Climate Engineering Denial And Deception, Holding Mainstream Media Accountable
Should we consider it acceptable for mainstream media news anchors and their "chief meteorologists" to completely ignore and marginalize the legitimate and verifiable concerns of the public that they claim to represent? Should we just stand silently by while media and meteorological "professionals" (that the community depends on) willfully blackout critical issues (that relate directly to public health and welfare) without doing a shred of honest or legitimate investigation? The short answer is no, we cannot, we must not accept such a betrayal of the public's trust. In Northern California, KRCR is an ABC affiliate that covers the North State. The chain of short messages below are my attempt to hold the ABC news anchor for KRCR (and their chief meteorologist) accountable by simply asking them to address the public's concerns in a town hall setting. This effort has been ongoing. The ABC news anchor finally gives a very unprofessional and completely inadequate response. A 40 year veteran Aerospace Avionics Engineer then directly addresses the ABC news anchor with his own letter which fully supports the reality of global geoengineering and our efforts to expose the ongoing atmospheric aerosol crimes.
Hello Mr. Kruger and Mr. Mangas,
As I am sure you are aware, the rapidly growing public concerns over the issue of climate engineering continues to accelerate. As meteorological and media representatives for the North State (through KRCR), it is my hope that you will agree to accept this formal invitation to attend a locally staged public forum (in a town hall setting) in order to address the public's questions and concerns about what we see constantly occurring in our skies. The lingering expanding jet aircraft trails often haze out the entire skyline (which is the stated goal of "solar radiation management" programs). If (as the KRCR chief meteorologist) Mr. Kruger believes climate engineering is not in fact going on, the public would like to know on what facts and information such a conclusion is based. I, and many others, hope you will accept this sincere invitation to address our concerns as our local weather and media representatives. If so, we would coordinate a date, time, and location for the meeting that would be acceptable to your schedules.
Verifiable facts sent for consideration:
Federal "gag order" on all NWS and NOAA employees
Links to numerous film footage clips of jet aircraft spraying
New Science Study Examines Methods To Gain Public Acceptance Of Climate Engineering
New Science Study Comes Closer To Disclosing The Catastrophic Health And Environmental Consequences Of Climate Engineering
Massive Senate Document On National And Global Weather Modification
Historical presidential report documenting ongoing and expanding climate engineering programs
Extensive list of climate engineering patents
Solar radiation management governance initiative
Hello Mr. Kruger and Mr. Mangas, I hope you would be kind enough to issue a response to the request sent last week. As mentioned in the former message, public concerns about climate engineering are escalating rapidly, it would seem appropriate for the chief meteorologist that represents our region to at least be willing to address the public's concerns in a town hall setting.
Thank you for your consideration to this second request.
FYI, perhaps previously unknown cloud formations like the ones we have just documented from NASA photos (below) can be one of the issues Mr. Kruger can address.
Hello Mr. Kruger and Mr. Mangas, we are all still hoping you will be willing to answer questions from the public to address our concerns about what is happening in our skies. The photo attached was captured today from the NASA worldview site, what could cause such a cloud formation? This is one of the many questions we would like to have addressed at a town hall meeting at a date, time, and location, that would suite your schedule. Again, as the local chief meteorologist that represents our region, we hope you will be willing to address our questions and concerns.
What could cause an alarming cloud formation like what is shown below? And on such a vast scale?
Hello again Mr. Kruger and Mr. Mangas, still hoping to have the courtesy of a response regarding the communities requests to have their questions and concerns about climate engineering addressed in a public town hall setting. Below is a satellite photo taken today over Northern California. It reveals an atmosphere that is completely saturated with aerosols which look more like blowing smoke on the radar image as opposed to natural cumulous or cirrus clouds. Smoke is of course a particulate, climate engineering/solar radiation management patents and programs expressly call for saturating the atmosphere with light scattering particulates dispersed from jet aircraft. If (as our chief meteorologist) Mr. Kruger feels our concerns are unfounded, and that we should not believe what we can see with our own eyes, we would be very interested in hearing on what basis of facts he comes to such a conclusion.
First response from KRCR ABC news anchor Mike Mangas
On Feb 18, 2016, at 6:20 PM, Mike Mangas wrote:
I apologize for not responding to your emails. I didn't see them – to be absolutely honest, I blocked them some time ago.
Going into the geoengineering debate, I tried to keep an open mind. I listened to you, to your followers, showed up at the seminar you had in the David Marr auditorium, and did online research. I'm not a scientist, and don't pretend to be, but of the things I could confirm, I have found lies, mistruths, conspiracy theories of all sorts (and not just geoengineering. That forum had a cornucopia of conspiracy theories. Who shot Kennedy, what really happened on 9-11, did we really go to the moon, etc.)
Reading things like we the media are being paid off by the government to keep things quiet, or to believe humans are capable of intentionally altering the environment on a global scale, for nefarious purposes, or that such an alleged massive operation could be done in complete secrecy, and talking with people in the airline industry whom I have known for years, whose opinions I respect, who literally laugh at geoengineering conspiracies, led me months ago to come to the conclusion that… I don't believe it. I do believe geoengineering is being discussed, but not anywhere near being implemented, and certainly not on such a grand scale.
Everyone is free to believe what they want to believe, and as I've said before, I admire your passion, but I'm done with this, and have been for months.
I just don't want to spend any more time on it.
Clearly, I have no interest in being involved in any sort of town hall meeting, nor in covering any such event. (I speak for myself only in that regard.)
I will not respond to any further correspondence, unless it's a subject other than geoengineering.
KRCR News Channel 7
My 1st email in response to ABC news anchor Mike Mangas and ABC "chief Meteorologist Mike Kruger
Mr, Mangas, with all due respect, do you really believe your response would hold up in any reasonable forum with a reasonable community of concerned citizens? Which clearly neither you nor Mr. Kruger have the courage to face? You baselessly claim all is "conspiracy" and yet make no acknowledgment of the mountain of climate engineering data to the contrary, including links I sent to you and Mr. Kruger. These links even contain the full text to 750 page US senate report and an 80 page US presidential report, both proving beyond doubt that global climate modification has been going on since the late 1940s. Did you really do any investigation at all, Mike? Or do you just rely on the opinions of "people whom you respect"? How about the federal "gag order" on all National Weather Service and NOAA employees? Any explanation for that? Are we to expect government scientists to speak out in spite of a federal "Gag Order"? It is unfortunate that those whom the community relies on for their news are not even willing to address legitimate and extremely dire community concerns about solid science issues like stratospheric aerosol geoengineering and solar radiation management. Unfortunately you have made the decision to distract from the science by plucking out a meaningless passing statement or two from the MC at the event. Clearly you have done your best to unjustly slander a major community event with 1000 in attendance and many experts including former military and former government scientists.
Anyway, Mr. Mangas, thank you for making clear your unwillingness to address critical and legitimate community concerns on verifiable science issues like climate engineering/geoengineering/solar radiation management. Your comments are now on the record (I can only assume Mr. Kruger is taking the same position). As the climate engineering issue becomes impossible to hide, I can only imagine the community will justifiably feel extremely betrayed by those in media who have done their best to hide and/or marginalize issues of such dire gravity. The issue of global geoengineering will soon enough be exposed and acknowledged as the climate system disintegrates, wait and see. At that time, individuals like you and Mr. Kruger (and other local media representatives) will have a great deal of explaining to do for the citizens you claim to represent, but instead have chosen to blatantly betray.
My 2nd email to ABC news anchor Mike Mangas and ABC "chief meteorologist" Mike Kruger
Hello Mr. Mangas and Mr. Kruger, just an FYI, it seems the State of Rhode Island is waking up and acknowledging the geoengineering reality.
FYI, Rhode Island legislation draft to stop geoengineering, February 11, 2016
Rhode Island Legislation To Stop Climate Engineering
Below is a letter just sent to you, Mr. Mangas, from an Aerospace Avionics Engineer. Though this extremely qualified expert has asked me not to publish his identity for the time being (as he is still involved in research on the subject at hand), you are well aware of who he is Mike as I have already seen your response to this individual in an email you sent in reply to the letter below. This most recent expert testimony is on top of all the other experts that have already testified in Shasta County about the reality of climate engineering and the dire threat it poses. https://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/geoengineering-investigation-demanded-by-shasta-county-residents/
The letter below is from an Aerospace Avionics Engineer. It was sent to ABC's Mike Mangas (and forwarded to me) in response to the ABC news anchor's blatant refusal to honestly investigate or objectively report on the critical geoengineeering issue.
I just read your response to Dane about not covering any more GeoEngineering stories.
That may be difficult to avoid.
I am an Aerospace Avionics Engineer of over 40 years, with considerable work experience at our NASA Ames/Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards – working specifically on a high altitude research aircraft designed to study the Ozone layer. It was a part of the ERAST projects sponsored by NASA, the company I worked for was Aurora Flight Sciences.
During my work at NASA the folks at JPL figured out how to use the 4th bit in a data stream from an orbiting satellite – and ended up finding the Ozone hole in Antartica.
What failed to reach the public, is that the Ozone layer is usually only about a quarter of an inch thick! Another missed item was that Ozone can't be created without Oxygen and Ultraviolet light – above the Atmospheric layers – so it can't form on the dark side of the planet. This causes holes to form. Ozone holes are normal – to a point, that point is about where we are now; the Ozone layer is pretty much gone – we know this with the excessive UVB radiation, and the CERES satellite data.
This was 1994, and 1995 – at this time was the big R-12 refrigerant conundrum – this is what the Chemistry Engineers were telling us, and that the Chloromethane molecule was responsible for all the holes in the ozone layer.
I only had 1 simple question: "how does a heavier than air molecule reach tropopause?"
The next NASA project was the Barium release by satellite. Lots of data was gathered, and most people involved with the project thought they were doing real science for a good cause. Not so. It was government sponsored research data for the solar radiation management programs.
Since that time I have spent significant time and energy researching the CERES data, which was one of the first satellites measuring the "Energy Balance" for planet Earth – I am not using the public data, I have been granted access to the actual data (or so I'm told) that has not been scrubbed. After 2 years of studying this data, I still can't really determine what is going on. I am familiar with the scanning micro-bolometer that is the sensor aboard the satellite, but putting that data together in an easily understood video presentation has proved to be a major computer task.
I don't like conspiracy theories. I want facts. I want data that speaks for itself, no matter who reads it.
My first comparison of data gathered from 2000-2005 to data from 2010-2015 was very alarming. So alarming that I figured I made a mistake. I am taking more time to cover every line of program and every bit of data before any publication is made. There is 58.6 gigabytes of data.
Before I received the CERES data, I had to promise the Langley Center that they would receive copies of my papers before they go public. That bothered me at the time. Could be just an accuracy check.
I have emailed Dane on several occasions about my current research and his, and on each occasion Dane has had verifiable data to corroborate his claims. I don't see anything but an intense desire Dane has but to try and recover what we have left on this planet – before it is gone forever. Personally I admire Dane – it would be far easier for him if he just didn't care.
But he does, and so do I. This is intensely painful at times, especially when I hold my grandkids.
Here is a quote I learned many years ago "There is a bar to all understanding, it is contempt prior to investigation."
In my research I have to maintain an open mind – otherwise I introduce bias into the overall equation by ignoring or discounting certain data. It is critical I have error-free results, no exceptions. The stakes are way too high for all of us.
Mike, thanks for reading this – and I hope it doesn't piss you off! That, is NOT my goal – we need to have good news coverage – accurate, unbiased, and without fear.
We all need YOU, Mike, when I get finished with this project I'd like your opinion – and help.
A final note for this message, can Mr. Kruger, yourself, or the "airline industry" friends (who's opinion you stated you base your conclusions on) confirm (with verifiable facts) that the trails in the photos below are just "normal commercial traffic" trails, and not climate engineering/geoengineering/solar radiation management? Populations are waking up, the climate engineering insanity cannot be hidden in plain sight for much longer no matter how much deception and denial we are fed from the media and meteorological communities. How will the public react once they know the degree to which they have been lied to about such a dire issue?
Photo credit: Warren Grace
The effort to expose the global geoengineering assault requires that we each do everything we can to expose those who are helping to hide the ongoing climate engineering crimes. Make your voice heard in this most critical battle.
May be freely reprinted, so long as the text is unaltered, all hyperlinks are left intact, and credit for the article is prominently given to geoengineeringwatch.org and the article’s author with a hyperlink back to the original story.