Tag Archives: aerosol spraying

Winter Weather Forecast 2015-16

Posted on by

Climate Engineering, El Niño and the “Scheduled Weather” for the Coming Winter in The US

Climate Engineering, El Niño And The Bizarre ''Scheduled Weather'' For The Coming Winter In The US

24th September 2015

By Dane Wigington

Guest Writer for Wake Up World

Weather “forecasters” are now trumpeting the arrival of a “Godzilla” El Niño event, but somehow they seem to already know that there will be no relief for the epic California drought.

How can such a prediction be made so early on? Because of ongoing climate engineering.

Ocean temperatures in the Eastern Pacific are at record shattering high levels (pictured top), so why wouldn’t this translate into more rain for the now empty reservoirs in Northern California? Since when does El Niño not bring more rain to the West??

The El Niño pattern has been trying to form since 2007 but has been repeatedly suppressed by what meteorologists have coined as “the ridiculously resilient ridge” of constant high pressure over the US west coast. Was this rain-starving scenario the result of climate engineers and their aggressive effort to suppress El Niño formation in a destructive attempt to hold the lid on soaring global temperatures? Yes.

The Eastern Pacific (off of the US west coast) is constantly the target of massive aerosol spraying operations. Given their secrecy, the question must be asked: Is “solar radiation management” the only goal of this spraying, or are the known drought-causing impacts of atmospheric aerosol saturation and ionosphere heater high pressure zones a desired outcome for the geoengineers?

The electrically conductive heavy metals being sprayed enhances the effectiveness of ionosphere heater installations (like HAARP) which would then increase the weather-makers’ ability to create and maintain consistent zones of high pressure. What does a completely sprayed Eastern Pacific look like on a radar map? The reflective metals show up like precipitation when there is none, the radar image below is a glaring example.

Climate Engineering, El Niño and the Bizarre “Scheduled Weather” for the Coming Winter in The US - West Coast Precipitation Map

Climate engineering is about power and control, and about hiding the severity of climate damage already done (while doing even more damage at the same time) from a population that so far has not wanted to face the truth in the first place. The climate engineers have managed to keep the Eastern US cooler than average for almost three years in spite of a record warm world.

Why? To help manipulate the perception of the US population.

How anomalous has the Eastern US cool-down been? The map below covers “departure from normal high temperatures” for a two year period from 2013 to 2015, this is clear as it gets.

Climate Engineering, El Niño and the Bizarre “Scheduled Weather” for the Coming Winter in The US - Anomalous Temperatures Map

What should the expected impacts should be in the US for a strong El Niño Event?

Climate Engineering, El Niño and the Bizarre “Scheduled Weather” for the Coming Winter in The US - Impact on Winter

With a potential record El Niño, abundant precipitation should show up in California with overall temperatures pushed from above normal to far above normal throughout the US. Higher temperatures should be especially prevalent given the fact that our planet is free falling into a state of total meltdown. All this being said, how is it some of the latest “forecasts” call for the US West to continue frying into the fall with little to no rain and with wildfires still raging? And with predicted snowfall further inland?

Climate Engineering, El Niño and the Bizarre “Scheduled Weather” for the Coming Winter in The US - UccuWeather Highlights Fall 2015

Next, given the fact that we have a record warm world, record warm oceans surrounding the US, a record El Niño, and predictions of above normal highs in the Northern US (see below), how can it be possible for winter predictions of a “below average” temperature band to run right through the US from Southern California, to the Gulf Coast, to New York, covering some of the most heavily populated zones of the country?

The “forecast map” below should be carefully examined.

Climate Engineering, El Niño and the Bizarre “Scheduled Weather” for the Coming Winter in The US - Winter Temperature Outlook December to February

Other maps (below) use terms like “wintry battle zone” to describe their predictions for the southern states, in spite of the record warm condition of our planet already noted. The map below also states there may be “above normal” snow in spite of warmer temperatures.

Climate Engineering, El Niño and the Bizarre “Scheduled Weather” for the Coming Winter in The US - Early 2015-2016 Winter Forecast Map

How can there be such anomalies? How does NOAA know about them already? Radical and highly destructive climate manipulation is how. These weather “predictions” are nothing more than the scheduled weather. 

Who is running the weather forecast industry?

In regard to weather forecasting, with few exceptions, the global power structure owns it all. Those in power have gone to insane, unimaginable, and unbelievably destructive lengths in their attempt to control the weather. In order to hide the crimes of the climate engineering assault on our planet, the globalists also needed to control the flow of information to the public that relates to the weather and climate. Thus the purchase of weather reporting and data modelling companies was necessary.

Climate Engineering, El Niño and the Bizarre “Scheduled Weather” for the Coming Winter in The US - The Weather Channel Chemtrails

Defense contractor Raytheon is involved in geoengineering programs, owns geoengineering patents, and also does the weather modeling for NOAA and the National Weather Service. Lockheed Martin (another defense contractor involved in weather modification) supplies the weather modeling for the FAA. The Rothschilds own the controlling interest in the world’s leading provider of interactive weather graphics and data services, and actually supply the weather modeling “predictions” for government agencies. The Weather Channel is owned by massive multinational corporations that are a core part of the global power cabal. And let’s not forget about Monsanto Corporation and their purchase of “Climate Corp” for nearly a billion dollars.

(Learn more at: The Weather Channel Interactive and Monsanto Announce New Agriculture News & Forecast Web Site.)

The Weather Channel and their cast of paid disinformation actors are tasked with covering up the completely engineered and unnatural climate anomalies that are now occurring constantly as the geoengineering programs are fully unleashed. The WC “meteorologists” constantly explain away an endless list of climate engineered events and occurrences as if completely natural. Many of the Weather Channel’s background photos are actually skies filled with geoengineering aerosol clouds, this is part of their disinformation and conditioning campaign.

The Weather Channel’s Geoengineering Advertisement Describes Geoengineering Chemtrails as a “$4 Trillion Solar Umbrella”

Continuously cooling down heavily populated regions of the US is about engineering public perception for as long as possible. Controlling the message also allows them to control public perception. Meteorologists (with few exceptions) are paid liars who are simply reading scripts. Their job is to convince the population that the completely engineered climate is just “natural weather”. Their job is to convince the population that “mostly sunny” predictions that involve the sprayed-out skies we are all subjected to are just normal. Their job is to cover the tracks of the criminal climate engineers. Anyone that contributes to such a cover-up in exchange for a paycheck and a pension should be considered a criminal accomplice to the geoengineering crimes. When the Weather Channel is not busy covering for the geoengineers, they now simply show countless reality shows in order to altogether avoid actually covering the engineered weather.

So how about those predicted cold zones which are surrounded by record warm oceans and a record warm world? Welcome to engineered snow storms. The Chinese openly announced their practice of engineering snow storms out of what should have been rain until they did a billion dollars of damage to Beijing. Do you believe our government does not know how to do the same? And do you believe our government would actually ask our permission before doing it?

Climate Engineering, El Niño and the Bizarre “Scheduled Weather” for the Coming Winter in The US - China's Weather Manipulation

With enough atmospheric moisture the geoengineers can produce snowstorms under a wide variety of conditions. The July 2015 snowstorm in Jackson Hole Wyoming is one of many examples. The extra moisture from El Niño will be used for the chemical cool-downs already scheduled for the US this winter. As the planetary meltdown accelerates, the Arctic continues to melt and glaciers continue to disintegrate around the world, the climate engineers are becoming increasingly desperate and blatant in their aggressive planetary assault. It appears that the moisture Northern California needs so badly may be siphoned by the climate engineers for use further east in the US.

Whatever unfolds this winter, this point should be clear: the geoengineers and the global power structure have a noose around our collective necks and they are not about to let go. They control not only the weather, but the toxicity of the air we breath, the water we drink, and the soils we need to grow our food in. Though there are countless forms of anthropogenic damage to the planet and the climate system (this must always be considered and remembered), climate engineering is mathematically the greatest and most destructive single factor of all. If we are to have any chance at preserving Earth’s life support systems, we must all make our voices heard in the battle to expose and stop climate engineering.

from:

Rotational Rate of Earth & TIme

Posted on by

TIME
Clifford E Carnicom
Jul 23 2003
Edited Jul 24 2003


Y Axis is the Difference in Time Between TA1 and UTC
TA1 is based upon atomic time. UTC is based upon the rotational speed of the earth.
X Axis is the Julian Day Number. Data begins on May 15 1976 and ends on Jul 23 2003
Source of Data : U.S. Naval Observatory

Research has been underway for several months to investigate a hypothesis that has been been forwarded to me for evaluation. The source of these propositions will remain unidentified at this time. The hypothesis purports the onset of major geophysical changes and life extinction cycles in the foreseeable and upcoming decades. The impact upon the earth and life from such events is extraordinary and beyond the realm of consideration for many people. There is also a claim of a connection between the aerosol operations and the anticipated geophysical events, and this has formed the basis for the research that is being presented herein. Additional hypotheses are under investigation, (e.g., biological and pharmaceutical) but they will not be be discussed at this point. No judgement on the veracity of these claims is being made, however, certain leads of investigation are being followed to see if they hold up to scrutiny and logic.

ONE such claim being made is that there exists a connection between the anticipated geophysical changes, the rotational rate of the earth and the aerosol operations. It has been stated that there is an attempt to use the aerosols to increase the rotational speed of the earth. This increase is viewed as an offsetting mechanism to the geophysical events which it is claimed will occur. At first response, it might appear that such a claim defies the realms of physical possibility, however, honest research does not allow such a presumption without an adequate investigation. It is also to be understood that no claim of benevolence to the general human population accompanies this description of geophysical manipulation.

There is a well known line by Mr. Carl Sagan, to the effect that, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” Such is the case here. In my examination of this hypothesis, it appears to me that the central issue of examination drives toward the issue of TIME. If one were to claim that the rotational speed of the earth can be artificially affected, then a closer examination of time should reveal whether that claim has any merit. This would be the case regardless of the role, or non-role, of the aerosol operations. The rationale for this investigation is that TIME has historically evolved as an expression of that very same rotational rate of the earth. It is only with the more recent introduction of time based upon atomic standards that the issue of time has become murkier. Time is not so steady as many of us might presume, and there are now many different ways by which it can be measured. This discussion will be confined to three of these standards of time: TA1 (Atomic time), UT (based on the rotational rate of the earth) and UTC (UT adjusted periodically to keep pace with atomic time).

Small differences in time must now be considered to examine the questions which are before us. The geophysical effects of such small changes must also be considered in the future; initial research indicates that small changes in time (i.e., rotation rate) may lead to significant geophysical stress forces and their release. It also appears that our state of knowledge of earth rotational rate changes and geophysical correlations is quite inadequate.

There is, first of all, a fairly well established recent history that shows the rotational rate of the earth has been slowing down1,2,3. This rate is stated from numerous sources to be on the order of 0.7 to 0.9 seconds per year, and it seems to have held fairly steady since approximately 1900. In the interest of completeness, a graph4 depicting the history back to 1620 does show a period of increased rotational rate in contradiction to the more recent trend. To make matters additionally confusing, most sources that attribute a geophysical process of tidal actions to the slow down speak on the order of milliseconds per century, as opposed to a fraction of a second per year11. The same sources also do not appear to address the contradictions raised by the graphed data extending back to 1620. So there does appear to be many questions as to magnitude and rotational rate increase and decrease that must remain unanswered at this point.

The more immediate question is to ask whether or not it is conceivable that the aerosol operations are affecting the rotational rate of the earth. If this is the case, one would look for variance in the data beginning approximately 4 1/2 years ago as a potential indicator. The data that we should look at is the difference between atomic time (TA1) and the time based upon the rotational rate of the earth (UT). Although it required some labor to extract the data, this information is available from the United States Naval Observatory. In addition, the International Earth Rotation Service (IERS) also becomes an important source of information. The graph of this difference expresses any unusual changes that may be taking place with respect to the rotational rate of the earth.

This graph is presented above for your review, and there are some intriguing findings that are to be mentioned.

1. The most recent leap second added to bring UTC (based upon rotational rate of the earth) in closer accordance with atomic time (TA1) occurred on Dec 31 1998. The lack of leap seconds (at the anticipated rate loss of approximately 0.8 seconds year) since that time is very much out of character with the preceding historical data set spanning more than 25 years. This indicates to us that the earth’s rotational rate must have actually increased in more recent years relative to the historical record. As a point of observation only, the aerosol operations are generally understood to have begun at a global level at the close of 1998 and beginning of 1999.

2. The post 1999 change is in contradiction to the numerous sources that claim a fairly steady rotational rate decrease on the order of 0.7 to 0.9 seconds per year.

3. No explanation can be found at this time by IERS as to the abrupt change in leap second additions (decline of) at the beginning of 1999. There have been no leap seconds added since Dec 31 1998, and this is at variance with the regular history preceding this announcement and as shown on the graph from the US Naval Observatory data. It would appear that a leap second addition is inevitable in the near future, after a lapse of 4 1/2 years.

4. The rate of decline (slope) shown within the graph also shows itself to be unique within the time period covered, from 1976 to 2003. The decline (slope) post 1999 is considerably less than that which has preceded.

5. The “stair -step” behavior of the decline rate since 1999 is a most interesting feature of the data. There are 4 periods (and the beginning of a fifth), fairly regularly spaced, where the rotational rate decline temporarily levels off. This pattern also does not appear within the general data set, and it does indicate the possibility of a disturbing mechanism (artificial or otherwise) to the rotation rate.


“Stair Step” Pattern Visible in Post 1999 Series
Y Axis is the Difference in Time Between TA1 and UTC
TA1 is based upon atomic time. UTC is based upon the rotational speed of the earth.
X Axis is the Julian Day Number. Data begins on Jan 01 1999 and ends on Jul 23 2003
Source of Data : U.S. Naval Observatory

6. The long term predictions issued by the IERS for the period of 1997 – 2007 indicated that approximately 7 leap seconds were anticipated to be added within the period from 1999 to 2007. However, NO leap seconds have been added (as of this date), i.e., a period of 4 1/2 years have elapsed without any additions. This is out of character with the historical record as well as at odds with the last known predictions of the worldwide time standard service.

7. Curiously, the long term time prediction service of the U.S. Naval Observatory has apparently been discontinued, at least to the public. This is apparently the case with IERS also, as no updates past 1999 for long term predictions have been found. The question is, WHY? Why would a fundamental geophysical service that is important to many human endeavors be eliminated?

8. A statistical test between the means of the daily differences (leap seconds excluded) between the post Jan 01 1999 data and the pre Jan 01 1999 data is significant at the 99.9999+% level12. This test demonstrates that the data after Jan 01 1999 is highly anomalous relative to the previous history. The slope ratio between the two data sets is on the order of 1 to 3, with the post Jan 01 1999 data decreasing at a rate of 1/3 the pre Jan 01 1999 data.
(N1 = 8245, Mean1 = -.00201 secs. / day, sigma1 = .000701; N2 = 1633, Mean2 = -.00067 secs. / day, sigma2 = .000501 : Z = 91.4)

9. If attempts have been made to decrease the rotational rate decline, an analysis of the data would suggest that it may have been only momentarily successful and delaying; a more deeply entrenched geophysical process appears to reign.

In an effort to monitor this issue, this researcher has developed independent time standards. Astronomic occultation observations have been and are being conducted8,9,10, and a digital time standard has been established. The expected error in the astronomic observations is approximately 0.5 seconds, and the digital time reference system has an expected error of approximately 0.2 seconds per month. The insertion of leap seconds can likely be detected independently with these reference frames in place. The difference between UT1 (atomic time) and UTC (based upon rotational rate of the earth and adjusted within tolerance of atomic time) continues to be available to a high level of precision through the U.S. Naval Observatory, and can be monitored by the public.

If one now considers the possibility that the earth’s rotation rate can be artifically affected, the next important step is to ask what physical mechanism can conceivably accomplish this. This will undoubtedly lead toward advanced studies in physics, and at this point I can only make a suggestion as to where such research might lead. The source behind the hypothesis being discussed has stated only that methods of resonance involving sub-atomic particles are the basis of the physical mechanism; no additional specific or detailed information is available.

Any hypothesis that merits serious consideration must stand the tests of cross-examination and hopefully is tenable within the laws of physics and science that we have adopted in this time and place. In an effort to conclude the current discussion and yet prompt the reader with an avenue for further work, I would like to mention the following area of physics which holds some promise for the consideration of resonance as a physical mechanism.

I have acquainted myself with a sub-discipline of physics that is termed “nuclear magnetic resonance”, and it appears to be worthy of additional effort. Nuclear magnetic resonance has developed to become a highly significant branch of modern physics, and is most commonly known within the medical community. The fundamental principle behind nuclear magnetic resonance, as I understand it, is this:

Certain atomic particles, when subjected to radio frequency energy in the presence of a magnetic field, will absorb that energy to cause variations in their sub-atomic spin rates, i.e., the angular rate of rotation of that particle. Energy absorption will occur at resonance if the proper frequencies are used in conjunction with a particular magnetic field strength5,6,7. (Note : the source states that nuclear magnetic resonance is only ancillary to the primary mechanisms which operate at a broader level and with variable energy forms beyond that of radio frequencies).

This principle is clearly under the domain of quantum physics, and as such much work lies before us to fairly evaluate the viability of such a mechanism to operate at a geophysical level. Readers with knowledge of the 4 1/2 years of research embedded within this site may recognize why such a mechanism is to be considered in all seriousness. The apparent anomalies with the earth rotational data, as they have been described above, provide a further impetus for the deeper study ahead of us.


Clifford E Carnicom
Jul 23 2003
Edited Jul 24 2003

for references and source, go to:    http://www.carnicominstitute.org/articles/time1.htm