Subscribe to LSNN Daily News


Enter your email address:

Pat Mooney was interviewed by Maria Heibel

2013-04-07 23:59:14
Monday 00:56:29
April 08 2013

Pat Mooney was interviewed by Maria Heibel

Pat Mooney has more than four decades experience working in international civil society, first addressing aid and development issues and then focusing on food, agriculture and commodity trade. Mooney’s more recent work has focused on geoengineering, nanotechnology, synthetic biology and global governance of these technologies as well as corporate involvement in their development. 

The author or co-author of several books on the politics of biotechnology and biodiversity, Pat Mooney received The Right Livelihood Award (the “Alternative Nobel Prize“) in the Swedish Parliament in 1985. In 1998 Mooney received the Pearson Medal of Peace from Canada’s Governor General. He also received the American “Giraffe Award“ given to people “who stick their necks out“. Pat Mooney has no university training, but is widely regarded as an authority on agricultural biodiversity and new technology issues.

View 186.2K

words 4.1K read in 20 minutes, 40 Seconds

M. Thank you very to be here and to answer to some of the questions we will have for you. We have this beautiful map from Geo-engineering and you told that this was only a first step because not all what they are doing is known. So I would so I would like to ask you a little bit: what did you want to show with this map ?

P: Well, we’re alarmed at how rapidly the idea that you can be allowed to manipulate planetary systems and move from being science fiction to being a scientific discussion to being suddenly political debate. It seems as governments have the failures of Copenhagen and climate change and Cancun and climate change and Durban and climate change, more and more they say well, don’t worry there is a technological fix a technological solution that will solve the problems: So we don’t need to worry about having the people take the bus ,you don’t need to worry about having our economy change to become green ..

M: Change lifestyle ?

P: Yeah, change lifestyles, all we need to do is have a technological solution

M: Yeah,

P: And that takes care of it.

M: Yeah,well here we have hot spots on the map. What does it mean ?

P: Well there’ s a lot of work is going on, it’s where the governments are given financial support to research in Geo-engineering, ,where parliaments and congresses are actually debating the idea of Geo-Engineering and which scientific organizations are saying they want to conduct large scale experiments.

M.Large scale? What kind for example?

P: The one that we are most worried about is what we call the Solar Radiation Management and with that is that you find a way to block the sun

M: Yeah

P: So you can reduce the sunlight by two percent, not two percent, less than two percent, you can get a reduction in temperature so that postpones climate change. Doesn’t stop it just postpones it. And now in Russia there is talking about doing their own experimentation very seriously. The UK just a few days ago abandoned an experiment because of …


P: Yes SPICE, because of the pressure public pressure against them. United States though is actively looking for projects to test.So NASA in the United States is open to fund experimentation like this. China we think also is on the verge of conducting their own experiments. We hope not but we think they might.

M: And what does it mean,these hot spots...

P: Well , because that’s where most likely you’ll see the first big experiments.

M: And they are just making small experiences?

P: So far is just computer tests

M: Computer?

P. Yeah, they do computer simulations, they may do work in the lab , they do contained weather in contained facilities, but they haven’t done open air experimentation.
The problem with these experiments is , it sounds like you should say, you should be allowed to do experiments, why not? The problem with geo-engineering experience is: we are talking about the planet. We are talking about planetary systems. And you can’t have a small experiment. You don’t know anything.
You have to do a very big experiment. So you take tubes, and you run tubes across the temper zone to blow sulfates into the stratosphere, like a volcano. What happens, all the experiences show, all the computer simulations so far show that the indian monsoon goes below South Asia and causes havoc in Sub-saharan Africa. Youll see a drought in South Asia and youll have famine in Sub- saharan Africa.
That is fine for here. My country, Canada , will be O.K.? Italy will be O.K.?

M.Perhaps.We don’t know.

P. We dont’ know.

M. We hadn’t occasion to make it before, there was no other earth to test.

P. Exactly.

M.It ’s the fisrt time and there will be a result. We don’ know.
What about weather modification in all this area? Because we know very well what happens in China and in Russia. All the world knows now what theyre doing. But usually in Europe or in America we dont tell about it?

P: Good last. We tell about very often what it is.

P: Mostly are smaller tests, but we have had the United States for example in 1969 they went to the Philippines and they did weather (stratus) modifications that drop entire the Philippines and people had no idea.
They did the same in Bahar in India in 1965-66 where there was a famine and they tried to modify the weather. And they did the same in Pakistan, They did the same in …. and in Vietnam. The thing that is so attractive for industrialized countries is that they don’t need the United Nations. They can say: " We don’ need to have a consensus agreement in Copenhagen. All we need to do for the government… we need just the United States by itself or the United States perhaps with the agreement of China and Russia together we say okay let’s do a test”. And they can do it on their own soil blowing sulphates in to the stratosphere from their own land and there is no need for a multilateral agreement by the governments.

M.So, there was in Nagoya, there was the Moratorium of the Organization of the United Nations . What does it mean for the nations this kind of agreement now, because nobody told about it, mainstream didn’t talk about this moratorium..

P.Yeah, yeah, well but in some places they did,...

M.What kind of meaning has it now for for the governments of the single nations?

P.It’s weak for sure. But the moratorium was tested two weeks ago, well May 5th in Montreal. The UN Convention of Biological diversity had a meeting of scientific sub committee the scientific sub committee had Geo-engineering to debate with all the governments ,193 governments. So they went back and reviewed the decision of two years ago and they supported and strengthened it again .So every time the nations come together and they reinforce the moratorium it becomes stronger.The problem with the bio-diversity convention is that the United States is not a member.There are 193 countries that are members and only the United States, the Holy Seat and Andorra are not, the Vatican and Andorra are not members.

M.USA,Vatican and Andorra …

P. So, in a way they don’t have to the United States doesnt have to obey. That’s why I think we have seen the US government is putting up money for experiments so we say the issue has to go to Rio and governments in Rio need to as all governments of the world together say :no Geo-engineering experimentation, there is a ban on against it .

M.I know you was in Mainz now , there was a symposium and there was also David Keith who is a big promoter for putting not sulfur, but aluminum, into the atmosphere. One day or two days after they blocked the SPICE-Project. Could you tell a bit about the climate of scientists who discuss now the situation to manipulate globally the atmosphere.

P.Yes. We actually had the answer by the British government that was: "Well, well be ice”. The man who was in charge of the SPICE-Experiment was also there in Mainz on that day

M.Yea, he was there. Was it a consequence of the symposium?

P. No, no, just a bad luck by the British government. I think the real decision, the reason, because the British government made that decision, it was because this past Monday in New York we had a debate in the general assembly on geo-engineering and I was invited by the general assembly to present to them about geo-engineering and I presented the map. And it is the heart of the actual text for negotiation in Rio. So thats why the British government wanted to get rid of the spice project before that negotiation began. That was their decision.

M.What do you think about the project of Caldeira and Keith and they are sponsored by Bill Gates?

P. Well, they are sponsored by Bill Gates… Bill Gates has given them four and a half million dollars, which is nothing. For Bill Gates thats …

M.But it means he is interested in the work they are doing.


M.And David Keith since nineteen – twenty years is looking for this kind of manipulation of the atmosphere.

P. Yeah

M.Because he spoke about it just twenty years ago


M.So now he is speaking about aluminum instead of sulfur and I think you heard him in Mainz


M. How is the situation?

P. Well. He also got another three and a half million dollars or so from Gates, separate from the four and a half million dollars, which is given as grant. So it’s more than .. I think it’s strange. What they constantly say is that they have no choice: "We need this plan B because governments aren’t doing enough.” And quite right, Governments are not doing enough. That’s true. But at the same time the governments that behave so.. How do you do? What do you do? I mean: you have governments acting like sociopaths and you don’t give a sociopath a bigger government. And to say to the United States which has denied climate change for years: refuse to hear about climate change, to say, but it’s okay you can blast sulphates into stratosphere, aluminium into stratosphere. It is simply insane. Has there ever been a time … We asked ourselves that question: "Has there ever been a time in human history, any time, when governments have acted on behalf of the planet, wisely on behalf of the planet, in an economic crisis, in a military crisis, in an environmental crisis, in a health crisis?” They never act on behalf of the planet. So will they take an untested technology and use it safely?

M. Keith is very consciousness about the consequences because he said it will be a free-riding on the health of our grandkids. So, he knows very very well what they start or want to do or wish to do now.

P. They all say the same thing and they all want to do the experiments

M. Yes , but that it means they are speaking always about global warming or climate change or CO2 and they stopped to speak about pollution, about lifestyle and all these things became a fix point now..

P. No, mean, I dont think they are monsters ,these are not terrible human beings but they, I think they have an unreal sense of politics ,they don’t understand that the moment geo-engineering becomes an acceptable possibility then all of the industrialized countries go to that rather than to do the hard work of changing their economy

M. But there are the big lobbies now and they wish to have this kind of scientist like leader ...

P. Sure, ja. They would much rather have these kind of scientist than to change manufacturing.

M. Atmosphere we have only one, if it collapses theres not another one.

P. But there are the solutions. There is cutting back on greenhouse gas emission: doing the job, secondly there is adaptation to this. We know this could be changed .The matter is when happens had they to consider this a trouble. There are many ways in which we can strengthen agriculture so we have food for the rest of the century,for the next century. We are not doing those things and than more we try to use this to excuse as a quick fix for our problems, more we are not doing those other things.
So, I think, the politic situation is just like that. It is the assumption that Keith has.
They will be listened to. The politicians will listen to them and say: " Oh, okay, that’s how we should do it.” Or. "We shouldn’t do that, okay we won’t to do this.”

P: What would happen now, if this next few months an hurricane is looking to move towards Miami, a huge hurricane and Obama wants to win the next election and he doesn’t want to lose his vote in Florida and the public knows that there is a Geo-engineering technology that it can maybe stop the hurricane or change the direction of the hurricane? Obama will use the technology even if it meant destroying Cuba.He would use the technology because he would not want to loose the election.
And if Putin in Russia thought that the permafrost is melting underneath a city in Siberia and the naval base and other military bases were about to sink away. Would he use Geo-engineering to protect that even if it jeopardized the monsoon in Asia? He would!
And would China do? If China was having a drought in western China and their government was afraid to be overthrown by the people because of the drought? They would.

M: Political instruments

P: Ja

M: Also for water management because weather modification and water management is connected now.

P: Absolutely

M: Everywhere, where they create dams and water energy and so on they are doing water modification, rain-enhancement…

P: Effectively they are already

M: Already from Indonesia to Mississippi... everywhere

P: Ja

M: Okay

P: Once these geo-engineering tool is accepted as being a possibility, these governments will use it.

M: So its a very very strong politica,l also military instrument. We have general Mini in Italy, he said: "They did it in Kosovo they did in Vietnam , now it is an instrument to make war”.

P: Ja. And there is a treaty against that. There is a environmental modification treaty it was passed by the United Nations..And Russia and the United States and Britain and Germany and Italy have all signed that treaty. But is says we can’t do geo-engineering for military purposes. But it’s a very fine line between when its a military purpose and when it’s just having a very bad effect on the neighbours.

M: Do you know Rosalie Bertell?

P: Sure

M: Because she appreciates very much your work, she has a high opinion from your work and she has got the Alternative Nobel Price, like you, one year later. And she has written a very important book : "Hacking the earth”.

P: "Hacking the planet”.

M: And she is convinced that what they want to do, to inject in the atmosphere with particles of aluminum, they are just doing it, just because I cannot imagine that they will heal, not heal, cool the earth once in a time , altogether without having first trials So, I suppose that Rosalie Bertell is seeing very well whats happening: it’s small here, small there, small there, small there, but I must do it before. They cannot start globally in one moment without to do it all before. They must look what will happen on a small scale.

P: I like her a lot and I admire her work a lot. I don’t think that she is entirely true, partly because where she told me there are experiments going on in the sky they’re over cities like Singapore. One time she actually told me: "Well they are doing it right now over Singapore. Now if you doing geo if you doing those kind of experiments you do it on the ocean, you do it somewhere where no one hears it. You don’t do it over populated areas.It doesn’t make sense.

M: We know it from atomic tests…

P: They did it here?

M: No. No. In Australia for example they did , today the people have strontium in the bones.

P: Sure absolutely, but the experiments are where done ?

M: And fall-out is everywhere.

P: Ja absolutely

M: It is One world...

P: I agree with that what I don’t agree with is that the trails from aircraft over don’t make sense when they’re over Singapore or Seattle it makes sense that they are over the ocean . The pollution goes everywhere.

M: Like Fukushima you have it anywhere

P: Ja sure but until ’59 there were atmospheric nuclear testings over the pacific 459 yes the pollution went everywhere but they didn’t, they weren’t stupid enough to do it over Seattle.

M: It’s not the point where are they doing because for example 2000 atomic tests , it doesn’t matter where they are doing it is..

P: Goes everywhere

M: One world and fallout

P: But the argument being made..

M: and the consequences are for the whole world.

P: But the argument being made by chemtrailers is that they are saying that these tests, I wonder whats, the test they have already on mount Pinatubo in 1991: when mount Pinatubo exploded in the Philippines and they have that test to see.They have those kinds of experiments to show what the impact is. I think they are quite right that they know it work, they know it will do a climate change. What they don’t know how it will affect the planet . You don’t do that by little experiments over cities or anywhere you have to do that in a large scale enough to affect the planetary system.

M: And this wouldn’t they do? What David Keith had told to put thousands of tons of aluminum and inject them in the atmosphere and the moratorium in Japan in Nagoya gave the permission to make small trials.

P: Small trials.

M: Not a large.. I know in America there was a large one: L.A.C. In the 50 they did it.

P: Sure.

M: And the people didn’t know about it.

P: Ja, ja, ja and also in the UK.

M: We don’t never know what they are doing they do it and we don’t know

P: Ja, ja, ja

M: How will they arrive to do it globally. How can we know what they are doing?For example in Italy we have an agreement between the Italian Government and the American Government, and they can create future climate situations and we don’t know where, and we don’t know how, and universities and researchers are engaged in this type of research, not with the computer, but concretely.

P: Ja,ja

M: So you are all the time in conferences, you know much more than we can know because you see what happens there. How do you think will they will arrive to make a global injection?

P: I think if you start to see a crisis. If suddenly there is a tipping effect on environment where suddenly there is a huge trouble in the United States or a huge fire, or a huge disaster, or some kind of it. Theyll want to do it. They won’t be shy. They’ll go ahead and do it, they will do it. ..

M: They will start in one moment to make a global action or injection like Keith?

P: Oh , no Keith wants to do his experiments, for sure.

M: He wants?

P: For sure, ja

M: He has the permission to do because Nagoya

P: No, he is in the United States, he is in Harvard

M: Oh yeah !

P: They cannot do it outside of the United States.

M: But cannot they do it in Europe?

P: No he can’t,but the Russians will even if they signed in Nagoya, I have no doubt the Russians will still somewhere in Siberia or something may well be test. That’s for sure. If it ’s done in the United States we will know about it .The fact that theyre trying to get support , financial support to do the test is a sign that it hasn’t be done yet. The fact that the SPICE program in the UK: they tried to do it. They tried to do a test but they couldn’t do it, is a sign that there aren’t going on. They’re not .

M: Do you know Rosalind Peterson?

P: I have heard the name but I don’t know her.

M: She also spoke at the United Nations and she is a scientist and she made in California a lot of analysis .Th fact is, that in the soil and in the water there is a lot of barium and a lot of aluminum.

P: Sure

M: And she said they are destroying the atmosphere, they are just doing it So, you know the film from Michael Murphy I suppose, we know from the past they don’t tell us what they are doing

P: I know. I realize.

M: So we need really to look very well what they are doing because we are eating,drinking breathing …

P: The history is this. Fifty years ago we had the Cuban missile crisis and governments were prepared 50 years ago to blow up the planet in order to protect their stance of what they thought was democracy that was the cold war. Now we have a hot war: the hot war of climate change and the same governments are prepared to take the same risks on behalf of the rest of the planet and control the planetary cooling steps . Even though they have no right to.They will do the same thing. I don’t deny that absolutely.
It’s a risk, but I think that if in Rio we have not just a moratorium, but we have a statement from the United Nation saying we consider geo-engineering to be an act of war, because the government who are do it are attacking the planet . Some language like that, then that would cause the United States to be much more cautious and even Russia and China will be more too. Especially China will be more careful, I don’t know what Russia

M: Will you go on with this map and explain more what they are doing?

P: Sorry

M: This map will you be more perfect in future?

P: Oh yes yes

M:you will go on with it

P: Well have the dates and we add into it. We have the database on Internet and keep on changing it

M. What do you think about the scientists generally because I have lot of contacts also here in Italy?

M: I see very often scientists would like to come out from the projects you know because they know very well maybe that the work that they are doing is not what they would like to do

P: Ja ja

M: Because a lot of research is now connected. Which are not so clear.

P: Ja, you are not quite sure whether it’s geo-engineering or some other groups.

M: Every scientist has only a small part. You can also ignore or you dont want to see.

P: It’s really strange we deal a lot with nano technology and bio-technology.

M: That’s the other point. These are nano particles.

P: Sure ja ja absolutely, but all of these.

M: It’s not carbon dust like ..

P: No it’s very small.

M: Small for nature and for us

P: Ja. But scientists who are involved in those deals, all they say, they are so glad that that we are concerned about geo-engineering because geo-engineers are really dangerous

M: Ja

P: What they are doing is okay but geo-engineering is bad and it’s strange that way. A geo-engineer I talked to, he said: "Biotechnology is really dangerous but geo-engineering is not too bad.”
Scientists are very naïve

Source by Maria_Heibel

Articles Similar / Pat Moon...ia Heibel