Weather Control Part I: The Climate Manipulation Game

Weather control, also known as weather modification, refers to the deliberate manipulation of weather patterns and atmospheric conditions by employing scientific technologies and techniques. One of the most recognized methods of weather modification is cloud seeding, which involves dispersing substances like silver iodide or sodium chloride into the atmosphere to promote precipitation. This practice has been used since the mid-20th century and has seen varying degrees of success. The essential scientific principle behind cloud seeding is that it provides nuclei around which moisture can condense, thereby leading to increased rainfall.

Another significant area of research in weather control is geoengineering, which encompasses large-scale interventions aimed at counteracting naturally occurring climate change. Among geoengineering techniques, solar radiation management and carbon dioxide removal are prominent, the latter of which is so ridiculous I'm not sure whether we should laugh or cry when we see grown men and women, experts and even scientists espouse this dangerous and stupidly expensive doctrine. Solar radiation management seeks to reflect a small percentage of the sun's light and heat back into space, whereas carbon dioxide removal aims to extract and sequester CO2 from the atmosphere. 

Historically, the concept of weather modification can be traced back to ancient civilizations, which attempted rudimentary forms of rain-making. However, the modern era of weather control began after World War II, leading to a surge of interest and investment in scientific endeavours aimed at understanding and manipulating atmospheric conditions. Today, countries around the globe are conducting experiments and developing technologies in this field, highlighting that weather control is not merely a theoretical concept but rather a growing area of scientific inquiry.

The blend of ethical considerations and scientific exploration raises questions about the implications of human efforts to control nature. Historical memory is only for the cognitive elite, and consider that, '...cognition, is no respecter of persons'.

The Ethics & Morality of Influencing Nature

The ethical implications of weather control present a complex moral dilemma that has been the subject of extensive debate among ethicists, scientists, and policymakers. At the core of this discussion are fundamental questions regarding humanity's right to manipulate natural processes for various purposes, including economic or political gain. The potential consequences of deliberately altering weather patterns raises significant concerns about unintended impacts on ecosystems, societies, and global weather systems.

One primary ethical concern involves the unpredictability of weather manipulation. Natural ecosystems are delicate and often interconnected; any abrupt changes may lead to unforeseen consequences that could disrupt wildlife habitats or trigger adverse weather events. For instance, while cloud seeding may aim to alleviate drought conditions in a specific region, it may inadvertently influence precipitation patterns elsewhere, leading to floods, soil erosion, or other natural disasters. The implications of such actions extend beyond the immediate region, potentially cascading into larger global challenges that affect communities and ecosystems far from the initial intervention.

Furthermore, the question of justice looms large in discussions surrounding climate manipulation. Who benefits from weather control, and at what cost? Often, nations or entities that conduct such interventions may prioritise their own economic interests, neglecting the wellbeing of marginalised communities that could be disproportionately affected by climate modifications. This introduces ethical considerations related to equity and representation, as not all stakeholders are equally heard in the decision-making processes. Ensuring that all voices are considered becomes crucial in the development of ethical frameworks around weather control.

Ultimately, the moral legitimacy of influencing natural phenomena through weather control lies at the intersection of science and ethics. It necessitates a careful examination of potential risks and benefits, emphasising the importance of comprehensive regulatory frameworks that safeguard the environment. As discussions advance, it becomes increasingly clear that engaging multiple stakeholders is essential for ethically navigating the complexities that arise from the manipulation of weather patterns.

Enter: Geoengineering Watch

I've watched Dane Wiginton, the experts-expert, for years and even though I am an environmentalist and no shrinking violet I cast aside the truths and facts staring at me and all capable and concerned thinkers across the planet and declined to fully engage. I consigned those facts to yet another symptom of the obsessive nihilism of the predator elites - because in truth, I could not handle the sense of powerlessness and evil that comes with the territory.

Unsurprising then, that so many of us have remained moot. The recent actions and reactions that I perceiveas climate manipulation, however, I feel have gone too far - way too far. According to my understanding even before hurricane George hit Louisiana (1998) there have been devastating manipulations. However after that the whole thing's been ramped beyond lunacy.

Sceptical?                                                                           I would be.

The Anti-Science Behind It

You may think I'm a bit off, but I hope you find Robert. F. Kennedy. Jnr. sufficiently credible to get your attention.

It seems ludicrous to any normal person that militarily powerful countries would harm their own and other countries for reasons of control, chiefly through the 'Climate Change' agenda but also as a covert weapon of war. The subject is so vast that I'm going to have to leave it up to the reader to follow up the research, of which there is plenty, btw. 

Rather than ask how it's done, whether it's HAARP, scalar, extra-terrestrial or CERN derived 'technology' it's more useful to ask why anyone would do this.  The answer though will suffer from degrees of 'dialectical static' because of the intense level of information manipulation, the predominance of anti-scientific propaganda and a natural reluctance to believe that 'intelligent' people can be so death defyingly stupid. When you know how the apex predators think it all makes sense in a non-sense type of way.

Before we explore further let me give you the sanitised version  of the non-debate.

The Bell-end of the Argument

Now that you can see (above) the non-debate way the discussion is being presented at 1 min to Domesday let's parse out some of the unwitting testimony hidden in there amongst the didactics.

I'll comment on how the arguments have been shaped, directed and neutralised. A classic method of neutralising arguments, diluting credibility and fomenting confusion is to touch on relevant issues with generic imprecise terms, use circular and inconclusive statements evoking a virtue and validity hierarchy whilst obfuscating the link between class and consumerism.

To claim that climate modification has been extensively debated is false. The legacy media and pseudo science climate change cultists have succeeded through all the means at their disposal to defang and even ridicule the fact of geo-engineering despite the evidence and info on scientific forums which, if diligently examined, will resolve a clear and alternative narrative.

A powerful disinfo tool is what psyop units call, "poisoning the well". This refers to revealing a number of truths with a fundamental falsehood(s), in order to discredit the argument as a whole. A master stroke of well-poisoning is using the unpredictability clause. The implications of this run deep and are critical in assigning, 'attention-value'.

To bitesize the ruse, unpredictability is hard wired into the  nature of reality. The intelligentsia understand chaos and probability theory very well and use the clause to either legitimise or negate a point depending on their objective.

1. If something is unpredictable it is unreliable, however, sophists will contextualise the discussion to confirm it's opposite. I.e., because something is unpredictable it is predicted that it will occur but with no certainty how often and when.

2. Unpredictability can be contextualised to imply that something is unlikely to occur or materialise.

3. Unpredictability can also mean that there is a 50/50 chance of something occurring or having occurred.

The climate change cultists have stretched the meaning of unpredictability several steps beyond the 3 variables above. Unpredictability is code for catastrophe, and extreme manifestations of 1 & 2 whilst category 3, which is a general a statement of fact is disregarded entirely as it does not accord with their apocalypse fairy tale.

Another subject of subversion is the notion of interconnectedness. The butterfly effect, chaos-non-locality, the web of life and holism are invariably cited in matters of climate catastrophe. Those themes form a core part of the 'Greenwash', Club of Rome/WEF projection that humanity en-masse is responsible for their engineered End-Times calamity. They do not associate their systems of medicine, education, entertainment, employment and 'justice' with entropy, decay, exploitation, conflict and corruption. Consequently things that create disorder, disaster and dissolution are framed as part of human nature - essentially evil, the system that harvests our wealth, labour, ideas and creative energies turning them into pollution, war, famine, and yes, even climate disaster is the source of human salvation - good. 

People should have railed in the early 90's when the predator classes framed 'we, the people' as consumers - a materialistic index which centers around their profiteering and eugenics agenda, but they didn't. They, 'we', fulfilled their wildest dreams by becoming passive consumers. Having succeeded in making us see our worth in terms of our ability to 'consume' they advanced to the next stage in the dehumanisation-to-commodification schema. They started with the 'stake-holder' abomination.

Why abomination?

Aside from evoking the act of killing vampires (if only it was a thing), it is a very cunning switch and bait lingual. Stake-holder is a code word for shareholder, but because the word, 'stake' is seldom used it takes a while to make the connection, if at all.

Stake-holder has many other associations such as property owner, socially legitimacy - a paid up member of society. More subtly; if there are stake-holders (legitimate share-holders), there must be those who are 'stakeless', (non-stake-holder illegitimates) who have no share in what's at stake. This lingual sleight of tongue disinherits the poor, the indebted, the unemployed and the down-at-heel via word association, implication, vernacular and even wealth-shaming. As such the stakeless have no say in how and why things are run. Stake-holder being synonymous with share-holder reveals the true nature and magnitude of the psyop at hand - it is a divide and conquer meme that is a language-borne weapon of Class Warfare, the war between the have's and the have-nots. 

The last sentence of the AI produced excerpt above exposes their scandalous methods of deceit.  Their Silicon Valley 'Kool-Aid' narrative that no-doubt, their tech-tinkers have enscripted and been conscripted into, whether through natural gravitation or the Pavlovian conditioning of knowing how to please the real stake-holders which are not the self-important 'tax-payers' and financial middle-class. Their 'message' has permeated the subtext of human survival. The power elite have ensured that the middle/working class will protect and isolate them from responsibility. This protection has been legalised into the small and large print of contract, implicit and covert 'law'.

Image by: Queen Darkness. 'Stormy Clouds'. Source: http://www.deviantart.com

Image by: MSVERNS. 'RC34'. Source: http://www.deviantart.com

Music by: Wellington. Track: 'Trickle Down'

Continue to Part II - not for the faint of heart!

Understanding Weather Control:

Through further cunning they have shifted the consequences of 'weather manipulation' and climate change through propaganda and systemic bureaucracy to the 'tax-payers' (stake-holders). They have convinced us that because we eat, breathe, travel and 'consume' their products which we design, make and market and we live in a 'democracy' that they ruthlessly control we are responsible for the system that they enforce through coercion, intimidation and violence. Real stake-holders, power elites - i.e., the 0.01% set the agenda's behind closed doors are protected by private armies in elite havens such as Davos, Epstein Island and The Square Mile. The masses are only as legitimate as they are useful to their ivory-towered hierarchy. In their wicked genius they have successfully subverted language, context and meaning to dissociate themselves from their exalted agency, nullified the power and status of we who sustain their gilded existence but somehow made us believe that we authored it all. See how that works!