Should We be Concerned about Geoengineering?

Written by Marian Calcroft on January 18, 2018. Posted in Current News

Few people are aware of the relatively new science of geoengineering. Some scientists who are aware (like me) consider it a genuine threat to our planet’s climatic stability and ecosystems. Moreover, geoengineering, if left unconstrained, could pose a real danger to human health through the choice and toxicity of the materials used.

I am among those scientists who do not believe that the proponents of the use of Geoengineering have fully considered (if at all) the ramifications on our planet and its ecosystems. In this article, my aim is to encourage readers to investigate the issue themselves and become more informed.

Here is a very telling clip of Dane Wiggington interviewing David Keith (Geoengineering spokesman) where Dane asked David what research had been done on the health effects of the aerosol sprays and David said “we’ve only begun the research and published nothing.” (David Keith Admits to Dangers of Spraying Aluminum (GeoengineeringWatch.org ))

The aerosol sprays used for Solar Radiation Management (SRM) are known to be very toxic and detrimental to all ecosystems (including human) and the patents for geoengineering show their primary content to be nano-particles of Aluminium, Barium and Strontium.

There are grounds to feel serious concern about the long-term health effects of the contents of these aerosols -especially of Aluminium (a known neurotoxin) in conjunction with other pollutants that are synergistically detrimental – particularly Fluoride (in tap water and toothpaste) and Mercury (in tooth amalgams, and as thimerosal, a vaccine preservative).

There are also good grounds to feel concern about the dehydrating effects of Aluminium and Barium on plants and soil which can lead to plant desiccation and an increased incendiary effect in forest fires. I feel it is important to provide information that others may research for themselves that will demonstrate this, and also on how the health effects of geoengineering may be mitigated (through detoxing and chelation of toxins).

The use of (no-longer covert) geoengineering, is now admitted to by the UN, IPCC, and NASA, who say they must continue using it to prevent ‘Global Warming’ even though it is likely that the blanket of metallic particles in the aerosol sprays now entraps more heat than it reflects.  My concern is that geoengineering, that many people still do not recognise, is seriously affecting the planet and is likely causing many localised extremes of weather (along with the many natural cyclical climate changes).

Independent scientists and many researchers in Russia say we are more than likely than not now heading into a mini ice-age due to natural cycles. It appears that the reduction of input of energy from the Sun by Solar Radiation Management (SRM) seems to be likely to exacerbate the problem, and increasing cloud cover can cause great reduction in crop yields and solar energy yields, both of which will cause many problems for humans. Humans also produce far less Vitamin D when they do not receive enough solar energy through their skin, and this creates a compromised immune system leading to increased ill-health.

Geoengineering is also believed to create more extremes in localised weather events, such as droughts, floods, hurricanes, cyclones, earthquakes, tsunamis etc. It also destabilises the course of natural weather systems, and potentially upsets the natural balancing of the planet by its weather-related feedback loops.

Although there is much human input of thousands of pollutants (including carbon particles, carbon monoxide and methane) into our ecosystems and this problem needs to be urgently addressed, my personal opinion is that humans don’t have any effect as regards CO₂ gas production. CO₂ from volcanic eruptions and natural processes could far exceed input from human use of fossil fuels as a source of CO₂, and methane and water vapour have far greater effects as ‘greenhouse gases’ than does CO₂.

As a botanist I see CO₂ as a basic plant food, part of the carbon cycle of which we are a part, and as a plant food, necessary for our own survival. In low levels of CO₂ plants do not grow well, and so they produce less oxygen which we need to breathe! (CO₂ enriched atmospheres produce much higher plant yields in commercial greenhouse production). The geoengineers’ demand for carbon sequestration by un-natural chemical means is insanity as this could bind up the CO₂ far past normal time-scales, and/or not allow its re-use in the carbon cycle.

It is extremely probable that the attempt to tax anthropogenic CO₂ production is merely a ploy to institute a global tax as a form of control which can be administered by non-elected bureaucrats, and could be used to establish global regulations and a judiciary that would over-ride any nation’s laws and sovereignty.

For further investigation, readers may want to visit:

climateviewer.com, climateviewer.org, and weathermodificationhistory.com.

Marian Calcroft (Botanist)

Trackback from your site.