IPCC – Solar Radiation Management
The Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warns that, despite global side effects and long-term consequences, geoengineering techniques involving solar radiation management (SRM) should be maintained:
“If SRM were terminated for any reason, there is high confidence that global surface temperatures would rise very rapidly to values consistent with the greenhouse gas forcing.” [emphasis in original] IPCC Warns Not To Stop Chemtrails, aka ‘Solar Radiation Management’
Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering AKA Chemtrails
Weather Modification became a popular venture post-WW II, when researches at General Electric developed the technology for cloud seeding. This discovery was made in 1946. By 1951 the income generated from the private use of this new technology had reached an estimated price tag of $3-5 million. This technology was used again during the Vietnam War to extend monsoon season in the region in order to thwart enemy supply lines. This effort was known as Project Popeye. History tells us that climate control is entirely possible and profitable.
Weather Modification – A History Lesson
In the USSR, sustained interest in weather modification predated World War II. Beginning with the establishment of Leningrad’s Institute of Rainmaking in 1932, work on cloud modification moved outside the laboratory, with airborne cloud seeding experiments using calcium chloride beginning as early as 1934 and continuing until 1939. Work resumed immediately after the war with tests of cloud seeding using dry ice (1947) and silver iodide (1949).
In the 1950s and early 1960s Soviet interest in climate and weather modification reached its zenith. A single experiment during the winter of 1960–1961, for example, is reported to have cleared clouds over an area of 20,000 km.
The 1946 discovery of cloud seeding by Schaefer & Langmuir at the General Electric research labs ignited a commercial boom in weather modification. Within five years private cloud seeding ventures had total annual receipts of $3–5 million, and in 1951 had targeted an area equal to 14% of the landmass of the lower 48 states.
Henry Houghton, the chair of the MIT meteorology department was quoted as saying, “I shudder to think of the consequences of a prior Russian discovery of a feasible method for weather control. Fortunately for us and the world we were first to develop nuclear weapons … International control of weather modification will be as essential to the safety of the world as control of nuclear energy is now.” The pathological history of weather and climate modification: Three cycles of promise and hype
By the 1960s federal support for weather and climate modification grew rapidly, reaching $10 million by the decade’s end. In the 95th congress, session 24, Committee Print – Weather Modification: Programs, Problems, Policy, and Potential – Prepared at the request of Hon. Howard W. Cannon, Chairman. Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, United States Senate in 1978-79 – the United States further pursued the science of control and modification of weather.
Like most potential weapons of war, you won’t find a lot of information on the pursuit of such things as weather control. Immediately following this report, the United States ratified and eventually signed Geneva Conventions Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques. But of course it doesn’t need to be said that what governments say and what they do are two different things.
The text of the treaty in part reads:
“Recognizing that scientific and technical advances may open new possibilities with respect to modification of the environment,” (para 3)
“Recognizing, however, that military or any other hostile use of such techniques could have effects extremely harmful to human welfare,” (para 6)
Understanding Relating to Article II
It is the understanding of the Committee that the following examples are illustrative of phenomena that could be caused by the use of environmental modification techniques as defined in Article II of the Convention: earthquakes, tsunamis; an upset in the ecological balance of a region; changes in weather patterns (clouds, precipitation, cyclones of various types and tornadic storms); changes in climate patterns; changes in ocean currents; changes in the state of the ozone layer; and changes in the state of the ionosphere.
The implications of the events and subsequent convention of treaty, as well as the verbiage of the treaty itself, are obvious – the treaty does not just address incidents of the use of environmental toxic agents such as Agent Orange that was used in the Vietnam War.
The development of so-called “weather weapons” has been dismissed by many as paranoid hyperbole, the work of science fiction movie script writers and conspiracy theorists, but the fact is they have existed for decades.