So far we can find links to cancer and other health problems from particle matter, we have seen some of the health effects from barium. But this is far from the full story. You can see from the tables in this study published on biomedcentral the potential risks to human health are wide ranging. Just using a bit of common sense, let’s explore what some of these other possible risks might be. So we now know how barium may cause problems with anxiety, but more than that, it has also been hypothesised to be a possible cause of multiple sclerosis. There’s also the case of barium toxicity and Pa Ping published in the journal of American Academy of Neurology. This accounts of an incident in 1930 in which people with no prior family history of any conditions suddenly fell ill and became paralysed, eventually leading to death. As well as another event where striking similarities were seen. More extensive investigations were done and a link to barium was made. This is just one element which is being added to our environment.
Let’s have a look at a more prominent element, for instance aluminium. Aluminium has been linked to several health issues in humans, such as various lung problems, there also seems to be a strong link between aluminium intake and Alzheimer’s disease.
Strontium’s non radioactive isotopes are considered to have a low toxicity but there is some evidence that it can lead to DNA damage. Most people should know by now DNA damage is often a precursor to cancer. However, strontium does seem to have some medical benefits such as increasing bone mineral density, a large amount of the strontium we intake will be deposited into our bones. There seems to be evidence of other adverse effects such as myocardial infarction, venous thromboembolism and pulmonary embolism.
Silver iodide seems to be considered a relatively safe substance although it also seems to have a number of issues associated with it. For instance, environmental consequences such as affecting the natural biota in terrestrial and aquatic environments.
If governments wish to stop speculation then they must practice transparency. They must also accept and conform to popular opinion when populations disagree with certain actions. Politicians are elected as representatives and governments should behave as if so. Decisions which affect all of society should not be made by a privileged elite. Solar radiation management clearly has a lot of implications, it does seem that it is in fact more likely to make the situation at hand worse. Governments and private industry are already in the process of phasing out fossil fuels, but a lot of this might end up being too little too late. New technology can also bring with it new implications. The organisations pushing solar radiation management often say carbon reduction isn’t feasible and is too costly. The problem is for carbon reduction to work we need an international effort to increase carbon reducing solutions.
There are many feasible and not so costly methods of creating more carbon reduction solutions, for instance, we could reclaim land for reforestation and building code could be adapted to make housing more sustainable and environmentally friendly.
Planting forests might take a lot of manpower and heavy machinery which will increase carbon emissions if it was done by private industry, but it could alternatively be better tackled as a society. Governments and the international community could come together to nationalise land and form vast swathes of people ready to collect seed, and plant forests. Just as societies in the past have created holidays and capitalists have used holidays to expand consumerism, Governments could create or re-purpose holidays and coordinate societal involvement through schools, social security, military and volunteer programs. We could use these holidays to expand ecology and sustainability rather than consumerism. I believe we have the opportunity to be able to tackle global warming and reduce carbon dioxide should we act soon enough.
Agriculture has been one of the leading causes of deforestation and destruction of natural habitat, farming can now be better dealt with by industry, methods such as vertical farming can massively reduce the footprint of agriculture on the land and limit damage done to the environment. It doesn’t take a genius to see that there are lots of things that could still be done! It would be unreasonable to pursue questionable artificial methods of tackling global warming when we have perfectly feasible natural methods that we are not exploiting anywhere close to what we are capable of.
So far, if you have been following this post and reading all the links I have provided, we should have by now ascertained that chemtrails are indeed real. There is substantial evidence to prove silver iodide cloud seeding has been in widespread use for quite some time, and there is also evidence of the use of aluminium oxide, barium and strontium. We have also seen that there is some information about the long term effects to the environment and to health. We can see there is a large amount of organisation involved in promoting solar radiation management. It could be plausible that people are carrying out geo-engineering without the full knowledge of what they are a party to, such as with fuel additives. it’s also well documented that governments will carry out these sorts of programs covertly to intentionally try to withhold the truth from the public because of fears for national security. It’s also well proven that people responsible for calling the shots on weather modification very often lack the foresight to be able to see the mistakes they are making before they make them. It seems the organisations trying to promote solar radiation management as a solution to global warming are not being totally forthcoming about the scientific communities understanding of the risks. We can also see involvement of intelligence with events such as when the CIA director Brennan did a speech at the council of foreign relations. This also raises questions about one world government. Private entities seem to be the people who are coming up with policy on this one. With geo-engineering as with fracking, the public are not being given a choice in the matter, and most often have to deal with the consequences of poorly thought out action. One might even go as far as to say that it seems like some people are being wilfully ignorant of the consequences.