MOVIE: “Snowpiercer” Predicts Ice Age Created by Jet Aircraft Contrails 3

The Deeper Meaning of Snowpiercer (2013)

By: Jay Dyer (Source)

.

.

Snowpiercer Movie posterSnowpiercer stands out as a recent example of a trend fans of film are witnessing more of: philosophically-focused science fiction and fantasy.  While it could be argued that many science fiction classics deal with some philosophical themes, the trend has become far more common than in previous decades.  In the last several years, films such as After the Dark, The Double, Enemy, Another Earth, as well as many others ask audiences to grapple with complex conundrums such as globalism, meaning and the self, morality and death, and even deeper esoteric questions, like alternate worlds and mystical symbology.  While Hollywood is busy with found-footage horror, cynical raunchy comedies and comic book blockbusters (the latter of which do incorporate conspiriana), lesser-known independent films are touching on far more abtruse matters that extend beyond the realm of the political.  Seeing new films clearly influenced by Terry Gilliam, for example, is a welcomed beacon of hope.  A rebellion in the arts towards asking meaningful questions that challenge social engineering and prepackaged think tank paradigms is precisely what is needed, and that is partly my intention with this site.

Based on the French graphic novel Le Transperceneige, Snowpiercer is Korean filmmaker Bong Joon-ho’s first English release.  The plot involves a post-apocalyptic world that has entered a new ice age due to mankind’s failed geoengineering and climate-altering hubris.  The amorphous chemical “CW7” is sprayed globally to halt a supposed “global warming” catastrophe, while the ice age actually occurs as a result of the chemical spraying, and not “climate change.”  To see a film present the very real threat of geoengineering and climate alteration through aerosol spraying, as well as questioning the “global warming” hoax (now morphed into “climate change” by public relations consultants) is startling to say the least.  While there may be some film that has previously questioned these establishment orthodoxies, I am not aware of it.  For unknowing skeptics and system hacks, I present two clear examples of the reality of aerosol chemical spraying (“chemtrails,” as opposed to normal ice crystal “con trails”) and geoengineering that are undeniable.

The first is The Guardian’s piece on Bill Gates’ support for geoengineering, under the very auspices Snowpiercer questions – global warming. The Guardian reports in its 2012 article, ‘Bill Gates Backs Climate Scientists Lobbying for Large-Scale Geoengineering’:

snowpiercer.-Movie Scene

“A small group of leading climate scientists, financially supported by billionaires including Bill Gates, are lobbying governments and international bodies to back experiments into manipulating the climate on a global scale to avoid catastrophic climate change.  The scientists, who advocate geoengineering methods such as spraying millions of tonnes of reflective particles of sulphur dioxide 30 miles above earth, argue that a “plan B” for climate change will be needed if the UN and politicians cannot agree to making the necessary cuts in greenhouse gases, and say the US government and others should pay for a major programme of international research.”

Skeptics are likely to claim this is only theoretical, inasmuch as the article reports on scientists merely calling for this, as opposed to it actually being accomplished.  Such naiveté is common on these matters, as so-called skeptics perpetually display their own ignorance of establishment tendencies.  Like the taunting of psychopathic criminals, whatever is “called for” in the news is generally what’s actually been practiced for a long while, and aerosol geoengineering and atmospheric manipulation is no exception.  The technology is decades old, and began as weather warfare during World War II, where seasonal changes and storms could be harnessed to harm enemy resources through controlled droughts, floods, etc.  Earthquake weaponry also falls into this category, as well as biological waarfare, EMPs and HAARP, all falling under the broad umbrella of the concept of weaponized nature.  However, for hardened skeptics, I refer to the even stronger example of the Stanford VLF Group, which openly publishes dozens of scientific papers on HAARP, atmospheric aerosol spraying, geoengineering, frequency manipulation, and other advanced research projects.

Snowpiercer begins with planes spraying the sky, while news casts report the importance of CW7 as the last hope to save humanity.  As a result, virtually all life on earth perishes, while a small number of “chosen” are whisked away aboard a high-speed perpetual motion-run train that circles the globe.  A perpetual motion machine is, in fact, a holy grail of technology, as its desire grew from the mechanistic model of the universe that gained sway in the Enlightenment.  From the Enlightenment came the reign of quantity and rationalization of all reality into the collapsed, reductionist grand narrative of evolutionary materialism.  Within this paradigm, man is viewed as a cog in the deterministic, naturalistic machine of the inanimate, eternal and universal ecosystem.  In this view, the symbiotic ecosystem requires an inchoate metaphysical principle of “balance,” and thus the Malthusian presuppositions of eugenics come into play, removing man from his previous position of ordained steward of creation under God, to an impersonal artifact on a social Darwinian ladder, who must ever grapple to become the fittest.  The “fittest” then rapaciously destroy one another to subjugate and dominate nature en toto, in order to transcend it.  The culmination of this worldview is, of course, transhumanism, and Snowpiercer will become, as I argue, a warning for this worldview.

Protagonist Curtis (Chris Evans) plays the revolutionary leader of the “back” of the train, who, under the tutelage of the aging former leader Gilliam (John Hurt), must organize the final rebellion against the tyrannical “front” of the train.  Class warfare clearly comes to the fore, as the front of the train are all presented as decadent elite, wining and dining on the finest delicacies, enjoying every possible luxury a train can afford, while the workers at the back are forced by a brutal police state to produce for the parasitical front.  Minister Mason (Tilda Swinton) heads up the front class’ security forces in a role reminiscent of something akin to Mao Tse Tung’s wife, Jiang Qing.  Her communist dictator persona may seem out-of-place, given the monopolistic capitalism of the train’s inventor, Mr. Wilford (Ed Harris), yet regular readers will be familiar with the longtime argumentation presented here that communism and monopoly capitalism are flip sides of the same dialectical coin.  The corporate fascism of Wilford works hand in hand with the dictatorial militaristic police state polices of Minister Mason.  It is also not accidental that her name is Mason, given the history of world freemasonry exhibits a clear proclivity for communism, from Robespierre and Marat to Salvador Allende.  Communism and fascism are both political technologies designed to suit the same totalitarian ends.

As the Curtis Revolution progresses, car by car, each compartment gives a new revelation of the dark nature of the system.

The train’s unbending regimented eugenics policies and schoolhouse indoctrination programs emerge are the most significant, as viewers witness a classroom propaganda video portraying Mr. Wilford as a literal god and savior.  Here the film’s symbolism used to describe the train exemplifies an important deeper message.  The train is compared symbolically three ways in the narrative: to a machine, to the world, and to a human body.  Early on, as an angry worker loses his arm as a punishment, Minister Mason curiously describes the train as a body with a “head” and a “foot.”  “Everything must stay in its preordained place,” she exclaims, as the foot trying to become the head leads to chaos, and chaos means the dissolution of mankind and loss of the train’s balanced ecosystem.  As the insurrection seizes the car associated with water production, a captive Minister Mason informs Curtis that water comes “from the mouth of the train, not the bum,” and that a resource war will harm all the train’s inhabitants.  When Curtis reaches the front of the train, Wilford gives the descriptive imagery of the train as “an eternal machine” and as “the world,” but its significance will be detailed below.

While the revolution progresses, Curtis gradually begins to make tough moral choices that reveal more about his pragmatic designs to the viewer, as well as to himself.  Curtis is forced to sacrifice his friend’s life to apprehend Minister Mason, then shoot Mason in the head, as well as admitting to cannibalism in the past to survive.  Curtis slowly grasps that his own nature is quite cruel, calculating and vicious, and the difficulty of holding everyone to his egalitarian and equalitarian moral standards becomes more challenging.  By the time Curtis reaches the front car and the engine, Wilford divulges the entire regime change was staged and engineered.  Gilliam, the old revolutionary leader, is actually Wilford’s old friend, with a special direct phone line that communicates front to back.  Gilliam and the revolution are then sacrificed by Wilford to maintain the 74% eco-balance for “sustainability.”

Wilford’s monologue then paints the train as the world, revealing to Curtis that all along the plan was to offer him leadership of the train, replacing Wilford.  Since Curtis was the first worker to make a successful coup and reach the front, he was in a unique position to have seen the entire “machine” and its full hierarchical order, as no one else had.  Wilford explains that the train must be ruled by “anxiety, fear and horror” in a balance to psychologically manipulate and control the masses.  Meanwhile, the Curtis Revolution explodes into full anarchy and Wilford whispers to Curtis that without a hero, the train won’t run.  “The eternal engine. It is eternity itself,” Wilford sneers, waiting for Curtis to accept the implications of his failed mutiny.  The crucial point in all this is the principle of managed dialectics – iconized in the communist revolutionary as a controlled creation of the engineers of the system (Wilford), whose aspirations are already calculated to serve first class when anxiety, subversion, chaos or depopulation were needed. The phony left-right paradigm of Hegelian duality could not be better demonstrated. The train is a mini one world government built upon the industrial ingenuity of mass travel and global commerce, foreshadowing our own bleak dialectical future of a planetary regime.

Approaching the climax, Wilford hands Curtis a final secret message that reads “blood,” having previously sent “water,” which are basic elements of life and energy.  They are also crucial components of the human body and its machinery, so we can make a connection here between the heart and the engine.  Curtis also discovers the ominous reality that the engine runs on the work of child slave labor, while Wilford sneers that the tail section supplies a steady stream of kids.  The parasitical tyranny that is the train proves too much for Curtis, who opts to sabotage and derail it with the aid of the prophetic drug addict Nam and his daughter, Yona.  However, Nam and Yona have discovered the great secret – the ice and snow are gradually melting, meaning there is the possibility of life outside the train.  The real ecosystem is restoring its own balance, and man can be reconciled to it.  As the train derails,. Nam and Curtis sacrifice themselves to shield Yona and a child from the explosion, and as a result, they become the last two survivors of humanity.  Upon exiting the train, Yona spots a polar bear, meaning the existence of the train as the sole means for life and survival to be a farce.  Whether intentional or not, we aren’t told, the myth of the impossibility of life outside the train was a farce.  Although CW7 had brought an ice age, the principle of life triumphs over man’s technological dominance and alienation.  The great irony is that in Wilford’s doctrine of “everything in its place,” everything was out-of-place.  Wilford had succumbed to the same irrational hubris that blinded pre-apocalypse humanity before the ice age.

On an esoteric level, there are elements of gnosticism throughout (and communism shares gnostic origins): Curtis is a kind of new man, destined to be the philosopher king Wilford desired.  Wilford’s revelation of the need for the “noble lie” of divine rulership to quell the masses echoes Plato’s Republic, which also curiously utilizes the symbology known as the “anthropic principle”.  The anthropic principle is the notion that observations about the physical universe bear some fundamental correlation and connection to human consciousness as its observer.  In esoteric tradition, the anthropic principle extends as far as the idea that the human body itself is the microcosmic (microprosopus) mirror to the macrocosmic (macroprosopus) universe as a whole.  Thus, in Plato’s Republic, the ideal republic is compared the body of man, while in his creation account, the Timaeus, this tradition replicates on the cosmic scale, comparing the universe to the body of a man.  Curtis’ journey from the tail to the front may also symbolize the ascent of the soul in many traditions, particularly traditions that describe the soul after death passing through several gates or planetary “toll houses” to reach God, heaven or some blissful afterlife.  Having forgotten his former life before the train, Curtis’ journey also echoes the Platonic doctrine of the soul’s migration from embodied particularity back to the One, from which all being flows.  Curtis can be viewed on this level as the enlightened philosophic or religious soul seeking to escape the illusory reality the platonic demiurge has imposed upon the senses through the veil of materiality and flux.

In a world where man has acquiesced to allow his technological lust to outweigh his wisdom, the dangers of bare gnosis without wisdom become apparent.  Snowpiercer asks us to ponder this profound question, and consider scientism’s past mistakes and blunders that have not led to human apotheosis, but mass death and self-destruction.  Is large-scale geoengineering, tampering with the ecosystem under phony Malthusian sustainability and eugenically-regimented population control not itself the cause for much of the misery, chaos and alienation man experiences in his modern technocratic, quantification-obsessed existence?  Snowpiercer answers in the affirmative, and the film displays this wise message in a skillful and sophisticated form that makes it stand out in its craft.  Can we exit crazytrain before crazytrain suffers a train wreck?

MIT Study Warns About the Dangers of Geoengineering and Weather Modification 1

Activist Post Header

Source: Activist Post

NOTE:  Open Complete MIT report as PDF Here

By Derrick Broze

As humanity works to avoid further environmental and ecological destruction to the planet, scientists continue to search for possible solutions to the numerous issues facing our species. One of these proposed solutions has been the science of geoengineering.

According to a 2013 congressional report:

The term ‘geoengineering’ describes this array of technologies that aim, through large-scale and deliberate modifications of the Earth’s energy balance, to reduce temperatures and counteract anthropogenic climate change. Most of these technologies are at the conceptual and research stages, and their effectiveness at reducing global temperatures has yet to be proven. Moreover, very few studies have been published that document the cost, environmental effects, socio-political impacts, and legal implications of geoengineering. If geoengineering technologies were to be deployed, they are expected to have the potential to cause significant transboundary effects.

In general, geoengineering technologies are categorized as either a carbon dioxide removal (CDR) method or a solar radiation management (SRM) method. CDR methods address the warming effects of greenhouse gases by removing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere. CDR methods include ocean fertilization, and carbon capture and sequestration. SRM methods address climate change by increasing the reflectivity of the Earth’s atmosphere or surface.

Aerosol injection and space-based reflectors are examples of SRM methods. SRM methods do not remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, but can be deployed faster with relatively immediate global cooling results compared to CDR methods.

Geoengineering is seen as a controversial solution, to say the least. That controversy is likely to deepen following a recent study from MIT’s Center for Global Change Science and the Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences. The study, published in Nature’s Scientific Reports, has found that ocean fertilization geoengineering would alter global rainfall patterns and affect water resources.

Ocean fertilization is a type of geoengineering that seeks to mimic the ability of phytoplankton, the microalgae at the base of most oceanic food webs, to photosynthesize sunlight. As the phytoplankton absorb carbon dioxide, they also release dimethyl sulfide (DMS) into the atmosphere, which can form sulfate aerosols and reflect sunlight and cool the climate. Geoengineers hope to reproduce this natural process and thus reflect sunlight and cool the Earth.

According to Phys.org, the researchers used one of the global climate models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which simulates the evolution of and interactions among the ocean, atmosphere, and land masses. These simulations found that increased DMS emissions would actually lead to an increase of 1.2 degrees Celsius by 2100 and “substantial reduction in precipitation for some regions.”

Chien Wang, a co-author of the study and a senior research scientist at MIT’s Center for Global Change Science and the Department of Earth, said the study was “the first in-depth analysis of ocean fertilization that has highlighted the potential danger of impacting rainfall adversely.”

Benjamin Grandey, a senior postdoc in Wang’s group who configured the model simulations and analyzed the data, said that although “Generally, our results suggest that the cooling effect associated with enhanced DMS emissions would offset warming across the globe, especially in the Arctic,” it would also lead to dangerous changes in global weather. “Precipitation would also decline worldwide, and some parts of the world would be worse off. Europe, the Horn of Africa, and Pakistan may receive less rainfall than they have historically,” Grandey stated.

The lower rainfall could reduce water resources considerably and threaten the environment and livelihoods of the animals and people in the affected regions.

The MIT team is not the first to ring the alarm bells when it comes to geoengineering and other forms of weather modification. Although a number of authorities have warned about the dangers of geoengineering techniques, the risks are seen as secondary to the perceived risks of climate change. The interesting thing to note is that although proponents of geoengineering hail it as the solution to climate change and sustaining life, studies show that geoengineering could actually have the reverse effect of heating the Earth.

In February of 2015, an international committee of scientists released a report stating that geoengineering techniques are not a viable alternative to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to combat the effects of climate change. The committee report called for further research and understanding of various geoengineering techniques, including carbon dioxide removal schemes and solar-radiation management before implementation.

The scientists found that Solar Radiation Management, or albedo-modification techniques, are likely to present “serious known and possible unknown environmental, social, and political risks, including the possibility of being deployed unilaterally.” The report was sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences, the U.S. intelligence community, NASA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the U.S. Department of Energy.

Another danger of manipulating the weather is the loss of blue skies. According to a report by the New Scientist, Ben Kravitz of the Carnegie Institution for Science has shown that releasing sulphate aerosols high in the atmosphere would scatter sunlight into the atmosphere. He says this could decrease the amount of sunlight that hits the ground by 20% and make the sky appear more hazy.

According to a 2013 study published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, if geoengineering programs were started and then suddenly halted, the planet could see an immediate rise in temperatures, particularly over land. The study, titled, “The impact of abrupt suspension of solar radiation management,” seems to indicate that once you begin geoengineering, you cannot suspend the programs without causing the very problem you were seeking to resolve.

What are the solutions to the many ecological and environmental problems facing humanity? The studies indicate that attempting to play God with the weather will have disastrous effects on the ability of the human population to live and prosper. If you fear the results of mad scientists controlling the weather or pursuing dangerous solutions like geoengineering, please share this article and continue to spread knowledge. It is time for the awakened people of this Earth to stand together against those who seek to destroy the planet — and seek solutions that work with Earth rather than seeking to dominate and exploit it.

Also Read: Masters Of The World Meet To Play God With The Climate

This article (MIT Study Warns About the Dangers of Geoengineering & Weather Modification) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Derrick Broze and theAntiMedia.org. Tune in! The Anti-Media radio show airs Monday through Friday @ 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Help us fix our typos: edits@theantimedia.org.

Military Photographer Documents Fighter Jets Spraying Chemical Contrails 4

French-Indian Military Exercise “Garuda II”

Istres AFB, France

Click to ZOOM

The US Air Force continues to deny “Chemtrails”. They call it a “conspiracy theory”, even though the word was first used and published by the DoD as the title of an Air Force Academy chemistry course for future pilots for the 1990 Fall term. Eventually, “chemtrails” was used by civilian observers to describe artificial contrails in the mid-1990’s. Source

In 2005, military pilots from France and India spilled the beans at Garuda II with air-to-air video of aerosol spraying from two SU30K military jets.

India’s SU30K is an all-weather aircraft with extended range and mid-air refueling capability – well suited for high altitude/high speed chemical aerosol pollution into the environment.

Garuda II Exercise.

Jet aircraft SU30K

Military Photos.net

Original Video

Su30K – Click to ZOOM

____________________

PACIFIC OCEAN DYING: Ocean Die-Offs Signal Earth Entering Mass Extinction Reply

Natural causes in the environment are partly to blame; so too are the corporations of man; the effects of Fukushima, unleashing untold levels of radiation into the ocean and onto Pacific shores; the cumulative effect of modern chemicals and agricultural waste tainting the water and disrupting reproduction. More…

EPA Permits Use of Toxic Coal Ash in Covert Chemical Contrails Operations Reply

STATE OF THE NATION

EPA Permits Unlimited Use of Toxic Coal Fly Ash in Chemical Geoengineering Operations

Coal Fly Ash: Main Component of Chemtrail Aerosols

EPA Rules Toxic Coal Fly Ash Non-Hazardous Waste,
Aluminum, Mercury, Lead and Arsenic Content Ignored

Chemtrail Tanker

Systematic Use of Coal Fly Ash by Chemical Geoengineering Programs Introduces Heavy Metals, Radioactive Solids, and Aluminum into the Atmosphere

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is well known for working directly with industry lawyers and lobbyists to ensure that corporate interests are served first, second and third. Whether it’s rule-making or regulation-changing at the federal or state level, the high-paid corporate lobbyists are always the first through the EPA door. Who has not heard or read on the internet about the “Environmental Protection Racket”?

CONTINUE

PDF