Political Crossfire Forums

this is nuking iraq to destroy their weapons of mass destruction

The bigger question is what do I want for lunch.

Yeah, I think that is the natural, reasonable and immediate reaction of most people. It seems very risky. I guess my question revolves around the worst case scenario: if there is the scientific consensus to believe that climate change will eventually present an existential threat to humans, would it make sense to do this? Or are such projects doomed from the start, given our limited ability to understand the totality of how climate works?

Further, do you think that resorting to such technology will simply result in more emissions, due to the impression that we have the means of handling the problem?

Non's got a new conspiracy theory.

Global Warming is being encouraged by the powers that be as a means of ultimately implementing the population reduction component of Agenda 21.

If it can be solved, and that's a big if, climate change will only be corrected if doing so can be made profitable. The world doesn't do anything on that scale without a profit motive. If there is less money coming out than going in...it simply isn't going to happen. It would require global cooperation...to the extreme of the developing world voluntarily hamstringing their industrial revolutions.

Good luck with that.