NEWS HEADLINES: “Chemtrails Are Real, It’s Clearly Not Water Vapor!” * 100PercentFedUp.com * by Noah

Tucker Carlson:

It’s always the obvious questions that are so vigorously discouraged. And one of the questions that’s been the most discouraged over the past 30 years is, what are those lines in the sky that you see trailing jets? What is that? Some people call them chemtrails and claim that somehow the U.S. government is spraying poison on the population. Those people are clearly crazy, Wikipedia calls them crazy, every news outlet calls them crazy, but the trails are still there and it’s clearly not water vapor because that doesn’t make sense at all. So what are they?

We spent the last six months trying to find someone credible who could explain that to us—a serious, sane person with an engineering background who could tell us what we are looking at, because we’re looking at something, and I don’t care what names you call me, I still want to know what it is. And we think we have found that person. Dane Wigington of Northern California has been on this subject for almost 30 years and has compiled what we believe, after looking at it pretty carefully, is the most comprehensive account of what we’re seeing. And it’s very bad.

Dane, thanks a lot for joining us. I never knew what to think of this topic. Are all these strange streaks in the sky chemicals being released into the air—chemtrails or contrails or the stripes in the sky that linger after airplanes pass? I don’t remember them as a child; they’re very common now. I’ve heard people say there’s something up, something nefarious going on.

So I go to Wikipedia to see what they say, and I want to read you the Wikipedia entry—the first part of it on this question. Okay, you may have seen this, and I’m quoting from Wikipedia as of this morning: “The chemtrail conspiracy theory is the erroneous belief that long-lasting condensation trails left in the sky by high-flying aircraft are actually ‘chemtrails’ consisting of chemical or biological agents sprayed for nefarious purposes undisclosed to the general public.” Believers in this conspiracy theory say that while normal contrails dissipate relatively quickly, contrails that linger must contain additional substances. Those who subscribe to the theory speculate that the purpose of the chemical release may be solar radiation management, weather modification, psychological manipulation, human population control, biological or chemical warfare, or testing of a biological or chemical agent on the population, and that the trails are causing respiratory illnesses and other health problems.

So I read that, and the purpose, of course, of that paragraph is not to illuminate what this might be, but to attack anyone who speculates about what it might be. It’s a form itself of psychological warfare, of propaganda. And when I read that, I said to myself, there’s clearly something going on, because the people who control Wikipedia—which would be the intel agencies, as we know—don’t want anyone to talk about this. So with that lengthy preface explaining why this conversation is taking place, I will turn it over to you to explain: what are these lines in the sky that we have all seen?

Dane Wigington:

They’re sprayed particulate dispersion. There is no theory in this equation. Bottom line: we have up-close film footage of these aircraft at altitude—KC-10s, KC-135s, C-17 Globemasters—with nozzles visible, turning dispersions on and off. This is not “condensation.” GeoengineeringWatch.org is the only entity that has taken a NOAA flying lab—National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration—top scientists in it, to sample what these heavy aircraft are emitting at altitude. That sample was processed at Rensselaer Polytechnic in New York, one of the world’s most renowned testing institutions.

We found exactly what we knew we would find, starting with aluminum nanoparticles. Bioavailable, free-form aluminum is toxic to all life—period. That element is named in numerous climate engineering patents as part of a geoengineering dispersion element. So again, there’s no theory involved in any of this. And what’s so incredibly profound in this equation, Tucker: you have the entire global climate science community, governments all over the world, saying we need to put aircraft in the air immediately to disperse light-scattering particles.

We use the science terms at GeoengineeringWatch.org because the “chemtrails” term is the instant marginalization term by design. You bring that term up, any elected official won’t talk to you anymore; media will immediately marginalize you. Solar radiation management, stratospheric aerosol injection, cloud albedo enhancement, climate engineering—if we stick to the science terms, they can’t marginalize us. So again, this elephant in the sky that we are told is a conspiracy theory is exactly what the entire global climate science community says we need to deploy immediately to slow down the warming of the planet.

The stated purpose is to deflect some of the sun’s incoming thermal energy. We know these programs, not surprisingly, are making a bad situation worse, not better. And, Tucker, they’re being used as a form of warfare. We know that we have countries like Iran constantly demonized. Of course, as you well know, immediately after 9/11 we have the list of countries to be targeted given to General Wesley Clark—a list that clearly existed before 9/11 even occurred.

Subsequently, every one of those countries endured a once-in-1,000-year drought. Statistically, mathematically, that’s impossible without climate intervention operations. And we have the leader of Iran on the floor of the U.N., on film, on the record, stating NATO was cutting off their precipitation. We have Iranian top scientists recently stating NATO’s been doing this for 40 years. Destabilize the food supply by destabilizing the rain, and you destabilize the population.

Tucker Carlson:

So you just said a bunch of amazing things—all of which, I just want to say, sound plausible to me. But let’s just back up a little bit. So you’re calling this “geoengineering.” The term “chemtrails,” you say, is a propaganda term designed to discredit people who ask sincere questions about what the hell am I looking at. If anybody is unfamiliar with the issue and they Google that term, they’ll get what you got, and that’s what we try to avoid.

So we try to point out: semantics matter in this case. Okay, so the first line of the Wikipedia entry points out something true, which is that when you look at these lines in the sky and you’re told, “Well, it’s just condensation; it’s water vapor,” you know that maybe that’s not the right explanation, because water vapor dissipates and doesn’t remain in the sky for, like, 20 minutes after the plane leaves. That suggests bigger particles in the mist—the particulate matter in the mist. Is that correct?

Dane Wigington:

Exactly correct. If you see, for example, breath condensing—if you see some researchers in the Arctic and their breath is condensing because it’s very cold—do they get a cloud starting to form over their head? If you have a vehicle whose exhaust is condensing in the morning, do you have a freeway with giant clouds hanging over it from the condensation from the vehicles in some cold region? No. That’s not how condensation behaves.

And again, my journey into this whole battle of now 27 years started when I built my off-grid home in Northern California, middle of the wilderness. It was the cover of the world’s largest renewable energy magazine. I have solar, wind, and hydro. And I was losing, on some days, from what these aircraft were emitting, 50, 60, even 70% of my solar uptake.

I knew that could not be condensation. When I began to research, I was very surprised at the mountain of information on geoengineering and solar radiation management. I looked for primary elements. I began to test my precipitation. I hoped I would not find these elements in my rain, because I knew if I did, it would change the entire course of my life.

I cannot look the other way. I came up with seven parts per billion in my first rain test. Over the next 18 months—because I took that long researching before I was willing to speak out on this issue—at the end of 18 months, I had single rain events with 3,450 parts per billion of aluminum in my rain. This is bioavailable, free-form aluminum, which is toxic to all life forms—period—primary element named in climate engineering patents. And we have the world’s most recognized geoengineers specifically stating, on film, on the record, their goal of using aluminum in these programs because of its high reflectivity—with no consideration of the consequences.

That’s how I got into this battle. So if I understand what you’re saying, what we’re watching is an attempt—I assume by governments, and we’ll get into who’s doing this—to mitigate the effects of climate change, to reflect back rays from the sun so that the earth doesn’t warm at a pace that is dangerous to whatever they think it’s dangerous to. That is the stated purpose. We know that is the stated purpose.

Tucker Carlson:

So I think that’s plausible because there is so much energy—commitment, sincere commitment in some cases, obviously fake commitment in others—and so much money behind this effort to mitigate global warming that that makes absolute sense. It is a religion. And you’re saying that you were not originally aware of this or interested in it, but because you live off-grid and you derive a lot of your electricity from solar and you clearly have an engineer brain, you were wondering, like, why the hell is my solar not working correctly? And that got you into this process of learning about it.

Dane Wigington:

Correct. And I have friends in the solar industry who, off the record, inform me that some of the commercial solar plants are producing half their design output, and they won’t talk about why because they don’t want to lose subsidies. So again, this is a very known element in many fields. In fact, with the nation’s weathermen—National Weather Service and NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration—there is an illegal federal gag order on all agency operations with those two entities.

Why would our government feel the need to gag the weathermen? I had NOAA scientists state to my face, quote: “We all know this is going on. We have no First Amendment protection. We don’t know what to do.” So the bottom line is, let’s all just pretend this isn’t going on while it’s virtually dismantling the planet’s primary life support systems and ubiquitously contaminating everything everywhere.

We’re not just talking about aluminum. We have—in lab tests, and again we’ve done hundreds of lab tests; we did 500 working with the University of Minnesota, an internationally recognized agricultural institution—aluminum, barium, strontium, manganese, surfactants, polymer fibers, graphene. All of this coming down in our breathable air column. Tucker, that’s horrifying.

Tucker Carlson:

So who’s doing this specifically? Who is behind this?

Dane Wigington:

Ultimately, all roads lead to those who print the money. But we know, as far as the coordinating entities: certainly DoD, DARPA. We have documents to prove the existence of these programs going back decades—documents hundreds of pages long. We have an 800-page U.S. Senate document from 1978 outlining the scope and scale of these programs then, specifically calling for intergovernmental cooperation—even between “otherwise adversarial nations”—because of the cross-border ramifications of these programs.

You can’t just geoengineer over your own country. Who’s the biggest player? Obviously the United States of America, because of the size of our military. The U.S. military has three times more aerial tankers—which are the primary aircraft used in these operations—than all other militaries in the world combined.

And if I could back up to the whole condensation-trail narrative again—which is perhaps one of the greatest lies ever perpetrated on populations all over the world—all military tankers and all commercial aircraft are equipped with what’s known as a high-bypass turbofan jet engine. That’s a jet-powered fan. Ninety percent of the air that moves through that engine is not combusted. So by design, that engine is nearly incapable of producing any condensation material except under rare and extreme circumstances, which are diminishing by the day because of the warming that’s occurring in the troposphere.

So much warming. We’ve had two former military pilots who fly private aircraft—important people—contact us at GeoengineeringWatch.org. In both cases, they were off the coast of the Pacific Northwest, and their aircraft were forced into emergency auto-descents because the air outside that aircraft was 45 to 50 degrees above what it should have been. The air was not dense enough to carry those aircraft. These people are very, very alarmed but very afraid to speak out.

Tucker Carlson:

Well, that’s an amazing fact, and it points up something that I think is indisputably true, which is the climate is changing. Why it’s changing is a whole separate set of debates—of course it’s always changed. But climate engineering alone—if I could elaborate—I mean, climate engineering alone, and I’m not negating the other sources of damage to the planet; we’ve been very poor stewards. Our point at GeoengineeringWatch.org is: how could anybody, from any perspective—and the environmental left is the most reluctant to face this issue, and we know why, Tucker, because they don’t want to lose their 501(c)(3) nonprofits.

Our attorneys at GeoengineeringWatch.org spoke to attorneys from every major environmental group—Greenpeace, Sierra Club, WWF—all of them. They will not address this issue because they don’t want to lose their nonprofit status. Is that not criminal hypocrisy? So we’re stating that in the case of trapping more heat than it deflects, these programs are causing far more harm than any perceived good. They’re simply using it as a weapon under the guise of trying to mitigate the climate.

Dane Wigington:

So again, these operations are taking us from the frying pan into the fire, so to speak. The greatest, most damaging form of human activity on the planet at this moment in time must be considered these operations—climate engineering. Well, sure. I mean, geoengineering by its very nature is just like textbook hubris—where you think you’re God and you’re in charge of the weather and the planet. No—you’re just some lumpy, furry schmuck living out an incredibly short lifespan with no ability to make anything better, because you’re not God.

Tucker Carlson:

Just the whole mindset is the mindset that gets us to nuclear war, so I’m opposed to it on those grounds. But before we ascend too much higher, let’s just come back down a little bit and to the specifics. What is the government’s position on climate engineering? Where are these aircraft taking off from? Where do these chemicals come from—the aluminum particulate, the magnesium, all the rest you described? What’s the chain that gets us to the stripes in the sky that we see?

Dane Wigington:

Aircraft are taking off from countless locations. We’re aware of a number of military bases where we know they’re deploying from. We also have commercial aircraft with commercial markings that we know are being used in these operations. We know that because we have film footage of these aircraft: retrofit nozzles mounted on the wing pylons; we have up-close photographs aimed into the exhaust jetstream to make this look like “condensation.”

We are not implicating commercial pilots or personnel, but we are communicating with them. Some commercial pilots distribute our printed materials in pilot lunchrooms, for example, covertly, because they know their aircraft are being used. These are automated systems. They carry a small payload. You might remember: around the year 2000 the weight of the aircraft became a very big deal—how much luggage you carried on, how much weight you carried on. That appears to be when this was implemented.

And we also know that the DoD has leased a significant number of commercial aircraft with commercial markings. Why would the DoD need or want that? For the base material—because we’re talking about an extraordinary amount of material here—based on our testing with the University of Minnesota (about 500 lab tests) and extrapolating how much material was in the precipitation and projecting that globally, it appears something in the range of 40 to 60 million tons of nanoparticles are being dispersed annually in skies all over the globe. The smaller the particle, the more toxic it is, the more harmful it is, the more bioavailable it is.

All the official air quality testing, by design, doesn’t even look for these elements, let alone disclose them. Official air quality testing is PM10—10 microns—occasionally PM2.5. Those are boulders compared to a nanoparticle. You can fit up to 100,000 nanoparticles across the width of a single human hair. They’re inconceivably small.

The reason they use such small particles is because they stay aloft longer—and that’s the goal. Keep the particles suspended in the atmosphere, and there’s more volumetric forcing—there’s more surface area the smaller the particle for a given amount of material. It appears—and we have a published study on this—there is a peer-reviewed published study that implicates coal fly ash as a base material for these operations, because it contains many of the elements the climate engineers feel they need to disperse in our skies. It provides plausible deniability, and it gets rid of the waste product they’re always trying to get rid of.

There are other elements added. American Elements Corporation appears to be one of the primary suppliers for these operations. But again, the fact that this can go on in our skies, with the mountain of data that exists on this, and the continued pretending by the so-called climate science community that this isn’t ongoing, is mind-numbing. They won’t be able to hide this for much longer.

Tucker Carlson:

I’m not necessarily surprised. What I am surprised by, however, is the fact that this program—the one you’re describing—could have continued for over 60 years at this scale, continental and global scale, and no one knows about it or talks about it. I mean, you know, we have a huge government, lots of elected officials. Like, what do they say when you ask them?

Dane Wigington:

This is a bit like the “safe and effective” narrative, isn’t it? Let’s have the entire medical community pretending that injecting toxic heavy metals is safe and effective, and they still pretend to this day that’s the case—when it doesn’t take a large intellect or an educated individual to understand that’s going to do harm. And yet that narrative still continues to this day. So again, this mass psychosis of denial is mind-numbing.

But you can’t hide this for much longer. We do have the climate science community now starting to speak out, starting to state how incredibly catastrophic these programs would be if they were implemented. They’re not outright admitting it yet, but they’re getting closer. And if you look at historical precedent: when did the U.S. military start its modification in hurricanes? There are some interesting things going on on the hurricane front this year—as in, none of them. They’re being deflected.

People who pretend that you can’t manipulate a weather system of that size—that’s absolute nonsense. The science completely disputes that. The U.S. military commenced its hurricane modification operations in 1947 with Project Cirrus, and even the results of that initial small-scale testing appeared to have so much effect on a cyclonic rotation that there were lawsuits pending from that—at which time they began to be more covert about their operations.

Tucker Carlson:

And you said you’ll notice that there aren’t hurricanes in Florida. So, the last few years, Florida—the west coast of Florida in particular—has been hammered, absolutely destroyed; tens of billions of dollars of damage done by hurricanes. No hurricanes this year. And you’re saying that that’s not an accident. Is that what you’re saying?

Dane Wigington:

I’m saying that we know the technology exists to steer storms of that size. Let me make a comparison: you could have a 10-year-old child divert the course of a 100,000-ton freight train by pulling a lever and changing the tracks. That’s the kind of small input, massive output you can have with these cyclonic rotations when they have the ability to manipulate atmospheric pressure zones. This is undisputed, patented science.

So why would we think they’re not using these types of operations? We have historical precedent. Project Popeye in Vietnam was so successful at controlling precipitation that in 1976 they passed the ENMOD treaties forbidding weather manipulation for wartime purposes—but not over a country’s own population. If we look at that—

Tucker Carlson:

Can I ask you to stop? I’m sorry, you’re throwing—I’m so ignorant on this topic, but I’m suddenly very interested, and I just want to make sure we don’t miss anything. Operation Popeye—is that what you called it in Vietnam? I’ve never even heard of that; I’m embarrassed to say. What is it? What was it?

Dane Wigington:

Very easily researched historical record: the U.S. military was so successful at controlling precipitation over Vietnam that the international community was very concerned about this—at least on the surface. They passed Environmental Modification (ENMOD) treaties in 1976, international treaties forbidding weather manipulation in wartime. So when people claim this is conspiracy—that we don’t have this kind of power and control—and they try to muddy the climate engineering issue by conflating it with localized, publicized cloud-seeding operations, those are two completely different animals.

We see even some state legislators doing the same, and we’re trying to correct that at GeoengineeringWatch.org because we’re working with numerous state legislators now and have been. There’s legislation pending in 36 states to ban geoengineering over their skies. Tennessee and Florida have already done so. But we’re correcting them and giving them an accurate compass heading: the localized, publicized cloud-seeding operations—which they tried to implicate in the Texas floods that killed so many young Americans—are virtually meaningless in comparison to climate engineering. It’s an ant compared to an elephant.

Intentionally, those that control media and are trying to control the narrative are trying to confuse these two issues. They are completely different. They’re trying to mask or hide the elephant in the sky, which is climate engineering operations. These programs are historical record.

The Chinese government has been so successful at, for example, engineering snowstorms—Tucker, do you remember the blizzard in New Orleans this January? The blizzard in Florida? Blizzards on the Gulf Coast? That was January 21st, by the way. These are demonstrations of what climate engineering can do.

The Chinese government has long since openly stated they were engineering snowstorms with endothermic reacting elements—patented elements that can literally transition what should be a liquid precipitation event (a rain event) into snow. Think of the cold pack in a first-aid kit that sits on a shelf at room temperature for 20 years: you mix the pack together and you have ice instantly. That’s an endothermic reaction. Yes, that’s being introduced into cloud moisture.

They were so successful in China, they caused billions of dollars of damage to Beijing, at which time they began to be less open about this. Everybody covered it—CNN, Popular Science, The Guardian. But if you bring that up here, suddenly you’re a tinfoil-hat-wearing nutcase. On that same day, while it was blizzarding in New Orleans, in the polar regions—Alaska, Greenland, Iceland, Siberia—it was above freezing and raining.

Do you remember the deep freeze in Texas, Tucker, a few years ago? When it was below zero in Dallas, it was 33 degrees warmer at the North Pole. Think about that. That’s what we’re not told.

So, the COP climate conferences—the international climate conferences—are not to change business as usual; they are to force countries to actively or passively participate in climate engineering. At some of those conferences—the Cancun conference, the Copenhagen conference—we had record low temperatures at the time of the conference in spite of above-normal temperatures in surrounding areas. That’s a demonstration of what climate engineering can do.

Back to the hurricanes: the deflection of hurricanes so far this year—is that a demonstration to other countries as well of the power that the U.S. military has to manipulate atmospheric pressure zones? These are patented processes. For listeners who’ve heard of HAARP in Alaska—that’s an ionosphere heater. It transmits power to the electrically charged ionosphere, causing an electrical chain reaction. They’re literally using the atmosphere as a physics lab.

You know of Project Starfish Prime and Project Fishbowl—U.S. military experiments with detonating hydrogen bombs in the magnetosphere, which they thought could collapse the whole atmosphere. Did that stop them? No. Installations like HAARP are used to control atmospheric pressure zones.

Back to the hurricanes: if you can manipulate atmospheric pressure zones with these directional ionosphere heaters, you can manipulate their path. Is that what we see going on? Is that a demonstration to others right now? Does the administration want to avoid a big hurricane cataclysm since they’ve gutted emergency protections? We don’t know—we can speculate—but the fact that there is nothing we can call natural at this point is indisputable.

Tucker Carlson:

A couple different threads. One, the U.S. military, in this country, runs propaganda operations against our population, and they do it on social media and through conventional media as well, and they have for a long time—but it’s certainly gotten more aggressive. That’s illegal, immoral; anyone who participates should be in prison. But it happens, and unfortunately we haven’t been able to stop it.

We know they lie to our population about a whole bunch of things, including what they’re doing. Two, we know that in the past 15 years you see these kind of fat, effeminate generals talking about how climate change is one of the main national security threats and the purpose of the U.S. military is to fight climate change. There’s been a lot of that, and it’s very confusing to people like me who think the purpose of the U.S. military is shooting people trying to invade our country. What does climate change have to do with national security?

Dane Wigington:

Your description suddenly makes it all make sense. A lot of what they do is trying to mitigate—or say they’re trying to mitigate—the effects of climate change. I would call it masking the effects, because they’re certainly not mitigating it. Everything they do—every short-term toxic surface cool-down—comes at the cost of a worsened overall warming and damage to the planet.

You’re completely correct, Tucker, in the U.S. military’s top brass statements on the record that they consider the collapsing climate system the greatest national security threat of all. When we have so many military bases at sea level, some of which are already being inundated, that’s part of the problem. But you have other elements: the ozone layer is near functional collapse right now. It’s not the hairspray cans.

The single greatest damaging factor is climate engineering—period. Not just the oxidizing particles being dispersed in our atmosphere, but the manipulation of those particles with extremely powerful frequency transmissions. Of all the towers being put up everywhere for “communications”—fake trees and all the forms they come in—we know many of those installations are being supplied with ten times more power than they need. That’s part of my background in the electrical field.

I know people who work on these towers—ten times more power than they need for communications. Why do they need that much power? And we know these facilities are being used to manipulate the electrically conductive atmospheric particulates. There’s a repelling effect caused from these transmissions; we can see the effect on water vapor loops.

If we look at the flash flooding in Texas as an example that killed so many young Americans, we captured in real time—I’m still surprised we have access to these data loops—the transmissions from the NEXRAD network that are used to manipulate weather systems. Because of the repelling effect of those transmissions, when there was that convective cell over that location and transmitters energized all around that cell—and we recorded that; it’s posted—it held that cell in one place. It precipitated out in one location.

We can speculate about agendas and objectives; we can’t know that. But the fact that that storm was manipulated is beyond dispute. Same with Hurricane Helene—we recorded frequency transmissions manipulating that storm and steering it into place. It’s indisputable; these are patented technologies.

Hurricane Harvey—we recorded that. How did meteorologists know seven days in advance that Hurricane Harvey was going to go where it went and sit there for three days? How could they possibly know that? Frequency transmissions held it there. We recorded that in real time.

These people are reading scripts, Tucker. They’re literally reading scripts passed down to them by Raytheon and Lockheed Martin—private defense contractors neck-deep in climate engineering: patents, operations—everything. They literally supply the “forecast,” which is the scheduled weather, to the National Weather Service and NOAA—our nation’s weathermen. That passes all the way down.

Local meteorologists know how long their leash is; they’re protecting their paychecks and pensions. They toe the line as well—just like “safe and effective” in the medical community—everybody toes the line because they don’t want to disrupt their personal paradigm. These storms are being steered and manipulated—period. That’s beyond dispute.

Tucker Carlson:

I’m glad you keep bringing up the COVID vax, because it would be hard for my middle-aged brain to accept a lie at this scale—like, how could you hide something this big, this profound, from an entire population? Except I just saw it five years ago with the COVID vax, which was a total lie, and now there’s no dispute that they lied about it. But no one was ever punished, and most people believed it. So I know for a fact what you’re describing is possible.

Can you—well, actually, before I forget, let me ask: who pays you to do this? Why are you doing this? This sounds like quite an operation that you’re running. You’re clearly not in it for the money. This is a bigger movement than I was aware of until right now.

So you’re running lab tests on rainwater; you’re researching this actively. Is this a volunteer effort? How and why are you doing this?

Dane Wigington:

Because I can find no greater point for existing. How can I possibly look the other way? I was restoring habitat in Northern California, the east side of Lake Shasta—habitat that was decimated by irresponsible logging practices. I wanted to do that the rest of my life. I wanted to plant trees and watch them grow the rest of my life.

There’s no greater solitude than what I was doing. But how was I to continue doing that, knowing what I knew, when the solar output reduction happened that I mentioned earlier? I began to test rain, knowing the implications of toxic rain—rain that contained aluminum. By the way, aluminum doesn’t just kill soil microbiome; it affects tree root systems. This is peer-reviewed study: bioavailable aluminum shuts down nutrient uptake.

So the trees die a slow, protracted death, and all official agencies blame beetles. “The trees are dying because of the beetles.” The bottom line is beetles are a symptom of a sick, dying tree. My father was an arborist. I know trees. I love trees.

When I was in kindergarten, they had to come out after recess and drag me out of the tree because I didn’t want to come down. With no trees, no people—that’s simple, right? So how was I to continue doing that? I can’t look myself in the mirror. I can’t look my children in the eyes. How could I not do this?

Tucker Carlson:

The mass death of insects and trees around the globe—bees are collapsing, right?

Dane Wigington:

We know this year we were told 70% collapse this year. That’s staggering; that’s incredibly alarming. But what’s the real figure? The real figure is that’s a 70% collapse of the 20% that was remaining—we’re down to single-digit percentages of pollinators left right now.

We know insect populations have declined—terrestrial and aquatic—80 to 90% globally. It’s very noticeable. If you don’t believe it, remember the windshield on your parents’ station wagon as a child in the summertime was covered in bugs. I drive in a rural area every night: no bugs. That’s real. No bugs, no people.

Also, we publicized this in 2012 with former government scientists who could speak out because they’re retired; the science community tried to marginalize us, and now they’ve had to admit it. If your listeners search “insect apocalypse,” they’ll find alarms going off all over the globe. This translates to plankton as well—no plankton, no people. We have peer-reviewed science study now for the Atlantic: plankton population is down 90%. Other oceans are not far behind.

That’s the greatest oxygen producer on the planet; that’s the base of life on Earth—plankton. The human race right now, Tucker—I’ve used this example before, but it’s accurate—it’s like occupants of a car parked on the railroad track. The train is seconds from impact, lights flashing, horn blaring, and they’re trying to decide what station to put the radio on. No matter what other issue we’re facing, I would argue power-structure maneuvering—from conflict zones to carnage zones—is directly related to the unfolding and accelerating biosphere collapse, which climate engineering is fueling, not mitigating.

They will not let go of this covert weapon of control. It is the crown-jewel weapon with which they can bring populations to their knees, including our own, without those populations ever knowing they’re under assault. They’re not going to let go of this weapon. As for our military brothers and sisters participating in this—many ask, “Why would they?”—they took an oath to protect their populations from all threats, foreign and domestic. They’re being compartmentalized.

They’re being told these programs are benevolent and necessary—just like the pilots in Vietnam, I’m sure, were told when they were spraying Agent Orange on everybody. They weren’t told, “This is going to kill your comrade on the ground.” Of course not. Here we are.

Tucker Carlson:

And I think, in a lot of cases, people don’t know; they don’t think it through. They’re so high on this false feeling of omnipotence—“we’re in charge, we have the technology, we can make things better.” People delude themselves; good people delude themselves into committing evil because they think they have this power that they actually don’t have.

So, okay, the bees start disappearing; the bats; insects; plankton—these are all phenomena that most people are not going to notice because they live in cities. But the trees dying is very obvious. These are plants that live for 100 years, and all of a sudden they’re dying. The fir trees are dying. Give us a sense of American forestry right now. How are the trees in this country?

Dane Wigington:

The more important statistic might be global at this point, because we have that statistic. Tree cover has declined since pre-civilization baselines—66%. Sixty-six percent gone. The remaining one-third is dead and dying. We’ve changed atmospheric chemistry so much, forests do not smell like forests anymore.

Anybody who knows trees, who knows what forests once smelled like, knows that scent is gone. Why is it gone? Because of the now intense UV radiation that’s bombarding the planet. We’re getting, by the way, UVC at the surface. I mentioned the ozone layer collapse—climate engineering is the single greatest factor.

The climate science community acknowledges this. They acknowledge openly that if we geoengineer—as if we haven’t been for 80 years already—these programs would destroy the ozone layer. We had a former NASA contract engineer working directly for GeoengineeringWatch.org with state-of-the-art metering equipment into five figures, which we supplied—and again, we do this out of pocket. Our film The Dimming—the groundbreaking documentary, 26 million views—non-monetized, posted for free the day it was done. I’m in this for the cause.

If we don’t win this battle, nothing else matters. Back to the trees: forests don’t smell like forests anymore because the trees are shutting their stomata—that’s the respiratory port on the trees allowing them to breathe, to feed on carbon, to release oxygen. They are not respirating. They’re dying a slow, protracted death.

That’s the second greatest oxygen producer on the planet. From every conceivable direction, climate engineering is pounding the nails into our collective coffins. They will not let go of this covert weapon of control. For those who say, “They wouldn’t do this to themselves,” they already have. We detonated 2,400 nuclear bombs on the planet.

How many people know that the Nevada detonations—which they did in secrecy—we now know from peer-reviewed study: the downwind fallout from the Nevada nuclear bomb detonations killed no less than 700,000 Americans. That’s peer-reviewed study. How many people know that?

As far as biological testing: according to The Washington Post, as of 1977, the U.S. military had conducted no less than 239 open-air biological tests on innocent, unknowing civilians. Look it up. This is historical record covered by mainstream media.

Tucker Carlson:

We had a revolution over a tea tax. You can’t put up with this. I encourage all of your listeners to look up every single thing you state—very easy to find. It’s clear from the statistics you’re citing you’re not shooting from the hip.

Dane Wigington:

Let’s look at Zbigniew Brzezinski—a former U.S. presidential adviser going back to Johnson. He stated, on the record—your listeners can look this up easily as well: with today’s technology, it’s far easier to kill a million people than to control them. Do you think these people are here to help? Really?

The amount of layers with this issue is immense, and there are many legitimate concerns. If we don’t deal with what’s happening in our skies, we’re not going to be here long. On CO₂: the world’s second most recognized climate engineer, Dr. Ken Caldeira—former DoD scientist—we own audio of him at GeoengineeringWatch.org, in his words, stating that what he did for the DoD was design methods of spraying pathogens into clouds to infect the populations below.

We know in the outbreak of COVID-19, at one point 85 countries were infected in three days. That’s indicative of an airborne dispersion. Italian researchers found COVID-19 attached to airborne particulate. Do not all these dots connect? They certainly appear so.

From our precipitation testing with RPI in New York, we have polymer fibers and graphene in our rain. Graphene is like a vascular machete. It’s listed in geoengineering patents for certain purposes. Those two elements are also used militarily as biological carrier platforms to carry a pathogen from the clouds to the ground to infect the population below. Why is that in our rain right now?

Could they, at any point of their choosing, put something much more lethal into the precipitation and level the playing field? Certainly they could.

Tucker Carlson:

Have you spoken to elected officials about this—members of Congress?

Dane Wigington:

Many, and I continue to. Many know. I’ve had private meetings with Gavin Newsom at the California State Capitol—his top aide—and not that that individual would ever do anything for the common good; he wouldn’t. He’s there to serve those who have him on the end of their strings. No response there.

Tucker Carlson:

So you actually said this—or a version of this—to Gavin Newsom, the governor of California?

Dane Wigington:

Yes. And I conveyed to Newsom that if these programs were allowed to continue—because I was focused more on California and the impact here—the drought catastrophes in California would be catastrophic. I supplied data, which he didn’t try to dispute. I’ve had meetings with California Energy Commission scientists as well, air quality scientists.

California’s been concerned about the lack of precipitation, which affects hydropower production; also affects Hoover Dam, Canyon Dam. In presentations I gave well over a decade ago—Engineered Drought Catastrophe, Target California—everything I said then is more relevant now than ever. I presented that data to Newsom, and the drought has continued, which they’re not even disclosing now. Even in Northern California right now, they show “zero drought.” That’s a blatant, glaring statistical falsification. It has never been drier here in regard to soil moisture and fire fuel moisture.

They’re lying about everything. They’re lying about the UV readings on the surface—blatant, glaring lies. Their meters—every aspect of this equation—are disposing and metering only down to 300 nanometers in regard to the UV spectrum. That’s half of the UVB spectrum. No UVC is even metered for, let alone disclosed.

Same as the air quality particulates—PM10 is looked for, nothing below that. I’ve had California state air quality officials in a closed-door meeting—five of them—tell me to my face: “The system is rigged. We’re testing for combustion particulates only; the rest goes out the window.” The whole system is designed to not show the immensity of damage being done.

Tucker Carlson:

Is the government using wildfires as a climate engineering weapon?

Dane Wigington:

They know. The Palisades fire, as an example—the ability for the climate engineers to shut off precipitation is far greater than their ability to augment it. They can shut down rain as long as they want, as we know from Middle Eastern countries—as I stated on Iran. In the case of the Palisades: no rain for eight months. That’s not an accident.

These particulates are incendiaries. Aluminum nanoparticles are such an effective incendiary they’re used in military demolitions—thermite. That incendiary dust coats the forest floor, coats foliage, and when it builds up over time, everything becomes more volatile. I spoke about atmospheric pressure zones, which they can and are manipulating. In doing so, they can manipulate surface wind flows, creating extreme zonal wind-flow patterns—the same as they did in Lahaina.

Extremely anomalous low-pressure zones—one to the north—and an engineered high-pressure zone to the south; Hurricane Dora. Between those two, you create a bellows effect—a blowtorch effect. Whatever the source of ignition—many online speculate—what’s setting the template for these fires to burn with such ferocity? That is definitely climate engineering.

We found a 140-page U.S. military document—posted—titled Wildfires as a Military Weapon. Within that document, 17 sites were named in the U.S. as study zones. L.A. was one. It described exactly the type of pre-preparation that we see happening in all these locations. Lahaina was declared a “flash drought” zone a week prior to that incineration.

We can speculate on agendas and objectives being carried out. The fact that climate engineering is inseparable from these equations is absolutely indisputable. That document, by the way, is also posted at GeoengineeringWatch.org with the important sections highlighted. Shocking data.

Tucker Carlson:

Has there been any attempt to push back legislatively? Has Congress ever taken this up?

Dane Wigington:

Yes. We have 36 states with legislation in some process. Two states have already passed it. I’m communicating with an aide to DeSantis; I’ve had an hour conference call with Dr. Ladapo there on the issue. We have some very rational people involved.

Marjorie Taylor Greene just addressed this; that was publicized. We tried to reach Mrs. Greene before this to give some compass heading, because if you fly into this blind, you can do more harm than good. One thing we encourage—and unfortunately Marjorie didn’t get this message; we hope she does at some point—don’t open the entire climate scenario and mix it with this issue. Keep the focus on climate engineering.

When there’s a denial of the other sources of damage to the planet, that tends to immediately alienate half the people we need in this battle. What we encourage other legislators to do is: if the subject of the climate comes up, say, “How can we have any legitimate discussion of climate anything, from any perspective, without first and foremost addressing this elephant in the equation?” That narrative is much more productive at building bridges instead of burning them.

Tucker Carlson:

So, I knew the climate was changing, because I pay attention to nature. You’ve just single-handedly convinced me that a lot of this is driven by human activity—just not your suburban hairspray. It’s driven by the U.S. military.

Dane Wigington:

It’s both—I want to stress again, we’re not denying at GeoengineeringWatch.org that we’re putting about 100 million tons of carbon into the air a day, burning 26 million tons of coal and 100 million barrels of hydrocarbon. We’re cutting down forests, paving the planet, poisoning the oceans—all of these have an effect. We’re acknowledging that. But we’re saying when we have intentional intervention which has prevented the planet from responding to the damage done—if it weren’t for toxic rain, the forests may have tried to uptake more of that carbon and keep things more in balance, but they can’t.

The trees can’t; their root systems are being poisoned; soil microbiome is being poisoned; the ozone layer is being destroyed. These programs are literally disabling the planet’s counterbalancing life-support systems. We will never know now how much better a position we would have been in had climate engineering—aka weather warfare—never been deployed. We will now never know.

Those in power do not care about the consequences of their actions—even to themselves. Psychoanalysis specifically cites the kind of personality disorders common with those in power: a near total lack of comprehension as to the consequences of their actions, even to themselves. That’s a power addict. Does an addict care the next fix may kill? They don’t care.

At this point, it’s a runaway train. For many who say, “They would never do this to themselves,” they already have. We know this from the nuclear scenario I outlined. If I could tie one more dot together—because it’s important and an existential threat—climate engineering is decimating the planet’s primary protective life-support system, starting with the ozone layer.

Now we’re much more susceptible to a CME—a coronal mass ejection, solar flare. If we have an event like the Carrington Event in the 1800s, that would shut down grid power around the world. Now we have nuclear plants that can’t cool themselves. Now we have Fukushima times 100 or 200—game over. Again, directly connected to climate engineering.

Tucker Carlson:

Is climate engineering impacting Earth’s animal population? What about mammals—do you notice any effect?

Dane Wigington:

Yes. We have peer-reviewed study of whales with extraordinary amounts of aluminum in their tissue. Where’s that coming from? This is bioavailable aluminum.

Debunkers say “aluminum’s a very common element,” which it is—the third most abundant in the earth’s strata—but it does not exist in free form naturally—period. It’s always bonded to other elements. That’s the part they leave out. Even whales are absorbing this same material, having an obvious effect.

Global wildlife populations are down, conservatively, about 75% in the last four years alone—that’s 75% of an already depleted population. The giant herds of caribou—some were a million strong—are down to 5,000 or less from a million. Virtual crash. We have extraordinary images from what chemical ice nucleation can do.

An endothermic reaction is profound, too. We have images of hundreds of waterfowl frozen solid to the surface of a lake—how does that happen? You’ve seen the massive baseball- and softball-size hail falling everywhere—so much so that insurance companies are canceling hail coverage now because it’s increased so profoundly. That’s chemical ice nucleation.

The extreme form—if your listeners search “Lake Michigan ice balls,” they can see the shores of Lake Michigan coated with 75-pound, perfectly spherical ice balls. They don’t fall that big from the sky; they form in the lake because they’re chemically nucleating over the Great Lakes constantly. That’s how they pile up massive amounts of snow in Erie and Buffalo and make sensationalized headlines. You can literally throw a rock to no snow, but they only show the four or five feet of snow in Erie and Buffalo and sensationalize, “Look how much snow,” while we’re 80 degrees at the top of the Sierras in the middle of winter in California.

They don’t publicize that. In 2014, Boston had record lows and sensational snow. What didn’t they tell us? Middle of winter, while Boston was buried in snow, there was literally no snow 14,000 feet up in the Sierras. They never told us that, did they?

There’s a perception aspect to keep business as usual until the last possible moment—until the moment of impact—retaining power while using weather as a weapon. The crops are shutting down as well globally. We have crop collapse happening everywhere. Same scenario: stomata shutting; not feeding; not absorbing carbon; not releasing oxygen.

This is a ubiquitous contamination. I think the first step is to let people know the facts you’ve laid out and to have a public debate. It always begins with words. Anything good starts there.

Tucker Carlson:

Where can people learn more? Could you end by telling us—speak slowly—where people can get more information on this?

Dane Wigington:

GeoengineeringWatch.org strives to be a data repository on this issue. The only way we can move this fight forward is to share credible data from a credible source, and we strive to be that source. I have one goal, one mission: I live for the day when what’s happening in our skies is fully exposed and halted—which, Tucker, I would argue we can only do from the inside out.

Legislation is good because it puts it on the radar, but it’s symbolic. They’re not going to stop DoD operations from that. Only by pushing this issue to the full light of day can we cause a shockwave around the world so that populations and countries all over the world understand what their governments have either actively or passively done to them without their knowledge or consent.

In doing so, our military brothers and sisters would hopefully awaken to what they’re doing to their countrymen and, one would hope, would stand down. I know we have the Milgram experiments as an example: most human beings, if told by someone they perceive as authority, will carry out almost any form of atrocity. We need to get past that.

If we can fully expose this, the fur will fly. I would argue we would alter the equation and drag many other issues with it—issues like 9/11 or “safe and effective”—because you can’t hide what’s happening in our sky. Many issues people can try to put in the rearview mirror; you can’t do that with this. It’s getting worse by the day; the damage is getting worse by the day.

If we share credible data from a credible source, that’s more effective at waking people up than running into the street, pointing at the sky, and ranting. If they can look at satellite images—which we capture the moment we see them on the NASA satellite feed—we capture them because they try to scrub them. We have satellite images beyond shocking; you don’t even need to know meteorology to know something very radical and very wrong is going on.

We put that on our printed materials, which we distribute to legislators; we supply them for activists and the public. There’s about a half-million of our 20-page booklets in circulation right now. We’re trying desperately to give visuals—which are a better key to the door. We’re trying desperately with legislators to not open up the whole climate-change front.

Stick to this issue. We can’t have a discussion about climate unless or until we deal with this first. We take this out of the equation; then we can assess where we’re at. By knowing how to play chess—knowing the chessboard—we need to play effectively and efficiently.

If we can do that and start spot-fires of awareness—ask others to do the same—we’ll put enough holes in the dam that those in power can’t plug the leaks, and we will push this issue to the full light of day. If we can do that, we will alter the equation. Time is not on our side. You can avoid a toxic medical concoction; you can avoid a lot of things. We have to breathe.

Every breath we take is filled with these nanoparticles. We have peer-reviewed studies to prove that, as well. In the case of nanoplastics—the climate science community is now starting to admit—they’re showing up in human brains, lungs—every human organ. We know these particles are not just a result of plastic decomposition in the environment, because our testing with RPI in New York conclusively proved the particles we found were manufactured.

They can tell with spectroscopy. Bottom line: we’re dealing with a ubiquitous contamination of the planet, and if we can’t breathe without inhaling that, the ramifications are beyond grave. This is a fight for life—right here, right now.

Tucker Carlson:

Are you spraying chemicals into the air without telling me, using my tax dollars? Simple question that I plan to start asking people in leadership positions. I don’t know how I made it this long without knowing all of this, but I’m grateful for this conversation, and I hope it sparks a national conversation and some outrage. Dane, thank you very much.

Dane Wigington:

Thank you, Tucker. Thank you so much for your voice. Thank you to your team. The importance of you and your team at this critical moment in human history cannot be overstated.

We at GeoengineeringWatch—and our platforms, which are much smaller than yours; a quarter-million followers is all, nothing compared to yours—but everybody in our ranks is 1,000% behind you, brother.

Tucker Carlson:

Well, that’s so nice. Thank you. We want to be helpful. I appreciate it. Thank you, Tucker.