My Thoughts on the Motivation on Spying of Geoengineering Researchers...
Veli Albert Kallio
Although I am just a very peripheral player in geoengineering research, and that I have hardly published anything on this particular field, and that it is just only couple of times I have posted into this geoengineering group (i.e. can you yourself recall me making posts in this group, perhaps ever?). Despite all the above it appears that an extensive monitoring operations about my communications and publications are now being carried out by Geoengineering Watch group - shown here by Academia.edu analysis website: see .pdf of web traffic analysis of my site.
It was a virtually unrelated article about melting Arctic that related to the evidence I was giving at the Houses of Parliament here in the UK, this April for Sea Research Society. If you read through 47 pages of my evidence I gave, you will come across just one solitary reference, a word 'geoengineering' research therein. Nevertheless, this one solitary reference to 'geoengineering research' in my Parliament evidence has drawn over dozen geoengineering queries by Geoengineering Watch group - an astounding achievement by them in monitoring me: https://www.academia.edu/33000316/MPs_to_review_UKs_role_in_Arctic_sustainability_-_24th_April_2017.docx I deliberate here on the possible motivations of "reasons why" and backers of those people who so actively monitor geoengineering researchers that their radar captures even mosquitoes like me (unless I have unknowingly become something of a geoengineering research giant without really noticing what I had invented)!!!
My foremost thought here is that the very idea of someone researching or citing about geoengineering - even briefly - implies (indirectly) that there would be an evidence about changing climate which then justifies an investment in such a research (that threatens the interests of the patrons of the campaigns against geoengineering research). So, if geoengineering research can be refuted (killed), it means that there is also neither climate change and so no need to mitigate any such a climate change. Thus, by killing geoengineering research, "the Plan B", this would also kill all argument for any climate change happening in the first place.
According to BBC, during his election campaign, Donald Trump stated recently that climate change was 'a hoax' and, implicitly reconfirmed this by his announcement on Thursday, 1st June 2017, stating that the United States will now withdraw from the Paris Climate Change Agreement. President Trump has since avoided questions on the subject likewise his White House press secretary Sean Spicer.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40128026 I would like to have your reflections what you think about the motivations of those who want to stifle geoengineering? Do you think like I am starting to think that it is partly arising as a fear of admission of climate change happening in the first place. I just think that my Parliament evidence was very thin in geoengineering indeed and there seems to be a paranoia that even one single word justifies attack by a dozen or more people from the said organisation to peer through all 47 pages. Have you had experiences like this or any harassment as a geoengineering researcher? What do you think about my paper and how you see it relevant here?
Yours sincerely,
Veli Albert Kallio, FRGS
Environmental Affairs Department
Maggie Zhou
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to geoengi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Greg Rau
From: 'Maggie Zhou' via geoengineering <geoengi...@googlegroups.com>
To: "albert...@hotmail.com" <albert...@hotmail.com>; geoengineering <geoengi...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 4, 2017 10:25 AM
Subject: Re: [geo] My Thoughts on the Motivation on Spying of Geoengineering Researchers...
Douglas MacMartin
There’s nothing to worry about beyond the more general worry about chemtrails and people’s ability to distinguish reliable sources of information (which is a much broader issue than simply geoengineering). I wouldn’t call it “spying” per se. I’ve had some interaction with Dane W., the guy who runs geoengineeringwatch, and it is clear to me that he is quite consciously aware that he’s just making stuff up and deliberately deceivng people; I presume the whole thing is an ego trip for him or something. My conclusion is that it is an utter waste of time engaging with him in any way (in my case he heavily edited our email exchange to make it look like he was being nice and I was evasive, and then posted his semi-made-up exchange on his website to “prove” that I refused to answer his questions when in reality I had addressed them. Which is why I’m convinced that he knows full well what he’s doing).
His site does get a lot of traffic, and the people who read his site are a mix of well meaning but deceived people and deeply disturbed people spewing hatred. The former are generally willing to listen, the latter aren’t worth responding to.
doug
From: geoengi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:geoengi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Greg Rau
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2017 4:51 PM
To: mzho...@yahoo.com; albert...@hotmail.com; geoengineering <geoengi...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [geo] My Thoughts on the Motivation on Spying of Geoengineering Researchers...
I guess it's reassuring that someone outside of the usual GE suspects is reading this stuff (assuming it's not a bot). On the other hand, if geoengineringwatch is the only group doing this, that might be concerning. Are you able to find out who else bothered to read this report? Is there a reason to be paranoid?
Greg
From: 'Maggie Zhou' via geoengineering <geoengi...@googlegroups.com>
To: "albert...@hotmail.com" <albert...@hotmail.com>; geoengineering <geoengi...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 4, 2017 10:25 AM
Subject: Re: [geo] My Thoughts on the Motivation on Spying of Geoengineering Researchers...
My guess would be that they're monitoring geoengineering research because they can't distinguish it from chemtrails spraying, which I think is military related spraying in the sky that at some level sounds a lot like aerosol spraying in SRM. Many citizens are extremely concerned (and rightly so!) with the health and environmental effects of chemtrail spraying, hence the watchdog group monitoring anything and everything they could find related to it.
If a simple keyword in your publication automatically triggered some monitoring by their method, then it's not surprising you got onto their watch list.
Maggie
On Sunday, June 4, 2017 12:18 PM, Veli Albert Kallio <albert...@hotmail.com> wrote:
|
Dear Sirs,
RE: Thoughts on the Motivation on Spying of Geoengineering Researchers
Although I am just a very peripheral player in geoengineering research, and that I have hardly published anything on this particular field, and that it is just only couple of times I have posted into this geoengineering group (i.e. can you yourself recall me making posts in this group, perhaps ever?). Despite all the above it appears that an extensive monitoring operations about my communications and publications are now being carried out by Geoengineering Watch group - shown here by Academia.edu analysis website: see .pdf of web traffic analysis of my site.
It was a virtually unrelated article about melting Arctic that related to the evidence I was giving at the Houses of Parliament here in the UK, this April for Sea Research Society. If you read through 47 pages of my evidence I gave, you will come across just one solitary reference, a word 'geoengineering' research therein. Nevertheless, this one solitary reference to 'geoengineering research' in my Parliament evidence has drawn over dozen geoengineering queries by Geoengineering Watch group - an astounding achievement by them in monitoring me: https://www.academia.edu/33000316/MPs_to_review_UKs_role_in_Arctic_sustainability_-_24th_April_2017.docx
|
The draft paper as at 24th April which is being amended as the draft for the oral presentation session 5th April 2017 does not contain any references and text errors needed corrections. The paper is still being worked on with more sections being |
I deliberate here on the possible motivations of "reasons why" and backers of those people who so actively monitor geoengineering researchers that their radar captures even mosquitoes like me (unless I have unknowingly become something of a geoengineering research giant without really noticing what I had invented)!!!
So what are the 'reasons why' and the backers of those people who are attempting to monitor geoengineering researchers and gather information about anything and everything even as small as just one solitary word reference to geoengineering in a fairly long 47-page Parliamentary evidence document? Several possibilities and motivations of these people and other similar groups are coming to my mind. These kind of extensive monitoring efforts almost certainly point to an indirect organised interests and perhaps utilitarian purposes to carry out (help) campaigns against geoengineering research and so to monitor the researchers meticulously.
My foremost thought here is that the very idea of someone researching or citing about geoengineering - even briefly - implies (indirectly) that there would be an evidence about changing climate which then justifies an investment in such a research (that threatens the interests of the patrons of the campaigns against geoengineering research). So, if geoengineering research can be refuted (killed), it means that there is also neither climate change and so no need to mitigate any such a climate change. Thus, by killing geoengineering research, "the Plan B", this would also kill all argument for any climate change happening in the first place.
According to BBC, during his election campaign, Donald Trump stated recently that climate change was 'a hoax' and, implicitly reconfirmed this by his announcement on Thursday, 1st June 2017, stating that the United States will now withdraw from the Paris Climate Change Agreement. President Trump has since avoided questions on the subject likewise his White House press secretary Sean Spicer.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40128026
|
These are external links and will open in a new window In the end the collected pressure from environmentalists, diplomats, major US corporations, foreign ... |
I would like to have your reflections what you think about the motivations of those who want to stifle geoengineering? Do you think like I am starting to think that it is partly arising as a fear of admission of climate change happening in the first place. I just think that my Parliament evidence was very thin in geoengineering indeed and there seems to be a paranoia that even one single word justifies attack by a dozen or more people from the said organisation to peer through all 47 pages. Have you had experiences like this or any harassment as a geoengineering researcher? What do you think about my paper and how you see it relevant here?
Yours sincerely,
Veli Albert Kallio, FRGS
Vice President, Sea Research Society
Environmental Affairs Department
https://exploresrs.academia.edu/VeliKallio
Veli Albert Kallio, Sea Research Society, Environmental Affairs Department, Faculty Member. Studies Climate Change, Climatology, and Meteorology. |
|
The Sea Research Society (SRS) is a non-profit educational research organization founded in 1972. Its general purpose is to promote scientific and educational ... |
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to geoengi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to geoengi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Erik Neumann
Researcher and activist [Dane Wigington](http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org) has been documenting disturbing changes in the environment he attributes to the practice of "geoengineering." This includes various weather modification techniques including chemtrails and projects such as HAARP. He began his three hour segment by telling George and the listeners that the Earth is headed for "omnicide," or the elimination of all life on the planet because of what he says are secret climate control projects that stretch back to at least 1947. The reports of China boasting that they controlled the weather during the recent Beijing Olympics is just the tip of the iceberg, according to Wigington. He believes that weather modification has caused far more damage to the atmosphere and contributed to global heating than simple pollution and carbon emissions.
Wigington believes that the climate changes that are coming are "past the point of no return," and wants people to be aware of the causes. The reasons for governments engaging in weather modification are purely to control populations by controlling the food supply, he contends. He cited documented evidence of chemical spraying from high-altitude aircraft, and added that pilots are silenced with non-discosure agreements that include a provision for "use of deadly force" if they do not comply. He thinks that the spraying is designed to block sunlight and cool regions that have become too hot. In spite of this seemingly exact control of the weather, Wigington believes the evidence he has gathered proves that things are so out of balance at this point that fixing the climate is like "trying to put out fires with buckets of gas."
Wigington’s research has proved to him that earthquakes can be caused by directed energy weapons (such as HAARP) which bounce streams of electromagnetic waves off of the upper atmosphere, which superheats the air over "seismically sensitive" areas such as California and some areas of the midwest, causing unstable fault lines to rupture. He says that there is evidence for this in the correlation of weather and earthquake records from such areas as Haiti, Fukushima, and New Zealand. He also contends that areas where anomalous cold weather and snow are present are being engineered through the use of "chemically nucleated" cloud seeding. Wigington characterizes the global efforts at weather control as a "climate engineering Manhattan Project."
Michael Hayes
Keep up the good work and be proud that you are now being recognized as a leading expert, even though in a back handed way.
Michael