within attempting to insure understanding Alexei, i am still pondering this aspect of your comment...
"view is that it's a reflection of modern man's hubristic belief in his own unlimited powers that results in the "belief" that he can control the climate"...
like from my perspective it becomes hubristic to bel…
within attempting to insure understanding Alexei, i am still pondering this aspect of your comment...
"view is that it's a reflection of modern man's hubristic belief in his own unlimited powers that results in the "belief" that he can control the climate"...
like from my perspective it becomes hubristic to believe that we cannot influence the climate in ways that might serve us poorly...
so, if you or others can further explain how mankind could/would be limited such that we could not cause a climate effect, i would be of interest...
You ask: "if you or other can further explain how mankind could/would be limited such that we could not cause a climate effect"
I did not say we could not cause a climate "effect" (whatever you might mean by that) but that I doubt we can or do "control" the world's climate, in other words, make the climate change. It's not disputed that we can cause small-scale local weather effects such as seeding the clouds with silver iodide to induce rain, or disperse hurricanes by various methods, or Andrew Yang's giant mirrors to reflect the sun's rays back into space or injecting sulphur dioxide into the stratosphere also to prevent the sun's rays reaching earth. Some scientists have raised alarm at such ideas as having unpremeditated negative repercussions in other parts of the world. Indeed, huge amounts of sulphur dioxide were spewed into the atmosphere in 1815 by the largest volcanic eruption in history - Tambora in the Far East. It was considered one of the greatest environmental disasters to affect mankind, causing floods, droughts. starvation and disease for the next few years and the following year, 1816, was known as the Year Without a Summer as the skies were covered in a thick layer of volcanic dust shielding out the sun altogether, which was catastrophic for vegetation and food production.
Cloud seeding IS practised in a few countries locally but that is Weather, not Climate and is local, not global. As far as inducing rain is concerned, you must be aware of the water cycle and that the planet's water content is finite, such that changing its availability in one location may negatively impact another location down the road, so-to-speak.
So to answer your question, so far there are no viable, manageable methods of changing and controlling the earth's GLOBAL climate. Also, as a matter of interest, the increased amount of C02 is greening the planet. 35 years of satellite observations by NASA found the planet had greened by some 14%.
As for what IS responsible for changes in climate, alternative theories favor one or several factors depending on the scientist - the Solar cycles and sunspots, water vapor/cloud formation ( =78% of the atmosphere, whilst C02 = 0.04%), the changing tilt of the earth's axis relative to its orbital plane and earth's orbital eccentricity, Cosmic rays, the geomagnetic field, ocean currents, i.e. the Pacific Decadal Oscillations, volcanic activity ..... etc. In my view, a combination of these factors interrelating with each other are far more likely causes than C02 or methane, or the latest culprit, nitrogen.
The climate change agenda has nothing to do with controlling the climate, it's about controlling the people, about who controls money, wealth and resources and where that is relocated around the world, it's about globalist institutions taking control from nation states, making them subordinate to unelected plutocrats and corporations, it's all about our enslavement really and the end of democracy. Just look at who turns up to all the climate change conferences.
adding a follow-up comment...
within attempting to insure understanding Alexei, i am still pondering this aspect of your comment...
"view is that it's a reflection of modern man's hubristic belief in his own unlimited powers that results in the "belief" that he can control the climate"...
like from my perspective it becomes hubristic to believe that we cannot influence the climate in ways that might serve us poorly...
so, if you or others can further explain how mankind could/would be limited such that we could not cause a climate effect, i would be of interest...
In response --
You ask: "if you or other can further explain how mankind could/would be limited such that we could not cause a climate effect"
I did not say we could not cause a climate "effect" (whatever you might mean by that) but that I doubt we can or do "control" the world's climate, in other words, make the climate change. It's not disputed that we can cause small-scale local weather effects such as seeding the clouds with silver iodide to induce rain, or disperse hurricanes by various methods, or Andrew Yang's giant mirrors to reflect the sun's rays back into space or injecting sulphur dioxide into the stratosphere also to prevent the sun's rays reaching earth. Some scientists have raised alarm at such ideas as having unpremeditated negative repercussions in other parts of the world. Indeed, huge amounts of sulphur dioxide were spewed into the atmosphere in 1815 by the largest volcanic eruption in history - Tambora in the Far East. It was considered one of the greatest environmental disasters to affect mankind, causing floods, droughts. starvation and disease for the next few years and the following year, 1816, was known as the Year Without a Summer as the skies were covered in a thick layer of volcanic dust shielding out the sun altogether, which was catastrophic for vegetation and food production.
Cloud seeding IS practised in a few countries locally but that is Weather, not Climate and is local, not global. As far as inducing rain is concerned, you must be aware of the water cycle and that the planet's water content is finite, such that changing its availability in one location may negatively impact another location down the road, so-to-speak.
So to answer your question, so far there are no viable, manageable methods of changing and controlling the earth's GLOBAL climate. Also, as a matter of interest, the increased amount of C02 is greening the planet. 35 years of satellite observations by NASA found the planet had greened by some 14%.
As for what IS responsible for changes in climate, alternative theories favor one or several factors depending on the scientist - the Solar cycles and sunspots, water vapor/cloud formation ( =78% of the atmosphere, whilst C02 = 0.04%), the changing tilt of the earth's axis relative to its orbital plane and earth's orbital eccentricity, Cosmic rays, the geomagnetic field, ocean currents, i.e. the Pacific Decadal Oscillations, volcanic activity ..... etc. In my view, a combination of these factors interrelating with each other are far more likely causes than C02 or methane, or the latest culprit, nitrogen.
The climate change agenda has nothing to do with controlling the climate, it's about controlling the people, about who controls money, wealth and resources and where that is relocated around the world, it's about globalist institutions taking control from nation states, making them subordinate to unelected plutocrats and corporations, it's all about our enslavement really and the end of democracy. Just look at who turns up to all the climate change conferences.