Paul Watson wrote a "commentary" on Russ George entitled "*The Return of a Dangerous Ecological Criminal*<http://www.seashepherd.org/commentary-and-editorials/2012/10/29/the-return-of-a-dangerous-ecological-criminal-574>" published by his Sea Shepherd Society online October 29 2012. This Watson "commentary" seems to be all the Toronto Globe and Mail had as a source for Paul Watson's views on Russ George and *geoengineering* as described in their Nov 7 2012 article (I cited previously). Watson, in his article, states his Sea Shepherd Society "did not make any judgement on the scientific merits, if any, of this scheme [Russ George's 2007 plan to use PLANKTOS to dump iron into waters west of the Galapagos Islands]". Watson, apparently, was anxious that "Ecuadorian, American and International law" *be upheld*. * (This is what his article states*). The Globe and Mail reporter couldn't talk to Watson directly because "Mr Watson hasn't been seen in public since July when *he skipped bail in Germany*..."
As for ETC, their *Geopiracy: The Case against Geoengineering<http://www.etcgroup.org/content/geopiracy-case-against-geoengineering> *webpage is still up. ETC concludes, obviously, that "A moratorium on real-world geoengineering experimentation is urgent", apparently because we don't know what will happen if the *slightest thing* is done that ETC classifies as geoengineering. From their first paragraph, ETC takes geoengineering to be a* technological* strategy "that could reduce or delay climate change, at least until social forces make a practical agreement [to "mitigate climate chaos" by reducing GHG emissions]" Naturally,* no one wants that*. *Reasonable people, obviously, would want to increase or accelerate climate change, before social forces develop and make a practical agreement that might mitigate it.... ? * >From Alice in Wonderland, by Lewis Carroll: *"**I don't think they play at all fairly,' Alice began, in rather a complaining tone, 'and they all quarrel so dreadfully one can't hear oneself speak — and they don't seem to have any rules in particular; at least, if there are, nobody attends to them *". On Friday, April 26, 2013 7:19:50 PM UTC-7, Ken Caldeira wrote: > > Does it matter to ETC or Paul Watson whether the intent is to increase > fishery yields versus reduce the magnitude of climate change? > > Would the action be 'geoengineering' in the latter case but not the > former? > > > On Friday, April 26, 2013, David Lewis wrote: > >> Paul Watson is known for going as far as attempting to sink ships in >> international waters that he feels are in violation of his conservation >> principles. >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
