Former Microsoft Tech Officer Suggests Crackpot Terraform Idea to Save the Planet

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
December 22, 2009

Nathan Myhrvold has an idea he says will save us from the theory of global warming. Myhrvold, a former technology officer for Microsoft, wants to run a hose tethered by balloons up into the stratosphere and pump out sulfur particles to block the sun. Mr. Myhrvold says his scheme will not kick off another ice age. It will only cost about two hundred and fifty million dollars and will not require a global tax or world government.

Sulfur occurs naturally in the environment, Mr. Myhrvold points out, so his balloon and hose scheme would not endanger the environment. The amount he estimates is needed to to do the job is relatively small — less than 1 percent of the sulfur already in the atmosphere.

Mr. Myhrvold’s had another terraforming idea a while back. He said we could prevent hurricanes through a system that would literally mix up the water in the Gulf of Mexico and other areas vulnerable to tropical storms.

“Look, I’d prefer not to do it,” Myhrvold told TechFlash in October. “I’d prefer we weren’t in this pickle, but we seem to be, and our political and diplomatic efforts to get out of the problem so far aren’t getting any traction.”

Earlier this year the Obama administration proposed “shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays,” an idea proposed by the Council On Foreign Relations. Obama’s so-called science adviser (and unabashed eugenicist) John P. Holdren said he is in favor of an “artificial volcano” that would pump sulfur into the atmosphere and block the sun. Despite Holdren’s admission that such measures could have “grave side effects,” he added “we might get desperate enough to want to use it.”

The CFR admits such crackpot ideas are merely a pretext to establish a global carbon tax and ultimately world government. “A CFR geo-engineering meeting summary document from 1999 (PDF pages 12,13,14) also categorically states that the ultimate goal under ‘A technology strategy for global warming’ is the implementation of a global Carbon Tax,” writes Steve Watson. “The memo also pedantically explains how the perceived fear of global warming can be used to sell to Americans what is essentially a tax on air.”

From the CFR document:

While taxing tea pales in comparison to taxing air as a perceived government affront, the clear benefits of a taxation policy to combat global warming might convince even the descendents of our tax-resistant Founding Fathers.

In fact, many “descendents of our tax-resistant Founding Fathers” are up in arms over the CRU revelations and the threat to shut down economies, bankrupt nations, and exacerbate the problems of the third world by implementing draconian policies in the name of global warming. Leaders of third world nations were outraged and walked out of the Copenhagen summit earlier this month when a draft agreement was leaked revealing how “rich nations” (or the elite in control of these nations) planned to use the climate change ruse of consolidate power and sideline the United Nations. The so-called “Danish text” spelled out a scheme to further empower the World Bank and the IMF.

The crackpot theories of Nathan Myhrvold and others associated with Holdren are merely a circus sideshow attraction designed to sell the idea of a worldwide totalitarian government implementing radical social and scientific theories.

Excluded from the Copenhagen Agenda: Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD) and Climate Change

The manipulation of climate for military use

by Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, December 5, 2009

The term "environmental modification techniques" refers to any technique for changing - through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes - the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space. (Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, United Nations, Geneva: 18 May 1977)

"Environmental warfare is defined as the intentional modification or manipulation of the natural ecology, such as climate and weather, earth systems such as the ionosphere, magnetosphere, tectonic plate system, and/or the triggering of seismic events (earthquakes) to cause intentional physical, economic, and psycho-social, and physical destruction to an intended target geophysical or population location, as part of strategic or tactical war." (Eco News)

"[Weather modification] offers the war fighter a wide range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary... Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally… It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog and storms on earth or to modify space weather… and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of [military] technologies." (US Air Force document AF 2025 Final Report)

World leaders are meeting in Copenhagen in December 2009 with a view to reaching an agreement on Global Warming. The debate on Climate Change focuses on the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions and measures to reduce manmade CO2 emissions under the Kyoto Protocol.

The underlying consensus is that greenhouse gas emissions constitute the sole cause of climate instability. Neither the governments nor the environmental action groups, have raised the issue of "weather warfare" or "environmental modification techniques (ENMOD)." for military use. Despite a vast body of scientific knowledge, the issue of climatic manipulations for military use has been excluded from the UN agenda on climate change.

John von Neumann noted at the height of the Cold War (1955), with tremendous foresight that:

"Intervention in atmospheric and climatic matters ....will unfold on a scale difficult to imagine at present... [T]his will merge each nation’s affairs with those of every other, more thoroughly than the threat of a nuclear or any other war would have done." (Quoted in Spencer Weart, Environmental Warfare: Climate Modification Schemes, Global Research, December 5, 20090

In 1977, an international Convention was ratified by the UN General Assembly which banned "military or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects." (AP, 18 May 1977). Both the US and the Soviet Union were signatories to the Convention.

Guided by the interest of consolidating peace, ... and of saving mankind from the danger of using new means of warfare, (...) Recognizing that military ... use of such [environmental modification techniques] could have effects extremely harmful to human welfare, Desiring to prohibit effectively military ... use of environmental modification techniques in order to eliminate the dangers to mankind. ... and affirming their willingness to work towards the achievement of this objective, (...) Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military ... use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party. (Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, United Nations, Geneva, May 18, 1977. Entered into force: 5 October 1978, see full text of Convention in Annex)

The Convention defined "'environmental modification techniques' as referring to any technique for changing--through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes--the dynamics, composition or structure of the earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere or of outer space." (Environmental Modification Ban Faithfully Observed, States Parties Declare, UN Chronicle, July, 1984, Vol. 21, p. 27)

The substance of the 1977 Convention was reasserted in very general terms in the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) signed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro:

"States have... in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the (...) responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction." (UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, New York, 1992)

Following the 1992 Earth Summit, the issue of Climate Change for military use was never raised in subsequent climate change summits and venues under the auspices of the UNFCCC. The issue was erased, forgotten. It is not part of the debate on climate change.

In February 1998, however, the European Parliament's Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy held public hearings in Brussels on the U.S based weather warfare facility developed under the HAARP program.

The Committee's "Motion for Resolution" submitted to the European Parliament:

"Considers HAARP.[The High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program based in Alaska].. by virtue of its far-reaching impact on the environment to be a global concern and calls for its legal, ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an international independent body...; [the Committee] regrets the repeated refusal of the United States Administration... to give evidence to the public hearing ...into the environmental and public risks [of] the HAARP program." (European Parliament, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy, Brussels, doc. no. A4-0005/99, 14 January 1999).

The Committee's request to draw up a "Green Paper" on "the environmental impacts of military activities", however, was casually dismissed on the grounds that the European Commission lacked the required jurisdiction to delve into "the links between environment and defense". Brussels was anxious to avoid a showdown with Washington. (see European Report, 3 February 1999).

In 2007, The Daily Express reported --following the release and declassification of British government papers from the National Archives-- that:

"The [declassified] documents reveal that both the US, which led the field, and the Soviet Union had secret military programmes with the goal of controlling the world's climate. "By the year 2025 the United States will own the weather, " one scientist is said to have boasted.

...

These claims are dismissed by sceptics as wild conspiracy theories and the stuff of James Bond movies but there is growing evidence that the boundaries between science fiction and fact are becoming increasingly blurred. The Americans now admit that they invested L12million over five years during the Vietnam war on "cloud seeding" - deliberately creating heavy rainfall to wash away enemy crops and destroy supply routes on the Ho Chi Minh trail, in an operation codenamed Project Popeye.

It is claimed that rainfall was increased by a third in targeted areas, making the weather-manipulation weapon a success. At the time, government officials said the region was prone to heavy rain. (Weather War?, Daily Express, July 16, 2007)

The possibility of climatic or environmental manipulations as part of a military agenda, while formally acknowledged by official government documents and the US military, has never been considered relevant to the Climate debate. Military analysts are mute on the subject. Meteorologists are not investigating the matter, and environmentalists are strung on global warming and the Kyoto protocol.

The HAARP Program

The High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) based in Gokona, Alaska, has been in existence since 1992. It is part of a new generation of sophisticated weaponry under the US Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Operated by the Air Force Research Laboratory's Space Vehicles Directorate, HAARP constitutes a system of powerful antennas capable of creating "controlled local modifications of the ionosphere" [upper layer of the atmosphere]:

HAARP has been presented to public opinion as a program of scientific and academic research. US military documents seem to suggest, however, that HAARP's main objective is to "exploit the ionosphere for Department of Defense purposes." (See Michel Chossudovsky, The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: "Owning the Weather" for Military Use, Global Research, September 27, 2004

Without explicitly referring to the HAARP program, a US Air Force study points to the use of "induced ionospheric modifications" as a means of altering weather patterns as well as disrupting enemy communications and radar. (Ibid)

HAARP also has the ability of triggering blackouts and disrupting the electricity power system of entire regions:

"Rosalie Bertell, president of the International Institute of Concern for Public Health, says HAARP operates as ‘a gigantic heater that can cause major disruptions in the ionosphere, creating not just holes, but long incisions in the protective layer that keeps deadly radiation from bombarding the planet’.

Physicist Dr Bernard Eastlund called it ‘the largest ionospheric heater ever built’. HAARP is presented by the US Air Force as a research programme, but military documents confirm its main objective is to ‘induce ionospheric modifications’ with a view to altering weather patterns and disrupting communications and radar.

According to a report by the Russian State Duma: ‘The US plans to carry out large-scale experiments under the HAARP programme [and] create weapons capable of breaking radio communication lines and equipment installed on spaceships and rockets, provoke serious accidents in electricity networks and in oil and gas pipelines, and have a negative impact on the mental health of entire regions.’

Weather manipulation is the pre-emptive weapon par excellence. It can be directed against enemy countries or ‘friendly nations’ without their knowledge, used to destabilise economies, ecosystems and agriculture. It can also trigger havoc in financial and commodity markets. The disruption in agriculture creates a greater dependency on food aid and imported grain staples from the US and other Western countries." (Michel Chossudovsky, Weather Warfare: Beware the US military’s experiments with climatic warfare, The Ecologist, December 2007)

An analysis of statements emanating from the US Air Force points to the unthinkable: the covert manipulation of weather patterns, communications systems and electric power as a weapon of global warfare, enabling the US to disrupt and dominate entire regions of the World. According to an official US Air force report

"Weather-modification offers the war fighter a wide-range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary... In the United States, weather-modification will likely become a part of national security policy with both domestic and international applications. Our government will pursue such a policy, depending on its interests, at various levels." (US Air Force, emphasis added. Air University of the US Air Force, AF 2025 Final Report, http://www.au.af.mil/au/2025/ emphasis added)

Copenhagen CO15

The manipulation of climate for military use is potentially a greater threat to humanity than CO2 emissions.

Why has it been excluded from the debate under COP15, when the UN 1977 Convention states quite explicitly that "military or any other hostile use of such techniques could have effects extremely harmful to human welfare"? (Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques United Nations, Geneva, 1977)

Why the camouflage?

Why are environmental modification techniques (ENMOD) not being debated by the civil society and environmentalist organizations under the auspices of the Alternative Forum KlimaForum09?

---

Related articles

Spencer Weart, Environmental Warfare: Climate Modification Schemes, Global Research, December 5, 2009

Weather War?, Daily Express, July 16, 2007

Michel Chossudovsky, Weather Warfare: Beware the US military’s experiments with climatic warfare, The Ecologist, December 2007

Michel Chossudovsky, The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: "Owning the Weather" for Military Use, Global Research, September 27, 2004

---

ANNEX

Adopted by Resolution 31/72 of the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1976. The Convention was opened for signature at Geneva on 18 May 1977.

Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques

The States Parties to this Convention, Guided by the interest of consolidating peace, and wishing to contribute to the cause of halting the arms race, and of bringing about general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control, and of saving mankind from the danger of using new means of warfare,

Determined to continue negotiations with a view to achieving effective progress towards further measures in the field of disarmament,

Recognizing that scientific and technical advances may open new possibilities with respect to modification of the environment,

Recalling the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, adopted at Stockholm on 16 June 1972,

Realizing that the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes could improve the interrelationship of man and nature and contribute to the preservation and improvement of the environment for the benefit of present and future generations,

Recognizing, however, that military or any other hostile use of such techniques could have effects extremely harmful to human welfare,

Desiring to prohibit effectively military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques in order to eliminate the dangers to mankind from such use, and affirming their willingness to work towards the achievement of this objective,

Desiring also to contribute to the strengthening of trust among nations and to the further improvement of the international situation in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,

Have agreed as follows:

Article I 1. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party.

2. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to assist, encourage or induce any State, group of States or international organization to engage in activities contrary to the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article.

Article II As used in article 1, the term "environmental modification techniques" refers to any technique for changing - through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes - the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space.

Article III 1. The provisions of this Convention shall not hinder the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes and shall be without prejudice to the generally recognized principles and applicable rules of international law concerning such use.

2. The States Parties to this Convention undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of scientific and technological information on the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes. States Parties in a position to do so shall contribute, alone or together with other States or international organizations, to international economic and scientific co-operation in the preservation, improvement and peaceful utilization of the environment, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.

Article IV Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to take any measures it considers necessary in accordance with its constitutional processes to prohibit and prevent any activity in violation of the provisions of the Convention anywhere under its jurisdiction or control.

Article V 1. The States Parties to this Convention undertake to consult one another and to co-operate in solving any problems which may arise in relation to the objectives of, or in the application of the provisions of, the Convention. Consultation and co-operation pursuant to this article may also be undertaken through appropriate international procedures within the framework of the United Nations and in accordance with its Charter. These international procedures may include the services of appropriate international organizations, as well as of a Consultative Committee of Experts as provided for in paragraph 2 of this article.

2. For the purposes set forth in paragraph 1 of this article, the Depositary shall within one month of the receipt of a request from any State Party to this Convention, convene a Consultative Committee of Experts. Any State Party may appoint an expert to the Committee whose functions and rules of procedure are set out in the annex which constitutes an integral part of this Convention. The Committee shall transmit to the Depositary a summary of its findings of fact, incorporating all views and information presented to the Committee during its proceedings. The Depositary shall distribute the summary to all States Parties.

3. Any State Party to this Convention which has reason to believe that any other State Party is acting in breach of obligations deriving from the provisions of the Convention may lodge a complaint with the Security Council of the United Nations. Such a complaint should include all relevant information as well as all possible evidence supporting ItS validity.

4. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to cooperate in carrying out any investigation which the Security Council may initiate, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, on the basis of the complaint received by the Council. The Security Council shall inform the States Parties of the results of the investigation.

5. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to provide or support assistance, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, to any State Party which so requests, if the Security Council decides that such Party has been harmed or is likely to be harmed as a result of violation of the Convention.

Article VI 1. Any State Party to this Convention may propose amendments to the Convention. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Depositary, who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties.

2. An amendment shall enter into force for all States Parties to this Convention which have accepted it, upon the deposit with the Depositary of instruments of acceptance by a majority of States Parties. Thereafter it shall enter into force for any remaining State Party on the date of deposit of its instrument of acceptance.

Article VII This Convention shall be of unlimited duration.

Article VIII 1. Five years after the entry into force of this Convention, a conference of the States Parties to the Convention shall be convened by the Depositary at Geneva, Switzerland. The conference shall review the operation of the Convention with a view to ensuring that its purposes and provisions are being realized, and shall in particular examine the effectiveness of the provisions of paragraph 1 of article I in eliminating the dangers of military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques.

2. At intervals of not less than five years thereafter, a majority of the States Parties to this Convention may obtain, by submitting a proposal to this effect to the Depositary, the convening of a conference with the same objectives.

3. If no conference has been convened pursuant to paragraph 2 of this article within ten years following the conclusion of a previous conference, the Depositary shall solicit the views of all States Parties to this Convention concerning the convening of such a conference. If one third or ten of the States Parties, whichever number is less, respond affirmatively, the Depositary shall take immediate steps to convene the conference.

Article IX 1. This Convention shall be open to all States for signature. Any State which does not sign the Convention before its entry into force in accordance with paragraph 3 of this article may accede to it at any time.

2. This Convention shall be subject to ratification by signatory States. Instruments of ratification or accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

3. This Convention shall enter into force upon the deposit of instruments of ratification by twenty Governments in accordance with paragraph 2 of this article.

4. For those States whose instruments of ratification or accession are deposited after the entry into force of this Convention, it shall enter into force on the date of the deposit of their instruments of ratification or accession.

5. The Depositary shall promptly inform all signatory and acceding States of the date of each signature, the date of deposit of each instrument of ratification or accession and the date of the entry into force of this Convention and of any amendments thereto, as well as of the receipt of other notices.

6. This Convention shall be registered by the Depositary in accordance with Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations.

Article X This Convention, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall send duly certified copies thereof to the Governments of the signatory and acceding States.

In witness whereof, the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto, have signed this Convention

Done at Geneva, on the 18 day of May 1977.

Annex to the Convention

Consultative Committee of Experts 1. The Consultative Committee of Experts shall undertake to make appropriate findings of fact and provide expert views relevant to any problem raised pursuant to paragraph 1 of article V of this Convention by the State Party requesting the convening of the Committee.

2. The work of the Consultative Committee of Experts shall be organized in such a way as to permit it to perform the functions set forth in paragraph 1 of this annex. The Committee shall decide procedural questions relative to the organization of its work, where possible by consensus, but otherwise by a majority of those present and voting. There shall be no voting on matters of substance.

3. The Depositary or his representative shall serve as the Chairman of the Committee.

4. Each expert may be assisted at meetings by one or more advisers.

5. Each expert shall have the right, through the Chairman, to request from States, and from international organizations, such information and assistance as the expert considers desirable for the accomplishment of the Committee's work.

Former Belgian Mayor Crusades Against Chemtrails

Chellow’s unarmed blog
July 25, 2009

First appeared in De Gentenaar, July 26, 2009.

“We are massively being poisoned and brainwashed” Former mayor Peter Vereecke (53) of Evergem wants the justice department and the city council to act against planes that are according to him spraying day and night disease causing germs and chemicals all over the world. ”Rest assured I am not insane”

	Peter Vereecke

“Don’t confuse this with contrails”, said Vereecke. “Those are harmless condensation trails that are only visible for a few seconds. On the other hand chemtrails are clouds of chemicals and disease causing germs that are deliberately sprayed on us to manipulate our behaviour. De councilmen and – women were stunned and listened to his every word. At last some other subject than a loose tile or a backed-up sewage pipe.

“I hope that the city council mobilizes all possible government ministries to fight this mental and physical attack. I have already filed two complaints with the local police, but they don’t to anything with it”, said Vereecke. Could it be that they had a good laugh with it?

The internet is full of conspiracy theories about chemtrails: the spray planes that are supposedly being used to conduct massive sterilisations in populated areas, for large vaccination campaigns and genetic manipulation of humans and plants, for the spread of epidemics, for the subjugation of populations, to manipulate weather and to combat climate change. Or a combination of the above.

“I find the theories all very interesting but I don’t choose a side” says alarmist Vereecke. "I’m only saying that the chemtrails have provable effects on our health en that they are being conducted by hidden power structures behind the veil of the official political world. Don’t make any illusions: what we see are merely puppets. Even Barack Obama is a puppet. De real powers are hidden under the lee."

Can you be more specific? Who are the people that are really pulling the strings?

Peter Vereecke: “Those are the co-called Illuminati, the enlightened ones. They are members of secret societies like the Bilderberg group, but are also active in business and global organisations like the United Nations and NATO. It’s not about one certain group but about a type of person with a certain DNA that is common in higher levels of power: people that do not care about the value of human life and are obsessed with power, money and control.

Names, give us a few names.

“Take Al Gore for example. He is member of the illuminati. His message about global warming only has one purpose: money. Because worldwide we will have to pay for the coming measures. That will result in higher taxes and higher food prices and environmental measures in business. That will result in a massive cash-flow. Meanwhile it is confirmed that human activity only accounts for 3% of the global warming.”

But what does Al Gore have to do with chemtrails?

“My point is this: all global processes revolve around money, power and control. De brains behind the chemtrails are at the top level of the pharmaceutical and chemical industries. 100 years ago for example, 1% of people got cancer. Today that number is one in three. Dat is very convenient for some people. The cancer cure industry is a billion dollar business. Just like the treatment of so many other diseases that are skyrocketing in the last 10-15 years. Alzheimer, Parkinson, autism, ADHD, asthma, diabetes, allergies,…we have never been so sick as now. Our physical, emotional and intellectual health is being systematically undermined. How do you explain that?”

Chemtrails?

“Voilà. They certainly play a role in this because the spray planes are being used more intensively the last few years. You can observe the phenomenon in our country at least 10 days per month. Why don’t you see these chemtrails above the Sahara of the Amazon? Spraying chemicals over there would be useless as there are no people living there. Our whole environment is chemicalized: our food, healthcare, everything is based on chemistry.”

No one takes action…

“Because our thinking processes are being conditioned. Look at the eyes of the people in the street, they are medicated and walk around like zombies. A dull look without "joie de vivre" and without an outlook on life. Hence my crusade: people wake up, open you eyes, act before it is too late…”

“I will call the current mayor to hear what he is going to do with my message. I want him to make clear to the higher bodies that people are concerned. The Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of the Interior, the Department of Health, the Ministry of the Environment… they need to be told about these concerns and our outrage. I don’t want this to be covered up.

[…]

I can imagine people calling you insane: “Mister Vereecke has seen the light”

“Not to my face. And probably also not behind my back because I have solid curriculum and a strong image. Most people remember me as philologist, mayor and business man. Not as a dreamer or crazy person but as a sober, critical and level-headed person that is looking for answers.

Just to confirm: you are not being treated psychologically at the moment.

(laughs hard) “No I feel mentally and physically fit. But I must admit if I were currently in the city council and someone would start talking about white lines in the sky, I would ask if that person Peter Vereecke is all there.

Precipitation Enhancement: Active Weather Modification Campaigns

Treaty Issues: “Local, non-permanent changes, such as precipitation enhancement, hail suppression , fog and cloud dispersal, are permitted under the U. N. treaty.”

Robert Allison
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, May 12, 2009

New revelations have shed more light on weather modification programs, also referred to as geo-engineering, commonly called chem-trails. The “new” terminology, ‘Precipitation Enhancement‘, has revealed government and governmental contractors have been dispersing chemicals into the atmosphere on a regular basis for decades, dating back to the 1950’s. This article is an attempt to remove the conspiracy theory label that has been attached to very real man-made phenomenon of weather modification.

Precipitation Enhancement programs are ongoing in Texas, California, Australia, China, Iran, and many other locations worldwide. The following programs are documented, and the websites below list the flight missions over Central and South Texas:

There are currently at least 10 precipitation programs underway in Texas, covering more than 50 million acres, under the Edwards Aquifer Authority since 1999. California has cloud seeding programs underway under the authority of Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E).

Water management is the supposed justification for many of these programs, but upon further investigation, flash flooding and severe thunderstorms are typical results. This link takes you to a summary of some of the missions over South and Central Texas, and if you open the first twoDaily Reports (PDFs), flash floods, and severe storms the precipitation enhancement missions caused are documented. As a side note, flood insurance in Texas is hard to obtain.

The U.S. Military has been involved in weather modification for half a century, and the extent to which they have progressed is still unknown, however we do know that droughts, floods and general degradation of enemy forces are a few objectives the Air Force can produce. This document describes the known uses for military applications of weather modification, and this link will take you to a database of weather modification PDFs.

Waylon “Ben” Livingston, aka the father of weather weapons, in an interview with documentary film-maker Alex Jones, admitted the weather was being modified around the world, using what was learned a half-decade ago flooding the Ho Chi Minh trail in Vietnam.

We now have documentation revealing Geo-engineering (1), (2), (3), (4), Weather Modification (5), and Precipitation Enhancement (6), from governments, universities, private companies and public companies such as water districts. The debate about whether or not chemicals are being dispersed in our sky on a regular basis should now shift to focusing on what recourse we the people have to stop these unnatural and harmful secret programs.

As stated above, “Local, non-permanent changes, such as precipitation enhancement, hail suppression, fog and cloud dispersal, are permitted under the U.N. treaty banning weather modification”, conveniently enough, due to legal loopholes. If you obtain a permit, you can modify the weather, just be sure to follow the 200 pages of guidelines.

Edwards Aquifer Precipitation Enhancement Program:

• http://edwardsaquifer.org/pages/research_precip.htm

• http://edwardsaquifer.org/pages/Default.asp?QU=precipitation+enhancement&Search=Go&Action=Search

• http://edwardsaquifer.org/pages/Default.asp?Action=Search&QU=enhancement

South Texas Weather Modification Program (Including Mission Briefs and Flight Path Maps):

• http://southtexasweathermodification.com/

• http://southtexasweathermodification.com/missions.html (Important - Details of Missions, Flight Tracks)

South Texas Rain Enhancement Association:

• http://swtrea.org/

• http://swtrea.org/latest_missions.htm

PDF Documents Available At This Link:

• PDFs Here

Obama's Plan To "Geo-Engineer" The Planet Mirrors CFR Policy Documents

Radical terraforming programs come from elite Internationalists

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Thursday, April 9, 2009

The Obama administration's announcement that it is to consider radical planetary "geo-engineering", such as "shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun's rays", exactly mirrors recent publications penned by the elite Council On Foreign Relations.

Yesterday the Associated Press reported that the Obama administration has held discussions regarding the possibility of "geo-engineering" the earth's climate to counter global warming.

The AP report states that Obama's science advisor John Holdren is pushing for radical terra forming programs to be explored such as creating an "artificial volcano". Despite Holdren's admission that such measures could have "grave side effects," he added that, "we might get desperate enough to want to use it."

Such ideas exactly mirror those put forth by the CFR in previous years.

In briefing notes (PDF) published in May 2008 from the CFR's Geoengineering: Workshop on Unilateral Planetary Scale Geoengineering, the elite internationalist group lays out the exact same radical ideas now being touted by the Obama administration.

The following excerpts are taken from the document:

Geoengineering Strategies

Among all geoengineering schemes, those currently considered most feasible involve increasing the planetary albedo, that is, reflecting more sunlight back into space before it can be absorbed. There are a number of different methods that could be used to increase the planet’s reflectivity:

1. Add more small reflecting particles in the upper part of the atmosphere (the stratosphere which is located between 15 and 50 kilometers above the Earth’s surface).

2. Add more clouds in the lower part of the atmosphere (the troposphere)

3. Place various kinds of reflecting objects in space either near the earth or at a stable location between the earth and the sun.

4. Change large portions of the planet’s land cover from things that are dark (absorbing) such as trees to things that are light (reflecting) such as open snowcover or grasses.

[…]

Stratospheric Aerosols that might be engineered to migrate to particular regions (e.g. over the arctic) or to rise above the stratospher (so as not to interfere in stratospheric chemistry).

Adding more of the right kind of fine particles to the stratosphere can increase the amount of sunlight that is reflected back into space.

Applied to geoengineering, various technologies could be used to loft particles into the stratosphere, such as naval guns, rockets, hot air balloons or blimps, or a fleet of highflying aircraft. Potential types of particles for injection include sulfur dioxide, aluminum oxide dust or even designer self-levitating aerosols.

The CFR's geo-engineering research program is directed by David G. Victor a Professor at Stanford Law School and an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. Also involved are M. Granger Morgan, head of Carnegie Mellon University's Department of Engineering, Jay Apt, Professor of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University, and John Steinbruner, Professor of Public Policy and Director of the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland.

In an article entitled The Geoengineering Option: A Last Resort Against Global Warming? published in this month's Foreign Affairs, the CFR's monthly magazine, the directors once again lay out their ideas for planetary terraforming, calling for a worldwide 60-80 percent cut in carbon emissions.

Obama's push toward a so called "cap and trade" carbon taxation program is also a direct descendant of Victor et al's CFR policy formation.

A CFR geo-engineering meeting summary document from 1999 (PDF pages 12,13,14) also categorically states that the ultimate goal under "A technology strategy for global warming" is the implementation of a global Carbon Tax.

The memo also pedantically explains how the perceived fear of global warming can be used to sell to Americans what is essentially a tax on air:

"While taxing tea pales in comparison to taxing air as a perceived government affront, the clear benefits of a taxation policy to combat global warming might convince even the descendents of our tax-resistant Founding Fathers."

The tentative announcement by the Obama administration of the existence of geoengineering research programs is a first step toward introducing the idea to the wider public.

However, as we highlighted in our master article yesterday, geo-engineering is undoubtedly already being conducted by government-affiliated universities, government agencies, and on a mass scale through chemtrail spraying.

Such programs merely scratch the surface of what is likely to be a gargantuan and overarching black-budget funded project to terraform the planet, with little or no care for the unknown environmental consequences this could engender.

Further Research: Here is an extremely valuable file folder containing 8 PDFs, all published by the CFR, and all concerning their Geo-Engineering Program.

Concerns About Chemtrails Given Fresh Impetus

Obama administration’s announcement to explore “geo-engineering” spurs questions about programs already underway

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, April 10, 2009

The Obama administration’s announcement to explore “geo-engineering” the environment in the name of preventing global warming has given fresh impetus to concerns about whether such programs are already underway in the guise of chemtrails.

Chemtrails differ from ordinary contrails in that they hang in the sky for hours and are often observed to be emitted from planes that fly criss-cross routes, leading to the formation of ‘X’ and grid-like patterns in the sky. Chemtrails also directly effect localized weather by turning a clear blue sky into a hazy overcast.

Last year, a KSLA news investigation found that a substance that fell to earth from a high altitude chemtrail contained high levels of Barium (6.8 ppm) and Lead (8.2 ppm) as well as trace amounts of other chemicals including arsenic, chromium, cadmium, selenium and silver. Of these, all but one are metals, some are toxic while several are rarely or never found in nature. The newscast focuses on Barium, which its research shows is a “hallmark of chemtrails.” KSLA found Barium levels in its samples at 6.8 ppm or “more than six times the toxic level set by the EPA.”

KSLA also asked Mark Ryan, Director of the Poison Control Center, about the effects of Barium on the human body. Ryan commented that “short term exposure can lead to anything from stomach to chest pains and that long term exposure causes blood pressure problems.” The Poison Control Center further reported that long-term exposure, as with any harmful substance, would contribute to weakening the immune system, which many speculate is the purpose of such man-made chemical trails.

Indeed, barium oxide has cropped up repeatedly as a contaminant from suspected geoengineering experimentation.

KSLA also put aerosolized-chemical testing in its historical context, citing a voluminous number of unclassified tests exposed in 1977 Senate hearings. The tests included experimenting with biochemical compounds on the public. KSLA reports that “239 populated areas were contaminated with biological agents between 1949 and 1969.”

The announcement this week that the Obama administration has held discussions regarding the possibility of “geo-engineering” the earth’s climate to counter global warming by “shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays” has stoke fresh concerns that similar programs are already underway, and that chemtrails are directly connected to such experimentation.

Indeed, as we covered in previous article, numerous universities and government agencies have been conducting studies in this field for years.

In addition, the Obama administration’s interest in exploring “geo-engineering” mirrors recent publications penned by the elite Council On Foreign Relations.

In a document entitled Geoengineering: Workshop on Unilateral Planetary Scale Geoengineering, the CFR proposes different methods of “reflecting sunlight back into space,” which include adding “small reflecting particles in the upper part of the atmosphere,” adding “more clouds in the lower part of the atmosphere,” and placing “various kinds of reflecting objects in space either near the earth or at a stable location between the earth and the sun.”

The proposals in the CFR document match exactly the atmospheric effects observed in the aftermath of chemtrail spraying.

An excellent new video summarizing concerns about chemtrails entitled Geoengineering and Eugenics has just been released by Media Rival Productions. This footage shows huge windowless airplanes dispersing chemtrails, as well as aircraft that appear to turn chemtrail emissions on and off in mid-flight. The fact that something is being deliberately dispersed is clear from the video and cannot be confused with crop-dusting which is done by light aircraft at low altitudes.

This video is a fantastic summary of the chemtrail issue and needs to go viral. We need to push the issue of chemtrails to the forefront of public awareness and force the corporate media to cover the subject. Only then will cracks begin to appear in the unified wall of denial that authorities have erected around the issue thus far.

The clip is embedded below along with two additional videos also recently put out by Media Rival Productions.

Obama Advisor Back Pedals On Geo-engineering Announcement

Says government is not considering radical terraforming, yet programs have been ongoing for years

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Friday, April 10, 2009

President Obama's chief scientific adviser is back pedaling over comments he made in an interview regarding planetary geo-engineering.

As we reported earlier this week, John Holdren told Associated Press that the Obama administration has held discussions regarding the possibility of artificially altering the earth's climate, with the justification of countering global warming.

According to the report, Holdren discussed methods of geo-engineering such as shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun's rays and other radical terraforming programs such as creating an "artificial volcano".

"It's got to be looked at," Holdren was quoted as saying, "We don't have the luxury of taking any approach off the table." The AP also reported that Holdren said he has raised the concept in administration discussions.

However, since both the mainstream and alternative media picked up on Holdren's comments and sent them viral, the former director of Harvard University's Science, Technology and Public Policy Program has backtracked, saying that his comments were exaggerated and that the Obama administration IS NOT considering geo-engineering.

The New York Times reports that Holdren responded via email after the AP story was published:

"I said that the approaches that have been surfaced so far seem problematic in terms of both efficacy and side effects, but we have to look at the possibilities and understand them because if we get desperate enough it will be considered. I also made clear that this was my personal view, not Administration policy.

Asked whether I had mentioned geo-engineering in any White House discussions, though, I said that I had. This is NOT the same thing as saying the White House is giving serious consideration to geo-engineering - which it isn't - and I am disappointed that the headline and the text of the article suggest otherwise."

Perhaps Holdren, or his higher ups have become concerned at the level of media exposure that has been generated by his comments.

After all, such exposure could lead to further investigation of secret climate engineering programs that are already being conducted by government-affiliated universities, government agencies, and on a mass scale through chemtrail spraying.

As we reported today, the coverage generated by Holdren has given fresh impetus to concerns regarding the aerosolized-chemical spraying that is undoubtedly being carried out worldwide.

Of course, just like the "New World Order", though this has been announced in hundreds of mainstream publications and by leading government figures, it remains a "conspiracy theory".

Watch Alex Jones' special on geo-engineering and his interview with chemtrail expert Rosalind Peterson: