I can read fine. You can't write. Your messages so far have been full of spelling errors, are hard to understand, and you can't even quote properly. Come on now.

You act like I should know all about this Carter person, when they were in power long before I was born, in a country I don't even live in. It's daft. Most people on this site either wouldn't have been born or would have been small when Carter was talking about this stuff. That happened in the 1970s. If it isn't absolutely clear using renewables for everything in the 1970s wouldn't have been practical. Nuclear would have been great, but it's mainly environmentalists that put a stop to that, as they keep trying to do now. It seems most environmentalists and climate activists even now don't want nuclear, even though it's the obvious choice for certain applications like data centers and AI. The most staunch anti-nuclear people have always been environmentalists. Nuclear also wouldn't have solved any of the problems caused by cars. It doesn't even work without large grid storage or demand management, at least not using the reactor technology available back then. Those are things we are only just figuring out now for goodness sake. It could have at least replaced coal for baseload power, which is much better than nothing.

You can't say in one breath that the planet is already doomed, and in the next say we should make major changes. It's a contradiction. If people believe we are really doomed they aren't even going to try. This should be relatively straight forward to understand. So if you want people to make a change then stop saying we are already dead.

And that's been the statement people make every time for the last 15 years. But at a certain point there is only people that accept it and people who will never do so until they die.

Small scale tests have to be done slowly over time, and it's best to do that now at the very least so we have a good grasp of what won't work at scale so we didn't chase means that are less practical.

But the real point is that very few people commenting actually read the article. This was about marine cloud brightening, where they're only making clouds slightly brighter. It's the least offensive option possible that is technically a thing that everybody likes more anyway. People act like mr burns blocking the sun.

The only one that has any real risk is the iron fertilization concept because changing the limited ingredient in an ecosystem could possibly have an effect on the system.