Sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction, it's why you must research. In this case the truth may well be that humans have an easier time making the sun shine less rather than lowering our carbon footprint.
> Such a group of sunshades would need to occupy an area of about 3.8 million square kilometers if placed at the L1 point. The deployment of the flyers is an issue that requires new technology. Large railguns or coilguns are proposed to fire a capsule containing a million shades into space every 5 minutes for 10 years using 20 separate launch sites.
This is science fiction.
That said, if scientists believe that all they lack is money, who are you to tell them otherwise.
(Not space lenses, but another risky, poorly-understood geo-engineering proposal)
That system is essentially a modern re-implementation of GPS, a known, proven technology.
To suggest that this untested, unproven, highly speculative solar shade project would cost the same is laughable to me. You're also totally discounting the unintended consequences and second-order effects of trying to engineer the climate.
This if anything proves my point, nothing seems insane about launching a lens into space. We have satellites now, this is essentially one with a lens.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(satellite_navigation)...
I'm not discounting anything, just assuming scientists and engineers involved have done their job.