Instead of polluting less and so on, why not figure out how to

>>8282857
Ah yes, we totally meant to invent the best ways to pollute, all of those evil nihilistic Victorians.

>>8282857
Entropy tells us that the amount of energy retroactively fix something is significantly higher than proactively fixing it.

>>8282857
You're right.

They should calculate how many nukes they'd need to set off to cool shit down, but avoid a nuclear Winter. Make more of a nuclear breezy Fall day.

>>8282857
we already did that in the 70's nigga. the problem is CO2 and NOx doing other obnoxious things.

File: meme.png (373KB, 975x971px) Image search: [Google]

373KB, 975x971px

>>8282876
> nuclear breezy Fall day
10/10

File: img20160819_163404.png (57KB, 540x432px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 540x432px

>>8282892
OC. Feel free to use it as a research topic, /sci/

>>8282857
We can't get corporations to agree to increase spending ever-so-slightly, to put in proper pollution countermeasures, without having them fight tooth and nail, and further subvert both science and the governments they control to work against the effort...

....How do you think you are going to get them to spend the money to refrigerate the entire goddamned planet?

>>8282876
What if global warming became such a big problem that nuclear detonation was the only solution. Of course nobody would willingly nuke their own country. Which will lead us to nuking neighboring countries in spots with the lowest population densities. I can imagine China or Russia nuking the nevada desert to minimize causalities but accidentally nuke Area 52 or something.

If someone proposed this to this to the military they'd see global warming as a threat to national security and the military would take it more seriously. Somebody do it, please.

File: Naamloos-2.jpg (34KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x600px

>>8282971
Is this what they call a cold war?

>>8282971
>n
why would russia nuke murica? Every country should just nuke their own desert problem solved no war.

>>8282977
CARLOS!
>>8283044
Did you seriously just ask why everyone won't nuke their own country?

>>8283129
>Did you seriously just ask why everyone won't nuke their own country?
Yeah i guess ur right. Makes morr sense to nuke someone else. They wont retaliate if its just their shitty lands nuked anyways

>>8282971
>Area 52
Off by one, m8.

>>8283208
everyone with access to Google Maps knows where area 51 is located. Kinda hard to "accidentally" nuke it. Area 52 however is much more elusive. So much more elusive.

Orbital mirrors/solar panels that block sunlight would be a way better (though more expensive) solution.
Fallout, no matter how clean, will cost a lot in further changed weather patterns and increased cancer rates.

>>8282876
nuclear breezy Fall day
Kek

File: bkgd_rad.gif (9KB, 593x349px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 593x349px

>>8283216
>further changed weather patterns
That's the plan.

>increased cancer rates.
Surprisingly less than you'd think. Utah got the brunt of the fallout from open air testing in the 60's but even that is less what you're getting from your computer monitor right now. And bombs today are much cleaner than they were in the 60's

thats actualy preaty easy. you just have to increase the transparancy of the atmosphere to IR radiation so more energy can leave the planet.
how to do it? easy, stop polluting it with greenhouse gases.

File: Screenshot_20160813-070959.png (1MB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1440px

>>8282857
JUST USE THE GARBAGE AS FUEL AND BURN IT FOR POWERING CITYS.

SWEDEN ALREADY DOES THIS AND THEY DONT HAVE ENOUGH GARBAGE.

>>8283226
>but even that is less what you're getting from your computer monitor right now.
Do you live in Ghana? Or the 90's?
Because otherwise you're ignorant and retarded, only CRTs will expose you to radiation.

And I hope you understand that what you're posting right now is (beside not cited) most likely just a statistic based on a generic assumption (ie fallout spreads evenly with wind etc) and that's 50+ years after a number of low-yield tests after which extensive cleanup was done.

If you a-bomb the earth with the intent to cover the atmosphere with fallout it's NOT going to be the same with your shitty statistic you retarded underage piece of shit.

>>8283226
It's not the radiation; it's the dust and other particles kicked into the atmosphere. Volcanoes do the same thing.

Nerve gas China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Africa, Middle East and Latin America.

>>8283226
>radiation from your computer monitor
L0Lno fgt pls

>>8282857
Because that would be like building a dam against constantly rising water.
The warming is a function of the total mass of CO2 and CH4 in the atmosphere.
You can geoengineer to hold back the effect of warming for a decade or two, but the continuing increasing of CO2 and CH4 will overwhelm it sooner or later.
It's like trying to stop a river from flowing, at some point the river will flow over any dam you build.

>>8282971
>the military would take it more seriously
They take it very seriously, they were on it already a decade ago. It's the politicians that are the idiots.

https://youtu.be/Mc_4Z1oiXhY?t=2m25s

I know this thread is satire but I hope you guys are aware that the causes of global warming is actually pollution which causes the warming. The heat will probably be the least of our worries. I mean that's if we survive all of the retarded weather we are having already.

>>8283397
US increasing like rabbits, using resources 10x/person more than anyone else.

ky

>>8282876
A final solution to the global warming problem.

>>8284207
>It's the politicians that are the idiots.

Ironically politicians are easy to control, to an extent Use the anti-vaccine movment as a blueprint to create a new movement to end global warming via nuclear breezy Fall day. The babyboomer/facebook are generation is easily swayed sheep that will join a flock if it's big enough. Just gotta fake it till you make it. Once you got a following big enough to affect the polls then politicians will take notice.

>>8282857
because the consequences of geoengineering are unknown

>>8284337
>create a new movement to end global warming via nuclear breezy Fall day.

Let's do this /sci/. Start publishing.

>>8284337
>>8284342
>will join a flock if it's big enough.
>fake it till you make it

This is why facebooks uses targeted adds. If you bombard a small tight group with targeted adds it'll give the illusion that this movement is huge and nationwide. Give the illusion that their friends and everyone they know is into this and they'll accept it to fit in.

>>8282857
If you reduce the population, you reduce all forms of pollution as well as environmental stress and resource depletion.

>>8284531

And reduce progress

>>8284536
Agreed, India is the most advanced and prosperous nation on the planet, along with Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria and Ethiopia. No one can match their scientific, economic or cultural output.

there is probably going to be a catastrophe that significantly reduces the population in the next 200 years right? sound pretty reasonable.

>>8284541

Oh so you just want to kill all browns

>>8284582
yes

>>8284582
My actual point is that most people regardless of where they live aren't 'contributing to progress'. Humanity wouldn't regress to stone age if the population magically dropped from 7 to 1 billion, there wouldn't even be a measurable effect on scientific development because scientists are a tiny minority on global scale.

>>8284605
>scientists are a tiny minority on global scale.
A tiny minority extracted from the huge majority.
Less total people means less opportunities for scientists.

There are two limiting factors on the amount of gifted scientists:
the amount of people born with an attraction/predisposition/talent/will for it.
the amount of people working directly productive jobs to support them

Both of those factors are proportional to the total population.

>>8284632
This. It takes a minimum of a hundred million people in a society to put a human on Earth's moon. And the more the better. You don't discover the Haber Process with ten million people on Earth.

>>8284339
This, and even if it does work we can't ever stop. If do the sulfate aerosol trick and for whatever reason decide to stop funding it, we get a lot of warming VERY FAST!

>>8282857
Because it will be easier to produce more efficient less polluting technology than it will be to reduce the temperature of the entire fucking planet.

>>8282870
This was really /thread.

>>8286378
Actually that's retarded, because the sun is like a fucking petawatt of power.
This is not a closed system you fucktards.
This is like saying that it's super expensive to cool your house during winter because the heat is on.

>>8286385
>This is not a closed system you fucktards.
No-one said it was.

Threads like this really show how far /sci/ has slid.

The simple answer is that global engineering schemes to cool the planet are already an area of major research. Any reply explaining why we should start researching or why it's an obviously dumb idea and that's why it's not researched should be ignored.

>>8282857
But that's easy anon, just open the windows when you turn on the a/c and problem solved

File: climate_remediation.jpg (8KB, 300x219px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 300x219px

>>8282857 >>8286410
>artificially cool the planet?
status: experimental evaluation, going on for decades, increasing budget.

https://www.cia.gov/news-information/speeches-testimony/2016-speeches-testimony/director-brennan-speaks-at-the-council-on-foreign-relations.html

ctrl-f SAI and decode the diplomatic doublespeak. coming winters will be interesting. russian prediction: eurasia first, then north america. the former silently prepares, the latter may collapse.

File: 1470612692148.jpg (111KB, 1440x2296px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 1440x2296px

>>8282857
If we artifically cool the planet using technology we would require alot of energy. Alot of the energy will be released as heat. Also when cooling a system you are only transferring heat from said system to the external system. Were can we transfer the energy to other then objects on the earth.
>inb4 giant space heat sinks

>>8286804
>>inb4 giant space heat sinks

The Earth is always dumping heat into space. It's just our technology is powered by fuel sources that make the natural heat sink less efficient.

>>8286804
Quite the opposite, it's relatively speaking dirt cheap.
https://youtu.be/Mc_4Z1oiXhY?t=52m

Talking about climate things, how about artificial photosynthesis? Shouldn't be so hard. Would solve many problems

>>8286853
What would that solve?
How would it take CO2 out of the air?

>>8286856
With a fucking big compressor

>>8286858
That needs energy, lots of it. Producing that energy would just push CO2 into the atmosphere.

>>8286864
Energy comes from socket and money from bank, you racist bigot

>>8286870

[math]
\text{ }^{\color{#571da2}{\displaystyle\text{W}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{\color{#462eb9}{\displaystyle\text{h}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#3f47c8}{\displaystyle\text{y}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#3f62cf}{\displaystyle\text{ }}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#437ccc}{\displaystyle\text{i}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#4b90bf}{\displaystyle\text{s}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#56a0ae}{\displaystyle\text{ }}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#62ab99}{\displaystyle\text{t}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#71b484}{\displaystyle\text{h}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#82ba70}{\displaystyle\text{i}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#96bc5f}{\displaystyle\text{s}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#a9bd52}{\displaystyle\text{ }}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#bcbb48}{\displaystyle\text{o}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#ceb541}{\displaystyle\text{n}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#dcab3c}{\displaystyle\text{ }}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#e39938}{\displaystyle\text{/}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#e68033}{\displaystyle\text{s}}}}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{^{^{^{\color{#e3632d}{\displaystyle\text{c}}}}}}}}}\text{ }^{^{^{^{\color{#de4227}{\displaystyle\text{i}}}}}}\text{ }^{\color{#da2121}{\displaystyle\text{/}}}
[/math]

>>8286878
>>>/g/

File: greenhouse.jpg (115KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1000x750px

>push CO2 into the atmosphere
Yes, please. Growers still supplement up to 1400 ppm to please their plants.

>>8282857
>When I shit the bed I'll just buy a new mattress instead of getting up and going to the toilet

>>8286988
>Growers
It's nice when you can control temperatures, and water is abundant.

What OP means is why not build devices to scrub the greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20121004-fake-trees-to-clean-the-skies

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jan/12/artificial-trees-fight-climate-change

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/prospects-for-direct-air-capture-of-carbon-dioxide/

>>8287732
>What OP means is why not build devices to scrub the greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.
Because every study done on those things has consistently found that extracting and storing a kilogram of CO2 is harder than reducing emissions by 1kg and just leaving the carbon underground.

>>8283129
>what are nuclear tests

>>8282857
Why don't we just make a hole in the ozone layer to let all the heat out?