Marvin Herndon

[Wayne Hall]

www.naturalblaze.com/2017/04/climate-change-geoengineering-deceptions.html

[Wayne Hall]

This is some discussion from the uncontrolled DiEM25 facebook group: www.facebook.com/groups/diem25/permalink/1753715684934959/

WH: Naomi Klein concentrates on exposing the rackets on one side: the fossil fuels, nuclear power side. But the other side that wants to make money out of fear of climate change, is also involved in racketeering. The US Republicans manage the publc relations of one of the rackets. The US Democrats manage the public relations of the other racket. They each make accurate exposures of the opposite racket but not of their own. Naomi Klein is apparently concerned not to have leftists look too deeply into the Democrat racket and focus all their rage on the Republican racket. There will be enough criticism of the Democrats for her to be able to say she is not a Democrat shill. But no more:
halva.proboards.com/thread/385/obama-emissions-trading?page=1&scrollTo=1191

Albert A. Soren: Tamra Gilbertson and Oscar Reyes quote Naomi Klein in their criticism of carbon trading, which since The Kyoto Protocol has been a hocus-pocus abra-cadabra - selling fresh air to make big polluters look as if .... : "Anyone who still thinks that creating a carbon casino can solve our climate crisis owes it to themselves to read this book. The most convincing and concise challenge to the green profiteers yet."
Naomi Klein, author, the Shock Doctrine ;
www.tni.org/en/publication/carbon-trading-how-it-works-and-why-it-fails

WH: Thanks for this valuable link.Yes, I am not surprised to see Naomi Klein say this. She after all wrote "Disaster Capitalism", which is a very shocking book. But her thesis is that disaster capitalists take advantage of disasters caused by extreme climate phenomena. She does not show herself as willing as some (including even some with "climate change skeptic"views) to look into the extent to which these extreme phenomena: hurricanes, tsunamis, earthquakes, droughts, floods, are the result of anything other than "mother Nature's" response to centuries of industrialization and its environmentally destructive but unintentional, not deliberate, side effects. Moreover in the "This Changes Everything" film she starts with an expose of "geoengineer" David Keith and his "mad" proposals for global spraying of toxic aerosols in the upper atmosphere in ostensible "mitigation" of global warming, without looking further into the geoengineers and their far from straightforward relations with the mainstream climate debate. It is true that there are/were some climate change skeptics (e.g. Freeman Dyson, Edward Teller) who both deny/denied that there is a global warming problem and also propose global spraying of toxic aerosols as a solution to it, but this is a level of absurdity that is avoided by most climate change skeptics, who content themselves with denying that there is a global warming problem and then sitting back to attribute all the insanity that is being proposed and practised in the name of "solutions" and "mitigation" to their (often green and ecological) opponents in the climate debate. Naomi Klein identifies the Heartland Institute climate change skeptics as baddies, correctly, but does not investigate all their crimes, or the full extent of their cynicism. To depict them simply as tools of the fossil fuels lobby does not touch on a tenth of what is wrong with them, or wrong with their opponents in the climate debate. Greens and ecologists have not shown themselves the slightest bit interested, for example, in Professor Marvin Herndon's allegations that fly ash from coal-burning power stations is a key ingredient in atmospheric aerosol spraying programmes purportedly to "mitigate" global warming. It cannot all be used for making roads so it is sprayed into the atmosphere out of aircraft. That is what he claims. He also claims that aircraft emissions have a net warming effect (and he is not the only person to claim this. The European Commission does the same). So what is the logic of geoengineering proposals to use aircraft emissions to "mitigate" global warming? Naomi Klein does not investigate this subject.

[Wayne Hall]

In accordance with Article 15 of the Rome Statute, we herewith submit allegations and claims alleging crimes against humanity and the environment, and planetary treason as described with specificity in the attached document “Open Letter to the International Criminal Court Alleging United Nations Complicity in Planetary Treason,” that also contains a list of 70 Authorities consisting in the main of peer-reviewed publications in the scientific and medical literature, and contains also relief sought from the International Criminal Court.

Said document, and many of said listed Authorities can be downloaded here:

nuclearplanet.com/Environmental_Warfare.html

or here:

nuclearplanet.com/Geoengineering_Scientific_Articles.html

Kindly acknowledge receipt.

Sincerely,

J. Marvin Herndon, Ph.D.

Mark Whiteside, M.D., M.P.H.

Ian Baldwin, M.A.

[Wayne Hall]

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol. 9, No. 10
Publication Date: October 25, 2022
DOI:10.14738/assrj.910.13328.
Herndon, J. M., Whiteside, M., & Baldwin, I. (2022). Open Letter to the International Criminal Court Alleging United Nations
Complicity in Planetary Treason. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 9(10). 243-258.
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
Open Letter to the International Criminal Court Alleging United
Nations Complicity in Planetary Treason
J. Marvin Herndon, Ph.D.
Transdyne Corporation
San Diego, California 92131 USA
Mark Whiteside, M.D., M.P.H.
Florida Department of Health
Key West, Florida 33040 USA
Ian Baldwin, M.A.
Publisher Emeritus, Chelsea Green
Craftsbury Common, Vermont 05827 USA
ABSTRACT
We provide a preponderance of evidence that worldwide covert environmental
modification (geoengineering) activities have been ongoing for several decades,
citing numerous peer-reviewed scientific and medical articles and other sources in
support of our allegation that such activities are causing innumerable harms to
Earth’s systems. These harms include, but are not limited to, catastrophic loss of
wildlife, aggravation of global warming and climate chaos; disruption of habitats;
aggravation of droughts and concomitant degradation of agriculture; and depletion
of stratospheric ozone, which exposes surface life to deadly solar ultraviolet
radiation. In 1978 the United Nations (UN) oversaw the creation of the Convention
on the Prohibition of Military or Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification
Techniques (ENMOD), a deliberately vague and deceitful international treaty that
has served as a Trojan horse to provide a “legal” basis for subsequent worldwide
geoengineering activities (as described herein). Since the creation of the UN
Environmental Program (UNEP) in 1972, the UN and some of its other agencies,
including the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC), and the World Health Organization (WHO), has formally
committed itself to the integrity of the planetary environment. We appeal to the
International Criminal Court to render judgement in favor of the world’s individual
citizens, whose fundamental rights have been abrogated by planetary
geoengineering, as herein documented. We respectfully request the following relief
from the International Criminal Court: 1) Immediate and permanent end to the
ENMOD Convention; 2) Permanent global injunction on all activities undertaken
under ENMOD’s authority; 3) Declassification of all documents related to ENMOD
activities as well as making all such documents freely available to the world; 4)
Establishment of a legal body, fashioned after the International Military Tribunal at
Nuremburg, to hear evidence and render justice for planetary treason and crimes
against humanity and the environment.
244
Vol. 9, Issue 10, October-2022Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ)
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
INTRODUCTION
Since the creation of the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) in 1972, the United
Nations (UN) has formally committed itself to the integrity of the planetary environment. In
response to world outrage over the discovery of the United States’ use of environmental
weapons in Vietnam, including weather warfare, in 1977-1978 the UN oversaw the creation of
the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Other Hostile Use of Environmental
Modification Techniques (hereafter ENMOD) [1].
ENMOD, we allege, employed deliberately vague language to conceal its covert purpose, which
was not to prohibit environmental warfare per se, but to mandate signatory countries, i.e.,
“States Parties,” to participate in environmental modification activities for “peaceful purposes”
and to “improve the environment,” without specificity or limitations.
The general lack of specificity by ENMOD is unwarranted and deliberate. By contrast, ENMOD
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.”
That definition is so broad as to permit ENMOD to mandate “States Parties” to contribute, for
instance, to gain-of-function modification of natural viruses or even to the genetic modification
of human populations.
In 1988 the UNEP and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) created the UN
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC’s politically determined mission
is to document anthropogenic global warming, a.k.a. “climate change,” especially as caused by
carbon dioxide and to provide advice to political leaders accordingly.
In the mid-to-late 1990s, people worldwide began to report increasing numbers of jet-laid
trails. In 1990-91 the U.S. Air Force used the term “chemtrails” in its introductory chemistry
textbooks. Later in the decade that term was appropriated by the lay public to describe the
trails they were observing overhead [2]. Chemtrails, manifestly a form of devastating
environmental modification, as we document below, have since grown as an observable, daily
phenomenon, worldwide [3-5].
In the following, we present a preponderance of evidence, published over several years (2015-
2022) in several peer-reviewed scientific and medical journals, that demonstrates:
• the toxic nature of chemtrail particulates and the wholesale destruction of life caused
by said toxic chemtrail particulates; and,
• the physical, environmental consequences of chemtrails, which include the aggravation
of global warming and climate chaos; the biophysical disruption of habitats globally; the
precipitation of droughts and the concomitant degradation of agriculture, not only
through drought but chemical pollution-poisoning as well; and the depletion of
stratospheric ozone which exposes surface life to solar ultraviolet radiation.
245
Herndon, J. M., Whiteside, M., & Baldwin, I. (2022). Open Letter to the International Criminal Court Alleging United Nations Complicity in Planetary
Treason. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 9(10). 243-258.
URL: dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.910.13328
A preponderance of evidence indicates that the UNEP, WMO, IPCC and World Health
organization (WHO) are complicit in these covert activities, which include:
• causing global warming; and,
• intentionally melting polar ice.
We respectfully request the following relief from the International Criminal Court:
• Immediate and permanent end to the ENMOD Convention;
• Permanent global injunction on all activities undertaken under ENMOD’s authority;
• Declassification of all documents related to ENMOD activities as well as making all such
documents freely available to the world;
• Establishment of a legal body, fashioned after the International Military Tribunal at
Nuremburg, to hear evidence and render justice for crimes against humanity and the
environment
A TROJAN HORSE INTERNATIONAL TREATY
Since the 1970s, the United Nations has been directly involved in global activities that are based
upon false scientific assumptions. Said activities are systematically destroying life on Earth as
well as aiding and abetting an elitist agenda aimed at subjugating and dehumanizing global
populations.
The United Nations produced a treaty document, originally classified as a disarmament
document, entitled “Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of
Environmental Modification Techniques” [hereafter ENMOD] which was opened for signature
at Geneva on May 18, 1977 and entered into force on October 5, 1978 [1].
From top to bottom, this treaty is deceptive. ENMOD does not prohibit the “Hostile Use of
Environmental Modification Techniques,” as its title indicates. 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,” to wage hostile
environmental modification [6, 7] – de facto warfare – for “peaceful purposes,” without
limitation against harm to human and other biogenic populations in the broadest possible
circumstances [8, 9]. And it does so without defining “peaceful purposes,” which is a
fundamental contradiction, as any activity that upsets the natural balance that exists between
biota and geophysical processes injures or destroys life and cannot be construed as “peaceful,”
except in the most perverted and diabolical sense of the term.
ENMOD provides the “legal” means to co-opt sovereign nations’ military and other national
security institutions to engage in undisclosed “environmental modification techniques for
peaceful purposes.” These undisclosed modification techniques are highly destructive to
agriculture and food production. They also cause global warming, weather-and-climate chaos,
and habitat destruction. And, they radically compromise human and environmental health [8,
9]. They in fact constitute prima facie evidence of environmental warfare against human
populations [6, 7].
246
Vol. 9, Issue 10, October-2022Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ)
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
TROPOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENTAL MODIFICATION
At least as far back as the 1990s, concerned citizens had started to notice and report white jet-
laid trails that stretched across the sky, diffusing briefly to resemble cirrus clouds, before
spreading out to form a white haze in the sky [2, 10]. By 2012 these particulate trails, sometimes
reported as “chemtrails,” had become a near-daily, near-global occurrence, as illustrated in
Figure 1.
Figure 1. Chemtrail jet-emplaced particulates for environmental modification. Clockwise from
upper left: San Diego, California, USA; Karnak, Egypt: Geneva, Switzerland; Paris, France;
London, England; Jaipur, India.
Forensic scientific investigations have demonstrated that the aerosolized particulate matter,
jet-dispersed into the lower atmosphere, is consistent with coal fly ash [11-17], the extremely
fine-grained, light-ash waste product of industrial coal-burning that due to its toxicity is
trapped and sequestered in Western nations (where it constitutes one of the world’s largest
industrial waste streams).
The public has been consistently lied to, including by the U.S. Air Force [18] and the
Environmental Protection Agency [19], about the nature of these covert jet-laid chemical trails,
and deceived about the risks they pose to human and environmental health [20-22]. Publication
of medical and public health articles warning of health risks have been unwarrantedly rejected
without peer review by the Bulletin of the World Health Organization, by Environmental Health
Perspectives, a publication of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, and by the Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences [23]. Professional disinformation agents coerced managers and
editors of public health journals to retract two peer-reviewed and published articles without
ever allowing the author (JMH) to see and respond to criticisms [24, 25], a serious breach of
scientific protocol.

[Wayne Hall]

See above.