It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Now, a powerful coalition of forces is quietly constellating around the idea of transforming the Earth's atmosphere by simulating volcanic eruptions to counter the warming effects...Engineering the planet's climate system is attracting the attention of scientists, scientific societies, venture capitalists...think tanks. Despite the enormity of what is being proposed nothing less than taking control of Earth's climate system the public has been almost entirely excluded from the planning.
But the option that is taken most seriously is altogether grander in conception and scale. The scheme proposes nothing less than the transformation of the chemical composition of the Earth's atmosphere so that humans can regulate the temperature of the planet as desired. Like volcanic eruptions, it involves injecting sulphur dioxide gas into the stratosphere to blanket the Earth with tiny particles that reflect solar radiation.
Various schemes have been proposed, with the most promising being adaptation of high-flying aircraft fitted with extra tanks and nozzles to spray the chemicals. A fleet of 747s could do the job.
The Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) is carrying out a public dialogue on geoengineering to assess public opinion on how future research relating to the subject should be directed, conducted and communicated. If you would like to take part in the dialogue the following link will take you to an online survey about geoengineering.
geoengineering.dialoguebydesign.net...
The online survey closed on 12th April 2010 but you can now view the responses and the summary report of the online survey, and the main report of the Public Dialogue on Geoengineering.
2.4.2 Geo-engineering
‘Geo-engineering’ is a term used to describe ‘technological efforts to stabilize the climate system by direct intervention in the energy balance of the earth’ (IPCC 2007b: 815).
A range of geo-engineering proposals have been put forward, including:
•the release of aerosols into the stratosphere to scatter incoming sunlight (Crutzen 2006)
•cloud seeding through the artificial generation of micro-meter sized seawater droplets (Bower et al. 2006)
•fertilisation of the ocean with iron and nitrogen to increase carbon sequestration (Buesseler & Boyd 2003)
•changes in land use to increase the albedo (reflectivity) of the earth’s surface (Hamwey 2005).
Originally posted by xizd1
I guess I am really behind the times. All my life I have suffered under the delusion that CO2 was a good thing that plants need to survive. When did this change, how did I miss it?
How could adding sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere be a good thing?
I'm confused and feel like I'm being hoodwinked!
royalsociety.org...
Emissions targets
•Involvement of developing countries in mitigation and trading
•International emissions trading –cap and trading (generates financial flows to developing countries)
•Financing emissions reductions from deforestation
•Technology (existing, near-commercial, breakthrough)
•Adaptation
•Implementation and institutions
Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by ChemBreather
It is interesting, is it not that ClimateGate proved them all liars. I have looked at many of these PDF's in the data base already, it is the same old garbage. Cap and Trade so that the smaller poor nations can have Global Dimming when they cant afford it! Its absolutely sick. They use all of the fabricated numbers that were exposed during ClimateGate.
Maybe they have decided that that since ClimateGate, they will just try another avenue. Like trusting that the general public is so naive, so unlearned that they can dupe us into thinking we must accept mans superior alternate universe.
Permanent White Skys, and the toxic air?
This must be stopped.
Wood is right: there is no law against a private individual attempting to take control of the Earth's climate.
Originally posted by soficrow
reply to post by burntheships
S&F
...and I agree with Maxmar - most likely, they're already doing it.
When will they ever learn? The fools.
Originally posted by ChemBreather
Yes, Grey silvery skies , yukk... This comment should peel open your eyes though :
Wood is right: there is no law against a private individual attempting to take control of the Earth's climate.
What the heck kind of thinking is that ?? No Law ? It belongs to every living thing here, and is not up for grabs,man...You see how dangerous these people are ..
Dangerous thinking, indeed. Maybe they have decided that they can dupe the younger generation, and just force it on the majority of adults? Really, afterall, who are we to object?
They are truely maniacal!
source
Eric Scheiner
CNS News
Sept 16, 2010
John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, says that the term “global warming” is “a dangerous misnomer” that should be replaced with “global climate disruption.”
At the Environmental Protection Agency’s 40th celebration of the Clean Air Act on Tuesday, Holdren said, “I think one of the failures of the scientific community was in embracing the term ‘global warming’. Global warming is in fact a dangerous misnomer.” And in a speech last week in Norway, echoing remarks he made at a 2007 speech at Harvard University, Holdren said the term ”global climate disruption” should be used instead of “global warming.”
Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by ChemBreather
It is interesting, is it not that ClimateGate proved them all liars. I have looked at many of these PDF's in the data base already, it is the same old garbage. Cap and Trade so that the smaller poor nations can have Global Dimming when they cant afford it! Its absolutely sick. They use all of the fabricated numbers that were exposed during ClimateGate. ...
...a handful of selected emails were taken out of context by a number of climate-denier organizations. These organizations, many part of the Koch Web, claim the emails prove a “conspiracy” of scientists and cast doubt on the scientific consensus on human-caused climate change.
This incident, dubbed "ClimateGate" by climate-denier groups, has been distorted and repeated many times by conservative media and blogs since late November 2009. Twenty organizations, roughly half of the Koch-funded groups profiled in this report, have contributed to the "ClimateGate" echo chamber. Among the most vocal groups are organizations that received over $1,000,000 from Koch foundations since 2005, including Americans for Prosperity, the Heritage Foundation, and the Cato Institute.
...populist anger is encouraged by a network of conservative think tanks funded, in part, by Big Carbon. These links, which have been heavily documented, are close enough to provoke the Royal Society to take the unprecedented step of writing to Exxon Mobil asking the company to desist from funding anti-science groups.
...promoted the view that politics should be guided by eugenics and by a genetically superior elite. The selling of eugenics in Sweden is an example of the co-production of science and social order.
© 2010 The Royal Society