“Frankenskies”: New Film Raises Big Questions On Climate Engineering.

By Jerry Alatalo

n 1962 United States President Lyndon Johnson in a commencement address at Southwest Texas State University talked to graduates about “..controlling the weather”, and “..controlling the world”. Just to what extent the U.S. military has advanced since 1962 in the area of weather warfare is unknown except by those in the military working directly in the alleged programs.

Learning the truth will require men and women willing to take the same severe personal risks as Daniel Ellsberg (Vietnam War), Julian Assange (government/corporate crimes), Edward Snowden (government surveillance), Chelsea Manning (Iraq War crimes), John Kiriakou (illegal torture), Scott Bennett (terrorist financing), Brad Birkenfeld (banking corruption), and others determined to speak the truth.

Mr. Matt Landman directed the film “Frankenskies” about the history, development, and facts concerning the phenomenon termed climate engineering, geoengineering, and other various scientific designations. His choice to balance the amount of time in the film to information from both “sides” of the debate over weather control was a good one, adding seriousness and weight to the effort. The final effort, 120-minute film production’s quality is excellent, and a superb example for others to follow in comparison to other small-budget, independently made documentaries.

The topic of weather control technologies, for researchers, is one which can lead one down some very deep, multi-directional, even sometimes strange rabbit holes. Thankfully – and wisely, in light of its very controversial subject – Mr. Landman keeps the film’s focus inside the boundaries of logical, academic and/or scientific reasoning. The result is a very strong film message viewers will find close to impossible to ignore or forget.

Many people will immediately react to mention of weather control with labels of “conspiracy theory”, but they might experience an extreme change of perspective and attitude after watching “Frankenskies”.  They surely will come away with facts and details they’ve never seen mentioned or reported by the corporate media, but for “conditioning”, surprising reports – such as the 12 new cloud formations (or species of clouds) added institutionally recently. The film’s information has neither been transparently shared by government and/or military officials but for recent revelations – again, described in the film as a form of societal “conditioning” for what’s ahead.

What inclines one to lean toward the explanation that weather modification is essentially a tool for war? …The unanimous unwillingness by elected representatives in the U.S. Congress in responding to concerns expressed by large numbers of their constituents on the matter. Add to that government avoidance of historical facts presented in Mr. Landman’s film, and the logical conclusion to arrive at is that nations and high-level military/intelligence officials have been using weather control technology since the 1950’s as a weapon of war.

“Frankenskies” has already, just hours after posting, begun going viral on the internet. The question now becomes one of gathering sufficient momentum, creating a state of affairs making impossible continued government dismissal of legitimate concerns, and leading to where honorable action brings about open public meetings exposing the truth of the matter.


To  those appreciative of his work and wishing to send financial support to Matt Landman for making his next film “Frankenskies II”, please visit:


(Thank you to Matt Landman at YouTube)

She’s Got Bread Bags On The Soles Of Her Shoes.

by Jerry Alatalo

aaa-21Alphabet The first action taken up by the Republican controlled House of Representatives and Senate was the Keystone XL pipeline. Billionaire industrialist brothers Charles and David Koch stand to make billions of dollars in profits if the pipeline from Canada across the center of the United States to Texas refineries becomes built. That’s because, if reports are correct, the Koch brothers own gazillions of acres of land in Canada where large amounts of tar sands oil exist.

Charles and David Koch provided strong financial backing to 44 year-old Iowan Joni Ernst in her successful campaign for the U.S. Senate in America’s 2014 mid-term elections. Freshman Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa became the choice of Republican leadership to give their party’s response to President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address. The one – and only – specific domestic or foreign policy issue Senator Ernst addressed in her response was the Keystone XL pipeline.

Oops. Correction. Attentive observers of Senator Ernst’s Republican response couldn’t help but catch her bold, newly insightful and absolutely innovative remarks about “climate change”. However, Senator Ernst’s perception of climate change is slightly different from most Americans’, and perhaps not quite as consequential and worrisome as the scientists assert.

Ms. Ernst doesn’t see Koch Industries’ ravaging of their gazillions of Canadian acres for the world’s dirtiest fossil fuels as any concerning issue for Americans or humanity. She sees climate change as something very simple, without the need for complex explanations from scientists but easily understood by everyone:

One school day it’s sunny, the next school day it’s rainy. See, the climate changed.

She went into great detail for the American people about her own personal experience with “climate change”. When she was a youngster, she had only one “good pair of shoes”, so on school days when it was raining her mother would give her plastic bread bags to protect those shoe from water damage.

So, there’s no need to listen to any geeky, pocket-protector wearing scientists for ways to effectively deal with climate change. It’s soooo much simpler than that.

Just save those bread bags.


(Thank you to democracynow at YouTube)