Let's take a further walk on the wild side and slither into yet another rabbit hole. They used to be way out in the rural but now, increasingly, they are turning up much closer to civilization. To the consternation of our rulers, even the normies are beginning to take an interest. However, rather than the ground beneath our feet, the 'conspiracy theories' that are the subject of this offering concern the skies above.
A brief aside before I continue. No matter how low my opinion of our corporate/governmental elite was prior to embarking on this mission, the more I peel the onion, the more I am surprised by the depth of their malfeasance. I suspect that this is largely the result of a slightly belated realization that psychopathy is the dominant characteristic of this class of people. As such, I have yet to locate even an atom of evidence to suggest that I am close to finding the limits of their perfidy.
But this time around, the pre-eminent sin is sheer recklessness – a reflection of what can happen when the lunatics get away with deviant behavior for decades. It's not as though a circumspect approach to matters is characteristic of them in the first place, but when they are able to operate in a consequence-free zone, the result is moral mayhem, the texture of which is gradually being uncovered. What they have done (and are still doing) in our atmosphere would be an eleven on Nigel's amp.
There are three distinct elements – EMF radiation, weather modification and microplastics and they are all interconnected. Information about them is, as we now know to be the norm, either hidden or distorted. It might, therefore, be best to first set out what it is that we can prove (which is more than you might think) before trying to draw useful conclusions as to outcomes and intent. I'll start with 5G.
The blob and Big Telecom are united in their insistence that 5G is not problematic. As with the 'vaccines', the next generation of broadband is 'safe and effective'. That being the case, there must be no evidence to suggest otherwise. But, one again, they speak with forked tongue. It shouldn't need to be said, but many things that ought to be evident have been subsumed by the bullshit that is the elites' preferred mode of communication. So, to state the bleeding obvious – radiation is not our friend and soaking us in yet more of it will cause increased harm.
1G was stand alone (call only) and 2G to 4G were all versions of the same tech, which was gradually refined and enhanced, but 5G is a different beast entirely. It isn't simply an upgrade on 4G. For starters, there are three frequency bands in 5G, not just the one. The range between 600 MHz and 2.4 GHz is very similar to 4G's operational range, but will achieve slightly better speeds (allegedly) and more density, thus catering for many more users.
The medium range, between 3 GHz and 6 GHz, will offer moderate coverage and a range of around two miles. This is the band that will be rolled out first. But it's the third band (the C band) that is the most problematic. This spectrum is currently between 24 GHz and 52 GHz; the US has auctioned off the 37 GHz, 39 GHZ and 47 GHz bands and, worldwide, the 26 GHz, 28 GHz, 39 GHz and 41 GHz bands are being used.(1) Upwards of 30 GHz, the radio waves are in the millimeter range; in other words, they're coming thick and fast. At 1 GHz, radio waves are 300mm apart; at 10 GHz the distance is down to 30mm and at 30 GHz, the gap is 10mm.
Licensing bodies - such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the US – have announced that frequencies up to 300 GHz will be available. We are already immersed in a soup of electrosmog, as even a WiFi router uses the same frequency as a microwave oven, albeit transmission density is much lower.(2) However, our exposure is near constant and the longer waves in the 2.4 GHz range can penetrate the body and cause cell damage. Cell phones and SMART meters operate in the 900 MHz to 2.8 GHz range – the lower end of that frequency can penetrate even deeper into the body, especially so when pulsed as with the meters. Then we have Bluetooth devices, activity trackers and the like, plus the existing 2G, 3G and 4G infrastructure. All emit radiation and radiation and humans do not go well together.
That can be said with certainty, but we don't know the full extent of the damage because nobody has ever bothered to find out. We do know that there are no scientific studies showing that exposure to 3G and 4G radiation is safe. The only regulatory standards apply to short term exposure and the possible thermal effect on the skin and, as such, the radiation levels they recommend are far higher than is safe for longer term exposure.(3) Scientists know this; 180 of them from 35 countries wrote an open letter saying just that.(4) There have also been at least sixty appeals against the roll-out, involving thousands of scientists.(5)(6)
Even the WHO classified radiation from radio frequencies a potential carcinogen.(7) We know that mice who were subjected to prolonged exposure to low range 5G frequencies (900 MHz to 1.9 GHz) suffered measurable DNA damage and an increased incidence of brain and heart tumors.(8) And as of 2018, there were over 1,500 studies that demonstrate the biological and health impacts of radiation via electro-magnetic fields at levels well below most national and international guidelines.(9)
We know that a 5G network doses individuals with the equivalent radiation level of an airport scanner. What isn't known is the long term impacts; just that it won't be good.
“You will not be able to walk down a sidewalk without being continuously exposed to elevated levels of EMFs. EMFs cause cancer in both humans and animals, interfere with human reproduction and triggers a syndrome of electrohypersensitivity in some individuals, characterized by headache, fatigue and cognitive dysfunction.” Dr. David Carpenter, Director of the University of Albany’s Institute for Health and the Environment (10)
Which means that this (which appeared on a residential New York street overnight, without so much as a by-your-leave) is more than just an eyesore.
Figure 1
The first (and only) study on the effects of 5G street architecture was conducted in Sweden. A 5G base station replaced a 4G base station on the roof of a house; there was a consequential sharp rise in radiation and the appearance of symptoms in the occupants below. These were commensurate with Microwave Syndrome – dizziness, headaches, fatigue and memory and concentration problems:
“Measurements before and after the installation of 5G on the roof showed that 5G caused a massive increase in radiation in the apartment. Before 5G, there were already base stations for 3G or 4G in the same place directly above the apartment, but switching to 5G technology led to an increase in radiation from 9,000 microW / m2 to a maximum of 1,690,000 microW / m2.”(11)
The difference in radiation exposure is enormous. I don't know whether the base station was high frequency or not, or whether it was pulsed. Higher frequency 5G that is pulsed (in order to carry more information) is much more dangerous that 3G or 4G.(12) These bad effects are on top of the widely acknowledged detrimental effects of low level radio frequency radiation; there are 31 such reports at this citation.(13) These bad outcomes are the result of “disrupted immune function from exposure to low-intensity non-ionizing radiation (radiofrequency radiation).”(14)
Clearly, all of the above is not favorite. However, matters are about to get considerably worse, if our elders and betters get their way. There will be:
“Massive constellations of … satellites in low-Earth orbit are being planned and manufactured that … will blanket the globe in low-latency, high-bandwidth capacity” in order to expand the reach of the global Internet to rural and remote areas and complement terrestrial 5G networks.”(15)
I should really say that matters have already gotten worse, as fleets of these self same satellites have already been launched into orbit. For context – Iridium launched 66 satellites in 1998. These provided satellite phone coverage for the entire globe.(16) More followed over the next 22 years, but by December 2020, there were still 'only' 3,400 active satellites in orbit.(17) That's when our allegedly red-pilled hero, Elon Musk, started the next phase of his Starlink programme. By March 2021, there were another 1,200 circulating the Earth.(18) That's nothing – between them Starlink, Amazon, OneWeb, GalaxySpace and a host of other companies plan to launch a total of around 60,000 5G satellites in the next few years.(19)(20) Sixty thousand of these.
Figure 2
This is a really bad idea. Of course, satellites are a lot further away than a mast outside one's bedroom window. It's tempting to surmise that this might ameliorate the radiation treatment. Regrettably not.
“Starlink is 5G phased array technology from the sky. When a Starlink dish is online, that means a satellite is aiming a narrow beam at it. But by the time the beam reaches Earth from a few hundred miles up in space, the beam can be 8 miles in diameter or more. The dish also aims a beam of radiation directly at the satellite, and scatters radiation around it.”(21)
There will be no escape, when combined with the satellites' earthbound cousins:
“The current plan with regard to 5G is to put out tens of millions of 5G antennae all over the EU, all over the US, all over many other parts of the world, such that we will be irradiated almost continuously no matter where we go. And the current plan is to do that without even a single biological safety test of genuine 5G radiation. This is absolutely insane.”(22)
So, a technology that even the most cerebrally challenged could predict would be harmful to human health (if evidence of it wasn't censored) is being rolled out, regardless. And if it's harmful to us, might we also expect it to be harmful to other life-forms? Indeed we might, because all life is electro-magnetic. Electrons, cells, heartbeats and brain currents are electro-magnetic processes that are basic to life itself. Were we to search for studies on the biological effects of electromagnetism, we would find over 75,000.
Birds and insects were already particularly sensitive to cell towers of the 4G variety. They rely on the Earth's magnetic field “for navigation, breeding, feeding, migration and survival” -(23) which is obvious, once one thinks about it. It follows, therefore, that scientists not in the employ of Big Telecom have found that:
“Biologists have noted that wildlife are susceptible to harm from manmade ambient electromagnetic fields. Researchers are now attributing RFR from cellular telecommunications to be a contributing cause of bee “colony collapse disorder”, insect disappearance, the decline in house sparrows in London, as well as the steady deterioration of the worlds bird population with now than 40% of bird species under critical threat....Insects, the base of the food chain, appear particularly susceptible to radiofrequency radiation, especially 5G millimeter wavelengths which are the size of the insect and create a damaging resonance effect.”(24)
If insects can't do their thing and bees don't pollinate (presumably at least partly due to heavy contamination by aluminium, as demonstrated in a UK study),(25) we are going to find ourselves in serious trouble in very short order. But academia, in the round, isn't falling over itself in the rush to find evidence of an obvious problem and one assumes that the usual threats and enticements from industry will prevent them from conducting the necessary research. We will then be treated to that time honored favorite - “there is no evidence to suggest” et cetera – while the destruction continues and the global food chain is further compromised. Maize, peas, tomatoes and onions are among the species of plants which seem to most effected by microwave radiation alone.(26)
Or, perhaps, the great and the good will fall back on that other staple; the contention that non-ionizing EMFs (Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, fields from electronic devices) cannot possibly be carcinogenic. They are prepared to acknowledge that UV rays and X-rays are problematic as they are high-frequency EMFs that directly damage DNA and cause mutations, but that's are far as it goes. The truth, however, is that radio-frequency EMFs have also been shown to cause heart and brain tumors in rats and brain cancers in humans.(27)(28)(29) The science linking heavy mobile phone usage with malignant brain cancers was readily established nearly twenty years ago.(30)(31) It's simply been ignored.
Figure 3
The following images are the central brain cross-section of an unirradiated rat followed by a rat irradiated by a mobile phone.
Figure 4
Figure 5
Not good. We remain blissfully ignorant of the effect that a plethora of electronics have upon us. We are already subjected to EMF radiation at a level that far exceeds what is healthy. Indeed, some countries have adopted safety limits that are up to 100 times lower than the international standard,(32) and yet now we will be exposed to even higher levels.
The 5G phenomenon has all the hallmarks of the pre-launch 'vaccine' saga – another rush to effectively impose a technology that is known to be harmful to human health. If the jab was (at least partly) about bio-surveillance, 5G is the indispensable second part of the double whammy. How will a SMART city, packed with shoebox apartments, mainlining on the Internet of Things, CBDCs, driverless cars, surveillance cameras on every lamppost (equipped with facial recognition software) and our internal, Bluetooth-enabled nanotech possibly function without the bandwidth? Answer – it can't and seeing as how the technocrats cannot achieve the level of desired control without it, the means – however injurious – are, to them, justified.
So, to recap. EMF, in both ionizing and non-ionizing guises, harms us and most other living things. It disrupts delicate ecosystems and long-evolved know-how in uncharted (but clearly detrimental) ways. Festooning our cities with 5G base stations is, therefore, an act of wanton malpractice. Filling our skies with tens of thousands of satellites that will ensure incessant exposure is worse still. Yet that's what our 'leaders' are in the process of doing. But it's far from all they're doing. They're also messing with the weather.
Of course, they say that they are doing no such thing. They say that only now are they thinking about whether they should 'tweak' the climate to prevent humankind's inevitable future incineration. Perhaps they ought to disperse some reflective particles in the stratosphere to cool the Earth's temperature? Or maybe they could spray saltwater into the air to make brighter clouds? And if they added some chemicals to seawater, they could make it more alkaline, which would draw more CO2 from the atmosphere.
Figure 6
What could possibly go wrong? Well, we're about to find out, because all of those experiments are already underway.(33) Plus, we can offer some insight into the harm that has already been caused on the down low. Our leaders would prefer if we forgot about this, for instance.
Figure 7
And this.
Figure 8
And definitely this.
Figure 9
The second of those, incidentally, was taken over London as long ago as 2012. The UN was given the good news about chemtrails even earlier, in 2007 – not that it would have been news to many, if not most, of the delegates:
“Weather modification programmes – experimental ones, done by private companies, done by the United States government, done by states across the United States – are underway. There are more than 50 of them in operation across the United States..“There are programmes around the world – international corporations are modifying our weather all the time. And they’re modifying it in ways that cover thousands and thousands of square miles. Most of it is chemically altered so what happens is that we are putting chemicals – ground-based chemicals that are shot into the air or chemicals coming from aeroplanes – that change or modify our weather... However, the incidents of putting chemicals into our atmosphere are going to change and impact agricultural crop production … reduce crop production.”(34)
Reduce crop reduction, you say? Like 5G does? Well, well, well. That's doubly unfortunate, isn't it? The chemicals in question include aluminium, barium, and strontium, amongst others. And because we're in the fact-based portion of the 'conspiracy theory', we know this because researchers in the US managed to obtain samples and analysed them with a mass spectrometer.(35) We know it because rainwater, when analysed, is contaminated with aluminium, arsenic, barium and boron.
Figure 10
So, while we're still on the facts segment of what is endearingly referred to as 'geoengineering' – which sounds neutrally scientific – what else can we be reasonably sure of? Well, we can be sure that whatever it is that is sprayed at altitude doesn't stay up there for ever. What goes up in aircraft, must come down. Inevitably, the particulates must;
“...fall onto the ground invisibly, affecting foliage, forests, crops, rivers and lakes, animals, and humans....Breathing nanoparticles of toxic metals into the lungs bypasses our primary immune system’s defenses. These substances make their way into the blood directly from the lung’s capillaries. And aluminium gets through the blood-brain barrier.”(36)
We know that barium and aluminium have both been linked to neuro-degenerative diseases such as multiple sclerosis and Alzheimers (37) and also to damage to the kidneys, lungs, liver and heart (because it's a toxin)(38) and that;
“...the most renowned MS clusters in Saskatchewan, Sardinia, Massachusetts, Colorado, Guam, NE Scotland demonstrated consistently elevated levels of Ba in soils (mean: 1428 ppm) and vegetation (mean: 74 ppm) in relation to mean levels of 345 and 19 ppm recorded in MS-free regions adjoining.”(39)
We also know it because water samples from the peak of Mount Shasta in California (height 14, 179 feet) have aluminium levels which are “4,800 times the maximum contaminant level of drinking water.”(40) You might wonder why anyone thought to test the water at the summit of a mountain. Well, they'd already tested the soil in the valley, because trees were dying and grass and crops weren't growing and they found that vast quantities of aluminium and barium (together with other elements) had changed the pH level of the soil.(41) This is a result that has been replicated around the world, thus making it a global, not simply a localized, phenomenon.(42) In Hawaii, a dozen years ago, aluminium was measured at 20,300 parts per million. Any level above 1,600ppm is considered excessive; any number above 400ppm is harmful to soil.(43)
We know it because of the vast numbers of patents that have been filed in the US Office. A far from exhaustive list would include Patent No. 3564253 (February 1971) for a “System And Method For Irradiation Of Planet Surface Areas”; Patent 3659785 (December 1971) for “Weather Modification Utilizing Microencapsulated Material”; Patent 3813875 (June 1974) for a “Rocket Having Barium Release System To Create Ion Clouds In The Upper Atmosphere” (pretty specific, I'd say); Patent 4412654 (November 1983) for a “Laminar microjet atomiser and method of aerial spraying of liquids”; Patent No. 4686605 (August 1987) for a “Method and apparatus for altering a region in the earth's atmosphere, ionosphere and/or magnetosphere”; and Patent No. 4999637 (March 1991) for the Creation of artificial ionisation clouds above the Earth”.(44)
We know it because we know that the authorities are lying when they say that what we see in the sky are contrails, not chemtrails. Contrails (a condensation trail made of ice crystals) can only physically start forming at 28,000 feet, but are more usually seen at altitudes between 36,000 and 38,000 feet, where the temperature is around minus 63 Celsius. Chemtrails aren't that high. Typically, they are applied between 10,000 and 12,000 feet. The contrail explanation is, therefore, contrary to the laws of physics.(45) Which it already was anyway, because contrails don't behave in the way that chemtrails do. As the ice crystals fall towards the earth they become water vapor. They don't spread out in the skies afterwards (Figure 12) and they don't do this, either.
Figure 11
Figure 12
It isn't as if weather modification, in and of itself, is a dark art that must never be acknowledged. Cloud seeding is a known technology, whether by the dispersal of silver oxide – which “exists naturally in the environment at low concentrations, and is not known to be harmful to humans or wildlife”(46) (yet another reversal of the precautionary principle) – or with an electrical charge, as the UAE does, with somewhat unpredictable results.
Figure 13
The US military attempted something similar on the Ho Chi Minh trail from 1966 (although the technology itself probably originates twenty years earlier).(47) Operation Popeye was intended to make the trail impassable, thus greatly impeding the Viet Cong in their operations against the Americans.(48) The belated disclosure of this operation, in 1974, led to an international agreement barring any action by a hostile force that could result in
“...earthquakes, tsunamis; an upset in the ecological balance of a region; changes in weather patterns (clouds, precipitation, cyclones of various types and tornadic storms); changes in climate patterns; changes in ocean currents; changes in the state of the ozone layer; and changes in the state of the ionosphere.”(49)
Which is remarkably sweeping in its scope. Who'd said anything about any weather effect other than rain-making? Why was it felt necessary to also mention earthquakes, tsunamis and the ionosphere? And how on earth could such a convention be enforced when the ability to measure any such modification is lacking? Answer – it can't. Any transgressor would have plausible deniability in spades. Nonetheless, it's worth noting that the Great Powers were alive to the possibility that war could be waged (potentially) by a range of weather modifications a whole five decades ago.
One might have hoped that an ability to make rain, however imprecise in practice, might nonetheless be useful in drought-affected areas of the world. It could be a force for good and, to a degree, it has been. Officials seed the clouds in the Sierra Nevada mountains each winter, thus ensuring that the water supply from melting snow is sufficient come summer.(50) And summertime cloud seeding in support of agriculture is widespread – (51)(52) the Chinese alone create billions of tonnes of rain each year.(53) So we know that the weather can be (and is being) manipulated in allegedly benign ways; is it far-fetched to surmise that other potentialities have also been explored? I would suggest not.
Especially when we know that they have lied to us. If the contrails are chemtrails – or, at the very least, not contrails – what's in them, if not the elements that are poisoning the soil? And, more to the point, if there was an innocent explanation, why hasn't it been given? Why was it necessary to give an explanation that's out by at least 16,000 feet? As we now know, when our rulers lie to us there is never an innocent explication. It is always nefarious, to a greater or lesser extent. Plus, the fact that they believe that lying to us, when they are supposed to be our representatives, is an acceptable way of doing business, ought to set off all kinds of warning klaxons.
We know that, although they are thin on the ground, there have been whistle-blowers and insiders who have come forward and given details of the operation; most pertinently in the US, Germany and the UK.(54)(55)(56) It seems that militaries and private contractors are both involved. In the UK, the chemtrail planes have been assigned transponder identifiers that don't stop up on flight tracking apps - the better to obscure their identity - and operate out of smaller airports such as Doncaster, Newquay and Bournemouth.(57) They are paid through thousands of shell companies which then shut down – not the way a legitimate, above-board operation is conducted.
And at the nexus of knowledge and supposition, we know that the intention to 'own the weather' by 2025 was explicitly expressed by the US Air Force way back in 1996, in a research paper entitled “Weather as a Force Multiplier – Owning the Weather in 2025”:(58)
“In 2025, US aerospace forces can “own the weather” by capitalizing on emerging technologies and focusing development of those technologies to war-fighting applications. Such a capability offers the war fighter tools to shape the battlespace in ways never before possible. It provides opportunities to impact operations across the full spectrum of conflict and is pertinent to all possible futures. The purpose of this paper is to outline a strategy for the use of a future weather-modification system to achieve military objectives rather than to provide a detailed technical road map.”(59)
The authors seemed to be particularly enamored of carbon black dust, which readily absorbs solar energy and, when released over a body of water, will eventually produce clouds and precipitation. The idea was that copious amounts of rain would disrupt the enemy's logistical supply chain. They suggested using stealth UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones to you and me) for this task. What they don't do is acknowledge that black carbon is particularly injurious to human health and life in general:
“Black carbon, a component of particulate matter, is especially dangerous to human health because of its tiny size. But black carbon not only has impacts on human health, it also affects visibility, harms ecosystems, reduces agricultural productivity and exacerbates global warming.”(60)
Microwave, nanotechnology, SMART materials...they were all under discussion thirty years ago as a means of generating designer storms. Modification of the ionosphere, to disrupt enemy surveillance and communications, was also a priority. Especially as it was believed to be possible to achieve whilst being “indistinguishable from naturally occurring environmental events”.(61) Is it likely, therefore, that research into weather modification has continued? Of course.
To the extent that this research would be a classified black op, acknowledgement of its existence is a non-starter. Participants will almost certainly be subject to various Official Secrets Acts and non-disclosure agreements and the penalties for breaching same would be severe. It wouldn't be entirely surprising to find an extensive programme that has remained under the radar for decades. Nor would it be a shock to find that a number of countries have felt it necessary to do their own research, if only as a defensive measure.
Then there's that US Patent No. 4686605A, filed in 1985, classified under category F41H13/0043 – directed energy weapons. The one that is concerned with “altering a region in the earth's atmosphere, ionosphere and/or magenetosphere.” It is customary in such matters to provide an exposition as to the uses to wish the invention can be put. This patent, filed by a gentleman named Bernard J. Eastlund, was no exception, but its potential utility was far from ordinary. Eastlund thought it had a “phenomenal variety of possible ramifications and potential future developments”.(62) He wasn't wrong. Allow me to set them out as succinctly as possible.
Eastlund's invention was a device which transmitted “electromagnetic radiation...upwards...at a frequency which excites electron resonance to heat and accelerate the charged particles” in the air.(63) It might look something like this.
Figure 14
Heating the charged particles increases their density. An increase in temperature of several hundred degrees is possible in a very short time span and it can be accomplished by “transmitting from earth based antenna high frequency radiation”.(64) This heating effect “can be made to act on electrons anywhere above the surface of the earth”,(65) preferably at heights between 50km and 800km. Such a device would require huge amounts of energy and a degree of isolation; Eastlund was, therefore, most keen on building in Alaska.
Apparently, there are 'field lines' (magnetic lines of force) in the Earth's atmosphere, resulting in belts of trapped electrons and ions. Both the Americans and the Russians had been studying this phenomena to see if it could be harnessed for “beneficial purposes”. To that end, in the late fifties and early sixties, both superpowers detonated a series of nuclear devices at altitudes of 200km and more, to generate large numbers of charged particles. (This was news to me – and to my search engine.) The magnetosphere is where the action happens, as there are no trapped belts within the ionosphere.
But what results can be expected? It appears that heating a specific part of the magnetosphere (at a height of 500km or more) and thereby messing with the density of the electrons in the plasma, 'lifts' a layer of plasma in the magnetosphere and/or the ionosphere upwards. This plasma forms a plume “which will be relatively stable for prolonged periods of time”.(66) Initiating such a process would be an option if one sought to disrupt the microwave transmissions of satellites or inhibit airborne and sea communications of both the civilian and military variety. Indeed, if the device was situated at various strategic locations, it would be possible to cause “total disruption of communications over a very large portion of the earth”.(67) Handily, whoever throws the switch could still utilize one of the various frequencies deployed to maintain their own comms while the rest of the world would be reduced to the use of carrier pigeons, who will no longer know where home is.
That's not all. Clearly, as a defense weapon, the device has legs. The guidance systems on incoming missiles would also be vulnerable to disruption. But it's on offence where the biggest wins can be found, because these 'plumes' can be made to move in a particular direction at will - “vast amounts of sunlight” can be focused “on selected portions of the earth”,(68) for example. But here's the motherlode:
“...plumes can be formed to simulate and/or perform the same functions as performed by the detonation of a “heave” type nuclear device without actually having to detonate such a device.”(69)
So, the energy that could be generated by the creation of a plume which then 'lifts' a portion of the ionosphere is the equivalent of a nuclear detonation. And plumes can also be used to produce long-standing droughts in specific locations. Or so Eastlund claimed in his patent. But a patent is just a piece of paper – this device would still need to be built, would it not? Is there any evidence that it has been?
Well, figure 14 is a picture of the HAARP facility – in Alaska, as luck would have it. HAARP stands for the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program and the 'phased array' in the picture is a high powered radio frequency transmitter that is used to temporarily excite a limited area of the ionosphere (according to Wikipedia) – which sounds somewhat adjacent to the device in the Eastlund patent. The site was also given the green light in 1990 (five years after the patent was granted) and was run by the USAF – the outfit whose declared intent was to “own the weather”.
The company that built it used to employ Eastlund and it was, in relatively short order, taken over by Raytheon; a company trusted with numerous classified projects by the US military.(70) That same military swears blind that the device doesn't use Eastlund's patent, even though the company that built it was also the holder of that patent. And, in addition, the military doesn't do pure science – it does science that may have a military application.
So, once more slipping into the field of speculation (but, I would submit, just barely), I am hugely skeptical of the USAF's alternative reality. If it walks like a duck et cetera. I am certainly not alone in that view. In 1999, the European Union had quite a lot to say about HAARP. They even passed a resolution, calling the project a global concern and were unabashed in labeling HAARP “a weapons system which disrupts climate”.(71) They stated that similar experiments were also being conducted in Norway, the Soviet Union and probably in Antarctica, too. Much of the memo mirrors (and expands upon) the claims made in Eastlund's patent, but there are some additional allegations made – particularly with regard to the Cold War era series of nuclear tests in the Van Allen Belts:
“This created new magnetic radiation belts which covered nearly the whole earth...According to US scientists it could take hundreds of years for the Van Allen belt to return to normal. HAARP could result in changes in weather patterns. It could also influence whole ecosystems, especially in the sensitive Antarctic regions.”(72)
The Americans simply ignored the EU, as is their wont. But there is another facility in Antarctica called the IceCube Neutrino Observatory, allegedly a passive listening device. To the layman's eye, it doesn't look much like the HAARP facility, but perhaps that's because its 'array' is underground, instead.
Figure 15
The official story is that the facility is designed to look for “point sources of neutrinos in the teraelectronvolt (TeV) range to explore the highest-energy astrophysical processes”,(73) an explanation that is suitably impenetrable to all but subject-matter experts. Apparently, the scientists on the scene are tracing particles that originate both within and without our solar system. Their neutrino detector is situated deep in the ice, like so. Or so we're told.
Figure 16
The military has, allegedly, lost interest in the HAARP project (as of 2015) and handed the facility over to the University of Alaska Fairbanks, although those of us on the outside are incapable of verifying whether they are truly uncoupled or not. There is also no official role for the military at the South Pole, although all resupplies go through their base at McMurdo Sound. I have my doubts, but lack the evidence to firm them up.
It's here that we enter the realm of pure speculation, in my view – possibly because I have been unable to find the truth, either way. Much of the discussion (in 'conspiracy' circles) about potential directed energy weapons is of the assertive variety, but without the provision of proof. It may well be that the latter is extremely hard to come by and the speculation is, in fact, true. In any event, there are researchers who contend that the HAARP technology has been recreated in mobile platforms.
Two stand out – the SBX-1 and the X-37B. This is the former, “a floating, self-propelled, mobile active electronically scanned array early-warning station designed to operate in high winds and heavy seas.”(74) Note the claim that its role is purely defensive in nature. It's been in use since 2006, is based in either Alaska or Pearl Harbor and has spent a considerable amount of time in the North Pacific monitoring the North Koreans and their missile programme.
Figure 17
Figure 18
The X-37B's (there are two) are unmanned, reusable space plane that are about the size of a small bus. Together, they have completed six orbital missions since 2010, of increasing duration. The first was in the air for 224 days, but the last completed flight lasted 908 days. In total, one or the other craft has been in orbit at a maximum altitude of 1,200 miles for a little over 10 years.(75) The scuttlebutt in the conspiracy community is that the payload is comprised of a HAARP type weapon, an assertion that gained a degree of traction when the military disclosed that part of the mission was to investigate the chances of “transforming solar power into radio frequency microwave energy”.(76) Beyond that morsel, the entire programme is classified.
Figure 19
The extraordinary length of the missions do give pause, though. To this layperson, a two and a half year orbit is on the generous side if the objective is truly benign research on solar radiation. It might more plausibly be characterized as a patrol, perhaps, but there isn't much of a consensus as to the X-37B's true purpose, other than an all-encompassing rejection of whatever it is that the government claims – which isn't a bad place to start, given their capacity for mendacity. Other researchers claim that HAARP is, in fact, a global phenomenon and that there are sites all over the shop. Again, such assertions seem to lack provenance.
As do further contentions that the US uses its directed energy weapons against other nations, so that they may force them to comply with American imperatives. Various disasters are pinned on HAARP, including the Japanese earthquake of 2011 and the Christchurch, Auckland quake of the same year.(77)(78) According to this theory,
“Scientists at the HAARP institute discovered that a 2.5 Hz radio frequency is the signature frequency of an earthquake. Since this discovery the HAARP phased array antennas have been used by the US military to beam the earthquake frequency into the ionosphere and the ionosphere reflects it back to Earth – penetrating as deeply as several kilometers into the ground, depending on the geological makeup and subsurface water conditions in a targeted area. By beaming the frequency at a specific trajectory HAARP can trigger an earthquake any place on Earth.”(79)
Figure 20
As far as I can tell, there is no evidence that is available to back up any of those statements – which doesn't mean that they aren't necessarily true, just that they float, unsupported, in the ether. Which is not to say that a directed energy attack of a similar nature would be impossible, if we cleave to the potentialities envisaged by Eastlund. If “...plumes can be formed to simulate and/or perform the same functions as performed by the detonation of a “heave” type nuclear device without actually having to detonate such a device”, then perhaps a 'heave' on a fault line might just do the job. I don't know and I'm not sure who would, outside of the in-crowd.
There are others who claim that DEW (directed energy weapons) are responsible for several recent disasters, particularly the Camp Fire at Paradise Valley, California in 2018 and the Lahaina fire of last August. Again, to the non-expert eye, while there are certainly anomalies, I don't know exactly what to make of them. This is the Camp Fire, after and before.
Figure 21
I find it difficult to believe that this was a wild-fire; it looks far too neat and tidy and there doesn't seem to be a fire path through the forest to the community. And every house that burned down looks exactly the same in the aftermath. All that's left is dust – everything is gone.
Figure 22
Figure 23
Figure 23 is also from the Camp Fire and shows burn scars in the nearby forest. I would not expect fire to burn in this fashion, nor would I expect a wild-fire to be able to melt aluminium and, particularly, glass. A typical house fire burns at around 1,100°F, aluminium at 1,300°F and glass at 2,700°F.
Figure 24
Figure 25
This next one is from a fire at Santa Rosa Beach, Florida in 2020. Again, it doesn't look right (if I had to guess, it looks more like houses burned from the inside) and, again, I don't know what may be the answer to the conundrum.
Figure 26
And this is is a screenshot of an aerial view of the fire on Maui which, again, stretches credulity.
Figure 27
These are boats at anchor off 50 meters off Lahaina harbor. I'm at a loss to explain this, too. Fire should not be capable of jumping over that much ocean.
Figure 28
If any or all of this destruction is to be laid at the door of DEWs, an attack from above would probably be necessary. And it's not as though the concept of space-based DEWs had never previously been considered. They most certainly have been, during Reagan's 1980s-era Star Wars initiative. In 1982, the US government was bullish on the subject:
“The United States is pursuing directed-energy weapon technologies involving devices for generating and controlling laser, particle, and microwave beams which may revolutionize military strategy, tactics, and doctrine....One widely discussed laser-weapon concept involves a constellation of laser-weapon platforms in space which has the potential to provide a credible air and ballistic missile defense system for the United States.”(80)
A laser that can take out a rocket can, presumably, be pointed at other targets, too. Did they succeed in creating such a weapon? How would we know if they did? However, if we briefly depart the arena of rampant speculation, there is one additional factor that we can depend on. Aluminium and barium dust can be explosively combustible when combined and the high levels found in soil will enhance the destructive capacity of a fire and increase the speed with which it can move.(81) And “it has been reported the fires move faster than anyone has ever seen and barriers that in years past contained them such as rivers, no longer do.”(82)
As far as I can tell, therefore, most of the alternative explanations for the role of directed energy weapons can usefully be categorized at hypotheses, not revealed truths. This isn't because they are, on their face, so barking as to be immediately cast aside (I'm not quite sure where that line would be any more) but more as a result of a severe lack of information. We know that an Air Force site on Maui is part of the Directed Energy Directorate,(82) for instance, but we don't know whether we should attach any significance to that fact.
We do know that the US Navy has a directed energy weapon mounted on at least one warship and that the system is operational.
Figure 29
Figure 30
Figure 31
But beyond that, it's all guesswork. As is my particular theory on the extraordinary ubiquity of microplastics. On the one hand, we are informed that plastic is a 'forever' pollutant that is extremely difficult to break down. On the other hand, this same plastic has, in fact, broken down and is now everywhere and in everything – us included. This strikes me as a potential contradiction worthy of further exploration.
“Microplastics—tiny pieces of plastic, often so small as to be invisible to the naked eye—have been identified as a particular threat, acting as “Trojan horses” to carry these chemicals deep into our bodies. They also carry them to the furthest reaches of the planet: to the bottom of the oceans, to the Arctic and Antarctic, and to the tops of the highest mountains.”(83)
It's a simple enough question that hasn't, to my knowledge, been properly addressed – where is it all coming from? The standard answer is that, as Wikipedia notes, cosmetics, clothing, food packaging and industrial processes all produce microplastics.(84) But they've been found in around 90% of all protein-based food,(85) in human placentas (all 62 that were tested),(86) in the blood and the heart (87)(88) – even in the brain.(89) Klaus's boffins at the WEF reckon that, by 2050, our ocean's will contain more plastic by weight than fish.(90)
And, whilst it is true that less than 10% of all the plastic ever produced has actually been recycled and current rates are only around half that (yes, plastic recycling is yet another narrative that doesn't stand up to scrutiny),(91)(92) most of it ends up on landfills in its original condition. Degrading a plastic bottle to the size of microplastic (less than five millimeters long) is not the job of a moment. It's true to say that some of the blame, for animal contamination at least, can be laid at the door of livestock feed producers. Mystifyingly, they have gotten into bad habits:
“It seems that – at least part of the – former food products, including from supermarkets, are processed into livestock feed with packaging and all. This is not only detrimental to animal welfare, but perhaps also to ourselves. Most likely, almost every steak and burger contains small pieces of plastic.”(93)
The average human, according to Australian research, consumes about five grams of plastic per week.(94) But still. The explanation is that the microplastics that are currently floating around in the environment are 40 to 50 years old, because it's taken that long to degrade them.(95) And there's yet another possibilities for how it is that particles can travel great distances, carried on the wind. Researchers estimate that 1,000 tonnes of microplastics fall on the western region of the US every year.(96)
Perhaps so. But that's an awful lot of forty of fifty year old plastic, especially as the use of plastic has only quadrupled in the past thirty years.(97) Color me skeptical, once more. Is it possible that there are other explanations? Microplastics have, after all, been found in cloud, too.(98) According to the professionally incurious folk at CNN – no doubt anxious to avoid stepping on a third rail – the debris can simply be “hoisted into the atmosphere”.(99) But what if, instead of being hoisted up, it rains down?
After all, air forces have long used chaff – aluminium-coated fiberglass and plastic – as an electronic countermeasure, designed to confuse radar and missile alike:
“Chaff is a very light material that can remain suspended in air anywhere from 10 minutes to 10 hours and can travel considerable distances from its release point, depending on prevailing atmospheric conditions.”(100)
The USAF is known to dump at least 500 tonnes a year into the atmosphere. Is it safe? They would like to think so, although they don't know but, for reasons already elucidated, it can't be. And there is at least some crossover between chaff's ingredients and the composition of chemtrails. I'm having a hard time believing that wind and tide have deposited earth-based microplastics on the top of Everest and the floor of the Mariana Trench, but a much easier time attributing those phenomena to particulate matter that has been released at altitude. But it's just a theory and, given the vow of omerta that surrounds the subject of chemtrails, it's likely to remain one for some time yet; although, as previously mentioned, recent developments may serve to push 'weather modification' (as a desirable concept) into the mainstream as a way to retroactively normalize what they've already been doing.
So, overall, a mix of unacknowledged truths and speculation of various hues – a lot to digest. However, the certainties include disturbing revelations. 5G radiation, soon to be unavoidable, is dangerous. Our leaders know this, but they care not. Geoengineering is definitely a thing and it's not a recent thing – it may have been going on for over twenty years, as there is speculation that commercial airliners were recruited in around 2002, the time at which restrictions of the amount of passengers' luggage were introduced. The inference is that they needed cargo-hold space for other purposes.
Directed energy weapons exist and have done for decades. HAARP also exists and its design mirrors Eastlund's patent, no matter the USAF's protestations to the contrary. We know what the patent says HAARP can do, but we don't know what it actually has done. We wouldn't know how to distinguish natural events from the contrived; partly, that's because it is inherently difficult and partly it's due to the fact that we cannot now be confident about our baseline.
How are we to know how much of what constitutes the world's climate, for the past however long, is actually natural? If, cumulatively, millions of tons of aluminium or chaff have been disgorged into the atmosphere over the past twenty years, what effect has it had? What would our climate have been like without it? If HAARP can create plumes with the energy of a nuclear device, has it been deployed? Are some of the 'natural' disasters that have overtaken various nations unnatural in origin, instead?
It's possible that there is another world on the other side of the looking glass – a world that resembles our own, but which is not as it seems. A place where there are some big secrets to which we are not privy. A place where some of the nonsensical decisions made by our erstwhile leaders are actually explicable, if one takes into account the potential downside of not doing what one is told. Perhaps an earthquake or a tsunami, maybe a multi-year drought. It all sounds too fantastical to be possible. Then again, the USAF didn't think so back in 1996 – they thought they could use the weather offensively. They were still of that mindset nine years later:
“Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally… It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog, and storms on earth or to modify space weather…and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of technologies which can provide substantial increase in US, or degraded capability in an adversary, to achieve global awareness, reach, and power.”(101)
So we come finally to intent. We can see how 5G fits into the grand plan – vastly increased bandwidth is essential to our SMART future and the Fourth Industrial Revolution. The ruling class is clearly fine with the radiation that comes with it, as long as they don't suffer the worst of the effects (Gates' Palm Beach is the only part of Florida that will be free of 5G towers).(102) But what about chemtrails? Isn't that all about reflecting sunlight back into space, in an attempt to slow down 'global warming'? No, it isn't. They don't believe in human-induced climate change. Sure, some of the pink-haired monomaniacs from Just Stop Oil are defenders of the faith, but their backers aren't. They can't be – they can read a graph as well as the next man and the graph looks like this.
Figure 32
The global dimming that they are invested in is not for our benefit. It is unnecessary, as a naturally warmer planet is a more fertile planet. Reducing sunlight, by as much as 20%, can only ever be detrimental to us. What, then, is the plan? Perhaps the answer lies in a detailing of the combined effects of 5G and chemtrails.
Cell tower radiation harms the natural world and animals. It disrupts Nature's cycles and put pressure on our food supply, as do the toxic levels of aluminium, barium and the like that can only come from the sky. Geoengineering disrupts the hydrological cycle and, instead of reflecting heat, can trap what still gets through under a layer of artificial cloud, thus increasing temperatures in some locations. We also have less rain than we would enjoy in a wholly natural environment.
It is notable (and far from coincidental) that it is the US military that has driven the agenda on all things climate, not a civilian body, and they have not been backward in sharing their ambitions - they clearly see an ability to control the weather in adversarial terms. We might, in the dim and distant, have assumed that the United States, as an entity, would utilize any such capacity in the service of the nation state. That can no longer be the case, as it is clear that the ruling elite is at war with its own people, as well as its overseas targets of choice, and has been since 9/11 (and the Patriot Act) at the latest.
As such, any advantage that they have accrued in the area of weather modification will be theirs alone and will come at the expense of the rest of us. I'm also not convinced that they are deliberately warming the planet so that they might maintain their climate change scam. After all, all they have to do is gerrymander the data (which they do with regularity) and none of us would be any the wiser.
It doesn't actually have to be noticeably warmer; the sheople haven't cottoned on to the fact that nothing much has changed in the past twenty years and that every catastrophising prediction has failed to launch, but most seem to still believe the lie anyway. It is, of course, possible that the climate would be noticeably cooler without the weather manipulation – we are overdue a cooling cycle, after all. Perhaps that also been part of the plan.
But I believe that the primary aim is darker and that the combination of 5G and toxic compounds is designed to sicken us and destroy our food supply. This conclusion isn't a huge stretch, given the ruling class's recent 'vaccine' campaign and the ongoing war on food (and those who supply it); it's simply a more protracted version of same.
Given the fact that most of are now part aluminium and that 5G radiation can only exacerbate the deleterious effects of any heavy metal that we have ingested or inhaled and that, in addition, our food supply and the natural world are being quietly decimated, it's clear that the friendly skies have been weaponized – they are yet another front in the ceaseless war in which we find ourselves embroiled.
Citations
(1) https://beebom.com/5g-bands-explained/
(2) https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/active-denial-system-5g-radiation-weapon/
(3) https://bioinitiative.org/
(4) https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/Scientist-5G-appeal-2017.pdf
(5) https://ehtrust.org/doctors-scientists-appeal-stricter-wireless-technology-regulation/
(6) https://www.5gspaceappeal.org/
(7) https://emfadvice.com/5g-radiation-dangers-health-concerns/
(8) https://www.saferemr.com/2016/05/national-toxicology-progam-finds-cell.html
(9)https://drive.google.com/file/d/19CbWmdGTnnW1iZ9pxlxq1ssAdYl3Eur3/view?pli=1
(10) https://prepforthat.com/5g-health-risks/
(12) https://expose-news.com/2022/06/05/ukgov-contempt-towards-emf-health-impacts-is-obvious/
(15) https://www.broadbandcommission.org/Documents/publications/WG-Technologies-in-Space-Report2017.pdf
(16) https://cellphonetaskforce.org/assault-on-nature/wi-fi-in-the-sky/
(18) https://www.space-track.org
(19) https://www.naturalscience.org/news/2021/04/5g-satellites-the-world-in-a-radiation-cage/
(20) https://cellphonetaskforce.org/assault-on-nature/wi-fi-in-the-sky/
(21) https://cellphonetaskforce.org/dogs-cats-birds-and-maui/
(22) https://expose-news.com/2022/06/05/ukgov-contempt-towards-emf-health-impacts-is-obvious/
(23) https://mdsafetech.org/environmental-and-wildlife-effects/
(24) Ditto
(25) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456414/
(26) https://mdsafetech.org/environmental-and-wildlife-effects/
(27) https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/topics/cellphones
(28) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29530389/
(29) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16873421/
(31) https://www.spandidos-publications.com/10.3892/ijo.2015.2908
(32) https://ehtrust.org/policy/international-policy-actions-on-wireless/
(34) https://expose-news.com/2023/06/25/sixteen-years-ago-un-was-told-about-chemtrails/
(35) https://expose-news.com/2023/11/24/hidden-agenda-behind-uk-gov-chemtrail-operations/
(36) https://naturalsociety.com/chemtrails-obvious-overhead-pollutant-ignored-denied/
(37) https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00204-023-03581-6
(38) https://naturalsociety.com/barium-everywhere-tell-congress-stop-spraying/
(39) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15082100/
(40) https://www.yourdailyjournal.com/opinion/columns/79582/chemtrails-what-are-they-spraying
(42) https://naturalsociety.com/chemtrails-obvious-overhead-pollutant-ignored-denied/
(43) https://kauaisky.blogspot.com/2012/05/barium-aluminum-soil-level-letter.html
(45) https://expose-news.com/2023/11/24/hidden-agenda-behind-uk-gov-chemtrail-operations/
(47) https://www.popsci.com/operation-popeye-government-weather-vietnam-war/
(48) Ditto
(49)https://web.archive.org/web/20190502054235/https://www.state.gov/t/isn/4783.htm
(50) http://dpw.lacounty.gov/wrd/Projects/Cloudseeding/2015MND.pdf/
(52)https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-cloud-seeding-india/
(55)
(56) https://expose-news.com/2023/11/24/hidden-agenda-behind-uk-gov-chemtrail-operations/
(57) Ditto
(58) https://zerogeoengineering.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/WeatherAsAForceMultiplier.pdf
(59) https://zerogeoengineering.com/2018/weather-force-multiplier-owning-weather-2025/
(60) https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2016/03/22/the-damaging-effects-of-black-carbon/
(61) https://zerogeoengineering.com/2018/weather-force-multiplier-owning-weather-2025/
(62) US4686605.pdf
(63-69) Ditto
(70)
(71) https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-4-1999-0005_EN.html?redirect
(72) Ditto
(73) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IceCube_Neutrino_Observatory
(74) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea-based_X-band_Radar#In_popular_culture
(75) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37#Speculation_regarding_purpose
(76) https://www.space.com/x-37b-military-space-plane-nears-mission-duration-record
(78)
(80) https://www.gao.gov/products/c-masad-82-10
(83) https://amgreatness.com/2023/06/26/corporate-culture-and-the-lords-of-lies/
(84) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microplastics
(86) https://hsc.unm.edu/news/2024/02/hsc-newsroom-post-microplastics.html
(87) https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.est.2c07179
(88) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412022001258?via%3Dihub#f0005
(89) https://archive.ph/TLfyL#selection-1235.82-1235.93
(91)https://www.earthday.org/plastic-recycling-is-a-lie/
(94)https://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/plastic_ingestion_web_spreads.pdf
(97) https://www.earthday.org/plastic-recycling-is-a-lie/
(98)https://edition.cnn.com/2023/11/15/weather/microplastic-pollution-weather-study-climate/index.html
(99) https://edition.cnn.com/2023/11/15/weather/microplastic-pollution-weather-study-climate/index.html
(101) https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/
(102) https://tapnewswire.com/2020/05/neither-trump-nor-gates-want-5g-near-their-home/
Figure 1 https://westviewnews.org/2023/01/11/new-york-city-a-sorcerers-garden-of-5g-cell-towers/james/
Figure 2 https://www.mushroomnetworks.com/blog/spacexs-starlink-satellite-internet-service-review/
Figure 3 https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/emfs-possible-human-carcinogen
Figure 4 https://waveguard.com/en/5g-satellites/
Figure 5 Ditto
Figure 6 https://www.wsj.com/science/environment/geoengineering-projects-cool-planet-weather-f0619bf7
Figure 7 https://chemtrailsprojectuk.com/
Figure 8 Ditto
Figure 9 Ditto
Figure 11 https://chemtrailsprojectuk.com/evidence/photos/#lightbox/5/
Figure 12 https://chemtrailsprojectuk.com/evidence/photos/#lightbox/14/
Figure 14 By Michael Kleiman, US Air Force - http://science.dodlive.mil/2010/02/23/haarps-antenna-array-the-kitchen-in-the-sky/, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=11034772
Figure 15 By Cmichel67 - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=128003225
Figure 16 By Karen Andeen and Matthias Plum for the IceCube Collaboration -https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333164791_Latest_Cosmic_Ray_Results_from_IceTop_and_IceCube (https://dx.doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201921003005), CC BY 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=133098636
Figure17 https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/bh8fi1/the_seabased_xband_anti_ballistic_missile_defense/
Figure 18 https://www.kijkmagazine.nl/tech/amerikaans-radarstation-noord-korea/
Figure 19 https://t3n.de/news/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/boeing-x-37B-Orbit.jpg
Figure 20 https://rense.com/general92/haarp.htm
Figure 21 http://www.chemtrailplanet.com/DEW.html
Figure 22 Ditto
Figure 24 Ditto
Figure 25 Ditto
Figure 26 http://www.chemtrailplanet.com/DEW.html
Figure 30 Ditto
Figure 31 Ditto
Figure 32 https://twitter.com/ICU1010/status/1648285375540985856