Reversing Global Warming?Now we can all relax. We can check "global warming" off our "to do" list! Thank goodness!
The global cooling caused by these high carbon clouds wouldn't be as catastrophic as a superpower-versus-superpower nuclear winter, but "the effects would still be regarded as leading to unprecedented climate change," research physical scientist Luke Oman said during a press briefing Friday at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington, D.C.
Wait... are you saying you aren't completely enthralled with the idea of unleashing a minor "global winter" around the world?
"Our results suggest that agriculture could be severely impacted, especially in areas that are susceptible to late-spring and early-fall frosts," said Oman, of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.You say you worry about the side-effects of radiation poisoning? Oh... and you say you don't trust that the "experts" have foreseen all the "known unknowns" to use the Rumsfeldian neologism. Oh, and there are those nasty "unknown unknowns". We won't even mention those!
"Examples similar to the crop failures and famines experienced following the Mount Tambora eruption in 1815 could be widespread and last several years," he added. That Indonesian volcano ushered in "the year without summer," a time of famines and unrest. (See pictures of the Mount Tambora eruption.)
Why is National Geographic publishing this ridiculous "article"? Are they like William Randolf Hearst with his yellow press, i.e. drumming up "small regional nuclear wars" as a fix for global warming because it will sell more of their National Geographic magazines? What is the point of this article?
The nuclear winter scenario was milked for all it was worth back in the 1980s. Why is National Geographic reviving this "research" now? And why in the context of "fixing" global warming?