Adam Wears
![Of course, the fact that it's a human writing this means robots will never replace wri[SYNTAX ERROR]](https://s3.crackedcdn.com/phpimages/article/2/8/1/689281_v3.jpg)
But wait! Didn't some scientists recently suggest that we could stop global warming by dimming the sun? That sounds ... extremely stupid, but let's give it the benefit of the doubt! The heating system in our home has a thermostat, which means (according to the laws of transitive property) that our home planet must have a thermostat too. Why didn't we think of this sooner?
Possibly because it is stupid baby logic that has no basis in reality.
indy100If that doesn't work, the next step is to set the sun to black light mode. That won't solve anything, but at least climate change will look rad as fuck.
These headlines were in response to a paper by Wake Smith and Gernot Wagner in Environmental Research Letters, which examined the capabilities and costs of solar geoengineering -- basically, the idea that dumping a shitload of particles into the upper atmosphere would deflect enough sunlight to stave off Armageddon for a little bit longer. It's a concept that scientists have been kicking around since the 1970s, so Smith and Wagner weren't exactly off their meds by covering it.
If they'd read the paper, however, the media might have seen that while solar geoengineering is theoretically possible, implementing any such plan would require us to disperse those particles 4,000 times a year ... using an aircraft which, as of writing, doesn't exist ... for a total cost of $2.25 billion a year ... over the next 15 years. It's theoretically possible, yes, but so is our revolutionary theory that we could stop global warming by plugging every smokestack in the world with a comedically large banana.
