![\"\"](\"https:\/\/yogaesoteric.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/ase1-e1708707332888.jpg\")
<\/p>\nIn addition to the weather modification, militaries around the world are also routinely dispersing tiny bits of aluminum-coated fiberglass and plastic \u2014 known as \u201cchaff\u201d \u2014 into the air, to shield aircraft and ships from enemy radar. Not surprisingly, this has been done for decades, without clear evidence if it\u2019s safe for humans and the environment.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
According to a 1998 General Accounting Office report and a 1999 follow-up report by the Naval Research Laboratory, the environmental, human and agricultural impacts of chaff used in military training scenarios at the time were \u201cnegligible and far less than those from other man-made emissions<\/em>,\u201d but does that really mean it\u2019s safe? As explained in a 2001 Navy Medicine paper:<\/p>\n \u201cRadiofrequency (rf) chaff is an electronic countermeasure designed to reflect radar waves and obscure planes, ships, and other assets from radar tracking sources.<\/em><\/p>\n Chaff consists of aluminum-coated glass fibers (also referred to as dipoles) ranging in lengths from 0.8 to 0.75 cm. Chaff is released or dispensed from military vehicles in cartridges or projectiles that contain millions of dipoles.<\/em><\/p>\n When deployed, a diffuse cloud of dipoles is formed that is undetectable to the human eye. Chaff is a very light material that can remain suspended in air anywhere from 10 minutes to 10 hours and can travel considerable distances from its release point, depending on prevailing atmospheric conditions.<\/em><\/p>\n Training for military personnel, particularly aircraft pilots, in the use of chaff is necessary to deploy this electronic countermeasure effectively. As with most acquired skills, the deployment of chaff must be maintained by practicing in-flight release during training.<\/em><\/p>\n It is estimated that the U.S. armed forces dispense about 500 tons of chaff per year, with most chaff being released during training exercises within the continental United States<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n Is Chaff Safe?<\/strong><\/p>\n According to the Naval Medicine investigation, inhalation of whole, intact chaff fibers pose \u201cno risk<\/em>\u201d to humans due to their larger size. \u201cIf inhaled, dipoles are predicted to deposit in the nose, mouth, or trachea and are either swallowed or expelled<\/em>,\u201d the paper states.<\/p>\n Note the use of the word \u201cpredicted<\/em>,\u201d however. Predictions are not evidence. They\u2019re basically guessing. Open questions also remain about what occurs when the fibers degrade.<\/p>\n \u201cseveral investigations have demonstrated that al-coated dipoles are resistant to weathering and breakdown under desert conditions,\u201d the paper states.7<\/p>\n \u201cA 1977 U.S. Navy-sponsored a study found no evidence to indicate that chaff degrades significantly or quickly in water from the chesapeake bay nor did this material leach significant amounts of aluminum into the bay.<\/em><\/p>\n A recent study by our group found no evidence that 25 years of chaff operations at the naval research laboratory detachment at Chesapeake Beach resulted in a significant increase in sediment or soil aluminum concentrations (Wilson et al 2000).<\/em><\/p>\n However, additional studies are needed to determine the half-life of chaff dipoles in various soils and environmental conditions and whether dipoles breakdown to respirable particles.<\/em><\/p>\n Although there is no definitive evidence from the epidemiological literature that chaff exposure is not harmful, there is epidemiological information available on workers involved in the glass fiber manufacturing industry. Data from these studies suggests that exposure to fibrous glass is not associated with increased risk of death from respiratory disease<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n The problem with that is that fiberglass workers are equipped with protective gear, including respirators, Tyvek suits and safety goggles \u2014 gear that normal people don\u2019t wear when they\u2019re out and about. All this tells us is that chaff is unlikely to cause harm to public health, provided people are wearing respirators, which they don\u2019t.<\/p>\n Remarkably, not much beyond these three reports exist. While all admitted the need for continued research, none appears to have been published, so there\u2019s really no telling what the real-world impact might be. That said, common sense tells us that air dispersed aluminum and fiberglass is highly likely to have some sort of impact on the environment and human health.<\/p>\n Geoengineering Has Been Going on for Decades<\/strong><\/p>\n Aluminum and fiberglass are not the only toxins being sprayed across our skies. As detailed by Dane Wigington, founder of Geoengineeringwatch.org<\/em>, weather modification, also known as geoengineering, in which various toxic metals and chemicals are dispersed at high altitude, has been going on for more than 70 years, and is increasing rather than declining.<\/p>\n In response to a United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report issued in August 2021, which called for radical measures to prevent further global warming, the Biden Administration launched a research effort in 2022 to determine the most effective way to dim the sun.<\/p>\n One proposal involves injecting sulfur dioxide aerosols into the Earth\u2019s stratosphere. The tiny reflective particles would bounce sunlight back into space instead of onto the Earth\u2019s surface. According to Harvard researchers, this strategy is not only \u201ctechnically possible<\/em>\u201d but also \u201cremarkably inexpensive<\/em>,\u201d having a price tag that is \u201cwell within the reach of several nations<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n Earth\u2019s climate is largely controlled by how much solar radiation reaches the Earth and how much is absorbed by its surface or reradiated to space. Cloud coverage and greenhouse gasses are examples of factors that influence the reflectance of solar radiation.<\/p>\n \u201cIf geoengineering proposals are to influence global climate in any meaningful way, they need to intentionally alter the relative influence of one of these controlling mechanisms<\/em>,\u201d Britannica explains.<\/p>\n The U.N. report mentions solar radiation management and greenhouse gas removal as forms of geoengineering. Sulfate aerosols fall into the solar radiation management category. By reflecting more solar radiation back into space, the aerosols lower global temperatures but also have a serious \u201cside effect<\/em>\u201d \u2014 they lower average precipitation.<\/p>\n As a result, additional geoengineering techniques \u2014 such as thinning out cirrus clouds in the upper atmosphere \u2014 would be necessary to counteract the decrease in precipitation. What could possibly go wrong?<\/p>\n Supercomputers have run models to predict how solar radiation management may affect different parts of the Earth, not only in terms of temperature but also rainfall and snowfall. Report author Govindasamy Bala, from the Indian Institute of Science, said \u201cthe science is there<\/em>,\u201d but it\u2019s far from an exact one.<\/p>\n \u201cI think the next big question<\/em>,\u201d Bala told Reuters<\/em>, \u201cis, do you want to do it? That involves uncertainty, moral issues, ethical issues and governance<\/em>.\u201d As Reuters<\/em> reported, \u201cThat\u2019s because every region would be affected differently. While some regions could gain in an artificially cooler world, others could suffer by, for example, no longer having conditions to grow crops<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n \u2018Catastrophic Risks\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n Three months after the IPCC published its panic-inciting report, Australian and British researchers published an original research article warning that stratospheric aerosol injection carries \u201ccatastrophic risks<\/em>\u201d that may well lead us into \u201ca fate worse than [global] warming<\/em>\u201d:<\/p>\n \u201cInjecting particles into atmosphere to reflect sunlight, stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), represents a potential technological solution to the threat of climate change. But could the cure be worse than the disease? <\/em><\/p>\n SAI plausibly interacts with other catastrophic calamities, most notably by potentially exacerbating the impacts of nuclear war or an extreme space weather event. SAI could contribute to systemic risk by introducing stressors into critical systems such as agriculture.<\/em><\/p>\n SAI\u2019s systemic stressors, and risks of systemic cascades and synchronous failures, are highly understudied. SAI deployment more tightly couples different ecological, economic, and political systems. This creates a precarious condition of latent risk, the largest cause for concern.<\/em><\/p>\n A well-coordinated use of a small amount of SAI would incur negligible risks, but this is an optimistic scenario. Conversely, larger use of SAI used in an uncoordinated manner poses many potential dangers. We cannot equivocally determine whether SAI will be worse than warming. For now, a heavy reliance on SAI seems an imprudent policy response<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n In June 2023, the European Commission put out a call for \u201cinternational talks on the dangers and governance of geoengineering<\/em>,\u201d warning that geoengineering schemes aimed at altering the global climate pose \u201cunacceptable<\/em>\u201d risks. During a news conference, EU climate policy chief Frans Timmermans stated:<\/p>\n \u201cNobody should be conducting experiments alone with our shared planet. This should be discussed in the right forum, at the highest international level<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n Time will tell whether such talks ever take place. In September 2023, the Climate Overshoot Commission, chaired by Pascal Lamy, a former World Trade Organization chief, called for a worldwide moratorium on solar radiation modification experiments \u201cthat would carry risk of significant transboundary harm<\/em>,\u201d and to focus instead on strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But, as of yet, no such moratorium has been agreed upon.<\/p>\n Socialist Ideology, Not Climate Science<\/strong><\/p>\n Zuzana Janosova Den Boer experienced Communist rule in Czechoslovakia before moving to Canada. In her article, I Survived Communism \u2014 Are You Ready for Your Turn?<\/em> she detailed the \u201call-too familiar signs of the same propaganda<\/em>\u201d starting to permeate her adopted country.<\/p>\n In relation to geoengineering, she points out that communism has been subverting the environmentalist movement since the 1970s, when then-chairman of the Communist Party USA, Gus Hall, published a book called Ecology<\/em>, in which he stated:<\/p>\n \u201cHuman society cannot basically stop the destruction of the environment under capitalism. Socialism is the only structure that makes it possible, we need to be the organizers, the leaders of these movements<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n Den Boer writes:<\/p>\n \u201cThis idea was incorporated into the U.S. Green Party program in 1989, in which the fictitious threats of \u2018global warming\u2019 and \u2018climate change\u2019 are used to scare the public into believing humanity should \u2018save the planet\u2019:<\/em><\/p>\n \u2018This urgency, along with other green issues and themes it interrelates, makes confronting the greenhouse [effect] a powerful organizing tool survival is highly motivating, and may help us to build a mass movement that will lead to large-scale political and societal change in a very short time.<\/em><\/p>\n First of all, we [need to] inform the public that the crisis is more immediate and severe than [they] are being told, [that] its implications are too great to wait for the universal scientific confirmation that only eco-catastrophe would establish\u2019<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n The U.N.\u2019s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Den Boer suggests, is promoting not climate science but socialist ideology, citing as evidence comments made by Ottmar Georg Edenhofer, former co-chair of the IPCC Working Group III, who in a 2010 interview stated that climate issues are about economics, and that:<\/p>\n \u201cWe need to free ourselves from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy, we need to state clearly that we use climate policy de facto to redistribute the world\u2019s wealth<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n Geoengineering Poses Extinction-Level Threat to Humanity<\/strong><\/p>\n Even without factoring in social control, the practical risks of geoengineering are impossible to ignore. According to scientific studies, the particulates dispersed during these geoengineering events \u201cshred\u201d the ozone layer. They also disrupt the hydrological (rain) cycle, which leads to another host of downstream effects, and this is in addition to spreading toxins across the entire planet surface.<\/p>\n So, while some of the planet might benefit from these programs, other parts could be decimated by droughts, raging forest fires, flooding or storms. Moreover, while global cooling is the stated aim of most of these geoengineering programs, as the planet warms, the laws of physics state you need more precipitation to cool it, not less, because the atmosphere carries more moisture as the temperature rises.<\/p>\n To cool the planet, you need to create more rain, but these programs have resulted in less rain, and the reason for the reduction in rain fall is due to the particulates in the atmosphere. In addition to deflecting heat from the outside, these particles also trap heat down below, making the overall heating of the planet massively worse.<\/p>\n According to Dane Wigington, the risks of geoengineering are so immense, it poses an extinction-level threat to humanity, and the window of opportunity to save ourselves is rapidly closing.<\/p>\n \u201cThe risks are so immense, Wigington warns geoengineering already poses an extinction-level threat to humanity. The window of opportunity to save ourselves is rapidly closing<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n Unfortunately, if people really understood the totality of the situation \u2014 not just that the climate is being manipulated, but that as a result, the global climate systems have deteriorated to the point that the entire Earth is in serious trouble; in short, that these programs may have created a runaway extinction event \u2014 the emotional impact might be too great to bear for many. Wigington addressed this in an interview back in 2016:<\/p>\n \u201cOur situation is far more severe than most people have any understanding of<\/em>,\u201d he said. \u201cClimate engineering is making the situation worse, not better.<\/em><\/p>\n So [they need to] try to keep the population from panicking because of the severity and immediacy of the climate implosion, and keep the population in the dark because the climate intervention programs have helped to accelerate this process and toxified every single one of us in the process.<\/em><\/p>\n Every single human subject we test is packed full of aluminum, barium \u2014 all the heavy metals we know are associated with these programs. It doesn\u2019t matter where they live.<\/em><\/p>\n And we know it\u2019s coming down in the precipitation in unimaginable quantities \u2014 quantities enough to change soil ph values in the pacific northwest 10 to 12 times total alkaline \u2014 that\u2019s an unimaginable amount of metal coming down in the rain.<\/em><\/p>\n If populations understood, truly, what\u2019s been done to them, what\u2019s been done to the planet, they\u2019d be taking to the streets with pitchforks and torches all over the globe<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n California Aquatic and Terrestrial Insect Life Has Been Decimated<\/strong><\/p>\n Geoengineeringwatch.org<\/em> lists a number of lab tests that have been performed on rain water, air sample and more, and their results. You can find them under the Tests<\/em> section.<\/p>\n \u201cIn regard to the effect in the environment, in northern California alone, what we\u2019ve seen in the last decade is a 90% decline in aquatic and terrestrial insect life \u2014 a virtual crash<\/em>,\u201d Wigington told in 2016.<\/p>\n \u201cThere\u2019s so much aluminum coming down the precipitation, affecting the soil ph, and \u2014 this is very important \u2014 the UV radiation level is off the charts, and that we can link directly to climate engineering, we\u2019re seeing UVB levels about 1,000% higher than we\u2019re being told. It\u2019s burning the bark off of trees. It\u2019s killing plankton. It\u2019s affecting insect life.<\/em><\/p>\n [It increases UVB radiation] because it shreds the natural protection for the planet. When you put a particle in the atmosphere, it doesn\u2019t matter whether it\u2019s from a back of a jet or a volcano; it causes a chemical reaction in the atmosphere that destroys ozone. Period. So the more of these particles you put in the atmosphere, the more rapid the ozone destruction is<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n Considering all that, it\u2019s highly unlikely that military chaff dispersements have no bad impact. An argument could be made that chaff is too important of a defense system to get rid of, and that may be true. But the climate-specific engineering is another matter altogether.<\/p>\n In years past, it was kept hush-hush, and dismissed as a conspiracy theory. Since then, however, governments around the world, and international bodies like the U.N. have become quite open about the use of geoengineering for climate control, and if the global public does not push back against these efforts, we might not survive to regret it.<\/p>\n We also recommend watching Wigington\u2019s documentary The Dimming<\/em>, below, to learn more.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/yogaesoteric.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/ase2-e1708707391994.jpg\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/yogaesoteric.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/ase3.webp\")
<\/strong><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/yogaesoteric.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/ase4.png\")
<\/em><\/p>\n