How about a "nuclear cool down"?

It's NOAA's job to say it looks bad.

If you worked for an ad-agency that was hired to orchestrate a come-back of Beanie Babies ... you wouldn't be doing your job if you weren't trying to convince everyone in America that Beanie Babies are the best thing since spice racks.

Selling your product is what agencies do ...

View attachment 688545
"It's NOAA's job to say it looks bad"

I suppose fisherman poo poo them and sail into bad weather when NOAA lies. Like a fn salesman. Got it.
 
OK, let the global warming continue...
Or how about we use our human ingenuity and industriousness to save the world rather than destroy it? This world was not passed down from our ancestors, it is on loan from our children and their children and so forth.
 
Nope. Too heavy.

One geoengineering technique, stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), would pump millions of tiny sulfate particles into the stratosphere, where they would reflect a fraction of sunlight back into space before it reaches the Earth. That essentially would simulate the sunlight-blocking effect of large volcanic eruptions such as the 2001 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines, which pumped 15 million tons (13.6 million metric tons) of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere — resulting in a global temperature drop of 1 degree Fahrenheit (0.5 degrees Celsius) that lasted for 15 months.
How do you "inject" 13.6m tons of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere"? That's impractical. The nuke option is a better bet.
 
Did you actually read the OP? Do you think it's reasonable to blow up deserts with Bombs just to avoid dealing with our climate mess and the politically powerful industry that caused it?
The point of the OP is that there is no "dealing" with the climate mess.
China, India, forest fires from global warming, are not going to stop pumping CO2 into the atmosphere.
 
youre proof theres a sucker born everyday,,
Not a STEM Major, huh?

When disaster hits its too late.

Looks real to me.
1661734813000.png
 
It's NOAA's job to say it looks bad.

If you worked for an ad-agency that was hired to orchestrate a come-back of Beanie Babies ... you wouldn't be doing your job if you weren't trying to convince everyone in America that Beanie Babies are the best thing since spice racks.
Selling your product is what agencies do ...
NOAA is not a political party. They are scientists with no agenda. They can only warn us of what the global projections look like.
 
Or how about we use our human ingenuity and industriousness to save the world rather than destroy it? This world was not passed down from our ancestors, it is on loan from our children and their children and so forth.
I'm listening. Put up a better idea. I put mine up in the OP.
 
NOAA is not a political party. They are scientists with no agenda.

In fact, NOAA is a taxpayer-funded agency. Congress determines how much funding they get, who works there and how much they get paid.
 
Last edited:
I'm listening. Put up a better idea. I put mine up in the OP.
There's no magic bullet for this. In the short term we are probably screwed. We should have been working on this 40 years ago if we were interested in keeping things somewhat stable. Now? Well there will always be some part of the globe that is still nice for the billionaires to stay.
 
There's no magic bullet for this. In the short term we are probably screwed. We should have been working on this 40 years ago if we were interested in keeping things somewhat stable. Now? Well there will always be some part of the globe that is still nice for the billionaires to stay.
So your "final answer" is "fuck it", what happens happens? Everybody has to die of something?
 
Did you actually read the OP? Do you think it's reasonable to blow up deserts with Bombs just to avoid dealing with our climate mess and the politically powerful industry that caused it?

Do you think it's reasonable to blow up deserts

No. How long have you been hydrocarbon free?
 
So your "final answer" is "fuck it", what happens happens? Everybody has to die of something?
My answer is that we keep calm, carry on and do what we can. Trying to have a "controlled" nuclear winter is stupid. If that's all we can come up with we deserve extinction. Humanity has to change how we manage our resources if we want to live, Even so places like Bangladesh, the pacific island nations and anyone on a flood plane is going to have to move.
 
Or how about we use our human ingenuity and industriousness to save the world rather than destroy it? This world was not passed down from our ancestors, it is on loan from our children and their children and so forth.

That's a great idea!!!

How many new nuclear reactors should we build?
 
My answer is that we keep calm, carry on and do what we can. Trying to have a "controlled" nuclear winter is stupid. If that's all we can come up with we deserve extinction. Humanity has to change how we manage our resources if we want to live, Even so places like Bangladesh, the pacific island nations and anyone on a flood plane is going to have to move.

If your planes are flooding, you need a new airline.
 
Do you think it's reasonable to blow up deserts

No. How long have you been hydrocarbon free?
Never. This modern life they built for us is impossible without wrecking the planet. There are vast forces at work to make sure that never changes. You are a foot-soldier in the battle to use every drop of fossil energy before alternatives make them the less attractive alternatives.
 

Forum List

Back
Top