| Home | The Strait Gate | | Click for Kansas City, Missouri Forecast

Friday, June 09, 2006

CHEMTRAILS: agenda stepped up

source: May 2006 Idaho Observer

CHEMTRAILS: Nationwide reports indicate "spraying" agenda stepped up in recent months

Conspiracies develop among entities compelled to cooperate with one another because each have something to gain should the plot succeed. Whatever material or political gains individual conspirators may realize is their payoff for participating in plots that often produce long-term results (intended or coincidental) that are far more harmful than those that are immediately apparent.

IO readers from all over the nation have called to report that aerial "spraying" in their areas has been intensified over the last couple of months. As we have discussed in previous editions:

We know aerial spraying that results in "chemtrails," is occurring and that the toxic particulates contained in the spray vary depending upon what tropospheric platform is being built to enhance which technological innovation.

We know that the military is using virtual imaging and communications technologies that require seeding the sky with various particulates (including barium, aluminum and copper).

We know that non-government environmental organizations have convinced governments that financing the introduction of certain particulates via aerial spraying will inhibit global warming.

We know the relative toxicity of the substances (primarily heavy metals) admittedly being sprayed.

We know that the spraying agenda has been ongoing since the mid-90s.

And now we are beginning to see the "fallout" of these operations. At what cost must the plants, animals and humans of the world endure the military’s desire for advanced communications and virtual imaging systems? What is the net benefit of allegedly minimizing global warming when the process is toxic to all life on earth?

Read Complete Article Here

Monday, June 05, 2006

Climate Control, Beijing-Style

Climate Control, Beijing-Style
By Melinda Liu
Newsweek International
June 4, 2006

June 2, 2006 - The rainy season has come to northern China, and it’s a brave new world out there. Actually the natural rainy season doesn’t start until July. But the season of man-made rain is upon us, and Chinese rainmakers have been busy. Over the past month they've mobilized cloud-seeding aircraft, artillery and rockets to enhance rainfall. "We've ordered technicians to try to make it rain again today, but so far they haven’t reported back on the results," says Zhang Qiang, a businesslike woman who heads the Beijing Weather Modification Office (yes, that’s the official name of a real Chinese government agency). "We did it many times last week to increase the rainfall."

Not content with simply making it rain, now China's weather modifiers have taken on another meterological mission: to help guarantee perfect weather when Beijing hosts the Olympic Games in 2008. "In China, we haven’t done this type of thing on a very large scale yet," says Zhang during an interview in a west Beijing compound housing five antiaircraft guns used to shoot chemicals into the clouds. "The Russians have experience creating good weather, and we can learn something from them. We still have two more years for testing. I’m sure our preparations for the Games will go well."

Zhang's office, which employs 30 people, is part of the Beijing municipal government and the nationwide China Meteorological Administration. Her unit uses two aircraft and 20 artillery and rocket-launching bases to help modify weather around the city. Springtime is the busiest season for agricultural purposes. But more and more, Zhang and her colleagues are experimenting with weather modification to try to create blue skies. Toward this end, they’ve spent nearly a month and a half total researching the effects of certain chemical activators on different sizes of cloud formations and at different altitudes. Chinese meteorologists claim that similar efforts helped create good weather for a number of past VIP events in China, including the World Expo in Yunnan, the Asian Games in Shanghai and the Giant Panda Festival in Sichuan.

And why not? The central-government leadership—dominated by engineers—has been messing with Mother Nature ever since the Chinese Communist Party came to power. They’ve built the world’s biggest dam, the world’s highest railway and even the world’s biggest Ferris wheel (in Nanchang, still awaiting verification from the Guinness World Records). Why not perfect the science of climate control?

Well, um, there is the small political question of what happens to apparatchiks if they get it wrong. At least that’s what was on Zhang’s mind on Sept. 30, 1999, as Chinese leaders frenetically prepared for Beijing’s National Day celebration the following morning. Marking the 50th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China, Oct. 1 was slated to be a bash with a full-on military parade, goose-stepping militiawomen in red miniskirts and a flyover of aircraft and helicopters buzzing Chinese VIPs on the rostrum above Tiananmen Square.

But there was one problem: a storm system threatened to make it rain on Beijing’s parade. China’s rainmakers debated whether to induce a strong downpour just before the gala, increasing the chances of blue skies on the big day. “I was on duty,” recalls Zhang. “I intended to modify the weather by using artillery.”

But Zhang understandably fretted about Mother Nature’s unpredictability. “I worried that if the techniques I used weren’t good enough, there would be a big problem. I could make things even worse,” acknowledges Zhang, inferring that she could have lost her job. “So I didn’t dare do anything.” To everyone’s relief, the rain stopped of its own accord.

In the beginning, the idea was to improve harvests for Chinese farmers, who still comprise nearly three quarters of the nation’s 1.3 billion people. Chinese scientists began researching man-made rain in 1958, using chemicals such as silver iodide or dry ice to help produce condensation in moisture-laden clouds; such efforts can enhance rainfall during planting seasons or minimize the destructive effect of hail. Firefighting is another function; last autumn, authorities in northeast China induced artificial rain to assist 10,000 firefighters battling a massive forest fire in Heilongjiang province.

Today Chinese rainmakers are among the world’s busiest. Beijing's nationwide weather-modification budget exceeds $50 million a year. The communist regime’s 11th Five Year Plan, which kicked off this year, calls for the creation of 48 billion to 60 billion cubic meters of artificial rain annually (somewhere between 12 trillion to 16 trillion gallons of water). Beijing needs it. Right now is when fruit trees and crops need life-giving water; the parched North China plain has been stalked by drought since 1998. Normal precipitation is between 22 and 24 inches annually, says Zhang, but Beijing had only 18 inches last year. And drought continued around China’s capital city this spring, “so we’re increasing rainfall using our own means,” says Zhang. “But man-made efforts can’t solve the drought problem altogether; they can increase rainfall by only 10 to 15 percent.”

And tampering with Mother Nature has been known to backfire. Cloud-seeding shells and rockets have sometimes gone astray, damaging homes and injuring inhabitants. City dwellers have raised concerns about environmental pollution, though meteorologists insist the silver iodide is used in such tiny quantities that it brings no negative health consequences. And the rainmaking scramble became so intense in 2004 that five Henan province villages reportedly squabbled over “cloud theft” after they all seeded the clouds simultaneously but only one district received the lion’s share of rain.

Still, Chinese authorities have discovered weather micromanagement can bring psychological relief from heat and dust. In 2004, when Shanghai’s sweltering temperatures soared above 95 degrees in July, weather modifiers induced rain to break the heat wave and reduce demand on the city’s overstretched power grids. “Shanghai was the first city in China to use man-made rain to cool down temperatures,” boasted Yu Zhaoyu of the city’s Meteorological Bureau.

This spring Beijing suffered from unusually fierce dust storms, which swirl out of the Gobi desert each year and coat the capital in fine yellow grit. One day in April a monster dust storm dumped 300,000 tons of sand on Beijing, according to local media. The city was still shrouded in gritty powder when temperatures and pollution levels began rising a week ago. To dispel the haze, technicians of the Weather Modification Office fired rocket shells packed with cigarette-size sticks of silver iodide into the clouds. It worked. Beijing enjoyed its heaviest rainfall of the year, which helped “alleviate drought, add soil moisture and remove dust from the air for better air quality,” reported the official Xinhua news agency.

The idea of creating good weather received political support from China’s former party head Jiang Zemin after he attended a 2000 celebration in Russia marking the 55th anniversary of the end of World War II. Jiang was impressed when the Russians induced rain to successfully clear up clouds for the ceremony. “When he came back, Jiang said China should do the same thing,” says Zhang, “We’re trying our best to be ready for the Olympics. Already we’ve succeeded in clearing up small cloud formations.” Dissipating larger formations that cover hundreds or thousands of square miles remain a challenge, she says. At any rate, heavy rains typically aren’t so prevalent in August, the month when the 2008 Games are scheduled. So when the time comes, China’s weather modifiers may ironically get a little help from Mother Nature.

© 2006 Newsweek, Inc.

Friday, June 02, 2006

Global Warming Hoax

source: www.telegraph.co.uk

There IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998
By Bob Carter (Filed: 09/04/2006)

For many years now, human-caused climate change has been viewed as a large and urgent problem. In truth, however, the biggest part of the problem is neither environmental nor scientific, but a self-created political fiasco. Consider the simple fact, drawn from the official temperature records of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, that for the years 1998-2005 global average temperature did not increase (there was actually a slight decrease, though not at a rate that differs significantly from zero).

Yes, you did read that right. And also, yes, this eight-year period of temperature stasis did coincide with society's continued power station and SUV-inspired pumping of yet more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

In response to these facts, a global warming devotee will chuckle and say "how silly to judge climate change over such a short period". Yet in the next breath, the same person will assure you that the 28-year-long period of warming which occurred between 1970 and 1998 constitutes a dangerous (and man-made) warming. Tosh. Our devotee will also pass by the curious additional facts that a period of similar warming occurred between 1918 and 1940, well prior to the greatest phase of world industrialisation, and that cooling occurred between 1940 and 1965, at precisely the time that human emissions were increasing at their greatest rate.

Does something not strike you as odd here? That industrial carbon dioxide is not the primary cause of earth's recent decadal-scale temperature changes doesn't seem at all odd to many thousands of independent scientists. They have long appreciated - ever since the early 1990s, when the global warming bandwagon first started to roll behind the gravy train of the UN Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - that such short-term climate fluctuations are chiefly of natural origin. Yet the public appears to be largely convinced otherwise. How is this possible?

Since the early 1990s, the columns of many leading newspapers and magazines, worldwide, have carried an increasing stream of alarmist letters and articles on hypothetical, human-caused climate change. Each such alarmist article is larded with words such as "if", "might", "could", "probably", "perhaps", "expected", "projected" or "modelled" - and many involve such deep dreaming, or ignorance of scientific facts and principles, that they are akin to nonsense.

The problem here is not that of climate change per se, but rather that of the sophisticated scientific brainwashing that has been inflicted on the public, bureaucrats and politicians alike. Governments generally choose not to receive policy advice on climate from independent scientists. Rather, they seek guidance from their own self-interested science bureaucracies and senior advisers, or from the IPCC itself. No matter how accurate it may be, cautious and politically non-correct science advice is not welcomed in Westminster, and nor is it widely reported.

Marketed under the imprimatur of the IPCC, the bladder-trembling and now infamous hockey-stick diagram that shows accelerating warming during the 20th century - a statistical construct by scientist Michael Mann and co-workers from mostly tree ring records - has been a seminal image of the climate scaremongering campaign. Thanks to the work of a Canadian statistician, Stephen McIntyre, and others, this graph is now known to be deeply flawed.

There are other reasons, too, why the public hears so little in detail from those scientists who approach climate change issues rationally, the so-called climate sceptics. Most are to do with intimidation against speaking out, which operates intensely on several parallel fronts.

First, most government scientists are gagged from making public comment on contentious issues, their employing organisations instead making use of public relations experts to craft carefully tailored, frisbee-science press releases. Second, scientists are under intense pressure to conform with the prevailing paradigm of climate alarmism if they wish to receive funding for their research. Third, members of the Establishment have spoken declamatory words on the issue, and the kingdom's subjects are expected to listen.

On the alarmist campaign trail, the UK's Chief Scientific Adviser, Sir David King, is thus reported as saying that global warming is so bad that Antarctica is likely to be the world's only habitable continent by the end of this century. Warming devotee and former Chairman of Shell, Lord [Ron] Oxburgh, reportedly agrees with another rash statement of King's, that climate change is a bigger threat than terrorism. And goodly Archbishop Rowan Williams, who self-evidently understands little about the science, has warned of "millions, billions" of deaths as a result of global warming and threatened Mr Blair with the wrath of the climate God unless he acts. By betraying the public's trust in their positions of influence, so do the great and good become the small and silly.

Two simple graphs provide needed context, and exemplify the dynamic, fluctuating nature of climate change. The first is a temperature curve for the last six million years, which shows a three-million year period when it was several degrees warmer than today, followed by a three-million year cooling trend which was accompanied by an increase in the magnitude of the pervasive, higher frequency, cold and warm climate cycles. During the last three such warm (interglacial) periods, temperatures at high latitudes were as much as 5 degrees warmer than today's. The second graph shows the average global temperature over the last eight years, which has proved to be a period of stasis.

The essence of the issue is this. Climate changes naturally all the time, partly in predictable cycles, and partly in unpredictable shorter rhythms and rapid episodic shifts, some of the causes of which remain unknown. We are fortunate that our modern societies have developed during the last 10,000 years of benignly warm, interglacial climate. But for more than 90 per cent of the last two million years, the climate has been colder, and generally much colder, than today. The reality of the climate record is that a sudden natural cooling is far more to be feared, and will do infinitely more social and economic damage, than the late 20th century phase of gentle warming.

The British Government urgently needs to recast the sources from which it draws its climate advice. The shrill alarmism of its public advisers, and the often eco-fundamentalist policy initiatives that bubble up from the depths of the Civil Service, have all long since been detached from science reality. Intern-ationally, the IPCC is a deeply flawed organisation, as acknowledged in a recent House of Lords report, and the Kyoto Protocol has proved a costly flop. Clearly, the wrong horses have been backed.

As mooted recently by Tony Blair, perhaps the time has come for Britain to join instead the new Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (AP6), whose six member countries are committed to the development of new technologies to improve environmental outcomes. There, at least, some real solutions are likely to emerge for improving energy efficiency and reducing pollution.

Informal discussions have already begun about a new AP6 audit body, designed to vet rigorously the science advice that the Partnership receives, including from the IPCC. Can Britain afford not to be there?

• Prof Bob Carter is a geologist at James Cook University, Queensland, engaged in paleoclimate research

What the masses of human beings all over the world have not been told is that it is possible to control and manipulate weather with a technology called 'scalar energy'. These energy weapons have other major capabilities that are even more dangerous than atomic weapons. Scalar Weapons could literally destroy the world and it is of the utmost urgency that human beings all over the world must be told of the existence of this devastating technology. ~Michael Shore

Top of Page