wrote:


There ia a guy (widely thought to be a bit of a crackpot),
who posts under variations of the handle Archimedes
Plutonium on sci.environment and sci.geo.meteorology
who has come up with schemes for doing such things.
OTOH just this morning I heard the Paul Crutzen, who
can hardly be considered a crackpot since he won
the 1995 Nobel Prize in chemistry for his work on the
destruction of stratospheric ozone, has proposed
putting balloons full of sulfer compounds (I imagine
probably sulfur dioxide, althought the story didn't say)
high in the atmosphere and then exploding them to
create sulfur aerosols to block part of the sunlight.
This is not a fundamentally impossible idea, since
such particles are created by some volcanic eruptions
and have in the past cooled the planet temporarily.
Examples are Tambora in 1815 (arguably a major
contributor to the year without a summer, 1816) and
a recently as Mount Pinatubo in 1991.


Get used to it, that is my full legal name.

The trouble with Crutzen's plan is that it eventually it rains out as
sulfuric acid and upsetting to the environment. It is a health hazard.
But instead of balloons a better delivery system would be to compress
the sulfur gases into containers and emitted by airplanes in the apogee
of flightpath. All those commercial airplanes each and every day they
fly would emit some sulfur gases. But it is a health hazard to life
whereas thistle seed is no health hazard.

That is why thistle seed distributed into the atmosphere by airplanes
in the apogee of their flightpath will not be a health hazard.

When I started this adventure to engineer a Earth Air Conditioner I was
thinking of a radical form of the CFC molecule to self transport itself
into the atmosphere. I could have spent time on sulfur compounds such
as Crutzen. But I came to the conclusion that chlorine or sulfur in the
atmosphere are too damaging to life.

So something like thistle seed or finely shredded paper emitted is a
better answer.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

wrote:
wrote:

You might have replied to the NG that this was posted to.
That would have been the proper thing to do. I seldom
read this NG anymore because of the cranks.

[crossposted back to src for my convenience]


There ia a guy (widely thought to be a bit of a crackpot),
who posts under variations of the handle Archimedes
Plutonium on sci.environment and sci.geo.meteorology
who has come up with schemes for doing such things.
OTOH just this morning I heard the Paul Crutzen, who
can hardly be considered a crackpot since he won
the 1995 Nobel Prize in chemistry for his work on the
destruction of stratospheric ozone, has proposed
putting balloons full of sulfer compounds (I imagine
probably sulfur dioxide, althought the story didn't say)
high in the atmosphere and then exploding them to
create sulfur aerosols to block part of the sunlight.
This is not a fundamentally impossible idea, since
such particles are created by some volcanic eruptions
and have in the past cooled the planet temporarily.
Examples are Tambora in 1815 (arguably a major
contributor to the year without a summer, 1816) and
a recently as Mount Pinatubo in 1991.


Get used to it, that is my full legal name.

Doesn't matter to me. Why would you think it does?


The trouble with Crutzen's plan is that it eventually it rains out as
sulfuric acid and upsetting to the environment. It is a health hazard.

Maybe, but I don't know the levels he proposes. I've never
heard of long range downwind health problems from SO2
fallout from volcanoes, but I don't know if it's been studied.
Such eruptions are rare enough to make it unlikely unless
major health problems were noticed. That certainly leaves
the problem of low level health effects an open question.

But instead of balloons a better delivery system would be to compress
the sulfur gases into containers and emitted by airplanes in the apogee
of flightpath. All those commercial airplanes each and every day they
fly would emit some sulfur gases.

But to really do the job the SO2 needs to get up in the
stratosphere where commercial airplanes don't go.

But it is a health hazard to life
whereas thistle seed is no health hazard.

Unless one is allergic to thistle seed. ;-) And there are
ecological questions about spreading a weed. I have
not read your posts on the idea (like I said, I mostly
avoid sgm these days since the cranks arrived and most
of the few posters who have a clue left), so maybe you've
discussed that.


That is why thistle seed distributed into the atmosphere by airplanes
in the apogee of their flightpath will not be a health hazard.

When I started this adventure to engineer a Earth Air Conditioner I was
thinking of a radical form of the CFC molecule to self transport itself
into the atmosphere. I could have spent time on sulfur compounds such
as Crutzen. But I came to the conclusion that chlorine or sulfur in the
atmosphere are too damaging to life.

So something like thistle seed or finely shredded paper emitted is a
better answer.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Cheers,
Russell
--
All too often the study of data requires care.

wrote:

I do not know if that newsgroup is moderated.

Maybe, but I don't know the levels he proposes. I've never
heard of long range downwind health problems from SO2
fallout from volcanoes, but I don't know if it's been studied.
Such eruptions are rare enough to make it unlikely unless
major health problems were noticed. That certainly leaves
the problem of low level health effects an open question.


I do not think anyone studied the sulfur that returned to the surface
of Earth from Pinatubo 1991-2. Studied the increase in acid rain.

I concluded some year back that chlorine or sulfur compounds would not
be a good choice for making a Earth Air Conditioner. They threaten life
on the surface. And left me with a carbon compound as a basis for the
material to use. Carbon is lighter in weight than chlorine or sulfur.
One harms ozone for life and both return as acids to the ground. So I
concluded that the best basis for material is carbon or carbon hydrogen
compounds such as thistle seeds.

But instead of balloons a better delivery system would be to compress
the sulfur gases into containers and emitted by airplanes in the apogee
of flightpath. All those commercial airplanes each and every day they
fly would emit some sulfur gases.

But to really do the job the SO2 needs to get up in the
stratosphere where commercial airplanes don't go.


Agreed, and another reason why thistle seed or pulverized wood pulp or
paper fiber would be better. Because these materials act effectively
when released at the apogee of airplanes.

But it is a health hazard to life
whereas thistle seed is no health hazard.

Unless one is allergic to thistle seed. ;-) And there are
ecological questions about spreading a weed. I have

Another poster pointed out that the UV would probably destroy the
thistle seed of its potential to sprout and that the UV would probably
pulverize the seed into a finer fiber that is able to float in the air
for longer time.

All we need to do now is try a batch of seed out. Australia in winter
maybe a ideal spot. So that every airplane flying in Australia obliged
to emit some seed from its cargo. See if the weather improves as cooler
and more rainfall. If such pans out, then do it worldwide.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

wrote:
wrote:

I do not know if that newsgroup is moderated.

No .mod at the end, but you could bother to check it out
if you were unsure. To save you the trouble, no it isn't,
so I've crossposted it again.


Maybe, but I don't know the levels he proposes. I've never
heard of long range downwind health problems from SO2
fallout from volcanoes, but I don't know if it's been studied.
Such eruptions are rare enough to make it unlikely unless
major health problems were noticed. That certainly leaves
the problem of low level health effects an open question.


I do not think anyone studied the sulfur that returned to the surface
of Earth from Pinatubo 1991-2. Studied the increase in acid rain.

I concluded some year back that chlorine or sulfur compounds would not
be a good choice for making a Earth Air Conditioner. They threaten life
on the surface. And left me with a carbon compound as a basis for the
material to use. Carbon is lighter in weight than chlorine or sulfur.
One harms ozone for life and both return as acids to the ground. So I
concluded that the best basis for material is carbon or carbon hydrogen
compounds such as thistle seeds.

But instead of balloons a better delivery system would be to compress
the sulfur gases into containers and emitted by airplanes in the apogee
of flightpath. All those commercial airplanes each and every day they
fly would emit some sulfur gases.

But to really do the job the SO2 needs to get up in the
stratosphere where commercial airplanes don't go.


Agreed, and another reason why thistle seed or pulverized wood pulp or
paper fiber would be better. Because these materials act effectively
when released at the apogee of airplanes.

But it is a health hazard to life
whereas thistle seed is no health hazard.

Unless one is allergic to thistle seed. ;-) And there are
ecological questions about spreading a weed. I have

Another poster pointed out that the UV would probably destroy the
thistle seed of its potential to sprout and that the UV would probably
pulverize the seed into a finer fiber that is able to float in the air
for longer time.

All we need to do now is try a batch of seed out. Australia in winter
maybe a ideal spot. So that every airplane flying in Australia obliged
to emit some seed from its cargo. See if the weather improves as cooler
and more rainfall. If such pans out, then do it worldwide.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

How do we determine if it panned out? Discriminating
between induced change and natural variability has
been the bane of weather modificatioon from the
beginning.

Cheers,
Russell

wrote:


How do we determine if it panned out? Discriminating
between induced change and natural variability has
been the bane of weather modificatioon from the
beginning.

Cheers,
Russell

The quickest way would be pulverized paper fiber since thistle seed
would take time to collect. And the best problem case is California
heat wave and the offshore Florida hurricanes in infancy. California
has alot of airplane traffic. So require every airplane in California
to emit some paper fiber in the apogee of flight over California. If
the emission breaks the California heat wave and/or brings rainfall
then consider the mission a success.

Then, emit the same over the ocean tracks where a infant hurricane is
forming and is calculated to move. If it breaks-apart the infant
hurricane, then consider the technique a success.

Best of all, here in the Midwest where we have had a 2 month long
drought, emit the paper fibers over the Midwest skies. If it makes us
cooler and provides rainfall, then continue the practice. Make it a law
that every airplane that flys must emit a cargo portion amount of
thistle-seed or crushed paper fiber in the apogee of their flightpath
or so directed.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

In article .com,
wrote:

wrote:


How do we determine if it panned out? Discriminating
between induced change and natural variability has
been the bane of weather modificatioon from the
beginning.

Cheers,
Russell

The quickest way would be pulverized paper fiber since thistle seed
would take time to collect. And the best problem case is California
heat wave and the offshore Florida hurricanes in infancy. California
has alot of airplane traffic. So require every airplane in California
to emit some paper fiber in the apogee of flight over California. If
the emission breaks the California heat wave and/or brings rainfall
then consider the mission a success.

Then, emit the same over the ocean tracks where a infant hurricane is
forming and is calculated to move. If it breaks-apart the infant
hurricane, then consider the technique a success.

Best of all, here in the Midwest where we have had a 2 month long
drought, emit the paper fibers over the Midwest skies. If it makes us
cooler and provides rainfall, then continue the practice. Make it a law
that every airplane that flys must emit a cargo portion amount of
thistle-seed or crushed paper fiber in the apogee of their flightpath
or so directed.


You didn't answer Russell's question. How would we determine if the
"cooler and provides rainfall" came from what you put into the Midwest
skies or whether it would have happened if hadn't done anything. Just
because the weather changes after you did something doesn't mean it was
because of your activity.
--
Harold Brooks

Harold Brooks wrote:


You didn't answer Russell's question. How would we determine if the
"cooler and provides rainfall" came from what you put into the Midwest
skies or whether it would have happened if hadn't done anything. Just
because the weather changes after you did something doesn't mean it was
because of your activity.

I did answer his question. If we start a test case which yields a
cooler and wetter Australia or a cooler or wetter California or a
breakup of a infant hurricane would be the licence to go forward and do
it worldwide.

Any improvement in a test case is licence for worldwide application.

Thence, we strive to imitate Pinatubo of 1992-3 summer which were the
coolest in recent history.

So there are two things--- The TEST case and in the test case we only
see if some improvement occurs. Test cases are not about proofs. We do
not care for your so called proof or beyond your skeptical doubts so
that all the couch potato skeptics who ne'er do any experimental are
happy. In the Test Case we look for improvement, not proof. If we see
improvement, is licence for the World Wide Application.

In the World Wide Application we want proof. We expect and want to see
the 2007 summer to be similar or approaching that of the summer of
1992-3 (the Pinatubo summer). So if the Thistle Seed EArth Air
Conditioner Application in 2007 does not deliver a cool and wet summer.
Then something is wrong. But if the 2007 summer has few if no
hurricanes. And has a cooler summer than 2006 with no California heat
wave and no MidWest drought, and if 2007 begins to converge on the
1992-3 summer is proof that our Air Conditioner works.

By applying thistle seed via airplanes in the apogee of flightpath can
approach the Pinatubo summer of 1992-3, is proof that the program
works.

Summary: do you understand a difference between a Test Case and the
full fledged program. Proof would be convergence to a Pinatubo like
summer of 1992-3.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

wrote:
Harold Brooks wrote:


You didn't answer Russell's question. How would we determine if the
"cooler and provides rainfall" came from what you put into the Midwest
skies or whether it would have happened if hadn't done anything. Just
because the weather changes after you did something doesn't mean it was
because of your activity.

I did answer his question. If we start a test case which yields a
cooler and wetter Australia or a cooler or wetter California or a
breakup of a infant hurricane would be the licence to go forward and do
it worldwide.

Any improvement in a test case is licence for worldwide application.

Wrong answer.


Thence, we strive to imitate Pinatubo of 1992-3 summer which were the
coolest in recent history.

So there are two things--- The TEST case and in the test case we only
see if some improvement occurs. Test cases are not about proofs.

All I ask for is reasonable evidence, and a single test case in
a noisy system provides insufficient evidence. One needs to
gather data from a sufficient number of test cases to show
that random chance is not a viable alternative hypothesis.

We do
not care for your so called proof or beyond your skeptical doubts so
that all the couch potato skeptics who ne'er do any experimental are
happy. In the Test Case we look for improvement, not proof. If we see
improvement, is licence for the World Wide Application.

You should read _Fooled by Randomness_.


In the World Wide Application we want proof.

As Number Six would say, "You won't get it." :-)

We expect and want to see
the 2007 summer to be similar or approaching that of the summer of
1992-3 (the Pinatubo summer). So if the Thistle Seed EArth Air
Conditioner Application in 2007 does not deliver a cool and wet summer.
Then something is wrong. But if the 2007 summer has few if no
hurricanes. And has a cooler summer than 2006 with no California heat
wave and no MidWest drought, and if 2007 begins to converge on the
1992-3 summer is proof that our Air Conditioner works.

Even that would not be proof, although given the recent trend it
would provide fairly strong evidence in my mind.


By applying thistle seed via airplanes in the apogee of flightpath can
approach the Pinatubo summer of 1992-3, is proof that the program
works.

Summary: do you understand a difference between a Test Case and the
full fledged program.

Yes and it isn't a applicable scientific method in this
case. The question is do you understand statistical
testing?

Proof would be convergence to a Pinatubo like
summer of 1992-3.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Cheers,
Russell

In article . com, wrote:

wrote:

I do not know if that newsgroup is moderated.


If it (or this group) were, you wouldn't get nearly as much drivel through.

Please pass the Ivory Liquid.

Crutzen's plan is sulfur balloons into the stratosphere (10 to 50 km
from surface) from which artillery shells would burst the balloon and
release the sulfur.

AP's plan is thistle seed (or substitute such as cotton or paper fiber)
into the Troposphere (0 to 10 km from surface) transported by airplanes
releasing the carbon material (thistle seeds) at the apogee of
flightpath. But thistle seed could be emitted by space shuttle or space
station into the Mesosphere (50 to 85 km) or Thermosphere (85 to 110
km).

Crutzen's plan is based on sulfur and the sulfur will stay up there for
about 2 days. AP's plan depends on carbon in the form of floating seeds
or fiber such as thistle seed. Based on some homemade experiments, I
calculate that thistle seed would remain aloft on average about 9 days.
And 9 days is considerably longer of a time than that of 2 days for
Crutzen. But the best part of my plan is that aircraft have to go up
anyway, and so my delivery system is virtually free whereas it takes
alot of energy to make these balloons and to shoot them.

Comparing health risks, my plan wins in that sulfur comes back to
surface in the form of acid rain which we know is killing the eastern
USA forests. Carbon in the form of thistle or cotton or paper fiber is
harmless.

The area where Crutzen's sulfur plan may win over my carbon plan is the
question of whether rainfall is increased. It is fact that Pinatubo
sulfur eruption caused a heavy rainfall for 1992-3. Would thistle seed
or carbon yield increasing rainfall. I really do not know. And it is
only a guess until actually tried out. I would guess the answer is
favorable to my plan by a factor of about 3 to 4 times greater rainfall
than Crutzen's sulfur plan. The reason I say this is because cloud
seeding involving silver iodide is about forming water droplets and
because of the seed emitted in airplane contrails provides a further
opportunity for enucleated condensation.

So all in all, my plan is far superior to Crutzen's, provided it works.
And the only way to know if it works is to try it out.

Just tonight on the news was that Switzerland Alps mountains were
losing all of their snow to global warming. We really do not have time
to delay or waste. We should immediately try out my plan of putting
carbon in the form of thistle seed or cotton or paper fibers into the
troposphere.

P.S. another question is whether the thistle seed reflects the Sun rays
into outer space or whether it is trapped into the layers above the
troposphere. Many questions need answers. The important thing is to
start and try out this plan.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies