Off Topic Dark Matter and other Astronomy information.

list part 5
5912396 – June 15, 1999 – System and method for remediation of selected atmospheric conditions
5922976 – July 13, 1999 – Method of measuring aerosol particles using automated mobility-classified aerosol detector
5949001 – September 7, 1999 – Method for aerodynamic particle size analysis
5984239 – November 16, 1999 – Weather modification by artificial satellite
6025402 – February 15, 2000 – Chemical composition for effectuating a reduction of visibility obscuration, and a
detoxifixation of fumes and chemical fogs in spaces of fire origin
6030506 – February 29, 2000 – Preparation of independently generated highly reactive chemical species
6034073 – March 7, 2000 – Solvent detergent emulsions having antiviral activity
6045089 – April 4, 2000 – Solar-powered airplane
6056203 – May 2, 2000 – Method and apparatus for modifying supercooled clouds
6110590 – August 29, 2000 – Synthetically spun silk nanofibers and a process for making the same
6263744 – July 24, 2001 – Automated mobility-classified-aerosol detector
6281972 – August 28, 2001 – Method and apparatus for measuring particle-size distribution
6315213 – November 13, 2001 – Method of modifying weather
6382526 – May 7, 2002 – Process and apparatus for the production of nanofibers
6408704 – June 25, 2002 – Aerodynamic particle size analysis method and apparatus
6412416 – July 2, 2002 – Propellant-based aerosol generation devices and method
6520425 – February 18, 2003 – Process and apparatus for the production of nanofibers
6539812 – April 1, 2003 – System for measuring the flow-rate of a gas by means of ultrasound
6553849 – April 29, 2003 – Electrodynamic particle size analyzer
6569393 – May 27, 2003 – Method and device for cleaning the atmosphere

 

I can't speak for that photo, which is why I didn't run off to the internought and grab photos off of a web page, the UK royal society is discussing this exact process btw, go on their site look it up. It's already being done though.

I can only speak for what I can see with my own eyes and the photographs I took, I live near enough to an airport, I see contrails, they do not last hours mate sorry, they certainly do not spread out to cover the sky in a white haze, it's solar radiation management.

There are many stupid "they are gonna kill us all" conspiracies out there, but these people usually forget that those that are supposedly "trying to kill us all by poisoning the air" breathe the same ****ing air

 

I am not even saying this is bad, all I am saying is I want to know wtf they are at.

 

Yeah of course it is mate x

 

Fix your quotes you ****

 

Not sure why it is an issue of ridicule and "conspiracy theory" to discuss this.

The UN are talking about it.
There are geoengineers.
The Royal Society discuss it.

All imaginary of course. Someone who's not done 2 minutes of research, tell me I am "off my meds"
Aerial delivery system
US Patent 7413145 B2 - Original AssigneeEvergreen International Aviation, Inc.
http://www.google.com/patents/US7413145

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

If anyone posts anytihng from Metabunk and Contrail science I'll piss myself laughing. Mick West runs both sites and is a known disinfo agent.
Evergreen ties to CIA, it's wiki so it's not Fackt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evergreen_International_Airlines

 

I have no issue with renewables, but the truth is it is really really expensive, there are hundreds of millions of people without electricity in the world Tobes. Forgive me if my opinion is not "well **** them"

With no energy it means substandard or no healthcare, transport, infrastructure and impacts everything from agriculture to education.
Take infant mortality, places with no electricity suffer much higher rates, more disease, poorer health.

Now renewables are something these hundreds of millions cannot afford. Not even remotely, they can barely feed themselves.

Take western Australia I think, they are 40% windfarm energy, and their 3 month bills are around 700 -800 AU dollars because this energy is so costly.

How the **** can most of africa and india afford those prices and afford the tech?

So a process of limiting cheap energy will over decades cost millions of lives. Is that OK cos we already built our economies on fossil fuels so **** them?
As is most of the normal folk in our part of the world cannot afford solar panels and we ahve no storage solutions at all.

Take a Tesla car, 100k, the company gets 4.5bn in tax breaks to make cars for people who can afford 100k cars, how hte **** is that sustainable? The wealthy are the biggest emitters of emissions through energy use, like Gore $20.000 a year energy bills for his properties. So the tesla car they drive doesn't mitigate **** all.

If we could all go solar, it would be great, of course. But we either cannot afford it and if we can we cannot store the energy.

I think you need to look at what is being said by your own gov, you pay "too little for electricity" and "you can't have energy 24x7" They are even considering carbon budgets for families, this will include your holiday travel, transport, and your energy use. Like internet in the old days, go over your budget and the price per kw goes through the roof.

It is not economically viable until the technology becomes available. When your pocket really starts getting hit you will see the light. It all starts in 2020.

The mad thing is that we have enough fuel already for thorium reactors in nuclear waste to last 1000 years. Why aren't those being built I ask myself.

Also, it is ok it seems for our economies to benefit from China building coal station after coal station to 2030 and beyond. As long as the iPhones keep rolling in it's al cool. This totally mitigates all of Europe and US windfarms, totally and uttely because Chinese emissions are many times what western wind and solar mitigates. Give with one hand and take several times as much with the other hand, it's a fiction, an expensive one

 

It's shown that wealth will enable lowering of emissions, pollution and population increases.

Logically the answer is get the underdeveloped world developed as quickly as possible, by using cheap energy. It solves three problems at once.

 

All of which ignores the point.

Saying that renewables are too expensive so lets carry on burning hydrocarbons because the 3rd World needs it, is such a bollocks argument I don't know where to start disembowelling it, lol.

We should be working flat out to come out with methods of creating energy that are both low cost and low impact, whilst we're focussed on extracting hydrocarbons this simply won't happen to the level it needs to. Look at wave technology, that's extremely exciting, it's free energy and zero impact, once the thing is built.

Using the Chinese output of hydrocarbons to excuse the rest of the World being bothered about trying to create sustainable energy is a lazy argument btw.

 

This is complete bollocks and you failed to address any point I made on that issue you just refuted it without argument, you are not worth discussing it with, you are anti debate. Go find someone else for your forum battles mate. Seriously.

All about "winning" to you. I even offered ideas as to a solution.. you just want to win.

 

Oh here we go, ignores the points I've made and the teddy's come over the side as I've dared to disagree with the entire premise of his argument.

Slap me back on ignore you flakey ****

 

Yeah, I made an extensive case for this and face palm all you want, you take to debate in a dickish way and deride alternate opinions no matter how source and researched based they are.

When it all becomes too much work for your lazy half baked 5 minute researched opinions you just **** off.

Should I expect more on a football forum, not really, it is what it is.
You seem to be an expert on every subject I bring up. How's that work

 

The IPCC, do you know how they plan to fund thrid world renewable structures, by taxing us as all the CO2 is "our fault". Your electricity bills are already funding renewable projects, and expect to pay even more once this process starts. A lot more.

Who makes all of the money? Those who invest in renewables like Bill Gates for example.

 

You don't debate anything, you post cut and past after cut and paste and then cobble together your 'thesis' that generally have more holes than a swiss cheese.

As soon as anyone challenges your premise you go off on one, same as you have here, read it back ffs. You dismiss my knowledge for the sole reason that I don't agree with your entire argument.

You're not here for any form of debate, you're merely trying to indoctrinate people with whatever your latest hobby horse or bullshit theory is.

Trying to belittle when you're patently as thick as pigshit is laughable btw.

 

The biggest warmist alarmist leftist rag in the UK, the Guardian, owned by Guardian media Group. GMG have £800 million invested in fossil fuels.

 

Which they've openly said they're getting rid of and why..........

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...oup-to-divest-its-800m-fund-from-fossil-fuels

 

The Guardian have been blabbing about global warming for over a decade Only when it was called into question they said "they will" divest. and still to this day have not divested. That link is 2015 ffs

And you use the guardian as a source when the guardian is questioned? That's like asking a bank robber who robbed the bank.

In your quest to prove me wrong out of some twisted crusade you end up looking like an idiot well done, well done indeed

You and logic are not friends mate

They have had 2 decades to divest, but as soon as it is pointed out, they report they "will in the future at some unstated point, divest".

You drone

What is hilarious is you jumping to the defence of the Guardian to disagree with me, when everyone with a brain know the media cannot be trusted. Really

 

Oh look another rant....

"Jumping to the defence", no petal, I was merely pointing out that it patently wasn't a secret, and they've said they were moving the stock on.

Oh and the reason this issue came to light in general in 2015 is due to the global push for divestment of fossil fuel stocks, across Universities, charities and all manner of investment arms, which pressure groups had focussed on, based on previous experience of doing so against the likes of the tobacco industry and apartheid SA, you massive twat.

 

Ah stop, granted I am being over the top and a bit dickishness in my replies though I am not being serious.

If you can't see how ludicrous your defence of the guardian is then where the **** is your sense of humour

 

Arctic has the most june ice in a decade, for the third year in a row




Antarctic which is much more representative of the climate and planet health because of the oceans in the southern hemisphere has more ice cover now than ever in history, increasing year on year.

Just sayin

More ice is proof of man made global warming