This site exists on your donations. Donate here
Switch theme
About Contact Log in Register!

351,278 users • 209,072 reviews
122,558 films • 18,496 TV series

Climate Change and You. Or Geoengineering and Aerosols In Our Skies (302 views, 19 replies)

This topic has been closed.

top expert
Report comment
(1y)
(edited)

www.cnn.com/2023/02/12/world/sol...

Climate Change scientists are discussing, yet again, a radical [Risqué] method of cooling the earth. Called Solar Geoengineering, the plan [idea] is simple; use weather balloons to disperse aerosols in our upper atmosphere. Namely that of sulfur dioxide which would, in theory, reflect the sun's rays back into space, thus cooling the earth. The above link discusses this in further detail. Please review and discuss. Or don't. It's up to you.

+1
 

master
Report comment
(1y)
(edited)

EauButtWait... somebody smiley HAS A NEW PLAN! Sure, it sounds smiley butt the NEW IDEA is blasting moon dust cannons toward earth to cloak us in dusty clouds that'll deflect sun rays. WHY KNOT? smiley

* smiley Then housekeepers will enjoy high paying essential status, like surgeons... and hero citizens wearing tin foil hats will help increase the solar deflection.


www.popularmechanics.com/space/m...
noshyt u think ahm joking?

+2
 
Hide 1 reply...
Report comment
(1y)

@(⌐■_■) That's even more insane than the plan to saturate the atmosphere with greenhouse gases. Moon dust? That's out there with blocking solar emissions with mirrors en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_mirr...

+1
 

top expert
Report comment
(1y)

Thats an interesting concept. The arguments for and against are quite strong. Yet I dont see that as a hindering factor in developing the concept further. The point here is that both a risk assessment and a feasibility study are needed. And if the benefits outweigh the risks, then it is certainly something to be attempted. Because the current progress on limiting pollutants is just too slow and doesnt hit any mark worthy to make a difference. And the weather keeps getting more and more violent and unpredictable. Pretty soon, this will become the norm and then we are up sh*t creek.

+1
 
Hide 9 replies...
Report comment
(1y)

@M3g4m1nd I mean at least someone is trying to do something (anything) about it. TONS of folks complain and talk about climate change. Yet, I dunno... what happens when these aerosols remain longer in the atmosphere? What happens when volcanoes erupt and double these emissions? Good thing it's still in the assessment and investigation stage.
I mean, most countries are still burning coal for their energy supply. Not to mention places where the majority still doesn't even have electricity.
Personally, I'm a pessimist. I think we are already up Schidt's Creek without a paddle.
www.reuters.com/business/environ...
I think it's already too late to significantly curb climate change.

+1
 
Report comment
(1y)
(edited)

@nonehere I agree. Its too late to turn things around but its not too late to freeze or even slow down the progress of climate change. Your comment on the volcano and the consequences of a potential eruption is the most worrisome part.

I imagine that it would depend on the size of the eruption. Anything from a VEI 4 becomes a real problem. We have already had 51 VEI 6 eruptions, 166 VEI 5 and 421 VEI 4 eruptions in the last 10.000 years. Luckily we havent had anything above 6 but the frequency of the others is such that it would certainly be a factor to any feasibility and risk assessment study.

EDIT: I just thought of another factor complicating the process. Cloud seeding and general weather modification. As the whole process is heavily reliant on the spraying of aerosols to effect weather change, there must be a study to determine the possibility of a negative overlap between the two.

+1
 
Report comment
(1y)
(edited)

@M3g4m1nd Indeed, all these factors are included in the study. The biggest issue with volcanic events is that we can't predict when one will occur, or the severity of the eruption, as with most natural disasters.
There's also the impact on the rest of our climate as a whole. What about the wildlife that depends on the climate? What if aerosols transfer from the atmosphere to say the oceans? Over-fishing and pollution has already damaged the ocean's ecosystem to a point where we would need to stop fishing completely for more than 20 years in order to restore ocean life populations. Global mean temperatures have risen to a degree that 'bleaching' has occurred in most coral reefs around the globe.
Yet, it is good that we (governments and the scientific communities) are discussing, even pursuing options to abate climate change. All ideas should at least be examined with true scientific fervor and analysis.
...
Read more

+1
 
Report comment
(1y)

@nonehere Well, it does seem we are heading for the 6th mass extinction event quite rapidly. We are already past the point where we as a species are at higher numbers than the earth can sustain with flora and fauna. So, it may well be that any attempt to correct the climate may come too little too late.

+1
 
Report comment
(1y)

@M3g4m1nd Yes, another good point. I agree completely. There are just too many for the earth to sustain us. Makes you wonder why all these natural disasters are happening? Mother Earth is a living, breathing, thinking, and feeling lifeform. At least, as I know her.

+2
 
Report comment
(1y)

@nonehere I suppose one could argue that Mother Earth is trying to balance things out. Get rid some of us, one way or another.

+1
 
Report comment
(1y)

@M3g4m1nd I think that all things in the universe, in order to exist, must be at balance with all other things. That technology's ultimate purpose is to support that balance. That our current technological interaction with nature 'acts' like a cancer, attacking the 'cells' around it. Leaving nature no choice but to 'defend' against this action. Much like the body responds to cancer by either increasing white cells that either eradicate cancer cells or by surrounding the cells in tissue that form a cyst or tumor in order to prevent further damage to healthy cells. Once, or if, we can develop technological interactions that also benefit the rest of nature, balance will be restored. We know that nature does 'work against' what we could call erroneous cells because there's some math involved. Namely the work of a physicist Jim Gates. Here's a link.
...
Read more

+1
 
Report comment
(1y)

@nonehere Sounds like a really interesting man. Especially the part about teaching himself supersymmetry.

Well, if he says so, who am I to say otherwise? Its his field, his expertise, his theory. smiley smiley

+1
 
Report comment
(1y)

@M3g4m1nd smiley That's what I thought. It is a provocative theory to say the least.

+1
 

master
Report comment
(1y)

butt wait there's MORE...
v.redd.it/52z9xf7v3tha1

0
 
Hide 1 reply...
Report comment
(1y)

@(⌐■_■) I live near there. The entire town has had to be evacuated because of this spill.

0
 

senior master
Report comment
(1y)

After the failure of humanity to work together upon the covid pandemic waves, the wars and conflicts we witness and the ruthless financial abuse of the big mass of people by the wealthy countries and their financial institutions ....I find useless to imagine solutions of any kind. If some scientific project come up it'll probably be coverup for some further exploitation. I feel shame as human being for the cultural and political decay of our nations and the impotence of the academic community upon the challenges of our times.

+1
 
Hide 1 reply...
Report comment
(1y)

@Nasos Very good point my friend, and I agree wholeheartedly.

+1
 

top expert
Report comment
(1y)

I also would like to point out that for the longest time, conspiracy theorists have talked about 'chemtrails' being perpetrated by the United States Federal Government. Here we have a CNN article about the very same thing, only under a different name. Not that I believe in conspiracy theory, or anything. It's the irony of it. Someone call Alanis Morrissette.....

+1
 
Hide 2 replies...
Report comment
(1y)

@nonehere You know, I used to work in Aviation Safety Organisations for about 10 years. I have officially replied to this conspiracy theory more times than I can count. And I always found it quite interesting that people believed the chemtrail theory and yet did not believe that weather modification is actually a thing since 1946. Not to even mention that to plan such an air drop would require a supercomputer to calculate the different speeds and direction of wind per 1000 ft of of atmosphere, when in fact if you wanted to effect 100% of dispersion, all you needed to do is to simply infect the water supply.

+1
 
Report comment
(1y)

@M3g4m1nd Yeah, I know. I know.. again, the irony of it, and this gives them more fuel for the inane argument.

+1
 
Log in or register to post your comment.
This topic has been closed.

Similar forum topics




FEEDBACK

Join 351,278 users who love movies and TV shows!

209,072 reviews • 122,558 films • 18,496 TV series

Log in   Sign up free!