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.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by pianopraze
It seems to me that they are talking about taking action on CO2 emissions, not SRM.
edit on 2/6/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)
So our subject this evening is geoengineering,... I'm kind of worried that when the current climate deniers kind of wake up at some point and realize something is serious happening here, that they'll be seeking easy fixes. So I'm really, really pleased that the Council has chosen to have this conversation today
We've got to do geoengineering.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by pianopraze
Who's going to work for free? What about the computers?
Ok. So no research at all then.
Fine. Great. Let's just do what we're doing. Come what may.
BTW, did you read Keith's work? That globalist funded nonsense?edit on 2/6/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)
Keith's own studies suggest that if we were ever forced to try to screen out some of the sun's rays globally, it would be more effective to spray sulphuric acid from aircraft (Geophysical Research Letters, DOI: 10.1029/2010GL043975).
It would also be cheaper, costing a few billion dollars a year according to a study by Aurora Flight Sciences
Proposed self-aligning, levitating, sunlight-reflecting nano-disc (Keith, 2010)
In a nutshell, David’s idea is to engineer discs around 10 micrometers across and 50 nanometers thick, with a core of aluminum, a top layer of aluminum oxide, and a bottom layer of barium titanate. Injected high enough into the atmosphere
Here I examine the possibility that engineered nanoparticles could exploit photophoretic forces, enabling more control over particle distribution and lifetime than is possible with sulfates, perhaps allowing climate engineering to be accomplished with fewer side effects. The use of electrostatic or magnetic materials enables a class of photophoretic forces not found in nature. Photophoretic levitation could loft particles above the stratosphere, reducing their capacity to interfere with ozone chemistry; and, by increasing particle lifetimes, it would reduce the need for continual replenishment of the aerosol. Moreover, particles might be engineered to drift poleward enabling albedo modification to be tailored to counter polar warming while minimizing the impact on equatorial climates.
Keith's own studies suggest that if we were ever forced to try to screen out some of the sun's rays globally, it would be more effective to spray sulphuric acid from aircraft
Photophoretic levitation could loft particles above the stratosphere, reducing their capacity to interfere with ozone chemistry; and, by increasing particle lifetimes, it would reduce the need for continual replenishment of the aerosol. Moreover, particles might be engineered to drift poleward enabling albedo modification to be tailored to counter polar warming while minimizing the impact on equatorial climates.www.pnas.org...
We need to bring our troops home, and focus on paying our bills!
This man is sure a con man then, all of his papers going on about these elaborate
methods of SRM ...when they are not needed.
That could be construed to think the man insane, and crazy. IMO...
so how about some actual evidence to back up your claim?
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by pianopraze
But you think Bill Gates should pay our bills? Maybe an interest free loan to the Treasury but I wouldn't expect him to just give all that money away to bail out the government.edit on 2/6/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)
So they have a major goal to promote geoengineering, so our money gets spent on their political agenda like geoengineering - and how do they pay for them?
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by pianopraze
So they have a major goal to promote geoengineering, so our money gets spent on their political agenda like geoengineering - and how do they pay for them?
You have my interest. How much is in the budget for geoengineering research?
The FY 2011 budget requests $2.7 billion for USGCRP programs—an increase of about 24% over the FY 2010 level.4 This increase reflects the expanded needs discussed above and represents a commitment by the Obama Administration to the USGCRP.
In 2001, President Bush established the Climate Change Research Initiative (CCRI) to investigate uncertainties and set research priorities in climate change science, aiming to fill gaps in understanding within a few years.3 In the fol- lowing year, it was announced that the USGCRP and CCRI together would become the Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). The USGCRP label re- mained attached to many of the program’s activities. Now, consistent with the statutory language of the GCRA, the whole effort continues to move forward in the Obama Administration as the USGCRP
A report entitled “Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States” released in 2009, documents how the USGCRP divided the US into nine regions similar to FEMA regions. Also tucked into the report was the statement “A central finding of the report was that the vast majority of climate scientists agree that global warming is unequivocal and primarily human induced”
Geoengineering (or the new term, Climate Remediation officially coined on October 4, 2011, by the Bipartisan Policy Center which is a private congressional lobbying group), also has under its umbrella genetically modified trees, plants, seeds, crops, etc. The intention is to drive a carbon tax which will fund many private corporations who will engage in a myriad of geoengineering schemes and make huge sums of money under government and other contracts or to fund under a U.S. government budget in 2012.
1) Legal Issues & Treaties: Professor of International Law - Catherine Redgwell, University College, London UK and Member of the Royal Society Geoengineering Working Group in 2009. (Catherine Redgwell, General Editor International and Comparative Law Quarterly (2010) - British International Institute of Comparative Law, 19 Russell Square, London WC1B 5JP) Listen to Redgwell Audio Here (download).
2) Professor Ken Caldeira, Member of the Royal Society Geoengineering Group(2009) In 2010-2011, a Member of the Bipartisan Policy Center Working Group on Geoengineering (Climate Remediation). (Ken Caldeira, Department of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution of Washington-Stanford, CA in 2011.)
3) Professor David Keith, Canada Research Chair in Energy and the Environment, Director ISEEE - Energy and Environmental Systems Group, University of Calgary, Canada. Member of the Royal Society Geoenginering Group (2009). In 2010-2011, a Member of the Pipartisan Policy Center Working Group on Geoengineering (Climate Remediation)
Originally posted by randomname
instead of bill gates funding crazy scientists that want to manipulate the atmosphere by releasing sulfur dioxide and blocking u.v. light, which sounds like the perfect climate for vampires and demons, he should be pressuring senators and congress to regulate and stop the major polluters.