U.N. Urged To Freeze Climate Geo Engineering Projects

U.N. Urged To Freeze Climate Geo Engineering Projects

www.reuters.com

The United Nations should impose a moratorium on "geo-engineering" projects such as artificial volcanoes and vast cloud-seeding schemes to fight climate change, green groups say, fearing they could harm nature and mankind.

The risks were too great because the impacts of manipulating nature on a vast scale were not fully known, the groups said at a major U.N. meeting in Japan aimed at combating increasing losses of plant and animal species.

(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
The Powerful Coalition That Wants To Engineer The World's Climate
G Edward Griffin Exposes Conspiracy - Monsanto's Aluminum Resistant Seeds and Geoengineering

Well well.

All of those who think that Geoengineering has been not been implemented, raise your hand.

Dont worry, I dont have an "Explode Your Kids Button"

As to understand, we have a convoy of 200 countries gathered together, that object ongoing Geo Engineering Projects. Yet the majority of skeptics deny this has been implemented?

"It's absolutely inappropriate for a handful of governments in industrialized countries to make a decision to try geo-engineering without the approval of all the world's support," Pat Mooney, from Canada-headquartered advocacy organization ETC Group, told Reuters on the sidelines of the October 18-29 meeting.

"They shouldn't proceed with real-life, in-the-environment experimentation or the deployment of any geo-engineering until there is a consensus in the United Nations that this is okay."

Its a sure sign that we have been lied to,
its time to realize...they have been doing this for a long long time.



www.reuters.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Please explain what, in that article, indicates that there are any ongoing geoengineering projects. All I see are various proposals.

reply to post by Phage



Star and Flag for LiveForever.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Geo-Engineer David Keith explains the possible consequences of Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering.

“And by the way it’s not really like a moral hazard. It’s more like free-riding on our grandkids.”

Free ride on our kids...our grandkids?


Phage, You should have been one to represent the 200 countries perhaps?
Why would 200 countries urge a freeze?

reply to post by burntheships

Because they don't want a handful of other nations unilaterally undertaking various activities that are fraught with uncertainty in both efficacy and the possibility of unforeseen consequences...like it says in the article. Sounds prudent to me.

It is definitely curious at the least, to hear this being said......

And if absolutely nothing was happening, why all the fuss from these people?


Very good points.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by burntheships

 

Because they don't want a handful of other nations unilaterally undertaking various activities that are fraught with uncertainty in both efficacy and the possibility of unforeseen consequences...like it says in the article.

Remember those were your words...."undertaking various activites that are fraught with uncertainty in both eficacy and the possiblity of unforseen consequences."

You are aware that they deem the spraying from modified 747's to be one of the most effective and safe methods of Geo Engineering.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3ea4a89e95f9.png[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/af22587ccaa1.png[/atsimg]

Displaying estimated effectiveness versus "safety" for twelve geoengineering approaches. Based on data in the Royal Society Geoengineering the climate report -
2020science.org...

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.

Above Top Secret

reply to post by alienreality

The concern is nothing new. In 2008 the Council on Foreign Relations (yes, the evil CFR) addressed the issue.

We will explore formal, legal strategies as well as informal efforts to create norms that could govern testing and deployment of geoengineering systems and their possible undesirable consequences. We will probe whether it is possible to limit the use of geoengineering to circumstances of collective action by the international community in the face of true global emergencies and what might happen when there are disputes over when the emergency “trigger” should be pulled.

www.cfr.org...

reply to post by burntheships

Actually, that chart shows stratospheric aerosols as having a low safety rating. Two on a scale of five, with five being the safest.. I would tend to agree that it's not the best idea.

reply to post by Phage


Something we agree on then, along with nearly 200 countries.

The common ground with the envoys from nearly 200 countries gathered in Nagoya, Japan,
object to the destruction of forests, rivers and coral reefs that provide resources and services central to livelihoods and economies. Conservation groups say geo-engineering is a way for some governments and companies to get out of taking steps to slash planet-warming emissions.

The U.N. climate panel says a review of geo-engineering will be part of its next major report in 2013.

Not to far away, seems they are running short on time to "test the waters".
Yet since this is all a scam to yet again defraud and bilk the taxpayers

Thirty-two states are on the path to UN-inspired carbon reduction, Cap-and-Trade schemes and unconstitutional alliances; the supporting Governors must be held accountable. Carbon reduction and population reduction go hand in hand. The United Nations failed to impose their treaties from the top down (the Kyoto and Copenhagen Accords) and the federal government has abandoned its unpopular national Cap-and-Trade scheme for now. Cap-and-Trade is being pursued on the state level, and one region has even raised over $700 million in carbon auctions.

www.morphcity.com...

A few weeks from now, on November 2, New Mexico’s Environmental Improvement Board is scheduled to vote on proposed regulations setting in motion a cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gases. It is likely to approve them. That same day, voters will elect a new governor. She will object to the whole idea.

The state board — its members appointed by outgoing Democratic Governor Bill Richardson — has been considering regulations to lay the groundwork for New Mexico’s participation in the cap-and-trade program envisioned by the Western Climate Initiative, an effort involving seven states and three Canadian provinces to reduce carbon emissions.

That is the Western Climate Initiative...
And then we have the REGIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS INITIATIVE (RGGI)

RGGI is the nation's first mandatory greenhouse gas cap and trade regulating entity. This waste of tax dollars is responsible for "making an impact on climate change" in 10 Northeast states. Never mind that GLOBAL WARMING ISN'T EVEN REAL! The only impact RGGI has made so far is they have raised energy prices and created a slush fund for each member state. What exactly that money is being used for is unclear.

And the MIDWEST GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION ACCORD (MGGRA)

All of these Initiatives and Accords are a bypass of the failed Cap and Trade.

ClimateGate, MeatGate, WeatherGate, StormGate,
www.morphcity.com...

The fast-track growth of the global carbon trading market, which grew at a compound annual growth rate of 89 percent from 2005 to 2009, has also resulted in several carbon trading scams over the past year in the UK, Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, and now Germany as European countries put more policing efforts in place.

Regulatory efforts to mitigate climate change have driven tremendous growth in the carbon market, rising from $10.9 billion in 2005 to $138.3 billion in 2009, according to a report from GBI Research, reports Commodity Online.

www.environmentalleader.com...
patriotsforamerica.ning.com...

An interview, titled The Wizard Of the Baca Grande, which Maurice Strong conducted with West magazine of Alberta, Canada, in May 1990, he provides details which elucidate the reasons behind the Illuminati’s support of the environmental movement.

Strong concluded with a disturbing apocalyptic scenario he would to include in a novel he says he would like to write:

Each year the World Economic Forum convenes in Davos, Switzerland. Over a thousand CEOs, prime ministers, finance ministers, and leading academics gather in February to attend meetings and set the economic agendas for the year ahead.

What if a small group of these word leaders were to conclude that the principle risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? Will the rich countries agree to reduce their impact on the environment? Will they agree to save the earth?

The group’s conclusion is “no.” The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?

This group of world leaders form a secret society to bring about a world collapse. It’s February. They’re all at Davos. These aren’t terrorists ­ they’re world leaders. They have positioned themselves in the world’s commodity and stock markets. They’ve engineered, using their access to stock exchanges, and computers, and gold supplies, a panic.

Then they prevent the markets from closing. They jam the gears. They have mercenaries who hold the rest of the world leaders at Davros as hostage. The markets can’t close. The rich countries...?” and Strong makes a slight motion with his fingers as if he were flicking a cigarette butt out of the window.[10]

Above Top Secret.Com

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...
Enter Center Stage Elite Global Control

On page 75 you can find the quote:
"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself."

www.archive.org...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 27-10-2010 by burntheships because: (no reason given)

There is no money for the green groups except with cap and trade.

Al Gore will make a lot of money on the CO2 trading market.

But big companies will make as much or more money on climate geo engineering and the greens will not get any of this money.

What the greens will do is blackmail big companies that they do not agree with.
Cap and trade WILL become a weapon for the greens.

I believe governments have been doing experiments on weather modification for decades. Now if someone could make artificial snow that would not melt all the way up to say 110 degrees and make it cheaply, they could sell it to everyone to spread all over their house and yard in the summer time and reduce their monthly cooling bills. If whole neighborhoods and cities did this, temperatures over a large area could be affected. I'm all for it. Ideas for polluting the air with sunlight blocking substances I am not for. It's pollution. We breathe what is in the air. It blocks sunlight and I believe would harm the efficiency of solar panels. It may even slow down the carbon absorption rate of vegetation since the vegetation might not grow as fast with less sunlight and that might even cause additional global warming instead of cooling.

Studying the effects of dumping iron ore powder in the ocean that would cause massive plant growth and absorption of carbon I'm all for someone studying. The only harmful effect other than possible massive global cooling (which is the desired effect) would be the depletion of oxygen in the water. I'm thinking there could be a possibility of controlling how much iron is dumped in certain areas to limit oxygen depletion. This method may be such an inexpensive way of controlling global warming that no nation is interested in it when they can tax industries and people instead and make a whole lot of money in taxes. Governments are more interested in collecting more money and taxes, not fixing problems in my opinion.

reply to post by orionthehunter

What you are referring to is shown in the chart above as urban albedo modification. Low risk but also low effectiveness. A good option but possibly not enough to avert doom (human induced or otherwise).

reply to post by burntheships


Good catch. S&F

I tend to agree that "weather modification" efforts have camouflaged geo-engineering projects for a while now. It's a good cover and with some techniques, there is overlap.

reply to post by Phage


You love to twist that to make it seem like the CFR are the good guys. I will repost this here as I have responded to this twist in several other threads already:

There are a variety of strategies, such as injecting light-reflecting particles into the stratosphere , that might be used to modify the Earth’s atmosphere-ocean system in an attempt to slow or reverse global warming. All of these "geoengineering" strategies involve great uncertainty and carry significant risks. They may not work as expected, imposing large unintended consequences on the climate system. While offsetting warming, most strategies are likely to leave other impacts unchecked, such as acidification of the ocean, the destruction of coral reefs, and changes in composition of terrestrial ecosystems. Yet, despite uncertain and very negative potential consequences, geoengineering might be needed

www.cfr.org...
Starting on page 11 he rings his allegorical hands at the fact that nations that want to do it will unlikely be stopped. Woe is the poor little powerless CFR

Starting on page 12
He suggests that

set norms about responsible geoengineering. This approach would recognize that international law is weak (especially when inconvenient), but norms can be powerful if they become internalized within the communities that might contemplate geoengineering. Historically, similar norms emerged around the deployment of nuclear weapons—for example, against the “first use” of nuclear weapons and against reckless testing of weapons—and probably helped reduce the danger of nuclear war. Important norms have emerged about safe testing and deployment of genetically engineered crops.

Ibed
I've yet to see any safe GMO's but that's another thread.

So what did they discuss??? How to stop it??? Nope. How to set "norms"... in other words, they have no intention of stopping it. They just want complete control over the teams that do it.

At the workshop we should discuss what norms should govern geoengineering and how they might gain widespread adherence.

Getting all relevant nations to adhere to such norms may be especially difficult.

...geoengineering seems to be so inexpensive that large NGOs and rich individuals could do these things on their own.

They even admit that a rich enough individual could do it on his own. Bill gates, Grand Cayman, and mosquitos comes to mind, but they've got the spin going full blast on that one.

Lord Help us from these globalists.

So twist all you want, get all your buddies to star you up. The truth is the truth.

This whole paper is a very subtle mind conditioning. If you anyone knows enough about the way to lead someone down a certain path with psychology... they will recognize it here. You say "oh how horrible this must be... (someone thinks stopped....) controlled" and then you subtly say how bad it would be to do it... but instead of focusing on stopping it you work on ways of doing it... and suggest it's even possible for individuals to do... which becomes almost a subtle invitation to do it... because of course it's going to get done anyways... so we must regulate it... by the end you're subconsciously thinking it is a necessary evil and must be done.

So far from being the good guys, they are the advocates for this... with their total globalists control, of course.

reply to post by pianopraze

Nail on the head , they're going to do what they're going to do, period. Just like the TPTB don't want anyone with nukes but themselves unless of course it benifits their agenda and then they're all in.

Originally posted by burntheships
Well well.

All of those who think that Geoengineering has been not been implemented, raise your hand.

Me!!!

Athough technically carbon emissions, deforestation, industrial pollution, farming and urbanisation are all examples of geoeingeering.

But I don't think you or the UN are referring to them. Just these rather bizarre sci-fi plans to supposedly counter the effects of global warming - some of which have advocates proposing small scale tests (like spreading iron filings in the ocean to promote algae growth to in turn remove CO2 from the atmosphere).

It's worth noting that we don't always wait until someone actually jumps off a building before saying they shouldn't do it.

The moratorium was enacted, and the United States abstained.

rs.resalliance.org...

One is that the CBD moratorium places a considerable limit on geoengineering experimentation and attempts. The only exception are “small-scale” controlled experiments that meet specific requirements, i.e.: that they are assumed in controlled settings and for explicit scientific purposes, are subject to prior environmental impact assessment, and have no impacts beyond national jurisdiction.
[...]
The first is that the agreement has no legally binding power, and that formal sanctioning mechanisms are absent. The CBD moratorium is “soft law” which implies that States still could launch geoengineering schemes unilaterally. Note also that the United States has not formally ratified the CBD convention.

Second, even though the CBD moratorium might be seen as defining an upper limit on the scale of geoengineering experiments, key definitional questions remain to be teased out.
[...]
Third, as the US Congressional Research Service notes in its report, international agreements are best equipped to deal with disputes between countries, and not necessarily between one country and one private actor, or between private actors that may shift locations to suit their interests (pp. 29). And major private or semi-private actors and funders are out there, including the Bill Gates and Richard Branson $4.6 million Fund for Innovative Climate and Energy Resources, Ice911, Intellectual Ventures (see WJS article “Global warming might be solved with a helium balloon and a few miles of garden hose”), Carbon Engineeering, Planktos Foundation, and GreenSea Ventures (featured in Nature here).

So, do we really have a real, effective global moratorium on geoengineering? Far from it it seems

www.treehugger.com...

Other more recent ideas (oft discussed in TreeHugger) include "seeding the skies with compounds to encourage the formation of low-lying, cooling clouds; building a giant sun-shade in space; and dumping iron in the oceans to encourage the growth of algae that would take in carbon when alive and trap it in on the sea floor when dead." and "the most promising idea may be to spray tiny sulphate particles into the upper atmosphere, where they will reflect incoming sunlight.

www.treehugger.com...

While the science behind the sulfur particle proposal is actually fairly sound in principle -- the sulfur particles ejected into the stratosphere, like the ash and sulfur dioxide released by volcanoes during eruptions, would reduce the Earth's absorption of sunlight, prompting a cooling effect -- its secondary effects, including the promotion of chemical reactions that would lead to the destruction of the ozone layer, seriously undermine any perceived benefits. Indeed, Simone Tilmes, the lead author and an atmospheric scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), believes the proposal would push back almost 2 decades' worth of efforts to repair the planet's ozone layer.

That isn't to say that this study should necessarily drive the final nail in geo-engineering's coffin; as with many such schemes, there's always a flip side to inaction. In this case, as Phil Berardelli goes on to report, another study, led by University of Colorado, Boulder, atmospheric scientist Judith Perlwitz, a full restoration of the Antarctic ozone hole could greatly intensify the impact of global warming in the Southern Hemisphere -- causing temperatures in the Antarctic stratosphere to rise by as much as 9°C by century's end. Such a huge increase would drive temperature increases worldwide.

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by burntheships
Well well.

All of those who think that Geoengineering has been not been implemented, raise your hand.

It's worth noting that we don't always wait until someone actually jumps off a building before saying they shouldn't do it.

Important note indeed.

Aside from the industrial byproducts, I think there's a LOT going on that we don't know about. And I do think it's much more likely to be global corporations that are messing around, not national governments. ...They have the money, expertise, technology and motive.


And oh yeah, a complete lack of scruples .