from ActivistPost Website
Geoengineering is a type of weather modification (or climate engineering) which has been researched, but, until recently, has been considered too unpredictable to attempt on a large scale.
According to a 2013 congressional report:
The U.S. government's caution with geoengineering programs seems to be shifting as indicated by a new announcement related to an upcoming real-world climate engineering experiment.
At the recent "Forum on Solar Geoengineering Research," Harvard engineer (and consistent proponent of climate engineering) David Keith announced his plan for a new project that will assess the risks and benefits of deploying geoengineering on a large public scale.
Keith and fellow
engineer, Frank Keutsch, will research the benefits and risks
by spraying particles such as sulfur dioxide, alumina, or calcium
carbonate from a high-altitude balloon over Arizona during 2018.
The move to real-world testing of geoengineering should not come as a surprise given that in the final days of former-President Obama's administration the U.S. Global Change Research Program released a report detailing the path of research into climate change, including new research on geoengineering.
With the release of their report the GCRP became the first scientists in the federal government to formally recommend studies involving geoengineering.
David Keith said there will be a multi-phase plan for research and conducting real-world testing within the next 18 months.
Keith also called for stratospheric spraying within three years and continuous spraying for at least a century...
Technology Review reports that Keith said his team is already in the process of,
The very notion of unilateral geoengineering means that other countries could face potential risks.
This creates a need for new governance structures, or possibly, a global government.
This makes the Trump administration's support for geoengineering curious since President Trump has been very outspoken against "globalists."
However, as The Guardian notes,
The Guardian also notes that while Energy Secretary Rex Tillerson was still CEO at ExxonMobil his company was involved in developing geoengineering techniques.
David Keith did note that his next move depends on what an advisory committee recommends.
Keith's experiments are publicly acknowledged as some of the earliest, large-scale geoengineering experiments conducted outside of a lab or computer model, although this view is disputed by some researchers (more on that in a moment).
Despite this lack of real-world knowledge, Keith has been adamant that any environmental impacts would be negligible.
Again, this view is disputed by geoengineering research.
The Possible Dangers of Geoengineering
Most recently, in late October 2016, the United Nations' Convention on Biological Diversity released a report examining the problems of geoengineering and whether or not humanity will be forced to employ the practice in an attempt to halt climate change.
The report, 'Update on Climate Geoengineering in relation to the Convention on Biological Diversity - Potential Impacts and Regulatory Framework,' found that geoengineering,
...but also cause unpredictable rain and temperature distribution on the local level.
The U.N. report states that the effectiveness of geoengineering is "uncertain" and,
Dr. Phillip Williamson, lead author of the report and scientist with the Natural Environment Research Council in the United Kingdom, says he is skeptical of geoengineering.
The U.N. concludes that although SRM may possibly slow the loss of Arctic sea ice, but not without,
One particular method of SRM involves injecting aerosols into the atmosphere via airplanes.
The study found that the use of sulphur aerosols for SRM would be associated with a risk of stratospheric ozone loss.
There is also a risk that stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) would have a small impact on climate change but could lead to negative impacts on biodiversity.
In 2016 it was also reported on an analysis released by the Finnish Meteorological Institute (FMI). The FMI is the government agency responsible for reporting weather data and forecasts in Finland.
The Institute's study, "Modelling Radiative and Climate Effects of Aerosols - From Anthropogenic Emissions to Geoengineering," examined the potential for SRM to combat climate change.
The study specifically looked at two types of SRM:
The researchers stated that their key objectives were to,
The researchers found that the geoengineering techniques which were studied do in fact have the potential to cool the climate and slow down warming.
In other words, the effort, money, and time it would take to invest and create geoengineering methods would likely do very little to actually limit the amount of greenhouse gas emissions.
The researchers even state that, based on their models, if the world replaced coal with nuclear power for energy production it would lead to a,
Also, the cooling that does result from an increase in aerosols is,
In February 2015, an international committee of scientists released a report stating that geoengineering techniques are not a viable alternative to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to combat the effects of climate change.
The committee report called for further research and understanding of various geoengineering techniques, including carbon dioxide removal schemes and solar-radiation management before implementation.
The scientists found that SRM techniques are likely to present,
The report was sponsored by,
According to a 2013 study published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, if geoengineering programs were started and then suddenly halted, the planet could see an immediate rise in temperatures, particularly over land.
The study, titled, "The Impact of Abrupt Suspension of Solar Radiation Management," seems to indicate that once geoengineering begins, the programs cannot be suspended without causing the very problem the engineering was intended to solve.
Geoengineering to save humanity? Or something more nefarious?
There is also a dispute among many researchers as to whether geoengineering programs are already active.
What the geoengineering researchers describe - specifically spraying aerosols from planes - is eerily reminiscent of various conspiracies involving the government using weather control technology to manipulate world events.
This is what is derogatorily called the "Chemtrails Conspiracy."
Essentially, some believe geoengineering is actively taking place in our skies.
They say the "contrails" you see behind planes are actually geoengineering programs being carried out covertly. The "chemtrails" label comes from the portion of the crowd that believes these programs are delivering dangerous chemical additives to the food, water, soil, and humans below for population control.
Despite the knee-jerk dismissal from many casual researchers, the theories might be grounded in reality.
It's important to know the United States government has a history of weather modification.
In a 1996 document entitled "Weather as a Force Multiplier - Owning the Weather by 2025," the U.S. Air Force discussed a number of proposals for using weather as a weapon.
The Air Force document was not the first time the U.S. military mentioned weather weapons.
A New York Times piece from June 15, 1947 quotes General George C. Kenney, commander of the Strategic Air Command, as saying,
But the government did not simply research these ideas. It actually implemented them. During the Vietnam War, the U.S. government operated covert weather modification programs under Operation Popeye.
In 2012 it was also revealed that the U.S. Army sprayed toxic chemicals over the skies of St. Louis without informing the public.
In February 2015, while speaking at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Jose, California, Professor Alan Robock discussed the possibility that the CIA is using the weather as a weapon of war.
Robock has done research for the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC) in the past. Robock's theory that the CIA was using weather as a weapon of war was later proven somewhat correct when the CIA discussed weather modification.
Obviously, the fact that the U.S. has researched weather modification in the past does not necessarily indicate that the technology is still in use.
However, when considering all of the evidence - historical documentation, actual implementation of technology via geoengineering and cloud seeding, and visual confirmation of spraying from planes - one can start to make an educated judgment.
We know that the U.S. government (and other governments) have studied and researched weather modification for over 100 years. We also know they have written about using the weather as a weapon of war.
Based on the government's pattern of lying and concealing technologies from the public, is it that difficult to imagine they could be secretly testing out geoengineering programs?
Finally, we know that proponents of geoengineering claim to want to fight global climate change.
Even with a wealth of studies warning about the potential pitfalls, these scientists push forward. One must assume they are either lost in their hubris or intentionally ignoring the evidence.
If we consider the possibility that they are ignoring the evidence and lying, we must ask why?
This leads me to the darkest corner of the geoengineering conspiracy.
Who is funding Geoengineering and why?