Feds for Freedom supporters expressed some strong opinions related to the U.S. Government’s role in another bit of scientific adventurism. Geo-engineering and weather manipulation, like gain-of-function (GoF) research, appear to be another example of scientific hubris, combined with government secrecy, and just a dash of conspiracy.
Voila! You have yourself another controversy.
Feds for Freedom would like to caveat our commentary on this topic. Our members working in the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) should not be the subject of death threats, nor should any government servant for that matter.
You heard that right.
Employees at NOAA have received death threats from actual far-right conspiracy theorists who have conflated NOAA’s role in reporting, monitoring, and researching weather patterns and their role in marine ecosystem conservation with the role often reserved for the Department of Defense (DOD), Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), and other government agencies in developing weather and geoengineering technology.
Threatening to kill the climate researchers because one suspects the weatherman is plotting to cause widespread famine, direct hurricanes over economic centers, and flood populated areas which are rich in valuable natural resources in a shameless land-grab is really a question of scope and capability.
I no longer watch SNL and the above clip is not meant to disrespect our NOAA colleagues. My intent is to remind our supporters that in comparison to humorless hacks spitting out nonsense once weekly, NOAA leaders are only millimeters closer than Lorne Michaels to our secret government plans to plunge the Earth into a state of permanent dimness. You know, because of climate change.
Well, I suppose a comparison with SNL is a criticism of NOAA leadership, but they are tiniest minority of that agency. NOAA employs about 12,000 personnel. There are some very capable scientists and researchers, but they are the next tiniest minority of the whole cadre of NOAA professionals.
NOAA doesn’t have the people, the capability, nor the budget to hide an army of mustache twirling evil doers.
Let’s take a look at what NOAA does.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) mission is to:
Predict changes in the weather and marine ecosystems;
Share information, and;
Conserve and manage coastal and marine resources.
They accomplish those tasks with:
Daily weather forecasts;
Severe storm warnings;
Climate monitoring;
Fisheries management;
Coastal restoration, and:
Support for marine commerce.
The problem is trust in government.
When the government gets involved in widespread censorship and – objectively – has been involved in dissembling, it becomes increasingly easy to assume the worst. The U.S. Government has lied about COVID, vaccinations, secret government programs, UFOs, assassinations, and a whole host of other topics. NOAA does not appear to be the organization developing geoengineering tools. They conduct research and propose theoretical methodologies, but are not controlling vast resources to execute large-scale whole of government plans.
|
But wait!
We have news articles talking about NOAA research being conducted that looks a whole lot like geoengineering. At this point in the game, I expect that most Feds for Freedom supporters are capable of reading further than the headlines. These type of studies are just that – an academic exercise. The researcher said it was not feasible in the near-term, admitted their were many unknowns, and other experts also admitted that the proposal “does not have a lot of answers given all the uncertainties.”
There are other culprits worthy of investigation.
Common sense tells us there are other agencies more worthy of our attention. NOAA is a minor player in the U.S. Government and given our national security establishment has listed climate change as a national emergency, it stands to reason … we should look at the national security apparatus if we are searching for a conspiracy.
The problem with most videos… they sound breathless and use needlessly exaggerated and emotional commentary. I am open to discussion on anything, but delivery matters.
Linking a theory to the intelligence community is a sure fire way to go viral, but only in the rarest cases can one find information that provides a definitive link to an active intelligence program. Former CIA director Brennan’s discussion is tantalizing and highlight’s the community’s knowledge of the programs, but his comments don’t point to a conspiracy. Like Brennan, numerous government agencies have stated publicly they intend to change the weather to save us from CO2.
This sort of evidence only proves that their is interest in these type of programs from the national security apparatus. There are no smoking guns.
Elijah Shafer, the host of the Daily Dose on Vigilant News provided professional and moderate commentary, noting that there was room for debate. I found a number of large holes in climate researcher, Dane Wigington’s description of events. It doesn’t mean he was wrong or lying, and it could have been an artifact of the program format and timing, but I had questions. Lots of questions.
I don’t really know what “weather planes” mean. The answer could be a matter of a few google searches or sharpening of some imprecise language. Are there specific planes being used in cloud seeding? Military or civilian? Wigington highlighted discussions with North Carolina legislators, but we don’t know with whom he spoke? We don’t know the details of his discussions, nor do we (directly) know how legislators responded to his claims that the 2024 flooding in North Carolina was man-made. Those State Congressman could have nodded their heads in agreement while they discreetly slipped his promotional material into the “crazies” bin.
Wigington seemed sincere and he is an author/director on the same subject. Please check out The Dimming on YouTube… Or watch right here.
The documentary’s arguments are very convincing. Skip to minute 6:05 if you want to see flashbacks to our recent revelations surrounding GoF research. The documentary also highlighted the fact that geoengineering isn’t a new topic of discussion. It has been an area of DoD research for at least the last four decades.
Senators Lisa Murkowski and Sue Collins were part of a subappropriations committee hearing regarding High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project (HAARP) experiments in 2014. Later in the video, we were treated to Senator Herbert Kohl’s questions related to the suspected intent for use of weather tampering techniques…
Tuesday 26 November 2024, you will get a chance to see our podcast host Stephanie Weidle interview Ginny Silcox and J. Marvin Herndon to discuss geoengineering or, rather, “total environmental interference.”
They will explore what is actually being sprayed into the air, how we spot it, and its effects on our atmosphere, land, and bodies.
Ginny Silcox holds a Q clearance with the Department of Energy and designed training for the DOE Emergency Operations Training Academy, as part of the National Nuclear Security Administration. Ginny has research and development experience in electromagnetic compliance for light-based medical monitors including tissue spectrometers and pulse oximeters. This work investigated radiated and conducted emissions, electrostatic discharge, and short and long-field radio emissions.
J. Marvin Herndon, holds a Ph.D. in Nuclear Chemistry. He is a geophysicist and has published dozens of peer-reviewed papers about SRM geoengineering…
This topic is going to be a spicy one!
I have just one request… Don’t go threatening hard working NOAA employees. They are our first line of defense when our weather and marine ecosystems go haywire… man-made disaster or not.
SOURCE https://fedsforfreedom.substack.com/p/please-dont-kill-the-weatherman?utm_source=cross-post&publication_id=443959&post_id=152089324&utm_campaign=1709220&isFreemail=true&r=aae8o&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
TRUMP E MUSK LICENZIANO IN MASSA METEOROLOGI DELLA NOAA – LE CONSEGUENZE?
IMPORTANTE!: Il materiale presente in questo sito (ove non ci siano avvisi particolari) può essere copiato e redistribuito, purché venga citata la fonte. NoGeoingegneria non si assume alcuna responsabilità per gli articoli e il materiale ripubblicato.Questo blog non rappresenta una testata giornalistica in quanto viene aggiornato senza alcuna periodicità. Non può pertanto considerarsi un prodotto editoriale ai sensi della legge n. 62 del 7.03.2001.
