Washington (DC) - It's being reported by the Associated Press that the president's new science advisor, John Holdren, just confirmed last month, is looking at extreme methods of cooling the Earth's air. The most extreme example mentioned involves shooting air-polluting particles into the Earth's upper atmosphere. These will reflect the sun's rays back into space, thereby cooling the Earth.
Holdren told the AP that the situation so dire that the air-polluting reflective particle idea is being discussed by Obama's administration. He said, "It's got to be looked at. We don't have the luxury of taking any approach off the table."
See the original AP article republished on Yahoo News.
Data compiled by R.S. Bradley and J.A. Eddy based on J.T. Houghton et al., Climate Change: The IPCC Assessment, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990 and published in EarthQuest, vo. 1, 1991. Courtesy of Thomas Crowley, viewable at Geocraft.com.
When we look at this graph of the temperature over the past 18,000 years, we see that while we are warmer today than we were 18,000 years ago, we are still notably cooler then we were at various points over the past 10,000 years. In fact, for the past 10,000 years the temperature has gone up and down repeatedly within an upper and lower range, forcing me to ask a real question: How is the situation now "so dire" that this administration, the one operating between 2009 and 2013, has to tackle his problem right now? Surely we can afford to wait 20 years to find out if it's part of the normal cycles seen in our past? Or 50 years? Or 100 years?
It's this kind of fear-based language coming from experts (national science advisor) with press coverage like, "The president's new science adviser said that global warming is so dire, the Obama administration is discussing drastic options to cool Earth's air" that boggles my mind!
Seriously, who do these people think they're fooling?