SANTA MONICA, Calif.— “From space one could control the earth's weather, cause drought and floods, change the tides and raise the levels of the sea, make temperate climates frigid,” then‐Senator Lyndon B. Johnson told a joint session of Congress in 1957. Like many other legislators, he accepted Defense Department fantasies that the United States was in race with the Soviet Union to develop environmental weapons.
Mr. Johnson as President made the fantasies real by ordering rainmaking in Southeast Asia, Between 1967 and 1972 he and President Richard M. Nixon authorized at least $3.6 million annually on secret cloud‐seeding over North and South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia in an attempt to muddy trails and slow enemy movements.
Although in one instance this enhanced rainfall by 30 percent, Pentagon officials call the operations failure. But the Pentagon defends them as humane, saying, “Raindrops don't kill people; bombs do.” (The Department of Defense denies it was seeding over North Vietnam in 1971 when that nation suffered the heaviest rains since 1945. In 1945. a million Vietnamese died of flood and famine.)
Can a nation that tampers with natural balances deny responsibility for what follows? This question, together with recognition that United States policy condemns warfare aimed at civilians, prompted Senator Claiborne Pell in 1973 to introduce a resolution calling for an international treaty to prohibit environmental warfare “or the carrying out of any research or experimentation directed thereto.” The Senate voted 82 to 10 to approve the resolution, which lacks force of law.
Last August, at the 31‐nation United Nations conference of the Committee on Disarmament, in Geneva, the United States and Soviet Union jointly proposed a draft convention to ban “military or any other hostile use of environmental techniques.” Unfortunately it is far weaker than the Senate resolution. For example, it fails to prohibit military research or development of environmental‐modification techniques, and allows all “peaceful” work on such things.
The Pentagon says its Climate Dynamics program, formerly Project Nile Blue, is peaceful and needed to detect Soviet attempts to disrupt North American weather. (Because the treaty appoints no inspection agency to enforce its ban, leaving nations to bring evidence of violations to the United Nations Security Council, treaty ratification would justify increased funding for Climate Dynamics monitoring.)
But Climate Dynamics researchers. using computer models of oceans and atmosphere, have studied ways to melt the polar ice caps, generate destructive storms, and otherwise use “key environmental instabilities” to release huge amounts of energy. They have found how the United States, acting secretly from space, could inflict bad weather on the Soviet Union, thereby ruining harvests and keeping that country dependent on United States grain imports.
In the Soviet Union, engineers are reversing the Arctic‐flowing Pechora River and creating inland seas, actions that experts say will alter global climate. This is “peaceful.”
In 1975 the National Academy of Sciences reported that cooling in the Northern Hemisphere since the 1940's makes the start of a new ice age within 100 years a small but real possibility. Scientists cannot determine whether the cooling is caused by humans or if one nation's had weather is caused by another's weather‐modification programs, so the potential for hostility arising from such programs is obvious. Global climatic changes will prompt many nations to use such modification techniques, but the world's unstable political climate demands that such techniques be internationally regulated, with adequate safeguards and with reparations for those who suffer drought or storm damage.
The draft treaty could be a step toward such regulation. But the treaty allows some weather warfare by prohibiting only techniques having “widespread, long‐lasting or severe effects harmful to human welfare.” What does this mean? The tiniest tampering with natural balances can set off chain reactions with unforeseen consequences.
Senator Pell and Representatives Gilbert Gude and Donald M. Fraser have proposed that all United States environmental‐modification research—by civilians, the military and the Central Intelligence Agency—he put under Congressional control. Until this is done and the United States amends the draft treaty to eliminate loopholes and cloudy language, few nations will believe we want environmental warfare banned.
Lowell Ponte is author of the forthcoming booh “The Cooling,” about climatic change and modification.
Worth noting: In 1892, at the Geneva Convention, the smartest man in the oil industry J.D. Rockefeller paid scientists to call oil a 'fossil fuel' to induce the idea of scarcity, in order to set a 'world price for oil'. The truth is that oil is actually the second-most prevalent liquid on earth next to water, and regenerates within the earth faster than it can ever be used. It will never run out.
By now it should be clear to any thinking creature that the climate scam, failing an alien invasion, was picked by the Club of Rome as a 'common cause' for all humans. It was Maurice Strong, a Rockefeller intimus, who saw it as his mission to submerge us in this false narrative. "Homo sapiens is the virus destroying the Earth". Decades of indoctrination have now resulted in suicidal practises. Young people can't even imagine that people used to live here free of climate worries. People will believe anything. Even that vaccines are safe and effective. So sad...
Do they fear fossil fuels will soon run out, or is it something more to do with higher costs of extraction? Just read that oil extraction to be lowered to keep prices high. Also, the amount of fossils required in extraction and manufacture of so called green turbines, batteries and solar panels hardly makes them green. Is it because the lies are repeated enough times that people accept them as truth without researching for themselves? The really sad part is that without CO2 levels high enough, all plantlife will die and so will humans. I used to feel inferior in the company of graduates, with plethoras of degrees, with Firsts, 2.1 and 2.2s, somehow assuming their 3 or 4 years at uni had made them vastly more inteligent than lowly me who left school at 15 years old without a certificate to my name. I did ok in life and learned as I went along, still learning. You forgot to mention how the proponents of the scam like to buy beach front properties despite claims of artics melting and sea levels rising by metres which would engulf coastal areas.
Dead man Talking stack has just posted about climate change with lots of links. I wonder if people will wake up to this quicker than the scamdemic? From my own experience, more people will talk about this, plenty are not convinced, especially in the UK, where organising a BBQ or other summer event is usually ruined by the weather. We've been lied to on starting wars and many other things yet people fell hook, line and sinker, as I did initially, on the dangerous virus, more so it's deadly antidote.
Tha New York Times
WAR OF THE WEATHERS
BY Lowell Ponte
April 17, 1976
SANTA MONICA, Calif.— “From space one could control the earth's weather, cause drought and floods, change the tides and raise the levels of the sea, make temperate climates frigid,” then‐Senator Lyndon B. Johnson told a joint session of Congress in 1957. Like many other legislators, he accepted Defense Department fantasies that the United States was in race with the Soviet Union to develop environmental weapons.
Mr. Johnson as President made the fantasies real by ordering rainmaking in Southeast Asia, Between 1967 and 1972 he and President Richard M. Nixon authorized at least $3.6 million annually on secret cloud‐seeding over North and South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia in an attempt to muddy trails and slow enemy movements.
Although in one instance this enhanced rainfall by 30 percent, Pentagon officials call the operations failure. But the Pentagon defends them as humane, saying, “Raindrops don't kill people; bombs do.” (The Department of Defense denies it was seeding over North Vietnam in 1971 when that nation suffered the heaviest rains since 1945. In 1945. a million Vietnamese died of flood and famine.)
Can a nation that tampers with natural balances deny responsibility for what follows? This question, together with recognition that United States policy condemns warfare aimed at civilians, prompted Senator Claiborne Pell in 1973 to introduce a resolution calling for an international treaty to prohibit environmental warfare “or the carrying out of any research or experimentation directed thereto.” The Senate voted 82 to 10 to approve the resolution, which lacks force of law.
Last August, at the 31‐nation United Nations conference of the Committee on Disarmament, in Geneva, the United States and Soviet Union jointly proposed a draft convention to ban “military or any other hostile use of environmental techniques.” Unfortunately it is far weaker than the Senate resolution. For example, it fails to prohibit military research or development of environmental‐modification techniques, and allows all “peaceful” work on such things.
The Pentagon says its Climate Dynamics program, formerly Project Nile Blue, is peaceful and needed to detect Soviet attempts to disrupt North American weather. (Because the treaty appoints no inspection agency to enforce its ban, leaving nations to bring evidence of violations to the United Nations Security Council, treaty ratification would justify increased funding for Climate Dynamics monitoring.)
But Climate Dynamics researchers. using computer models of oceans and atmosphere, have studied ways to melt the polar ice caps, generate destructive storms, and otherwise use “key environmental instabilities” to release huge amounts of energy. They have found how the United States, acting secretly from space, could inflict bad weather on the Soviet Union, thereby ruining harvests and keeping that country dependent on United States grain imports.
In the Soviet Union, engineers are reversing the Arctic‐flowing Pechora River and creating inland seas, actions that experts say will alter global climate. This is “peaceful.”
In 1975 the National Academy of Sciences reported that cooling in the Northern Hemisphere since the 1940's makes the start of a new ice age within 100 years a small but real possibility. Scientists cannot determine whether the cooling is caused by humans or if one nation's had weather is caused by another's weather‐modification programs, so the potential for hostility arising from such programs is obvious. Global climatic changes will prompt many nations to use such modification techniques, but the world's unstable political climate demands that such techniques be internationally regulated, with adequate safeguards and with reparations for those who suffer drought or storm damage.
The draft treaty could be a step toward such regulation. But the treaty allows some weather warfare by prohibiting only techniques having “widespread, long‐lasting or severe effects harmful to human welfare.” What does this mean? The tiniest tampering with natural balances can set off chain reactions with unforeseen consequences.
Senator Pell and Representatives Gilbert Gude and Donald M. Fraser have proposed that all United States environmental‐modification research—by civilians, the military and the Central Intelligence Agency—he put under Congressional control. Until this is done and the United States amends the draft treaty to eliminate loopholes and cloudy language, few nations will believe we want environmental warfare banned.
Lowell Ponte is author of the forthcoming booh “The Cooling,” about climatic change and modification.
The New York Times Archives
See the article in its original context from
April 17, 1976, Page 16
https://www.nytimes.com/1976/04/17/archives/war-of-the-weathers.html
⭐️ https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10202947926002353&set=a.3919411746962&type=3&app=fbl
Worth noting: In 1892, at the Geneva Convention, the smartest man in the oil industry J.D. Rockefeller paid scientists to call oil a 'fossil fuel' to induce the idea of scarcity, in order to set a 'world price for oil'. The truth is that oil is actually the second-most prevalent liquid on earth next to water, and regenerates within the earth faster than it can ever be used. It will never run out.
By now it should be clear to any thinking creature that the climate scam, failing an alien invasion, was picked by the Club of Rome as a 'common cause' for all humans. It was Maurice Strong, a Rockefeller intimus, who saw it as his mission to submerge us in this false narrative. "Homo sapiens is the virus destroying the Earth". Decades of indoctrination have now resulted in suicidal practises. Young people can't even imagine that people used to live here free of climate worries. People will believe anything. Even that vaccines are safe and effective. So sad...
Do they fear fossil fuels will soon run out, or is it something more to do with higher costs of extraction? Just read that oil extraction to be lowered to keep prices high. Also, the amount of fossils required in extraction and manufacture of so called green turbines, batteries and solar panels hardly makes them green. Is it because the lies are repeated enough times that people accept them as truth without researching for themselves? The really sad part is that without CO2 levels high enough, all plantlife will die and so will humans. I used to feel inferior in the company of graduates, with plethoras of degrees, with Firsts, 2.1 and 2.2s, somehow assuming their 3 or 4 years at uni had made them vastly more inteligent than lowly me who left school at 15 years old without a certificate to my name. I did ok in life and learned as I went along, still learning. You forgot to mention how the proponents of the scam like to buy beach front properties despite claims of artics melting and sea levels rising by metres which would engulf coastal areas.
I'm sure I mentioned that fact (Obama buying beachfront property) in a previous letter!
Dead man Talking stack has just posted about climate change with lots of links. I wonder if people will wake up to this quicker than the scamdemic? From my own experience, more people will talk about this, plenty are not convinced, especially in the UK, where organising a BBQ or other summer event is usually ruined by the weather. We've been lied to on starting wars and many other things yet people fell hook, line and sinker, as I did initially, on the dangerous virus, more so it's deadly antidote.