Mysteries, Chemtrails, Aerosols :: Mysterious NZ New Zealand based Discussion Forums The strange & mysterious, archaeological anomalies, modern oddities... Current affairs, health & medical issues, Aerosol Spraying in NZ... ...and general interest: ARCHIVES
Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:09 pm Post Subject: Let's have a look at some of the 'evidence' then
Operation Sunscreen By Arnold Kling 02 Nov 2006
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=110206B
This is an essay written by Arnold Kling who "is a TCS (Technology Commerce Society) Contributing Editor and an adjunct scholar with the Cato Institute.
He holds a Ph.D. in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology." (from his biographical blurb)
He is an academic economist and says in part...
"Climate engineering, or what I call Operation Sunscreen, would mean trying to alter the heat absorption properties of the atmosphere. The goal might be to reduce average temperatures by, say, 2 degrees centigrade.
I have no idea how to reduce heat absorption, ... " and so on. He doesn't have the slightest glimmer of any understanding of the physics of the problem, or of his solution, for that matter.
It's not a real operation. It's just an idea someone might toss about in the tea break.
There are no other references that I could find, and I wanted to find them, believe me, about Operation Sunscreen other than to the original essay, re-runs of it, or comments about it on weblogs.
What is TCS Daily? See http://www.tcsdaily.com/about.aspx
Ah, yes... a free market extremist think tank.
Here is what Wikipedia says about TCS Daily (formerly Tech Central Station) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tech_Central_Station The wiki is more polite, but you get the idea.
This is an opportunity to make a comment involving the revolution and walls.
Dr. Edward Teller
Here he is in the big Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Teller
You quoted this from the source document at http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/WOR406A.html Chemtrails: Aerosol and Electromagnetic Weapons in the Age of Nuclear War by Amy Worthington.
"In 1997, Teller publicly outlined his proposal to use aircraft to scatter in the stratosphere millions of tons of electrically-conductive metallic materials, ostensibly to reduce global warming.
Shortly after Teller’s presentation, the public began seeing frenetic chemtrailing."
Wait a minute... Chemtrails/contrails are in the troposphere (yes, near the top of it, although some say lower). Teller suggested the stratosphere which is above the troposphere, so the sprayers are operating in all the wrong places if they are following Teller's suggestion. Hello-o!
What is www.globalresearch.ca ? Centre for Research on Globalisation
Ah, yes... lefty, neo-socialist anti-globalisation think tank. It'll be these guys who probably will start the revolution!
You chaps aren't too choosy about which end of the econo-political spectrum you cherry-pick your information from, are you? One end to the other without hardly pausing for breath! Spectacular, elevate.
William Thomas http://www.willthomas.net/ (the researcher, not the country/folk/rock musician who is at the .com) is extensively quoted and referenced by Amy Worthington in her "Chemtrails" article.
Just as a little interlude, here's a plug for a program on the Discovery Channel shortly. I think this was on the home page of the William Thomas site... whatever.
Quote:
Chemical Contrails
Don’t miss this upcoming Discovery Channel Special on “Chemical Contrails”
After more than eight years of controversy and censorship, the Discovery Channel is set to bring “chemtrails” into living rooms across North America at 9PM, February 22nd, 2007.
The producers ask: “What is in those fuel emissions, and what causes them to linger for hours and link up with one another like a ghostly blanket that seems to affect the weather and perhaps our health?” Are lingering jet trails seen by millions of people “potentially toxic ‘chemical trails’ emitted intentionally as part of secret geo-engineering experiments or weather-weaponization tests?”
To answer these questions, “Best Evidence” has spent months asking “experts and passionate observers on both sides” to present their best evidence exposing decades of weather modification experiments. Featuring an extended conversation with original chemtrails investigator William Thomas, as well as many other chemtrails researchers and debunkers, the show’s field producer has told willthomas.net that this first-ever television special on chemtrails will be “spectacular”.
At least this is what one American father found while paging through his child's science book. SmT was astonished to find seventh graders being taught about chemtrails. And geoengineeering their home planet.
Anyone with question about the "spray programs" he now says, "should perhaps just ask their kids."
The chemtrails section is found in the Centre Point Learning Science I Essential Interactions science book. Under "Solutions for Global Warming", section 5.19 features a photo of a big multi-engine jet sporting a familiar orange/red paint scheme.
The caption reads: "Figure 1- Jet engines running on richer fuel would add particles to the atmosphere to create a sunscreen".
The logo on the plane says: "Particle Air".
"I kid you not," SmT insists. "Why did I spend all of that time doing research when I could have just asked my kids?"
Helping habituate children to a life under lethal sunshine and "protective" spray planes, this trippy textbook urges young readers to "Use Sun Block". But its authors are referring to a sunscreen spread across the sky.
"Could we deliberately add particles to the atmosphere?" asks the text, before helpfully suggesting that "Burning coal adds soot to the air."
You might be old enough to recoil at such a notion. But in a country where down is up and wrong is right, your kids could be learning that what used to be bad and a bummer is a now good thing!
Well, that's the spin on it... there's more; read it if you want to. The link's up there.
This (the school book) is on a level a little above the Operation Sunscreen essay by Arnold Kling, the academic economist. The authors of the school book probably have some idea of the science involved. But it's not a real airline! It's not a real operation! It's a suggestion for a discussion in a school setting about global warming and possible solutions. It's an intellectual exercise! An intelligent kid would likely say, "Oh, stop it! The atmosphere is polluted enough, and you want to spray particulates into it now? You idiots! It won't work anyhow, and here's why..."
I will get to the "An Airline Manager's Statement," Posted by C.E. Carnicom on behalf of the author which you picked out of the notes of the Amy Worthington piece.
Here's the powerful penultimate paragraph of Ms Worthington's work, well worth quoting it's so well crafted...
Quote:
So, while we await the great awakening, have a wonderful, barium-dried summer under a synthetic tarpaulin of aluminum-white, particle-laden, electrically-charged aviation scum that passes for sky. Endure well your respiratory and ocular difficulties while staring at huge oily sun rings and smeary sundogs, the patent signature of chemical assault. Don't forget to salute and click your heels when you see tanker formations patriotically saturating the atmosphere with such a dense, micro-particulate brew that they cast black shadows alongside or ahead of themselves.
Well, I certainly agree with Amy on that one - they are shadows. Brilliant! Disappointing there's no footnote with a reference to support her opinion. But then, self evident, I suppose.
I'll have a look at the other stuff later, and possibly post some comments. But, really, if this is the quality and depth of the material upon which you are basing your stand, I may not bother.
It's quite apparent that the route along the shortest distance between any two unrelated random points is well under construction in many places on the information super highway.
Joined: 05 Nov 2003
Posts: 814
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 8:52 am Post Subject:
Hector wrote:
Well, I certainly agree with Amy on that one - they are shadows. Brilliant! Disappointing there's no footnote with a reference to support her opinion. But then, self evident, I suppose.
Personally, I don't regard Will Thomas as any kind of authority (I think he has agendas all his own), nor for that matter, do I imagine that Discovery Channel will present anything balanced or genuinely informative.
Self evident? Now, Hector - how does the science work again? When the sun is in front of the plane, which is leaving a contrail behind it, a long dark shadow is cast in front of the plane??
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 11:09 am Post Subject: yawn
Quote:
You chaps aren't too choosy about which end of the econo-political spectrum you cherry-pick your information from, are you? One end to the other without hardly pausing for breath! Spectacular, elevate.
yawn hector, whats your point exactly?
you seem to have missed my point as usual...
For starters as ive already stated before your selection process for what constitutes usefull information is extremely narrow minded and SELECTIVE...
something needs to have a .govt at the end of the website for you to take any notice of it... as ive already said i dont pick and choose my sources of info based on some criterion, i keep an OPEN MIND and I look at all possiblities, and I dont avoid reading something or avoid a website because it has 'anti-globalisation' or 'leftist' or 'greenies' or whatever other stereotype or label YOU or some other wishes to put on a site or info.
My fluoride info was to demonstrate to you (as just one example) of why you cant always trust academics or govt institutions, and many of these people are simply paid for spokespersons, ie: they are in the pocket of some thinktank or whatever.
Its funny how in this new thread you critique my posts and then seem to think you have proven something.. but only in your mind dude, from your point of view.. you are so brainwashed its staggering, your whole approach to official type debunking stuff is laughable.. im sorry man but it is...
just a few points no i dont agree with everything carnicom says on his site, some think he has an adgenda, i dont know if he has, its very difficult to tell, but its also very difficult to tell if a governemnt group has an adgenda either, and they often do because thats what they are set up for ususally, to SELL something to the public mind... all dressed up in officialdom
but you Hector obviously dont see it that way..
you cant fathom how even a group of people could be used for the purpose of seeling something to the public, without individuals in that group even been aware that they are been used...
Things are not black and white, there are an infinate amount of shades of grey int this whole topic of chemtrails, government sponsored terrorism, black budget exercises, public conditioning, manipulation of awareness and information, and it is patently obvious to me Hector from your last post and others that we are wasting our time with this thread..
you debunking is great... only if your on a website with heaps of other skeptics and debunkers, then u might get someone who agrees with you.. i think youir wasting your time here... anyway
im certainly not going to counter debunk your debunking anymore as its coming from a totally different mindset.. can you see this?
please refer to my previous posts and comments on different mindsets and about your own selective researching for replies to your future posts, otherwise ill just end up repeating myself endlessly...
You have mad eit clear how you research this stuff, you DONT..
first you ignore, sidestep or ridicule anything that has by your admission a 'conspiracy' label, a leftist, or rightwing, or anti-govt, or anti-globalisation or even has the word "chemtrail" on it...
this website has the word chemtrail all through it... by your own admission you should have never came here in the first place if you used a seach engine to find it, you have clearly pointed out how you SELF FILTER info and limit the possibilities of your own research and thinking by conditioned and assumed stereotypes by simply ignoring websites or info in search engines.
This admission alone is bizzare to any free-thinker...
perhaps you think of free-thinkers as lefties or flakey or whatever
i recon if everyone was like you '1984' would already be a full blown reality on this planet... just my opinion...
cheers anyway its been kinda fun, i havnt learnt anything new yet from your input but its been a laugh...
I suggest you read up on the tavistock institute and how they mold public opinion by seeding phrases into the mainstream media, like 'terrorist' and conspiraicy theory ete, you might learn something from it...
but i guess youd just goto wikipedia for your info on that right? or perhaps look for a govt. sponsored website to tell you what a wonderfull service tavistock has performed over the years aye?!
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 11:15 am Post Subject: hey
hey hector arnet you been a bit selective in your debunking replies? why dont you check out ALL the chemtrail-type patents i pointed out previously, not just that teller one again...
i see a patten here, you skim over my stuff and u attack bits that you can attack, then i and others probably do the same with your info, and we both have our reasons for doing this due to our totally different mindsets, whats the point? there is none i recon, its a waste of time.. its yawny
You know elevate, your posts would be a far better read with a little attention to your spelling and grammar. For someone with the ability to rattle off such verbose answers one would think you would have the intelligence to be able to spell " you’re/your" correctly e.g.
Quote:
you debunking is great... only if your on a website with heaps of other skeptics and debunkers, then u might get someone who agrees with you.. i think youir wasting your time here... anyway
Dr. Edward Teller and "his proposal to use aircraft to scatter in the stratosphere millions of tons of electrically-conductive metallic materials, ostensibly to reduce global warming.
Shortly after Teller’s presentation, the public began seeing frenetic chemtrailing."
The original article making this connection is at
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/WOR406A.html Chemtrails: Aerosol and Electromagnetic Weapons in the Age of Nuclear War by Amy Worthington.
See my comments in a post above.
Actually, there's a lot of information in the Worthington piece that warrants some digging, so I'll come back to that. It's full of footnotes and references so it should be easy going... up to a point.
The following declassified U.S. Government documents can be obtained from:
Office of the Inspector General
Pattie Cirino
Chief, FOIA/PA Office
400 Army Navy Drive, Room 405
Arlington, VA 22202-2885
(703) 604-9775
fax number: (703) 604-9792
e-mail address: foia@dodig.osd.mil
...
Operation Cloverleaf 9810109-V and 9910395-P closed 30 Nov 1999 and 03 Aug 2000;
...
www.mindcontrolforums.com? Ok...
I sent an e-mail to the address given. FOIA is the abbreviation for Freedom Of Information Act in the US. Our equivalent is the Official Information Act. My message bounced; the reason given was that the e-mail address is "blocked". The email address was probably avalanched by e-mail after mindcontrolforums put that document up, so not surprising that it's blocked now.
There is another site that has declassified US Government documents; "The National Security Archive" at http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/ . A search there didn't return a link to Operation Cloverleaf. Well, it may not be a "National Security" operation.
Dead-end so far with getting a look at those documents. Actually, I am unsure if it is "Project Cloverleaf" or "Operation Cloverleaf". The Worthington article uses the two interchangeably, so a good look at the references will clear that up. Later.
NCAR (National Center for Atmospheric Research)
I'm still researching that lead.
how do you explain hector thses two planes side by side (against the rules), one trail is a different colour to the other so clearly different compositions in the spray..
...
NOTE: on this video clearly can be seen a black line projected in front of ONE of the planes only... this is a very interesting video and worth pausing and watching closely, we see two different coloured lines formed and two planes very close and a black line effect.
The video shows two aircraft in loose, line-abreast formation, possibly 50 to 100 metres apart. The video soundtrack says that there was nothing corresponding to these on Flight Explorer, and that the (local?) air traffic radar controller said there was nothing on their radar. If they were military, they would not be on FE. We know that. Who knows what the air traffic radar guys are allowed to say about radar targets they see painted on their displays? The military flights policy that applies to data that appears (or does not appear) on FE may well extend to what they can convey on the phone. I suppose, with the proper air traffic clearances, military aircraft are allowed to travel this way.
As for the different colours of the contrails; there may be a number of explanations and the truth of the matter is probably not discoverable now. They may be different aircraft types, or different variants on the same type, for instance. And so on.
Ah, yes, the beams. Have a close look at about 0:28. There are two. And at 0:41 - 0:42 only the lower one has a beam. The person who took the video didn't notice, or thought nothing of it if he did. I think they are shadows, and I have discusses that aspect of this video clip in the "Beams" topic.
elevate introduces the next one:
Quote:
Also hector watch this video, does this look normal to you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlU5oEDByvc&NR
here we see normal planes NOT laying trails and other planes laying trails on the same day at similar altitudes, go figure?
Transcription:
0:00 (tweet-tweet) zoomed in to 2-engine, high altitude, contrailing, almost overhead
0:29 pan past a TV antenna, MVO: "Totally blue skies..." and so on, suburbs and cumulus sky
0:40 beach scene, cumulus/stratocumulus sky
0:49 seagull, soaring on the seabreeze
1:01 contrail, (zoom out) lots of them!
1:09 (zoomed) contrail, (zoom back and pan right), more contrails
1:10 (zoomed) contrail in a sky full of them, (zoom back and pan right), more contrails
1:18 distant contrail, briefly
1:20 another distant contrail in a sky full of them, MVO: "(mumble) blue sky... (more mumbling) ... ", more contrails back in the suburbs, MVO: " ... spreading out, spreading out...blending together to turn the sky completely white",
2:00 new contrail, old contrail, airplane at moderate altitude, not contrailing
2:02 2-engine jet, low altitude, not contrailing
2:07 (zoomed out) contrail, curved, MVO mumbling something
2:17 4-engine jet, high altitude, contrailing, almost overhead MVO: "... (more mumbling) ... "
2:24 (zoomed in) 2-engine jet with a blue tail, moderate altitude, not contrailing (zoom back to wide), contrails
2:32 (wide view) contrail forming, other colder contrails present
2:35 (zoomed in) same? 4-engine jet, high altitude, contrailing, MVO: " (mumble) ... streaming out of these jets in UK skies" (zoom out), other contrails
2:44 (wind view) trees, several contrails in the sky, (panning about) MVO: "Today in north Wales, they would have the same weather, not a trail in the sky, not a cloud in the sky, pure? blue skies."
2:54 rural scene, panning right MVO: "... (mumbling) ..."
2:58 rapid pan left, trees, contrails MVO: "... (mumbling something about skies) ..."
3:08 sunburst! trees, sun in shot with contrail forming and an older one, (zoom in) 4-engine jet, high altitude, contrailing, distant
3:17 sun in shot, pan to 2 fresh contrails, one curved, MVO: "... (mumble) ..." zoom to curved contrail crossing over the strait one MVO: "... crossed over"
3:25 zoom to 2-engine jet, moderate to low altitude, not contrailing, MVO: "grey wings and a while fuselage (zoom out) and you can hear it, and it's loud. It's very loud (indistinct)"
3:33 2-engine jet, low altitude, not contrailing, flying away from camera, MVO: "Not a whiff of a trail."
3:38 (ends)
The planes that were not contrailing had distinct shape, colour and outline when zoomed in to, and were clearly at lower altitude that the contrailing plains which were far less distinct when zoomed in to, and clearly at much higher altitude. There is nothing suspicious in this video, in my opinion. Jets doing what jets will do in the right conditions... making contrails. In some conditions contrails will persist for long periods, and spread out covering large areas. This is all well known. We saw it in Wellington one day in the week before last.
elevate introduced this next one:
Quote:
or how about this staggering video.. where two jets come very close to each other from the opposite directions, i recon these guys gotta be jet fighter pilots to be doing maneuvers like this.. i think its done to make scalar effects more visual for their testing of various frequency affects in the sky for various reasons and purposes... check it out!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A35vpnJpVsQ&mode=user&search=
How u explain these close flying over uk civilian airspace?
Staggering? OK, let's watch...
Transcription:
0:00 view of two contrails being formed, the 'plane approaching from the right will cross over the path ahead of the one from the left, MVO: "...( mumble) ..."
0:07 (zooming in) left 'plane crosses behind the right 'plane
At 0:09 (zooming further in) MVO: "eeh, very close." The left 'plane (moving towards the right) is well past the 'crossing' point, and a shadow appears on the contrail of the right 'plane (moving towards the left). This means that the 'plane moving towards the right is above and beyond (further away from camera) than the other. The planes are probably kilometres apart; they just look close from the cameras view point.
0:09-0:24 (zooming way in, panning about, trying to get something of interest in frame, finally zooms out rapidly to wide angle view) MVO: " (?) ... 'n'there's the cross." At 0:23 the cross is in view again and the shadow is no longer visible.
0:25 view of contrails through some tree branches, zooms way in to the head of a contrail being formed, zooms back out to the view through the branches.
0:43 zoomed to the head of another contrail forming in a sky already containing contrails, (voice over is indistinct), zooms way in, and back again
0:54 wide angle view (low angle - horizon of trees) of sky full of old and fresh contrails, MVO: "Clear morning. 8 o'clock on the 2nd of May.(?) The sky is absolutely turning white!"
1:03 panning low angle view of sky with some old contrails and cirrus which is possibly older contrails, MVO: "Come across; Not a cloud in the sky... every single thing here is from 'planes!"
1:12 trees and sun glare, pan left to fresh contrails, 4 crossing in the distance, one just being formed, panning left, bird sounds, pan to almost overhead, old contrails, pan right again to the crossed contrails, finish panning left again.
1:36 panning left along a high fence, showing the same part of the sky as in the previous take, same tree (the Larch!)
1:49 back to the same view as the beginning of the last take (Yep, this is a truly staggering video!), MVO: "(mumbles)", panning left, same fence, MVO: "Pure blue sky...", a glimpse of the Larch again, pan to high angle, contrails. MVO: "... absolutely covered in the stuff."
2:05 (ends)
There is nothing extraordinary in this video. Jets doing what jets will do in the right conditions... making contrails. In some conditions contrails will persist for long periods, and spread out covering large areas. This is all well known. We saw it in Wellington one day in the week before last.
It's like deja vu all over again.
These are close ups of non commercial jets leaving thick white permanent trails across Cheshire, England June 5th-8th 2006.
These trails were on the warmest driest days....
Airliners at any altitude in the same skies leave no trails.
Transcription:
00:00-00:15 2-engine, high altitude, contrailing
00:16-00:20 same one a bit later?
00:21-00:26 2-engine, high altitude, contrailing
00:27-00:33 4-engine, high altitude, contrailing
00:34-00:39 2-engine, high altitude, contrailing
00:40-00:42 2-engine?, moderate altitude?, not contrailing
00:42-00:50 views of contrails over the 'burbs
00:51-01:06 4-engine, high altitude, contrailing (trails of the LH 2 engines appear merged)
01:07-01:15 same one a bit later?
01:06-01:32 2-engine, high altitude, contrailing, almost overhead
01:33-01:47 same one a bit later?
01:48-02:04 2-engine, moderate altitude, not contrailing
02:05-02:20 view of contrails in late afternoon light; zoom to 2-engine? 'plane, high altitude, contrailing
02:21-02:39 one curved contrail, one straight, both high altitude
02:40-02:44 zoom out to view of same two contrails? and others in late afternoon light
02:45-02:54 2-engine, moderate to high altitude, not contrailing, almost overhead; zoom out to wider view
02:55-03:04 2-engine?, high altitude, contrailing, distant
03:05-03:25 2-engine, high altitude, contrailing, almost overhead
03:26 .. 03:52 same one a bit later? and a bit later again?
03:53-03:56 high altitude, contrailing, distant; zoom out to town-scape
03:57-04:02 (zoomed in) contrail
04:03-04:12 2-engine, high altitude, contrailing, almost overhead; zoom out briefly to include another contrail
04:13-04:26 2-engine?, high altitude, contrailing, almost overhead; zoom out briefly to include other contrails
04:27-04:33 4-engine, high altitude, contrailing; zoom out to view of a house
04:34-05:06 2-engine, high altitude, contrailing, almost overhead; quite a long take, trying to keep plane in frame; zoom out and pan to see another contrail
There is nothing remarkable there. These all look like passenger or freight jets to me. For contrails to occur, it doesn't matter at all what the conditions are like on the ground... warm, cold, dry ... it doesn't matter. What does matter is the conditions where the plane is flying. Cold and moist enough - contrails; not - none. It's that simple... and you can calculate it from a nearby sounding on the day.
elevate's intro for the last video was...
Quote:
....and still more evidence, barium and aluminium...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sm6rbwVUxGU&mode=related&search=
sounds like a lie to fix global warming to me.... but really with the intention of preparing the population for a mass culling by weakening us first...
thats whats going on.... the weather modification bill in congress, a perfect excuse to kill us ligitimately with a bullsh*t cover story...
Transcription:
NBC4 news item: (added to YouTube 24 May 2006)
00:00 "Community in the San Bernardino Mountains ... real mystery on its hands ... official explanation jet contrails causing strange lines in the sky and that it's pollen making people sick on the ground ... others convinced it is something else. Is the government experimenting with our weather?"
Insert: speeded up shots of contrails with shhhhht noise
00:20 "There was a HUGE dust cloud.""
00:25 Cedar Glen resident Gretchen Sherman "... never see any thing like it ... covered the entire Cedar Glen area."
00:30 "... a cloud of dust leaving a sticky yellow slime all over her car ..."
Insert: speeded up shots of contrails with the shhhhht noise
00:37 "It happened again last February. " (Year? Possibly 2005.)
00:40 "... calls to local Alpenhorn newspaper ..."
00:43 Dennis Labadie - publisher, Alpenhorn News - "... tremendous upsurge of children that were not going to school at that toime."
00:49 Pharmacist Ed Burrows - the most mysterious illness that he's seen in 22 years on the mountain - Ed Burrows: "... a lot of eye infection problems, upper repertory problems, nose bleeds ..."
00:58 Nearby March(?) Air Force Base says it didn't come from them - others said it was a pollen cloud
01:03 "Department of Health found a yellowish tint on a tissue submitted for testing but, quote, There was no sign of any biological form. ... such as cedar pollen and the test was ruled as inconclusive."
01:17 "... ballooned into a sky-high mystery ..."
01:20 Paul Moyer (The Channel 4 News): "People say the government is up there in airplanes spraying all kinds of chemicals to change or manipulate the weather; leaving what you see there; (contrail in the distance above a house and behind trees) and they call that a chemtrail."
01:30 Paul Moyer, interviewing a woman in a green dress: "So when I look up there and I think are contrails you're telling me are chemtrails." "Yes. A contrail would be dissipated by now." "It would?" "Yes, it would."
Insert: speeded up shots of contrails with the shhhhht noise, and cut to screen shot of the CHEMTRAILS web site
01:40 "On the Internet they are cited as proof that the government is creating cloud to combat global warming."
01:45 "In response the Air Force says that, quote, There is no such thing as a chemtrail - the actual contrail is a safe and natural phenomenon."
01:52 "... and that people are seeing more contrails simply because there are more jets forming large clouds depending on weather conditions as in this video of alleged chemtrails shot near San Francisco."
02:05 "I think these are contrails." Prof Gregory Benfield of UC Irvine works with the Department of Energy on weather research
02:12 Benfield: "That's very odd. They could be vary large contrails." Paul Moyer: "He says the DoE doesn't know of any jets spraying chemicals to affect the weather. (shot of 4-engine jet almost overhead with an intermittent contrail) However you will probably see it in the near future." Benfield: "You've got to in a sense engineer all these to you get the right kind of clouds for the effects we want."
02:27 "It is called geo-engineering. Fighting global warming by putting a chemical dust in the atmosphere and reflecting harmful radiation back into space."
Insert: speeded up shots of contrails with the shhhhht noise
02:35 "You could use barium oxide for example which makes big fluffy clouds; you could use tiny little bits of aloominum (=aluminium) (shots of intermittent contrails) which is benign in the environment; and essentially manage the climate."
02:46 Rosalind Peterson of California Skywatch: "... and what I found was unusual spiking since the early 1990's in barium, aloominum (=aluminium), and ..."
02:53 "Health Department records show a sharp increase in both chemicals in the water supply of northern California... (graphs in shot show plots low (50-150 ppm? to '96, 4300 in '97, 2500 in '98, and 0 in '99. Dated Jan 2001) ...
03:04 ... dating from the time the huge contrails started appearing over her home." (shot of crossing contrails; some old, some fresh) in Mendocino County)
03:08 Paul Moyer: "What is the significance of the barium and the aloominum?"
Rosalind Peterson: "I went and got all the tests, and all these things in the same test would be up, way over state and federal standards. This had to be airborne because how could it get to such diverse regions of our county?"
Insert: speeded up shots of contrails with the shhhhht noise
03:21 "We have jets going in every direction... X's, east, west, north, south, circles. Thirrus something going on in the air; I don't know exactly what, but I think there is some experimentation."
03:31 Paul Moyer: "Is it legal?"
03:33 Rosalind Peterson "I don't know because we haven't had a public discussion."
Insert: flash of a document and splat sound of it hitting the table (this is elsewhere in the clip at various points when documents are shown)
03:37 "But what is unknown today maybe actual fact tomorrow...
03:39 (shot of Capitol Building in Washington)
03:40 ... thanks to a bill soon to be voted on in the US Senate. A 'Weather Modification Act' calling for research in quote '... attempting to change or control by artificial methods the natural development of atmospheric cloud forms.'"
03:53 Paul Moyer: "Doesn't it seem to you that they're going to be doing it in the future for sure?"
03:55 Rosalind Peterson "Yes... and if they are, I want to know about it."
Insert: speeded up shots of contrails with the shhhhht noise
04:01 (flags flying from a pole on a building) "In the meantime people are wondering if they will ever get clear skies...
04:04 (4-engine jet, contrailing, almost overhead) ... and a clear answer."
unknown voice: "The legislation is there, therefore somebody is thinking about this."
04:09 (back to the interview with the green dress woman) "So, how does this make sense?" "I d'now. Maybe they're practising?" "What's their secret plan? ... over, over Arrowhead?" (shot of 2-engine jet, contrailing) "Ah... I guess you have to try it out before you use it? I'm not sure."
04:20 (back in the studio, Paul Moyer with a bemused look) "Well, you be the judge. We'll keep you posted further on this story, and there will be more, that's for sure. More information on the Weather Modification proposals, check on out web site, NBC4.TV."
04:30 (ends)
OK. What are the facts revealed here?
1 There was a cloud of yellow dust, twice. Tests revealed they contained barium and aluminium, but no biological substance, and were "inconclusive".
2 There are some medical problems associated with the dust cloud.
3 Contrails are seen. Some are persistent.
4 Prof Gregory Benfield is a bit surprised by the extent of a contrail, and is quoted out of context probably discussing how geo-engineering might be carried out and for what purpose. Unfortunate and irresponsible journalism, but this happens all the time. Watch any news item about something controversial, or even something fairly mundane and every-day.
5 Heath Department found barium and aluminium in California water supply in the late 90's. In 2001 these elements were no longer present.
6 Weather Modification Bill introduced in March 2005.
( Read it at http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-717 )
What is not established here?
1 There is no connection found or even conjectured about to connect the contrails with the dust cloud.
2 No connection of any kind is found between any of the dust cloud in Cedar Glen, the barium and aluminium in the California water supply, the contrails or the Weather Modification Bill.
All the way through there is the speeded up shots of contrails with the shhhhht noise to suggest that there is a connection. In fact, no connection is established in the news item. Clever editing, but poor journalism.
The dust cloud? The water supply tests? Sure, something nasty happened. But I seriously doubt these have anything to do with contrails. Sound familiar?
Rosalind Peterson is unfairly asked by Paul Moyer, "Is it legal?" How the hell would she know? He should be putting that question to someone qualified to give an informed answer; like a specialist in environmental law or resource management or whatever. Good grief, does this man possess any journalistic integrity at all?
I checked out the NBC4.TV web site for more on this story as Paul Moyer suggested. A search for "contrails" found 4 items. Two were the same video clip. One was a derisory article by a staff writer about goofy hoaxes. One was a teaser for the news item which caused the PC I was using to re-boot! Errrk!
I haven't been able to raise that site again, so I'll search there for "Weather Modification" some other time.
4) Chemtrail patents (US):
http://www.lightwatcher.com/chemtrails/patents.html
US patent 6,315,213 (Cordani) issued November 13, 2001.
US patent 5003186; Stratospheric Welsbach Seeding for Reduction of Global Warming, Hughes Aircraft Company, issued March 26, 1991.
6) Global Warming and Ice Ages: Prospects for Physics-Based Modulation of Global change, Edward Teller and Lowell Wood, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, prepared for invited presentation at the International Seminar On Planetary Emergencies, Erice, Italy, August 20-23, 1997;
7) "The Planet Needs a Sunscreen," Wall Street Journal, 10-17-97.
8) "An Airline Manager's Statement," Posted by C.E. Carnicom on behalf of the author, 5-22-00. (Project Cloverleaf)
9) Operation Cloverleaf 9810109-V and 9910395-P closed 30 Nov 1999 and 03 Aug 2000. I need to find another archive, or a live e-mail address at the US FOIA Office.
10) NCAR (National Center for Atmospheric Research)
What are they doing?
11) The Amy Worthington article: http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/WOR406A.html Chemtrails: Aerosol and Electromagnetic Weapons in the Age of Nuclear War. I will focus on the "chemtrail" parts of this as the depleted uranium issue is important but not relevant to the chemtrail/contrail controversy.
Have I overlooked anything? I hope not; and I don't want to transcribe any more of those goofy YouTube video clips! I might do "Numa Numa" as a special favour... but under what topic category? :wink:
good job there, i see youve got a good line up of info to check out...
hope it is enlightening for you...
cheers for the posts, ive read it and so far...well... chemtrails still exist.. but hey thats just my opinion, we can only really prove something to ourselves ultimately... someone can show us info but individually we must decide for ourselves what to make of it... intuition and gut feelings work well for some, not so well for others..
my point? no point.. just thoughts :)
Posted: Sun Mar 18, 2007 9:52 pm Post Subject: hey
hey this is just a we tangent, but have you heard about the fact that apparently there are no persistent contrails ever reported or photographed in china?
What i mean is no contrails that persist for more than say 5-10 minutes or spread out to cover the whole sky etc.. but im sure there must be a lot of air traffic...BUT china is not part of the UN, and apparently its only UN countries that report chemtrails.. something worth looking into that..
Also ive heard of reports of people in passenger planes flying from a UN country to a non UN country and remarking on how there is a dramatic change from heavy contrials seen to nothing in the non-UN country...
something also worth investigating...
