Not clicking Gizmodo, but if this refers to the sulfur dioxide aerosol strategy, it really is not a terrible field dressing for an otherwise mortally wounded climate and shouldn’t be dismissed just because some billionaire talks about it.
First it is not a billionaire plot. Scientists have driven the research for decades now. Global warming causes further global warming, a runaway cycle that worsens exponentially over time.
So yes this strategy is a bandaid, and not meant as a permanent solution, but the fact that it can flexibly and reversibly halt the otherwise runaway cycle — buying us time for recapture and reversal with less permanent ecological damage — shouldn’t be dismissed simply because a billionaire tries to attach their name to it.
You're not wrong, but to be fair have you ever managed to persuade a billion odd people to have less for the betterment or the other 7 billion and themselves?