Cyclone Oswald formed in the hot waters of the Gulf of Carpentaria on January 21^st 2013. Oswald crossed Cape York, headed east and tracked 3000 kilometers along the east Australian coast from Cairns to Sydney. The storm manages to hit every major checkpoint along the way. The storm also curves with and continues to stay very close to the east Australian coastline (As sourced from the image attached to this post). Luckily I read the Sydney Morning Herald, because without this newspaper I would have no image which provides the full path and track of Cyclone Oswald. Why are there no images that provide the full path and track of Cyclone Oswald on the internet?

Also attached to this post is an article written by Anthony Cornelius. Anthony is a meteorologist from Weather Watch and his article is titled “Oswald shows flaws in warning system”. Anthony quotes, “Oswald was difficult to forecast because it took an unprecedented path from Cairns to Sydney” and that “there is no other system on the record books that might have helped inform meteorologists about how it might behave“. The caption under the title suggests that “unusual behavior and limited information made it hard to predict”. The behavior of Cyclone Oswald was unusual and the track of Cyclone Oswald was also unusual.

The Wikipedia page below is labeled “2013 Eastern Australia floods”, rather than Cyclone Oswald and the path of Oswald is incomplete. It seems I have to rely on two pages from the Sydney Morning Herald in regards to path.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclone_Oswald

Attached below is the only image available that provides the full track of Cyclone Oswald. It speaks for itself. (Source: Sydney Morning Herald “Tuesday 29th January 2013″)

The ENMOD Convention is specifically intended to prevent use of the environment as a means of warfare by prohibiting the deliberate manipulation of natural processes in order to protect the environment because these modifications could produce phenomena such as hurricanes, tidal waves or changes in climate. Unfortunately environmental modification can be used outside of conflict without any knowledge its occurrence.

Convention on the Prohibition of Military or any other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques – United Nations Treaty (Signed in Geneva May 18, 1977)

The treaty created a list of phenomena that could result from the use of environmental modification techniques (this list is sourced from the United Nations Treaty above):

“earthquakes and tsunamis; an upset in the ecological balance of a region; changes in weather patterns (clouds, precipitation, cyclones and tornadic storms); changes in climate patterns; changes in ozone currents; changes in the state of the ozone layer and changes in the state of the ionosphere.”

On February 7th 2013, three months after Hurricane Sandy devastated the New York State area, “Colossal Blizzard Nemo” ripped through the same area of the United States. This resulted in heavy snowfall and hurricane force winds. If Sandy was manufactured, could this phenomena be the result of Hurricane Sandy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blizzard_of_2013

As stated in an earlier post, it is unfortunate that the ENMOD treaty prohibits only the use and not the research into environmental modification techniques. Since ENMOD it is evident that environmental modification has been researched and at very least tested. To what degree has our climate been effected since 1976? Has the effect of weather and environmental modification been so severe that the world has decided to impatiently geoengineer and create a carbon conspiracy? Are governments now taking advantage of these past effects with the use of their own environmental modification techniques? (E.g. Sandy, Evan & Oswald?)

The treaty also aims to prohibit the use of any prohibited techniques within a States territory (sourced from the United Nations Treaty):

“In particular, each State should enact criminal legislation to outlaw and repress the use of prohibited techniques within its territory and anywhere else under its jurisdiction or control.”

ENMOD was enacted because of Operation Popeye, which was a United States military cloud seeding operation. In the United States there are a number of civilian run weather modification programs and associations, for example “Weather Modification, Inc.” and the “Weather Modification Association”. In China the “Beijing Weather Modification Office” runs as a unit of the Beijing Meteorological Bureau. The Beijing Weather Modification Office form a part of China’s nationwide weather control effort, believed to be the world’s largest and it employs 37,000 people nationwide. These civilian run programs do exactly the same thing as Popeye, seed clouds. It should not matter on what scale weather modification is used, collectively it could have the same effect. I believe that criminal legislation should be enacted to outlaw and repress the use of cloud seeding due to the fact that ENMOD was enacted because of cloud seeding.

The treaty also states:

“Any State with reason to believe that any other State is violating the Convention may lodge a complaint with the Security Council of the United Nations, on the basis of which the Security Council may conduct an inquiry.”

I have reason to believe a State is violating (Sandy, Evan, Oswald). Unfortunately I am not a State and I do not know which State is violating. Therefore, environmental modification presents a very difficult situation because this criteria needs to be met. A State needs to lodge a complaint and there needs to be enough suspicion on the State that is violating. If we exposed the effect of weather and environmental modification to the world and exposed the unusual nature of storms and the possibility that they are manufactured, people would do the rest. The major problems in the world today with technology, weaponry and the environment began when governments started keeping secrets. We wouldn’t have these problems if they just exposed the truth about everything in the first place.