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.

 

“Give me half a tanker of iron and I will give you an ice age.”- Russ George

page: 2
68
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 08:37 AM
link   
so this guy wants to experiment with oceans & make them absorbe more co2 than they would other wise do naturally..........wow

does he & his family offer them selves up for being experimented on ?
cause i dont want this guy to use oceans in an experiment that involves me & my family.
niether do i want a man made ice age or any man made weather adjustments.
whats wrong with making less carbon to start with ?.
so many cars all over the world more often than not drive around with at least 2 empty seats (because of frackin selfish drivers) its not like we cant reduce carbon by sharing a bit more often.
this guy gets the




posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by pieman
we know that where we add something to the environment the results are unpredictable at best.

what is being suggested is that we screw around with a complex system we don't fully understand in order to fix a problem we shouldn't be causing in the first place.

fixing an imbalance we caused by creating an imbalance elsewhere seems like a stupid idea to me, it's that kind of idea that caused all the issues in the first place.

what we actually need to do is take some responsibility for own own actions, not something that is hugely popular with the childish mind but something that people will have to understand eventually.


Hammer meets nail.

Anyone who thinks they can alter such a massively complex system and predict the results is simply foolish. In the past mankind has altered ecosystems with little thought to the results (Starlings, Purple Loosestrife, Buckthorn, Dams, roads, etc. etc.) and future generations are left to clean up the mess. Some problems cannot be fixed properly in a single generation, some take time and the long view. We didn't get ourselves into this mess overnight and we won't fix in a figurative "overnight" either.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by badgerprints
The problem is that the damage is done. If we can actually fix it instead of using the situation to control people and their money by forcing huge expenditures on "carbon reduction" ,which we know won't happen successrfully, then why not actually find a solution?


the carbon reduction efforts have nothing to do with fixing the problem, they are about stopping you making it any worse. the damage hasn't been done, the damage is being done.


The oceans are already in a poor state because of overfishing and trillions of tons of crap that has been pumped into them by man. If man finds something that will actually repair some of the damage, how is it a "stupid idea" as you so succinctly put it?


because it isn't an effort to fix the ocean, it is an effort to fix the atmosphere by manipulating the ocean. it won't fix the ocean, it's just pumping more crap into it and hoping the ripples that this solution causes won't be too disturbing.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:02 AM
link   
I think this theory is worth investigation. It should be heavily tested in it's own quarantined ecosystem to make sure we wouldn't create a sea of rust.

Chances are if we were to "seed" the oceans properly and not pollute (meaning over-seeding) the oceans at one time ... it's just crazy enough it might work.

F'd & the S.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by SwatMedic
I'd like to see some laboratory testing and data before we let this guy start filling up the oceans with iron.

Test in a lab, if that goes well, test in the field on a very small scale.

Then show us all with the data that this indeed does work.

Then his bandwagon will fill.


There is already millions of tons of Iron on the Ocean floor, it looks
like Planes , Ships and Subs. There in every ocean scattered everywhere.
This doesn't even count the Number of Cars in Rivers
across the Planet. And then there's the empty Food Containers thrown overboard by Ships.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   
This reminds me of a short story I read years ago in which we polute the oceans to the point where a film over the surface appears and does not allow water to evaporate causing worldwide drought and death. Something like this sounds good but I for one think that to say mankind is behind recent climate change is absolute rubbish. The earth is going through cycles and it is being discussed all over the scientific community that we are headed for a mini ice age rather than Global warming.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:32 AM
link   
This is old news. He really needs soluble iron salts, but once he has that, the next things he'll probably need are nitrogen and phosphorus. The problem with any of these large scale experiments is large scale unintended consequences.
"Gee, we didn't realize that all that iron in the ocean would domino along and wipe out the world. Oops."



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by pieman


fixing an imbalance we caused by creating an imbalance elsewhere seems like a stupid idea to me, it's that kind of idea that caused all the issues in the first place.


I wouldnt say its a stupid idea, just something that will need a lot of research and small tests before allowing a massive rollout like described.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by badgerprints
 

This technique will KILL everything in the oceans! When you get phytoplankton blooms in an area, it creates what are called dead zones! The plankton strips oxygen out of the water, and too much iron can poison fish as well. Iron in food supplements is a top killer in children.

With a half a tanker of iron, this guy would create massive oceanic die offs, AND an ice age! Fantastic!!



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Well, I'm getting meself ready for the beating so here goes.

Something does have to be done and it has to be done now and in mass. If nothing is done forget having children and you probably won't get to have the pleasure to have Grandchildren.

Fossil fuels have to be done away with and we need alternatives fast. To get rid of the CO2 in the air........ plant trees in mass (trees and plants) The Tree of Life (hint, hint)

With our waters which we are also destroying we do need to replenish the Plankton we need to get oxygen into the water. I am not a scientist so I don't known the correct termonolgy would it be oygenate or re-oxygenate the water.

Time is ticking and from what I have been shown you have little time 37 years left to have gotten it right.



[edit on 22-7-2009 by observe50]



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:55 AM
link   
iron may not be a metal that is among the most harmful

but is it really a good idea to intentionally pollute the waters with even more metals and toxins and stuff like that


i mean personally i think climate change is nothing more then genius marketing



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by observe50
 


i agree with you we need to stop using fossil fuels

i dont think it will have much of a impact on our climate as history has proven earth goes through its extremes of climates whether we're on earth or not

but i do know we will run out of fossil fuels

and its stupid to continue down that path without moving faster to implement alternatives

especially when knowledge of several alternative are already out there

like hemp



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:10 AM
link   
This method may well work. Stimulates the growth of plankton which in turn reduce atmospherical carbon. This method would also remove some of the many dead spots in the ocean, stimulating growth.
kx



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChemBreather
Ok, we got ridd of ALL the co2 in the world, what happens ??

Let us say there are NO co2 at all any where, would the world stop changing ?

Hmmm... Are you talking about people's habits, or are you talking about geological changes?

[edit on 22-7-2009 by Pathos]



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dramey
reply to post by observe50
 


i agree with you we need to stop using fossil fuels

i dont think it will have much of a impact on our climate as history has proven earth goes through its extremes of climates whether we're on earth or not

but i do know we will run out of fossil fuels

and its stupid to continue down that path without moving faster to implement alternatives

especially when knowledge of several alternative are already out there

like hemp


Like hemp? Do you really think a crop could power the world? There is no fossil fuel alternative!



We live on a cold planet that is only warm a small percentage of the time.

The notion that we should learn to completely manage this world and do away with the natural order is out there, but ponder it just a bit. Is it not the only option we have? We must completely own the means to our survival rather than continue to be dependent upon an doomed ecosystem.

Consider that 98% of all species that have ever existed are now extinct because this world is continually destroyed and rebuilt . There will without question come a time when humankind will completely manage the atmosphere or face certain extinction. The AGW crowd should be pushing for technology like this, instead of cutbacks. This is a step in the right direction!

The ideal that we should just maintain a balance and exist in harmony with nature is without question a suicidal notion for our species. Please stop the madness. I love nature too, but we are in it for the species!

P.S.

Did you know even discussing the decimalization of Cannabinoids here on ATS will cause your post to be removed? So, shhh on the hemp thing. You wouldnt want to lose your account!



[edit on 22-7-2009 by Donkey_Dean]



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by badgerprints
 


I'm not going to argue whether the recent rise in CO2 is natural or man-made, but...

This guy's idea makes some scientific sense:
2 to 3 billion years ago when the Earth's atmosphere was mostly carbon-dioxide, the plankton in the water fed on the iron in the water (the oceans were iron-rich back then) creating most of the Earth's supply iron oxide we have today -- and those plankton also gave off extra oxygen that the iron did not bond with. That extra oxygen, over hundreds of millions of years, began to replace much of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, giving us the atmosphere we have today.

It seems that Russ George is trying to emulate that process.

HOWEVER....
I agree with ATS member 'pieman' who says "we know that where we add something to the environment the results are unpredictable at best."

I would worry that we don't know enough about this process and may end up with unwanted consequences, perhaps putting the earth in a worse state.

[edit on 7/22/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by observe50
I am not a scientist so I don't known the correct termonolgy would it be oygenate or re-oxygenate the water.


wouldn't thousands of tons of .5micron iron powder take up all the free oxygen in the water as it reacts with the salt water and turn to rust?



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Saw a write up on Russ in Pop Science or Scientific American last month on the very same thing. He is doomed to failure at the public level simply because of the monetary potential of the global warming myth cult. If anyone does anything it would have to be a private, dare we say, secret endeavor. Otherwise it doesn't happen.

IMHO, the value to the oceanic ecosystem is worth the effort. If it send the globe into an iceage, so what. The carbon credit dorks will come up with a global cooling scheme to heat the planet back up.


PG



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:40 AM
link   
I think that Iron Oxide seeding in moderate amounts will do good. Whoever said that dumping Iron oxide in the oceans will cause dead zones due to these blooms, obviously doesn't know about the Plant Plankton. Iron Oxide will allow growth of Phytoplankton, it causes those parts of the ocean to turn green. These little guys make oxygen, not take it out of the ocean. More O2, more life (at least that is the theory).

Take a look at this article, I know it is from 2002, but at least it does give results from the natural dumping of dust in the ocean via the jet stream. Now the dust has more then just iron oxide, I know this, but it has produced a bloom which is worthy to note.

Asian dust storm causes plankton to bloom in the North Pacific



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Although the algae will definately grow faster and take up more CO2, it will also eventually result in an ocean which contains a lot of dead fish. What happens is when the algae die, they precipitate to the bottom of the ocean and are then consumed by bacteria who also consume oxygen. Oxygen levels in the oceans drop and subsequently the fish die.

more info on that phenomenon can be found here:
jcwinnie.biz...

for people who hate a collegue: you can do the same trick by adding a teaspoon of sugar to the aquaria of the person you don't like


edit: haha: what skada said

[edit on 22-7-2009 by captain howdy]




top topics



 
68
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join