It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Whistleblower AC Griffith and California Chemtrails

page: 1
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 06:52 AM
link   
Continuing my research for the thread "Operation Indigo Skyfold," I was re-listening to AC Griffith's testimony in the YouTube video "Purpose of Chemtrails with AC Griffith":



Griffith stated that what's being sprayed is a barium salt.

A google search for "barium salt" brought up the website Stop Spraying California, where I saw a reference to "chemtrail samples," which, in turn, brought up the page "Chemtrail Articles" on the website.

One of the articles, "Have you looked at the skies lately?" states:


Sometimes chemtrails could be seen slowly falling toward the ground and samples can be collected. Dr. Len Horowitz has submitted chemtrail samples to the EPA but they refused to analyze them.

www.stopsprayingcalifornia.com...

Why, do you suppose, would the Environmental Protection Agency refuse to analyze them?

A huge red flag in my book.

Continuing, the article goes on to say:


Nevertheless, concerned citizens provided samples to the several independent laboratories which have conducted tests and the particulates of Aluminum oxide, Barium, Magnesium were detected in them.

www.stopsprayingcalifornia.com...

Regarding barium salt, the website states:


Barium levels found in chemtrail samples were at 6.8 ppm or “more than six times the toxic level set by the EPA.”

www.stopsprayingcalifornia.com...

Griffith goes on to say that the name of the program in the aircraft industry is Project Cloverleaf.

He said that the program is the most secretive thing he has ever encountered.

As I pointed out on the "Operation Indigo Skyfold" thread, Griffith had a top secret, cryptographic clearance, according to information posted by Zoom Info.

I certainly hope the smear of AC Griffith will not be posted again on this thread, which will indicate some progress and some hope.


and think, please, before replying.




posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 06:55 AM
link   
If they are using chemtrails to try and change California's climate, they aren't doing a very good job at it are they.

And I have NEVER seen a contrail ever get close to the ground enough for someone to get a sample with. I call BS on that. Coming from a Californian.
edit on 27-7-2015 by TheLotLizard because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: ConnectDots


…think, please, before replying.

About what, how barium salts are "destroying the country"?

Sorry, this guy hits every rung on the geo ladder all the way down…

Wright Patterson, CIA, secret spraying, secret results of secret spraying…

As droll as the 'only water' contrail crowd… expected shortly.


edit on 27-7-2015 by intrptr because: spelling



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:11 AM
link   
a reply to: TheLotLizard


And I have NEVER seen a contrail ever get close to the ground enough for someone to get a sample with. I call BS on that. Coming from a Californian.

I have seen that stuff drifting down. Also 'coming from a Californian'.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Barium levels found in chemtrail samples were at 6.8 ppm or “more than six times the toxic level set by the EPA.”

www.stopsprayingcalifornia.com...



Well that link won't open for me but I suspect you'll find that it was actually 0.0688 ppm and someone did the maths wrong

Also, as far as I'm aware nobody has ever sampled a trail and published their results
edit on 27-7-2015 by mrthumpy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
If they are using chemtrails to try and change California's climate, they aren't doing a very good job at it are they.

Actually, they are doing exactly what they intend to do.

"They" is the shadow government, which carries out numerous black projects to achieve their goals, which, by the way, are not goals that are in the best interest of ordinary folk.


And I have NEVER seen a contrail ever get close to the ground enough for someone to get a sample with. I call BS on that.

Are you saying a sample taken from the air?

I had assumed the article was referring to a sample taken from the ground.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Who doesn't enjoy a good salt bath? I like mine with a little barium and aluminum sulphate, ahhhh, so soothing!



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: ConnectDots

I had assumed the article was referring to a sample taken from the ground.


Have ground based sources been eliminated then?

If so, how?



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
If they are using chemtrails to try and change California's climate, they aren't doing a very good job at it are they.

And I have NEVER seen a contrail ever get close to the ground enough for someone to get a sample with. I call BS on that. Coming from a Californian.


It seems like this could be easy enough to capture on video. I'd love to see a cloud from 30,000 feet fall straight down.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:17 AM
link   
a reply to: ConnectDots

Ground samples are contaminated. You can't prove beyond a doubt that they're from a contrail or a ground source. The only way to be certain is a direct sample of a trail.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: TheLotLizard


And I have NEVER seen a contrail ever get close to the ground enough for someone to get a sample with. I call BS on that. Coming from a Californian.

I have seen that stuff drifting down. Also 'coming from a Californian'.



I sure hope you get get this on video! Perhaps you can get it tested too. Then you will KNOW what's in a contrail.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: ConnectDots
Dr. Len Horowitz has submitted chemtrail samples to the EPA but they refused to analyze them.


So why didn't the dentist get them analysed himself? Did he think it was the EPA's job to analyse anything given to them by some random off the street?


Why, do you suppose, would the Environmental Protection Agency refuse to analyze them?


Why do you suppose the EPA would?


A huge red flag in my book.


Why exactly do you think that?



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: mrthumpy
Well that link won't open for me but I suspect you'll find that it was actually 0.0688 ppm and someone did the maths wrong

Be patient.

The link takes a long time to open.


originally posted by: mrthumpy
Also, as far as I'm aware nobody has ever sampled a trail and published their results

If I am correct that we have a shadow government, which at the top is downright evil, then you are not going to find the published results you're looking for.

Everything centers around whether or not there is a shadow government.

If you're unwilling to consider that possibility, there's nothing to talk about as far as I'm concerned.

We would be wasting our time continuing the discussion of the wrong things.

Meanwhile, the spraying continues, and things just keep getting worse and worse while stupid conversations are carried on ad infinitum.
edit on 7/27/2015 by ConnectDots because: Clarify



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: mrthumpy



Barium levels found in chemtrail samples were at 6.8 ppm or “more than six times the toxic level set by the EPA.”




Toxic levels for what? You'll notice they don't say.

Drinking water MCLG can be up to 2ppm. Soil in the US averages 200 to 3000 ppm. So if your "chemtrail sample" is airborne dust, 6.8ppm is not out of line.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: ConnectDots

Wait, so the shadow government lets you guys publish some samples but not others?

Is this what you're saying? I mean you've quoted someone who took samples and got some results, yet you've just said the shadow government won't let the results get published.

So which is it?


edit on 27/7/15 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus

Chadwickus,

Please forgive my naivete.

I am relatively new to the chemtrail debate.

What do you mean by "ground based sources"?



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: ConnectDots
If I am correct that we have a shadow government, which at the top is downright evil, then you are not going to find the published results you're looking for.


However, if you're incorrect and there is no shadow government, you'll get the same results. Obviously, the test criterion of "not finding results" is thus meaningless.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: ConnectDots

What do you mean by "ground based sources"?


Dust from soil. Airborne dust and gas from brake pads or clutches. Or coal fired power plants. There are a lot of natural sources of barium in the air.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: ConnectDots

originally posted by: mrthumpy
Well that link won't open for me but I suspect you'll find that it was actually 0.0688 ppm and someone did the maths wrong

Be patient.

The link takes a long time to open.


originally posted by: mrthumpy
Also, as far as I'm aware nobody has ever sampled a trail and published their results

If I am correct that we have a shadow government, which at the top is downright evil, then you are not going to find the published results you're looking for.

Everything centers around whether or not there is a shadow government.

If you're unwilling to consider that possibility, there's nothing to talk about as far as I'm concerned.

We would be wasting our time continuing the discussion of the wrong things.

Meanwhile, the spraying continues, and things just keep getting worse and worse while stupid conversations are carried on ad infinitum.


The link comes up with an Unknown Host error


Barium levels found in chemtrail samples were at 6.8 ppm



If I am correct that we have a shadow government, which at the top is downright evil, then you are not going to find the published results you're looking for.


Which is it? Did they test a trail and find 6.8ppm barium or are the 'shadow government' covering up the results?



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 07:37 AM
link   
a reply to: ConnectDots

Ground based sources, like factories, mines, mills, power plants, refineries etc etc.

Spewing out BILLIONS of pounds of barium and aluminium alone...




edit on 27/7/15 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join