Top Tweets for #OpcLibrary

888 Bundesbehörden geben zu, dass Flugzeuge das Wetter durch das Versprühen von Chemikalien am Himmel verändern Mehrere Bundesbehörden haben soeben zugegeben, dass Flugzeuge Chemikalien in den Himmel sprühen, die das Wetter verändern. Das bahnbrechende Eingeständnis wurde in einem neuen Bericht veröffentlicht, der von der Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), der National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) und der National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) herausgegeben wurde. Die… https://t.co/RbCmIx643e

Newly released JFK files shed more light on Operation Mongoose, revealing that the CIA planned agricultural sabotage in Cuba using biological agents to trigger crop failure. The documents confirm that the CIA considered bioweapons for regime change. Aerial spraying could have been a possible method for dispersing chemicals over farmland. The individuals in the document used subtle biological agents to avoid detection, ensuring no clear link to the U.S.

In my research of Geo-Engineering, I have come across several sites that explain how the manipulation of our weather systems does a lot more harm than good. https://t.co/aLimptDpFQ Why is Geoengineering a Bad Idea? It won’t fix the climate crisis Geoengineering technologies do nothing to address the drivers of the climate crisis, and all come with major risks and unknowns. For example, solar geoengineering is inherently unpredictable and risks further destabilizing an already destabilized climate system. Models show that it would have an uneven effect regionally and could exacerbate climate change in countries on the front line of the crisis. What’s more, it carries the risk of ‘termination shock’ where temperatures suddenly spiral if, for whatever reason, deployment is paused or stopped. Meanwhile, no marine carbon dioxide removal techniques have been proven effective in the long-term removal and storage of CO2, and some could undermine the ocean’s ability to sequester carbon. It’s a dangerous distraction that undermines real climate solutions The illusion that geoengineering can help “fix” climate change is a dangerous distraction from the real solutions to the crisis and risks prolonging fossil fuel dependence. In fact, geoengineering technologies are inherently unpredictable and pose new, significant, unprecedented risks to the fragile ecosystems that sustain life on Earth, which are our best allies in the fight against the crisis. What’s more, relying on the promise of future speculative technologies instead of implementing real solutions today will lead to an overshoot of the critical climate threshold of 1.5ºC and lock in catastrophic climate change. By undermining transformative, justice-centered solutions to the climate crisis, geoengineering approaches also risk entrenching inequitable political and social power and perpetuating neocolonialism. It would turn Earth into a risky lab By their very nature, it’s impossible to test geoengineering technologies for their intended impact on the climate without large-scale outdoor deployment, by which time any harmful and potentially irreversible impacts would be locked in. Research showing theoretical benefits tends to use highly idealized models underplaying harmful impacts and the likelihood that deployment would not go as planned in the real world. Small-scale outdoor experiments only serve to help develop technology and risk a slippery slope to deployment. It requires an unprecedented scale for any meaningful climate impact To have any chance of their intended impact on the climate geoengineering technologies would have to be deployed at a truly unprecedented scale – with enormous political, social, and environmental consequences. For example, ocean fertilization and ocean alkalinity enhancement would require approximately 10 percent of the ocean’s surface for a meaningful climate impact. While for SRM to have its intended effect, the Earth would be locked into using these risky technologies for an indeterminate amount of time while emissions were reduced by highly speculative CDR approaches, with so-called “peak-shaving” scenarios for stratospheric aerosol injection implying deployment of 100- 200 years. It would be impossible to govern deployment fairly or safely Because of the proposed scale and duration of geoengineering, and the inherent risks it poses, there is nothing in human history to suggest that deployment could ever be fairly or safely governed. For example, Stratospheric Aerosol Injection is likely to require constant injection of sulfur compounds in the upper stratosphere over multiple generations if not centuries – a feat that only powerful nation-states or military regimes would be able to attempt. What’s more, the uneven impact of any cooling would create  ‘winners and losers’, exacerbating geo-political tensions, and the risk of termination shock from any pause or cessation. What Should Policymakers Do? Geoengineering is neither insurance to “buy time” nor any form of supplement to mitigation. Instead of chasing fantasy techno-fixes, governments should urgently prioritize real solutions to the climate crisis. This means equitably phasing out fossil fuels and supporting the many decentralized, diverse, and readily available alternatives for socially and ecologically sustainable production and consumption patterns. It requires wealthy countries to step up to their responsibility for causing the climate crisis and  provide climate finance in accordance with their fair shares, to enable countries on the front lines who have done least to cause the problem to cut emissions, adapt to climate impacts, and eradicate poverty . It also means protecting and restoring the forests, oceans, and polar and other ecosystems that are our best allies in the fight against climate change, while upholding the rights of Indigenous Peoples who are in direct relationship with these ecosystems, and the communities who depend on them for their livelihoods.

Publically available documents reveal US Congress has been quietly approving funding for weather modification, geoengineering projects The same projects the media calls everyone conspiracy theorists for talking about “We know that Congress mandated to fund these geoengineering projects without a single study on the effects of human health, or without a single vote passed by we, the people, giving our consent. We know this because now we can see how and where our tax money is being paid and spent via the website usaspending . gov” 24 States have began the process to fight back against geoengineering: Here are the states you listed formatted as bullet points: - Arizona - Connecticut - Florida - Idaho - Illinois - Indiana - Iowa - Kentucky - Maine - Minnesota - Mississippi - Missouri - New Hampshire - North Dakota - Ohio - Oklahoma - Pennsylvania - Rhode Island - South Carolina - South Dakota - Tennessee - Texas - Utah - Wyoming