It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Discussing a 1965 proposal to increase the Earth’s albedo with bright particles spread across the
tropical oceans (among the first serious global warming geo-engineering schemes), Fleming
claims that “No one thought to consider the side effects of particles washing up on tropical
beaches or choking marine life, or the negative consequences of redirecting hurricanes, much
less other effects beyond our imagination. And no one thought to ask if the local inhabitants
would be in favor of such schemes.” (p. 58).edit on 1-3-2013 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)
These results highlight numerous limitations and consequences of stratospheric sulfate geoengineering. In addition to limited efficacy, ozone destruction, and surface acid deposition that have been published previously, we find a significantly enhanced upper tropospheric sulfate burden which may alter tropospheric clouds, chemistry, and radiative forcing. We recommend geoengineering ideas to be studied in more detail before they are seriously considered as climate intervention options.
"Tropospheric sulfate burdens as a consequence of stratospheric sulfate geo-engineering"
The number of flights to maintain the necessary layer in the stratosphere has been estimated at 1 million flights per year. That could not be hidden.
5.3.1 Large Cargo Type
Large passenger and cargo transport airplanes are well suited to geoengineering due to their size and affordability but provide limited usefulness due to a lack of high-altitude capability. Regional operations allow the Boeing 747 to operate from 1 or more bases and carry a large payload of 128,000 kg (less than max capacity to allow for better performance at max altitude) per sortie, requiring 47 sorties per day from the fleet. At a release rate of 0.03 kg/m flown, mission lengths are short enough to allow a fleet of 14 747s to execute the 47 sorties a day.
For maximum cooling impact, the particulate payloads are best placed near the equator. This study assumes that the payload is released within latitudes 30°N and 30°S, though North-South basing location had minimal effect on cost.
Are you sure you do?
Do they exist? No.
Can you provide a source for the estimated number of flights a year it would take?
They've even developed nano particles that are designed to stay aloft longer on their own.
During the Vietnam War, Operation Popeye, a clandestine field trial of cloud seeding was conducted along the Ho Chi Minh Trail to stonewall traffic..
You mean for applying SRM at higher latitudes? Nope, I haven't seen those figures. But using the report from Aurora doesn't exactly help to support the claim that "chemtrails" are evidence of SRM in action.
Got a source for that? Or are you just referring to this proposal and claiming that it means the technology exists?
Originally posted by Phage
Cloud seeding is not chemtrails and not exactly clandestine. As much as the "chemtrail" crowd wants to move the goal posts, no.
Here. Read about it. Then tell me how it resembles "chemtrails".
edit on 3/1/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)
No. I don't deny that things are sprayed or otherwise dispersed from aircraft.
You're clearly evading the mechanism of dispersal of "chemicals" would be in the pattern of a "trail" behind the aircraft clandestinely lest it was dropped on one single cloud.
I understand that. I also understand that the Aurora report assumes application at only low latitudes.
I supplied to Aurora report to show that those figures were grossly over estimated by stars15k.
You claimed that the report I supplied was not correct
I already posted a video where David Keith describes the technology GO WATCH IT
Originally posted by AndyMayhew
Who is spraying them?
What do they comprise of?
What do they look like (specifically) and why are they visible?
What is their purpose?
How can we prove these assertions true?