“A hound it was, an enormous coal-black hound, but not such a hound as mortal eyes have ever seen.”
― Dr John Watson, The Hound of the Baskervilles
In part 12 we followed the footprints of this fearsome beast from 1961 to 1974. We now enter the period where we may more clearly glimpse its outline.
Winter Was Coming
In the 1970’s many scientists, as if to ram home the need for a climate warming campaign, warned of a coming mini-ice age based on the solar cycle and its correlation with global temperatures, perhaps exacerbated by the additional cooling effect of emitted sulphates. The sun was due for a prolonged winding down phase which would lead to a corresponding reduction in global temperatures. The last time this had occurred was known as the Maunder Minimum in the 17th and early 18th century which lasted for 70 years.
“Much has been made of the probable connection between the Maunder Minimum, a 70-year deficit of sunspots in the late 17th-early 18th century, and the coldest part of the Little Ice Age, during which Europe and North America were subjected to bitterly cold winters.”
Jasper Kirkby, an atmospheric scientist at CERN predicted that the Maunder Minimum would occur around 2015:
In 2015, Nature published a paper confirming the very real possibility of such an event:
“The decline in solar activity has continued, to the time of writing, and is faster than any other such decline in the 9,300 years”
And now the Weather Channel are also speculating on the effects:
“The researchers of the study financed by the state of California and published in Astrophysical Journal Letters said that while a short-term cooling here on earth can be expected, it will have little impact on global warming in the long run. A separate study determined that while temperatures may decline for however long the minimum lasts, perhaps for as many as 50 years, temperatures will quickly catch up to current predictions for future warming.”
These studies, in line with mainstream science, only seem to be considering the effects of the fluctuation in UV radiation associated with the solar cycle. Recall, however, Henrik Svensmark and his cosmic ray theory to account for the amplification of the effects of solar radiation fluctuation, covered in part 2. Changes in the strength of the solar magnetic field allow cosmic rays through in varying degrees of intensity. These cosmic rays, in turn strip electrons from the air that, catalyse the formation of lower cloud condensation nuclei.
Thus, when the Sun’s magnetic field winds down, global temperatures should decrease and the opposite scenario occurs with a greater sunspot number and solar magnetic field strength – temperatures should increase.
The British climate expert, Hubert Lamb, wrote an article in 1971 entitled “Climate-engineering schemes to meet a climatic emergency.”
I put it to you that scientists in the 70’s were aware of this coming low sunspot phase of prolonged duration and instigated a campaign to prepare for it by means of melting the Arctic and warming the climate.
1971 was also the year in which nearly all the leading scientists from the US and Western Europe, met with the Russian scientists in Leningrad. At this point in time only a few scientists believed that CO2 actually posed a significant threat in terms of the warming it would cause. It was here that Mikhail Budyko expressed his conviction, in contradiction to everybody else, that the earth would be warming due to human activity. It was not well received. Budyko, however, thought this was good news and that nothing should be done to prevent it. Indeed, it was he that had suggested coating the Arctic with soot to melt the ice. This would lower the albedo and warm the air, exposing the dark underlying soil and ocean water, absorbing yet more solar radiation and accelerate warming. The ice might would not reform according to this theory and would lead to a beneficial alteration (from Budyko’s point of view) in the climate of the planet, particularly Siberia, and render the Arctic Ocean navigable.
Later in 1974, Budyko calculated:
“that if global warming ever became a serious threat, we could counter it with just a few airplane flights a day in the stratosphere, burning sulfur to make aerosols that would reflect sunlight away.”
Gray’s Black Carbon
In 1975, William Gray proposed ground based dispensers of black carbon plumes for the purpose of snow/ice melting and enhancement of lower cloud convection. Gray modelled his ideas on actual carbon dust smoke plumes generated by black carbon plants and petroleum fires.
Recall that we outlined in part 3 the role that offshore oil and gas rigs were playing in fulfilling Gray’s criteria for “ground based dispensers of black carbon plumes.” The black carbon particles would absorb both incoming solar radiation and that reflected by the snow and warm the air just above the ice by means of convection. The particles would also eventually reach the surface where they would reduce snow albedo and contribute to the ice melt. As we have seen black carbon is a major player in the Arctic meltdown and here we have a technology proposed in the period just before it began that intentionally makes use of that very substance.
A sustained perusal of Gray’s paper will make it clear that the geoengineers had moved on from trying to use black carbon as a cloud condensation nuclei or ice nuclei.
“Being basically inert and hydrophobic, the carbon should not cause any changes in condensation nuclei or ice nuclei concentrations”
Instead it was to be deployed as an artificial atmospheric heat source. It absorbs Solar Radiation and transmits that energy as sensible heat to the surrounding air. Now, anyone who is familiar with cloud seeding as envisioned by Langmuir, Vonnegut and Schafer will know that heat is anathema to this form of cloud seeding. Clouds need cold so that water vapour will condense upon the nuclei.
The latest research also supports the theory that Black carbon slows or prevents the formation of the CCN into cloud droplets:
“Black carbon (BC) aerosol absorbs sunlight that might have otherwise been reflected to space and changes the radiative heating ofthe atmosphere and surface. These effects may alter the dynamical andhydrological processes governing cloud formation. A new, microphysical,effect of BC on climate is identified here, in which solar heating within BC containing cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) slows or prevents the activation of these CCN into cloud drops.” Emphasis mine
“Acknowledgments. This work was supported by Office of Naval Research grant N00014-96-1-0119.”
This has even been patented as a method of wiping out contrails, which as we know, are artificial clouds:
“The attempted hiding of vapour trails through introducing black carbon into the aircraft engine effluent (U.S. Pat. No. 3,289,409A) results in additional emissions of a species (black carbon) which is known to have an environmental warming impact.” – Rolls Royce Patent 9518965
The genius of Gray was to disperse the carbon particles from below. The artificially generated heat causes air and moisture to rise by means of convection. As it rises to colder layers above it condenses to form cloud (of course with help from cloud condensation and ice nuclei).
- If the black carbon were dispersed at the surface level it would encourage the formation of lower clouds.
- If dispersed at the level of cumulus clouds in it would simultaneously discourage the formation of lower clouds whilst encouraging the formation of higher clouds.
It is clear that, when used in conjunction with ice nuclei seeded at the appropriate levels, air masses can be warmed or cooled at will.
Black Carbon Cloud Seeding has made it into the glossary of Meteorology of the American Meteorological Society:
A type of cloud seeding where microscopic soot particles are dispersed into the atmosphere in order to absorb radiant energy and thereby heat the surrounding air, possibly leading to convection”
Black’s grey outlook
James Black who had worked in hydrogen bomb research in the 50’s, was one of the first Exxon scientists to study and confirm the greenhouse effect. Black was also an avid weather modification enthusiast who was fascinated with the possibility of improving agriculture in arid countries (think Budyko and Borisov).
In 1977 he made a presentation to Exxon’s top management warning of the harmful consequences of CO2 accumulation on the environment and mankind. During the 70’s, Exxon was actually considering a gradual shift from oil towards diversified energy which is why it funded such research. Their scientists were convinced that Earth’s poles would warm more quickly than the rest of the planet and a reduction in ice and snow cover would alter the planet’s ability to reflect sunlight (again, think Budyko and Borisov).
The Real Cold War
This is also the period of numerous negotiations between the world powers, the US and the USSR to limit the use of methods of environmental modification to peaceful, non-military purposes.
“During the summit meeting in Moscow in July 1974, President Nixon and General Secretary Brezhnev formally agreed to hold bilateral discussions on how to bring about “the most effective measures possible to overcome the dangers of the use of environmental modification techniques for military purposes.” Emphasis mine
“The Convention defines environmental modification techniques as changing — through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes — the dynamics, composition or structure of the earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydro-sphere, and atmosphere, or of outer space. Changes in weather or climate patterns, in ocean currents, or in the state of the ozone layer or ionosphere, or an upset in the ecological balance of a region are some of the effects which might result from the use of environmental modification techniques.” Emphasis mine
“Article I sets forth the basic commitment: “Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party.” Emphasis mine
“With regard to peaceful uses of environmental modification techniques, the convention provides that the parties shall have the right to participate in the fullest possible exchange of scientific and technological information.” Emphasis mine
“In addition to the provision for mutual consultation regarding complaints and for resource to the Security Council, the revised draft establishes the framework for a Consultative Committee of Experts, which would meet on an ad hoc basis when so requested by a party, in order to clarify the nature of activities suspected to be in violation of the convention.” Emphasis mine
In 1978 the Environmental Modification Treaty was brought into effect after being signed by 51 countries in 1977 and 1978.
It is worth recalling the words of US Navy officer, Capt. H.T. Orville who reported that the USSR “had conducted numerous unpublicized but still detectable experiments apparently aimed at finding ways to speed melting of polar icecaps; and has even offered to join the United States in a project to turn the Arctic Ocean into a sort of warm water lake by melting the polar icecap.”
What if this treaty was really about thrashing out a joint project to melt the polar icecap and turn the Arctic Ocean into a warm water lake, modifying the climate to one more congenial to the northern temperate zones, especially if a new Maunder Minimum was imminent? Ironically, this project would, in effect, constitute a long-term covert act of war against the poorer countries situated closer to the equator and, through the dislocations to global agriculture, the poor of the world. Class warfare on a global scale, if you will
In the early 80’s Exxon’s research stopped receiving federal funding and their enthusiasm to pursue this avenue came to a grinding halt. Was this due to the new climate of international cooperation to avert the mini ice age?
The intent to engineer a warmer climate had been more or less overt until; quite mysteriously in the 1980’s, after scientists in the decade before had been warning of an oncoming ice age, proposing such schemes as spreading soot on the Arctic ice and seeding artificial clouds to counteract it, they bifurcated into two groups:
- One of these represented the official face of the new global warming threat. Fossil fuel use and by implication humanity itself would become the new adversary.
- The other represented the cover-up and denial of such a threat.
Through much of the 80’s, scientists working directly for the most powerful arm of Big Oil, Exxon, had actually confirmed the growing consensus that a doubling of CO2 levels in the 21st century would result in an average global temperature rise of 3.0 ± 1.5°C. This would bring about significant changes to the climate including those of rainfall distribution. Some of those very same researchers later made an about face and became prominent skeptics after surviving lay-offs in the mid-80’s. Lay-offs in one of the most powerful corporations on the planet. One, Brian Flannery, became chief scientist and attended IPCC meetings, this time deriding their assessments and pouring doubt over what before he had been so certain of.
Exxon has since covertly funded organizations that have distorted and suppressed climate science whilst at the same time being a member of the IPCC since 1992.
Two Exxon scientists as leading authors attend all the meetings. Because the IPCC has a rule of unanimity they have substantial influence over the narrative.
A narrative that traps us in the illusion of two choices:
- Business as usual with the threat of climatic and environmental destruction
- Or subjugation to a tyrannical, planetary police state.
A narrative that distracts us from the gorilla in the greenhouse:
We are already subjugated under a planetary police state and in the midst of a climatic and environmental catastrophe
The Coal-Black Hound
From around the mid-70’s, the planet underwent an unprecedented acceleration in warming that has been ascribed to anthropogenic activity.
As covered earlier, this uneven heat signature reveals that warming due to CO2 alone cannot account for it. Warming solely due to CO2 should warm both the poles more than the equator as predicted by Roger Revelle and the Exxon scientists. This even, global, heat-blanket effect, leading to an average 1-3°C increase over the 21st century is clearly not happening in this fashion.
Nor can the solar cycle account for it:
From 1980 we observed an unprecedented break in the correlation between sunspot numbers and global temperatures as, despite the sun winding down, global temperatures have been going up.
If the sun and climate have been going their opposite ways since 1980, then the sun cannot be the cause of the recent global warming.
This suggests that the geoengineers may have been successful in their endeavours.
The Link in the Chain
Intentions on the part of international scientists back in the 60’s and 70’s to induce warming by modifying cloud cover are apparent from the literature of such individuals as W. Murcray and J.O. Fletcher.
We attain another glimpse of an overt intention in this paper published in 1983:
“Abstract. The effects of thin to moderately thick cirrus clouds on daytime air temperature rise or nighttime air temperature fall near the ground can be approximated as linearly proportional to the change in solar heating, or nocturnal radiative cooling, of the surface, produced by the clouds. It is estimated that a uniform overcast of cirrus with a thickness comparable to an average aircraft contrail will reduce daytime heating by 10 to 20% and nighttime cooling by up to 50% compared to the heating and cooling that would have occurred in cloudless conditions.” Emphasis mine
Recently it has been shown that under some circumstances it may be cost-effective to stimulate artificially the formation of cirrus clouds in clear ice-supersaturated air in order to reduce nocturnal cooling in urban areas during the cold season (Detwiler and Cho,1982)” Emphasis mine
“Clouds could also be used to moderate temperatures in agricultural areas when extremely hot or cold conditions present problems. Changes in both surface temperatures and evapotranspiration may result if cloud cover is altered.” Emphasis mine
“Cloud-cover modification techniques have received little attention in the past from weather modification researchers compared to the attention given to the development of precipitation enhancement and hail suppression techniques.” Emphasis mine
“ Changnon (1981) has speculated that aircraft contrails already may be inadvertently moderating temperatures in portions of the mid-western United States. Here, we will be concerned with the production of cirrus clouds in clear, or mostly clear, air by seeding with ice-forming nucleants.” Emphasis mine
As hinted at in the paper above, the application of weather modification had been at least officially; geared towards the development of precipitation enhancement and hail suppression techniques in the form of cloud seeding, which entered the realms of accepted science in 1946. One application of cloud seeding, that of cloud-cover modification, receives less attention but is of the utmost relevance to this study. This application is the link in the chain that draws together cloud seeding with geoengineering proposals for global warming mitigation and the inferred, actual, ongoing, clandestine geoengineering campaign aimed at global warming inducement.
After this period, the picture becomes darker. We are left with traces of such an intent, left behind unintentionally and we must raise our powers of deduction to a higher pitch.
We can make out the footprints left behind in the atmosphere with the help of the HIRS polar orbiting satellite data reported by Wylie and Menzel, covered in chapter 6, which found that cirrus clouds, from 1979 to 2001, a period of 22 years, had increased in the latitudes 60°S – 60°N by an average of 1.95% per decade. That’s around a 4.3% increase in 22 years. With a conservative estimate of 0.2 Wm2 per 1% of cirrus cloudiness, this gives us a forcing of around +0.86 Wm2 (roughly +0.26C) over 22 years.
The geographical locations of changes in all-cloud and high-cloud frequency between the first and last 8 yr of this study
(1994–2001 minus 1985–92)
We also have the correlation between air traffic corridors and increase in cirrus cloud cover from 1982 to 1991 established by Olivier Boucher.
Those ubiquitous trails that expand and blot out our skies from horizon to horizon.
We can speculate that the commercial airline industry, operating at precisely the altitudes where cirrus form, has been used as the delivery mechanism. To supplement these jets, drones have been used. In fact, modern commercial jet planes can be controlled remotely to the extent that one with no pilot and empty of passengers, is basically a drone. If this were to be a clandestine operation, then using commercial jets would be the most effective way of concealment – in plane sight.
Beyond this we have clandestine aircraft such as AWACs captured in the act of releasing great quantities of aerosols in curiously shaped patterns that morph and grow into formations that reach over 80 times their original size. These concentrate the number of aerosols and maximize coverage to supplement and fine tune the coverage already established by commercial air traffic with adulterated fuel. They also explain the increased cirrus cloud over the mid-to-high latitudes of the southern hemisphere where commercial air traffic is far less frequent.
Evolution of the Contrails into Cirrus
We can see that in the 22-year period covered by the HIRS study from 1979 to 2001, with the 4.3% global increase in cirrus cloud cover, and the deposition of soot on the Arctic ice, the global distribution matches well with the thermal signature reported by NASA for the same period:
Curiously however, a study published in 2016, reprocessing the HIRS data, this time for a longer period of 35 years, from 1980 to 2015, revealed that no overall trend in high clouds was found in the latitudes 60°N–60°S high-cloud detection.
What does this mean?
It means that, although cirrus clouds were increasing for the 22 years from 1979 to 2001 at the same time temperatures were rising, from 2001 to 2015 there must have been an equal decrease in cirrus cover so that no overall trend was revealed.
Aircraft density has certainly not decreased nor even slowed. Neither have the trails themselves in any way abated, rather the opposite. Once you notice them, you can never not notice them. They occur in ever-growing profusion. So how can cirrus cover have reduced?
As ever, the immortal detective offers us light:
“What is out of the common is usually a guide rather than a hindrance.” Sherlock Holmes
We shall address this “guide rather than a hindrance” in part 14.