Welcome
Welcome to All Aircraft Are Not Involved.

Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, make your voice heard!

U.S. Govt. Admits Chemtrails Are For "Weather Mitigation"

dialogue and research on chemical trails

Form letters & e-mails

Unread postby NatureisMad » Mon Apr 28, 2008 3:36 am

Necessary Reiteration!:

posted by socrates
Maybe someday, one of us gets some freedom of information materials which can pinpoint the activities taking place now. It's ******** that nobodies like us are supposed to figure this out. Where are the reporters and decent academics who would have the know-how to crack this case? I wrote to a bunch of meteorologists in Boston. Not one of them wrote back. Not even with a ******** explanation.


I know. This part of it all drives the anger within me towards the surface, big-time. Well said. I've tried letting meteorologists know & they show me that they are either absolutely clueless, &/or conditioned robots, living in denial, or just plain told to not mention it. To anybody. Ever.

posted by socrates
I was just thinking of that one thread we had called emails and form letters or something. Maybe we can try to get some letters published. The internet is probably easy enough. Maybe we could get a standard letter with the basic info of the bills, some choice quotes, and then here's the key, we never use the word chemtrails.


Yes, exactly. This was my main intent of that thread right from the get-go. To establish some kind of starting point for people (in all levels of learning & understanding of the chemtrails) to try & spread the word from. Such as actual snail-mail letters, e-mails, & such. We should all collaborate on this site to try & get something like this going.
Born into...& trying to survive this science fiction world
User avatar
NatureisMad
solid chemmie
 
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:55 am
Location: Colorado

New "Weather Mitigation" Bills: Good Cop Versus Bad Cop

Unread postby socrates » Mon May 26, 2008 2:52 pm

New "Weather Mitigation" Bills: Good Cop Versus Bad Cop
by CPellatt and Socrates
May 26th, 2008


Image
{all photo credits to CPellatt}


New "Weather Mitigation" Bills: Good Cop Versus Bad Cop
by Socrates

On July 17th, 2007, Sen. Kay Hutchison [R-TX] introduced S. 1807: The Weather Mitigation Research and Development Policy Authorization Act of 2007. Just a few weeks later, Rep. Mark Udall [D-CO] introduced H.R. 3445: The Weather Mitigation Research and Technology Transfer Authorization Act of 2007. There has been no mainstream coverage on these bills. The previous attempts at creating a similar law, S. 517 {109th} and H.R. 2995 {109th} didn't even make it to a vote. Bills have two years in which to become law. Then they are either scrapped completey or incorporated into new bills. The Senate version was scheduled for debate, though it is unclear whether such debates took place. The House version never made it out of the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards. Hutchison and Udall were also the sponsors for these earlier versions.

While both S. 1807 and H.R. 3445 would create a Weather Mitigation Advisory And Research Board, there are major differences with the two bills. For a bill to become law, it must contain identical language in both versions. As presently constituted, there appears to be a wide gap between the two bills.

From looking at Udall's previous comments on the 2005 version and this power point presentation located on a Western Governors' Association website, one may tend to think that H.R. 3445 is mostly concerned with the water interests of western states. This begs the question: Is Senator Hutchison and her supporters attempting to buy passage of the most controversial elements of S. 1807 with Washington, political, pork products?

Let's take a look at each bill. People need to realise a few things. These bills are not getting any media coverage. Secondly, what exactly does all this talk of weather mitigation really signify?


H.R. 3445
{excerpts}

Last Action: Aug 24, 2007: Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.

To establish the Weather Mitigation Operations and Research Board, and for other purposes.


You gotta wonder what "and for other purposes" means.

SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

It is the purpose of this Act to develop and implement a comprehensive and coordinated national weather mitigation policy and a national cooperative Federal and State program of weather mitigation research and development.


(3) RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT- The term `research and development' means theoretical analysis, exploration, experimentation, and the extension of investigative findings and theories of scientific or technical nature into practical application for experimental and demonstration purposes, including the experimental production and testing of models, devices, equipment, materials, and processes.


(4) WEATHER MITIGATION- The term `weather mitigation' means changing or controlling, or attempting to change or control, by artificial methods the natural development of atmospheric cloud forms or precipitation forms which occur in the troposphere. Examples include rain enhancement, snowpack augmentation, and hail suppression.



I thought the above examples of weather modification were already legal. All weather modification by law must be on file with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

So if weather modification for water issues is already legal, why the need for this new bill?

(b) Membership-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Board shall consist of 11 members appointed by the Secretary of Commerce, of whom--

(A) at least 1 shall be a representative of the American Meteorological Society;

(B) at least 1 shall be a representative of the American Society of Civil Engineers;

(C) at least 1 shall be a representative of the National Academy of Sciences;

(D) at least 1 shall be a representative of the National Center for Atmospheric Research of the National Science Foundation;

(E) at least 2 shall be representatives of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the Department of Commerce;

(F) at least 1 shall be a representative of institutions of higher education or research institutes; and

(G) at least 1 shall be a representative of a State that is currently supporting operational weather mitigation projects.

(2) TENURE- A member of the Board serves at the pleasure of the Secretary of Commerce.




(b) Advisory Committees- The Board may establish advisory committees to advise the Board and to make recommendations to the Board concerning legislation, policies, administration, research, and other matters.

(c) Initial Meeting- Not later than 30 days after the date on which all members of the Board have been appointed, the Board shall hold its first meeting.


SEC. 5. DUTIES OF THE BOARD.

(a) Promotion of Research and Development- In order to assist in expanding the theoretical and practical knowledge of weather mitigation, the Board shall promote and fund research and development, studies, and investigations with respect to--

(1) improved forecast and decisionmaking technologies for weather mitigation operations, including tailored computer workstations and software and new observation systems with remote sensors; and

(2) assessments and evaluations of the efficacy of weather mitigation, both purposeful (including cloud-seeding operations) and inadvertent (including downwind effects and anthropogenic effects).




b) Financial Assistance-


(2) to provide for research and development with respect to weather mitigation by grants to, or contracts or cooperative arrangements with, public or private agencies.

(c) Report- The Board shall submit to the Secretary of Commerce biennially a report on its findings and research results.


SEC. 6. POWERS OF THE BOARD.


(a) Studies, Investigations, and Hearings-


(c) Cooperation With Other Agencies- The Board may cooperate with public or private agencies to promote the purposes of this Act.


(d) Cooperative Agreements- The Board may enter into cooperative agreements with the head of any department or agency of the United States, an appropriate official of any State or political subdivision of a State, or an appropriate official of any private or public agency or organization for conducting weather mitigation activities or cloud-seeding operations.



(e) Conduct and Contracts for Research and Development- The Executive Director, with the approval of the Board, may conduct and may contract for research and development activities relating to the purpose described in section 2.



SEC. 7. COOPERATION WITH THE WEATHER MITIGATION OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH BOARD.

The heads of the departments and agencies of the United States and the heads of any other public or private agencies and institutions that receive research funds from the United States shall, to the extent possible, give full support and cooperation to the Board and to initiate independent research and development programs that address weather mitigations.




SEC. 8. FUNDING.


(b) Authorization of Appropriations- There are authorized to be appropriated to the Board for the purposes of carrying out this Act $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2015. Any sums appropriated under this subsection shall remain available, without fiscal year limitation, until expended.

(c) Gifts- The Board may accept, use, and dispose of gifts or donations of services or property.




Ok. Let's take a look at S. 1807 which goes well beyond the relatively benign language used by Rep. Udall. Does Mark Udall realise he is about to give away the shop to Frankenscientists and government agencies seeking to control the atmosphere?



Image



S. 1807
{choice excerpts}

To establish the Weather Mitigation Advisory and Research Board, and for other purposes.


Again, what is with this phrase "and for other purposes?"

SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

It is the purpose of this Act to develop and implement a comprehensive and coordinated national weather mitigation policy and a national cooperative Federal and State program of weather mitigation research and development.


SEC. 3. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) According to a 2003 report by the National Research Council, `people in drought- and hail-prone areas willingly spend significant resources on weather mitigation programs, and in 2001 there were at least 66 operational programs being conducted in 10 States across the United States. At the same time, less than a handful of weather mitigation research programs are underway worldwide, and related research in the United States has dropped to less than $500,000 per year from a high of $20,000,000 in the late 1970s.' The NRC report entitled *** `Critical Issues in Weather Modification Research' also states that `a coordinated national program of weather modification research is needed'.


*** Critical Issues in Weather Modification Research


2) Droughts in the United States


(3) Past and recent evaluations of the potential for snowpack augmentation by cloud seeding


The next part is where the Hutchison bill clearly has an agenda which far surpasses the Udall presentation. Here we go from water issues and cloud seeding to Frankensteinian atmospheric science.



(4) The impacts of possible climate change and the human impact on weather are not well understood. Weather mitigation research could provide data on what, if any, impact pollution may have on the precipitation processes in cloud systems. Research into inadvertent and planned weather mitigation may increase our understanding and knowledge of any potential impacts.



(3) RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT- The term `research and development' means theoretical analysis, exploration, experimentation, and the extension of investigative findings and theories of a scientific or technical nature into practical application for experimental and demonstration purposes, including the experimental production and testing of models, devices, equipment, materials, and processes.



SEC. 5. WEATHER MITIGATION ADVISORY AND RESEARCH BOARD ESTABLISHED.

(a) Establishment- There is established in the National Science Foundation the Weather Mitigation Advisory and Research Board to establish and coordinate the national research and development program on weather mitigation described in section 6.

(b) Membership-

(1) COMPOSITION- The Board shall consist of 11 members appointed by the Director of the National Science Foundation as follows:

(A) At least 2 members shall be representatives of States that are currently supporting operational weather mitigation programs.

(B) At least 2 members shall be a representative of the National Center for Atmospheric Research of the National Science Foundation.

(C) At least 1 member shall be a representative of National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

(D) At least 1 member shall be a representative of the American Meteorological Society.

(E) At least 1 member shall be a representative of the American Society of Civil Engineers.

(F) At least 1 member shall be a representative of the National Academy of Sciences.

(G) At least 1 member shall be a representative of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the Department of Commerce.

(H) At least 1 member shall be a representative of the Department of Agriculture.

(I) At least 1 member shall be a representative of institutions of higher education or research institutes with experience in the field.

(2) TENURE- A member of the Board shall serve at the pleasure of the Director of the National Science Foundation.



(e) Advisory Committees- The Board may establish advisory committees to advise the Board and to make recommendations to the Board concerning legislation, policies, administration, research, and other matters.



f) Initial Meeting- Not later than 30 days after the date on which all members of the Board have been appointed, the Board shall hold its first meeting.



(i) Powers of the Board-

(1) STUDIES, INVESTIGATIONS, AND HEARINGS- The Board may conduct studies, obtain information, and hold hearings necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act.

(2) COOPERATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES- The Board may cooperate with public or private agencies to promote the purposes of this Act.

(3) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS- The Board may enter into cooperative agreements with the head of any department or agency of the United States, an appropriate official of any State or political subdivision of a State, or an appropriate official of any private or public agency or organization to conduct research and development pertaining to weather mitigation.

(4) CONDUCTING AND CONTRACTING FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT- The Executive Director, with the approval of the Board, may conduct or contract for research and development activities in accordance with section 6.



SEC. 6. NATIONAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM ON WEATHER MITIGATION.


(a) Implementation Plan- Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Executive Director shall develop and submit to Congress a plan for the establishment and coordination of the national research and development program required by section 5(a). Such plan shall--

(1) for the 10-year period beginning in the year it is submitted, establish the goals and priorities for Federal research that most effectively advance scientific understanding of weather mitigation;

(2) describe specific activities required to achieve such goals and priorities, including funding of competitive research grants, training and support for scientists, and participation in international research efforts;

(3) identify and address, as appropriate, relevant programs and activities of the Federal agencies and departments that would contribute to the program;

(4) consider and use, as appropriate, reports and studies conducted by Federal agencies and departments, weather modification organizations, and other expert scientific bodies, including the National Research Council report entitled `Critical Issues in Weather Modification Research';


People need to take a close look at these two bills for themselves. Climate change is being described as an issue of national security.


Image



{more of the Senate version}
(5) make recommendations for the coordination of program activities with weather mitigation activities of other national and international organizations; and

(6) estimate Federal funding for research activities to be conducted under the program.




(b) Program Activities- The national research and development program required by section 5(a) may include the following activities related to weather mitigation:

(1) Interdisciplinary research and development and coordination of research and development and activities to improve understanding of processes relating to planned and inadvertent weather mitigation, including the following:

(A) Research related to cloud and precipitation physics.

(B) Cloud dynamics and cloud modeling.

(C) Improving cloud seeding-related technologies.

(D) Severe weather and storm research.

(E) Research related to potential adverse affects of weather mitigation.

(2) Coordination with relevant organizations that engage in weather mitigation research.

(3) Development through partnerships among Federal agencies, State agencies with weather modification experience, and academic institutions of new technologies and approaches for weather mitigation.

(4) Establishing scholarships and educational opportunities that encourage an interdisciplinary approach to weather mitigation.

(5) Promotional activities in accordance with subsection (c).

(6) Administering the grant program described in subsection (d).




(c) Promotion of Research and Development- In order to assist in expanding the theoretical and practical knowledge of weather mitigation, the Board shall promote and fund research and development, studies, and investigations with respect to--

(1) improved forecast and decision-making technologies for weather mitigation operations, including tailored computer workstations and software and new observation systems with remote sensors; and

(2) assessments and evaluations of the efficacy of weather mitigation.

(d) Grant Program for Research and Development-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Board may establish a grant program for the award of grants to eligible entities for research and development projects that pertain to weather mitigation. To the extent practicable, the grant program shall be modeled after both the Atmospheric Modification Program implemented by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in 1980, and the Weather Damage Modification Program implemented by the Bureau of Reclamation of the Department of the Interior in 2002.





(4) ELIGIBLE ENTITIES- For purposes of this subsection, an eligible entity is a State agency, institution of higher education, or nonprofit organization that has--

(A) an established background and expertise in the field of weather mitigation; and

(B) experience with working with and coordinating with State agencies.

(5) USE OF FUNDS- A recipient of a grant under this subsection may only use the grant for a research and development project that--

(A) pertains to weather mitigation; and





SEC. 7. ANNUAL REPORT ON ACTIVITIES.




(1) A summary of the achievements of Federal weather mitigation research, including Federally supported external research, during the preceding fiscal year.

(2) An analysis of the progress made toward achieving the goals and objectives of the plan developed under section 6(a), including the identification of trends.

(3) A copy or summary of the plan required by section 6(a) and any changes made to the plan.

(4) A summary of agency budgets for weather mitigation activities for the preceding fiscal year.

(5) Recommendations, if any, regarding additional action or legislation that may be required to assist in achieving the purposes of this Act.

(6) A description of the relationship between research conducted on weather mitigation and research conducted pursuant to the Global Change Research Act of 1990 (15 U.S.C. 2921 et seq.), as well as research on weather forecasting and prediction.

(7) A description of any potential adverse consequences on life, property, or water resource availability from weather mitigation efforts, and any suggested means of mitigating or reducing such consequences if such efforts are undertaken.




SEC. 8. COOPERATION WITH WEATHER MITIGATION ADVISORY AND RESEARCH BOARD.

The head of any department or agency of the United States and the head of any other public or private agency or institution that receives research funds from the United States shall, to the extent practicable, cooperate with the Board for purposes of carrying out this Act.

SEC. 9. FUNDING.

(a) Authorization of Appropriations- There are authorized to be appropriated to the Board for the purposes of carrying out this Act $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2017. Amounts appropriated pursuant to this subsection shall remain available until expended.

(b) Gifts- The Board may accept, use, and dispose of gifts or donations of services or property.





Decisions are being made behind the scenes with no accountability. We the people are not being consulted on decisions that could set off butterfly effects. According to this California Tech. web page:

The "Butterfly Effect", or more technically the "sensitive dependence on initial conditions", is the essence of chaos. This is illustrated in the accompanying applet of the Lorenz Attractor.



I have a question for Udall and Hutchison. What does "weather mitigation" look like?



Image


Is "weather mitigation" already being implemented? Are these bills transparent attempts to legalise what has already been started? Jeff Ferrell of KSLA News12 Louisiana and Paul Moyer of KNBC News4 Los Angeles have already asked this same question.

It is my conclusion after years of research into this topic that the powers that be are big supporters of Frankensteinian atmospheric shenanigans. However, they are also terrified of legal and social implications. This is why "weather mitigation" has been pigeon holed as science fiction. This is why there will be no reporting on these bills. Please good people, look up to the sky and start demanding accountability. Based on solid research, I believe it is fair to say that more likely than not, "weather mitigation" has already begun and has been around for nearly a decade.




Weather Modification and Weather Mitigation-Which is Which?
By Carole Pellatt

Upon further examinaton of the terminologies “weather modification” and “weather mitigation,” we see that according to the Miriam-Webster Dictionary, these terms differ quite strikingly.

Modification:

1) the making of a limited change in something; also : the result of such a change b: a change in an organism caused by environmental factors
2) A change in an organism that results from external influences and cannot be inherited

[Middle English modifien, from Old French modifier, from Latin modificre, to measure, limit : modus, measure; see med- in Indo-European roots + -ficre, -fy.]


Mitigation:

1) to cause to become less harsh or hostile : mollify aggressiveness may be mitigated or channeled

[Middle English mitigaten, from Latin mtigre, mtigt- : mtis, soft + agere, to drive, do; see act.]


WHAT DOES THIS MEAN TO BILL S. 1807?

It’s very interesting that the term “weather mitigation” seems to have replaced “weather modification” for the purposes of this bill and in the introduction of new weather related bills and articles in general. It’s ironic that of the weather related hardships described in the introduction to bill S.1807, “hail suppression” is about the only one that is truly deserving of the term “mitigation.” When rainfall and snowfall are described, they become synonymous with the words “augmentation” (close to the opposite of mitigation).

In scientific usage, if the word “mitigation” is used in relation to heat, rain, and snow, it tends to appear as such: “to mitigate the effects of acid rain” or “blowing snow mitigation” or “heat dissipation mitigation." But in this bill, as far as rain and snow pack are concerned, the purpose of “weather mitigation” is to increase these phenomena, not lessen or calm them. This makes no linguistic sense to me.

We must also examine why the usage of the word “modification” is shrinking from publicly worded bills and articles. When the word “modification" appears in this bill, it becomes synonymous with programs and advisory committees, and not actually weather change; such as “The Weather Damage Modification Program,” “Weather Modification Association,” and “weather modification research” - as it relates to weather mitigation.

In the 1975 Weather Modification Treaty between Canada and the USA, the term “weather modification” is mentioned approximately 19 times. The term, “weather mitigation” is completely non-existent.

Shall we say that the U.S. military practiced weather “mitigation” or “modification” in Vietnam?

When we speak of the early weather experimentation programs of the the Russians, and of the current weather related practices of China, are we accusing them of “weather mitigation” or “modification?” When we attempt to use weather as a weapon (force multiplier) to starve, demoralize, or cause an “enemy” to weaken and become easily swayed by us (please see the report “Owning The Weather”), are we modifying or mitigating?

I still must ask myself, “For what purposes have the lawyers, the practicing linguists in Congress and the Senate tried to downplay the meaning of the phrase “weather modification” by replacing it with that of “weather mitigation?” We know that mitigation means to soften or lessen and certainly not to augment. But it sounds nicer and kinder than the previously and more appropriately worded weather modification bills, weather modification treaties, and legal studies on the implications of weather modification and inadvertant weather modification. Do they really mean that they will study the inadvertant, litigation-causing effects of “weather mitigation” or “weather modification?” Which expression makes the most sense when we are discussing the possible damage and catastrophe that could result in scientists interfering or modifying an ancient living system that is the lifeblood of our planet and our civilization; modification or mitigation? I guess that’s for you to decide.

A Final Thought
To the average person, “weather modification” is an expression that belongs in the anals of science fiction, something from a James Bond movie, or a conspiracy theory. To this type of person, “weather mitigation” will probably sound like a nice, gentle, legitimate thing. A positive step forward for science who so deeply cares for us. Aside from the watered down impression we get from the terminology of bill S. 1807, we see admissions of previous weather modification actions and experiments dating back to the 1970’s .

For those who are so far behind science that they are oblivious to the fact of weather modification, this bill offers some solid insight. For instance, we learn that “in 2001 there were at least 66 operational programs being conducted in 10 States across the United States. At the same time, less than a handful of weather mitigation research programs are underway worldwide.” These reported numbers are understated, but at least they are present.

In the meantime, the benefits of discussing this bill are to educate those who scream “conspiracy theory” whenever weather modification is brought up in a discussion. This bill and every other legal document alluding to weather modification is proof that it not only exists apart from the realm of science fiction, but has been going on for over half a century in this country and all over the world. This is according to published scientific reports for the Weather Modificaton Association, The U.S. Military, NOAA, NASA, Congressional Studies, and a large array of other scientific organizations and educational institutions.

If the reality of weather modification is so blantant to anyone who looks, even on the most suprficial level, why is it a completely foreign concept to the person on the street? If it is such a positive advantage for us to try to change the weather to benefit mankind, why aren’t they shouting it from the rooftops? Why was I taught nothing about weather modification in science, climate, or chemistry class? Why do I NEVER see or read stories on weather modification- as a matter of fact- in the mainstream media?

The brutal reality is that the spraying of billlions and billions of metallic particulates and other unknown experimental particulates, the pulsing of electromagnetic waves and the launching of weather related incendiary devices into the sky relentlessly for six decades has changed our troposphere, our atmoshere, our earthly rhythms, our environment, our eco-systems, our health, and our way of life, in profound and I believe detrimental ways. Ways that are too late and too deep to be measured. For it’s far too late for them to ask us for permission to wreak havoc with the earth, as one assumes would have to happen in a democracy. But how late is it really? This is what we must ask ourselves.
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby cpellatt » Tue May 27, 2008 12:21 am

Nice job Socrates. Thank you!
cpellatt
 

Previous

Return to Frankensteinian Atmospheric Shenanigans

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron
suspicion-preferred