Alan's point, I believe, is that the geoengineering "group" is a listserv, not an organization. Hence a call for a manifesto should make clear that any such document would not be issued on behalf of the geoengineerin "group" but rather on behalf of those who sign it. References to the geoengineering "group" would only confuse matters. David
----- Original Message ----- From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com <geoengineering@googlegroups.com> To: Alan Robock <rob...@envsci.rutgers.edu> Cc: Geoengineering <geoengineering@googlegroups.com> Sent: Wed Sep 23 04:39:36 2009 Subject: [geo] Re: Manifesto for Geoengineering Dear Alan, I don't think it's so ridiculous. There is a lot of agreement about the seriousness of the situation, and that just reducing emissions is not the whole solution. Kind regards, John Alan Robock wrote: > Dear John, > > Don't be ridiculous. There is no consensus among readers of this > group. A few of you are completely gung ho, with no interest in > evaluating the risks as well as the benefits of any policy > recommendation, but that does not represent the views of very many. > > Of course, you are free to write any sort of "manifesto" that you > want, but don't claim that it represents a consensus of more than the > individuals that end up signing it. > > Alan > > Alan Robock, Professor II > Director, Meteorology Undergraduate Program > Associate Director, Center for Environmental Prediction > Department of Environmental Sciences Phone: +1-732-932-9800 x6222 > Rutgers University Fax: +1-732-932-8644 > 14 College Farm Road E-mail: rob...@envsci.rutgers.edu > New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551 USA http://envsci.rutgers.edu/~robock > > > On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, John Nissen wrote: > >> >> >> Hi everybody, >> >> I have been subscribed to this group for well over a year, and have seen >> a great deal of valuable information produced. I have seen discussions >> and consensus reached. We have a great deal of expertise among us. But >> I fear much of our understanding of how to tackle the global environment >> crisis is being lost in the blogosphere. >> >> So I propose that we, as a geoengineering group, should work together to >> produce a manifesto for geoengineering. This would: describe the state >> of the Earth's climate system, identify critical risks, put the case for >> geoengineering, consider how side-effects can be avoided or minimised, >> and suggest when is the best time for geoengineering action. Otherwise >> we will finding ourselves saying the same things again and again over >> the coming months and years. And we need a reasonably solid position >> statement on which to peg further developments of ideas, which may be >> more speculative. >> >> A manifesto would allow particular members to contribute their >> particular expertise, and have it scrutinised by others from different >> viewpoints. >> >> I would be will to help in preparing such a manifesto, which would be an >> open document, but subject to editing control, perhaps on the lines of >> wikipedia. (Andrew might advise on this, with his wikipedia >> experience.) However it should be open to the latest thinking (and it >> would not be sensored in the way that sometimes happens on wikipedia re >> geoengineering). >> >> Cheers, >> >> John >> >> >> >> >> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
