All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 23, 2012 - InfoWars Nightly News
01:10:59
20121123_Fri_NightlyNews
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Thank you.
.
Yeah.
Welcome to InfoWars Nightly News.
Thank you for tuning in.
Thank you for supporting Liberty and a true alternative press for a free country.
On this 23rd night of November 2012, on this Friday night, I thought that we would retransmit for all the viewers out there a very important special report we did for PrisonPlanet.tv that I don't think got the attention it deserved.
The head of Skywatch California Rosalind Peterson, who has done just an amazing job exposing the aerosol spraying campaigns and other things that are going on in our atmosphere.
And here she is with the Chemtrail cover-up, Rosalind Peterson, here on InfoWars Nightly News in this in-depth interview and analysis.
Rosalind Peterson is an environmental impact analyst and founder of California Skywatch.
Today, Rosalind is a leader in the fight to expose the true nature of the chemicals being sprayed in our skies.
She has compiled extensive data documenting the ongoing geoengineering and weather modification programs contaminating our skies, water, and food supply.
My name is Rosalind Peterson and I was born and raised in Mendocino County in California.
I was on a working farm in Mendocino County and grew up on a working farm.
So I have a background in agriculture.
I could drive a cat tractor.
I could do the irrigation systems.
I decided to take environmental studies and planning course at Sonoma State University where I got my degrees.
After some training, I became an agriculture crop loss adjuster.
Which meant that if there were any crops that failed in California for any reason, crop loss adjusters were sent by the state of California to go investigate where these crop losses were and why there were crop losses throughout the state.
So I was traveling about 50,000 miles a year in this process from county to county assessing what kind of crops, what kind of damage they had, And looking into the reasons for the failure itself and how much value the crop was that was lost at that particular time and then if there was a crop loss that was legitimate then ranchers or farmers could be paid crop insurance for the loss of their crops.
In 98, I began to notice just a little bit of tree decline on the property here.
I began to notice that some trees didn't look as healthy and I started to worry about that.
Just in the background is something that was nagging because I was concerned about losing the beautiful trees we have around here.
Then in early 2000, I began to notice that
I would see jets and they would leave these little tiny trails and then the sky would white out after that and I was always irritated because our skies used to be so crystal clear and blue and gorgeous and all of a sudden you would see these jets and I kind of thought of them almost as joyriding and when they were or skywriting and when they did this then the sky would haze over and so I found myself when I was teaching tennis and being outdoors all the time
Or traveling for work that I was irritated a little bit about the idea that the skies were hazed over a lot.
So that was the first inkling.
And then in 2002, I was working for the Mendocino County Probation Department.
I was on a lunch break and a friend of mine stopped me and dragged me into his office and said, what do you know about this?
And I said, nothing.
And so he said, well, he said, look, he said, I want you to know that something strange is happening here, and I'm really concerned about it.
My brother, who's in the military, is concerned about this and has called me a couple of times to say he was concerned that there was something here that was going on that was not quite right.
He couldn't go any further, but he did take me outside that lunch hour and say, today is a really bad day.
And that's when he really brought my attention to watching the jets and how the jets would leave a small trail and that it would expand into these huge plumes.
And at that particular juncture of time, that day, I was in and bought a pair of binoculars, After work, and a camera, and I started taking pictures and watching what was going on.
And that day I had never seen so many jets flying in so many directions, leaving so many huge plumes that turned into the, you know, small trails that turned into these huge plumes in my life.
And I knew that something was wrong.
And that started me investigating what was going on.
In the beginning, when I first began to see, you know, notice the jets, I would see one and then I would see some white haze.
But I never did take notice of really any notice other than some irritation when we hazed out.
However, I can say that when I saw this particular day and I began to pay attention, I could hardly drive straight and I had to pull over all the time just to be able to look at these jets and say, look, this is not normal.
I think that there were a lot of jets flying that day because there were many going in the same direction leaving parallel lines.
And in subsequent days I would see many jets flying where the lines were parallel and there would be five or six or seven or eight all leaving trails at one time.
And I thought that that was really peculiar that there would be so many.
Later, I think that there were fewer jets, but that they would circle the county, and they'd go up one side of the county on the east side, and they'd go down the west side, and then they'd go up the east side, and so they would move around the county in kind of a clock-like, moving around a clock.
Later we discovered from talking to people in different counties that they were looping out over the Pacific Ocean and then coming back in and they were doing these huge loops.
Discovered that from the size of one plume and watching one plume expand that they could cover our skies in solid cloud cover in about three hours here in Mendocino County.
So that became my initiation and then I started to watch before work During lunch hour, after work, I started taking pictures and I started documenting what I was seeing because I thought that there was something wrong with this picture.
I had never seen anything like this in my entire lifetime.
My mother, who was in her 80s at the time, I showed her and she said, I've never seen anything like that in all the years I've lived here.
Nothing.
I went to look at NASA studies and NASA in their school program and also in their terminology and their research began to realize that there was a brand new phenomenon that was occurring in which jet contrails, instead of dissipating relatively quickly if you saw them in a few seconds, began to persist and grow and NASA studies proved that they turned into man-made clouds
That would change the climate, exacerbate global warming, impact natural resources.
And they began to show pictures on their website of clouds that look like these in the pictures next to me.
They would show these pictures.
And in showing these pictures, they were like what I was photographing in the skies above us.
So I realized that there was a great deal of interest by many agencies and universities into looking at these and what effect they were having on the climate, what effect they were having on raising humidity, what effect they were having on, in other words, what was going on with these that had changed.
why they were persisting but what happened was that they never did in any of their investigations most of the time they only looked at commercial airlines they didn't look at military uh... emissions and plumes the second thing that they never did is they never took into account that that there might be something environmentally unsound about having our skies covered over with these clouds in the beginning they just noted them
But they never addressed if anything was being sprayed or what changes in the jet or jet fuel or anything else was causing them.
They scrubbed all that documentation so all they did was identify them as persistent jet contrails.
In order to gain some sort of credibility and be able to speak at the United Nations and speak at other areas, if I had used the word, for example, chemtrail The United Nations would not have invited me as a keynote speaker because then I would have been talking about something that was listed on all these websites and by the Air Force by NOAA and NASA as a hoax.
So you don't gain the credibility of anyone or any group or agency when you just use the term.
So it didn't behoove me to use it and so I refused to do so.
NASA, first of all, in the late 1980s initiated a schools program for children K through 12.
And they started in some foreign countries and then they brought the program to the United States.
And NASA began to have children starting to count contrails because they said that they're satellites and also that they couldn't count them from the ground.
So therefore they needed school children to do this as part of a kind of like a game.
I think that they really began to want children to think that this was a normal phenomenon.
And so, in the late 1980s, this program started to go through.
When we offered to give our videotapes and our pictures and called up NASA and said, look, we'll provide this because we've done day-to-day time, date, everything on the pictures and on the videotapes.
And NASA turned us down because school children, as they put it, were more reliable.
Now, the other thing that was odd, I kid you not, this is what I was told.
I mean, I was speechless at this point, but that's what I was told.
So then, the second thing I found out, by calling the National Weather Service, and I would ask them, are you on, you know, online, are you looking at the satellite?
And they said, yes.
And I said, can you look over Ukiah?
And they said, yes.
And I said, well, can you see a jet, you know, leaving a plume?
And so I was on the phone with them and I found that within a few seconds, if a jet leaves the plume and it starts to get a little bit larger, not real small, but a little bit larger, they can see the plume expanding.
And we were talking about the same one that was going right over Ukiah and the plume was expanding.
And I said, well how come in your weather reports you don't talk about this as man-made clouds or persistent jet contrails?
how come you're talking about this as being a front, a weather front?
And they said, "Well, that's the way we deal with it because it's clouds.
So we look at it that this is being, you know, a weather front is coming through and this would produce these clouds." "Well," I said, "But it's not being produced by a weather front.
The barometer is not dropping.
There's nothing going on." I said, "How come you don't just use the terminology?" And he said, "Well, we just don't." So it was an odd dichotomy of having your weather reporters who could see these on satellite, which told me that the argument that school children could do better and that they couldn't see the contrails from satellite, they can see them and they can see the cloud cover.
I even found out from the National Weather Service that they can see haze.
They can actually, it's so good, they can identify haze.
So, I begin to think to myself, well, if they're seeing all this, why isn't it being reported?
And it's curious because, now weathermen will talk about it, if the cloud, if Ukiah was, the sun was occluded and all these man-made clouds appeared over Ukiah and covered the whole thing, after three hours, They would say, well, it was a front, but you could look to the west and there was no cloud and there was the barometer hadn't dropped.
There was no cloud front coming in from the Pacific.
There was none from any direction.
And yet we were covered over in this man-made clouds and haze.
And they were saying that this was part of a weather front.
So I began to find that I was not happy with what was being said about what we were seeing in the skies.
So then it became identifying how long these trails persisted, filming them over time to see how much they expanded, how large someone got.
We looked at the Blackcon trails, we looked at the jets themselves and odd behavior of jets.
The configuration on the jets was absolutely terrible because all these agencies were saying it was increasing jet traffic And yet we could tell from the flight patterns that we got from the FAA that a lot of the flights were not, were military.
They weren't normal flight patterns.
My Congressman Mike Thompson from California First District, due to several inquiries, He got these maps for me.
They're three maps and they're from the FAA and then his office sent them to me.
And the map shows the San Francisco, Bay Area, Mendocino County and I had asked how many flights there were over Mendocino County.
So he gave me three separate maps.
One is incoming air traffic to Oakland, San Francisco, and San Jose.
One is outgoing flights to those same locations.
And then a third one was what they call intraflights.
And this is designated on the map in yellow.
What we discovered was in Mendocino County there weren't many commercial flights flying over Mendocino County.
So, in not having many commercial flights flying over Mendocino County, we discovered that it was the intraflights that we were seeing looping the loop around the county and making the X's in the cross hatchings.
And from these maps, I first learned about intraflights, and I also figured out that commercial airlines were in trouble.
So when you have commercial airlines, if you'll note in the green and the red and the blue areas, all of these flights leave the airport, they take a trajectory and they fly in a straight line to wherever their destination is.
They don't have extra fuel to loop.
The yellow ones, however, they do the loop around the county and they have a few planes, not very many, but they can do many, many loops and back and forth crisscrossing.
So you'll see the loops.
And that's how we begin to figure out that the jets Leaving the persistent contrails, which turned into these heavy plumes and cross-hatching, were actually the ones that were the intraflights that were moving around.
But we had very few that flew over Mendocino County itself, so the commercial airline impact for our county is so small here.
Absolutely so small that there wouldn't be the type of impact from seeing many persistent jet contrails from them.
And they fly straight.
They never loop.
The jets around us look like racetracks sometimes, where they're going in an oval around the county, or they're going over the Pacific Ocean, over to Lake County, and back.
So they're traveling across many counties in these circular patterns.
And this was the first time I had the FAA representation to show this particular endeavor.
Okay, this area here, right here, is Mendocino County, Sonoma County on one side, and Humboldt County on the other side.
But this area here, you can see that the majority of the jet traffic in the green and the red is not covering and not going across our county.
So it's mostly free of commercial air traffic.
Now, the yellow here are what they call intraflights.
And this is where they go in all directions.
Now, there are no flights which leave Sacramento to the east of us that fly out over the Pacific.
No commercial flights.
So therefore, the intra-flights go in this direction, they go towards Sacramento, they go in all directions, but you can see the big loop pattern here, which would give you, if they were leaving persistent jet controls that persisted, then you would see these different loops.
Other jet patterns loop around the county like this.
So we started to see that from this map we learned that intraflights couldn't possibly be commercial airlines because they'd be using so much fuel and they'd be off their schedule.
And so, because when you get on a flight, they say so much time and you go straight.
You don't loop and loop and loop unless there's a weather problem at an airport or something.
But this is way too far away for them to be looping into the San Francisco Bay Area, which is way down here.
So, and these loops are way out of their range for being in any type of feeding pattern to San Francisco, Oakland or San Jose.
So this is when I first learned about inter-flights, but this is also when I confirmed that there wasn't much Air traffic over Mendocino County.
So this made us unique in being able to look at the phenomenon of persistent jet contrails and know that when the jets were going in certain directions, it wouldn't be any type of commercial patterns.
So that's why we know that the big jets flying and the big ones we really saw all of the time, many of them unmarked or not clearly marked, were a part of this inter-flight pattern that you can see on this map.
Persistent geochondrials that persist and stay in the environment for up to 20 hours.
This is like geoengineering.
It means that you're artificially, man-made in some way, changing our environment.
You're adding particulates, you're adding something to the atmosphere, and it's more deliberate than not, but what you can add is you can add particles and chemicals Weather modification is geoengineering, making it rain somewhere where it normally wouldn't.
So we have all of these things where we talk about geoengineering.
The interesting part of geoengineering is that it's now being proposed as a way to put particulates in the atmosphere so that we can stop the direct sunlight from reaching the Earth.
It means that they could add iron particles to the ocean.
That's another form of geoengineering.
In other words, when you have jets that change the climate, that's another form of mad-made geoengineering.
So geoengineering means something that you're going to do in the atmosphere that would not normally be happening on any normal type of basis.
In other words, a volcano would be normal.
The particulates coming up from a volcano, for example, would be a normal phenomenon, and then we would take whatever consequences comes from that.
However, when you start taking and talking about, as Holdren is, he's Obama's science advisor, talking about taking care of global warming, in other words, by putting particles in the air, like sulfur or some other particles, then that means that we're going to take some action where we're going to try to interfere with some normal processes that are going on.
And the problem with this, for example with sulfur, is that sulfur In the sense of it, we took it out of diesel fuel in California in 2006 and we said we have to clean it up because kids get asthma from sulfur, lots of health problems associated with too much sulfur and diesel fuel.
We take it out of diesel fuel and then someone says, comes along like Paul Crutzen and he says, we're going to put it up in the atmosphere to obscure the sunlight So less sunlight reaches the earth and therefore that will cool us down.
But what about the health effects?
If you have to take it out of diesel fuel, then my question is, why are you going to put up something that's not helpful into the atmosphere and try to change the process that we live under?
And that's what geoengineering is.
It's taking something and you're going to artificially induce something into our environment that's going to change for some reason.
For example, stopping global warming or slowing it down.
Let me go back to 2006 in November.
NASA Ames in California had a meeting of geoengineers from all over the world.
It was a big meeting.
It went on for a week, and it was not open to the public.
During the course of this meeting, they were talking about these different geoengineering projects that they were studying.
These were university professors, different people, and there were many proposals that were put forward at this meeting.
I was lucky enough to be present at the one day public event that they had on this meeting where several of the scientists and college professors spoke at this meeting with regard to geoengineering.
One of the things we have on tape because it was allowed to be videotaped is that they were talking about the word geoengineering and many of the geoengineering people in 2006 said that they had kept the word out of the public realm
Because they knew that if the public would find out about some of their schemes of putting chemicals into the air, to shooting salt into the air, all kinds of different experiments, that the public might say no.
So they actually admitted that they kept the word geoengineering out of text and out of You can't find it in a lot of college textbooks at any lower level in high school, or you can't find it in undergraduate classes a lot of times in colleges.
I found that to be true because I went back and looked.
So what happened was the phrase was taken out, but a lot of scientists were getting money to study how they could interfere with the normal atmospheric conditions.
So there was weather modification, there was planning to put chemicals or particles in the air, and so these schemes had been around for a long time, but they weren't really discussed in any public forum.
They were discussed within their own cliquey group, essentially.
I think that they're trying to begin to put it out to the public because they've been experimenting on it for a long time and they want to do more experiments and they need the funding.
And one of the things that these geoengineers were talking about at their meeting that we heard is that they wanted to be able to take these programs forward and make them public so that they got more funding for experiments with these programs.
This is the curiosity, though, is that they were talking about shooting up ocean water into the atmosphere.
In other words, in salt particulates.
And they knew from some experiments that salt particulates rain out quickly.
Well, if you shoot salt particulates into clouds as a particulate to make it rain, when that cloud rains out over land, you're going to salt up your soils and make it unproductive for agriculture.
You're going to salt up your drinking water sources.
What they wanted to do was add other programs that they wanted to experiment on into the atmosphere to test their different hypotheses.
About their studies, and in this way they would gain more university funding through the US government, the Pentagon, whoever wanted to know, you know, in other words, sponsor these studies.
Private individuals could also contribute as well.
So a whole culture had built up about how we can put things into the atmosphere to cool us down, and this is one of them.
I went back and I knew from previous experience working within the California state government that all drinking water tests for every drinking water source in the state of California, now anything that's a winery, anything that's used for public consumption with so many people except for private wells,
All drinking water sources, every district, every well, every producer of grapes who had a winery on his place and used well water, whatever it was, all had to test their water.
And they have to do the tests that are required, hundreds of them, under the EPA.
It occurred to me that if anything was being sprayed at any one time, if I could identify it, it might be showing up in drinking water tests.
So there's a CD that's public, it's free of charge, anyone can buy it.
It's got about 18 million bytes of data on it.
And you can go up and you can get one or you can email the state.
They'll send you one immediately within three or four days.
And you can look at every drinking water test taken since 1972 in the state of California.
I cannot tell you how many tests this amounts to because every month, every week, they're taking tests all the time, all over the state, different utilities, different districts.
I went back and looked at spreadsheets of every county, city, state, whatever, and I tried to determine from looking at all this data if there was anything that looked unusual.
I found herbicides and pesticides were expected to find them in the Central Valley where they use a lot of herbicides and pesticides.
So I kind of took those out.
I looked at everything that I thought you would normally find downwind of a factory.
After I got rid of all of those, I began to look at was there anything showing up in all the drinking water spikes across California on a pretty consistent level.
Initially, I looked for things like barium, aluminum, manganese, magnesium, calcium.
I looked at what the pH of the water was to see if I could find any blips in pH.
But what I discovered was that during the course of the year starting in 1990, no less, that the water sources were all registering unusual spikes.
Now they weren't spiking just alone.
Almost every water test in the state of California was showing spikes in a certain year and a certain month for certain of these chemicals.
And I have a list of them and I will be able to give them to you, but I was absolutely amazed and surprised about these spikes and I said, what's going on?
Why are these spikes occurring in almost all the drinking water sources all at the same time?
Across the state of California.
Now sometimes wells would spike in a time distance if they had any type of, the water that would come down in rainfall or flooding would get into the well systems.
Then you would show spikes later and not as high because of percolation problems.
But we began to find these spikes.
And it began to tell me that somebody somewhere was beginning to use inordinate amounts of arsenic, barium, aluminum, calcium, manganese, magnesium, and that all of these things, lead, iron, were all spiking at the lead, iron, were all spiking at the same time.
How can you have them spiking in the same time across the entire state of California when prior to the 1990s, and they were testing for these chemicals prior to the 1990s, that they weren't showing up in water systems at all, or they weren't spiking.
And all of a sudden, way over state and federal standards, we found this data.
A friend of mine took and graphed every single water district, every single piece of data.
And we now have a graphing program so we can look at any water system in California and we can determine if they were spiking in unison with any other water system across the state of California.
It took 300 hours to write a program to do this.
Monumental chore to do.
But we now have it.
And we can show you the graphs.
We can show you the actual water data from the state and show that these are unusual spikes.
My job then began to go and look at graphs that were provided by the California Air Resources Board and what we discovered is that the spiking from the California Air Resources Board air tests were also spiking in the same years and at the same time and coordinated with the spikings in the water supply which led us to believe That this was something that was airborne and had to be hitting us from the air.
Now the California Air Resources Board did do a number of tests to see if any of these chemicals over time, and they weren't doing it because of us, they were doing it out of curiosity, but they did run some tests to see if any of these chemicals were coming over from China.
And what they found is, if there was, it wasn't in any great quantity.
And for the most part, here in Mendocino County, where they had one test site, there wasn't anything coming over.
So, that led me to believe that it had to be over us.
Something had to be happening that was happening here, versus maybe somewhere else coming in from the Pacific.
So that set me off to look at government documents on these chemicals.
How dangerous they were, where they were being used, factories, everything.
And what I found out was that we were having these spikes here and we have no industry between the Pacific Ocean and Hawaii and where we are here in Mendocino County.
There wasn't any industry and the few industries that were small and weren't consequential because they didn't release anything that would look like the massive amounts of lead and iron and barium would not be coming from those particular plants.
Professor Gregory Benford in 2006 was on KNBC and interviewed on television in Burbank, California, And what happened is he said that you can mix aluminum and barium and you can make clouds.
And that he saw it coming that they would be able to put these clouds where they wanted them to do what they wanted to with them.
And he is part of the geoengineering group that I was present at when they had that meeting at NASA Ames.
The second thing is that I started to look at other programs that the government was doing, atmospheric testing programs, other things, not related to the jets, and I began to find that these chemicals were being shot up on the space shuttle and shot up on rockets.
And that they would send canisters packed with sulfur hexafluoride, which is a man-made chemical which exacerbates global warming, barium, aluminum, trimethylaluminum, strontium, lithium, and they would send the canisters up, release them at different levels in the atmosphere, and to do ionospheric testing, they would superheat them until they exploded.
And then they would do these chemical reactions much like explosions you would see from light shows and things like that.
You'd have this big explosion and then you would go through and these chemicals would blow up and intermix.
So, the barium, I began to think that were these coordinating, these atmospheric tests, were they coordinating with the spikes in California and other areas?
And I believe that from some of the data that I looked at, trying to correspond the dates of the tests, when they were done, and also the water data, and the air data, I think that some of these could have actually added to the water pollution in the state of California, airborne, because this would come down.
Now, a lot of people have associated the jets with releasing different types of chemicals.
I do know from the EPA that there's a whole host of chemicals, jet fuel emissions.
And they're highly polluting, just like automobile exhaust.
Carcinogens are involved in them.
They deplete beneficial atmospheric ozone.
They have crop damage associated with them.
Some of the chemicals are involved in short-term memory loss, other things.
So, we do know that in this plume it's not benign water vapor and ice crystals.
But I could never find any documentation which would say that anything else was being sprayed.
And with all these other chemicals being used in other government programs, it would be very hard to make a correlation unless you actually got into the plume and took a test.
But since most of the planes that are leaving these big, huge plumes are military airplanes, you can't fly in that airspace.
Pilots would be arrested and it would be extremely dangerous to get into that airspace under Homeland Security rules and regulations to be able to take the test.
So having to take a test at altitude and in other areas, it makes it very difficult.
The government has not expressed any interest, nor have elected officials, in actually putting the subject to rest by testing these plumes either.
So what they do is NASA, NOAA, a lot of studies, university studies, they look at these plumes and say, yes, these are man-made clouds.
They don't say how they turn into man-made clouds, if it's chemical or whatever.
And then they discuss the fact that in these clouds, that it's causing certain types of problems.
Covering us in cloud cover, dimming the sun, and then it's changing our climate and negatively impacting natural resources.
The spiking in these chemicals, the state of California and all water districts across the United States and the EPA all require water testing and they test for chemicals in the water that are hazardous to human health in some way.
If they figure that a chemical is not hazardous to human health or animals, etc., they normally don't test for it.
But the minute that they think that it's going to get up above a certain level that it would be injurious, they test for it to make sure that they try to keep it below that standard or to keep it out of our drinking water supplies altogether.
So the concern is that when we're seeing these spikes over stated health, you know, when they go up above any acceptable level that the EPA has put in place for these chemicals, we know they're dangerous.
They're going to have a human health impact.
And they're going to have a human health impact on animals, humans, anybody that is coming in contact with these chemicals.
So this is what we know is that the EPA and all these government agencies wouldn't be testing unless there was a problem.
What impact they're going to have is each chemical has a different property to it, and they have synergistic effects.
So it's hard to say that if you are exposed to a whole source of chemicals, what the synergistic effect.
In other words, each chemical will have one property.
For example, barium can raise blood pressure just as one.
But when you combine that with other chemicals, then what kind of reaction are you going to get?
How much are you exposed to, etc.? ?
So we have that element of it, but persistent jet contrails, on the other hand, are changing our climate and they're changing the agriculture part of what's going on with us.
When you change the climate and you change the microclimates and you put in more cloud cover, you're going to lower crop production.
And they know this from University of Illinois corn crop studies, that if you have normal rainfall but you have more cloud cover, crop production drops.
In areas where you had direct sunlight mixed with normal weather, then you would have increased crop production.
So, just putting and saying that these are ice crystals and water vapor, it's benign in the environment, not true because it can heat us up.
It can change the amount of sunlight reaching the earth so it can affect the health of crops, health of your trees, because without photosynthesis, trees and plants can't grow strong enough to produce.
And you need all of this.
So to say that we're going to cut off the sunlight by either geoengineering or through allowing these persistent jet contrails to keep persisting, what we're saying is we're changing our climate, we're doing a geoengineering project, and it's going to have consequences on our food supply, Any chemicals added would have consequences on our water supply.
So there's a broad impact here.
So whether I know what, if jets are spraying anything in particular, what I do know is that they're already harming the environment and that there's a lot of studies that talk about the impact in coming years will be tremendous.
In some cases, they don't know what the effects are.
They want to experiment.
And they readily admitted that.
That was one.
Two, they want to be able to continue with their work, because that's job security for a lot of university professors.
Three, several of them have stated, well, you know, the public, we're going to be who the world turns to when global warming becomes this big problem.
They're going to ask us to save the world.
We're going to be the new stewards of the environment and our programs are going to be the ones that will be initiated to save the world from global warming or whatever catastrophe.
So therefore we have to experiment now, get the funding and experiment now or continue our experiments so that we are ready to be the new stewards of the environment.
But the problem is when you start putting up chemicals and you start doing atmospheric experiments, you start to impact agriculture, food supplies, watersheds.
You start to impact everything that we depend upon for life on Earth.
And what happens if their programs go awry?
And when they were asked this, they said, well, then, you know, it's just an experimental program.
You know, well, if someone gets hurt or harmed, well, so what?
Their attitude was very cavalier about this.
And Professor Benford actually wrote a program about the Arctic, and they said in his article, he even said, well, if something goes wrong, why, it will wash out eventually in the long term.
And if you have to sacrifice a few people or an area like the Arctic, then that's okay because it's all in the realm of scientific study.
So, it's a fascinating article to read.
I think it's actually the underlying cause of all of this and some of the funding is military funding.
Because the military wants to be able to control the weather.
The military has got an agenda.
That if they control the weather, they can control any country to make it do whatever they want.
And many documents, Owning the Weather 2025, there's several documents in which they talk about how rather than having some weapons of mass destruction, in other words bombs or something, if they could control the weather in a country they could actually force them and say look we will put you in drought, we will put you in floods.
So some of the experiments with the weather modification and other things that the geoengineers are doing Would mean that they would have, it would be a military application and a lot of money comes from the military sector for this.
I've looked at some of the universities and I looked at the funding chain.
In other words, who's funding these?
Because it has to be public and we know that the military is also initiating programs and paying for funding.
So when you look at the funding stream, you can see that it's private corporations, you can see that it's the military.
So there's a lot of funding in there that's not coming from you and I because we couldn't afford it.
And the big military budget is where there's a lot of extra money for experimentation.
So that's where a lot of the funding.
And then it's private corporations who will make money from these experiments going in and will produce whatever is needed to do these experiments.
So that funding is coming in.
It's like the CRESS program, the CRRES, when they were sending up these canisters loaded with chemicals to superheat, well, that was a NASA budget, that's the U.S.
Air Force budget, and then they do ionospheric testing.
Well, how do we know what impact that had on the environment that protects us around the Earth?
We don't really know.
We just don't really know.
The first thing that we started to notice about jets and these engines is they would leave a small contrail, very small.
You would see it behind the plane, it would disappear within seconds and be gone.
All of a sudden, this new phenomenon began to appear somewhere in the late 1980s, as far as I can document from Mendocino County, looking at pictures and weather documents and cloud pictures, old cloud pictures.
All of a sudden, there seemed to be a time when NASA and other agencies began to realize that contrails were beginning to persist.
So NASA started studying jet contrails and they started to see that they were persisting for up to 20 hours.
They could cover 4,000 square kilometers.
So they could cover huge areas.
One contrail this is.
So, NASA studies began to show that they were exacerbating warming, starting around 1975.
They began to show that there was a new phenomenon, which they didn't have before, had not seen before, where these contrails persisting, rather than dissipating very quickly, began to be something that they talked about, studied, etc.
We don't know, in other words, why they begin to persist.
This is one of the curiosities here.
And we just know that the studies, that they were studying them, but they didn't study what they were composed of, why they would be forming and, in other words, expanding to such huge sizes.
But my curiosity with NASA became that when they were talking about persistent jet contrails, they didn't talk about the fact that there were all these different varieties.
In other words, one side of the jet having one type of contrail, the other jet engine on the other side leaving a different type of contrail.
One would dissipate quickly, the other could leave a large plume.
We had black contrails that we were seeing here.
We had contrails that would turn into, it looked like toothpaste on a tube.
And when you saw these, we call them, I call them toothpaste trails.
When we saw them, what we noticed is that they would dissipate relatively quickly.
They'd break up into unusual configurations.
So, what I did is, in order to have people understand that what they were looking at were different types of trails that had different dissipation rates or would turn into haze, and also that these contrails that we were seeing would turn into different types of man-made clouds.
NASA just talks about jet contrails turning into mountain made clouds in their studies, but they don't tell you about the brown clouds.
They don't tell you about the different cloud configurations that these contrails turn into.
So one of the things I did from my pictures and from videotape and looking at different times is I compiled this index
In 2006 of some of the different types of contrails that we were seeing and I named them The reason I named them is people were telling me what they were seeing but they had no vocabulary so in naming them People would tell me that they would see toothpaste trails or they would see knots on a rope where you'd have a straight line with little bulges in it that looked like someone had tied knots in a rope and You would have black contrails.
So this particular document, poster, I created to put on the internet and to give to people so that they could see that this was different than anything that they had seen before.
So, when I started to document this, I took and I would find that there were things called bursts, where a jet would fly in leaving a contrail, and then all of a sudden you'd see this huge burst, no contrail leaving, but you would get this kind of configuration, and I go, well, what happened here?
Why did this create a burst which then expands for miles and miles and miles over the sky above us?
And why would this part of the trail turn into this type of configuration?
So this was odd.
So we had bursts.
Then this configuration on the same day we'd see other jets flying in and it would leave bursts that look like this.
And after a period of time they would turn into these kind of little cloud formations that would hang out in the sky around this bigger burst.
Now other trails that would be left would be absolutely huge.
And configuration.
And they'd start small, like up here.
Every one of these contrails started very small.
This is a fine line.
But then after watching for a minute or two, we would figure out that it would turn into one of these other configurations.
So some of them, we can tell right away, would turn into this type of a plume, which would turn into this white, in other words, kind of a cloud-like formation, but not a real cloud, It's a man-made cloud according to NASA, and it would cover the whole entire sky.
So these configurations, if we saw anything that looked like this after a short period of time, we knew that this would cover the whole sky.
Now, other configurations, knots on a rope, you'd have something that looked like waves, you would have what we call mushroom type of contrail, where part of the contrail turned into mushroom-like, it looked like mushrooms growing.
On one side of it, and the other side would not have that configuration.
So the two sides of the jet engine would release a different type of plume, which would turn into, on either side of the jet, one plume could dissipate quickly, the other plume could turn into a different configuration.
So we thought it odd.
Then we'd have black contrails that would expand and look, expand like the white ones, but look like black.
So we thought, well, what's being released that would turn black?
So all of these contrails I put into this poster so that people could see the feathers and the different ones.
And as this was on the internet, people began to say, we're seeing this type of plume today.
We're seeing a twist, where it looked like there's a twist on one end and then this big plume would come up.
So they could name the trails, how long they were seeing them.
So when I talk to people from around the world and in the United States, And we can discuss what type of trails that they're seeing, and then they tell me about more and send pictures of different ones.
Now, this one, this colorful one right here, almost looks like an aurora, and this type of contrail is usually laid out before we see this kind of configuration.
Now, without this, you can't see the color in the background unless you have the contrail here.
Show you what it looks like against the cloud.
You can't watch the experiment or whatever's going on.
We never saw anything like this when we were growing up.
My mother, who first saw these when we were back, first seeing this in 2002, ...said, never saw anything like this, we would have noticed.
Somebody would have been taking pictures of this.
Someone... See, it has to be new because there were no pictures of this.
So, this is why I invented this particular poster, just so that people could get an idea of the different types.
Well, then, what happens?
Why would you get different types?
And so, the standard answer is, well, there's different atmospheric conditions.
But then we found that one jet would lay a short contrail, another jet right behind it would be leaving one that turned into a huge plume, another one would leave white haze.
So we're saying it can't be just atmospheric conditions, there has to be something else going on.
Then we saw X's and stop and go's, where a plume would, a jet like this would leave a plume and then all of a sudden it would stop.
We saw spray apparatuses where there was a wingtip to wingtip Spraying.
So that you could see that there was spray coming off the entire length of the wing.
Stop for a while, then start again.
Stop for a while, start again.
So all of these things were going on and we're saying, this isn't just normal, something that we've seen since 1919, before we even had the equipment and no jet engines.
So when NASA says they've seen contrails, for example, since 1919, not from jet engines because they weren't in existence.
Many times in recent years we have seen this configuration, this aurora type configuration here.
However, when you go back into recorded history, people have been taking pictures for a long time.
People have been addressing this issue for a long time and there would have been pictures somewhere somewhere in the sixties and in the fifties someone would have been taking these kind of pictures looking at these type of clouds seeing these configurations and so that's why this is a new phenomenon and this is something we have to address because it's impacting agriculture and the amount of sunlight reaching the earth as these expand.
So we know that they're having certain problems, so we have to get our elected officials to begin to address these issues of how they're impacting our environment and are we going to allow this to continue?
And that's another issue here to be dealt with somewhere down the road.
But this is why I'm bringing all of this to attention.
Now the other thing is up in these pictures up here, a lot of pictures we have white haze.
And we never had white haze here.
We had clear, deep blue skies.
We could see the stars.
Now we have studies showing that telescopes are going to be worthless, because we're either going to have the white haze, or we're going to have these man-made clouds.
You won't be able to see the stars, which we can't a lot at night, because we've got all of this cloud cover and white haze going on.
But, a lot of times the jets will quit spraying here if they say there's some celestial event going on or there's going to be some sort of fireworks or an air show.
All of a sudden, how come we have blue skies?
Jets aren't leaving contrails anymore just because there's an air show or because some event is taking place.
So, sometimes we have no jets.
And our skies start to go back to blue and the white haze begins to dissipate, but then the minute that they start again, then we go back into having our skies look like this.
That leads us to questions on why rickets is on the rise, where children now in the United States are suffering from rickets, according to the CDC.
University of California at Berkeley, Kaiser Permanente Hospital, are all studying an increase in rickets.
Why are we having rickets?
Well, it's the turn of the century and when children worked in coal mines in the United States, those children suffered with this bone disease called rickets.
Now it's on the rise in the United States and could it be that we're having so much cloud cover from these persistent jet contrails that turn into man-made clouds and haze that we're getting less sunlight and therefore we're not getting enough vitamin D and we're getting cases of rickets.
No one is looking at this subject With regard to when they're studying rickets.
When I look at their studies, they're studying a lot of other things but they're not studying what's happening in our skies to determine if this is one of the causes and this is something that should be addressed.
What we see from the ground is we'll see a plume and then it expands.
And satellite pictures do show, and I have a lot of them, other people have a lot of them, we've seen them, do show the contrails and they show the cross hatching.
They show that they're expanding.
You can watch them over time on satellite pictures and you can see as there's flights going around over certain areas that they expand.
So, we can see them.
So, they can see them from space.
They can see them from the ground.
So, there's no secret here about who's flying the jets.
The FAA keeps records.
Homeland Security keeps records.
Everybody keeps records.
Who's leaving the contrails.
Where these planes take off from because they have to file a flight pass.
And they can see them and they can follow them at the National Weather Service to see how the plume expands.
So this is not a secret.
So the satellite pictures are very revealing and they're very good with looking at this type of phenomenon.
Global dimming just means that the amount of sunlight reaching the earth is beginning to be reduced by cloud cover, by haze, by pollutants.
So the studies have been going on for quite some time now showing that the amount of sunlight reaching the earth is being reduced.
Now, the catch-22 here is, if we're already reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth, then when the geoengineering community says, we need to put particulates up and we need to put other things in the atmosphere to reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth, we are already subjecting ourselves to global dimming from some of our activities and the jets.
So, wouldn't this cause a worse problem because we're not cooling down, technically?
Because we're in a global dimming cycle which is getting... the amount of sunlight reaching the earth is getting less and less.
So I have some questions about global dimming and also about scientists putting more things in the air to stop sunlight reaching the earth because if you don't have the sunlight then you don't have crop production as well.
So human health decline, you know, mental aid, depression, all kinds of things can happen because we obscure the sunlight from reaching the earth.
Weather modification means that someone puts a chemical or particulate, something into the air to seed clouds to get them to rain out or to snow in areas where they may not rain out or snow if left on the normal weather cycles.
So weather modification is done throughout the United States.
Anyone can modify the weather at any time without any congressional oversight, no state oversight, for the most part except for Texas has an advisory body.
But people can go and modify the weather.
They may or may not have to report to the federal government, NOAA, and if they have to report to NOAA, NOAA can probably waive any requirements for reporting, and that's why we think that we don't see a lot of ongoing weather modification reported in the eastern part of the United States, is because they may be waiving the requirement.
We're not sure about this.
But that's another level of investigation.
However, documents that I obtained from NOAA, they're all public record, anyone can obtain them, show that there's over 60 ongoing weather modification programs in the states that are marked in yellow.
Now, I designed this because of NOAA documents.
And documents from Canada and documents from weather modification companies who were openly talking about doing weather modifications in other countries.
So the yellow part of this section is all ongoing weather modification programs.
They can use rockets, small planes, large planes.
They can use any method to ground-based applications, sending shooting things into the air.
All these can be used in weather modification by companies or states or cities, private companies, private individuals, anyone can modify your weather.
Now, they don't need public consent, public permission.
They can use any chemical that they choose, experimental or servo-iodide, which has been around for a long time.
And so, all of these programs are ongoing.
One weather modification can modify 184,000 square miles at one time, and that's bigger than the square miles of the state of California.
Here.
California is only 164,000 square miles and yet one state is modifying 184,000 square miles.
That's bigger than Idaho is modifying only has 63,000 square miles but they can modify 184,000 square miles.
of, that's bigger than Idaho, is modifying, only has 63,000 square miles, but they can modify 184,000 square miles.
So the range that they're modifying is into other states over other areas.
Now, you can have rain enhancement, snow enhancement, you can have hail suppression, they can dissipate fog, all kinds of programs are going on.
But most of it is involved in putting rainfall or snow, more of it, or into areas where it doesn't usually get very much.
So you can, the impacts, the major impacts are agriculture, watersheds, tree areas that might be subjected to not getting as much rainfall.
And once these programs are implemented, they can't control the end result.
So you could get flooding, too much rain, not enough rain.
Now, Wyoming, for example, here, decided in 2006 to put more snow into the Wyoming mountains than ever in recorded history.
And what they intended to do with that extra is to run it all into Southern California to feed Southern California's thirst here.
So, they implemented the program and they were extremely successful.
Never had Wyoming had so much snow in its mountains.
However, since that time, Colorado and surrounding counties in Wyoming have on and off suffered drought, extreme drought, and they have less water coming down the Colorado River.
There's less in the watershed.
So you're having a problem that when you modify in one area, you're going to subtract or have a negative effect on another area.
Siskiyou County up here in the central part of the state, up north of us and east, fought PG&E and solved the problem of the weather modification that was going to be implemented there because they said, we don't want you to modify our weather to put our snow and our we don't want you to modify our weather to put our snow and So they put a stop to PG&E modifying the weather.
However, the city of Los Angeles is now got a weather modification in the San Gabriel Mountains.
And this weather modification is new.
So starting in 2008, and now we're having complaints from agriculture producers in this area that they're in drought and not getting enough rainfall.
The Panhandle Texas ranchers are,
Are complaining bitterly that weather and their snow and rainfall is being redirected into other areas by weather modification programs and that the grass isn't growing so that they either have to feed their cattle or go out of business and there's an online discussion of that on March 6, 2008 that you can download from the Texas regulatory body here to listen to their complaints and they even feel that some of the weather modification programs have triggered tornadoes.
And unusual weather events in their areas.
So this is what it looks like here.
Canada modifies the weather here.
You're having some experiments in Florida and you're having some experiments in Alaska.
And Mexico is modifying the weather.
So as the jet stream moves from west to east, California PG&E says, well, if we need extra water, we can take an extra 10% of the water from one of our programs and keep the water from traveling into Nevada.
We will have it rain out and put it in snow, and we will do that so that Nevada could get less water.
So, as the jet stream moves this way, and people are putting in more and more weather modification programs, it's going to affect agriculture, watersheds, water supplies, as it goes this way.
Because you're going to be putting it in places that don't need it for private gain, commercial gain.
A ski resort could have a weather modification over their ski resort, which might take water from somewhere else, or snow, from some other location.
We need to get Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison's bill, number 601, defeated this year because it allows anyone to mitigate or modify the weather with very little definition of mitigation in order to do what?
So, but all these government agencies would be allowed without congressional oversight or public consent to modify the weather.
So what happens to crop production?
What happens to normal climates?
We can disrupt the microclimates.
And we add to this the jets and NASA studies and IPC studies, lots of things, university studies showing that the jets are changing the climate.
So now we're modifying the weather and the jets are changing the climate.
No wonder people here are having, all across the United States are having weird weather events or lightning events or because there's lots of experiments We have lightning experiments as well going on.
So there's lots of things going on which impact all of us, but it's our food supply and our water supply that is going to be impacted the most from all of this.
I'm not sure to what extent, but we're becoming more and more sophisticated in being able to possibly manipulate the jet stream.
We're being more sophisticated in what MIT professor Emmanuel said in a television program that I saw on the Discovery Channel that was talking about this issue.
He was saying that what we can do is we can take carbon black Okay, and we can take jets and we can release carbon black on the west coast and as it heats up going across the United States, it creates these weather fronts that grow in intensity.
And what it can do is it can, these weather fronts grow in intensity so that when there's a hurricane coming in over here, the jet stream and these fronts are moving this way and it would push the hurricanes off the coast.
Now, he talked about a fleet of jet airplanes releasing carbon black that would create these disturbances or perturbances, as he calls them, or fronts.
My question is, what happens to the weather as this carbon black, which is soot, Which is a pollutant that we don't like in our cars and automobiles and jets.
Starts being released by a series of jets and what happens to the weather?
What happens to the air quality as this is happening?
What happens to agriculture as you change the fronts and the weather that's going on across the United States just to redirect a hurricane off, in other words, from Florida or some area on the East Coast?
So these are being proposed, these geoengineering projects are being proposed.
We kind of feel that since we're seeing black contrails here every so often, that they may be starting to practice with this so that they could determine and see if this particular project would work.
There's a treaty against using, manipulating the weather for warfare.
There's also a treaty against having weather modification programs that last more than so many days, etc.
But, everyone is engaged here, as you can see from this map, in modifying the weather.
There's something going on all over.
The programs can last as long as they want.
All this is going on, and as we perfect this, and do studies and research, and they perfect, More and more, they will be able to control the weather, change what's happening, and when they do that, they disrupt your watersheds, the water supplies to your watersheds, and they disrupt agriculture and the microclimates needed to produce crops.
And so the detrimental effect is on all of us.
And I think that they're at some point with these weather modification programs experimenting on us.
In other words, we're the guinea pigs to see that if we do this, then we may have this effect.
And we could be used to perfect it.
And since there's no oversight, no rules, any chemicals can be used, any experiment, with regard to the atmosphere and that the public has no say, then this is a dangerous thing that we're experimenting with because we could be destroying our own food supplies.
Visit InfoWars.com and PrisonPlanet.com.
When you're on the site, you can also tune in 24 hours a day to my daily radio broadcast.
There's also a free iPhone app to listen to the syndicated radio show when and where you want.
Alex Jones here with a message that could revolutionize health in this country.
Going back about a year and a half ago, I began to learn about the incredible health effects of longevity products.
Erin Dykes lost 92 pounds.
We're going to show you some before and afters.
Aaron, break down what happened.
Your story.
I've worked really hard with diet and exercise to try to lose weight, but I just didn't get the results.
It just didn't happen.
Then I saw what you were doing with Infowarsteam.com.
I wasn't even trying to lose weight, but I got it because I wanted to feel better energy.
I wanted that nutrition.
Didn't even understand I don't understand how that could kickstart my own weight loss goals, but the products did that for me.
I found myself suddenly losing weight, more energetic, wanting to exercise, wanting to eat the right foods, and they don't even advertise it as weight loss!
I want to challenge our radio listeners to go to InfoWarsTeam.com.
Sign up as a distributor and get wholesale pricing discounts at InfoWarsTeam.com.
Alex Jones here with a message to fellow freedom lovers.
The prognosis for the entire planetary economic system runs from bad to worse.
The globalist model is to shut down societies and starve patriots out until they acquiesce to the global takeover.
That's why we've assembled the most vital and important preparedness items at InfoWarsShop.com.
These are items that I did research on, that I personally use.
You've got the LifeStraw, so you can turn fetid water into safe water anywhere you go.
The KTOR Hand Crank Generator, to charge up key equipment during power outages or out in the field.
Strategic Relocation 3rd Edition by Joel Scalzo.
When Disaster Strikes by Matthew Stein.
Therosafe used by Homeland Security to protect yourself during any radiological event.
Hand crank shortwave AM FM radios.
Everything that we've researched and found to be the best is available at Infowarshop.com and your purchase makes our Infowar possible.
We're getting prepared.
Are you?
▲
Export Selection