I would like to invite people to give presentations to the COP15 follow-up meeting at Copababamba. It is my understanding that travel will be fully covered for a limited number of delegates. If you are able to join us 20-22.4.2010, let me know and I pass your details to my coordinator.
I cannot guaratee, but I believe this meeting is one of the big ones and we need to be there in order to refute all rubbish some conservationists throw at us. I look at horror how environmental organisations are becoming distorted about Copenhagen's failure. Environmental charities are dependent on donations. The climate change earmarked donations are on the dry down. As a result, the marketing departments fighting for the campaigners jobs are now focused developing campaings like: nuclear-scare, GM-food scare, biofuel-scare and geoengineering-scare to raise donations. I think this is a distortion and distraction of potential ways of addressing climate problems as all the blanket bans throw baby with bathwater. I cannot stress enough that we need early dialoue to engage with those people groups and organisations that are otherwise prone to be mislead by this fund raising oriented climate-scare industry, such as Greenpeace, where it applies in particular. Copababamba climate summit may also open doors to people from other cultures and regions such as the Persian Gulf that do not carry the same preconceptions and mind sets that apprear in the West. Who cares if the sources came from eccentric environmentalist from the Middle East or some other parts of the world if we can get something funded and closer to the realisation. However, I would try us be present to give information about geoengineering so that people can make informed decisions what is worth to be funded without being first immersed in the misinformation disseminated by Greenpeace and the likes and some of the most outrageus claims can be dismissed on the spot provider we have a goal-keeper in this soccer game. I will do my best to take geoengineers either under my own quota, or, get your institution represented, may be even as private individuals. There might be as many as 150 sponsored delegates departing from London, and the same perhaps from the USA. Please, if you can make time on that week for 20-22.4 summit. From London the departures are either 15.4. or 17.4. and returning London no later than 25.4. Shorter time periods may be possible. I will do my utmost in securing as many sponsored delegates / places as possible. A UK magazine specializing political gossips mentions a plan of a meeting on the Arctic Ocean, convening perhaps as early as next month (the marine buoys show now the weakness [thinness] of Arctic Ocean's sea ice much alike the story the visual images [area] from the satellites): As the rapid disappearance of sea ice cover "a rapidly convened global summit concerning series of issues, including the law of the sea, control of fish stocks, limits to territorial waters and claims for control of th Arctic and Antarctic". The govenrment analysts' estimate that the Copenhagen style impasse is likely as "agreements reached now are unlikely to be long-lived". Foulsham, Ref: ISSN 0071-8084, p. 39, col. 3. If you have any idea who is, or has been planning for this conference, it would be interesting to know more about what is going on, or where this gossip originated that suggests "open-waters" sharing conference convening in March 2010 - and if this converence is still on agenda. This would again suggest me that there are at least some parties, may be, in the military that knows the sea ice conditions is even worse. With kind regards, Veli Albert Kallio > Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 09:22:26 -0800 > Subject: [geo] Re: Global Solicitation for Alternative Schemes > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > Thank you Ken for your response. > > My main concern is that a formal solicitation and ranking of > geoengineering schemes has not yet been done, but that I believe the > scope and complexity of the problem absolutely warrants (and > necessitates) doing this. > > It wouldn't be a list that would stand the test of time, necessarily, > but one that has been through a disciplined and transparent process, > that we and others could look back against and have "best confidence" > with at the time. > > Though some ideas have been proposed through this site over the last > few years, because a formal evaluation process hasn't been in place, > and because there may be some very good ideas from those not yet > connected with this site, important concepts may have been missed that > could make a big difference in our future. > > Finally, it seems like site participants have mainly been limited to > the US, Canada and the UK. What about the French? The Chinese (who > have a huge weather modification agancy)? India? There are a hell of > a lot of smart people out there, and a lot of them are concerned with > global warming and what to do about it. This is a global issue that > will have to obtain global approval. I think it also requires global > solicitation from the beginning, as an inherent part of the process. > > -- > 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. > _________________________________________________________________ Do you have a story that started on Hotmail? Tell us now http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/ -- 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.
