Lynn Woolsey's Blind Eye: The Congressional
Geoengineering Hearings
by Peter
A. Kirby Source: Activist Post
August 22, 2012
My
federal representative in the House is a woman by the name of Lynn Woolsey (D -
CA 6th district). I sent her a written letter about chemtrails a couple of
years ago. She sent me a letter back telling me that the lines in the sky are
nothing more than ordinary jet contrails and are comprised of 'ice-crystals.' I
have since sent her other emails and letters and she continues to send me back
the same canned response.
Although she claims ignorance, she knows all about it. You see, Mrs.
Woolsey has been on the House of Representatives Science and Technology
Committee for many years. In late 2009 and early 2010, she, along with all the
other committee members, heard detailed congressional testimony from top
geoengineers. They called the hearings 'Geoengineering: Parts I, II, and III.'
During
the course of these hearings, stratospheric aerosols disbursed from aircraft
are mentioned many, many times.
Most testifying geoengineers characterized the practice as a cheap and
effective way to mitigate global warming. Geoengineer Lee Lane writes the best
example: Several proposed delivery techniques may be feasible (NAS, 1992). The
choice of the delivery system may depend on the intended purpose of the SRM
[solar radiation management] program. In one concept, SRM could be deployed
primarily to cool the Arctic. With an Arctic deployment, large cargo planes or
aerial tankers would be an adequate delivery system (Caldeira and Wood, pers.
comm., 2009). A global system would require particles to be injected at higher
altitudes. Fighter aircraft, or planes resembling them, seem like plausible
candidates. Another option entails combining fighter aircraft and aerial
tankers, and some thought has been given to balloons (Robock et al., 2009).
They
even go so far as to give validity to my theory that our military is using drones
to do the spraying. In his response to a follow-up question by Chairman Bart
Gordon, geoengineer Alan Robock writes: Certainly studies should be done of the
feasibility of retrofitting existing U.S. Air Force planes to inject sulfur
gases into the stratosphere, as described by Robock et al. [2009], as well as
of developing new vehicles, probably remotely-piloted, for routine delivery of
sulfur gases or production of aerosol particles. Mrs. Woolsey can forget about denying knowledge of the word
'chemtrail.' During these congressional hearings, the 'c' word is used twice.
Former congressman Brian Baird (D - WA 3rd district) said the word in context
first, "And so I applaud you all for suggesting that we are not going to
have this— to rescue us by, you know, chemtrails or whatever people want
to distribute into the air."
Chairman
Baird used the word again when he jumped right into the conspiracies and said
this:
I
will share with you, though, this idea of placing particles in the upper
atmosphere. Are any of you familiar with the conspiracy theory known as
chemtrails? Have you heard of this? It is a rather interesting phenomenon. I
was at a town hall and a person opined that the shape of contrails was looking
different than it used to, and why was that? I gave my best understanding of
atmospheric temperature and humidity and whatnot, but the theory which is
apparently pretty prevalent on the Net is that the government is putting
psychotropic drugs of some sort into the jet fuel and that is causing a difference
in appearance of jet fuel and allowing them to secretly disseminate these
foreign substances through the atmosphere via our commercial jet airline fleet.
You
thought it ended there, didn't you? Woolsey wishes it did. Have you heard of
the Manhattan Project? The Manhattan Project was a secret US research and
development project conducted largely from 1942-1946. It produced the world's
first atomic bombs and involved thousands of people. Due to
compartmentalization, the project remained secret. Is geoengineering today's
Manhattan Project? These geoengineering hearings referenced the Manhattan
Project three times. Geoengineer Philip Rasch, in written testimony, provided
the best example:
In
my opinion before a nation (or the world) ever decided to deploy a full scale
geoengineering project to try to compensate for warming by greenhouse gases it
would require an enormous activity, equivalent to that presently occurring
within the modeling and assessment activities associated with the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) activity, or a Manhattan
Project, or both. It would involve hundreds or thousands of scientists and
engineers and require the involvement of politicians, ethicists, social
scientists, and possibly the military. These issues are outside of my area of
expertise. Early 'back of the envelope' calculations estimated costs of a few
billion dollars per year for full deployment of a stratospheric aerosol
strategy (see for example, Crutzen, (2006) or Robock et al (2009b)).
Congresswoman
Suzanne Kosmas (D - FL 24th district) asked a good question:
Ms.
KOSMAS: ...So my remarks will be focused for the most part on the solar
radiation management, my remarks and questions. But I want to suggest to my
friend, Mr. Hall, that while you might think this is science fiction, I was
talking with my daughter yesterday who was telling me my son, who is in China,
was saying that they had a massive snowstorm induced by the state of China or
the nation of China. So do you not believe that that happened?
Dr.
ROBOCK: I believe that the snowstorm happened, but I donŐt think you can prove
that they caused it.
Ms.
KOSMAS: Okay. All right. Well, maybe it is science fiction. I donŐt know. But
it is interesting, and I suspect if they could, they would.
Well,
I guess we're just going to have to prove it, then.
This
next excerpt is from the hearing's charter:
...negative
public perceptions of geoengineering may also prove to be a powerful catalyst
for emissions reductions. A study by the British Market Research Bureau found
that while participants were cautious or hostile toward geoengineering,
'several agreed that they would actually be more motivated to undertake
mitigation actions themselves' after a large-scale geoengineering application
was suggested.
They're
suggesting that geoengineering could be used as a threat. Ask yourself . . .
who are the terrorists?
Our
congresspeople were repeatedly told about possible negative impacts as well.
Although geoengineers just about always come up short of speaking to any human
health effects, Dr. Alan Robock writes:
Key
challenges of geoengineering related to the side effects on the climate system
are that it could produce drought in Asia and Africa, threatening the food and
water supply for billions of people, that it would not halt continued ocean
acidification from CO2, and that it would deplete ozone and increase dangerous
ultraviolet radiation.
Furthermore,
the reduction of direct solar radiation and the increase in diffuse radiation
would make the sky less blue and produce much less solar power from systems
using focused sunlight. Any system to inject particles or their precursors into
the stratosphere at the needed rate would have large local environmental
impacts.
Nowhere
in the course of these hearings did Mrs. Woolsey make any comments.
Although
I do expect her to be tough enough to take it, I don't particularly enjoy
attacking Mrs. Woolsey. She works with many local activists. She voted 'no' on
both the Patriot Act and the National Defense Authorization Act; and if I
looked further into her voting record, I am confident I would find other
commendable actions. I understand that she basically pulled herself up by her
own bootstraps. She seems like a nice enough woman. I bet she would defend my
right to criticize her. I'm just shaking her cage. I want service over here!
The
problem is that, when it comes to chemtrails, she is not doing what she should.
If she's intelligent and dedicated enough to do all these other good things,
then why does she not put two and two together, realize that we are being
sprayed and do something about it? There is no greater threat to the people of
her jurisdiction. Because the chemtrail spraying planes cross over state
boundaries, this is a federal issue. Mrs. Woolsey is my most direct federal
representative. We need her to stand up and say 'no.' But, being that she is a
lame duck (she announced her retirement in June of last year), she's probably
going to just dodge this issue and ride out impotently.
Mrs.
Woolsey, if you are reading this, as soon as you stand up resolutely and
consistently against chemtrails and geoengineering, I will stop attacking you
and begin recognizing you properly as I have done here with other politicians.
Until then, as long as you occupy the office, you are my number one target.
Note:
-' Geoengineering: Parts I, II, and III' hearing before the Committee on
Science and Technology House of Representatives 2009-2010
Website:
woolsey.house.gov
Peter
A. Kirby is a San Rafael, CA author and activist. Check out his ebook
Chemtrails Exposed.'