Global Warming Solution: Change Colour of Sky
- Thread starter Sharwood
- Start date
I don't see that being an issue. A lot of animals wouldn't even be able to distinguish the difference as they don't have blue cones.
It's been surmised the sun will heat the Earth by about 3 degrees c in the next million years or so anyway. We're going to have some fun times trying to figure out how to survive mass extinction without exacerbating the problem ourselves. I doubt changing the sky colour is going to seriously tried but what do I know? Those wacky space mirror things sound more plausible atm.
Two points I took from the report, how exactly does he know the current CO2 levels are enough to cause catastrophe? That's not something even the boldest scientists will claim, probably a bit of scaremongering I think?
As for planting undergrowth I was reading an article today that said that all around the Sahara, people were planting trees again to stop the winds and sand storms that devastated crops in the past. Funnily enough back in the day before Europe moved in it was punishable by having your hand cut off to chop down certain trees in the area of the Sahara, and it was only when westerners came in that they began the deforestation process in earnest. We're quite dumb sometimes.
Two points I took from the report, how exactly does he know the current CO2 levels are enough to cause catastrophe? That's not something even the boldest scientists will claim, probably a bit of scaremongering I think?
As for planting undergrowth I was reading an article today that said that all around the Sahara, people were planting trees again to stop the winds and sand storms that devastated crops in the past. Funnily enough back in the day before Europe moved in it was punishable by having your hand cut off to chop down certain trees in the area of the Sahara, and it was only when westerners came in that they began the deforestation process in earnest. We're quite dumb sometimes.
They almost all have blue cones. Blue cones are evolutionarily ancient. What most animals don't have is a difference between their red and green cones (i.e., there's only one cone type where we have two cone types).
In fact, some mammals (the mouse for sure) has evolved their blue cones such that they seem to be 'prepared' to get more blue light from the sky than from the ground (excess light damages the cones and there need to be repair mechanisms: these repair mechanisms are only present in the portions of the retina that are commonly exposed to the sky).
Anyway, I don't really like this idea much, because it will cause "sky wars". If one country is benefited from a cooler clime, they'll over produce sulphates. Another country benefited by warmer clime will then over produce CO2. Yuck.
Hmmm, I thought it was most mammels had red AND green or blue?
We all have blue, and the blue is diffuse through the retina. The middle of the retina have "M-opsins", which are usually homogeneous. Some primates have a diversity in their M-opsins allowing red and green to be in the same retina.
Our blue cones tend to be how we tell how 'bright' something is, our red-green is how we tend to tell colours apart.
Our blue cones tend to be how we tell how 'bright' something is, our red-green is how we tend to tell colours apart.
Our eyes are most keenly able to perceive light in the green area of the spectrum, a mix of blue and yellow. Hardly surprising really given our history and the planet Earth, well before we got rid of a lot of green. Might explain why we find natural scenes more awe inspiring than grey drab skylines filled with sky scrapers? Don't know speculating.
BasketCase
Username sez it all
This solution strikes me as a BAD idea.
Most plants are known to be partial to specific frequencies of light. There's a reason their leaves are green--the light that bounces back to you gives you a good idea of which frequencies didn't get absorbed.
The frequency spread the plants receive needs to remain approximately the same.
Most plants are known to be partial to specific frequencies of light. There's a reason their leaves are green--the light that bounces back to you gives you a good idea of which frequencies didn't get absorbed.
The frequency spread the plants receive needs to remain approximately the same.
cubsfan6506
Got u
This is by far the worst Idea I've ever heard. Revoke his Australian of the year award, Revoke I say. But seriously this would probaly wipe out most ecosystems.
cubsfan6506
Got u
This is by far the worst Idea I've ever heard. Revoke his Australian of the year award, Revoke I say. But seriously this would probaly wipe out most ecosystems.
lutzj
The Last Thing You See
You must mean k3w1
Berzerker
Deity
and this guy got some awards for his "environmentalism"?
CaptainF
The Professional Poster
If Global Warming advocates cared about the perception of their cause, they'd sack this guy.
Grimz101
King
I vote that we all move to one side of the world, and then jump all at the same time!!
Apparently it will move the world half the radius of an hydrogen atom!
Apparently it will move the world half the radius of an hydrogen atom!
Thorbal
not enough ram!
Great! 7 billion people jumping merrily under a purple/yellow with pink dots/... sky! Count me in
! Perhaps we could apply different colours to the sulphur every few months to change the colour of the sky according to the latest fashion.. woooooo technology!Edit: hey... wait... if we jump often enough then, we could alter the Earth´s orbit so we would be farther away from the sun, reducing incoming radiation and solving climate change!!!11
Similar threads
