Geoengineering proof from NOAA?

David Keith, Professor of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering at the University of Calgary
admits here within the first 1 1/2 minutes he is involved in nearly every effort, organization,
and conversation about Geoengineering.

Here he talks about Geoengineering as a Time Machine



www.youtube.com...#

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to post by pianopraze

 

hmmm, looks like they've stumbled upon a umm, source of additional and unpredicted concentrated particulate emission

also it seems there's a move back to global cooling which i remember reading about in the 70's


funny how Mckennas predictions re the speeding up
of events/novelty have seemingly shifted into high gear this year

before the usual suspects arrive and noting
a lot of new members on your last thread, and for their benefit i'll start off with an expose on

chemtrail debunkers methods and tactics:
Debunking Chemtrail Debunkers - The Government's Quisling Shills

They try to "counsel" people against using the guidance of their eyes and their common sense in chemtrails; they, instead, apparently, want them to blindly obey "the official story".

Orgone tech for dispersing chemtrails or whatever is being... added to the athmosphere
Goodbye Chemtrails, Hello Blue Skies! The Do-It-Yourself Kit for Sky Repair

Yes I'm quite familiar with these rules of disinformation. That's why I get upset with those that use them, especially the alice in wonderland techniques which is common to abusers.

They can try to put words in my mouth as has already been done once and use Alinsky methods all day till they are blue in the face. Once people open their eyes and observe who is using these methods and what they are deflecting... a whole new picture opens up and what is going on in these threads becomes obvious.

You understand the game they are playing.


And that they really want to : Own the Weather

The number of specific intervention methodologies is limited only by the imagination, but with few exceptions they involve infusing either energy or chemicals into the meteorological process in the right way, at the right place and time.

So again we have the disinfo brigade presenting data that they do not read and/or do not understand.

Then when the obvious is pointed out they resort to ad hominem attacks & changing the goal posts.

Yes...they are certainly aware of the "rules of disinfo" - invented by their fellow conspiracy believers. And they are very good at following them.

reply to post by Phage

Another study on the effects of small volcanic eruptions.

From 2002 onwards, a systematic increase has been reported by a number of investigators. Recently, the trend, based on ground-based lidar measurements, has been tentatively attributed to an increase of SO2 entering the stratosphere associated with coal burning in Southeast Asia. However, we demonstrate with these satellite measurements that the observed trend is mainly driven by a series of moderate but increasingly intense volcanic eruptions primarily at tropical latitudes. These events injected sulfur directly to altitudes between 18 and 20 km. The resulting aerosol particles are slowly lofted into the middle stratosphere by the Brewer-Dobson circulation and are eventually transported to higher latitudes.

www.agu.org...

reply to post by pianopraze


Your link to "Owning the Weather" has also been well explained already.

Some wish to read into it that title, and imagine all sorts of (wrong) assumptions. In short, that was a piece of imaginative science fiction. Not a "blueprint" or anything like that. More of a "What if??" kind of thing.....

So, can we focus on the NOAA research and studies??

reply to post by pianopraze


Wow! I see I have some catching up to do.

I just wanted to comment about the video in your Op. As I listen to it, I can detect the "between the lines" stuff pretty easily. One part that stuck out at me is the way he says at the 3:20 mark in his comments about cloud brightening, we'll do it "preferably out over the sea where nobody's going to object". They know damn well that the majority of people would not be pro-geoengineering if they knew all they should about it.

I also find it interesting the way Delhi is concerned about climate change and the rising waters. I did a thread not too long ago about New Delhi not being very concerned about earthquake preparedness since they're not even updating their existing structures in the event they get a massive quake again. I see rising water from perceived global warming as the least of their worries. Somebody obviously doesn't have their priorities straight. Then again, there's more money through investing in geoengineering than there is updating their citizens' living quarters and shops.

reply to post by pianopraze


Piano, thought it a perfect moment to add this military doc, its a shared
paper on Contrails, Chaff and other stuff.......

www.af.mil...

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
So again we have the disinfo brigade presenting data that they do not read and/or do not understand.

Then when the obvious is pointed out they resort to ad hominem attacks & changing the goal posts.

Yes...they are certainly aware of the "rules of disinfo" - invented by their fellow conspiracy believers. And they are very good at following them.

Thank you for illustrating for me.

Care to address my op, or otherwise bring anything to this discussion that is on topic?

For example, I found this wonderful video from the CFR discussing geoengineering in several ways including Solar Radiation Management through ejecting aerosols into the stratosphere.


You can count me amongst those "climate deniers" she mentions. I don't think we need to worry about global warming, I think we need to worry about triggering an ice age with geoengineering.

If phage is right and our climate swings so quickly with minor vulcanism, we sure as hell don't need to be geoengineering because a major volcano or two would send us tumbling...

But I really don't think it is minor vulcanism or meteors like NOAA said. I think SOMEONE, can't prove who, is geoengineering already.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by pianopraze

 

Wow! I see I have some catching up to do.

I just wanted to comment about the video in your Op. As I listen to it, I can detect the "between the lines" stuff pretty easily. One part that stuck out at me is the way he says at the 3:20 mark in his comments about cloud brightening, we'll do it "preferably out over the sea where nobody's going to object". They know damn well that the majority of people would not be pro-geoengineering if they knew all they should about it.

I also find it interesting the way Delhi is concerned about climate change and the rising waters. I did a thread not too long ago about New Delhi not being very concerned about earthquake preparedness since they're not even updating their existing structures in the event they get a massive quake again. I see rising water from perceived global warming as the least of their worries. Somebody obviously doesn't have their priorities straight. Then again, there's more money through investing in geoengineering than there is updating their citizens' living quarters and shops.

Yes they are discussing quite a few things with clouds that they call geoengineering now.

They have included cloud-seeding under the rubric of geoengineering:

Seeding such cirrus with very efficient heterogeneous ice nuclei should produce larger ice crystals due to vapor competition effects, thus increasing OLR and surface cooling.

Modification of cirrus clouds to reduce global warming

They have also admitted they don't have to get into stratosphere to spray for SRM

A potential delivery mechanism for the seeding material is already in place: the airline industry. Since seeding aerosol residence times in the troposphere

climate sensitivity is very sensitive to upper tropospheric cloud cover and humidity, making cirrus clouds a logical candidate for climate modification efforts. Cirrus clouds also affect OLR more than other cloud types, with their modification directly addressing the radiation imbalance imposed by greenhouse gases

Airlines can do it, and they couldn't put it in the jet fuel

Since commercial airliners routinely fly in the region where cold cirrus clouds exist, it is hoped that the seeding material could either be (1) dissolved or suspended in their jet fuel and later burned with the fuel to create seeding aerosol, or (2) injected into the hot engine exhaust, which should vaporize the seeding material, allowing it to condense as aerosol in the jet contrail.

reply to post by pianopraze

If phage is right and our climate swings so quickly with minor vulcanism, we sure as hell don't need to be geoengineering because a major volcano or two would send us tumbling...

Who said minor volcanism caused a climate swing? It resulted in a reduction of forcing by 0.1 W/m2. Partly offsetting the increase in forcing caused by the increase in CO2 over that period of time.

There have been more than a major volcano or two in our lifetimes. They didn't send us tumbling.

reply to post by pianopraze


Also, thought it a good time to bring in this document from The World Bank,
and its policy talk and schemes about Geoengineering.
Beyond Mitigation: Potential Options for Counter-Balancing
the Climatic and Environmental Consequences
of the Rising Concentrations of Greenhouse Gases

Michael C. MacCracken
Prepared as a Background Paper for the World Bank’s
World Development Report 2010

By Chief scientist for climate change programs at the Climate Institute, Washington D.C.
[email protected].

In addition to analyses of the offsets and their impacts, research, analysis, and even prototype
demonstrations are needed of the various proposed approaches for augmenting the stratospheric
loading of sulfate aerosols. Among the approaches proposed have been aircraft, artillery,
balloon-held hoses, and upward mixing and then stratospheric oxidation of tropospherically inert
carbonyl sulfide (COS), each of which would introduce scientific and technological aspects
meriting research and development.

www.climate.org...

reply to post by pianopraze


But, ...but, ... we need geoengineering. Since there's absolutely positively NO clean energy sources, we need to be able to counter all the fossil fuels we're addicted to. Besides, the rich are going to be massively wealthy since they are invested in fossil fuel sources as well as geoengineering technology. You know that keeping the big cats fat is most important.

/sarcasm

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by pianopraze

 

Your link to "Owning the Weather" has also been well explained already.

Some wish to read into it that title, and imagine all sorts of (wrong) assumptions. In short, that was a piece of imaginative science fiction. Not a "blueprint" or anything like that. More of a "What if??" kind of thing.....

So, can we focus on the NOAA research and studies??

It is what it is, and states what it is right up front. But it shows what the military want to do and what they are working at doing. They develop a plan of attack then work on implementing it. That is a paper showing that weather is one of the things they want to use. And there is lots of documentation on weather modification in the vietnam era by the military... that was long enough ago SOME of it is being declassified. But that was 40-50 years ago... I'm sure they have come a long way since then...

... don't you?

Yes they supposedly are bound by the geneva convention and other treaties:

The Convention on the Prohibition of Military or any other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD Convention) is an instrument of international disarmament law specifically intended to protect the environment in the event of armed conflict. It prohibits hostile use of the environment as a means of warfare. The provisions of Protocol I of 1977 additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 form an essential complement to those of the ENMOD Convention, as they directly prohibit damage to the environment during armed conflict. Other rules and principles of international humanitarian law also confer protection on the environment during armed conflict, though without mentioning it specifically. This is particularly the case with general customary principles regarding the conduct of hostilities, such as the principle of distinction, which limits attacks to military objectives, and that of proportionality, which prohibits the use of means and methods of warfare that cause excessive damage. The ENMOD Convention was negotiated at the Conference of the Disarmament Commission and was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 10 December 1976. It was opened for signature in Geneva on 18 May 1977, and entered into force on 5 October 1978.

link

But their actions in MK-ULTRA, rendition flights, Guantanamo etc... and the Owning the Weather document itself shows they aren't going to be bound by any treaties or laws. They will do whatever they want...

Don't you agree?

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by pianopraze

 

If phage is right and our climate swings so quickly with minor vulcanism, we sure as hell don't need to be geoengineering because a major volcano or two would send us tumbling...

Who said minor volcanism caused a climate swing? It resulted in a reduction of forcing by 0.1 W/m2. Partly offsetting the increase in forcing caused by the increase in CO2 over that period of time.

There have been more than a major volcano or two in our lifetimes. They didn't send us tumbling.

edit on 3/12/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

NOAA did, quote in my OP - sorry if you object to "swing" ... modification better?

That is the whole goal of SRM, climate modification. Neither I nor you can prove how much has or has not been caused by this minor vulcanism... NOAA can't even do that apparently. If they are right in their assumptions.

However, would you not agree that if this minor vulcanism is indeed causing such a modification, then major vulcanism on top of SRM - which could send us into an ice age - is more dangerus than any slow, gradual climate warming?

I suggest, weither or not SRM has begun, this is technology that SHOULD NOT be considered...

And I've proved beyond a shadow of a doubt some of the biggest political organizations on the planet are considering geoengineering even if I can't prove it has begun other than circumstantial evidence.

Profit and Politics are driving this whole geoengineering discussion. CFR want's control and carbon credits is the new medium they want to use to control us...

Look at the future they want us either in a mind controled city, or a freedom slum:

That's real, not a farce. It's by this organization...

Who is this organization? It's some of the biggest corporations on earth! Here is a full list from their webpage, but a few examples include:
Bank of America: Merrill Lynch
eBay
Hewlett-Packard
Kraft Foods
Panasonic
Pepsi
Sony Ericsson
Time Warner

I couldn't make this poop up if I tried

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by pianopraze

 

Sorry, dude...again, no "proof" as suggested (but, you did use a '?' in the title).

Given that, the OP is a clutch of facts and misinformation, rolled into one. It is also a bit of a 'blitzkrieg" of info, making it more time-consuming to address each and every aspect where sources are known to be questionable.

I made a conspiracy theory on geoengineering, in the geoengineering forum on a conspiracy theory website...

**shocker**

You would rather I state my theory as fact and call them chemtrails so you can make fun of me?

Sorry.

I am presenting hard hitting document after hard hitting document showing they are considering geoengineering through SRM by injecting aerosols in the stratosphere... exactly what NOAA is finding.

I show a consistent pattern of actions by our government of lying then later admitting. Why would I assume they change their SOP on this subject?

Why would you?

reply to post by pianopraze

NOAA did, quote in my OP - sorry if you object to "swing" ... modification better?

Yes. "Swing" connotes a dramatic change. Neither the source article nor the article you quoted indicates that. All it says is that small volcanic eruptions need to be considered as influences on climate.

Neither I nor you can prove how much has or has not been caused by this minor vulcanism... NOAA can't even do that apparently.

On the contrary, from your source:

“Stratospheric aerosol increased surprisingly rapidly in that time, almost doubling during the decade,” Daniel said. “The increase in aerosols since 2000 implies a cooling effect of about 0.1 watts per square meter – enough to offset some of the 0.28 watts per square meter warming effect from the carbon dioxide increase during that same period.”

www.noaanews.noaa.gov...

However, would you not agree that if this minor vulcanism is indeed causing such a modification, then major vulcanism on top of SRM - which could send us into an ice age - is more dangerus than any slow, gradual climate warming?

Well that would depend on the amount of artificial SRM I suppose but no, I don't think it could send us into an ice age unless there were a bunch of major eruptions which continued for some time. The Pinatubo eruption (quite major) caused a drop in temperature of about 0.25ºC which peaked a year or so after the eruption. So, if SRM were ever used and if it was successful at stabilizing temperatures, a Pinatubo eruption or two probably wouldn't cause an ice age.

I suggest, weither or not SRM has begun, this is technology that SHOULD NOT be considered...

Yes, there is much research being done on the potential effects of SRM. But I disagree about your stance on research. While I don't think SRM is necessarily a good option, I think research (in the form of modeling) should be done in the event that climate change (warming) reaches the point of catastrophic loss of life and property. That same research will also help us understand the impacts of major volcanism and other factors on our climate.

Originally posted by pianopraze

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
So again we have the disinfo brigade presenting data that they do not read and/or do not understand.

Then when the obvious is pointed out they resort to ad hominem attacks & changing the goal posts.

Yes...they are certainly aware of the "rules of disinfo" - invented by their fellow conspiracy believers. And they are very good at following them.

Thank you for illustrating for me.

Care to address my op, or otherwise bring anything to this discussion that is on topic?

You are the one who raised the "rules of disinformation" - I hardly see how you can complain about me commenting on them!

reply to post by pianopraze


Thanks for throwing in the clip of Vee and the sustainable cities. My favorite is Sprawlville.

It's not difficult to see that geoengineering, GMOs, using plants for SRM, and "natural" disasters are all facets of a much greater agenda. I believe we're seeing more than just the tip of the iceberg at this point. Just as you demonstrated by pointing out geoengineering consistencies within the Illuminati Card Deck, it's becoming clear as day.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by pianopraze

 

I suggest, weither or not SRM has begun, this is technology that SHOULD NOT be considered...

Yes, there is much research being done on the potential effects of SRM. But I disagree about your stance on research. While I don't think SRM is necessarily a good option, I think research (in the form of modeling) should be done in the event that climate change (warming) reaches the point of catastrophic loss of life and property. That same research will also help us understand the impacts of major volcanism and other factors on our climate.

Phage, how many billions of dollars spent all to come to the same conclusions?
Over a decade and counting...

in 2002, Teller, who worked for the U.S. Department
of Energy, along with colleagues Roderick Hyde and Lowell
Wood, submitted an article to the U.S. National Academy
of Engineering in which they argued that geoengineering
– not reduction of GHG emissions – “is the path mandated
by the pertinent provisions of the UN Framework
Convention on Climate Change.”17 www.etcgroup.org...

www.geoengineeringwatch.org...

I see another agenda at work,
I dont see honest scientists hard at work finding an ethical solution.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

You are the one who raised the "rules of disinformation" - I hardly see how you can complain about me commenting on them!

And.... he still posts off topic....

Look ATG, I am posting hard hitting evidence backing up my conspiracy theory... what exactly are you doing?

I have shown there is a lot of smoke... I can't prove theirs fire yet... but you know how that saying goes.

I am exposing a whole new group of people to a very dangerous reality. Geoengineering is russian roulette with the entire planet... and for what motivation? As far as I can see it's profit and control by a globalist "elite"...

Even the geoengineers themselves say that this is a HUGE gamble and could result in horrific side effects, some they know and some they haven't even considered!

Geoengineering
 should 
be 
viewed 
as 
a 
choice 
of 
last
 resort... .
Geoengineering
 would 
be 
a 
gamble.

I
 don’t 
think 
scientists 
know 
enough 
today 
about 
consequences 
of 
geoengineering
 to 
climate...

I have shown circumstantial evidence at worst, at best I am connecting some dots exposing a very dangerous situation.

Now would you care to post on topic?