Crazy Geoengineering for the Illusion of Climate Change By James Reed
I do not have a science degree, and know nothing about science, but that does not disqualify me from the righteous belief that climate change is a myth. I refer not just to the present fashionable idea that humans are altering the environment by the most magic of all things, producing masses of consumer goods in this age of plenty, to make us all happy, but to any climate change, you know dinosaurs and nonsense like that. How could that be when God made the universe only 4,000 or 6,000 years ago? There can be no time for climate change! Read more:
Now the mad scientists want to dim the sun, which I thought involved putting a giant cosmic fire hose on it, which, apparently would not put out a nuclear fire anyway. No, the dimming is done to the Earth’s atmosphere:
“Scientists have proposed a new method to fight global warming: sun-dimming aerosols released into earth’s atmosphere. Research from scientists at Harvard and Yale universities was recently published in a journal called Environmental Research Letters which proposes using a technique called stratospheric aerosol injection to fight against climate change. The proposed technique would see scientists launching sulfate particles into the Earth’s lower stratosphere at altitudes up 12 miles high. Currently, the technology exists but there are no aircraft suitable to carry the particles and “developing a new, purpose-built tanker with substantial payload capabilities would neither be technologically difficult nor prohibitively expensive,” the researchers stated. The researchers have estimated that it would cost $3.5 billion to launch a system in 15 years time and would cost $2.25 billion a year to maintain over the course of those 15 years.”
Well, that sounds … dangerous … because who knows what kickon effects this supreme act of “playing god,” could have? And, according to their paradigm, isn’t all supposed to be over by then? Consider the report: Global Warming of 1.5°C, an IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Wow, that has just about everything in it except genders. And have the scientists even thought about the gender consequences of dimming?
I think about gender all of the time over a bottle of cheap wine, with a three legged goat, I mean a three day growth: