loader

An Act

To End Atmospheric Experimentation Without Notification

Desiring to prohibit effectively military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques in order to eliminate the dangers to mankind from such use, and recognizing the Environmental Modification Convention of 1976, it shall be law that any individual or organization shall give prior notice of intent to modify weather or climate in order to determine if such actions are hostile or result in monetary, environmental, or physical losses.

Further, this Act shall require the creation of a weather modification detection system consisting of sensors capable of determining the difference between inadvertent and intentional weather modification.

  1. Create an International Registry of Atmospheric Experimentation (IREA) events:
    1. Registry must be publicly available on a website as well has available in hard-copy.
    2. Registry should include: Intention (snowpack augmentation, rainfall enhancement, hail mitigation, etc), funding source(s), operator, area of effect, hours of operation, and duration of event.
  2. Require nations/states/persons to notify the IREA (at least) 48 hours prior to initiation of Atmospheric Experimentation to ensure public notice, and liability should said experimentation/modification cause monetary, environmental, or physical losses.
  3. Verify the composition of our atmosphere (chemical, aerosol, gases, and electromagnetic activity) by creating both citizen-powered and government-sponsored sensor networks with data publicly available and displayed in real-time
    1. Create an atmospheric sensor network for verification of the IREA by unifying worldwide weather data for easy transmission, dissemination, and processing.
    2. Provide support for the creation of a citizen-powered sensor network to augment and/or validate the sensor network mandated by this Act.

Definition

Atmospheric Experimentation: Any act with the purpose of studying or modifying weather or climate, however small, using the following techniques:

  1. Release of chemicals
    1. Cloud Seeding
    2. Sounding Rockets
    3. Tracer Experiments
  2. Modification of pollution sources
    1. Alteration of Effluent Stacks
    2. Jet Fuel Doping (Contrail-Induced Cirrus)
    3. Use of Bunker Fuel (Ship Tracks)
    4. Any other technique that results directly in cloud creation or control.
  3. Electromagnetic or Sonic Energy
    1. Ionospheric Heaters
    2. Lasers
    3. Cloud Ionizers
    4. Resonance Technology
    5. Any other technique that modifies
      1. atmospheric rivers
      2. jet streams
      3. pressure zones
      4. ionosphere
  4. Any other technique that intentionally alters temperature, rainfall, cloud cover, or any other measureable change in climate or weather.
Ten Technologies to Own the Weather Today!

I attended the 98th annual American Meteorological Society (AMS) meeting in Austin, Texas on January 9-11, 2018. At this meeting I interviewed attendees and some of the geoengineering and cloud seeding researchers at the 21st Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification. Here is how I made it there:

Original Post: November 11, 2017

Welcome ClimateViewers, My name is Jim Lee from ClimateViewer News at climateviewer.com, climateviewer.org, and weathermodificationhistory.com.

Today I am here to bring you an important message about weather warfare and a solution.

Watch this video on YouTube • VIDEO LINK

God should control the weather, well, God or Gaia, not man. Unfortunately, that is not the case today. Billions of dollars are spent annually modifying the weather worlwide and after 100 years of rainmaking and hurricane hacking few know the secret history of the Climate Changers. In 1978, the United Nations banned weather warfare with the passage of the Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD). This law came as a result of the disclosure by reporter Jack Anderson of the United States Air Force’s weather warfare activities over Vietnam (Operation Popeye). The problem we face today is there is zero accountability in the hidden world of climate engineering. I seek to change this dilemma today.

My solution which I call “The Environmental Modification Accountability Act of 2018” #ENMODAA is an addendum to the international weather warfare ban (ENMOD) requiring two things:

TRANSPARENCY: a worldwide requirement to give 48 hour notice before modifying or experimenting in our sky or surrounding atmosphere.

VERIFICATION: create a worldwide citizen-powered sensor network to monitor atmospheric conditions, record video footage of sky conditions, and display atmospheric aerosols in real-time on a publicly available website. (Map available at ClimateViewer.org).

Those who seek to violate the conditions of this addendum will be caught with our sensor network and will be held responsible in court.

While we have a sensor network to immediately let us know when North Korea detonates a nuclear blast, we have no way to know for sure who is Owning Your Weather. The Environmental Modification Accountability Act of 2018 (formerly known as The Clarity Clause) is a necessity to protect all citizens on Earth from monetary, environmental, and physical losses from weather warfare, rogue geoengineering, and the butterfly effect of massive cloud seeding projects. Militaries are using plausibly deniable weapons of mass destruction and the only way to end that secrecy is through verification with a sensor network. Trust but verify.

Only through this two step process can we finally determine the question that plagues us all: was this extreme weather event caused by nature or man?

One cannot blame hurricanes on Climate Change if one does not account for the Climate Changers.

I am crowd-funding a trip to the 21st Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification at the 98th American Meteorological Society’s annual meeting this coming January. This meeting will be a gathering of the world’s top geoengineering scientists and experts in the field of weather modification technology. This is a rare opportunity for me to hear three days of presentations by the world’s leading researchers in weather control and ask them some hard questions.

I will explain the necessity of The Environmental Modification Accountability Act of 2018 to the scientists at this Weather Modification Conference and hopefully interview many of them. I hope to start a new dialogue between the scientific community and the public that is grounded in facts and based on solutions, not name calling.

I recently created an infographic to show the scope of my research on Weather Modification technologies over the past seven years. I would like to eliminate confusion about these extremely mind boggling technologies.

Send me and I will change the discussion about geoengineering and weather modification and push (like a gentleman) for a real solution to weather warfare: transparency and verification with The Environmental Modification Accountability Act of 2018.

#ENMODAA UPDATE: February 3, 2018

Dr. James Roger Fleming, Dr. David Keith, and Dr. Renaud de Richter have expressed support for #ENMODAA!

I did attend the American Meteorological Society’s 98th Annual Meeting. Updates related to this will be posted on this page with the tag AMS2018.

We have over 3 hours of interviews with Jim Fleming, William Cotton, Daniel Rosenfeld, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, the US Naval Research Lab, and many more!

We are beginning the process of creating a feature length film!

I have already released a few teaser videos.

Watch this video on YouTube • VIDEO LINK

Watch this video on YouTube • VIDEO LINK

Watch them all on ClimateViewer News: https://climateviewer.com/tags/ams2018/

Watch them on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLfN7m5OaSZKQqnI6owEv7IhDXOk_LcorY

Watch this video on YouTube • VIDEO LINK
Watch this video on YouTube • VIDEO LINK
Watch this video on YouTube • VIDEO LINK
Watch this video on YouTube • VIDEO LINK
Watch this video on YouTube • VIDEO LINK
Watch this video on YouTube • VIDEO LINK
Watch this video on YouTube • VIDEO LINK
Watch this video on YouTube • VIDEO LINK
Watch this video on YouTube • VIDEO LINK
Watch this video on YouTube • VIDEO LINK

Dr. James Roger Fleming, January 9, 2018

I think there's a real important role you can play in this. There was a movement to ban atmospheric nuclear testing after Starfish Prime. Part of it was a run-up to fallout plumes [The Limited Test Ban Treaty] and that was stimulated very much after 1962. I think the ban was in 1963. And so there was a public outcry and the strum of war, and men got involved, very prominent people agreed that we were doing things that beyond our kin. And so I think there's a role to keep this accountability there. I would argue for a longer warning period for the public notice - Video Link

Dr. David Keith, December 29, 2017

I think public notice make sense because I think transparency is very important for building trust. I think 48 hours is much too short a period, I think a longer period is make sense to enable public comment on experiments.

Obviously one challenge is to define what constitutes an experiment.

Most sensor networks already have public data access. Happy to lobby for more public access.
Yours,
David. via Email

Dr. Ken Caldeira, December 28, 2017

My first impression is that you are trying to solve a non-problem. I don't think there are any bad actors who want to engage in experiments that have any potential for producing lasting damage.

Further, I would think that such bad actors, were they to exist and were they attempting to do something at scale, could most easily be found through traditional intelligence techniques (e.g., monitoring of financial transactions, monitoring of communication, satellite observations of ground activities), and that a network of atmospheric monitoring would be a relatively ineffective way of detecting such a program.

Further, I find the 'us and them' framing of your email a bit disconcerting. Aren't the scientists also citizens? Wouldn't we all want more transparency in the conduct of potentially damaging experiments?

Also, the devil is in the details. For example, what is an 'atmospheric experiment'?

I am making an effort in my own life to focus on solving real problems, and not waste time with purely hypothetical problems.

Best,
Ken. via Email

Dr. Renaud De Richter, October 19, 2017

I don't oppose [ENMODAA] at all, in fact, we need it. - Video Link

Sharing is Caring

Comments


Support The Environmental Modification Accountability Act! ... Continue reading


How cloud-making pollution became a climate engineering solution ... Continue reading