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.

 

A Cheap and Easy Plan to Stop Global Warming

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by grey9438
but im sure if you follow the money trail youd come to it.


Yes, I think you have hit it. How many scientists have been given "research"
funds for this scheme? How much taxaton can be levied?




posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 01:14 PM
link   
The best and cheapest solution to global warming is to have everyone play this Heikki Lunta snow dance song. They played it in the Copper country this January because of the warm weather that was interfering with the building of Michigan Tech's snow statue building and was causing problems with skiing and snowmobiling. The area is getting swamped with snow now, there are eight foot snowbanks everywhere. Here is a link to the original potent magic song. Beware, if you play it you may need to play the Heikki Lunta go away song to get him to leave.

csumc.wisc.edu...

There, saved the taxpayers a trillion bucks over the next five years



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by rickymouse

csumc.wisc.edu...

There, saved the taxpayers a trillion bucks over the next five years


I am sure that is at least as credible as Al Gore.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Peer-Rev iewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis



Don’t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem.

www.forbes.com...
Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Alright!!
The best way the scientists can find to stop "global warming" is to distroy the ozone layer and increase air polution.
I would think a much cheaper and easier solution would be to paint the tops of all our building and highways white. There is probably enough total surface area there to reflect a good deal of the sun's light as they propose with the spraying.
I know this would not be a solution but it should be a start with the least adverse effects on the rest of the environment.
It should also enhance night driving by reflecting the light from our cars and increase our visibility.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by burntheships
Peer-Re viewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis



Don’t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem.

www.forbes.com...
Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis


That survey is severely flawed. The survey is a representation of the ones that responded and those who are conservative are less apt to respond because of lack of definite proof. In science undeniable proof to challenge consensus of the time is needed so those who do not see exact evidence of us causing will not say definitively that we are causing it. They won't challenge the corporations that supply their funding if they are not sure.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by teamcommander

I would think a much cheaper and easier solution would be to paint the tops of all our building and highways white. There is probably enough total surface area there to reflect a good deal of the sun's light as they propose with the spraying.


Good points, I think the reason they dont do this is it would be so effective, and cheap.
Also, there is no research money for the mad scientists....it would make them feel...
well ...disposable.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 


Perhaps, and that could go both ways. Those who are funded by research grants to prove
AGW will not speak out against it either.

edit on 20-2-2013 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 03:17 PM
link   
I agree with the poster on painting roofs and roads white. However, if they are going to attempt to block solar radiation, I think it should be done with mirrors in space that will not interfere with the composition of the atmosphere and can be reversed by removing them or folding them up. We have all seen disasters in our environment before from trying radical new ideas in our environment only to find out some unknown resulted in undesired effects.

This idea is a disaster waiting to happen if you ask me.


Edit: removed love bug issue. I didn't realize that was fokelore that they were synthetic,
edit on 20/2/13 by spirit_horse because: correction:



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by spirit_horse
We have all seen disasters in our environment before from trying radical new ideas in our environment only to find out some unknown resulted in undesired effects.

This idea is a disaster waiting to happen if you ask me.


Thanks for your comments!


A list of disasters that could come from Sulfate Aerosols here:


Geoengineering in general is a controversial technique, and carries problems and risks, such as weaponisation.[citation needed] However, certain problems are specific to, or more pronounced with this particular technique.[23]
Drought, particularly monsoon failure in Asia and Africa is a major risk.[24]
Ozone depletion is a potential side effect of sulfur aerosols;[25][26] and these concerns have been supported by modelling.[27]
Tarnishing of the sky: Aerosols will noticeably affect the appearance of the sky, resulting in a potential "whitening" effect, and altered sunsets.[28]
Tropopause warming and the humidification of the stratosphere.[26]
Effect on clouds: Cloud formation may be affected, notably cirrus clouds and polar stratospheric clouds.
Effect on ecosystems: The diffusion of sunlight may affect plant growth.[29][30][31] but more importantly increase the rate of ocean acidification by the deposition of hydrogen ions from the acidic rain[32]
Effect on solar energy: Incident sunlight will be lower,[33] which may affect solar power systems both directly and disproportionately, especially in the case that such systems rely on direct radiation.[34]
Deposition effects: Although predicted to be insignificant,[35] there is nevertheless a risk of direct environmental damage from falling particles.
Uneven effects: Aerosols are reflective, making them more effective during the day. Greenhouse gases block outbound radiation at all times of day.[36]
Stratospheric temperature change: Aerosols can also absorb some radiation from the Sun, the Earth and the surrounding atmosphere. This changes the surrounding air temperature and could potentially impact on the stratospheric circulation, which in turn may impact the surface circulation[37].

Further, the delivery methods may cause significant problems, notably climate change[38] and possible ozone depletion[39] in the case of aircraft, and litter in the case of untethered balloons.
en.wikipedia.org...(geoengineering)



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 





Further, the delivery methods may cause significant problems, notably climate change[38] and possible ozone depletion[39] in the case of aircraft, and litter in the case of untethered balloons


Wish I had thought of that part.
I guess it could be counted in the air pollution though.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by teamcommander
 


Yes, the part about it causing climate change would be hilarious if it were not
so deadly serious. Ok, lets laugh at that anyways...




top topics



 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join