Welcome
Welcome to All Aircraft Are Not Involved.

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

Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention

dialogue and research on chemical trails

Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention

Unread postby Isard » Sat Apr 17, 2010 10:09 am

I found about this conference at http://www.climate.org website

The Climate Institute
Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention
Pacific Grove, CA. March 22-26, 2010
http://www.climate.org/resources/climate-archives/conferences/asilomar.html

The Scientific Organizing Committee for the Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention Technologies drafted and approved the following statement after consideration of valuable input from Conference participants. The list of those conference attendees who have asked to be identified as supporters of the statement can be found below under the heading “Individual Supporters of the Conference Statement"
Conference Statement

More than 175 experts from 15 countries with a wide diversity of backgrounds (natural science, engineering, social science, humanities, law) met for five days (March 22-26, 2010) at the Asilomar conference center in Pacific Grove, CA. The participants explored a range of issues that need to be addressed to ensure that research into the risks, impacts and efficacy of climate intervention methods is responsibly and transparently conducted and that potential consequences are thoroughly understood. The group recognized that given our limited understanding of these methods and the potential for significant impacts on people and ecosystems, further discussions must involve government and civil society.

Such discussions should be undertaken with humility and recognition of the threats posed by the rapid increase in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations.

Participants reaffirmed that the risks posed by climate change require a strong commitment to mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions, adaptation to unavoidable climate change, and development of low-carbon energy sources independent of whether climate intervention methods ultimately prove to be safe and feasible.

The fact that humanity’s efforts to reduce global emissions of greenhouse gases (mitigation) have been limited to date is a cause of deep concern. Additionally, uncertainties in the response of the climate system to increased greenhouse gases leave open the possibility of very large future changes. It is thus important to initiate further research in all relevant disciplines to better understand and communicate whether additional strategies to moderate future climate change are, or are not, viable, appropriate and ethical. Such strategies, which could be employed in addition to the primary strategy of mitigation, include climate intervention methods (solar radiation management) and climate remediation methods (carbon dioxide removal).

We do not yet have sufficient knowledge of the risks associated with using methods for climate intervention and remediation, their intended and unintended impacts, and their efficacy in reducing the rate of climatic change to assess whether they should or should not be implemented. Thus, further research is essential.

Recognizing that governments collectively have ultimate responsibility for decisions concerning climate intervention and remediation research and possible implementation, this conference represented a step in facilitating a process involving broader public participation. This process should ensure that research on this issue progresses in a timely, safe, ethical and transparent manner, addressing social, humanitarian and environmental issues.


Take a special look at the "Post-Conference Briefing".
http://www.climate.org/PDF/AsilomarConferenceSummary.pdf


Isard
User avatar
Isard
truth warrior
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:04 pm
Location: Uruguay

Re: Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention

Unread postby socrates » Tue Apr 20, 2010 12:58 pm

Nice find, Isard. This was a big story. I'm not seeing it having gotten any coverage by mainstream newspapers. Back in January The Guardian reported on it being scheduled but did no follow up. The only folks who ever seem to cover these types of things are science blogs. Here's a piece done by Wired.com. They report that the founder of the Climate Response Fund has a financial interest in a geoengineering company. Not surprising.

Looking at the PDF, a few things stand out. Basically, these people want to play God. There is no doubt that they want to disperse aerosols into the stratosphere. They admit it. Mostly I see this all as propaganda. They want to astroturf that this type of geoengineering is the way to go, and that they are scientists with ethics who will not hide anything. They say the funding will come from the governments, yet that the militaries will not be involved. Yeah, right, give me a break. And NASA is a civilian agency. :evil:

I'll put up a few screenshots.

Don't be a stranger. You're the only one left it seems. Zapp has disappeared. The only other people who ever sign up tend to be nutjobs, fake or otherwise. I've kind of given up on blogging about the ptb's messing with the atmosphere. I've been blogging in other areas at DFQ2. You're more than invited to participate there. I even made one chemtrail entry there. I'll link to this one also.

I try to make a post at AAANI now and then just to let the forum host know we are still ticking.

I saw some chemtrails the other day. The conditions needed for cirrus aviaticus yet again were not present. But this is not anything new. I'd also like to repeat that chemtrails appear to be different from geoengineering. That can't be emphasised enough. Chemtrails are about blocking out uv radiation, imho after research and reflection. Geoengineering is about keeping the temperatures down.

Climate change has been classified as an issue of national security. Thus we will never be informed of what's truly going on, despite what these Dr. Frankensteins say.

They made it seem like the conference was an open house for the media.

The Conference was open to the media,* and there was significant participation

Total media participation included 19 individuals, representing:
•The American Scholar
•Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, documentary (3)
•Chemical and Engineering News
•The Economist
•Monterey County Herald
•Mother Jones
•Nature
•New Scientist
•Science
•Science News
•University of California
•Independent writers, local and freelance journalists, filmmakers (6)

* In addition to the press attending the plenary and breakout group sessions, there were interviews outside of the Conference sessions, and there was also a conference call/briefing for the press at the end of the meeting


But check this out. The quack scientists told them no names could be applied to quotes, and that only one part of the conference could be recorded. Wtf?

Image

This conference was all about putting lipstick on a pig. They said it wasn't about deployment but rather all about working on "legal, ethical, societal, economic, and governance issues." These were to be the only things the media would be allowed to record, and even then quotes could not be attributed to the individuals making them. Hmmm. This conference was all about spreading propaganda about psychotic geoengineering.

These are the creeps who make up the Scientific Organizing Committee:
Dr. Michael MacCracken, Climate Institute (Chair), Dr. Paul Crutzen, Max Planck Institute, and Scripps Institution of Oceanography (corresponding member), Dr. Scott Barrett, Lenfest Professor of Natural Resource Economics, Columbia University, Dr. Roger Barry, Director of the World Data Center for Glaciology and Distinguished Professor of Geography, University of Colorado, Dr. Steven Hamburg, Chief Scientist, Environmental Defense Fund, Dr. Richard Lampitt, Senior Scientist, National Oceanography Center and Professor, University of Southampton, Dr. Diana Liverman, Director of the Institute of the Environment and Professor of Geography and Regional Development, University of Arizona, US. Senior Fellow in the Environmental Change Institute, Oxford University, Dr. Thomas Lovejoy, Heinz Center Biodiversity Chair at the Heinz Center for Science and the Environmen,t Dr. Gordon McBean, Professor, Departments of Geography and Political Science and Director of Policy Studies at the Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction, The University of Western Ontario, Dr. John Shepherd, Professorial Research Fellow in Earth System Science, School of Ocean and Earth Science, National Oceanography Centre, University of Southampton, and Deputy Director (External Science Coordination) of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, Mr. Stephen Seidel, Vice President for Policy Analysis and General Counsel at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Dr. Richard Somerville, Distinguished Professor Emeritus and Research Professor at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego, Dr. Tom M.L. Wigley Professor, University of Adelaide and Senior Scientist, National Center for Atmospheric Research


The participants came from 14 nations:
Australia 6 Austria 1 Brazil 2 Canada 3 Germany 3 India 2 Israel 1 Japan 1 The Netherlands 3 South Africa 2 Spain 2 Sweden 2 United Kingdom 16 United States 137


Image

Presentations were given on "approaches to climate intervention for which research is being proposed."
John Shepherd FRS, University of Southampton: Introduction and Overview of Proposed Approaches to Climate Intervention, Phil Rasch, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory: Model Analyses of the Potential for Aerosols in the Troposphere or Stratosphere to Limit Incoming Solar Radiation, David Keith, University of Calgary: Experimenting with Solar Radiance Engineering: Possibilities, Limits and their Policy Implications, Richard Lampitt, National Oceanography Centre: The Potential for and Challenges of Enhancing Ocean Uptake of Carbon, Jerry Melillo, Marine Biological Laboratory: The Potential for and Challenges of Storing More Carbon in the Terrestrial Biosphere, David Keith/Rob Socolow (subbing for Klaus Lackner), University of Calgary/Princeton University:Status of Air Capture Techniques


Wow, I highlighted above the word troposphere. Could that be a smoking gun for chemtrails?

For the propaganda part, presentations were given "on the social science context for research on potential climate intervention."

Catherine Redgwell, University College, London: The International Legal Framework for Climate Intervention, Oran Young, University of California Santa Barbara: Governing Climate Intervention: Lessons from the Study of International Institutions, David Morrow, University of Chicago: Ethical principles for trials of climate intervention technologies, Steve Smith, PNNL: The economic context for climate intervention, Scott Barrett, Columbia University: Geoengineering: Incentives and Institutions, David Victor, University of California San Diego: Regulating the Testing of Geoengineering Systems, Granger Morgan, Carnegie-Mellon University: Decision-making Frameworks for Geoengineering Policies


Now that I think about it, these fockers say one of their goals is to have temperature averages drop. Perhaps chemtrails have been about trying to do so. I say chemtrails are about blocking out uv radiation because of ozone depletion. But there could be some other reasons. But, and here's the rub, they are Frankensteinian rationales. This has nothing to do with aliens, mind control, weather wars (enmod), or any other stupid, kooky ideas that the major chemtrail websites have pushed.

You asked folks to take a special look at the end of the pdf. Here it is. Thanks again for your efforts, Isard. It's nice to know there are others out there who understand wtf is going on. They do say no national security exemptions in regards to disclosure. Yeah, right. The nature of national security secrecy is that we never know about it without whistleblowing. That's a hollow declaration to make.

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention

Unread postby socrates » Tue Apr 20, 2010 11:41 pm

The volcano in Iceland is a good reminder of what crazy fools like Paul Crutzen want to do. He wants to inject sulfur particles into the stratosphere and create fake cirrus. Problem is too much sulfur will result in acid rain. What if there is a lot of volcano activity coinciding with their playing God? Someone needs to put a stop to this nonsense. I'll try to check out if some of the science blogs are still fighting these maniacs through the keyboard. I remember most scientists have been calling this bullshite for what it is, a manmade threat to both the Earth and its inhabitants.

Mysterious Volcano Lightning Creates Pretty Pictures
In Photos: Lightning electrifies volcano ash

Image

Image
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention

Unread postby socrates » Sun Apr 25, 2010 1:53 pm

I've a few things to mention in this post.

Here's an article written by Gavin Schmidt. He works for NASA as a climatologist. He is proof that there is hope to stop the Dr. Evils of the world. Nothing is etched in stone. We the people can and must fight for democratic ideals and a stop to the madness.

Why Levitt and Dubner like geo-engineering and why they are wrong

Here's the money quote.
Geo-engineering is neither cheap, nor a fix, and the reasons why it is very likely to be a bad idea are ethical and legal, much more than its still-uncertain scientific merits.


*****************************************************************************************************************************

In a private message, Isard shared a link.

Hands Off Mother Earth
Image

From fishing around that website, I went from one link to another and ended up watching an interesting video at youtube. A weatherman made a startling statement. He said that military aircraft had produced fake cirrus. While his explanation was that it had to do with chaff for radar purposes (not what chemtrails are really about) doesn't take away from the fact that what we have sensed, this man has confirmed. All Aircraft Are Not Involved! The only part of the segment ye might want to watch is from about a minute into the clip.




Here in Southern Oregon and Northern California, we've got a bit of an unusual situation. Now this first portion of the radar cycle is fairly bland and typical, but then you see these bands of very distinct cloud cover moving into the region. That is not rain. That is not snow. Believe it or not. military aircraft flying through the region are dropping chaff- small bits of aluminum, sometimes it's made of plastic, even metallized paper products. But it's used as an anti-radar issue, and obviously they're up there practicing. Now they won't confirm that, but I was in the Marine Corps for many years, and I'll tell you right now, that's what it is.


Image


Image


Image
Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention

Unread postby socrates » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:02 pm

MSNBC has come out with a report on plans for geo-engineering.


MSNBC video link if youtube one is pulled

Like I've said many times before, I don't think chemtrails are for geoengineering global warming. Though it is pretty much the same process, just lower it to the troposphere. Here are some bizarre looking chemclouds from Canberra, Australia. Pay heed to the fine sheet which has formed in front of the sun. That's what chemtrails evolve into. The follow-up trails are for reinforcement. HAARP allows the ptb's to be able to manipulate the jet stream and spread the gunk out to their satisfaction. The top sheet could be geo-engineering, while the lower trails could be for blocking out harmful solar radiation getting through due to holes in the ozone layer. The bottom line is that these are not trails inadvertently forming from commercial air traffic contrails. They are being deliberately produced. Climate change is considered an issue of national security. Thus we are not being consulted.

Image

Image



Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention

Unread postby socrates » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:34 pm

I've crossposted some from this thread to DFQ2. Posts can be made there without the need to register. DFQ2 enables us to bring this issue out more to the mainstream.

Former Marine Corps Weatherman Admits Fake Clouds Are Being Produced
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts


Return to Frankensteinian Atmospheric Shenanigans

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron
suspicion-preferred