Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
The sky is falling - or at least changing color
Posted by: McQ on Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Ready for this:
Australia's best-known expert on global warming has updated his climate forecast for the world - and it's much worse than he thought just three years ago.

He has called for a radical suite of emergency measures to be put in place.
Step one:
Professor [Tim] Flannery says climate change is happening so quickly that mankind may need to pump sulphur into the atmosphere to survive.

[...]

The gas sulphur could be inserted into the earth's stratosphere to keep out the sun's rays and slow global warming, a process called global dimming.

"It would change the colour of the sky," Prof Flannery told AAP.

"It's the last resort that we have, it's the last barrier to a climate collapse.

"We need to be ready to start doing it in perhaps five years time if we fail to achieve what we're trying to achieve."
Prof Flannery, the 2007 Australian of the Year, said the sulphur could be dispersed above the earth's surface by adding it to jet fuel.
Any side effects?
"The consequences of doing that are unknown."
Oh. Sounds like "sound" science to me.

Meanwhile, elsewhere:
Nearly 32,000 scientists sign a petition that says they reject the claim that humanity is causing global warming.
How crazy is it getting out there among the climate changers? As you can see there is at least one willing to load the atmosphere up with sulpher without having any idea of the consequences ("We had to destroy the village to save it".). What bothers me more than anything is worrying that some government will take him up on it.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
2007 Australian Of The Year
2008 Barking Mad Australian Of The Year
 
Written By: the wolf
URL: http://
"It would change the colour of the sky," Prof Flannery told AAP.
Im somehow reminded of Highlander 2...
 
Written By: josh b
URL: http://
We should conduct a scientific experiment. Stuff the guy in a sealed box and pump it full of sulphur. Just to see what happens.
 
Written By: SkyWatch
URL: http://
Im somehow reminded of Highlander 2...

Oh good, I’m not the only one.
 
Written By: Achillea
URL: http://
Im somehow reminded of Highlander 2...
The worse movie ever.
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
True but I’m reminded of the ATMOS pollution control system, that is at the center of the "Sontaran arc" on Dr. Who. Needless to say, it doesn’t go well.
 
Written By: narciso
URL: http://
Actually, this idea has been around since the 1950s and it’s not so radical. Every time a volcano has a major eruption, it dumps hundreds of thousands of tons of gas and ash into the atmosphere. For a year or more, sunsets and sunrises are spectacular. Sulphur dioxide, carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide are a part of these events and after the eruption, surface temperatures actually decrease. It is worth noting that these are natural events, so the consequences are not so unpredictable after all. Unlike CO2, it also fits the current computer models.

Professor David Keith at University of Calgary has been recommending this for some time. It’s comparatively cheap ($300B per year), but the big problem is that it doesn’t preclude use of fossil fuels, nor does it give the radical environmentalists control of the world’s economy.
 
Written By: Arch
URL: http://
"It’s comparatively cheap ($300B per year)"
Did you write this with a straight face? Spending 300B for something that isn’t needed is cheap compared with what? Spending 600B for something that isn’t needed?

 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
Mr. Grimshaw, we are rapidly approaching a moment of truth both for ourselves as human beings and for the life of our nation. Now, the truth is not always a pleasant thing, but it is necessary now make a choice, to choose between two admittedly regrettable, but nevertheless, distinguishable post-election environments: one where you got three hundred billion dollars spent, and the other where you got one thousand and five hundred billion dollars spent.
 
Written By: General Turgidson
URL: http://
General, I remain pathetically optimistic that if enough people witness enough foolishness for long enough they will learn to change their behavior. If not, I have no problem packing up and leaving the country to avoid being sucked under.
 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
The environmentalists have been pushing for the reduction of sulphur emissions for decades. The US (and most of the developed world) has strict limitations on sulphur emissions and a cap and trade system in place to charge for the emissions. Most major coal power plants have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on "scrubbers" to dramatically reduce sulphur dioxide from their emissions, largely because it made economic sense because the SO2 emissions credits were so expensive.

So after billions were spent, now we want sulphur in the atmosphere? Wouldn’t it be cheaper to just cancel CAIR?

 
Written By: Daedalus Mugged
URL: http://
Grimshaw:

Exactly! We are faced with some expensive choices.

1. Hand over our economy to radical environmentalists who will end our way of life and cost us trillions of dollars per year,

2. Do something stupid to solve a non-problem (global warming) by putting pollutants into the atmosphere at great cost ($300B per year), or

3. Do nothing.

I recommend option 3.
 
Written By: Arch
URL: http://
is there any way to pump the environmentalists into the air at cheaper cost?
 
Written By: josh b
URL: http://
QxblvM jyozwzhdbbhl, [url=http://bbyondumiowe.com/]bbyondumiowe[/url], [link=http://caehxcylcfbb.com/]caehxcylcfbb[/link], http://ohzcfuejhzwj.com/
 
Written By: ukhuxsao
URL: http://yibkunsgxztg.com/
XdS01w ffhuzrnigsld, [url=http://ycudlryvonox.com/]ycudlryvonox[/url], [link=http://maztjrbrfvxr.com/]maztjrbrfvxr[/link], http://ofzggwcokkrh.com/
 
Written By: qgkxrideeg
URL: http://puodrunewyii.com/

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider