Here’s an excerpt of an AP story posted on Brietbart by President Obama’s science advisor, John Holdren, suggesting putting particulate matter into the air to reflect sunlight.
It seems like we’ve already tried that and then cleaned it up in the last century.
Excerpt:
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.”
Full story here
Note to commenters, while this is a political story also, please keep the discussion limited to the science. – Anthony
h/t to Mark Danner
Climate information is even coming from financial advisor Bob Hoye of Institutional Advisors. (Hoye is a true guru who predicted the current financial mess long before others did.) Anyway, if enough of this type of information is spread from enough sources, maybe it will even get over the climate wall high-IQ Obama has erected around his administration.
http://www.safehaven.com/article-13044.htm
Reply: Flagged for possible deletion because contents not discussing the science, but politics ~ charles the moderator
Chris Ballance (15:36:27) :
I snickered a bit….however, if we had the fusion we wouldn’t need the atmosphere processor! LOL
I’m with you Rasmin!
I find this whole proposal for geo-engineering of the global climate by an American presidential adviser to just plain bloody arrogant and stupid in the extreme but not particularly out of character for some of the current American leadership!
The underlying assumption is that the American political and scientific hierarchy who comprise the leadership of less then 400 million humans or about 6% out of the earth’s 6.8 billions, have the god given right to unilaterally go ahead with a potentially catastrophic attempt at modifying and changing the global climate.
This purely on the basis that some of the political and scientific cadre of leaders believe that a predicted climate catastrophe based only on the outcome of some very dodgy, non proven American created climate models is leading to a “potential” global climate warming disaster.
They arrogantly assume that they have the right to do what they wish and can just go ahead in attempting to change the global climate regardless of the needs, wishes and life threatening consequences for the other 94% of the human race.
Those other human inhabitants of this planet, particularly the poorer and non influential people who with only very limited resources to protect themselves from the consequences of such an experiment and who may face the ultimate fate from a massive global climate changing experiment going wrong, will not even be asked if they want such an extremely dangerous climate modifying experiment to proceed with all it’s completely unknown long term consequences.
I am pro-american and admire much about America but sometimes like this time, the sheer gall, hubris and utter arrogance and ignorance of the American leadership is just a little too much to swallow for anybody who is not an American and I suspect for a lot of thinking Americans as well.
Reply: Flagged for possible deletion because contents not discussing the science, but politics ~ charles the moderator
Re: Don B (12:48:28) : “Obama is a bright, high IQ person”
Bright, yes; high IQ, no way of knowing. What we do know is that Obama is ignorant in many areas. He is downright stupid, an acquired trait, in addition to being a serial lying sociopath. His selection of advisers is consistent with his persona.
Regarding Holdren’s idiocy, he proposes a challenge for engineers and geologists. They need to identify the places in tectonic plate systems where well placed H-bombs can be detonated to cause earthquakes and trigger volcanic eruptions sufficient to precipitate the next ice age.
I know that the “Fallen Angels” hypothesis was plausible. Now I know how it occurred.
Reply: Flagged for possible deletion because contents primarily heavy politics ~ charles the moderator
Ron de Haan:
Thanks. Huaynaputina the heralder of Maunder Minimum was catastrophic, VEI=6. You know, the bigger ones are the ones which has been dormant for many hundred years, as it was the case with the Chaiten (900 years). Near the Huaynaputina there is one dormant by : The Misti volcano, it has not erupted since more than 700 years ago; it has a city at his base with more than one million inhabitants (Arequipa city).
A VEI=7 you are expecting for, it would be really too much.
ROM (16:27:03) :
“I am pro-american and admire much about America but sometimes like this time, the sheer gall, hubris and utter arrogance and ignorance of the American leadership is just a little too much to swallow for anybody who is not an American and I suspect for a lot of thinking Americans as well”.
Rom,
Unlike the EU and the British Government that already have surrendered to Cap&Trade and 80% CO2 reduction schemes by 2050, the US Congress recently rejected similar proposals from the Obama Administration budget.
I still see the US as the most vibrant democracy in the World and I am still confident that common sense will prevail.
It will be a hard fight but it’s winnable.
Reply: Flagged for possible deletion because contents not discussing the science, but politics ~ charles the moderator
What are the odds that the neo-malthusians want to plunge us into an ice age to reduce population and consumption. That man is even contemplating messing with global climate with our dismal understanding of the science is horrifying. Reminds me of my attempts at the age of 8 to improve some household appliances with a screwdriver and hammer. Lost my allowance for a year to pay for my mistakes
Reply: Flagged for possible deletion because contents not discussing the science, but politics ~ charles the moderator
I agree about being cold enough. I am cold enough. Done with cold actually. Want cold to go away. Want warm.
Adolfo Giurfa (16:43:38) :
“Ron de Haan:
Thanks. Huaynaputina the heralder of Maunder Minimum was catastrophic, VEI=6. You know, the bigger ones are the ones which has been dormant for many hundred years, as it was the case with the Chaiten (900 years). Near the Huaynaputina there is one dormant by : The Misti volcano, it has not erupted since more than 700 years ago; it has a city at his base with more than one million inhabitants (Arequipa city).
A VEI=7 you are expecting for, it would be really too much”.
Well Adolfo,
During the little ice age there were on average five major volcanic eruptions per century.
I was thinking about a Mount Tambora like eruption (1815, Year without a Summer 1816) 140 Giga tonnes (This makes it a VE7 eruption)
The same goes for the Laki Eruption (also a VE7) see:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laki#1783_eruption.
Some geological statisticians are convinced that a VE7 or even a VE8 is on the menu soon.
Many of the volcano’s that were active during the Maunder and Dalton Minimum
are still active today.
Volcano’s are the absolute wild card.
Richard Sharpe (14:13:30):
Adam (London, England) says:
As far as I know there hasn’t been a large ozone hole recorded over the arctic.
Surely, you are wrong. Since most CFCs are produced in the Northern Hemisphere, I am sure that the Ozone hole over the Arctic would have to be bigger than the one over the Antarctic.
It is probable that in order to avoid panic the MSM have been covering up the fact of the large Ozone hole over the Arctic.
Richard… Adam is right; it’s not an ozone hole but an ozone layer depletion.
Regarding Volcanic/seismic activity concurrent with grand solar minima: We should be asking ourselves if correlation exists between the two, and if yes, is this more than coincidence?
OT Llaima volcano blocked with debri. Code Red
http://scienceblogs.com/eruptions/2009/04/llaima_vent_blocked_with_debri.php
So when did polluting and destroying your environment become good for the earth?
As a matter of fact, this is criminal and would reverse any REAL positive steps we have taken in the last 50 years to clean our environment and make our planet a better place to live on for both us and nature, on REAL issues.
It sounds more like criminal negligence’s to the environment, ignoring extreme consequential damage that might be caused, based on a belief or religion.
Kind of like the Exxon Valdez captain running a ground because he heard there might be mermaids in the water.
We’re living in bizarro times.
Mike Bryant (12:18:19) :
I’m having alot of trouble thinking of anything scientific to say about such an unscientific idea, so maybe I’ll just ask a question or two. Do scientists have anything comparable to the Hippocratic Oath that doctors have?
Mike here’s something interesting about the science of medicine I found today:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123914878625199185.html
“Dr. David Sackett, a pioneer of “evidence-based medicine,” where results from clinical trials rather than anecdotes are used to guide physician practice, famously said, “Half of what you’ll learn in medical school will be shown to be either dead wrong or out of date within five years of your graduation; the trouble is that nobody can tell you which half — so the most important thing to learn is how to learn on your own.” Science depends upon such a sentiment, and honors the doubter and iconoclast who overturns false paradigms.”
Too bad they can’t think like that concerning climate science.
I love this plan! Use “good pollution” to battle “bad pollution” kinda like Mothra vs Batra!
This wingnut scientist is a leftover from the days of eugenics, conservationists and Gaians and has been a doomsayer for about 30 years or more. Never right once, but hey being right has never qualified anyone to be the Science Adviser!
Never watched any doomsday movies? The Science Adviser is always a pompous ass who ignores the facts, distorts the science or caused the problem… life imitates art.
From “The Core” ( most under-rated doom film of the century)
Astronaut: “What if we get there and the core is thicker or thinner than we expect”
Science Adviser Guy… “What if the core is made of cheese! Best guess that is all science is”
Astronaut : “I will take that as you don’t know”
Roughly transcribed my memory may not be perfect and I am too tired to hunt for movie dialog right now.
All this disparagement of Advisor Holdren’s intelligence is uncalled for and misses the mark. I once had a fellow working for me who had a PhD in nuclear physics and an I.Q. probably beyond measure. I discovered the bleary-eyed scientist spent his nights walking our high voltage power lines while equipped with special electronic gear of his own design intended to detect flying saucers. Apparently, the man had convinced himself that our transmission line losses were the result of flying saucers feeding off those lines at night when no one was watching.
I think of that fellow often these days. I.Q. and the innate ability to spot the difference between truth and fiction are two entirely different things.
Claude, you said, “I think of that fellow often these days. I.Q. and the innate ability to spot the difference between truth and fiction are two entirely different things.”
It seems like many of the people here have extremely high B.Q.s (Bullsnip Quotient).
Charles the moderator, Thank you for restraint in NOT deleting some very pertinent comments here, political or not.
I have followed Holdren for at least 20 years now, and have long recognised that he is a first class wacko!
Claude Harvey,
Wonderful story!
The guy who invented this no doubt also has an astronomical I.Q.
This would be a disaster. One tiny mistake (like doing the calculations in Liters and the application in gallons, see: NASA) and we are screwed. Why in the world would you tinker with something you barely understand?
This reminds me of a clip from a song where Dr. Frankstein and Igor are wild with glee saying “We’ve done it! We’ve done it!………… Uhoh……..”
Lee Kington touched on what is most important about this idea of using particulate distribution to cool the atmosphere. IMO, we are well within “natural variation”, even if it can be proven that man is having an affect on the global temp. To “engineer the atmosphere” is most assuredly going to result in unexpected consequences. Look at the recent “iron filings” experiment in the ocean. Results that NO ONE foresaw. The one surety in all this is that the result will be drastically different than what was intended. No one should be allowed to experiment with humanity in the balance.
This thread is about John Holdren suggesting that releasing particulate matter into the atmosphere will help slow global warming.
I read all of these “flags” here Charles and I appreciate what you are trying to do that is keep things on focus….
But in this case [as in many others] science and politics are bound together inextricably…because EVERYTHING is bound together.
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act” George Orwell
And that is what this site is about. TELLING THE TRUTH. And so when one has to make a political statement to do so [without making an ad hominem], then I would say…many of the “flags”..are inappropriate.
I am expecting a “flag” for my post [but I hope not]. Regardless…it is important to remember: That the topic of this thread is less scientific [in an of itself] than it is political [because John Holdren is involved].
Sorry. He is the WORST possible candidate for any science advisor for any presidency because he is EXACTLY what you are trying to prevent here: politicization at its zenith!
Thanks for your consideration of my thoughts here. I appreciate what you all are trying to accomplish here…and am definitely a fan.
But the thread topic “Holdren suggests Climate Engineering with Particulates”… can not be commented upon without some occasional political inference.
Best,
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Several comments have touched on the effect previous levels of air pollution might have had on surface temperatures. I have to confess that this is not a point I had heard or thought of before.
It seems obvious that air pollution would reduce surface temperatures in the areas it affects for the simple reason that the nice warm rays can’t get to us because of the nasty fug. That seems to be the reasoning behind the current proposal and if it’s true now it must follow it was true before. But I have no idea to what extent this might have affected historic temperature readings nor whether it is taken into account in Dr Hansen’s computer game.
I don’t recall ever hearing of Outer Mongolia or Borneo being affected by smog as a result of steel factories in Yorkshire or Pittsburgh pumping grime into the air. Smog seems to be enjoyed predominantly by those who create it. If that is so, I would expect to see suppressed temperatures in the industrialised countries during the smoggy years with an increase when the sky turned from black to blue as de-filthing measures came into effect. These are, as I understand it, the very countries that have the longest and most reliable surface temperature measurements.
Of itself, that would suggest that we should have seen warming over the last fifty years or so as cleaner air has allowed more of the Sun’s nice warming juices to dribble down to our bounteous lands and the thermometers thereon.
Is there any learning on this subject?
Just light off a few volcanoes like Pinatubo, Krakatoa, or even a super volcanic erruption from Yellow Stone, and we could get all the cooling we could ever want and then some!
George E. Smith (15:19:32) :
We barely have scratched the surface of explaining how this chaotic ocean/atmosphere system even works; and people are talking about re-engineering a system that nobody understands fully; and have an unlimited budget to try and do that.
This sounds eerily like the Army Corps of Engineers at work, George.
Mark