Bright sparks: readers are appalled to learn that Harvard scientists will attempt to replicate the climate-cooling effect of volcanic eruptions during the 2019 Strospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment – a controversial attempt to dim the sun.
“This can’t be allowed! This is the worst idea I have ever heard,” protested Buddyruff777.
Spadestick agreed: “Damn you scientists for messing with nature – haven’t you guys done enough damage to the earth? Cane toads, killer bees, genetically modified mosquitoes, nuclear winters…”
“News like this is put out to ease people into accepting what the government has already been doing for years. It’s called chemtrailing. But you were called a conspiracy theorist if you spoke about it,” suggested Mark Langford.
Jason was particularly angry: “They should be charged with assault against everyone they spray this crap over, along with environmental terrorism.”
This reader wasn’t keen on the experiment, but was on something else:
Have scientists gone too far this time? Join the discussion ›
Cold front: as a reminder of the impact of climate change on the environment, Olafur Eliasson has placed 30 blocks of glacial ice in public spaces across London. The temporary installation, called Ice Watch, has divided commenters.
“What a pointless contribution to global warming. Heart sinking” said Geoff Dale in dismay.
James Beckett shared the sentiment: “How much embodied energy was used to create this installation? How about we leave the ice where it’s supposed to be.”
Not everyone was upset though, including John Curran: “I was quite floored when I discovered the work on an evening walk. It is both emotionally and intellectually engaging. If you have not actually seen it in person, you will not have understood it. It is magical to see people interact with it.”
“I quite like it” agreed Tko. “The impact of being able to see something slowly die and disappear in front of your eyes will leave a huge impression on those who view it.”
This reader also believes the installation will leave a lasting impression:
Do you think Ice Watch will melt from memory ? Join the discussion ›
Home comforts: readers think that House and Studio Lambeth, a new building that architecture office Carmody Groarke slotted into the shell of a Victorian warehouse in London, is lacking the “homely” feel.
“This may be a house but will never be a home,” commented Miles Teg.
“Brilliantly detailed joyless austerity,” elaborated Alex. “Is this where architecture is heading?”
Sir John V replied: “It’s already gone up there, up an architect’s in-situ concrete backside, out of which falls bricks.”
“Whoever thought the bedside table was a good idea (my head is hurting from hitting it) they stopped short of minimalism,” added Oli.
However one reader thought very highly of the project:
Would you want to live here? Join the discussion ›
Job half done: Shepherd Design Studio has redesigned the traditional Islamic prayer mat. By reducing the volume of material used, the Saudi Arabian office aimed to make the product more sustainable. But not all readers agree it actually is.
“Is this a joke?” asked Quinoa.
HeywoodFloyd went on: “I might accept a student being ignorant of subtracted material being included with the total material used, but a professional should know better. What a joke.”
“Does creating a lot of useless off-cuts really make it more sustainable? Particularly given that the thin connecting strips which remain don’t look like they will stand up to much wear and tear?” asked PhilipP.
James Calbraith had different concerns: “This looks like it will tear easily.”
One reader was much more forgiving though:
What do you think of the reinterpretation? Join the discussion ›