Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,719 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,471,343
Pageviews Today: 2,063,267Threads Today: 440Posts Today: 9,100
02:52 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?

 
George B (OP)

User ID: 19998253
United States
04/03/2013 09:44 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
Leave it to the Government to make things too expensive and complex . . . Lesson on how to mitigate persistent contrails . . . see below


"At typical contrail-friendly altitudes, between about 28,000 and 40,000 feet, temperatures run from about -36 to -76 degrees. If the airplane leaves a long trail, the air is not only cold but humid, allowing the ice crystals to persist. If the contrail stops, then starts up again, creating a broken line, chances are the airplane flew through a dry patch.

In 1994 the government awarded a $63.5-million [other sources report $16 million] contract to the Northrop Corporation to fine-tune stealth bombers in a number of ways. One retrofit involved the installation of "contrail management systems." Ophir, an optical sensor manufacturer in Littleton, Colorado, saved the day. Its Pilot Alert System uses lidar (light detection and ranging) to differentiate contrails from clouds and tell the pilot to change his altitude when his aircraft is "conning."

[link to www.globalsecurity.org]

How about a $5 mirror or a $200 video camera?? . . . Yup . . . that is a contrail all right . . . another do

Last Edited by George B on 04/03/2013 09:45 AM
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
George B (OP)

User ID: 19998253
United States
04/03/2013 09:46 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
B-2 Contrail
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1211465
United States
04/03/2013 10:05 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
Visibility does, however, correlate with trapping long wave solar radiation (positive radiative forcing) . . . and thus increasing global warming potential . . . . which is contrary to the goal of reducing global warming potential. . . and would be opposite of the normal goals of geoengineering. . . .

huffy

:Radiative Forcin:
 Quoting: George B


You're a fucking waffler....

You can't even decide what you are whining about...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1211465


I don't think so . . . huffy

"1. Introduction
1.1 2009 is a key moment in the history of attempts to tackle the urgent threat of climate
change. New science suggests its impacts will be even more severe and felt far sooner than previously
anticipated. The window of opportunity for avoiding dangerous levels of climate change is closing
fast. All sectors have a responsibility to act and to act quickly to reduce their GHG emissions
substantially. Bunker fuels, including those from international aviation, are in no sense an exception
and must be brought into global GHG reduction plans and the UNFCCC Agreement in Copenhagen
in December 2009. GIACC alongside ICAO, its member states and industry and civil society
observers, has a solemn responsibility at this 11th hour to agree to effective proposals to this end.

2. Aviation’s contribution to radiative forcing is 4.9% of the global total and exceeds shipping
by 75%


2.1 ICSA’s presentation to GIACC/3 highlighted aviation’s contribution to climate change.
Since the meeting, new evidence has been published by Lee et al which updates the IPCC’s Fourth
Assessment Report (4AR), providing results based on operational data for 2005 (IPCC 4AR was
based on 2000 data). The report shows that global emissions of CO2 from air transport grew over 45%
between 1992 and 2005, reaching an estimated 733 million tonnes a year by the end of the period.
Between 2000 and 2007 alone, aviation traffic grew at an annual average rate of 5.3%, leading to a
38% increase in passenger traffic. The European Environment Agency (EEA) moreover estimates that
EU15 CO2 emissions from aviation grew 102% between 1990 and 2006. Lee et al calculated that the
CO2 and non-CO2 radiative forcing (RF) attributable to aviation in 2005 was 4.9% of the total RF when best estimates for the effects of aviation induced cirrus cloud formation are included (Lee et. al.
– see Appendix B). Without cloud effects, the figure was
3.5%. Estimates of total aviation RF(excluding cirrus) in 2050, using fuel usage growth factors of 2.7 to 3.9 over baseline year 2000, are 3 to 4 times greater than the 2000 value.


[link to legacy.icao.int]
 Quoting: George B


STILL not "chemtrails".
George B (OP)

User ID: 19998253
United States
04/03/2013 10:12 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
Visibility does, however, correlate with trapping long wave solar radiation (positive radiative forcing) . . . and thus increasing global warming potential . . . . which is contrary to the goal of reducing global warming potential. . . and would be opposite of the normal goals of geoengineering. . . .

huffy

Radiative Forcin

[link to spie.org]

 Quoting: George B


You're a fucking waffler....

You can't even decide what you are whining about...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1211465


I don't think so . . . huffy

"1. Introduction
1.1 2009 is a key moment in the history of attempts to tackle the urgent threat of climate
change. New science suggests its impacts will be even more severe and felt far sooner than previously
anticipated. The window of opportunity for avoiding dangerous levels of climate change is closing
fast. All sectors have a responsibility to act and to act quickly to reduce their GHG emissions
substantially. Bunker fuels, including those from international aviation, are in no sense an exception
and must be brought into global GHG reduction plans and the UNFCCC Agreement in Copenhagen
in December 2009. GIACC alongside ICAO, its member states and industry and civil society
observers, has a solemn responsibility at this 11th hour to agree to effective proposals to this end.

2. Aviation’s contribution to radiative forcing is 4.9% of the global total and exceeds shipping
by 75%


2.1 ICSA’s presentation to GIACC/3 highlighted aviation’s contribution to climate change.
Since the meeting, new evidence has been published by Lee et al which updates the IPCC’s Fourth
Assessment Report (4AR), providing results based on operational data for 2005 (IPCC 4AR was
based on 2000 data). The report shows that global emissions of CO2 from air transport grew over 45%
between 1992 and 2005, reaching an estimated 733 million tonnes a year by the end of the period.
Between 2000 and 2007 alone, aviation traffic grew at an annual average rate of 5.3%, leading to a
38% increase in passenger traffic. The European Environment Agency (EEA) moreover estimates that
EU15 CO2 emissions from aviation grew 102% between 1990 and 2006. Lee et al calculated that the
CO2 and non-CO2 radiative forcing (RF) attributable to aviation in 2005 was 4.9% of the total RF when best estimates for the effects of aviation induced cirrus cloud formation are included (Lee et. al.
– see Appendix B). Without cloud effects, the figure was
3.5%. Estimates of total aviation RF(excluding cirrus) in 2050, using fuel usage growth factors of 2.7 to 3.9 over baseline year 2000, are 3 to 4 times greater than the 2000 value.


[link to legacy.icao.int]
 Quoting: George B


STILL not "chemtrails".
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1211465


Come on . . . you are saying persistent contrails are not what most Chemtrail Conspiracy Advocates are complaining about . . . ?? huffy

That is exactly what I am pointing out . . . these persistent trails in the sky along with the contrail induced cirrus cloud banks are a problem acknowledged by scientists world wide . . . they just don't call them Chemtrails . . . horsepoop

Last Edited by George B on 04/04/2013 08:37 AM
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
George B (OP)

User ID: 19998253
United States
04/03/2013 10:12 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
Visibility does, however, correlate with trapping long wave solar radiation (positive radiative forcing) . . . and thus increasing global warming potential . . . . which is contrary to the goal of reducing global warming potential. . . and would be opposite of the normal goals of geoengineering. . . .

huffy


 Quoting: George B


You're a fucking waffler....

You can't even decide what you are whining about...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1211465


I don't think so . . . huffy

"1. Introduction
1.1 2009 is a key moment in the history of attempts to tackle the urgent threat of climate
change. New science suggests its impacts will be even more severe and felt far sooner than previously
anticipated. The window of opportunity for avoiding dangerous levels of climate change is closing
fast. All sectors have a responsibility to act and to act quickly to reduce their GHG emissions
substantially. Bunker fuels, including those from international aviation, are in no sense an exception
and must be brought into global GHG reduction plans and the UNFCCC Agreement in Copenhagen
in December 2009. GIACC alongside ICAO, its member states and industry and civil society
observers, has a solemn responsibility at this 11th hour to agree to effective proposals to this end.

2. Aviation’s contribution to radiative forcing is 4.9% of the global total and exceeds shipping
by 75%


2.1 ICSA’s presentation to GIACC/3 highlighted aviation’s contribution to climate change.
Since the meeting, new evidence has been published by Lee et al which updates the IPCC’s Fourth
Assessment Report (4AR), providing results based on operational data for 2005 (IPCC 4AR was
based on 2000 data). The report shows that global emissions of CO2 from air transport grew over 45%
between 1992 and 2005, reaching an estimated 733 million tonnes a year by the end of the period.
Between 2000 and 2007 alone, aviation traffic grew at an annual average rate of 5.3%, leading to a
38% increase in passenger traffic. The European Environment Agency (EEA) moreover estimates that
EU15 CO2 emissions from aviation grew 102% between 1990 and 2006. Lee et al calculated that the
CO2 and non-CO2 radiative forcing (RF) attributable to aviation in 2005 was 4.9% of the total RF when best estimates for the effects of aviation induced cirrus cloud formation are included (Lee et. al.
– see Appendix B). Without cloud effects, the figure was
3.5%. Estimates of total aviation RF(excluding cirrus) in 2050, using fuel usage growth factors of 2.7 to 3.9 over baseline year 2000, are 3 to 4 times greater than the 2000 value.


[link to legacy.icao.int]
 Quoting: George B


STILL not "chemtrails".
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1211465


Come on . . . you are saying persistent contrails are not what most Chemtrail Conspiracy Advocates are complaining about . . . ?? huffy

That is exactly what I am pointing out . . . these persistent trails in the sky along with the contrail induced cirrus cloud banks are a problem acknowledged by scientists world wide . . . they just don't call them Chemtrails . . . horsepoop

Last Edited by George B on 04/03/2013 10:27 AM
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
George B (OP)

User ID: 19998253
United States
04/03/2013 10:24 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
These Poll results further support my point . . . people see the trails and think they are something other than simply contrails . . .

Thread: How were you introduced to the concept of the Chemtrail conspiracy?

POLL: How were you introduced to the concept of the Chemtrail conspiracy?

3) I notice them first in the sky and started to ask questions 51.6% (192)
2) I visited a website and they talked about them 15.6% (58)
1) Someone (a friend, family, etc.) told me about Chemtrails 10.5% (39)
4) I was reading about a different conspiracy and they mentioned them . . . 8.6% (32)
9) Other . . . please specify 7.8% (29)
5) I saw a discussion on a YouTube video 3.8% (14)
7) I was watching TV and I saw a documentary on the History Channel 1.1% (4)
8) I had a dream about them and just knew 0.8% (3)
6) I was watching TV and there was a news story about them 0.3% (1)
Blank (View Results) (55)

Non-Blank Votes: 372

Last Edited by George B on 04/03/2013 10:25 AM
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
WindyMind

User ID: 7244814
United States
04/03/2013 11:40 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
But the long fluffies that cause the flu are chemtrails. kitty
George B (OP)

User ID: 19998253
United States
04/03/2013 11:47 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
But the long fluffies that cause the flu are chemtrails. kitty
 Quoting: WindyMind


Windy, do you think the flu needs any help spreading on its own? Just spray it on a few passengers in any major airport and if the incubation period is 48 hours that strain of the flu will be across the country and possibly the world in a matter of days . . . coffee4
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
WindyMind

User ID: 7244814
United States
04/03/2013 11:53 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
No 1dunno1
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1211465
United States
04/03/2013 01:15 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
...


You're a fucking waffler....

You can't even decide what you are whining about...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1211465


I don't think so . . . huffy

"1. Introduction
1.1 2009 is a key moment in the history of attempts to tackle the urgent threat of climate
change. New science suggests its impacts will be even more severe and felt far sooner than previously
anticipated. The window of opportunity for avoiding dangerous levels of climate change is closing
fast. All sectors have a responsibility to act and to act quickly to reduce their GHG emissions
substantially. Bunker fuels, including those from international aviation, are in no sense an exception
and must be brought into global GHG reduction plans and the UNFCCC Agreement in Copenhagen
in December 2009. GIACC alongside ICAO, its member states and industry and civil society
observers, has a solemn responsibility at this 11th hour to agree to effective proposals to this end.

2. Aviation’s contribution to radiative forcing is 4.9% of the global total and exceeds shipping
by 75%


2.1 ICSA’s presentation to GIACC/3 highlighted aviation’s contribution to climate change.
Since the meeting, new evidence has been published by Lee et al which updates the IPCC’s Fourth
Assessment Report (4AR), providing results based on operational data for 2005 (IPCC 4AR was
based on 2000 data). The report shows that global emissions of CO2 from air transport grew over 45%
between 1992 and 2005, reaching an estimated 733 million tonnes a year by the end of the period.
Between 2000 and 2007 alone, aviation traffic grew at an annual average rate of 5.3%, leading to a
38% increase in passenger traffic. The European Environment Agency (EEA) moreover estimates that
EU15 CO2 emissions from aviation grew 102% between 1990 and 2006. Lee et al calculated that the
CO2 and non-CO2 radiative forcing (RF) attributable to aviation in 2005 was 4.9% of the total RF when best estimates for the effects of aviation induced cirrus cloud formation are included (Lee et. al.
– see Appendix B). Without cloud effects, the figure was
3.5%. Estimates of total aviation RF(excluding cirrus) in 2050, using fuel usage growth factors of 2.7 to 3.9 over baseline year 2000, are 3 to 4 times greater than the 2000 value.


[link to legacy.icao.int]
 Quoting: George B


STILL not "chemtrails".
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1211465


Come on . . . you are saying persistent contrails are not what most Chemtrail Conspiracy Advocates are complaining about . . . ?? huffy

That is exactly what I am pointing out . . . these persistent trails in the sky along with the contrail induced cirrus cloud banks are a problem acknowledged by scientists world wide . . . they just don't call them Chemtrails . . . horsepoop
 Quoting: George B



LOL, sometimes you say the persistence has nothing to do with why you're here...and other times they are THE reason...

And of COURSE science doesn't call them "chemtrails".

They have had a REAL name for almost 100 years!

Which is what I'm saying! Even though YOU know the trails are contrails, you jump on the "chemtrail" bandwagon to align yourself with a larger group...in an effort to twist and contort their views to match yours.

But, you OVER-estimate the true problem with the contrails and contrail cirrus so that chemtards will hate aviation as much as you do.

ACTUAL scientists don't seem anywhere near as concerned as you, a pseudo-scientist, do. I wonder why....

Which brings us full circle, as to WHY you want chemtard support behind you.

You are a sneaky one, Jorge...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1211465
United States
04/03/2013 01:15 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
But the long fluffies that cause the flu are chemtrails. kitty
 Quoting: WindyMind


Sure they are....
George B (OP)

User ID: 19998253
United States
04/03/2013 01:46 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
...


I don't think so . . . huffy

"1. Introduction
1.1 2009 is a key moment in the history of attempts to tackle the urgent threat of climate
change. New science suggests its impacts will be even more severe and felt far sooner than previously
anticipated. The window of opportunity for avoiding dangerous levels of climate change is closing
fast. All sectors have a responsibility to act and to act quickly to reduce their GHG emissions
substantially. Bunker fuels, including those from international aviation, are in no sense an exception
and must be brought into global GHG reduction plans and the UNFCCC Agreement in Copenhagen
in December 2009. GIACC alongside ICAO, its member states and industry and civil society
observers, has a solemn responsibility at this 11th hour to agree to effective proposals to this end.

2. Aviation’s contribution to radiative forcing is 4.9% of the global total and exceeds shipping
by 75%


2.1 ICSA’s presentation to GIACC/3 highlighted aviation’s contribution to climate change.
Since the meeting, new evidence has been published by Lee et al which updates the IPCC’s Fourth
Assessment Report (4AR), providing results based on operational data for 2005 (IPCC 4AR was
based on 2000 data). The report shows that global emissions of CO2 from air transport grew over 45%
between 1992 and 2005, reaching an estimated 733 million tonnes a year by the end of the period.
Between 2000 and 2007 alone, aviation traffic grew at an annual average rate of 5.3%, leading to a
38% increase in passenger traffic. The European Environment Agency (EEA) moreover estimates that
EU15 CO2 emissions from aviation grew 102% between 1990 and 2006. Lee et al calculated that the
CO2 and non-CO2 radiative forcing (RF) attributable to aviation in 2005 was 4.9% of the total RF when best estimates for the effects of aviation induced cirrus cloud formation are included (Lee et. al.
– see Appendix B). Without cloud effects, the figure was
3.5%. Estimates of total aviation RF(excluding cirrus) in 2050, using fuel usage growth factors of 2.7 to 3.9 over baseline year 2000, are 3 to 4 times greater than the 2000 value.


[link to legacy.icao.int]
 Quoting: George B


STILL not "chemtrails".
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1211465


Come on . . . you are saying persistent contrails are not what most Chemtrail Conspiracy Advocates are complaining about . . . ?? huffy

That is exactly what I am pointing out . . . these persistent trails in the sky along with the contrail induced cirrus cloud banks are a problem acknowledged by scientists world wide . . . they just don't call them Chemtrails . . . horsepoop
 Quoting: George B



LOL, sometimes you say the persistence has nothing to do with why you're here...and other times they are THE reason...

And of COURSE science doesn't call them "chemtrails".

They have had a REAL name for almost 100 years!

Which is what I'm saying! Even though YOU know the trails are contrails, you jump on the "chemtrail" bandwagon to align yourself with a larger group...in an effort to twist and contort their views to match yours.

But, you OVER-estimate the true problem with the contrails and contrail cirrus so that chemtards will hate aviation as much as you do.

ACTUAL scientists don't seem anywhere near as concerned as you, a pseudo-scientist, do. I wonder why....

Which brings us full circle, as to WHY you want chemtard support behind you.

You are a sneaky one, Jorge...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1211465

Wrong as always . . . and they are a problem and getting worse each year . . . strides have been made in most areas of mitigation but the most visible, troubling, and controversial radiant forcing agent is ignored except for tons of studies and proposed methods of mitigation but not one practical attempt to do anything . . . grumpy2
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 36488183
United States
04/03/2013 04:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
...


It says proposed
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1645786



yeah...funny shit proposed.



snarl
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 5141990


None of those tests have anything to do with contrails and most of those tests were done at ground level, like inside the underground tunnels or from a ship.

"In another chapter, 'Large Area Coverage Trials', the MoD describes how between 1961 and 1968 more than a million people along the south coast of England, from Torquay to the New Forest, were exposed to bacteria including e.coli and bacillus globigii, which mimics anthrax. These releases came from a military ship, the Icewhale, anchored off the Dorset coast, which sprayed the micro-organisms in a five to 10-mile radius."

The air releases were at 500 feet, not 30,000
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36488183


[link to www.whale.to]

One chapter of the report, 'The Fluorescent Particle Trials', reveals how between 1955 and 1963 planes flew from north-east England to the tip of Cornwall along the south and west coasts, dropping huge amounts of zinc cadmium sulphide on the population. The chemical drifted miles inland, its fluorescence allowing the spread to be monitored. In another trial using zinc cadmium sulphide, a generator was towed along a road near Frome in Somerset where it spewed the chemical for an hour.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36419852



Again read the report. The planes flew at 500 feet, not 30,000 feet. And since when is a car driving down the road anything like flying at 30,000 feet? Nothing in that report is talking about contrails
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 36488183
United States
04/03/2013 04:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
So bottom-line there is significant circumstantial evidence that there are official secrets within the geoengineering and climate control research apparatus at LLNL going back to the same group who first computer modeled the effects of global warming and those who did the atomic research and research on SDI (Star Wars) . . .
 Quoting: George B


All you can say is that there are secrets at LLNL. You cannot conclude what they are about
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 36488183
United States
04/03/2013 05:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
I have continually POSTED over and over that visibility has nothing to do with an aerosol injection program and that persistent trails in the sky are most assuredly persistent contrails and contrail induced cirrus cloud banks. huffy. . . . . .I am hiding nothing. . . .however, that being said, to suggest that the people who run the show are not capable and willing ( if they thought it necessary ) to engage in geoengineering is false. . . . and it would be very difficult to detect if done properly. . . .
 Quoting: George B


So you are saying that with all of the thousands of researchers around the world studying global climate and all of the satellites taking data on the climate somehow no one would notice when the climate started to change. Really?
George B (OP)

User ID: 19998253
United States
04/03/2013 06:27 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
So bottom-line there is significant circumstantial evidence that there are official secrets within the geoengineering and climate control research apparatus at LLNL going back to the same group who first computer modeled the effects of global warming and those who did the atomic research and research on SDI (Star Wars) . . .
 Quoting: George B


All you can say is that there are secrets at LLNL. You cannot conclude what they are about
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36488183


I think you can because it is highly probable. . . because Caldeira was doing climate computer modeling but was asked to apply for a security clearance but refuse to do so and was thus denied access to the inner circle of LLNL . . . so if his expertise was climate modeling it makes sense he was being denied classified climate information . . . goodnews

More interesting info on the connection between LLNL, Teller and Geoengineering and SECRECY. . . .ohno

"In 1990, a year short of his doctorate, Caldeira went to Leningrad to study with Russian climate scientist Mikhail Budyko, one of the first champions of geoengineering. In the 1970s, Budyko had suggested an early version of the basic Teller-Wood idea — decrease the global temperature by shooting sunlight-scattering particles into the stratosphere. While he was in Leningrad, Caldeira's philosophical outlook still predisposed him to distrust such interventions, but years later that would change.

In 1993, the former peace activist accepted a research post at that haven of bombmakers, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Caldeira was running high-powered computer models to study the climate, but when he was offered a security clearance that would have allowed fuller access to the lab's resources, he tried to stay true to his old principles by declining. As a result, he didn't see much of Wood. "There's an outer fence at Livermore, and then there's an inner fence," Caldeira says. "Lowell worked inside the fence."


[link to www.wired.com]
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
George B (OP)

User ID: 19998253
United States
04/03/2013 06:32 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
I have continually POSTED over and over that visibility has nothing to do with an aerosol injection program and that persistent trails in the sky are most assuredly persistent contrails and contrail induced cirrus cloud banks. huffy. . . . . .I am hiding nothing. . . .however, that being said, to suggest that the people who run the show are not capable and willing ( if they thought it necessary ) to engage in geoengineering is false. . . . and it would be very difficult to detect if done properly. . . .
 Quoting: George B


So you are saying that with all of the thousands of researchers around the world studying global climate and all of the satellites taking data on the climate somehow no one would notice when the climate started to change. Really?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36488183


I think they did and have but don't have the evidence or tools to determine what has been the exact cause of the changes observed . . . they have speculated but never allow themselves to consider that geoengineering is a possible cause . . . hiding2
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
George B (OP)

User ID: 19998253
United States
04/03/2013 06:39 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
Thanks for all your participation . . . dasbier


POLL: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?

8) I see persistent trails in the skies . . . 69.9% (267)
10) Scientific papers, patents, symposia (mainstream) . . . 7.9% (30)
12) Other. . . please specify in this Thread. . . . 7.3% (28)
4) YouTube Videos about chemtrails . . . 6.5% (25)
7) There are websites I visit that talk about them . . . 2.4% (9)
11) Papers, articles, symposia by other chemtrail believes . . . 1.8% (7)
2) I have dreams about them . . 1.3% (5)
5) Reading about different conspiracies they mentioned them . . 1.3% (5)
3) Documentaries about them on the History Channel . . . 0.5% (2)
6) My friends and/or family talk about them . . . 0.5% (2)
9) Rap songs or other entertainment including celebrities . . . 0.5% (2)
1) TV news stories about them . . . 0% (0)
Blank (View Results) (191)

Non-Blank Votes: 382
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 5141990
United States
04/04/2013 12:12 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
...



yeah...funny shit proposed.



snarl
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 5141990


None of those tests have anything to do with contrails and most of those tests were done at ground level, like inside the underground tunnels or from a ship.

"In another chapter, 'Large Area Coverage Trials', the MoD describes how between 1961 and 1968 more than a million people along the south coast of England, from Torquay to the New Forest, were exposed to bacteria including e.coli and bacillus globigii, which mimics anthrax. These releases came from a military ship, the Icewhale, anchored off the Dorset coast, which sprayed the micro-organisms in a five to 10-mile radius."

The air releases were at 500 feet, not 30,000
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36488183


[link to www.whale.to]

One chapter of the report, 'The Fluorescent Particle Trials', reveals how between 1955 and 1963 planes flew from north-east England to the tip of Cornwall along the south and west coasts, dropping huge amounts of zinc cadmium sulphide on the population. The chemical drifted miles inland, its fluorescence allowing the spread to be monitored. In another trial using zinc cadmium sulphide, a generator was towed along a road near Frome in Somerset where it spewed the chemical for an hour.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36419852



Again read the report. The planes flew at 500 feet, not 30,000 feet. And since when is a car driving down the road anything like flying at 30,000 feet? Nothing in that report is talking about contrails
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36488183


Why don't you bring it forward than? Copy and paste it...500 ft from the article. Don't forget to post the link.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 5141990
United States
04/04/2013 12:15 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
Blue skies and very low activity here...considering all the endless possibilities 23 miles from our lovely capital.

dasbier

I smell something in the air and it is not chemtrails....
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 5141990
United States
04/04/2013 12:16 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
...


None of those tests have anything to do with contrails and most of those tests were done at ground level, like inside the underground tunnels or from a ship.

"In another chapter, 'Large Area Coverage Trials', the MoD describes how between 1961 and 1968 more than a million people along the south coast of England, from Torquay to the New Forest, were exposed to bacteria including e.coli and bacillus globigii, which mimics anthrax. These releases came from a military ship, the Icewhale, anchored off the Dorset coast, which sprayed the micro-organisms in a five to 10-mile radius."

The air releases were at 500 feet, not 30,000
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36488183


[link to www.whale.to]

One chapter of the report, 'The Fluorescent Particle Trials', reveals how between 1955 and 1963 planes flew from north-east England to the tip of Cornwall along the south and west coasts, dropping huge amounts of zinc cadmium sulphide on the population. The chemical drifted miles inland, its fluorescence allowing the spread to be monitored. In another trial using zinc cadmium sulphide, a generator was towed along a road near Frome in Somerset where it spewed the chemical for an hour.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36419852



Again read the report. The planes flew at 500 feet, not 30,000 feet. And since when is a car driving down the road anything like flying at 30,000 feet? Nothing in that report is talking about contrails
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36488183


Why don't you bring it forward than? Copy and paste it...500 ft from the article. Don't forget to post the link.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 5141990


btw the report is about CHEMTRAILS not contrails.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 5141990
United States
04/04/2013 12:17 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
Blue skies and very low activity here...considering all the endless possibilities 23 miles from our lovely capital.

dasbier

I smell something in the air and it is not chemtrails....
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 5141990


bump

lol!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 30170064
United States
04/04/2013 01:59 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
...


STILL not "chemtrails".
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1211465


Come on . . . you are saying persistent contrails are not what most Chemtrail Conspiracy Advocates are complaining about . . . ?? huffy

That is exactly what I am pointing out . . . these persistent trails in the sky along with the contrail induced cirrus cloud banks are a problem acknowledged by scientists world wide . . . they just don't call them Chemtrails . . . horsepoop
 Quoting: George B



LOL, sometimes you say the persistence has nothing to do with why you're here...and other times they are THE reason...

And of COURSE science doesn't call them "chemtrails".

They have had a REAL name for almost 100 years!

Which is what I'm saying! Even though YOU know the trails are contrails, you jump on the "chemtrail" bandwagon to align yourself with a larger group...in an effort to twist and contort their views to match yours.

But, you OVER-estimate the true problem with the contrails and contrail cirrus so that chemtards will hate aviation as much as you do.

ACTUAL scientists don't seem anywhere near as concerned as you, a pseudo-scientist, do. I wonder why....

Which brings us full circle, as to WHY you want chemtard support behind you.

You are a sneaky one, Jorge...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1211465

Wrong as always . . . and they are a problem and getting worse each year . . . strides have been made in most areas of mitigation but the most visible, troubling, and controversial radiant forcing agent is ignored except for tons of studies and proposed methods of mitigation but not one practical attempt to do anything . . . grumpy2
 Quoting: George B


Yeah, wrong...because some paranoid anus says so. That coming from the guy who thinks one can use the Appleman chart from ground level with old and distant data...

Come on, show me evidence that actual scientists are as concerned about this as you are.


Show me evidence that they are ignoring the other 95% of manmade sources of CO2./sulfur...or that they are as worried about the mitigation of contrails as you are...

All these studies, all these methods for mitigation...and they do nothing?!

Oh, and because they do nothing( because nothing needs to be done) that's evidence, in your warped mind, that it's intentional...

To me, it's evidence that the the problem isn't as serious as you suggest it it...

But, go ahead, whine about it on conspiracy sites...I'm sure that will get "them" to do something about it....

laugh
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 30170064
United States
04/04/2013 02:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
...


[link to www.whale.to]

One chapter of the report, 'The Fluorescent Particle Trials', reveals how between 1955 and 1963 planes flew from north-east England to the tip of Cornwall along the south and west coasts, dropping huge amounts of zinc cadmium sulphide on the population. The chemical drifted miles inland, its fluorescence allowing the spread to be monitored. In another trial using zinc cadmium sulphide, a generator was towed along a road near Frome in Somerset where it spewed the chemical for an hour.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36419852



Again read the report. The planes flew at 500 feet, not 30,000 feet. And since when is a car driving down the road anything like flying at 30,000 feet? Nothing in that report is talking about contrails
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36488183


Why don't you bring it forward than? Copy and paste it...500 ft from the article. Don't forget to post the link.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 5141990


btw the report is about CHEMTRAILS not contrails.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 5141990



lol
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 30170064
United States
04/04/2013 02:09 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
I have continually POSTED over and over that visibility has nothing to do with an aerosol injection program and that persistent trails in the sky are most assuredly persistent contrails and contrail induced cirrus cloud banks. huffy. . . . . .I am hiding nothing. . . .however, that being said, to suggest that the people who run the show are not capable and willing ( if they thought it necessary ) to engage in geoengineering is false. . . . and it would be very difficult to detect if done properly. . . .
 Quoting: George B


So you are saying that with all of the thousands of researchers around the world studying global climate and all of the satellites taking data on the climate somehow no one would notice when the climate started to change. Really?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36488183


I think they did and have but don't have the evidence or tools to determine what has been the exact cause of the changes observed . . . they have speculated but never allow themselves to consider that geoengineering is a possible cause . . . hiding2
 Quoting: George B


Oh Jorge...I think you need to contact them right away! All the tools and man hours of study they have and they missed the critical information you inven....err, understand!

I think you should just continue to post crap on this conspiracy site and make polls for chemtards! You are performing a great service for your country, and all of mankind. By posting your opinions and beliefs on GLP!

You are a true hero Jorge!

They need YOUR input to "allow" them to consider the geoengineering possibility!

So, continue to preach to the choir on conspiracy sites....that s sure to help.


Jorge, have you ever asked any environmental or atmospheric scientists if they have considered this possibility?!
George B (OP)

User ID: 4883853
United States
04/04/2013 06:19 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
So bottom-line there is significant circumstantial evidence that there are official secrets within the geoengineering and climate control research apparatus at LLNL going back to the same group who first computer modeled the effects of global warming and those who did the atomic research and research on SDI (Star Wars) . . .
 Quoting: George B


All you can say is that there are secrets at LLNL. You cannot conclude what they are about
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36488183


I think you can because it is highly probable. . . because Caldeira was doing climate computer modeling but was asked to apply for a security clearance but refuse to do so and was thus denied access to the inner circle of LLNL . . . so if his expertise was climate modeling it makes sense he was being denied classified climate information . . . goodnews

More interesting info on the connection between LLNL, Teller and Geoengineering and SECRECY. . . .ohno

"In 1990, a year short of his doctorate, Caldeira went to Leningrad to study with Russian climate scientist Mikhail Budyko, one of the first champions of geoengineering. In the 1970s, Budyko had suggested an early version of the basic Teller-Wood idea — decrease the global temperature by shooting sunlight-scattering particles into the stratosphere. While he was in Leningrad, Caldeira's philosophical outlook still predisposed him to distrust such interventions, but years later that would change.

In 1993, the former peace activist accepted a research post at that haven of bombmakers, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Caldeira was running high-powered computer models to study the climate, but when he was offered a security clearance that would have allowed fuller access to the lab's resources, he tried to stay true to his old principles by declining. As a result, he didn't see much of Wood. "There's an outer fence at Livermore, and then there's an inner fence," Caldeira says. "Lowell worked inside the fence."


[link to www.wired.com]
 Quoting: George B

Further proof that LLNL was in advance of all climate studies and computer modeling . . .

"(LLNL) Researchers at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory are so far the only ones who have modelled the stratospheric albedo modification scheme . . .

ALBEDO ENHANCEMENT BY STRATOSPHERIC SULFUR INJECTIONS: A CONTRIBUTION TO RESOLVE A POLICY DILEMMA?
An Editorial Essay

(LLNL) Researchers at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory are so far the only ones who have modelled the stratospheric albedo modification scheme. In a first study, Govindasamy and Caldeirau (2000) simulated this by reducing the solar luminos- ity by 1.8%, to balance future climate warming by a doubling of CO2. Although solar radiative forcing has a different physics and spatial distribution than the in- frared effects caused by CO2, the model results indicated that the global temper- ature response by both perturbations at the Earth’ surface and atmosphere largely cancelled out. Although these preliminary model results would be in favor a strato- spheric sulfur injection operation, the required annual S inputs are large, so that the possibility of adverse environmental side effects needs to be fully researched before the countermeasure to greenhouse warming is attempted. What has to be done first, is to explore whether using a sulfur injection scheme with advanced micro-physical and radiation process descriptions will show similar model results as the simple solar luminosity adjustment scheme of Govindasamy and Caldeira (2000). Further studies, following those conducted by Govindasamy (2003), should address the biological effects of the albedo modification scheme. As already men- tioned, injection of soot may be an alternative, but in need of critical analysis. Such studies by themselves, even when the experiment is never done, will be very informative.

Page 5

[link to www.cogci.dk]

Last Edited by George B on 04/04/2013 08:00 AM
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
George B (OP)

User ID: 4883853
United States
04/04/2013 07:11 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
I have continually POSTED over and over that visibility has nothing to do with an aerosol injection program and that persistent trails in the sky are most assuredly persistent contrails and contrail induced cirrus cloud banks. huffy. . . . . .I am hiding nothing. . . .however, that being said, to suggest that the people who run the show are not capable and willing ( if they thought it necessary ) to engage in geoengineering is false. . . . and it would be very difficult to detect if done properly. . . .
 Quoting: George B


So you are saying that with all of the thousands of researchers around the world studying global climate and all of the satellites taking data on the climate somehow no one would notice when the climate started to change. Really?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36488183


I think they did and have but don't have the evidence or tools to determine what has been the exact cause of the changes observed . . . they have speculated but never allow themselves to consider that geoengineering is a possible cause . . . hiding2
 Quoting: George B


Oh Jorge...I think you need to contact them right away! All the tools and man hours of study they have and they missed the critical information you inven....err, understand!

I think you should just continue to post crap on this conspiracy site and make polls for chemtards! You are performing a great service for your country, and all of mankind. By posting your opinions and beliefs on GLP!

You are a true hero Jorge!

They need YOUR input to "allow" them to consider the geoengineering possibility!

So, continue to preach to the choir on conspiracy sites....that s sure to help.


Jorge, have you ever asked any environmental or atmospheric scientists if they have considered this possibility?!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 30170064

1rof1

Please . . . no mainstream, established scientist is going to entertain such a question . . . if they did they would be jeopardizing their careers . . .
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
George B (OP)

User ID: 19998253
United States
04/04/2013 08:16 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
Oh Jorge...I think you need to contact them right away! All the tools and man hours of study they have and they missed the critical information you inven....err, understand!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 30170064


Here is your answer . . . the satellite which may have answered the question of geoengineering failed to launch in 2011 . . . see #1 below; the fact they are making educated guesses instead of knowing . . . can be seen in #2 below . . . coffee4

1. Raytheon’s Aerosol Polarimetry Sensor

Raytheon’s Aerosol Polarimetry Sensor (APS) will measure aerosols in Earth’s atmosphere to provide scientists and policy makers a better understanding of how those aerosols affect global climate change.

“The Glory Aerosol Polarimetry Sensor can distinguish between various types of aerosols and reveal the different role each plays in either warming or cooling our planet,” said Bill Hart, vice president, Space Systems. “Since black carbon aerosols generally contribute to warming, and sulfate aerosols to cooling, the concentrations of these aerosols and others must be determined to ensure accurate climate modeling.”

Both natural and man-made aerosols are important constituents of the atmosphere that affect global temperature. Yet they remain poorly quantified and, according to NASA scientists, represent the largest uncertainty regarding climate change.


[link to www.raytheon.com]

2. "The reasons for the 10-year increase in stratospheric aerosols are not fully understood and are the subject of ongoing research, says coauthor Ryan Neely, with the University of Colorado and the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES). Likely suspects are natural sources – smaller volcanic eruptions – and/or human activities, which could have emitted the sulfur-containing gases, such as sulfur dioxide, that react in the atmosphere to form reflective aerosol particles." [link to www.noaanews.noaa.gov]

Last Edited by George B on 04/04/2013 08:24 AM
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 3616254
United States
04/04/2013 08:30 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
So bottom-line there is significant circumstantial evidence that there are official secrets within the geoengineering and climate control research apparatus at LLNL going back to the same group who first computer modeled the effects of global warming and those who did the atomic research and research on SDI (Star Wars) . . .
 Quoting: George B


All you can say is that there are secrets at LLNL. You cannot conclude what they are about
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36488183


I think you can because it is highly probable. . . because Caldeira was doing climate computer modeling but was asked to apply for a security clearance but refuse to do so and was thus denied access to the inner circle of LLNL . . . so if his expertise was climate modeling it makes sense he was being denied classified climate information . . . goodnews

More interesting info on the connection between LLNL, Teller and Geoengineering and SECRECY. . . .ohno

"In 1990, a year short of his doctorate, Caldeira went to Leningrad to study with Russian climate scientist Mikhail Budyko, one of the first champions of geoengineering. In the 1970s, Budyko had suggested an early version of the basic Teller-Wood idea — decrease the global temperature by shooting sunlight-scattering particles into the stratosphere. While he was in Leningrad, Caldeira's philosophical outlook still predisposed him to distrust such interventions, but years later that would change.

In 1993, the former peace activist accepted a research post at that haven of bombmakers, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Caldeira was running high-powered computer models to study the climate, but when he was offered a security clearance that would have allowed fuller access to the lab's resources, he tried to stay true to his old principles by declining. As a result, he didn't see much of Wood. "There's an outer fence at Livermore, and then there's an inner fence," Caldeira says. "Lowell worked inside the fence."


[link to www.wired.com]
 Quoting: George B


He didn't want a security clearance. Fine. How can you possibly extend that to mean there is chemtrail research going on. That makes absolutley no sense. It isn't logical
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 3616254
United States
04/04/2013 08:31 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
So bottom-line there is significant circumstantial evidence that there are official secrets within the geoengineering and climate control research apparatus at LLNL going back to the same group who first computer modeled the effects of global warming and those who did the atomic research and research on SDI (Star Wars) . . .
 Quoting: George B


All you can say is that there are secrets at LLNL. You cannot conclude what they are about
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36488183


I think you can because it is highly probable. . . because Caldeira was doing climate computer modeling but was asked to apply for a security clearance but refuse to do so and was thus denied access to the inner circle of LLNL . . . so if his expertise was climate modeling it makes sense he was being denied classified climate information . . . goodnews

More interesting info on the connection between LLNL, Teller and Geoengineering and SECRECY. . . .ohno

"In 1990, a year short of his doctorate, Caldeira went to Leningrad to study with Russian climate scientist Mikhail Budyko, one of the first champions of geoengineering. In the 1970s, Budyko had suggested an early version of the basic Teller-Wood idea — decrease the global temperature by shooting sunlight-scattering particles into the stratosphere. While he was in Leningrad, Caldeira's philosophical outlook still predisposed him to distrust such interventions, but years later that would change.

In 1993, the former peace activist accepted a research post at that haven of bombmakers, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Caldeira was running high-powered computer models to study the climate, but when he was offered a security clearance that would have allowed fuller access to the lab's resources, he tried to stay true to his old principles by declining. As a result, he didn't see much of Wood. "There's an outer fence at Livermore, and then there's an inner fence," Caldeira says. "Lowell worked inside the fence."


[link to www.wired.com]
 Quoting: George B

Further proof that LLNL was in advance of all climate studies and computer modeling . . .

"(LLNL) Researchers at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory are so far the only ones who have modelled the stratospheric albedo modification scheme . . .

ALBEDO ENHANCEMENT BY STRATOSPHERIC SULFUR INJECTIONS: A CONTRIBUTION TO RESOLVE A POLICY DILEMMA?
An Editorial Essay

(LLNL) Researchers at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory are so far the only ones who have modelled the stratospheric albedo modification scheme. In a first study, Govindasamy and Caldeirau (2000) simulated this by reducing the solar luminos- ity by 1.8%, to balance future climate warming by a doubling of CO2. Although solar radiative forcing has a different physics and spatial distribution than the in- frared effects caused by CO2, the model results indicated that the global temper- ature response by both perturbations at the Earth’ surface and atmosphere largely cancelled out. Although these preliminary model results would be in favor a strato- spheric sulfur injection operation, the required annual S inputs are large, so that the possibility of adverse environmental side effects needs to be fully researched before the countermeasure to greenhouse warming is attempted. What has to be done first, is to explore whether using a sulfur injection scheme with advanced micro-physical and radiation process descriptions will show similar model results as the simple solar luminosity adjustment scheme of Govindasamy and Caldeira (2000). Further studies, following those conducted by Govindasamy (2003), should address the biological effects of the albedo modification scheme. As already men- tioned, injection of soot may be an alternative, but in need of critical analysis. Such studies by themselves, even when the experiment is never done, will be very informative.

Page 5

[link to www.cogci.dk]
 Quoting: George B



Climate studies does not mean the contrails we see are chemtrails.

News