Once More From the Peanut Gallery

You know, this whole man made global warming thing is starting to give all of pseudoscience a bad name. Second hand smoke is starting to get embarrassed.

Despite a whole slew of climate change activist scientists jumping ship, lack of hurricanes and a decade long cooling pattern turning this year into the year without a summer in many places, we still have to deal with all these Al Gore, doomsday weather alarmists and their so called "solutions" to the "crisis".

So, here we go. The next great idea, the amazing Cloud Ship! As seen on Drudge! All we need is Billy Mays to pitch it and we've got something.

(To read the full story go to the Telegraph or to Drudge.)

This massive waste of time and energy resembles a star trek battle cruiser with three smoke stacks coming out of the top. These abominations would of course be wind powered because that technology is so reliable. The ships would suck up the seawater and shoot it out of the smokestacks in fine droplets creating large white clouds that would theoretically reflect the sunlight back from the fire pit of damnation from whence it came. The boats will be satellite controlled and unmanned.

It would cost $9 billion and 25 years to test the boats. This is seen as a steal compared to other ideas such as shooting mirrors into the atmosphere to reflect the light at a cost of $395 trillion. A bargain indeed.

Even forgetting for the moment that global warming isn't man made, I have a couple of issues with this plan.

The first is the idea of sucking up ocean water to spray it into the air. It seems to me that to have any effect on sunlight there would have to be quite a few of these ships shooting up quite a bit of seawater. How exactly is the precious oceanic ecosystem going to respond to that kind of treatment? I doubt the precious plankton will find it very enjoyable and numerous other habitats could be disturbed greatly.

Secondly, how does shooting up tons of salt water impact the weather cycle? Assuming it does in fact create heavy cloud cover, it seems that all that extra moisture in the atmosphere could cause drastic change in the weather. Many places in society rely on a predictable pattern of rain and drought to properly manage their lives through agriculture, etc. Will all the extra clouds create more rain? Change the patterns or create hard, more dangerous storms? Maybe New Orleans won't be buried by a hurricane but rather by a massive increase in thunderstorms.

Third, i will once again point out the incredible arrogance of trying to dictate the climate. All of the discussion revolves around the premise that humans can accurately determine what the optimal climate is. The assumption seems to be that the current (recent history) climate is the perfect climate for the continuation of society. There is no possible way to know that. Trying to freeze the weather in time is just a self centered attempt to prevent people from having to adapt to the naturally changing climate as we've done since the beginning of time.

My final complaint is the time frame. 25 years to test and implement. This is a common tactic amongst climate alarmists. Because they know that most of their predictions will be proven false (some will be correct through sheer chance), they extend the time frame so that people will forget that they made them in the first place. Nobody wants to make a prediction for only 10 years out and then look foolish. Yes, I'm talking to you Ted Danson. We still have oceans. By creating an infinite timeline, they can never be said to be completely wrong and they can just keep dragging this myth out forever until the sun finally burns out of its own accord. When such a thing happens, the Al Gore of the future will no doubt look to the heavens and with his last frozen breath scream to the heavens:

"I feel validated!"

The rest of us will just feel relief.