The Geoengineering Debate

Because there has been so much discussion on the Internet, I can't ignore this any more, so I am presenting two sides of the geoengineeing debate - first a talk by Dane Wigington on Climate Engineering Weather Warfare, and the Collapse of Civilization; on the other side a "debunking" of the theory by scientist, David Suzuki.

I do not believe for a moment that either one of these two gentlemen is lying - they are simply seeing things through their own prism.

I do take exception to this sort of 'debunking'. It would be better to take people a little bit more seriously than Suzuki does and to address, point-by-point their concerns.

There are quite genuine reasons for concern - what about the sicknesses that are arising and seem to coincide with high levels of aerosols and aluminium, and what are those phenomena that sometimes crisscross the sky, and what are those bizarre cloudforms that those of us that have been around for a while know are not natural?  Why are all the trees dying?

He comes with all the bias of a scientist who says, "I know because I am a scientitst"

Yet on the other hand, he is right about so much, such as 

"endorsement of a cluster of conspiracy theories ... predicts rejection of climate science as well as the rejection of other scientific findings."

and 

human-caused climate change "provokes self-defensive biases" and its politicization "fosters ideological polarization."

My experience is certainly that people who follow chemtrails, HAARP, weather wars etc. almost invariably are climate change deniers of one sort or another. It seems to me that blaming "them" is a great way of avoiding complexity, as well as uncertainty.

When I started watching Mr. Wigington, I was initially quite impressed.

He presented a lot of the material on just how dire the situation with global warming is. He presented all the graphs and information we are so familiar with. He correctly pointed out how this information is being suppressed and is not supported by "mainstream science"

So far, so good.

He even evokes the Arctic Methane Emergency Group's maps to show the increase of methane in the atmosphere.

But then comes the logical jump.

This is all due to geoengineering, he says.

He shows weather maps showing the distortion of normal jet stream movements and the temperature anomalies we are used to seeing here just about every day.

He says. "these are not natural movements of the Jet Stream". That is because they are cooling the atmosphere and distorting the Jet Stream.

He's right - these are not "natural" movements of the Jet Stream (ie. they are not the usual movement.

It's a pity he didn't go a wee bit further into the Arctic Blog without quoting them out of context - he would then have seen that the strange behaviour of the Jet Stream is due something he appears to have previously acknowledged (ie. global warming). 

And the evidence for that comes with a lot more weight and evidence.

It is a common thing, I have found, with these sorts of "analysis' they start with something at least connected with science or logic, but then there comes the twist, or the jump, where conclusions are made that don't follow from the original premise - and before we know it we are talking about the Rothschilds and which organisitons they own.

Don't get me wrong.

I don't reject the possibility that a program of this nature is going on, and there certainly are questions to be answered.

I don''t embrace "chemtrails" largely for these reasons:

• There does not appear to be any prima facie evidence of a program large enough to make the difference to the chemical makeup of the atmosphere, as CO2 and other greenhouse gasses (including aerosols)

• The whole obsession with chemtrails and HAARP is associated, one way or another with climate change denial and is often associated with reductionism, and with a lack of connection with nature

• It is a red-herring, and takes us away from the immediate issue of abrupt climate change that threatens to end life on earth.

To the climate- change deniers - I know that there is no way on earth that I am going to persuade you because your minds are already made up and not easily swayed by facts or logical discourse.

These are indeed very confusing times, so, I say, let's stick to the knitting.

Seemorerocks

PS. I will freely admit that I only watched the first one-third of Dane Wigington's talk. I may go back and see if he pulls something a bit more convincing in the last third.  If someone can clarify what Dane's qualifications are, I would be interested to know

Planet Earth is under an all out weather warfare assault.
In this video, Dane Wigington gives another presentation in Northern California on the harmful effects of Geoengineering, declaring that there is virtually NO NATURAL WEATHER due to the massive global climate engineering. 

The very essentials needed to sustain life on earth are being recklessly destroyed by these programs. This is not a topic that will begin to affect us in several years, but is now already causing massive animal and plant die off around the world, as well as human illness. 



The debate over whether geoengineering programs are going on is now a moot point. We have more than enough data to confirm it. 

We have actual footage showing tankers spraying. The materials showing up on the ground are exactly the same materials mentioned in the numerous geoengineering patents and documents. 

Visit our website for a list of these government patents and documents.

Our skies today are simply not normal. Upon examination this cannot be denied. They are filled with nanoparticulates of heavy metals. 

But the skies have been filled with grid patterns for so long now that we are used to them and do not see them anymore. Sadly, the fact is that people do not look up. 

To be clear, what we are seeing is not cloud seeding to increase rainfall. 

These particulates are designed to block the sun and move the jet stream. Dane explains how this is causing the drought and deluge being experienced around the globe.



Our atmosphere is nothing but a massive physics lab to geoengineering scientists who have no concern whatsoever about the consequences to humanity or any living thing, including themselves. The experiments are literally tearing the planet apart and destroying life on earth.



Dane reports, among other things, on:


• Geoengineering related climate disruptions, extreme drought and deluge


• Ozone depletion

• Methane release


• Drastic reduction in arctic sea ice 


• Global oxygen content reductions


• Oceans on the brink of collapse
• Massive fish die offs


• 200 species becoming extinct every single day


• A drastic rise in Autism, Alzheimer's, and Dementia


• Crisis level forest reductions


• The sterilization of soils making it impossible for plants to grow without Monsanto's aluminum resistant seeds



Dane Wigington presents hard data which reveals what these catastrophic programs have done to our planet to date and what they will do if they are allowed to continue. 

Please take the time to watch this video, follow up with some investigation of your own on our site -- ‪http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org, and share this information far and wide.



Thank you,


GeoengineeringWatch Staff


Conspiracies fuel climate 

change denial and belief in 

chemtrails

By David Suzuki

with contributions from Ian Hanington, Communications Manager

I'm a scientist, so I look at credible science — and there is none for the existence of chemtrails. They're condensation trails, formed when hot, humid air from jet exhaust mixes with colder low-vapour-pressure air

David Suzuki,

5 February, 2014

I recently wrote about geoengineering as a strategy to deal with climate change and carbon dioxide emissions. That drew comments from people who confuse this scientific process with the unscientific theory of 'chemtrails'. Some also claimed the column supported geoengineering, which it didn't.

The reaction got me wondering why some people believe in phenomena rejected by science, like chemtrails, but deny real problems demonstrated by massive amounts of scientific evidence, like climate change.

Chemtrails believers claim governments around the world are in cahoots with secret organizations to seed the atmosphere with chemicals and materials — aluminum salts, barium crystals, biological agents, polymer fibres, etc. — for a range of nefarious purposes. These include controlling weather for military purposes, poisoning people for population or mind control and supporting secret weapons programs based on the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program, or HAARP.

Scientists have tested and used cloud and atmospheric seeding for weather modification and considered them as ways to slow global warming. With so many unknowns and possible unintended consequences, these practices have the potential to cause harm. But the chemtrails conspiracy theory is much broader, positing that military and commercial airlines are involved in constant massive daily spraying that is harming the physical and mental health of citizens worldwide.

I don't have space to get into the absurdities of belief in a plot that would require worldwide collusion between governments, scientists and airline company executives and pilots to amass and spray unimaginable amounts of chemicals from altitudes of 10,000 metres or more. I'm a scientist, so I look at credible science — and there is none for the existence of chemtrails. They're condensation trails, formed when hot, humid air from jet exhaust mixes with colder low-vapour-pressure air. This, of course, comes with its own environmental problems.

But what interests me is the connection between climate change denial and belief in chemtrails. Why do so many people accept a theory for which there is no scientific evidence while rejecting a serious and potentially catastrophic phenomenon that can be easily observed and for which overwhelming evidence has been building for decades?

To begin, climate change denial and chemtrails theories are often conspiracy-based. A study by researchers at the University of Western Australia found "endorsement of a cluster of conspiracy theories ... predicts rejection of climate science as well as the rejection of other scientific findings."

Many deniers see climate change as a massive plot or hoax perpetrated by the world's scientists and scientific institutions, governments, the UN, environmentalists and sinister forces to create a socialist world government or something.

Not all go to such extremes. Some accept climate change is occurring but deny humans are responsible. Still, it doesn't seem rational to deny something so undeniable! In a Bloomberg article, author and Harvard Law School professor Cass R. Sunstein points to three psychological barriers to accepting climate change that may also help explain why it's easier for people to believe in chemtrails: People look to readily available examples when assessing danger, focus "on risks or hazards that have an identifiable perpetrator", and pay more attention to immediate threats than long-term ones.

Researchers Ezra Markowitz and Azim Shariff of the University of Oregon Psychology and Environmental Studies departments add a few more, including that human-caused climate change "provokes self-defensive biases" and its politicization "fosters ideological polarization."

People who subscribe to unbelievable conspiracy theories may feel helpless, so they see themselves as victims of powerful forces — or as heroes standing up to those forces. Whether it's to deny real problems or promulgate imaginary ones, it helps reinforce a worldview that is distrustful of governments, media, scientists and shadowy cabals variously referred to as banksters, global elites, the Illuminati or the New World Order.

The problem is that science denial is, in the case of chemtrails, a wacky distraction and, in the case of climate change denial, a barrier to addressing an urgent, critical problem. Science is rarely 100 per cent certain, but it's the best tool we have for coming to terms with our actions and their consequences, and for finding solutions to problems. The science is clear: human-caused climate change is the most pressing threat to humanity, and we must work to resolve it. We don't have time for debunked conspiracy theories.