Atmospheric interference: The climate crazies are dangerous

 

Back in July, under the title “An Alternative to Blowing Up the Sun,” this blog linked to reports of some demented climate change warriors who suppose they can fix allegedly man-made climate problems by “Dimming the Sun.”  Now it’s actually happening.  Someone writing under the name 'Raw Egg Nationalist' just published an analysis at The National Pulse about actual atmospheric interference -- interference that is so irresponsible and idiotic that it’s hard to believe it’s true:

Corporates Have Begun ‘Geoengineering’ The Climate,
With Basically No One’s Consent

The deployment of sulphur dioxide into the atmosphere
is one of the ways the climate change lobby
are considering manipulating the weather

An American startup firm has admitted to releasing reactive particles into the atmosphere in an attempt to alter the climate. The move has attracted widespread criticism, and marks a potentially dangerous new stage in the intensifying response to Earth’s “climate crisis”.

Just before Christmas 2022, the firm ‘Make Sunsets’ acknowledged it had launched weather balloons containing sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere. The launches took place in April 2022, in Baja California, Mexico, months before the company was even incorporated.

When quizzed about it, the company’s CEO, Luke Iseman, was unrepentant. “It’s morally wrong, in my opinion, for us not to be doing this”, he said, adding that it’s important “to do this as quickly and safely as we can,” because of the threat of man-made climate change.

Critics, including geoengineers, say Make Sunset’s efforts are dangerous, not only because the field is very much in its infancy, but also because they could have wildly different effects from those intended.

“The current state of science is not good enough… to either reject, or to accept, let alone implement” solar geoengineering, said Janos Pasztor, executive director of the Carnegie Climate Governance Initiative, which seeks to impose restrictions on geoengineering projects. “To go ahead with implementation at this stage is a very bad idea.”

Other scientists believe this unannounced and unmonitored release of chemicals into the atmosphere could set the science back, disrupting its funding and leading to public calls to restrict research. The move has been compared to other reckless innovations, including the use of CRISPR gene-editing technology by a Chinese scientist on human embryos, without proper evaluation of the safety and ethics of doing so. . . .

Mr. Raw Egg N concludes:

Given the pace of change, and the determination of our leaders – and now captains of industry – to reshape the world with or without our consent, we need to find ways to make our voices heard, fast. We must realize that it makes no difference to withdraw consent retroactively, especially when what’s done cannot be undone.  

Read the complete analysis here. 

# # #