Agrotechnology

The ENMOD Treaty and the Sanctioned Assault on Agriculture and Human and Environmental Health

Marvin Herndon J^1*, Mark Whiteside² and Ian Baldwin^{3 1}Transdyne Corporation, 11044 Red Rock Drive San Diego, CA 92131, USA
²Florida Department of Health in Monroe County, 1100 Simonton Street, Key West, FL 33040, USA
³Chelsea Green Publishing Company, 85 North Main Street, White River Junction, VT 05001, USA
^*Correspondence: Marvin Herndon J, Ph.D, Transdyne Corporation, 11044 Red Rock Drive San Diego, CA 92131, USA, Tel: 1-858-232-1177, Email:

Received: 20-Feb-2020 Published: 03-Apr-2020, DOI: 10.35248/2168-9881.20.9.191

Introduction

In 1968 Gordon J. F. MacDonald (1929-2002), a highly regarded geophysicist and U.S. government advisor [1], authored a bookchapter entitled “How to Wreck the Environment” in which he described the ways a nation might alter the environment to surreptitiously inflict harm on an enemy nation [2]. In particular he noted: “The key to geophysical warfare is the identification of the environmental instabilities to which the addition of a small amount of energy would release vastly greater amounts of energy.” MacDonald [2] described potential environmental warfare methods that deliberately trigger instabilities in large-scale natural systems such as weather and climate, hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanos, tsunamis, and the human brain.

Many of MacDonald’s predictions and speculations have come to pass, not with the technologies of his time, but with more effective and potentially more devastating technologies that were subsequently developed and have been publicly discussed by high military officials since the 1990s [3,4]. From his chapter title [2] one can infer that MacDonald considered environmental warfare to be not only extremely destructive but within reach of rapidly evolving military warfare technology. By the end of the Vietnam War, in which early environmental weaponry was deployed with horrific effect, it is not surprising that people and governments everywhere would have wanted to ban environmental warfare.

Accordingly, the United Nations garnered appropriate support and produced a treaty document, originally classified as disarmament, entitled “ Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques” [hereafter ENMOD] that was opened for signature at Geneva on May 18, 1977 and entered into force on October 5, 1978 [5]. Figure 1 shows the ENMOD status of sovereign nations.

Figure 1: ENMOD status of sovereign nations as of January 3, 2018.

In point of fact, however, ENMOD does not prohibit “Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques. ” ENMOD, we allege, was and remains a Trojan horse. It not only fails to expressly forbid the use of hostile environmental modification techniques, as its title might seem to indicate, but instead it sanctions the use of environmental modification techniques for “peaceful purposes” and, moreover, obligates each signatory “ State Party ” to cooperate in unspecified environmental “ improvement ” operations by an unspecified international organization for unspecified purposes.

For the reasons set forth below, the ENMOD document together with evidence of international, covert environmental modification activities [6-10] constitute agricultural and environmental trespass on a global scale. ENMOD provides the means to co-opt sovereign nations’ military and other national security institutions into engaging in undisclosed “environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes” that have the consequences of being highly destructive to agriculture, as well as more generally to human and environmental health. Although the environmental modification activities currently being undertaken without public discussion are presumably for “peaceful purposes,” they are nonetheless highly destructive: they cripple agriculture and food production; they cause weather and climate chaos; and, they radically compromise human and environmental health. Whether intended or not, these activities are tantamount to de facto warfare waged against sovereign nations and their citizens.

Effectively, the UN persuaded many governments of the world to sign a treaty that has obligated each signatory party to be an unwitting pawn in the abrogation of its own sovereignty and has brought about each nation’s environmental degradation, whose ENMOD source is officially unrecognized. A careful legal reading of that treaty [5], Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques [ENMOD], should leave no doubt as to the correctness of our characterization of its being a Trojan horse.

Critique of the ENMOD Trojan horse

ENMOD [5] Article I states:

“1. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party.”

“ 2. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to assist, encourage or induce any State, group of States or international organization to engage in activities contrary to the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article.”

Whereas a cursory or superficial reading of the ENMOD treaty might seem to prohibit hostile uses of environmental modification, careful examination leads to an entirely different understanding. The phrase “ undertakes not to ” sounds prohibitive, but it is a ‘toothless tiger’ in the legal sense. Were the intent to prohibit, the phrase “ shall not ” rather than “undertakes not to” would have carried the force of law.

The ENMOD treaty, we allege and explain below, has a different purpose. It is a Trojan horse that obligates the unwitting cooperation of independent signatory countries, i.e. “ States Parties ” , in the waging of future hostile environmental modification – de facto warfare – for “peaceful purposes,” without limitation against harm to human and other biogenic populations in the broadest possible circumstances. And it does so without defining “peaceful purposes”.

The true intent of the ENMOD treaty, we submit, is described concisely in legally binding terms in Article III. In each of the two sections of Article III the legally-binding term “shall” is used.

ENMOD Article III states:

“ 1. The provisions of this Convention shall not hinder the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes and shall be without prejudice to the generally recognized principles and applicable rules of international law concerning such use.”

“2. The States Parties to this Convention undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of scientific and technological information on the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes. States Parties in a position to do so shall contribute, alone or together with other States or international organizations, to international economic and scientific co-operation in the preservation, improvement and peaceful utilization of the environment, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.”

Article III Section 1 makes it clear that there is nothing in ENMOD that would “hinder the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes.” A cursory or superficial reading of Article III might lead one to assume its sole intent is to allow States Parties to engage in environmental modification, but that is not correct.

The final sentence of Article III Section 2 as written seems to obfuscate its true purpose, which becomes quite clear and incontrovertible when some of the clutter is removed: “States Parties ... shall contribute, alone or together with other States or international organizations, to...co-operation in the preservation, improvement and peaceful utilization of the environment.”

In American jurisprudence, the use of “ shall ” mandates compliance. The Constitution of the United States of America makes frequent use of “shall” in significant, clearly mandatory instances, such as, for example, establishing the judicial branch of government: Article III Sec. 1. - Judicial powers / “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court ....”

The mandatory “shall” is extensively used throughout ENMOD Articles V-X and its Annex. Most telling of the intended use of “shall” is ENMOD Article VII which states in its entirety: “This Convention shall be of unlimited duration.”

ENMOD, we allege, is a Trojan horse. The subject of its title, “ Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques,” is not prohibited, which it would have been had the mandatory “shall” been used. Instead, the true intent of ENMOD is to mandate international co-operation in the “...improvement...of the environment.” Examples of such environmental “improvement” might include climate engineering to control global warming, or to bring rains or postpone them, or to melt Arctic ice for commercial operations, among other examples. Are such global engineering projects “peaceful”?

We do not believe so, for reasons we describe below.

As an instrument of international law, ENMOD is purposefully misleading. It signifies toothless prohibition, and is devoid of legally enforceable mandates on prohibition (Article I). Yet in Article III ENMOD clearly mandates action that is not at all related to the Convention’s title, “Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques.” Moreover, the mandated action (Article III Section 2) lacks the specificity appropriate for mandated actions. For example, “States Parties in a position to do so shall contribute, alone or together with other States or international organizations” lacks specificity as to the meaning of “ international organizations, ” or to the nature, purpose, extent, and cost, both human and environmental, of the mandated “contributions”.

This lack of specificity is unwarranted and deliberate. By contrast, ENMOD Article II is quite specific and broad-based in defining the term “environmental modification techniques.” Article II states: “As used in article 1, the term “environmental modification techniques” refers to any technique for changing – through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes – the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space”.

In its entirety ENMOD fails to mandate any prohibitions, limitations, requirements, specificity or definitions of its Article III – mandated “ improvement and peaceful utilization of the environment.” This wording specifically mandates non-exclusion of “ the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes. ” Nor does ENMOD define peaceful purposes. Nevertheless, ENMOD Article I defines “hostile use” with the following words – “ hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party.”

Any large-scale alteration of the natural environment will inevitably have “widespread, long-lasting or severe effects” on humans and other biota, and, we allege, can only be extremely hostile, not “peaceful” as we document and justify in this review.

ENMOD, we allege provides a legally binding global agreement to wage geoengineered warfare “for peaceful purposes” against the citizens of sovereign nations by “international organizations” – preeminently it must be supposed, the United Nations and its various agencies, whose purposes, we allege, include the subordination of all nations’ sovereignty to that of the UN itself.

For thirty years, the UN through its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] [11] has been engaged in indoctrinating political leaders and propagandizing citizens around the world to accept the theory of anthropogenic-carbon-dioxide-caused global warming, a common, planetary “enemy” against which war must be eventually – and justifiably – waged. The purpose of this global campaign involves the surrender of each subscribing nation’s sovereignty and their aggregation as entities suborned under a one-world-governance system that controls the world ’ s energy systems, energy being fundamental to contemporary civilization.

Evidence of ENMOD environmental modification activities

Jet-sprayed particulate trails in the troposphere have been observed by concerned citizens for decades [12-15]. Since at least 2010, possibly earlier, the aerial-spraying has become a neardaily, near-global activity that has generated considerable concern among citizens [15]. Figure 2 shows some examples of the tropospheric particulate trails. Immediately after spraying, the trails spread out, briefly resembling cirrus clouds, before becoming a white haze in the sky [9]. Particulates thus emplaced into the troposphere become heated by solar short- and longwave radiation and by long-wave radiation from Earth’s surface, transferring that heat through molecular collisions to the surrounding atmosphere, which in turn reduces the adverse temperature gradient relative to near-surface air, thus reducing convection-driven heat loss, and concomitantly causing local and/or global warming [16].

Figure 2: Environmental modification tropospheric particulate trails. Clockwise from upper left: San Diego, California, USA; Karnak, Eqypt; London, England; Jaipur, India.

In the application of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes mandated by ENMOD [5], not only are the existence and operational details not disclosed to the public, but the public is also systematically deceived [17-19].

There are concerted efforts to deceive the scientific community [18,19] (as well as the public) into believing that particulate trails, such as shown in Figure 2 are ice-crystal ‘contrails’ that are sometimes produced by moisture vapor in jet exhaust under conditions of high humidity and low-temperature [20].

Concerned citizens have taken numerous photographs showing that the particulate trails observed are physically inconsistent with being ice-crystal contrails [9,15,21]. Figure 3 shows both the typically white trails, like those in Figure 2, which are consistent with coal fly ash [7-9,21] and show much scattered light, and black trails, likely produced by carbon black, which absorbs light much more efficiently with far less scatter than other aerosols. Ice crystal contrails are never black. The near-total reflectivity of snow evidences the extremely low spectral absorbance of ice [22]. One of us (JMH) witnessed white trails beneath the cloud cover over Frankfurt, Germany, and black trails above the clouds, presumably emplaced there so as to be difficult to observe.

Figure 3: From [74]. Both white and black particulate trails above Danby, Vermont, an impossible combination for alleged ice-crystal ‘contrails’, evidence contrary to the persistent disinformation that the particulate trails are harmless ice-crystals from jet exhaust [18,75].

What “improvement and peaceful utilization of the environment” [5] could possibly be attained by heating the troposphere on a neardaily, near-global scale? Evidence suggests that one of the ENMOD ‘environmental improvements’ is to melt polar ice to open a Northeast or Northwest Passage for global shipping lanes as well as to permit access to underlying petroleum and mineral resources. But make no mistake: Such “improvement” is neither “ peaceful, ” nor non-injurious to human and biotic health generally. It is in fact categorically hostile. It represents a direct attack on global agricultural production as well as on human and environmental health, as described below. Moreover, it is not otherwise disclosed to the public, for instance, in public safety warnings. Furthermore, it plays into or accommodates the UN’s “science-based” political ideology that greenhouse gases are the sole or “ primary ” cause of global warming – thus necessitating climate ‘intervention’ activities.

On or about February 14, 2016, an oily-ashy substance fell on seven residences and vehicles in Harrison Township, Michigan (USA). Suspecting that this was an accidental release from an undisclosed geoengineering activity, one of us (JMH) “obtained samples of the material from one of the residents whose property was splattered from above and had the material analyzed” ... and reported [6] “ the results of those analyses provide evidence of a deliberate operation to melt ice and snow....patterns of quasi-circular holes, sometimes called ‘cryoconite holes’, are observed on ablating glacier surfaces worldwide; these holes resemble the distribution pattern of the air-drop material....the air-drop material is synthetic cryoconite, or protocryoconite, whose purpose is to melt glacial ice. That explanation is consistent with the now near-daily, near-global spraying of a particulate substance, evidenced as coal fly ash, into the troposphere which has the effect of causing global warming....” The similarity between the airdrop material and cryoconite is shown in Figure 4, adapted from [6].

Figure 4: Upper Left: Air-Drop Distribution; Upper Right: Cryoconitehole Distribution in Glacier; Lower Left: Air-Drop Synthetic or Proto- Cryoconite; Lower Right: Natural Cryoconite.

Non-peaceful crippling of agriculture and health

Humans require food to eat, water to drink, and air to breathe. Global geoengineering that degrades any of these three fundamental resources also has the effect of degrading the sovereignty of nation states.

Emplacing air pollution particulates into the troposphere, the region where clouds form, or into the stratosphere where in time geoengineered aerosols precipitate out into the troposphere, has adverse consequences for agriculture that are already severely harming agriculture:

Particulate pollution particles cause local, regional, or global warming [23-26] leading to reduced crop yields [27,28].

Particulate pollution particles inhibit rainfall, causing drought at one location while causing deluges and floods at another [3,9]. The global warming thus produced causes increased evaporation and increased rainfall [7].

Upon settling to ground or to water, pollution particles absorb solar radiation and heat the surface; on snow and ice they cause melting and also reduce albedo, which leads to further global warming [16].

Aerosolized particles cause climate chaos, disrupting more-or-less stable weather patterns that have made agriculture possible [9,28-31].

Geoengineered disruption of weather patterns can exacerbate decimation of agricultural crops, for example, by locusts [32].

Aerial particulates decimate populations of beneficial wildlife, like bees [33], bats [34], and birds [35].

Particulates used in the aerial spraying, evidenced as coal fly ash, poison the soil and water with multiple toxic elements, including mercury [8], arsenic and thallium [36], and the plant toxin, chemically mobile aluminum [10,37,38].

Coal fly ash particulates, when lofted into the stratosphere [39-41], destroy protective atmospheric ozone and allow solar ultraviolet radiation to damage plants, making them more susceptible to pathogens [10,42].

Atmospheric particulates reduce available sunlight to the detriment of crops [43] just as they reduce the energy output of solar cells [44].

Particulate matter that settles on leaves reduces transpiration and hampers growth [45].

Rainwater-extracted elements from aerosol particulates, including toxins such as chemically mobile aluminum, upon wetting the leaves, become concentrated by evaporation and drip down to poison the roots [10].

Aerosol particulates, especially coal fly ash, raining down into fish farms and other aqueous bodies, shifts the phytoplankton balance in the direction of harmful algae and cyanobacteria [46].

Emplacing air pollution particulates – including, but not limited to, coal fly ash – into the troposphere also has known adverse consequences for human health:

Air pollution particulates are the leading environmental cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide [47,48].

Air pollution spherical magnetite particulates are found in the brains of persons with dementia [49,50].

Reactive iron magnetic particulates were recently found in abundance in hearts of persons from highly polluted areas [51].

Air pollution is a major contributor to both stroke and neurodegenerative disease [49,52,53].

Air pollution particulate particles penetrate deep into lungs and systemic circulation and contribute to stroke [54], heart disease [51,54], lung cancer [55], COPD [56], respiratory infections [57], and asthma [58].

Air pollution particulates are a risk factor for spontaneous pregnancy loss [59,60], cognitive decline at all ages [61], Alzheimer’s Dementia later in life [61], children having cognitive defects [62,63], and, for cognitive decline in older women [64].

UN institutional conflicts regarding mandated environmental modification

The ongoing harmful, global, mandated environmental modification activities performed under the UN’s ENMOD aegis [5] are contrary to the objectives and missions of other UN laws and organizations.

Climate scientists, including those associated with the UN ’ s IPCC, have avoided even the mention, much less discussion of the potential environmental consequences of the ongoing jetspraying of pollution particulates into the atmosphere. They do not acknowledge its obvious consequences on weather, climate, agricultural production, or human and environmental health [11].

The UN cannot in good faith claim that global warming is occurring because heat is being trapped by greenhouse gases [11], and simultaneously ignore the global climatological, environmental and health effects of ongoing tropospheric aerial spraying. Under the auspices of ENMOD it cannot engage in environmental modification through the jet-spraying of particulates into the region where clouds form, thereby contributing to global warming [16,23-26], and then unabashedly claim unintentional anthropogenic global warming through the combustion of fossil fuels is the sole cause of climate change.

The Director-General of the UN’s World Health Organization recently noted [65] that the simple act of breathing is killing seven million people a year and injuring billions more. “No one, rich or poor, can escape air pollution, ” he acknowledges, “ Despite this epidemic of needless, preventable deaths and disability, a smog of complacency pervades the planet. ” In accordance with the Precautionary Principle in Public Health [66,67], as credentialed professionals two of us (JMH and MW) submitted to the Bulletin of the World Health Organization a Perspective warning of the worldwide health risks of the environmental modification by jet-emplaced particulate pollution. That Perspective was rejected without review [68].

The UN’s Rio Declaration on Environment and Development [69], a pillar of UN ’ s Convention on Biological Diversity, declares: “States shall cooperate in a spirit of global partnership to conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the Earth's ecosystem.” The population decimation of insects [33], bats [34] and birds [35] and the disruption of ecological balance in nature [8,10,46] caused by tropospheric particulate spraying all stand in striking conflict with the above stated mandate of the UN’s Rio Declaration [69].

Beneficiaries of ENMOD mandated environmental modification

As U. S. Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson stated in a May 27, 1962 address to Southwest Texas State University [70], “He who controls the weather will control the world.” World control, that is, the power to exercise world authority, is the UN’s intent in its implementation of ENMOD [5], of its so-called environmental improvement mandate, to which all other UN organizations are subordinate, including its Food and Agriculture Organization.

There are other beneficiaries of ENMOD. Military organizations, their corporate contractors and multiple subcontractors, and associated, supporting and administrative governmental organizations, all reap significant income from the global ENMOD-sanctioned environmental modification activities. Nor is that all.

ENMOD ’ s sanctioned “ peaceful ” environmental modification activities can obscure or act as a cover for hostile de facto environmental warfare operations, nearly impossible to decipher as such, as explained long ago by geoscientist and strategic presidential advisor Gordon J. F. MacDonald [2].

In 1968, MacDonald [2] wrote of “…removing moisture from the atmosphere so that a nation dependent on water...could be subjected to years of drought. The operation could be concealed by the statistical irregularity of the atmosphere. A nation possessing superior technology in environmental manipulation could damage an adversary without revealing its intent. ” In 2016, one of us (JMH) wrote [21]: “ The development of a methodology for inhibiting rainfall by spraying pollution particulates into the troposphere has now progressed to an operational level. The potential use of that may constitute threats to the agriculture for any nation so targeted.”

Figure 5 is a NASA Worldview satellite image from February 4, 2016 that shows particulate trails blanketing the Republic of Cyprus, but nearly absent in surrounding regions. Cyprus citizens, so far to no avail, requested an explanation from their government for the deliberate obscuration of their skies and “extreme weather conditions” [71]. Following the February 2016 presentations made to the Parliamentary Environmental Committee, the Environment Services Department promised an investigation of the aerial spraying, but to date no response has been received.

Figure 5: NASA Worldview satellite image from February 4, 2016 showing jet-emplaced particulate trails blanketing the air above the Republic of Cyprus but nearly absent in surrounding regions.

One military purpose of aerial emplacement of particulate matter into the regions where clouds form is to impede precipitation, and cause damaging agricultural drought in an unfriendly country [21]. Former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accused Western countries of surreptitiously engaging in drought-causing activities [72].

The winter of 2006/2007 began an extremely harsh 3-year drought that devastated agriculture in Syria and led to civil war, which some believe bore indications of anthropogenic causation [73]. Were anthropogenic factors in play and were geoengineering activities a factor, was malicious intent involved? We may never know, but the consequences experienced by the millions of human lives affected may be taken as a warning of what could happen when state or non-state entities use environmental modification techniques to cause agricultural collapse or bring about other malevolent results.

Conclusions

The United Nations deceived many governments to sign on to a treaty that obligates them to be unwitting pawns in compromising their national sovereignty and in their own unwitting slow destruction. Instead of prohibiting “Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, ” as its title suggests, ENMOD obligates signatory nations to consent to and even participate or acquiesce in unspecified “peaceful” environmental modification activities performed by unspecified entities, under unspecified circumstances, without limitation to harm inflicted on agriculture, the environment, or human health.

Large-scale environment modification is not peaceful, but extremely hostile. Ongoing undisclosed tropospheric aerosol geoengineering and other geoengineering activity have already begun to have devastating consequences for agriculture, as well as widespread, long-lasting, and severe effects on human and environmental health.

No one has the right to poison the air we breathe, or to disrupt agriculture and poison the soil, or to cause weather and climate chaos, or to slowly and insidiously cause lung cancer, cardiac, neurodegenerative, respiratory, or other diseases that will inevitably result from the aerial spraying, or to harm God’ s creatures in the same way – specifically by disrupting once stable weather patterns, decimating insect, bat, and bird populations, exacerbating wildfires and destroying forests, enabling harmful algae in our waters, and destroying the ozone layer that shields life from the sun’s deadly ultraviolet radiation. Yet these are all consequences of the ongoing ENMOD-sanctioned environment modification.

Ongoing environmental modification activities, we allege, constitute de facto warfare on sovereign nations, warfare that cripples agriculture, damages the biosphere, and leads to massive human suffering and death. Moreover, those activities are blatantly contradictory to the missions of other UN entities, including, but not limited to, the World Health Organization, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, and the Food and Agriculture Organization.

The absence of public disclosure and concerted disinformation about the ongoing ENMOD-sanctioned environmental modification activities is further evidence of deceitful intent. Moreover, the techniques developed can be applied surreptitiously by lawless states to inflict agriculturally devastating droughts on enemy nations.

Life on Earth is possible because of a delicate balance between myriad biota and their environments. The adverse consequences of ENMOD-sanctioned environmental modification activities pose the greatest anthropogenic threat to life on Earth. Agricultural collapse and mass starvation are one of the potential consequences. Environmental modification activities must be halted immediately and permanently if we and our progeny are to live healthy lives.

The covert global operation should be exposed to public scrutiny.

When tropospheric particulate emplacement ceases, the pollution particles will fall to Earth in a matter of days or weeks, global warming will be reduced, and that will lead to improvements in agricultural production, public and environmental health, and the long-awaited return of natural blue skies, a boon to the spirits of people everywhere on Earth.

REFERENCES

1. https://aas.org/obituaries/gordon-james-fraser-macdonald-1929-2002
2. MacDonald GJ. How to wreck the environment.  Unless Peace Comes: A Scientific Forecast of New Weapons. New York: The Viking Press; 1968. p. 181-205.
3. Herndon JM, Whiteside M, Baldwin I. Fifty Years after “How to Wreck the Environment”: Anthropogenic Extinction of Life on Earth. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2018;16(3):1-15.
4. Cohen W. Address by Defense Secretary Cohen: Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and U. S. Strategy. 1997.
5. http://wwwun-documents.net/enmod.htm
6. Herndon JM. An indication of intentional efforts to cause global warming and glacier melting. J Geography Environ Earth Sci Int. 2017;9(1):1-11.
7. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Further evidence of coal fly ash utilization in tropospheric geoengineering: Implications on human and environmental health. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2017;9(1):1-8.
8. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Contamination of the biosphere with mercury: Another potential consequence of on-going climate manipulation using aerosolized coal fly ash J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2017;13(1):1-11.
9. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. California wildfires: Role of undisclosed atmospheric manipulation and geoengineering. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2018;17(3):1-18.
10. Herndon JM, Williams DD, Whiteside M. Previously unrecognized primary factors in the demise of endangered torrey pines: A microcosm of global forest die-offs. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn 2018;16(4):1-14.
11. Stocker T, Qin D, Plattner G, Tignor M, Allen S, Boschung J, et al. IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 1535 pp. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York; 2013.
12. http://www.nuclearplanet.com/1958evidence.pdf
13. Kirby PA. Chemtrails Exposed 2012.
14. Thomas W. Chemtrails Confirmed. Carson City, Nevada (USA): Bridger House Publishers; 2004.
15. http://www.nuclearplanet.com/websites.pdf
16. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Further evidence that particulate pollution is the principal cause of global warming: Humanitarian considerations. Journal of Geography, Environment and Earth Science International. 2019;21(1):1-11.
17. Herndon JM. An open letter to members of AGU, EGU, and IPCC alleging promotion of fake science at the expense of human and environmental health and comments on AGU draft geoengineering position statement. New Concepts in Global Tectonics Journal. 2017;5(3):413-416.
18. Shearer C, West M, Caldeira K, Davis SJ. Quantifying expert consensus against the existence of a secret large-scale atmospheric spraying program. Environ Res Lett. 2016;11(8):p. 084011.
19. Tingley D, Wagner G. Solar geoengineering and the chemtrails conspiracy on social media. Palgrave Communications. 2017;3(1):12.
20. Schumann U. On conditions for contrail formation from aircraft exhausts. Meteorologisch Zeitschrift. 1996;N.F.5:4-23.
21. Herndon JM. Adverse agricultural consequences of weather modification. AGRIVITA Journal of agricultural science. 2016;38(3):213-221.                  
22. Grenfell TC, Warren SG, Mullen PC. Reflection of solar radiation by the Antarctic snow surface at ultraviolet, visible, and near‐infrared wavelengths. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. 1994;99(D9):18669-18684.
23. Herndon JM. Air pollution, not greenhouse gases: The principal cause of global warming. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2018;17(2):1-8.
24. Herndon JM. Science misrepresentation and the climate-science cartel. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2018;18(2):1-13.
25. Herndon JM. Fundamental climate science error: Concomitant harm to humanity and the environment J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2018;18(3):1-12.
26. Herndon JM. Role of atmospheric convection in global warming. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2019;19(4):1-8.
27. Zhao C, Liu B, Piao S, Wang X, Lobell DB, Huang Y, et al. Temperature increase reduces global yields of major crops in four independent estimates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2017;114(35):9326-9331.
28. Tigchelaar M, Battisti DS, Naylor RL, Ray DK. Future warming increases probability of globally synchronized maize production shocks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2018;115(26):6644-6649.
29. Vogel E, Donat MG, Alexander LV, Meinshausen M, Ray DK, Karoly D, et al. The effects of climate extremes on global agricultural yields. Environmental Research Letters. 2019;14(5):054010.
30. Scheelbeek PF, Bird FA, Tuomisto HL, Green R, Harris FB, Joy EJ, et al. Effect of environmental changes on vegetable and legume yields and nutritional quality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2018;115(26):6804-6809.
31. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/dining/farming-climate-change.html
32. El Husseini MM. Weather Engineering and its Undesirable Side Effects on the Environment, Natural Resources, Agriculture and Human. Acta Scientific Agriculture. 2019;3.7.
33. Whiteside M, Herndon JM. Previously unacknowledged potential factors in catastrophic bee and insect die-off arising from coal fly ash geoengineering Asian J Biol. 2018;6(4):1-13.
34. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Unacknowledged potential factors in catastrophic bat die-off arising from coal fly ash geoengineering. Asian Journal of Biology. 2019;8(4):1-13.
35. Whiteside M, Herndon JM. Aerosolized coal fly ash: A previously unrecognized primary factor in the catastrophic global demise of bird populations and species. Asian J Biol. 2018;6(4):1-13.
36. Moreno N, Querol X, Andrés JM, Stanton K, Towler M, Nugteren H, et al. Physico-chemical characteristics of European pulverized coal combustion fly ashes. Fuel. 2005;84:1351-1363.
37. Sparling DW, Lowe TP. Environmental hazards of aluminum to plants, invertibrates, fish, and wildlife. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol. 1996;145:1-127.
38. Kopittke PM, Moore KL, Lombi E, Gianoncelli A, Ferguson BJ, al. e. Identification of the primary lesion of toxic aluminum in plant roots. Plant Physiology. 2015;167(4):1402-1411.
39. Delany A, Shedlovsky J, Pollock W. Stratospheric aerosol: The contribution from the troposphere. Journal of Geophysical Research. 1974;79(36):5646-5650.
40. Fromm MD, Servranckx R. Transport of forest fire smoke above the tropopause by supercell convection. Geophysical Research Letters. 2003;30(10).
41. Yu P, Rosenlof KH, Liu S, Telg H, Thornberry TD, Rollins AW, et al. Efficient transport of tropospheric aerosol into the stratosphere via the Asian summer monsoon anticyclone. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2017;114(27):6972-6977.
42. Herndon JM, Hoisington RD, Whiteside M. Deadly ultraviolet UV-C and UV-B penetration to Earth’s surface: Human and environmental health implications. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2018;14(2):1-11.
43. Tie X, Huang R-J, Dai W, Cao J, Long X, Su X, et al. Effect of heavy haze and aerosol pollution on rice and wheat productions in China. Scientific reports. 2016;6:29612.
44. El-Shobokshy MS, Hussein FM. Degradation of photovoltaic cell performance due to dust deposition on to its surface. Renewable Energy. 1993;3(6-7):585-590.
45. Rai A, Kulshreshtha K, Srivastava P, Mohanty C. Leaf surface structure alterations due to particulate pollution in some common plants. The Environmentalist. 2010;30(1):18-23.
46. Whiteside M, Herndon JM. Role of Aerosolized Coal Fly Ash in the Global Plankton Imbalance: Case of Florida's Toxic Algae Crisis. Asian Journal of Biology. 2019;8(2):1-24.
47. Landrigan PJ, Fuller R, Acosta NJ, Adeyi O, Arnold R, Baldé AB, et al. The Lancet Commission on pollution and health. The lancet. 2018;391(10119):462-512.
48. Friedrich M. Air Pollution Is Greatest Environmental Threat to Health. JAMA. 2018;319(11):1085.
49. Maher BA, Ahmed IA, Karloukovski V, MacLaren DA, Foulds PG, Allsop D, et al. Magnetite pollution nanoparticles in the human brain. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2016;113(39):10797-10801.
50. Plascencia-Villa G, Ponce A, Collingwood JF, Arellano-Jiménez MJ, Zhu X, Rogers JT, et al. High-resolution analytical imaging and electron holography of magnetite particles in amyloid cores of Alzheimer’s disease. Scientific Reports. 2016;6:24873.
51. Calderón-Garcidueñas L, González-Maciel A, Mukherjee PS, Reynoso-Robles R, Pérez-Guillé B, Gayosso-Chávez C, et al. Combustion-and friction-derived magnetic air pollution nanoparticles in human hearts. Environmental Research. 2019:108567.
52. Jeremy W. Air pollution and brain health: an emerging issue. Lancet. 2017;390:1345-1422.
53. Whiteside M, Herndon JM. Aerosolized coal fly ash: Risk factor for neurodegenerative disease. Journal of Advances in Medicine and Medical Research. 2018;25(10):1-11.
54. Miller KA, Siscovick DS, Sheppard L, Kristen Shepherd K, Sullivan JH, al. e. Long-term exposure to air pollution and incidence of cardiovascular events in women. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(5):447-458.
55. Whiteside M, Herndon JM. Coal fly ash aerosol: Risk factor for lung cancer. Journal of Advances in Medicine and Medical Research. 2018;25(4):1-10.
56. Whiteside M, Herndon JM. Aerosolized coal fly ash: Risk factor for COPD and respiratory disease. Journal of Advances in Medicine and Medical Research. 2018;26(7):1-13.
57. MacIntyre EA, Gehring U, Mölter A, Fuertes E, Klümper C, Krämer U, et al. Air pollution and respiratory infections during early childhood: an analysis of 10 European birth cohorts within the ESCAPE Project. Environmental health perspectives. 2013;122(1):107-113.
58. Organization WH. Ambient air pollution: A global assessment of exposure and burden of disease. 2016.
59. Leiser CL, Hanson HA, Sawyer K, Steenblik J, Al-Dulaimi R, Madsen T, et al. Acute effects of air pollutants on spontaneous pregnancy loss: a case-crossover study. Fertility and sterility. 2019;111(2):341-347.
60. Perin PM, Maluf M, Czeresnia CE, Januário DANF, Saldiva PHN. Effects of exposure to high levels of particulate air pollution during the follicular phase of the conception cycle on pregnancy outcome in couples undergoing in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Fertility and sterility. 2010;93(1):301-313.
61. Kilian J, Kitazawa M. The emerging risk of exposure to air pollution on cognitive decline and Alzheimer's disease–evidence from epidemiological and animal studies. Biomedical journal. 2018.
62. Calderón-Garcidueñas L, Azzarelli B, Acuna H, Garcia R, Gambling TM, Osnaya N, et al. Air pollution and brain damage. Toxicologic Pathology. 2002;30(3):373-389.
63. Calderon-Garciduenas L, Franko-Lira M, Mora-Tiscareno A, Medina-Cortina H, Torres-Jardon R, al. e. Early Alzheimer'd and Parkinson's diese pathology in urban children: Friend verses foe response - it's time to face the evidence. BioMed Research International. 2013;32:650-658.
64. Weuve J, Puett RC, Schwartz J, Yanosky JD, Laden F, Grodstein F. Exposure to particulate air pollution and cognitive decline in older women. Archives of internal medicine. 2012;172(3):219-227.
65. Carrington D, Taylor M. Air pollution is the ‘new tobacco’, warns WHO head. The Gaurdian. 27 October 2018.
66. Harrell JA, Baker EL. The essential services of public health. Leadership Public Health. 1994;3(3):27-30.
67. Kriebel D, Tickner J, Epstein P, Lemons J, Levins R, Loechler EL, et al. The precautionary principle in environmental science Environ Healt Perspec. 2001;109(9):871-876.
68. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Geoengineering: The deadly new global “Miasma”. Journal of Advances in Medicine and Medical Research. 2019;29(12):1-8.
69. https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_CONF.151_26_Vol.I_Declaration.pdf
70. https://wwwyoutubecom/watch?v=K3j0Wj_MwKk
71. http://cyprus-mail.com/2016/02/17/minister-pledges-probe-into-chemtrails/
72. Staff R. Ahmadinejad says enemies destroy Iran's rain clouds -reports. Commodity News [Internet]. 2011.
73. Kelley CP, Mohtadi S, Cane MA, Seager R, Kushnir Y. Climate change in the Fertile Crescent and implications of the recent Syrian drought. Proceedings of the national Academy of Sciences. 2015;112(11):3241-3246.
74. Herndon JMW, M. Geophysical consequences of tropospheric particulate heating: Further evidence that anthropogenic global warming is principally caused by particulate pollution. Journal of Geography, Environment and Earth Science International. 2019;in press.
75. http://www.nuclearplanet.com/Massive_Public_Deception.pdf