IPCC Using Climate Engineering as Global Warming Illusion 23

IPCC Chemtrails Global Warming Agendagreat-global-warming-blunder-roy-spencerClimate Scientist Roy Spencer suggests that “CLOUDS” are the key to understanding what is causing “global warming”.

BOOK: The Great Global Warming Blunder

The work of climate scientist Joyce Penner, PhD. (IPCC workgroup, 1999) established that artificial clouds warm the climate.  And Spencer suggests that an excess of clouds can cause a positive feedback of climate chaos.  An increase in surface temperatures due to artificial clouds is intended to give the illusion of global warming to the uninformed public.

Dr. Spencer’s observations match what we see in satellite images as tons of aerosols are dumped into the atmosphere to cloak the earth in a giant artificial cloud.  Even when the sky appears to be mostly blue, a closer look will reveal an artificial aerosol haze that traps heat like an artificial cloud that serves to warm surface temperatures regardless that the could is less noticeable to the eye.

Beginning in 2011 as surface temps began to rise “chem-bombs” were pointed out by Bruce Douglas as a new method of massive artificial aerosol cloud deployment that likely triggered the positive feedback associated with current high temperatures. Today, we see fewer chemical contrails and far more chem-bombs or LVAP (Large Volume Aerosol Plumes) consistent with increased surface temperatures.

Terry Lawton is a gifted climate engineering activist and musician

_____________

Terry Lawton delivers a longer presentation on this topic

APOCALYPSE CANCELLED :  Astrophysicist Prof Shaviv outlines where the IPCC have gone wrong. This new science discovered by Shaviv, Veizer and Svensmark, means that the high sensitivities to CO2 in the computer models can be ruled out. – Lecture recorded on the 10th April, 2014 in Germany.

_____________

Cosmic Rays. Clouds and Climate:  Professor Henrik Svensmark explains the significance of his research into galactic cosmic rays and clouds as an indicator of global warming/climate change (video)

NOTE: The ship trails (at minute 6:10) demonstrate a deliberate injection of CCN aerosols into the atmosphere to lock water vapor (a GHG) aloft to delay rainfall. Notice Svensmark’s key phrase:if you can do this systematically”)  Along with cosmic rays, this is the contrived mechanism of false global warming where positive feedback provides the climate chaos to warm surface temperatures. Dare I mention aircraft contrails sprayed as aerosols to create artificial clouds?  (Don’t call them chemtrails unless you want to be called a holocaust denier)  Svensmark alluded to this covert aerosol operation but careful not to make an explicit connection lest he be attacked with career-ending criticism by Zionist operatives in the media, IPCC and operatives connected to Universities who can influence career paths and ability to publish.

_____________

COSMIC RAYS and CLIMATE: In this excerpt from a 2009 presentation at CERN, atmospheric scientist – Jasper Kirkby, PhD – confirms undisclosed climate modification using jet aircraft to deploy “aerosol dumps” high in the atmosphere. (Article)

 

 

 

23 comments

  1. I have thousands of pictures that I’ve taken of the sky and clouds since 2012 (I was mainly taking picture of contrails to try to catch chemtrails). Though I can’t say for sure if any of the trails that I photo’d are chemtrails, many “persist” when the sky has haze in it and there are MANY days where the sky is cloudy and thus the trails persist.
    I don’t know if the haze is natural or has just become the norm due to geoengineering.

    • The atmosphere above 30,000 feet is too dry to form persistent contrails except in rare cases. Chances are that almost all your photos showing PC are actually aerosols. The haze cannot be denied and is mostly an aftermath of spraying. The haze warms surface temperatures because it continues to act as an artificial cloud (perhaps to a lesser degree) but reflects long-wave IR back to warm the earth’s surface. “Solar radiation management” is sold as geoengineering to mitigate global warming but the opposite is actually true. The artificial clouds are causing a positive feedback that is causing record warming thanks to the 1% crime families who are running the science fraud and politics at the UN/IPCC.

      • when there are cirrus clouds up in the sky, there’s plenty of humidity to have persistent trails. I have plenty of photos show how when planes get near clouds, especially when there’s lots of cirrus clouds, the trails last a lot longer.
        As I’ve posed to those who don’t believe in chemtrails, “if you planned to lay out chemtrails, wouldn’t a day when there’s lots of cirrus clouds up there be the perfect day because even real contrails can last for hours?”

      • Nope….Cirrus clouds and relative humidity are not the same thing. There is almost never “plenty of humidity”. Measured Relative humidity above 30,000 feet seldom exceeds 50%. This is far too low to produce “persistent contrails”, especially in a high bypass turbofan engine used by military transport and commercial airliners. The atmosphere needs to be saturated with water vapor before a persistent contrail can form. Period. Any PC that forms in RH below 60% contains chemical aerosols.

    • SRM is a myth: Reflecting sunlight back into space by spraying particles in the low troposphere is not effective. Even if suitable reflective particles are sprayed, the upper troposphere and tropopause will simply bounce most of the infrared heat back towards the earth a second time to increase surface warming. Effective reflection of sunlight back into space can only take place if the particles are deployed much higher into the TRUE stratosphere starting at 60,000 feet or higher. Stratospheric aerosol injection cannot take place in the troposphere at 35,000 feet. Period.

  2. Cirrus clouds and humidity are not the same thing but they are intimately related. The very reason that humidity readings are so low in the upper atmosphere is because of the presence of cirrus clouds and the over-seeding regime of aerosols that forms them. Aerosols by entraining water, reduce humidity. This is the reason that, on those rare occasions when a region of the upper atmosphere is free from aerosols, the humidity readings jump up.
    Also Harold, water does reach the stratosphere and even the mesosphere from both the breakdown of methane and convection. Again, the humidity readings are low up there because of the ever increasing presence of Polar Stratospheric Clouds and Polar Mesospheric Clouds. These are ice clouds just like cirrus, based on the aerosols but also ramped up by ionospheric heating technology.
    So in actual fact, deployment of aerosols in the stratosphere is going to have an even larger net-warming influence because the higher the cloud the greater the warming as Fletcher noted in the 60’s.

    • Dylan…Thanks for taking the time to post the best technical answer, although, notwithstanding Fletcher, it’s not clear that stratospheric reflection of sunlight using effectively “suitable” particulates or “devices” will approximate a “cloud” in the intended sense.

      • I suppose that genuine stratospheric reflection of sunlight would require such vast quantities of aerosol that would overwhelm the humidity levels and prevent actual ice cloud formation owing to the too-numerous nuclei. Similar to a the effects of a volcanic eruption, where the idea came from I believe.

    • Aerosols from Mt Pinatubu eruption are reported to have caused surface cooling. How would Fletcher respond to the ambiguity of aerosol causation of increased warming?

  3. Given enough humidity, the aerosol entrains ice to form a crystal far greater in size than the original particle. The ice allows through short wave radiation whilst trapping and reflecting greater amounts of long wave radiation than the original particle ever would. Yet without the particle, there would be no cloud.
    In an eruption there is simply not enough water to go round, you just get gigantic global blanket of aerosols that blot out the stratosphere.

    • In your original reply, you stated, ” aerosols in the stratosphere is going to have an even larger net-warming influence because the higher the cloud the greater the warming as Fletcher noted in the 60’s.”

      But in your recent reply you seem to agree that surface cooling can take place in a Pinatubo scenario.

      • You are quite correct, because the aerosols currently deployed in the stratosphere are clearly not overwhelming the water up there as evidenced by the ever increasing frequency of Polar Stratospheric Clouds encroaching ever further into the lower latitudes. PSCs most certainly have a net-warming effect. The aerosols are indeed the cause because without them the humidity would remain as humidity.
        Cooling has occurred due to volcanic eruptions, that is simply historical fact.
        This is not the same as aerosol deployment from AWACs and the like however. Nowhere near the amount of aerosols are required, contrary to what people are claiming. Remember Ben Livingston, “You don’t measure these particulates in terms of tons, you measure them in terms of half-pounds.” Two small planes to seed an entire hurricane. The principle holds in the upper atmosphere as well.

      • Even when the sky “appears” to be clear, the aerosol haze or barely detectable residual continues to warm surface temps as cloud-cover. Many are temped to say the spraying has stopped but this is incorrect. It only means they are spraying elsewhere to distribute an effective global cloud-cover.

  4. TAKING PHOTOS AND VIDEO IS GREAT. I TOO NOW HAVE UPWARDS OF 1.5 TERABYTES THAT DOCUMENT THE CHEMTRAILING AND ATMOSPHERIC ANOMALIES THAT HAVE OCCURRED IN MY SKIES OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS. BUT, IN ADDITION, I HAVE BEEN PERFORMING THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF SCIENCE THAT ALL THESE SELF PROCLAIMED ‘EXPERTS’ FAIL TO DO – AND THAT IS OBSERVATION. WITHOUT HOURS SPENT IN THE FIELD MAKING OBSERVATIONS, NO EXPERT’S OPINION IS WORTH CONSIDERATION AND SHOULD BE SUSPECT AS PURE ACADEMIC CONJECTURE UNSUBSTANTIATED BY SUBSTANTIVE OBSERVATION AND UNSUPPORTED BY EMPIRICAL DATA.

    WITH MORE THAN ENOUGH OBSERVATION AND DATA I CAN SUBSTANTIATE AND THUS CONCLUDE THAT THERE IS MOST CERTAINLY AN AEROSOLING PROGRAM THAT IS INTELLIGENTLY CONTROLLED THAT IS UTILIZING PRIMARILY COMMERCIAL PLANES TO DISPERSE A VARIETY OF CHEMICALS AND/OR AGENTS INTO THE ATMOSPHERE THAT CREATE WHAT NASA REFERS TO AS ‘MAN-MADE CIRRUS CLOUDS’ THAT DIRECTLY CAUSE OBSERVABLE ANOMALIES AND ATYPICAL PATTERNS OF SMALL PARTICULATE SMOG IN OUR SKIES THAT DIRECTLY AFFECT OUR DAILY WEATHER UNNATURALLY AND THUS ADVERSELY.

    IN ADDITION, RAIN WATER TESTING HAS DOCUMENTED EXCESSIVELY HIGH AND IN SOME TESTS DANGEROUS AMOUNTS OF CHEMICALS SUCH AS ALUMINUM METAL SALT AND RADIOACTIVE BARIUM.

    TO SUGGEST ANYTHING BEYOND WHAT IS STATED ABOVE, SUCH AS, WHAT FOR; OR WHO; OR WHY WOULD BE CONJECTURE. BUT IT IS ENOUGH TO GIVE CAUSE FOR AN INVESTIGATION UTILIZING BOTH PRIVATE AND GOVERNMENT RESOURCES. IN FACT, WITH THE RIGHT LEGAL ADVISER, A GRAND JURY COULD BE ESTABLISHED TO INVESTIGATE THIS MAN-MADE AERIAL POLLUTION AND UNCOVER THE ANSWERS EVERYONE WANTS TO KNOW – IS IT REAL, AND IF SO, WHO IS DOING IT AND WHY. WE DESERVE TO KNOW NOW.

    • About the “manmade cirrus clouds”, how do you know they’re manmade?
      No, I’m not doubting you. It sure seems that in No. Kalifornia there’s an awfully lot of them but then again I never paid much attention clouds before.
      I’d love to know of how to figure they’re manmade. I wonder if there’s a way to look at videos of global weather to the west and see where one thing ought to happen and then something else happens. (I’m wondering if I need to study up on meteorology)

      • + stevor – PLEASE, YOU ARE SOOOOOO TRANSPARENT. YOU ARE PURPOSELY POSTING DOUBTING COMMENTS SO THAT WE ALL WASTE OUR TIME DEALING WITH YOUR STUPID COMMENTS. THE ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS ARE IN MY ORIGINAL COMMENT. IF YOU ARE TRULY THAT IGNORANT THAT YOU CANNOT READ AND COMPREHEND PLAINLY WRITTEN ENGLISH THEN GO BACK UNDER THE ROCK YOU CRAWLED OUT FROM UNDER. YOU ARE A TIME WASTING SHILL – BUT – JUST IN CASE YOU ARE JUST SOME POOR IGNORANT SLOB WHO JUST DOESN’T GET IT – HERE’S A CLUE TO YOUR QUESTION. NASA CALLS THEM ‘MADE-MADE CIRRUS CLOUDS’ WHEN REFERRING TO THE CONTRAILS OF COMMERCIAL AIR PLANES. THEY HAVE THREE CLASSIFICATIONS: 1] SHORT LIVED 2] PERSISTENT 3] PERSISTENT SPREADING. NOW, GO ‘WONDER’ SOMEWHERE ELSE AND STOP WASTING OUR TIME.

  5. Look up NASA. They will tell you that every contrail is a “manmade cirrus cloud”. The nuclei they are formed on are anthropogenic in origin, both inadvertently (anthropogenic) and deliberately (philanthropogenic).

    • Yes. There is no such thing as a “normal contrail” since these artificial clouds are created by 20th century machines that produce enough CCN to produce a visible but man-made vapor trail.

  6. Even the 1999 UN IPCC Workgroup (Joyce Penner,PhD) report says that normal contrails are man-made clouds that tend to warm surface temps.

  7. Pingback: IPCC Using Climate Engineering as Global Warming Illusion | ahmadsenany

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s