I disagree. My experience is that anyone who doesn’t swallow the whole potion is a denier. So I do not attack the behavior of the advocates (hyper greens you call them). I simply point out what is lacking from their argument(s) and assert over and over and over again how science works to reach the stage called theory and why anthropogenic CO2 caused warming is only a part of the total global warming story and stands only as an incomplete hypothesis; hardly even approaching the stage of theory despite the massive research because of the components of global warming are unpredictable (e.g. sunspots).
Sometimes I point to the 540 million year history of the Earth’s climate and show how the current warming is part of a long term upward trend that is being exacerbated by but not caused by anthropogenic CO2 emissions and why Geoengineering will be needed in any case. We should stand our ground and be firm but not insulting or demeaning. It only diminishes us. History will record that it is the hyper greens that are the assholes. -gene From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lane, Lee O. Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2009 8:10 AM To: [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: geoengineering; [email protected] Subject: [geo] Re: ETC Group on Royal Society Report: The Emperor's New Climate: Geoengineering as 21st century fairytale Dear David, In one sense, I agree with you. It can seem futile to engage in any kind of debate with hyper-greens. In another sense, though, there is a problem with allowing their claims and charges to go unanswered. People who pride themselves on their environmental "ethics" often attack the motives and integrity of those with whom they disagree. The ETC group seems clearly to fall into this category, but they are far from being alone. In fact, such attacks are standard operating procedure for much of organized environmentalism and for its academic fellow travelers. It is difficult to know how to respond, but I think that Ken is right to point out the inappropriate nature of this behavior. Maybe the ETC group is too marginal even within the green movement to warrant much attention. The tactic, though, is not at all marginal. To the contrary, it plays a large and corrosive role in public discourse. Those of us who would like to see a more dispassionate discussion of the issues should, I think, join in condemning such behavior - even if we do so without great hopes of effecting change. Lee Lane _____ From: [email protected] on behalf of David Schnare Sent: Sat 8/29/2009 12:39 PM To: [email protected] Cc: geoengineering; [email protected] Subject: [geo] Re: ETC Group on Royal Society Report: The Emperor’s New Climate: Geoengineering as 21st century fairytale The more you complain about ETC, the more credibility they get. Just speak to their errors and to the need for the research. If asked specifically about the ETC, simply explain that they are a politically enabled group that has not done their homework. You need thick (thicker) skin. d On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Ken Caldeira <[email protected]> wrote: I find it offensive that the ETC group has resorted to calling the authors of the Royal Society report "tricksters". "The Royal Society will play an important role in this performance by offering a prestigious platform and global microphone to some modern- day tricksters." http://www.etcgroup.org/en/materials/publications.html?pub_id=762 It is one thing to suggest that we are uninformed, misinformed, or even deluded, but another thing entirely to suggest that we are acting with the intent to "trick" people into doing things that might harm the environment. Charges that we are acting in bad faith are unfounded, reckless, repugnant, and malicious. ETC owes an apology to me and the other authors of the Royal Society report. Furthermore: ETC says the emperor has no clothes. We are calling for an examination of the emperor's garments. ETC asks us instead to close our eyes and trust them blindly. If ETC really believes the emperor really has no clothes, they should be happy to join us in calls for an investigation into the emperor's clothing. Best, Ken On Aug 29, 4:31 am, Stephen Salter <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Diana > > Thank you for the copy of your report about the Royal Society. > > I am attaching a paper which tries to show the effects of an experiment > on cloud albedo control and how difficult it will be to detect a change > big enough to offset the thermal effects of double CO2 or the greenhouse > equivalent amount of methane which is coming off at an accelerating rate > from the Arctic and Siberia. > > Your paper mentioned costs. My estimate for the total cost of a cloud > albedo research project will less than 0.38 on the Ronaldo scale with > annual running costs of a system to 'hold the fort' of about 1.5. One > Ronaldo is £80 million and replaces the previously used G8 summit unit. > The latter rose from £85 million at Gleneagles to £285 million at Lake > Toya and is now regarded as being too volatile. > > Stephen Salter > > Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design > School of Engineering and Electronics > University of Edinburgh > Mayfield Road > Edinburgh EH9 3JL > Scotland > tel +44 131 650 5704 > fax +44 131 650 5702 > Mobile 07795 203 195 > [email protected]http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/~shs > > > > Diana Bronson wrote: > > ETC Group > > News Release > > 28 August 2009 > >www.etcgroup.org <http://www.etcgroup.org/> > > > SCIENCE FICTIONS: UK’S ROYAL SOCIETY TO ISSUE MAJOR REPORT > > ON GEOENGINEERING SEPTEMBER 1; > > BAN REAL-WORLD EXPERIMENTS, SAYS ETC GROUP > > > The oldest scientific academy in the world, the UK’s Royal Society, > > will release its long-awaited report on geoengineering September 1st > > 2009 in London. The report, drafted by a panel dominated by > > geoengineering enthusiasts, is widely expected to recommend that the > > government support more research and perhaps even real-world > > experimentation of these controversial new technologies that > > intentionally manipulate the earth’s climate on a large scale with the > > aim of lessening the effects of climate change. > > > “Geoengineering is a bad idea, and, unfortunately, it may transform > > Lord Rees’s book from musings to memoir,” says Diana Bronson, > > researcher for the international technology watchdog ETC Group, > > referring to the Royal Society President’s 2004 book, Our Final > > Century, which suggested that humans may not live to see the end of > > the 21st century. > > > Geoengineering can refer to sulphate-injections in the stratosphere > > and cloud-whitening to reflect sunlight away from the earth, > > fertilization of the oceans with iron nano-particles to try to > > increase their carbon-carrying capacity, intentionally modifying > > global weather patterns, among other techniques. > > > “The Royal Society may be cautious in their report but, in fact, when > > it comes to geoengineering, a yellow light can quickly turn green. For > > the climate to take notice, any geoengineering scheme would have to be > > massive – sulphate particles or whitened clouds would have to deflect > > a lot of sunlight and ocean fertilization would have to cover great > > swathes of sea. Even the most careful computer models won’t be able to > > predict what will happen if an experiment is scaled-up and moved out > > of doors,” argues Bronson. “If governments believe there is a techno- > > fix to the climate change conundrum that will let them off the hook at > > the climate change treaty negotiations in Copenhagen, they will throw > > precious time and dollars at sci-fi fantasies, overlook potentially > > devastating side effects and divert their attention from the urgent > > need to reduce carbon emissions at source.” > > > ETC Group’s new special report, “The Emperor’s New Climate: > > Geoengineering as 21st century fairytale,” questions the narratives > > commonly used by the geoengineering lobby to advance their agenda. > > “Contrary to what geoengineers are saying, this is a costly time- > > waster,” says Bronson. The report calls for a broader international > > discussion and concludes that “any effort to experiment these > > technologies in the real world is nothing short of geopiracy and > > should be banned.” > > > ETC Group’s special report, “The Emperor’s New Climate: Geoengineering > > as 21st century fairytale,” is available on the Internet athttp://www.etcgroup.org/en/materials/publications.html?pub_id=762 > > > -30- > > > For more information: > > > Diana Bronson (Montreal, Canada) [email protected] > > Phone: +1 514 273 6661; cell +1 514 629 9236 > > > Kathy Jo Wetter (Durham, NC, USA) [email protected] > > Phone: +1 919 688 7302 > > > Silvia Ribeiro (Mexico City) [email protected] > > Phone: 011 52 5555 6326 64 > > > Molly Kane (Ottawa, Canada) [email protected] > > Phone: +1 613 241 2267, ext 26; cell +1 613 797-6421 > > -- > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > Salter Satellite albedo demo preprint.doc > 3089KViewDownload -- David W. Schnare Center for Environmental Stewardship --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
