Scientific American: Geoengineering Test Quietly Launches Salt Crystals into Atmosphere
"The experiment, which organizers didn't widely announce to avoid public backlash, marks the acceleration of a contentious field of research known as solar radiation modification. The concept involves shooting substances such as aerosols into the sky to reflect sunlight away from the Earth.”
You can read the article here.
Most of the stuff they don't want us to know about happens "quietly". The FDA also quietly made exceptions to informed consent "when a clinical investigation poses no more than minimal risk to the people participating in the research."
And we've seen what they deem "minimal risk."
But I personally think this is just more narrative seeding.
In my opinion, this is a limited hangout to regain control of a narrative as truth about weather manipulation leaks into public awareness. It allows readers to believe that scientists are concerned and will address issues around transparency and consent (they won’t). It also allows mainstream publications to seem like they’re exposing the truth, and are therefore credible sources (they’re not).
"Since this experiment was kept under wraps until the test started, we are eager to see how public engagement is being planned and who will be involved," said Shuchi Talati, the executive director of the Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering, a nonprofit that seeks to include developing countries in decisions about solar modification, also known as geoengineering.
"While it complies with all current regulatory requirements, there is a clear need to reexamine what a strong regulatory framework must look like in a world where [solar radiation modification] experimentation is happening," she added.
They’re letting us know the experiment complies with current regulatory requirements (which just made exceptions for informed consent).
The project comes as global heat continues to obliterate monthly and yearly temperature records and amid growing interest in solar radiation modification from Silicon Valley funders and some environmental groups.
Notice how the article reinforces a global warming narrative to suggest urgency and a need for this solution.
Solar radiation modification is controversial because widespread use of technologies like marine cloud brightening could alter weather patterns in unclear ways and potentially limit the productivity of fisheries and farms. It also wouldn't address the main cause of climate change — the use of fossil fuels — and could lead to a catastrophic spike in global temperatures if major geoengineering activities were discontinued before greenhouse gases decrease to manageable levels.
Again. Limited hangout. This reduces concerns around solar radiation management/geoengineering to a couple of vague notions. But notice the assertion that fossil fuel use is “the main cause of climate change” that “could lead to a catastrophic spike in global temperatures.”
So, we NEED geoengineering… in addition to restrictions in fossil fuel use. The public just doesn’t get it yet.
"The idea of interfering with nature is so contentious, organizers of Tuesday's test kept the details tightly held, concerned that critics would try to stop them," the Times reported. The White House also distanced itself from the experiment, which is being conducted with the cooperation of a Smithsonian-affiliated museum.
No one wants to be associated with these experiments until we’re behind them…
And we’re intended to get behind them…
"The world needs to rapidly advance its understanding of the effects of aerosol particles on climate,” Kelly Wanser, the executive director of SilverLining, said in a press release. "With a deep commitment to open science and a culture of humility, the University of Washington has developed an approach that integrates science with societal engagement, and can help society in essential steps toward advancing science, developing regulations, promoting equitable and effective decision-making, and building shared understanding in these areas."
This is ultimately what they want us to come away with. They’re “helping society in essential steps towards advancing science.” We just keep getting in the way because we don’t understand all the good they’re trying to do for us.
Geoengineering is happening. It’s been happening. And now that the “salt crystals” are out of the bag, they’ll work on manufacturing our consent… or finding loopholes around it.
But I wouldn’t start trusting Scientific American to start telling us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Because that’s NOT happening
One begins to ask, how much of climate change is CO2, and how much of it is idiot control freaks deliberately trying to change the climate in 70 different countries?
Excellent breakdown. Thank you.