Government Weather Manipulation Exposed

a reply to: Mary Rose
Yes - do you have any answer to my question?

The chemtrail conspiracy is weaksauce. OF COURSE governments do secret things. OF COURSE weather mod is something that has been worked on. But as stated previously, jet fuel is easy to test.

originally posted by: Mary Rose

originally posted by: Mary Rose
Today on YouTube there is a new breakdown by Alex Jones of his research showing that it is a matter of public record, if one reads and connects dots, that major western governments have been secretly adding to jet fuel radio-active isotopes to manipulate the weather on this planet, the purported reason being to repair the atmosphere.

I heard Alex Jones say on another video, "Mainstream Media Engaging in Nazi Level Propaganda," that the specifics of the geoengineering is classified.

Isn't it just really astonishing that people say things like "I heard Alex Jones say..." and unquestioningly accept that as indisputable fact with no further checking or evidence required? Alex said it so it must be the truth!

Whereas all of the science — thousands of pages of academic papers, weather records from around the world, atmospheric sampling etc etc — that demonstrates that chemtrails simply DO NOT EXIST gets waved away with the explanation "Oh well they are lying".

The logical disconnect in some people's minds is truly strange.

originally posted by: Mary Rose

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
There is a great deal of information "out there" about geoengineering - a quick goggle scholar search gives almost a million results - perhaps unsurprisingly Alex Jones doesn't feather in the first few pages!! (although chemtrails do)

Did you read my OP?

Did you bother looking at any of the responses to your OP?

originally posted by: Mary Rose
Today on YouTube there is a new breakdown by Alex Jones of his research showing that it is a matter of public record, if one reads and connects dots, that major western governments have been secretly adding to jet fuel radio-active isotopes to manipulate the weather on this planet, the purported reason being to repair the atmosphere.

By "public record" he means that which is declassified.

As I previously posted, he's said the specifics are classified.

One has to wonder why.

originally posted by: Mary Rose
One has to wonder why.

Good Lord, they are pumping radioactive isotopes in the jet fuel. It's got to be classified. Everyone who comes in contact with airplanes, fuel, or any part of that process will die a horrible death from cancer. They will have babies with three arms and 12 toes. This is either the greatest threat to mankind EVER, or it's complete Bulls*it (if the ad can use it, so can I).

Of course, I highly doubt "they" are doing any of this,and Alex Jones is merely spreading his manure as usual.

I sure wish people engaged in critical thinking before they post things like this.

a reply to: Mary Rose

As I previously posted, he's said the specifics are classified.

And that would be because he is having a hard enough time trying to push his misrepresented evidence he has now.

You really do take what Alex says pretty seriously, do you mind if I ask why?

originally posted by: Mary Rose
By "public record" he means that which is declassified.
As I previously posted, he's said the specifics are classified.
One has to wonder why.

Indeed - why DO you believe hat he says?

originally posted by: Rob48

Whereas all of the science — thousands of pages of academic papers, weather records from around the world, atmospheric sampling etc etc — that demonstrates that chemtrails simply DO NOT EXIST gets waved away with the explanation "Oh well they are lying".

The logical disconnect in some people's minds is truly strange.

Hmmm.. really? No papers on atmospheric sampling show no chainge in stratospheric aerosols?

This NOAA paper that says the stratospheric aerosol levels have DOUBLED in the last decade and they DON"T KNOW WHY...

The authors analyzed measurements from several independent sources – satellites and several types of ground instruments – and found a definitive increase in stratospheric aerosol since 2000. “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 warmingeffect from the carbon dioxide increase during that same period.” Sources of stratospheric aerosols. Sources of aerosols reach the stratosphere from above and below, as shown in the graph. Sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbonyl sulfide (OCS), and dimethyl sulfide(DMS) are the dominant surface emissions which contribute to aerosol formation. Download here. (Credit: NOAA) The reasons for the 10-year increase in stratospheric aerosols are not fully understood and are the subject of ongoing research...

NOAA link


Maybe they should ask their sister DOD agency NASA who is injecting aerosols there:

The cloud was created by a Black Brant XII sounding rocket launched from NASA's Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia. The rocket released a cloud of electrically-charged aerosols near the top of Earth's atmosphere to investigate the formation of noctilucent clouds or "NLCs."

It'a a joint project with the Navy an Virgina Tech

The team not only studies natural clouds, but is involved in a Naval Research Laboratory project to create an artificial noctilucent cloud. Called the charged aerosol release experiment (CARE), the project entails sending a sounding rocket from Wallops Island, Va., to create a large dust cloud over the East Coast. The Virginia Tech team will be involved in developing a theoretical and computational model to study the turbulence generated in the charged dust cloud. "Radars will be used to bounce signals off the dust cloud to see if the turbulence, which is linked to global change, is the same as a natural noctilucent cloud," Scales says. The sounding rocket project principal investigator is Paul Bernhardt of the Naval Research Laboratory.

Maybe they are putting it in the military jet fuel as suggested in this paper which suggest we just use the current military planes by changing the jet fuel mix, and list the plains capable of getting them there with no or very little modifications:

Existing small jet fighter planes, like the F- 15C Eagle (Figure 2a), are capable of flying into the lower stratosphere in the tropics, while in the Arctic, larger planes, such as the KC-135 Stratotanker or KC-10 Extender (Figure 2b), are capable of reaching th e required altitude. Specialized research aircraft such as the American Lockheed ER-2 and the Russian M55 Geophysica, both based on Cold War spy planes, can also reach 20 km, but neither has a very large payload or could be operated continuously to deliver gases to the stratosphere. The - 9 - Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk can reach 20 km without a pilot but costs twice as much as an F-15C....

Options for dispersing gases from planes incl ude the addition of sulf ur to the fuel, which would release the aerosol through the exhaust system of the plane, or the attachment of a nozzle to release the sulfur from its own tank within the plane, which would be the better option. Putting sulfur in the fuel would have the problem th at if the sulfur concen tration were too high in the fuel, it would be corrosive and affect combustion. Also, it would be necessary to have separate fuel tanks for use in the stratosphere and in the troposphere to avoid sulfate aerosol pollution in the troposphere. The military has already manufactured more planes than would be required for this geoengineering scenario, potentially reducing the costs of this method. Since climate change is an important national security issue [ Schwartz and Randall , 2003], the military could be directed to carry out this mission with existing aircraft at minimal additional cost ...

Using existing airplanes for geoengineering would cost several billion dollars per year, depending on the amount, location, and type of sulfur gas injected into the stratosphere.

Where would those couple billion dollars come from? Maybe the 2 billion listed in the GOA report:

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.

P.S. Chemtrails is a straw man. Geoengineering is the reality. I could provide you tens to hundreds of papers suggesting what and how, this is just the tip of the iceburg. Can't prove they are doing it yet, but NOAA says somethings changing the aerosol levels and they don't know what.

a reply to: pianopraze

Maybe you should read the follow up paper where they've traced those particulates to small volcanoes

A team led by the University of Colorado Boulder looking for clues about why Earth did not warm as much as scientists expected between 2000 and 2010 now thinks the culprits are hiding in plain sight -- dozens of volcanoes spewing sulfur dioxide.

The study results essentially exonerate Asia, including India and China, two countries that are estimated to have increased their industrial sulfur dioxide emissions by about 60 percent from 2000 to 2010 through coal burning, said lead study author Ryan Neely, who led the research as part of his CU-Boulder doctoral thesis. Small amounts of sulfur dioxide emissions from Earth’s surface eventually rise 12 to 20 miles into the stratospheric aerosol layer of the atmosphere, where chemical reactions create sulfuric acid and water particles that reflect sunlight back to space, cooling the planet.

Neely said previous observations suggest that increases in stratospheric aerosols since 2000 have counterbalanced as much as 25 percent of the warming scientists blame on human greenhouse gas emissions. “This new study indicates it is emissions from small to moderate volcanoes that have been slowing the warming of the planet,” said Neely, a researcher at the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, a joint venture of CU-Boulder and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

www.colorado.edu...

And you should probably pay attention to the stuff you are posting

The rocket released a cloud of electrically-charged aerosols near the top of Earth's atmosphere to investigate the formation of noctilucent clouds or "NLCs."

That's on the edge of space not

Specialized research aircraft such as the American Lockheed ER-2 and the Russian M55 Geophysica, both based on Cold War spy planes, can also reach 20 km, but neither has a very large payload or could be operated continuously to deliver gases to the stratosphere. The - 9 - Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk can reach 20 km without a pilot but costs twice as much as an F-15C....

a reply to: mrthumpy

Would be interesting to read the actual paper that is not in that link. But what i read there seems to me it is more conjecture. The original NOAA paper also conjectured Volcanos. But from what I see the original NOAA paper was the most honest. This paper says :

thinks the culprits are hiding in plain sight -- dozens of volcanoes ... part of his CU-Boulder doctoral thesis.

NOAA at least admitted they don't know! This paper is only another theory from what I read there.

I gave two different examples of injection of aerosols. Geoengineering by SRM through injecting Sulfer into the Stratosphere via military jets (which if we are doing it could be the reason for the rising levels and is just as valid a theory as volcanos), and NASA/NAVY/VT injecting aerosols.

I have many, many other scientific papers suggesting many other methods as well. I stopped with two for brevity, but if you want more links I can provide many many more.

I have shown that 1. there IS a change in aerosols causing SRM and 2. there are papers suggesting how to put them there and 3. there are active programs putting aerosols there.

a reply to: pianopraze

But sadly, it's not helping. If you talk to the AGW crowd, it's just getting worse. So whatever is happening is either doing nothing, or making it worse.

I agree that Chemtrails are BS and the idea is there to distract the easily distracted, and I think that we need to keep paying attention to the skies to ensure that nobody starts trying out untested Geo-engineering ideas. I just wish this could be discussed without the chemtrail overtones.

I still don't think anybody is spraying anything yet since there is no evidence pointing in that direction.

originally posted by: pianopraze
I have shown that 1. there IS a change in aerosols causing SRM and 2. there are papers suggesting how to put them there and 3. there are active programs putting aerosols there.

You do know that those tests were announced ahead of time and they only released a tiny amount of a tracer chemical right?

originally posted by: pianopraze
a reply to: mrthumpy

Would be interesting to read the actual paper that is not in that link. But what i read there seems to me it is more conjecture. The original NOAA paper also conjectured Volcanos. But from what I see the original NOAA paper was the most honest. This paper says :

thinks the culprits are hiding in plain sight -- dozens of volcanoes ... part of his CU-Boulder doctoral thesis.

NOAA at least admitted they don't know! This paper is only another theory from what I read there.

They seem fairly sure

Comparison of the model results to observations reveals that moderate volcanic eruptions, rather than anthropogenic influences, are the primary source of the observed increases in stratospheric aerosol.

I gave two different examples of injection of aerosols. Geoengineering by SRM through injecting Sulfer into the Stratosphere via military jets (which if we are doing it could be the reason for the rising levels and is just as valid a theory as volcanos), and NASA/NAVY/VT injecting aerosols.

I have many, many other scientific papers suggesting many other methods as well. I stopped with two for brevity, but if you want more links I can provide many many more.

I have shown that 1. there IS a change in aerosols causing SRM and 2. there are papers suggesting how to put them there and 3. there are active programs putting aerosols there.

1. Which can reasonably be attributed to volcanoes it would seem which was the inspiration for SRM in the first place
2. It's never been a secret
3. No you haven't.

Alex Jones is correct on what he is saying as this woman can't think of her name but she found the top secret documents on the NSA website and uploaded them to her site www.stopthecrime.net, she talks of the document stating about the fuel in planes being dispersed so go find it for your selves you disbeleivers

a reply to: PlanetxIsComing

Alex Jones is correct on what he is saying as this woman can't think of her name but she found the top secret documents on the NSA website and uploaded them to her site www.stopthecrime.net, she talks of the document stating about the fuel in planes being dispersed so go find it for your selves you disbeleivers

Her name is Deborah Tavares and you may want to read this...

www.metabunk.org...

And if I remember correctly she thought a planet the size of Jupiter was hanging out next to the sun...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Bat# crazy...yes

Credible source...not even close.

And what exactly is it that makes you think Alex Jones is even close to being right?

a reply to: pianopraze

What a bizarre post. You respond to a comment by Rob saying chemtrails don't exist by seeming to counter it with lots of stuff about geoengineering, only to finish by stating that chemtrails are a red herring. It really looked like you were disagreeing with him until that point.

originally posted by: pianopraze
P.S. Chemtrails is a straw man. Geoengineering is the reality. I could provide you tens to hundreds of papers suggesting what and how, this is just the tip of the iceburg. Can't prove they are doing it yet, but NOAA says somethings changing the aerosol levels and they don't know what.

Is this accurate about the term "chemtrail":

www.geoengineeringwatch.org...

a reply to: Mary Rose

Seems unlikely - since PP admits that he doesn't actually have any evidence that "it" is actually being done - therefore any "definition" that includes supposedly factual statements such s the one you provided (uses nano materials, is classified, is ongoing, is dispersed by aircraft jet trails (whatever those are)) cant be justified.

originally posted by: Mary Rose

originally posted by: pianopraze
P.S. Chemtrails is a straw man. Geoengineering is the reality. I could provide you tens to hundreds of papers suggesting what and how, this is just the tip of the iceburg. Can't prove they are doing it yet, but NOAA says somethings changing the aerosol levels and they don't know what.

Is this accurate about the term "chemtrail":

www.geoengineeringwatch.org...

No. It is almost 100% inaccurate. Aerosols are dispersed, only in the sense that a suspension of ice particles in the air is an aerosol. And cirrus clouds are somewhat reflective, which is why we can see them.

But none of this is "classified", it is a simple combustion equation, hydrocarbon + oxygen = H₂O + CO₂. It has been going on for decades.