Anti-Chemtrail posters are totally correct!

[LnGrrrR]

Hey, don't get me wrong, I wish our gov/military had the power to control weather! I just highly doubt it.

[RandomGuy]

Hey, don't get me wrong, I wish our gov/military had the power to control weather! I just highly doubt it.

It's another one of those things that is outright physically impossible, simply due to the sheer amount of power/energy it would take.

These people posit something akin to a radar array affecting weather through some electromagnetic means on a global scale.

Setting aside for a second that manipulation of the globes magnetosphere, something that is constantly fluctuating to some degree or another, would require computing power on a scale unseen to humans so far, the equations governing electrical fields always involve some squared or cubed function depending on the volume of the field involved.

It doesn't take much to have those equations get large and silly pretty quickly.

X field strength over a 8 meter cubed (two by two by two) volume (2 to the third power) is one thing.

Double that, and you get 4x4x4 volume or 64 meters^3.
Double that and you get 8x8x8 volume 512 metesr^3

The graph of y= x^3 kinda puts it into a more visual perspective:


It's just common sense on the part of anyone vaguely familiar with this stuff to see the problem inherent in like this.

Not that that ever stopped a true believer.

Math shmath, you know they did it!

[Winehole23]

Manipulation of the magnetosphere relates to what, please? Is this a HAARP related vein?

[LnGrrrR]

RG, you can't prove that the gov't can't do it. Therefore, ipso facto, they are. Quid pro quo. Ad infinitum. E pluribus unum.

[DarrinS]

Hey, don't get me wrong, I wish our gov/military had the power to control weather! I just highly doubt it.

I agree. We also don't have the power to control climate.

[Yonivore]

Hey, don't get me wrong, I wish our gov/military had the power to control weather! I just highly doubt it.

And, yet, we're to believe mankind controls the climate?

[Blake]

And, yet, we're to believe mankind controls the climate?

controls ≠ effects

[Yonivore]

controls ≠ effects

You mean "affects" (because "control can equal effect") and, okay, I'll change the statement:

And, yet, we're to believe mankind affects global climate.

[Blake]

You mean "affects" (because "control can equal effect") and, okay, I'll change the statement:

And, yet, we're to believe mankind affects global climate.

ah, I did mean "affects".

I do believe mankind affects global climate.

[Yonivore]

ah, I did mean "affects".

I do believe mankind affects global climate.

I know you do. I don't.

Evidence supports my position.

[Blake]

I know you do. I don't.

Evidence supports my position.

Such ironclad evidence that there are multi-page threads constantly popping up discussing just how ironclad it is.

[Yonivore]

It's the continual discrediting of evidence to the contrary on which I rely.

To date, there is not one shred of iron-clad, irrefutable empirical evidence that humans have had any affect on global climate -- and, certainly none to the degree it's been irreversibly changed over the long term.

[MannyIsGod]

i know you do. I don't.

Evidence supports my position.

lol

Humanity has affected climate in so many different ways outside of AGW that your statement is so stupid. There were CFCs that blocked the sun and lowered temps earlier this century, there's desertification of large land areas by changing the vegitation, and there is deforestation of rain forests and the climate changes that produces over the deforested areas just to name a few.

Go ahead, move the goal posts again.

[Yonivore]

lol

Humanity has affected climate in so many different ways outside of AGW that your statement is so stupid. There were CFCs that blocked the sun and lowered temps earlier this century, there's desertification of large land areas by changing the vegitation, and there is deforestation of rain forests and the climate changes that produces over the deforested areas just to name a few.

Go ahead, move the goal posts again.

It's the continual discrediting of evidence to the contrary on which I rely.

To date, there is not one shred of iron-clad, irrefutable empirical evidence that humans have had any affect on global climate -- and, certainly none to the degree it's been irreversibly changed over the long term.

You're moving the goal post.

[MannyIsGod]

Whats the long term? No one has ever argued its irreversible but you can make phantom claims and move the goalposts if you want.

Every bit of literature on AGW has a time frame of centuries and not FOREVER LIVE IN DOOM.

Why do you feel the need to make up fake positions to argue against? Do you like straw?

[MannyIsGod]

You can go back and edit the post if you want but changing the climate over large areas of land inevitably has an effect on global climate. Put that in some different colors.

[Yonivore]

Whats the long term? No one has ever argued its irreversible...

The ridiculous costs involved in "hoping" to have an impact over the next 50-100 years is the same as claiming it's irreversible. And, in fact, there are some, on your side of the argument, who do claim it's too late, we're doomed.

...but you can make phantom claims and move the goalposts if you want.

Every bit of literature on AGW has a time frame of centuries and not FOREVER LIVE IN DOOM.

Centuries are very convenient for a society with a life span of less than a 100 years.

[Yonivore]

You can go back and edit the post if you want but changing the climate over large areas of land inevitably has an effect on global climate. Put that in some different colors.

I meant to copy and re-post, I changed it back.

[MannyIsGod]

The ridiculous costs involved in "hoping" to have an impact over the next 50-100 years is the same as claiming it's irreversible. And, in fact, there are some, on your side of the argument, who do claim it's too late, we're doomed.

I'm terribly sorry your lack of vocabulary prohibits you from expressing your ideas clearly but thats not what irreversible means.

Centuries are very convenient for a society with a life span of less than a 100 years.

I'm sorry the earth doesn't work on your preferred time scale.

[Yonivore]

I'm terribly sorry your lack of vocabulary prohibits you from expressing your ideas clearly but thats not what irreversible means.

It's the same ing thing. Particularly when none of the predictions are coming true...there's nothing to reverse.

I'm sorry the earth doesn't work on your preferred time scale.

Nor does its climate bend to the whims of man.

[MannyIsGod]

It's the same ing thing. Particularly when none of the predictions are coming true...there's nothing to reverse.

Its not the same thing at all. Irreversible means not able to be reversed. It doesn't have anything to do with costs and it doesn't mean in the next 50-100 years. Like I said, its not my fault you're not articulate enough to express what you want but no one is arguing that climate change is irreversible. In fact, the attempts to REVERSE IT you mention pretty much refute that very fact.

No wonder you plagiarize. You don't even know what irreversible means.

Nor does its climate bend to the whims of man.

Didn't you get into this mess in this thread to begin with by implying control? Why are you going back to that strawman you yourself took down? I should buy stock in hay the way you erect straw around here.

[The Reckoning]

just some terraforming experiments. move along, nothing to see here.

[RandomGuy]

Manipulation of the magnetosphere relates to what, please? Is this a HAARP related vein?

Yup. Not sure if I spelled out that specifically, but that was what I referred to.

[Winehole23]

You didn't spell it out and you didn't mention HAARP. I almost got lost there.

[Wild Cobra]

Don't mention weather wars, he might start harping on the old HAARP schtick.

(yeah, I went there)

Parker hasn't specifically opined on HAARP and its evil global control of the weather, but if he believes in chemtrails, then a belief in the evil HAARP conspiracy seems possible.

Oh please...

Don't get him started on that one. He Let him remain ignorant of it.