TweetStorm Update: #HandsOffMotherEarth

We Need Your Help!

When: January 9th 2018, 11am London Time. (view countdown clock here).

Duration: 1 hour

#HandsOffMotherEarth TweetStorm

Feel free to copy and/or download any of the information below. The images have been sourced from the #HandsOffMotherEarth Manifesto cover and hashtags added. Please note that twitter has cracked down on accounts posting the same tweet multiple times and posting too many unsolicited (@) tweets. For this reason we recommend rotating tweets, and limiting your @’s to 5 per hour; alternatively you can create your own tweets without @’s. For more information see twitters rules and best practices policies.

How to join in the Tweetstorm:
1. Use the hashtag #HandsOffMotherEarth on all of your tweets for one hour, starting at 11am London time.

2. Include a link to the Hands Off Mother Earth: 2018 Manifesto Against Geoengineering and/or website (see below).

3. Use the images provided, share your own images or visit @OpCImageGallery for images.

4. Send Tweets to the United Nations, your President/Prime Minister etc., local representatives, environmental organizations, media outlets, and academic institutions.

Links to the Manifesto pdf:
1. http://www.etcgroup.org/sites/www.etcgroup.org/files/files/home_manifesto_english_.pdf

2. https://web.archive.org/web/20190105094021/http://www.etcgroup.org/sites/www.etcgroup.org/files/files/home_manifesto_english_.pdf

Links to ETC Group website:
1. http://www.etcgroup.org/content/hands-mother-earth-1

2. https://web.archive.org/save/http://www.etcgroup.org/content/hands-mother-earth-1

Pretweets:

If you endorse geoengineering, you endorse genocide #HandsOffMotherEarth http://www.etcgroup.org/content/hands-mother-earth-1

We Do NOT Consent #HandsOffMotherEarth http://www.etcgroup.org/sites/www.etcgroup.org/files/files/home_manifesto_english_.pdf

How much more can our planet take? #HandsOffMotherEarth http://www.etcgroup.org/sites/www.etcgroup.org/files/files/home_manifesto_english_.pdf

Your Silence Means Consent. Support #HandsOffMotherEarth 2018 Manifesto Against Geoengineering http://www.etcgroup.org/sites/www.etcgroup.org/files/files/home_manifesto_english_.pdf

Did you consent? #HandsOffMotherEarth: Manifesto Against Geoengineering (2018) http://www.etcgroup.org/sites/www.etcgroup.org/files/files/home_manifesto_english_.pdf

Note: We will add more pretweets before Jan 9th.

The Big Geoengineering Squeeze: time for political pressure

Governments and academic institutions vehemently deny such programs exist, yet the fact that for decades our atmosphere has been geoengineered by aircraft trails and ship trails is increasingly understood and acknowledge by a majority.

Although the recent news coverage on Harvard’s geoengineering circus and American State University was a double slap in the face to many anti geoengineering activists, concepts such as or similar solar radiation management (SRM), stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) and marine cloud brightening (MCB) are finally being discussed by the broader community. More importantly is has caused many people to question what they have already been witnessing in their sky.

Personally, I believe Harvard formally announced its’ ‘hypothetical’ plan to dim the sun (problem) to generate a flood of public concern (reaction), which will enable them to implement their plans for global governance of geoengineering programs (solution). Despite my personal opinion, the recent mainstream coverage concerning geoengineering may in fact be a positive development.

How on earth could it be positive?
We all know that voting systems these days are questionable to say the least, but now that geoengineering has been propelled into the mainstream arena political parties can be pressed to affirm the political party’s view on the matter (in black and white).

Ask your local representatives about their level of understanding and opinion on geoengineering; do they support research and/or future deployment? If a representative is found to endorse geoengineering technology, this can be used to launch a social media campaign which will inform voters that if they vote for ‘X’ they are voting for geoengineering. If representatives are unaware of geoengineering, this would be a perfect time to provide them with information.

Even if your local representatives deny the ongoing geoengineering programs we currently witness in our sky, they can no longer deny that governments and members of academia, adorning their sophisticated facades and passive aggressive mentality, are and now openly, but coyly, calling for the ‘official future deployment’ of geoengineering technologies and for the creation of a global governing body.

Academics keep the public bewildered by claiming geoengineering is only in the research stages, yet, the same people often fail to mention that some of these research projects last for almost as long as Smith and Wagner’s conjectural ‘SAIL’ program, which has a projected deployed lifespan of 15 years. Another detail which is often neglected is the fact that scientists and academic institutions were conducting outdoor experiments as early as the 1950’s.

Also, it is well documented that for a decade or more psychologists, sociologists, public relations experts and even philosophers have been employed by governments and academic institutions to research public opinion, reactions, apprehensions and knowledge regarding geoengineering. Is such research into human behaviour and psyche what is driving the geoengineering narrative now promoted by mainstream?

More Information
Below is a list of relevant information and websites you may like to share with your local representatives (or anyone who would like to learn more about geoengineering).

Artificial Clouds [website]: http://artificialclouds.com/

Weather Modification History [website]: https://weathermodificationhistory.com

Hands Off Mother Earth: Manifesto Against Geoengineering [pdf]: http://opchemtrails.com/archives/504

Evidence of Clear-Sky Daylight Whitening [pdf]: http://opchemtrails.com/archives/499

The Belford Group Report: Case Orange [pdf]: http://opchemtrails.com/archives/491

Weather Modification: Programs, Problems, Policy, and Potential (1978) [pdf]: http://opchemtrails.com/archives/522

Additional Resources:
OpChemtrails Library: https://opchemlibrary.blogspot.com/

Links to informative websites: http://opchemtrails.com/home-2/welcome/links-info

___

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.


Written by Kali_Furies, for OpChemtrails.com, 2019.

Support: Hands Off Mother Earth – Manifesto Against Geoengineering (2018)

“Mother Earth is our common home and its integrity must not be violated by geoengineering experimentation and deployment.

We are committed to protecting Mother Earth and defending our rights, territories and peoples against anyone attempting to take control of the global thermostat or the vital natural cycles of planetary functions and ecosystems.”

For More Information Visit the ETC Group website

The Push for Global Governance of Climate Engineering

In October 2018 the Academic Working Group on Climate  Engineering Governance Governing Solar Radiation Management released its report which explores the “governance needs and options for Solar Radiation Management(SRM) technologies.”

More specifically the report focuses on “feasible and needed actions” which can be achievedby 2025 at “the national, regional, and international levels and by non-state actors.” Meaning these actions will be managed by both regional and corporate powers and will undoubtedly involve United Nations forming a new ‘body’ responsible for the governance of global climate engineering technologies and programs, as recommendedon page 30 of the report.

“Who should take action? Established by the UN General Assembly, with members appointed by the UN Secretary-General” p.30. Read the entire document below. And please take the time to view and sign this petition.

Download the PDF here.

Finding Wally: Propaganda, Inner Circles & Deniability

Finding Wally

Media outlets and online scientific communities came alive this week, with headlines such as “Could an anti-global-warming atmospheric spraying programme really work?”,  “100 Special planes and $2.5 Billion per year for sulphate geoengineering” and “Solar geoengineering could be remarkably inexpensive”.

This buzz of activity surrounds findings of a ‘new’ study, “Stratospheric aerosol injection tactics and costs in the first 15 years of deployment”, by Wake Smith and Gernot Wagner. The study looks at the hypothetical possibility and costs of conducting a global geoengineering program. Interestingly, and perhaps in an attempt to deflect from questions surrounding ongoing aviation induced cloud cover being reported by citizens worldwide, the study also looks at  whether the SAIL (Stratospheric aerosol injection lofter) program could be deployed secretly, concluding that it could not. This conclusion will be explored by examining existing relevant documentation relating to SAI technologies and by comparing US air traffic statistics to the SAIL deployment statistics provided by Smith and Wagner.

I would also like to note, that when looking closely at many of the scientific papers relating to geoengineering, certain names and institutions keep popping up. As highlighted in the article “Harvard Science = Mad Science”, the pro geoengineering community appears to be dominated by a top down (vertical) hierarchy. Meaning a small group of people are using various types of capital to influence the many. Any observer has to wonder why Harvard  appears to have developed a propensity for publishing pageant articles related to ‘geoengineering and secrecy’.

Download >> Finding Wally: Propaganda, Inner Circles & Deniability

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gf4ONSETZQG5VDJQl1di0jtVF-Z14AnP/view?usp=sharing