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.'