Where do "Environmentalist" NGOs like Greenpeace stand on Geoengineering, Climate Modification, and Weather Warfare?!

I can't decide whether Greenpeace International's latest promotional image is a subtle attempt to wake their followers to the ongoing Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering Solar Radiation Management programs (SAG SRM) or if a mere coincidence has them encouraging their legions to "Look Up And Think About The Arctic".

Greenpeace International has 1.3 million followers on Facebook so it would be great if they got behind to wheel on exposing Geoengineering.  I think they will soon take a stance on the issue, but I doubt they are planning to address the fact that climate modification has been taking place for over a decade.  We'll see...

I ponder this conundrum because searching Greenpeace.com for the term "geoengineer" brings up a mere 8 hits total.  Five results link to obscure PDFs from 1991, 1997, 1999, 2001, and 2011 respectively. Two results link to the same article published in 2011 which only mentions geoengineering once in passing.

Believe it or not, the sole remaining search result on Greenpeace.org for "geoengineer" links to a comment I personally made on their post "Is the world heading towards another food crisis" on November, 2012:

In short, it appears that NOBODY at Greenpeace has an opinion on geoengineering... except for me.  I find it hard to believe that no other comments including the word "geoengineer" have ever been made at Greenpeace, so perhaps my comment somehow slipped past the censors.  Either that or Greenpeace's internal search engine sucks.

For the purpose of the point I'm making in this article, it is irrelevant whether one believes that geoengineering is already taking place or that geoengineering is merely in the experimental and proposed stages.  The only unacceptable opinion on the topic is one based entirely on ignorance.

Regardless of how far along geoengineering programs have progressed, there is NO DOUBT that they have been proposed and do in fact exist and are explicitly designed to intentionally change the climate.  A simple Google News Search for "geoengineer" yields a whopping 1,270 results at the time of writing.  Most mainstream articles give the impression that geoengineering is in the experimental stage, but they clearly admit it exists and that governments are considering it.

Surely someone at Greenpeace should have chimed in by now with an opinion on the issue or at least an objective article that simply explains the topic... but like so many other Environmental NGOs Greenpeace seems deaf and dumb to geoengineering.

Here is a fine example of typical mainstream coverage of the topic of geoengineering: Harvard Geoengineer David Keith interviewed by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.  This particular interview is very revealing...

Broadcast: 22/11/2012
Reporter: Tony Jones

In a recent Gallup Poll titled US Distrust in Media Hits New High, 60% of Americans said they trusted the mainstream media "very little or not at all".  That 60% figure is certainly higher for committed Environmentalists than it is among the general populace.  Despite the widespread distrust of the media, it's amazing how many Environmentalists and NGO Environmental Organizations merely regurgitate one side of the Mainstream Misleadia's narrative on Climate Change.

One branch of the Mainstream Misleadia says that Climate Change does not exist or that it is not caused by humans.  The other branch of the Mainstream Misleadia says that Climate Change is largely human's fault and is primarily due to our greenhouse gas emissions.  The second perspective is clearly more accurate, but is it the whole truth on the issue?

When does the Mainstream Misleadia give the whole truth on any issue?!

And if the Mainstream Misleadia is already reporting on Geoengineering, why doesn't Greenpeace have an opinion on the topic?!  Surely attempts to intentionally change the climate are of rather important concern to Environmental NGOs.  Or are Environmental NGOs like Greenpeace merely toeing the globalist's line and only pushing the soft issues that really don't matter?!

Surely any attempts to intentionally change the climate are the greatest environmental issue of our time.

My advice to Environmentalists is to look up and actually study the skies directly over their own heads.  By merely comparing what is seen overhead with data accessible through flight traffic tracking websites it becomes apparent rather quickly that some jets leave long, lingering, spreading trails while other jets don't.  Comparing data makes it easy so see that these planes are of a similar design and are flying at similar altitudes... so why do some leave massive spreading trails while others leave trails that disappear quickly?!

Want more info on the history of weather modification, climate modification, and weather warfare?

Check this article out: WEATHER WARFARE 101  I worked hard on it to do justice to this crucial issue.  Thanks for your consideration.  Peace.