The atmospheric aerosol program, I have read, goes by the umbrella designation of Operation CLOVERLEAF. The name suggests the intersection of a number of overlapping programs or ‘leaves’.
The public cover — the fig-leaf, if you like — is climate remediation. Nearly a quarter of a century ago, Edward Teller, one of the first scientists to raise the alarm about CO2 levels, proposed a stratospheric aluminum oxide shield to deflect sunlight. Later in the same decade he reversed his opinion on global warming, and was one of the most prominent signatories of the Oregon Petition (1998), which states:
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.
Nothing has changed since then, in terms of the case for CO2-driven climate change: merely an endless parade of ad hoc hypotheses, none of which can save the misconceived central thesis, but which buy time for treaties, legal frameworks and bureaucracies — the infra-structure of global governance — to set and harden in place.
Meanwhile, the universities, the UN, and various government science and public policy advisors, such as Professor David Keith of Harvard University and the Obama administration’s Chief Scientific Officer John P Holdren, seek to acclimatize the public by projecting the ‘possibility’ of using stratospheric aerosol injection to limit the amount of solar energy entering the climate system. It is acknowledged that experimentation has been underway for some time. Oxford University offers post-graduate degrees and research posts in Solar Radiation Management (SRM) or Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering (SPICE), as do Harvard and other leading universities. Such ‘proposals’ — recently referenced in a ‘limited hang-out’ by CIA Director John Brennan at the Council on Foreign Relations — assume the feasibility of this type of climate engineering, because the delivery systems already exist. And they exist because they are being used.
The ‘chemtrails’ phenomenon is extremely well documented, from huge amounts of video and photographic evidence, to whistleblower testimony, to relevant patents, to copious data from laboratory analysis of rainwater, soil and snow samples. There are a number of reputable websites, such as Geoengineeringwatch, Californiaskywatch, or About the Sky, which compile and publish relevant data.
The phenomenon has many names. The popular term, ‘chemtrails’, has no scientific standing or definition. Academics and scientists use various acronyms. SRM — Solar Radiation Management; SPICE — Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering; SAG — Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering; SAI — Stratospheric Aerosol Injection; and a number of others. Activists and officials use the umbrella term of geo-engineering.
Whatever you call it, it is happening on a huge scale. Our skies have been visibly transformed by a global geo-engineering program of aerosol injection. This is incontrovertible. We can debate its significance, but for any thinking person to refuse to discuss it is simply a denial of reality. Willful blindness to threatening realities may not be anything new, but the scale and visibility of this is so great that the act of not seeing involved is almost miraculous.
Having seen what we are seeing, and having substantiated it with a congruence of laboratory tests, visual evidence, documentary evidence, whistle-blower testimony and official pronouncements, logic compels us to ask the question: Why? What are the purposes of the aerosol injection program filling our skies with white filth? With such an extensive program, we should assume that there are multiple objectives.
Clifford Carnicom is an independent scientist who has been studying the issue for some time. A paragon of the scientific method, Carnicom is painstaking, pedantic and exacting, and his papers represent the result of years — often more than a decade — of work. He is the founder of CarnicomInstitute.Org, and his papers can be read (and peer-reviewed) there.
While Carnicom stubbornly avoids speculation and prefers to talk only about what can be proved, his researches have enabled him, over the course of seven years, to develop a list of possible answers, some of which overlap, to the question of purpose. Carnicom has settled on seven — not necessarily a complete list, but potential applications he is able to envisage which satisfy all the data. Here it is:
1 Environmental modification and control/ weather modification
2 Military operations
3 Electromagnetic operations
4 Biological operations
5 Geophysical effects
6 Surveillance using LIDAR – light detection and ranging
7 Detection of exotic propulsion systems within the atmosphere
To read more about the intersecting leaves of Operation CLOVERLEAF, please go to CarnicomInstitute.Org.
NEXT: GENOCIDAL KITSCH