In Other News May 28, 2018

 

We focus in on the diligent complex investigative reporting that examined failed oversight and corporate fraud perpetrated by a multi-billion dollar biotech startup. The company is called Theranos. Its founder was CEO Elizabeth Holmes. In early 2003, Holmes dropped out of Stanford University and created Theranos after patenting an idea to develop portable blood testing machines that use only a single drop of blood. She rose to success and soon became known as the youngest female billionaire. Despite the deals signed with consumer health companies, federal approval, and raving New Yorker and Forbes articles calling Holmes the next Steve Jobs, there were big problems behind the scenes. Theranos blood test technology was exposed as error prone and inaccurate by former employees. Some of the employees fearfully reached out to Wall Street Journal reporter John Carreyrou and he began to investigate. After three and a half years of tenacious reporting, his recently published book Bad Blood: Secrets and Lies In A Silicon Valley Startup now chronicles the hubris and criminal activity that led up to the Theranos crater.

Guest – John Carreyrou is a member of The Wall Street Journal’s investigative reporting team. He joined the Journal in 1999 and has been based in Brussels, Paris and New York for the paper.

Mr. Carreyrou has covered a number of topics at the Journal, ranging from Islamist terrorism when he was on assignment in Europe, to the pharmaceutical industry. In 2015, he won a Pulitzer Prize for Investigative Reporting with several colleagues for a series of articles exposing fraud and abuse in Medicare, the federal health program for the elderly and disabled. Earlier in his career, he was also part of a Journal team that won a Pulitzer Prize for Explanatory Reporting for its coverage of corporate scandals. His coverage of the Silicon Valley blood-testing company Theranos has won George Polk, Gerald Loeb and Barlett & Steele awards.

 

 

By |2018-05-28T19:52:02+00:00May 28th, 2018|Comments Off on In Other News May 28, 2018

In Other News May 7, 2018

 

We hear the second hour of the April 26, 2018 geoengineering debate with Dane Wigington and Professor Paul Beckwith. This is also the second debate with Professor Beckwith. As you will hear in this one hour, the discussion breaks down as Professor Beckwith refuses to directly respond to specific inquiry.

Here are the youtube versions on Dane Wigington’s channel if you want to check out comments, such as the one posted below.

Dane-ProfPaulBeckwith
Dane-ProfDougMacMartin
Dane-Patrick Wood
Dane-ProfPaulBeckwith 2

In the second hour, Professor Paul Beckwith returns for round two. Professor Paul Beckwith explores the data showing rapidly changing weather patterns. Beckwith said he would look in to Dane’s research on real time climate engineering indicating that ongoing geoengineering programs are a major causal factor related to the accelerating climate disasters and disruptions.

Professor Beckwith is a physicist and engineer. He’s a part-time professor at the University of Ottawa, laboratory of paleoclimatology and is in a Ph.D. program, with a focus on Abrupt Climate System Change and is also at Carlton University, department of Geography and Environmental studies.

Dane Wigington has a background in solar energy and forestry, he’s a former employee of Bechtel Power Corp and is the lead researcher for Geoengineerwatch.org. Dane focuses on the climate engineering issue and claims available evidence indicates geoengineering has been fully deployed for decades with catastrophic effects. Dane welcome back to the second live geoengineering discussion.

What is climate engineering or geoengineering, some define it as the deliberate modification of a planet’s environment by the addition or subtraction of a resource or energy input on a massive scale. Proposed geoengineering projects on Earth, often introduced as a means of combating climate change , have included space mirrors, aluminum or sulfur-spraying in the stratosphere, and oceanic carbon sequestration.

 

From youtube video of second debate with Paul Beckwith:

———

I will not unsubscribe to Paul’s channel, but I no longer donate. (Of course I donate to geoengineeringwatch.org) Paul’s time and effort that he has put into his tutorial videos are still VERY valuable. Yes, it’s unfortunate, he practically refuses to take into consideration the climate engineering realities, specifically solar radiation management (SRM) and its “proposed” practices. But, cmon, his videos are not full of lies. There’s a lot of validity to them. His scientific observations and researching efforts are genuine. He cares about peoples understanding of the natural world, and in essence for life on planet earth. He speaks passionately about an ice free Arctic within 2 years, if not sooner. So, I will not discredit his videos. For instance, the feedback loops in the Arctic videos are still worthy of sharing for anyone who wants to learn (more) about the processes behind them. Anyone Ive shared those videos with are grateful for the share… So, I now ask you all, more so, I ask Mr. Beckwith, if you refuse to read or view what you disagree with how can you gain deeper insights into your own convictions? What we (all need) want is to show Paul the light. And allow him to come to conclusions on his own. That won’t happen if we shun him for not seeing it yet… Key word, YET. I BELIEVE he will come around. I believe everyone will. Fingers crossed. Toes too! But, positivity is the way to lead. Bullying someone into believing your (our) ways is not conducive in changing someone’s mind. It makes them more prone to denying the facts, thus getting further away from seeing the light. Anyway, either way, we shouldn’t be insulting him for his efforts in an attempt at a SECOND debate with Dane. Yes, indeed Paul failed again at disproving Danes theoretical research. Dane makes him look a fool. And that probably makes him angry. But, that’s human nature. Dane aggravates, in my opinion, EVERYONE he debates. Not because he wants to though. Dane is just amazing that way because he is so diligent in his efforts in finding the truth and then by the sharing of it. So, let’s give credit where credit is due, and say it is definitely ballsy of PAUL to willingly engage in another debate. That’s not necessarily a compliment, but it’s not an insult either. So, for the love of all things good, could you, Paul, at least look at some of the RESEARCH and information provided on Geoengineeringwatch.org? Pleaseeeee, Paul….that’s all I and really anyone, can ask of you. Dane provides that information and research so individuals don’t have to spend the years of time, mental energy, or physical effort he has in order to find the information themselves. And I thank him from the bottom of my heart for doing so. Since this information is being strategically hidden from us through distraction and gag orders. Dane asks/tells, everyone not to believe him, and to do their own research, but he helpfully provides what he has found already to anyone who wants to view it. This is not a malicious attempt to misguide people, but a sincere way of letting any and everyone see what he’s already found and seen for himself. So, again, I beg you, Paul, at least challenge your own convictions. If you insist on having biased opinions towards one thing, versus another, well for crying out loud, don’t let yourself become ignorant because of your bias. Naivety is one thing, ignorance is another. Since, neither are traits one wants to be characterized by, lets agree that ignorance is far worse. Ignorance is bliss.. Why? Because ignorance is due to an observation(s) being denied, consciously, of critical/logical thought processes. Naivety is an unconscious DELAY in critical/logical thought process because of a LACK in understanding of the observation(s).
By |2018-05-12T17:12:01+00:00May 7th, 2018|Comments Off on In Other News May 7, 2018

In Other News April 23, 2018

 

This Thursday April 26, 3-5PM, there will be a second In Other News special discussing opposing viewpoints on geoengineering live on WBAI. Dane Wigington will speak with author Patrick Wood who researches the technocratic totalitarianism but consciously omits climate engineering within the belief that climate change data and concerns are not real and that its part of a multi-prong scam. A scam imposed by entities such as the Trilateral Commission and the United Nations that set up the long game known as Agenda 2030. Dane Wigington will counter with climate change and climate engineering evidence indicating climate change is real, and that climate engineering has been fully deployed – further fueling an overall climate collapse.

To be clear, you can’t talk technocracy, Agenda 2030 and the Trilateral Commission without mentioning the ongoing real time climate engineering.

In the second hour, Professor Paul Beckwith returns for round two. Professor Paul Beckwith explores the data showing rapidly changing weather patterns. Beckwith said he would look in to Dane’s research on real time climate engineering indicating that ongoing geoengineering programs are a major causal factor related to the accelerating climate disasters and disruptions.. That’s this Thursday April 26, 3-5PM live on WBAI.

In the process of putting this second live on air discussion together I sent out many requests to a variety of scientists and experts on climate change and geoengineering. Most of them declined. But I found it interesting that the scientists who declined such as David Keith and Gernot Wagner at Harvard University or Ken Caldiera at Stanford. These scientists are in a position to knowledgeably speak on geoengineering. You would expect, in a normal world that scientists who work in this field of study, when presented with mountains of evidence that a massive aerosol operation is in full deployment, would stand up and at least present a scientific argument. Instead their tone goes beyond dismissive, mocking and arrogant. Some of them claim they’re receiving death threats from the activists working in the anti-geoengineering communities. I’m not saying people aren’t upset by this group of arrogant scientists but I might suggest that these death threats are a counter measure to discredit anti-geoengineering activists as unstable and dangerous.

So, Wagner immediately departs from the specific topic to mislead and then calls what the Dr. is referring to (ongoing aerosol operations) contrails. Can you now understand why people are upset with David Keith, Ken Caldiera, Gernot Wagner and others?

This atitude isn’t unlike how the medical industry will force doctors to make their patients suffer because while they know the cure to a disease through natural remedy, they’ll instead prescribe a drug. Chanca Piedra, the herb that grows on the side of the road in Mexico breaks up kidney stones at the same time relaxing the muscles surrounding the ureter that involuntarily contract around the stone creating pain. You won’t be told about this miracle herb by the medical industry.

Meanwhile, the geoengineering industry are selling their wares, as the start up businesses focus on their markets and government, military contracts. This, in my opinion is the effort to transition out of the black operations and into the open as so called heroes saving the planet. Remember, that film Geostorm? When Hollywood tries to fictionalizes a so called conspiracy, big plans ahead.

We hear from past interviews on the topic of geoengineering, or climate engineering or the illegal aerosol operations.

Most listeners to this show know that one of the main areas of focus is on weather control technology, geoengineering, and the spraying of aerosolized chemicals into the atmosphere at various altitude. This is in context to the agenda of the climate change slash global warming scandal. Anti-geoengineering activists are not against taking care of the environment, they’re not against designing lifestyles that are more harmonious to natural ecosystems, it’s actually the opposite. As many listeners know, what’s very sneaky here is that the very topic of being environmentally mindful has been hijacked. The anti-geoengineering activists actually care deeply about the health of the environment, that’s why they’ve sounding the alarm about the effects of spraying soft metals into the atmosphere and using electromagnetic technology to heat weather systems. That technology changes weather patterns on a mass scale.

This scam is a critical lynchpin for the surveillance state and its steamrolling ahead under the United Nations Agenda for the 21st Century protocol. Huge climate summits and conferences are convening to that may end with a global carbon tax. This would be a sucker punch to the economies of countries world wide recovering from recessions or austerity. Meanwhile, we are to believe at this point that there is no weather control technology being used, only cloud seeding, that mother nature is dying and retaliating with violent weather, therefore you, the individual will be taxed. As past guest Andrew Hennessey had written – ‘We’ ; have polluted the earth, destroyed our planet, started wars – and ‘WE’ should be punished etc etc. The blame gets laid at the door of ‘We’ the common people. ”

Ignore the thankless work of anti-geoengineering activists across the world who have pushed back against the torrent of well funded propaganda. The amplified voices of trusted experts and scientists betray the public in asserting that the persistent jet trail lines and grid work, compass and square designs in the sky are merely natural condensation trails and to consider otherwise is delusional. Yet, most of us who have looked at the research have seen the patents on this very same technology. We’ve seen the military white papers matching the exact activity witnessed marring the skies. The arrogance of carrying out this operation in full view is almost incomprehensible for some. Recently, Dr. J. Marvin Herndon’s scientific paper on Coal Fly Ash shocked the scientific community and a retaliation is being launched against him. Similar to Dr. Judy Wood, author of Where Did the Towers Go?, Dr. Herndon stood up and did the right thing by using his experience, knowledge and resources to officially determine for all of us that the substance in the rain water samples are matching more than 90 percent the various chemicals in coal fly ash, like a fingerprint.

Sodium fluoride is a highly toxic chemical compound waste by-product from the phosphate fertilizer industry, the aluminum industry and atomic weapons labs. Sodium fluoride is regularly dumped into public drinking water. Experts and doctors say these industries have found it more cost effective to use human beings as filter machines for their hazardous waste, than to properly dispose of the toxic compounds. Yet, to take the coal fly ash from smoke stack scrubbers, aerosolize and spray it into the troposphere appears to most people to be a massive criminal act. Not in the United States, however, the EPA doesn’t list coal fly ash as a toxic substance. Do some research on it. Look up the association on coal fly ash and see how expensive it is to dispose of it, its used in cement, roads, and is sequestered in lined ponds, because its also radioactive. Yet according to real scientific research, its being sprayed in the atmosphere. We listen now to several past guests discussing the topic of weather control, UN Agenda 21 and health effects from atmospheric aerosol operation fallout.

By |2018-04-25T03:06:53+00:00April 23rd, 2018|Comments Off on In Other News April 23, 2018

In Other News March 19, 2018

Back we go again into the fringe on the topic of individuals who have captured numerous high quality video footage of Unidentified Flying Objects and more. What makes this next story stand out is that its not unlike the experiences of Damien Nott in Australia or past guest Alison Kruse in Pennsylvania. To summarize, its a situation in which one person continues to witness and capture unknown aircraft in vivid clarity repeatedly over a period of time. Early on, our guest had witnessed a very large flying craft in Salem, Massachusetts. The 1973 event shocked the community and was published in local newspapers. A county employee and various other witnesses described an object flying silently and very slow above homes and country clubs. This event marked the opening chapter for our guest in what was to be an ongoing experience in witnessing and recording some of the best UFO footage released into the public domain. However, you may not of heard about his work. There’s a reason for that. The backbiting, youtube-google censorship, artificial low video counts, interference, personal attacks, pervasive fake UFO videos cluttering the internet, false debunking, trolling, and government monitoring have all contributed to marginalizing and drowning out authentic footage.

Aside from this unfortunate reality, could there a hidden gift in this intentional censorship? Our guest’s youtube handle is whotookmymojo. For this interview, he will go by the first name of Joe. Joe has not only videoed the craft flying and changing shape, but also landing. He also has caught movement inside the ship. A first of its kind.

Here’s a best of the Oregon sightings video

Extreme Movement

A Wow Encounter

By |2018-03-20T01:09:59+00:00March 19th, 2018|Comments Off on In Other News March 19, 2018

In Other News March 15, 2018

 

In this day and age, as grassroots movements become marred and battered by controlled opposition, such as false revolutions divide and conquer among race and sex, the actual engineering of climate, such as creating drought and enhancing hurricanes remains essentially ignored by a well funded progressive movement.

Though anyone can watch video of aerosol operations being conducted in skies across the planet, with this topic in particular of climate change, global warming, geoengineering and real time weather control technology, there are several realities colliding into each other within the public consciousness. One of the more disappointing of these realities is the absenteeism of the so called environmentally conscious progressive left that Vivian Warkentin sharply described in her article titled The Real Inconvenient Truth.

I’ll be joined by one of the leaders in the antigeoengineering movement who will speak in this live on air session with a prominent climate scientist and then a professor who has been researching climate engineering potentials for more than 10 years. I’ll be moderating an exchange of conflicting viewpoints on the topic of geoengineering and climate change to facilitate a better understanding of an emotionally charged and intentionally muddied topic. As many have become convinced that real time weather climate control (AKA geoengineering operations) are conducted across this planet, yet within the halls of academia (and think tanks) scientists and weather experts relay to the outside world that geoengineering is not happening but would be necessary in an emergency. Let’s examine the evidence from their perspectives.

Guest – Dane Wigington, lead researcher with geoengineeringwatch.org who claims available evidence indicates that climate engineering operations have been fully deployed. Dane has a background in solar energy and forestry health. Dane is focused on the climate engineering issue and says ongoing geoengineering operations have created many of the catastrophic environmental effects we witness today.

In the first hour, Professor Paul Beckwith, a physicist and engineer joins Dane in the discussion. Professor Beckwith is a part-time professor at the University of Ottawa, laboratory of paleoclimatology and is in a Ph.D. program, with a focus on Abrupt Climate System Change and is also at Carlton University, department of Geography and Environmental studies. Mr. Beckwith does not believe global climate engineering operations have been deployed.

In the second hour, Dane is joined by Professor Douglas MacMartin, a Senior Research Associate and Senior Lecturer in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at Cornell and a research Professor in Computing + Mathematical Sciences at the California Institute of Technology. Since 2006, Professor MacMartin has focused on what is termed “the largest control problem” – geoengineering. Its the idea that one might offset some of the consequences of climate change by reflecting some sunlight back to space.

By |2018-03-17T22:28:24+00:00March 16th, 2018|Comments Off on In Other News March 15, 2018
Load More Posts