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.

 

Do you like breathing and drinking Silver Iodide?

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Bravo,

Many have been trying to awaken people to what is happening but you can see there are those that just like to sleep.




posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alexander the o.k.
Do you guys even read the sources that are posted with regard to ingesting / toxicity of metals ?


Sure:
en.wikipedia.org...

Silver is widely used in dental work. I can't imagine anyone would carry a deadly poison in their mouth! Same applies to silver jewelry which is one of the oldest on the planet.


Leave the disingenuous comments to others with better standings on the board.


First off, this statement of yours doesn't make sense whatsoever (like those with "better standing", however you define that, have a monopoly on making untruthful, disingenuous statements... Just read again what you wrote, genius. Second, let me make my own determination as to where and when to post on-topic comments.


[edit on 19-11-2007 by buddhasystem]



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Now I don't know much about cloud seeding but I can give some information on the elements/compounds. If you are referring to silver then it is not dangerous to humans....here:


Is silver harmful to humans?

Unlike other metals such as lead and mercury, silver is not toxic to humans and is not known to cause cancer, reproductive or neurological damage, or other chronic adverse effects. Nor has normal day-to-day contact with solid silver coins, spoons or bowls been found to affect human health. This is because solid silver is almost completely biologically inert, and even if ingested, would pass through the human body without being absorbed into tissues.

In very high doses — such as those a factory worker might encounter in an accident — or from prolonged exposure to silver dust or fumes, silver can have some mostly mild effects on health. For example, inhaling silver fumes or dust may irritate mucous membranes or the upper respiratory tract.

Occasionally, sensitive individuals suffer allergic reactions — contact dermatitis or eye irritation — after exposure to powdered silver, silver solutions or dental fillings. Similarly, skin creams containing silver compounds (silver nitrate and silver sulphadiazine) cause local skin discoloration in certain sensitive individuals. Ingesting silver compounds, such as in medicines, can sometimes irritate the stomach.

Prolonged exposure to silver dust or to the silver compounds in medicines or supplements can also result in a permanent blue-gray staining of the eyes, nose, mouth, throat and skin. This blue-gray staining is known medically as “argyria.” The condition can make people look ill, as if they suffering from lack of oxygen. Once a person turns blue from argyria, the skin coloring is unfortunately permanent. Most medical professionals believe argyria is the most serious known health effect of silver on humans. Aside from its permanent cosmetic effect, argyria is not believed to pose any other risk to human health.

The mild, observed human health effects of silver exposure appear to be highly variable from one person or situation to another. Scientists have not identified exposure levels that can be generalized as harmful.


Taken from www.abovetopsecret.com...


If you are referring to silver iodide as a whole compound then yes it is toxic just from my chemistry knowledge (first year student at uni (woohoo)). I can't really find a good source, this is the best I found which says:

Potential Acute Health Effects: Hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant), of eye contact (irritant), of ingestion, of inhalation.


From www.sciencelab.com...

And by NFPA 704 standard it is ranked 2 towards health so it is dangerous still but only over long periods of exposure.

[edit on 19/11/2007 by Snake64_009]



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Snake64_009
 


My research through MSDS sheets I found this



Handle only in well ventilated areas.

Do not get in eyes or on skin or on clothing.

Do not take internally.

Do not breathe dust.

Do not reuse containers.

Clean up spills as they occur.

Silver Iodide MSDS

We should probably cut down on salt too.



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alexander the o.k.

zero,
I suggest you start a thread as to why weather modding is impossible, giving your reasoning, rather than to try to derail this thread with disingenuous and off topic 'questions'.


I'm sorry I thought this was a discussion and I didn't realize I needed to be a cheerleader for the cause.

There is absolutely zero trolling in my post. I been flying in the military for 27 years and so I know what flying is all about. When you look at this conspiracy and back it up from the chem trails to the place where the chemicals are made you start to see that this requires a huge infrastructure and transportation system to support it.

You can’t just say oh look at the chem trails that are crossing all of America everyday without thinking how they got there and the airplanes dumping them would be just the tip of the spear. This would be a massive operation with 1000s of people involved.

The huge amount of chemicals and the fleet of aircraft needed for this undertaking is something that just cannot be overlooked. These aircraft would also need systems on them to store and spray the chemicals that as of today are a hidden mystery of something that once again would be so numerous it could not stay hidden.

As we back this up some more, the trucks used to ship this stuff to the airplanes would also need to be a massive fleet to support this mission and then finally the factories to actually produce the stuff would need to be many.

Also as you start adding 1,000s of people involved while all this has spanned decades I for one need to ask these questions, but these are things that seem to never get addressed and all anyone wants to talk about is the final produce floating in the air.


[edit on 19-11-2007 by Xtrozero]



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 10:00 PM
link   
Can I just see a few pictures of the factories, transportation equipment, aircrafts, systems etc to inject millions of 55 gallon drums of chemicals into our air?

All we see are the actual chem trails and nothing of the huge industries that would be required to get all those chem trails in the air.

What kind of gets me with so many conspiracies is when you actually start to map out the infrastructure needed to accomplish these conspiracies and how many people would need to be involved it all starts to look really ridiculous.


Maybe this is why unemployment is below 5




Umm If you need confirmation of cloud seeding projects then head to the Tasmanian goverment for information they cloud seeded a area and it caused large floods throughout nthrn Tasmania a year and a half ago, They where strongly criticised for their timing. The only reason you need silver iodine is when the water droplets dont contain the levels of heavy water in each droplet that you get in normal storm activity..The question should be asked is what has happened to the formation of naturally produced heavy water matter that we need to replace it.. ?



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 10:29 PM
link   
As someone who daily sees lab reports on the silver content of water and soil samples from the mid- western U.S. I have seen no increase in average silver content for the past 20 years that I've been watching. Yes, many scientists are watching almost everywhere for a variety of environmental contaminants.

Silver contamination may well be occurring somewhere.



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 11:03 PM
link   
This post is actually amusing to me. My grandpa moved out here (Wyoming) from Illinois somewhere around 1957-60 to work for the University of Wyoming seeding clouds. Really have to bite my tongue when someone would tell me they don't seed clouds


I can tell you that they have known since at least then that the metals/chemicals they used were unsafe. Other than hearing that a couple times when I was a kid, and how they would fly a plane and dump the chemicals in clouds to create condensation (typical procedure... much more effective than the squirt gun method... j/k) can't say I heard much else about it.



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


hi mister Xtrozero - for pictures try
here for photos of the equipment
Do a google for cloud seeding companies. 100's and therefore thousands of employees.

All like the OP said so why are you denying their existence?

Almost like saying there is no drug problem as there isn't any obvious factories or supply lines.

also they do seed in the UK


Still don't believe then meet the people for yourself.

The 17th Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification, cosponsored by the American Meteorological Society and the Weather Modification Association, and organized by the AMS Committee on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification, will be held April 21-25, 2008 in Westminster, Colorado (between Boulder and Denver).

[url=http://www.weathermodification.org/annual_meeting.htm]source[/url



[edit on 20-11-2007 by puzzled2]



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAvenger
 


Avenger, what methods are you using to detect silver?





ABSTRACT. Silver iodide is currently the most favored cloud seeding material in weather modification projects. While the literature indicates that its ecological effects are likely to be insignificant, its disposition in the terrestrial ecosystem after snow melt has not been adequately studied. Silver levels in soil, plant and litter material are being monitored twice a year on a mountainous area in southwestern Colorado, to determine whether annual accretion from cloud seeding can be measured with current techniques and whether significant changes in silver concentration take place in grass, aspen, and spruce communities. One AgI generator site is also being monitored.

Comparison of silver concentrations in terrestrial components of the target area indicates no measurable increase after the first winter's seeding. On an ash basis, spruce foliage and litter contain about four times as much silver as soil. On a dry weight basis, soil from all three plant communities contains about six times as much silver as foliage. Consistent increases in silver concentration were found in soil and pine foliage within 200 meters of one generator site.
Source


and



Water quality monitoring data in the Fraser River basin includes that measured by the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment's Water Quality Control Division
at Granby. A review of the data from this station for the period from 1977 to 1987
indicates elevated phosphorus, mercury, cadmium, copper, silver and lead
concentrations as well as pH as high as 8.5.
Source


and



This action implements revisions to the Basic Standards and Methodologies for Surface Water adopted by the Commission in January, 1995. As part of a July, 1994 rulemaking hearing, the Commission considered the proposal of various parties to delete the chronic and chronic (trout) table values for silver in Table III of the Basic Standards. As a result of that hearing, the Commission found that the evidence demonstrated that ionic silver causes chronic toxicity to fish at levels below that established by the acute table values. It was undisputed that silver is present in Colorado streams and in the effluent of municipal and industrial dischargers in Colorado. The evidence also demonstrated that the removal of silver from wastewater can be costly
Source



Sorry Avenger, I'm having a little trouble believing your info.



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 05:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


I would have an easier time if NASA would release the aviation mishaps. I believe they are not releasing them because it would show where the activity in the air is stemming from.





posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 06:15 AM
link   
Here is the real truth about Silver Iodide.



The Office of Environment, Health and Safety, UC Berkeley, rates silver iodide as a Class C, non-soluble, inorganic, hazardous chemical that pollutes water and soil.(8) It has been found to be highly toxic to fish, livestock and humans.(6,7,8,9) Numerous medical articles demonstrate that humans absorb silver iodide through the lungs, nose, skin, and GI tract.(7,8,9) Mild toxicity can cause GI irritation, renal and pulmonary lesions, and mild argyria (blue or black discoloration of the skin). Severe toxicity can result in hemorrhagic gastroenteritis, shock, enlarged heart, severe argyria, and death by respiratory depression.(8)
Source



I believe the main aircraft being uses is the E-6B Mercury

Picture of chemtrail plane refueling while spraying.



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 06:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by puzzled2

hi mister Xtrozero

All like the OP said so why are you denying their existence?


I think there a confusion developing between weather modification - ie spraying silver iodide into low level clouds to cause precipitation - and the internet myth that high level cirrus clouds, and contrails produced by ever increasing numbers of airliners, are deliberate 'chemtrails'
We're only discussing the former here.

(If anyone wants to discuss 'chemtrails', I'm still waiting for someone to debunk the photos at the end of this thread




also they do seed in the UK


Did. They tried it in the 1950s. Nothing since. And it didn't cause the Lynmouth floods as Philip Eden has shown.

[edit on 20-11-2007 by Essan]



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 06:45 AM
link   
Check this out, if you aren't convinced yet.



WARNING! HARMFUL IF SWALLOWED OR INHALED. CAUSES IRRITATION TO SKIN, EYES AND RESPIRATORY TRACT. CHRONIC EXPOSURE MAY PRODUCE IODISM
...
15. Regulatory Information

--------\Chemical Inventory Status - Part 1\---------------------------------
Ingredient TSCA EC Japan Australia
----------------------------------------------- ---- --- ----- ---------
Sodium Iodide (7681-82-5) Yes Yes Yes Yes

--------\Chemical Inventory Status - Part 2\---------------------------------
--Canada--
Ingredient Korea DSL NDSL Phil.
----------------------------------------------- ----- --- ---- -----
Sodium Iodide (7681-82-5) Yes Yes No Yes

--------\Federal, State & International Regulations - Part 1\----------------
-SARA 302- ------SARA 313------
Ingredient RQ TPQ List Chemical Catg.
----------------------------------------- --- ----- ---- --------------
Sodium Iodide (7681-82-5) No No No No

--------\Federal, State & International Regulations - Part 2\----------------
-RCRA- -TSCA-
Ingredient CERCLA 261.33 8(d)
----------------------------------------- ------ ------ ------
Sodium Iodide (7681-82-5) No No No


Chemical Weapons Convention: No TSCA 12(b): No CDTA: No
SARA 311/312: Acute: Yes Chronic: Yes Fire: No Pressure: No
Reactivity: No (Pure / Solid)

Source


IODISM


Long-term ingestion of iodine in amounts that exceed dietary requirements may lead to iodism
(see chronic effects section C). The direct acute toxicity of iodine is due to its irritant properties
(NAS, 1980). In excessive amounts, elemental iodine (I
2
) is corrosive and irritates tissue via all
routes of exposure (inhalation, ingestion, and skin contact). Airborne iodine is an irritant of the
respiratory system, eyes, and skin, and may have adverse effects on the central nervous system
and cardiovascular system (Genium, 1999). Pharmaceutical solutions applied to the skin or
ingested generally have low toxicity. However, in rare instances, an individual may display
hypersensitivity to skin contact with iodine. Symptoms of hypersensitivity include fever and
generalized skin reaction (Hardman et al., 1996).
Check out the source!



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 06:56 AM
link   
Anybody notice Google is down.



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xtrozero


You can’t just say oh look at the chem trails that are crossing all of America everyday without thinking how they got there and the airplanes dumping them would be just the tip of the spear. This would be a massive operation with 1000s of people involved.

The huge amount of chemicals and the fleet of aircraft needed for this undertaking is something that just cannot be overlooked. These aircraft would also need systems on them to store and spray the chemicals that as of today are a hidden mystery of something that once again would be so numerous it could not stay hidden.

[edit on 19-11-2007 by Xtrozero]


From what I can remember, they only use a small amount of these chemicals, and they are simply added into the fuel. In the past they were labeled as things such as "Fuel Catalysts". A small amount is all that's needed to supercondense the vapor already produced by the jet. Those droplets fall and collect with other vapor in trhe air and eventually fall to earth in the form of rain (and jet fuel byproducts).

With that in mind, it's pretty easy to see how this is possible. How did flouride get in our drinking supply, even though we know well what it does to us? That would seem a pretty imossible task as well, involving tens of thousands of people, and thousands of municipal drinking water supplies... "just couldn't be done" is right out of the question, since we know it ALREADY has been done. Get a grip on the facts... most of the people in the US are familiar with cloud seeding, but most don't really care. "If someone is trying to help, then good... if they hurt anyone, then I will protest" seems to be the normal thought on this. Out of sight, out of mind. The reason "Sally" doesn't say anything about what is going on, is because nobody ever asked her. She'll go along with the program and get her paycheck, and when someone does ask, nobody else really cares. "oh, you seed clouds? That's interesting. What's it do? Oh, so you just get rain to fall where it's needed? That's a good idea... glad to know we won't ever end up in another Dust Bowl era..."

Unless a person is immediatly famailiar with what the effects on humans the chemicals have, they probably aren't going to think about it... after all, it is released in trace amounts over hundreds of square miles... makes a laymen assume that they wouldn't ever even come in contact with enough to do harm... they just don't think about the accumulation factor.



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by puzzled2
reply to [
hi mister Xtrozero - for pictures try
here for photos of the equipment
Do a google for cloud seeding companies. 100's and therefore thousands of employees.

All like the OP said so why are you denying their existence?

Almost like saying there is no drug problem as there isn't any obvious factories or supply lines.
[edit on 20-11-2007 by puzzled2]


I do not deny that there is process called cloud seeding, and your pictures fit it to a tee. I do not have a single problem with it and agree 100% with you.

But the chem trails that everyone shows have nothing to do with your proof positive pictures for those aircraft don’t even fly that high and would only carry enough chemicals for a small localized area.

I really think you are missing my point, and it is these aircraft trails cover all of America with 1000s of them a day. This becomes a very big leap to say that these aircraft trails are full of chemicals with a purpose. You all say they are to seed clouds, others say they are to poison Americans, while many others state other reasons.

When we start to suggest that this is a national level event, such as what we see with aircraft trails, then the amount of support for this event starts to dramatically increase to get the job done. Not even going into the huge infrastructure needed again, when we are talking about an undertaking like this that is designed to have bad effects on the general population on a very large scale it is at this point I start to see what could be fact turn to fiction.

If you suggested there was experiments over lets say a small town with pictures, tests, and documentation of the after affects on the small population then I would see something that would be a possibility.



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Earthscum
From what I can remember, they only use a small amount of these chemicals, and they are simply added into the fuel. In the past they were labeled as things such as "Fuel Catalysts". A small amount is all that's needed to supercondense the vapor already produced by the jet. Those droplets fall and collect with other vapor in trhe air and eventually fall to earth in the form of rain (and jet fuel byproducts).


Have you ever seen a jet vapor actually grow into a cloud other than the thin line that we see? When you are talking about a small amount, how diluted does it become as it is dumped out of the jet exhaust at 35,000 feet before it hits the ground?

I would also like to know a few other things too. One of them (being an ex jet engine mechanic too) is the turbine area is around 1000c or more, and so how does this affect those chemicals? The last part is if jet fuel had particles in it then there would be a good chance that these particals would form carbon or other material in the hot sections of these engines and start to close off the very small cooling air holes along with other issues.

When you start to talk about a chemical that is burned through the engine at very high temps and not sprayed this opens up a whole new direction of dialog. Not that I am disagreeing at this point.



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 12:01 PM
link   


Have you ever seen a jet vapor actually grow into a cloud other than the thin line that we see? When you are talking about a small amount, how diluted does it become as it is dumped out of the jet exhaust at 35,000 feet before it hits the ground?


In the picture I posted, you can see the pods on the wingtips also producing a trail.
www.airliners.net...

And here is a youtube video of jet trails forming into clouds.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by stompk
reply to post by TheAvenger
 


Avenger, what methods are you using to detect silver?

Sorry Avenger, I'm having a little trouble believing your info.


We use both Atomic Absorption and I.C.P. to test for siver and other metals. The A.A. detection limit for silver is 40 ug/L.(parts-per billion)

If you don't want to listen to this senior environmental chemist working at an independent lab, You're free to believe whatever you choose. I won't waste any more of my time or yours with the facts that I have observed in my occupation.

I suggest you that you call the U.S.E.P.A. and ask them about any increase in the silver content of U.S. soil or water over the past few decades. If you don't trust this agency, randomly select a few dozen independent labs across America, then call each lab manager and ask them about any increase in the average silver content of water or soil.

My comments are completed here.





[edit on 11/20/2007 by TheAvenger]



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join