Posted on 07/28/2013 5:34:28 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
As you squeegee out your basement, replace your blown-off roof tiles, bury your heat-withered tomato crop and think about moving to a house on higher ground, you will be forgiven if you want to step out onto the street, tilt your head toward those odd-shaped clouds massing on the horizon, and scream, “Fix it!
And that might be a reasonable request. The weather is broken. To some degree, this is because we broke it: While it is foolish to link any individual extreme-weather event to the larger climate, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the growing frequency and intensity of windstorms, floods, hurricanes and extremes of heat and cold is a consequence of higher levels of weather-system volatility related to a warming trend caused in part by human-generated carbon emissions.
If we broke it, should we fix it?
The idea of geoengineering – planet-scale projects to reverse climate change – was on the sci-fi fringes of political thought when first proposed by the scientific community back in the 1970s, when the climate effects of fossil-fuel emissions first became apparent.
But it has recently gained a lot more mainstream credibility in both scientific and policy circles. Last week saw a major breakthrough, as the U.S. National Research Council, along with NASA, the U.S. Geological Survey, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and other high-level agencies, convened a blue-ribbon group of scientists to evaluate the leading high-tech proposals to fix the Earth.
There are, basically, three big ideas for reversing the warming trend: Putting chemicals in the atmosphere to make it more reflective so less sunlight reaches the surface; changing the chemistry of the oceans (possibly by dumping millions of tonnes of iron filings into them) so they absorb more carbon; and increasing the carbon absorbency of the soil by seeding it
(Excerpt) Read more at theglobeandmail.com ...
I love how opinions are now scientific facts...!
This will work realllly well. We can fix Mother Nature, right? The arrogance of ignorance has no bounds but bounds about in unintended consequential glee, sure of its brilliance, unrestricted by its stupidity.
Translation: a lot of overeducated BS artists and liars are meeting to justify their munificent paychecks.
No kiddin !
Yep i agree and that about sums it up. When will we be told that just recently that through satellite observation the worlds major deserts are now sprouting more green life than ever? Oh the inconvenience truth will never see daylight.
Well said.
Well said.
RE: Fix the Earth?” Are you $hittin’ me? These people are insane.
I guess that want the earth’s weather to always be nice with no storms, no typhoons, no tornadoes, no blizzards (Maybe no earthquakes and tsunamis too )
That’s what they mean by “fix”.
... all the cool people believe this -- take the blue pill and you can be cool, too ...
that the growing frequency and intensity of windstorms, floods, hurricanes and extremes of heat and cold
... alleges facts not in evidence ...
is a consequence of higher levels of weather-system volatility
What is "weather-system volatility"? Can you quantify or measure it at all? If not, how do you know that it's occurring at a "higher level"?
related to
Which is not the same as "caused by".
a warming trend
Alleging facts not in evidence again.
caused in part
So any radical action taken could, at best, fix only part of a problem whose existence hasn't even been established yet?
I should have known better...
OK!! Everybody pay attention!
Lesson for today:
1. The sun is 1,300,000 times as big as the earth.
2. The sun is a ball of fire that controls our climates.
3. The earth is a rock.
4. The earth is a speck in comparison to the size of the sun.
5. Inhabitants of the earth are less than specks.
Study Question: How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?
blue-ribbon group of scientists
$$$$ $$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$
Taxes and three card Monte what could go wrong indeed.
Lesson Number 2 - the center of the earth is filled with molten rock. Molten rock - meaning, in the range of 1300 - 2400 degrees F. And we’re worried about our cars causing global warming????!!!!
Let us assume, for purposes of discussion, that the first bolded section is indeed "a fact."
If it is, then the second bolded section is also probably a fact. But doesn't it make a rather dramatically critical difference whether the "in part" refers to 1% responsibility or 99%?
It is highly unlikely man has had NO impact on climate. It is also highly unlikely we are the primary factor.
I thought it was millions of degrees. A Nobel-winning scientist said so.
Might well be a lot hotter than the number I quoted. I did a quick, cheap "wiki" check on lava and came up with that figure. But lava flow has already been cooled by the ambient air and the adjacent earth crust, which is a LOT cooler than the lava itself.
“While it is foolish to link any individual extreme-weather event to the larger climate, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the growing frequency and intensity of windstorms, floods, hurricanes and extremes of heat and cold is a consequence of higher levels of weather-system volatility related to a warming trend caused in part by human-generated carbon emissions.”
NOT TRUE.
http://www.co2science.org/articles/V10/N29/EDIT.php
“(In) the period 1901-2000, the four researchers identified 30 drought episodes throughout the world that satisfied these stringent criteria during the 20th century.
“...seven of them occurred during the first two decades of the 20th century (1901-1920), seven occurred during the next two decades (1921-1940), eight during the middle two decades of the century (1941-1960), but only five during the next two decades (1961-1980), and a mere three during the final two decades of the century (1981-2000), which is not at all what one would have expected if the climate-alarmist thesis that is propounded by Gore and his followers was correct.
“The 30 major droughts of the 20th century were likely natural in all respects; and, hence, they are “indicative of what could also happen in the future,”. And happen they will.”
The bottom line is that believing you live in times with more “extreme weather” events is much like some Christians, who since the time of Christ believed they had identified portents of the “Biblical End Times”, in their own times.
After about 2000 years of people believing that *their* times were the End Times, Christian skeptics should be skeptical. And unless we want 2000 years of climate change advocates whining at us about “extreme weather events” being caused by Man Made Global Warming, we need to put our foot down, now, and challenge it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.