Geoengineering Coverup

[Michael K.]

Above: four jet planes flying in formation leaving spreading, persistent "contrails" all hang a u-turn.  


http://pubs.acs.org/cen/government/88/8808gov2.html

Seeking Funds For Geoengineering

Congress should fund a federal research effort on geoengineering technology, a panel of scientists told the House of Representatives Science & Technology Subcommittee on Energy & Environment earlier this month. The results of such federal research could, if needed, help buy time for the world to wean itself off fossil fuels, the researchers said.

Once dismissed by many scientists as too risky or presumptuous, geoengineering efforts to weaken the effects of human-induced global warming are gaining more support from researchers, albeit with strong caveats...

Meanwhile, Keith argued for Congress to fund geoengineering research on solar radiation management. Possibilities for these technologies include injecting aerosols into the stratosphere and promoting the formation of clouds. Such techniques could rapidly cool the planet, buying time for society to ratchet down greenhouse gas emissions.

Boeing 777-200LR being refueled by Boeing 767 (KC-46 A)

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/kc-777.htm

The KC-777 tanker is based on Boeing's new long-range 777-200LR, which entered airline service in 2006. It is the world's longest-range passenger plane. Boeing used the 777-200LR design as the basis for its 777 freighter, which was in development. The development process would take about three years. However, much of the technologies and experiences of creating a tanker from a 767 would be applicable in the case of a KC-777. Also, the commercial freighter version of the 777 had matured, and that also would decrease the developmental risk of converting the 777 to a tanker.

The KC-777 would be 209 feet long with a wingspan of 212 feet, 7 inches. That's the same size as the 777-200LR commercial jet. The KC-777 would be able to carry far more fuel, cargo and passengers than either the KC-767 or the Airbus A330 tanker. The KC-767 offers more operational flexibility, while the KC-777 would be better suited for long-range strategic missions in which more cargo needs to be delivered.

The KC-777 would be able to carry more than 350,000 pounds (160,000 kilograms) of fuel and offload more than 220,000 pounds (100,000 kg) of it on a mission of 500 nautical miles (900 kilometers). On the other hand, the KC-767 can lift off with more than 200,000 pounds (90,000 kg) of fuel and offload more than 130,000 pounds (60,000 kg) in a similar mission. The KC-777 would be able to deliver 200 percent more fuel after flying 1,000 nautical miles than older Air Force KC-135s. The KC-777 could carry up to 37 pallets of cargo, compared to the 19 pallets for the KC-767.

Long-range and cargo capacity make the 777 the best tanker option for missions where maximum fuel offload and cargo/passenger capabilities are paramount. The 777 provides extended payload range, strong fuel offload performance and hauling capacity that exceeds 170,000 pounds (77,000 kilograms) of cargo. With its fuel-efficient design, it would excel at supporting global strike and aircraft deployment missions.

[/i]



http://www.scienceprogress.org/2009/03/ ... ering-tip/

When Will Geoengineering "Tip"?
Let's Hope Real Public Dialogue, Rather than Scandal, Will Be the Trigger

The titanic issues that surround the prospect of modifying the planet, currently off the radar for most Americans, could come up in a very big way in the relatively near future. We need leaders to start talking to the public before that happens.

By Chris Mooney | Wednesday, March 18th, 2009

Science Insider had the scoop: It appears the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, is holding a meeting at Stanford University soon on the controversial topic of geoengineering, or modifying the planet artificially in order to offset the effects of global warming. This is newsworthy for at least two reasons: The U.S. government has, thus far, kept the subject of geoengineering at a relative arm's-length; and one reason for that shyness is the extremely checkered past history of U.S. military ventures in weather modification, including the notorious attempt to use "weather warfare" to our advantage in Vietnam.

In a story in Wired magazine last year, I explained the most likely geoengineering scenario to get serious consideration: Infusion of the stratosphere with sulfate aerosol particles, which will reflect sunlight and cause global cooling. This we know with something bordering on certainty: It's precisely what volcanic eruptions do. Our planet has already run the experiment. What other environmental side effects would occur is not nearly as certain, of course—this is where the real scandal and controversy kicks in—but in a situation of climate crisis, we might not have the luxury of worrying about them.

Indeed, a group of experts—Stanford's David Victor, Carnegie Mellon's M. Granger Morgan, and others—recently made roughly this case in Foreign Affairs (subscription required). It's just the latest in a series of articles by major climate researchers, or policy wonks, essentially sounding the alarm about geoengineering: This is real, this is very possible, this is scary, this requires attention.

Boeing 767 (KC 46 A) set up as tanker



http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/64829/david-g-victor-m-granger-morgan-jay-apt-john-steinbruner-and-kat/the-geoengineering-option

The Geoengineering Option A Last Resort Against Global Warming?  

By David G. Victor, M. Granger Morgan, Jay Apt, John Steinbruner, and Katharine Ricke
March/April 2009

Summary:

Global warming is accelerating, and although engineering the climate strikes most people as a bad idea, it is time to take it seriously.

DAVID G. VICTOR is a Professor at Stanford Law School, Director of Stanford's Program on Energy and Sustainable Development, and an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. M. GRANGER MORGAN is Head of Carnegie Mellon University's Department of Engineering and Public Policy and Director of the Climate Decision Making Center. JAY APT is Professor of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University. JOHN STEINBRUNER is Professor of Public Policy and Director of the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland. KATHARINE RICKE is a doctoral student at Carnegie Mellon University. Additional materials are available online at http://www.cfr.org/geoengineering.

THE NORTH AMERICAN WEATHER MODIFICATION COUNCIL

NAWMC Mission Statement

The mission of the North American Weather Modification Council (NAWMC) is to advance the proper use of weather modification technologies through education, promotion and research. The Council serves as a forum for the exchange of information on weather modification issues; to promote the effective use of these technologies to enhance precipitation, suppress damaging hail and mitigate fog; and to advance research and development activities to increase scientific knowledge about weather modification capabilities.

What is Weather Modification?

Weather modification involves cloud seeding as an environmentally friendly technology that helps clouds more efficiently produce precipitation in the form of rain or snow. It is also used to reduce hail generated by thunderstorms and to eliminate fog. This well-established technology has been in use since the 1940s in dozens of countries around the world.

And the Case of the Disappearing Link

http://www.naiwmc.org/4dcgi/GetSubCategoryRecord/News/Archives

Senate Subcommittee hears S.517

The Senate Subcommittees on Science and Space and Disaster Prevention and Prediction held a joint hearing for S.517, the Weather Modification Technology Transfer Authorization Act of 2005, on November 10, 2005. Presenting testimony were: Dr. Joseph Golden, Senior Research Scientist, Cooperative Institute for Research in the Environmental Sciences; Dr. Tom DeFelice, past president of the Weather Modification Association; and Dr. Michael Garstang, Chair of the committee on Critical Issues in Weather Modification Research, National Research Council of The National Academies. Their written testimony can be found at the web site link.

http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/witnesslist.cfm?id=1683



Editorial Comment:

So they are revealing that aerosol geoengineering is real by stating that "in the near future" it might be necessary to do so on a grand scale.  You think these people are tinfoil hatters?  Or that this is really about the future?  They are your gods on Mt. Olympus (the Council on Foreign Relations), and you will do what they tell you, in this case you will suffer from cognitive dissonance since they will deny and prohibit the evidence of your senses until geoengineering is one day revealed as a fact, but by that time you will already accept that it is good for you, because it counters "global warming."  See that, even though you are not allowed to discuss it when it happens, it is at the same time "good for you".  True doublethink and mind-control.

Whatever the case, you will never find the minutes of the Senate subcommittee meeting on S. 517 anywhere on Internet, although references to it abound.  You don't need to know that information, it will just make you go off your feed.  What are you looking at?  Quit looking up -- there's nothing to see.  Go back to your entertainment, it's good for you.