Pondering Climate Change

Geoengineering/Climate Intervention is an increasingly alarming, potentially catastrophic layer to climate change and soil destruction

The late Rosalind Peterson, a certified USDA Farm Service Agency Crop Loss adjustor in California, began her trek into the world of geoengineering when she saw what was happening to agriculture as a result of obvious experiments taking place in the sky above her head.

In 2002, Peterson founded California Skywatch after researching atmospheric testing and weather modification programs. In 2006 she co-founded and became the California President of the Agricultural Defense Coalition to protect agriculture from a wide variety of experimental weather and atmospheric testing programs. In 2007 she was a United Nations Keynote Speaker at the 60th Annual DPI/NGO Conference on Climate Change where she spoke about agriculture and the negative impacts of experimental weather modification programs on tree and plant health. After that, she presented her United Nations Power Point Presentation to colleges, universities and interested groups and had also been interviewed on numerous radio and television programs.

Sadly, Rosalind Peterson passed away February 4, 2018, but not before inspiring others to carry on her work, including myself.

By 2010 geonegineering activist and self-educated expert Jim Lee started collating his own in-depth research into geoengineering. A software programmer by trade, Lee was equipped with the necessary tools to develop three well documented, interactive websites which are augmented by a facebook page, a youtube channel, and a Patreon channel as a means by which to educate others about the grave threat posed by geoengineering experiments which have been going on much longer than most of us assume. He has testified before the EPA, interviewed numerous experts and attended numerous weather related conferences since.

To view the extensive collection of documents collected by Lee and his associate Dominic Marama, be sure to visit Weather Modification History. For video clips of interviews by Jim Lee, along with mountains of additional information see Climate Viewer. This 45 minute video will provide a sample introduction to his extensive work. He includes links in his description box because, as he says, YOU need to investigate this yourself!

As Lee uncovered, there is a relationship between geoengineering and the United Nations stance on "climate action" which is the 13th of their 17 Sustainable Goals Program. For example, in the FAQS section of an article appearing below a video entitled Cirrus Clouds Matter, Lee writes that It is no coincidence that the section covering contrails in the last IPCC report in 2007 was co-authored by at least five geoengineering SRM advocates. Their names are provided in bold in the "facts section" and include Ken Caldeira, mentioned in Climate Change, among others. (More on the IPCC below.)

Today, as reported by Jim Lee, a new company known as Climate Global Control Trading, LLC bills itself as the global leader in the provision of climate services, with the ability to create and steer hurricanes with ionospheric modification and cloud ionization. It essentially introduces the concept of monetization of a global market of water resources via the cryptocurrency Climate Cron.

Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change

As laid out in Climate Change, Land Use and Monetary Policy, "the CO2 problem" is far more complex than we assume or have been led to believe. For ex: how would one define "the CO2 problem"? Does it take into account the effects of methane, nitrous oxide, water vapor? If so, how exactly?

How might geoengineering, including cloud seeding with carbon black dust and other materials, interfere with earth's systems and who benefits from such programs. It isn't the farmer even if farming is one stated reason for geoengineering climate. You can read some of the history of such cloud seeding programs here.

Scientists are now finding that certain "spreading" aircraft contrails connected to geoengineering efforts can evolve into cirrus clouds indistinguishable from those formed naturally. These 'spreading contrails' may be causing more climate warming today than all the carbon dioxide emitted by aircraft since the start of aviation.

Adding to the confusion, new cloud studies suggest earth's climate may not be warming as quickly as expected. A fuller discussion here. A phenomenon known as Grand Solar Minimums may be playing a part, as a presentation given by Professor Zharkova at the Global Warming Policy Foundation in October, 2018 strongly suggests.

Another very recent study released in January of 2019 asserts that we need to rethink every thing we know about global warming because of the grossly underestimated effects of air pollution (including Black Carbon Dust, or soot, and other particulate matter released as a result of geoengineering experiments and projects).

Professor Thayer Watkins of San Jose State University, analyzes the IPPC by saying in part:

First off, let it be noted the mistakes of the IPCC are not in the technical studies. These are largely flawless. The colossal mistakes of the IPCC are in what was not done, what was left out, what was ignored. These are the mistakes of the administrative function of the IPCC and not the scientific contributors. The first category of the crucial missing parts concerns the role of water in the Earth's climate system. The climate projection models presume that as CO2 and the other non-water greenhouse substances increase there will be an increase in temperature which will result in more water vapor in the atmosphere and hence a positive feedback effect. But, since the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere is 25 to 100 times as much as the amount of CO2 a small downward fluctuation in the amount of water vapor can cancel out the entire effect of the CO2. It is a very small tail that climate modelers are presuming will wag the dog. Fundamentally the major problem with the IPCC is that it did not function as a truth seeker; instead it functioned as a true believer focused upon anthropogenic CO2. . .

Additional articles under the heading of "Global Warming and Politics" by Thayer are listed here.

In keeping with Dr. Thayer's analysis, consider also that in 2009 the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) set up an unelected international climate regime with authority to dictate land use, relocate “human settlements” and to directly intervene in the financial, economic, health care, education, tax and environmental affairs of all nations signing the treaty. One must wonder why somewhere around $100 billion has been spent on promotion of the current global warming model yet next to no discussion is devoted to natural forcing agents such as solar and cosmic radiation, volcanoes, clouds, water vapor, and grand solar minimums - even though these have been well documented in the scientific literature to have significant impact on climate. Nor have funds been committed to disseminating information about military weather warfare or other geoengineering projects and their effects on climate, and the environment. Yet at least five geoengineering Solar Radiation Advocates co-authored the section covering contrails in the 2007 IPCC Report. Of particular note is that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was one of three conventions adopted at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. "Its sister Rio Conventions are the UN Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention to Combat Desertification. The three are intrinsically linked." (See my article A Word to the Wise: Beware the Green New Deal at Dissident Voice and Global Research.)

An article by Dr. Tim Ball echoes Thayer, and much of what I wrote in Climate Change:

The plants need more atmospheric CO2 not less. Current levels of 400 parts per million (ppm) are close to the lowest levels in 600 million years. This contradicts what the world was told by people using the claim that human production of CO2 was causing global warming. They don’t know the UN agency, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), established to examine human-caused global warming, were limited to only studying human causes by the definition they were given by Article 1 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). It is impossible to identify the human cause without understanding and including natural causes. Few know that CO2 is only 4 percent of the total greenhouse gases. They assume that a CO2 increase causes a temperature increase. It doesn’t, in every record the temperature increases before CO2. The only place where a CO2 increase causes a temperature increase is in the computer models of the IPCC. This partly explains why every single temperature forecast (they call them projections) the IPCC made since 1990 was wrong. If your forecast is wrong, your science is wrong.

Dr. Ball is no lightweight in the field, as he himself is compelled to say: I studied weather as aircrew with the Canadian Air Force, including five years of search and rescue in Arctic Canada. After the Air Force, I went to university to study weather and climate, culminating in a Ph.D., in Historical Climatology from the University of London, England.

Speaking of the role of water, there is this 2 hour and fifteen minute workshop/documentary by soil microbiologist and climate scientist Walter Jehne titled Restoring Water Cycles to Naturally Cool Climates and Reverse Global Warming which begins with the fact that NINETY-FIVE PERCENT of the global heat dynamics of our planet is governed by water, not CO2 which is about four percent. The capacity of the soil to hold water is fundamental in regulating the heat dynamics of this planet. This three minute video on "weird water" provides (more or less) background material for Dr. Jehne's lecture.

As an interesting factoid, oil consumption by the U.S. military for aircraft, ships, ground vehicles and facilities makes the Pentagon the single largest oil consumer in the world. According to the 2006 CIA World Factbook rankings, there are only 35 countries (out of 210) in the world that consume more oil per day than the Pentagon. Many of these military vehicles are involved in geoengineering projects as revealed by Jim Lee mentioned above.

So, taking four GHGs one at a time, very briefly, starting with water vapor:

1) Water Vapor. The National Data Climate Center informs its readers that "the feedback loop in which water is involved is critically important to projecting future climate change, but as yet is still fairly poorly measured and understood." (Water vapor makes up the vast majority of atmospheric gases.)

2) Methane. Methane is said to have a global warming potential of 72 times that of CO2 as averaged over 20 years. Methane, as outlined in my book, is produced via oil, gas and coal extraction, via landfill sites and waste treatment sites, including those abominable concentrated feeding operations (CAFO's aka industrial agriculture) as well as via rice cultivation and biomass burning - yet cow farts were not too long ago banned in California, with absolutely no mention of the fracking operations going up all over the state!

3) Nitrous oxide. Nitrous oxide [a reactive form of nitrogen] has a global warming potential that is estimated to be 296 to 310 times that of CO2, and remains in the atmosphere for 100 years. A major source of nitrous oxide is chemical fertilizers (The nitrogen in chemical fertilizers has been shown to decrease soil carbon, a very threatening situation for all life on this planet). As one source tells us, man's influence on the nitrogen cycle is greater that on any of the other biogeochemical cycles and has nearly doubled since the pre-industrial era, with a myriad of effects on waters, soils, and the atmosphere. Interestingly (and alarmingly) earth's atmosphere is comprised of 78% nitrogen and only .038% CO2 (percentages exclude water vapor). So, it should be quite newsworthy that the nitrogen load has doubled since the pre-industrial, yet where is any mention of it? Perhaps not so surprisingly, researchers recently found that fertilizer produces far more greenhouse gas than expected.

4) Carbon dioxide or CO2. Carbon, both in the form of an atmospheric gas or CO2 and in the form of soil carbon, is not only essential for life on earth it is also well known for its "fertilization effect." For example, algae grown as a biofuel needs fossil fuel plants nearby as a CO2 "fertilization" source. Similarly greenhouses typically maintain CO2 levels 4 times the current 400 ppm. One 2009 study discussed in Climate Change, Land Use and Monetary Policy showed that although warmer temps (presumably created by additional CO2 remaining in the atmosphere) will result in the increased availability of nutrients due to accelerated decomposition of plant material - this process is not enough to offset the reduced level of plant growth caused by previously unrecognized limitations. Lower levels of plant growth will then lead to increased CO2 over the next 100 years because smaller plants take in less CO2. NB: Our soils have been mined of carbon-rich Humus, the font of soil nutrients! We need to get carbon back in the soil!

Another study came to the shockingly obvious conclusion that since "the earth's climate system is a highly complex, non-linear system made up of sub-systems that are themselves highly non-linear, our singular focus on reduction of CO2 emission not only over-simplifies the policy questions raised by human GHG emissions, it also misunderstands the significance of the scientific questions."

Even the former President of Greenpeace International, with a Ph.D. in Ecology from the University of British Columbia has offered his well-thought out critique.

Let us end with an investigation of how we broke the water cycle, as described in this 57 minute video titled How Monsanto and Weather Modification are Really Related.

We all might ask as I did in Climate Change, Land Use and Monetary Policy: WHY do we NOT look to regenerative agriculture (based on the holistic management framework) as the primary solution to our climate and environmental crisis, such as these now exist outside the many and sundry efforts at geoengineering?