global warming

U.S. wants to block the sun to prevent global warming

Thursday, February 01, 2007 by: David Gutierrez, staff writer
Tags: climate change, global warming, bad science

eTrust Pro Certified

Most Viewed Articles
Popular on Facebook
CDC issues flu vaccine apology: this year's vaccine doesn't work!
Biologist explains how marijuana causes tumor cells to commit suicide
Depopulation test run? 75% of children who received vaccines in Mexican town now dead or hospitalized
Companies begin planting microchips under employees' skin
BAM! Chipotle goes 100% non-GMO; flatly rejecting the biotech industry and its toxic food ingredients
U2's Bono partners with Monsanto to destroy African agriculture with GMOs
NJ cops bust teenagers shoveling snow without a permit
Russia throws down the gauntlet: energy supply to Europe cut off; petrodollar abandoned as currency war escalates
McDonald's in global profit free fall as people everywhere increasingly reject chemically-altered toxic fast food
Chemotherapy kills cancer patients faster than no treatment at all
March Against Monsanto explodes globally... World citizens stage massive protests across 38 countries, 428 cities... mainstream media pretends it never happened
Why flu shots are the greatest medical fraud in history
600 strains of an aerosolized thought control vaccine already tested on humans; deployed via air, food and water
Italian court rules mercury and aluminum in vaccines cause autism: US media continues total blackout of medical truth
Flu vaccine kills 13 in Italy; death toll rises
The 21 curious questions we're never allowed to ask about vaccines
Vicious attack on Dr. Oz actually waged by biotech mafia; plot to destroy Oz launched after episode on glyphosate toxicity went viral
Whooping cough outbreak at Massachusetts high school affected only vaccinated students

Delicious
(NaturalNews) The U.S. government has officially recommended that scientists research ways to block out the sun's light as a way to halt global warming without reducing emissions of greenhouse gases.

"The level of environmental insanity among US policymakers reaches new heights with this proposal," charged Mike Adams, a consumer health advocate and coauthor of "The Real Safety Guide to Protecting Your Environment ."

"Blocking the sun would devastate global ecosystems, reduce solar power efficiency, harm crops and disrupt the global food supply. It's an idea so insane it could have only come from politicians, not genuine scientists."

The suggestion came in the government's official response to a draft report by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC report, written by climate experts from around the world, will form the foundation for the next round of international climate negotiations. The draft was submitted to world governments for comment in 2006.

According to the U.S. response, "modifying solar radiance ... is a very important possibility that should be considered." Possible techniques for blocking out sunlight include firing giant mirrors into space, pumping reflective sulfate droplets or dust into the high atmosphere, or thousands of small, reflective balloons.

The IPCC draft report, commenting on such ideas, called them "speculative, uncosted and with potential unknown side effects."

Other portions of the report contested by the U.S. included the draft's focus on a binding international treaty to reduce emissions, and that "the report tends to overstate or focus on the negative effects of climate change."

By contrast, the U.S. wants an emphasis on voluntary emissions standards and more responsibilities for poorer countries.

The draft report predicts an average global temperature rise of between 1 and 6.3 degrees from 1990 to 2100. Professor Stephen Schneider, a key figure on the IPCC with more than 30 years of climate consultation experience, estimated that the average increase is likely to be 3 degrees or more, with a 10 percent chance of a 6 degree increase or more. He expressed alarm at how slowly the world has been responding to the threat of global warming.

"Hell, we buy fire insurance based on a 1 percent chance," he said. "If we're going to be risk averse ... we cannot dismiss the possibility of potentially catastrophic outliers and that includes [ice sheets breaking up], massive species extinctions, intensified hurricanes and all those things. There's at least a 10 percent chance of that. And that, to me, for a society is too high a risk."

###

Join over four million monthly readers. Your privacy is protected. Unsubscribe at any time.
comments powered by Disqus
Take Action: Support NaturalNews.com by linking back to this article from your website

Permalink to this article:

Embed article link: (copy HTML code below):

Reprinting this article:
Non-commercial use OK, cite NaturalNews.com with clickable link.

Follow Natural News on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus, and Pinterest

Colloidal Silver

Advertise with NaturalNews...

Support NaturalNews Sponsors:

Advertise with NaturalNews...

GET SHOW DETAILS
+ a FREE GIFT

Sign up for the FREE Natural News Email Newsletter

Receive breaking news on GMOs, vaccines, fluoride, radiation protection, natural cures, food safety alerts and interviews with the world's top experts on natural health and more.

Join over 7 million monthly readers of NaturalNews.com, the internet's No. 1 natural health news site. (Source: Alexa.com)

Your email address *

Please enter the code you see above*

No Thanks

Already have it and love it!

Natural News supports and helps fund these organizations:

* Required. Once you click submit, we will send you an email asking you to confirm your free registration. Your privacy is assured and your information is kept confidential. You may unsubscribe at anytime.