Why in The World are They Spraying - Subtitle - Bul, eng, ru, ***, thai, spa, fr, ita, ger, hol

[mellow music plays] So let's say we were doing geoengineering because we wanted to make the weather a little bit better. There'll be monsoon failures during that period. There'll be huge hurricanes. The global studies indicate there will be some impact on precipitation patterns. Might involve large-scale regional agricultural disruption lasting a number of years. Potentially two billion people could have their food disrupted by such interventions. That the aerosols can-- at least in these models, simulations, or indicated by these simulations-- can offset most climate change in most places most of the time for both precipitation and runoff. But it's likely to cause some damage in some places. [theme music playing] When I grow up, I wanna be either an artist or a teacher. I wanna grow up in a world where there's lots of nature. I love nature. How can I look my children in the eyes... and not try to shed the light on this issue, knowing every breath they take is--is laden with these metals? I have been forced to conclude that there is no greater or no more immediate threat to anything that lives and breathes than the global geoengineering programs, short of nuclear catastrophe. Geoengineering is defined as the artificial modification of the earth's climate. Geoengineers are proposing spraying 10 to 20 million tons of toxic aluminum and other substances into our sky for the stated goal of cooling our planet. So let me distinguish these two different, uh, kinds of geoengineering as clearly as I can. So the first one is--we call solar radiation management, and that's the idea that you could put reflective, mostly reflective particles or other means to make the earth whiter, effectively to increase the earth's reflectivity, reducing the amount of--of heat that's absorbed by the sun and therefore exerting some overall cooling tendency on the earth. I think, though, the initial results of climate models indicate that reflection of sunlight away from the earth can offset most climate change in most places most of the time. But it will damage some places. We've mostly thought about sulfur. Nevertheless, there might be some good reasons to think about aluminum. Turns out, first of all, there's been a lot of work on the environmental consequences of aluminum in the stratosphere. There's a bunch of papers going back to the '70s that look at the radiative and ozone-- ozone destroying properties of aluminum in the stratosphere, and those make you think it might be useful. Do this in just a jet in a very simple way. Make high-quality aluminum particles just by spraying aluminum vapor out, which oxidizes. So it's certainly, in principle, possible to do that. Since we released "What in the World Are They Spraying," hundreds of people from around the world have began taking rain tests. What they're finding is what many are calling the chemtrail geoengineering footprint of aluminum, barium, and strontium. So we're finding this Welsbach footprint internationally, all over the world, wherever they take samples and get a, uh, chemical analysis of rain and snow water. This is quite common. Wherever you see the jet chemtrails go over, you're gonna get aluminum, barium, strontium coming down on you. Why would we not believe that it's happening when what we see in the sky matches exactly the express goal of numerous geoengineering patents, about 160 or more? Why would we not believe this is happening when every element showing up in the rain tests are the primary elements named in those geoengineering patents? Why would we not believe this is happening when we have escalating levels in very short time frames, as much-- as short as five years, we see rain levels of aluminum, for example, escalating as much as 50,000%? California air quality studies do not show these metals migrating from China, and it's of recent origin. So, you know, this bombardment of heavy metals that's raining down on us is coming from somewhere. Why would we not believe geoengineering is occurring when the weather patterns are so altered here in exactly the manner stated by geoengineers and reports on the consequences for geoengineering, which are diminished rainfall, which are increased ozone destruction. We have a massive ozone hole in the Northern hemisphere now. Should aluminum be in the soil and the rain? And yes, it should be in the soil. It's naturally there. Always was there. And should it be in the rain? Well, absolutely not. But the standard reply has been, "Your samples are contaminated." But since we are getting samples now that show zero aluminum, and we're getting lots of barium and strontium and zero aluminum. So that just proves that if there was dirt in our samples of some sort, dust blown up from the ground, we should get some aluminum in some detectable quantity. The primary ingredients in geoengineering are specifically the oxides of metals, including aluminum oxide. This is devastating plants, totally devastating. The trees are dying. Why? Approximately two years ago, I rode in the back-- and you can ride in the back of my place for miles. You can go all the way through the woods, you know, creeks and everything, and it was--I say was--gorgeous. And the day before yesterday, I took a ride, and I rode in the back, and what I found was total devastation. As I pointed out before, Michael, we're seeing, as in this example here, very hardy, native plants completely flash out dead. That looks like it's been hit with some kind of a chemical. And we've only seen this in the last couple years. And there's another one there, there, back over there. We're seeing mature madrone trees, which are 70, 80 feet high, flash out dead just like this. USDA refuses to investigate it. The pH typically around here should be about 5.6. Well, since the contrailing got heavy, I watched the pH here in these forests, well, go up I guess would be the word. from 5.6, it went about 20 times more alkaline. Very big red flag of fallout from these materials are pH changes to the forest floor. We have very extensive studies from the U.S. Department of Agriculture on the soils in our region, and those soils have changed in five to six years. The pH's have changed in this-- in this area as much as 10 to 12 times toward alkaline in five to six years. I've personally been in the forest testing with USDA soil scientists who just scratched their heads and seemed to have no explanation for incredibly profound changes in pH, which is affecting the ecosystem here tremendously. Aluminum buffer action, aluminum hydroxide is what we think it is, uh, plus the barium carbonate, strontium titanate, strontium oxides, barium oxides, probably some aluminum oxides in there. But this has apparently driven our acid soils about 20 times more alkaline, to about 6.8. There are simply too many dots here that connect. Our skies are almost never blue anymore. That is a named consequence of geoengineering. The amount of lost sunshine hitting the planet right now is beyond belief. If people look up the term "global dimming," they will see that fully 20% of the sun's rays that reached the planet several decades ago are no longer reaching the planet. I mean, that's a profound change that few people even know is occurring. And you have very visible occurrences in the sky from the aircraft, a very visible sun blocking, expanding, dingy trails that are exactly what geoengineering patents describe. Heavy aluminum--I'm talking, like, in the 40s and 50s, up to 3,000, 4,000, 5,000-- that's still common. Uh, barium, strontium, to, um, oh, somewhere 40 or 50 to, again, about 2,000 or 3,000. Same for both barium and strontium. Where is this mountain of metal coming from? Why is asthma, A.D.D., Alzheimer's, autism-- all elements related in many studies to aluminum or particulate inhalation-- why are these el-- why are these ailments going off the charts with no apparent explanation? Why has respiratory mortality in the continental United States gone from eighth on the list to third in six years? And no one seems to ask any questions, why everybody, uh, every other person has asthma now, why every other commercial on TV is an allergy medication. And again, when David Keith, the world's most recognized geoengineer, was asked on the record, had there been any studies done as to the consequences of dumping 20 million tons of aluminum into the atmosphere, his answer was patently, "No." While geoengineers claim that their models are to cool the planet, a number of studies now are arising that indicate, yes, temporarily, there will be, regionally, cooling as these particulates reflect the sun. However, they actually at night act as a blanket and will warm the planet. So the question now remains, "Why in the world are they spraying?" One of the things that geoengineering is about, when you're environmentally doing something with the atmosphere, is that you can be engaged in weather modification. Historically, weather modification in the United States began to be looked upon in the 1940s as something that people would want to do. And so they started looking at making it--enhancing snow, enhancing rain. They started looking at hurricane control. There was a whole bunch of projects in the '40s that started. One was Project Stormfury, which turned into a disaster when they tried to modify a hurricane. I'm Mark McCandlish. And for the better part of 30 years, I worked in the Aerospace and Defense Industry. I had a secret clearance twice during my career. Some of the technology that I saw or participated in the creation of tends to play a role in, um, some of the things that are used to control the weather. The very distribution processes being employed in the aerosol campaign-- manipulating the weather, crops, um, you know, taking over the--the, uh, the food production or controlling the food production, the military applications-- the process evolved when they realized in the-- in the 1800s that you can put things into the environment that will influence the uptake of moisture and where it drops out of the atmosphere again. My name is Scott Stevens. I, uh, was a television weatherman for 20 years. These chemtrails are absolutely required to impact whatever weather event they were designing. And the trails were an absolute necessary ingredient for them to achieve their weather modification goals. So we're finding the aerosols, the metal particulates, all of those can be used and leveraged to create weather events that are several standard deviations or outside what would be typically normal. When the geoengineering really got underway with the Russians in the mid-'70s, we ended up with snow in Miami. We ended up even with frost deep into Mexico. You know, the bizarreness of the weather really exploded on the scene when, uh, when weather engineering got going in the mid-'70s. The Dakotas, in winter, they recorded a temperature of almost 100 degrees, 94 degrees. It broke the former record by 32 degrees. There's very profound things that people don't notice. Blue skies almost never. We almost never have dew on the ground. That's a known consequence of geoengineering, if they did it, which they appear to be. It sucks the moisture out of the atmosphere. It doesn't descend, doesn't form dew. We have massive temperature disruptions. People are starting to wonder, "Why is it 80 degrees one day "and then snowing the next day at 50 degrees or 45 degrees, and then back up to 80 the day after that?" When you push and pull the climate with these-- these manipulations programs, of which there's a mountain of data to corroborate their existence, then you start to have massive fluctuations in the system. And we saw in March, in the continental U.S. there were 15,232 temperature records broken. That's profound. Some of the daytime highs, the former records were broken by as much as 32 degrees. Don't people wonder what in the world is going on? Whether they want to make it snow at 45, 46, 47 degrees-- I remember when 38, 39 was a big deal. Those kind of snowfalls in the upper 30s. And now that's been pushed into the 40s. There's a patent called "Ice nucleation for Weather Modification". This is a patent from NASA. It can be found online in its full form. This patent is for the creation of artificial snowstorms from what would have been rainstorms. However preposterous it sounds to people, if they look up "Chinese create snowstorms", they will find a long list of articles where the Chinese Bureau of Weather Modification openly admitted that they were creating snowstorms until they did a billion dollars' worth of damage in Beijing. So my question would be, if the Chinese can do this, and NASA has a patent for the same purpose, why would we believe snow events here are natural, when it's snowing now, regularly, at 45 degrees, sometimes 50 degrees-- heavy, wet, concrete snow that's full of aluminum, full of barium, full of strontium? Consider the ice pack in their first aid kit that can sit dormant at room temperature for decades, until the chemicals are mixed together, at which time it creates ice. As an on-air meteorologist, I had a responsibility to my audience. There were storms that were not behaving as they were modeled or they historically would have responded. If you can control where moisture is collected and where it's dropped, so to speak, in the form of rain or any other kind of precipitation, then you can really--you can do everything. You can steer the weather system. If you want to be able to manipulate the weather, one of the things we know about the materials that are being used in the aerosols-- we--we've seen everything from aluminum oxide, barium salts, strontium, copper sulfate, uh, potassium iodide, um, a number of different kinds of things, each of which have different levels of reactivity with the moisture in the air. Some, like aluminum oxide, tends to sequester the moisture. The aluminum oxide nanoparticles, which are microscopically fine and uniform in size, attract the humidity and the moisture in the air, and they can--it basically forms like a nucleation process, where the moisture condenses on these particles. The--with cloud seeding, the cooling will be achieved by making clouds reflect a bit more sunlight back to space than they would otherwise. And less sunlight reaching the surface would tend to cool the planet. These aerosol particle act-- particles act as something called cloud condensation nuclei, and, um, this is--these are sites where-- these particles act as sites where cloud drops can form. Well, the one thing that we know has happened is, because these are nanoparticles, and they float like mad with a little bit of, uh, moisture added to them. They go over the Continental Divide. They dumped all of California's rain into the Mississippi Valley, which is the reason they're having floods and tornadoes and fierce storms and odd weather back east. The effect here in California is drought. Now, then, if you hit that area of the sky with a beam of a particular kind of radiation, and you can heat those particles up, just like heating up, you know, your--your cup of coffee in the microwave, these particles begin to vibrate and resonate, if you use the right frequency of--of, uh, RF energy, that they then heat the surrounding air, and they will take all of that air and the moisture that is in it to a higher altitude, where it's much colder, and it'll condense and then become a low pressure system. Well, there--there's a couple of locations where they tend to be very interested in--in leaving their trails. The big one and the surprising one for me is under areas of high pressure, where you would--you would expect to see the blue skies, the dry conditions. Those are prime targets for trailing. Couple of reasons: High pressure is--is stable. It's relatively still. You know, we've got the, uh-- the clockwise flow around it. And if you accentuate the high, so it's very easy to add those particulates of aluminum, barium, and whatever else they want to put in there, and as you add heat to that, those particulates then radiate the heat into the atmosphere, and it warms. And what does a warming atmosphere do? Boom, it expands. So that's one way. It's a very simple way, but it's very apparent, because under the high pressure, it's supposed to be quiet. It's supposed to be still. It's supposed to be blue. And we're not seeing that. Then as the storm approaches, the high begins to recede. And then they're running the flights back and forth, back and forth, back and forth, and literally seeding the leading edges of the cirrus. So the cirrus canopy is accentuated. That cirrus canopy, which would maybe be 200, 300 miles at a head--at a head of a cold front is now 400, 450 miles. Based on geoengineering data, it would appear the Pacific Northwest gets an excessive amount of-- of the fallout from these programs, because much of the weather, much of the precipitation in the storm tracks and the jet stream move across us. So, as stated by globally recognized geoengineers like David Keith, that that's the type of area they would want to seed these particulates, as incoming fronts start to cover landfall, and that's exactly what we see here. When there's any kind of incoming front, we see jets everywhere. The global studies indicate there will be some impact on precipitation patterns, and obviously, there's a lot more opportunity for work in that area. After studying my time lapse surveillance, one of the reasons I discovered for the trails was that the persistent ones would break. They would misshape it or deform, and other planes would come along and precisely mark off those locations of-- of deformation. And you're not gonna get that with a regular fleet, so this had to be one of the primary purposes for chemtrails, in my opinion, was to measure off where we have these discontinuities showing up in the atmosphere. And in doing these actions and discovering those zones where there's different energies in the atmosphere, I think that plays very closely into their weather engineering programs of mark, surveil, and then that data goes into--into a weather model that they can then use to forecast, or, once again, engineer the weather to their designs. But you can also influence what happens locally with the atmosphere by, um, painting the materials that these aerosols are made of with different kinds of radio frequency, or RF energy-- radar, microwave, the HAARP system. You know, HAARP is, um, uh, an array, a field of antennas, radio frequency antennas. They're 72 feet tall, then they have a crosstie pulled across the top that's about 60 feet in each direction. 180 of these are in the array today, so you can imagine this field of antennas. What happens is, by firing each one, they produce radio frequency energy that normally comes off of an antenna, spreads out rather rapidly. Same principle... principles in physics would be like a flashlight shining on a wall. You know, you start with a narrow beam, and by the time you hit the wall, you've got a wide beam. The idea with HAARP is to get it to focus or concentrate that radio frequency energy so it doesn't spread out, so you can hold it tighter together and then manipulate it in very specific ways. Weather control is a broad topic. So there's lots of ways to control or manipulate weather. HAARP is one of them. Because you also have private sector companies getting into this business of weather modification. In the case of HAARP, do you need, uh-- People always ask me, you know, "Do you need particulates dispersed in the atmosphere to make it more effective?" You actually don't. Would it make things more possible? Could you enhance certain effects? Probably so. Could you control energy distributions more efficiently? Probably so, because you're putting in conductors or you're putting in reflectors. You're putting in particulate material. If you've ever experienced a hailstorm and you've picked up one of the hailstones, and you slice it open with a razor blade, you'll see that it's layer upon layer upon layer of ice. Now, hail is usually formed where you have a low-pressure system where there's a tremendous updraft of air. The air gets warmed up by the sunlight ahead of the storm. The air rises. It takes the moisture that's in the air up to a higher altitude, where it's much colder. The moisture begins to condense into water droplets, but the updraft is so powerful that the water is carried to extreme altitudes, where it freezes, and it begins to fall. And as it falls, it starts to be caught up in the updraft again, so it's circulated up into the air again. And so each time it's lofted up into the atmosphere, more of the moisture that is condensing on the outside of this-- this nuclei of ice begins to form another layer, another layer. And each time it's caught back in the updraft, it goes up again, and it gets another layer of ice. And so, if you have a system like HAARP working in conjunction with aerosols, chemtrails that are spraying in the air, you can actually create updrafts that are so powerful that you can have these hailstone circulation patterns going over and over again, where you get hailstones the size of baseballs, or even softballs. The weather has always been a strategic... desire to control by the generals, whether it was Napoleon, marching towards Moscow, or Hitler, in his Russian campaign, or our own Pacific fleet trying to understand typhoons and use them for our strategic advantage. War and weather are very closely connected. And they've been connected ever since about 1812 or so, maybe earlier than that. Hannibal had to face the snows in the Alps. And so there's a long history of weather and warfare interactions. Environmental manipulation is like the ultimate method of covert warfare because you can literally shut down food production. You can create a situation where the people within a country revolt against their own government, and you're invited in to mop up the mess. The issue of owning the weather by 2025, it's this military publication. We've quoted it as far back as, I think, '94 or '95, even. But you go back to these earlier reports, and you look at, sort of, what was the objective? And the objective is exactly that: control the battlefield environment. Environmental factors give you an absolute advantage. If you can weaken your adversary before you have to fire the first bullet, maybe you even win the war. Whether it's incredibly historic sandstorms when we're invading Iraq, or you want to drought out or flood out a dictator that you're not happy with or obscure a beach when there's a landing, or if you just want to make money on the futures market. Owning the weather by 2025, using the weather as a force multiplier. And this kind of goes back to what I was saying before about if you can-- if you can control where a weather system goes and how much or how severe the weather system is, then you can do other things. Like you may have heard more recently that many of the aircraft that we've been developing are what they call "all-weather capable," which means that they can fly in any kind of weather. They can shoot and target the enemy under really nasty weather circumstances. And these are all things that you can use to your advantage if you happen to be controlling the weather, also, because you can have a terrible storm front come in and make it difficult, if not impossible, for the enemy to operate on the ground or to fly their aircraft if they don't have aircraft that are as sophisticated as the ones that you have. And so, by creating or using the weather as a force multiplier, as the title implies, that you can achieve an advantage over an enemy force that gives you the upper hand. One of the ideals of the-- of the Air Force is to have this all-weather Air Force, or to have their pilots coming back safely and using the weather as a salient against the enemy and clearing out their own airports from, say, from ice, fogs, or from bad weather. And so if we could--if-- the idea here is that if we can fly and they can't, that's a great military advantage. There was also research studies on hurricanes that the scientists were truly curious about the behavior of hurricanes, but their military patrons were very interested in how to steer them or direct them in certain ways, almost as a-- as a guided weapon. This jet stream's moving across, and it shoots 50 miles north and then 75 miles east and then drops back south again and kind of goes on its way. And they attributed that little dog leg in the jet stream in Alaska to swinging storm systems out of Central Texas into Central Florida, where they deposited a couple of tornadoes in the middle of Orlando that were, like, really rare to see in that part of the country. And so people remember that event, and they remember that situation. But it'd be a good example of a very small change in Alaska in terms of a jet stream, and what kind of a lower-48 effect that would have. And that's again where weather modification, small input in one place could have tremendous change and unexpected outcome in another. You can create weather systems that are so severe, they culminate in battlefield denial, where the enemy is not able to use the roads or the bridges or--or get through the environment because the weather is so severe. And you can--you can use the weather to destroy his crops, deny him a food source, destabilize his population, because people get hungry, and when they're hungry, they get angry and nasty, and they don't like what's happening. So there's lots of different things that you can do with the materials. It's all how you use them in the environment, how you apply it. One of the biggest concerns of early cloud seeding weather control activities by the General Electric Corporation came from their lawyers, who thought that the corporation was totally vulnerable to lawsuits because if they started to make fair or foul weather, the people down below in Massachusetts, or downwind of Schenectady could institute massive lawsuits that could put G.E. out of business. So the first response to weather control from their in-house lawyers was to shut it down, was to give the project to the military and ask them to do it, with the G.E. lawyers only being the consultants on the project. So they were allowed to suggest and, uh, design certain activities, but they weren't allowed to touch anything or throw anything out of the plane. The United States government, during the Vietnam War, perfected weather modification techniques, and also they perfected releasing toxic chemicals like Agent Orange over many areas to defoliate land, trees, grasslands, and other areas. But this is technology that does come up, and it comes up when-- when you see that the technology has advanced far enough to where the practicality of utilizing it in the battlefield environment and the temptation by administrations-- I mean, the best covert war is using environment itself against your adversary. There was a military moment, and it was actually from pretty recent history, and this was the U.S. military thinking that they might be able to control the monsoon over Vietnam during that conflict. And so only a few--a handful of top-level military advisors and the president were informed that they were going to try to make it rain over the Ho Chi Minh Trail and try to have some military advantage by doing this kind of intervention. When you start talking about manipulating the environment, we have treaties that go back to the mid-'70s that forbid this, number one, as weapons of war. So the perfection of weather modification took place, but it became apparent that using weather modification for wartime purposes was not acceptable to the United States government and other nations of the world. So therefore, the ENMOD Treaty came into being and was signed by the United States government after passing Congress. The reason it was signed and implemented was because it would ban warfare weather modification techniques and use during times of war. Almost all of our treaties that we've signed, including the non-proliferation, counter-proliferation treaties, chemical treaties--you know, the ones that were signed recently, the last few years, uh, you know, back maybe a decade now, I guess. Times goes. But they had domestic exemptions, and so does the environmental treaty, where you can do whatever you want in your own territorial boundaries. I mean, you start manipulating weather in one part of- of the planet, it doesn't look on the ground and say, "Oh, yeah, wait. This is the boundary of-- a political boundary." It fails to recognize those. So you start to talk about geophysics and manipulating the planet itself. Then it's a question of-- those kinds of exemptions shouldn't even be allowed. Meteorology and the military have a very long history, as I said. And it goes into this strategic advantage that multiplies your traditional force-- that is, your armament-- into using nature to your advantage as well. They want to create a storm in the Southeast, then they'll start engineering out of the North Pacific. That's where the trails will be, because you want to work out several days ahead of time so you have less input. And you multiply that over a couple of days, you can have a big result in five days' time. So small input upstream, big result downstream. And one of the rules is always work with what's coming. Don't try to necessarily work against it. You can kill a storm in place. That's easy to do with HAARP. You just change the polarization. You change the ionization of the atmosphere, and the storm will fall apart. It will affect the setting up of the storm tracks, the jet stream, the location of the storms, and so you end up with-- an intervention on the solar side of things would pretty directly begin to affect the weather patterns. And so climate control, or attempted climate control, and weather control lie on this very large spectrum of intervention. It's also true that if you can forecast climate, you can control a lot of futures markets, and you could know--if you had the best information, or if you had some leverage over what the climate system is going to turn out to be, you would be able to invest in advance and own your crop futures and your agricultural activities and-- And not just agriculture, but weather affects-- I think it's something like 80% of the U.S. economy is weather-sensitive. And so all kinds of businesses would like to see some weather edge or some advantageous information that they would have. It's absolutely, entirely possible to profit from the weather. Hi, my name is Michael Agne. I'm an independent trader... trading commodities at the C.M.E. Group, member of the Chicago Board of Trade, and I've traded derivatives and futures cash for over 15 years. Weather derivatives are financial instruments that firms would use to hedge risk concerned with adverse weather conditions. The first weather derivative was originally traded by Enron back in 1997. Weather derivatives started in 1999 at the C.M.E. Group. Big utilities reinsures to hedge against hurricanes or tornadoes or flooding, some sort of catastrophe. Hedging against a cooler summer or a warmer winter. Let's just say I was insuring a product for 5 million, no matter what it was. Let's say if it was a utility company, a farmer, whatever it was. Let's say I had $5 million worth of crop, but I can do derivatives that are worth double that amount, and I can then control the effects to where I collect on the insurance that's worth 10 million, as opposed to selling the crop for five million. Yes, I could definitely profit from that. 2010, 2011, Southern Illinois, Missouri, those--those, you know, we had a high peak of tornadoes, and those types of adverse weather conditions definitely raised the price of commodities as well as drove the volatility, which also raises the price of commodities. You're gonna make more money if a crop fails. You're creating insurance that's over the price of what your crop is worth, let's say. So what if you can control the weather? You control how these products grow. And if you had an insight to how these products were actually seeded and what products you used to actually grow those items-- corn, soybeans--and you can control that market, it's unlimited profit potential if you can control the weather. If you want to send you know, cold into the Midwest, you buy at pipeline capacity, you buy up options on heating and cooling degree days. You buy derivatives off of-- off of rainfall. There are mechanisms that you can make hundreds of billions of dollars annually and defray a huge chunk of the cost of this just on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, playing with derivatives in the weather market. Weather derivatives are basically-- you're betting that there's gonna be a weather disaster, and you're betting that it's going to occur within a particular timeframe in a particular location, and then, you know, the money that you put up basically is like a bet. It's like a wager saying that, uh, this incident's gonna happen here. And then, when it does happen, there's a big payoff. And that big payoff is something that motivates people to continue to participate in this kind of thing and maybe even feed the very process that's causing the bad weather to happen, particularly if there's a connection between the people that are seeding the clouds and the people that are making investments. This is a new opportunity. It's a new tool for investors. You know, even if, uh, someone has no interest in, you know, going on the offensive side and buying things, um, it definitely behooves them to be aware of what's going on out there. The extreme weather is here. You know, and it's not gonna reverse itself. The weather event has to be severe. Ionospheric heating, in fact, these instruments, um, when they were first utilized, which was in the former Soviet Union back in the '70s-- they started out then-- they still call these ionospheric heaters because, in one mode of operation, you can literally create-- above this instrument on the ground, you can heat an area 30-- up to 30 miles in diameter in the ionosphere. So you heat it up, and by heating it, it literally raises it. So you can then imagine this column moving up several hundred kilometers out, and then the lower atmosphere begins to rush in and fill that vacant space, that void. And then, as a result, you're altering pressure systems for, you know, quite a-- quite a distance, which of course alters the weather. You're also able, if a jet stream is coming in the area, you're able to alter its course. And if you alter a jet stream even a small amount, then the swing factor on the other end, you can move it, so you're moving storms, say, out of the Midwest onto the East Coast or this kind of thing, by just swinging it high in-- in terms of its flow and getting it redirected. Okay, so now if we look at precipitation, much has been made of this issue of, uh, damage from precipitation. Which the particulates that these trails intro-- have a--have introduced into the sky are-- Let's just say the storms can develop more violently, more quickly, um, in places that are not necessarily as, uh, where you would expect them to be. And so we see more flooding. We see more intense droughts. We see rainfall rates of 1 to, you know, 2 1/4 inches an hour that are just bizarre. And sometimes even rainfall, you know, 1 1/4 inch a minute. It's just unheard of. And so you have an area that's already been heated by the sun's rays, and then you have the aerosol drift in over that area. And it's reflecting both ways. It's reflecting the heat of the sun back out, but it's also trapping the heat that's already been created there by the sunlight. So it will actually create more heat and trap heat inside and closer to the atmosphere. It can actually exacerbate global warming problems. And if you become more aware of what's happening, where the global commodities are, what extreme weather events, you're one step ahead of them. The nature of the risk and our ability to respond to the risk is much greater in the case of the scenario that might involve large-scale regional agricultural disruption lasting a number of years. So the agenda was drought. The agenda was to kill the storm at least in that one particular spot. You see a tremendous and significant loss of property and, uh, crop production. Many times, this will cause farms to go out of business, and when farmers go out of business, they usually have to sell. And then if there's somebody waiting in the wings to buy their land and then turn that land over to the production of genetically modified crops, you can see where there would be kind of a strategic advantage there. There's something that happened in the Midwest, and I'm sure everybody's heard about the flooding in the Midwest. And what happened is, um, George Soros and his big corporate monolith went in and started buying up the farmland. So not only is it--is it creating all these stresses, it appears to be a corporate land grab. In other words, when the farmers, the small farmers go out of business, they're wiped out through these droughts and everything, then the big guys come in, buy up the land. And if you think of Western history, there's a lot of it concerning water rights and even water wars. And so they were shooting about access to, uh, water, to water your livestock. And now people are thinking, or at least the people who are involved in weather control sometimes think about the river of moisture above our heads, and, "Jeez if we could just tap that." But that too is a, uh, a water right that would involve access to, uh, to people that felt like maybe they had prior rights over it. And you're reducing the food security of people through deploying these kinds of approaches that... Potentially 2 billion people could have their food disrupted by such interventions. I've been an organic farmer my entire life... and I've been, um, in the last eight years, been certified organic. And so I've been growing food in a way that feels healthy, where I have the most energy, and now it's not so healthy. I want to pass a really nice, healthy soil, rich soil earth on to the children and have it be fertile. My name is Joel Gilcoca. I've been farming on this land for about five years... since 2007, and I'm certified organic since 2001. Ten years ago, when I started working for myself, we can grow cilantro, no problem. We can grow basil, no problem. We can grow Chinese cabbage without get trouble or any vegetable. But ten years after--I mean, five years after that, everything start decline. Could you add something to the environment that would affect a large population? The answer is absolutely yes. I started seeing chemtrails being laid overhead more frequently and noticing the change in the crop production. What we see in our area anytime there's convective clouds, anytime there's a large cumulus cloud forming and beginning to rise, we hear aircraft in the vicinity. We see them actually flying over these convecting clouds, and then in a very short time, before those clouds generally will drop any precipitation, we'll see the entire cloud more or less dissolve into what looks like a massive smoke bank. If you can control the weather, then you can control where the rain falls or where it doesn't fall. And if you can do that, then you can control whose crops survive and whose crops thrive. And if you happen to be favoring, um, a corporation or a group of corporations that are flooding the market with genetically modified crops, you can see how manipulating the weather can actually change the market share that one or more corporations have. Um, and there's, you know, there's lots of different ways that you can do it. You can do it by denying precipitation or by giving too much. You can cause, uh, you know, unusually large hailstones to come out of the sky and completely obliterate a crop of corn. There's lots of different ways that you can do it. Um, you know, tornadoes, rip up an entire town, like Joplin, Missouri, I think it was. If you look back at the tapes of those weather systems, and you look five days prior to that, you'll see that in those days preceding those events, there was all kinds of aerosols being sprayed all along the California coastline, where the moisture for those storms came from, where those storm systems originated. You know, it's-- I mean, it's insidious, when you think about it. Oh, my God, I've seen, since the chemtrails have come, there's a direct correlation with the way the health-- The food doesn't look as healthy and vibrant, and less of it. And that concerns me. And of course, all crop losses are related to weather modification problems. Either climate, uh, worldwide weather, or local weather, which is called micro-climates. And these micro-climates definitely determine what crop grows where and in which community. And so, therefore, without stable micro-climates, we can not produce as much food for the rest of the world and ourselves as when we have more stable micro-climates, not only in the United States, but in other countries as well. We fertilize it really good, and they still have a lot of trouble to produce. And I think this is not fun, because we losing a lot of money put them into this kind of production. In 2008, 2009, three times I losted my complete planting of Chinese cabbage. Weather events is one of the key components to most, uh, commodities that are traded. Let's just say your agricultural group--corn, soybeans, wheat, something along those lines, weather is by far the largest, uh, affecting factor in the price of those commodities. If one farmer's crop fails, we have a major crop failure, say, in corn, now that's going to affect every other company that uses corn in their manufacturing process. There's gonna be less of it. And anytime there is less of something, that creates a price rise. Demand rises. Okay? Because there isn't any of it. There's only one thing. You've got five people that want it. So they're gonna pay more money for it. The companies know that. So they're gonna hike the prices up anyway. The consumer actually sees the big brunt end of the higher, you know, cost in the commodity due to the adverse weather condition. Obviously, the consumer will pay that price. I've noticed that the rainfall is less predictable, and then, when it does rain, it does rain periods of time that's more, more, like, longer periods. So not only do we have the pollution, not only do we have stunted growth, but we also have changes in weather. And there's been severe changes in weather all across the globe. I don't have a clue how bad they are, but I know they are affecting already in the-- in certain plants, you know, like basil, cilantro, and sometime the broccoli get too much, uh, fungus. It can be from those thing because, um, no matter what we do, it doesn't fit. It not working right. It appears to be a fungally related ailment. And if one looks at the species extinction rate, which today is estimated to be 1,000 times natural variability, that's 1,000 times normal, a figure you'd think would alarm most reasonable people, which is 100,000% of normal, and 70% to 80% of that extinction, plant and animal, is related to fungal infection. Geoengineering particulates are known to proliferate fungal reproduction. Abiotic stresses are drought, cold, heavy metals, excess moisture in the soil, and Monsanto has a patent that actually addresses all of those abiotic stresses. And the plants that it addresses is everything from apples to zucchini. 2011 was one of the worst years for things that create abiotic stress. They had 12 worldwide severe weather problems. This destroyed a good portion of the food supply. Now I'm having a hard time growing cherry tomatoes outside under these conditions, and I've turned to having to build a greenhouse, where I'm now growing large tomatoes, heirlooms. And they are producing really nice, big tomatoes. I see that the tomatoes that I planted now are really healthy, and the ones outside are dying. The Midwest grows 40% of the world's corn. And it does have a tendency to flood, so we can expect more and more flooding, according to the statistics. The E.P.A. statistics say that there's going to be more and more flooding. Monsanto is one of the world's largest chemical companies. They also own 90% of the seed companies in the world right now, and they are the largest company putting out genetically modified seeds. So what does Monsanto do? Corn is the lead-in because corn is in just about everything. Corn is the main crop, and Monsanto leads in with corn products before it does anything else. So what we have is Monsanto leading in with a drought-resistant corn and an abiotic-stress- resistant corn. The drought and the flooding, it's all the same patent. Monsanto has a patent for abiotic stress. Abiotic stress is the drought. It's the flooding. It's the excess soil. It's anything that's going to stress a plant. G.M.O. is Genetically Modified Organism, and it's also called G.E., Genetic Engineering. Well, the history of farming has been, a farmer will plant a seed into the ground, and there will be nutrients in the ground that will enable that plant to grow, and then at the end of the growing season, they will take some of the seeds, and they will save them for next year, and they'll grow their next crop. But what is going on with the genetically modified seeds is they're what's called terminator seeds. A terminator seed will not produce other seeds. With the terminator seeds, these farmers have to go back to Monsanto every single year and purchase these extremely high-priced seeds. There have been studies outside of the United States showing that genetically modified seeds, the plants that come from them, are extremely harmful to humans and other life on this planet. Uh, when I started farming, I produce 100% my crops. But in the last four years, I've been declined to 50%, 75% if I took into later crop, because I've been lost everything. And that's why I start moving all different crop, so I can cover the loss. Well, my food production has declined at least by 60% in the last, I don't know, ten years. I've noticed banana stalks are smaller, and certainly the tomatoes-- I'm hardly getting any. I use to get bushels of tomatoes, and now I can barely get a bowl. My concern--it can be, you know. It's possible if they go- we go and run out of business if they continue doing that. They really need to stop they're doing. That's all I believe, because we cannot change the system, you know, the Mother Nature. We have to keep going the way it is. It's not possible. On the other hand, the, you know, heat stress is going to be one of the things, or thought to be one of the things that might limit production of crops throughout the tropics. And so there are some questions of tradeoffs, of, you know, when-- if you think you're gonna benefit many people and harm some people, how do you deal with this issue of equity, and what-- I mean, what are the options for dealing with that? A really interesting thing that I've found is that the E.P.A. has concluded that incidents of heat stress, drought, flooding, cold, any type of abiotic stress is on the increase. And loss due to that is going to double by 2030. Then you put yourself up as the solution. So when all of this weather comes and wipes you out, or you have a drought problem, "Oh, drought? We've got the seed for you. "Here is our drought-tolerant corn, just for you, "and it'll solve your problems. "Oh, by the way, you have to sign this agreement, "this 40-page agreement, "so that when you go ahead and plant these seeds, you now belong to Monsanto." The weather disasters seem to be directly correlated to an increase in Monsanto's sales. So there will be the have and the have-nots. And one of the things that's being discussed under global geoengineering is which countries will be the haves and which countries will be the have-nots when that type of climate remediation is undertaken by many people at a certain level, mostly private corporations funded by the U.S. government, they are hoping. The fact that it's cheap isn't necessarily a good thing at all. As I'll come to in a second, the fact that it's cheap is part of the hard problem of governance. The fact that it's cheap means any small state or even, conceivably, individuals could do this. And that is a very dangerous thing. There's only probably under $10 million per year, and maybe far less than that, being spent on geoengineering research. Um, it's a mix of a handful of government grants and some private money, including support from Bill Gates. Bill Gates invests in geoengineering. Geoengineering destroys crops. Monsanto supplies the seed to replace those crops. Bill Gates invests in Monsanto, so Bill Gates makes a ton of money, Monsanto makes a ton of money, and the small farmer gets squashed. Corn prices go higher because of a severe drought in this country, um, you know, where 41% of the country-- the world's supply of corn comes from. So corn prices are higher. The farmer has more money. So what does he do? He buys fertilizers, which dries up the mosaic stock, and--or he could purchase genetically modified seeds from Monsanto. You've got severe, severe drought in Africa. In 2011, there was a severe drought. This is causing nothing but death. It's causing starvation. It's causing malnutrition. It's causing a severe water shortage. How do you grow anything without water? You cannot grow anything without water. So what does Monsanto do? They say, "Oh, we got a drought-tolerant corn for you." There's been an excessive push to get bioengineered crops into Africa. They look at severe conditions as an opportunity. They're disaster capitalists. So here you have farmers, and they've got flooding, they've got droughts, they've got everything that totally wipes them out. So what happens? Okay, they--if they plant it early enough in the year, they can go ahead and try and plant again. So buy more seed. Okay? Buy Monsanto seed. So they're just raking up on that end of it. Okay? So if you can create enough weather manipulation, you can shorten growing seasons, you can create enough of that disaster, and you've got the seed supply, they've got to come to you. Geoengineers have stated on the record that if global geoengineering were started, it could cause droughts in Asia and Africa. And they state that to the American public for probably obvious reasons. Why would they tell the American public that it could also cause droughts here? Why wouldn't it cause droughts here? There's nothing special about America and the geography here that would not have the same effect as Asia and Africa. If the atmosphere is filled with particulates, those particulates diminish and disperse rainfall, period. There's too many condensation nuclei, so the water droplets do not combine and fall as rain. They simply adhere to those tiny particles and migrate further. And that's exactly what we see. One of the suggestions about geoengineering has been that we genetically modify trees and plants, um, we genetically modify crops to be aluminum resistant, and this is ongoing at this time. And part of the geoengineering scheme is to say, "We're gonna put all these chemicals and particles "into our atmosphere, "which is going to cause air pollution, water pollution, "changes in soil pH, "and could disrupt agriculture crop production to a great degree." So, therefore, instead of saying that maybe this isn't a good idea that we pollute our air, water, and soils with the chemicals we're gonna put into the atmosphere, which do come back down, there's a scheme abounding which is happening right now to modify some crops so that they are aluminum resistant to the types of chemicals and particles they're gonna put into the atmosphere. It's just gonna get worse until the point where we're not gonna able to grow anything at all unless it's a Monsanto genetically modified, abiotic-stress-resistant seed. The chemical companies and the genet--and Monsanto and all of these companies are working together to make us totally dependent on their products for growing corn or growing any kind of agricultural product or trees, whatever. We're going to corporatize not only where the rainfall goes and who gets it through geoengineering and weather modification schemes, but we're also going to say that these are gonna be the only crops that are gonna grow in areas where we're putting in toxic chemicals that are coming down and altering the soils. One of the most basic things about human society is that we need food and water. And these are two of the things that, uh, are most severely dependent upon good weather-- rain at the right time of the year, sunshine so crops can grow. Not enough sunshine, and they don't grow. Too much water, the plants die. Not enough water, the plants die. All of this goes back to the amount of food that's available. So if you starve people, they will be vulnerable. They will be much easier to manipulate and force to do whatever the government wants them to do. So if you control how much food there is or its availability through things like the weather or using the weather as a strategic tool, militarily, um, you can, you know, dramatically influence what's going on in the country. And by doing that over and over again sequentially through a region, um, it's possible that you can change the, um, the political spectrum over an entire region by doing this over and over again. Um, maybe even, you know, do it over a much wider region. Create so much instability that you're able to, you know, come in and say, "Oh, we have these wonderful, "fast-growing crops, you know, genetically modified. "And you know, this-- you'll have-- you'll have something to eat in less than three weeks." You know, um, and I imagine that, uh, you know, if you can control the food supply, that you can then consolidate the financial and the political interests of a country. Could predicting the weather enable a group or a specific entity to profit from that knowledge of knowing what type of weather or weather pattern will be? Absolutely. That's what all commodities are driven by. They're driven by predicting the weather, how the weather will be in a certain location, and that directly is correlated to the price of that commodity. Absolutely. There's no doubt. While there are a number of agendas associated with these damaging programs, one thing is for sure: They can be used to control our weather and thus corporatize every natural system on the planet. This enables certain individuals to consolidate an enormous amount of both monetary and political power into the hands of a few, at the expense of every living thing on the planet. Just by definition, the geoengineering programs are a direct assault on the most elemental aspects of nature. What we're doing when we modify the weather is we're changing the world's climate, and we're changing the micro-climates. And we are doing it. There are things we can say for certain. There's a mountain of metal raining down on us. We're certainly breathing that metal. We have documented from the computer modeling some unintended consequences. If such a contamination is present, shouldn't we investigate? Shouldn't local agencies investigate, which they have patently refused to do? There's no question that large-scale climate engineering is untested and dangerous. I would disagree quite strongly that it is-- um, doesn't exist. I think that the capacity to do it in engineering terms most certainly exists, and that's part of the reason we have to think seriously about how we manage that. We are breathing a mountain of metal, and that can't be denied. If geoengineering continues, and the weather manipulation continues, and genetic modification continues overtaking, we're going to lose our ability to grow good, nutritious food. We are going to lose our ability to thrive. I personally consider this ongoing toxic dumping into our atmosphere to be, along with nuclear radiation, the most dangerous threats to our health and to our environment. We've seen UV scales go off the charts, which are a known consequence of geoengineering, ozone destruction. We've seen rainfall patterns disrupted in ways that meteorologists don't seem to be able to explain or predict. The challenge that all of these weathermen face, all of them, whether they're aware of it or not-- sooner or later, they will be aware of it. And I went through a period after the epiphany of, "How did I not see this sooner? How? "I mean, seriously, "I'm supposed to do this for a living. How did I not see this?" We have--seem to have lost our moral fiber and our ethical compass when we talk about that we all should live within an experiment that somebody else is conducting. If you knew or could predict the weather at any given time in any given area, then you control the fate of mankind and what they pay for everything. Washington is not responsive to the average person. It's responsive to commercial interests, who can spend millions on campaigns now without restriction, who literally drive the policy-making in Washington, D.C. I guess I'm under the belief that you can't control the weather. Um, you know, I hope someday we could control the weather. Power becomes an addictive thing. We're taking what the Creator has created, usurping his authority, and bringing it under the authority of corporations. I'm worried that one person or one group would try to have that much leverage over the whole planet. I don't believe that anybody has the right to play God, especially when they're putting particles and chemicals into the atmosphere, which there's unintended-- and consequences that are known. We don't know it all. We can not assume the role of Creator without dire consequences. This is not a good idea. And this is not a reason to take and do a test. The atmosphere and the earth belong to all of us. It provides the food we eat, the air we breathe, the water we drink, and no one should have the right to own it. The biosphere is at risk from top to bottom. Though you have climate scientists calling for emergency geoengineering due to events like methane mass expulsion, which appears to be occurring in the Arctic... It would have a significant impact on the way that we operate. Notice it also has enormous political, social, and economic implications. And so we don't want to have some giant planetary oops, I mean, capital oops, in which you have a loss of life. It's much, much harder to actually figure out the environmental risks and effectiveness of these new methods than it is to cook them up. They're creating an artificial environment to replace the natural environment. Shredded ozone layer, global droughts, toxified soils, poisoned populations. Don't these issues matter? Affecting ecosystems in ways we've never been able before. Um, the whole concept of literally playing God with the technology we have at our fingertips today. And however the climate changes, wouldn't we be better to let the planet react on its own, instead of trying to play God? It doesn't have any benefits to society at all. It doesn't benefit the plant. It doesn't benefit the farmer. It doesn't benefit the environment. It's all about money, and weather is another form of commoditizing, a way the central command group can commoditize another form of our life. Whereas the E.P.A. has stated that there is going to be more weather, and they're attesting it to climate change. Well, I agree. It's changing. The weather's changing. Now, the real issue is, is it natural or is it manmade? And if it's manmade, who's doing it? Is it the geoengineering guys? That's what I believe if geoengineering continues, that whatever changes are happening to the planet, we will exponentially worsen those changes and poison everything in the process, and, indeed, with the amount of metal falling on us, that poisoning appears to have been occurring now for quite some time. Why are you spraying that stuff in our sky? It's accumulating massive amounts of wealth in very few hands. And that's what they're trying to do in all aspects of these economies. The money's not worth it. This is my future. I encourage people to get involved in the projects they're interested in, whether it's this one or some other one. To thrive, we need to organize locally, nationally, and globally to expose and stop this practice immediately. Please quit free-riding on our future. But do what you can do. And I think that's really the answer for all of us, is recognize that there is a network more powerful than the Internet. It's the human race. We are connected in a way that's quite powerful. The fact is, acting on what we know to be right and true, doing something about what we care about that we can do. Please tell everyone you know about this. Bring this message to community meetings, demonstrations, and other public events. The work we're doing will provide cover for others to come out. And I'm most interested in whistleblowers. Send this film to environmental farm groups, media groups, A.D.D., Alzheimer's, asthma groups, and other organizations that would do something if they only knew. Because we deserve-- deserve a future. And if you control the weather, you gonna control the planet. It's that simple. Some people address this issue in fear. Some people address it in anger. I address this in faith. Faith believing that we, collectively, as human beings, as humanity, have the power and the ability to stop these damaging programs. [Skull's "Cry Die"] All right, now here we go. All right, now here we go. [singing] I look up to the sky Can you tell me why? Can you tell me why? I don't wanna see you cry I just wanna see you smile, baby I look up to the sky Can you tell me why? Can you tell me why? I don't wanna see you die I just wanna see you smile, baby Me look up in da sky, and me can't see clear Blue skies are gone and white lines appear Dem say it's natural Me no believe dem Dem say it's vital Me no listen to dem Something strange is going on Feel it in my heart Sensing something strong All right, now here we go Gotta save the future, put the rumors to rest Gotta help the children, gotta give it the best Can't stand around, be blind to the facts Can't take it no more, how can we relax? I look up to the sky Can you tell me why? Can you tell me why? I don't wanna see you cry I just wanna see you smile, baby I look up to the sky Can you tell me why? Can you tell me why? I don't wanna see you die I just wanna see you smile, baby Living on earth, we must respect the earth Human and animal, we all deserve The right to peace and opportunity But nowadays, we're blind We can't see Hidden agendas But we can't surrender Children are our future We must remember Oh, oh Don't know what's going on Yeah We must stand up for the earth Oh, oh Don't know what's going on Tell ya We must stand up for the earth I look up to the sky Can you tell me why? Can you tell me why? I don't wanna see you cry I just wanna see you smile, baby I look up to the sky Can you tell me why? Can you tell me why? I don't wanna see you die I just wanna see you smile, baby We want the truth Give us the truth, yo We want the truth, gotta save our youth We want the truth Give us the truth Unite as one, bring out the proof Living on earth, we must respect the earth Human and animal, we all deserve The right to peace and opportunity But nowadays, we're blind We can't see Hidden agendas We can't surrender children, our future We must remember All right Ay, ay, ay, ay All right, now here we go I look up to the sky Can you tell me why? Can you tell me why? I don't wanna see you cry I just wanna see you smile, baby I look up to the sky Can you tell me why? Can you tell me why? I don't wanna see you die I just wanna see you smile, baby �