The Russian writer Leo Tolstoy made an interesting observation regarding the role of scientists in maintaining untouchable dogmas.
“Science in our time occupies exactly the place that hundreds of years ago was occupied by a pagan priesthood. The same type of priest-teacher is involved, the same caste system, with a priesthood of science in the Academy, in universities, at conferences. The same trustfulness and the same absence of criticism from the faithful. Among the priesthood the same differences that for some reason do not start a process of creative confusion. The same incomprehensible words. Instead of thought and reflection the same self-confident pride. “
Has anything in the meantime changed?
No. Sadly, human nature does not change on a time scale measured in hundreds of years.
You have become a victim of a scientific inquisition. The Grand Inquisitor Wikipedia has shown its face. What can you say about the Orwellian deletion of texts from your Wikipedia profile?
Wikipedia, like many Internet sites, has a major flaw by allowing “screen names” to be used instead of one’s verified identity. Anonymity often cloaks deceit. If people could only make comments under their own identities, there might be some improvement. Even so, those with their own agendas will act to shield and/or promote those agendas. Wikipedia cannot be trusted, and I know of no activity to improve that situation.
What is the role of the “politically correct” scientific elite in suppressing the truth about climate engineering.
In 1951 the USA was by far the undisputed leader in science, and was a world role model to be followed. In that year the US National Science Foundation was established and literally wrote the rules on how civilian research would be supported. But the rules were flawed, and those laws have led to a persistent corruption of science. For example, one’s competitors were allowed to review proposals for financial support, and were allowed to review them anonymously.
Well, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see what happened. And what happened is just like what happens in a totalitarian government with secret police. If a scientist wanted to get support he/she had to be very careful not to contradict anyone that might be a reviewer. Science is all about finding out what is wrong with existent ideas and presenting an improved understanding. But if a scientist did that, then there is a strong possibility that someone would seek revenge through the anonymous peer review. So, the scientist adopted the idea of “political correctness” before that term came into being.
More than a half century of such behavior has led to a severe weakness in the scientific community. So, when the whole “global warming”/“climate change” agenda came into place academic scientists were well trained to become willingly subservient. The real agenda, though, has been driven by military and commercial interests. Academic scientists, at universities and at some prestigious research institutes, have acted like pawns or shills.
It is deceitful that such scientists should talk about geoengineering as if it might be some future possibility, when in fact it is an ongoing activity that has been going on at full scale for several years, and experimentally perhaps for 15 years. (N.B. Dr. Herndon is here underestimating the length of time that the spraying has been in progress.)
Would David Keith defend his crazy ideas if there were be an open forum for dialogue with serious opponents?
There should be in science serious dialogues, but people are afraid to speak out because, if they do, they might lose their financial support. In 1979 I was a young scientist looking towards a career in academia. I came to realize that the inner core of the earth might not have the composition that people had thought for 40 years.
I wrote a paper suggesting a different composition; it was communicated to the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London by Nobel laureate Harold C. Urey, and I received a highly complementary congratulatory letter from Inga Lehmann, the woman who had discovered the inner core. I thought that there would be debate and discussion, and I thought that people with well-established laboratories would take up the idea and make many advances. Instead, there was silence: it was as if the paper had never been published, and soon my proposals for funding encountered obstacles. I was excommunicated. And the science environment has worsened since that time.
The campaign against the scientists willing to speak up ranges from belittling their scientific credibility to their physical liquidation. What motivated you in such circumstances to speak out about the dirtiest secret – the spraying campaign?
At the beginning of 2014 I noticed the near daily spraying, which increased to daily spraying. Nobody seemed willing or knowledgeable to find out what the composition is of the main substance being sprayed. What I found is strong evidence that the main substance being sprayed to make artificial clouds is coal combustion fly ash. This is a toxic nightmare, a substance that in the presence of water releases many toxic elements, including aluminum in a highly mobile form. When utilities burn coal, the heavy ash settles out, while the very fine particles, the so-called fly ash goes up the smokestack. But coal fly ash is so toxic that in Western countries regulations require it to be trapped electrostatically and not allowed to go up the smokestack into the environment.
I think one of the best military secrets is that coal fly ash is the main component being sprayed in the troposphere for weather modification or geoengineering reasons. You have to wonder what kind of fools are our political leaders that approve aerial spraying of a substance such as coal fly ash. Maybe they were not told what would be sprayed? Maybe they never asked? Maybe they were deceived? But they are allowing the people who elected them, as well as their own families, to be exposed to this toxic substance.
When coal formed, millions of years ago, it trapped many toxic elements. When coal is burned, those toxic elements become concentrated in the coal fly ash. Consider just one of the toxic substances, aluminum. The crust of the earth contains approximately 8% aluminum, but the aluminum is tightly bound as oxides and as silicates; it takes extreme chemistry to render that aluminum into a form that it dissolves in water. Recall the debate in the 1970s about acid rain. One of the major concerns about acid rain is that it would liberate aluminum in a chemically mobile form, which could lead to forest die-offs, for example.
The fine particles of coal fly ash sprayed into the air can enter the body through the lungs, through the mouth, through the skin, and even through the eyes. These very fine particles embed themselves in deep into the lungs which can cause inflammation; moisture from the body can extract the toxins including aluminum in a chemically mobile form. Aluminum has been implicated in autism, Alzheimer’s disease, and other neurological diseases. With the ongoing spraying, is there any wonder why these neurological diseases are on the increase?
For the military, coal fly ash is an ideal substance. It is a cheap by-product, the production and transportation infrastructure is already in place, the particles are extremely fine and remain suspended in the atmosphere for some time. They also retard Earth’s loss of heat as well as retarding rainfall. Moreover, the elements that leach out into the tiny droplets of water make that water electrically conducting, which plays into the bigger picture of controlling the movement of clouds. Coal fly ash is ideal for the military’s application, as long as the military and political leaders have no regard for humanity, which seems to be the case.
The role of coal fly ash then, as I see it, is the main substance for the military’s weaponizing weather and geoengineering. It is also a base substance to which all sorts of other substances can be added for specific purposes, such as to precipitate ice, or perhaps to control populations. There is no limit to the nature of experiments that the military is permitted to use over unsuspecting populations. There is no moral fiber, there is no humanity.
In addition to the presence of aluminum powder in the form of nanoparticles and heavy metals you also find dust created by burning coal – “coal combustion fly ash”. What is the role of this component?
At first we saw the white marks in the sky. They call them contrails. Now it is “persistent contrails”. More recently we can see darker elements – black shadows – is this a sign of fly ash? At first I saw, and now I see sometimes, the typical white trails that diffuse into cirrus-like clouds which further diffuse into a white haze. Sometimes this spraying is so heavy that the clouds take on a brownish appearance. Sometimes huge masses are dumped at once. These make brownish clouds that gradually spread out and become whitish clouds, eventually becoming a white haze. I think the brownish appearance IS a result of the coal fly ash.
What are the consequences of inhaling these particles?
Studies have shown that air pollution particles less than two micrometres in size can shorten human life. Coal fly ash particles can do the same thing, plus they release a multitude of toxins deep in the lungs including radioactive uranium and thorium, which can cause cancer. One of the toxins that are released is arsenic, which can cross the placenta of a pregnant woman and get into her yet unborn child. I am sure that I am describing just the tip of the iceberg, a very dirty iceberg indeed.
Do you believe in the story of anthropogenic causes for warming the planet, and the role of CO2?
The simplistic anthropogenic global warming story is based upon a flawed understanding of the dynamics of our planet. It is based upon the assumptions that the heat from the sun is constant and that the heat exiting Earth from within is constant. These are flawed assumptions. Heat coming out under the ocean, for which there is evidence, heats the ocean which releases some of the dissolved CO2. That is not taken into account in the simplistic global warming/climate change models.
But then one must really ask the question, with all the ongoing geoengineering that changes the climate, whether the warming we are witnessing is a natural phenomenon or is induced by the spraying. Is the goal to cool planet Earth or to melt the Arctic ice to make available the oil beneath it and to open Northwest passages?
Obama recently announced that cow dung emits methane, which is more dangerous than CO2. He declared war on cow dung, and proposed that the cows must eat food additives to reduce the methane in their dung. On that occasion it was announced that the feed industries already own the formula for this supplement. Can we expect the Environmental Protection Agency to adopt a law on mandatory feeding of these supplements to livestock, regardless of the lack of testing on the functioning of such modified meat and dairy products on the human body?
The EPA, NASA, NIH and presumably all government agencies are “in the tank”. They are party to what’s going on and have no independence. They are not to be trusted. Early in 2014, instead of ruling that coal fly ash is a toxic substance as many expected, the EPA classed coal fly ash as a solid waste. Previously, the EPA had raised the permissible limits for aluminum and barium in drinking water by a factor of four.
Does the FDA ever carried out by measuring samples of water and soil to aluminum and other heavy metals?
I doubt they measure samples; they are primarily concerned with food and medicines.
You did it independently by yourselves. Do they accept your findings?
There is a major effort to suppress my scientific publications. The first paper in Current Science received a whole list of criticisms and a demand for retraction. The editor provided verbatim comments and wisely asked me to respond in writing, which I did. The person complaining however would not allow his name to be used, so my response was never published. The editor of my second paper in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health was similarly attacked. He never provided verbatim comments and retracted my paper based upon lies and misrepresentations.
I am enclosing an attachment that describes the situation. I do not accept that retraction. I have filed a formal complaint against the editor for academic malfeasance at his university and I will continue to file formal complaints throughout the international scientific community until truth and reason prevail. Incidentally, I recently was shown a quote from someone on the web who bragged that he had paid a visit to the editor and after five minutes conversation convinced him to retract my paper. There are serious matters of ethics-failure here.
The Serbian scientist Milutin Milankovitch, a mathematician and author of scientific papers related to “celestial mechanics”, around 1920 published a formula for calculating the temperature of our planet, foreseeing its gradual cooling up to a final ice age. Are you familiar with his scientific work?
I am familiar with the Milankovitch Cycles.
Modern science does not take into account these cosmic changes and their impact on the climate? Do you think that Milankovitch’s work can help in understanding this influence?
Yes.
You’ve drawn attention to the ‘modellers’ and said that quasi-science is unable to predict future climate. Can you predict the consequences of climate engineering for the living world?
Climate engineering of the kind presently ongoing will, if allowed to, devastate all the creatures of the earth, corrupt our planet’s natural systems of equilibrium and ultimate enslave human populations.
Indian scientists have approached you regarding your research papers on the impact of aluminum and coal fly ash. To what extent is India open to scientific dialogue?
India (praise be) has not yet capitulated to the new Empire that is flexing its muscles.
Spraying is observed over countries that are NATO members or sympathizers. When did spraying start in India?
I have no reason to believe that spraying is actually taking place in India, although spray may reach their shores.
A video from India suggests the contrary. [W.H.]
In Serbia the spraying began after the “democratic changes” of 2005 that brought the pro-NATO politicians to power. They signed a protocol on “Open Skies” with NATO, the content of which has not been disclosed. From that moment on there was an obvious presence of aircraft leaving persistent trails, with an effect on the albedo. Our mainstream media call them “persistent con trails”. What will be the next step in the Paris conference – legalization of clandestine activities?
That is the fear of many rational scientists who look at the sky in dismay.
Serbian activists have tried to get an answer from the Ministry of Nature Protection about the nature of the substance being released from the planes, but we found out that no ministry in Serbia is responsible for monitoring the presence of heavy metals in air and water. Is it the same in your country?
The government does not tell the truth in my country.
What do you expect from the meeting in Athens?
I hope it will help to bring to public consciousness the crimes against humanity being perpetrated. I will give a short address via video.
Interviewer: Mara Kern
