It was just after the announcement of the Harvard Solar Geoengineering Program that I reviewed a mountain of information regarding the “normalization” of geoengoneering and education programs for young people that teach that the purpose of aerosolized spraying is to prevent a “climate emergency.”
We have discussed on this show that many technical and scientific uncertainties remain but the various projects are underway and now the normalizing propaganda and the re-educating process is underway to get people especially younger people accustomed to having days where the skies are not so blue anymore.
If you dig deep enough into the various proposals for the changing of the climate – there is available evidence that suggests that methods such as stratospheric aerosol injection.
This action according to the available literature theoretically would reflect a small but significant amount of incoming shortwave radiation sufficient to restore global mean temperatures.
The idea of pushing a climate emergency model to justify or normalize the spraying activity already happening in our skies has drawn increasing criticism from both opponents and advocates of more research. This criticism has been fragmented and incongruent, originating from natural scientists, social scientists, philosophers, and others.
Put simply, climate scientists have no agreed definition of what would constitute a climate emergency, and are nowhere close to reaching consensus on the issue.
Whether the emergency is an unproven runaway greenhouse effect or, more credibly, a climate tipping point, what is clear is that the concept of a “climate emergency” is a propaganda spin to have the public accept that the skies above them will be whiter and cloudier because of a climate emergency. An emergency, climate or otherwise is ultimately a shared idea, rather than objective reality.
What is most aggravating is with all of this discussion of solar geoengineering for a runaway climate emergency is that there seems to be no appointed authority that is empowered to define a climate emergency and determine whether a particular event qualifies for tampering with the earth’s climate using aerosolized sulfates dropped from planes.
This should concern all of us.
The emergency framing and the propaganda spin of the normalization of spreading contrails indicates that there are a few unnamed experts and scientists that wish to see our form of government dovetail into a technocracy.
In other words, political involvement in things like climate science, and even geoenegineering indicates that our government has surrendered to scientific experts. This has the potential to erode democratic practices, and leads to public policy that favors rule by technical experts over popular representatives.
This should be challenged.
However, most people still have the attitude that all of this concern is invalid because it is alleged by the majority of people to be nothing but conspiracy theory.
The guide states that “because kids are so good at watching clouds, they can be easily taught to identify contrails.”
The recommended age range for the teaching of this lesson is for children ages 6 through 10.
Furthermore, the lesson states:
Because kids are natural sky watchers, they are curious about both clouds and contrails. It is likely that when contrails are present that young children will notice and pay more attention to them than adults.
Here are some basic facts that will interest them:
1. Contrails are long clouds of ice crystals caused by the exhaust from the engines of high-flying aircraft.
2. Contrails can spread into cirrus clouds that reduce sunlight during the day and warm the Earth at night.
3. Contrails are formed when the temperature of the air is around -40 degrees Celsius (which equals -40 degrees Fahrenheit).
4. Contrails do not form when the air is too dry. The length of contrails provides a clue about how dry the sky is where the plane that caused the contrail is flying.
5. Clouds that shade the sun during the day can cause cool weather.
Now why is it important for kids to know this?
It says in the final statement that “Kids know that some clouds signal rain and other mean fair weather. They need to know that contrails are actually manmade clouds and that they can cause measurable changes in the temperature far below where they live and go to school.”
So children will be taught that the trails in the sky are man-made and that they can create a cooler day.
NOAA and NASA have actually changed the definition of ‘contrail’ on cloud charts by using pictures of jet-sprayed clouds to depict normal contrails. And other ‘scientists’ are claiming that jet exhaust ‘contrails’ are spreading out to form clouds, without any analysis that it is actually coming from the exhaust, or from affixed nozzles on the aircraft. They as of yet not explained why they cannot be contrails.
NASA has indicated on a website entitled “Contrail Education” that scientists are most interested in persistent contrails because they form long-lasting and sometimes extensive clouds that would not normally have formed in the atmosphere.
Persistent contrails can last for hours to days, and spread over thousands of square kilometers, becoming indistinguishable from naturally occurring cirrus clouds.
Scientists are concerned about contrails because predicted increases in air-traffic could result in a continued increase in cloud cover.
Knowing when and where contrails form is key to determining their contribution to cirrus cloud cover and their effect on the energy balance.”
There is also a new concern that the normalization process for trail filled skies can be seen in movies, TV commercials, TV shows, and children’s cartoons.
For years now, video games, news programs, commercials, talk shows, and even game shows have added a background design that consists wholly or partly of chemtrails. It has been discussed in forums that the trail adding has become so commonplace that it is now hard to not find a chemtrail design in the background. It has been observed that chemtrails have even been digitally added to movies. Not only do chemtrails start to seem normal as a result; they also become almost unnoticeable due to the over familiarization of them.
This type of subliminal brainwashing was first observed in the Disney animated movie,“Cars.”
About 43 minutes into the movie, a race takes place between two cars in the desert. In the sky you can clearly see chemtrails with normal clouds around them. There have also been chemtrails in the skies above Teletubby Land – the hilly and grassy place where the Teletubby’s from the successful children’s show live.
There were chemtrails seen in the animated film “Over the Hedge,” and they have appeared in the Simpsons, and the new Lego cartoons. Now mind you these are only a few that I have seen.
I am sure there are many more.
Some argue this subliminal indoctrination in order to get people to remain at ease over the issue by making it lingering contrails to appear historically omnipresent and harmless.
This technique is eerily similar to what Robert Anton Wilson called, fnords. The word comes from the book the Illuinatus trilogy. A fnord is disinformation or irrelevant information intending to misdirect, with the implication of a conspiracy. In this case, the fnord is simply putting chemtrails everywhere in order to indicate that there is no conspiracy to hide their true meaning and danger.
In the trilogy, a fnord was interjected in regular print. It appeared so many times that humans would glance over it, but it still made them uneasy when they saw it.
A conspiracy of the world’s controlling powers conditions everyone from a young age to be unable to consciously see the word “fnord.” Fnords were scattered liberally in the text of newspapers and magazines, causing fear and anxiety in those following current events.
So are these chemtoons acting like fnords to condition young people not to worry, but triggers anxiety in those who are older and are aware of what they mean?
One episode of CSI NY featured a conspiracy theorist professor as a victim, someone who actor Gary Sinise’s investigator character called “totally anti-American” because the professor believed in chemtrails and was against water fluoridation.
Chemtrail researchers, chemtrail photographers, bio apocalypse nutcases, just a few of the terms the mainstream press levied unfairly against the underground media when they attempted to fight their way out of the nebulous fog that seemed to hover over the clear skies of the United States in the latter part of the 1990’s.
There are some people who see themselves as critical thinkers. They question some of the data that is being presented as “true” data by some nebulous body that are faceless scientists that give us their hypothesis ion many of the most pressing matters that face us today.
From 1998 to the present, there have been many news stories reported that circumstantially indicate a random chemical spraying on the populace is taking place and people are physically reacting negatively to the aerosolized geoengineering fog.
For years the mainstream press has sought to ridicule those who have questioned the existence of these trails. Scientists have even gone to the extreme of saying that they are a hoax.
However, they are hoping that you are unaware of the geoengineering programs where they use the very things they say do not exist.