White House cautiously opens the door to study blocking sun's rays to slow global warming

submitted by Drewski from eenews.net

all 48 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]StillLessons 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (23 children)

Oh, yeah, here we go...

This is end-of-the-world stuff here. We can only hope temperatures go down enough in the notable future that they forget about this shit.

This ranks among contenders as the stupidest idea humanity has ever entertained. Two-part problem. First problem: what is the correct surface T on Earth? Well now, that's an impossible question to answer as Earth has never (never as in 100% of its history) had a stable surface temperature. What temperature, then, should we target, and what would be the consequences of achieving that temperature? Anyone who answers those questions with definitive answers is a fool and is lying to you. WE. DON'T. KNOW. And it is impossible TO know the answer to this question. This is the problem with geoengineering as even a concept. VERY STUPID to play with a system we don't understand. Kids playing with matches.

Second part of the problem: let's assume we could ignore part one, above. Even if we knew the temperature we wanted, what they are talking about is still insanely stupid. How much aerosol in the atmosphere will achieve that result? I worked in the "climate change biz" for about eight years. I have read the literature, and I am published in the literature. The least well-controlled variable in Earth's climate? CLOUDS. We have next to zero understanding of how clouds work, even after millions spent by NASA on precisely this question. So these asshats are going to fuck with a system that WE DON'T UNDERSTAND to achieve their goal. Let's imagine they introduce some number of metric tonnes of some particulate into the atmosphere to "block the sun's rays". Then they watch for a while. Oh, wait! We put in too much. The effect is greater than we thought! Hmm... WHAT NOW?!!? SHIT!!!! You cannot undo what they are talking about doing. You cannot un-cook the omelette.

Again, the first part of the problem is enough to put an absolute lid on even the concept of fucking around with a system we don't understand. BUT if they really feel the need to fuck with this system, it MUST BE REVERSIBLE. They would have to be absolutely able to turn off the fuckup once they turn it on.

Otherwise, they could literally destroy the conditions which make life possible on Earth with shit like this. Not just for humans. For LOTS of species. And they wouldn't even know why their experiment failed. That's the point. They are playing with a system they pretend to understand, but the level of understanding we have is far more primitive than they are willing to admit.

This is not a toy they should be allowed to play with. But it's just the conditions for life on Earth? How badly can they fuck it up? Right?

[–][deleted]  (10 children)

[removed]

    [–]In-the-clouds 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

    If they stop oil, how will all those rockets get launched?

    [–]UbiquitousCultOfSelf 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    They are stopping drilling for liquefied dino and plant remains, not closing down the hollywood sound stages the rockets are filmed from! Don't overreact here! We still need the money pumping into the "space" agencies, so kindly hush on the pseudoscience so we can continue with business as usual.

    [–]In-the-clouds 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    All those satellites in orbit, that power things like GPS and global communications, got there somehow, didn't they?

    [–][deleted]  (6 children)

    [removed]

      [–]In-the-clouds 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

      It's time for man, if he wants to live, to put his trust in the Lord God instead of in corporations or governments.

      [–][deleted]  (4 children)

      [removed]

        [–]In-the-clouds 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

        Many witnesses also saw his empty tomb and watched him ascend in the clouds.

        The prophecies have yet to be fulfilled for the Anti-Christ and the worldwide mark of the beast for buying and selling. But yes, the world continues to descend and this is the generation that will see the scriptures fulfilled. Jesus returns to rescue those waiting for him.

        [–][deleted]  (2 children)

        [removed]

          [–]In-the-clouds 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          Yes, and the COVID injection was the precursor to the mark of the beast. Look at how much of the world accepted it, demonstrating they are now willing to take the mark in the right hand or the forehead, without which no man will be permitted to buy or sell. And as the book of Revelation (given by Jesus to John) says:

          Here is the patience of the saints. Here are they which keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.

          It is the time of testing and purification for the body of Christ.... the time of great tribulation. With God's help, we can overcome the world. Nothing can separate us from his love, care, and mercy through Christ Jesus.

          [–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

          Particulates in the stratosphere are not permanent. All your fears are nonsense. This is a far better plan than the carbon credit road to tyranny.

          [–]MaiqTheTrue 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          I mean we actually don’t know that. We don’t know what they’ll use, or how much or how they’ll get them up there.

          [–]StillLessons 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          It's not either/or. You think that if they dump a bunch of particulate, they're going to stop with the carbon credit scam? You know they wouldn't. It's far too profitable (only for them, of course, nobody else). They'll do both.

          Again, the problem is the initial hubris to think that we are sufficiently knowledgeable even to know what "the climate should do", not to mention to control that for our own ends. I don't trust any "nudging" humans will do (dropping the catastrophism out of it to follow your lead for the sake of argument) to be clearly "better" than the system would have created on its own, without our input. The climate's going to change whether we do anything or not; it always has and it always will because it's a dynamic system. Is any change we provoke going to be preferable to the natural change in our absence? That's a bold premise from which to operate. It's a thoroughly unprovable proposition.

          [–]rrzibot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

          These are good questions that you are asking. Don't you want to find the answersnto them?

          [–]StillLessons 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

          "Answers" are static. The miracle of the universe is that it never stays still. The answer to today's configuration is rendered obsolete tomorrow because the boundary conditions have changed. Wanting "answers" is an absolutely human desire, and following this desire has led us to a lot of very cool discoveries. There are some questions, however, where the infinite motion of the system (at least on human timeframes) makes such an "endpoint" meaningless (an answer being an endpoint to a problem).

          [–]rrzibot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

          Do you prefer people to stay ignorant or understand what would be the impact of playing with the different methods of blocking the sun and how dangerous this is?

          [–]StillLessons 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

          Understanding and answers have two different meanings. Those who understand a complex subject matter best know they are offering rough descriptions (with huge gaps) of processes that can and do change with time. That's not the same as an "answer", which suggests the completion of a process.

          This is semantics, but it's important. For people to gain the understanding you are pointing to, we need to recognize precisely the constraints under which "science" is operating when scientists offer information and the models derived from that information.

          In fact, our exchange here illustrates precisely the problem I see in the climate debate. The political / corporate powers have decided they have the "answer" to climate change: carbon (now nitrogen as well...). Because they have an "answer", they can use that answer to reverse engineer the problem; answers are reproducible. But their answer is a ridiculously oversimplified model of the effects of a single variable (going to two...) on the system. They are distorting our society in radical and tyrannical ways based on their strategies to mitigate a problem using the incomplete information from a false answer. Now, in this thread, we're introducing a new variable: solar radiation. Solar radiation, just like carbon and nitrogen cycling, is not static. We're in this never-ending battle to impose our "solution" on to a system in motion. As I said to Canbot above, I remain firmly unconvinced that we are sufficiently wise or knowledgeable to nudge this system in a manner that will create a "better" outcome than what it naturally would have shifted to without our influence.

          Beware confidently-stated and defended false answers! They motivate actions that 99% of the time (made-up number, of course) lead to harm, not benefit.

          [–]rrzibot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

          To your point it is a complex subject. Do you think people should be educated on the subject, it's complexity, dangers, details and be provided with data and evidences of how dangerous and unpredictable these methods for limiting the solar radiatios are? Because the alternative is to have ignorant people that think they can blocks the sun with a let's say... an umbrella.

          [–]StillLessons 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          This is why censorship is bar-none the greatest evil in history. Censorship is the prevention of having complex discussions. There's a reason the founders put the first amendment first. How can we educate people when the free speech required for such education does not exist? What I have written above would be disallowed from NYT, NPR, the alphabets, etc as climate disinformation (the modern term for heresy). So instead we rattle around in the backwaters like this site that remain small enough that the censors focus only limited effort in shutting us down.

          [–]rrzibot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          You are making a good point. Help me understand what do you think about my question?

          [–]twolanterns 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          sounds like a good formula for yet another disastrous 'solution' which takes more freedom stealing control to try to fix

          they COULD MAYBE make one hell of an umbrela out of those trillions of wasted dollars converted to single dollar bills and glued together ...

          [–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          What temperature, then, should we target, and what would be the consequences of achieving that temperature?

          People use the pre-industrial mean temperature. The IPCC reckons that 2°C warmer than that will have very negative consequences for humanity in terms of loss of productivity of oceans and arable land, and drowning infrastructure and homes.

          Ecologists have suggested 1.5°C instead, as there are many ecosystems that would be collapsing by 2°C.

          So these asshats are going to fuck with a system that WE DON'T UNDERSTAND to achieve their goal.

          We're already doing that will the greenhouse gasses.

          This is not a toy they should be allowed to play with. But it's just the conditions for life on Earth? How badly can they fuck it up? Right?

          It's not a great outcome. But neither is global warming.

          [–]Canbot 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

          I like it.

          It wont happen because the whole point of the global warming hoax is to install carbon credits that will be used to restrict everyone's activities by limiting their credits.

          This is nothing more than a fake plan to create the illusion that global warming is real and the people in power are looking at all options to stop it. It is fake.

          The only option they want is a carbon credit system.

          [–]rrzibot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

          The conspiracy is not that ther is no global warming. There is. There are measurements and evidences and we know how thermometers works. So global warming is real. We measure the temperatures and we know they increase, we measure the amount of ice in the ice caps and we know they decrease.

          What the conspiracy is about is whether it is man made or a natural process that we cant do anything about.

          Does this makes sense? Because if we keep denying the temperatures are rising we get to be disproven quite fast. But as we discuss what's causing it, it is kind of difficult to prove/disprove.

          [–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

          My claim is not that there are no temerature fluctuations in earths climate. I agree that the earth is warming very slowly, and has been since just before the ice started to receed from our ice age maximum, where it reached all the way down to where it created the great lakes.

          But the global warming is specifically the claim that there is a huge increase of warming caused by co2, and that it will cause devestating and even human ending changes to climate. The term global warming was created to name those specific lies.

          It is not my claim that the earth had no warming.

          [–]FourteenDigitz 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          They are not lies. You’re just really, really stupid.

          [–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Name callers are really really stupid.

          [–]FourteenDigitz 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          It is 100% verifiably human-caused. Or do you think it’s just a coincidence that it only started happening after the Industrial Revolution?

          CO2 is a known greenhouse gas. 200+ years of atmospheric CO2 measurements have shown that the relative concentration of C13 and C14 (biogenic and radioactive isotopes, respectively) are on a steady decline, with C14 being impossible to measure since the 50s due to the increase of atmospheric radiation following Cold War-era nuclear bomb tests.

          The only possible reason for C12 to be the increasingly most dominant isotope in the atmosphere is from carbon that has not A) been expelled by photosynthesis, or B) exposed to cosmic rays, for millions upon millions of years.

          And where would that over abundance of essentially sterile carbon be coming from? That’s right, us.

          [–]rrzibot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          To your point it seems to be. All the data points us in this direction. OP was denying the measurements of thempratures and wanted to help him understand where the conspiracy is and that it is not in whether it is real or not.

          [–]FourteenDigitz 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Global warming isn’t a hoax you’re just really, really stupid

          [–]HiddenFox 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          "Since the dawn of time man has yearned to destroy the sun! I shell do the next best thing and block it out!" - Mr.Burns

          [–]Drewski[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          archive.today mirror | archive.org mirror

          [–]In-the-clouds 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

          The sun shall be darkened and the moon will no longer give its light, before the great and terrible day of the Lord. See the old prophecies:

          Joel 2:31 “The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.”

          Isaiah 13:10 “For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.”

          Joel 3:15 “The sun and the moon shall be darkened, and the stars shall withdraw their shining.”

          Matthew 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:”

          Mark 13:24-26 "But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory."

          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

          [removed]

            [–]In-the-clouds 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

            Jesus truly did show us the path to eternal life by his humility and deeds of love. Those that want to enter the kingdom of God must pick up the cross daily and follow him. He will help those that ask. Ask daily for his help (through prayer every day, not just one day) and learn from the Master of Life.

            [–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

            Those are called solar eclipses. They do not refer to humans using technology to slightly reduce solar output.

            [–]In-the-clouds 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

            Explain this with an eclipse: "And the stars of heaven shall fall".

            [–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

            That's called a meteor shower. Are you sure you finished kindergarten?

            [–]In-the-clouds 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

            Kindergarten (and the indoctrination of the school system in general) is overrated.

            To be clear: You equate a meteor to a star? I think even little children would find that hard to believe.

            [–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

            A falling star is indeed a meteor. Something in a religious text written by morons for morons could certainly refer to that.

            [–]In-the-clouds 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

            written by morons for morons

            Your interpretation of the word of God is obviously biased with that attitude. The adversary has you under his control, but there is a way of escape, but you would have to want it to take it. The wisdom in the scriptures is far and above anything that man could ever produce.

            [–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

            You sound like a LLM with an annoying prompt.

            [–]turtlew0rk 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

            Well as long as they being cautious...

            [–]twolanterns 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

            senile puppet bidens on strings ...

            yep fits right in to The Thunderbirds (supermarionation) where they did shit like that

            [–]Clownfall 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

            At this point, the 'trans umbrella' must be huge enough to block a significant percentage of incoming sunlight. Just use that...

            [–]UncleWillard56 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

            JFC, please don't do anything so stupid! And besides, isn't the current theory that we fucked it up in the first place? I don't see how meddling with the sun can lead to anything short of wiping ourselves out. I got a stable of sci-fi books that would bolster that too. And the worst people to undertake it is the government. They seem ripe to be one of Fermi's great filters.