Content uploaded by J. Marvin Herndon
All content in this area was uploaded by J. Marvin Herndon on May 22, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
The ENMOD Treaty and the Sanctioned Assault on Agriculture and Human
and Environmental Health
J. Marvin Herndon1*, Mark Whiteside2, Ian Baldwin3
1Transdyne Corporation, 11044 Red Rock Drive, San Diego, CA 92131, USA; 2Florida Department of Health in Monroe County,
1100 Simonton Street, Key West, FL 33040, USA; Chelsea Green Publishing Company, 85 North Main Street, White River
Junction, VT 05001, USA
The 1978 “Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification
Techniques” [ENMOD] obligates signatory nations to fundamentally compromise their own sovereignty and to bring
about widespread, permanent agricultural devastation. Instead of prohibiting “Hostile Use of Environmental Modification
Techniques ”, as its title suggests, ENMOD obligates signatory nations to participate in unspecified “ peaceful ”
environmental modification activities performed by unspecified entities, under unspecified circumstances, without
limitation to harm, whether inflicted on a nation or region’s agriculture, its environment, or on health of its
population, that is, its citizenry. Large-scale environment modification cannot be construed as “peaceful”; it is instead
fundamentally hostile. Ongoing undisclosed tropospheric aerosol particulate geoengineering has already begun to
have devastating consequences for agriculture, as well as widespread, long-lasting, and severe effects on human and
environmental health. These effects include lung cancer, cardiac, neurodegenerative, respiratory, and other diseases;
the disruption of once stable weather patterns; the decimation of insect, bat, and bird populations; the exacerbation
of wildfires and the death of forests; the propagation of harmful algae in our waters; and the destruction of the ozone
layer that shields life from the sun’s deadly ultraviolet radiation. Ongoing sanctioned covert environmental modification
activities constitute de facto warfare on sovereign nations. Moreover, those activities are blatantly contradictory to the
missions of other United Nations’ entities, including, but not limited to, the World Health Organization, the Rio
Declaration on Environment and Development, and the Food and Agriculture Organization. Agricultural collapse
and mass starvation are one of the potential consequences of environmental modification “for peaceful purposes.”
Covert global environmental modification activities must be halted immediately, and permanently, if we and our
progeny are to survive. The operation should be exposed to public scrutiny. When aerial particulate tropospheric
emplacement ceases, the last geoengineered particulates will fall to Earth in a matter of days or weeks and global
warming will be reduced. Agricultural production and public health will improve worldwide.
Keywords: Agriculture toxins; Diminished crop yields; ENMOD; Famine; Geoengineering; Global warming;
Particulate pollution; Pestilence
In 1968 Gordon J. F. MacDonald (1929-2002), a highly regarded
geophysicist and U.S. government advisor , authored a book-
chapter entitled “How to Wreck the Environment” in which he
described the ways a nation might alter the environment to
surreptitiously inflict harm on an enemy nation . In particular
he noted: “The key to geophysical warfare is the identification of the
environmental instabilities to which the addition of a small amount of
Agrotechnology Review Article
*Correspondence to: J Marvin Herndon, Ph.D, Transdyne Corporation, 11044 Red Rock Drive San Diego, CA 92131, USA, Tel: 1-858-232-1177;
Received: February 20, 2020; Accepted: March 27, 2020; Published: April 03, 2020
Citation: Herndon JM, Whiteside M, Baldwin I (2020) The ENMOD Treaty and the Sanctioned Assault on Agriculture and Human and
Environmental Health. Agrotechnology 9:191. doi: 10.35248/2168-9818.104.22.168.
Copyright: © 2020 Herndon JM, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Agrotechnology, Vol.9 Iss.1 No:191 1
energy would release vastly greater amounts of energy.” MacDonald 
described potential environmental warfare methods that
deliberately trigger instabilities in large-scale natural systems
such as weather and climate, hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanos,
tsunamis, and the human brain.
Many of MacDonald’s predictions and speculations have come
to pass, not with the technologies of his time, but with more
effective and potentially more devastating technologies that were
subsequently developed and have been publicly discussed by
high military officials since the 1990s [3,4]. From his chapter
title  one can infer that MacDonald considered
environmental warfare to be not only extremely destructive but
within reach of rapidly evolving military warfare technology. By
the end of the Vietnam War, in which early environmental
weaponry was deployed with horrific effect, it is not surprising
that people and governments everywhere would have wanted to
ban environmental warfare.
Accordingly, the United Nations [UN] garnered appropriate
support and produced a treaty document, originally classified as
disarmament, entitled “ Convention on the Prohibition of
Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental
Modification Techniques” [hereafter ENMOD] that was opened
for signature at Geneva on May 18, 1977 and entered into force
on October 5, 1978 . Figure 1 shows the ENMOD status of
Figure 1: ENMOD status of sovereign nations as of January 3, 2018.
In point of fact, however, ENMOD does not prohibit “Military
or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification
Techniques.” ENMOD, we allege, was and remains a Trojan
horse. It not only fails to expressly forbid the use of hostile
environmental modification techniques, as its title might seem
to indicate, but instead it sanctions the use of environmental
modification techniques for “peaceful purposes ” and, moreover,
obligates each signatory “ State Party ” to cooperate in
unspecified environmental “improvement” operations by an
unspecified international organization for unspecified purposes.
For the reasons set forth below, the ENMOD document
together with evidence of international, covert environmental
modification activities [6-10] constitute agricultural and
environmental trespass on a global scale. ENMOD provides the
means to co-opt sovereign nations’ military and other national
security institutions into engaging in undisclosed
“environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes”
that have the consequences of being highly destructive to
agriculture, as well as more generally to human and
environmental health. Although the environmental modification
activities currently being undertaken without public discussion
are presumably for “ peaceful purposes,” they are nonetheless
highly destructive: they cripple agriculture and food production;
they cause weather and climate chaos; and, they radically
compromise human and environmental health. Whether
intended or not, these activities are tantamount to de facto
warfare waged against sovereign nations and their citizens.
Effectively, the UN persuaded many governments of the world
to sign a treaty that has obligated each signatory party to be an
unwitting pawn in the abrogation of its own sovereignty and has
brought about each nation’s environmental degradation, whose
ENMOD source is officially unrecognized. A careful legal
reading of that treaty , Convention on the Prohibition of Military
or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques
[ENMOD], should leave no doubt as to the correctness of our
characterization of its being a Trojan horse.
Critique of the ENMOD Trojan horse
ENMOD  Article I states:
“1. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in
military or any other hostile use of environmental modification
techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means
of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party.”
“2. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to assist,
encourage or induce any State, group of States or international
organization to engage in activities contrary to the provisions of
paragraph 1 of this article.”
Whereas a cursory or superficial reading of the ENMOD treaty
might seem to prohibit hostile uses of environmental
modification, careful examination leads to an entirely different
understanding. The phrase “ undertakes not to ” sounds
prohibitive, but it is a ‘toothless tiger’ in the legal sense. Were
the intent to prohibit, the phrase “ shall not” rather than
“undertakes not to” would have carried the force of law.
The ENMOD treaty, we allege and explain below, has a different
purpose. It is a Trojan horse that obligates the unwitting
cooperation of independent signatory countries, i.e. “ States
Parties ” , in the waging of future hostile environmental
modification – de facto warfare – for “peaceful purposes,” without
limitation against harm to human and other biogenic
populations in the broadest possible circumstances. And it does
so without defining “peaceful purposes”.
The true intent of the ENMOD treaty, we submit, is described
concisely in legally binding terms in Article III. In each of the
two sections of Article III the legally-binding term “shall ” is
ENMOD Article III states:
“1. The provisions of this Convention shall not hinder the use of
environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes and shall
be without prejudice to the generally recognized principles and
applicable rules of international law concerning such use.”
Herndon JM et al.
Agrotechnology, Vol.9 Iss.1 No:191 2
“2. The States Parties to this Convention undertake to facilitate, and
have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of scientific
and technological information on the use of environmental modification
techniques for peaceful purposes. States Parties in a position to do so
shall contribute, alone or together with other States or international
organizations, to international economic and scientific co-operation in
the preservation, improvement and peaceful utilization of the
environment, with due consideration for the needs of the developing
areas of the world.”
Article III Section 1 makes it clear that there is nothing in
ENMOD that would “hinder the use of environmental modification
techniques for peaceful purposes.” A cursory or superficial reading
of Article III might lead one to assume its sole intent is to allow
States Parties to engage in environmental modification, but that
is not correct.
The final sentence of Article III Section 2 as written seems to
obfuscate its true purpose, which becomes quite clear and
incontrovertible when some of the clutter is removed: “States
Parties ... shall contribute, alone or together with other States or
international organizations, to...co-operation in the preservation,
improvement and peaceful utilization of the environment.”
In American jurisprudence, the use of “ shall ” mandates
compliance. The Constitution of the United States of America
makes frequent use of “shall” in significant, clearly mandatory
instances, such as, for example, establishing the judicial branch
of government: Article III Sec. 1. - Judicial powers / “The judicial
Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court ....”
The mandatory “shall” is extensively used throughout ENMOD
Articles V-X and its Annex. Most telling of the intended use of
“shall” is ENMOD Article VII which states in its entirety: “This
Convention shall be of unlimited duration.”
ENMOD, we allege, is a Trojan horse. The subject of its title,
“ Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other
Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques,” is not
prohibited, which it would have been had the mandatory “shall”
been used. Instead, the true intent of ENMOD is to mandate
international co-operation in the “...improvement...of the environment.”
Examples of such environmental “improvement” might include
climate engineering to control global warming, or to bring rains
or postpone them, or to melt Arctic ice for commercial
operations, among other examples. Are such global engineering
We do not believe so, for reasons we describe below.
As an instrument of international law, ENMOD is purposefully
misleading. It signifies toothless prohibition, and is devoid of
legally enforceable mandates on prohibition (Article I). Yet in
Article III ENMOD clearly mandates action that is not at all
related to the Convention’s title, “Prohibition of Military or Any
Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques.”
Moreover, the mandated action (Article III Section 2) lacks the
specificity appropriate for mandated actions. For example,
“States Parties in a position to do so shall contribute, alone or together
with other States or international organizations” lacks specificity as to
the meaning of “international organizations, ” or to the nature,
purpose, extent, and cost, both human and environmental, of
the mandated “contributions”.
This lack of specificity is unwarranted and deliberate. By
contrast, ENMOD Article II is quite specific and broad-based in
defining the term “environmental modification techniques.” Article
II states: “As used in article 1, the term “environmental modification
techniques” refers to any technique for changing – through the deliberate
manipulation of natural processes – the dynamics, composition or
structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and
atmosphere, or of outer space”.
In its entirety ENMOD fails to mandate any prohibitions,
limitations, requirements, specificity or definitions of its Article
III – mandated “ improvement and peaceful utilization of the
environment.” This wording specifically mandates non-exclusion
of “the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful
purposes. ” Nor does ENMOD define peaceful purposes.
Nevertheless, ENMOD Article I defines “hostile use” with the
following words – “ hostile use of environmental modification
techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means
of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party.”
Any large-scale alteration of the natural environment will
inevitably have “widespread, long-lasting or severe effects” on humans
and other biota, and, we allege, can only be extremely hostile,
not “peaceful” as we document and justify in this review.
ENMOD, we allege provides a legally binding global agreement
to wage geoengineered warfare “for peaceful purposes” against
the citizens of sovereign nations by “international organizations” –
preeminently it must be supposed, the United Nations and its
various agencies, whose purposes, we allege, include the
subordination of all nations’ sovereignty to that of the UN itself.
For thirty years, the UN through its Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change [IPCC]  has been engaged in indoctrinating
political leaders and propagandizing citizens around the world
to accept the theory of anthropogenic-carbon-dioxide-caused
global warming, a common, planetary “enemy” against which
war must be eventually – and justifiably – waged. The purpose
of this global campaign involves the surrender of each
subscribing nation’s sovereignty and their aggregation as entities
suborned under a one-world-governance system that controls the
world ’ s energy systems, energy being fundamental to
Evidence of ENMOD environmental modification
Jet-sprayed particulate trails in the troposphere have been
observed by concerned citizens for decades [12-15]. Since at least
2010, possibly earlier, the aerial-spraying has become a near-
daily, near-global activity that has generated considerable
concern among citizens . Figure 2 shows some examples of
the tropospheric particulate trails. Immediately after spraying,
the trails spread out, briefly resembling cirrus clouds, before
becoming a white haze in the sky . Particulates thus emplaced
into the troposphere become heated by solar short- and long-
wave radiation and by long-wave radiation from Earth’s surface,
transferring that heat through molecular collisions to the
surrounding atmosphere, which in turn reduces the adverse
Herndon JM et al.
Agrotechnology, Vol.9 Iss.1 No:191 3
temperature gradient relative to near-surface air, thus reducing
convection-driven heat loss, and concomitantly causing local
and/or global warming .
Figure 2: Environmental modification tropospheric particulate trails.
Clockwise from upper left: San Diego, California, USA; Karnak,
Egypt; London, England; Jaipur, India.
In the application of environmental modification techniques for
peaceful purposes mandated by ENMOD , not only are the
existence and operational details not disclosed to the public, but
the public is also systematically deceived [17-19].
There are concerted efforts to deceive the scientific community
[18,19] (as well as the public) into believing that particulate
trails, such as shown in Figure 2 are ice-crystal ‘contrails’ that are
sometimes produced by moisture vapor in jet exhaust under
conditions of high humidity and low-temperature .
Concerned citizens have taken numerous photographs showing
that the particulate trails observed are physically inconsistent
with being ice-crystal contrails [9,15,21]. Figure 3 shows both the
typically white trails, like those in Figure 2, which are consistent
with coal fly ash [7-9,21] and show much scattered light, and
black trails, likely produced by carbon black, which absorbs light
much more efficiently with far less scatter than other aerosols.
Ice crystal contrails are never black. The near-total reflectivity of
snow evidences the extremely low spectral absorbance of ice .
One of us (JMH) witnessed white trails beneath the cloud cover
over Frankfurt, Germany, and black trails above the clouds,
presumably emplaced there so as to be difficult to observe.
What “improvement and peaceful utilization of the environment” 
could possibly be attained by heating the troposphere on a near-
daily, near-global scale? Evidence suggests that one of the
ENMOD ‘environmental improvements’ is to melt polar ice to
open a Northeast or Northwest Passage for global shipping lanes
as well as to permit access to underlying petroleum and mineral
resources. But make no mistake: Such “improvement” is neither
“ peaceful, ” nor non-injurious to human and biotic health
generally. It is in fact categorically hostile. It represents a direct
attack on global agricultural production as well as on human
and environmental health, as described below. Moreover, it is
not otherwise disclosed to the public, for instance, in public
safety warnings. Furthermore, it plays into or accommodates the
UN’ s “ science-based” political ideology that greenhouse gases
are the sole or “ primary” cause of global warming – thus
necessitating climate ‘intervention’ activities.
Figure 3: From . Both white and black particulate trails above
Danby, Vermont, USA an impossible combination for alleged ice-
crystal ‘contrails ’, evidence contrary to the persistent disinformation
that the particulate trails are harmless ice-crystals from jet exhaust
On or about February 14, 2016, an oily-ashy substance fell on
seven residences and vehicles in Harrison Township, Michigan
(USA). Suspecting that this was an accidental release from an
undisclosed geoengineering activity, one of us (JMH) “obtained
samples of the material from one of the residents whose property was
splattered from above and had the material analyzed” ... and reported
 “ the results of those analyses provide evidence of a deliberate
operation to melt ice and snow....patterns of quasi-circular holes,
sometimes called ‘cryoconite holes’, are observed on ablating glacier
surfaces worldwide; these holes resemble the distribution pattern of the
air-drop material....the air-drop material is synthetic cryoconite, or proto-
cryoconite, whose purpose is to melt glacial ice. That explanation is
consistent with the now near-daily, near-global spraying of a particulate
substance, evidenced as coal fly ash, into the troposphere which has the
effect of causing global warming....” The similarity between the air-
drop material and cryoconite is shown in Figure 4, adapted from
Figure 4: Upper Left: Air-Drop Distribution; Upper Right: Cryoconite-
hole Distribution in Glacier; Lower Left: Air-Drop Synthetic or Proto-
Cryoconite; Lower Right: Natural Cryoconite.
Herndon JM et al.
Agrotechnology, Vol.9 Iss.1 No:191 4
Non-peaceful crippling of agriculture and health
Humans require food to eat, water to drink, and air to breathe.
Global geoengineering that degrades any of these three
fundamental resources also has the effect of degrading the
sovereignty of nation states.
Emplacing air pollution particulates into the troposphere, the
region where clouds form, or into the stratosphere where in
time geoengineered aerosols precipitate out into the
troposphere, has adverse consequences for agriculture that are
already severely harming agriculture:
Particulate pollution particles cause local, regional, or global
warming [23-26] leading to reduced crop yields [27,28].
Particulate pollution particles inhibit rainfall, causing drought at
one location while causing deluges and floods at another [3,9].
The global warming thus produced causes increased evaporation
and increased rainfall .
Upon settling to ground or to water, pollution particles absorb
solar radiation and heat the surface; on snow and ice they cause
melting and also reduce albedo, which leads to further global
Aerosolized particles cause climate chaos, disrupting more-or-less
stable weather patterns that have made agriculture possible
Geoengineered disruption of weather patterns can exacerbate
decimation of agricultural crops, for example, by locusts .
Aerial particulates decimate populations of beneficial wildlife,
like bees , bats , and birds .
Particulates used in the aerial spraying, evidenced as coal fly ash,
poison the soil and water with multiple toxic elements,
including mercury , arsenic and thallium , and the plant
toxin, chemically mobile aluminum [10,37,38].
Coal fly ash particulates, when lofted into the stratosphere
[39-41], destroy protective atmospheric ozone and allow solar
ultraviolet radiation to damage plants, making them more
susceptible to pathogens [10,42].
Atmospheric particulates reduce available sunlight to the
detriment of crops  just as they reduce the energy output of
solar cells .
Particulate matter that settles on leaves reduces transpiration
and hampers growth .
Rainwater-extracted elements from aerosol particulates,
including toxins such as chemically mobile aluminum, upon
wetting the leaves, become concentrated by evaporation and
drip down to poison the roots .
Aerosol particulates, especially coal fly ash, raining down into
fish farms and other aqueous bodies, shifts the phytoplankton
balance in the direction of harmful algae and cyanobacteria .
Emplacing air pollution particulates – including, but not limited
to, coal fly ash – into the troposphere also has known adverse
consequences for human health:
Air pollution particulates are the leading environmental cause of
morbidity and mortality worldwide [47,48].
Air pollution spherical magnetite particulates are found in the
brains of persons with dementia [49,50].
Reactive iron magnetic particulates were recently found in
abundance in hearts of persons from highly polluted areas .
Air pollution is a major contributor to both stroke and
neurodegenerative disease [49,52,53].
Air pollution particulate particles penetrate deep into lungs and
systemic circulation and contribute to stroke , heart disease
[51,54], lung cancer , COPD , respiratory infections ,
and asthma .
Air pollution particulates are a risk factor for spontaneous
pregnancy loss [59,60], cognitive decline at all ages ,
Alzheimer’s Dementia later in life , children having cognitive
defects [62,63], and, for cognitive decline in older women .
UN institutional conflicts regarding mandated
The ongoing harmful, global, mandated environmental
modification activities performed under the UN’s ENMOD aegis
 are contrary to the objectives and missions of other UN laws
Climate scientists, including those associated with the UN’ s
IPCC, have avoided even the mention, much less discussion of
the potential environmental consequences of the ongoing jet-
spraying of pollution particulates into the atmosphere. They do
not acknowledge its obvious consequences on weather, climate,
agricultural production, or human and environmental health
The UN cannot in good faith claim that global warming is
occurring because heat is being trapped by greenhouse gases
, and simultaneously ignore the global climatological,
environmental and health effects of ongoing tropospheric aerial
spraying. Under the auspices of ENMOD it cannot engage in
environmental modification through the jet-spraying of particulates
into the region where clouds form, thereby contributing to
global warming [16,23-26], and then unabashedly claim
unintentional anthropogenic global warming through the
combustion of fossil fuels is the sole cause of climate change.
The Director-General of the UN’s World Health Organization
recently noted  that the simple act of breathing is killing
seven million people a year and injuring billions more. “No one,
rich or poor, can escape air pollution, ” he acknowledges,
“ Despite this epidemic of needless, preventable deaths and
disability, a smog of complacency pervades the planet. ” In
accordance with the Precautionary Principle in Public Health
[66,67], as credentialed professionals two of us (JMH and MW)
submitted to the Bulletin of the World Health Organization a
Perspective warning of the worldwide health risks of the
environmental modification by jet-emplaced particulate pollution.
That Perspective was rejected without review .
The UN’s Rio Declaration on Environment and Development
, a pillar of UN ’ s Convention on Biological Diversity,
Herndon JM et al.
Agrotechnology, Vol.9 Iss.1 No:191 5
declares: “States shall cooperate in a spirit of global partnership to
conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the Earth's
ecosystem.” The population decimation of insects , bats 
and birds  and the disruption of ecological balance in nature
[8,10,46] caused by tropospheric particulate spraying all stand in
striking conflict with the above stated mandate of the UN’s Rio
Beneficiaries of ENMOD mandated
As U. S. Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson stated in a May 27,
1962 address to Southwest Texas State University , “He who
controls the weather will control the world.” World control, that
is, the power to exercise world authority, is the UN’s intent in its
implementation of ENMOD , of its so-called environmental
improvement mandate, to which all other UN organizations are
subordinate, including its Food and Agriculture Organization.
There are other beneficiaries of ENMOD. Military
organizations, their corporate contractors and multiple
subcontractors, and associated, supporting and administrative
governmental organizations, all reap significant income from the
global ENMOD-sanctioned environmental modification activities.
Nor is that all.
ENMOD ’ s sanctioned “ peaceful” environmental modification
activities can obscure or act as a cover for hostile de facto
environmental warfare operations, nearly impossible to decipher
as such, as explained long ago by geoscientist and strategic
presidential advisor Gordon J. F. MacDonald .
In 1968, MacDonald  wrote of “…removing moisture from the
atmosphere so that a nation dependent on water...could be
subjected to years of drought. The operation could be concealed
by the statistical irregularity of the atmosphere. A nation
possessing superior technology in environmental manipulation
could damage an adversary without revealing its intent. ” In
2016, one of us (JMH) wrote : “ The development of a
methodology for inhibiting rainfall by spraying pollution
particulates into the troposphere has now progressed to an
operational level. The potential use of that may constitute
threats to the agriculture for any nation so targeted.”
Figure 5 is a NASA Worldview satellite image from February 4,
2016 that shows particulate trails blanketing the Republic of
Cyprus, but nearly absent in surrounding regions. Cyprus
citizens, so far to no avail, requested an explanation from their
government for the deliberate obscuration of their skies and
“extreme weather conditions” . Following the February 2016
presentations made to the Parliamentary Environmental
Committee, the Environment Services Department promised an
investigation of the aerial spraying, but to date no response has
One military purpose of aerial emplacement of particulate
matter into the regions where clouds form is to impede
precipitation, and cause damaging agricultural drought in an
unfriendly country . Former Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad accused Western countries of surreptitiously
engaging in drought-causing activities .
Figure 5: NASA Worldview satellite image from February 4, 2016
showing jet-emplaced particulate trails blanketing the air above the
Republic of Cyprus but nearly absent in surrounding regions.
The winter of 2006/2007 began an extremely harsh 3-year
drought that devastated agriculture in Syria and led to civil war,
which some believe bore indications of anthropogenic causation
. Were anthropogenic factors in play and were
geoengineering activities a factor, was malicious intent involved?
We may never know, but the consequences experienced by the
millions of human lives affected may be taken as a warning of
what could happen when state or non-state entities use
environmental modification techniques to cause agricultural collapse
or bring about other malevolent results.
The United Nations deceived many governments to sign on to a
treaty that obligates them to be unwitting pawns in
compromising their national sovereignty and in their own
unwitting slow destruction. Instead of prohibiting “Hostile Use of
Environmental Modification Techniques, ” as its title suggests,
ENMOD obligates signatory nations to consent to and even
participate or acquiesce in unspecified “peaceful” environmental
modification activities performed by unspecified entities, under
unspecified circumstances, without limitation to harm inflicted
on agriculture, the environment, or human health.
Large-scale environment modification is not peaceful, but extremely
hostile. Ongoing undisclosed tropospheric aerosol
geoengineering and other geoengineering activity have already
begun to have devastating consequences for agriculture, as well
as widespread, long-lasting, and severe effects on human and
No one has the right to poison the air we breathe, or to disrupt
agriculture and poison the soil, or to cause weather and climate
chaos, or to slowly and insidiously cause lung cancer, cardiac,
neurodegenerative, respiratory, or other diseases that will
inevitably result from the aerial spraying, or to harm God’ s
creatures in the same way – specifically by disrupting once stable
weather patterns, decimating insect, bat, and bird populations,
exacerbating wildfires and destroying forests, enabling harmful
algae in our waters, and destroying the ozone layer that shields
life from the sun’s deadly ultraviolet radiation. Yet these are all
consequences of the ongoing ENMOD-sanctioned environment
Ongoing environmental modification activities, we allege,
constitute de facto warfare on sovereign nations, warfare that
cripples agriculture, damages the biosphere, and leads to massive
Herndon JM et al.
Agrotechnology, Vol.9 Iss.1 No:191 6
human suffering and death. Moreover, those activities are
blatantly contradictory to the missions of other UN entities,
including, but not limited to, the World Health Organization,
the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, and the
Food and Agriculture Organization.
The absence of public disclosure and concerted disinformation
about the ongoing ENMOD-sanctioned environmental
modification activities is further evidence of deceitful intent.
Moreover, the techniques developed can be applied
surreptitiously by lawless states to inflict agriculturally
devastating droughts on enemy nations.
Life on Earth is possible because of a delicate balance between
myriad biota and their environments. The adverse consequences
of ENMOD-sanctioned environmental modification activities pose
the greatest anthropogenic threat to life on Earth. Agricultural
collapse and mass starvation are one of the potential
consequences. Environmental modification activities must be
halted immediately and permanently if we and our progeny are
to live healthy lives.
The covert global operation should be exposed to public
When tropospheric particulate emplacement ceases, the
pollution particles will fall to Earth in a matter of days or weeks,
global warming will be reduced, and that will lead to
improvements in agricultural production, public and
environmental health, and the long-awaited return of natural
blue skies, a boon to the spirits of people everywhere on Earth.
2. MacDonald GJF. How to wreck the environment. Unless Peace
Comes: A Scientific Forecast of New Weapons. New York: The
Viking Press; 1968:181-205.
3. Herndon JM, Whiteside M, Baldwin I. Fifty Years after “How to
Wreck the Environment” : Anthropogenic Extinction of Life on
Earth. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2018;16(3):1-15.
4. Cohen W. Address by Defense Secretary Cohen: Terrorism,
Weapons of Mass Destruction, and U. S. Strategy. 1997.
6. Herndon JM. An indication of intentional efforts to cause global
warming and glacier melting. J Geography Environ Earth Sci Int.
7. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Further evidence of coal fly ash
utilization in tropospheric geoengineering: Implications on human
and environmental health. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn.
8. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Contamination of the biosphere with
mercury: Another potential consequence of on-going climate
manipulation using aerosolized coal fly ash J Geog Environ Earth
Sci Intn. 2017;13(1):1-11.
9. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. California wildfires: Role of
undisclosed atmospheric manipulation and geoengineering. J
Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2018;17(3):1-18.
10. Herndon JM, Williams DD, Whiteside M. Previously
unrecognized primary factors in the demise of endangered torrey
pines: A microcosm of global forest die-offs. J Geog Environ Earth
Sci Intn 2018;16(4):1-14.
11. Stocker T, Qin D, Plattner G, Tignor M, Allen S, Boschung J, et
al. IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 1535 pp.
Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York; 2013.
13. Kirby PA. Chemtrails Exposed 2012.
14. Thomas W. Chemtrails Confirmed. Carson City, Nevada (USA):
Bridger House Publishers; 2004.
16. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Further evidence that particulate
pollution is the principal cause of global warming: Humanitarian
considerations. Journal of Geography, Environment and Earth
Science International. 2019;21(1):1-11.
17. Herndon JM. An open letter to members of AGU, EGU, and
IPCC alleging promotion of fake science at the expense of human
and environmental health and comments on AGU draft
geoengineering position statement. New Concepts in Global
Tectonics Journal. 2017;5(3):413-416.
18. Shearer C, West M, Caldeira K, Davis SJ. Quantifying expert
consensus against the existence of a secret large-scale atmospheric
spraying program. Environ Res Lett. 2016;11(8):084011.
19. Tingley D, Wagner G. Solar geoengineering and the chemtrails
conspiracy on social media. Palgrave Communications. 2017;3(1):
20. 20. Schumann U. On conditions for contrail formation from
aircraft exhausts. Meteorologisch Zeitschrift. 1996;N.F.5:4-23.
21. Herndon JM. Adverse agricultural consequences of weather
modification. AGRIVITA Journal of agricultural science.
22. Grenfell TC, Warren SG, Mullen PC. Reflection of solar radiation
by the Antarctic snow surface at ultraviolet, visible, and near‐
infrared wavelengths. Journal of Geophysical Research:
23. Herndon JM. Air pollution, not greenhouse gases: The principal
cause of global warming. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn.
24. Herndon JM. Science misrepresentation and the climate-science
cartel. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2018;18(2):1-13.
25. Herndon JM. Fundamental climate science error: Concomitant
harm to humanity and the environment J Geog Environ Earth Sci
26. Herndon JM. Role of atmospheric convection in global warming. J
Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2019;19(4):1-8.
27. Zhao C, Liu B, Piao S, Wang X, Lobell DB, Huang Y, et al.
Temperature increase reduces global yields of major crops in four
independent estimates. Proceedings of the National Academy of
28. Tigchelaar M, Battisti DS, Naylor RL, Ray DK. Future warming
increases probability of globally synchronized maize production
shocks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
29. Vogel E, Donat MG, Alexander LV, Meinshausen M, Ray DK,
Karoly D, et al. The effects of climate extremes on global
agricultural yields. Environmental Research Letters. 2019;14(5):
30. Scheelbeek PF, Bird FA, Tuomisto HL, Green R, Harris FB, Joy
EJ, et al. Effect of environmental changes on vegetable and legume
yields and nutritional quality. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences. 2018;115(26):6804-6809.
Herndon JM et al.
Agrotechnology, Vol.9 Iss.1 No:191 7
32. El Husseini MM. Weather Engineering and its Undesirable Side
Effects on the Environment, Natural Resources, Agriculture and
Human. Acta Scientific Agriculture. 2019;3.7.
33. Whiteside M, Herndon JM. Previously unacknowledged potential
factors in catastrophic bee and insect die-off arising from coal fly
ash geoengineering Asian J Biol. 2018;6(4):1-13.
34. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Unacknowledged potential factors in
catastrophic bat die-off arising from coal fly ash geoengineering.
Asian Journal of Biology. 2019;8(4):1-13.
35. Whiteside M, Herndon JM. Aerosolized coal fly ash: A previously
unrecognized primary factor in the catastrophic global demise of
bird populations and species. Asian J Biol. 2018;6(4):1-13.
36. Moreno N, Querol X, Andrés JM, Stanton K, Towler M, Nugteren
H, et al. Physico-chemical characteristics of European pulverized
coal combustion fly ashes. Fuel. 2005;84:1351-1363.
37. Sparling DW, Lowe TP. Environmental hazards of aluminum to
plants, invertibrates, fish, and wildlife. Rev Environ Contam
38. Kopittke PM, Moore KL, Lombi E, Gianoncelli A, Ferguson BJ, et
al. Identification of the primary lesion of toxic aluminum in plant
roots. Plant Physiology. 2015;167(4):1402-1411.
39. Delany A, Shedlovsky J, Pollock W. Stratospheric aerosol: The
contribution from the troposphere. Journal of Geophysical
40. Fromm MD, Servranckx R. Transport of forest fire smoke above
the tropopause by supercell convection. Geophysical Research
41. Yu P, Rosenlof KH, Liu S, Telg H, Thornberry TD, Rollins AW, et
al. Efficient transport of tropospheric aerosol into the stratosphere
via the Asian summer monsoon anticyclone. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences. 2017;114(27):6972-6977.
42. Herndon JM, Hoisington RD, Whiteside M. Deadly ultraviolet
UV-C and UV-B penetration to Earth ’ s surface: Human and
environmental health implications. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn.
43. Tie X, Huang R-J, Dai W, Cao J, Long X, Su X, et al. Effect of
heavy haze and aerosol pollution on rice and wheat productions in
China. Scientific reports. 2016;6:29612.
44. El-Shobokshy MS, Hussein FM. Degradation of photovoltaic cell
performance due to dust deposition on to its surface. Renewable
45. Rai A, Kulshreshtha K, Srivastava P, Mohanty C. Leaf surface
structure alterations due to particulate pollution in some common
plants. The Environmentalist. 2010;30(1):18-23.
46. Whiteside M, Herndon JM. Role of Aerosolized Coal Fly Ash in
the Global Plankton Imbalance: Case of Florida's Toxic Algae
Crisis. Asian Journal of Biology. 2019;8(2):1-24.
47. Landrigan PJ, Fuller R, Acosta NJ, Adeyi O, Arnold R, Baldé AB,
et al. The Lancet Commission on pollution and health. The
48. Friedrich M. Air Pollution Is Greatest Environmental Threat to
Health. JAMA. 2018;319(11):1085.
49. Maher BA, Ahmed IA, Karloukovski V, MacLaren DA, Foulds
PG, Allsop D, et al. Magnetite pollution nanoparticles in the
human brain. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2016;113(39):10797-10801.
50. Plascencia-Villa G, Ponce A, Collingwood JF, Arellano-Jiménez MJ,
Zhu X, Rogers JT, et al. High-resolution analytical imaging and
electron holography of magnetite particles in amyloid cores of
Alzheimer’s disease. Scientific Reports. 2016;6:24873.
51. Calderón-Garcidueñas L, González-Maciel A, Mukherjee PS,
Reynoso-Robles R, Pérez-Guillé B, Gayosso-Chávez C, et al.
Combustion-and friction-derived magnetic air pollution
nanoparticles in human hearts. Environmental Research.
52. Jeremy W. Air pollution and brain health: an emerging issue.
53. Whiteside M, Herndon JM. Aerosolized coal fly ash: Risk factor
for neurodegenerative disease. Journal of Advances in Medicine
and Medical Research. 2018;25(10):1-11.
54. Miller KA, Siscovick DS, Sheppard L, Kristen Shepherd K,
Sullivan JH, et al. Long-term exposure to air pollution and
incidence of cardiovascular events in women. N Engl J Med.
55. Whiteside M, Herndon JM. Coal fly ash aerosol: Risk factor for
lung cancer. Journal of Advances in Medicine and Medical
56. Whiteside M, Herndon JM. Aerosolized coal fly ash: Risk factor
for COPD and respiratory disease. Journal of Advances in
Medicine and Medical Research. 2018;26(7):1-13.
57. MacIntyre EA, Gehring U, Mölter A, Fuertes E, Klümper C,
Krämer U, et al. Air pollution and respiratory infections during
early childhood: an analysis of 10 European birth cohorts within
the ESCAPE Project. Environmental Health Perspectives.
58. World Health Organization. Ambient air pollution: A global
assessment of exposure and burden of disease. 2016.
59. Leiser CL, Hanson HA, Sawyer K, Steenblik J, Al-Dulaimi R,
Madsen T, et al. Acute effects of air pollutants on spontaneous
pregnancy loss: a case-crossover study. Fertility and Sterility.
60. Perin PM, Maluf M, Czeresnia CE, Januário DANF, Saldiva PHN.
Effects of exposure to high levels of particulate air pollution
during the follicular phase of the conception cycle on pregnancy
outcome in couples undergoing in vitro fertilization and embryo
transfer. Fertility and sterility. 2010;93(1):301-313.
61. Kilian J, Kitazawa M. The emerging risk of exposure to air
pollution on cognitive decline and Alzheimer's disease–evidence
from epidemiological and animal studies. Biomedical journal.
62. Calderón-Garcidueñas L, Azzarelli B, Acuna H, Garcia R,
Gambling TM, Osnaya N, et al. Air pollution and brain damage.
Toxicologic Pathology. 2002;30(3):373-389.
63. Calderon-Garciduenas L, Franko-Lira M, Mora-Tiscareno A,
Medina-Cortina H, Torres-Jardon R, Early Alzheimer'd and
Parkinson's disease pathology in urban children: Friend verses foe
response - it's time to face the evidence. BioMed Research
64. Weuve J, Puett RC, Schwartz J, Yanosky JD, Laden F, Grodstein F.
Exposure to particulate air pollution and cognitive decline in
older women. Archives of internal medicine. 2012;172(3):219-227.
65. Carrington D, Taylor M. Air pollution is the ‘new tobacco’, warns
WHO head. The Gaurdian. 27 October 2018.
66. Harrell JA, Baker EL. The essential services of public health.
Leadership Public Health. 1994;3(3):27-30.
67. Kriebel D, Tickner J, Epstein P, Lemons J, Levins R, Loechler EL,
et al. The precautionary principle in environmental science
Environ Healt Perspec. 2001;109(9):871-876.
68. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Geoengineering: The deadly new
global “Miasma”. Journal of Advances in Medicine and Medical
Herndon JM et al.
Agrotechnology, Vol.9 Iss.1 No:191 8
72. Staff R. Ahmadinejad says enemies destroy Iran's rain clouds -
reports. Commodity News [Internet]. 2011.
73. Kelley CP, Mohtadi S, Cane MA, Seager R, Kushnir Y. Climate
change in the Fertile Crescent and implications of the recent
Syrian drought. Proceedings of the national Academy of Sciences.
74. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Geophysical consequences of
tropospheric particulate heating: Further evidence that
anthropogenic global warming is principally caused by particulate
pollution. Journal of Geography, Environment and Earth Science
Herndon JM et al.
Agrotechnology, Vol.9 Iss.1 No:191 9