Whoever is in charge of the aerosol spraying of our global skies is attempting to remove the word chemtrails from public’s vocabulary, and it is nothing new. As more and more disinformation websites step up their campaigns, claiming that chemtrails are geoengineering, the more confused the public becomes! Seriouly , this is HOW disinformation works. Even chemtrail activists are referring to chemtrails as geoengineering instead of using the correct term for it, which is chemtrails. The term ‘chemtrail’ generally refers to chemical jet contrails, like the ones depicted in the following photo.
Let us be very clear. It is NOT just a matter of a name. It is so much more than that.
Chemtrails (Chemical lingering contrails, generally expelled from jets) are not geoengineering because geoengineering refers to a program whose claimed efforts are “to stop or slow down global warming“, something that does not exist, a hoax. The definition of geoengineering is always advertised with the efforts to mitigate or stop a false condition known as global warming. We have already proven that global warming does not exist, so much so that governments of the world are now referring to it as Climate Change. You must look back into our now so distant past and realize, the general public refused to believe that Global warming exists, and it soon became the Global Warming Hoax across the world. If we are to understand the difference between chemtrails and geoengineering, we must first look at the facts surrounding the two, and when you finally educate yourselves, you will not confuse the two again.
We will set out in this article to prove to you the disinformation that has been set into play, which is really just a “play on words”.
Â First, a definition of geoengineering:
Geoengineering – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“The main use of geoengineering refers to “the deliberate large-scale intervention in the Earthâ€™s climate system, in order to moderate global warming“. The discipline divides broadly into two categories, as described by the Royal Society: “Carbon dioxide removal techniques [which] address the root cause of climate change by removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. Solar radiation management techniques [which] attempt to offset effects of increased greenhouse gas concentrations by causing the Earth to absorb less solar radiation.””
Second, geoengineering promoted as the “cure to climate change or Global Warming”.
NASA – Geoengineering: Why or Why Not?
Why not inject aerosols into the stratosphere to repeat the effect, slowing the inexorable warming that is melting away the ice at Earth’s poles, among other effects on nature? It’s called geoengineering, and Alan Robock spoke Friday before an overflow crowd at the Science Directorate of the potential benefits and consequences of doing just that. “Freshwater precipitation goes down after a big volcanic eruption,” said Robock, a professor of climatology at Rutgers and a member of the Intergovenmental Panel on Climate Change that shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former Vice President Al Gore.
Simply put, an absent or highly filtered sun inhibits evaporation that forms clouds that bring rain. Even further back in time, to the Laki, Iceland, eruption of 1783-84, the effect produced killer droughts in Egypt, based on the Nile River’s levels at Aswan, where records have been kept since 622 AD. There also is anecdotal evidence of droughts in India and China because of Laki. For example, geoengineering could have a similar effect to the volcanic eruptions, producing regional climate change that could induce droughts. Possible ozone depletion and increased oceanic acidity could develop.
Geoengineering and Climate Intervention: What We Need to Know
Concepts for directly and deliberately manipulating Earth’s climate system, collectively referred to as “geoengineering,” have been proposed as contingency responses to global warming.
The above graph is being promoted by a Climate Change website:Â http://www.climatecentral.org/gallery/graphics/geoengineering_schemesÂ Now please pay attention here as to their claims. They state:
“In order to slow down climate changes likely caused by the increase in human-generated greenhouse gases, some scientists and policy makers are exploring ways in which to cool the planet. A number of geoengineering strategies, or ways in which the environment might be manipulated to offset global warming, have emerged, though there is not yet an agreed upon definition of which methods should be categorized as geoengineering.”
According to the Royal Societyâ€™sÂ report on geoengineering the climate, released in 2009, there are two main approaches. One involvesÂ deflecting a small amount of the sunâ€™s lightÂ and heat away from the planet to lower global temperatures; this could include the use of reflective aerosols or mirrors high in the atmosphere, or may require the deliberate formation of clouds. A second general method for cooling the planet involves removing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere, either via sequestration orÂ CO2 capture, or possibly throughÂ ocean iron fertilizationÂ to promote the growth of CO2-consuming algae.”
Now that you have carefully read the above paragraphs, what do you see? Where have we heard all of this language before? It mentions green house gases, but further more, the mere mention of policy makers is enough to make my blood curdle. Policy makers? If I remember, policy makers RUN from the idea of chemtrails…..they prefer to remain silent on most environmental issues because most of this disinformation campaigns are so convoluted, dare they put their own feet in their mouth?
All the above references have one thing in common, they all mention geoengineering as a remedy to global warming. Chemtrails on the other hand, is the opposite. Chemtrails contribute to heating of the planet by cloud insulation, which we now refer to as global warming.
Let’s talk about the effect of trails
According to climate scientists:
Emissions trading in international civil aviation
“At cruise altitude, apart from CO2 it is above all NOx, water vapour, contrails and cirrus clouds that contribute towards the greenhouse effect.”
Also see this video, someone found that the temperature coming from the trails was higher than the other part of the sky:
If contrails and the clouds (contrails cirrus) formed from these lingering contrails contribute to the greenhouse effect, then it is virtually impossible for chemtrails to be the chosen solution for reversing global warming.
Extreme Weather, unstable weather & misrepresented categories of weather: Have you noticed it yet?
Extreme weather that has been happening around the world today coincides with the increased witnessed chemtrails in our skies, yet the last decade it is proven that levels of carbon or methane have NOT increased . Scientific data also supports the idea that both (Carbon and methane) do not contribute to the global extreme or catastrophic weather.
Again if Global warming is a hoax and is not responsible for extreme weather, then what is? Common sense and a small dose of logic points to Chemtrails.
The evidence of disinformation and divertion
Here is an example of a disinformation video:
The above video was suggesting that the public (yes that means YOU) abandon the word chemtrails and replace it with geoengineering. The video actually opens with asking you to forget the word chemtrails, and to use a “better” explanation such as “Solar Radiation Management”. But chemtrails are not SRM at all. Chemtrails do not shield us from the sun, they trap heat instead.
The video goes on to explain the various methods of repelling (refracting, reflecting) the sunlight back into space as if it is something required to do. It is not. What we need to cool the earth from any warming or any extreme weather is to stop chemtrails. The video also uses scare tactics suggesting that CO2 emissions are the culprit and it is “much worse than what they originally thought it was”. Again, the culprit is Chemtrails and this is easily proven!
Unfortunately, some activists play to this kind of disinformation. They suggest that the public should abandon the word chemtrails. They ask people to avoid the word chemtrails. Their reason is because people associate chemtrails with hoax. That is simply a false assumption. People often open the eyes after more explanation.
They end up giving people a twisted meaning to geoengineering. So people end up having to use and waste time to explain the different definition of geoengineering. They waste time trying to change the meaning of geoengineering instead of explaining why chemtrails kill people. Most people and the mainstream science learn that geoengineering do not refer to those trails, for them geoengineering refer to an attempt to cure the planet, but the disinformed people try to change that accepted definition. That require a huge amount of effort. An effort that should be used to educate people about chemtrails instead of trying to change the definition of geoengineering.
Their approach to use geoengineering word is also detrimental for the chemtrails movement. Because now people think there is nothing wrong, there is no secret need to be unfold and there is no one trying to plan bad thing. Because people learn that geongineering is done without secret.
What is worse, the clueless public now will think that chemtrails movement is against an attempt to cure the planet! When in reality chemtrails movement is an attempt to cure the planet by trying to stop the spraying. Those disinformed people, the one that call chemtrails as geoengineering, giving anti chemtrails community a bad name.
An attempt to get SRM accepted by the public!
SRM is still an unproven method. But the promoter use anything to try to make SRM accepted by the public, to make SRM as something promising, this include using the chemtrails community to promote SRM.
We see a lot of publication that promote SRM as the only solution, an example:
“SRMG :The Solar Radiation Management Research Governance Initiative (SRMGI) was convened by a partnership of the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the Royal Society, and TWAS, the academy of sciences for the developing world. The project was launched in March 2010 in response to the 2009 Royal Society reportÂ Geoengineering the climate. That report concluded thatÂ geoengineering is not an alternative to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but that it might be the only option to reduce temperatures quickly in the event of a climate emergency. It emphasised the importance of good governance, and the need for international partners to work together on this matter.”Â http://www.srmgi.org/“
PROMOTERS of GLOBAL WARMING:
The Royal Society reports: 2012 was one of the â€śtop five wettest years on recordâ€ť, however the beginning of the year saw a widespread drought across much of the UK.Â Join David Shukman, Science Editor for BBC News, and Professor Tim Palmer FRS as they discuss extreme and adverse weather conditions with Liz Howell, Head of BBC Weather.Â How do these events arise, how they are reported, and how can the latest research improve the forecasting of storms or flooding in the future?”
Above photo of David Keith (David Keith is to Geoengineering what Al Gore is to Global Warming)
David Keith states: Solar Geoengineering
I have been thinking about geoengineering since the early 1990s, when I wrote one of the first assessments of the technology and its policy implicatons in the journal literature, work that grew into a more systematic look at the technology and its historical roots that appeared inÂ Annual Review of Energy and the EnvironmentÂ and in shorter form inNature. My current work on geoengineering includes:
- Assessments. Member of the working group for UK Royal Society’s 2009 reportÂ Â the first by a national science academy devoted to geoengineering. In 2010 I testified before committees of the US CongressÂ Â and the UK Parliament. I presented at US National Academy meetings in 2000 and 2009Â served on the drafting committee for the American Meterological Society’s statement and was co-author of the geoengineering sub-chapter (4.7) of the mitigation volume of the Third IPCC Report and serving on the IPCC AR5.”
Notice that THE ROYAL SOCIETY and DAVID KEITH are one in the same? Also notice that David Keith TESTIFIED before US CONGRESS back in 2009, 5 years ago. YET, the word “Chemtrail” has become a conspiracy oriented term referring crazy activists who essentially ‘need to get a life’.
Chemtrails are not the government’s Solar Radiation Management Program, so please stop buying the lie!Â We should always refer chemtrails as chemtrails because currently there is no mainstream geoengineering category for chemtrails. Only those who are in charge of atmospheric testing and experimentation of our skies will continue to profit from by eliminating the word chemtrails from our vocabulary all together. Their goal is to make you believe and promote global warming all over again. BEEN THERE, DONE THAT! If they (whoever they are) can not make you believe in global warming by creating extreme weather to validate their claims, then they try to make you believe that the persistent trails you see is an attempt to reduce the real problem. This could not be further from the truth!. It is the opposite! Chemtrails are the problem, and they have been for quite sometime. Chemtrails are creating the global warming, but they want to make you believe that those trails is to combat global warming.
MOTIVE: Follow the money
All geoengineering firms NEED money (to the tune of billions of dollars) in conducting these so called “experiments” to substantiate their claims! They are premising these costly aerosol programs on a faux global warming scam, and the public is eating it up like candy!
This is just the first step, the first wave if you will, of implementing these programs globally. Humanity will finally begin to accept the carbon cap, carbon tax and any other inconvenience caused by accepting the global warming agenda. Global warming is not real, it is wrong to call chemtrails as geoengineering.
Some scientist has realize that jet exhaust trails (Which we call as chemtrails) is a sign of problem and may be the cause of current problem. Some example of their finding are:
Global radiative forcing from contrail cirrus – Ulrike Burkhardt* and Bernd KĂ¤rcher
“Aviation makes a significant contribution to anthropogenic climate forcing. The impacts arise from emissions of greenhouse gases, aerosols and nitrogen oxides, and from changes in cloudiness in the upper troposphere. An important but poorly understood component of this forcing is caused by ‘contrail cirrus’-a type of cloud that consist of young line-shaped contrails and the older irregularly shaped contrails that arise from them. Here we use a global climate model that captures the whole life cycle of these man-made clouds to simulate their global coverage, as well as the changes in natural cloudiness that they induce. We show that the radiative forcing associated with contrail cirrus as a whole is about nine times larger than that from line-shaped contrails alone.”
Even scienstist know that those smoke released by jet plane produce bad effect. Stop calling chemtrails ‘geoengineering’, because they are NOT ONE IN THE SAME. Stop referring to Global warming and Climate Change as though it were real. You have been scammed once again. Below, we have some references for you to read, one being Agenda 21, as the “weather” is spelled out in this document, as well as food shortages and genocide (for use of depopulation, etc.)
Agenda 21Â (This link includes your own FREE personal download of the Agenda 21 Document)
Introduction to SRMGIÂ Advancing the International Governance of Geoengineering
“The Solar Radiation Management Governance Initiative (SRMGI) is an international NGO-led project that seeks to promote the good governance ofÂ solar reflection methods (SRM) of geoengineering. It is neither in favour of, nor against, SRM geoengineering and research, since it is impossible to tell at this stage whether the technology will be helpful or harmful. SRMGI recognises that this is a controversial issue that has potentially serious global implications, and believes that multi-stakeholder discussions, alongside international network building, will strengthen humanityâ€™s ability to handle the issue.”
The above link show that SRM is not something definite yet, it is still a questionable method. It is not proven to work yet. But why people talking as if SRM is something that really can cool the earth?
Remember, chemtrails are not the same as Geoengineering. Do your homework, it makes a big difference!