Is geoengineering occuring?

What you are ignoring is that any action taken would need to take place over thousands of square miles at the least. Russia might have the territory to do it, but Russia is not that wealthy. They really have a military industrial complex. They are extremely dependent on the sales of natural resources, oil and gas that they send to Europe (there is some evidence that they are behind some of the anti fracking campaigns), gold and the price on it has dropped. They have a lot of diamonds, but that market is easy to flood and to collapse the prices. Twenty per cent of folks in Russia work in the defense industry.

Russia is not that wealthy.
 
Cairenn said:
What you are ignoring is that any action taken would need to take place over thousands of square miles at the least. Russia might have the territory to do it, but Russia is not that wealthy. They really have a military industrial complex. They are extremely dependent on the sales of natural resources, oil and gas that they send to Europe (there is some evidence that they are behind some of the anti fracking campaigns), gold and the price on it has dropped. They have a lot of diamonds, but that market is easy to flood and to collapse the prices. Twenty per cent of folks in Russia work in the defense industry.

Russia is not that wealthy.
Click to expand...
Who is presently? That is why I would expect cost sharing with private sources . . . Russia sells or donates its excess sulfur from its massive oil and gas production and someone buys the aircraft and pays for the injection . . . A win-win situation and Putin saves the world!!! LoL!
 
Last edited:
Maybe Putin has already started? LoL!

And now it's global COOLING! Record return of Arctic ice cap as it grows by 60% in a year
  • Almost a million more square miles of ocean covered with ice than in 2012
  • BBC reported in 2007 global warming would leave Arctic ice-free in summer by 2013
  • Publication of UN climate change report suggesting global warming caused by humans pushed back to later this month
By DAVID ROSE
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...global-warming-predictions.html#ixzz2fWqhTJwe
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Click to expand...
 
George B said:
Maybe Putin has already started? LoL!
Click to expand...
The international scientific community understands the risks of Geoengineering and fears unilateral actions . . .
“Unless the apparent lack of political will to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions changes soon, geoengineering may be needed and SRM methods could be used in unregulated and possibly reckless ways by individuals, corporations or individual countries,” said Professor John Shepherd, Fellow of the Royal Society and a co-chair of SRMGI.” These actions would have consequences beyond national borders that are as yet unknown. We must also work outside our national borders, bringing together interested parties from around the globe to debate the issues of geoengineering, agree appropriate governance structures and ensure that any research is undertaken in a safe, transparent and socially acceptable manner. The question of whether solar geoengineering will prove to be helpful or harmful will largely depend on how humanity can govern the issue and its political implications, and avoid unilateral action.”
http://www.srmgi.org/report/
Click to expand...

 
Last edited:
George B said:
Maybe Putin has already started? LoL!
Click to expand...
Nice to see you back George. BTW what is the 'O club'?

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...global-warming-predictions.html#ixzz2fXTBWqNh

And now it's global COOLING! Record return of Arctic ice cap as it grows by 60% in a year
The continuing furore caused by The Mail on Sunday’s revelations – which will now be amplified by the return of the Arctic ice sheet – has forced the UN’s climate change body to hold a crisis meeting.
Content from External Source
I bet it has. Now how are they going to spin this?

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was due in October to start publishing its Fifth Assessment Report – a huge three-volume study issued every six or seven years. It will now hold a pre-summit in Stockholm later this month.

Leaked documents show that governments which support and finance the IPCC are demanding more than 1,500 changes to the report’s ‘summary for policymakers’. They say its current draft does not properly explain the pause.

At the heart of the row lie two questions: the extent to which temperatures will rise with carbon dioxide levels, as well as how much of the warming over the past 150 years – so far, just 0.8C – is down to human greenhouse gas emissions and how much is due to natural variability.
Content from External Source
Or maybe the whole global warming/global changing/global wierding/climate change...has been blown out of all proportion and used for political expediency... now there is an 'off the wall' concept.

BTW Russia has experienced unprecedented floods over a massive area over the last few months but this has received little attention in Western media. Some are saying it is more evidence of global warming but is it, or is it simply that the weather on Earth is not as settled as some would like to think?

http://robertscribbler.wordpress.co...d-disaster-worsens-amur-river-to-hit-30-feet/

 
Hello Oxy . . . it has been a while . . . o'club is short for officer's club where military officer members go for a few drinks after a long day . . . my days were usually too long to participate . . .

I agree with your questions above . . . however, I fall on the side that warming is real but it has many complex causes and may be cyclical as well in ways we have yet to comprehend . . .
 
Is or has Geoengineering been undertaken?

1) Can large scale Geoengineering occur without detection?

2) How would one detect such activities?

3) Is there monitoring done that would raise a flag quick enough to prevent environmental damage?

4) Could experimentation occur without the scientific communities' knowledge?

5) Is anyone looking for such activity?

6) If detected could it be stopped?
 
Last edited:
George B said:
I agree with your questions above . . . however, I fall on the side that warming is real but it has many complex causes and may be cyclical as well in ways we have yet to comprehend . . .
Click to expand...
I wouldn't disagree with climate getting warmer over the short term but I think it is being investigated from a politicised viewpoint. Very complex with warring factions, not least the oil & gas sector. I think politically it is a means of creating fear and money whilst dampening underdeveloped Countries ability to pursue their own industrial revolution and to make them reliant on technology predominantly from the West.

However, our emissions do need to be cut, 'just in case' and also for the fact that we do not want to live in a toxic soup but that seems to be politically impractical as well. It is definitely a complex issue. One of the biggest and simplest changes I see is to legislate on the emissions of ships which apparently 16 of, produce as much pollution as the global pollution from cars.

I also see the issue of pollution being a major stumbling block to Globalisation
 
Last edited:
 
George B said:
Is or has Geoengineering been undertaken?

1) Can large scale Geoengineering occur without detection?

2) How would one detect such activities?

3) Is there monitoring done that would raise a flag quick enough to prevent environmental damage?

4) Could experimentation occur without the scientific communities' knowledge?

5) Is anyone looking for such activity?

6) If detected could it be stopped?
Click to expand...

No need to keep asking the same old questions, George.
They have all been answered before.
There was a page that went many many pages where we hashed and re-hashed all of this.

Why are you starting over as if that didn't happen?
 
The secret to understanding geoengineering is that it MUST necessarily increase aerosol optical density (AOD), in simple words this means that the amount of aerosols in the atmosphere are increased. If this happens then the density of the atmosphere increases. This comes from the 2012 "State Of The Climate", produced by the American Meteorological Society, and is a compilation of research conducted by authors worldwide whose listing runs 8 pages long. You can easily see how clearly even forest fire changes in aerosol optical density can be seen by any of hundreds or thousands of scientists who continually try to out-do each other in discerning things that happen in our atmosphere.

Seeing geoengineering would be similarly easy to see.
If AOD anomalies did not match known ordinary sources of anomalies, they would be detectable, would be noticed and stopped.

AOD 2012.JPG
 
Jay Reynolds said:
The secret to understanding geoengineering is that it MUST necessarily increase aerosol optical density (AOD), in simple words this means that the amount of aerosols in the atmosphere are increased. If this happens then the density of the atmosphere increases. This comes from the 2012 "State Of The Climate", produced by the American Meteorological Society, and is a compilation of research conducted by authors worldwide whose listing runs 8 pages long. You can easily see how clearly even forest fire changes in aerosol optical density can be seen by any of hundreds or thousands of scientists who continually try to out-do each other in discerning things that happen in our atmosphere.

Seeing geoengineering would be similarly easy to see.
If AOD anomalies did not match known ordinary sources of anomalies, they would be detectable, would be noticed and stopped.

AOD 2012.JPG
Click to expand...
Jay . . . you didn't answer #6) . . . If detected could it be stopped? . . . and I don't think a slow, gradual, measured injection would necessarily be seen above the background noise for many, many months or not at all . . . I wonder how an expert from NASA might answer the questions?
 
Last edited:
George B said:
Jay . . . you didn't answer #6) . . . If detected could it be stopped? . . . and I don't think a slow, gradual, measured injection would necessarily be seen above the background noise for many, many months or not at all . . . I wonder how an expert from NASA might answer the questions?
Click to expand...

I don't think NASA has any experts in atmospheric geoengineering.

Your question #6 begs a few questions; like, If it were detected, could you determine the culprit.
 
Ross Marsden said:
I don't think NASA has any experts in atmospheric geoengineering.

Your question #6 begs a few questions; like, If it were detected, could you determine the culprit.
Click to expand...
I think Jay implies one could determine source, etc or at least it would be so obvious who the culprit was that it is a non issue (which I don't agree with). . . but I will let him speak for himself . . .

As far as NASA experts . . . me thinks their division dealing with persistent contrail, clouds and climate effects via satellite imaging, etc may qualify. . . Dr Minnis, etc.

http://ceres.larc.nasa.gov/index.php
 
Last edited:
AOD 2012.JPG

I'm having lots of internet problems because of heavy rain offshore Louisiana, and tried like hell to post this last night but failed.

The above image is from the AMS document "State of the Climate in 2012", page 35.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/news/2012-state-climate-report-released

This is a 258 page compilation of research about the climate last year. It is annual and past issues are available. The list of authors runs 8 pages.
These scientists compete with each other to identify notable happenings in the atmosphere. This competition means they are each trying to out-do the other in finding and explaining things like the anomalies shown.

It shows an snapshot example of the resolution available by satellite for Aerosol Optical Density (AOD). You can see fires in Siberia, but also fires in the US western states. You can also see dust events from the US southwest heading northeast, and the major sources of amospheric solid aerosols, the Gobi and Sahara Deserts..

The anomaly map for
total AOD shows the extensive burning that occurred
in Russia and Siberia during the boreal summer and
the active dust season that induced increased transport
over the Atlantic Ocean, particularly in the dust
outflow area. It also shows an unusual bull's-eye of
positive values in central Africa. The feature was
caused by the eruption of volcano Nyiragongo (DR
Congo, 1.52°S, 29.25°E), with an additional plume
Click to expand...

If geoengineering were taking place, it could not be hidden any more than a forest fire or dust storm could.
 
Jay Reynolds said:
AOD 2012.JPG

I'm having lots of internet problems because of heavy rain offshore Louisiana, and tried like hell to post this last night but failed.

The above image is from the AMS document "State of the Climate in 2012", page 35.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/news/2012-state-climate-report-released

This is a 258 page compilation of research about the climate last year. It is annual and past issues are available. The list of authors runs 8 pages.
These scientists compete with each other to identify notable happenings in the atmosphere. This competition means they are each trying to out-do the other in finding and explaining things like the anomalies shown.

It shows an snapshot example of the resolution available by satellite for Aerosol Optical Density (AOD). You can see fires in Siberia, but also fires in the US western states. You can also see dust events from the US southwest heading northeast, and the major sources of amospheric solid aerosols, the Gobi and Sahara Deserts..



If geoengineering were taking place, it could not be hidden any more than a forest fire or dust storm could.
Click to expand...
Why? The sulfur compounds would most likely be visually invisible, not from one recognizable static origin and with an infrared signature quickly the same as the ambient environment . . . and even if seen would probably look no different than a persistent or regular contrail . . .
 
Last edited:
Get real, George. AOD is not infrared or visible. IT IS AOD!
Finally got the image to load after ten tries.....

AOD 2012.JPG
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jay Reynolds said:
Get real, George. AOD is not infrared or visible. IT IS AOD!
Finally got the image to load after ten tries.....

AOD 2012.JPG
Click to expand...
Jay, just how would you know what causes an increase or decrease in AOD?!? . . . NOAA took months or more correctly years to decide it was possibly caused by volcanic activity in the Tropics in 2011 . . .


As the caption says, satellite measurements are denoted by the thick black curve. Note the large increase in AOD (higher opacity) over the tropics in the mid-2000s (b) and the large AOD increase over the northern mid-latitudes in the late-2000s (a). While not a perfect fit to the observations, the model run with volcanic eruptions (red curve) does the best job of explaining the origin of the SO2.
http://weatherdem.wordpress.com/201...gely-responsible-for-recent-warming-slowdown/
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
George B said:
Jay, just how would you know what causes an increase or decrease in AOD?!? . . . NOAA took months or more correctly years to decide it was possibly caused by volcanic activity in the Tropics in 2011 . . .
Click to expand...
You or I might not know, George, but there are many people out there worldwide who have a great incentive to know, and they would find out.

You want sulfur? Got it, daily:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Think they are spraying you with particulates like aluminum oxide, barium, or strontium??
Got it, daily.



See that evil "Dr. No"? He is clearly spraying particulates from the two most prolific sources of mineral dust on earth, the Sahara and Gobi deserts. "Crafty fellow, James, have to get you and Miss. Moneypenny out there right away.......
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bottom line, George, this information isn't on a "need to know" basis.
It is on a "want to know" basis for those who "want to understand".
 
Jay Reynolds said:
Bottom line, George, this information isn't on a "need to know" basis.
It is on a "want to know" basis for those who "want to understand".
Click to expand...
I think NOAA's inability to decide the true source of SO2 as recently as 2011 is sufficient evidence to me to prove all the above data is not sufficient in precision to identify with adequate certainty the origins of any variation in AOD. If NOAA has trouble with all their resources, to expect anyone else to prove SO2 injection is or is not been being accomplished and discover the moving, distributed, low volume point sources represented by aircraft is highly unlikely . . . unless you feel there is only now brand new technology. . .
 
You can think whatever you want, George. The data is right there in front of anyone in the world to see. There is also Aeronet, a worldwide ground based network which does "ground truth" for those satellite measurements.
Reject them if you want to, but from the look of it you didn't even know that real-time AOD by species was available like that.
I don't mean to be insulting, but I did bring up the 2011 State of the Climate last year to you when you were going all paranoid like this, perhaps you should have studied up on aerosol science before you started thinking/speculating about aerosol science.....????? :eek:
 
You want to know what I think, George? "I think, and that is sufficient evidence to me", that Dr. No's particulate dispersion coincidentally at the world's largest source of mineral dust, the Sahara Desert, is stopping all the hurricanes from forming of Cape Verde this year.

You and Miss Moneypenny had better get over there and stop that, old chap!
bond.jpg bond.jpg
 
Jay Reynolds said:
See that evil "Dr. No"? He is clearly spraying particulates from the two most prolific sources of mineral dust on earth, the Sahara and Gobi deserts. "Crafty fellow, James, have to get you and Miss Moneypenny out there right away..."
Click to expand...
That cloud washes over the Canary Islands occasionally, so I can vouch for its existence, (George! :)).

But at the moment we have crystal clear motionless air...
 
Last edited:
Jazzy said:
That cloud washes over the Canary Islands occasionally, so I can vouch for its existence, (George! :)).

But at the moment we have crystal clear motionless air...
Click to expand...
It is time to ask the experts . . . instead of the continual discussion . . . I maintain the existing monitoring technology is inadequate to . . .

1) Prove or disprove the existence of a newly initiated well conceived stratospheric Sulfur injection program for example by Russia or Canada or allowed within their territories by a private group . . .

2) And if established there is no way anyone could stop them under the existing international law or Treaty . . . and that is exactly what is feared as possible by some of the world's scientific community . . .
 
The has an article on geoengineering today which lists eth following technologies as being under investigation:


Solar radiation management (SRM)
  • Albedo enhancement: Increasing the reflectivity of clouds or the land surface so that more of the Sun's heat is reflected back into space
  • Space reflectors: Blocking a small proportion of sunlight before it reaches the Earth
  • Stratospheric aerosols: Introducing small, reflective particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect some sunlight before it reaches the surface of the Earth
Carbon dioxide removal (CDR)
  • Afforestation: Global-scale tree-planting efforts
  • Biochar: Burning biomass (plant material) and burying it so that its carbon is locked up in the soil
  • Bio-energy with carbon capture and sequestration: Growing biomass, burning it for energy and capturing and locking away the CO2 generated in the process
  • Ambient air capture: Building machines that can remove CO2 directly from ambient air and store it elsewhere
  • Ocean fertilisation: Adding nutrients to the ocean in selected locations to increase marine food production, which draws down CO2 from the atmosphere
  • Enhanced weathering: Exposing large quantities of minerals that react with carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and storing the resulting compounds in the oceans or soil
  • Ocean alkalinity enhancement: Grinding up, dispersing, and dissolving rock types such as limestone, silicate, or calcium hydroxide in the ocean to increase its ability to store carbon and directly ameliorate ocean acidification
Content from External Source
And contrary to the popular CT belief that it is all about spraying stuff in the atmosphere it says:
The most scrutinised technology so far has been ocean fertilisation, which involves using iron to stimulate phytoplankton growth in the ocean, increasing the uptake of CO2.
Content from External Source
 
George B said:
2) And if established there is no way anyone could stop them under the existing international law or Treaty . . . and that is exactly what is feared as possible by some of the world's scientific community . . .
Click to expand...


As per the BBC link, altering the weather of another country is a war crime......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

John J.
Is "Improved Instrumental Techniques...", Nolan, Vallee, Jiang, Lemke 2022 a useful paper?
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
Z.W. Wolf
Z.W. Wolf
NorCal Dave
Meta Materials From UFOs
2 3 4
Replies
134
Views
23K
Gary C
Gary C
NorCal Dave
Claim: The Plasmoid Unification Model (PUM) of Malcolm Bendall provides "free energy".
2
Replies
66
Views
21K
Mendel
Mendel
NorCal Dave
Claim: A UFO crashed in 1933 Italy and the US Recovered it
Replies
24
Views
4K
john.phil
J
NorCal Dave
Claim: Ancient Egyptians Could Not Work Granite Without High-Tech Diamond Tools
2
Replies
60
Views
12K
JMartJr
JMartJr

Latest posts

Back
Top