Home Page Home Page


Jerry E. Smith's Facebook profile





By Jerry E. Smith


Originally published in the American online journal Connecting The Dots on May 8, 2007 and in the same week in the English online journal Conspiracy Times at: http://www.conspiracy-times.com/content/view/81/1/.


Later it appeared in print in a much abbreviated form in Atlantis Rising magazine, issue #65 for Septermber/October 2007 under the title "Weather Goes to War." http://www.atlantisrising.com Later it appeared in The Dot Connector Magazine, Number 4, July-August 2009. http://www.thedotconnector.org/mag/

This article is now available in full in the new paperback book from Feral House SECRET AND SUPPRESSED II: Banned Ideas and Hidden History into the 21st Century, Edited by Adam Parfrey and Kenn Thomas. Now available from Adventures Unlimited Press at http://adventuresunlimitedpress.com/proddetail.php?prod=SAS2


If man can modify the weather, he will obviously modify it for military purposes. It is no coincidence that the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Signal Corps have been deeply involved in weather modification research and development. Weather is a weapon, and the general who has control over the weather is in control of an opponent less well armed… The idea of clobbering an enemy with a blizzard, or starving him with an artificial drought still sounds like science fiction. But so did talk of atom bombs before 1945.



So wrote author Daniel S. Halacy Jr., in his book, The Weather Changers, published in 1968.


Modern scientific attempts to control the weather began with Dr. Bernard Vonnegut’s discovery in 1946 that microscopic crystals of silver iodide (AgI) nucleate water vapor to form ice crystals. His breakthrough invention of a practical way of generating tiny AgI particles to serve as nuclei for ice crystals led to the modern practice of cloud seeding. More than fifty years later his method continues to be the most common. Control of the weather, at least to some degree, is today an established and expanding field of scientific and commercial endeavor across North America and around the world.





Mankind has always had a keen interest in the weather. Throughout human history we have seen the effects of weather on crops, and the loss of life and property through the violence of storms. In ancient times people made sacrifice to the gods in a crude attempt at influencing the weather. In many parts of the world today people still conduct elaborate rituals for rain and fertility.


The modern interest in making rain for profit and/or the public good began, surprisingly enough, following the American Civil War. A large volume of literature on the subject was generated between 1890 and 1894 alone. Martha B. Caldwell in her article “Some Kansas Rain Makers,” published in the Kansas Historical Quarterly in August of 1938 summed up much of this material. She wrote:



These writers had various theories as to the methods of producing rain. A French author suggested using a kite to obtain electrical connections with the clouds. James P. Espy, a meteorologist from Pennsylvania, proposed the method of making rain by means of fires. This idea is prevalent on the Western Plains where the saying, "A very large prairie fire will cause rain," has almost become a proverb. The Indians on the plains of South America were accustomed to setting fire to the prairies when they wanted rain. A third method patented by Louis Gathman in 1891 was based on the supposition that sudden chilling of the upper atmosphere by releasing compressed gases would cause rapid evaporation and thus produce rain. One of the oldest theories of producing artificial rain is known as the concussion theory, or that of generating moisture by great explosions. The idea originated from the supposition that heavy rains follow great battles. Gen. Daniel Ruggles of Fredericksburg, Va., obtained a patent on the concussion theory in 1880, and urged congress to appropriate funds for testing it.


By 1890 the subject of artificial rain making had attained considerable dignity; two patents had been issued and through the efforts of Sen. C. B. Farwell, Congress had made appropriations, $2,000 first, and then $7,000 to carry on experiments. In 1892 an additional appropriation of $10,000 was made to continue the work. The carrying out of these experiments naturally fell to the Department of Agriculture, and the Secretary selected R. G. Dryenforth to conduct them. In 1891 Mr. Dryenforth with his assistants proceeded to the "Staked Plains of Texas" to begin work. Included in the equipment which he took with him were sixty-eight explosive balloons, three large balloons for making ascensions, and material for making one hundred cloth covered kites, besides the necessary explosives, etc. He used the explosives both on the ground and in the air. An observer stated that "it was a beautiful imitation of a battle." The balloons filled with gas were exploded high in the atmosphere. After a series of experiments carried on in different parts of Texas over a period of two years, his conclusions were to the effect that under favorable conditions precipitation may be caused by concussion, and that under unfavorable conditions "storm conditions may be generated and rain be induced, there being, however, a wasteful expenditure of both time and material in overcoming unfavorable conditions."


Twenty thousand dollars in 1890 would have the purchasing power of about a quarter million today! Over the next eighty years Congress maintained an on again, off again interest in funding this research. One notable expenditure occurred in 1967 when the U.S. Senate passed the Magnusson Bill authorizing the Secretary of Commerce to accelerate programs of applied research, development and experimentation in weather and climate modification. That bill allocated $12 million, $30 million and $40 million over the next three years, respectively. They projected expenditures of some $149 million annually by 1970.


It can be argued that by the beginning of the 1970s portions of the U.S. government and/or military viewed weather and climate modification research as having transitioned from the “basic research” stage to the “operational” stage. Experiments were occurring — or had occurred — in 22 countries, including Argentina, Australia, Canada, Iran, Israel, Kenya, Italy, France, South Africa, Congo and the U.S.S.R. Airborne seeding programs were undertaken to combat drought in the Philippines, Okinawa, Africa and Texas. Fog clearing had become a standard operation at airports, as had hailstorm abatement, which had been proven successful in several parts of the world. Forest fire control had been carried out in Alaska and watershed seeding was widely practiced, while lake storm snow redistribution was under extensive investigation. By 1973 there were over 700 degreed scientists and engineers in the U.S. whose major occupation was environmental modification (EnMod).


And then it all changed. In 1978 The United States became a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (EnMod Convention or ENMOD for short). The EnMod Convention prohibits the use of techniques that would have widespread, long-lasting or severe effects through deliberate manipulation of natural processes and cause such phenomena as earthquakes, tidal waves and changes in climate and weather patterns.


Independent journalist Keith Harmon Snow wrote a massive report entitled: “Out of the Blue: Black Programs, Space Drones & The Unveiling of U.S. Military Offensives in Weather as a Weapon.” In it he tells us:



In 1976, U.S. government officials outlined 50 experimental projects and 20 actual pilot programs costing upwards of $100 million over the next eight years.


It was an explosive subject, up [through] the 1970s but, after 1977, EnMod interest seemed to disappear almost overnight. In other words, after decades of intense research and development, after billions of dollars of investment, after major institutions and governmental bodies were created and charged with oversight of EnMod and its many peripheral issues, and after the entire reorganization of the U.S. Government to channel and guide and map out the future of this new and promising military and civilian “technology” — said to be more important than the atom bomb — everything stopped.


Or did it?


It was as if a huge curtain fell over the subject as all research, all institutional interests, huge salaries and thousands of jobs — vanished. And the mass media stopped reporting anything and everything as if struck by plague. That — sudden and total silence — is perhaps the most telling and suspicious indication of the secrecy and denial that the EnMod arena was shackled with. Today it is almost as if it never happened.



Could it be that the US government said, “Oh gee, we can’t do that any more” and just gave up on military EnMod — or did the whole program go “black”?





The American military-industrial-academic complex early on recognized the importance of weather as a weapon. After the great battles of the Civil War it was noted that rains seems to follow. A General patented an idea for making rain from this observation, but it would take nearly eighty years for a technology to be developed that was GI friendly. The Battle for Britain was partially won because Allied forces successfully used a fog-dispersal system known as FIDO to enable aircraft takeoff and landing under otherwise debilitating fog conditions. Cold fogs were similarly dissipated during the Korean War. Cloud seeding became a weapon in Vietnam under Project Popeye.


Project Popeye is a now exposed and proven conspiracy on the part of the military to circumvent the laws of humanity in time of war using environmental modification as a weapon — and to keep this secret the Secretary of Defense was forced to lie to Congress!


Project Popeye was originally conducted as a pilot program in 1966. It was an attempt to extend the monsoon season in Southeast Asia with the goal of slowing traffic on the Ho Chi Minh Trail by seeding clouds above it in hopes of producing impassable mud. Over the course of the program silver iodide was dispersed from C-130s, F4 Phantoms and the Douglas A-1E Skyraider (a single engine propeller driven fighter-bomber), into clouds over portions of the trail winding from North Vietnam through Laos and Cambodia into South Vietnam. Positive results from the initial test led to continued operations from 1967 through 1972.


Some scientists believe that it did hamper North Vietnamese operations, even though the effectiveness of this program is still in dispute. In 1978, after the efforts at cloud seeding in Vietnam produced mixed results, the U.S. Air Force declared its position to be that "weather modification has little utility as a weapon of war." Recent military publications indeed have stated quite the opposite. For example the U.S. Air Force's own Air University's “SPACECAST 2020” contained a section on Counterforce Weather Control for force enhancement, which pointed out that:



Atmospheric scientists have pursued terrestrial weather modification in earnest since the 1940s, but have made little progress because of scientific, legal, and social concerns, as well as certain controls at various government levels. Using environmental modification techniques to destroy, damage, or injure another state are prohibited. However, space presents us with a new arena, technology provides new opportunities, and our conception of future capabilities compels a reexamination of this sensitive and potentially risky topic.



“SPACECAST 2020” has been superseded by the now infamous “Air Force 2025” series of White Papers, which made this same point saying:



The influence of the weather on military operations has long been recognized. During World War II, Eisenhower said, “In Europe bad weather is the worst enemy of the air [operations]. Some soldier once said, ‘The weather is always neutral.’ Nothing could be more untrue. Bad weather is obviously the enemy of the side that seeks to launch projects requiring good weather, or of the side possessing great assets, such as strong air forces, which depend upon good weather for effective operations. If really bad weather should endure permanently, the Nazi would need nothing else to defend the Normandy coast!”



Clearly, weather control could have a marked effect on the outcome of military operations. The problem the military has is not whether weather control should be affected, but how it could be done, meaning technically, legally and politically. Many researchers, myself included, believe that the DoD never truly gave up trying to find out.


Project Popeye reached broad public consciousness when syndicated columnist Jack Anderson revealed it under the code name “Intermediary-Compatriot” in his Washington Post column of 18 March 1971.


US Defense Secretary Melvin Laird was forced to testify before Congress about it in 1972. He told the US Senate that Anderson’s wild tales were untrue and that the United States never tried to seed clouds in Southeast Asia. But on 28 January 1974 a private letter from Laird was leaked to the press. By 1974 he had left Defense and was counsel to President Nixon who was fighting for his political life following the break-in at the Democratic Party's National Committee offices in the Watergate Hotel on 17 June 1972. In the letter he privately admitted that his 1972 testimony had been false and that the US did in fact use weather modification in North Vietnam in 1967-68.


On 20 March 1974 the United States Senate held a top secret hearing in which representatives of the military finally admitted to the existence of Operation Popeye. They conceded that the cloud seeding program had been conducted over neutral Cambodia and Laos (in violation of international law), as well as both North and South Vietnam. The testifying Pentagon officials stated that Popeye had been ongoing from 1966 through 1972 and that at least 2,600 flights had released over 47,000 units of cloud-seeding materials during the program, at a total cost for the operation of around $21.6 million.


These hearings also revealed that the US military had attempted other environmental modifications as well. The US had used massive spraying of chemical herbicides in the hopes of depriving its foes of both food supplies and shelter. According to analyst L. Juda (from “Negotiating A Treaty On Environmental Modification Warfare: The Convention On Environmental Warfare And Its Impact On The Arms Control Negotiations,” published in International Organization) the idea was simple:



If, as has been suggested, then the guerrilla is to his base area as fish are to the sea, the destruction of the sea would kill the fish and the elimination of the base area with its supports would destroy the guerrilla.



The implications of this operation staggered Senator Claiborne Pell, a Democrat from Rhode Island. In 1976 he said:



The U.S. and other world Powers should sign a treaty to outlaw the tampering with weather as an instrument of war. It may seem farfetched to think of using weather as a weapon — but I am convinced that the U.S. did in fact use rainmaking techniques as a weapon of war in Southeast Asia. We need a treaty now to prevent such actions — before military leaders of the world start directing storms, manipulating climates and inducing earthquakes against their enemies. It may seem a great leap of imagination to move from an apparent effort by the United States to muddy the Ho Chi Minh trail in Laos by weather modification to such science fiction ideas as unleashing earthquakes, melting the polar ice cap, changing the course of warm ocean currents, or modifying the weather of an adversary's farm belt. But in military technology, today's science fiction is tomorrow's strategic reality.



Senator Pell had conducted the Senate hearing in 1972 in which he was lied to by Defense Secretary Laird and the secret one in 1974 that learned the horrible truth. After these he became a leading advocate for what became the EnMod Convention. A subcommittee chaired by Minnesota Congressman Donald Fraser did the same in the House of Representatives in 1974 and 1975. Senator Pell did a lot of stumping and article writing to force the world to act. In one article he wrote:



Apart from the sheer horror of the prospect of unbridled environmental warfare, there is, I believe, another compelling reason to ban such action. We know, or should know, by now, that no nation can maintain for long a monopoly on new warfare technology. If we can develop weather warfare techniques, so can and will other major powers. Experience has taught us that the weapons that make us feel secure today, will make us feel very insecure indeed when our adversaries possess the same capabilities.



In The Cooling, Lowell Ponte describes the events that led to the ENMOD Convention:



During a summit meeting between President Nixon and Soviet Premier Leonid Brezhnev on July 3, 1974, the nations agreed to conduct discussions toward a ban on environmental warfare. Before the first of these discussions, set for Moscow in November, got underway, the Soviet Union introduced a resolution before the United Nations General Assembly to ban environmental warfare. When revised, the resolution was passed by the body 102 votes to none. The United States and half a dozen other nations abstained from the vote. Senator Pell suspected that the president felt miffed by the surprise Soviet action, a move that made it appear that the Soviet Union and not the United States had taken the lead in trying to ban environmental modification. In fact, the Soviet resolution was similar to one passed by the North Atlantic Assembly in November 1972 and to another authored by Senator Pell and passed by an 82 to 10 vote by the United States Senate in July 1973.


Discussion between U.S. and Soviet negotiators resumed in Washington, D.C., on February 24, 1975. On August 21, 1975, the two nations presented their jointly produced draft treaty banning environmental modification as a weapon of war to the thirty-one-nation Geneva Disarmament Conference.



The EnMod Convention (ENMOD) was later passed by the United Nations General Assembly and opened for signature in 1977. It came into effect 5 October 1978, when it was certified by the required total of 20 nations. It prohibits the use of techniques that would have widespread, long-lasting or severe effects through deliberate manipulation of natural processes and causing such phenomena as earthquakes, tidal waves and changes in climate and in weather patterns. The treaty was warmly received by most of the international community – the exception being a coalition of American environmental groups who thought that its threshold level of a violation needing to be widespread, long-lasting or severe was too high. Another complaint was that it does not ban the development of this technology, leaving it open for beneficial techniques to be discovered and employed in the service of mankind. The environmentalists (correctly) believed that the failure to ban research in this field would allow the military to develop technologies that adhered to the letter of the law while violating its spirit, as blatantly detailed in the Air Force 2025 White Paper “Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025.” Unfortunately for us, the EnMod Convention is a total failure with only 70 nations thus far signatory to it, and it is unenforceable in any realistic sense.





Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski, a Polish-American political scientist, geostrategist, and statesman who served as United States National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981, wrote in his 1970 book Between Two Ages:



It is ironic to recall that in 1878 Friedrich Engels, commenting on the Franco-Prussian War, proclaimed that “weapons used have reached such a stage of perfection that further progress which would have any revolutionizing influence is no longer possible.” Not only have new weapons been developed but some of the basic concepts of geography and strategy have been fundamentally altered; space and weather control have replaced Suez or Gibraltar as key elements of strategy.



After events like the Christmas 2004 Asian tsunami and 2005’s record-shattering Atlantic hurricane season many people have wondered just how “natural” those natural disasters were. Has “weather control” really become a key element of national strategy?


In the post-EnMod U.S. of the 21st Century weather control is an activity mainly confined to local governments and privately owned commercial enterprises (“civilian contractors”) like Weather Modification, Inc. (WMI) of Fargo, North Dakota.  WMI provides services to universities, governmental agencies, and private sector entities across the country and around the world. These services include hail suppression in Argentina, snowpack augmentation in Idaho, and cloud seeding in Nevada. Interestingly, one of the senior scientists at WMI went on Art Bell’s Coast To Coast AM radio show in 2005 to “out” himself as having been one of the scientists involved in Operation Popeye!


Intentional hostile control of the weather and other environmental processes is collectively called geophysical warfare. Dr. Gordon J. F. MacDonald wrote: "The key to geophysical warfare is the identification of environmental instabilities to which the addition of a small amount of energy would release vastly greater amounts of energy." This was in "Geophysical Warfare: How to Wreck the Environment," a chapter he contributed to Nigel Calder's 1968 book, “Unless Peace Comes: A Scientific Forecast of New Weapons.”


In the 1960s Dr. Gordon J. F. MacDonald was a distinguished geophysicist and climatologist. He was Associate Director of the Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). Dr. MacDonald was also a member of the President's Science Advisory Committee and the President's Council on Environmental Quality, as well as being a senior member of NASA’s first Physics Committee. He was also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and one of the JASONs, a military think tank at the top of the Military-Industrial-Academic pyramid.


Dr. MacDonald wrote many articles on future weapons. In “Space” an article for the book Toward the Year 2018, released in 1968, Dr. MacDonald elaborated on the possibilities of geophysical warfare writing: “… technology will make available to the leaders of the major nations a variety of techniques for conducting secret warfare … techniques of weather modification could be employed to produce prolonged periods of drought or storm, thereby weakening a nation’s capacity and forcing it to accept the demands of the competitor.” Elsewhere he wrote: "Such a secret war need never be declared or even known by the affected population. It would go on for years with only the security forces involved being aware of it. The years of drought and storm would be attributed to unkindly nature and only after a nation was thoroughly drained would an armed takeover be attempted." He warned that these geophysical weapons systems, should they in fact be developed, would produce long-term up-sets in the climate.


BusinessWeek magazine reported on 24 October 2005: “China has 35,000 people engaged in weather management, and it spends $40 million a year on alleviating droughts or stemming hail that would damage crops.” North Korea, downwind of China, has been ravaged by droughts for a decade. It is entirely possible that China has been intentionally stealing North Korea’s rain so as to force North Korea to follow China’s political dictates and buy Chinese food (I wonder if it comes in those little white cartons – with six million you get egg rolls?). Reports from North Korea make not just the nation’s dictator, Kim Jung Il, but the whole country sound crazy. Could their seeming mass insanity be induced?





One much discussed project that embodies both civilian and military geophysical applications is the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP). Although HAARP proponents claim it is nothing more than a simple civilian research station designed to investigate the properties of the upper atmosphere, few investigators buy that explanation.


HAARP does have the appearance of a civilian project with open access and the work being done by civilian scientists. However, the project is managed by a joint US Air Force and Navy committee and is funded out of the Department of Defense (DoD) budget. Most recently the heart of the program, the Ionospheric Research Instrument (IRI), was completed by one of the world’s largest defense contractors working under the direction of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), a top research and development (R&D) organization for the DoD. DARPA manages and directs selected basic and applied R&D projects for the DoD pursuing research and technology “where risk and payoff are both very high and where success may provide dramatic advances for traditional military roles and missions.”


Under construction since 1990, the HAARP IRI is a field of antennas on the ground in Southeastern Alaska. The facility was probably completed late in 2005 with the announcement of same added to the DARPA website in March of 2006. It is now the world’s largest radio frequency (RF) broadcaster, with an effective radiated power of 3.6 million watts — over 72,000 times more powerful than the largest single AM radio station in the United States (50,000 watts). The IRI uses a unique patented ability to focus the RF energy generated by the field, injecting it into a spot at the very top of the atmosphere in a region called the ionosphere. This heats the thin atmosphere of the ionospheric region by several thousand degrees. HAARP, then, is a type of device called an ionospheric heater. This heating allows scientists to do a number of things with the ionosphere. Controlling and directing the processes and forces of the ionosphere is called “ionospheric enhancement.” An early HAARP document stated:



The heart of the program will be the development of a unique ionospheric heating capability to conduct the pioneering experiments required to adequately assess the potential for exploiting ionospheric enhancement technology for DoD purposes.



What might those DoD purposes be? Something about winning wars, eh? How might those purposes be achieved? What technologies will be needed to win the wars of the future? Researchers trying to answer those questions have come up with a vast number of possibilities, most bordering on science fiction. But then again, good science fiction is about recognizing the problems of the future, and suggesting solutions to them before they happen.


On 23 March 1983 President Ronald Reagan called upon "… the scientific community in our country, those who gave us nuclear weapons, to turn their great talents now to the cause of mankind and world peace, to give us the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete." This quest for the creation of a technology, of a weapon or weapons system that would make atomic war impossible was officially named the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). The press lost no time in dubbing it Star Wars after the George Lucas movie.


That Initiative sent the United States military-industrial-academic complex on the greatest and costliest weapons hunt in human history. Thousands of ideas were floated, hundreds of those were funded. While SDI research has since been officially abandoned, some ideas are still being actively pursued to this day.


Not all of these ongoing developmental programs are taking place in laboratories of the military and its contractors. Some of these ideas involve technologies or applications that, as weapons, violate international treaties; others, the use of which would be repugnant to the ethical and moral values of the majority of Americans. In an effort to avoid public outcry (and international condemnation) some of these programs have been disguised as civilian science. One of those may be HAARP.


As Dr. Bernard Eastlund, the putative inventor of HAARP put it: "The boundary between science fiction and science comes with can you actually make the thing that you're proposing." Bernard J. Eastlund is a physicist who received his B.S. in physics from MIT and his Ph.D. in physics from Columbia University. He led a team of scientists and engineers working for Advanced Power Technologies, Inc. (APTI), a wholly owned subsidiary of ARCO. Eastlund’s team developed the concept of a massive antenna array that could produce the kind of shield called for by President Reagan.


The APTI patents that HAARP is probably based on openly discuss manipulating the weather by moving the jet stream and using other techniques to create floods and droughts at will. These patents also describe a way to raise the ionosphere, sending it out into space as an electrically charged plasma capable of destroying anything electronic (like an incoming ICBM or a spy satellite) passing through it. HAARP certainly looks like a ground-based Star Wars weapons system, a “relic” of the Cold War. But unlike most such relics this one is up and running and now fully funded.


In August of 2002 the Russian State Duma (their version of Congress or Parliament) expressed concern about HAARP, calling it a program to develop "a qualitatively new type of weapon.” A joint commission of the State Duma's International Affairs and Defense Committees issued a report that said:



Under the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) the USA is creating new integral geophysical weapons that may influence the near-Earth medium with high-frequency radio waves. The significance of this qualitative leap could be compared to the transition from cold steel to firearms, or from conventional weapons to nuclear weapons. This new type of weapon differs from previous types in that the near-Earth medium becomes at once an object of direct influence and its component.



The report further claimed that the USA's plan to carry out large-scale scientific experiments under the HAARP program, and not controlled by the global community, would create weapons capable of jamming radio communications, disrupting equipment installed on spaceships and rockets, provoke serious accidents in electricity networks and in oil and gas pipelines and have a negative impact on the mental health of people populating entire regions.


An appeal, signed by 90 deputies, demanding that an international ban be put on such large-scale geophysical experiments was sent to President Vladimir Putin, to the United Nations (UN) and other international organizations, to the parliaments and leaders of the UN member countries, to the scientific public and to mass media outlets.


Getting back to Dr. MacDonald… Among the coming "advances" he wrote about were manipulation or control over the weather and climate, including destructive use of ocean waves and melting or destabilizing of the polar ice caps; intentional ozone depletion; triggering earthquakes; and control of the human brain by utilizing the earth's energy fields. Today the polar ice caps are indeed melting and holes in the ozone layer are growing. Could these be the handiwork of advanced weapons? What about earthquakes and mind control? Are we, the private citizens of the world, in the crosshairs of bizarre, unthinkable weapons?


What about the Russian Duma’s claim that HAARP could have a negative impact on the mental health of people populating entire regions of the globe? In “Vandalism In The Sky?,” their seminal article on HAARP in Nexus Magazine, Dr. Nick Begich and Jeane Manning describe how HAARP could be used to induce mental dysfunction, quoting from Brzezinski on a proposal from Dr. Macdonald saying:



Political strategists are tempted to exploit research on the brain and human behavior. Geophysicist Gordon J. F. MacDonald — specialist in problems of warfare — says [an] accurately-timed, artificially-excited electronic stroke “…could lead to a pattern of oscillations that produce relatively high power levels over certain regions of the Earth... In this way, one could develop a system that would seriously impair the brain performance of very large populations in selected regions over an extended period...”



Dr. MacDonald commented on the possible use of the destructive effects of electromagnetic fields in the environment on human health and performance. He said that weapons systems could be developed that would increase the intensity of the electromagnetic field oscillating in the spherical-shaped cavity between the Earth and the ionosphere, and that these weapons could be used to "seriously impair brain performance in very large populations in selected regions over an extended period” just as the Duma feared HAARP might do. Could HAARP, or another similar antenna elsewhere, be the source of North Korea’s madness? Could Kim Jung Il be a true Manchurian Candidate? And if so, whose?


In 1969 Dr. MacDonald wrote: "Our understanding of basic environmental science and technology is primitive, but still more primitive are our notions of the proper political forms and procedures to deal with the consequences of modification."

It would appear that the gap between our understanding of environmental science a technology and our ability to grapple with this knowledge as a body politic has changed little in the intervening decades. You, my friend, must take action to create the necessary "forms and procedures to deal with the consequences of modification." It is, after all, your planet.

Click to view a PRINTER-FRIENDLY version of this page!  

By Jerry E. Smith:

Click for Details

Click for Details

Click for Details

Click for Details

Click for Details