Showing posts with label climate change. Show all posts
Showing posts with label climate change. Show all posts

04 March 2010

Mr MaGoo Egg Head Scientists Miss Chem Trails


As a follow up to the previous posts concerning 'chem trails' you might want to learn the meaning of 'Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-engineering' - or SAG for short. SAG is what scientists claim needs to be done to 'save' the planet. It involves changing the climate by spraying chemicals, metals and other substances into the high atmosphere over population areas. They are concerned about global warming. The scientists seem to be in some sort of cocoon, because they are blissfully unaware -apparently- of the massive amount of spraying already underway all over the world. I guess it is comforting to know they are upholding their scientific credentials by calling for 'research' to determine if such spraying, if it were to be initiated, is actually safe. They seem not to notice what is in the sky above their heads.

Enjoy. Learn. Share.

What In The World Are They Spraying?
By Michael J. Murphy
03 March, 2010Countercurrents.org
What would you say if you were told that airplanes were regularly spraying toxic aerosols in the skies above every major region of the world? That is exactly what a group of protestors were claiming outside of the annual American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) meeting that was held in San Diego from February 18-22. However, inside the convention center was a different story. The scientists gathered to discuss the “plausibility” of implementing various Geo-engineering campaigns throughout the world, all under the guise that the Earth has a man-made global warming problem that can be solved in-part by spraying aerosol aluminum and other particles into the sky to block the sun. When these scientists were asked about the possibility of existing aerosol programs; they stated that no aerosol spraying programs have been implemented to date. A little confused? Why would protestors gather outside of a meeting making claims that world-wide aerosol programs were under way if scientist were only now discussing the possibility of implementing these programs? Could it be that one of these groups is being deceived?
Mauro Oliveira, the Webmaster of Geoengineeringwatch.org, was one of the protestors. He claimed that the program for Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-engineering (SAG), AKA chemtrails, has been well under way around the world. As a matter of fact, Oliveira stated that witnesses from around the globe claim that heavy aerosol spraying is occurring almost every day over just about every city. He went on to explain the difference between a contrail and a chemtrail. He stated that when a jet airplane flies at a certain altitude, a visible trail of streaks of condensed water vapor sometimes form in the wake of the aircraft. This is called a contrail. Contrails are normal and usually dissipate in a few seconds. They are very similar to when we breathe in cold weather. According to Oliveira, what occurs behind a SAG plane spraying aerosols is quite different. What can be seen is a thick white line also called a chemtrail that lingers in the sky for several hours. The SAG lines are sprayed into the upper atmosphere and then spread out forming what then appear to be clouds. The particles from these aerosols then fall to the ground where they enter our soil and water and can also be inhaled.
Another group of protestors had traveled over 10 hours from a small Shasta County community in Northern California. They became concerned about SAG when many from this community began to see dramatic changes not only in the sky, but also on the ground. Trees were dying, grass was not growing and many farmers were having difficulty getting any crops to grow on their farms. The crisis prompted biologists from the community to take action by testing the soil. The results were shocking. Aluminum, barium and other elements were found to be up to thousands of times higher than normal limits. Such high quantities lead to unhealthy PH levels in the soil which can be deadly to ecological life systems. These shocking results led to additional testing of Lake Shasta with samples from the Pit River arm tributary that tested over 4,610 times the maximum contamination level of aluminum allowed in drinking water in the state of California. Also, peer reviewed scientific studies conclude that bio-available aluminum, now found in huge quantities in rain world-wide, is very harmful to flora and thus the eco-system. Ironically, these are the same substances the scientists are considering implementing in the various potential “future” aerosol spraying campaigns that were being discussed at the meeting.
A large number of other protesters became interested in SAG after experiencing burning eyes, migraine headaches, anxiety, irregular heartbeat, high blood pressure and other health problems on days that airplanes were allegedly witnessed spraying aerosols in the sky. Deborah Whitman, Founder and President of the non-profit environmental organization Environmental Voices and also Producer of the documentary “Sky Lines” is no stranger to these symptoms. She has been hospitalized over 51 times on what she calls “heavy spraying days”. Whitman has committed her life to helping people who claim to be experiencing similar problems resulting from aerosol spraying and gets calls from all over the U.S. in response to her website and documentary. Her recommended health tips can be found at www.environmentalvoices.org. Other indicators that possibly validate the claim that SAG is connected to health problems are the respiratory mortality rate, which has risen from eight on the list of mortality to third in the past five years, and the fact that Alzheimer’s and other illnesses linked to aluminum have continued to rise around the globe at astronomical rates since the inception of the alleged spraying.
The AAAS meeting hosted some of the world’s leading geo-engineering scientists. With years of education and even more experience in their respected fields, the scientists looked at geo-engineering issues from many angles. Workshop subjects ranged from, the effectiveness of geo-engineering to potential problems and even touched upon the issue of ethics. According to independent reporter Stewart Howe of Los Angeles, all of the scientists seemed to be looking for solutions to what they believe is the problem of global warming. Howe stated that the scientists appeared to be carefully weighing both the pros and cons of SAG when presenting potential campaigns to address the man-made global warming theory. Many were actually advocating alternative methods to combat this issue due to the potential risks of SAG that include droughts, ozone depletion, less solar power, decimated weather patterns, military use of technology and other various environmental impacts. Howe said, “after witnessing the aerosol spraying for years, I was surprised by the discourse among scientists.” Stewart went on to say that he believes that most of the scientists attending seemed to be separated from the knowledge of any current SAG deployment. As a matter of fact when asked about current SAG operations, leading geo-engineering scientist Ken Caldiera replied that he was unaware of any current aerosol spraying operations and when prompted to explain the long lingering trails left behind planes, he stated that they are simply normal contrails from jets.
David Keith, another leading scientist and expert in the field of geo-engineering, discussed the well-funded studies that have been conducted to predict potential future risks as well as benefits associated with geo-engineering. Some of the potential benefits include a cooler planet, and the reduction of melting sea ice and rising sea levels. Keith discussed what aerosol particles would be most effective in achieving the stated goals of the SAG program. He went on to say that initially sulfur was considered, however, aluminum is more effective and can be used by adding ten to twenty mega-tons per year into the stratosphere. When asked about health related studies that have been conducted to predict the potential risks of adding the particles in our air, Keith stated that many studies have been completed and indicate few risks. However, when asked specifically about the use of aluminum as an aerosol, he said “we haven’t done anything serious on aluminum, so there could be something terrible that we will find tomorrow that we haven't looked at." After the meeting, Keith showed consideration to the protesters by initiating a discussion about the SAG program outside where the protestors were standing. When confronted with concerns about SAG deployment from the group, he went on to say that he shared similar views and is against any deployment until proper research is completed to determine potential risks of aerosol spraying. He also went on to say that he is unaware of any current SAG operations, but, would be willing to look at any scientific proof if presented to him.
As the skies around our world continue to change, there is strong evidence that points toward current deployment of massive aerosol operations. Could it be that scientific data and studies are being used to implement pre-mature full-scale SAG programs with-out the knowledge of the top scientists who are involved with the research? If so, what kind of ethical considerations can we expect from the geo-engineering community in the future? It is hard to believe that the strange white lines in the skies witnessed around the world and the toxic elements found in the soil, water and air are from an unrelated source. We the people, in partnership with the scientific community need to challenge not only the environmental and health risks associated with SAG but also the numerous world-wide allegations about current deployment. It is imperative that we become educated and involved in uncovering the truth of this alleged crime against both nature and humanity. The future of our planet depends on it. As concerns continue to grow around the world about this issue, additional information including meet-up groups can be found on various chemtrail and geo-engineering websites.
Michael J. Murphy is a journalist and political activist from the Los Angeles area whose work focuses on issues that go beyond the interest of the Corporate mainstream media.

10 December 2009

The Link Between Climate Change and Depopulation


According to Lord Monckton, the Copenhagen Conference on Climate Change, may result in the adoption of a treaty that brings in World Government under the guise of doing something about climate change. The 'climate-gate' scandal has exposed the corrupt science behind the climate change movement, headed by Al Gore, among others. In addition to World Government, population reduction is directly linked to a reduction in CO2 emmissions. Increased CO2 promotes increased plant growth and will help to feed the world's hungry people. Cutting it back to pre-industrial levels will reduce food production by 12% causing the deaths by starvation of hundreds of millions of people who today exist on the margins.

Enjoy. Learn. Share.



Population Reduction Question Brought Up at Copenhagen
Anti-Climate-Change Lobby Conference
COPENHAGEN, Dec. 8 (EIRNS)--Today, the second alternative
conference against the climate change lobby was held, entitled
"The Copenhagen Climate Challenge Conference," with senior
scientists and other speakers, sponsored by Climate-Sense, CFACT,
and NIPCC (http://www.climate-sense.com/). It was initiated by persons
from Denmark and Great Britain, with Lord Monckton on the board
of advisors. Today's speakers are listed below.
A LaRouche representative asked the following question after
a speech by H. Leighton Steward, a Texan geologist,
"environmentalist," and energy executive, who is promoting the
increase of CO2 to produce increased plant growth. His speech
documented the increase of grain productivity, and other plant
growth, as a result of increased CO2, and noted that plants also
need less water (his website is: http://www.plantsneedco2.org/). During
his speech, he brought up the fact that reducing CO2 would reduce
plant growth, and therefore cause population reduction.
"My name is Michelle Rasmussen from the Schiller Institute
and {Executive Intelligence Review}, and I wanted to raise this
population-reduction question with you. You said that the effect
of the policies to reduce CO2 -- that can lead to a reduced
population, [Yes, he replied] and I wanted to bring that up,
because we are circulating this statement, by the friends of
Lyndon LaRouche, the U.S. economist, that maybe the reason why
the environmentalist movement is pushing for this reduction in
the human activities, is purposely to have an ideology that would
go along with a reduction in population. [He starts to answer]
Just one more thing. Let's remember that Prince Philip, the
founder of the World Wildlife Fund, said that the Earth is better
if there were only 2 billion people. What do you have to say to
this?"
"Well, I say that a lot of people do feel that way, because
I've read, and I've heard some people say that. Exactly that. But
relative to the real fact, not getting into that philosophical
area, since the start of the industrial revolution in 1860, the
plant growth on Earth has increased 12%, our food crops, etc. Our
forests have grown, our trees, as you can see, have grown at a
higher rate, our forests have improved, or gotten more robust by
18%. So most of the environmental groups, unless they can figure
out what you're up to, when you say, 'where do you think the
atmospheric CO2 should be? Should it be where we are today, at
385 parts per million, or should it be 350, as Dr. Pachari, the
head of the IPCC, says?' Most of them, given the choice, will go
back to the beginning of the industrial revolution, and say, well
it was 280 there, and that's where it ought to be, before man
started tampering with all this CO2. So all we have to do is go
back logically and say, our food growth, on the chart, would
decrease by 12%.
"There are already a billion people on Earth who are
severely undernourished. Associated Press said two weeks ago that
a child is dying from malnutrition every six seconds. That's
their statistics, not mine, that's Associated Press in all the
major newspapers. So you can just logically go back and say, if
we reduced the food supply on Earth by 12%, a lot of those people
are going to die, because they're almost dead now. And a lot of
them will die because of malnutrition, lack of nutrition."
Other speakers on the first day of the two-day conference
were: Prof. Nils-Axel Moerner, on world sea levels; Prof. Cliff
Ollier, on glaciers; Stuart Wheeler; Prof. Ian Plimer, on the
ever changing Earth climate; Prof. Henrik Svensmark, on the solar
activity-cloud research.