Dane Wigington
GeoengineeringWatch.org

Imagine the whole of academia pretending the ongoing geoengineering operations we see in our skies are not really there. Imagine the vast majority of populations blindly accepting the official denial of climate engineering, and thus completely ignoring what they can easily see occurring with their own eyes.

Mainstream media (CNBC) has recently produced a video on the critical issue of climate engineering. Not surprisingly, there are a numerous deceptions woven into the video message, starting with the title itself.

 "Why Bill Gates Is Funding Solar Geoengineering Research"

Bill Gates is nothing more than a prop in the elaborate power structure disinformation campaign on the climate engineering issue. Though Gates may in fact be contributing to the "SCoPEx" climate engineering experiment, the experiment itself is also nothing more than an orchestrated distraction from the ongoing global climate engineering operations that have been deployed for approximately 74 years (over a decade longer than Bill Gates has even been alive).

New released CNBC video on geoengineering:

Inarguable footage of a geoengineering jet aircraft spray dispersion is revealed in the 2 minute video below.

The CNBC video deceptions continue:

#1 The video states that climate engineering "could" cause a long list of downstream consequences.

There is no "could, may, or might", the consequences of the ongoing global climate engineering assault are far beyond incalculable already, and continue to manifest by the day. Of course, the CNBC video makes no mention of the complete contamination of the biosphere (and thus the air we breath) from the highly toxic climate engineering fallout).

#2 That over two thirds of the population would support the use of goengineering.

Such a conclusion is completely deceptive. Survey questions, which completely omit the most relevant facts regarding the true danger and devastation that climate engineering is already causing, cannot be considered an accurate measure of public opinion. Of over 1500 scientists surveyed, NONE were willing to deny the ongoing climate engineering reality on the record (including Professor Alan Robock who was featured in the new CNBC geoengineering disinformation video).

#3 Geoengineering technology is "cheap". 

This conclusion is deception on an unimaginable scale. First, the claims for the needed scale of climate engineering deployment are a small fraction of the scale on which climate engineering has long since already been deployed. Next, and most importantly, the scale of destruction climate engineering has long since inflicted on the biosphere, human health, and the entire web of life, is nowhere named by the CNBC propaganda video.

#4 The "Keith Group" will be the first to conduct a geoengineering experiment.

Again, to even make such a claim is truly alarming. The ongoing climate engineering operations being conducted by jet aircraft in skies all over the world could not be more obvious and inarguable. The SCoPEx project is nothing more than a form of intentional public mass distraction and deception.

#5 "No existing aircraft can inject particles into the Stratosphere". 

First, the elevation of the Stratosphere in the polar regions can be as low as 24,000 feet. All jet aircraft can far exceed that altitude including heavily loaded military jet tanker aircraft. Next, the vast majority of the clearly visible jet aircraft particulate spraying is occurring in the Troposphere.

#6 "Nozzles still need to be designed which can continuously blast out trillions of particles".

Yet another complete deception from CNBC. Retrofit spray nozzles are absolutely located on the wing pylons of most commercial carrier jet aircraft, and on military tankers. These nozzles are aimed directly into the jet exhaust stream to make the dispersion look like "condensation". The "condensation trail" lie is perhaps the biggest deception ever perpetrated on populations around the world. ALL commercial aircraft and ALL military tankers are fitted with a "high bypass turbofan" jet engine. This engine is a jet powered fan which by design is nearly incapable of producing any condensation trail except under increasingly rare and extreme circumstances.

#7 "Scientists still need to decide what chemicals to spray".

View the 4 minute video below to see Dr. David Keith (head of the Keith Group and the SCoPEx geoengineering experiment) state in his own words the advantages of using aluminum nanoparticulates as a primary geoengineering / solar radiation management material. 10 million tones was the suggested annual atmospheric dispersion amount.

#8 "The uncertainty of climate engineering impacts is holding back deployment".

Is it rational to believe that the military industrial complex cares about the consequences of their actions? Is it rational to believe that the military industrial complex would ask for public acceptance and permission before deploying climate engineering operations? Climate engineering is a matter of historical record, this is not opinion, speculation, or conjecture. It is important to remember and consider that the top US military leadership has long since stated on the record that the collapsing climate is the greatest national security threat of all.

#9 "Geoengineering will require international cooperation".

Numerous historical government documents prove that international cooperation has long since been in place regarding the ongoing climate engineering assault. An almost 800 page US senate document is but one example. Click HERE to view the document with the most relevant sections already highlighted by GeoengineeringWatch.org. 

#10 "Geoengineering should only be deployed if we have to".

Again, this is the the criminal deception being propagated by the whole of academia, official sources, and power structure controlled media, that geoengineering might someday have to be used. Climate engineering is not just a dangerous proposal, but has long since been a lethal reality.

#11 "Within a couple decades, for better or worse, geoengineering could be part of the solution to return the planet to pre-industrial temperatures".

After over 70 years of ongoing global climate engineering operations (at an ever increasing scale), are global temperatures going down? The short answer is no. In the dangerous attempt to mask rising global temperatures from populations (in order to maintain business as usual for as long as possible), climate engineering has worsened the overall climate collapse scenario we face, not mitigated it. Climate engineering has also been utilized as a covert weapon of war for decades. This is not an opinion, it is a verifiable fact.

How desperate are the climate engineers? The video report below is a shocking case in point.

Climate and environmental collapse are unfolding with blinding speed all over the world. Will populations wake up to the ongoing global climate engineering operations in time to make a difference? Waking a critical mass of the population up to the climate engineering reality is the first and most important leap forward in the battle to halt the climate engineering assault. Share credible data from a credible source, make your voice heard, make every day count.
DW

May be freely reprinted, so long as the text is unaltered, all hyperlinks are left intact, and credit for the article is prominently given to geoengineeringwatch.org and the article’s author with a hyperlink back to the original story.

Dane Wigington
GeoengineeringWatch.org

Corporate media, of course, does their best to spin and marginalize the geoengineering reality as they are paid and told to do. This being said, the issue is still getting needed coverage. The 12 minute exchange in the video below was originally scheduled to last another 8 minutes, but the session was cut short. I was not allowed any final response to their "skeptic's fabrications about the "high bypass turbofan" jet engine, or his incorrect overall conclusions on WWll "contrails". Perhaps CBS Australia's Studio 10 supervisors felt the attempt to "debunk" the climate engineering issue was not going as they had hoped.

Geoengineered skies. Photo credit: Alberto Ibanez

The day of climate engineering exposure draws ever nearer as such operations become all but impossible to hide any longer in plain sight. Now more than ever we need to keep our stride in the battle to raise awareness. Share credible data from a credible source, we must make every day count.
DW

Dane Wigington
GeoengineeringWatch.org

The global climate engineering assault is becoming all but impossible to hide in plain sight as the climate and biosphere collapse accelerates. In response, the power structure's propaganda puppets are doing all they can to continue their attempt to cover up the critical climate engineering issue with carefully crafted disinformation. How do we counter the climate engineering cover-up campaign of disinformation? By knowing the building block data and facts relating to this issue, by sharing credible data with others, and by holding the propagators of propaganda publicly accountable for their criminal disinformation campaigns. “Earther.com" has just published a climate engineering cover-up article of disinformation authored by Gernot Wagner (further down in this post). Below is my response to Mr. Wagner which was forwarded to his email contact hello@gwagner.com

Hello, Mr. Wagner,

In regard to your recent article “Chemtrails Aren’t The Geoengineering Debate We Should Be Having Because Chemtrails Aren’t Real" yes, “chemtrails” (the term you chose to rely on in your article) is not a science term, and thus not “real”.  This being said, Mr. Wagner, geoengineering / climate engineering / solar radiation management / stratospheric aerosol injection / cloud albedo enhancement, etc., are verifiably (semantics matters) ongoing realities. This fact / conclusion becomes apparent to any who have the courage to do an honest investigation of available data / documents / lab tests / film footage / photographic evidence, etc. In your article your denial of climate engineering relies on a survey conducted by geoengineer Ken Caldeira in which scientists were asked if “chemtrails” were “real”. Were you aware, Mr. Wagner, of a similar survey (of the very same scientists and 1430 more) which used the science terms in the survey? When the actual science terms were utilized, "climate engineering", "geoengineering", "solar radiation management", "cloud albedo enhancement", 100% of the scientists surveyed refused to deny the climate engineering reality on the record. A legal team working directly with GeoengineeringWatch.org is actively pursuing legal avenues to force public disclosure of the illegal climate engineering operations. In addition to our legal action in Canada, our ongoing lawsuit against the US Department of Commerce (the overseeing agency for NOAA) will soon produce thousands of documents relating to the weather / climate modification / engineering operations (documents which the DOC / NOAA have been ordered to release to us). Mr. Wagner, your strategy of obscuring the climate engineering reality by attempting in your article to associate this subject with fringe theories is nothing new in disinformation circles. In your article you correctly address the grave dangers posed by atmospheric particulate pollution, yet you do all you can to divert your readers attention from climate engineering as a major source of atmospheric particulate pollution. In a 2011 report NOAA admitted on the record that atmospheric aerosols have skyrocketed since 2000 and the source of this escalation could not be identified. Why wouldn’t (or couldn’t) NOAA acknowledge geoengineering atmospheric aerosol dispersions as a source of particulate pollution? In addition to US government scientists having no first amendment protection, and in addition to confidentiality agreements being standard for so many government positions and posts, now there is the illegal federal “gag order” on all National Weather Service and NOAA employees to consider. Why no mention of these facts, Mr. Wagner? Whatever your motive for participating in what can only be considered a campaign of climate engineering cover-up, rest assured that we, at GeoengineeringWatch.org, will do our best to publicly expose you (and all those like you who are participating in the climate engineering cover-up) to populations that deserve to know the truth about the ongoing highly destructive and dangerous geoengineering programs that were long ago deployed without public knowledge or consent. 

Sincerely
Dane Wigington
GeoengineeringWatch.org

The “earther.com” climate engineering disinformation article authored by Gernot Wagner is below. Inserted in red are my responses to Wagner's false statements.

Solar geoengineering is controversial, and for good reason. It describes a set of technologies that seeks to reflect a small fraction of sunlight back into space to cool the planet. The most prominent such technology involves deliberately injecting tiny reflective particles into the stratosphere.

There’s a serious debate worth having, both on the science and technology itself and on the societal and policy implications. Unfortunately, in some corners of society valid concerns over the impacts of solar engineering have been overtaken by a different set of fears—various versions of the so-called chemtrails conspiracy theory. 

Authors of disinformation articles (like Gernot Wagner) utilize the non-science "chemtrails" term as much as possible, this is a part of their disinformation strategy.

Geoengineered skies in Antioch, Tennessee. Photo credit: Brent Rodriguez

According to that conspiracy, solar geoengineering has been happening at scale for years or even decades.

The conspiracy isn’t exactly small. Around 60 percent of all social media discourse on geoengineering is conspiratorial, according to co-authored research I published last year. A representative poll of the U.S. public reveals that 10 percent describe the conspiracy as “completely true,” another 20 to 30 percent say it is “somewhat true.” Belief in the conspiracy appears across party lines, and it can get rather personal, too—death threats and all. 

Most versions of the conspiracy involve planes crisscrossing the skies spraying toxins, turning ordinary contrails into “chemtrails.”

Mr. Wagner is simply parroting the official narrative regarding "contrails". Wagner is apparently completely ignorant of the high bypass turbofan jet engine design characteristics which make actual "contrail" production nearly impossible, except under the most rare and extreme of circumstances. High bypass turbofan jet engines are standard on all commercial carrier aircraft and all military tanker jets.

Motivations range from weather modification (and yes, there are serious research efforts on that topic, too) to mind control or worse. No surprise, Twitter and other largely anonymous online fora allow this community of conspiracy to flourish—necessitating responses showing that no, NASA does not have a “cloud machine” but is instead testing its rocket boosters.

Mr. Wagner attempts to associate fringe and non-credible claims with legitimate data that confirms the climate engineering reality. In regard to the particular subject Wagner cites, NASA's "cloud making machine", Geoengineering Watch has also exposed the same disinformation. Citing this type of disinformation is Wagner's attempt to distract his readers from the hard facts that confirm the climate engineering reality.

I have no doubt that some who have stumbled upon the chemtrails conspiracy are earnestly looking for the truth. Much like some who believe that vaccinations cause autism, despite all evidence to the contrary, are motivated by having a close relative suffer from autism, chemtrail conspirators sometimes appear to be looking to learn why a loved one suffers from a respiratory illness. The real answer, sadly often, is indeed air pollution, which kills some 3 to 6 million people a year globally. Decreasing that pollution clearly ought to be a global priority.

Internationally recognized award winning medical professionals have already acknowledged the dire health threat from climate engineering particulate pollution, yet Wagner ignores such information. Why?

A blatant example of geoengineering operations over Mesa, Arizona (3/21/18). Video footage credit: Joni Davis

It is also clear that some of those peddling the conspiracy do so for mercenary reasons—selling ads on their website, or using it to grow their brand and drive page clicks.

Accusations from Wagner like the one above are yet another standard form of distracting readers from credible data.

Whatever the motivation, the “evidence” presented in favor of the conspiracy does not add up. Conspirators often argue that all one needs to do is look up. Scientists have. What they see are contrails: trails largely made up of condensed water vapor. It is the same effect that occurs when you breathe out on a cold day.

Mr. Wagner, if a person walks a mile in very cold conditions (when their breath is seen condensing), have you ever seen an expanding long lingering cloud resulting from this condensation? Or from an automobile under the same conditions? No, never.

If the air is sufficiently cold and moist, a plane’s mere turbulence can cause a contrail to form. Adding exhaust from a jet engine aids the process.

Contrails have been with us since the dawn of aviation. The earliest explanation of the science I could find in the popular press is a March 1943 article in Popular Science explaining what was then called “vapor trails.”

Geoengineered skies have become the norm, all over the world. Photo credit: Rayangely Evaleigh

Mr. Wagner, of course, does not mention other historical publications from Popular Science (and other sources) that fully acknowledge the weather warfare reality and the greats posed by it (going back nearly 7 decades).

The number of contrails, of course, has since increased dramatically, in line with the number of planes in the sky. And yes, those planes pollute. Each roundtrip flight from New York to San Francisco emits around 1 ton of CO2 per economy-class passenger. Sadly, CO2 is invisible. Were it a smelly pink goo, the world would have acted much sooner on CO2 pollution. It hasn’t, despite amazing progress slashing other kinds of air pollution.

In fact, some of the progress reining in air pollution, such as the sulfur dioxide (SO2) coming out of smoke stacks, leads to serious climate tradeoffs. While outdoor air pollution kills, it also—inadvertently—counteracts some of the warming effects of CO2. Removing all such air pollution, while clearly positive for human health, could indirectly cause a lot of harm, as the planet warms even further. The result is what Nobel Prize-winning chemist Paul Crutzen, in 2006, described as a “Catch-22.”

It is also, to me personally, the best moral case for solar geoengineering research in the first place.

And with the statement above, Mr. Wagner reveals his real motives, lobbying for climate engineering operations. Like geoengineer Dr. David Keith, it seems Wagner does not consider geoengineering to be a "moral problem".

This is precisely where the real solar geoengineering debate ought to be had. What are its potential risks and benefits? Would mere talk of solar geoengineering distract from the need to cut CO2 emissions? Or would such talk be a clarion call to prompt more action on climate mitigation? Reasonable people can disagree and, ultimately, can come down on different sides of the question of whether solar geoengineering could—or should—play a role in an overall climate policy portfolio.

But these arguments are a far cry from claims that contrails are really “chemtrails,” that thousands of commercial planes aren’t “merely” emitting massive amounts of CO2 but, for example, are deliberately spraying alumina. Aluminum oxide, in one’s soil, is presented as “evidence” for chemtrails. It isn’t. Aluminum is the third-most abundant element in the Earth’s crust, and aluminum oxide is its most common form.

First, Mr. Wagner, if jets are not intentionally dispersing materials into the atmosphere, why have they been retrofitted with spray nozzles aimed directly into the jet exhaust stream? This chosen location for spray nozzle mounting gives the desired appearance of the jet engine emission being "condensation", which it is absolutely not. 

Other supposed explanations are even odder and wholly unbelievable to scientists having looked at the topic.

Wagner's reference to an orchestrated "chemtrails" survey, of course, does not acknowledge the complete absence of willingness of the same scientists to deny the climate engineering reality when the science terms were used.

All that, of course, raises the question of why to trust scientists in the first place. Wouldn’t they have an incentive to hide evidence if there were a global “chemtrails” program operating somewhere? Well, no—that’s just not how science works. Does any one institution have incentives to keep secrets? Sure. But would individual scientists across the world keep some sort of vast “chemtrails” conspiracy a secret? 

Mr. Wagner fails, yet again, to mention the fact that US government scientists have no first amendment protection, are generally required to sign confidentiality agreements, and now have an illegal federal gag order placed on them.

Scientists aren’t all that good at lots of things. Polite, social interactions might be one. But the one thing they are good at is pointing out why others are wrong, and improving on prior knowledge. Pointing out why the broad scientific consensus that the planet is warming and humans are the cause of it is wrong would clearly make a scientific career. The fact that this hasn’t happened makes me comfortable to trust the consensus science on climate change. The fact that in decades no scientist has shown that ordinary contrails aren’t just that makes me similarly confident that there isn’t anything to the “chemtrails” conspiracy.

Mr. Wagner makes clear he sees no reason to actually investigate the climate engineering reality since the official "contrails" narrative has not yet been challenged by institutionally funded scientists for reasons already stated.

The world faces a serious pollution challenge. That goes for SO2 killing scores today, and it goes for the impacts of CO2 both today and in the future. There are some serious tradeoffs between the two. That’s the debate to have, and anyone I know who does research on solar geoengineering is happy to have it. It’s also the kind of debate that anyone with an earnest interest in the future of our planet should want to participate in. 

Gernot Wagner is research associate and lecturer at Harvard, co-director of Harvard’s Solar Geoengineering Research Program, and co-author of Climate Shock.

Radio show host Geoff Brady (from Pacifica radio station WBAI in New York) formally invited Mr. Wagner to discuss / debate the geoengineering issue on air with me, Dane Wigington, from GeoengineeringWatch.org (WBAI has hosted other debates with experts on the critical climate engineering issue). Mr. Wagner promptly declined the invitation to discuss relevant facts related to the ongoing climate engineering operations (in spite of what he stated in the closing statement of his geoengineering disinformation "article" in the quote shown directly above).

Hi Mr. Wagner,

Yes, I did see the article. I think it would be important to open this dialogue. 
I would moderate to ensure no one talks over each other and the full viewpoints are expressed in the time given.
This opportunity is granted by the listenership of WBAI. They want to hear differing opinions. 
thanks for considering. 
Geoff

Gernot Wagner's response:

Dear Mr. Brady,

Many thanks for the invitation. I will have to decline.

Best,

Gernot

Those who wish to let Gernot Wagner know his campaign of criminal public deception is not OK, can do here: hello@gwagner.com

We must collectively stand against the power structure's well organized and funded disinformation organizations and individuals. We must work collectively in the effort to expose the same. Sharing credible data from a credible source is key, all of us are needed in the critical battle to expose and halt the ongoing global geoengineering operations.
DW

May be freely reprinted, so long as the text is unaltered, all hyperlinks are left intact, and credit for the article is prominently given to GeoengineeringWatch.org and the article’s author with a hyperlink back to the original story.

Dane Wigington
GeoengineeringWatch.org

Harvey dropped over 25 TRILLION gallons of water in Texas and Louisiana. The immensity of water volume carried in our warming atmosphere by massive storms like Harvey is truly difficult to even comprehend (over 25 trillion gallons of precipitation). Though power plant cooling towers do create steam clouds under the right conditions, are power plant cooling towers really being covertly used to supply all the moisture for weather systems? Even for hurricanes? Is this even mathematically possible? Deluges and catastrophic floods are increasing all over the globe, what are the primary factors? Numerous activists have requested me to address the facts just mentioned, the 10 minute video below is my reply.

Again, though the water vapor emitted from cooling towers can and does create impressive cloud formations under the right conditions, this is a very different issue than being the primary mechanisms of Earth's atmospheric water vapor generation for fueling storms which is what some are falsely claiming. The primary driver of Earth's hydrological cycle is more evaporation from a warming planet and warming seas (which climate engineering is making worse overall, not better). If power plant cooling towers were a primary (or even significant) source of storm and hurricane moisture, why aren't hurricanes actually forming over land? If "ocean based water vapor machines" are the source of moisture for hurricanes, why has not a single "ocean based water vapor machine" ever been photographed or documented in any way?

GeoengineeringWatch.org reached out to a cooling tower industry expert / contractor for his opinion on this issue, his statement is below:

Cooling towers

Cooling towers do not add excessive amounts of water vapor to the atmosphere, in fact that form of technology has greatly diminished over the last two decades. Evaporative cooling of water to in turn cool machinery has high maintenance costs, looses expensive water and chemical additives, plus is a potential source of Legionaries disease where in many metropolitan areas monthly testing in mandatory.  

Advances in mechanical refrigeration have rendered cooling towers obsolete except in major power plants. New refrigerants that are ozone  friendly, which are also up to 25 percent more efficient in their heat exchange capacity, coupled with larger condensers, micro electronic controls, and advances in compressor technology have replaced evaporative cooling towers in nearly all cases of new buildings and as old towers fail they are either eliminated or replaced with closed loop or just more efficient versions such as dry coolers.  

Having spent over 30 years designing, installing, repairing and maintaining industrial manufacturing and power generation heating and cooling equipment I can state with complete authority, the argument of cooling towers adding significantly to atmospheric moisture is either misinformed, misinformation, or both.

Geoffrey Taylor

Received Mechanical Contractors license in 1982.

Studied Computer Science at Uof Michigan 

Studied Electrical Engineering at Lawerence Technological University 

Was a consultant to the EPA on regulations concerning ozone depleting chemicals in the 1990's.  

The sources who claim "power plant cooling towers are supplying all the moisture for clouds and storms" (even hurricanes over the ocean) often refer to patent # US 20100074390 A1 as proof of their claims.

But what is the real purpose of this "vapor generation" patent? The two excerpts below have been taken from the patent in question.

 A cloud for blocking sunlight is formed in the sky from the water vapor jetted to reduce the temperature of the earth surface. This enables a weather modification without discharging any greenhouse gas, e.g., CO₂.

How much power is required in order for this patent to even be feasable?

Provided that 10 nuclear fusion reactors each of a 1,000,000-Kw class are arranged, for example, vapor of a volume 10-fold that of each of the nuclear fusion reactors

To more completely understand the total irrelevance of the "vapor generator" patent, another statement from Mechanical Engineering / cooling tower contractor Geoffrey Taylor is below:

In this time of environmental crisis, ideas are crucial, but these ideas must be based on even the most rudimentary laws of physics and common sense.  This is an absolutely absurd patent? Proposition? Word document???

It's pseudo technical language describes nothing more than using Fusion which doesn't exist yet, a test plant may come on line in 20 years, or a standard fission nuclear power plant to generate water vapor combating the suns rays.

First, water vapor is a poor reflector so using it as a basis for the invention is nonsense.

Second, the amount of energy needed for a global envelope of cloud cover is incalculable. One small hurricane produces 6x10to the 14th watts, 200 times the entire world wide power grid. We would have to build tens of thousands of nuclear power plants to maybe deliver enough power. 

Third, to get the steam to the upper atmosphere would require 10 plus thousand feet of pipe 20 foot in diameter. Pushing the weight or "head" of the steam requires more power the higher you go. Water has mass, that is why it falls as rain. As the steam rises into the cooler atmosphere it will cool, condense and run down the pipe.  

Next, Alkaline steam…. Boil water and the impurities stay while the water vapor rises, thats pretty basic. 

Some sources theorize that hundreds of ships armed with fusion power plants and ten thousand foot smoke stacks will be roaming the ocean as well as countless more nuclear plants covering the globe, with their ten thousand foot stacks don't forget.

So much other nonsense can be easily disputed, common sense people. These are dangerous times, think and act with serious purpose.

Are there any existing facilities that have actually been constructed according to this patents design? None known. To be clear, this patent outlines a potential process to create artificial cloud cover, it does not claim the ability to function as a primary water source for producing precipitation.

The fight to expose and halt the climate engineering assault is the most critical battle we face. If we are to have even the slightest chance of prevailing, credibility is crucial. We must all investigate before coming to conclusions in order to ensure any information we share is actually credible.
DW

Dane Wigington
GeoengineeringWatch.org

In the Orwellian world we find ourselves in, there are some individuals who stand out as torch bearers for the power structure and the collective insanity. National media host David Pakman is a poster child among those who have made their living by pushing and propagating the “official narrative” for those in power. Pakman has just posted the video below stating that:

It is Thanksgiving week so we've got something extra special for you. For the Thanksgiving spirit, I don’t know how Thanksgiving connects to “chemtrails”…

In this 16 minute debate Pakman interviews me while desperately trying to discredit the critical issue of climate engineering. He clearly never bothered to actually investigate geoengineering or the verifiable facts relating to it. Not surprisingly, Pakman repeatedly insisted on using the "chemtrails" term, this is yet another example of why utilizing the science terms is so important.

David Pakman is the epitome of power structure propaganda pushing so called “journalists”. His aggressive participation in the criminal climate engineering cover-up makes him an accessory to the climate engineering crimes of planetary ecocide and potential omnicide. If you are not OK with Pakman’s attempt to try and marginalize (and thus cover up) the critical climate engineering issue, let him know HERE.

Geoengineered skies. Photo credit: Rudewald Gumbs

Many activists inquire about how best to debate climate engineering deniers. Though I generally advise activists not to waste time on people who clearly don't want to investigate (let alone wake up), and I generally avoid such debates also. However, when there is an opportunity to have the debate aired on a very large national radio show, the effort is well worth the time. Here is another heated on-air geoengineering debate with a national radio show’s expert denier (WHO NewsRadio 1040) recorded in the video below. When the station's own patrons began to call and express their support for the information being presented on the geoengineering reality (and the dangers of geoengineering), the station host brought the interview to an immediate end.

There are many media sources playing the same part as David Pakman and WHO radio, it is up to us to expose them for the power structure disinformation sources they are. This is best accomplished by forwarding credible and verifiable data. Credibility is key in the fight to expose and halt climate engineering, make your voice heard in this all important battle to sound the alarm.
DW

Dane Wigington
GeoengineeringWatch.org

Industrialized/militarized society is, unfortunately, filled with individuals who are willing to do anything (or say anything) so long as it provides a paycheck, a pension, and what they perceive as a secure place in the most powerful tribe. The global climate engineering/weather warfare/biological warfare assault is the greatest and most immediate threat faced by humanity and the web of life (short of nuclear cataclysm). When specific individuals have made a career out of helping to cover up the criminal geoengineering programs by their "professional" public denial, these individuals need to be exposed. The "scientists" in question are paid to pretend geoengineering is only a "proposal" which helps to pacify the population in regard to the threat already posed by the ongoing geoengineering programs. "Carnegie Science" appears to be major sponsor of the ongoing climate engineering cover-up disinformation campaign. The 3 minute video below from Carnegie representative Ben Kravitz is a very revealing example of the "geoengineering is just a proposal" deception.

Two more primary actors in the geoengineering deception effort (also part of "Carnegie Science") are Dr. Ken Caldeira and Douglas MacMartin (AKA Doug MacMynowski). The 10 minute video below is a very revealing exposé, is their acting convincing?

Climate engineering/solar radiation management programs are obscuring skies all over the globe. Highly toxic heavy metals and chemicals from these illegal programs are supersaturating our breathable air column and thus contaminating every breath we take.

Geoengineered skies, Yosemite National Park, California. Photo credit: Sydne Pomin

Yet another "Carnegie Science" climate engineering disinformation representative is Dr. David Keith. Keith has helped to draft the new study shown below. Ken Caldeira, and Doug MacMartin (AKA MacMynowski) also contributed to this "study".

Carnegie Council Announces Launch of Carnegie Climate Geoengineering Governance Initiative 

Two excerpts from this report are below:

"There is a considerable lack of understanding of the governance requirements for addressing climate geoengineering—technologies that fundamentally require multilateral governance approaches," said Pasztor, the executive director. "This is what the C2G2 Initiative plans to address."

there is no comprehensive international framework to govern these technologies, which have planetary-wide consequences, pose many serious, unknown risks, and raise profound ethical questions.

What did Ken Caldeira do when he worked as a scientist for the United States government? In the 1 minute video below you can hear some of the shocking answers in Mr. Caldeira's own words (how to spray pathogens into clouds to infect the populations below, create tsunami's for destroying costal cities, weather as a weapon, etc).

In the 5 minute video below, David Keith ( also exposed publically be Stephen Colbert) has stated at an international science conference that the goal of the geoengineers is to put 10,000,000 tons of aluminum nanoparticules into the atmosphere annually (by jet aircraft dispersion).

This final 2 minute video (below) is of Mr. MacMartin (AKA Mr. MacMynowski) explaining how we can "test" global geoengineering programs. 

With all the above information considered (along with other geoengineering studies and solar radiation manegement reports drafted by Douglas MacMartin), the dialog shown below becomes very relevant. It is a full transcript of my very recent communications with Douglas MacMartin in which he compares "believing" that geoengineering is already deployed, is to believe that "the moon is made of blue cheese".

The conversation with "Carnegie Science" climate engineering disinformation representative Douglas MacMartin (AKA MacMynowski) began from an initial message sent to MacMartin from a very dedicated and credible anti-geoengineering activist, Maciej Kocialkowski, who expressed his very dire and justified concerns about climate engineering to Mr. MacMartin. 

Response to Maciej from Douglas MacMartin (AKA Douglass MacMynowski):

Good day Maciej,

I am sorry that you have been so deliberately deceived, but if you were a decent human being you would learn the facts before accusing other people of bad behaviour.

Theory #1: Clouds are made of water vapour

Theory #2: There is a vast conspiracy of hundreds of thousands of people in every single country on the planet, not one of whom is willing to break the silence and acknowledge that clouds are, in fact, not made of water vapour.

Personally I find Theory #1 to be more likely, but I understand that there are some people on the planet who find Theory #2 to be compelling, and that they are even capable of taking pictures and posting them on websites; just because they know how to use a camera and know how to type doesn’t mean that you should trust what they say.  Like I said, I’m sorry you’ve been deceived by dishonourable people, but please don’t accuse us of lying when we tell you that clouds are made of water.

I think it is clear who is cowardly, morally and ethically bankrupt here…

I was cc'd the above communication between Maciej and Douglas, and joined in the dialog:

Hello Mr. MacMartin,  our legal team (Legal Alliance to Stop Geoengineeing, LASG) recently conducted a survey of almost 1500 climate scientists/meteorologists. These academicians were asked if they were willing to deny (on the record) ongoing geoengineering deployment. Not a single scientist was willing to deny the geoengineering reality Mr. MacMartin, not one. Are you willing to tell us on the record that you know with certainty that global geoengineering/climate engineering/solar radiation management/stratospheric aerosol injection programs have not yet been deployed?

Survey of 1500 scientists/meteorologists (the entire list of academicians surveyed is contained in the link, PDF file)

FYI

https://geoengineeringwatch.org/scientists-surveyed-unanimously-refuse-to-deny-climate-engineering-reality/

I have been on conference calls all week with a growing # of attorneys that are joining our effort, geoengineering will be exposed, wait and see. When that happens, how will the public react to your narrative of denial which in effect has helped to cover up the ongoing climate engineering crimes? Time will soon enough reveal the answer to that question.

Sincerely

Dane Wigington

GeoengineeringWatch.org

Response from MacMartin (MacMynowski):

Hi Dane,

Yes, there is no deployment anywhere of any deliberate stratospheric aerosol injection program that is intended to significantly alter the climate.  If there were some clandestine operation somewhere on the globe that was big enough to matter, we would be able to detect it from satellite data.

The fact that most scientists don’t waste their time responding to random emails from people doesn’t prove that they believe such a program exists.  I tend to get about 100 emails a day on average, I can’t possibly waste my time responding to everything that comes in.  A quick skim of some of the responses you got makes it quite obvious that no-one believes such a program exists. 

I also think that if you demanded of 1500 scientists that they deny that the moon is made of blue cheese, you would find very few who would open the email and bother responding.  If you think that that means that scientists think that the moon is made of blue cheese, you would be certifiably delusional. 

Please do not post material stating that I am a liar when you have no evidence of such a statement (and indeed, since that statement is false, it is you who are a liar, you who are deliberately deceiving innocent people).  I think that either you are incapable of rational thought, or morally repugnant.  You would be wise to stop and think clearly before trying to spread false information.

There are real problems in this world that demand real attention.  Inventing fake ones is a waste of everyone’s time.

doug

My reply to MacMartin (MacMynowski):

Mr. MacMartin, it seems you continue to irrationally display your adversity to reality. As a "scientist" you can amazingly say with certainty that you somehow  that no climate engineering programs have been deployed anywhere by anyone? And for proof you state you would "detect" such spraying activity from satellite data? Though 1500 scientists refused to deny the climate engineering issue on the record, you somehow know for certain that no climate engineering whatsoever is taking place?

https://geoengineeringwatch.org/scientists-surveyed-unanimously-refuse-to-deny-climate-engineering-reality/ 

Perhaps you need to take a closer look at some satellite images Douglas, which you claim prove there is nothing going in our skies.

FYI, there are countless satellite images that clearly show ongoing aerosol operations, clearly not commercial traffic,

geoengineering trails satellite images

If your claim is that this is all just "condensation trails" Mr. MacMartin, this also does not hold up to any legitimate investigation. 

FYI 

https://geoengineeringwatch.org/the-contrail-lie/

Are the NASA satellite images in the link below also just "natural cloud cover" Douglas?

https://geoengineeringwatch.org/nasa-satellite-imagery-reveals-shocking-proof-of-climate-engineering/

or these NASA images

https://geoengineeringwatch.org/is-climate-engineering-real-square-cloud-formations-are-undeniable-proof/

Perhaps you should comb through this 750 page historical congressional document on global climate intervention programs and explain to us all why we should ignore it.

FYI

https://geoengineeringwatch.org/massive-us-senate-document-on-national-and-global-weather-modification/

The final statements in your message to me truly reveal an irrational desperation to deny on your part, Mr. MacMartin (the quote from MacMartin is below). 

"I also think that if you demanded of 1500 scientists that they deny that the moon is made of blue cheese, you would find very few who would open the email and bother responding.  If you think that that means that scientists think that the moon is made of blue cheese, you would be certifiably delusional. 

Please do not post material stating that I am a liar when you have no evidence of such a statement (and indeed, since that statement is false, it is you who are a liar, you who are deliberately deceiving innocent people).  I think that either you are incapable of rational thought, or morally repugnant.  You would be wise to stop and think clearly before trying to spread false information.

There are real problems in this world that demand real attention.  Inventing fake ones is a waste of everyone’s time."

The public is rapidly waking up to the willful mass deception being propagated from the very "academicians" like yourself that the public has been so well trained to trust. I would ask you, Mr. MacMartin, how do you think the population will react (once fully awakened to the truth) to individuals such as yourself who have done everything in their power to hide the lethal climate engineering reality from them? Do you not believe that such an awakened public will hold people like you legally and morally accountable as accessories in the crimes of the climate engineering cover-up? Time will soon enough tell as the critical mass of awakening draws near. About my statements relating to your total disregard for the truth, I stand by them. There are only three possibilities in your case, Mr. MacMartin, either you are criminally negligent in your knowledge of the very profession in which you claim to be an expert, or you are visually challenged and cannot see the blatant aerosol spraying that is so clearly visible in countless satellite images that you claim prove there is no aerosol spraying, or finally, yes, for whatever reason or motive, you are willfully choosing to deceive the population on this most critical issue, Mr. MacMartin.

The truth about the ongoing climate engineering reality will soon be known by all, Douglas, wait and see. When that time comes, you, and all those like you (who have willfully deceived the public about the geoenigneering reality and dangers), will face the public's demand for legal and moral accountability.

Dane Wigington

geoengineeringwatch.org

MacMartin's (MacMynowski's) reply:

On Jan 23, 2017, at 5:29 AM, Douglas MacMartin wrote:

It is clear that you are not interested in reality.  Please don’t waste our time.

My reply to MacMartin (MacMynowski):

Is that the best response to all the data I posted that you could come up with Douglas? "It is clear that you are not interested in reality. Please don’t waste our time". Did you even bother to examine the NASA satellite images included in the last message? Or the 750 page US Senate report? I see that Dr. David Keith is on this email list which someone has put together. Mr. Keith, like you, will soon enough likely be held legally and morally accountable by an awakened and enraged population.

Another FYI below Douglas, a very damning 5 minute video of Dr. Keith discussing the dumping of 10 to 20 million tons of aluminum into the stratosphere annually.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qEBZAE0rbs

The next FYI 6 minute video below is shocking time-lapse footage of solar radiation management programs being carried out. Yes, populations are beginning to wake up to the fact that they are all a part of a grand and lethal experiment without their knowledge and consent. An illegal and unimaginably destructive experiment that individuals like you, Dr. David Keith, and Dr. Ken Caldeira, are willfully deceiving the public about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUo1H1fJGdw

And there are countless other up close film captures of what is clearly jet aircraft aerosol dispersions

FYI, 

2 minute video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLwfFtDFZDpwulG0PJ9IID0iypsRXDSa1E&v=iK9nVR9H34g

And another

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2q-BZxl-Zxk

And another

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSSWnXQsgOU

And another

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GrspMZJoyE

And there are many more.

Douglas, can you state with a straight face that this is just "condensation" being turned on and off from these jet aircraft?

Understand this, Douglas, I and a rapidly growing number of others all over the country and, indeed, the world, will continue to do our best to make sure the public is completely aware of the part you (and people like Dr. Keith and Dr. Ken Caldeira) have played in the criminal climate engineering cover-up.

Dane Wigington

GeoengineeringWatch.org

Reply from Douglass MacMartin (MacMynowski)

Hi Dane,

I’m sure that you are a well-intentioned person who simply cares deeply about the planet (like me and presumably everyone else you email), but that you have misled yourself, and in doing so have gotten yourself too angry to have a polite and informed conversation from which you might learn something.

At some level I don’t really care if you believe things that aren’t true, but you are misleading other well-intentioned people and filling them with mis-placed anger as well.  The world would be better off if people spent their energy working on real problems in constructive ways.  If you are concerned about climate change, for example, write your representatives and senators and ask for policies to address climate change.  Unfortunately, by convincing people of things that aren’t true, you aren’t helping make the world a better place but simply wasting people’s energies.

While I unfortunately don’t have high confidence (based on your previous emails) that there is any chance that you will be swayed, I would ask the rest of the people that you have tried to influence to think carefully about why they are believing you rather than believing the tens of thousands of people who have devoted their entire careers towards understanding the climate and how to make the world a better place.

My understanding from people I’ve talked to about this is that the root confusion here is that what any meteorologist looks at as a natural contrail, you take pictures of and claim it isn’t a contrail.  Why do you believe that water vapour can make clouds under the right atmospheric conditions, yet water vapour that comes out of a jet exhaust shouldn’t do the same?  (Especially in the presence of lots of appropriate cloud condensation nuclei in the exhaust.)  This isn’t anything mysterious…

And I am utterly baffled as to why anyone would draw any connection between aircraft contrails and those of us who are working to understand climate engineering.  Those of us involved in that research are motivated entirely by concern over the suffering of humans and non-humans alike due to climate change, and we think there is sufficient cause for alarm about the future to do the research into the idea of putting something like sulfate (not a significant part of aircraft exhaust) into the stratosphere (higher than the airplanes you see making contrails).  No-one is doing anything like this now.  No-one ever has.  No-one is even proposing it.  When you claim that those things are true, you are simply making it up and then accusing lots of other people of lying.  (And if in 30 years someone does decide that the situation is dire enough to warrant geoengineering, it won’t look remotely like contrails from aircraft.)  The only connection between aircraft contrails and geoengineering is that both of them involve the atmosphere; that’s a pretty tenuous link.  The only thing that exists today is computer modeling.  Everything that you have said about me is something that you have simply made up and then tried to convince other people is true.

If you want to understand something about climate engineering, I would recommend reading the National Academy report on the subject from 2015, and you will quickly learn that it has nothing whatsoever to do with any of the things that you write about on your website. 

If you are interested in learning something from polite, curious, open-minded conversation, that’s great.  If you are only interested in ranting and accusing people of bad behaviour, I don’t think that is constructive or useful to any of us.  Sorry to be blunt, but I don’t go around making things up and convincing dozens of my friends to send meaningless hate-mail to random people, and I think you could help make the world a better place if you didn’t do that either.

doug

P.S.  You might also want to know that when you try to disparage other people and falsely accuse them of bad behaviour in a public way, that doesn’t come across well and doesn’t reflect well on your values.

My response to MacMartin (MacMynowski)

Mr. MacMartin (or is it Mr. MacMynowski? Isn't that your former name? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6o8wBo4R7ME), perhaps you think you are fooling some on this email list by pretending to be a victim (which you absolutely are not), but even the academicians and corporate media sources on the list are becoming aware that the climate engineering elephant in the room can't be hidden much longer. Coming article posts will continue to present data that exposes you, and those like you, who appear to be making a career out of public deception on an issue of unimaginable gravity.  Douglas, the truth about the global climate engineering/geoengineering/solar radiation management programs will soon be known by the masses, how do you think they will react to those who did their best to cover-up the highly toxic and environmentally devastating climate engineering crimes? We will soon enough find out…

DW

Geoengineeringwatch.org

BTW

The questions below, already sent to you, which you never gave an honest answer to, or any answer to, Mr. MacMartin. (other than to compare the ongoing climate engineering issue to the moon being made of  "blue cheese" even when you have been directly involved in the climate engineering issue for a very long time https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6o8wBo4R7ME).  

https://geoengineeringwatch.org/scientists-surveyed-unanimously-refuse-to-deny-climate-engineering-reality/ 

Questions formerly sent but never even acknowledged by you. No comment on the NASA photos and US Senate documents?

Perhaps you need to take a closer look at some satellite images Douglas, which you claim prove there is nothing going in our skies.

FYI, there are countless satellite images that clearly show ongoing aerosol operations, clearly not commercial traffic,

geoengineering trails satellite images

If your claim is that this is all just "condensation trails" Mr. MacMartin, this also does not hold up to any legitimate investigation. 

FYI 

https://geoengineeringwatch.org/the-contrail-lie/

Are the NASA satellite images in the link below also just "natural cloud cover" Douglas?

https://geoengineeringwatch.org/nasa-satellite-imagery-reveals-shocking-proof-of-climate-engineering/

or these NASA images

https://geoengineeringwatch.org/is-climate-engineering-real-square-cloud-formations-are-undeniable-proof/

Perhaps you should comb through this 750 page historical congressional document on global climate intervention programs and explain to us all why we should ignore it.

FYI

https://geoengineeringwatch.org/massive-us-senate-document-on-national-and-global-weather-modification/

Final response from MacMartin (MacMynowski)

Dane,

First, don’t bother responding to this email, as I’ve already blocked your email address, as it is clear that you are not interested in any polite discourse from which you might learn something.  So I will never see what your response is, and you won’t be able to receive any satisfaction from thinking that whatever you type, someone just might feel insulted.  Any response you type will just be wasted effort going into a meaningless void (kind of like this email, come to think of it)…

So many in the circles of academia (and journalism) have completely betrayed the human race, and the entire web of life. One cannot help but wonder how such individuals can so completely and totally abandon any sense of honor or morality. Man's attempt to manipulate Earth's life support systems is the epitome of human folly and insanity, it is nothing short of willfull planetary omnicide.  Exposing the criminal climate engineering deception and cover-up (and all those contributing to it) is essential, all of our efforts are needed in this battle.
DW

May be freely reprinted, so long as the text is unaltered, all hyperlinks are left intact, and credit for the article is prominently given to GeoengineeringWatch.org and the article’s author with a hyperlink back to the original story.

Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org

Anyone who claims to be against climate engineering, anyone who claims to be in the fight to expose and halt it, and anyone who claims to care about the truth, has a responsibility to view the 15 minute video interview below. "Lord Monckton" adamantly and aggressively denies the climate engineering/weather warfare reality.

Now more than ever before the power structure's tools of disinformation and deception are in full operation. There are specific individuals who have become the front line of the disinformation effort relating to climate engineering and the true state of the climate. "Lord Christopher Monckton" is one of the most prominent faces of the ramped up disinformation campaign being orchestrated to cast doubt on climate engineering and the true state of the climate. Monckton has been touring and speaking in Northern California, below is a letter that was just published by the Siskiyou Daily News. If the truth matters, then the links in this letter should be opened so that the statements the letter contains can be verified.

Local Event Speaker Has Very Dubious Record

"Lord Christopher Monckton" was the featured speaker at a community meeting in Yreka that took place on Tuesday, December 6th.  "Lord Monckton" claims to be an expert on the state of the climate (and the environment), and he was represented as being a credible speaker on the subjects mentioned, but is he? Should Monckton be considered honest in any sense of the word?  A simple online search of "Lord Monckton" reveals a long list of damning information (from numerous credible sources) that exposes his inability to simply tell the truth. For example, the Guardian newspaper in the UK published this report: 

"The House of Lords has taken the unprecedented step of publishing a "cease and desist" letter on its website demanding that Lord Christopher Monckton……… should stop claiming to be a member of the upper house."

The cease and desist action taken by the British government in response to Monckton's fabrications is just the beginning. The excerpt below addressing Monckton's deceptions is listed clearly in the UK parliament website and numerous other sources.

 "The House of Lords authorities have said Monckton is not and never has been a member and that there is no such thing as a non-voting or honorary member of the House."

What other deceptions has "Lord Monckton" tried to propagate about himself? The excerpts below were taken from the long list of information that has been compiled on the "Lord Monckton Rap Sheet" public information website.

1. Monckton claimed that he has developed a cure for Graves’ Disease, AIDS, Multiple Schlerosis, the flu, and the common cold.  This is no joke–he actually filed applications to patent a “therapeutic treatment” in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013.

2. The list of diseases cured by Monckton’s miracle tonic expands from time to time.  At one point he claimed, “Patients have been cured of various infectious diseases, including Graves’ Disease, multiple sclerosis, influenza, and herpes simplex VI.”  At another time he said, “Patients have been cured of various infectious diseases, including Graves’ disease, multiple sclerosis, influenza, food poisoning, and HIV.”  Maybe some of you physicians out there can help me interpret this, but it looks to me like Monckton is claiming that his Wonder Cure will 1) wipe out any virus without harming the patient, and 2) cure auto-immune disorders that may (or may not) have initially been triggered by a viral infection.

3. "Monckton claimed to be a co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Al Gore and the IPCC because he supposedly sent the IPCC a letter pointing out something that needed to be corrected in a draft report.  At one point he said the claim to be a Nobel laureate was all a joke, but it continued to be posted by Monckton in his bio at the Science and Public Policy Institute until early 2012, and the sorts of people who believe Monckton have often repeated the claim with a straight face. This brings up an important question.  On whom was Monckton playing the joke?"

4. "Monckton has made several dubious claims about what he did as a member of Margaret Thatcher’s policy unit."

5. "One example of these dubious claims is that he was the author of “a 1200-word article for the Daily Telegraph on the reasons in international law why the Falkland Islands are British, read out on the BBC World Service’s Argentinian broadcasts every 20 minutes during the Falklands War.”  George Monbiot phoned up the BBC, and they said they had never done any specifically Argentine broadcasts.  Maybe Monckton was confused about who did the broadcasting, however."

6. "Monckton is now claiming to be “an appointed expert reviewer for the forthcoming ‘Fifth Assessment Report’ to be published by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”  But all you need to do to be an “expert reviewer” is to make a self-declaration of expertise and volunteer.  The IPCC doesn’t “appoint” anyone as a reviewer."

"Lord Monckton" is also currently touring the US with a scientifically verifiable false message that he just put out on KCNR radio in Northern California: that he (Lord Monckton) has single handedly disproved the entire science community on the subject of global warming, (he further states) there is nothing wrong with the climate, more Co2 is good, the oceans are not acidifying and are in fact healthy and thriving, the Great Barrier Reef is fine, the planet itself is greening and thriving, there is nothing wrong with the environment at all, and we need to burn more coal in order to save lives.
It is unfortunate that "Lord Monckton" and his long list of deceptions were not in any way investigated by those who are now parading him around as an oracle of truth. Whatever "Lord Monckton's" motivation is, whatever his agenda is, willfully deceiving the public on the dire issue of the climate is not OK. Given Monckton's incredibly long list of verified public deceptions, why was he represented as a qualified expert and allowed to speak as such?
Dane Wigington

A final quote (not included in the published letter above) that was issued from the UK Clerk of Parliaments and posted on the UK Parliament web site:

I must repeat…… you are not, and never have been, a Member of the House of Lords. 

What actions cause great harm to the critical cause of exposing and halting climate engineering/weather warfare? "Lord Monckton" was recently the top speaker at an event in Arizona that was built completely around exactly the kind of verifiable disinformation "Lord Monckton" is spreading. The organizer of this event claims to be against the lethal climate engineering programs. If this is true, why would an ardent climate engineering denier ("Lord Monckton") be the top speaker at this event? Why would well known alternative news sites (who claim to be against climate engineering) also push this aggressive climate engineering denier who is propagating the exact narrative the power structure and the climate engineers would want him to put out? This only helps to hide the tracks of the climate engineers. Why would any website or group push "Lord Monckton's" false narrative when his total disregard for the truth (on countless dire issues) is a verifiable and undisputable fact of record? Why would anyone who claims to be fighting to expose and halt climate engineering help to advertise and advance the agenda of a speaker who so aggressively denies climate engineering? In the all important battle to expose the truth there is no room for ideology, preconception, personal bias, or personal agendas. Those who claim to care about the truth must show it by actually investigating the facts, and then building their conclusions on those facts. The "herd mentality" or peer pressure "groupthink" has no place in an honest search for the truth. The effort to expose verifiable truths must only be about the fight for the greater good. It must only be about the commitment to face unimaginably difficult realities head-on without closing our eyes in denial. It must be about prioritizing our available time, efforts, and energies toward the fight for the greater good no matter how daunting the challenge appears to be.
DW