Geoengineering proof from NOAA?

reply to post by burntheships

Phage, how many billions of dollars spent all to come to the same conclusions

I give up. How many?
But I'm pretty sure not many (or even one) billions have been spent at this point.

Teller was an interesting guy. He thought thermonuclear devices would be a good way to dredge harbors.

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

You mean like reducing carbon emissions? Or carbon sequestration? I guess you haven't been looking in the right places.

Originally posted by pianopraze

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...

Where they say:

Forum for the Future’s scenarios are not predictions or depictions of desirable futures which we wish to promote, and they do not represent our vision of a sustainable future. They are pictures of different possible futures, designed to help people understand the major trends that are shaping our world. They aim to challenge, inspire and excite, so that people feel motivated to plan for a better, more sustainable future.

So quite obviously it IS a farce - an unpleasant parody of what the future might be like if we don't plan in advance. There were three other similar parody videos of extreme possible scenarios.
www.forumforthefuture.org...

Originally posted by pianopraze

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?

Replying to your posts to me of course.

BTW so far your "hard hitting evidence backing up my conspiracy theory" has been completely debunked by others.

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

the "fire" has been revealed by others - and it seems you are actually using a smoke generator to simulate one!!.

Your "hard hitting evidence backing up my conspiracy theory" is all smoke and mirrors!!

reply to post by Phage


LOL!!! LMAO!!!

Teller was an interesting guy. He thought thermonuclear weapons would be good for dredging harbors.

Uh oh.....next come the "straw-man" complaints.

Oh, wait....."straw-man" are the main component of the so-called "geoengineering" and "chemtrail" claims, usually!!


@@ OP:

SHOW THE PROOF!!

Not this load of innuendo crap, and the snide allusions and such....real, hard evidence.

And, cut out the confirmation bias, along the way......

reply to post by Phage


Then we will have to agree to disagree.

I see this as dangerous, and the potentially planet wide side effects as unconscionable.

The planet would go on, but we would be set for mass death, starvation and worse. Something they wrote in stone they want anyway...

Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.

Of course the globalist "elites" already have their disaster shelters prepared... they don't give a damn about me...




... or you.

Another great thread here and I cannot thank you enough for posting honest information here.

"Sorry, dude...again, no "proof" as suggested (but, you did use a '?' in the title" This is a quote from Proud Whacker.....Now I ask you, does this sound like a statement from a Pilot with over 40 years flying time?

Maybe a Californian sufer Dude but certainly not a pilot from anywhere else....with an approximate age of at least 60 and probably closer to 70 years of age....


To the OP keep them coming and they can't stop the flow here they can only hope to delay the inevitable.

Regards, Iwinder

Originally posted by Phage
But I'm pretty sure not many (or even one) billions have been spent at this point.

I'm pretty sure your data is not up to date.

2 Billion Each Year

The Government Accountability Office found in its report more than 50 current studies,

totaling slightly more than $100 million, focusing on piecemeal strategies to reverse climate change,

but none directly addresses what would happen if adventurous programs on carbon dioxide

reduction and solar radiation management were put in place.

"Without a coordinated federal strategy for geoengineering, it is difficult for agencies to determine
the extent of relevant research, and policymakers may lack key information to inform subsequent
decisions on engineering and existing climate science efforts,"

the report said, adding that most of the $2 billion spent each year on federal climate science

research could also help geoengineering with better coordination.
www.myfoxmemphis.com...

2 Billion a year, just the U.S. Alone...yeah they couldnt possibly be doing anything...

reply to post by Uncinus


Then why are they quietly lining up to do things like agenda 21?

Eugenics?

“Eugenic goals are most likely to be attained under another name than eugenics.” - Frederick Osborn

“Eugenics views itself as the fourth leg of the chair of civilization, the other three being a) a thrifty expenditure of natural resources, b) mitigation of environmental pollution, and c) maintenance of a human population not exceeding the planet’s carrying capacity. Eugenics, which can be thought of as human ecology, is thus part and parcel of the environmental movement.”
- John Glad “Future Human Evolution: Eugenics in the Twenty-First Century.”

You see the UN has been at eugenics from the beginning. UNESCO, the UN education authority has been pushing global government and eugenics through the worlds education system:

"The general philosophy of UNESCO should be a scientific world humanism, global in extent and evolutionary in background...its education program it can stress the ultimate need for world political unity and familiarize all peoples with the implications of the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world organization...Political unification in some sort of world government will be required...Tasks for the media division of UNESCO (will be) to promote the growth of a common outlook shared by all nations and cultures...to help the emergence of a single world culture....Even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable."
- The first director -general of UNESCO Sir Julian Huxley, 1948, "UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy."

And trying to finagle carbon credits as the new currency?

Cap and trade is just the first step towards a new currency based on carbon credit... which as that video planed-opolis shows is one based on this ponzi scheme:


They might not get all these things, but they sure are trying.

Do you really want to be on their side of this?

reply to post by Uncinus

So quite obviously it IS a farce - an unpleasant parody of what the future might be like if we don't plan in advance. There were three other similar parody videos of extreme possible scenarios.

Yes. So funny, aren't they? Making something out to be a joke is just another way of hiding something in plain sight.

I was going to point you to a video of the MSM admitting that aerosols are being sprayed from airplanes of some sort, but, strangely, it has been removed.
It was discussed on this thread by human_alien here: www.abovetopsecret.com...
The video showed an April Fool's broadcast about the trails in the sky. At the end of the segment, the newcaster makes the comment similar to: "I hope the joke's not on us." By him stating this, it makes me think he's worried that chemtrails aren't a joke. I'll post the video if I'm able to locate it.

Originally posted by Iwinder
Another great thread here and I cannot thank you enough for posting honest information here.

"Sorry, dude...again, no "proof" as suggested (but, you did use a '?' in the title" This is a quote from Proud Whacker.....Now I ask you, does this sound like a statement from a Pilot with over 40 years flying time?

Maybe a Californian sufer Dude but certainly not a pilot from anywhere else....with an approximate age of at least 60 and probably closer to 70 years of age....


To the OP keep them coming and they can't stop the flow here they can only hope to delay the inevitable.

Regards, Iwinder

Thank you for the kind words.

Sooner or later the truth will come out... it's dripping now, but like a crack in the damn... it will come to light eventually. They want to do this even if they haven't started yet.

I am working to expose what they are doing. People can't fight something they can't see... we're exposing it here, and using their own papers to do it.

Geoengineering is insanity.

Every time man tries to control nature there are lots of unintended side effects. They can model away billions of our tax dollars and still not know whats going to happen... and then one big volcano and we are through!!!

We are out billions to the globalists pockets and this technology could potentially kill us all... sounds like a win win to those corrupt bastards and a loose loose to me and you.

reply to post by burntheships

My data is fine.
You fell for Fox's spin.

Would you like to see the GAO report?

www.gao.gov...

Now, please find how Fox came to this conclusion:

the report said, adding that most of the $2 billion spent each year on federal climate science research could also help geoengineering with better coordination.

Never mind. I'll do it.

In addition to these efforts, federal officials noted that a large fraction of the existing federal research and observations on basic climate change and earth science could be relevant to improving understanding about proposed geoengineering approaches and their potential impacts.

Does it say "most"? No. Does it say it would be spent on geoengineering research? No.
It says that the knowledge gained by existing climate research could be applicable to geoengineering research. I suppose you, like Fox News, thinks climate research is a pointless waste of money.

Staff from federal offices coordinating the U.S. response to climate change—CEQ, OSTP, and USGCRP—stated that they do not currently have a geoengineering strategy or position. Additionally, a USGCRP official stated that, while the USGCRP could establish an interagency working group to coordinate a federal effort in geoengineering research, such a group is not currently necessary because of the small amount of federal funding specifically directed toward these activities.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Replying to your posts to me of course.

BTW so far your "hard hitting evidence backing up my conspiracy theory" has been completely debunked by others.

the "fire" has been revealed by others - and it seems you are actually using a smoke generator to simulate one!!.

Your "hard hitting evidence backing up my conspiracy theory" is all smoke and mirrors!!

edit on 12-3-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)

They've debunk all those scientific papers on Solar Radiation Management?



They haven't even tried. I see someone with a smoke and mirror machine all right...

And still you fail to contribute anything of substance, not even a logical argument.

You do provide lots of amusement though

Thank you for your contribution!

Care to address my OP now? Topic is NOAA's data showing a significant increase of aerosols providing SRM - just like in all these patents and papers I've been posting... and the governments long history of lying as they do whatever the hell they please up to and including killing people.

You might never admit anything, but I know other people are seeing the big picture here.

... if they kill people I'm sure they wouldn't hesitate to kill a few chickens.

You better wake up and see which side you really are on. While you clown away amusing us they are preparing soup...

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by burntheships

 

My data is fine.

No, Phage...its not.

Never mind. I'll do it.

nice try, but no thanks

Here is just one report.
www.aaas.org...

The American Association for the Advancement of Science's report,
A snapshot of US Federal spending on research, including budgets for 2011
and how these numbers compare to previous years

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

NOAA’s total budget request is $5.6 billion, which would be an increase of 17.0 percent. Of this, $437 million would be for climate research funding, which is an increase of $77 million.

$437 million spent on climate change research in one year, in one agency. Here's another:


National Science Foundation (NSF). NSF would receive $7.4 billion in FY 2011, an increase of 8 percent relative to the FY 2010 appropriation. The request includes $370 million under the USGCRP framework, which is an increase of 16.0 percent. The Geosciences Directorate would receive $955 million (a 7.4 percent increase) in FY 2011 with $480 million going to Atmospheric and Earth Sciences. NSF’s Science, Engineering, and Education for Sustainability (SEES) program would receive $765.5 million. This is intended to promote discoveries and capability needed to inform societal actions in ways that contribute to environmental and economic sustainability. NSF’s request also includes $19 million for RE-ENERGYSE, a joint program with the Department of Energy intended to promote education in clean energy research. An additional $10 million would fund Climate Change Education, which seeks to increase understanding of climate among the next generation of Americans.

$480 million here, $765.5 million there, throw in another $10 million for climate education and you've got $1.25 billion dollars spent on climate change research just at the NSF, just in ONE YEAR! Next is NASA:


National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). NASA’s FY 2011 budget request is $19.0 billion. NASA Earth Science is a relatively small fraction of this total, $1.8 billion or 9.5 percent, but would increase substantially relative to the FY 2010 appropriation (up 26.8 percent). NASA Earth Science funds climate change R&D through several programs. Two of particular note are Earth Science Research, which would receive $438.1 million (an increase of 14 percent)...

It seems like the $450 million mark is a common budget for climate research among these agencies. NOAA's funding, the NSF's atmospheric science funding, and NASA's Earth Science research are all around $450 million. It may be an interesting coincidence. Next is the Department of Energy:

Department of Energy (DOE).


The President’s budget request for DOE in FY 2011 is $28.4 billion. This includes $4.6 billion for R&D in the Office of Science (an increase of 3.8 percent), and $2.4 billion for energy R&D (an increase of 6.8 percent). Within the Office of Science, the Office of Biological and Environmental Research (BER), which supports basic research in atmospheric sciences, terrestrial ecosystems and climate modeling, would receive $627 million (an increase of 3.8 percent). BER’s request includes $28.6 million for the Terrestrial Ecosystem Science (TES) program, which examines the impact of climate change on biological systems and land-surface carbon cycle feedbacks to climate change.

$627 million taken from a taxpayer or borrowed from a future taxpayer, spent in one year. Next the Department of the Interior:


Department of the Interior (DOI).

DOI requests $171 million (an increase of 26.0 percent) for its Climate Change Adaptation initiative, which seeks to identify areas and species most vulnerable to climate change and implement coping strategies. Of this, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) would receive $77.9 million for climate science (an increase of 15.5 percent).

And the list goes on and on and on.

Thanks for putting the thread together praze, and all this stuff tells me one of two things, either our planet is in danger of solar radiation or climate change so great that we must address it, or, there is a hell of a lot of money to be made by certain(chemical?) industries and govs. Can you imagine the monetary value of such endeavors?
What I don't get is in another thread they say just 10 balloons can lower the global temps 2dC over a couple of years, so if that is enough, why aren't there more plans, internationally, for that resolution?

Additionally, it seems that industrialization(China reference) does affect the climate, so now what? I thought humans do not contribute to climate change. Such a fuzzy subject with much to gain and/or lose. Only time and research will reveal what is going on I suppose. But the whole geo-engineering issue has become more evident over the years, on a global scale, which just a couple of years ago was considered far fetched and unlikely.

Keep up the good work man,
spec

Originally posted by speculativeoptimist
Thanks for putting the thread together praze, and all this stuff tells me one of two things, either our planet is in danger of solar radiation or climate change so great that we must address it, or, there is a hell of a lot of money to be made by certain(chemical?) industries and govs. Can you imagine the monetary value of such endeavors?
What I don't get is in another thread they say just 10 balloons can lower the global temps 2dC over a couple of years, so if that is enough, why aren't there more plans, internationally, for that resolution?

Additionally, it seems that industrialization(China reference) does affect the climate, so now what? I thought humans do not contribute to climate change. Such a fuzzy subject with much to gain and/or lose. Only time and research will reveal what is going on I suppose. But the whole geo-engineering issue has become more evident over the years, on a global scale, which just a couple of years ago was considered far fetched and unlikely.

Keep up the good work man,
spec

Thanks for coming in... I think you hit the nail on the head... follow the money.

The same people that brought you all the other bubbles... want to introduce and even bigger global bubble they can scam TRILLIONS of dollars:


The only thing they have done so far is screw us over time and again...

... why would we fall for it again?

Especially with one this dangerous which could potentially kill most of the population of the planet.

Doen't matter which side of the global warming debate you choose... this is the wrong solution.

I wonder what breakthroughs our scientist could come up with in solar and other clean energies if we gave them those same billions... and you know it will go into the trillions eventually.

Give the money to scientists and small business owners who are innovation and building solutions.... not the same globalists who have been destroying our financial systems over and over.

How many billion do you think it would take to give everyone a solar/wend/other renewable generators big enough to run their hose? I bet its a lot fewer than they are going to spend on this.... and with much worse possible side effects. And the more money they spend the more people will innovate and the cleaner our planet will become.

... but this is really about power and control from a top down system.

reply to post by burntheships

I thought we were talking about the "many billions" spent on geoengineering. Did you even read what you posted? I don't see anything there about geoengineering. It's about climate science and other programs.


Here is a GAO report which presents the actual numbers.

Most of the research focused on mitigation efforts, such as geological sequestration of CO2, which were identified as relevant to CDR approaches but not designed to address them directly. GAO found that nine activities, totaling about $1.9 million, directly investigated SRM or less conventional CDR approaches.

www.gao.gov...

Of $100.9 million spent on geoengineering (mostly sequestration research) in 2009 and 2010, about 2% was spent on SRM research. At that rate it'll take 1,000 years to spend the first billion.

Another thread that has hit it out of the ballpark!

Indeed no sign of fire yet but the smoke trail is leading us closer.

I will reiterate once again....the sceptics will need to be bonked on the head with an international announcement.

Until interanational accords are signed by all countries, public disclosure of SRM will not be forthcoming. But CFR does not need permission for their clandestine operations now do they?

But those of us who know disclosure policies of gov'ts, already know what's happening. Right?

Major props to Praze, and BTS for their outstanding contributions.

ETA: re; OPOLIS future....that is downright creepy! We're not far off though. Humanity's ignorance will lead down this path.

Originally posted by Goldcurrent
Until interanational accords are signed by all countries, public disclosure of SRM will not be forthcoming.

There is public disclosure of the state of SRM all over the place - the article linked in the OP is a perfect example of this.

You're supposed to deny ignorance on here - not demonstrate it!!

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


OK...SRM being done by spraying aerosols such as sulphates by jets. Is that good enough for you chickenspook?

reply to post by Goldcurrent


The state of that happening is also completely public - lots of articles detailing the proposals and research are all over this forum.

do try to keep up!!