We need a geoengineering forum..."Chemtrail" properly geoengineering, threads do not belong instan

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


I disagree it is obviously going on in the State I live in.

Maybe it's not happening near you. But how would you know if it is happening in other areas?

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

I disagree it is obviously going on in the State I live in.

and yet you cannot actually pin down any real evidene to show that.

I would suggest that you should change your language to says that yuo BELIEVE it is going on in your state, etc.

Because as long as you keep stating it as a fact you run into teh basic problem that you havent' actually got any credible evidence to back up your claims.

Maybe it's not happening near you. But how would you know if it is happening in other areas?

I would know it was going on in other areas if there was credible evidence showing that to be the case.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


I have plenty of valid evidence. You're not the judge of what is valid.

I would suggest you use the terms "I BELIEVE" when saying that chemtrail don't exist.

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

I have plenty of valid evidence. You're not the judge of what is valid.

Why not?

I would suggest you use the terms "I BELIEVE" when saying that chemtrail don't exist.

I usually do.

I believe all the evidence shown to support the chemtrail theory so far is unverifiable, unrepeatable, bad science, unsupported hearsay, unsupported assertion, full of mistakes, deliberately false, or any combination of those.

Whereas there is a wealth of scientifically valid data that I believe shows that everything the chemtrail theory proposes is perfectly normal, if often man-made.

Therefore I believe, on the balance of probabilities, that the chemtrail theory is not true.

I also believe it's not the first time I have written as much

David Rockfeller
chemtrailsnorthnz.wordpress.com... hile/

David Rockefeller: Memoirs 2002 Founder of the CFR: “We wield over American political and economical institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political structure, one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Carnegie Insitution for Science
carnegiescience.edu...

Ken Caldeira Testifies to Congress on Geoengineering THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2009 Can global warming be mitigated by a technological fix such as injecting light-blocking particles into the atmosphere or chemically “scrubbing” excess greenhouse gases from the atmosphere? Department of Global Ecology scientist Ken Caldeira addressed this question in his testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science and Technology in a hearing titled“Geoengineering: Assessing the Implications of Large-Scale Climate Intervention” on November 5, 2009.

Bill Gates
news.sciencemag.org...

Billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates has been supporting a wide array of research on geoengineering since 2007, ScienceInsider has learned. The world’s richest man has provided at least $4.5 million of his own money over 3 years for the study of methods that could alter the stratosphere to reflect solar energy, techniques to filter carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere, and brighten ocean clouds. But Gates’s money has not funded any field experiments involving the techniques, according to Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Palo Alto, California. Caldeira and physicist David Keith of the University of Calgary in Canada have been in charge of deciding how to dispense the money. The pair have been informal energy and climate advisers to Gates for several years, and they say they remain independent. "This is philanthropic money and when it arrives [to Calgary] Gates does not control it," says Keith.

United States Government Accountability Office
www.gao.gov...

Federal Agencies Have Sponsored Some Research Activities,
but These Activities Are Not Part of a Coordinated Federal Geoengineering Research Strategy

For SRM approaches, DOE, through its Sandia National Laboratories, has sponsored a study investigating the potential unintended consequences and economic impacts of sulfur aerosol injection. Additionally, DOE has contributed a small amount of funding for modeling studies related to cloud-brightening and stratospheric aerosol SRM approaches at its Pacific Northwest National Laboratory—an effort that is primarily funded by the University of Calgary

David Keith
Opinion
Research on global sun block needed now
Geoengineering studies of solar-radiation management should begin urgently
January 2010
people.ucalgary.ca...

Dearth of data
Decades of upper-atmosphere research — such as that done to investigate the effect of supersonic passenger aircraft — has produced a mass of relevant science. But, except for a recent, small Russian test, there have been no field tests of SRM. Until now, there has been essentially no government research funding available for SRM anywhere in the world; although a few programmes for geoengineering have begun in the past few months.

The environmental hazards of SRM cannot be assessed without knowing the specific techniques that might be used, and it is impossible to identify and develop techniques without field testing. It is often assumed, for example, that a suitable distribution of stratospheric sulphate aerosols can be produced by releasing sulphur dioxide in the stratosphere. In fact, new simulations 2 of aerosol physics suggest that the resultant aerosol size distribution would be skewed to large particles that are relatively ineffective. Several aerosol compositions and delivery methods may offer a way around this problem, but choosing between them and quantifying their environmental effects will require in-situ testing. NASA’s ER-2 high-altitude research plane might be used to release aerosols into the stratosphere, and to fly through the plume to assess the effects. Such tests take years to plan and cost millions of dollars. It would be reckless to conduct the first largescale SRM tests in an emergency. Experiments should expand gradually to scales big enough to produce barely detectable climate effects and reveal unexpected problems, yet small enough (of the order of hundreds of kilotonnes) to limit risks. The ability to detect the climatic respons

Ken Caldeira
dge.stanford.edu...

ADVISORY PANELS / DISSERTATION COMMITTEES
National Academy of Sciences, America's Climate Choices panel member (2009)
UK Royal Society geoengineering report panel member (2009)
Global Carbon Project, steering committee member (2009)
European Project on Ocean Acidification (EPOCA), Advisory board member (2008-present)
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission, representative at International Maritime Union negotiations (2008, 2009)
UK Royal Society ocean acidification report panel member (2007)
IPCC Special Report on CO2 Capture and Storage, Oceans Chapter, Coordinating Lead Author (2005)
US Delegation to climate-related negotiations leading up to G8 Summit, Technical Support (2005)
UNESCO International Oceanography Commission CO2 Panel of Experts (2002-2004)
US Global Carbon Cycle Scientific Steering Group (2001-2004)
Dissertation Committees of students at Stanford, MIT, and University of Illinois

Gorbachev - Bush Artificial Clouds Institute
www.newruskincollege.com...

Dr. Ken Caldeira's Papers on Artificial Clouds & Carbon Mgmt

Abstract 2:
1 million tons of scattering materials ~ 1%
refresh about 20% per year

discusses lifting masses into air or space

Indeed, some types of stratospheric deployment of oxide particulates – e.g., SO 2 or Al 2 O 3 – might be accomplished simply by operating one or more well-engineered combustors – e.g., of elemental S or Al – at high-altitude, near-equatorial ground-sites, from which stratospheric injection of warm gas is intrinsically advantaged. (Combustor engineering would focus on mass-efficient, optimal-sized scatterer particle generation in the vertically-directed exhaust, which likely would have a rocket nozzle character in order to facilitate swift manipulation of the temperature and density of combustion products across usefully large ranges.)


.

TO BE CONTINUED

www.newruskincollege.com...

Gorbachev-Bush Artificial Clouds Institute @NewRuskinCollege.com
The Gorbachev-Bush Artificial Clouds Letters
Home
NASA NEWS & THE ENVIRONMENT
The Gorbachev-Bush Artificial Clouds Letters
Moynihan
Royal Society
Congress Listens
Dr. Hansen Says Yes!
Climate Engineers
Dr. Nathan Myhrvold says yes!
Dr. Teller's Paper on Artificial Clouds
Dr. Teller's 2nd Paper
Dr. Crutzen's and Dr. Wigley's Papers on Artificial Clouds
SuperFreakenomics
Dr. Ken Caldeira's Papers on Artificial Clouds & Carbon Mgmt.
Dr. Gregory Benford's Paper on Artificial Clouds
Clouds
SUN, COSMIC RAYS, & CLIMATE CHANGE
Earths Bio Response
Abrupt Climate Change: Oceans
Abrupt Climate Change: Permafrost
Macro Engineering: Climate
Remediation: Artificial Clouds
Remediation: Nuclear Power
Remediation: Forests, Plankton, Sequestration
Remediation: Bio Technology
Politics and Technology
Ethanol Fraud
Geo Engineering: Venice
Geo Engineering: Mississippi Delta
Geo Engineering: ! Save Earth!

Archivist’s Note:

The Institute has the only known copy of the first draft.

First Draft


President Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev
President of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
The Kremlin
Moscow, U. S. S. R.

President George Bush
President of the United States of America
The White House
Washington, D. C.

Peter [deletion]
[deketuib] East Ave.
Hayward, Ca. 94[deletion]


Dear Sir;

I am writing this letter to you to find out if you are willing to do something about the "green house effect?" It has been estimated that within the next century the oceans will rise five meters. This change will be catastrophic. Yet people such as yourself, with the greatest powers possessed by any person in all of history, appear to sit idly by transfixed by the spectacle of our impending doom.

We would need to remove from the moon and suspend in orbit a volume of material equal to twenty percent of Mt. Krakatoa. An engineering project on the order of the Panama Canal. (The Panama Canal was an engineering project undertaken at a time when there were great men who dared to dream.) We would need only twenty percent of the volume of Mt. Krakatoa because one, we would not want to cool down the planet too much as in the "year with out a summer," and two, we will be placing this material in orbit where it will block solar radiation permanently and continuously.

The blocking of solar radiation by reflecting radiation before it reaches the Earth's atmosphere will manifest itself in one, global generalized effects, two, continental effects and three, micro climate effects. Fairly minor reductions in solar radiation will have great affects on global warming. Just as a few degrees warming will raise sea level many meters, minor cooling, a reduction in solar radiation on the order of a half or a quarter percent will have equally great counter effects. Secondly, by creating areas of "shade," where solar radiation is reduced by ten or twenty percent, continental weather patterns can be changed or sustained. For example the warming of the Indian Ocean competes with the subcontinent of India for moisture.

Later Mr. Gorbachev paid an official visit to California and had many instructive things to say about space exploration.

www.newruskincollege.com...

CERES is a package of three telescopes that watch our planet from Earth orbit. "One telescope is sensitive
to ordinary sunlight," says Wielicki. "It tells us how much solar radiation is reflected from clouds or ice." The other two telescopes sense longer-wavelength infrared heat. They reveal how much heat is trapped by clouds and how much of it escapes back to space.

Wielicki and other NASA scientists used CERES to test the idea. It turned out that such clouds did trap infrared heat. But even more so they reflected visible sunlight back into space. Fewer of the clouds would mean more global warming, not less. The iris hypothesis was wrong. Another problem CERES will tackle concerns aerosols. Aerosols are tiny particles like volcanic dust, pollution and even sea spray suspended in the air. Aerosols reflect sunlight. They also help clouds form by serving as "nucleation sites" around which water droplets grow. No one knows if increasing numbers of aerosols will cool or warm our planet.

artificialclouds.com...

A) NATIONAL AND GLOBAL SECURITY
1. Solar Radiation Management/Climate Change Remediation
Jets can create thousands of square miles of shade in a matter of hours, blocking a significant portion of the Sun's radiation. This could help slow down the loss of ice and land mass, and may also be important on days when the Sun's radiation is especially strong. Scientists predict that solar flares and radiation patterns could severely intensify, so our artificial clouds may one day shield us from extreme solar storms and radiation.
As shown in the documentation below, patents for jet contrail enhancement have been made by corporations that are capable of executing large-scale programs in cooperation with the US government that are intended to reduce the effects of warming and drying related to climate change. The concept is the same as explained above: thick, icy clouds from jets create shade when sunlight hits the top of the clouds and bounces back into space. However, blocking radiation does not help the increasing acidity of the oceans, the other major impact of our increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere.

2. Precipitation Enhancement
A brilliant product of enhanced jet contrails, artificial clouds in full force can redirect and intensify storms. This is done by creating vast areas of cloud cover, which creates shade and drops the temperature in that area. As the air cools, it contracts, dropping the pressure. This allows storms to move in which otherwise would have been repelled by higher pressure. This is critical, since states that provide the most food for America have been drying out for at least half a century. In California, for example, our underground water reservoirs have dropped consistently for the past 50 years. (What happens if California, supplying so much of our country's food, lacks water to produce sufficient crops?)

Solar Radiation Management
Similar to the way a volcano blocks solar radiation for years after an eruption, adding sulphur dioxide directly to the stratosphere using jet aircraft can provide shade for the Earth by reflecting the Sun's rays back into space. Since matter in the stratosphere is so high above the Earth, injecting aerosols at this altitude creates an enormous area of shade compared to tropospheric clouds.

While other methods of reducing solar radiation have been proposed, including space-based reflectors, none of these solutions are immediate, nor are they as inexpensive as enhancing contrails to create artificial clouds.

These experiments are underway today with dramatic results: huge areas of the globe are covered with artificial clouds daily, whitening the sky and causing the phenomenon known as "global dimming."

This process-- creating artificial clouds by adding aerosolized materials to jet contrails-- is referred to as chemtrails by many people who witness the persistent, bright super-contrails that thicken and white out the sky.

Background
At the time of my first report in 2007, which was sent to all US Senators (including then-Senator Obama), we didn't know for certain whether artificial clouds spawned by jet contrails were deliberately created. We now know that they are.

While contrails are a "natural" part of jet travel, contrail science doesn't explain the ability of aircraft to start and stop contrails at will, nor does contrail theory include the ability of jets to create dense cloud cover over thousands of square miles.

Through the formation of clouds made by jet contrails, humans can now exert a great deal of control over weather.

Companies like Hughes Aircraft, a major defense contractor, have patented methods of using metal oxides in contrails "for reduction of global warming." (View the patent) Federal laws passed over the last few years allow these experiments.

Some of the Potential Benefits of Artificial Clouds
A) NATIONAL AND GLOBAL SECURITY
1. Solar Radiation Management/Climate Change Remediation
2. Precipitation Enhancement

B) NATIONAL DEFENSE
1. Missile Defense Shield
2. Weather Warfare
3. Wartime Communication Systems Medium


Potential Side Effects and Predictable Hazards
A) Lung disease, cancer, and numerous other health issues
B) Saturation of soil, air and water with sulfur dioxide and other chemicals

C) Decimation or extinction of birds, bees and damage to the ecological cycles on Earth

D) Dependence on petroleum for national defense and security

E) Potential for HAARP energy pulses to affect the human brain

F) The backfiring of the "cloud program" could cause accelerated warming due to CO2 being delivered into the stratosphere in large quantities.

G) The need to continue more and more stratospheric solar radiation blocking, disrupting photosynthetic processes on Earth while the problem worsens.

Contrails, Chemtrails and Artificial Clouds

artificialclouds.com...

Special thanks to NASA, NOAA, and
all the other people who tolerated my
questions during this project.

ILLUSIONS IN FRONT OF US
Once we are familiar with a word, its meaning usually becomes
associated with a particular context. We charge words with
those specific connotations, so when we try to use them
outside of that familiar context, they no longer convey the
same meaning. As generations pass, meanings of words
become blurred.
In more than one way, contrails, which are now more often
called chemtrails, are a phenomenon unlike anything we have
ever seen before, one born of technology and human drive and
expansion...and imagination. When we first used the word
“contrail,” we didn’t picture the sky becoming completely filled
with artificial clouds. (This photo shows a new contrail being
formed among previous trails that are starting to look like
natural clouds.)
Contrails have changed.
Whatever your conclusions may be about jet contrails and
artificial clouds after reading this, they are in any case a
reminder that there are things in our experience as humans
that are at once hard to perceive, hard to understand and hard
to explain...there are mysteries.
The chemtrails/contrails controversy and the lack of credible
information available to the public also illuminates the truth
that sometimes a single perspective can’t notice everything.
This report is for people who are now asking:
What are chemtrails and chemclouds, exactly?
Why are they there, and how can they make clouds?
Why are they so variable and hard to explain?
Are they dangerous? How should we respond?
In a greater context, the presence of chemtrails is natural. It’s
just us humans, interacting with our environment. And this is
our story

Mass quoting the opinions of another chemtrail believer who hasnt done his research properly does not support yours or anyone else's argument

(Incidently, the main scientific concerns with the proposal to spray sulphates into the stratosphere in order to replicate the effects shown to occur from massive volcanic eruptions, and thus create temporary atmospheric cooling - to counter AGW - are a) ozone depletion and b) increased acid rain. As well as the law of unintended consequences - ie anything else we havent thought of and weren't expecting!)

AAAS Science Magazine

Science 3 November 1972:
Vol. 178 no. 4060 pp. 504-505
DOI: 10.1126/science.178.4060.504
Artificial Cloud Formation in the Atmosphere

www.sciencemag.org...

An artificial cloud in the cloudless atmosphere at a temperature below 0°C was formed by introducing pellets of Dry Ice into air containing more water vapor than would be present at the saturation point with respect to ice. Such clouds could be utilized to establish radiative equilibrium between ground and air so as to inhibit the cooling of selective arctic surface regions under clear skies.

Night Time Artificial Cloud Study Using NASA Sounding Rocket
www.nasa.gov...

A NASA Black Brant XII rocket launches carrying the CARE experiment Credit: NASA
View Larger Image A rocket experiment that may shed light on the highest clouds in the Earth’s atmosphere was conducted from NASA's Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia on September 19, 2009. The experiment was launched on a NASA Black Brant XII Sounding Rocket.

The Charged Aerosol Release Experiment (CARE) was conducted by the Naval Research Laboratory and the Department of Defense Space Test Program using a NASA four-stage Black Brant XII suborbital sounding rocket. Using ground based instruments and the STP/NRL STPSat-1 spacecraft, scientists will study an artificial noctilucent cloud formed by the exhaust particles of the rocket’s fourth stage at about 173 miles altitude.

www.colorado.edu...

Liability and Governance Liability and “robbing-Peter-to-pay-Paul” arguments are common in weather modification discourse, but actual cases simply have not materialized during decades of active cloud seeding. I believe the field has managed to stay in business partly because cloud seeders get to claim a beneficial effect that is small enough not to cause problems. Barely a dozen court cases since 1950 have yielded no findings of liability, nor tort precedence (Standler, 2002, 2006). Weather modification “governance” is almost non-existent. Professional best-practices and standards do exist, along with a professional society (the Weather Modification Association) and WMO and American Meteorological Society (AMS) policy statements on weather modification and guidelines for projects (www.wmo.int...) and www.ametsoc.org...). But, only very weak regulation and government oversight has emerged in cloud seeding projects. Several U.S. states have weak

chemtrails.cc...

Scientists now admit that emissions from aircraft are forming artificial clouds that block out the sun, precisely what geoengineering advocates like top eugenicist and White House science advisor John P. Holdren have called for, but the article tries to insinuate that the effect is caused by natural “vapours,” when in reality it can be attributed to chemtrails that contain substances harmful to humans.
“The phenomenon occurs when aircraft fly above 25,000ft, where the air temperature is around minus 30C. This causes water vapour emitted by the engines to crystallise and form the familiar white streaks across the sky, known as contrails,”


Science experiment to-do list:
1. Obtain a commercial sample of Stadis 450 and perform LCMS analysis for presence of metals associated with chemtrails.
2. Collect and analyze air samples from locations varying in proximity to major airports that use commercial jet fuel. Use blind labeling of samples and data. Look for any association between metal aerosol in air and proximity to airports.
3. Obtain high power gimball tracking telescope. Record chemtrail aircraft. Check trail dispersal pattern and plane for spray nozzles and spray or exhaust pattern behind aircraft that leave persistent chemtrails. Produce a video with wide angle time lapse and close-up overlay to show whether chemtrails are associated with spray pattern from nozzles or with exhaust gases.

chemtrails.cc...

Chemtrail researchers have identified at least two current, secret dispersal programs.
Cloud seeding metallic aerosol, including barium, aluminum, strontium, calcium or other metal salts. The most likely source is a fuel additive such as DuPont/Octel Stadis® 450 static dissipator, which contains dinonylnapthalene sulfonic acid and barium and/or calcium salts [1,2]. The two “Trade secret” additives in Octel’s MSDS for Stadis 450 are almost certainly barium or calcium salts.
Morgellon’s fiber organism. Some chemtrail researchers believe that a this organism, GMO, or nanotechnology may be related to airborne fibrous material. Its not entirely clear that these fibers are coming from aircraft, or that they are indeed related to Morgellon’s organism. However, evidence for the existence of this organism is strong.

References:
Stadis 450 antistatic additive MSDS [pdf].
chemtrails.cc...

High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program Test Plan and Data Review, Dinonylnaphthalene Category [pdf].
chemtrails.cc...

THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL CHEMTRAIL COVERAGE

www.newswithviews.com...

By Dr. Stephen C. L'Hommedieu, D.C. March 4, 2007 NewsWithViews.com Saturday evening I was able to sit back and watch the Discovery channel chemtrail coverage originally presented on Thursday evening. With previous news of the upcoming broadcast I pondered what slant would be used to obscure the public’s understanding to what these really are.

Sure enough, I wasn’t disappointed. Immediately the deception began by directing the emphasis of the presentation to a faulty concept of an aluminum component present in commercial jet fuel. This ‘scientific investigation’ appeared very impressive on the surface. It seemed as if they were actually determined to go all-out to solve this chemtrail ‘mystery.’ Armed with $1M in research equipment to ‘sniff’ out the chemical culprits thought to be secretly hidden in commercial jet fuel; predictably, they found nothing. I suspect even the researchers knew they wouldn’t find anything in the commercial jet fuel because even I knew they wouldn’t.

However, I did find it interesting that the military refused to provide a sample of their jet fuel for testing. Suggestive that something is obviously going on. The material for this ‘investigation’ presented by the ‘Not to Discover’ channel was just as you would expect from a controlled media production. They presented carefully selected material arranged into a purposely crafted design. They started with an easily dismantled, implausible and ridiculous hypothesis from a collection of amateur opinions on chemtrails.

The investigation then set the stage for discarding the validity of chemtrails from this bogus hypothesis. This is the kind of bad ‘science’ commonly implemented to dismantle any information that gets too close to the truth. It’s called discrediting. Patrick Minnis, the senior researcher at the NASA Langley Research Center, provided the typical disparaging analysis that you would expect from insiders involved with a cover-up. For instance, he described Rosalind Peterson’s carefully documented findings and descriptions of these chemtrails as particularly creative and imaginative.

The Discovery Channel announcer went on to emphasize where Minnis sees clouds and contrails, Peterson sees these chemtrails. Then to solidify the uncertainty necessary to obscure the truth, Minnis claimed that “the notion of chemtrails is ludicrous,” and continued with “it appears no one seems to agree on what these are other than they’re not contrails.” Well then, what are they? Would Minnis actually provide a thorough and scientific explanation to the question presented?

Unfortunately, the only answer extracted out of Minnis, an authority on the subject, was “there must be an explanation for each of Peterson’s photographs.” Thank you sir; yes, we already realize that. But again, the question is what exactly are they? Curiously, he didn’t bother to indulge us any further on this important topic to set all of us straight. Naturally!

reply to post by Essan


I'm not mass quoting, this is my collection of research papers.

Some papers even agree with certain arguments of you debunkers.

I'm about to prove you all wrong, though............

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


Prove us wrong about what?

Our contention is what some people (though apparently not yourself) refer to as chemtrails are simply normal aircraft contrails produced as a result of engine exhaust and atmospheric conditions.

You have declined to engage in a discussion to show that they are not contrails. So what are you trying to prove?

reply to post by Essan


The Canadian study shows how they can do geoengineering through injection of So2 particles into the jet engine which would come out in the contrails. There are several references provided by mat referencing Operation Cloverleaf about injecting particles currently in operation.

Phage suggested that So2 particles would not be visible. I do not know if this is true or that Operation Cloverleaf is anything more than rumor.

Either way geoengineers point to injecting aerosol particulates into the stratosphere (aka chemtrails) as being the cheapest, most effective per dollar method of geoengineering. The white hose paper on ADAPTATION suggest there are current geoengineering programs currently being carried out by "other" nations as of 2010.

It is not much of a stretch to imagine these geoengineering aka adaptation programs are using the number one method.

So please do not focus on "chemtrails" in this document as I have repeated pointed out that is a derailment.

However the strategic injection of aerosol particulates is a valid geoengineering (aka adaptation) geoengineering topic.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

BTW I am staring you and Essan until you troll. Right now you have mostly been on topic.

Do you believe the increased incidence of contrails are tantamount to geoengineering?

Phage has suggested that So2 would not increase contrail size or duration so it is possible they have begun geoengineering aka adaptation without anyone knowing it. Many have referenced Project Cloverleaf as a current geoengineering project that is Top Secret. All Top Secret projects are SCI (Secret COMPARTMENTALIZED Info). So it would be possible for no one but those at the top to know what was going on.

Our government has history replete with such actions. It is no stretch to believe this geoengineering project has been initiated. The white house clearly wants to begin such projects per the whitehouse dot gov documented on adaptation aka geoengineering I posted.

Originally posted by pianopraze
reply to post by Essan

 

The Canadian study shows how they can do geoengineering through injection of So2 particles into the jet engine which would come out in the contrails.

I don't think there's ever been any doubt that this can be done - the Canadian paper that I'm aware of examines the costs, a/c numbers requierd, etc.

Either way geoengineers point to injecting aerosol particulates into the stratosphere (aka chemtrails) as being the cheapest, most effective per dollar method of geoengineering.

SRM through stratospheric aerosols seems to be widely perceived as a very quick process - but there is a lot of concern expressed in many papersthat the potential for causing other ecological damage is significnat, and maybe it should be restricted to "emergency" situations only.

For example the Royal Society report: Geoengineering the Climatenotes that Stratospheric Aerosols notes:

Compared to Carbon Dioxide Removal methods, Solar Radiation Management techniques are expected to be
relatively cheap and would take only a few years to have an effect on the climate once deployed. However there
are considerable uncertainties about their consequences and additional risks. It is possible that in time, assuming that these uncertainties and risks can be reduced, that Solar Radiation Management methods could be used to augment conventional mitigation. However, the large-scale adoption of Solar Radiation Management methods would create an artifi cial, approximate, and potentially delicate balance between increased greenhouse gas concentrations and reduced solar radiation, which would have to be maintained, potentially for many centuries.

Which is not so obviously simple, cheap and promising as amateur proponents make it sound! It's also talkng about a range of SRM techniqe -

• Increasing the surface reflectivity of the planet, by brightening human structures (eg by painting them
white), planting of crops with a high reflectivity, or overing deserts with reflective material;
• Enhancement of marine cloud reflectivity;
• Mimicking the effects of volcanic eruptions by injecting ulphate aerosols into the lower stratosphere;
• Placing shields or defl ectors in space to reduce the mount of solar energy reaching the Earth.

For example of alternative strategies in this list - Bill Gates is funding research into seawater cloud seeding precisely because it is more benign than stratospheric aerosols.

I think we tend to forget that there are a number of possible techniques for SRM - ranging from painting all our roofs white on upwards in complexity.

And also that SRM is jsut one of many geo-engineering techniques under invvestigation - the chemtrail discussion morphing into a decent chat about SRM is only ficusing on one among amny.

The white hose paper on ADAPTATION suggest there are current geoengineering programs currently being carried out by "other" nations as of 2010.

Is that paper one of the 2 on this page - www.whitehouse.gov... ?

I don't see much mention of "foreign" activities there at all.

However ther are several geo-engineering processes already being carried out - SRM is only one of many such activities - carbon sequestration is one such process that has actually been carried out on a small scale - eg see en.wikipedia.org...

It is not much of a stretch to imagine these geoengineering aka adaptation programs are using the number one method.

There is no "number one method" -

However the strategic injection of aerosol particulates is a valid geoengineering (aka adaptation) geoengineering topic.

Sure is - as long as it isn't mixed up with chemtrails....although the exhaust products of aviation are also part of the mix when dicussed in a rational manner.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Good post.

This was the whitehouse paper I linked to but that one does also refernce same material: whitehouse paper

Which seems to be the US implementation of the UN Adaptation agenda: UN webpage on Adaptation.

They are currently holding a summit on adaptation as we speed in Thailand! UN conference website.

The sixteenth session of the AWG-KP (AWG-KP 16) and the fourteenth session of the AWG-LCA (AWG-LCA 14), as well as workshops pursuant to the Cancun Agreements, are taking place from Sunday, 3 April through Friday, 8 April at the United Nations Conference Centre (UNCC) of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP), in Bangkok, Thailand.

The political dialogue is clearly geared towards claiming there is an emergency on the UN website. They have a huge section on ADAPTATION. It seems the science is being discussed under geoengineering vernacular while the political dialogue about implementing geoengineering is using the adaptation vernacular.

Quite a slick way to go about it. Also Adaptation is a benign term that hides most of the actual documents because the search produces mostly biological references. I find this a common trick governments are using to hide things now. They use terms that are hidden beneath tons of non-relevant search results. I would almost go far enough to postulate that bands and other pop culture films, tv shows, etc.. are created to further burying the results, but that is conspiracy theory only, not provable. But fact is you almost have to have pinpoint knowledge of what you are searching for now a-days to find it. The web is being sanitized/prioritized by google et all on certain subjects.... Webpages that I have bookmarked that you used to be able to easily find via google search to are not not findable anymore, yet still there if you direct link.

There is a number one in discussion. But you are right there are a number of geoengineering procedures which you outlined and maybe a couple more listed in the links in this thread but you outlined the most talked about. Of these most talked about aerosols are clearly talked about the most. JW suggested that there have been attempts made at geoengineering such as cloud whitening and ocean (iron dumping? i disremember) but he did not link the papers on this but he said they were failures.

I find it troubling that the UN is going full scale at geoengineering/adaptation when the papers have been proven to be falsified. They changed vernacular to climate change from global warming but are proceeding the same.

When we can't predict the weather a week in advanced, how do they have the arrogance to assume they can predict the impact of these processes many of which the geoengineers themselves have predicted could have dire impacts??? Especially acting on a proven falsified premise!

The Committee on Science and Technology
Geoengineering III: Domestic and International Research Governance
March 18, 2010
Archived Webcast
science.edgeboss.net...

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
science.house.gov...

Purpose
On Thursday, March 18, 2010, the House Committee on Science and Technology will hold a hearing entitled “Geoengineering III: Domestic and International Research Governance.” The purpose of this hearing is to explore the governance needs, both domestic and international, to initiate geoengineering research programs. Specifically, discussion will focus on governance to guide potential geoengineering research projects and which U.S. agencies and institutions have the capacity or authorities to conduct such research.

Criteria for Governance Development
SRM technologies, on the other hand, are more likely to require international governance for research. For example, two proposed SRM technologies, marine cloud whitening and atmospheric injections of sulfur particles would likely take place in an area governed by the international community, disperse trans-nationally, and have transnational effects. Other SRM technologies such as land surface albedo modification may have lesser need for international governance

Conclusions
Some geoengineering technologies appear to be technically feasible; however, there is high uncertainty regarding their effectiveness, costs, environmental effects, and socio-political impacts. Appropriate governance structures that allow for an iterative exchange between continued public dialogue and further research are needed to determine if such technologies are both capable of producing desired results and socially acceptable. Climate change is a global problem that impacts people and ecosystems at the local scale. If traditional mitigation efforts are not effective on their own, 12 we will need alternatives at the ready. In the next decade the debate over geoengineering will intensify. Research will lead to increasingly plausible and economically feasible ways to alter with the environment. At the same time, political and social pressure will grow – both to put plans into action (whether multi- or unilaterally), and to limit the development of geoengineering research. These issues led the U.K. and U.S. Science and Technology committees to jointly consider the role for potential governance structures to guide research in the near term and to oversee potential demonstration projects in the long term

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


So, in essence, "we" need more research and discussino with the public before we do anything.

How is this a problem?

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


The problem is they can not predict the weather for a week let alone how these geoengineering aka adaptation efforts would affect the plant for years. Many scientists suggest we are at the peek of a natural warming trend that has been going on for the last i forget exactly but I think it was 20k years and we are on the edge of a global cooling that could be much worse for us than the current weather. Such geoengineering efforts might trigger this prematurly.

The problem is mat has given several references earlier in this thread to human testing and even shown two FDA loopholes they could apply to geoengineering efforts. I have outlined in this and other threads how they denied such things as radioactivity testing on unknowing subjects and diagnosed them as paranoid schizophrenic when these subjects went public only to admit the testing many years after the individuals death. Example: Elmer Allen. Other examples include MK ULTRA and the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments: link.

The problem is they could be currently geoengineering, with the FDA loophole technically legally implementing these efforts, particularly the injection of aerosol particulates. JW stated two cases they admitted to geoengineering. History shows them guilty of lying about ongoing projects. Rationally we should assume they continue, Gitmo proves the evil they are currently doing. Our government continually perpetuates evil and lies and covers it up.

The problem is So2, aluminum, barium, strontium, etc are less lethal in the short run, but in the end might kill more people in the long run.

Originally posted by pianopraze
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

The problem is they could be currently geoengineering, with the FDA loophole technically legally implementing these efforts, particularly the injection of aerosol particulates. JW stated two cases they admitted to geoengineering.

I am unaware of those - what are they?

History shows them guilty of lying about ongoing projects. Rationally we should assume they continue, Gitmo proves the evil they are currently doing. Our government continually perpetuates evil and lies and covers it up.

it also continually does stuff that it does not cove up.

Sorry - but this line of "proof" for anything simply isn't proof at all.

It is reason to be suspicious if you want to be suspicious - but it does NOT show that something is actually happening.

The problem is So2, aluminum, barium, strontium, etc are less lethal in the short run, but in the end might kill more people in the long run.

Less lethal than what?

All het proposed versions of SRM by stratospheric injection of aerosols involve SOx, not any of ther others at all - why do you mention them?