A new target for weather modification suggested.
‘POLE COOLING’ PROMOTED
A team of scientists have outlined a plan to “refreeze the North and South Poles” and “dial down the global thermostat”, in a controversial new study.
According to reports, the scientists say high-flying jets could spray microscopic aerosol particles into the atmosphere to “cool the melting icecaps”.
Under the plan, a fleet of 125 military air-to-air refuelling tankers would release a cloud of microscopic sulphur dioxide particles at an altitude of 43,000ft (13km) and latitude of 60 degrees in both hemispheres, roughly equivalent to the Shetland Islands in the north, and the Falklands in the south.
Around 175,000 flights a year would be needed, releasing millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide.
The research was published in IOP’s Environmental Research Communications and suggests that the method would be feasible and fairly cheap.
The new study was led by Wake Smith from Yale University in the United States.
According to the research, particles would “slowly drift towards the poles on high-altitude winds, slightly shading the Earth’s surface beneath”.
They say just over 13 million tonnes of particles released in the spring and summer “would be enough” to “cool the polar regions by 2C”, with “more moderate cooling at mid-latitudes”.
At a cost of £10 billion per year ($17 billion AUD), the researchers argue only 1% of the human population lives in the “target deployment zone”.
“If the risk-benefit equation were to pay off anywhere, it would be at the poles,” said Smith.
“Any intentional turning of the global thermostat would be of common interest to all of humanity.
We are worried about the impacts (of climate change) right now. It’s really urgent.”
A former UK chief scientist has backed the plans, telling reporters that “polar warming is now critical” – and “refreezing the ice could hold back the rise in global sea levels”.
Climate hysteria has masked a new-age normalisation of geoengineering programs, with ideas like this becoming more common in recent years as a ‘solution’ to our problems.
SPRAYING THE ATMOSPHERE
Although controversial, as we know, this type of idea is not necessarily new.
A plan to release particles from a balloon in northern Sweden last year was abandoned after protests from environmentalists.
Sir David King, a former government chief scientist and founder of the Centre for Climate Repair (CCR) at Cambridge University, told Sky News that radical action is needed to save polar ice.
The CCR is working on a strategy in its labs to brighten clouds over the Arctic Ocean with a fleet of ships pumping seawater into the atmosphere.
The clouds would reflect sunlight back into space, cooling ice in the region.
The CCR supports a United Nations moratorium on attempting any form of geo-engineering at scale until experiments have shown it is safe and there is agreement that there is a critical need to use it.
What is new, however, is the idea to spray above (and target) the poles specifically.
To achieve this, the scientists say such large-scale release programme would need international agreement. Luckily, they are already working on something like this with the Paris Agreement that is being pushed at the highest stages — a plan that includes geoengineering as a discussion point.
The plan is controversial, not in the least because we do not fully understand the implications of what spraying hundreds of tonnes of chemicals into the atmosphere could do — but also for the lobby itself.
The large number of flights — equivalent to more than two days of all world air traffic in 2021 — would release large amounts greenhouse gases into the atmosphere to get the project done.
Other scientists are also cautious about unleashing ‘solar shading’, because it could have unintended consequences, such as reducing crop yields and a re-emergence of diseases like malaria.
Although this program would not reach the same heights as solar geoengineering suggestions (sticking largely to lower-level cloud covers), the consequences could still produce similar results.
Dr Shaun Fitzgerald, the CCR’s director, said the large number of flights “could be justified” if “they dealt with the immediate problem of sea-level rise”.
I see. The old ‘ends justifies the means’ argument.
Why are we letting these groups of individuals potentially wreak havoc on the future?
These types of ideas are the next evolution in a range of programs that have been going for several decades now, including right here in Australia as part of military and government programs.
This includes a plethora of both ground-based and aerial spraying techniques:
After being kept secret and denied for many years, the climate lobby now provides the perfect justification (and ‘crisis’) for these programs to slowly enter the mainstream eye.
Playing God with the Earth’s weather is okay now, apparently, because we are using it to ‘save’ ourselves.
For more TOTT News:
Facebook — Facebook.com/TOTTNews
YouTube — YouTube.com/TOTTNews
Instagram — Instagram.com/TOTTNews
Twitter — Twitter.com/EthanTOTT
Bitchute — Bitchute.com/TOTTNews
Gab — Gab.com/TOTTNews