Maybe a few chemtrails...

[Debi]

Harvard scientists to release sun-dimming sky chemical in 2019

Harvard Scientists to Release Sun-Dimming Sky Chemical in 2019
But just a tiny bit, to see what happens.

Sky Doctors
A longstanding idea to fight the catastrophic predicted effects of climate change is to release a compound into the stratosphere that would reflect some of the Sun’s energy back into space. Last week, a new report estimated that a sunlight-dimming program could cost as little as $2 billion dollars per year.

Now, in a first-of-its-kind experiment, researchers from Harvard are preparing to release calcium carbonate into the stratosphere in 2019 — a small-scale trial that could provide crucial data about the potential risks and rewards of a larger-scale geoengineering effort.

Sun Blockers
The Harvard experiment will operate at a tiny scale, according to Nature. The researchers will send a steerable balloon up into the stratosphere, where it’ll release about 100 grams of calcium carbonate. Calcium carbonate, which is the active ingredient in antacids, is a tempting candidate for geoengineering efforts because simulations show that it could stay in the air for years as it reflects sunlight.

After releasing the calcium carbonate, the balloon will use a laser imaging system to watch how the particles disperse — data the researchers can use to model how larger quantities of the substance might behave.

Full story at site

 

[NobleHouse]

Harvard scientists to release sun-dimming sky chemical in 2019

Harvard Scientists to Release Sun-Dimming Sky Chemical in 2019
But just a tiny bit, to see what happens.

Sky Doctors
A longstanding idea to fight the catastrophic predicted effects of climate change is to release a compound into the stratosphere that would reflect some of the Sun’s energy back into space. Last week, a new report estimated that a sunlight-dimming program could cost as little as $2 billion dollars per year.

Now, in a first-of-its-kind experiment, researchers from Harvard are preparing to release calcium carbonate into the stratosphere in 2019 — a small-scale trial that could provide crucial data about the potential risks and rewards of a larger-scale geoengineering effort.

Sun Blockers
The Harvard experiment will operate at a tiny scale, according to Nature. The researchers will send a steerable balloon up into the stratosphere, where it’ll release about 100 grams of calcium carbonate. Calcium carbonate, which is the active ingredient in antacids, is a tempting candidate for geoengineering efforts because simulations show that it could stay in the air for years as it reflects sunlight.

After releasing the calcium carbonate, the balloon will use a laser imaging system to watch how the particles disperse — data the researchers can use to model how larger quantities of the substance might behave.

Full story at site

NOT good. Who knows what their meddling will produce?!

 

[Debi]

NOT good. Who knows what their meddling will produce?!

This is the thing I worry about. They just want to see what will happen? They have no clue. Hey, they yelled to get stuff out of the atmosphere for years....now they want to put stuff in it?

 

[Paintman]

Nuts.
Harvard screwballs.
This is sort of like when you watch the news and the Harvard Medical ethicist comes on to defend a horrible medical procedure. I know exactly what he is going to say, before he says it, and he's wrong.
And we are governed by these idiots. William F Buckley was once asked if he would like to be governed by The Faculty of Harvard. He said no, I would rather be governed by the first 300 names in the Boston phone book.

 

[Debi]

Nuts.
Harvard screwballs.
This is sort of like when you watch the news and the Harvard Medical ethicist comes on to defend a horrible medical procedure. I know exactly what he is going to say, before he says it, and he's wrong.
And we are governed by these idiots. William F Buckley was once asked if he would like to be governed by The Faculty of Harvard. He said no, I would rather be governed by the first 300 names in the Boston phone book.

Why is it scientists just feel like they can experiment without any idea of outcome? One of these "educated guesses" is going to wipe out humanity one of these days. (Happens in every good sci fi movie!)

 

[jadamz]

yes,what we all need...MORE chemicals

 

[Ronin]

This is a level of stupid that's difficult to describe.

 

[Paintman]

This is a level of stupid that's difficult to describe.

I live in a family of doctoral candidates. We all stopped short when we figured out that they're a bunch of morons.

 

[Ronin]

I live in a family of doctoral candidates. We all stopped short when we figured out that they're a bunch of morons.

Ok, I'm diving into politics a little here, so my apologies.

First off, consensus != science. We're told that man, nothing else, is responsible for climate change. Yet the climate on Earth has always changed. It was hotter during the entire hundred million year age of dinosaurs than the most extreme doom-laden prediction from climate scientists. We *just* emerged from a mini-ice-age immediately before the Industrial Revolution and the temperature is still stabilizing.

Pausing here to add in that...

We're told the sun is an amazing, rare, extra-special star in that it not a variable star, unlike at least 2/3 of all other stars - where we can only view the most intense energy, given the distances involved. Therefore, solar energy can't play any significant role in our environment. But also, we call the total non-variability of our sun's output the solar cycle. It can definitely be ignored for the purposes of climate, though. /sarcasm

We're now beyond at least 4 dates by which we were supposed to have seen coastal cities flooded due to the runaway high temperatures. The dates are now pushed out beyond when anyone making or reading policy will be alive: 2100+. We're told in the same breath 3 important things:

1) We must do something immidiately or the Earth will be devastated
2) We're beyond the point where we can stop it
3) Consensus is that we're responsible and nothing else

Yet the policy suggestions say something different:

[snip]

I cut short my rant because I was going full verbose, so I'll summarize here:

Follow the money. Remember all the "cigarettes are ok" and "oil doesn't hurt the environment" studies that were funded by...cigarette and oil companies? Same for climate change. No funding is done for causes, systems, etc. You get money only by researching presupposed conclusions: man is responsible for climate change and the policy from it is that the United States must change. Do a GIS for China/India and smog and tell me again that China and India are cleaner than the US. Try publishing anything against "consensus" and see how fast you lose your career. Hell, read the highly detailed "nothing wrong happened here" account of the Climate Research Unit email controversy: notice that at no point was any of the science examined, and the conclusions were certified to be in-line with consensus. But none of the data would be released for review, none of the claims actually investigated, and in general, everything was swept right under the rug. And that's not me reaching this conclusion, it's all sourced right in the page itself from the institutions involved.

The goal of climate policy is to keep the global temperature no more than 2 degrees Celsius above that of the era pre-industrial age. That one where we'd just gone through the Little Ice Age. We're up 1 degree. One. I'll let you do your own google search for predictions over the past 20 years to see where we've been modeled to be. I'll also let you draw your own conclusion as to why the graph on the wiki page - which is a more expansive version than the one normally used to show the incredible temperature spike - uses such a small range so that the ONE degree in question looks like such a extreme crisis compared to the other data points.

But the question I have that my rant was designed to get back to is this: why are we performing our first experiment with this in the real, actual atmosphere, and not in a giant enclosed area to see how the stuff lingers, disperses, and diffracts a large energy source? CERN's budget is north of 50 billion dollars; for a fraction you could build an enclosed area of massive volume, put in what would essentially be a large-scale grow light, and fans/humidifiers, etc, and actually ruin tests in a controlled environment. You know, like you do for science. Science, not consensus.

Yes, I agree the Earth is warming. But it's warmed a single degree Celsius since the end of a small-scale ice age. Temperature rebounds after those. We have evidence of that from past ice ages. But every graphs is presented to show this minute change in the worst possible visual manner. Policy is always aimed at the United States, never larger, more polluted nations. Policy is also crafted to allow "developing" nations to be exempt. If it is true that this is a scientific crisis, why in the world does does the reaction to it seem to be of an entirely political bent, and one not questioned by the scientific - sorry, consensus community?

 

[Ronin]

Phew, sorry about that wall. I really could have gone on a long time on this.

I'm actually totally in favor of solar, wind, tidal, and geothermal power for the specific reason that they are better long-term solutions with less environmental impact. I happen to love my environment, so cleaner = better as far as I'm concerned. But the story being told doesn't line up with the research done or the solutions proposed.

Hell, California was a damn cesspit in the 50s and 60s, but they cleaned up their act in an amazing way. There's no reason not to take the same approach, and force innovation in power generation. Hopefully in power storage, too, because our current batteries are not only expensive, but hideously bad for the environment.

Anyway, my 2 cents.

Maybe a quarter...