Susanne Posel, Contributor
Use of geoengineering is supported by members of the scientific community working in line with the climate change alarmists. These modifications extend to plate tectonics, ocean fertilization, cloud seeding, Co2 sequestration and military weaponry.
Project Cirrus (PC), a.k.a. Project Stormfury), was conducted by the US government between 1962 and 1983 in an attempt to manipulate the weather by affecting hurricane behavior.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) states in their study that “climate engineering technologies, focusing on their technical status, future directions for research and potential responses.” The GAO reviewed the scientific literature and government reports, consulted experts with a wide variety of backgrounds and viewpoints, and surveyed 1,006 adults across the United States.
Areas of study were:
- Carbon dioxide removal
- Solar radiation management
Solar radiation management (SRM), a technique for blocking the sun’s light in order to prevent access heat from affecting the Earth’s surface, has been used in many countries including:
- The United States
- Costa Rica
- Most European countries
SRM consists of spraying crystals and toxic chemicals such as sulfate aerosols and barium into the upper atmosphere.
For more than a decade, first the United States and then Canada’s citizens have been subjected to a 24/7/365 day aerosol assault over our heads made of a toxic brew of poisonous heavy metals, chemicals, and other dangerous ingredients. None of this was reported by any mainstream media. The US Department of Defense (DOD) and military have been systematically blanketing all our skies with what are known as Chemtrails (also known as Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering).
The GAO admits that current geoengineering techniques are immature and that many of them could have potentially negative consequences. Yet, the consensus of governmental agencies has chosen to disregard the health hazards to the general public in favor of the continued use of geoengineering.
Scientists in support of geoengineering, knowing “major technology risks or limited future climate change” show their bias toward the “science”. The GAO have looked toward the private sector because governments and corporations working with them subvert their findings and conduct experiments worldwide without consent.
According to the Geoengineering: Governance and Technology Policy (GGTP) report, produced by the Congressional Research Service, the US government “has joined with other nations . . . as a participant in several international agreements on climate change.”
The experimental aspect of geoengineering in the US is directed in the “absence of a comprehensive [climate change] policy” that will “modify the Earth’s climate” and make these technologies available to “foreign governments and entities in the private sector to use unilaterally without authorization from the US government or an international treaty.’
Oversight concerning geoengineering research and experimental projects is allocated to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of Energy (DoE), Department of Agriculture (DoA), and the Department of Defense.
Although there is no provision, many of the UN’s international treaties relating to climate change, maritime pollution and air pollution are used to govern the pursuit of geoengineering.
In 2010, the UN’s Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) outlined the necessity of geoengineering for the sake of saving the Earth’s biodiversity.
The US government, using the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as their guide, has created policies to mitigate the fabled effects of man-made climate change.
The GGTP states that:
geoengineering technologies, applied to the climate, aim to achieve large-scale and deliberate modifications of the Earth’s energy balance in order to reduce temperatures and counteract anthropogenic (i.e., human-made) climate change; these climate modifications would not be limited by country boundaries.
In 2009, the Congress’ House Science and Technology Committee discussed:
potential environmental risks and benefits of various proposals, associated domestic and international governance issues, evaluation mechanisms and criteria, research and development (R&D) needs, and economic rationales supporting the deployment of geoengineering activities.
The United Kingdom (UK), Germany, and India provided scientists that supported the engagement of geoengineering technologies in the name of reducing emissions, preserving “climate sensitivity”, and climate thresholds under the pursuit of political, social and economic mitigation strategies.
The UN’s assertion that climate change is directly causal to humans has inspired mandates for geoengineering governance. This scheme does not rely on scientific data or research studies, but rather real world experiments with chemtrail technologies conducted by governmental agencies and private sector corporations employed by policymakers and international entities.
Through the covering of governmental policy, the UN hopes to design technologies to control the climate; advance geoengineering options in lieu of effectively mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (for example, could result in a number of adverse effects, including ocean acidification, stresses on biodiversity, climate sensitivity shocks, and other irreversible consequences); engage the private sector corporations by enticing them with government subsidies while examining their ownership models, intellectual property rights and trade and transfer mechanisms for the dissemination of geoengineering technologies.
While the UN anticipated that the general public would become aware of their schemes (as is happening now) they planned a propaganda campaign to assert transparency while hiding the actuality of critical technologies to avoid liabilities and compensation to the public for adverse effects of geoengineering.
To cover up their unethical impact on the Earth, the UN created “ information” to be made available to the public and hired scientists to praise their deployment of geoengineering.
John Holdren, US Science Adviser to Obama, has come out publicly to claim that geoengineering will assist the planet in stabilizing its weather with regard to global warming.
Holdren says geoengineering is a perfectly viable way to cool the planet’s temperature. He fully supports the process of releasing particles of barium, magnesium, aluminum, nano-fibers, bacillus blood spores and other chemicals to reflect sunlight away from the Earth.
The implementation of geoengineering, a scheme of the UN’s decisive endeavor to create global governance, is not only fully supported by the US government, but the UN’s direct policies and procedures are literally adopted as strategies of the Obama administration.
Susanne Posel is the Chief Editor of Occupy Corporatism. Our alternative news site is dedicated to reporting the news as it actually happens; not as it is spun by the corporately funded mainstream media. You can find us on our Facebook page .