Geoengineering (chemtrails) threatens to unleash “unintended consequences” that could be catastrophic for the planet, EU warns

The European Commission (EC) published a report this week warning that the risks and “unintended consequences” of manipulating the skies with geoengineering and “chemtrails” under the guise of fighting global warming and climate change are too severe to allow.

Climate fanatics are increasingly demanding interventions such as artificial cloud-seeding to block natural sunlight, which they claim will “cool” the earth’s surface and prevent the polar ice caps from melting and killing us all. The European Union (EU), however, is saying not so fast.

“In the context of accelerated global warming, deliberate large-scale intervention in the Earth’s natural systems (referred to as ‘geoengineering’), such as solar radiation modification, is attracting more attention,” the report states.

“However, the risks, impacts and unintended consequences that these technologies pose are poorly understood, and necessary rules, procedures and institutions have not been developed.”

The specific risks mentioned in the report include power imbalances between nations that could spark major conflicts while raising “a myriad of ethical, legal, governance and political issues.”

(Related: Even more of a threat than artificial cloud-seeding and chemtrailing is volcanic sulfur dioxide, which threatens the global food supply.)

No, blocking the sun to “cool” the planet isn’t a good or sound idea

Scientists from Harvard University, for instance, claim that “spraying tiny particles called sulfate aerosols into the atmosphere to reflect away sunlight” is somehow a good idea.

Others out of MIT said much the same, arguing that “geoengineering might be our final and only option” to save the planet from the mythical idea known as climate change. (Note: the climate has always changed, as this is a natural phenomenon.)

EU climate policy chief Frans Timmermans told reporters this week that such ideas are ludicrous and must never be taken seriously.

“Nobody should be conducting experiments alone with our shared planet,” he stated. “This should be discussed in the right forum, at the highest international level.”

If left unchecked – or even if checked by all the “experts” – tampering with the planet in such a way could produce irreversibly devastating consequences for everyone, including not just the countries where it is occurring but everywhere since planetary weather systems are all interconnected.

In the comments, someone joked that the way all of this sounds when simplified exposes the climate agenda as a control and extermination agenda.

“Hey, I have a fool-proof plan: let’s solve a bogus ‘man-made’ global climate ‘crisis’ by using a man-made geoengineering plan,” this person wrote about how ridiculous the whole concept really sounds when stated honestly like this.

“Actually, Timmermans, this should be discussed at ‘lowest’ level, by and with the people,” wrote another. “We know that you guys ‘at the highest level’ are rotten whores to the globalists. You already sold your people’s health for a few shekels.”

Another from Canada speculated that perhaps the Canadian wildfires are a test run for larger-scale geoengineering projects in North America, which is, of course, not governed by the EU or the EC.

“The lack of investigation into the source or into any type of future prevention speaks volumes,” this person wrote.

Still another wrote that perhaps a better idea is to tackle the things we actually can and should tackle environmentally speaking, including by not littering; cleaning up trash and pollution; and making simple, common-sense adjustments to daily life for conservation purposes.

“Control yourselves and clean up your own carbon-based figurative dog poop in your behavioral yard before looking over the fence,” this person said, putting it in plain and simple terms. “You lot are addictively the first morally inferior problem that you need to solve.”

The latest news about geoengineering can be found at ChemtrailsNews.com.

Sources for this article include:

ZeroHedge.com

Newstarget.com