Thursday, April 09, 2009

Obama May Block Sun's Rays to End Global Warming

Yes, that is the exact headline, and NOT a joke, except in the "madhouse" sense!  

Utter Lunacy on the Environmental Front -- "To Save the World, We Must Pollute!"

The idea related in the article below ranks up there with the Atomic-Powered Airplane, the Solar-Microwave Satellite Power Plant scheme, and using small a-bombs to dig canals.  Yes, all those really neat ideas were "seriously discussed" and even given considerable funding, over decades in some cases, before the nut-heads who came up with them finally died off.   Hopefully this new turkey will be shot down pretty quick, but I am not confident.  Like "Hot Fusion" reactors, which have got Billions in funds every year since I was a college student back in the 1970s, but which have not yet produced even one kilowatt of power, these Dr. Frankenstein ideas gain a life of their own, and are kept alive by regular infusions of Your Tax Dollars.  Because this new idea is so much simpler -- put more junk in the air to increase its opacity, to reduce sunlight and cool things down -- it could actually be implemented fairly easily.

Yes, just what we need, more stuff in the air to choke on, that will also blot out the sun!  Then, "the world will be saved"!   Seems some of BHO's top "science advisers" are on the weed, or maybe secret "chemtrail" enthusiasts.

Crazier and crazier...

Excuse me now, but I must go out and shovel the snow off my porch.  I'm doing my bit to end global warming by burning in a woodstove, making lots of smoke.  How about you?     J.D.


Obama May Block Sun's Rays to End Global Warming
Wednesday, April 08, 2009

WASHINGTON -  The president's new science adviser said Wednesday that global warming is so dire, the Obama administration is discussing radical technologies to cool Earth's air.
John Holdren told The Associated Press in his first interview since being confirmed last month that the idea of geoengineering the climate is being discussed.
One such extreme option includes shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun's rays. Holdren said such an experimental measure would only be used as a last resort.
"It's got to be looked at," he said. "We don't have the luxury of taking any approach off the table."
Holdren outlined several "tipping points" involving global warming that could be fast approaching.
Once such milestones are reached, such as complete loss of summer sea ice in the Arctic, it increases chances of "really intolerable consequences," he said.
Twice in a half-hour interview, Holdren compared global warming to being "in a car with bad brakes driving toward a cliff in the fog."
At first, Holdren characterized the potential need to technologically tinker with the climate as just his personal view. However, he went on to say he has raised it in administration discussions.
Holdren, a 65-year-old physicist, is far from alone in taking geoengineering more seriously.
The National Academy of Science is making climate tinkering the subject of its first workshop in its new multidiscipline climate challenges program.
The British parliament has also discussed the idea.
The American Meteorological Society is crafting a policy statement on geoengineering that says "it is prudent to consider geoengineering's potential, to understand its limits and to avoid rash deployment."
Last week, Princeton scientist Robert Socolow told the National Academy that geoengineering should be an available option in case climate worsens dramatically.
But Holdren noted that shooting particles into the air - making an artificial volcano as one Nobel laureate has suggested - could have grave side effects and would not completely solve all the problems from soaring greenhouse gas emissions.
So such actions could not be taken lightly, he said.
Still, "we might get desperate enough to want to use it," he added.
Another geoengineering option he mentioned was the use of so-called artificial trees to suck carbon dioxide - the chief human-caused greenhouse gas - out of the air and store it.
At first that seemed prohibitively expensive, but a re-examination of the approach shows it might be less costly, he said.

Comments: Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. [Ref.]

If you find this material of value, please donate to OBRL:

Or, purchase books on related subjects from our on-line bookstore:

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?