Comments on: We need a third point of contention in the Global Warming debate.

By: Skycypher

Skycypher — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 03:50:00 +0000

The 3rd point of contention in the global warming debate is weather control through new, but as of yet undivulged technology that is accelerating the climate changes we are witnessing.

By: julia

julia — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 02:42:50 +0000

The political system is broken and doesn’t work. Current events might be influenced by the Lunar Eclipse, but obviously that’s not enough to fix the problem. Maybe the third point of view you are looking for is that of the stars, and the planet earth herself.

By: Skycypher

Skycypher — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 16:10:15 +0000

“The climate change movement has to confront the reality of climate modification, and decide, in dialogue with our opponents, whether we want to it to be legalized or banned.”

I say banned. The responsibilty of these ‘weather wizards’ is so far beyond their current forecasting that I’m not willing to allow them the experimentation to test their theories. They may have already gone too far in secret! If so, the unintended consequences of their irresponsible actions may have doomed us all to an uncontrollable future of extreme weather for decades to come.

Skycypher

By: halva

halva — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:49:36 +0000

I agree that the present climate change debate has to be placed on a different basis.

I presented some thoughts on this at a paper that was submitted to the European Social Forum in Athens, Greece in 2006.
http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/climate-change.pdf

By: Skycypher

Skycypher — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:01:48 +0000

Katrina- a case of weather manipulation?

From World-Mysteries.com

Was Hurricane Katrina a phenomenon of weather warfare? Was it a test of Pentagon capabilities? Or is it the continuation of some other covert warfare of heretofore undisclosed factions?

http://www.world-mysteries.com/doug_katrina.htm

By: Skycypher

Skycypher — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:58:27 +0000

Beneath the Debate on Climate Change: Weather Warfare and the Manipulation of Climate for Military Use

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=3653

Excerpt:

The ongoing debate on Climate Change focusses exclusively on the impacts of global warming. The debate on climate change centers on formal measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol.

The recent publication of a report by Sir Nicholas Stern, former chief economist at the World Bank, presents a catastrophic picture of climatic disruptions. “Its recommendations are based on stabilising carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere at between 450 and 550 parts per million - which would still require a cut of at least 25 per cent in global emissions, rising to 60 per cent for the wealthy nations.”

The underlying consensus is that greenhouse gas emissions constitute the sole cause of climate instability.Neither the governments nor the environmental action groups, have raised the issue of “weather warfare” or “environmental modification techniques (ENMOD).” for military use.

Despite a vast body of scientific knowledge, the issue of deliberate climatic manipulations for military use is no longer part of the UN agenda on climate change.

In 1977, an international Convention was ratified by the UN General Assembly which banned “military or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects.” (AP, 18 May 1977). Both the US and the Soviet Union were signatories to the Convention.