[Newsbot]

Title: Time to start researching global "sun block," says climate scientist
Category: Environmental
Posted By: Hyack
Date: 2010-01-27 14:26:29
Canadian

[QBall]

The road to hell is paved with good intentions and quite frankly I feel that this idea is another brick in that path. I say it would be ludicrous to start adding things to the atmosphere with extensive research and testing of all possible effects both environmentally and biologically. Quick fix answers always make me nervous.

[Akhenaten]

QBall QBall:

The road to hell is paved with good intentions and quite frankly I feel that this idea is another brick in that path. I say it would be ludicrous to start adding things to the atmosphere with extensive research and testing of all possible effects both environmentally and biologically. Quick fix answers always make me nervous.

Dead on correct. The idea is interesting but the approach by this author is laughable. I mean just listen to this 'rational scientist':

$1:

"The risks of not doing any serious research, not beginning to build the tools of governance, are bigger than the risks of doing it," he said.

Uh-what? How on Earth can he know that? I just shake my head. Guys like this are supposed to be 'smarter' than guys like me yet I wouldn't dare utter something so presumptuous.

[sandorski]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

QBall QBall:

The road to hell is paved with good intentions and quite frankly I feel that this idea is another brick in that path. I say it would be ludicrous to start adding things to the atmosphere with extensive research and testing of all possible effects both environmentally and biologically. Quick fix answers always make me nervous.

Dead on correct. The idea is interesting but the approach by this author is laughable. I mean just listen to this 'rational scientist':

$1:

"The risks of not doing any serious research, not beginning to build the tools of governance, are bigger than the risks of doing it," he said.

Uh-what? How on Earth can he know that? I just shake my head. Guys like this are supposed to be 'smarter' than guys like me yet I wouldn't dare utter something so presumptuous.

He's just saying it's better to get the Research done on it before someone just goes ahead and does it out of desperation. He's right about that.

[romanP]

So the answer to a lot of harmful stuff being in the air is to.. put more harmful stuff in the air?

Hmmm.. No sir. I don't like it.

[Akhenaten]

sandorski sandorski:

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

QBall QBall:

The road to hell is paved with good intentions and quite frankly I feel that this idea is another brick in that path. I say it would be ludicrous to start adding things to the atmosphere with extensive research and testing of all possible effects both environmentally and biologically. Quick fix answers always make me nervous.

Dead on correct. The idea is interesting but the approach by this author is laughable. I mean just listen to this 'rational scientist':

$1:

"The risks of not doing any serious research, not beginning to build the tools of governance, are bigger than the risks of doing it," he said.

Uh-what? How on Earth can he know that? I just shake my head. Guys like this are supposed to be 'smarter' than guys like me yet I wouldn't dare utter something so presumptuous.

He's just saying it's better to get the Research done on it before someone just goes ahead and does it out of desperation. He's right about that.

Hmm. Maybe you're right. I took it to mean the exact opposite, i.e. advocating getting it done sooner rather than laboriously researching it. Its kinda hard to believe he would say such a thing.

[Zipperfish]

I think he's on to the right idea. If positive feedback to CO2 concentration increases turns out to be the case, and if those positive feedbacks turn out to be rather large in magnitude (say +6 deg C in the Arctic by 2100 or 2150), then we'll need some back-pocket technology ready to go.

And it could be useful for when we terraform Venus, which we should probably get going on now.

[QBall]

I just don't like the alarmist tone the guy is using. This kind of research could take decades and never get a satisfactory result. The way this guy is talking he sounds like the kind of scientist who will fudge numbers to get a result that matches a political ideologue or keep a funding scheme going (like we haven't seen that recently!).

[romanP]

In the case of "doing nothing isn't going to make it better", he's wrong. If we all did nothing at all, the planet would be better off. If we stopped consuming and stopped breeding, the pollution problem would mostly solve itself.

Of course, we wouldn't be around to enjoy the lack of pollution if we did that. The happy medium is to consume less and breed less.