Podcast: David Keith | Climate hacking
I have not watched this and am not going to because I regard the likes of David Keith as psychopaths who are willing to destroy life on the planet to “save the planet”. I have been very tolerant towards the support for geoengineering by some of the abrupt climate change people but that is wearing very thin.
I know of Paul Beckwith’s unstinting support for geoeongineering but, come to think of it, it is quite a few years since I heard Guy McPherson criticise it as a “theoretical” option.
Confronting Geoengineer David Keith
David Keith is likely the most internationally recognized geoengineer. Keith is, in my opinion, the epitome of what is wrong with an unfortunately high percentage of the scientific community. There is extreme arrogance without a shred of oversight or accountability. In so many cases there is absolutely no regard for the consequences of the experiments that the “scientists” carry out on us all in one form or another. In the 5 minute video below, David Keith’s completely cavalier approach to experimenting with life on Earth is clearly visible when I confronted him at an AAAS conference. Below this video is an “Open Letter To David Keith” which was penned by the “Chemtrails Project UK”. My thanks to this group for their well written document that can and should be used to wake the public up to David Keith and all those like him, the more exposure for the Keith letter the better.
An Open Letter to Dr. David Keith
Dr. Keith is one of the most prominent proponents of stratospheric aerosol geoengineering (SAG). In this open letter, we challenge Dr. Keith with a number of concerns regarding the SAG proposal.
Dear Dr. Keith,
I have seen your Colbert Report interview where you appear to publicise and promote the idea of Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering (SAG) – namely, the spraying of thousands of tonnes of toxic substances into our atmosphere as an attempt to fight global warming.
SAG, by your own admission, is expected to kill 10,000 people in the first year alone.
Of further concern is the overwhelming amount of evidence that indicates such practices are not mere proposals but are already happening in our skies. (Incidentally, as you will find in The Directive, this would not be the first time the UK population has been covertly sprayed.)
Please would you provide me your responses to each of the following questions:
- Aircraft trails that persist, spread and block out the sunlight are now being witnessed on a near-daily basis in the UK (and other countries). So why are you presenting the notion of blocking out sunlight with aircraft trails as a new possibility for the future when it is something that is clearly happening already?
- With the SAG proposal, why are you promoting the spraying of toxic chemicals such as sulphuric acid and/or aluminium oxide to block out our sunlight when we are already observing that the same effects – according to our government – can be achieved with natural condensation trails?
- If you believe the sun cannot be blocked out by natural condensation trails, do you concur that all these persistent, spreading trails that we now witness blocking out our sunlight cannot be composed of “essentially pure ice” and are, therefore, not ordinary condensation trails?
- To what extent do you believe the plethora of persistent, spreading aircraft trails that we witness today may be contributing to climate change?
- If SAG were to commence officially with the spraying of thousands of tonnes of aluminium oxide, should we expect our lower atmosphere to exhibit a grey/silvery haze – much like how we already witness on a near-daily basis?
- Would we also experience high levels of aluminium content in rainwater – much like how we are experiencing today?
- Would it also be reasonable to expect that, being military planes, the vast majority of geoengineering aircraft leaving persistent trails would not appear on real-time commercial flight-tracking services such as Flightradar24 and Plane Finder – just as we witness today?
- Could we also expect that these unidentifiable planes be the ones that would often leave grid patterns in the sky – again, just like we are experiencing today?
- To what extent do you believe the persistent, spreading, sunlight-blocking trails that we now commonly experience are contributing to the acknowledged phenomenon of global dimming?
- As a result of spraying 20,000 tonnes of sulphuric acid into the atmosphere, you say there will be around 10,000 deaths in the first year. Do you regard that as an acceptable death rate, and – taking into account the higher incidence of terminal illnesses that will result from these activities, along with the increased amounts that will be sprayed in the following years – by how much might the annual death rate increase as time goes on?
- What happened to the suggestion of putting 20,000,000 tonnes of aluminium into the atmosphere, as you proposed in 2010 at the AAAS conference in San Diego? And what would be the associated annual death rates expected in this scenario?
- You admit concerns over which country controls the SAG “thermostat” and allude to possible resulting conflict. On a similar note, does it also concern you that “chemtrails” were described in the first draft of the USA’s Space Preservation Act as an “exotic weapons system” but was later omitted… I.e., does it concern you that the USA has not only alluded to technologies similar to SAG being be used for military gain but has also made efforts to conceal it – and, by association, may use SAG with that same military intention?
I look forward to your response to each of these questions.
PS – This is an open letter, published at chemtrailsprojectuk.com and geoengineeringwatch.org where our future correspondence will also be published.