All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 15, 2013 - InfoWars Special Reports
26:44
20130115_SpecialReport-2_Alex
Source
| Copy link to current segment Download episode

Time Text
Well, that's what we saw at the AMS here in Austin.
We were looking for some way to tie global warming to geoengineering, and there really wasn't much other than that one organization was trying to turn weather forecasters into climate casters and use TV weather reports as kind of propaganda for global warming.
But we had one person there who was talking about climate engineering.
That was the David Mitchell interview that you saw.
But we wanted to broaden that out a little bit.
So we've got on the line here, Roslyn Peterson.
And she's been following this for quite some time, looking at contrails and their effects on the weather.
Welcome, Roslyn.
Well, thank you very much for having me as a guest on your show today.
Thank you.
You know, you've been following this for quite some time, and you've been watching the skies.
You've got an organization, it's California Skywatch, and also another one called Agriculture Defense Coalition.
Tell us how you got into this.
Well, back in 2002, ten years ago, I began to notice, since my background is in agriculture, That our skies were being covered over in white haze and persistent jet contrails.
And in 2002 it was so obvious here in Northern California where I live that you couldn't miss it.
So I started doing research to find out what was going on, impacts that this man-made cloud cover would have.
And over the last 10 years I've put about 40,000 documents on my website.
Yeah, you've got quite a bit of information there.
reports, all kinds of university studies, whatever I could find on the topic.
Yeah, you've got quite a bit of information there.
You know, one of the things I think came out of this conference that I watched is we sat
through quite a bit of, quite a few presentations.
It seems to me like the science is pretty unsettled as to what they really...
They're doing some things, obviously they're doing things, and we're seeing some effects.
And it seems like there's kind of a, well, let's throw this up and see what happens kind of effect.
The fellow who was talking about climate engineering, he was trying to do some things with aerosols,
that was what he was proposing, that would stop cirrus cloud formation because he believed
that that was going to have a net warming effect.
But the very first guy in the question and answer period that got up questioned that
and said, well, you know, cirrus clouds at a lower level actually have a net cooling
effect.
So they're not agreed as to what the effects are, and yet, you know, they do their computer
models and then they put the stuff up in the sky.
I thought it was kind of interesting, one of the articles that you sent to me, they talked about how there was a net warming in the three days that all the jets were grounded following September 11th, back in 2001.
Yes, but what they did is they took an average temperatures and so when they talk about there was a warming, they weren't, in other words, they didn't give you all of the data that was found, I don't think, in that report.
Therefore, I have some questions because Scientists at NASA found that cirrus clouds formed by contrails from jet aircraft exhaust, which contain water vapor, a potent greenhouse gas,
are capable of increasing average surface temperatures enough to account for a warming trend in the United States
that occurred between 1975 and 1994.
So there is, because of this man-made cloud cover, which is a form of geoengineering,
because it reduces the amount of direct sunlight reaching the Earth,
but also traps heat, which warms us at nighttime, as well as may have a little cooling effect during the day,
but it still traps heat.
And we're concerned about this because we feel that water vapor as an issue has not been
discussed by any of the scientists or in any of the hearings
that have been held on the subject of geoengineering by the U.S.
House Science and Technology Committee.
Yeah, and along those lines, news had just broken while we were at the AMS convention that they had just gone through and had the weather figures for 2012 and said it was, I think it was the warmest year they'd had on record or the warmest in quite some time, you know, in North America.
But overall, it was only the 7th or 8th warmest globally, because in other places there was cooling.
So, if they're putting a cloud cover that is raising the temperature of the United States, then that's something that could cause us to have warming here with their measurements, but perhaps, you know, not a global warming, because that's not being done everywhere.
Is that the way you see it?
Well, that's the way I see it.
And also, you have to look at a Stanford University report by Jacobson.
Professor Jacobson has noted that aircraft, aviation, and contrails uh... are responsible for a good percentage of the warming
over the arctic and alaska region and that the contrails from these
which is mostly water vapor and the man-made clouds they produce
are warming this area and no one talks about this in the news
and i put this on my alaska section of the website so people could look at the
data and see what was going on there with the warming in the arctic and
alaska Mm-hmm.
Now, are you concerned at all when you're watching this?
Are you noticing things?
Some people have said that they've seen soaring concentrations of aluminum and barium and other things like that in the soil and water.
Have you noticed that with your agricultural watches out there?
Well, the California State Department of Health Drinking Water Division, I obtained all of their drinking water data for going back to the 1980s.
And you can tell in state drinking water testing, which is done by private, it's not done by private citizens, it's done by water districts.
Their testing reveals that there is a definite increase statewide in aluminum and barium Magnesium and other contaminants in drinking water since the 1990s.
Yeah, it was in one of the presentations they were doing some testing.
They did computer simulation and modeling trying to determine if the computer could predict the right cloud conditions that would be optimal for their cloud seeding operation.
And so they were putting up silver iodide and they put up a couple of trace radioactive elements, indium and cesium, and then he said they were going to test for those to see where they were coming back down, see what the rain pattern was going to be.
But he also mentioned, casually, aluminum.
And I really wanted to ask him about that, but it was in the same session where the fellow was that was talking about climate engineering, so we went for him first and we lost the other guy.
But most of what we're seeing as far as climate change and that sort of thing, any talk about that, that was pretty much under the radar at AMS.
I guess one of the things that struck me was just the sheer quantity of work that's being done everywhere.
And it seems like it's focused primarily here in the United States and in China.
Have you noticed anything in terms of increased cloud cover in China?
Or is that anything that you monitor?
I do a little, but you did notice the cloud cover and the jet contrails during the Olympics when it was held in China.
And so there was some background where you could see in the skies, you could see the contrails in the skies.
So we know that contrails that persist exist in other countries as well as the United States, especially the NATO countries.
One of the things we always want to do is follow the money.
And some of the stuff that you sent me, I mean, everybody's heard of carbon credits that are going to go to private companies like the ones that Al Gore runs that make them wealthy.
We've also got carbon taxes, which could be a way to fund a global government because they have to do that globally.
But you also pointed out that there's weather derivatives.
That was something that was new.
Could you tell us a little bit about that?
Yes, the Chicago Mercantile Stock Exchange has been allowing betting on the weather for some time, and then in the last couple of years, they have decided that they're going to allow betting on the weather.
Weather, how much snow, how much rainfall, all kinds of betting.
And one of the things that we know is that there are 66 ongoing weather modification programs, ongoing in the United States, and that these programs are successful, that they're used every year.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, a public utility in California, has been doing it for over 40 years here in California as just one example.
But in Wyoming and Colorado, Texas, there's been weather modification programs ongoing for years.
And that these there, when they say that there's indefinite information, and we don't know how well it works, we have to realize that this has been perfected over time, especially considering that we the US Air Force perfected it in the Vietnam War.
They were doing weather modification there on a massive scale and they know that it worked because they perfected the technologies then.
Yes, we even have a document going back to 1977, this is from the U.S.
State Department, Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques.
This is something that came out of the State Department, went to the U.N., and so they were aware of it to the degree that they wanted to have treaties prohibiting using it as a weapon.
But there's nothing there that keeps them from using that here domestically, is there?
Well, yes, because the United States passed it, ratified it, and passed it.
So it is, the An Mon Treaty has been ratified by the United States, and because of our wartime activities in Vietnam, about using weather modification for warfare.
However, if you say that something is experimental or if you say that it isn't ongoing, it's one time research and testing, then anyone can modify or change the weather in the United States without public notification, public oversight, Without your elected officials knowing what's going on.
So we need to really be aware that there's no laws preventing atmospheric manipulation of any kind right now in the United States.
And we've had people like Bill Gates and others who have talked about massively dumping quantities of particulates into the atmosphere.
No, there isn't.
something that according to their computer models they hope will have a beneficial effect
in terms of cooling or something like that.
But there's really, as you said, there's not really anything that's going on.
They don't have to notify the public.
There isn't any agency that really oversees that, is there?
No, there isn't.
If you have an ongoing weather modification program, you do have to report to NOAA.
I sent you that NOAA list of weather modification programs, which is online, which they do on
a yearly basis.
But we're talking about, in other words, David Keith, for example, is talking about putting
aluminum oxide particulates in the air to reduce the amount of direct sunlight reaching
the earth using water vapor as a medium, which is a greenhouse gas, which doesn't make any
sense because you'd be adding more greenhouse gases.
via aviation to the atmosphere.
Exactly.
So we're talking about that.
We're also talking about putting salt particles up.
This was Bill Gates was going to be funding this.
In other words, looking to the skies to whiten the clouds to reflect more direct sunlight away from the Earth.
But here's your problem.
When you start putting up particles and chemicals, not only do you have an air, soil and water pollution problem, But you reduce the amount of direct sunlight reaching the earth and you have a photosynthesis problem.
Because all plants require direct sunlight to grow healthy and strong and produce crops.
for trees to grow strong and healthy. You also reduce the amount of vitamin D
absorbed to our skin, which means increasing health effects.
You lower solar panel power production when you start to add man-made
clouds and haze, and you start to put up things that brighten the clouds to
reflect more direct sunlight. You are going to have an impact on the
Earth's climate and weather system and our natural resources, as well as human
health, crop production, and other items that need to be really discussed by the
public.
And they're not being discussed at this time.
Yeah, it's amazing to me that, you know, both as government policy and also the EPA, for example, I mean, the things that most of their regulations are centering on, where they're shutting down businesses and that sort of thing, is to reduce CO2.
and to reduce, even more so, to reduce particulate matter.
They focused on that when they have CO2 reduction. And yet here you've got at the
same time these organizations proposing and in many cases actually
doing it, dumping massive amounts of particulates
and greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, as you point out. I mean
at the one hand they're cracking down on individual users and yet they're doing it at the same
time.
And then telling us that in order to protect us from this global warming that we're causing, they're setting up these massive global schemes to make money, like the carbon credit exchange, the carbon taxes, that sort of thing, and even, you know, betting on it as far as derivatives.
That's right, because when you put a program into place, and it's known, like the weather modification programs going on, in the United States, there's 66, you can bet on those.
You can bet that in Colorado or Wyoming, they're gonna enhance the snow in certain areas
and you can bet on that, make fortune.
Exactly, it's insider trading, isn't it?
It's just like what we see the Congress doing all the time and doing it with impunity, saying,
yeah, we're allowed to do insider trading.
Well, they're essentially doing insider trading with this and setting up a system to basically alarm us
into a world government.
an organization or to create kind of a Federal Reserve on a global level, which is the way
I see this carbon credit scheme going.
Well, the carbon tax that they're proposing is not...
What is that tax going to do?
It can't stop consumption because you don't have alternatives in place.
So they're going to tax us and then they're going to use the funds for something else.
And I object to that.
And they don't say how a carbon tax on all of this is going to, in other words, help
with the climate, reduce global warming.
They're not talking about reducing the water vapor produced by aviation.
They're not talking about water vapor as being a problem, that they could reduce this.
In other words, they have these schemes, and the interesting thing about geoengineering, or the part of it, solar radiation management, Which means reducing the amount of direct sunlight reaching the Earth, is that these schemes would be funded, but when you ask the people promoting them, a small group of men who really promote this, like David Keyes, for example, or Ken Caldeira, they say, well, once you start, you can never stop, because it doesn't fix the problem, it just masks the warming.
Yeah, yeah.
And that's incredible!
Sounds like the cancer industry.
Yeah, they don't ever come up with a cure, but they just endlessly treat it with more and more expensive treatments.
Yes, and they say, well, then you can't stop.
Well, when I say, well, you're going to do something in our atmosphere and you can't stop because then things will get worse, well, the programs that they're promoting are going to make things worse.
Air pollution, water pollution, soil pollution, human health problems, all kinds of things.
Those are going to get worse.
And then they say, well, we can't stop because then, you know, crisis will prevail.
Well, this doesn't seem like a long-term, long-lasting solution.
Yeah, exactly.
And I think one of the things that really disturbed me, of course, a lot of the people that we saw doing presentations, there were many, many presentations, because Each person's presentation only lasted 15 minutes, and they were doing these the entire day for four or five days.
But they're typically going in with a thesis and doing something small, local, experimental.
Most of the meteorologists were doing computer simulations, and then they were going out and taking measurements, getting empirical data, that sort of thing, and trying to close the loop.
But when we're talking about massive things like climate change, they're not able to do that.
The climatologists are different from the meteorologists.
The climatologists are looking at things that are stretching out over decades or centuries or even millennia.
And the way they're doing that is they're modeling things and they're doing computer projections.
And so, you know, their understanding and how good their model is, is not anything that we can really verify.
So, I guess one of the concerns that I have is that they're talking about doing things and are doing things that they really don't understand what the consequences are.
No, and they're very focused on one thing.
They're not focused in the agriculture field and impacts, or tree health, or photosynthesis.
They're not interested in solar panel power production, and their models don't help with those things.
And when they say models, they never usually put aviation impacts into models.
See, the models can be flawed, and unless you know what parameters are excluded, or if they're taking averages and excluding things, then you can never verify that their models are correct.
Exactly.
And as we watch them do this, I mean, even when they were doing relatively small contained experiments, where they're doing cloud seeding over an area, for example, maybe during the snow season.
And they're going out, they're measuring it constantly over two or three months, and trying to close that loop.
Even then, they have a hard time modeling it.
And so as you said, you know, when they've got, when they're trying to model, and the fellow that we talked to from the National Center for Atmospheric Research, he was very honest about the limitations of computer models.
And I think he was very skeptical about Trying to do any kind of climate engineering, and also the massive environmental impacts he mentioned that would have to be considered if you were to do climate engineering.
But when you look at what they're trying to do with just a local controlled experiment, and see how difficult that is for them to model, because they're out in the real world.
Like I mentioned to him, my background is electrical engineering.
You're modeling something, if you do a computer simulation of electrical circuit, you're doing something that's very well known, that's there in the laboratory, That, you know, it doesn't have the kind of infinite variables that the environment does.
And, as you said, they're not even looking at contrails and clouds that are coming, that are persistent from contrails that are being generated by aviation.
Yes, so the thing is that when they look at their models, they look at a very small, like you said, they look at a very small detail, and then say this or that about it.
But what we're finding is they don't look at the overall picture.
In other words, since agriculture, which is my background, and I work for the U.S.
Department of Agriculture here in California, for many years under the farm service agency.
What happens is that they have no knowledge of water pollution, soil pollution,
changing local climate. They have really no knowledge and they can't put it into their models
because the microclimates are hundreds of thousands.
Because each city and each town, each area has a different microclimate
that they use that agriculture depends upon. And you start changing those,
they have no idea what impact that's going to have to the next door neighbors.
Yes.
And so that's one of the things I want to say about that.
One of the things that has been noted is that you can enhance the snow or the rainfall in one area, but they're not studying the nearby areas that go into drought because their normal rainfall or snow never gets to them.
Very good point.
Yeah, yeah.
They're robbing from Peter to pay Paul.
Yeah, so they look at one little thing that, oh, well, it worked or didn't work or whatever they see, and they model it, but they aren't looking at the overall picture to see what's happening downstream.
Well, one last question I had for you, which was, you know, most of the stuff that they're doing is silver iodide.
They did talk about, I think it was bismuth tri-iodide was another particle that they were looking at for their cloud seeding stuff.
Nobody would say they were doing anything with aluminum, but do you have, looking at it from an agricultural standpoint, I mean, do you have any concerns about silver iodide?
Well, it depends on the amount and the scope that they're using, and it can have its impact because it rains out.
And there is some EPA documentation that shows that silver iodide, in other words, can have some negative effects, and that's on the California EPA website.
Anyone can look it up.
What I'm concerned about is that it isn't just silver iodide.
It's salt, sea salt, is being used for cloud seeding purposes.
Right, hygroscopic, yeah.
Yeah, and there's ground-based cloud seeding.
There's not just small aircraft cloud seeding, there's ground-based cloud seeding.
Yes.
So you have a tremendous amount of methods and techniques going on, and I list some of them on the weather modification section of my website, so that people can go and look at that, and they can see the various techniques and chemicals and different things that are used.
And it's stunning!
Yeah, yeah.
Your website has a wealth of information.
I've got to say, you must have sent me about 30 or 40 emails and each of them had multiple documents on there.
I mean, and that's just a small fraction of the data that you've collected over the years.
I would highly recommend anybody that wants to look into this and is wondering about, you know, the massive contrails that they see in the sky crisscrossing, go to agriculturedefensecoalition.org They're going to find a lot of information there.
Also, California Skywatch.
Is that .org or is that .com?
That's .org, right?
It's, no, Californiaskywatch.com and AgricultureDefenseCoalition.org.
If you click on the category section of either one, it will give you an alphabetical listing of everything on the websites by topic.
Great.
Thank you very much.
And that's the thing, you know, at this point we need to educate ourselves about what's being done because they're not telling us about it.
Most of what they're doing with the weather is under the radar at this point.
But you can find out what's going on if you go to these sites.
Roslyn Peterson and her organization has a wealth of information there.
Well, thank you very much, Roslyn, for talking to us.
Well, thank you very much, and it's been an honor and privilege to be on your show today.
Thank you.
Bye-bye.
Thank you.
Well, if you want to know more about ground particulates and things that are coming out of these geoengineering projects, or why they're doing it, there's an excellent couple of documentaries, What in the World Are They Spraying?
and Why in the World Are They Spraying?
We have those available at InfoWars store.
We have a chemtrail combo where you can get both of those for $34.90.
Very good documentaries.
They go over exactly what people are seeing in terms of the concentrations of aluminum and barium and other elements that are part of these geoengineering programs.
And they also look at why they're doing this.
Because there's a lot of evidence, there's a lot of documents that The globalists have come out with why they're doing this.
So those are a couple things you might want to check out.
And also go to Prison Planet TV to check out our documentaries.
If you get a membership, you'll be able to watch all the documentaries that we produce there at no additional charge.
And if you're watching this on YouTube, You can go to Prison Planet TV and get a membership that will help to fund our operation, and you can also pass that out to your friends and family, help to wake them up.
Ten people at a time can watch simultaneously.
Of course, you can hand it out to more people than that, but at least ten people can simultaneously watch it at a time, so that's a lot of reach to get this information out there to wake people up.
Just as we talked to Roslyn Peterson, you know, a lot of people don't really even take a look at what's going on above the sky.
They don't look and they might see things happening with the weather, they might see things happening with agriculture, but they don't stop to ask why.
We want to do that.
And I think if you're watching this, you're probably the kind of person who wants to do that.
Try to get your friends to be that kind of person, to look behind what's actually happening to them, to be aware of what's actually happening around the world, politically, chemically, in terms of weather, you know, and get the bigger picture.
Well, that's it for tonight.
We'll be back tomorrow night at 7 o'clock Central Time.
▲
Export Selection