We are now on Patreon! Click here to learn more about how you can help support the site.

Monday, November 29, 2021
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
You are viewing: Home > News > Science & Technology > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
Science & Technology

IPCC climate change plans leaked

June 17, 2011 | Comment icon 28 comments



Image Credit: sxc.hu
Leaked documents have disclosed a number of potential ways that the IPCC may tackle climate change.
Over 60 top scientists worldwide contributed to the ideas that include growing lighter coloured crops to reflect more sunlight, suppressing cirus clouds, painting roofs white, dumping large amount of iron filings in to the sea and blasting aerosol "mirrors" in to the stratosphere.
Experts suggested that the documents, leaked from inside the IPPC to The Guardian, show how the UN and other developed countries are “despairing” about reaching agreement by consensus at the global climate change talks.


Source: Telegraph | Comments (28)



Unexplained Mysteries is now on Patreon!

Click here to learn more about how you can help support the site and gain access to a range of perks including a subscriber badge, ad-free browsing, an exclusive weekly newsletter, sneak peaks of upcoming features and more.
24 / 25  
We are 96% of the way to our second Patreon subscriber target - thank you!
Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #19 Posted by 27vet 11 years ago
They better find a way to plug the volcanoes then.
Comment icon #20 Posted by Br Cornelius 11 years ago
They better find a way to plug the volcanoes then. The ones that have no net effect on atmospheric CO2 due to stable geological activity of time - would those be the ones? Or would those be the ones which have become more active in the last 100yrs - NOT! Br Cornelius
Comment icon #21 Posted by Wookietim 11 years ago
Is it just me or does this kind of thing not seem mildly over-complex? Really, all we need to do is change some of our behaviors : Use less fossil fuel, live closer to work, try to use transportation other than cars, eat less meat, and work to live within the environment rather than trying to bend the environment to our will (To name a few changes). I mean, not only would we make a positive impact on climate change if we did that, we would also end up with cleaner air and water, more resources to use, and healthier bodies...
Comment icon #22 Posted by javelin 11 years ago
These "scientists" ought to be tarred and feathered and thrown out on their butts. After Climate Gate we're supposed to pretend their either honest or competent? No way. They start fooling with mother nature and we're all screwed. They are insane. Out with these profiteering, liars and hypocrites - quick before they friggin wreck the world with their lamed brain mind on HOLD ideas! These professional nit wits are the reason the term, "mad scientist" exists.
Comment icon #23 Posted by odiesbsc 11 years ago
Is it just me or does this kind of thing not seem mildly over-complex? Really, all we need to do is change some of our behaviors : Use less fossil fuel, live closer to work, try to use transportation other than cars, eat less meat, and work to live within the environment rather than trying to bend the environment to our will (To name a few changes). I mean, not only would we make a positive impact on climate change if we did that, we would also end up with cleaner air and water, more resources to use, and healthier bodies... Eat less meat ??????????
Comment icon #24 Posted by Wookietim 11 years ago
Eat less meat ?????????? Cows are not only a major source of CO2, they also require a lot of resources to raise... and red meat is not the best way to get nutrients (Meat is tasty, don't get me wrong and there is no reason not to include some in a persons diet, but Americans eat way too much of it to be healthy).
Comment icon #25 Posted by Br Cornelius 11 years ago
Cows are not only a major source of CO2, they also require a lot of resources to raise... and red meat is not the best way to get nutrients (Meat is tasty, don't get me wrong and there is no reason not to include some in a persons diet, but Americans eat way too much of it to be healthy). As a vegetarian of 20yrs I tend to think that a natural and sustainable diet has somewhat less than 10% meat. There are marginal lands which are only good for raising stock. However it is just plain crazy to set aside vast areas of prime arable land to produce beans and grains for raising meat. This represent... [More]
Comment icon #26 Posted by Wookietim 11 years ago
As a vegetarian of 20yrs I tend to think that a natural and sustainable diet has somewhat less than 10% meat. There are marginal lands which are only good for raising stock. However it is just plain crazy to set aside vast areas of prime arable land to produce beans and grains for raising meat. This represents a 1:10 loss of food value in the animal stage which means the same land can support only 1/10th of the human population - just plain crazy. Use stock land where only stock will grow. Br Cornelius Well, like I said - a little meat is perfectly reasonable (Not everyone can be a vegan... I ... [More]
Comment icon #27 Posted by Br Cornelius 11 years ago
Well, like I said - a little meat is perfectly reasonable (Not everyone can be a vegan... I tried and couldn't do it anymore than I could have given up drinking my morning mocha...). But we really do eat a bit too much for our own good and it's neither good for the environment or our digestive tract (Not to mention the wallet). Which brings me to the other point of trying to live with the environment... if a person lives closer to the things they need (work, shopping, etc...), then they can walk or bicycle to those things. That is good for the air, the climate, the water as well as making a pe... [More]
Comment icon #28 Posted by Pax Unum 11 years ago
Well if the U.N. is doing it, theres nothing to worry about... Right?... They couldn't possibly mess this up...


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


Recent news and articles