Environmental Modification Convention - 1978

In 1978 a treaty was enforced banning the use of environmental modification techniques by any military or hostile force.

As of 2008, 75 states have ratified or acceded to the treaty.

Then, last year 193 signatories agreed to ban geoengineering "until there is an adequate scientific basis on which to justify such activities and appropriate consideration of the associated risks for the environment and biodiversity and associated social, economic and cultural impacts"

So over 70 countries have signed a treaty to prohibit militarized use of weather modifications, over 190 countries have signed off an agreement to ban geoengineering until further study has been carried out.

Where does this leave the whole geoengineering/chemtrail debate?

www.newscientist.com...
www.state.gov...
www.un-documents.net...

I doubt treaties like this have stopped anyone from developing and testing the technology throughout the world. I am not one of those that cry HAARP and CHEMTRAILS as a explanation to any event that arises however I do believe that there is a lot more going on that we are privy to

reply to post by On the level


This is the obvious answer of course.

Why make a treaty only to go against it?

Why ban geoengineering just last year if it's supposedly been going on for 20 years already?

Originally posted by Chadwickus
In 1978 a treaty was enforced banning the use of environmental modification techniques by any military or hostile force.

As of 2008, 75 states have ratified or acceded to the treaty.

Then, last year 193 signatories agreed to ban geoengineering "until there is an adequate scientific basis on which to justify such activities and appropriate consideration of the associated risks for the environment and biodiversity and associated social, economic and cultural impacts"

So over 70 countries have signed a treaty to prohibit militarized use of weather modifications, over 190 countries have signed off an agreement to ban geoengineering until further study has been carried out.

Where does this leave the whole geoengineering/chemtrail debate?

www.newscientist.com...
www.state.gov...
www.un-documents.net...

the Geneva convention treaty comes to mind.........................how many nations ratified this? how many times in the past 10 years has the U.S. broken or bent the rules of this treaty?
yes, in a perfect world, one where there is not a different operating strategy for some in higher positions than the mass populations, or different rules. I agree this would usually mean that if this law or treaty is in effect we could not possibly have chemtrails, but, as I stated we do not live in that world, so, anything is possible.

Parker

The whole theory of the 'elites' doing whatever they want is that they are ABOVE THE LAW, no one questions them on what they do, They can get away with anything ? Chadwickus clearly you're missing something.

Do you not think its rather convenient that they deliberately banned weather modification techniques and yet they are using them daily all over the world in chemtrails, and recently HAARP. But oh wait, they banned that didnt they, so they cant possibly be doing it now, Just like the LAW, we all abide by that 100% to the letter dont we.

reply to post by RUSSO


Ahhh no...

reply to post by Vanishr


Well if they can get away with anything, then why 20 years of hiding it?

Why was the US the ones to initiate it?

Both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives held hearings, beginning in 1972, and the Senate adopted a resolution in 1973 calling for an international agreement "prohibiting the use of any environmental or geophysical modification activity as a weapon of war...." In response to this resolution, the President ordered the Department of Defense to undertake an in-depth review of the military aspects of weather and other environmental modification techniques. The results of this study and a subsequent interagency study led to the U.S. Governments decision to seek agreement with the Soviet Union to explore the possibilities of an international agreement.

It would seem that most individuals with a working thought process would take into account that the U.S. government has shown time and time again that it cannot be trusted, from incidences like the the gulf of tonkin affair, MK ultra, the outright twisting of the geneva convention treaty.

I would also have to look at all the indian affairs treatys, which we initated, and how we were so honorable in upholding those.

So, does it stand to reason that even IF the U.S. initated this treaty that they would some how abide by it?
I think it would take quite an imagination to believe that all of a sudden our government has decided to be "Honorable". As I would also find it rather hard to believe that someone could truly believe that the government just randomly decides what treaty or law should be adhered to, if they have broken so many in the past, why would they now decide to honor one?

Parker

reply to post by ParkerCramer


Then does this mean the other signatory countries are involved too?

If not, wouldn't they be holding the US accountable?

reply to post by Chadwickus


Yes, I would love to believe that the other countries would hold our foot to the fire....................
but, the other part of me shouts that as a big brother to the world, not unlike in our own lives, we can be made to do things that we are uncomfortable with.

I'm not 100% sure on this next statement, but, what about all the nuclear treatys, did not both us and russia break those many times, and I believe we still are. And, what gives us the right to tell other nations that yes, we can have nuclear weapons, but you guys are not responsible enough??

I do agree with your premise, I just have many doubts that it actually gets carried out in the way we would like to believe it does. you know kind of a whats good for the goose, is not good for the gander.

Parker

P.S. glad to see that we've put away the tape measures. LOL

These beings, who are they!??

Originally posted by Vanishr
The whole theory of the 'elites' doing whatever they want is that they are ABOVE THE LAW, no one questions them on what they do, They can get away with anything ? Chadwickus clearly you're missing something.

Yes - credulity.

Do you not think its rather convenient that they deliberately banned weather modification techniques and yet they are using them daily all over the world in chemtrails, and recently HAARP.

People keep saying all thsi is happening yet cant actually show any credible evidence to support their assertions.

Therefore I conclude that such accusations are purely speculative - and to say that they are "using them daily" is to misrepresent what we actually do know.

You may BELIEVE they ar using them daily, however to present it as proven fact is unjustified at best - misleading at worst.

But oh wait, they banned that didnt they, so they cant possibly be doing it now, Just like the LAW, we all abide by that 100% to the letter dont we.

And because we don't all follow the law 100% therefore chetmrails exist and HAARP is really a secret weapon for making earthquakes? You consider that relationship to be actual evidence??

Excuse me while I fail to follow the train of illogic there.....