BAN Geoengineering & Chemtrails –> Globally




By Will Thomas

“The healing of the Earth and the healing of the human spirit has become one and the same thing,” writes Jonathan Porritt. Taking Porritt’s point to heart, the Belfort-Group, Citizens In Action is hosting the first International Chemtrails Symposium in Ghent, Belgium on the weekend of May 28th – 30th, 2010.

Peter Vereecke, former mayor of Evergem and co-founder of the Belfort-Group, has invited this writer, as well as “fellow chemtrail-fighters from all over the world” to join this global symposium in revealing “the truth on chemtrails.”

Last year, three timely Belfort-group symposia dealt with vaccinations, health, and the continuing attempts to outlaw natural supplements by Big Pharma. This month’s international symposium concerns “The illegal Spraying of harmful substances in the atmosphere by airplanes, also known as ‘chemtrails’ – the Truth!”

The group’s “Great Dream” is shared by chemtrails activists and everyone no longer content to be exploited by faceless elites.

“While remaining detached from political, religious, ideological and other opinions, this citizens’ initiative wants to make a stand in Flanders – yet connected with similar initiatives from abroad – for truth, freedom and the integrity of mankind that are increasingly being compromised,” Peter Vereecke declares.

“Through information and actions, we would like to contribute from the grassroots to a sort of ‘revolution’, by this meaning to invite citizens to rise from a position of blind subjugation and stand up in truthfulness, dignity and liberty. All throughout, we wish to ensure that this takes place in a dignified, well founded and respectful manner. In this perspective Gandhi’s person and method gives us an example to follow.”

The Belgium gathering comes just two months after 200 would-be geoengineers gathered at the “dreamy” Asilomar resort south of San Francisco to discuss planet-tinkering opportunities in the wake of the climate mitigation talks sabotaged by the U.S. and Canadian governments in Copenhagen.

The “Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention Technologies” was funded by the Climate Response Fund, which hopes to profit from corporate-driven climatic catastrophe.

“As Copenhagen went down the drain, all of a sudden we see the emergence of a Global Climate Crisis Management Team, ready to ‘geo-engineer’ us out of the mess,” observes University of Los Andes senior lecturer in political sciences, Jutta Schmitt.

Among the chief science advisors of the Climate Response Fund, Schmitt points out, is Edward Frieman. An Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics research professor at the University California, Frieman is also Senior Vice President of Science and Technology at the notorious Science Applications International Corporation.

Schmitt’s Venezuelan readers know SAIC as the corporation which developed and managed the electronic components of Venezuela’s State Oil Company. Schmitt relates how SAIC “conducted the electronic sabotage and shutdown of the oil industry’s ‘electronic brain'” in 2002-2003 – resulting in the “lockout and sabotage of Venezuela’s industrial heart.”

“SAIC is a body shop in the brain business. It sells human beings who have a particular expertise – expertise about weapons… about computer systems, about ‘information dominance’ and ‘information warfare’,” Schmitt adds. “With regard to the possible military applications of Solar Radiance Engineering, it is disturbing to think that the very Senior Vice President of Science and Technology at the Science Applications International Corporation is among the chief Science Advisors of the Climate Response Fund” – which hosted the recent California conference on Climate Intervention Technologies. [ Mar 25/10]

The Asilomar meeting discussed how to impose costly geoengineering schemes across this watery world. While proponents like Bill Gates favour screwing with Earth’s rapidly dying oceans, the favoured cheap “fix” involves spreading even more sunlight-reflecting aluminum, barium and other particles across the sky to reduce Earth’s rapidly rising fever.   FULL ARTICLE CONTINUED…

Tufts University bioethicist Sheldon Krimsky observed that the modest regulations proposed at the first Asilomar conference were not based on any systematic definition of risk. During the panel discussing bio-risks, DNA co-discoverer James Watson blurted out, “These people have made up guidelines that don’t apply to their own experiments.”Watson later railed against Asilomar and similar meetings, branding them “a real theatre of the absurd in which the only professionals were a bizarre collection of kooks, sad incompetents, and down-right shits.” [Genetic Alchemy: The Social History of the Recombinant DNA Controversy]

Decrying the “myth that scientists in this field are self-governing,” science historian Susan Wright has also found that bioengineering and geoengineering research agendas “are shaped by utilitarian interests of government or corporate sponsors.”

Five years later, the controls proposed at Asilomar “were dismantled without anything like adequate knowledge of the hazards,” she adds.

“It is a myth that most scientists working under competitive pressures can address the implications of their own work with dispassion and establish appropriately stringent controls any more than an unregulated Bill Gates can give competing browsers equal access to the worldwide web.” [ March 23, 2010]

Bill Gates, Earth geoengineer

Invoking Gates is no coincidence. Hoping to hack a planet shared by billions of sentient beings, the megabillionaire software bully has for years funded two scientists at the forefront of geoengineering research.

Ken Caldeira, of Stanford’s Carnegie Department of Global Ecology and physicist David Keith of the University of Calgary “will decide which technologies should receive the cash in order to alter the stratosphere to reflect solar energy, filter carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere and brighten ocean clouds,” writes Wired’s Alexis Madrigal.

Caldeira performed the aerosol modeling for Edward Teller’s “sunscreen” concept at the Lawrence Livermore atom bomb lab in hopes of proving Teller wrong. This atmospheric scientist declined his invitation to Asilomar, saying he preferred to attend meetings held by “established professional societies and non-profits without a stake in the outcomes.”

“Geoengineering approaches come with all sorts of risks,” Caldeira has consistently warned. “One of the good reasons to prefer CO2 emissions reductions over geoengineering is that CO2 emissions reductions will protect the oceans from the threat of ocean acidification, whereas these geoengineering options will not.”

Caldeira considers deep cuts in carbon dioxide emissions to be the most effective safeguard against environmental meltdown.

“I do not have and never have had any relationship, financial or otherwise, with any U.S. government spraying program. Furthermore, I do not believe there is a U.S. government spraying program aimed at climate intervention,” Caldeira told the San Francisco Examiner after two Lawrence Livermore scientists described their chemtrails work at Wright-Patterson Air Force base, based on Nikola Tesla’s patents. [Chemtrails Confirmed 2010 by William Thomas]

David Keith – the Canadian physicist who advises Bill Gates on his geoengineering grants – is calling for international funded “Solar-Radiation Management” (SRM) as possibly “the only human response that can fend off rapid and high-consequence climate change impacts.”

Keith urges implementing these “fast, cheap and imperfect” technologies on a massive scale as “a hedge” against corporate-government insistence of driving and drilling as usual. Keith and his co-authors in the science journal Nature argue against negotiating an international treaty, or submitting to any kind of international regulation that could prove “burdensome” on research.

Instead, they endorse scientists voluntarily limiting their own egos and grant-funded programs. [ETC Group News Release Feb 11/10]

Outside the AAAS meeting, Bill Gates’ geoengineering advisor David Keith told Wired’s Madrigal that he would be happy to look at citizen tests showing aluminum, barium and other elements showing up in their water, air and soil. Suggesting a democratic referendum on the issue, Keith added that children should have a say whether geoengineering should be deployed,

But the scientist went on to insist that not everyone should have a say, citing “torture” and “nuclear weapons” as examples of things kept secret for “the better good.”
Gates’ funding also helps support scientific meetings in geoengineering in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Edinburgh, Scotland, and aeronautics research related to altering the stratosphere. Microsoft’s founder is spending at least $4.5 million to study massive chemtrail spraying, as well as technologies that filter carbon dioxide directly out of the atmosphere.

Apparently, the virtual reality master has never heard of trees.

Bill Gates is also an investor in Intellectual Ventures. Owned by Microsoft’s former chief technical officer Nathan Myhrvold, the Seattle, Washington firm has filed five patents for a technique to draw the heat energy from hurricanes by pumping cold ocean water some 500 feet to the surface using turbine-equipped barges.

Caldeira claims that Gates’ monopoly money has not yet funded any field experiments. But Gates is bankrolling Silicon Valley inventor Armand Neukermans to develop a seagoing scheme to brighten ocean clouds. San Francisco-based research institute Silver Lining has already received $300,000 of seed funding from Gates to test a “cloud whitening” technology that could prove cheap way to simultaneously kill off Earth’s ocean and ozone layer.

Worthy of a sci-fi sequel – perhaps best called Blade Ruiner – Gates’ latest brainstorm involves a fleet of robot sailing ship drones equipped with screens, pumps and water cannons with enough power to propel millions of gallons of seawater some 3,000 feet into the air, where clouds are formed. The added moisture will supposedly making the clouds “whiter” and more reflective. []

“Filtering” the already UV and pH-challenged phytoplankton that anchor the world food-chain and provide more breathable oxygen than all the remaining forests ashore – and tossing entire regions of these delicate organisms 3,000 feet into the air – have not been investigated or even acknowledged by Gates, who has yet to call a worldwide vote on a scheme that will allow carbon emissions to continue accumulating until the world ocean turns into a single acidic dead zone.

Despite worldwide opposition, Gates’ Silver Lining Project is pressing ahead with its plans to screw around with an undisclosed 10,000 square-kilometre target – a patch of ocean as large as the initial BP oil slick.

Sites frequently mentioned by scientists engaged in this project are off California, Ecuador, Peru and Chile. [ Jan 28/10; ScienceInsider Jan 29/10; Jan 27/10;; July 16/09; Feb 8/10]

Gates albedo ship drawing -B. Matthews </p>
“This lobbying offensive has been underway for more than a year now but it has moved into a critical new phase. The world needs to pay attention,” warns ETC’s Diana Bronson.”We knew Microsoft was developing cloud applications for computers but we didn’t expect this,” explained Jim Thomas of ETC Group, one of the founding organizations of the H.O.M.E campaign “Bill Gates and his cloud-wrenching cronies have no right to unilaterally change our seas and skies in this way. A global moratorium on geoengineering experiments just became a whole lot more urgent and the meeting in Nairobi is a fine place to ensure that it gets put into place rapidly.

International rules curtailing chemtrails and other geoengineering may result after scientists and diplomats from 193 nations meet May 12-20 in Nairobi. The 14th meeting of Subsidiary Body of Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice is the first time a UN Body has addressed geoengineering for the first time since the 1976 ENMOD Treaty banned environmental modification for “hostile uses”.

SBSTTA 14 is already recommending that the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity call on its member governments to impose a moratorium on all climate geoengineering activities when it convenes in Nagoya, Japan this October.

Governments attending the Nairobi meeting agreed to forward the groundbreaking recommendation after near-unanimous support saw “strong statements” from countries in Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America. On the final day, Canada announced it would not support the text.

“Canada is the bête noire of climate change negotiations and nobody was surprised to see it stand out as the main objector to this proposal. The delegation itself was embarrassed,” observed Silvia Ribeiro.

The SBSTTA resolution requests that “no climate-related geo-engineering activities take place until there is an adequate scientific basis on which to justify such activities and appropriate consideration of the associated risks for the environment and biodiversity and associated social, economic and cultural impacts.”

But British and American geoengineers “do not intend to wait for international rules on technology that deliberately alters the climate,” the London Times revealed.

A similar moratorium on dead-zone spreading ocean fertilization techniques – supported by the German environment minister and adopted by the Biodiversity Convention in Bonn in 2008 – was quickly violated by another German ministry sponsoring an ocean fertilization experiment in the Southern Ocean.

According to Hands Off Mother Earth, “The move caused a rift within the German cabinet, debate in the Bundestag, an international outcry”- and led to a strong reaffirmation of the moratorium by government delegates in Nairobi. [ May 19/10]

These messages are not getting through to the U.S. government, which continues to issue environmental waivers for further oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, even as it pursues chemtrails. Ignored by corporate media, the U.S. Congressional Geoengineering Committee has already met “two or three” times since November 2009 to assess the “Implications of Large-Scale Climate Intervention”.

“Over the past three months, a parade of advocates has been drowning out more cautionary voices,” ETC Group reports. [ETC Group News Release Feb 11/10]

The all-male congressional geoengineering panel includes Professor John Shepherd, Lawrence Livermore chemtrail modeller Dr. Ken Caldeira, Dr. Alan Robock, Dr. James Fleming and American Enterprise Institute blogger Lee Lane. Consistently opposed to emission-reduction measures, the American Enterprise Institute is a right-wing think tank that sponsors panels on aerosol spraying. [Atlantic July/August 2009]

“Insisting on proof of global informed consent as a precondition for testing CE amounts to saying that Climate Engineering can never be tested,” blogs Lee Lane. “Governments of the more industrialized states have concrete obligations to their own peoples.” [American Enterprise Institute Mar 30/10;]

Britain’s House of Commons Science and Technology Committee is joining their American counterparts to bankrupt the biosphere. But after chairing a Royal Society study on carbon sequestering and reflective aerosol spraying, Professor John Shepherd of the National Oceanography Centre in Southampton, UK bluntly told the House of Representatives committee, “None of the geo-engineering technologies so far suggested is a magic bullet, and all have risks and uncertainties associated with them. It is essential that we strive to cut emissions now.” [National Oceanography Centre Press Release Nov 13/09]

After more than a dozen years of chemtrail spraying admitted by a senior FAA Air Traffic Control manager and tracked by ATC radars across Canada and the United States, chairman Bart Gordon remarked in his opening statement last November that the closed hearing “marks the first time that a Congressional Committee has undertaken a serious review of proposals for climate engineering.”

“At its best geoengineering might only buy us some time,” Gordon admitted. “Geoengineering carries with it a tremendous range of uncertainties, ethical and political concerns, and the potential for catastrophic environmental side-effects,” he warned – before urging that more experiments be carried out.

“We must get ahead of geoengineering before it gets ahead of us”, Gordon concluded. [; Chemtrails Confirmed 2010]

“Big industry and big science want to press ahead with geoengineering either as a ‘plan B’, or as a free pass to avoid reducing emissions. It’s the big lie that lets them pretend that we can all carry on drilling and driving – business as usual!” derides Neth Dano of ETC Group in Nairobi.

But “assuming” that unproven technologies can bail us out of a crisis caused by untested technologies may make an “ass out of your and me.”

“My biggest problem with the backstop argument is that it encourages people to think there’s a do-over if we screw up our response to climate chaos, when in fact, we don’t have any proven response or remedy,” worries Worldchanging co-founder Alex Steffen.

After trashing the upper atmosphere with his Virgin Airways, billionaire Richard Branson has created a “Climate War Room” to work with “the right stakeholders” to “create a strategic roadmap for governance and regulation” in the geoengineering “battle area.”

Vladimir Putin’s key science advisor, Yuri Izrael directed a sulphate aerosol experiment in Russia last year that avoided publicity before being picked up by a popular blog.

Silvia Ribeiro at ETC Group’s Mexico office is not impressed by “the richest men and the richest countries in the world [beginning] actual experiments that tinker with the planet’s complex climate system that we do not fully understand.

“Suggesting a ‘bottom-up,’ governance process for such top-down planet-altering technologies is absurd. If they want a real ‘bottom-up’ process, they need to start with the people at the bottom who have already been affected by industry-induced climate change.

“Gates, Branson and the elite geoengineers are a long-way from the bottom. I’m sure they will keep their bottoms dry – and make money at the same time – no matter what happens to the planet. The geoengineering lobby has no mandate and no right to ‘manage solar radiation’ on behalf of anyone.” [ETC Group News Release Feb 11/10]