[mellow music plays] so let's say we weredoing geoengineering because we wanted to makethe weather a little bit better. there'll be monsoon failuresduring that period. there'll be huge hurricanes. the global studies indicatethere will be some impacton precipitation patterns. might involve large-scaleregional agricultural disruption
lasting a number of years. potentially two billion peoplecould have their food disrupted by such interventions. that the aerosols can--at least in these models, simulations, or indicatedby these simulations-- can offset most climate changein most places most of the time for both precipitationand runoff. but it's likely to cause somedamage in some places. [theme music playing]
when i grow up, i wanna beeither an artist or a teacher. i wanna grow up in a world wherethere's lots of nature. i love nature. how can i look my childrenin the eyes... and not try to shed the lighton this issue, knowing every breath they takeis--is laden with these metals? i have been forced to concludethat there is no greater or no more immediate threatto anything that lives and breathes
than the globalgeoengineering programs, short of nuclear catastrophe. geoengineering is definedas the artificial modification of the earth's climate. geoengineers are proposingspraying 10 to 20 million tons of toxic aluminum and othersubstances into our sky for the stated goalof cooling our planet. so let me distinguishthese two different, uh, kinds of geoengineeringas clearly as i can.
so the first one is--we callsolar radiation management, and that's the idea thatyou could put reflective, mostly reflective particlesor other means to make the earth whiter, effectively to increasethe earth's reflectivity, reducing the amount of--of heatthat's absorbed by the sun and therefore exerting someoverall cooling tendency on the earth. i think, though, the initialresults of climate models
indicate that reflectionof sunlight away from the earth can offset most climate changein most places most of the time. but it will damage some places. we've mostly thoughtabout sulfur. nevertheless, there might besome good reasons to think about aluminum. turns out, first of all,there's been a lot of work on the environmentalconsequences of aluminum in the stratosphere.
there's a bunch of papers goingback to the '70s that look at the radiativeand ozone-- ozone destroying propertiesof aluminum in the stratosphere, and those make you think itmight be useful. do this in just a jetin a very simple way. make high-quality aluminumparticles just by spraying aluminum vapor out,which oxidizes. so it's certainly, in principle,possible to do that. since we released "whatin the world are they spraying,"
hundreds of peoplefrom around the world have began taking rain tests. what they're findingis what many are calling the chemtrailgeoengineering footprint of aluminum, barium,and strontium. so we're finding this welsbachfootprint internationally, all over the world,wherever they take samples and get a, uh, chemical analysisof rain and snow water. this is quite common.
wherever you see the jetchemtrails go over, you're gonna get aluminum,barium, strontium coming down on you. why would we not believethat it's happening when what we see in the skymatches exactly the express goal of numerous geoengineeringpatents, about 160 or more? why would we not believe thisis happening when every element showing up in the rain testsare the primary elements named in thosegeoengineering patents?
why would we not believe thisis happening when we have escalating levels in very shorttime frames, as much-- as short as five years,we see rain levels of aluminum, for example,escalating as much as 50,000%? california air quality studiesdo not show these metals migrating from china,and it's of recent origin. so, you know, this bombardmentof heavy metals that's raining down on us iscoming from somewhere. why would we not believegeoengineering is occurring
when the weather patterns are soaltered here in exactly the manner statedby geoengineers and reports on the consequencesfor geoengineering, which are diminished rainfall, which are increased ozonedestruction. we have a massive ozone holein the northern hemisphere now. should aluminum be in the soiland the rain? and yes, it should bein the soil. it's naturally there.
always was there. and should it be in the rain? well, absolutely not. but the standard reply has been,"your samples are contaminated." but since we are getting samplesnow that show zero aluminum, and we're getting lotsof barium and strontium and zero aluminum. so that just proves that ifthere was dirt in our samples of some sort,dust blown up from the ground,
we should get some aluminumin some detectable quantity. the primary ingredients ingeoengineering are specifically the oxides of metals,including aluminum oxide. this is devastating plants,totally devastating. the trees are dying.why? approximately two years ago,i rode in the back-- and you can ride in the backof my place for miles. you can go all the waythrough the woods, you know, creeks and everything,and it was--i say was--gorgeous.
and the day before yesterday,i took a ride, and i rode in the back,and what i found was total devastation. as i pointed out before,michael, we're seeing, as in this example here,very hardy, native plants completely flash out dead. that looks like it's been hitwith some kind of a chemical. and we've only seen thisin the last couple years. and there's another one there,there, back over there.
we're seeing maturemadrone trees, which are 70, 80 feet high,flash out dead just like this. usda refusesto investigate it. the ph typically around hereshould be about 5.6. well, since the contrailinggot heavy, i watched the ph herein these forests, well, go up i guess would bethe word. from 5.6, it went about 20 timesmore alkaline. very big red flag of falloutfrom these materials
are ph changesto the forest floor. we have very extensive studies from the u.s. departmentof agriculture on the soils in our region, and those soils have changedin five to six years. the ph's have changed in this--in this area as much as 10 to 12 times towardalkaline in five to six years. i've personally beenin the forest testing with usda soil scientistswho just scratched their heads
and seemed to have noexplanation for incredibly profoundchanges in ph, which is affecting theecosystem here tremendously. aluminum buffer action,aluminum hydroxide is what we think it is, uh, plus the barium carbonate,strontium titanate, strontium oxides,barium oxides, probably some aluminum oxidesin there. but this has apparently drivenour acid soils
about 20 times more alkaline,to about 6.8. there are simply too many dotshere that connect. our skies are almostnever blue anymore. that is a named consequenceof geoengineering. the amount of lost sunshinehitting the planet right now is beyond belief. if people look up the term"global dimming," they will see that fully 20% of the sun's raysthat reached the planet several decades ago areno longer reaching the planet.
i mean, that's a profound changethat few people even know is occurring. and you have very visibleoccurrences in the sky from the aircraft,a very visible sun blocking, expanding, dingy trailsthat are exactly what geoengineering patentsdescribe. heavy aluminum--i'm talking,like, in the 40s and 50s, up to 3,000, 4,000, 5,000--that's still common. uh, barium, strontium,to, um, oh,
somewhere 40 or 50 to,again, about 2,000 or 3,000. same for both bariumand strontium. where is this mountainof metal coming from? why is asthma, a.d.d.,alzheimer's, autism-- all elements relatedin many studies to aluminum or particulate inhalation-- why are these el--why are these ailments going off the charts with noapparent explanation?
why has respiratory mortalityin the continental united states gone from eighth on the listto third in six years? and no one seems to askany questions, why everybody, uh, every otherperson has asthma now, why every other commercial on tvis an allergy medication. and again, when david keith, the world's most recognizedgeoengineer, was asked on the record,had there been any studies done as to the consequencesof dumping 20 million tons
of aluminum into the atmosphere, his answer was patently, "no." while geoengineers claim thattheir models are to cool the planet, a numberof studies now are arising that indicate,yes, temporarily, there will be, regionally,cooling as these particulates reflect the sun. however, they actuallyat night act as a blanket and will warm the planet.
so the question now remains, "why in the worldare they spraying?" one of the things thatgeoengineering is about, when you're environmentallydoing something with the atmosphere, is that you can be engagedin weather modification. historically, weathermodification in the united states beganto be looked upon in the 1940s as somethingthat people would want to do.
and so they started lookingat making it--enhancing snow, enhancing rain. they started lookingat hurricane control. there was a whole bunchof projects in the '40s that started. one was project stormfury,which turned into a disaster when they tried to modifya hurricane. i'm mark mccandlish. and for the better partof 30 years, i worked
in the aerospace and defenseindustry. i had a secret clearancetwice during my career. some of the technology that isaw or participated in the creation oftends to play a role in, um, some of the things thatare used to control the weather. the very distribution processesbeing employed in the aerosol campaign-- manipulating the weather, crops,um, you know, taking over the--the, uh,the food production
or controlling the foodproduction, the military applications-- the process evolvedwhen they realized in the-- in the 1800s that you can putthings into the environment that will influencethe uptake of moisture and where it dropsout of the atmosphere again. my name is scott stevens. i, uh, was a televisionweatherman for 20 years. these chemtrails are absolutelyrequired to impact
whatever weather eventthey were designing. and the trails were an absolutenecessary ingredient for them to achieve theirweather modification goals. so we're finding the aerosols,the metal particulates, all of those can be usedand leveraged to create weather events that areseveral standard deviations or outside what would betypically normal. when the geoengineering reallygot underway with the russians in the mid-'70s, we ended upwith snow in miami.
we ended up even with frostdeep into mexico. you know, the bizarrenessof the weather really exploded on the scene when, uh,when weather engineering got going in the mid-'70s. the dakotas, in winter,they recorded a temperature of almost 100 degrees,94 degrees. it broke the former recordby 32 degrees. there's very profound thingsthat people don't notice. blue skies almost never.
we almost never have dewon the ground. that's a known consequence ofgeoengineering, if they did it, which they appear to be. it sucks the moisture outof the atmosphere. it doesn't descend,doesn't form dew. we have massive temperaturedisruptions. people are starting to wonder,"why is it 80 degrees one day "and then snowing the next dayat 50 degrees or 45 degrees, and then back up to 80the day after that?"
when you push and pullthe climate with these-- these manipulations programs,of which there's a mountain of datato corroborate their existence, then you start to have massivefluctuations in the system. and we saw in march,in the continental u.s. there were 15,232 temperaturerecords broken. that's profound. some of the daytime highs,the former records were broken by as much as 32 degrees.
don't people wonder whatin the world is going on? whether they want to make itsnow at 45, 46, 47 degrees-- i remember when 38, 39was a big deal. those kind of snowfallsin the upper 30s. and now that's been pushedinto the 40s. there's a patent called "ice nucleation for weathermodification". this is a patent from nasa. it can be found onlinein its full form.
this patent is for the creationof artificial snowstorms from what would have beenrainstorms. however preposterous it soundsto people, if they look up"chinese create snowstorms", they will find a long listof articles where the chinese bureauof weather modification openly admitted that they werecreating snowstorms until they did a billiondollars' worth of damage in beijing.
so my question would be,if the chinese can do this, and nasa has a patentfor the same purpose, why would we believe snow eventshere are natural, when it's snowing now,regularly, at 45 degrees, sometimes 50 degrees-- heavy, wet, concrete snowthat's full of aluminum, full of barium,full of strontium? consider the ice packin their first aid kit that can sit dormantat room temperature for decades,
until the chemicalsare mixed together, at which time it creates ice. as an on-air meteorologist, i had a responsibilityto my audience. there were storms that were notbehaving as they were modeled or they historicallywould have responded. if you can control wheremoisture is collected and where it's dropped,so to speak, in the form of rain or any otherkind of precipitation,
then you can really--you cando everything. you can steerthe weather system. if you want to be ableto manipulate the weather, one of the things we know aboutthe materials that are being usedin the aerosols-- we--we've seen everythingfrom aluminum oxide, barium salts, strontium,copper sulfate, uh, potassium iodide, um, a number of different kindsof things,
each of which have differentlevels of reactivity with the moisture in the air. some, like aluminum oxide, tends to sequesterthe moisture. the aluminum oxidenanoparticles, which are microscopically fineand uniform in size, attract the humidityand the moisture in the air, and they can--it basically formslike a nucleation process, where the moisture condenseson these particles.
the--with cloud seeding,the cooling will be achieved by making clouds reflecta bit more sunlight back to spacethan they would otherwise. and less sunlight reachingthe surface would tend to cool the planet. these aerosol particle act--particles act as something calledcloud condensation nuclei, and, um, this is--these aresites where-- these particles act as siteswhere cloud drops can form.
well, the one thing thatwe know has happened is, because theseare nanoparticles, and they float like madwith a little bit of, uh, moisture added to them. they go overthe continental divide. they dumped allof california's rain into the mississippi valley,which is the reason they're having floodsand tornadoes and fierce storms and odd weather back east.
the effect herein california is drought. now, then, if you hitthat area of the sky with a beam of a particular kindof radiation, and you can heatthose particles up, just like heating up,you know, your--your cup of coffeein the microwave, these particles beginto vibrate and resonate, if you use the right frequencyof--of, uh, rf energy, that they then heatthe surrounding air,
and they will take allof that air and the moisturethat is in it to a higher altitude,where it's much colder, and it'll condense and thenbecome a low pressure system. well, there--there's a coupleof locations where they tend to bevery interested in--in leaving their trails. the big one and the surprisingone for me is under areasof high pressure,
where you would--you wouldexpect to see the blue skies, the dry conditions. those are prime targetsfor trailing. couple of reasons: high pressure is--is stable. it's relatively still. you know, we've got the, uh--the clockwise flow around it. and if you accentuate the high,so it's very easy to add those particulatesof aluminum, barium,
and whatever elsethey want to put in there, and as you add heat to that, those particulates thenradiate the heat into the atmosphere,and it warms. and what does a warmingatmosphere do? boom, it expands. so that's one way. it's a very simple way,but it's very apparent, because under the high pressure,it's supposed to be quiet.
it's supposed to be still. it's supposed to be blue. and we're not seeing that. then as the storm approaches,the high begins to recede. and then they're runningthe flights back and forth, back and forth,back and forth, and literally seedingthe leading edges of the cirrus. so the cirrus canopyis accentuated. that cirrus canopy, whichwould maybe be 200, 300 miles
at a head--at a head of a coldfront is now 400, 450 miles. based on geoengineering data, it would appearthe pacific northwest gets an excessive amount of--of the fallout from these programs,because much of the weather, much of the precipitationin the storm tracks and the jet streammove across us. so, as stated by globallyrecognized geoengineers like david keith,
that that's the type of areathey would want to seed these particulates, as incoming fronts startto cover landfall, and that's exactlywhat we see here. when there's any kindof incoming front, we see jets everywhere. the global studies indicatethere will be some impact on precipitation patterns, and obviously, there's a lotmore opportunity
for work in that area. after studyingmy time lapse surveillance, one of the reasonsi discovered for the trails was that the persistent oneswould break. they would misshape itor deform, and other planes would comealong and precisely mark off those locations of--of deformation. and you're not gonna get thatwith a regular fleet, so this had to be oneof the primary purposes
for chemtrails, in my opinion,was to measure off where we have thesediscontinuities showing up in the atmosphere. and in doing these actionsand discovering those zones where there's differentenergies in the atmosphere, i think that playsvery closely into theirweather engineering programs of mark, surveil,and then that data goes into--into a weather modelthat they can then use
to forecast, or, once again, engineer the weatherto their designs. but you can also influencewhat happens locally with the atmosphereby, um, painting the materials thatthese aerosols are made of with different kinds of radiofrequency, or rf energy-- radar, microwave,the haarp system. you know, haarp is, um, uh,an array, a field of antennas,radio frequency antennas.
they're 72 feet tall,then they have a crosstie pulled across the top that'sabout 60 feet in each direction. 180 of these arein the array today, so you can imagine this fieldof antennas. what happens is,by firing each one, they produce radio frequencyenergy that normally comes off of an antenna, spreads outrather rapidly. same principle... principles in physicswould be like a flashlight
shining on a wall. you know, you startwith a narrow beam, and by the time you hit thewall, you've got a wide beam. the idea with haarp is toget it to focus or concentrate that radio frequency energyso it doesn't spread out, so you can hold it tightertogether and then manipulate it in very specific ways. weather controlis a broad topic. so there's lots of ways tocontrol or manipulate weather.
haarp is one of them. because you also haveprivate sector companies getting into this businessof weather modification. in the case of haarp,do you need, uh-- people always ask me,you know, "do you need particulatesdispersed in the atmosphere to make it more effective?" you actually don't. would it make thingsmore possible?
could you enhancecertain effects? probably so. could you control energydistributions more efficiently? probably so, because you'reputting in conductors or you're puttingin reflectors. you're putting inparticulate material. if you've ever experienceda hailstorm and you've picked upone of the hailstones, and you slice it openwith a razor blade,
you'll see that it's layerupon layer upon layer of ice. now, hail is usually formedwhere you have a low-pressure system where there's a tremendousupdraft of air. the air gets warmed upby the sunlight ahead of the storm. the air rises. it takes the moisturethat's in the air up to a higher altitude,where it's much colder.
the moisture begins to condenseinto water droplets, but the updraft is so powerfulthat the water is carried to extreme altitudes,where it freezes, and it begins to fall. and as it falls,it starts to be caught up in the updraft again, so it's circulatedup into the air again. and so each time it'slofted up into the atmosphere, more of the moisture that iscondensing on the outside
of this--this nuclei of ice begins to form another layer,another layer. and each time it's caught backin the updraft, it goes up again, and it getsanother layer of ice. and so, if you havea system like haarp working in conjunctionwith aerosols, chemtrails that are sprayingin the air, you can actually create updraftsthat are so powerful that you can have thesehailstone circulation patterns
going over and over again,where you get hailstones the size of baseballs,or even softballs. the weather has always beena strategic... desire to controlby the generals, whether it was napoleon,marching towards moscow, or hitler,in his russian campaign, or our own pacific fleettrying to understand typhoons and use themfor our strategic advantage. war and weather arevery closely connected.
and they've been connectedever since about 1812 or so, maybe earlier than that. hannibal had to facethe snows in the alps. and so there'sa long history of weatherand warfare interactions. environmental manipulationis like the ultimate method of covert warfare because youcan literally shut down food production. you can create a situationwhere the people
within a country revoltagainst their own government, and you're invited into mop up the mess. the issue of owningthe weather by 2025, it's thismilitary publication. we've quoted it as far backas, i think, '94 or '95, even. but you go backto these earlier reports, and you look at, sort of,what was the objective? and the objectiveis exactly that: control the battlefieldenvironment.
environmental factors give youan absolute advantage. if you can weaken your adversarybefore you have to fire the first bullet,maybe you even win the war. whether it's incrediblyhistoric sandstorms when we're invading iraq, or you want to drought outor flood out a dictator that you're not happy with or obscure a beachwhen there's a landing, or if you just want to makemoney on the futures market.
owning the weather by 2025,using the weather as a force multiplier. and this kind of goes backto what i was saying before about if you can-- if you can control wherea weather system goes and how much or how severethe weather system is, then you can do other things. like you may have heardmore recently that many of the aircraftthat we've been developing
are what they call"all-weather capable," which means that they can flyin any kind of weather. they can shoot and targetthe enemy under really nasty weathercircumstances. and these are all things thatyou can use to your advantage if you happen to be controllingthe weather, also, because you can havea terrible storm front come in and make it difficult,if not impossible, for the enemy to operateon the ground
or to fly their aircraft if they don't have aircraftthat are as sophisticated as the ones that you have. and so, by creating or usingthe weather as a force multiplier,as the title implies, that you can achievean advantage over an enemy force that gives you the upper hand. one of the ideals of the--of the air force is to have this all-weatherair force,
or to have their pilotscoming back safely and using the weatheras a salient against the enemy and clearing outtheir own airports from, say, from ice, fogs,or from bad weather. and so if we could--if--the idea here is that if we can flyand they can't, that's a great militaryadvantage. there was also research studieson hurricanes that the scientists were trulycurious about the behavior
of hurricanes, but their military patronswere very interested in how to steer themor direct them in certain ways, almost as a--as a guided weapon. this jet stream's movingacross, and it shoots 50 miles northand then 75 miles east and then drops back south againand kind of goes on its way. and they attributedthat little dog leg in the jet stream in alaska
to swinging storm systemsout of central texas into central florida, where they deposited a coupleof tornadoes in the middle of orlando that were, like, really rareto see in that part of the country. and so people rememberthat event, and they rememberthat situation. but it'd be a good exampleof a very small change in alaska
in terms of a jet stream, and what kindof a lower-48 effect that would have. and that's again whereweather modification, small input in one placecould have tremendous change and unexpected outcomein another. you can create weather systemsthat are so severe, they culminatein battlefield denial, where the enemy is not ableto use the roads
or the bridges or--or getthrough the environment because the weatheris so severe. and you can--you can use theweather to destroy his crops, deny him a food source,destabilize his population, because people get hungry,and when they're hungry, they get angry and nasty,and they don't like what's happening. so there's lots of differentthings that you can do with the materials.
it's all how you use themin the environment, how you apply it. one of the biggest concernsof early cloud seeding weather control activities bythe general electric corporation came from their lawyers,who thought that the corporation was totally vulnerableto lawsuits because if they startedto make fair or foul weather, the people down belowin massachusetts, or downwind of schenectady
could institute massivelawsuits that could put g.e. out of business. so the first responseto weather control from their in-house lawyerswas to shut it down, was to give the projectto the military and ask them to do it,with the g.e. lawyers only being the consultantson the project. so they were allowedto suggest and, uh, design certain activities,
but they weren't allowedto touch anything or throw anythingout of the plane. the united states government,during the vietnam war, perfected weathermodification techniques, and also they perfectedreleasing toxic chemicals like agent orange over manyareas to defoliate land, trees, grasslands,and other areas. but this is technology thatdoes come up, and it comes up when--when you see
that the technologyhas advanced far enough to where the practicalityof utilizing it in the battlefield environment and the temptationby administrations-- i mean, the best covert waris using environment itself against your adversary. there was a military moment,and it was actually from pretty recent history, and this wasthe u.s. military thinking
that they might be ableto control the monsoon over vietnamduring that conflict. and so only a few--a handfulof top-level military advisors and the president were informedthat they were going to try to make it rainover the ho chi minh trail and try to havesome military advantage by doing this kindof intervention. when you start talking aboutmanipulating the environment, we have treaties thatgo back to the mid-'70s
that forbid this, number one,as weapons of war. so the perfection of weathermodification took place, but it became apparent thatusing weather modification for wartime purposeswas not acceptable to the united statesgovernment and other nationsof the world. so therefore, the enmod treatycame into being and was signedby the united states government after passing congress.
the reason it was signedand implemented was because it would ban warfare weathermodification techniques and useduring times of war. almost all of our treatiesthat we've signed, including the non-proliferation,counter-proliferation treaties, chemical treaties--you know,the ones that were signed recently, the last few years, uh, you know, back maybea decade now, i guess.
times goes. but they haddomestic exemptions, and so doesthe environmental treaty, where you can dowhatever you want in your own territorialboundaries. i mean, you start manipulatingweather in one part of- of the planet, it doesn't lookon the ground and say, "oh, yeah, wait.this is the boundary of-- a political boundary."
it fails to recognize those. so you start to talkabout geophysics and manipulatingthe planet itself. then it's a question of--those kinds of exemptions shouldn't even be allowed. meteorology and the military have a very long history,as i said. and it goes into this strategicadvantage that multiplies your traditional force--that is, your armament--
into using natureto your advantage as well. they want to create a stormin the southeast, then they'll start engineeringout of the north pacific. that's where the trailswill be, because you wantto work out several days ahead of timeso you have less input. and you multiply thatover a couple of days, you can have a big resultin five days' time. so small input upstream,big result downstream.
and one of the rules isalways work with what's coming. don't try to necessarily workagainst it. you can kill a storm in place.that's easy to do with haarp. you just changethe polarization. you change the ionizationof the atmosphere, and the stormwill fall apart. it will affect the setting up ofthe storm tracks, the jet stream, the locationof the storms, and so you end up with--an intervention
on the solar side of thingswould pretty directly begin to affectthe weather patterns. and so climate control,or attempted climate control, and weather control lieon this very large spectrum of intervention. it's also true thatif you can forecast climate, you can controla lot of futures markets, and you could know--if youhad the best information, or if you had some leverageover what the climate system
is going to turn out to be, you would be able to investin advance and own your crop futures and your agriculturalactivities and-- and not just agriculture,but weather affects-- i think it's something like80% of the u.s. economy is weather-sensitive. and so all kinds of businesseswould like to see some weather edge or someadvantageous information
that they would have. it's absolutely, entirelypossible to profit from the weather. hi, my name is michael agne. i'm an independent trader... trading commoditiesat the c.m.e. group, member ofthe chicago board of trade, and i've traded derivativesand futures cash for over 15 years.
weather derivatives arefinancial instruments that firms would useto hedge risk concerned with adverseweather conditions. the first weather derivative wasoriginally traded by enron back in 1997. weather derivatives startedin 1999 at the c.m.e. group. big utilities reinsuresto hedge against hurricanes or tornadoes or flooding,some sort of catastrophe. hedging against a cooler summeror a warmer winter.
let's just say i was insuringa product for 5 million, no matter what it was. let's say if it wasa utility company, a farmer,whatever it was. let's say i had $5 millionworth of crop, but i can do derivatives thatare worth double that amount, and i can then controlthe effects to where i collecton the insurance that's worth 10 million,
as opposed to selling the cropfor five million. yes, i could definitelyprofit from that. 2010, 2011, southern illinois,missouri, those--those, you know, we had a high peakof tornadoes, and those typesof adverse weather conditions definitely raised the priceof commodities as well as drovethe volatility, which also raises the priceof commodities.
you're gonna make more moneyif a crop fails. you're creating insurancethat's over the price of what your crop is worth,let's say. so what if you can controlthe weather? you controlhow these products grow. and if you had an insight to how these products wereactually seeded and what products you usedto actually grow those items-- corn, soybeans--and you cancontrol that market,
it's unlimited profit potentialif you can control the weather. if you want to send you know,cold into the midwest, you buy at pipeline capacity, you buy up options on heatingand cooling degree days. you buy derivatives off of--off of rainfall. there are mechanismsthat you can make hundreds of billionsof dollars annually and defray a huge chunkof the cost of this just on the chicago mercantileexchange,
playing with derivativesin the weather market. weather derivatives arebasically-- you're betting that there'sgonna be a weather disaster, and you're betting that it'sgoing to occur within a particular timeframein a particular location, and then, you know,the money that you put up basically is like a bet. it's like a wagersaying that, uh, this incident'sgonna happen here.
and then, when it does happen,there's a big payoff. and that big payoff is somethingthat motivates people to continue to participatein this kind of thing and maybe even feedthe very process that's causing the bad weatherto happen, particularly if there'sa connection between the people that areseeding the clouds and the people that aremaking investments. this is a new opportunity.
it's a new toolfor investors. you know, even if, uh, someone has no interest in,you know, going on the offensive sideand buying things, um, it definitely behooves themto be aware of what's going on out there. the extreme weather is here. you know, and it's not gonnareverse itself. the weather event has to besevere.
ionospheric heating,in fact, these instruments, um,when they were first utilized, which was in the formersoviet union back in the '70s-- they started out then-- they still call theseionospheric heaters because, in one modeof operation, you can literally create-- above this instrumenton the ground, you can heat an area 30--up to 30 miles in diameter
in the ionosphere. so you heat it up,and by heating it, it literally raises it. so you can then imaginethis column moving up several hundredkilometers out, and then the lower atmospherebegins to rush in and fill that vacant space,that void. and then, as a result,you're altering pressure systems for, you know, quite a--quite a distance,
which of coursealters the weather. you're also able, if a jet stream is comingin the area, you're able to alterits course. and if you alter a jet streameven a small amount, then the swing factor on theother end, you can move it,so you're moving storms, say, out of the midwestonto the east coast or this kind of thing,
by just swinging it high in--in terms of its flow and getting it redirected. okay, so now if we lookat precipitation, much has been madeof this issue of, uh, damage from precipitation. which the particulatesthat these trails intro-- have a--have introducedinto the sky are-- let's just say the stormscan develop more violently, more quickly, um,in places that are
not necessarily as, uh, whereyou would expect them to be. and so we see more flooding. we see more intense droughts. we see rainfall ratesof 1 to, you know, 2 1/4 inches an hour that are just bizarre. and sometimes even rainfall,you know, 1 1/4 inch a minute. it's just unheard of. and so you have an area that'salready been heated
by the sun's rays, and then you have the aerosoldrift in over that area. and it's reflecting both ways. it's reflecting the heatof the sun back out, but it's also trappingthe heat that's already been createdthere by the sunlight. so it will actually createmore heat and trap heat inside and closer to the atmosphere. it can actually exacerbateglobal warming problems.
and if you become more aware ofwhat's happening, where the globalcommodities are, what extreme weather events,you're one step ahead of them. the nature of the risk and ourability to respond to the risk is much greater in the caseof the scenario that might involve large-scale regionalagricultural disruption so the agenda was drought. the agenda wasto kill the storm
at least in that oneparticular spot. you see a tremendous andsignificant loss of property and, uh, crop production. many times, this will causefarms to go out of business, and when farmersgo out of business, they usually have to sell. and then if there's somebodywaiting in the wings to buy their land and thenturn that land over to the productionof genetically modified crops,
you can see wherethere would be kind of a strategic advantagethere. there's something thathappened in the midwest, and i'm sure everybody'sheard about the flooding in the midwest. and what happened is, um, george sorosand his big corporate monolith went in and started buying upthe farmland. so not only is it--is itcreating all these stresses,
it appears to bea corporate land grab. in other words,when the farmers, the small farmersgo out of business, they're wiped out through thesedroughts and everything, then the big guys come in,buy up the land. and if you thinkof western history, there's a lot of it concerningwater rights and even water wars. and so they were shootingabout access to, uh, water,
to water your livestock. and now people are thinking, or at least the people who areinvolved in weather control sometimes thinkabout the river of moisture above our heads, and, "jeez if we couldjust tap that." but that too is a, uh, a waterright that would involve access to, uh, to peoplethat felt like maybe they had prior rights over it.
and you're reducing the foodsecurity of people through deploying these kindsof approaches that... potentially 2 billion peoplecould have their food disrupted i've been an organic farmermy entire life... and i've been, um,in the last eight years, been certified organic. and so i've been growing foodin a way that feels healthy, where i have the most energy,and now it's not so healthy. i want to pass a really nice,healthy soil,
rich soil earth onto the children and have it be fertile. my name is joel gilcoca. i've been farming on this landfor about five years... since 2007, and i'm certifiedorganic since 2001. ten years ago, when i startedworking for myself, we can grow cilantro,no problem. we can grow basil,no problem. we can grow chinese cabbagewithout get trouble
or any vegetable. but ten years after--i mean,five years after that, everything start decline. could you addsomething to the environment that would affecta large population? the answer is absolutely yes. i started seeing chemtrailsbeing laid overhead more frequently and noticing the changein the crop production.
what we see in our area anytime there'sconvective clouds, anytime there'sa large cumulus cloud forming and beginning to rise, we hear aircraftin the vicinity. we see them actually flying overthese convecting clouds, and then in a very short time, before those clouds generallywill drop any precipitation, we'll see the entire cloudmore or less dissolve
into what looks likea massive smoke bank. if you can controlthe weather, then you can controlwhere the rain falls or where it doesn't fall. and if you can do that, then you can controlwhose crops survive and whose crops thrive. and if you happen to befavoring, um, a corporation or a group of corporations thatare flooding the market
with geneticallymodified crops, you can see howmanipulating the weather can actually changethe market share that one or morecorporations have. um, and there's, you know, there's lots of different waysthat you can do it. you can do itby denying precipitation or by giving too much. you can cause, uh, you know,
unusually large hailstonesto come out of the sky and completely obliteratea crop of corn. there's lots of different waysthat you can do it. um, you know, tornadoes,rip up an entire town, like joplin, missouri,i think it was. if you look back at the tapesof those weather systems, and you look five daysprior to that, you'll see that in those dayspreceding those events, there was all kinds of aerosolsbeing sprayed
all along the californiacoastline, where the moisturefor those storms came from, where those storm systemsoriginated. you know, it's--i mean, it's insidious, when you think about it. oh, my god, i've seen,since the chemtrails have come, there's a direct correlationwith the way the health-- the food doesn't lookas healthy and vibrant, and less of it.
and that concerns me. and of course, all crop lossesare related to weather modificationproblems. either climate,uh, worldwide weather, or local weather, which iscalled micro-climates. and these micro-climatesdefinitely determine what crop grows whereand in which community. and so, therefore,without stable micro-climates, we can not produceas much food
for the rest of the worldand ourselves as when we havemore stable micro-climates, not only in the united states,but in other countries as well. we fertilize itreally good, and they still have a lotof trouble to produce. and i think this is not fun, because we losinga lot of money put them into this kindof production. in 2008, 2009, three timesi losted my complete planting
of chinese cabbage. weather events is oneof the key components to most, uh, commoditiesthat are traded. let's just say your agriculturalgroup--corn, soybeans, wheat, something along those lines, weather is by far the largest,uh, affecting factor in the price of thosecommodities. if one farmer's crop fails, we have a major crop failure,say, in corn,
now that's going to affectevery other company that uses cornin their manufacturing process. there's gonna be less of it. and anytime there is lessof something, that creates a price rise. demand rises.okay? because there isn't any of it. there's only one thing. you've got five peoplethat want it.
so they're gonna paymore money for it. the companies know that. so they're gonnahike the prices up anyway. the consumer actually seesthe big brunt end of the higher, you know,cost in the commodity due to the adverseweather condition. obviously, the consumer will paythat price. i've noticed that the rainfallis less predictable, and then, when it does rain,
it does rain periods of timethat's more, more, like, longer periods. so not only do we havethe pollution, not only do we havestunted growth, but we also have changesin weather. and there's beensevere changes in weather all across the globe. i don't have a cluehow bad they are, but i know they are affectingalready in the--
in certain plants, you know,like basil, cilantro, and sometime the broccoliget too much, uh, fungus. it can be from those thingbecause, um, no matter what we do,it doesn't fit. it not working right. it appears to be a fungallyrelated ailment. and if one looks atthe species extinction rate, which todayis estimated to be 1,000 timesnatural variability,
that's 1,000 times normal, a figure you'd think wouldalarm most reasonable people, which is 100,000% of normal, and 70% to 80%of that extinction, plant and animal,is related to fungal infection. geoengineering particulatesare known to proliferate fungal reproduction. abiotic stresses are drought,cold, heavy metals, excess moisture in the soil,
and monsanto has a patentthat actually addresses all of thoseabiotic stresses. and the plantsthat it addresses is everything from applesto zucchini. 2011 was oneof the worst years for things that createabiotic stress. they had 12 worldwidesevere weather problems. this destroyed a good portionof the food supply. now i'm having a hard timegrowing cherry tomatoes outside
under these conditions, and i've turned to havingto build a greenhouse, where i'm now growing largetomatoes, heirlooms. and they are producingreally nice, big tomatoes. i see that the tomatoes that iplanted now are really healthy, and the ones outsideare dying. the midwest grows 40%of the world's corn. and it does have a tendencyto flood, so we can expectmore and more flooding,
according to the statistics. the e.p.a. statistics saythat there's going to be more and more flooding. monsanto is one of the world'slargest chemical companies. they also own 90%of the seed companies in the world right now, and theyare the largest company putting outgenetically modified seeds. so what does monsanto do?
corn is the lead-in because cornis in just about everything. corn is the main crop, and monsanto leads inwith corn products before it does anything else. so what we have ismonsanto leading in with a drought-resistant corn and an abiotic-stress-resistant corn. the drought and the flooding,it's all the same patent. monsanto has a patentfor abiotic stress.
abiotic stress is the drought. it's the flooding.it's the excess soil. it's anything that's goingto stress a plant. g.m.o. isgenetically modified organism, and it's also called g.e.,genetic engineering. well, the historyof farming has been, a farmer will plant a seedinto the ground, and there will be nutrientsin the ground that will enable that plantto grow,
and then at the endof the growing season, they will takesome of the seeds, and they will save themfor next year, and they'll growtheir next crop. but what is going on withthe genetically modified seeds is they're what's calledterminator seeds. a terminator seed will notproduce other seeds. with the terminator seeds, these farmers have to go backto monsanto every single year
and purchase these extremelyhigh-priced seeds. there have been studiesoutside of the united states showing that geneticallymodified seeds, the plants that comefrom them, are extremely harmful to humansand other life on this planet. uh, when i started farming, i produce 100% my crops. but in the last four years, i've been declinedto 50%, 75%
if i took into later crop, because i've been losteverything. and that's why i start movingall different crop, so i can cover the loss. well, my food productionhas declined at least by 60% in the last, i don't know,ten years. i've noticed banana stalksare smaller, and certainly the tomatoes--i'm hardly getting any. i use to get bushelsof tomatoes,
and now i can barelyget a bowl. my concern--it can be,you know. it's possible if they go- we go and run out of businessif they continue doing that. they really need to stopthey're doing. that's all i believe, because we cannot changethe system, you know, the mother nature. we have to keep goingthe way it is.
it's not possible. on the other hand, the,you know, heat stress is going to beone of the things, or thought to beone of the things that might limit productionof crops throughout the tropics. and so there are some questionsof tradeoffs, of, you know, when-- if you think you're gonnabenefit many people
and harm some people, how do you deal with thisissue of equity, and what-- i mean, what are the optionsfor dealing with that? a really interesting thing thati've found is that the e.p.a.has concluded that incidentsof heat stress, drought, flooding, cold,any type of abiotic stress is on the increase. and loss due to thatis going to double by 2030.
then you put yourself upas the solution. so when all of this weathercomes and wipes you out, or you havea drought problem, "oh, drought?we've got the seed for you. "here is our drought-tolerantcorn, just for you, "and it'll solveyour problems. "oh, by the way, you haveto sign this agreement, "this 40-page agreement, "so that when you go aheadand plant these seeds,
you now belong to monsanto." the weather disasters seemto be directly correlated to an increasein monsanto's sales. so there will be the haveand the have-nots. and one of the thingsthat's being discussed under global geoengineering is which countrieswill be the haves and which countrieswill be the have-nots when that type of climateremediation is undertaken
by many peopleat a certain level, mostly private corporationsfunded by the u.s. government, they are hoping. the fact that it's cheap isn'tnecessarily a good thing at all. as i'll come to in a second,the fact that it's cheap is part of the hard problemof governance. the fact that it's cheap meansany small state or even, conceivably,individuals could do this. and that isa very dangerous thing.
there's only probablyunder $10 million per year, and maybe far less than that, being spenton geoengineering research. um, it's a mix of a handfulof government grants and some private money, including supportfrom bill gates. bill gates investsin geoengineering. geoengineering destroys crops. monsanto supplies the seedto replace those crops.
bill gates invests in monsanto, so bill gates makesa ton of money, monsanto makes a ton of money, and the small farmergets squashed. corn prices go higher because of a severe droughtin this country, um, you know, where 41%of the country-- the world's supplyof corn comes from. so corn prices are higher.the farmer has more money.
so what does he do? he buys fertilizers,which dries up the mosaic stock, and--or he could purchase genetically modified seedsfrom monsanto. you've got severe,severe drought in africa. in 2011, there wasa severe drought. this is causing nothingbut death. it's causing starvation.it's causing malnutrition. it's causinga severe water shortage.
how do you grow anythingwithout water? you cannot grow anythingwithout water. they say, "oh, we got adrought-tolerant corn for you." there's beenan excessive push to get bioengineered cropsinto africa. they look at severe conditionsas an opportunity. they're disaster capitalists. so here you have farmers,and they've got flooding, they've got droughts,
they've got everything thattotally wipes them out. so what happens? okay, they--if they plant itearly enough in the year, they can go aheadand try and plant again. so buy more seed. okay?buy monsanto seed. so they're just raking upon that end of it. okay? so if you can create enoughweather manipulation, you can shortengrowing seasons,
you can create enoughof that disaster, and you've gotthe seed supply, they've got to come to you. geoengineers have statedon the record that if global geoengineeringwere started, it could cause droughtsin asia and africa. and they state thatto the american public for probably obvious reasons. why would they tellthe american public
that it could also causedroughts here? why wouldn't it causedroughts here? there's nothing specialabout america and the geography here that would not have the sameeffect as asia and africa. if the atmosphere is filledwith particulates, those particulates diminishand disperse rainfall, period. there's too manycondensation nuclei, so the water droplets do notcombine and fall as rain.
they simply adhere to those tinyparticles and migrate further. and that's exactlywhat we see. one of the suggestionsabout geoengineering has been that we genetically modifytrees and plants, um, we genetically modify cropsto be aluminum resistant, and this is ongoingat this time. and part of the geoengineeringscheme is to say, "we're gonna put all thesechemicals and particles "into our atmosphere,
"which is going to causeair pollution, water pollution, "changes in soil ph, "and could disrupt agriculturecrop production to a great degree." so, therefore, instead ofsaying that maybe this isn't a good idea that we polluteour air, water, and soils with the chemicals we're gonnaput into the atmosphere, which do come back down, there's a scheme aboundingwhich is happening right now
to modify some crops so thatthey are aluminum resistant to the types of chemicalsand particles they're gonna putinto the atmosphere. it's just gonna get worseuntil the point where we're not gonna ableto grow anything at all unless it's a monsantogenetically modified, abiotic-stress-resistant seed. the chemical companiesand the genet--and monsanto and all of these companiesare working together
to make us totally dependenton their products for growing cornor growing any kind of agricultural productor trees, whatever. we're going to corporatize notonly where the rainfall goes and who gets it through geoengineering andweather modification schemes, but we're also going to saythat these are gonna be the only cropsthat are gonna grow in areas where we're putting intoxic chemicals
that are coming downand altering the soils. one of the most basic thingsabout human society is that we needfood and water. and these are twoof the things that, uh, are most severely dependentupon good weather-- rain at the right timeof the year, sunshine so crops can grow. not enough sunshine,and they don't grow. too much water,the plants die.
not enough water,the plants die. all of this goes back to the amount of foodthat's available. so if you starve people,they will be vulnerable. they will be much easierto manipulate and force to do whatever the governmentwants them to do. so if you control how much foodthere is or its availability through thingslike the weather or using the weather asa strategic tool, militarily,
um, you can, you know,dramatically influence what's going onin the country. and by doing thatover and over again sequentiallythrough a region, um, it's possible that you canchange the, um, the political spectrumover an entire region by doing thisover and over again. um, maybe even, you know, do it overa much wider region.
create so much instabilitythat you're able to, you know, come in and say, "oh, we havethese wonderful, "fast-growing crops, you know,genetically modified. "and you know, this--you'll have-- you'll have something to eatin less than three weeks." you know, um, and i imaginethat, uh, you know, if you can controlthe food supply, that you can then consolidatethe financial and the political interestsof a country.
could predicting the weatherenable a group or a specific entityto profit from that knowledge of knowing what type of weatheror weather pattern will be? absolutely. that's what all commoditiesare driven by. they're driven by predictingthe weather, how the weather will bein a certain location, and that directlyis correlated to the priceof that commodity.
absolutely.there's no doubt. while there are a numberof agendas associated with these damaging programs, one thing is for sure: they can be usedto control our weather and thus corporatize everynatural system on the planet. this enables certainindividuals to consolidate an enormous amount of bothmonetary and political power into the hands of a few,
at the expense of everyliving thing on the planet. just by definition,the geoengineering programs are a direct assault on the most elemental aspectsof nature. what we're doingwhen we modify the weather is we're changingthe world's climate, and we're changingthe micro-climates. and we are doing it. there are things we can sayfor certain.
there's a mountainof metal raining down on us. we're certainly breathingthat metal. we have documentedfrom the computer modeling some unintended consequences. if such a contaminationis present, shouldn't we investigate? shouldn't local agenciesinvestigate, which they havepatently refused to do? there's no question thatlarge-scale climate engineering
is untested and dangerous. i would disagree quitestrongly that it is-- um, doesn't exist. i think that the capacity to doit in engineering terms most certainly exists,and that's part of the reason we have to think seriouslyabout how we manage that. we are breathing a mountainof metal, and that can't be denied. if geoengineering continues,
and the weather manipulationcontinues, and genetic modificationcontinues overtaking, we're going to loseour ability to grow good, nutritious food. we are going to loseour ability to thrive. i personally consider thisongoing toxic dumping into our atmosphere to be,along with nuclear radiation, the most dangerous threatsto our health and to our environment.
we've seen uv scalesgo off the charts, which are a known consequenceof geoengineering, ozone destruction. we've seen rainfall patternsdisrupted in ways that meteorologists don't seemto be able to explain or predict. the challenge that allof these weathermen face, all of them, whether they'reaware of it or not-- sooner or later,they will be aware of it.
and i went through a periodafter the epiphany of, "how did i notsee this sooner? how? "i mean, seriously, "i'm supposed to do thisfor a living. how did i not see this?" we have--seem to have lostour moral fiber and our ethical compasswhen we talk about that we all should livewithin an experiment that somebody elseis conducting.
if you knew or could predictthe weather at any given time in any given area, then you control the fateof mankind and what they payfor everything. washington is not responsiveto the average person. it's responsiveto commercial interests, who can spend millionson campaigns now without restriction,who literally drive the policy-makingin washington, d.c.
i guess i'm under the belief that you can't controlthe weather. um, you know, i hope someday wecould control the weather. power becomesan addictive thing. we're taking whatthe creator has created, usurping his authority,and bringing it under the authorityof corporations. i'm worried that one personor one group would try to have that muchleverage over the whole planet.
i don't believe that anybodyhas the right to play god, especially when they're puttingparticles and chemicals into the atmosphere, which there's unintended-- and consequencesthat are known. we don't know it all. we can not assume the roleof creator without dire consequences. this is not a good idea.
and this is not a reasonto take and do a test. the atmosphere and the earthbelong to all of us. it provides the food we eat,the air we breathe, the water we drink, and no one should havethe right to own it. the biosphere is at riskfrom top to bottom. though you have climatescientists calling for emergencygeoengineering due to events like methane mass expulsion,
which appears to be occurringin the arctic... it would havea significant impact on the way that we operate. notice it also has enormouspolitical, social, and economic implications. and so we don't want to havesome giant planetary oops, i mean, capital oops, in whichyou have a loss of life. it's much, much harderto actually figure out the environmental risksand effectiveness
of these new methodsthan it is to cook them up. they're creatingan artificial environment to replacethe natural environment. shredded ozone layer,global droughts, toxified soils,poisoned populations. don't these issues matter? affecting ecosystems in wayswe've never been able before. um, the whole conceptof literally playing god with the technology we haveat our fingertips today.
and howeverthe climate changes, wouldn't we be better to letthe planet react on its own, instead of tryingto play god? it doesn't have any benefitsto society at all. it doesn't benefit the plant. it doesn't benefit the farmer. it doesn't benefitthe environment. it's all about money, and weather is another formof commoditizing,
a way the central command groupcan commoditize another form of our life. whereas the e.p.a. has statedthat there is going to be more weather, and they're attestingit to climate change. well, i agree. it's changing. the weather's changing. now, the real issue is, is itnatural or is it manmade?
and if it's manmade,who's doing it? is it the geoengineering guys? that's what i believeif geoengineering continues, that whatever changesare happening to the planet, we will exponentially worsenthose changes and poison everythingin the process, and, indeed, with the amountof metal falling on us, that poisoning appears to havebeen occurring now for quite some time.
why are you sprayingthat stuff in our sky? it's accumulating massiveamounts of wealth in very few hands. and that's whatthey're trying to do in all aspectsof these economies. the money's not worth it.this is my future. i encourage people to getinvolved in the projects they're interested in, whether it's this oneor some other one.
to thrive,we need to organize locally, nationally,and globally to expose and stopthis practice immediately. please quit free-ridingon our future. but do what you can do. and i think that's reallythe answer for all of us, is recognize that there isa network more powerful than the internet. it's the human race.
we are connected in a waythat's quite powerful. the fact is, acting on whatwe know to be right and true, doing somethingabout what we care about that we can do. please tell everyoneyou know about this. bring this messageto community meetings, demonstrations,and other public events. the work we're doingwill provide cover for others to come out.
and i'm most interestedin whistleblowers. send this filmto environmental farm groups, media groups, a.d.d.,alzheimer's, asthma groups, and other organizationsthat would do something if they only knew. because we deserve--deserve a future. and if you controlthe weather, you gonna control the planet. it's that simple.
some people addressthis issue in fear. some people address itin anger. i address this in faith. faith believing that we,collectively, as human beings, as humanity, have the powerand the ability to stop thesedamaging programs. [skull's "cry die"] all right, now here we go. [singing]i look up to the sky
can you tell me why? i don't wannasee you cry i just wanna seeyou smile, baby i look up to the sky i don't wannasee you die i just wanna see yousmile, baby me look up in da sky,and me can't see clear blue skies are goneand white lines appear dem say it's natural
me no believe dem dem say it's vital me no listen to dem something strangeis going on feel it in my heart sensing something strong all right,now here we go gotta save the future,put the rumors to rest gotta help the children,gotta give it the best
can't stand around,be blind to the facts can't take it no more,how can we relax? living on earth,we must respect the earth human and animal,we all deserve the right to peaceand opportunity but nowadays, we're blind we can't see hidden agendas but we can't surrender
children are our future we must remember oh, oh don't knowwhat's going on yeah we must stand upfor the earth tell ya we want the truth give us the truth, yo
we want the truth,gotta save our youth give us the truth unite as one,bring out the proof we can't surrenderchildren, our future all right ay, ay, ay, ay i just wanna see yousmile, baby�
No comments:
Post a Comment