Cooling the Earth Through Solar Radiation Management

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


That's "we" as in "humans".

Like: "in manned space travel, we have only got as far as the Moon", is reasonable to say, even though I've not personally been to the moon.

reply to post by luxordelphi


Thank you luxordelphi,

I agree with you. I felt it was best to stick to the admitted agenda. Because, as you can see, there is still a campaign of denial going on just surrounding that issue.

If I speculated off the subject matter of the documents I listed then that would only give more means for the naysayers to derail and refute the truth.

However, I also have my suspicions as to whether we're getting the complete story behind these carefully and long thought out agendas. The amount of secrecy is astounding and definitely lends merit to having doubts about what little information that does get leaked out to the public.

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


Huh, where exactly is the secrecy? All the geoengineering researchers are very open about what they are doing. What have you been unable to find out?

reply to post by Uncinus


The question was not directed at you. Why are you speaking for someone else? How do you know?

Again that doesn't matter unless that person who posted and whom I directed the question to actually works with climate modeling themselves.

Since you decided to answer the question for them, would you care to answer the entire question for them?
Do they work with climate models? If they don't work with climate models, especially climate models regarding geoengineering, then they can't really speak as any kind of authority about what "we" as humans know. And to what extent the climate models are useful in regards to this topic of geoengineering.

Clearly the man and the scientists in the first document I listed don't agree that climate modeling is sufficient. They state that it will be necessary to do real life field testing.

Do I need to quote that segment again or do you at least concede that point?

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


Climate scientists have climate models.

They produce numbers, of uncertain accuracy.

If they are going to deploy, then they will have to do field testing.

They haven't done it yet.

That's all.

reply to post by Uncinus


In your opinion they haven't done it yet.

Or are you stating 100% without any doubt that they have not done it yet?

What makes you an authority on whether they have or have not done it yet?

Please provide your credentials that show you are qualified to make such a claim.

Unless you are basing your statement on opinion and mere speculation of course.

reply to post by Uncinus

Like: "in manned space travel, we have only got as far as the Moon", is reasonable to say, even though I've not personally been to the moon.

I see you edited this post with the above statement. Not to really nit pick but actually "we" have made it farther than the moon. The moon lander was in orbit around the moon correct?

Therefore during the period which the manned space craft was on the far side of the lunar orbit it would technically be farther than the moon correct?

But now we're getting off topic....this thread has nothing to do with the moon or manned space travel so not quite sure why you are using that as your example.

Anyway..........

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


I'm saying there's no evidence they have done it.

For which statement I need no credentials - merely the absence of evidence.

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


I think you missed the faulty reasoning. We run simulations based on our understanding of the atmosphere, the simulations aren't proof that we are currently doing anything! That assumption that delphi is making is incorrect. It's "crippled epistemology".

We refers to the scientists working in academia.

reply to post by adeclerk

It's "crippled epistemology".

A quote from Cass Sunstein gee isn't that special.

I think you've exposed more about yourself than you have anyone else with that one.

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by adeclerk

 

It's "crippled epistemology".

A quote from Cass Sunstein gee isn't that special.

It's a good quote, isn't it? It accurately represents the "chemtrail" believer's mindset.

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
I think you've exposed more about yourself than you have anyone else with that one.

What are you implicating? Anything you're thinking is a product of your own conspiratorial mindset. (refer to the first link in your signature)

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


There are so many things to discuss with the original two documents you presented that I'm just going to start at the top.

a 1992 report of the U.S. National Research Council12 estimated the potential costs of a programme of stratospheric albedo modification based on the use of a standard naval gun system dispensing commercial aluminium oxide dust to counteract the warming effect of a CO2 doubling. Undiscounted annual costs for a 40-year project the warming effect of a CO2 doubling. Undiscounted annual costs for a 40-year project were estimated to be USD100 billion. More recent analyses13,14, have suggested that well designed systems might reduce this cost to less than USD10 billion per year– clearly well within the budget of most countries,

So this is talking about a program that would be similar to the generators located in mountains for cloud seeding. And like cloud seeding with nano particles, which is unpopular, I bet they could get around a lot of regulation by setting up on private land. As far as international waters I'm not real sure about that - don't know too much about maritime law. Surely though if they're talking about countries paying into the pot, there would be some agreement. I don't think international waters belong to anyone - just don't know on that. Also the 10 billion a year may be a total so with everyone taking their share, per country, may be a lot less.

An SRM-modified world that held average global temperature to today’s level would result in reduced precipitation globally, and in changes in the patterns of precipitation.

This is something that is already being seen. S CA has never had so much rain as this past year and other places are experiencing unbelievable drought. So if this is truly a cause and effect then we might judge by the effect whether or not it has already been implemented. My government in the US has some time ago decided that their role toward me is no longer as a servant but is rather the role of a parent. In this unconstitutional and redundant role (I already have parents) they decide what I should be told and what not to tell. That's my take so far.

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by adeclerk

 

It's "crippled epistemology".

A quote from Cass Sunstein gee isn't that special.

I think you've exposed more about yourself than you have anyone else with that one.

It's actually from Russell Hardin's essay, “The Crippled Epistemology of Extremism”, originally presented in 1998. Sunstein borrowed it. Interesting essay.

www.nyu.edu...

Originally posted by luxordelphi
So this is talking about a program that would be similar to the generators located in mountains for cloud seeding.

No, it's talking about naval guns.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
And like cloud seeding with nano particles, which is unpopular, I bet they could get around a lot of regulation by setting up on private land.

Unpopular or non-existant? Let's skip the bull, it is the second. Regulation cannot be bypassed by private land, if that were the case, how are factories held accountable for pollution?

Originally posted by luxordelphi
As far as international waters I'm not real sure about that - don't know too much about maritime law.

If they ever even begin to test this.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
Surely though if they're talking about countries paying into the pot, there would be some agreement. I don't think international waters belong to anyone - just don't know on that. Also the 10 billion a year may be a total so with everyone taking their share, per country, may be a lot less.

Your quote says 100 billion. How is that money being hidden, since you do believe they are testing currently?

Originally posted by luxordelphi

An SRM-modified world that held average global temperature to today’s level would result in reduced precipitation globally, and in changes in the patterns of precipitation.

This is something that is already being seen. S CA has never had so much rain as this past year and other places are experiencing unbelievable drought.

Yes, weather extremes are a result of global warming. Head on over to wikipedia for a quick read on the subject.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
So if this is truly a cause and effect then we might judge by the effect whether or not it has already been implemented.

They aren't testing it, weather extremes have been increasing in recent years because of climate change.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
My government in the US has some time ago decided that their role toward me is no longer as a servant but is rather the role of a parent. In this unconstitutional and redundant role (I already have parents) they decide what I should be told and what not to tell. That's my take so far.

This opinion you hold explains a lot. Sorry to say, politicians aren't the only one's muddying the facts.

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


To continue with your very fascinating OP:

Unless special care were taken in the design of the particles used in stratospheric SRM, the surfaces of the particles could become chemical reaction sites at which ozone might be broken down. Ozone in the stratosphere is responsible for shielding life on the planet from harmful ultraviolet radiation.

So the effects of this experiment gone wrong would be an increase in skin cancers and probably a cascade of other events. I'm very much against the designer Frankonano particles not just because the field has no oversight. It's like mad scientists creating in the lab and then letting loose not a monster that anyone can see coming but something that requires the most specialized equipment to see. This excerpt again leads me to believe that experimentation has already taken place.

reply to post by luxordelphi

So the effects of this experiment gone wrong would be an increase in skin cancers and probably a cascade of other events.

Except, if you would care to do the least bit of study....the ozone layer is a bit above the altitudes where most jets fly. It is in the stratospheric layer....but, most jets barely reach the stratosphere.....they usually are in the realm of the tropopause, to the very bottom of the stratosphere.......

It is mainly located in the lower portion of the stratosphere from approximately 20 to 30 kilometres (12 to 19 mi) above Earth, though the thickness varies seasonally and geographically....

OZONE LAYER

THE ABOVE ^ ^ ^??

"12 to 19 miles?"

12 miles = over 63,000 feet!!!!! So, obviously....up to 19 miles? Even higher!!!

TRY to get a grip on this, please. Commercial airliners do NOT ever go above 41,000 feet!! The exception was the Concorde....up to about 50,000, to maybe at most, 55,000 feet. But of course, the Concorde is NOT flying any more, in any case.

This is part of being educated. There is a lot to learn. Please try to accommodate this education. It matters. A lot.

reply to post by ProudBird


Your reply makes no sense. The quote was from the OP article - the first one. That was the finding of scientists with hefty credentials. Are you taking them on or me?

reply to post by MathiasAndrew

The problem is that the air samples can not trace the source of any of the pollution.

Are you sure about that?

However, tracking air pollution is important because it has a negative effect on human health. Source tracking helps legislators draft industry laws that can help reduce pollution. Read more: Techniques for Source-Tracing Pollutants | eHow.com www.ehow.com...

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


I have heard of this too. Its real in my opinion. s/f op

reply to post by ProudBird


I am interewsesteed in study ing this where would I go? Where would it recomend? did you go where I can go? send me some info cause I want some. thank you