Royal Society wants man-made volcanoes to fight climate change

Here’s an interesting story from the Times. One wonders if the Royal Society is ready to deal with all the unintended and unmodeled consequences of such actions? The last man-made volcano didn’t go over so well. – Anthony

A familiar man-made volcano - The Mirage in Vegas - Image courtesy PDphoto.org

A familiar man-made volcano - The Mirage in Vegas - Image courtesy PDphoto.org

From The Sunday Times August 30, 2009

Man-made volcanoes may cool Earth

Jonathan Leake, Environment Editor

THE Royal Society is backing research into simulated volcanic eruptions, spraying millions of tons of dust into the air, in an attempt to stave off climate change.

The society will this week call for a global programme of studies into geo-engineering — the manipulation of the Earth’s climate to counteract global warming — as the world struggles to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

It will suggest in a report that pouring sulphur-based particles into the upper atmosphere could be one of the few options available to humanity to keep the world cool.

The intervention by the Royal Society comes amid tension ahead of the United Nations-sponsored climate talks in Copenhagen in December to agree global cuts in carbon dioxide emissions. Preliminary discussions have gone so badly that many scientists believe geo-engineering will be needed as a “plan B”.

Ken Caldeira, an earth scientist at Stanford University, California, and a member of a Royal Society working group on geo-engineering, said dust sprayed into the stratosphere in volcanic eruptions was known to cool the Earth by reflecting light back into space.

“If I had a dollar for geo-engineering research I would put 90 cents of it into stratospheric aerosols and 10 cents into everything else,” said Caldeira.

The interest in so-called aerosols is linked to the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines in 1991, the second largest volcanic eruption of the 20th century. The explosion blasted up to 20m tons of tiny sulphur particles into the air, cooling the planet by about 0.5C before they fell back to earth.

The Royal Society is Britain’s premier science institution and its decision to take geo-engineering seriously is a measure of the desperation felt by scientists about climate change.

read the rest of the story here

Advertisements

135 thoughts on “Royal Society wants man-made volcanoes to fight climate change

  1. having flown right by Mt Pinatubo as it was erupting in 91 on a flight to Hong Kong I doubt we have the technology to create an explosion of that size and ferocity unless it’s nuclear.
    Is there any evidence that the 1000 nuclear blasts that occurred in the 50s and 60s had any effect on global temps?

  2. And what happens if a real one erupts in the meantime and causes too much cooling?
    Like this for example.
    But this moronic behavior is what we are going to get with people brainwashed into believing there actually is unnatural warming going on.

  3. But if the world is cooling down because of lower solar activity, wouldn’t this be a very bad idea.
    Thank goodness for negative feedbacks in the climate system.

  4. This idea has been around for a while: Dr Tim Flannery in Australia’s resident chief warming alarmist, raised this issue a year or two ago.
    Perhaps I am completely wrong, and it is a good thing to investigate. More likely however, it is just a really dumb idea, designed to fix a “problem” that doesn’t exist (ie the climate change now occurring is an extension of the last 20,000 years of warming since the last Ice Age, and its a good thing).
    Talk about the law of unintended consequences, pumping sulpur into the atmospere in any other context has a single name: pollution. And you just know whatever the outcome, it wouldn’t be good. I wonder if these guys have ever heard of acid rain, for starters?

  5. “spraying millions of tons of dust into the air”
    “pouring sulphur-based particles into the upper atmosphere”
    Haven’t the developed nations spent many years and dollars to prevent dust and sulphur-based particles from entering the atmosphere?
    Are these folks new to planet Earth?

  6. Looks like the lunatics have taken over The Royal Society as well.
    Interesting article on the Indonesian mud volcano, Anthony. It’s a small world: I worked with Richard Davies in the mid nineties – we were doing field mapping in eastern Venezuela. Natural mud volcanoes are quite common both in Eastern Venezuela and Trinidad.

  7. I am not so sure that I could support the spraying of one of the components of acid rain into the atmosphere. It seems that the United States in the past 30 years has gone to great expense to stop the emission of these same chemicals into the atmosphere. Also if we are going to make great expensive experiments into the cooling of the planet maybe we should look at the current empirical evidence. I mean the recent evidence that suggests that the earth is very possibly not warming and may actually be cooling. I have great doubts that we are any where near a tipping point. Understand that I am not a scientists but I do read and try to keep myself informed. In my severely limited opinion we have a great deal to learn about climate before we should try to do any engineering to change something that we do not fully understand.
    Great job Anthony keeping us informed on the upcoming foolishness being proposed by these climate “scientists”. The climate is complex in the extreme and very chaotic in nature. I suspect that it will cure itself if we will just leave it alone.
    I personally think that we would be better stewards of our wealth if we would concentrate on pollution that we can do something about, real pollution. We should be more concerned about the availability of good usable fresh water, plenty to drink, plenty to keep clean with, plenty for agriculture/food production, and plenty for industry. CO2 isn’t a pollutant it is a natural gas that has been produced and absorbed and stored by nature since the earth was formed. We have other things that have a very much more sever impact on on the health and welfare of the animal and plants on the earth.
    Thanks for listening to my rant,
    Bill Derryberry

  8. Are these guys nuts? This geo-engineering to solve an imaginary problem leaves me utterly speechless.
    And what amazes me is that the they are trying to solve a supposedly man-made problem with yet another man-made solution!
    Leave the world alone and let if find its natural balance. “What’s so good about the climate we have now that we can’t let it change?” asked George Wills.

  9. Lying behind this and all other absurd attempts to change the weather is the most staggering degree of arrogance.
    I say “weather” not “climate” deliberately because there is no prospect whatsoever of any of these feeble exercises in navel gazing having a long-term effect. But that is not what I really want to say.
    I want to point out the breathtaking self-importance of those engaging in it. “Look at us, we are so powerful that we can influence the climate. Do you see how very important we are?” It amounts to nothing more than that.
    The effects of their proposed course of action are simply unknowable. There is nothing against which they can be measured or even estimated to any sensible level of accuracy. It is yet another futile gesture designed to fool the little people into thinking that human beings in the developed world – the tiny speck on the planet that we are – have the power to control the environment.
    It’s completely nuts.

  10. Now I’m only a lowly geologist, rather than one of those lofty climate scientists, but it seems to me that volcanoes spew a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere when they are also flinging ash and other particulates about the globe. Wouldn’t that be kind of counter productive to those who buy the “CO2 causes climate change” folks?

  11. The trouble is that sulphuric acid, which is made from SO2, is scarce now and its price has increased. So it is a more profitable to produce it than to send SO2 to the atmosphere. Contradiction is if some factory or sulphide metals refinery were going to send SO2 to the atmosphere it would be punished by green laws all over the world.
    Surely this is to be classified as Fun Stuff.
    I think first we must know if it is me crazy or you are crazy, or perhaps they are crazy, or we are crazy!

  12. Although technically trained, I do not feel qualified to comment on most of the issues on this site, but this is so over the top that I can’t resist shouting “garbage”.

  13. “janama (17:11:38) :
    having flown right by Mt Pinatubo as it was erupting in 91 on a flight to Hong Kong I doubt we have the technology to create an explosion of that size and ferocity unless it’s nuclear.
    Is there any evidence that the 1000 nuclear blasts that occurred in the 50s and 60s had any effect on global temps?”
    You’d be surprised;
    http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/Trinity.html

  14. The Matrix (redux ) ” We know who burned the sky.”
    On the other hand sulfur is needed for crops such as corn, and it is in short supply lately and getting worse. http://www.dtnprogressivefarmer.com/dtnag/common/link.do?symbolicName=/ag/blogs/template1&blogHandle=production&blogEntryId=8a82c0bc22ad9a1201231462321c052a . And: http://www.dtnprogressivefarmer.com/dtnag/common/link.do?symbolicName=/free/news/template2&product=/ag/free/news/rightnow&vendorReference=0702E648&paneContentId=2002&paneParentId=70104 .
    So sulfur isn’t all bad. No sulfur, no corn. No corn, no ethanol (among other things) . Sort of like CO2. Confusing isn’t it? Those damn unanticipated consequences just keep getting in the way.

  15. What is truely scary is that I suspect this is feasible and for a few hundred billion dollars (far less than the cost of Cap and Trade) could be done on a scale that actually effects the climate. Think tall chimneys which would have a natural updraft due the temperature difference between the ground and altitude, or had fans to pump air upward. Then inject dust or aerosols into the rising air.
    I’ve seen these kinds of chimneys proposed as a way of generating ‘clean’ energy and as way of getting iron into the ocean to promote algal growth and capture carbon.
    I thought this lunacy couldn’t get any worse. This proposal is utter madness.

  16. Oh yeah, and they’ll inadvertently vaporize limestone releasing that magical mystical gas and send us into the depths of …
    I guess all the genius’ are coming out to get on the gravy train.

  17. The Ridiculous society. It’s quite embarassing. someone on another thread that AGW ideology is going into the stupid stage. Thanks to the Royal society for taking us into the lunacy stage.
    Their global warming dogma is presented in an even more rudimentary and sparse way than the Met Office, devoid of data, proven models or possible doubts. At least the met office claim great uncertainties in present models. In fact, they almost boast about how uncertain their scenarios are.
    Who are the Royal Society to comment on matters about which they know even less?

  18. We don’t need a man-made volcano. Reverse some of those expensive automotive “clean air” regulations, including carbon, and phase them out again in the future, after global warming fears subside and clean burning, renewable fuels become more abundant and less expensive.
    Global temperatures began to rise in recent years when clean air standards phased out the “pollutants” faster than the use of fossil fuels (and CO2) could be phased out. Those “pollutants” were offsetting the relatively limited effects the increasing use of fossil fuels and associated CO2 might be having on global warming.
    AAR

  19. You know, it sure would be nice if we would throw more money into cold fusion research rather than hair-brained ideas like polluting our atmosphere in order to, “save it.”
    Seriously, why are we constantly looking for solutions to the side effects rather than the cause of the problem? If folks are really concerned about AGW, we should be investing in cleaner energy production rather than legislating CO2 emissions, trying to seed the atmosphere in order to make more clouds, or considering “simulating,” a volcanic eruption.
    I would have no problem wasting my tax dollars on funding expensive cold fusion research. I have a serious problem with our government trying to stifle our economic growth, or with our (or any other government) considering adding more pollution to our atmosphere in order to combat potential warming.

  20. Anthony, looking into that manmade volcano, it doesn’t sound to me like its actually man-made or man-caused. I was looking at this website: http://mikejkt.livejournal.com/14323.html, and it seems to me that there’s evidence this volcano wasn’t even remotely caused by the drilling. Just another case of a ‘scientist’ in the UK who did research from his computer and via satellite without actually looking at the evidence in person, and published a study devoid of the facts.

  21. “Hunt (18:41:47) :
    Seriously, why are we constantly looking for solutions to the side effects rather than the cause of the problem?”
    We meaning politicians? Because taxing the air we breathe and the fuels we use is….EASY!

  22. To tell you the truth, I’m sorta kinda all for a n ew Ice Age. Welfare bums don’t like living in states with real winters (particularly those with doctorates in desperate search for research grants). If we do it right, Mexico might wind up with an illegal immigration problem before the Royal Society numpties are done breaking things. Of course by then, THOSE guys would have made so much cash off of the grants they can retire to Cozumel on a legal retirement visa and not have to deal with the aftermath up nawth.

  23. Are these guys from the Royal Society stark raving mad as well as being so utterly arrogant that they believe they are so all powerful that they can control the global climate?
    Are they, with all their fancy degrees, really so utterly ignorant that they have never heard of the law of unintended consequences and the very good chance that they will destroy a good part of life on Earth when their crazed schemes go all wrong through consequences that neither they nor anybody else ever expected or foresaw?
    Have this tiny and completely arrogant bunch of totally self indulgent crazies ever bothered to ask the other six and three quarter billion people on this planet whether they want this mob of so called “climate scientists” to start messing with their weather and climate just so that this same almost invisible bunch of crazies can satisfy their own ideologically twisted mindset?
    The Royal Society was once a great and respected institution.
    With this sort of proposition emanating from it’s former hallowed halls, it is demonstrating it’s accelerating fall from the promotion of rational science and is degenerating into an outpost of extremism of the worst possible kind.

  24. Oh dear, more evidence that the left are completely unhinged… next thing they’ll be wanting us to detonate nuclear weapons in the Antarctic to create nuclear winter…

  25. Unfortunately, the state of science in England at the moment is quite dire with regard to veracity or explanations. It might have something to do with us being a small island with a corresponding myopic personality and so therefore take an advocacy based position which frames the evidence to fit the facts, than using facts to form a theory.
    I know that in the US, Germany, Denmark, Australia – in short, most countries with an aptitude for sound science there are many presenting peer reviewed and empirical studies the don’t confer this political agenda that has corrupted science on the matter of climate.
    in the UK we seem to have a lack of this. Maybe we’re just too homogenous a society and so when our institutions are wrong,. they are wrong all the way to the last degree. I must say, this position taken by this odd Royal Society is almost as amusing as some of the bizarre claims made by Aristotle. However, Aristotle wasn’t a ‘doom and gloom and life is woe advocate, but don’t worry, we can save the world just like Doctor Who’
    Perhaps too much science fiction has blurred the distinction between imagination and reality.
    Reply: There must be something left of the England that gave us Newton and Shackleton. ~ ctm

  26. Pineapples!
    We’ll fire them into the stratosphere causing them to freeze
    and explode into highly reflective sub-atomic pineappicules.
    This will reflect incoming radiation, cooling the atmosphere
    and creating a stratospheric smoothie. The Gaia Mother,
    being pleased, will allow us all to live happily ever after…..
    in Sedona!

  27. Hunt (18:41:47) :
    “I would have no problem wasting my tax dollars on funding expensive cold fusion research. I have a serious problem with our government trying to stifle our economic growth, or with our (or any other government) considering adding more pollution to our atmosphere in order to combat potential warming.”
    Im with you on that, (although im not sure how exactly cold and fusion go together) But as i understand it, fusion is mathematically possible, My brother has been doing some sums on this subject. And if he is to be believed it is doable. For that matter those fast breeder reactors show great potential. But certainly more practical things to be investing in, hell if we find out selves facing thermogedon, then its time for the half baked acts of lunacy. Not before hand.

  28. Some Dust Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest
    Chief Bromden: I’m not saying they killed him. They just worked on him. The way they’re working on you.

  29. How about waiting to entertain this idea until AFTER the MET office makes correct seasonal forecasts for three years running with their new super computer?

  30. I can’t believe these guys are serious. They must be trying to scare us into cutting carbon dioxide emissions by pretending the only other choice is even worse.
    Right?

  31. I strongly suspect that the reason cold fusion was ridiculed and all funding for it cut off was that had it proved a feasible energy source, it would have killed the AGW bandwagon stone dead, because the end of the age of fossil fuels and CO2 release into the atmosphere would have been clearly in sight.
    Climate scientists would now be modeling the effects of declining CO2 levels and the hysteria would be about the coming ice age.
    I’ve read the cold fusion papers and there is definitely a net energy producing process there, although its far from clear what it is.

  32. It could work.
    Or we could wait for 50 or 100 years to see if temperatures have actually increased.
    At least we’ll know if the Drake Equation needs to be adjusted for how long an intelligent civilization will last. It might need a pseudo-science run amok adjustment (on second thought, we should already make that change).

  33. “Tom in Texas (19:00:03) :
    Let’s drop a nuke into an active volcano and see what happens.
    Yeah, that would be fun.
    Any volcanos in Iran?”
    It’s funny, some people want to bomb Iran (Persia) when, after all, Iran didn’t exsit until the 1940’s. Iraq was formed in 1936, Israel in 1948. The whole region messed about with by the British to further their own political goals and fight the Turks. Palestine was Palestine…and what do we have today?
    Science isn’t happening in the pollitically correct UK. A blogger once said to me some years back that “communism” would have worked if it was applied to the UK rather than Russia. I am inclined to beileve that.

  34. A couple of ideas about the technology: How about a nuclear bomb on that pyramid of sulfur at Fort McMurray that no one seems able to market? Or how about a really big version of the science fair project that kids are told specifically to NOT do–a big, really big, unimaginably big, soda/vinegar volcano–but use sulfuric acid instead?
    In all seriousness, a cool planet will be a dry planet. Are the Royal Society geniuses ready to take the responsibility for that? Pinatubo had a pronounced effect on river discharge worldwide. The decline was something like 18%. This has the sound of another “we had to destroy the world in order to save it” sort of scheme.

  35. These people are mad and dangerous. This is non sense and even beyond crazyness the Royal Society lends itself to this farce.

  36. Stern documents the major increase and then reduction in anthropogenic sulfur.
    Reversal of the trend in global anthropogenic sulfur emissions, David I. Stern, Global Environmental Change 16 (2006) 207–220
    Now that North America cleaned up the air to breathe, we want to spend alot of money to make it dirty again?
    Better to have higher CO2 for more plant growth and more food, and fewer deaths from warmer weather.

  37. Can I get a government grant to spout silly ideas that will never be implemented, all in the name of saving the planet?
    I can prove, mathematically, that having busty blondes walk around topless will result in increased albedo, and so stave off the doom we’re headed for. Show me the (m/h)oney!

  38. If a fusion breakthrough were made today, it would still take 10-15 years before we could start deploying it commercially. And that doesn’t replace the fossil fuels we use for transportation, it would just take care of our electrical power. Anyway, look up LENR and Polywell. On Polywell, we should know within 18 months if it can led to a power reactor. LENR is interesting, but not so close to becoming a power source.
    The nuclear winter scenario is based on fires started by nuclear detonations, so you’d have to target forests, not ice caps. Since fires don’t drive particulates into the stratosphere, this never passed the laugh test for me.

  39. Umm yes.
    I don’t like dormant volcanoes, they tend to become active all of a sudden.
    If i am going to live next to a volcano I like it to be extinct. As indeed the one just up the road is.
    But why would you want to drop a fission/fusion device into an active volcano? Even if were 100 megatons or so it would not make much difference.
    Major volcanic events release energy on a scale so vast our little bombs are tinpot toys by comparison.
    Kindest Regards.

  40. From the comments above…GW skeptics are opposed to geoengineering.
    GW believers are also opposed to geoengineering. Though in bouts of pessimism, some will acknowledge that it might become a last resort.
    And there are others who have an interest. There is an easy prediction here, should global temperatures continue to rise…That geoengineering will be promoted as an alternative to serious CO2 cutbacks…

  41. People don’t get it. These folks are neo-malthusians, they want to speed up the coming ice age, to do so they have to convince the world they are fighting the myth of man made Global Warming. An ice age would wipe out 80% of the population, maybe more. Then they go, oops!, our bad, so sorry.

  42. OT On tamino’s blog open mind the following comment is made
    “But of course it’s possible sea level rise could be more; the simple model doesn’t allow for nonlinear behavior of the system, in particular it doesn’t anticipate accelerating disintegration of large ice sheets. ”
    To which I replied but equally it’s possible sea level rise could be less, particularly if there is no accelerating disintegration of ice sheets
    This comment however did not pass moderation. Why on earth not? It is hardly contentious just noting that it is equally possible that sea levels will not rise. Where is the harm in posting that?
    I doubt this will pass moderation either. If your readers don’t already I suggest they have a look at open mind which is a total misnomer and is home to the smuggest, self-satisfied, “we know best” brigade I have ever encountered anywhere

  43. It is amazing how some small human minds can actually propose such a trifle thing thinking it can change the world. This does expose how silly manmade global warming is.

  44. I mean, ” .. Are these guys from the Royal Society stark raving mad as well as being so utterly arrogant that they believe they are so all powerful that they can control the global climate? ”
    A better explanation would be that they are so narrowly focused on their speciality that actually questioning someone else’s idea about climate is the last thing on their minds. A sense of perspective is sadly lacking. None of them seem to consider that you can live in a cooler climate by simply moving further inland or South about 100 km.

  45. An ice age would wipe out 80% of the population, maybe more. Then they go, oops!, our bad, so sorry.
    Hmph. I’ll believe that when they go, “oops!, our bad, so sorry,” about DDT.
    I’m still waiting for them to go, “oops!, our bad, so sorry,” about anything.

  46. OT: Anthony, you might want to check out Dr. Roy Spencer’s blog. Interesting news posted today.

  47. Ian Plimer says that one good volcanic eruption releases more CO2 than humans do in a year. So that must mean that the dust from these volcanic eruptions would just be covering up the actual warming that they were producing from releasing all that CO2. Then since the cooling would only be temporary, we would have to destroy the world economy anyhow.
    And, since Anthony is a Denier, Everything he says is a politically motivated lie. So, he must have made all this up so that the truth sayers would look silly.
    And because of the law of unintended consequences, it will backfire on Anthony and then …..
    So, it follows that Al Gore is made of wood.

  48. One need only look at mankind’s attempts to “correct’ nature with the introduction of non-native species to see that this is a dangerous idea. Here in Oregon we are overrun with possums and nutria, English ivy and gorse, scotch broom, and hundreds of other pests. The Department of Fish and Wildlife has planted various game fish that have rendered our native cutthroat trout virtually extinct. While some would argue that we have already tampered with the climate, to deliberately do so would be an act of supreme arrogance, and the result another story of unintended consequences on a massive scale.

  49. The cognitive dissonance is just astounding. We spent the last 40 years getting sulfur and other particulates from power plants out of the air, now they want to put it back! Assuming CO2 really were a problem, a few hundred thorium fueled, passively safe, low waste/short half life, proliferation resistant nuclear reactors would eliminate it. But something that could actually be accomplished isn’t good enough for the greens because it would leave western civilization intact and allow the third world to rise from poverty. (I especially liked the juxtaposition of the infectious zombie next to the quotes from Prof. Launder – “civilisation as we know it will end within our grandchildren’s lifetime” – I think he’s already been infected! That will certainly happen if the radical greens get their way, however.)

  50. ^Ian (20:28:42) :
    I doubt anyone here does not already know what “Open Mind” really stands for. Grant Foster, er, Tamino, is just another RC-style apologist with an agenda.
    Mark

  51. OOPs indeed. Those are not words that you want to hear while geoengineering. Well, unless you are some kook environmentalist that thinks that there are too many people.
    Ya know as long as we suddenly want to put a bunch of sulfer into the air, why not burn only high sulfer coal in power plants? See, I knew you weren’t serious.
    These folks have lost their minds.

  52. John F. Hultquist (17:25:16) :
    “spraying millions of tons of dust into the air”
    “pouring sulphur-based particles into the upper atmosphere”
    Haven’t the developed nations spent many years and dollars to prevent dust and sulphur-based particles from entering the atmosphere?
    Are these folks new to planet Earth?

    No, but the Sunday Times editor appears to not have understood what they were telling him. The idea on the ‘synthetic volcano’ appears to be his, the ‘dust’ or ‘sulfur-based particles’ would be injected into the stratosphere of course (not where the developed nations have been trying to keep it from).

  53. It was E.Teller , of hydrogen bomb fame, who first mooted this, when the global warming scarecrow was first raised in the ’80s. He advised equipping jets with sulfur exuding outlets in the stratosphere to increase albedo,
    Geo engineering solutions should be reversible and easily controlled, if one believes that they are absolutely necessary.
    The seeding of clouds by self propelled ships http://www.eta.co.uk/2009/08/07/cloud-making-ships-tackle-climate-change
    is by far the most harmless and easily reversed solution.
    I believe global warming is a mass delusion, but as one deals with people who are living in their own reality, gently guiding them to the desired results, one should be talking of similar to the ships geoengineering solutions to appease their craziness. These ships will be harmless, except economically.
    A better channel to the geo engineering madness of AGW is space mirrors/shades. These could be reversed to be used in case the overdue ice age decides to set in, to increase sunshine on earth.

  54. I have read these kind of doomsday deperado plans before.
    Blowing volcanoes with nuclear devices is bound to be worse than the ailment, plowing massive amounts of radioactive gas & dust high into the atmosphere.
    Not only is it possible, it’s probable to work with dire consequences for Earth. I direct your attention to U-Tube video of the film the Soviet Union released covering their Tzar Bomba demonstration. At only 50 megatons, the reaction continued 30 seconds. They proved that yields are not contrained by any laws of phsyics beyond available fuel and design.. The blast scared them and the US, as it rightfully should.
    The people who are thinking of nuking volcanoes need to be scared out of their shorts as they have succumbed to total madness.
    They also need to be reminded in no uncertain terms that detonating nuclear devices underground is against International treaties. Break those treaties and down goes MAD doctrine, diplomatic channels and up goes the paranoid level.
    It gets even more dangerous: Start popping off big nukes all over the place and the door is opened for certain nations taking pot shots with the excuse of blaming a stray on somebody else. Major warfare has erupted over far less.
    Summary – 3 cans of worms in one Pandorras Box:
    Nuclear induced volcanic winter with copious amounts of acid rain
    Widespread radioacitve fallout and poisoning
    Nervous, Paranoid and Devious minds with fingers on Red Buttons.
    There’s no Do-over button at those levels.

  55. Now the hippies and commies can jump on the chemtrail bandwagon whenever they’re not trying to destroy the interests of the secret ‘Jewish’ cabal who run the world, and all that jazz.

  56. evanmjones (20:39:07) Sorry to go off topic, but I have to have a bit of a go at you on the DDT thing. DDT was a very good insecticide especially for mosquitoes which, of course transmit malaria and other vector borne viruses, but it’s indiscriminate use especially when broadcast was not. While it has been shown that it did not affect the eggs of gallinaceous or song birds, it does accumulate in the food chain and does cause pathological thinning of egg shells in raptors and caused severe harm to the populations of many of hawks, ospreys, etc. In addition, it did have a “silent spring” effect on song birds by diminishing their food supply, namely insects. Its complete ban was probably unwise, but how does one prevent excessive and indiscriminate use, especially in third world countries where pesticide regulations, if they exist at all, are widely ignored? Carbofuran is another example. It is sold and labeled as a soil fumigant/pesticide in East Africa, but is widely used by tribal herders as a very effective poison for lions when they kill cattle or threaten people. Sometimes an entire pride is wiped out by feeding on a single baited carcass. This has been devastating to lion populations which have been in severe decline for years. Lecture over :=)

  57. Thom Scrutchin (20:42:30) : “Ian Plimer says that one good volcanic eruption releases more CO2 than humans do in a year. So that must mean that…So, it follows that Al Gore is made of wood.”
    Burn the witch! Burn the witch!

  58. The idea of playing God with the Earth’s climate should not be condoned in any form.
    Give them an inch and I assure you they will weasel their way into going too far.
    We have not yet found a way to put the Nuclear Weapon genie back in the bottlle.
    What makes one think this will be different?
    They are bound & determined.
    Do not let them get started.

  59. “desperation felt by scientists about climate change”
    These people occupy positions of trust. They need to exercise some restraint and get a grip on their objectivity. If they can’t, demotion & replacement are warranted, if not required.

  60. Thom Scrutchin (20:42:30) :
    Ian Plimer says that one good volcanic eruption releases more CO2 than humans do in a year.

    Well no matter how many times he says it he’s not right! The largest recent volcanic eruption, Pinatubo in 1991, doesn’t even show a flicker on the M-L CO2 record.

  61. rbateman (21:52:04)
    “The idea of playing God with the Earth’s climate should not be condoned in any form.
    Give them an inch and I assure you they will weasel their way into going too far.”

    It’s the climate industry. The engineers want their piece. Everyone wants a piece of the funding, the action, and the imagined profit. Calming this now-wild beast down is going to be a serious challenge.

  62. P Wilson (18:56:01) : “Unfortunately, the state of science in England at the moment is quite dire with regard to veracity or explanations. It might have something to do with us being a small island with a corresponding myopic personality and so therefore take an advocacy based position which frames the evidence to fit the facts, than using facts to form a theory…”
    I blame the WWI meatgrinder into which three quarters of a million Brits were fed by an adventuresome, callous, and incompetent military clique. An entire generation was decimated. The UK hasn’t amounted to F.A. since, being led by an umbrella-brandishing fool during the ramp-up to WWII.
    See “Now It Can Be Told” by Philip Gibbs. The truth eventually does come out. Too late for many, however:
    “In Flanders Fields the poppies blow
    Between the crosses row on row…” –John McCrae

  63. None of the AGW crowd will like this plan – this solution is no good because it requires no sacrifice or change in lifestyle by everyone in the world. Watch the AGW’s scream about this – totally proving they don’t care about the the problem at all -it’s all about the politics & finding a “solution” which will to bring us all back to the stone age – why dont they just say it & stop beating around the bush – they are anti-human & anti-civilization & wont be happy until we are all living in caves. It is the height of passive-aggressive behavior by those ill-equipped to thrive in modern society.
    Sorry for the rant, but I am sick of these types….

  64. So if we use all of our nukes to drop the ‘roof’ of the Yellowstone caldera ‘into’ the magma chamber, . . .well, is that really a good idea?

  65. Matt Beck (22:09:02) :
    I am astounded at the pictures of that mud volcano. I had no idea that gas drilling done inexpertly could result in something like that.
    Only in certain special geological situations -were there are highly overpressured shale formations near the surface – which is a pretty rare thing (lest we shut down our domestic gas drilling for fear of a repeat performance). Dont worry – no where in the US is there analogous conditions

  66. Matt Beck (22:09:02) :
    On the Indonesian mud volcano. There are many overpressured mudstones at depth in petroliferous basins around the world: this region of Indonesia is just one example. As I mentioned above I worked for a while in Venezuela and Trinidad and mud volcanoes are relatively common there. These occasionally erupt bringing water, gas and oil to the surface in addition to often large volumes of mud. I was in Trinidad one time in about 1997 when there was an eruption and mud blew up to about 100m in the air for a few hours. They normally seal themselves off or blow themselves out after a while.
    Blowouts such as this are fairly uncommon these days in oil/gas drilling thanks to modern day drilling practices. In years past they did happen. Again, in Trinidad, there are a few recorded spectacular blowouts, one such being known as ‘The Barrackpore Spectacular’ if memory serves me right.
    Here is a very small mud volcano from Trinidad! – I’ll see if I can find a better example. I’ve got some photos from Trinidad which I took about 12 years ago and I’ll post them too.

    Someone has posted the location of one at Palo Seco on the south coast on Trinidad on Google Earth:
    http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=685957

  67. SURPRISED THAT NOBODY HAS USED THE TERM “CLOUD CUCKOO LAND” TO DESCRIBE THE ONCE GREAT, VENERABLE BUT NOW BATTY ROYAL SOCIETY.
    IT’S APPARENTLY A POPULAR PHRASE IN THE UK, ORIGINALLY FROM ARISTOPHANES “THE BIRDS”.
    DID NOT RECALL THE SOURCE OF THE PHRASE UNTIL TONIGHT, WHEN I LOOKED IT UP ON WIKI – A USEFUL SOURCE OF INFORMATION, EXCEPT ON THE SUBJECT OF “CLIMATE CHANGE”.
    I PREFER THE ORIGINAL, NOW UNFASHIONABLE TERM “GLOBAL WARMING”. WHO CHANGED IT TO “CLIMATE CHANGE”, AND WHEN? THIS SUGGESTS THAT THE WARMING ALARMISTS KNEW THE JIG WAS UP, EARTH WAS COOLING, SO THEY HAD TO QUICKLY RE-LABEL THEIR PHONY CRISIS.
    NOT SHOUTING BTW, JUST STARTED TYPING WITH CAPS LOCK ON AND DO NOT WANT TO RETYPE.
    There, whispering now…
    “Cloud Cuckoo Land refers to an unrealistically idealistic state where everything is perfect. (“You’re living in Cloud-cuckoo-land.”) It hints that the person referred to is naïve, unaware of reality or deranged in holding such an optimistic belief. The reference is to the play, The Birds by the Athenian playwright Aristophanes, in which Pisthetairos (which can be translated to mean “Mr. Trusting”) and Euelpides (which can be translated to mean “Mr. Hopeful”) with the help of Tereus, tired of the Earth and Olympus, decide to erect a perfect city between the clouds, to be named Cloud-Cuckoo-Land.”
    SERIOUSLY, IF EARTH IS COOLING, DO WE REALLY WANT TO MESS WITH IT BY PLAYING GOD WITH MANMADE VOLCANOES?
    BEFORE WE TAKE ANY RASH ACTION, IT WOULD BE BEST TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS HAPPENING – WE DO NOT KNOW THE MAGNITUDE OF ALLEGED GLOBAL WARMING – WE DO NOT EVEN KNOW THE SIGN (+ OR -).
    FORGET ARISTOPHANES; IN CANADA WE CALL PEOPLE WHO ADVOCATE SUCH NONSENSE “IMBECILES”.

  68. It isn’t just Mud volcanoes one needs to worry about please recall that the Krafla fires in 1975 in Iceland occurred just after and during the drilling events for their geothermal powerplant at Krafla. I just got back from there a couple of weeks ago and the ground is still warm in some parts even 30 years later. There are also other lava flows in the area which are much older so of course there is no telling if the drilling actually caused the eruptions but considering that the drilling started in 73 and the eruptions took place not 400 yards away in 74 and 75 sure seems like a correlation. The telling item is that magma also came out of a steam well there in 1977. More recently they just started drilling another borehole and evidently hit magma but much shallower in depth than expected see http://www.news.ucdavis.edu/search/news_detail.lasso?id=9174 if interested.

  69. No need to waste money and use nukes for this. You only need to stop taking the sulfur out of jet fuel and you will get lots of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere for few. Might be a bit uncomfortable for people living near airports, but a lot less nasty than nukes and volcanoes.

  70. “I blame the WWI meatgrinder into which three quarters of a million Brits were fed by an adventuresome, callous, and incompetent military clique. … See “Now It Can Be Told” by Philip Gibbs.”
    You should also read “The Donkeys” (Britain’s WWI military leadership), by Alan Clark.

  71. I think that alleviation measures like these deserve a look, if only to enable politicians to deny that they’re “doing nothing” about GW. We need to buy time for the CAWG madness/meme to run its course, for a trial-type hearing to be held (even if it’s not officially endorsed), for skeptical research and arguments to have time to mount a more coordinated offensive and make inroads on informed opinion, and for the current non-warming temperature trend to continue.
    The proposal mentioned here isn’t similar to merely reducing existing pollution controls, because the aerosols would be injected only into the upper atmosphere.
    I agree there can be, and have been, unintended consequences to man’s intervention in natural processes; but it doesn’t follow that every intervention must be catastrophic or even negative. Even if there are downsides, if they aren’t irreversible, and if the alternative is an economically catastrophic and practically inconsequential reduction of CO2 emissions, then alleviation methods are the lesser of two evils, by far.

  72. I don’t see a lot of harm in doing some research into the process. It might teach us more about the climate system, and surely understanding the processes in more detail must help. There is a risk of side-effects if it gets to the experimental stage – but I’m not sure they are proposing we take action now. What this could do is buy us a bit of time to avoid having to rush in drastic changes now ‘just in case’. If it becomes clearer in the next 10 years that the models are right, having more options is good. If it turns out that the consensus was wrong, we’ll have more research data, and a more sensible economy.

  73. tty (00:01:16) :
    No need to waste money and use nukes for this. You only need to stop taking the sulfur out of jet fuel and you will get lots of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere for free. Might be a bit uncomfortable for people living near airports, but a lot less nasty than nukes and volcanoes.

    Jets have several fuel tanks. Just use one with low sulphur for take off and landings. The high sulphur for cruise. (IIRC, centerline tank is use most often for TO and L, wing tanks at cruise).
    An easy, negative cost, solution…

  74. Another stupid idea from a once well respected scientific organisaton. What a waste.
    Seems that many scientists and politicitions have a god complex. Perhaps the effects of our quiet sun on our climate over the next few years will shatter their meglomaniacle illusions?

  75. Let me get this straight …!
    The alarmists want to make the world really cold by pumping sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere so we are then forced to burn more fossil fuel afterwards to keep warm ?
    Tim Flannery, Australian of the year……
    Hand that man a ‘NEW’ !!!

  76. The Royal Society is well known as two things:
    1. An old boys and girls club.
    2. A political organisation.
    So from this, you deduce:
    i. The Royal Society reckons that science funding for geoengineering is timely.
    ii. They need to link it to something politically trendy.
    iii. No doubt our ‘leading’ universities will set up ‘Centres of Excellence’ in geoengineering to hoover up the funds provided.
    That’s neither a crime nor a reason to believe in the assertions.
    It’s practical science politics.

  77. Ladies & Gentlemen,
    This may wel be absolutely barking. However, it does relate to the recent post by Richard Courtney about geoengineering solutions to global warming. Please be patient, it may be that skeptics within the RS are having some influence, WRT giving the politicos a ladder out of the hole. Although there is the more than a remote possibility that they are not, & they are in fact deadly serious! I cannot commnet on the IME & their Co2 removal scheme, sounds like a subsidy claim to me!
    BTW, Met Office claims UK summer warmer than average. The ONLY thing was the rainfall (or, one of the wettest summer on record, in English). This is as a direct result if Climate Change apparently! I do not claim that the weather was good for some, but not for most, it was just the rapid descent from long-range forecasting to almost looking out of the window stuff that upset folks.

  78. This is such complete and utter ridiculous nonsense I can hardly believe I am even commenting on it. All I can say is that it paints a very poor picture of the state of science in the world today.

  79. What could possibly go wrong?
    See the movie “Crack in the World”
    Directed by Andrew Marton, with Dana Andrews, Janette Scott, Kieron Moore. It is really ridiculous SiFi but I still like watching it.

  80. There is a far better and less polluting way to cool the planet. We fly a spaceship to Haley’s comet and mine a giant ice cube. The retrieved ice cube is then dropped in the ocean, solving problem once and for all.

  81. Just think how cool it would be if we had followed the 1970s crackpots who wanted to spread carbon black on the ice caps of both poles to stop the next ice age?
    Hey wait, wasn’t it the same crackpots then and now?

  82. Isn’t this (putting more sulphur into the air) already happening? What kind of coal are the Chinese burning in their many power plants?

  83. Brandon Dobson (20:50:05) :
    One need only look at mankind’s attempts to “correct’ nature with the introduction of non-native species to see that this is a dangerous idea.
    Asian ladybugs invading Germany.

    Originally imported to Europe as the natural enemy of plant lice (aphids) they have long liberated themselves from greenhouses and nurseries and roam freely.
    Vintners do suffer from this invasion: The bugs make themselves comfy in grapes and are crushed, releasing a secretion whose bitter taste pervades the wine.

    And the French vinters are worried about global warming?
    http://www.toytowngermany.com/lofi/index.php/t111876.html

  84. hys Jaggar (04:21:34) :
    The Royal Society is well known as two things:
    1. An old boys and girls club.
    2. A political organisation.

    Although I never thought of Brian Launder as one of the ‘old boys’.
    So from this, you deduce:
    i. The Royal Society reckons that science funding for geoengineering is timely.
    ii. They need to link it to something politically trendy.
    iii. No doubt our ‘leading’ universities will set up ‘Centres of Excellence’ in geoengineering to hoover up the funds provided.
    That’s neither a crime nor a reason to believe in the assertions.
    It’s practical science politics.

    Presumably politics is the reason that this has come up now since Brian gave an invited lecture on this material about 18 months ago, especially given the misrepresentation regarding the volcanos.

  85. Who owns the The Royal Society?

    There is no doubt that The Royal Society has a position on climate change, but to what extent is this venerable and distinguished organisation able to express a truly independent and objective opinion on a matter of current public policy?

    http://ccgi.newbery1.plus.com/blog/?p=216

  86. el gordo (19:15:18) :
    Just how does one pour ’sulphur-based particles into the upper atmosphere’?

    First you must get sulphur from an already exploded volcano or get it from metal sulphides and burn them…but all that was already forbidden by ecological laws. So, what do they want? … Kyoto or a new London agreement promoting pollution.

  87. This looks like a desperate attempt to stave off the collapse of the AGW theory by acting before natual cooling destroys the last 30 years of global warming tomfoolery. Taking credit for the cooling in store for us anyway will at least see them comfortably in their graves before the truth is out.

  88. I have the answer!: Tell them to place their “new age/brave new world/woodstock/droggy volcano” in Copenhaguen, but do it BEFORE the conference on climate change takes place, so attendants will have the oportunity to watch its ignition.

  89. Intelligent people seem to exhibit more than their share of stupidity. At least those who are ignorant have an excuse.

  90. Of course, instead of creating a man-made volcano to put a sulphur aerosol into the stratosphere, and counteract AGW, you could just put the sulphur in jet fuel, and have it dispersed into the stratosphere for no extra cost. Indeed, it would just be putting back the sulphur we started taking out of the jet fuel about 30 years ago…..hang on a minute, wasn’t that when all the AGW alarming started?

  91. Wizard Tim (11:17:27) :
    …..hang on a minute, wasn’t that when all the AGW alarming started?
    Do you know the story?. Please tell us because, as far as we know, it started long before being just green and more eastwardly, not to mention where there was a four legged symbol flag and strange trains…

  92. “The Royal Society is Britain’s premier science institution and its decision to take geo-engineering seriously is a measure of the desperation felt by scientists about climate change.”
    The desperation they are feeling stems from the fact that the wheels are coming off the CAGW/CC bandwagon. Geo-engineering is their last-gasp attempt at keeping the thing trundling along. Funding and careers are at stake after all.

  93. A better account than the Sunday Times one reported above can be found here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/6122322/Geo-engineering-should-be-developed-as-insurance-against-dangerous-climate-change.html
    Or better yet read the original here:
    http://royalsociety.org/news.asp?id=8734
    Professor John Shepherd, who chaired the Royal Society’s geoengineering study(2), said, “It is an unpalatable truth that unless we can succeed in greatly reducing CO2 emissions we are headed for a very uncomfortable and challenging climate future, and geoengineering will be the only option left to limit further temperature increases. Our research found that some geoengineering techniques could have serious unintended and detrimental effects on many people and ecosystems – yet we are still failing to take the only action that will prevent us from having to rely on them. Geoengineering and its consequences are the price we may have to pay for failure to act on climate change.”
    Not surprisingly there is no mention of ‘man-made volcanoes’:
    “Mimicking the effects of volcanic eruptions by injecting sulphate aerosols into the lower stratosphere;”

  94. Mike & Phillip:
    If memory serves,Bill Dorland, a graduated from U. of Texas, now at Maryland U., was a co-author of a paper proving cold fusion cannot work. I am not sure if their work has been verified or not. I believe he can be reached for questioning.
    David:
    The assertion that DDT caused thin eggs in birds was falsified about the time the EPA head banded it in the U.S. It has had no effect on wildlife. Its residual property and inexpensive price made it very popular. Its possible, I suppose, for insects to build an immunity, but it eradicated malaria and yellow feaver vectors from the southern U. S., which, coupled with air conditioning, as caused an industrial revolution in that area since WWII. Its certainly not a poison for people. The death of so many could have been averted.
    The caldera at Yellowstone is over 40 miles wide-it was devastating, and it is rising. If, or perhaps when, it blows it will eleminate all life over at least half ot the U.S.

  95. I want to remind folk here about Bob Ward, who, I suspect, blarneyed his way into the Royal Society as its PR man. Lindzen describes a situation pervading the whole of western Science, where activists with little scientific abilities have been getting into positions of power. I don’t have all the details about Bob right at my fingertips, but I seem to remember he moved on to pastures where he could rake in lotsa shekels from AGW fears. Here is the stinky email correspondence Ward ran with Martin Durkin over Durkin’s film The Great Global Warming Swindle.

  96. OceanTwo (09:16:22) :
    “Intelligent people seem to exhibit more than their share of stupidity. At least those who are ignorant have an excuse.”
    And when intelligent people are stupid, they can be really, really, really, very, very, very stupid…

  97. Huh. Would we get a yellow sky, or a green one?
    This is great stuff. I need to send a copy to my brother, who is trying not to use an A/C unit this year in order to reduce his carbon footprint.

  98. WilliMc (14:51:52)
    I’m well aware that DDT and eggshell thinning is controversial (and of the great benefits of DDT as an insecticide.) I’m not anti-DDT, just pro wise and careful use (and pro science). As I said in my brief comment to Evan, shell thinning was disproved in gallinaceous birds including Japanese quail, a common laboratory species. However, much of the literature is ancient now, but there is pretty strong evidence that shell thinning and gonadal lesions occur in at least some species of raptors. A very thorough and controlled two generation study by MacLellan, et.al. (1995) testing Dicofol (a close congener of DDT) demonstrated statistically significant shell thinning, gonadal lesions, and feminization of males in a captive colony of American kestrels. Interestingly and back to chickens, Holm, et.al. in Sweden more recently (2006) demonstrated shell thinning and oviduct abnormalities in hens which were directly exposed in ovo to DDT. I don’t want to start a new thread so that’s all I have. Suffice to say the controversy yet lives.
    Best,
    DavidinDavis

  99. Reading this report is quite instructive: if the same attempt were to be made for engineering the human race, these people would be considered very suspiciously. In particular their demand that there should be a consultation and explanation policy prior to attempting geoengineering, their dismissal of precautionary principle because the goal is -of course, what else- to save the planet from its own life is worrying at best.
    One has also to consider the authors. Take the University of Calgary guru Dr. Keith, his latest computer model based work on the alteration of climate by large wind farms through an influence on Rossby waves… (I am not kidding!)raises the alarm of meteorological analphabetism: changing the climate would mean altering the path and strength of MPHs that are 1500m thick through the few patches of wind turbines which max height would reach 100m… Sure the turbulent air dowstream of the turbine might change some parameters, just as building hectares of parking lots can alter locally the temperature, but as far as modifying the path of and intensity of MPHs… the good doctor is dreaming.

  100. David (21:46:53) :
    evanmjones (20:39:07) Sorry to go off topic, but I have to have a bit of a go at you on the DDT thing. DDT was a very good insecticide especially for mosquitoes which, of course transmit malaria and other vector borne viruses, but it’s indiscriminate use especially when broadcast was not. While it has been shown that it did not affect the eggs of gallinaceous or song birds, it does accumulate in the food chain and does cause pathological thinning of egg shells in raptors and caused severe harm to the populations of many of hawks, ospreys, etc. In addition, it did have a “silent spring” effect on song birds by diminishing their food supply, namely insects. Its complete ban was probably unwise, but how does one prevent excessive and indiscriminate use, especially in third world countries where pesticide regulations, if they exist at all, are widely ignored? Carbofuran is another example. It is sold and labeled as a soil fumigant/pesticide in East Africa, but is widely used by tribal herders as a very effective poison for lions when they kill cattle or threaten people. Sometimes an entire pride is wiped out by feeding on a single baited carcass. This has been devastating to lion populations which have been in severe decline for years. Lecture over :=)
    It is controversial, but as Junk Science pointed out at the time no evidence of egg shell thinning in raptors was found attributable to DDT, but was attributalbe another additive to the feed, known to cause egg shell thinning. Ms Carson also liked to be selective in her evidence presentation.
    I also point out that these birds were fed with obscence amounts of DDT that were extremely unlikely to occur in the wild. It is typical of experimentation today, vast amounts of a substance is pumped into a rat only for it to develop tumors, then claims are made about the corcenogenic effects of said substance! I also point out that there are ALWAYS those who will abuse & misuse something or other, it is an unfortunate trait of human nature!:-)

  101. Lucy Skywalker
    Bob Ward has had a chequered carteer since leaving the Royal Society.
    This shows he was moving to a co called Risk Management.
    http://www.stempra.org.uk/newsletter/06_autumn/06.htm
    Interestingly this co also popped up during the exchange you referred to above
    http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1519
    This about the co itself;
    http://www.rms.com/AboutRMS/
    But he had a short tenure there, moving here;
    http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/granthamInstitute/whoswho.htm
    Well well! The chair of the Institute is none other than NIck Stern- climate expert (when he is not a treasury adviser preparing costs and taxation opportunities on AGW for Gordon Brown). Its a small incestous world isnt it?
    tonyb

  102. We’ll leave it up to Anthony to Handel the question of getting someone to write some new Royal Freworks Music to accompany these Gummint volcanoes; that the Royal Society wants. Who was it who declined a fellowship of the Royal Society, on the grounds that he wouldn’t belong to any organisation that would have him as a member.
    Seems as thoguh the Royal Society has had its better days.

  103. Seems to me I recall that one time many years ago; someone in New Zealand came up with the harebrained idea of starting up a man made volcano in the crater of Rangitoto as a spectacular Guy Fawkes day celebration.
    In the end; sanity prevailed and they decided to leave sleeping dogs lie; and since the greater Auckland area is built on some 60 presumably extinct volcanoes; that was a pretty good idea.
    Starting up a synthetic volcano, in Auckland sounds a bit like The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, round-II to me.

  104. Yearly mean English temperature for 1884, was much warmer than 1883 when Krakatoa erupted. 1992 was warmer than 1991 when Pinatubo erupted. Its the same story for Santa Maria in 1902 (VEI 6 ?) and Novarupta in 1912 (VEI 6) and Agung in 1963 and El Chichon in 1982. Rather strange looking cooling!

  105. George E. Smith (14:49:35) :
    We’ll leave it up to Anthony to Handel the question of getting someone to write some new Royal Freworks Music to accompany these Gummint volcanoes; that the Royal Society wants.

    The Royal Society doesn’t want any volcanos, that’s just some nonsense the Sunday Times wrote.
    Who was it who declined a fellowship of the Royal Society, on the grounds that he wouldn’t belong to any organisation that would have him as a member.
    Groucho Marx!

Comments are closed.