NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/11/16/smog.warming.ap/index.html

Save the Earth: Fuck it up! :D

Waah? So confusing... @__@

Well, won't the oil companies be tickled.

Well, won't the oil companies be tickled.
You can tickle oil companies?? o_o

You can tickle oil companies?? o_o

You can tickle anything if you find the right spot. *nod*

Who would've thought that China is environmentally progressive when it chokes its cities with smog?

No offense, but I think sulfur dioxide is probably a lot worse than global warming in the short term. Plus, it's present in large quantities in the atmosphere of Venus and for some reason I don't think we want to emulate our sister planet any more than we currently do.

That... does not... compute...

You can tickle anything if you find the right spot. *nod*

Is it just me, or does that sounds really wrong? :D

You can tickle oil companies?? o_oOf course. You just say "We must burn more fossil fuels to help the enviroment" and they giggle like babes.

I thought this was old news? :confused:

Is it just me, or does that sounds really wrong? :D

Yet at the same time, really right. :)

The post-Global Warming Ecosystem will have more than twice as much arable land as now and will be capable of supporting up to three times more biomass.

Trying to tackle Global Warming is short-sighted and selfish.

But....but......pollution bad
*falls on the ground*
Owwww, my brain!

But....but......pollution bad
*falls on the ground*
Owwww, my brain!

Fun stuff, huh?

Do people still trust these guys to 'fix' the planet? :p

I think Al Gore put it best when he said "It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it."

The worst thing about global warming is public ignorance of it - the article says that the global temperature has risen by one degree (fahrenheit) in the past century, but if you say that to someone as part of a basis for an argument for action against global warming they'll look at you as if you're insane. Gah! :headbang: I hate ignorance like that!

So...Sulfuric acid rain?

I think the worst thing about global warming is the damage to environmentalism that focusing on it is doing. There are numerous real things we can be doing to help the environment in numerous ways, and instead everybody is so fixated on the flavor of the month issue of global warming.

I think that the fact that respectable environmental scientists are actually contemplating pollution as a possible solution to global warming is an excellent commentary on how overboard the issue has gotten and how little these environmental scientists actually know about the environment they want to try to 'correct'.

To think that people want these guys deliberately trying to manipulate global climate scares the bejesus out of me. Then again, I'm the crazy one. :p

I think that the fact that respectable environmental scientists are actually contemplating pollution as a possible solution to global warming is an excellent commentary t how overboard the issue has gotten and how little these environmental scientists actually know about the environment they want to try to 'correct'.

Don't forget that the processes that produce sulfuric acid also produce a shitload of carbon dioxide.

Don't forget that the processes that produce sulfuric acid also produce a shitload of carbon dioxide.

Indeed.

The public doesn't know jack about Global Warming. A polar bear on melting ice on the cover of Time magazine and everyone gets all riled up.

This is very old news. It's commonly known as "Global Dimming":

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/dimming_prog_summary.shtml

What.....The......Fuck......

That... does not... compute...

Its akin to halting a car that's rolling down a hill by rolling a car down an adjacent hill into it. Pointless, messy, but great for late night TV.

I think Al Gore put it best when he said "It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it."
No, I think that was Bush, actually.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/11/16/smog.warming.ap/index.html

Save the Earth: Fuck it up! :DWell, yeah, you can cool the atmosphere by pumping sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere. However, then you get the problem with acid rain.

The public doesn't know jack about Global Warming. Indeed, that's why there is so little support for preventing it.

Well, yeah, you can cool the atmosphere by pumping sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere. However, then you get the problem with acid rain.

Toss baking soda into the air at the same time. *nodnod*

I like to think that Im a little more informed than John Q. Public on the state of Global warming, but damn if all the many stories I read cant keep the story straight. If you want to know why the public is confused look at the facts.

I've heard the average temperature of earth has dropped in the past two-hundred years. I've heard it has risen. I know that in the 70's scientists were so scared of a new ice age that they wanted to cover Antartica with ash. Even the scientists who can stick to a story, dont know positively why.

Im not going to choose a side until im convinced that either of them are led by more than their own propoganda. I've read the TIME article, the NEWSWEEK stories, the many newspapers I've gotten ahold of- I've even followed the UN on it. Propoganda is all either side really has right now, because they sure as hell dont have facts they can agree on.

Indeed, that's why there is so little support for preventing it.

You're joking, right?

You're joking, right?I thought you were. :confused:

What, do they have Professor Farnsworth on the job?

I think Al Gore put it best when he said "It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it."

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/candidate.asp

looking at the article - its old news and only being contemplated by very few scientist. it actually reminds me of what they do in a cartoon that was made about how The Matrix began. To cut the robots off from their energy supply (the sun) they blacken the skys. It only spells bad news for the humans though. This plan seems pretty outrageous to me. Too iffy of an idea to actually implement.

I thought this was old news? :confused:

It is.

Either Nova or Scientific American Frontiers did a show on this phenomenon.


fo those of you who don't understand how this works, I'd like people in america at the time to think back to September 12, 2001.

The entire nation's air transport system was shut down at the time.

Try to remember what the weather was like.

Even the impact of jet contrails forming clouds behind them had a huge impact on the weather. Normally, something of this magnitude:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0410/contrails_nasa_big.jpg

has an enormous impact: shading the surface of the earth from the sunlight.

on that day, however, the planes were not in the air, and we did not enjoy as much cloud cover as we once did.


unfortunately: it comes down as Acid rain, and for those of you interested, it's turning the oceans into soda water:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0701-05.htm


in short:

sunlight comes to earth.

some of it is bounced back by the ozone layer, which is rapidly disappearing, some of it bounces off the tops of clouds, which are increasing, and the rest hits the earth, where it is absorbed as heat or reflected back into the atmosphere, which, being thicker, is keeping more of the heat than it should.

I thought this was old news? :confused:

It is. At least several months old...

Fun stuff, huh?

Do people still trust these guys to 'fix' the planet? :p
Ahhh, cut him some slack.....he is only a lunatic goofball like you:

The Nobel Prize-winning scientist who first made the proposal is himself "not enthusiastic about it."

"It was meant to startle the policymakers," said Paul J. Crutzen, of Germany's Max Planck Institute for Chemistry. "If they don't take action much more strongly than they have in the past, then in the end we have to do experiments like this."
:D


* runs off to open the world's first big box air pollutant store.

* envisages getting rich quick

What, do they have Professor Farnsworth on the job?

Sometimes I wonder. :p

Ahhh, cut him some slack.....he is only a lunatic goofball like you:


:D


* runs off to open the world's first big box air pollutant store.

* envisages getting rich quick

Smog R Us. :)

That's the problem with over exaggerating the threat of global warming. You go and come up with shit like this.

That's the problem with over exaggerating the threat of global warming. You go and come up with shit like this.

I wouldn't quite call it 'over exaggerating', more like over focusing.

I wouldn't quite call it 'over exaggerating', more like over focusing.
A little of both, I think. One leads to the other which leads back to the other again.

We're talking about a last resort solution (hopefully) to buy us more time to cut down on emissions. The point of coming out with this now is to illustrate how serious it is getting. As Crutzen points out:

"Crutzen admits that his geo-engineering experiment could lead to the elimination of the ozone and a whitening of the sky."
http://www.palmbeachdailynews.com/news/content/news/lyons1112.html

I'm guessing that there will be a bit more study before we do anything like this. Probably 20-25 years of study.

No, I think that was Bush, actually.
'twas Dan Quayle, IIRC.

And in other news Lynching Black people, promotes Civil Rights.:rolleyes:

I am always interested to see the lengths to which we will go to avoid dealing with the actual problem of greenhouse gas emissions.