Weather modification just moved from a chemtrail conspiracy theory to reality as Congress is holding a geoengineering hearing.
Washington, DC - On Wednesday, the Subcommittee on the Environment and the Subcommittee on Energy hosted the first House of Representatives hearings on geoengineering, which until now has been considered a conspiracy "conspiracy theory" and has been relegated to the margins of society by the Praetorian Guard of the Mass information controlled by the ruling elite oligarchy.
The controversial issue of climate control or weather modification, which has been popularized and simplified by the term "chem-trails", is coming out of the shadows for the first time into the public light.
In Congress, at the hearing on the theme: "Geoengineering: Innovation, Research and Technology", members of the chamber committees, as well as representatives of think tanks, researchers and scientists, took part to discuss the future of geoengineering.
The hearings on Wednesday were attended by Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), Chairman of the Environment Subcommittee Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) And Chairman of the Energy Subcommittee Randy Weber (R-Texas). Testimonies were presented by: Dr. Phil Rasch, Chief Climatologist, Research Assistant, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; Dr. Joseph Majkut, Director of Climate Policy from the Niskanen Center; Dr. Douglas MacMartin, Senior Research Fellow, Cornell University; and Ms. Kelly Wanser, Director of Marine Clouds Project, Joint Institute for Atmospheric and Oceanic Studies, University of Washington.
Interestingly, Chemtrails have long been spoken of as a conspiracy theory, with an enormous amount of misinformation being deliberately posted all over the Internet, including fake research and photographs. However, real-world research shows that “cloud seeding” or geoengineering has already taken place, indicating that secret testing projects have already taken place.
A study published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health reveals that geoengineering has already begun and that at least one substance is used that is a toxic byproduct of coal combustion, called fly ash.
During Wednesday's hearings, the potential need for a regulatory framework within which to experiment on this topic was discussed.
Promotional video:
California Congressman Jerry McNerney said he plans to introduce legislation soon to direct the Department of Energy and other federal agencies to support two of the National Academy of Sciences' reports on geoengineering.
According to investigative reporting by Derrick Broze writing for the Activist Post:
“The push from the Trump administration to discuss geoengineering should come as no surprise. Back in January 2017, the Activist Post reported that "the Global Change Research Program quietly recommended new research that explores two specific areas of research related to geoengineering." With the release of its report, the GCRP became the first in the federal government to recommend geoengineering research.”
We previously reported on CIA Director John O. Brennan speaking at a meeting with the Council on Foreign Relations at the end of June 2016 on the topic of geoengineering when discussing instability and global security in the face of transnational threats.
During protracted talks about threats to US interests, Brennan brought up the topic of geoengineering.
Another example is the spectrum of technologies, often referred to as geoengineering, that can potentially help mitigate the effects of global climate change. One that has caught my personal attention is stratospheric aerosol spraying or SAI, a method of seeding the stratosphere with particles that can help reflect solar heat.
Every expert who testified at Wednesday's hearings noted that geoengineering techniques should not replace efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions and prepare for the impacts of climate change.
During the Committee meeting, it was noted that geoengineering "can have a positive impact on the Earth's atmosphere", but there was a warning "we still have a lot to learn."
It is no longer debated whether geoengineering is real or not. Although it developed slowly and hid in the dark, it is clear that today it can be widely reported in the media to prepare the public for its implementation.
It seems that the public is completely excluded from the discussion.
Will the public speak up and hear their voices, or will there again be mockery in silence, being labeled as conspiracy theorists at the slightest mention of geoengineering?