Can We Stop Modern-Day Mad Scientists?

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Geoengineering researchers worry about "mad-scientists" just going ahead and doing it, discussing the recent dump of iron in the ocean by Russ George:


Pouplare Mechanics: Can We Stop Modern-day Mad Scientists?



The article is interesting enough as is. But I think fro a conspiracy theory point of view, this type of international outcry from the science community is pretty good evidence that if there's a covert geoengineering project going on, then the scientists don't know anything about it. And seeing as that's highly unlikely, I think it's pretty good evidence that there is no covert geoengineering project.

If you think otherwise, then I suggest you subscribe to the Geoengineering Google group mailing list, and just follow the conversations for a few months.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups#!forum/geoengineering

Clearly the people there are the worlds leading geoengineering researchers, and yet they all seem totally unaware of any secret SRM project. They all talk about it (with varying degrees of urgency) in the future tense.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Geoengineering researchers worry about "mad-scientists" just going ahead and doing it, discussing the recent dump of iron in the ocean by Russ George:


Pouplare Mechanics: Can We Stop Modern-day Mad Scientists?



The article is interesting enough as is. But I think fro a conspiracy theory point of view, this type of international outcry from the science community is pretty good evidence that if there's a covert geoengineering project going on, then the scientists don't know anything about it. And seeing as that's highly unlikely, I think it's pretty good evidence that there is no covert geoengineering project.

If you think otherwise, then I suggest you subscribe to the Geoengineering Google group mailing list, and just follow the conversations for a few months.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups#!forum/geoengineering

Clearly the people there are the worlds leading geoengineering researchers, and yet they all seem totally unaware of any secret SRM project. They all talk about it (with varying degrees of urgency) in the future tense.
They are aware and forewarned now . . . but what if there were attempts many years ago . . . which are now just part of the background noise ?? And without it warming would be much worse than it is now . . .
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
My main opinion on this is that much of it is just theoretical scientists maintaining an income stream. They must write grant proposals and get funding for their work to keep working. If they don't they are out of the business, unemployed. These aren't basic scientists looking at small parts of big things closely, they are theoretical scientists looking at big pictures, they are "Idea Men".

So, they think of things to do, they promote ideas. In this case, they focused on a question they are personally invested as well as many others, and there is funding for this. They may also have seen the public awareness issue, of which Keith has spoken, about how if people see this sort of desperate last-ditch scenario emerging they will take carbon reduction more seriously. Their last goal may have been to exert an impetus for international regulation which is hopeless.

Keith actually has a financial motive many of the chemmies haven't even mentioned. Maybe they are blinded but Murphy could have at least looked at it.

If SRM worked, Keith loses.
If SRM failed, Keith wins.

If you look closely enough at what they actually propose, however, the artillery barrages, jack-in-the beanstalk towers, space umbrellas and even the SRM, there are tremendous efforts which would have to take place before they could even be tried out. Like Jazzy said, wartime efforts, but the world is pretty broke right now, none of these have any real-life cause or reason to happen now. Keith also mentions this, Patrick Minnis told me about the pie-in-the-sky SRM over a decade ago, which falls short by a fleet of planes that don't exist.

All of this has probably blown up in the promoters face especially after the chemmies and other luddites got hold of it. They probably over-reached as we are all apt to do and now they are demonized as mad by some, literally threatened by others. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the main figures drop out altogether in the face of it.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Should mad scientists be stopped . . . ? As long as they don't break laws or treaties how can they be stopped . . .? How dire is the world's situation anyway . . . how long do we have before an environmental crisis or tipping point?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Yeah, Keith's thrust in encouraging research into SRM seems to be to ultimately demonstrate it's a bad idea. Ken Caldeira likewise.

But I think another thing the "chemmies" (and George) miss is just how incredibly complex this is. It's not a simple "add some pollution and reduce temperature" equation. There are multiple overlapping feedback cycles and semi-chaotic systems of dubious equilibrium. Just about all we are sure about right now is that added CO2 increases radiative forcing. So just about the only thing we can say with confidence would be a good idea for maintaining the status quo would be to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere back to historical levels (or at least stop increasing it). Any thing else, any actual geoengineering, is a huge gamble with potentially catastrophic consequences that are currently impossible to calculate.

Have a look at this article, and the comments, for Caldeira's opinion on CO2, and the complexity of the surrounding issues:
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/20...as-a-waste-dump-for-greenhouse-gas-pollution/
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Yeah, Keith's thrust in encouraging research into SRM seems to be to ultimately demonstrate it's a bad idea. Ken Caldeira likewise.

But I think another thing the "chemmies" (and George) miss is just how incredibly complex this is. It's not a simple "add some pollution and reduce temperature" equation. There are multiple overlapping feedback cycles and semi-chaotic systems of dubious equilibrium. Just about all we are sure about right now is that added CO2 increases radiative forcing. So just about the only thing we can say with confidence would be a good idea for maintaining the status quo would be to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere back to historical levels (or at least stop increasing it). Any thing else, any actual geoengineering, is a huge gamble with potentially catastrophic consequences that are currently impossible to calculate.

Have a look at this article, and the comments, for Caldeira's opinion on CO2, and the complexity of the surrounding issues:
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/20...as-a-waste-dump-for-greenhouse-gas-pollution/
I think I have some idea of the complexity regarding ozone depletion, increasing drought potential, acidification of the oceans, etc. ; but what I fear is decision maker/s deciding Mt Pinatubo is/was the model to follow . . . we survived 20 Million Tons of SO2 . . . geoengineering would require much less . . . so as Edward Tiller said . . . Let's do it . . .
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I think I have some idea of the complexity regarding ozone depletion, increasing drought potential, acidification of the oceans, etc. ; but what I fear is decision maker/s deciding Mt Pinatubo is/was the model to follow . . . we survived 20 Million Tons of SO2 . . . geoengineering would require much less . . . so as Edward Tiller said . . . Let's do it . . .

No, he said (in 1997) let's get international agreement, and test at the 0.001 level totally openly:

https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/231636.pdf

Pretty much what current geoengineering researchers are saying. Establish a regulatory framework, and research openly before deployment.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
No, he said (in 1997) let's get international agreement, and test at the 0.001 level totally openly:

https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/231636.pdf

Pretty much what current geoengineering researchers are saying. Establish a regulatory framework, and research openly before deployment.
He also made other comments that might just show his real position and frustration of the politicians . . .

 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
He also made other comments that might just show his real position and frustration of the politicians . . .


He also asked why not block the Straits of Gibraltar with nuclear explosions, turn the Mediterranean fresh water, flood Venice and all the Mediterranean costal cities, then blast a canal to irrigate the Sahara, so we can feed the growing world population. That does not mean he was suggesting we do it next week.

Read my quote again, then look at yours in the same context, slightly edited:

It seems to me he is advocating that we "study ways to offset any possible ill effects". The "Why not do that" refers to research, not deployment. If something is simply "promising" then you don't do it, you study it. And as noted, he called for fully open international study.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
He also asked why not block the Straits of Gibraltar with nuclear explosions, turn the Mediterranean fresh water, flood Venice and all the Mediterranean costal cities, then blast a canal to irrigate the Sahara, so we can feed the growing world population. That does not mean he was suggesting we do it next week.

Read my quote again, then look at yours in the same context, slightly edited:

It seems to me he is advocating that we "study ways to offset any possible ill effects". The "Why not do that" refers to research, not deployment. If something is simply "promising" then you don't do it, you study it. And as noted, he called for fully open international study.
Since Dr Teller is no longer with us we may never know. . . .I think this may be a mixed metaphor, if you will, mixing research and actionable injection operations within the same discussion. . . IMO one can take it either way. . . .
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
I'm disturbed that people think any type of geo-engineering should be done at all and is ever proposed in the first place, but I guess that in depth studying of hypothetical scenarios should be explored to at least tell us not to do it (presuming sanity prevails).
It's just the presumptive attitude of meddling arrogance that bothers me.
If there is a crisis scenario that cannot possibly be solved by other means, then we should know our options, but it seems the possibility of geo-engineering can be used as excuse to continue the bad-behaviour that led to the problem it seeks to solve in the first place, particularly by those invested in that behaviour.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I'm disturbed that people think any type of geo-engineering should be done at all and is ever proposed in the first place, but I guess that in depth studying of hypothetical scenarios should be explored to at least tell us not to do it (presuming sanity prevails).
It's just the presumptive attitude of meddling arrogance that bothers me.
If there is a crisis scenario that cannot possibly be solved by other means, then we should know our options, but it seems the possibility of geo-engineering can be used as excuse to continue the bad-behaviour that led to the problem it seeks to solve in the first place, particularly by those invested in that behaviour.

Indeed, and they are full aware of that. Look up geoengineering moral hazard
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
It is also a motivation to just do it and not tell anyone . . .

No it's not. Doing it and telling people does not create a moral hazard, as you'd only do if it were too late to do something else.

It might be a motivation to do some research and not tell anyone.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
No it's not. Doing it and telling people does not create a moral hazard, as you'd only do if it were too late to do something else.

It might be a motivation to do some research and not tell anyone.
I don't know if we can determine now what someone might have thought 10 to 20 years ago . . . however, a very common concept during that era was "Let's do it now and ask for forgiveness later!!" I found it stated several times in my tenure in the government . . .

If you truly felt that action now would prevent catastrophy later, one may feel compelled to act . . .
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
Just because you could do something, is usually not a very good reason to just forge ahead and do it.

Case in point:

 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
LoL!!!! . . . But they did do it . . . Think about it . . .


The bike is uncontrollable due to it's length, and the complexity of keeping 24 chainsaw engines each with it's own set of systems ultimately cause it to be unreliable.

In the end, despite the best efforts of a major German chainsaw manufacturer, the Dolmette failed when pitted against an ordinary 4-door Audi AS400, the bike lost the drag race.
dolmette3.jpg

Unfortunately, Dolmar was so embarassed they removed a video of the race from their site.

You see, what might look good at first glance, even despite heroic efforts, ended up being totally impractical in the end. They didn't "do it", it failed.

Thanks for making my point, George. Yes, I set you up........overnight.....and left the bait waiting for you to bite...
because I understand......... exactly how you think......

Think about it.........? :eek: :cool:
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
P Claim: NASA tried to stop Spielberg's 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind' Quotes Debunked 21
FatPhil "Stop global roll out of 5G networks until safety is confirmed", urges "expert" 5G and Other EMF Health Concerns 1
Mick West Crazy Contrails from LAX Ground Stop Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 1
deirdre Claim:Republicans block bill to stop terrorists from buying guns General Discussion 9
Trailspotter A new way to stop the gridlock in the skies General Discussion 0
Critical Thinker foreignpolicy.com: The Pentagon Has a Plan to Stop the Zombie Apocalypse. Seriously. General Discussion 4
Mick West Debunked: IPCC warns not to stop chemtrails, aka 'solar radiation management' Contrails and Chemtrails 11
TWCobra Debunked-Max Bliss implying that aluminium can be added to modern turbo-fan engine fuel. Contrails and Chemtrails 6
S Modern Man's Shrinking Brain Science and Pseudoscience 0
hamishsubedei Modern Uses of Thermite for Demolition and their applicability to the WTC 9/11 65
Hama Neggs Debunked: Chemtrails "Inserted" into Films [Footage reused in modern advertisement] Contrails and Chemtrails 19
Cairenn Claim that modern hybrid wheat is lacking in nutrition--True or bunk? Health and Quackery 29
Mick West Truth and lies: Conspiracy theories are running rampant thanks to modern technology General Discussion 3
M Claim: Hints of life on Venus: Scientists detect phosphine molecules in high cloud decks UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 21
Inti Confirmed Tesla quote; "Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments" Quotes Debunked 12
deirdre Climate Scientist says "Scientists should consider stretching the truth": Stephen Schneider Quotes Debunked 2
Leifer 3 scientists investigating melting Arctic ice may have been assassinated Conspiracy Theories 8
Critical Thinker San Diego Chemtrail group to 'educate' & Protest Scientists/Doctors Contrails and Chemtrails 3
Jacob Aman J. Marvin Herndon's chemtrail letter to San Diego City Council Contrails and Chemtrails 39
Mick West Debunked: 13 Foot Long Horned Sea Monster, Scientists Baffled [Decomposed Shark Carcass] UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 1
Joe Kerr Debunked: Pilots Doctors and Scientists tell Truth about Chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 66
RFMarine 1240 Scientists Demand Seralini GMO Study be Republished Health and Quackery 21
Critical Thinker Claim: "Australian and US scientists reverse ageing in mice, humans could be next" General Discussion 0
Jay Reynolds Dane Wigington & Co. get taken to the cleaners by climate scientists Contrails and Chemtrails 7
Steve Funk Three "Chemtrail Scientists" murdered Contrails and Chemtrails 6
Mick West Rotten eggs smell not from Chemtrails, claim scientists Contrails and Chemtrails 4
Mick West Debunked: Scientists risked destroying the earth during nuclear tests and CERN Conspiracy Theories 27
Mick West Sceptical climate scientists concede Earth has warmed Science and Pseudoscience 1
Mick West Advocating violence against "Chemtrail" planes, pilots, scientists, and debunkers Contrails and Chemtrails 1762
ThorGoLucky The Telegraph: Morgellons Disease continues to defeat scientists Health and Quackery 7
Mick West The Independent: Scientists face 'shocking levels' of vilification over discoveries Practical Debunking 2
Related Articles































Related Articles

Top