Surveyed scientists debunk chemtrails conspiracy theory
UCI, Carnegie paper explains persistent aircraft trails, substances in soil and water
Irvine, Calif., Aug. 12, 2016 – The world’s leading atmospheric scientists overwhelmingly deny the existence of a secret, elite-driven plot to release harmful chemicals into the air from high-flying aircraft, according to the first peer-reviewed journal paper to address the “chemtrails” conspiracy theory.
Researchers from the University of California, Irvine, the Carnegie Institution for Science and the nonprofit Near Zero organization asked 77 atmospheric chemists and geochemists if they had come across evidence of such a large-scale spraying program, and 76 responded that they had not. The survey results were published Wednesday in Environmental Research Letters.
Heat from aircraft engines produces condensation trails that can be clearly seen from the ground. A small but vocal segment of the population firmly believes that these are composed not merely of condensed water vapor but of chemicals and elements such as strontium, barium and aluminum that powerful, high-level entities have been intentionally and covertly releasing into the atmosphere for decades.
They find the increased number and lingering presence of these aerial streaks suspicious and claim to have identified toxic substances in soil and water samples.
“The chemtrails conspiracy theory maps pretty closely to the origin and growth of the internet, where you can still find a number of websites that promote this particular brand of pseudoscience,” said study co-author Steven Davis, UCI associate professor of Earth system science. “Our survey found little agreement in the scientific community with claims that the government, the military, airlines and others are colluding in a widespread, nefarious program to poison the planet from the skies.”
The belief in chemtrails parallels increasing public distrust of elites and social institutions, according to earlier social science research. To those convinced, the chemicals are sprayed to regulate the food supply, control human population and/or manipulate weather patterns. In recent years, the theory has expanded to include government-sponsored geoengineering to mitigate climate change.
Some of the surveyed specialists suggested that global warming may in itself be a cause of longer-lasting condensation trails from aircraft engines. Another contributor, outlined in the study, is the steady growth of air travel in recent decades, which leads airplanes to fly higher, where contrails are more likely to form and remain in the sky.
“Despite the persistence of erroneous theories about atmospheric chemical spraying programs, until now there were no peer-reviewed academic studies showing that what some people think are chemtrails are just ordinary contrails,” said Carnegie investigator and co-author Ken Caldeira. “Contrails are becoming more abundant as air travel expands. Also, it is possible that climate change is causing contrails to persist for longer than they used to.”
The survey’s respondents – many of them currently active in research on atmospheric dust and pollution –stressed that methods of collecting samples of water, snow and soil recommended by chemtrails-focused groups may be to blame for faulty results. Obtaining and transporting samples via Mason jars with metal lids, for example, was cited as a poor practice that could lead to erroneous outcomes.
One of the experts questioned wrote:
“The jar will contaminate the sample, as will the metal lid, particularly if you shake it. I cannot imagine a worse protocol for collecting a sample; the data would be totally worthless.” Another said, “To analyze metals in environmental samples, glass needs to go through an acid wash to remove any residual metals. Otherwise, plastic should be used.”
UCI’s Davis said:
“We don’t imagine that we’re going to sway the beliefs of hardcore adherents to the chemtrails conspiracy theory with this study. But we thought it was important to go on the record with fundamental scientific facts to refute claims that the government is deliberately spreading harmful chemicals from aircraft.”
Amen to that, as I’ve viewed “chemtrails” as some of the worst crap science out there. It goes hand-in-hand with wild atmospheric effect claims about HAARP, which persist today even though the HAARP facility was closed a few years ago.
Ken Caldiera, a climate scientist whom I’m often in disagreement with is a co-author of this study said that “…showing that what some people think are chemtrails are just ordinary contrails.”.
That’s exactly right. But conspiracy whackadoodles seem to think there’s an organized effort (imagine trying to keep thousands of airline pilots, ground personnel, and suppliers quiet for years), even going so far to fake-up video footage of a airliner cockpit “chemtrail switch” being thrown.
It is a laughably transparent fake, notice the switch label is an overlay to hide the real lettering under the switch. The overlay isn’t even attached, and it slides when thrown.
As the overlay label slides down, you can see the word LOGO. The actual switch function is the LOGO LIGHT, used to illuminate the company logo on the tail:
Here is what the switch panel looks like in a 747:
![extlights[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/extlights1.jpg?quality=83)
And here is the actual panel used in the faked-up switch video as seen in a Boeing 737-600. Annotations are mine:
Snopes.com debunked yet another version of a fake chemtrail switch.
Proponents use video like this one to say that there really is an on-off switch:
But what is actually happening is that the airliner is going from one type of air to another, such as crossing a frontal boundary, or by changing altitude where the dew point and temperature are no longer conducive to exhaust condensation. Of course, such simple Occam’s razor type explanations don’t satisfy the chemtrail kooks.
Here is a video produced to go with the paper:
Now if we can just put HAARP, Anti-Vaxxers, and the particularly wrong and angry Slaying the Sky Dragon no greenhouse effect kooks in their rightful place of understanding science properly, we might actually have a more pleasant Internet.
The paper:
Quantifying expert consensus against the existence of a ‘chemtrails’ conspiracy
Environmental Research Letters | August 10, 2016
Nearly 17% of people in an international survey said they believed the existence of a secret large-scale atmospheric program (SLAP) to be true or partly true. SLAP is commonly referred to as “chemtrails” or “covert geoengineering,” and has led to a number of websites (e.g., Global SkyWatch) purported to show evidence of widespread chemical spraying linked to negative impacts on human health and the environment.
To address these claims, we surveyed two groups of experts—atmospheric chemists with expertise in condensation trails and geochemists working on atmospheric deposition of dust and pollution—to scientifically evaluate for the first time the claims of SLAP theorists.
Results show that 76 of the 77 scientists (98.7%) that took part in this study said they had not encountered evidence of a SLAP, and that the data cited as evidence could be explained through other factors, including well-understood physics and chemistry associated with aircraft contrails and atmospheric aerosols.
Our goal is not to sway those already convinced that there is a secret, large-scale spraying program—who often reject counter-evidence as further proof of their theories—but rather to establish a source of objective science that can inform public discourse.
Read the entire paper – open access at: http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/8/084011
UPDATE: It occurred to me that some of the “harmful chemicals” being claimed as being “deposited” were actually quite common. From the paper:
Atmospheric deposition
SLAP proponents argue that seemingly abnormal concentrations of elements such as strontium, barium, and aluminum in water, soil, and snow samples are the result of sprayed chemicals. Our survey asked experts to evaluate photocopies of three different laboratory analyses of elemental concentrations in samples of pond sediment, filter media, and snow that were posted on the SLAP website, Geoengineering Watch. Additionally, experts were asked to evaluate the appropriateness of the sampling methods recommended by SLAP websites, and whether they have observed any secular changes in the environmental concentrations of strontium, barium, and aluminum over their careers, and the factors underlying any change.
Now compare that list to chemical analysis of seawater:
source: Karl K Turekian: Oceans. 1968. Prentice-Hall
Gosh just think of the terrible things that could happen if airplanes sprayed seawater in the air like the salt spray we get naturally from the oceans. /sarc
NOTE: Since Chemtrails is normally a banned topic at WUWT, comments will be heavily moderated. Rants, accusations, claims of being paid to publish this, etc. that don’t conform to WUWT policy will be deleted.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I used to work for a USGS analytical lab in Denver (not the one previously mentioned on this site, that got shut down). We were primarily focused on water quality, but we analyzed other matrices too (sediments, ground up fish and other critters, and some air samples). My focus was on organic contaminates. I don’t remember seeing anything weird or hearing about anything weird in air samples. Much of our work used mass-spectrometry — we could identify unknowns with this technique by electronically comparing the spectra with a mass-spectral library. And if the spectra didn’t show up in the library, the spectral information itself contained a lot of structural information. Most air samples were kind of on the “nasty” side. This was not because of the concentration of pollutants in air, but the way we concentrated them. We would suck air through an absorbent for days — maybe weeks, then extract and analyze the adsorbed contaminants. So because of the length of time involved in pumping air through the absorbent, even minutely small amounts of contaminants would be very apparent in the chromatograph.
Well you learn something new every day…… I did not know these people existed. Now we have another fringe group making up conspiracies. We cannot even keep our most important high security stuff secret, how do you control hundreds of thousands of people in the airline industry from spilling this? I truly fear for our society.
I saw a Hockey stick making a chemtrail
And the chemtrails are there to fight global warming, they are reflectors and cloud nucleators
About the third picture down shows a switch panel with switch marked wing next to the logo switch. It reminded me of a far side cartoon I liked.
http://www.iguanadons.net/files/gallery/0c6935ec81156bc24b888d4407a2ddcc.jpg
It’s a conspiracy so insidious and widespread that literally *everyone* but me is in on it!
I once, out of boredom and curiosity, listened to a program by one of the “new flat Earthers” (not quite literally but close enough), just to try to figure out what the argument could possibly be… and that was about it. Every photo of the curvature of the earth, every astronaut and NASA engineer, even the cosmonauts – all *in on it*.
There is a name for that in the DSM, I’m sure.
Long lasting contrails from jets appeared when cleaner jets stopped pouring out oily soot and switched to high detergent jet fuels that nucleates and holds larger water droplets from the exhaust gases for much longer than before the detergent use. So they naturally don’t evaporate as was as the previous fog.
From a complete layman’s standpoint, this reminds me of the group of morons who committed
mass suicide in San Diego a few decades back. They were convinced to commit suicide so as
to allow their spirits to hitch a ride on a “Space ship” that was tailing the comet Hale Bop. “Evidence”
of the existence of an alien spacecraft was a common photographic anomaly that anyone who has
ever driven at night is familiar with.These were the rays and rings that one often sees around
street lights. As I recall, one of the idiots was the brother of the actress who played Lt Uhura
on the original series Star Trek. I guess the dumb ass wanted to go to space just like his sister!
This whole chemtrail thing amounts to the same thing. White smoke billowing out of jet
engines must be evidence of some sinister conspiracy, it cannot be something as simple as
evaporation! I would have had to have failed every science lesson I took from elementary
school to high school to be that freaking STUPID! I used to listen to Alien Anal Probe Radio
just to laugh my ass off at parade of morons from the callers to the “Experts.”
My favorites are the dorks who keep insisting that being chased away from Groom Lake is
evidence of some vast alien conspiracy, and not the kind of security one would expect
at a proving ground for top secret spy planes!
Leonard,
“White smoke billowing out of jet engines must be evidence of some sinister conspiracy, it cannot be something as simple as evaporation!”
I see people here speaking as though such billows cannot be anything other than run of the mill contrails, which is absurd, because they obviously could be. It makes no difference at all that some people have believed strange things, it remains perfectly possible, and indeed I feel expectable, in the sense that feared global catastrophe would logically result in attempts to find ways of reducing the incoming energy, etc . . just as many patents and proposals have anticipated for years . .
And, Military brass have been talking about “owning the weather” for decades, which would obviously be very desirable to have in one’s bag of war waging tricks, so to speak . . So, simply deciding that none of it is being at least experimented with is highly problematic in terms of scientific style reasoning, and certainly nothing to be beating ones chest about, as I see the world I find myself in. It’s kinda . . weird, in my eyes, frankly.
About anti-vaxxers, I suspect most aren’t being honest about the facts, though we should also acknowledge that there might be some evidence of some issues, even if it’s exaggerated by most of what we would call anti-vaxxers. Consider https://youtu.be/lnS-xJCG6i4 (more here:
. BTW, I’m pro-vaccines, have gotten them myself, and encourage others to get vaccines. Though I think we should be a little worried that when an official CDC study of a vaccine -> autism link finds what looks like a link, it then chooses to not follow their own research protocol so they can avoid mentioning and reporting it, and even going so far as to intentionally destroy records. How many other studies have been shy about (and specifically found and avoided) reporting their findings for the same or similar reasons? Does it just so happen that the only time this sort of coverup has ever occurred we just got super-lucky that the details were eventually revealed? Doubtful. I think the CDC coverup story tells us we should be at least a little skeptical of “settled science” even in the area of vaccines. Even if you’re pro-vaccine.
The parenting fora I frequented before were not that forgiving on the people saying anything even slightly non-affirmative of vaccines, so feel free to revoke your pro-vaccine status at any time.
It is safe to assume that vaccines work. But that alone does not make you a pro-vaccine person. The nuances of what exactly they do, how well, and for how long, in reality never become an issue. You are either completely enthusiastic about vaccines, or you are a heretic in dire need of shaming.
The only reason why this tactic does not work that well in climate is because it is much easier bashing parents than scientists.
This conspiracy makes no sense. Why spray chemicals to brainwash the masses and breath the SAME AIR as the masses. That’s like Hitler drinking poisoned water knowing full well the effects of the water. To substantiate such claims these nut-jobs would also have to prove that the Elites are continuously taking the antidote to pass off the conspiracy. Until the elites starts selling or wearing HAZMAT suits there really is no substance to this conspiracy.
“That’s like Hitler drinking poisoned water knowing…”
Considering that commercial air carriers would comprise the enormous majority of people sworn to secrecy, it would be more like automobile companies having some sort of “reason” to intentionally design their automobiles to kill everyone who buys them.
Do the Chemtrailers have any idea WHY the Elite are trying to poison us?
(Any more than the Anti-Vaxxers know why they are trying to make all our kids autistic…)
Do the Chemtrailers have any idea WHY the Elite are ….”
Sure, they want to end rule by consent of the governed, and indeed severely discredit that approach, before initiating rule by a few elites. The US in particular presents a problem for them, and they want us crippled and discredited . .
Another way to approach the matter is to ask something like; Why don’t the authoritarian regimes of the world knock it off, and implement rule by consent of the governed?
Those who believe in chemtrails and those who believe in CAGW have one thing in common – a lack of hard evidence.
Don’t you mean a lack of hard evidence you are aware of and accept, Mike?
You’re not claiming to be all-knowing or infallible, right?
We have been conditioned/indoctrinated, I believe, to think and act as though things are impossible, if some authority (ourselves included) can merely say they are impossible, and demonstrate that someone/anyone saying they happen is wrong. You notice it when the CAGWers use such reasoning, it seems to me, but don’t when the declaration of impossibility coincides with your belief.
JohnKnight: “Don’t you mean a lack of hard evidence you are aware of and accept, Mike?”
The fact that I am not aware of any hard evidence eliminates the possibility that I am willfully refusing to accept any.
There are people who have never seen a unicorn alive or dead but nonetheless believe they existed. Their belief closely resembles that of those who believe in chemtrails and CAGW despite no evidence that either are real plus all share the same mythological basis suggesting something to fear or something inherently BAD about humanity, (e.g. unicorns were wonderful creatures that existed until bad humans killed them off or scared them all away).
If you have hard empirical evidence to prove the existence of unicorns, CAGW or chemtrails please don’t let me stop you from presenting it.
“Friday Funny: Chemtrails theory gets shot down by science”
I’m afraid it isn’t getting anything of the kind. This article is a report of an opinion survey, not a scientific test of anything.
What is funny about yet another survey of selected official “expert” opinions falsely claiming to have refuted a popular belief by explaining the phenomenon away as something ordinary and suggesting that the people who take it seriously are scientifically incompetent? Haven’t we seen such official pseudoscientific aggression before, not just in the field of climate research but also in just about every unconventional field of human enquiry, such as UFOs, psychic phenomena, alternative medicine, crop formations and so on ad nauseam? Whatever joke lies hidden in this tendentious academic survey is lost on me.
Found it!
Rather than taking a poll of atmospheric scientists, a poll of jet pilots would be better. Having contrailled thousands and thousands of times myself, I can assure you that no chemicals other than JetA1 aviation fuel were used. And there is no way in the world anything else could have been used. Although sometimes you might get a bit of blue leaky toilet fluid mixed in – but not with more modern vacuum type loos.
This particular conspiracy fantasy is an example of how detached from reality many modern people are – primarily because our education is so poor and our distrust of politicians so high. Some conspiracies might have an element of truth underlying them – like the proposition that some Moon landing photos were faked, which then morphed into a belief that the entire program was faked. But the chemtrail theory is merely social and political paranoia gone mad, with people being sucked into the most nutty of theories.
Ralph
Instead of polling atmospheric scientists, they should poll jet pilots. Having contrailled myself many thousands of times, I can assure you that no chemicals bar JetA1 were used. The chemtrailers are a bizarre cult of fantasists, with no technical knowlegde nor contact with the real world. They live in a world where politicians and governments are admittedly less than trustworthy, and so they see conspiracy at every junction. But they do not have the education, knowledge nor common sense to divide the crank theory from the possible or probable.
It is interesting that the majority of chemtriallers also believe that crop circIes are made by aliens – as if, after slogging half way across the galaxy, that is all an alien might do. Chemtrailers are the ones who used to sit at the back of the class doodling, because they did not understand the tutor or lesson. And that have taken that ‘experience’ and ‘understanding’ into their adult life.
Ralph
You are just one person, ralfellis, not everyone. I can honestly say that I have never murdered anyone, but I can’t rightly stretch that into a declaration that no one has.
Nothing funny about this article or the subject. I for one do my own observations from the ground and I use photography to record many observed actions in the atmosphere. I have always understood Anthony’s need to keep this site uncontaminated by the Spector of “Conspiracy Theory Website” label. WUWT has very good reason to keep to the science. Exactly why WUWT has put this post up is bewildering to me because he has been very good about steering clear of the chemtrail controversy. And it is a controversy as many thousands (tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands perhaps) of people from all walks of life all over the world are recording via video, photographic stills and chemical sampling and analysis chemtrails and their fallout. The vitriol heaped upon those people for simply looking up and snapping stills and recording footage of chemtrail planes and devices can only give credence to these people! Had they be so off the mark then no attention would be given. Yet media and government and scientific denial of what amounts to geo-engineering has not stifled the researcher at all. I maintain that my photo’s positively show particulates sprayed from craft that is not originating from engine exhaust but from a variety of nozzles placed in a variety of ways upon a variety of aircraft. Regardless, I must continue to applaud Anthony’s service to humanity here on this Site for bringing the science to the light of day!
“Regardless, I must continue to applaud Anthony’s service to humanity here on this Site for bringing the science to the light of day!”
Yes, I must as well . . Anthony is a boni-fide champion of science to me. My better, as far as I’m concerned.
I’ve tried to formulate 3 or 4 replies to ya, but lets just leave it that I read your comment.
George Edward Conant — give one specific ‘proof’ of so called chem trails from your photography. There is none. Every pattern in condensation trails, that is EVERY pattern, can be explained. What is more difficult is explaining the psychological issues of mistrust that some people must have.
Ian,
“Every pattern in condensation trails, that is EVERY pattern, can be explained.”
How exactly could you possibly even know that? Are you a God?
All it means to me is that you will attempt robotically to explain away anything anyone presents, and assume you’ve demonstrated something other than your utter lack of objectivity regarding the potential.
One day last year I watched as a group of planes swept into the sky above, and sprayed the remnants of a storm system that essentially dissolved as it approached me . . and I watched as individual remnant cloud clusters were targeted by individual planes, one after another, causing them to dissipate, till nothing remained.
You can believe it didn’t happen, but I’m not going to raise your belief above my own prolonged direct observations, sir. And frankly, you and many here scare the hell out of me with your bizzaro elevation of your own imagination to the level of absolute truth.
Consider please;
Abstract
A NAVY chemist has proved that carbon black can make or break a cloud. She is Florence W. van Straten, now working with the Navy Weather Service.
What van Straten’s discovery means in terms of scientific weather control is now being measured by Naval Research Laboratory. But she has already demonstrated that carbon black, absorbing heat from the sun, can change atmospheric conditions enough to create clouds or to break them up quickly.
For some time, van Straten believed she could modify clouds by influencing temperatures in parts of the atmosphere. In this manner, she says, cloud masses that exist could be dissipated, and, under some conditions, cloud masses could be created. She reasoned further that carbon black would be the ideal material to induce the temperature variations because of its ability to absorb heat.
Chem. Eng. News, 1958, 36 (40), pp 67–68
DOI: 10.1021/cen-v036n040.p067
Publication Date: October 06, 1958
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/cen-v036n040.p067
And, please consider;
‘Hurricanes from Above’
“Joanne Simpson predicted in the 1960s that seeding a cloud would cause it to double in height. She bootlegged aircraft time during Project Stormfury, a weather modification experiment started in 1961 by her future husband, Bob Simpson. She flew above clouds and ejected flares that ignited and created silver iodide smoke. The clouds behaved just as her computer model predicted.”
http://www.livescience.com/9381-schemes-control-weather-clouded-failure.html
JohnKnight August 15, 2016 at 12:17 am
Yes there are cloud seeding exercises these have been going on since the 1930’s and were even used in the recent Olympics in China. But the fact that there have small scale cloud seeding exercises does not mean that every non-persistent contrail is spraying mind altering drugs over the population. Aircraft now carry automatic broadcast systems (called automatic dependent surveillance) you can get applications for smart phones (and other computers) that allow you to identify the aircraft that you are suspicious of. But then don’t let me lift the tinfoil hat.
And yes every pattern from contrails is simple to explain, just because you do not want to understand it does not make it difficult.
Hi Ian W, I suggest you get a good camera with a high powered zoom lens and take your own photo’s and give yourself say five years and about 2000 hours of sky observations and photograph contrails and the craft making them. I am talking contrails that are excessive, oddly thick and heavy and persistent. I suggest you watch the interactions of natural clouds with such contrails and photograph that as well. Pay close attention to contrails and where the originate from the craft (from engines directly or off-set from engines) and if you have a steady hand zoom in on such contrail spewing craft and photograph that as best you can. THEN look at your own work and see what you see. Glad to hear your finding’s five years on….. Cheers!
Ian,
“But the fact that there have small scale cloud seeding exercises …”
That was just one example of what I have observed, and I will not go along with your (to me)m creepy attempts to dictate to me what I could not have observed or understood was going on in the sky above me, at any point in time.
To me, the very idea that you could somehow know with certainty that there are not/have not been other forms of “chem-trails” being generated is logically nonsensical. A “positive” along these lines, you could logically know with certainty, but not a “negative”, which would require God-like awareness.
The very fact that you are acting as though it is rational to think you could somehow be (rightly) absolutely certain of what has NOT been done in the realms of geoengineering, disqualifies you as a rational and/or honest person, regarding this entire realm, to me.
Knowing negatives is not like knowing positives . . and no amount of double-talk or mocking or distracting will cause me to forget that.
For the record so to speak, in regard to the vague phrase “cloud seeding”, that storm front disintegration I watched, was done in drought stricken California.
To quote my favorite skeptic in the whole world: The Amazing James Randi:
“There is a distinct difference between having an open mind and having a hole in your head from which your brain leaks out.”
There is a totally different way to approach this. The turnarounds of aircraft are quick most domestic aircraft will do a turnaround in less than 45 minutes. These are not secret the pax for the next flight watch them. So you see refueling, you see the toilet emptied, then you board. A tanker with a ton or so of liquid would be difficult to conceal. The cost to the airlines who only make around $1000 profit for a domestic flight would be considerable and difficult to hide in their accounts. It is just not true and shows the lack of intelligence in people who cannot understand how contrails are formed and dissipate from no contrails to non-persistent and persistent therefore invent a ‘faeries at the bottom of the garden’ explanation.
Well, I would say to those who believe the chemtrail thing to be real, what attempts have you made to falsify your own ideas? That is true skepticism isn’t it? Not just arguing for what you believe to be true, but also trying to prove yourself wrong. Looking at all the evidence, and not just the bits that would support what you already believe to be true.
I think a lot of people caught up in this movement don’t understand that not believing something, or believing something to be a conspiracy doesn’t make you a true skeptic. Being skeptical of something isn’t the same thing as analyzing issues skeptically.
Are you expecting folks like me to believe most mockers here applied your “true skeptic” principles in this realm, Philip? Seriously? . . Color me skeptical ; )
There is nothing like a chemtrail thread to bring in the stupid. Let me know when you find those invisible trucks leaving those invisible chemical plants with invisible workforces invisibly entering major airports to invisibly fill some sort of mass-less quantum pocket in an otherwise crowded aircraft fuselage.
I’m puzzled by this article and comments…
apparently there isn’t likely to be a chemtrails conspiracy, because it would have to be on an enormous scale and people would have noticed/come clean about it etc.
Yet time after time I read on sites and on comments discussing climate change that this or that or the other temp series, ice chart, data is faked.
We need to apply the same standards and logic filters to all questioning of science/natural phenomena.
Atmospheric scientists are to be trusted on chemtrails – yet if any of them published on climate change, what kind of reception would they get in comment streams like this one?
They’d be rightly torn to shreds, intellectually speaking, Griff, I have no doubt, if something like this survey/paper was offered up for discussion.
So it’s now okay to appeal to “consensus science” proven by a survey? Really?
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/climate-geoengineering-scary-idea-should-be-tried-out-n303901
The US military has long had a stated objective to “rule the weather”
In the blue corner is current USA Central Intelligence Agency Director John O. Brennan and in the red corner is geoengineeringwatch.org lead researcher Dane Wigington.
Brennan told the US Council on Foreign Relations (June 29, 2016) that an array of technological advances we are seeing today, often referred to collectively as geoengineering, potentially could help reverse the warming effects of global climate change.
“One that has gained my personal attention is stratospheric aerosol injection, or SAI, a method of seeding the stratosphere with particles that can help reflect the sun’s heat, in much the same way that volcanic eruptions do,” Brennan said.
Brennan said an officially sanctioned SAI program could limit global temperature increases and provide the world economy with additional time to transition from fossil fuels for a “relatively inexpensive” $10 billion yearly.
‘The strongest opposition comes from people who self-identify as politically conservative, who are distrustful of government and other elite institutions, and who doubt the very idea that there is a climate problem.’
Researchers are interested in pursuing the two major categories of geoengineering technologies: those that are designed to remove carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases from the atmosphere
(CDR) and those that are designed to reduce the Earth’s absorption of the energy from sunlight or solar radiation management (SRM).
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2052867/Machines-suck-CO2-aerosol-injections-sky-The-geoengineering-techniques-got-support-public.html#ixzz4HQ6tEr6J
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook