Solar Radiation Management, Chemtrails and Climate Mitigation

a reply to: MagicWand67

Because the sulfur is said to be beneficial to climate change issues

What about this?

a reply to: DenyObfuscation

Seems all the more reason to get the sulfur out then.

Interesting how similar studies have different conclusions.

I think it's always good to get different perspectives and listen to opposing viewpoints.

Here's a few more interesting articles with lots of links and information and a video from the experts.

Geoengineering SRM: Dark Clouds and Shady Solutions

Chemtrails and the Lies between the Lines

Weather Modification, Geoengineering, and Global Climate Control




The Case For and Against Climate Engineering

www.youtube.com...

Streamed live on Dec 2, 2013
Participants: Prof David Keith (Harvard) and Prof Mike Hulme (King's College London).

The debate will focus on solar geoengineering - proposed techniques to reflect a proportion of the sun's radiation back into space to counteract some of the effects of climate change.

Professor Keith has recently published a book entitled "The Case for Climate Engineering", while Professor Hulme will be publishing a book on climate engineering with a contrasting viewpoint, in April next year.

originally posted by: MagicWand67
Here's a few more interesting articles with lots of links and information and a video from the experts.
Geoengineering SRM: Dark Clouds and Shady Solutions
Chemtrails and the Lies between the Lines
Weather Modification, Geoengineering, and Global Climate Control

Jim Lee, author of all these, is busy trying to make a name for himself by redefining what "chemtrail" means

What is a Chemtrail?
1.IMPROPER: internet slang for “chemical-trail”, referring to contrails
2.CORRECT: (noun) the invisible exhaust particulates released from jet aircraft engines which contribute to the formation of persistent contrails (spreading, man-made clouds that cool the planet during the daytime and trap heat at night). • [3], [4], [5], [6]

- from the 2nd link

And then discussing "chemtrails" in terms of ordinary jet engine exhaust and its effects which can actually be backed up by science.

This way he can claim to have "proved" chemtrails and get all the believers onside, while at the same time his claims for effects will be scientifically valid.

Neat trick huh??

Of course this is just dishonesty at a basic level - pollution is pollution - calling it "chemtrails" does not stop it being pollution, and does not address the chemtrail myth in any meaningful way.

Various of his other "errors" can be seen discussed with him here - his login there is rezn8d

It is an ego trip - he is a clever bloke out to make a name for himself.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Once again I'm going to have to disagree with your opinion here. As investigations into chemtrails proceed more facts come to light and the theories evolve. I don't have a problem with redefining labels and terms when it seems appropriate.

Why do you want to focus on those insignificant details instead of the big picture? Sounds to me like you're attacking the messenger instead of the message. The information provided by those 3 articles is very valuable to an overall perspective.

There's solid info that shows a direct correlation between jet contrails and climate change. There's solid information that shows jet contrails can modify the weather. There's evidence that jet contrails are part of geoengineering schemes. And there's evidence that we are intentionally keeping the sulfur content in jet fuel higher than it needs to be.

This has always been at the core of the chemtrail debate. The article explains the mistakes made in the past (misidentification of contrails) and redirects the focus on the actual issues (Jet exhaust). I would think you would be pleased with people providing the correct info about contrails.

It's been understood since at least the 70's that contrails can modify weather in the same way that cloud seeding does.

ON THE POSSIBILITY OF WEATHER MODIFICATION BY AIRCRAFT CONTRAILS

The conclusions reached as a result of the above discussion are that nearly all results that can be produced by
seeding with ice crystals are in fact being produced as a result of routine airline operations; that the effectiveness
of ice crystals as nuclei over such a wide range of meteorological conditions and the scale on which they are being
deposited make it likely that they are affecting precipitation to a much greater extent than are present deliberate seeding operations (although the deliberate operations may still show more net results because of the selection of situations suitable for seeding).

originally posted by: MagicWand67
I would think you would be pleased with people providing the correct info about contrails.

When the discussion stops using the term "chemtrail", I think you will see a completely different tone about the subject. But slipping it in to every discussion about Geo-engineering will only stir the coals. (IMHO)

a reply to: MagicWand67

It's been understood since at least the 70's that contrails can modify weather in the same way that cloud seeding does.

The author basically offered conjecture. I'm not saying it turned out to be incorrect but the paper did not show evidence for such a claim.

It is good reading though. A great piece from 1970 talking about what contrails are. Have you read it? Of course more has been learned since then but still some good stuff in there.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Various of his other "errors" can be seen discussed with him here - his login there is rezn8d

He was a member here at one time and I had a good discussion with him about chemtrails in a thread.

He is a kook and cannot back anything he says up with actual scientific evidence.

a reply to: MagicWand67

You probably should have added this with your quote...

It cannot be concluded that any net effects are necessarily being produced on even local climates, although it
seems certain that the seeding is taking place, because tho possible results of any kind of seeding are not well under-
stood at present and because the very massiveness and frequency of the seeding makes it likely that such a pro-
fusion of effects in contradictory directions is being produced that the net result may be small. The actual
magnitude and direction of the effect on the weather can only be established by analysis of the records

. The purpose of this paper is to show that there is sound basis for the suspicion that contrails may he influencing the weather and that it is important to find out if they are. In conclusion it should be stated that if contrails are affecting the weather it is not necessarily for the worse, although if there is any considerable change it is sure to make Someone unhappy. The Russians might well be pleased with an ice-free Arctic Ocean; but if it leads to
major glaciation in central Canada, it is unlikely that the Canadians and Americans would regard it as favorable.

docs.lib.noaa.gov...

So it seems there was a suspicion back then not an understanding as you are saying.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

It really boils down to the fact that we know that jet exhaust and jet contrails have a large impact on climate change. Along with all the other sources of pollution jets have been unintentionally geoengineering the planet already. The negative impacts of the aviation industry need to be understood and reduced. Health concerns should be a priority over economics in my opinion.

Because of the apparent large amount of SRM schemes that involve the use of jet exhaust as a delivery method for sulfuric acid. And because sulfuric acid is already a by product of jet exhaust. It warrants suspicion and justifies close monitoring of the aviation industry to ensure that society is properly informed.

The possibility exists that scientists would use the existing aviation industry to model their SRM schemes. Perhaps the fuel companies intentionally change the amounts of sulfur or additives in the fuel to assist the academics. The fuel always remains with the safety guidelines but has enough differences to allow data to be collected.

A small fleet of aircraft could be used to run studies as well. Altering their methods of delivery and materials. This type of speculation is not without merit. There are too many examples of military experiments on the general population that go undisclosed while they occur.

I would rather be wrong and speak out. Than be right and say nothing.

originally posted by: MagicWand67
I would rather be wrong and speak out. Than be right and say nothing.

I can understand that logic, but please, leave the pitchforks and torches at the house until you have some evidence.

a reply to: network dude
And remember that you don't have the right to bear pitchforks - but anyone you try to use them against does have the right to bear guns!

a reply to: network dude

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul


Why am I not surprised by the juvenile responses you both display?

What's the big joke here?

a reply to: MagicWand67
your rationalizations are the joke.

"They might be doing what I fear they are doing because I can imagine them doing it" is not a way to go through life!

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

And you wrote the book on how to go through life?

Thank you but I'll choose my own path and I don't need any advice from you.

a reply to: MagicWand67

I would rather be wrong and speak out. Than be right and say nothing.

I would think someone would want to be right and speak out, instead of wrong and speaking out.

But that may just be me.

You do understand that when your wrong and speak out your still wrong....just something to ponder.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

I am quite pleased with the accuracy of the information provided here.

I am not concerned with your opinions or philosophy.

Seems you never learned that being a smart-arse doesn't make you smart.

Something you might want to think about.

We ARE at the cusp of intentional Geoengineering. Field studies have been scheduled. This is not some far of fantasy in the future. This is current and it affects everyone on the planet.

Ignoring important issues and instead behaving like ignorant high school teenagers disrupting adult conversations with blatant disrespect is no way to go through life. I would assume your mother and father taught you better than that.

The SPICE experiment shows what stage the research is at. It's no longer just computer models. It's in line to go live, real world open air testing.

Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering

Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering (SPICE) is a United Kingdom government-funded geoengineering research project that aims to assess the feasibility of injecting particles into the stratosphere from a tethered balloon for the purposes of solar radiation management.

Geoengineering experiment cancelled due to perceived conflict of interest


Now is the time to have the serious discussions about this topic. Now is the time to ask questions and raise concerns. Only a fool would ignore the seriousness of these issues. If you don't understand then you better ask somebody to explain it to you.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: MagicWand67

I would rather be wrong and speak out. Than be right and say nothing.

I would think someone would want to be right and speak out, instead of wrong and speaking out.

But that may just be me.

You do understand that when your wrong and speak out your still wrong....just something to ponder.

Ironic, coming from someone who hasn't learned the difference between you're and your.

You do understand the difference between you're and your right?