by Randy Shahbazian | WeaponizedNews.Com | June 8, 2015
As another long hot Valley summer approaches, we are facing dramatic lifestyle changes as a result of the exceptionally severe drought. So far, Californians have focused on water conservation efforts which certainly are logical in this predicament. However, there is a pervasive pessimistic undercurrent in the drought discussion that water conservation alone is not going to be adequate.
What is missing from the drought discussion is the concept of weather modification. Specifically, there is a stunning lack of public debate over utilizing technology to promote rainfall. Perhaps more disturbing is the possibility of such technology being used secretly to suppress precipitation over California.
Most people of a certain age have heard of cloud seeding which is a decades-old practice of spraying silver iodide into the air to cause rainfall. So-called weather weapons were utilized in the Vietnam conflict for creating specific weather conditions for strategic advantage.
More modern technology can be observed with the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) and similar ionospheric heater antenna arrays. Multibillion-dollar taxpayer-funded geoengineering programs are utilizing high-altitude aerosol spraying of metallic nanoparticles for multiple known purposes including weather modification.
The Environmental Modification Convention produced an international treaty which entered into force in 1978.
This treaty prohibited military or other hostile use of environment modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting, or severe effects.
Despite public conferences about them, these technologies are mostly shrouded in secrecy with ample opportunities for plausible deniability by government and corporate spokespeople. They additionally are quite technical and difficult for the general population to understand. Are there any credible, easily-understood examples of weather modification technologies?
A news article from arabianbusiness.com in January 2011 entitled “Abu Dhabi-backed scientists create fake rainstorms in $11-million project” describes how “scientists used large ionizers which resemble lampshades to generate fields of negatively charged particles. That, in turn, creates cloud formation leading to rain.”
A company named Meteo Systems claims to have used its “WeatherTec” technology in the summer of 2010 to cause rainfall over Al Ain, Abu Dhabi on 52 occasions on days when the nation’s weather service had not predicted any precipitation. The Meteo Systems ionizers were reportedly used 74 times when the atmospheric humidity reached the required minimum level of 30 percent. The article’s credibility is bolstered by noting that the project was monitored by the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology.
A similar company based in Australia called Aquiess utilizes electromagnetic energy to bring precipitation to drought-stricken areas around the world. Aquiess claims to have used its technology to break the droughts in Australia in 2005 and in Somalia in 2011. It appears that Aquiess was/is a contractor in the United Nations Global Rain Project.
As skeptical as I am of the United Nations and world government, I notice that the UN does not appear to be offering any such drought relief technology to California. If the Global Rain Project was good enough for Australia and Somalia, why is it not appropriate for us?
The evidence of weather modification technology being used to suppress precipitation is not quite as well established but still compelling. Ionospheric heaters may be used to disrupt low-pressure storm centers which then prevent incoming Pacific storms from dropping rainfall and snowfall on California as “our” precipitation gets dumped onto the Midwest and East Coast. Take a look at the HAARP Report analysis of the California drought to understand how the Pacific storms and the jet stream are being disrupted.
This phenomenon obviously requires further analysis by meteorologists and geophysicists.
The prospect of turning off California’s precipitation is reminiscent of the Enron electricity scandal in that an artificial scarcity of a resource financially hurts a colossal number of people while making a very select few extremely wealthy. Biotechnology companies stand to profit handsomely from the drought with genetically-modified drought-tolerant crop seeds. Water districts will be able to charge customers much more money for much less water.
To be sure, I am not endorsing benevolent weather modification to end the drought since the required ethical debate has not yet occurred. However, I absolutely condemn any malevolent manipulation of our weather into an extreme drought cycle. We must consider all reasonable methods of ending this drought.
It is time for the meteorologists, the multibillion-dollar agriculture industry, the ski resort owners, the water district managers, the landscaping industry, and countless other stakeholders to weigh-in on the weather modification phenomenon.