The CIA and the climate control

Share/Save
ЦРУ и климатический контроль

The CIA is funding a study on geoengineering (climate manipulation) that will last 21 months, with an initial cost of 630 thousand dollars. The National Academy of Sciences, will run it with the participation of NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in that country. CIA interest in climate is not new, but this participation is significant, due to the military implications that can manipulate the climate and pressure exercising proponents of geoengineering in that country to make progress in experimentation with these techniques, although there is a moratorium of UN against such applications. The project will examine different proposals of geoengineering, as handling of solar radiation and removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere; they will also study the effects of cloud seeding and other ways of manipulating the weather to cause rain, drought or control hurricanes. According to the official description, they will make a technical assessment of the impacts of these technologies from the point of view of environmental, economic and national security. These are the aspects that concern the CIA, in earlier documents called climate change and the climate control as factors of strategic geopolitical importance and of national security. Despite this, the Republicans voted for elimination of the Department of climate change of the CIA, which the Agency motivated to fund this initiative. The reasons could go much further, since the climate control is a military project of long standing in that country, which already carried out experiments during the Vietnam war, causing rain for months in a row for flooding crops and roads of the Vietnamese. In the same sense, the U.S. Air Force published in 1996 a document entitled Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025, the title of which clearly reflects their intentions. These interests converge with those of a small but influential group of climatologists and other scientists from countries of the North, alleging that geoengineering is necessary because the greenhouse gas emissions cannot be reduced rapidly (as if their countries were not those who have to take leading measures to do this). Or, as David Keith, a known advocate of geoengineering stated, because it is a cheap and easy way. Yes, cheap and easy for those who have caused the climate change with its over-consumption of resources and industrialization based on oil, because rather than actually reducing their emissions, they could continue warming the planet and make a juicy business with new technologies that handle the climate of all, to lower or raise the temperature as appropriate to the economic and military interests of those who control them. Under the term solar radiation management, the goal is to reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth. For example, through building a huge artificial volcanic clouds, by injecting them with sulfur particles. Other proposals include whitening the clouds, placing trillions of mirrors into space to reflect the light of the Sun or the more recent, by the same David Keith, dispersing sulfuric acid from aircraft at the Equator so that it mixes with clouds. Removal of carbon dioxide includes other techniques, such as machines or artificial trees that absorb carbon from the atmosphere (who by the way do not know where then it will be deposited to stay forever). The best known is ocean fertilization: pour nanoparticles of iron or urea in the sea to cause blooms of plankton that absorbs carbon dioxide. The results of geoengineering techniques are only theoretical some except say, like ocean fertilization  legal and illegal experiments showed that in addition the carbon remains at the bottom of the sea impacts of which can be enormous, including disruption of the marina food chain, anoxia (lack of oxygen) in marine layers, could create toxic algal blooms, etc. Geoengineering, to have impact on the global climate, would have to be applied at mega scale, destroying a global ecosystem which is little known, highly dynamic and in interaction with all life on the planet. There is therefore a pilot phase. What is done on a small scale will not show the action on the global climate, although it could have serious negative impacts in the area or in the region. And when executed on a large scale, it is not experimental, its deployment will be irreversible. They can form artificial volcanic clouds which will not be removable, until the particles will fall to the ground in a toxic rain. This technique will make it even worse in addition the hole in the ozone layer and acidification of the seas, two very serious global problems. If they were really be successful in decreasing the amount of sunlight that reaches the North, they would produce extreme droughts in Africa and disruption of monsoons in Asia, placing at risk food resources of 2 billion people. Imagine if the CIA could decide on the global thermostat. Geoengineering is so risky, both by their climatic effects as by potential hostile use against other countries, the only sensible thing is to prohibit its use internationally.