Author: digigod

The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: “Owning the Weather” for Military Use, Plus Cell tower neuroweapon, Who is the scientist J Marvin Herndon?

digigod

An Open Letter to Members of AGU EGU and IPCC Alleging Promotion of Fake Science

 

 

Author’s Introductory Note
Environmental modification techniques (ENMOD) for military use constitute, in the present context of global warfare, the ultimate weapon of mass destruction.
Rarely acknowledged in the debate on global climate change, the world’s weather can now be modified as part of a new generation of sophisticated electromagnetic weapons. Both the US and Russia have developed capabilities to manipulate the climate for military use.
Environmental modification techniques have been applied by the US military for more than half a century. US mathematician John von Neumann, in liaison with the US Department of Defense, started his research on weather modification in the late 1940s at the height of the Cold War and foresaw ‘forms of climatic warfare as yet unimagined’. During the Vietnam war, cloud-seeding techniques were used, starting in 1967 under Project Popeye, the objective of which was to prolong the monsoon season and block enemy supply routes along the Ho Chi Minh Trail.
The US military has developed advanced capabilities that enable it selectively to alter weather patterns. The technology, which was initially developed in the 1990s under the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), was an appendage of the Strategic Defense Initiative – ‘Star Wars’. From a military standpoint, HAARP  –which was officially abolished in 2014–is  a weapon of mass destruction, operating from the outer atmosphere and capable of destabilising agricultural and ecological systems around the world.
Officially, the HAARP program has been closed down at its location in Alaska. [I think it reopened and is functional]  The technology of weather modification shrouded in secrecy, nonetheless prevails.
Weather-modification, according to the US Air Force document AF 2025 Final Report,  “offers the war fighter a wide range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary”, capabilities, it says, extend to the triggering of floods, hurricanes, droughts and earthquakes:
‘Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally… It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog and storms on earth or to modify space weather… and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of [military] technologies.”
In 1977, an international Convention was ratified by the UN General Assembly which banned ‘military or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects.’  According to theConvention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques:
The term “environmental modification techniques” refers to any technique for changing – through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes – the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space. (Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques,United Nations, Geneva: 18 May 1977)
While the substance of the 1977 Convention was reasserted in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) signed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, debate on weather modification for military use has become a scientific taboo.
Military analysts and scientists are mute on the subject. Meteorologists are not investigating the matter and environmentalists are largely focusing on greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. The possibility of climatic or environmental manipulations as part of a military and intelligence agenda, while tacitly acknowledged, is not part of the broader debate on climate change under UN auspices.
Rest of article press  HERE

PG&E and CPUC Email Exchange – these are the emails in the YouTube Video “Plan to Burn Up Northern California”

digigod

 

From: Clanon, Paul

Sent: 8/22/2011 10:04:42 AM

To: Cherry, Brian K (/0=PG&E/0U=C0RP0RATE/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=BKC7)

Cc: Cooke, Michelle (michelle.cooke@cpuc.ca.gov); Lindh, Frank (frank.lindh@cpuc.ca.gov)

Bcc:
Subject: RE: Space Weather

Ah, the good old days.

From: Cherry, Brian K [mailto:BKC7@pge.com] Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 10:03 AM
To: Clanon, Paul
Cc: Lindh, Frank; Cooke, Michelle

Subject: RE: Space Weather

Just a reminder, we are the first to propose a solar generator in space that will beam RFwavesdowntoareceptorsiteandconvertittoDCcurrent. Wehavechangedour receptor site from the Mojave desert to Sebastopol.

From: Clanon, Paul [mailto:paul.clanon@cpuc.ca.gov] Sent: Monday, August 22, 20119:50 AM
To: Cherry, Brian K
Cc: Lindh, Frank; Cooke, Michelle

Subject: Space Weather

Brian,I assume you’re assembling a high-level task force of washed-up
and never-were, yet somehow movie-star-handsome, former astronauts to handle PG&E’s response to the upcoming “damaging space weather”? Also, please dribble out one at a time over the next few months all internal memos, lawsuits, PowerPoint presentations, and officer-coverup directives in which PG&E is repeatedly warned about damaging space weather and chooses to do nothing, then has its lawyers blame its customers, aka “earthlings”, for any adverse consequences resulting. Thank you.

Hail cannons weather modification in Mexico

digigod
Hail cannons weather modification in Mexico
This summer, German automaker Volkswagen (VW) began using “hail cannons,” shockwave generators that curb the formation of hail in the atmosphere, to protect vehicles in its outdoor car lots in Mexico’s Puebla state. Farmers, however, claim the practice has disrupted all precipitation in the area, pushing the region into drought. The Puebla government says it will work with VW and the farmers to reach an agreement on the issue. Deutsche Welle

VW ‘hail cannons’ anger drought-hit Mexican farmers

A practice employed by German automaker Volkswagen (VW) to protect its new vehicles from hailstorms has led to a dispute with local farmers in Mexico, who claim their crops are being damaged.

Bildergalerie weltweite VW-Standorte Puebla (Volkswagen)Mexican farming communities accused Volkswagen (VW) on Tuesday of “arbitrarily” provoking a drought in the central state of Puebla, where the German automobile manufacturer operates its largest car factory outside of Germany.

Read more: Climate change and farming: ‘Unpredictability is here to stay’

Farmers in Cuautlancingo, the rural municipality where the plant is located, claimed that VW’s use of “hail cannons” was causing a drought that has made them lose 2,000 hectares (5,000 acres) of crops.

In June, VW started using the shockwave generators — sonic devises that purport to disrupt the formation of hail in the atmosphere — to prevent its newly-built vehicles, which are parked in an outdoor lot, from being damaged by the falling ice pellets. The practice purportedly disrupts the formation of hailstones.

Gerardo Perez, a farmers’ representative in the area, said the devices not only disperse hail storms, but all precipitation that has occurred since May, which marks the beginning of the rainy season in Mexico. “The sky literally clears and it simply doesn’t rain,” he told the news agency AFP, adding that the cannons were “affecting the Earth’s cycles.”

Read more: The global heat wave that’s been killing us

Farmers in the municipalities of Puebla, Amozoc and Cuautlancingo are now seeking more than 70 million pesos ($3.71million, €3.2 million) in compensation from the automaker.

Unproven technology

In June and August, farmers staged protests and blocked access to VW’s Puebla plant, which is the German carmaker’s largest outside Germany, employing 15,000 people who produce more than 450,000 vehicles a year.

The Puebla government said it would meet with both the factory’s management and the affected farmers to reach an agreement. State Governor José Antonio Gali Fayad didn’t rule out the possibility that the affected farmers would be awarded compensation.

Meanwhile, Volkswagen has tried to defuse the conflict this week by announcing it was taking the cannons off automatic mode and would only fire them when potential hail storms approached. It also pledged to invest in protective mesh to serve as its first line of defense against hail.

But local farmers’ representatives described the offer as “unacceptable” as long as VW continued using the cannons.

“The company can take other measures to protect its cars, but people here can’t live off anything but their land,” Rafael Ramirez, the top local environmental official, told AFP. “Volkswagen claims to be an environmentally friendly company, but they’re not showing it.”

VW has officially been granted permission to use hail cannons, although the technology still lacks scientific evidence supporting its efficacy. Ironically, Mexican farmers themselves often deploy the machines as a storm approaches as a means to protect their crops from being damaged.

Why the Bay of Biscay is Dangerous for Ships? Dating back to WWII . . . Maybe the Blast Wave Accelerator?

digigod
EXCERPT From Article Below:  
 

It’s not now that the Bay is feared. It has been an “age old story dating back to the beginning of the Second World War”. Located between France and Spain, the bay has been dangerous and often feared. The German U-boats ruled the Bay and many British and American ships were reported sunk that entered her waters. There were as many as 15,000 casualties and another 5,000 ships that sunk. Despite the danger faced by the ships, they had no choice but to take the route so as to reach with supplies as well as troops to France.

INSIDER COMMENT:  KEEP in Mind that it was during WWII that the U.S. and New Zealand created “the Blast Wave Accelerator” called Operation Seal.  This operation was secret and created waves up to 33 feet . . . We discovered this in the Nasa War document on StopTheCrime.net
 

 

https://www.marineinsight.com/life-at-sea/why-the-bay-of-biscay-is-dangerous-for-ships/

Why the Bay of Biscay is Dangerous for Ships?

Located in the Celtic Sea, a gulf of the northeast Atlantic Ocean is called the Bay of Biscay. It is located in the northern coast of Spain and the western coast of France and is named after the Spanish province of Biscay. The average depth of the bay is 1745 meters and the maximum depth is 2790 meters and parts of the continental shelf extend into the bay those results into fairly shallow water at places.

Some of the fiercest weather conditions of the Atlantic Ocean can be witnessed in the Biscay Bay. The area is home to large storms during the winter months and there have been countless ships wrecks reported from the area as a result of the gruesome weather. The late spring and the early summer in the area are cool and cloudy and large fog triangles fill the south-western part of the inlet.

The weather in the Bay of Biscay is the most vital thing to be worried and talked about. As winters begin, the weather turns harsh and severe. Depressions are formed and enter the bay from the west. They eventually dry out and are born again in form of thunderstorms. They also bring in constant rain in the region often bringing thunderstorm that look like hurricane and crash at the bay. One such example can be the Klaus Strom.

Photograph by Sohit ShuklaPhotograph by Sohit Shukla

The Bay of Biscay has always been feared by the seamen. There have been several incidents reported of merchant vessels loosing direction in Biscay storms. At few instances lives have been lost as a result. However, with improved ships and other amenities, the accidents have been reduced to considerable amounts.Ships going to the Mediterranean chose options like the French river rather than taking the route from Biscay Bay due to the legendary reputation of the bay. Many times, the Atlantic swells form near the coasts and often make many ports inaccessible.

There have been quite a few incidents in the recent years of ships facing difficulties, sometimes resulting in grave consequences. In May 2000 two yachts faced disastrous journey even when they left with no signs of bad weather in the Bay of Biscay.

It’s not now that the Bay is feared. It has been an age old story dating back to the beginning of the Second World War. Located between France and Spain, the bay has been dangerous and often feared. The German U-boats ruled the Bay and many British and American ships were reported sunk that entered her waters. There were as many as 15,000 casualties and another 5,000 ships that sunk. Despite the danger faced by the ships, they had no choice but to take the route so as to reach with supplies as well as troops to France.

Additional Info

Various kinds of Dolphins and whales are seen in the waters of Bay of Biscay. Another commonly found animal species are Cetaceans. The greatest area to spot larger cetaceans lies in beyond the continental shelf, in the deep waters. Other seabirds can also be seen across the bay. The alga Colpomenia peregrina was found and first noticed in the bay way back in 1906.

 

WATER ALERT: State’s offer of working group to oversee water flows “a joke,” MID official says | The Modesto Bee

digigod
WORKING GROUP INPUT ILLUSION (THE DELPHI TECHNIQUE)  . . . These meetings are controlled by directives not only from the United Nations, NGO’s, universities, The World Bank and many many more to establish policies based upon fraudulent water science. .   We have Primary Water – water is a renewable, we are NOT running out of water. . .  We MUST as individuals access primary water, independently from the water takeover power structure that is set to ration water resources that are endlessly available to all.  Learn more go to PrimaryWater.org
 
EXCERPT:
 

An important role of irrigation district board members is deciding how much water to allocate for agriculture and city customers each year and how much to hold in storage, said Michael Frantz, a TID board member. “In certain years, (the STM Group) would take that control away from our elected leaders and transfer it to a Sacramento bureaucrat.”

The so-called “STM Working Group” would include state water board staff and its executive director, the state and federal wildlife agencies, and water users. The group would implement the flows downstream from the dams and assess their effectiveness in boosting salmon numbers.

“The STM Group is a joke,” said John Mensinger.

In a statement Friday, the state agency said it would not be operating the reservoirs. The STM group would assist with implementation and monitoring of the flow requirements and would be comprised of the current operators, who are experts on reservoir management, and fisheries experts, who know how to manage flows for fish protection, the board’s statement said.

“The STM working group is all about having experts that understand the local problems make recommendations to best manage the system,” the board said.

 

 

https://www.modbee.com/news/article217307280.html

State’s offer of working group to oversee water flows “a joke,” MID official says

Key elements of a State Water Resources Control Board plan for restoring fisheries are not acceptable to local irrigation districts, which are likely to sue if the state board does not compromise, district board members said Friday.

Most people know by now that the Bay Delta update would require 40 percent of unimpaired flows from February through June on the Stanislaus, Tuolumne and Merced rivers to restore salmon and support the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta estuary.

To implement the plan, the state board would create a working group for the rivers that would exert far too much influence over the operation of Don Pedro, New Exchequer and New Melones reservoirs, two board members said.

The so-called “STM Working Group” would include state water board staff and its executive director, the state and federal wildlife agencies, and water users. The group would implement the flows downstream from the dams and assess their effectiveness in boosting salmon numbers.

“The STM Group is a joke,” said John Mensinger, who sees himself as a moderate board member of Modesto Irrigation District, which co-owns Don Pedro with Turlock Irrigation District. “We are never going to accept it.”

An important role of irrigation district board members is deciding how much water to allocate for agriculture and city customers each year and how much to hold in storage, said Michael Frantz, a TID board member. “In certain years, (the STM Group) would take that control away from our elected leaders and transfer it to a Sacramento bureaucrat.”

In a statement Friday, the state agency said it would not be operating the reservoirs. The STM group would assist with implementation and monitoring of the flow requirements and would be comprised of the current operators, who are experts on reservoir management, and fisheries experts, who know how to manage flows for fish protection, the board’s statement said.

“The STM working group is all about having experts that understand the local problems make recommendations to best manage the system,” the board said.

The water board, which held a two-day hearing on the plan Tuesday and Wednesday, says it will vote on the Bay Delta water quality update Nov. 7. Local and state officials who spoke at the Sacramento hearing said they would prefer to negotiate voluntary agreements that could include other tools for improving the fisheries in the delta.

If there are no agreements, the state could impose the flow requirements through conditions on water rights starting in 2022.

The irrigation districts, including MID and TID, along with districts with rights to Stanislaus and Merced river water, take issue with the final flow proposals, which were issued in July, but also can’t live with proposals for year-to-year carryover storage behind the dams for environmental purposes.

With a more civil tone prevailing at the hearing this week, local officials had thought that Gov. Jerry Brown’s appointees on the board might compromise. But board members’ comments near the end of the meeting Wednesday evening suggested they won’t budge and were disappointing, Frantz said.

Felicia Marcus, chairwoman of the five-member board, is a former western director for the National Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group. Other board members have professional backgrounds with regulatory agencies.

Negotiations are still possible with the state’s Natural Resources Agency, Department of Water Resources and Department of Fish and Wildlife. Representatives of those agencies said at the hearing they’re committed to discussing voluntary settlements before the Nov. 7 decision.

“If the state board adopts this program, as it stands, we are going to sue them because the environmental document is deficient and a lot of things they are asking for are unlawful,” Mensinger said, noting he has seen a rough draft of a lawsuit.

Legal challenges to the Bay Delta update are also anticipated from environmental groups that have called for 50 to 60 percent river flows to benefit the fisheries.

Frantz said the carryover storage requirements are a lesser-known piece of the state’s plan and one reason for dire predictions of economic losses for the region.

He said it would result in cuts or total elimination of water deliveries to farmers and city of Modesto customers amid multiple dry years. As an example, he cited the severe drought from 2012 to 2015. No water would have been delivered to TID customers in the last two years of the drought if the state proposals had been in place, Frantz said.

Some special drought provisions in an agreement might help appease the districts.

“We expect to see more droughts,” Frantz said, noting that weather patterns suggest that dry spells could be longer and more severe in the future. Aside from the farm-related industries served by the districts, more than a million people live in the area affected by the water board’s plan.

The state plan would allow the increased river flows or an equivalent amount of water to be managed and shaped for creating river conditions and cooler water temperatures that support the salmon. The releases, starting at 40 percent of the natural runoff in the watersheds, could be adjusted in future years between 30 and 50 percent based on whether the measures are effective in boosting the fisheries.

Mensinger said the upper end of the range is too high — the MID won’t sacrifice half its water.

The irrigation districts are faced with convincing the water board to accept some of their ideas for salmon restoration in the three rivers. They contend more can be done with less water by providing habitat and suppressing nonnative bass that feed on young salmon swimming downstream.

Some have suggested the state should remove June from the requirements since the young salmon are no longer in the river that month.

If the flow requirements are approved in November, a signoff is required from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. It could be another flashpoint in the process given the recent efforts by the Trump administration to intervene in water resource policies in the delta. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has said the updated Bay Delta plan contradicts the congressional priorities for the federally run New Melones reservoir and has threatened legal action.

The state water board has not conceded that the federal EPA has approval rights over all of the Bay Delta water quality update.