Internationally Recognized Theoretical Physicist Acknowledges Climate Engineering

[Steve Funk]

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/...l-physicist-acknowledges-climate-engineering/
This is just another misleading headline. Not once in the interview does Vandana Shiva claim that a geoengineering program as imagined by Dane Wigington is actually going on. The interviewer phrases one question, "What do you think about the fact that they will be spraying nanoparticles. Vandana Shiva does mistakenly conflate cloud seeding with geoengineering, and considers nuclear testing (of which there has been very little the last 40 years) to be a form of geoengineering.

 

[David Fraser]

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/...l-physicist-acknowledges-climate-engineering/
This is just another misleading headline. Not once in the interview does Vandana Shiva claim that a geoengineering program as imagined by Dane Wigington is actually going on. The interviewer phrases one question, "What do you think about the fact that they will be spraying nanoparticles. Vandana Shiva does mistakenly conflate cloud seeding with geoengineering, and considers nuclear testing (of which there has been very little the last 40 years) to be a form of geoengineering.

This is another example of claims made coming into conflict. Vandana Shiva is more known for her anti-GM and environmental work and WITWATS claims that GM seeds are waiting in the wings. However Shiva does not campaign against chemtrails which would be an obvious avenue to halt the evil Monsanto. Hopefully many believers who follow her work will understand the misquote.

 

[Eden]

... nuclear testing (of which there has been very little the last 40 years) to be a form of geoengineering.

Since 1974, the United States alone has conducted at least 300 tests which resulted in nuclear fission or fusion explosion. This accounts for approximately one third of all nuclear tests conducted since 1942 by the US. Since the implementation of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, sub-critical nuclear testing has continued with organizations such as the DoE and Los Alamos National Laboratories continuing to expand their test facilities within the Nevada National Security Site.

With this in mind, I feel that it's fair to say that the amount of testing done over the last 40 years and testing which is ongoing amounts to more than "very little".

 

[Mick West]

Since 1974, the United States alone has conducted at least 300 tests which resulted in nuclear fission or fusion explosion. This accounts for approximately one third of all nuclear tests conducted since 1942 by the US. Since the implementation of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, sub-critical nuclear testing has continued with organizations such as the DoE and Los Alamos National Laboratories continuing to expand their test facilities within the Nevada National Security Site.

With this in mind, I feel that it's fair to say that the amount of testing done over the last 40 years and testing which is ongoing amounts to more than "very little".

Atmospheric testing is the only form that can really be considered geoengineering, unless she's using the old earth-scaping sense. Atmospheric testing ending in the 1980s. And 1974 is the year the US stopped, and started doing them underground.

Edit - actually 1974 is when France stopped. The UK, US and USSR stopped in 1963.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_testing

In 1963, three (UK, US, Soviet Union) of the four nuclear states and many non-nuclear states signed the Limited Test Ban Treaty, pledging to refrain from testing nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, underwater, or in outer space. The treaty permitted underground nuclear testing. France continued atmospheric testing until 1974, and China continued until 1980. Neither has signed the treaty.[1]

Underground tests in the United States continued until 1992 (its last nuclear test), the Soviet Union until 1990, the United Kingdom until 1991, and both China and France until 1996. In signing the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty in 1996, these states have pledged to discontinue all nuclear testing. However, as of December 2013, the treaty has not yet entered into force because of failure to be signed/ratified by eight specific countries. Non-signatories India andPakistan last tested nuclear weapons in 1998.

 

[JohnJones]

Since 1974, the United States alone has conducted at least 300 tests which resulted in nuclear fission or fusion explosion. This accounts for approximately one third of all nuclear tests conducted since 1942 by the US. Since the implementation of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, sub-critical nuclear testing has continued with organizations such as the DoE and Los Alamos National Laboratories continuing to expand their test facilities within the Nevada National Security Site.

With this in mind, I feel that it's fair to say that the amount of testing done over the last 40 years and testing which is ongoing amounts to more than "very little".

In the context of nuclear tests as a form of climate engineering, I think it's entirely accurate to describe ongoing testing as "very little". The last nuclear test carried out by the US was in 1992, four years before the signing of the CTBT in 1996, and since then the only testing that the US has done has been sub-critical testing -- that is to say, chemical explosives are set off next to plutonium, but no critical mass is formed and there is no self-sustaining nuclear reaction. These tests are carried out 290 meters underground, and no nuclear material is released to the atmosphere.

 

[Eden]

Thanks for the clarification, I wasn't aware that the OP was referring to atmospheric testing and thus I misinterpreted the statement as a reference to nuclear testing on the whole.

 

[Mick West]

Vandana Shiva does mistakenly conflate cloud seeding with geoengineering, and considers nuclear testing (of which there has been very little the last 40 years) to be a form of geoengineering.

Actually that seems to be mostly from the interviewer, and Vandana's response is basically that weather modification is NOT really geoengineering.

2:45 NoGeoingegneria
In my eyes geoengineering started in the 50s with atomic tests, because in this period they started to make geoengineering of the atmosphere of earth in a global sense, in a bigger sense, and a lot of projects in the 50s started to organize the earth, the planet, in a new way, with a new idea of engineering really the whole planet. With the power of atomic bomb scientists made a shifting in their mind, in my eyes. So in this period, in the 50′s weather modification also started very energically. It is part of geo engineering, and you have here the map of the ETC group, in the whole world, they are doing it, and you cannot do local modifications without changing the whole system. I know in India, in Thailand, and Australia weather modification maybe is more discussed, more open than in Europe. For example in Italy they made weather modification in the 80′s and people don't know it. What do you think about the role of weather modification in a sense of geoengineering for food, for water, for the whole system?

4:21 Vandana

Weather modification is a very small part of geo engineering. Geoengineering right now is the hubris of saying: "all this climate change, and we're living in the anthropocene age and now human beings will be the shapers of our future, that totally control the overall functions of not just our planet, but our relationship with other planets, so many of the solutions offered have been putting reflectors in the sky to send the sun back as if the sun was a problem rather than the very basis of life, or to put pollutants into the atmosphere in order to create a layer of pollution that would stop the sun from shining. But the instability of the climate that is the result of the greenhouse effect will just be aggravated by these interventions. Now weather modifications done in a narrow-minded way, to say "we are not getting rain so let us precipitate rain artificially so that agriculture doesn't fail" is something that for example the Chinese did for the olympics. They made sure there would be no rain during the Olympics. It is a lower level of hubris than the larger project of geoengineering.

 

[Ross Marsden]

How can nucear bomb tests be considered to be geoengineering in any sense?

 

[David Fraser]

How can nucear bomb tests be considered to be geoengineering in any sense?

I guess in a similar way volcanoes affect the environment. Nuclear bombs tend to blow alot of shit in the air.

 

[Jazzy]

They can convert a lot of solid materials to vapor. Sulfur will end up as sulfur dioxide. Their high temperatures allow nitrogen to combine with oxygen, which is why the rising gas cloud is brown-colored with nitrogen dioxide.

The are potent geoengineering devices. They will tend to open ozone holes to the equator in the event of nuclear spasm.

 

[Pete Tar]

'nuclear spasm'?
Is that some kind of runaway effect, or poetic license?

Edit - looked it up... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_retaliation
Also, if both sides of a conflict adopt the same stance of massive response, it may result in unlimited [URL='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_escalation']escalation (a "nuclear spasm"), each believing that the other will back down after the first round of retaliation. Both problems are not unique to massive retaliation, but to nuclear deterrence as a whole.[/URL]

 

[Jazzy]

Is 'nuclear spasm' poetic license?

I hadn't considered that.

I haven't had one for an awfully long while.

 

[Ross Marsden]

I guess in a similar way volcanoes affect the environment. Nuclear bombs tend to blow alot of shit in the air.

They can convert a lot of solid materials to vapor. Sulfur will end up as sulfur dioxide. Their high temperatures allow nitrogen to combine with oxygen, which is why the rising gas cloud is brown-colored with nitrogen dioxide.

The are potent geoengineering devices. They will tend to open ozone holes to the equator in the event of nuclear spasm.

Yes, I understand that, but to propose that geoengineering is the purpose of them is just absurd.

 

[David Fraser]

Yes, I understand that, but to propose that geoengineering is the purpose of them is just absurd.

Not really. It relates to geoemgineering in the truest sense, that is man impacting/engineering the environment whether that be deliberate or not. Much like burning of fossil fuels.

 

[Steve Funk]

Well, the term engineering implies intent, designing something to do a specific job. Can you say that unanticipated side effects are "engineered?"

 

[Mick West]

Well, the term engineering implies intent, designing something to do a specific job. Can you say that unanticipated side effects are "engineered?"

Well you can't. But that does not stop other people from doing so. People use words to mean what they think they mean.

 

[David Fraser]

Well, the term engineering implies intent, designing something to do a specific job. Can you say that unanticipated side effects are "engineered?"

If you recall the talk with David Keith and Max Bliss gets to ask questions the "experts" talk of geoengineering in terms of pollution.

 

[Ross Marsden]

If you recall the talk with David Keith and Max Bliss gets to ask questions the "experts" talk of geoengineering in terms of pollution.

David Keith was clear about his meaning there, that pollution was inadvertent alteration of the climate system.

In that interview referred to in the OP, NoGeoingegneria seems to be saying geoengineering started contemporaneously with the tomic tests in the 50s with weather modification, and not necessarily that the tests were part of wx mod. It's not mentioned again. It's a time marker of the most intense atmospheric testing, perhaps.

 

[Jazzy]

Yes, I understand that, but to propose that geoengineering is the purpose of them is just absurd.

Couldn't agree with you more, old boy.

But Mick and Lewis Carrol make the point. Words mean what people are prepared to make them mean.

 

[mrfintoil]

"Internationally Recognized Theoretical Physicist"

I guess the reason why she stopped working as a physicist so soon was because the scientific community often demands things like facts, something that her more recent campaigns against GMO does not contain at all.

 

[Svartbjørn]

Well you can't. But that does not stop other people from doing so. People use words to mean what they think they mean.

Couldnt resist.