[b]What Aerial Geo Engineering can do -- Is it Good or Bad[/b]

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Hi all, I have a few questions if you guys don’t mind chipping in. It seem to me we are in a time of desperation around the world. Powerful men doing what they think is best is not always best as we know many were psychopaths. My fear is the psychopaths are the powerful men of today. Some maybe involved in the Aerial Geo Engineering industry.

Thank you in advance to anyone that can keep honour though out the thread. I figured the beginning was the best place to start looking.

When did Aerial Geo Engineering first become an Idea and who is responsible for bringing it to the table?

How many Aerial Geo Engineering applications are we privileged to know about to date can they all be put up on this thread to be looked into deeply?

What is each Aerial Geo Engineering application one for, the idea of its use?

How does each Aerial Geo Engineering application achieve its purpose?

By what devices are the Aerial geo Engineering applications delivered to the targeted areas?

What are the substances used for Aerial Geo Engineering operations?

Is anyone, principal, or agent financing research and or experimenting, and or contracting to carry out any aspect of Aerial Geo Engineering?
If so, Who?

Looking forward to your input,
Fireyaguns




posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 10:02 AM
link   
My source for most of my posts are sourced here as a .pdf.
IPPC Expert Meeting on Geo-engineering Meeting Report

I will be referencing pages from this report unless noted otherwise. It is recent, comprehensive, multi-national, and fairly easy to understand as they provide abstracts; the full reports are referenced and usually easy to find on the web.

First question first:



When did Aerial Geo Engineering first become an Idea and who is responsible for bringing it to the table?


Here is a summary of the background of the term:


The concept of geoengineering can be traced back to the 1960s with a US report calling for research on “possibilities to deliberately bringing about countervailing climatic changes” to that of CO2 (Marchetti, 1977). The term geoengineering itself was originally used in the 1970s by Marchetti (1977) to describe the context of the idea of injecting CO2 into the ocean to reduce the atmospheric burden of this greenhouse gas. Since that time, the term has evolved considerably, coming to encompass a broad, and ill-defined, variety of concepts for intentionally modifying the Earth’s climate at the large scale (Keith, 2000). As a result, discussions of geoengineering in both academic and public contexts have sometimes convoluted characteristics from different techniques in ways that have unhelpfully confused discussions. Nonetheless, since Paul Crutzen’s 2006 editorial essay (Crutzen, 2006), scientific, policy and media attention to geoengineering concepts has grown rapidly. Several assessments have been conducted at the national level (The Royal Society, 2009; GAO, 2011; Rickels et al., 2011).
(source above, pg. 2)

Quick answer, 1960's although not called that until the 1970's. But then it was used to identify a project that did not involve airplanes.



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 10:28 AM
link   


How many Aerial Geo Engineering applications are we privileged to know about to date can they all be put up on this thread to be looked into deeply?


Here is an article from the Scientific American, addressing the issue of geo-engineering. Source
It came up when I googled "What Geoengineering is being done today". The rest of the sources seem to be reaching the same conclusion: NO.
The understanding of the scientific community, and please realize that this is the group that every other entity looks to when they have an idea, that geo-engineering is something that needs more study and has more of a chance to have cause harm than do any good. Studies from 11/21/2001 have shown that contrails contribute a heating effect, the exact opposite of the stated goal of geo-engineering.
So it's probably a bad plan, so it isn't being done now.

BTW, the SA article pins downs more dates as to the earliest calls for geo-engineering and use of that term. So it will provide a more complete answer to your first question.



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 10:37 AM
link   


What is each Aerial Geo Engineering application one for, the idea of its use?
How does each Aerial Geo Engineering application achieve its purpose?


In the first source used above, again starting on page 2 is the "Summary of the Synthesis Report." It answers this question better than I have seen, because it is tweeking the definitions of each application and expected results. This was done so early in the meeting so everyone would be working from the same "page", as it were. When any two people use the same term but different definitions, nothing can be accomplished. And these guys are the experts.

This is shown time and again on the ATS boards regarding the use of the world "aerosol." It is used by "chemtrail" believers to mean something being sprayed artificially; the correct use, and the one all science uses, is anything in the atmosphere that is not a gas. Water vapor is a gas, but clouds are aerosols. So is dust from wind storms, smoke, pollen, exhaust, salt from the sea with each crashing wave, and contrails, because they are ice and soot from the burning of a hydrocarbon as a nucleating particle.
The third question is answered by the same source, at the same time.
edit on 7-3-2013 by stars15k because: adding some informtion



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 10:43 AM
link   


By what devices are the Aerial geo Engineering applications delivered to the targeted areas?
What are the substances used for Aerial Geo Engineering operations?


Ah, this question is asked with confirmation bias. It implies that something is happening now, when there is no evidence.
There are patents for such things, but a patent is not anything more than words on paper. They hold an idea or product for financial reasons alone. A patent does not mean that something is made or used, or that such a thing would work as expected.
The second question above is answered in the sources cited. It also is an example of confirmation bias; the more correct form would be "What are the proposed substances...." as there is no evidence that any is being used now.
edit on 7-3-2013 by stars15k because: Trying to keep it short.



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 10:45 AM
link   

from this thread

try a google search on this guy!
edit on 7-3-2013 by tinhattribunal because: added source



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 10:56 AM
link   


Is anyone, principal, or agent financing research and or experimenting, and or contracting to carry out any aspect of Aerial Geo Engineering?

Who funds the research? Lots of places do. All over the world. Read the studies and see who the people are working for.
Experiments? Nope, computer modeling.
Carrying out? No. And it is not known who, when, where or why any geo-engineering plan would be implemented. The experts don't know; because any attempt at geo-engineering would be global, it is one of the things being discussed.
Luckily, the experts all seem to agree, that if such a thing was possible, it most likely would not be done.
There is no accounting for some rogue idiot, like what's his name in North Korea, but such an event would most likely be a catastrophic one, not a reasoned, well-thought-out plan.



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by stars15k
 


Thanks for the replies; I will bookmark the links you provided for future reference.

Wow 1960 is kind of late really considering the technology experimenting then. I’m going to see what others come up with so I can make an informed decision on this one. Perhaps in the 30’s some type of aerial geo engineering was in operation for warfare purposes, testing and so on. I would like to find out because I wasn’t there , If someone tells me I might agree with them, but real serious research is called for wouldn’t you agree?

Marchetti may be worth looking into I would say just for referencing of course.

In your 2nd post you say NO just wondering NO to what? I’m was to say thank you here but found you turn nasty, WHY?
Take Notice You are off topic mentioning contrails and chemtrails in this tread. Please reframe from derailing a serious thread in this manner. I will report you if you keep doing it.
3rd post, are trying voodoo on us or something?
To show the truth we must speak the truth, something my dad taught me and your 4 post in a row speak volume to me. If I was you I would leave now.

You appear to outed yourself



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 11:48 AM
link   
If you look at the fossil record and paleo-data from ice-cores and tree rings the earth has been much warmer in the past with as much bio-diversity as there is today. But we have also gone through serious Ice Ages ones that have devastated the biological populations.

What if our world was heading to this? A build up of green house gasses could prevent another iceage. I have to think that though there may be some harmful side effects Geo Engineering is one step to us becoming a type 1 civilization and reaching for the stars!



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by fireyaguns
 





Take Notice You are off topic mentioning contrails and chemtrails in this tread. Please reframe from derailing a serious thread in this manner.


You can call what you like,because you have some that say there the same thing..



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by fireyaguns
 


Sorry for the yelled response on my second post. It is my sloppy typing, not meant to be a slam.
Sorry, but "aerial geo-engineering" and "chemtrail" go hand-in-hand here on ATS. It's why there is a shared Forum. It is therefore not off-topic, as all the sources I used were regarding geo-engineering alone. To use planes for geo-engineering would mean spraying or burning something from a plane. It is the closest thing to "chemtrails" I can think of.
Third post, not voodoo, just nothing is being done. Or if it is it is both undetectable and not working.
LMAO about the threat, or rather threats.
I have outed myself already. I am a homemaker, who has dogs, bakes cookies, and knits. That you seem to think I am anything else, or anyone else, or whatever you are alluding to is funny. I use the name "Stars15k" all over the place. Feel free to look me up.



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Nothing much to add to Stars' excellent posts, just a few recent reports/studies on the subject that support the contention that aerial geoengineering may be ill-advised and is (IMO) unlikely to happen based on current science:

Venus holds warning for Earth

Geoengineering could disrupt rainfall patterns

Increasing aerosols in atmosphere would make sky whiter

Also, from the BBC: Geoengineering: risks and benefits



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by abeverage
 



Hi, are you referring to aerial geo engineering as cooling the earth or heating it up?
How many years old do you say the world is? It’s just I have never seen any evidence the world had an ice age.

I’ve got to say in my convictions and lawful rights some harmful side effects relating to any type of Geo Engineering in not acceptable.
I think we have gone too far in regards to being caretakers of earth so much so that nature’s way is not fast enough for the impatient man of today and nature does not conform to mans laws.



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by stars15k
 


No Slam at all.

No Aerial Geo Engineering and the word ( chemtrail ) Do Not go hand in hand, one you say does not exist correct?

Therefore please stay on topic and reframe from using an imaginary fairy dusttrail.

Do we have an agreement?



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by fireyaguns
reply to post by abeverage
 



Hi, are you referring to aerial geo engineering as cooling the earth or heating it up?
How many years old do you say the world is? It’s just I have never seen any evidence the world had an ice age.

I’ve got to say in my convictions and lawful rights some harmful side effects relating to any type of Geo Engineering in not acceptable.
I think we have gone too far in regards to being caretakers of earth so much so that nature’s way is not fast enough for the impatient man of today and nature does not conform to mans laws.


Ok well I will not get drawn into the age of the Earth argument with you so here is some fascinating information on the mini-AceIges in recorded history.
en.wikipedia.org...
Here is also evidence of Earth changing the climate for worse by volcanic activity
www.wunderground.com...
earthguide.ucsd.edu...

My question to you would be do we just sit around and stare at our feet and hope that our Earthy does not decided to Freeze us to death or over heat us to extinction. Or do we take charge and use our brains to figure out how to harness this power and weld it for our betterment?

Of course we could just sit around if there is a serious catastrophe to be rescued...



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by AndyMayhew
 


Thanks, links bookmared.

You mention this: unlikely to happen based on current science:

Are you imply there is aerial geo engineering or is not such a thing happening?



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by abeverage
 


We should not sit around no, no, no, we should not harness whatever this power is you’re talking of (HAARP maybe?)

The age of the earth is very important if we are to establish boundaries for facts and evidence.

As you know science changes its mind because the science changes so the facts and evidence must also change with them right? Is this not the way of the force we are up against?



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by fireyaguns
 


No, we don't have an agreement.
Yes, I know one of the things does not exist, but as a forum here at ATS, they have been forever linked. The field of geo-engineering is much more broad than just the part that uses planes. You made the distinction in your title, not I.
It is kind of like Christmas and Santa Claus. They go hand in hand, one is real, the other is not.



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by fireyaguns
You mention this: unlikely to happen based on current science:

Are you imply there is aerial geo engineering or is not such a thing happening?


No, I mean there is currently no deliberate aerial geoengineering and I think we're unlikely to engage in any such activity in the near future (even if it were financially practical - and who would pay for it?) because of the widespread scientific concerns about the problems it may cause. Science and technology may, of course, one day find a way around these issues, so we can never say never.

There have been attempts to trial the proposal for seeding the oceans with iron filings.

Personally, I'm against all such proposals - not least because of the law of unintended consequences. The introduction of cane toads in Australia being a good example of this.



posted on Mar, 7 2013 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by stars15k

It is kind of like Christmas and Santa Claus. They go hand in hand, one is real, the other is not.


Christmas isn't real?





top topics
 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join