in life, as well as osteoporosis, arthritis and even schizophrenia. They are now recommending that people allow themselves between 10 and 15 minutes of exposure to sunlight on most days. People should allow their hands, face and arms to be exposed, but still cover up between 10am and 2pm.

Professor Anne Marie Ponsonby, associate professor at the Australian National University in Canberra, said: 'It's about getting the balance right. We now realise that too little sun may be harmful, and we have to enable people to make vitamin D while also protecting their skin.

'I think the message is getting through to the public that people need to think about optimal sun exposure. They need to assess for themselves how much sun to have, based on whether they have a fair or a dark skin, but also the advice has to be tailored to where they live, because UV [ultra-violet] radiation that can damage skin depends on the latitude.'

Oliver Gillie, who runs the British Health Research Forum, has campaigned for government and bodies such as Cancer Research UK to acknowledge that we need more vitamin D.

'For years, we have seen these aggressive campaigns aimed at cutting back on any exposure to the sun because of concerns about skin cancer,' he said. 'But sunlight is the normal and natural source of vitamin D and, unlike food or vitamin pills, it is free. Some 60 per cent of people in the UK have insufficient amounts of the nutrient in their blood, so they are almost certainly at a higher than average risk of developing cancer, diabetes, high blood pressure, arthritis and a number of other diseases.'

Others also believe that the warnings have gone too far. Neil Walker, a consultant dermatologist and leading skin cancer expert, warned recently that messages that you had to to avoid the sun entirely are 'Draconian and unnecessary'.

His view was supported by Professor Brian Wharton, from the Institute of Child Health in London, who is worried that rickets may be making a comeback in children from Asian and African-Caribbean families, as their darker skin makes it harder to synthesise enough vitamin D. He said: 'We do need some sensible use of the sun and we have been swinging too strongly against it.'

The change follows a growing number of studies showing the dangers of vitamin D deficiency. This year, a joint British/US study suggested that teenage girls might need more vitamin D to cut the risk of breast cancer later in life. They found that women with the highest levels of the vitamin were up to 50 per cent less likely to develop breast cancer.

But in Britain, for six months of the year the sun is too weak for skin to synthesise vitamin D. A lifestyle spent in offices and cars exacerbates the problem, as does air pollution, which means less of the sun's UV radiation reaches the ground.

Dietary sources of vitamin D include fatty fish and liver, but to store the recommended amount would mean eating at least three portions of fish a week. The minimum desirable intake is 1,000 international units (IU) of vitamin D a day, but a typical diet provides just 150. Vitamin supplements provide around 200 IU a day.

Such concerns have to be balanced with concerns over malignant melanoma, one of the worst forms of skin cancer. The UK rate of diagnosis of the cancer trebled between 1975 and 2003, making it the country's fastest-rising cancer.

Even the charity Cancer Research UK, which has maintained that skin should be covered between 11am and 3pm on very sunny days, has subtly shifted its advice. They now suggest it is all right to have small doses of sunlight over the day in order to make vitamin D.

Sara Hiom, head of health information at the charity, said: 'There has been a shift in the evidence on sunlight, and there is now a case for saying that a little sun but often is what we need.

'If you are walking out at lunchtime, cross over to the sunny side of the street. The main message is not to let yourself go red or burn.'

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/may/28/cancercare.health

[steevo]

Thanks for the info RealFake. Here is my leaflet WHICH IS NOT FINISHED YET cos I have to add some text explaining in some detail (and I may change it abit too) :-

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=212&pictureid=1708

[realfake]

Every man and his dog has complained about the recent, poor summers we have experienced. I would use that as a headline and drop the scare tactics. I'm presuming you are aiming this leaflet at 'normal' folk after all? Think of things relevant to the subject that you may have heard people complaining about. Weak sunshine, skin not tanning like it once did etc.

[abaddon]

This should be stickied.

WTB STICKY


.......


Anyways, geoengineering....

I'm curious how the growing number of ocean 'deadzones' will react, if FED iron-feed, after reading this report

The US government has warned that enormous swarms of killer jellyfish - some the size of fridges and weighing up to a quarter of a ton - are ravaging the world's oceans. Particularly aggressive specimens are said to be capable of causing serious damage to ships, and have even managed to knacker nuclear power plants.

...

It seems that no less than half a billion "refrigerator sized" slimy horrors weighing 450 pounds each invade the Sea of Japan daily, while Australian waters are plagued with "deadly, peanut-sized" Jellybabies of Death. It took the scyphozoan (or possibly hydrozoan) hordes just eight years to seize control of the Black Sea, apparently.

The NSF boffins warn that the gelatinous global usurpers are spawned in hundreds of vast "Dead Zones" in the world's oceans, where nothing but jelly-based lifeforms can live. These frightful blancmange sargassos send out their wobbling hordes on fearful expeditions of destruction, probing the strength of humanity's defences in preparation for the long-planned Time of Slime...



http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/15/jellyfish_gone_wild/


That's if the data/report is true.

Along the same grain, this whole 'NWO plausible deniability' BS is doing my head in. It's as if tptb want us to give up because the problems are too great, and should be left to those "we trust" :confused:

[steevo]

Every man and his dog has complained about the recent, poor summers we have experienced. I would use that as a headline and drop the scare tactics. I'm presuming you are aiming this leaflet at 'normal' folk after all? Think of things relevant to the subject that you may have heard people complaining about. Weak sunshine, skin not tanning like it once did etc.

Yeah youre probably right about dropping the scare tactics. I wasnt actually trying to scare the people, just trying to grab their attention. People today are so de-sensitised to just about EVERYTHING that it makes it hard to grab their attention. I will re-do that leaflet. I'm trying to do a TEMPLATE so that I can easily change the CONTENT on each leaflet without having to waste too much time on the PSYCHOLGY of it on every darn leaflet. That's what the title is for. I want to bring out a leaflet pretty regularly and a template would help me be able to do that. I wanna get the leaflet right BUT I dont wanna waste too much time PERFECTING it or it will be too late. We need to hurry.

[hagbard_celine]

This is an outrage!:mad: They've been planning this for decades!

As a small child I watched a programme on TV that I’ve never forgotten: In those days I was a big fan of the BBC’s technology show Tomorrow’s World. In one episode, in about 1980 to 1983, they did up the studio floor as a picture of the Earth covered by a polythene dome and with a car running its engine inside to demonstrate global warming. They said that a solution to the problem was to change the Earth’s atmosphere by adding chemicals to it. This would reduce global warming. However it would have the serious side-effects of turning the sky white instead of blue:eek::( and would increase acid rain a lot:rolleyes:.

What were they talking about on Tomorrow’s World? This is chemtrails! :eek:This is that very proposal in operation, only it’s being done in secret to stop people kicking up about it!

[steevo]

I found this picture on The Independent website :-

http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00033/Seeding_33981d.jpg

[rhydra]

I'm not a scientist so forgive me for my ignorance here but I hear claims that chemtrails are being used to affect the climate, yet Co2 is not affecting the climate and global warming is a scam. Sorry, just confused about this.

[realfake]

I'm not a scientist so forgive me for my ignorance here but I hear claims that chemtrails are being used to affect the climate, yet Co2 is not affecting the climate and global warming is a scam. Sorry, just confused about this.I'll try to keep this as short as possible.

I reckon that the carbon hypothesis is a scam. Global warming is open to debate and chemtrails, well i view those as creation of artificial cloud cover.

In my opinion, climate change/carbon emissions have been packaged together in the interests of more control and profit, nothing more.

The Earth’s atmosphere contains roughly 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, 1% argon, and approximately 0.04% carbon dioxide. Climatologists argue that from the beginning of the industrial revolution to the present time the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rose from about 0.025% to 0.0385% for a net increase of about 0.013%.

Carbon dioxide is an essential airborne nutrient required for plant growth. Who are we to call that a pollutant? Green plant leaves absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and in the process of photosynthesis release oxygen. The fact that the composition of the atmosphere has remained relatively constant, despite mass deforestation contradicts the claims of the carbon hypothesis.

The Sun, along with cloud cover are the two major driving forces behind our climate. It has long been known that periods of global cooling are associated with reduced solar activity, but cloud cover is often overlooked. Most climate models simply see clouds as a byproduct of climate changes, even though the clouds themselves are a predominant factor in global cooling. Although they trap heat between the clouds and Earth's surface, they also reflect radiant energy from the sun back into space. The net effect of low lying clouds is therefore a cooling one.

Antarctica is not experiencing global warming and this is part of a long term climate trend in which Antarctica has for thousands of years experienced cooling while the rest of the world warms, and warming as the rest of the world cools. It is part of the really troubling evidence that "skeptics" of man made global warming routinely bring to the table and which popular films like Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" conveniently ignore.

Advocates of carbon as the primary mover of climate change typically try to brush off this anomaly by explaining that they need "more data" etc. But it's easily explained by stepping over their "inconvenient truth". The Antarctic ice cap is the one place on Earth that is so reflective that it actually loses more radiant energy on cloudless days than on cloudy ones. So, while cloud cover cools the rest of the planet, it warms Antarctica, and as the rest of the planet warms with a decrease in cloud cover, Antarctica cools.

Now, this is where 'chemtrails' come into play (in my opinion) Antartica is cooling (Recent satellite images of the region actually show an increase in the amount of sea ice) meaning less overall cloud cover. Therefore if history is anything to go by the rest of the world should be warming, is it?

I would say that it doesn't appear to be and i believe that the mass spraying operations are playing a part. I see a mass of evidence (offline) for crude, artificially cloud cover and I've long since lost count of the amount of times an early morning blue sky has been 'whited out.'

If you are familiar with the chemtrail subject, then i take it you will be aware of the metal Barium? Admittedly, its presence in the fallout of these trails is open to debate. But it's actually much more than just a simple toxin/irritant.

Barium is a soft metallic alkaline earth metal that is rarely found in nature. It oxidizes very easily when exposed to air and is also highly reactive with water. Once exposed to oxygen, this silvery metal oxidizes, producing Barium Oxide.

Barium Oxide is a white hygroscopic compound. Hygroscopy is the ability of a substance to attract water molecules from the surrounding environment through either absorption or adsorption. Barium Oxide dissolves in moisture, forming Barium Hydroxide. This compound is used in the demonstration of endothermic reactions, because of its ability to absorb heat from its surroundings.

Sounds ideal for creating artificial cloud cover does it not?. It oxidizes on contact with air and then attracts atmospheric moisture (Natural clouds are formed by condensing water vapor)

For me, these facts would go a long way towards explaining the milky haze that spreads out over a wide area, as these chemtrails disperse.

I should also add that Barium is used in glassmaking. It has a high refractive index. Have you ever observed chembows? They are caused by light dispersion. Whatever is being sprayed in the lower atmosphere has refractive properties.

To summarize - I reckon that the sun/clouds determine the great temperature fluctuations. Global warming could be the real deal, but will we ever find out, unless the sun is allowed to blaze down on us unhindered?

If you want my head on the chopping block, then i would state that i think this whole question has something to do with the Sun. It may have gone quiet on the spot front, but it has noticeably increased in radiance. For me, the Sun basically represents cosmic energy, the true energy of creation. And i am of the belief that the spraying is an attempt to counteract the increasing amount of electromagnetic radiation that should now be bathing our planet.

You may think i'm nuts, and/or talking complete bollocks, but that's for you to decide ;)

[anthony65]

Thanks for the info RealFake. Here is my leaflet WHICH IS NOT FINISHED YET cos I have to add some text explaining in some detail (and I may change it abit too) :-

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=212&pictureid=1708

They look good!

Did you finish them?

[hagbard_celine]

I'm not a scientist so forgive me for my ignorance here but I hear claims that chemtrails are being used to affect the climate, yet Co2 is not affecting the climate and global warming is a scam. Sorry, just confused about this.


I think the people involved in the Chemtrail programme, the plane pilots, chemists etc, are told that, but it's not really about Carbon emissions.

[steevo]

Thanks for the info RealFake. Here is my leaflet WHICH IS NOT FINISHED YET cos I have to add some text explaining in some detail (and I may change it abit too) :-

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=212&pictureid=1708

Can anyone think of a better word than "frightening" ? I need my leaflet to have an eye catching headline but the word "frightening" is like fear mongering. Thanks for any help.

[steevo]

Please post any constructive criticisms, they are PARTICULARLY welcome :)

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=212&pictureid=2458

[tothestars]

Please post any constructive criticisms, they are PARTICULARLY welcome :)

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=212&pictureid=2420

Looks good.

Why not add in a link where people can get more info about chemtrails?


(Link to this forum as well ? :D )

[john connor]

what about "Google Chemtrails" - find out for yourself

[steevo]

Thanks for your replies JC and ToTheStars :) I have decided not to bother with any link. The leaflets plant the seed and that is all I want to do, cos that is all that is necessary IN MY OPINION. Anyone who wants to know more about chemtrails will look it up on google without me needing to tell them to do it. In the meantime the seed is planted.

Edit : I have printed off a bundle of the leaflets and they look great (even if I do say so myself ;):D). The picture above doesnt look that good but in real life they are NICE :)

[fnulnu]

There's another masively long article today on this here:

The Geoengineering Option A Last Resort Against Global Warming?

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20090301faessay88206-p20/david-g-victor-m-granger-morgan-jay-apt-john-steinbruner-katharine-ricke/the-geoengineering-option.html

[debs67gb]

20 trees planted at my sons school yesterday :)

[anthony65]

Here is the link posted by fnulnu and a few extracts.

Would Marpat and Fuzzy Logic please contact the foreign affairs team to let them know that all this is impossible. :rolleyes:

How fortunate we are to enjoy the company of such brilliant individuals who are not only capable of dismissing any evidence that we bring, but also that of the mainstream scientific community. :eek:


http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20090301faessay88206-p10/david-g-victor-m-granger-morgan-jay-apt-john-steinbruner-katharine-ricke/the-geoengineering-option.html

In fact, every few decades, volcanoes validate the theory that it is possible to engineer the climate. When Mount Pinatubo, in the Philippines, erupted in 1991, it ejected plumes of sulfate and other fine particles into the atmosphere, which reflected a bit more sunlight and cooled the planet by about 0.5 degrees Celsius over the course of a year. Larger eruptions, such as the 1883 eruption of Krakatau, in Indonesia, have caused even greater cooling that lasted longer. Unlike efforts to control emissions of greenhouse gases, which will take many years to yield a noticeable effect, volcano-like strategies for cooling the planet would work relatively promptly.

This is exactly the scenario depicted in the ZDF Chemtrails video, where at the end they point out that sulphur is poisonous:

Chemtrails - YouTube

Another lesson from volcanoes is that a geoengineering system would require frequent maintenance, since most particles lofted into the stratosphere would disappear after a year or two. Once a geoengineering project were under way, there would be strong incentives to continue it, since failure to keep the shield in place could allow particularly harmful changes in the earth's climate, such as warming so speedy that ecosystems would collapse because they had no time to adjust. By carefully measuring the climatic effects of the next major volcanic eruption with satellites and aircraft, geoengineers could design a number of climate-cooling technologies.

Most schemes that would alter the earth's albedo envision putting reflective particles into the upper atmosphere, much as volcanoes do already. Such schemes offer quick impacts with relatively little effort. For example, just one kilogram of sulfur well placed in the stratosphere would roughly offset the warming effect of several hundred thousand kilograms of carbon dioxide
So far, launching reflective materials into the upper stratosphere seems to be the easiest and most cost-effective option. This could be accomplished by using high-flying aircraft, naval guns, or giant balloons. The appropriate materials could include sulfate aerosols (which would be created by releasing sulfur dioxide gas), aluminum oxide dust, or even self-levitating and self-orienting designer particles engineered to migrate to the Polar Regions and remain in place for long periods. If it can be done, concentrating sunshades over the poles would be a particularly interesting option, since those latitudes appear to be the most sensitive to global warming. Most cost estimates for such geoengineering strategies are preliminary and unreliable. However, there is general agreement that the strategies are cheap; the total expense of the most cost-effective options would amount to perhaps as little as a few billion dollars, just one percent (or less) of the cost of dramatically cutting emissions.

Altering the albedo of the earth would also affect atmospheric circulation, rainfall, and other aspects of the hydrologic cycle. In the six to 18 months following the eruption of Mount Pinatubo, rainfall and river flows dropped, particularly in the tropics. Understanding these dangers better would help convince government leaders in rainfall-sensitive regions, such as parts of China and India (along with North Africa, the Middle East, and the desert regions of the southwestern United States), not to prematurely deploy poorly designed geoengineering schemes that could wreak havoc on agricultural productivity. Indeed, some climate models already suggest that negative outcomes -- decreased precipitation over land (especially in the tropics) and increased precipitation over the oceans -- would accompany a geoengineering scheme that sought to lower average temperatures by raising the planet's albedo. Such changes could increase the risk of major droughts in some regions and have a major impact on agriculture and the supply of fresh water. Complementary policies -- such as investing in better water-management schemes -- may be needed.