Geoengineering the sky over Vermont’s Mad River Valley. Photo courtesy of David Garten.
Publisher’s Note: The clandestine USM geoengineering of our skies is the single most important environmental and civilizational issue of our time. Find Vermont Independent.Net co-founder and lead geoengineering researcher Ian Baldwin’s “Our Geoengineering Age” series below.
We’ve also included a link to OVERCAST: AN INVESTIGATION INTO CLIMATE GEOENGINEERING, a 2018 documentary film that provides a useful global overview about the geoengineering phenomenon and public (non)discussions about geoengineering. Read on…
Excerpt: “Though located in universities, prestigious research institutes, and erstwhile nuclear weapons labs, the academic geoengineers have an obscure brotherhood inside the military, whose scientific findings over a span of decades’ research form a legacy that is publicly unacknowledged, locked inside military manuals and classified scientific documents…”
Excerpt: “The Royal Society begins its definition of geoengineering as “the deliberate large-scale manipulation of the planetary environment” and by itself this serves as a historically valid definition. The Society adds: “to counteract anthropogenic climate change,” which serves to make the new but more narrow definition of geoengineering as climate engineering, or in its most current iteration, “climate intervention.” Broad or narrow, for nearly three-quarters of a century geoengineering has been conducted for reasons that have little to do with the mandate to ameliorate climate change and much to do with war, and secondly with commerce.”
Excerpt: “Science was cordoned off, in effect, inside the military-industrial complex, its findings kept under wraps. The 350-year tradition of independent, individual investigation of nature and matter gave way to the era of ‘Big Science’, meaning scientific research with big, government-funded budgets. And Big Science unequivocally included weather and climate modification, as well as other forms of geoengineering, all of which have been invariably cloaked in secrecy. But, as one physicist has noted, “secrecy always lowers the standard of environmental accountability” — not to mention democratic accountability.”
Excerpt: In reaction to the massive use of weather modification, defoliants, and herbicides such as Agent Orange, as well as other toxic aerosols — directly killing one to 3.5 million Vietnamese, maiming tens of thousands still being born with birth defects, and disrupting the ecology of 40 percent of their land, “reducing dense jungles and mangrove forests to barren wastelands”— the world community created the 1978 Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD)…After ENMOD the military-science-industrial research complex went further underground. Two decades later, 9-11 drove it yet deeper underground with the advent of a new, corrosive ethos of perpetual war  that again made the words ‘national security’ a supreme state prerogative, an unchallengeable barrier to independent inquiry, and furthered the steady retreat of the mainstream press’s willingness to confront power.”
Excerpt: “In the 1950s and early 1960s climate-change-geoengineering proposals in both the US and Soviet Union were oriented toward causing global warming for the benefit of human activity, with the melting of the Arctic then the glittering jewel on the geoengineer’s horizon, and a prospect devoutly hoped for by Soviet geoengineers and planners. “Russian opinion has long favored an open Arctic Ocean, and some scientists…believe that the beneficial effects of global warming might ‘pep up’ cold regions…making the country wealthier,” according to historian James R Fleming. In post-Cold-War Russia, this long-standing hope for an ice-free Arctic has grown stronger. In the Arctic-Circle year-round deepwater port of Arkhangelsk, hundreds of miles due north of Moscow on Russia’s White Sea, Vladimir Putin recently told CNBC during the 4th International Arctic Forum that “Climate change brings in more favorable conditions and improves the economic potential of this region.” Putin added, “Today, Russia’s GDP is the result of the economic activity of this region.”
Excerpt: Official US governmental recognition of climate change as a matter of national security is at least 45 years old. It is, moreover, a recognition split along two governmental axes: one military, the other civilian. Military recognition publically originated in response to the efforts of Soviet Union geoengineers, who were intrigued by the possibilities of hastening the warming of the Arctic. In 1972 a Department of Defense (DoD) official testified in the Senate that the Soviet Union had developed “a well-organized and extensive program in climate research…[and] that active modification of climate is an objective of this research.” Notably, the official added, “climactic changes are clearly potentially grave threats to national security, and have consequent implications for military planning [emphasis added].” 
Excerpt: It is not possible to grasp the preposterous idea that covert military geoengineering is taking place on a planetary scale without our consent unless we understand its historic context, its roots. What is the cultural, political, even civilizational background that has given rise to the outrageous possibility of deliberately altering — or “dominating” — an entire Earth system, such as the climate, or the ionosphere?
Excerpt: “To approach a serious investigation of nature required an entirely new attitude and method of gaining knowledge, as “the subtlety of nature far surpasses the subtlety of sense and intellect.”  Bacon had “a vivid appreciation for the role hitherto played in history by technology, and a vivid anticipation of the much greater effect that could be wrought on human life if technology could be made scientific.” [20, emphasis added] To acquire “those two goals of man, knowledge and power…which are chiefly frustrated by ignorance of causes,”  men had to “hound nature”  using the most recent scientific-technological instruments that did not “merely exert a gentle guidance over nature’s course” but had “the power to shake her to her foundations.” 
Excerpt: “Contrails, we the people were told, are all that people see, or can see, as no other elements but H2O—water vapor turned to visible ice crystals — exist to be observed coming from jets, military or commercial. This official dictum is “scientific,” hence cannot be questioned. This attitude is of course contrary to the real spirit of science, which involves constant doubt, or skepticism, and requires ceaseless proofs pro and contra in order for knowledge to progress openly in a free, unmilitarized open market—a ‘market’ that has slowly but steadily diminished since the 1940s, like a snake slithering into very dark caverns.  “Such official prevarication,” Amy Worthington explained, “only leads to public frustration and mistrust.”  Thus arose the present impasse between on-the-ground observers, many of whom attest to becoming ill as a result of heavy or prolonged spraying, and virtually all of officialdom, both civilian—including university experts and environmental “activists”—and military.”
Excerpt: “What’s going on? Why is California burning? Is it, as we are constantly told, somehow due to global warming? Or are other forces at work?”
Excerpt: “May my grandchildren live to prosper in this new world.”
Independent researcher Elana Freeland, based in the Pacific Northwest, who is researching her last of three books on GEOENGINEERING, connects the dots in this recent CA lecture: 1) weather warfare; 2) particle physics; 3) climate modification; 4) geoengineering; 5) 5G telecommunications technology; and 6) the US military industrial complex – accompanied by short videos from Lockheed Martin, Space-X, and other corporate and government players working to roll out a global “Space Fence” “Under an Ionized Sky.”
OVERCAST, one of the better GEOENGINEERING documentaries made in recent years.