If we can't figure out even how to do research on geoengineering without "catastrophically destabilizing our atmosphere", we have no business whatsoever thinking that we have the foggiest idea whether global warming even has anything to do with CO2.

It's the same physics. (And biology, for the most part, if it's biogeoengineering.) The proposal was to research it, in case we run out of other options.

I'm not really in the mood to engage with radical anti-scientific outlooks. I probably ought to be, as it is the responsibility of those who have knowledge to share it with those who don't and might be persuaded to learn because it's fascinating and important.

But I'm going to mostly abscond from my duty this time and simply tell anyone who happens to be reading: check out the IPCC AR6 WG1 (Climate Change 2021: the Physical Science Basis) and consider, if they know what they're talking about at all, how could it possibly be the case that research into trying to intentionally counteract some of the effects could have such drastically unintended consequences? (See IPCC AR6 WG1: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/, with special attention to Chapter 6, as those physical processes present some of the more plausible mechanisms by which to intervene transiently in the Earth's energy balance.)