this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2025
46 points (97.9% liked)

Global News

4726 readers
397 users here now

What is global news?

Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.


Post guidelines

Title formatPost title should mirror the news source title.
URL formatPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Country prefixCountry prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) where title is not clear enough from which country the news is coming from.


Rules

This community is moderated in accordance with the principles outlined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which emphasizes the right to freedom of opinion and expression. In addition to this foundational principle, we have some additional rules to ensure a respectful and constructive environment for all users.

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media postsAvoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

Icon generated via LLM model | Banner attribution


If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Hundreds of documents show how researchers failed to notify officials in California about a test of technology to block the sun’s rays — while they planned a much huger sequel. 

Archived version: https://archive.is/20250728172625/https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/27/california-sunlight-dimming-experiment-collapse-00476983


Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 30 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Honestly, we need to get over ourselves when it comes to sunlight modification. The fact that people are hand wringing about small trial projects that are just meant to investigate the concept is peak luddite thinking.

Do we need to be careful with the secondary effects? Yes. That's why we start with pilot projects, see how they go, and work our way up. Is a termination shock a possibility? Yes, but who cares? The alternative is we just stew in the high temps all day every day.

I get the opposition to the technology, but ultimately it comes from a place of hubris and pride. People just don't want to admit we've fucked things up so badly that now we need to resort to something as desperate as solar modification.

Well I'm sorry, but we're out of time. We're sitting here whining about possible side effects of this, when the consequences of not doing it are potentially biosphere-collapsing. Yes, I wish we had gone all in on renewables starting in 1980, but we don't live on that timeline. It takes a long time to change the course of a ship the size of an industrial civilization, and there has been immense political headwinds. Hang all the oil execs if you want, that won't change the fact that at this point, we have no reasonable path to avoiding the deaths of hundreds of millions of people and the collapse of entire biomes if we don't do solar modification. We're sitting here congratulating ourselves on not playing God as we watch as the Amazon rain forest burns down as a consequence of our own actions.

We need this technology. Yes, it sucks that we have to resort to it. But we are out of time. Right now, we are realistically looking at losing between 2-10% of the total human population by 2050 due to climate induced heat stroke and famine. Right now, the permafrost at the polls and the Greenland ice sheet are rapidly collapsing. Positive feedback loops are kicking in that mean that even if we cut off all emissions tomorrow, the temperature will still continue to snowball. This is a runaway train at this point. And the only hope we have of slowing it down is solar modification.

But people would rather keep their hands clean, refuse to "play God," and do nothing as the world burns.

[–] shani66@ani.social 2 points 2 weeks ago

Luddites really need to fuck off in general. They are just worthless cowards that don't want to see humanity succeed.

[–] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

It's literally our only option to buy us time to sequester carbon. I don't agree with aerosol or particle based shields that aren't easily removed, but a metal or solid shield in space locked between the sun and earth to deflect a % of the rays is totally doable and needed. I personally think a partially living shield made of 3D printed vulture head skin would work well but it is quite gruesome, so a bunch of metal is probably more likely than that.

[–] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I would think the aerosol or particle based shields would be even easier to remove than something up in orbit. The stuff in orbit will need to be pretty high up if you don't want it to immediately decay and reenter, so anything in orbit will remain that way for some time. Plus there's Kessler to worry about. But sulfurs and other aerosols wash out of the atmosphere pretty quickly. That's the whole reason people talk about termination shocks, and fret that we'll have to keep the aerosol effort continuously going. To me this seems like a virtue. If at any time we decide we don't like the effects, we can simply stop. There's no long term commitment.

[–] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

What I'm proposing is something like the start of the technology of a dyson sphere tbh, it would be further out into space and ideally only maintained by machine, no humans. If it has issues, the panels can be turned perpendicular to the direction of energy coming from the sun to let in more sun, or fuck, we could just set bombs on it and later remote detonate it if it's truly a concern.

I think the impact of spreading a bunch of sulfur or other particulates in the air is just a bad idea in terms of health for everyone (a major component of smog/pollution is sulfur, and we know sulfur works bc during covid, less ships running meant less sulfur and heating accelerated) and having a large blanket or shield in space would be less risky in that aspect but yes, more technically challenging. However, Beijing, MIT, Stanford, Japan, and Germany etc should be able to figure it out easily - they pretty much already made a cure for HIV and rabies together and permanently altered warfare w invention of drones and AI.