Interesting Geoengineering Map
- Thread starter DeerePoke
- Start date
What are your reservations about these projects?
Admit I didn't read it. I was doing other things. Just grabbed first search response and posted it. Search earths magnetic field weakening. Interesting stuff.
Dude the magnetic field has been weakening for 150 years exact time frame of man made global warming. Magnetic field wearing means more solar energy gets to earth. Makes earth warmer. Yeah 10 to 30% weakening directly corresponds with warming. Honestly I believe we have contributed.
Also cause of massive electricity failures. Which may or may not have happened in Europe a few weeks ago.
mugatu
Sheriff
Stop doing AI research. You cannot count on AI research for factual accuracy. It has been proven over and over. You MUST double check anything AI spits out with peer reviewed papers.
What I do know is that every major global warming event has been correlated to rises in atmospheric CO2. We have roughly doubled the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and current global climate models are showing that amount of CO2 leads to raising global temperatures.
mugatu
Sheriff
I have reservations about some projects if at larger scale. Impacts are lot limited to their borders. We need to do things with short lifespan and localized, predictable and controllable impacts.
For example, countries in dry areas can cloud seed to get more precipitation in their fields at the expense of down wind countrie, same as if they dam up rivers and cause droughts in downstream nations.
BS. CO2 drops under 200Ppm it's a mass extinction event. Seriously look into it. 1500ppm is healthy. When they were digging in the ice cores they said this before they didn't. It's a crazy change of story..
mugatu
Sheriff
...yeah I'm not taking research tasking or climate info as face value from the guy that earlier today was claiming chemtrails were a thing.
mugatu
Sheriff
You understand that researchers learn over time and opinions change.
mugatu
Sheriff
Please cite your 1500ppm is healthy. I've been looking and can't find that anywhere other than im c9ntext of maximum growth for plant life. If I'm missing something please educate with a legit source.
This is the type of thing i gound when pooking for 1500ppm.
Ancient Deepsea Shells Reveal 66 Million Years Of Carbon Dioxide Levels
Co-authored by two Texas A&M scientists, a new analysis using ancient marine organisms provides important past climate data and context to modern carbon emissions.
"The study found CO2 levels of more 1500 parts per million (ppm) in the atmosphere associated with extreme global warmth 50 million years ago, a climate so warm that no ice existed on the poles, the researchers said.
“For instance, at CO2 levels of around 1500 ppm, last seen about 50 million years ago, it was so warm that we find fossilized alligators in the Arctic,” said James Rae, lead author of the paper and reader in the School of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of St. Andrews."
Dude the earth is 4 billion years old. There has only been ice on it for a billion years. 75% of the time it has been ice free. If we as a species want to survive here. We better be able to live on an ice free planet. If not we are the next mass extinction.Please cite your 1500ppm is healthy. I've been looking and can't find that anywhere other than im c9ntext of maximum growth for plant life. If I'm missing something please educate with a legit source.
This is the type of thing i gound when pooking for 1500ppm.
Ancient Deepsea Shells Reveal 66 Million Years Of Carbon Dioxide Levels
Co-authored by two Texas A&M scientists, a new analysis using ancient marine organisms provides important past climate data and context to modern carbon emissions.stories.tamu.edu
"The study found CO2 levels of more 1500 parts per million (ppm) in the atmosphere associated with extreme global warmth 50 million years ago, a climate so warm that no ice existed on the poles, the researchers said.
“For instance, at CO2 levels of around 1500 ppm, last seen about 50 million years ago, it was so warm that we find fossilized alligators in the Arctic,” said James Rae, lead author of the paper and reader in the School of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of St. Andrews."
Isn’t that why we’re experimenting with ways to manipulate our environment in ways that would mitigate the effects? I feel like you keep answering your own questions.
You agree the earth is warming and may be ice free in the next century or so. You agree that it’s completely natural for that to happen. You agree that we need to adapt and prepare for a changing earth. But you seem to be freaking out about how.
What’s wrong with cloud seeding? What’s wrong with carbon capture? With solar radiation management?
What other things do you propose?
mugatu
Sheriff
So your claim that 1500 ppm is healthy is total BS. Got it.
...and there's only been anything living (not counting bacteria) on the surface for a little over 500 M years. So the normal is to only have single cell life... what's your point?
Timeline: The evolution of life
The story of evolution spans over 3 billion years and shows how microscopic single-celled organisms transformed Earth and gave rise to complex organisms like animals
So just to be clear, one species isn't a mass extinction, by definition that is an event where large portions of all life go extinct. We can go extinct and be part of a mass extinction but can't be one alone.
We, however, can potentially impact one because we have a larger influence on the environment than any previous single species. Even if we can live under the new warmer environmental conditions, if enough around us can't survive the change we won't either.
I do agree with one point. The world is going to warm and cool naturally through its own processes. I don't know what percentage of the current warming is natural vs human influenced because I'm not a climatologist and haven't studied it my entire professional life - so I tend to defer to the scientists.
Going to precede the following with this: I'm not saying we are or are not enroute to a mass extinction event caused by our own making and the subsequent collapse of our species. I dont know enough to make that kind of claim. I'm saying there's a lot of change happening very quickly now, and in the past when dieoffs happen, these changes are also present. So it wouldn't hurt to try to limit the swing where able vs just saying we need to be able to adapt to a warmer planet and continuing as is potentially exacerbating that issue.
What I've found in my looking this morning since you told me start googling last night:
Nature can only adapt at a certain rate, if things change faster than that the food web fails and life suffers (not just wildlife but humans too).
In the figure, blue is the average temperature change rate, green is total temperature change, red is extinction rate.
Thresholds of temperature change for mass extinctions - Nature Communications
The linkage between temperature change and extinction rates in the fossil record is well-known qualitatively but little explored quantitatively. Here the authors investigate the relationship of marine animal extinctions with rate and magnitude of temperature change across the last 450 million...
www.nature.com
Quick summary of 4 of the 5 mass extinction events.
Late Ordovician Extinction:
Caused by global cooling in transition from greenhouse to icehouse Earth followed by rapid warming back to a greenhouse Earth. Unsure reason for temperature swing.
PT extinction:
Caused by huge long lasting volcanic activity (Deccan traps) that drove CO2 up to 2500 ppm along with large releases of SO2 and caused huge warming and acidic rain.
Tr-J extinction:
Believed to be caused by massive long term (>20k years) volcanic activity (central Atlantic magmatic province) that drove temperatures up.
K-Pg extinction:
Combination of volcanic activity (Deccan traps again) with its climatic influence and a big a$$ asteroid (larger impact - pun intended).
Polds4OSU
Marshall
Speaking of. this article dropped just 3 weeks ago on Phys.org
About
With a global reach of over 10 million monthly readers and featuring dedicated websites for science (Phys.org), technology (Tech Xplore) and medical research (Medical Xpress), the Science X network is one of the largest online communities for science-minded people. Science X publishes over 200 quality articles every day, offering the most comprehensive coverage of sci-tech developments worldwide.
Geoengineering technique could cool planet using existing aircraft
Link
PJ-OSU
New member
Open minded research, nuanced response, AND deferring to scientists? What a sheep...So your claim that 1500 ppm is healthy is total BS. Got it.
...and there's only been anything living (not counting bacteria) on the surface for a little over 500 M years. So the normal is to only have single cell life... what's your point?
Timeline: The evolution of life
The story of evolution spans over 3 billion years and shows how microscopic single-celled organisms transformed Earth and gave rise to complex organisms like animalswww.newscientist.com
So just to be clear, one species isn't a mass extinction, by definition that is an event where large portions of all life go extinct. We can go extinct and be part of a mass extinction but can't be one alone.
We, however, can potentially impact one because we have a larger influence on the environment than any previous single species. Even if we can live under the new warmer environmental conditions, if enough around us can't survive the change we won't either.
I do agree with one point. The world is going to warm and cool naturally through its own processes. I don't know what percentage of the current warming is natural vs human influenced because I'm not a climatologist and haven't studied it my entire professional life - so I tend to defer to the scientists.
Going to precede the following with this: I'm not saying we are or are not enroute to a mass extinction event caused by our own making and the subsequent collapse of our species. I dont know enough to make that kind of claim. I'm saying there's a lot of change happening very quickly now, and in the past when dieoffs happen, these changes are also present. So it wouldn't hurt to try to limit the swing where able vs just saying we need to be able to adapt to a warmer planet and continuing as is potentially exacerbating that issue.
What I've found in my looking this morning since you told me start googling last night:
Nature can only adapt at a certain rate, if things change faster than that the food web fails and life suffers (not just wildlife but humans too).
In the figure, blue is the average temperature change rate, green is total temperature change, red is extinction rate.
View attachment 11603
Thresholds of temperature change for mass extinctions - Nature Communications
The linkage between temperature change and extinction rates in the fossil record is well-known qualitatively but little explored quantitatively. Here the authors investigate the relationship of marine animal extinctions with rate and magnitude of temperature change across the last 450 million...
Quick summary of 4 of the 5 mass extinction events.
Late Ordovician Extinction:
Caused by global cooling in transition from greenhouse to icehouse Earth followed by rapid warming back to a greenhouse Earth. Unsure reason for temperature swing.
PT extinction:
Caused by huge long lasting volcanic activity (Deccan traps) that drove CO2 up to 2500 ppm along with large releases of SO2 and caused huge warming and acidic rain.
Tr-J extinction:
Believed to be caused by massive long term (>20k years) volcanic activity (central Atlantic magmatic province) that drove temperatures up.
K-Pg extinction:
Combination of volcanic activity (Deccan traps again) with its climatic influence and a big a$$ asteroid (larger impact - pun intended).
Similar threads
