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.

 

EXCLUSIVE "What in The World Are They Spraying" Chemist talks to ATS about Geoengineering.

page: 10
53
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



However, that is a topic that I can speak to with quite a bit of authority and experience.


You are addressing a person that has freely given his name and his credentials may be checked..
ATS have requested that for the Radio show and that is fair enough.

But you.??? You could be Jack the Ripper for all we know..
You can NOT speak with any more authority than any other member if you wish to stay anonymous.

That's how it works weed, proof or you're a nobody like us all..




posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 05:53 PM
link   
I should not have called phage a disinfo agent, and i'm a little ashamed of myself for doing such. Forgive me for saying such.

I spend my life looking for ties that bind and am guilty of pushing apart.

Weed, I have a poor memory but I enjoyed our talk the other day on chat. I do not remember anything bad from it and am sorry if I perpetuated any.

Chad, thank you for calling me down.

I got a little to upset over a silly debate. As much as this is great for gathering information we are not going to solve anything from this discussion. More important are the relationships.

So I applaud everyone for the hard work they are doing on both sides of the debate. I hope we can find a more civil discourse, and I apologize for my part in making it less so.

We are distressing the good Dr. and I am in part to blame.

piano



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze

Are all contrails chaff? No. Does some look like contrails? Yes. Is this admitted by the military? Yes.



no. Just no. chaff

look at the pictures of what it is. Planes have a panel that's loaded with 24 to 48 tubes of chaff (depending on the type of panel) on each side. A small charge deploys the tube and it releases small shards of aluminum foil which makes the microwaves from the Magnetron in the radar emitted from the waveguide bounce off and are displayed as a very large target. The radar systems are calibrated to disregard birds, but a flock of birds will show up. The Chaff looks like a huge return, and will block out any attempt to pinpoint the aircrafts position. If you look at the picture in the wiki article, it looks like a small white cloud to the naked eye until it dissipates. It's purpose is to make a radar guided missile not hit the plane, and to disrupt tracking of said plane.

If you have an article or some other proof of the military claiming that chaff looks like contrails, I would be amazed and surprised.


You couple here who seem to be enamored with the few members who are against your position really need to go back and read your posts. If you feel that someone is in the wrong, push the alert button. Even if it's a mod. the other mods will deal with it. This thread is way messy.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 08:59 AM
link   
In any case, chaff (obviously - because it's what it's for) can be detected on radar. There was an infamous case a few years ago where chaff from a NATO exercise over Europe resulted in disruption to German rainfall radar, with a meteorologist lodging complaints to the German govt. Because if false returns appear on the radar it causes problems with tracking rainfall. So we don't like it!

If chemtrails are chaff then we can see them on radar. Since it's very rare to see chaff on radar then either chemtrails are not chaff or else chemtrails are very rare. And seen I watch the radar every day (and have access to archives) I can state with absolutey certaint that if chemtrails are chaff, no chemtrails have ever appeared over British skies. QED.
edit on 6-3-2011 by Essan because: typo



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   
LIfe is stressful for many reasons, but social chats are small potatos for stress. I appreciate being here and want you all to know that i seek the same answers - let's get something that makes sense.

In another thread i was asked about where on top of Mt. Shasta the data came from. I went to the forester in the movie and asked. His response:

"The snow melt sample that had 61,100 ug/l Al,Ba,Sr in it was collected 3/4 mile above the upper ski bowl parking lot, which is a mile above Panther Cr. meadows, which is about 8500' elevation. This is way above any motorized or casual tourist influence. We wanted it CLEAN! Well, it wasn't.

And mtn climbers drink that aircrap. Good thing they are young and healthy sorts. Sorry about the side effects of a hefty shot of aluminum, barium, strontium, boron and some arsenic. We have no idea whether it is going into our groundwater or not. "

Not only do i have chemistry credentials, but i have also worked outside in nature for the past 16 year - as an educator and a natural resources manager. I worked for a nIckel mine and smelter and then was the president of the local watershed council. One of the projects I am working on now is an EPA superfund site called Formosa where metals are leaching into the creek and acid mine drainage has killed all the bugs for 18 miles, in prime salmon habitat.

I first noticed chemtrails back in the late 1990's and asked some friends, who gave me the full contrail explanation. I was not curious enough to think it through back then. But i did think through ozone and atmospheric aerosols - especially the idea that halogenated hydrocarbons which are much denser than air are somehow causing stratospheric ozone loss. That was when i began dis-believing the pat answers in this area.

My status in the movie was to comment on chemistry. My status as a scientist is to become a speaker for the planet - which seems to be having some significant metabolic distress under the current living conditions. If the spraying is connected to global climate change, then we should look and see whether it should be stopped. Currently dis-information covers our playing field, but we have a group that can be insightful and cut through the BS. I will be happy to play the game for a bit as time allows - but after the radio show next weekend, i would like us to produce the best single page data sheet that we have to serve as a jumping point for answering the question posed by the movie - what in the world are they leaking out of the backs of the planes (just water vapor, right)

One last note: i have found that water does not act like the simple solvent we know and love. I will be running an on-line interactive course called The Many Facets of Water - the timing has yet to be determined. The host site is the Northwest Education and Training Institute - nweti.org . The technology at that site might be a good start toward changing the approach to higher education.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by speculativeoptimist
 


Allow me to take you up on your offer - what do all the numbers under the profile mean? Please send me a U2U that explains how to make friends and other nifty connects. I am a luddite that uses minimalist technology, but the game is changing rapidly - so droids and poofters be wary.

As far as Ormus - i value your opinion, let's talk off-line.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by lemmehowdt
 

Thanks for the clarification on origin of the snow sample. Please comment on my post here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

While you may first have noticed "chemtrails" in the late 1990's. They have been observed and studied since long before then.
www.abovetopsecret.com...






edit on 3/6/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by lemmehowdt

"The snow melt sample that had 61,100 ug/l Al,Ba,Sr in it was collected 3/4 mile above the upper ski bowl parking lot, which is a mile above Panther Cr. meadows, which is about 8500' elevation. This is way above any motorized or casual tourist influence. We wanted it CLEAN! Well, it wasn't.


Am I right then in thinking that the whole evidence for the hypothesis of a global spraying campaign is based on one sample at one location on one occasion?

As a scientist you must realise how damming that sounds!?

Surely, even at one location, numerous samples would need to be taken over a period of time? Let alone other locations,

Your 'evidence' amounts to someone seeing a white rhino in South Africa and asserting that they exist in their millions on every continent on the planet.

edit on 6-3-2011 by Essan because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by lemmehowdt
 

Thanks for the clarification on origin of the snow sample. Please comment on my post here:

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by lemmehowdt
 


how much dust is in a snow sample that has just fallen? I'm confused - not critical - can you take the time to explain to me where your thinking here is.


You say the snow sample had just fallen? Is that something you know or is it a statement like "from the top of Mt. Shasta" was. Who was it who said "words mean something"? Do you know the origin of the samples at all, the chain of custody?

The thing is the snow melt testing was for aluminum and barium only. Based on that, there is no way of knowing how much dust was in the sample. Were those the only contaminants present in the snow melt? There is no way to know that, is there? Without knowing the relative amounts of other "safe" materials, how can it be claimed that the metal levels were high? Unless of course, you assume that there were no other contaminants but making an assumption like that wouldn't be considered very scientific would it?

Let's apply a tiny bit of critical thought. The soil tests for the area do not show high levels of aluminum or barium. How can that be possible if "very high levels" of aluminum and barium are falling from the sky? Is there some sort of soil chemistry that makes them disappear when they encounter soil?

To answer your question about where else the contaminants in the water and snow may have come from if not falling from the sky? How about this?
2007
How low will it go?: Lake Shasta water could reach lowest level in 15 years
www.redding.com...

2008
UPDATED: Relics exposed in Lake Shasta
Hwy. 99 bridges, train trestles, town ruins emerge as water level drops
www.redding.com...

2009
Shasta Lake merchants question water priorities
www.pe.com...

At the time the samples were taken the region was enduring dry conditions. So dry that parts of the lake bed were exposed. What happens during dry periods? It gets dusty. Dust blows around and falls on snow. Dust which is in the air when it does start to rain gets caught by the rain drops and is carried to the ground.

There is a single soil test for barium, the one near Sisson Elementary School. Here aluminum tested at 1.05% and barium tested at 0.01%. As we know, that aluminum level is actually quite low. Barium makes up about 0.03% of the Earth's crust so the level shown in the test does not seem to be unusual either and in fact, it is found at higher levels naturally. But the important thing is the ratio between the aluminum level and the the barium level. The barium level is 0.78% of the aluminum level.

Now, looking at the samples which were tested for both barium and aluminum, and comparing aluminum to barium in the samples we find that the ratios have a standard deviation of only 0.03. In lieu of a full test of the water samples (which would have shown other contaminants). It seems very likely that the source of the metals in the snow and water samples was local dust. Local dust which is not particularly high in either substance.


edit on 3/5/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)


While you may first have noticed "chemtrails" in the late 1990's. They have been observed and studied since long before then.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


edit on 3/6/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Here is what he was asking you to address Dr. Thyme.

Phage he has politely asked not to put your questions in links like that.

He is an honored guest here at my request, not a normal ATS member. He is not tech savvy.

Thank you.
piano



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


Please read all the posts. He is discussing the samples provided in the movie. Feel free to discuss worldwide evidence, but please address the good Dr. with questions about the data in the movie.

He was a expert brought in to address the finding collected by the Forester. Please watch the movie.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 

Since that post was in response to a post of his in that thread, I thought a reposting of it was not really necessary or appropriate.

Is it so difficult to click a link?



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze
reply to post by Essan
 


Please read all the posts. He is discussing the samples provided in the movie. Feel free to discuss worldwide evidence, but please address the good Dr. with questions about the data in the movie.

He was a expert brought in to address the finding collected by the Forester. Please watch the movie.


And the findings prove absolutely nothing, unless many more samples are taken. Every scientist (and I would hope most non scientists) would know that - and would make such very clear were they asked to comment on it in any film.

My white rhino analogy stands.

As, indeed, does the 'I saw a cloud yesterday and this morning my garden is full of snails' analogy. It may well be that they are snails and that normally they would be expected to be found in such quantities in my garden. But is that evidence they fell out of the cloud? Or that the US government are deliberately spraying snails all over the world?


(And a thought: if I test snowfall in my garden and it contains none of the chemicals found on Mt Shasta, does that not falsify the whole premise?)
edit on 6-3-2011 by Essan because: added comment



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by lemmehowdt
 


Dr. Thyme,

Thank you for your invitation to inquire on a technical chemical explanation.
I would like to introduce these two documents below; and your comments are most wanted.
Thank you


Most studies of geoengineering focus on the release of SO2
or H2S gas into the stratosphere where over time (~1 month), they are converted to
condensable H2SO4.
Recent work by Pierce et al has shown that directly emitting
H2SO4 allows better control of particle size6 and therefore more effective reflection of
incoming flux.

people.ucalgary.ca...

Can you elaborate the impact this proposed method of geoengineering -Sulfate Aerosols in Jet Fuel?

Commentary on the Status of Climate Engineering and Discussion of Options for Reflecting Sunlight Using Soot and Sulfate Aerosols Delivered to the Stratosphere by Jet Aircraft

by Alvia Gaskill, Jr. Environmental Reference Materials, Inc. Research Triangle Park, N.C.

October 22, 2006



Option 1: Increasing Sulfur Content of Jet Fuel in Commercial Fleet

This option involves increasing the sulfur content of jet fuel for the commercial fleet of jet aircraft (around 20,000 planes today) from 0.04% to 0.6 and increasing to 0.9% by 2050. Sulfur dioxide gas is emitted in the turbine exhaust and ideally, nearly all of it converted to sulfuric acid gas and then to sulfuric acid aerosol. The sulfuric acid aerosol floats around in the stratosphere for 1-2 years and reflects sunlight. The level in jet fuel is raised each year to match increased greenhouse gas emissions.



www.library4science.com...
www.global-warming-geo-engineering.org...

I originally posted these documents in my thread on the Aluminum Resistant Seeds developed by Monsanto.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


edit on 6-3-2011 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Asked/Answerd.

Originally posted by lemmehowdt
Sorry Richard, my bad. I cannot send a reply to you because i have less than 20 posts. I would like a new line - the area here has me totally confused about how to respond. Not like any chat i have been to before. I would like to respond, but i don't get how this thing works - there seem to be too many input streams that refer back to themselves, so i keep reading the same thing over and over. Yuk.


Originally posted by lemmehowdt
I am a luddite that uses minimalist technology


In modern usage, "Luddite" is a term describing those opposed to industrialisation, automation, computerisation or new technologies in general

wiki

Either you do not read, care to understand, or are trying to provoke emotional reaction. I question why, but am done with emotional responses.

He has asked please place question without sublinks.

He is being kind taking his time to come here, let's make this as pleasant for him as possible please.

Thank you.

edit on 6-3-2011 by pianopraze because: added quote



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


Very interesting. Could this be why some contrails have persistence?

The more I look at some of the pictures and videos the more I shake my head. There are videos of long contrail after long contrail then one that doesn't which is flying in the same airspace which presumably would not change THAT fast. I guess it could, but again there are videos where one plane flies by with persistent, one doesn't, then one does...

Here are a few random photos illustrating my question:




same as above just zoomed out:







posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


Why do you assume the aircraft were at the same altitude?



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 

Maybe you didn't read. He wasn't talking about links.



Allow me to take you up on your offer - what do all the numbers under the profile mean?


He was asking about ATS "ratings".

edit on 3/6/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


Asked/answered. link.

Different types of chaff. Government admitted the contrail looking were chaff. Samples analyzed were chaff.

A side note: If chaff falling to the ground brings other particulate matter that normally persist it raises further questions before geoengineering should be considered and stopped if begun.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 

I have questions too. That is why I asked the good Dr. to come answer them here.

My part in this started in Burntheships excellent thread.

But please address questions without angst.

Here are some of my questions including could the sand from the gobi cause these aluminum levels?
Are these aluminum levels any more or more dangerous than the aluminum we put on our skin through deodorants?
Can we trust the government statements on aluminum toxicity?


Originally posted by pianopraze

Chetelat pointed to a NASA study of sand storms in the Gobi and Sahara deserts that stated aluminum and other elements from the storms drift to the United States.

It would be from the Gobi in Asia, not the Sahara affecting the west coast but I could find no soil analysis stating how much aluminum would be in this soil:

Large dust plumes originating in the Sahara are transported across the Atlantic Ocean to the Carribean Islands and the southeastern coast of the U.S. Saharan dust is suspected to influence nutrient cycles in the Amazon Basin

Particles from dust storms in northern Asia influence biogeochemical cycles in Hawaii and have been detected as far away as North America. For example, dust originating in China's Gobi desert has been transported across the Pacific in sufficient quantities to cause brown skies in the Western U.S. (e.g., Seattle, Washington).

link

Among the health hazards cited by aluminum’s detractors are the risks of cancer from aluminum in water, antiperspirants, deodorants, cookware, antacids, cosmetics and foods. Claims have also been made that aluminum contributes to Alzheimer's disease.
The World Health Organization says scientific studies do not support these claims.
“There is little indication that aluminum is acutely toxic despite its widespread occurrence in foods, drinking water, and many antacid preparations,” WHO says.

This is an interesting fact not brought up in the video, they suggest the increase might be linked to the spraying, but I would wager there is more in the deodorant I am putting on than in any spraying done. But this is an aside. I do not trust the WHO they have been repeatedly caught lying and misrepresenting to protect and promote corporate agendas and profits. There has been a huge rise in the cases of Alzheimer's... but this was occurring even before any spraying was supposed to have begun. At worst it could only be another contributing factor, not a prime cause as insinuated in the video.

I accidentally stumbled on this as I was looking for data on the dust. There are insiders saying they are engaged in geo-engineering. Of course people lie so you cannot absolutely trust what is being said. But I have been wondering if this is going on where are the insiders telling it's going on?:


This is starting to look like a cover up. I do not trust this news report because they are clearly misleading. It is 4:30am and I'm going to bed, but if I can catch them in this many lies and misrepresentations it makes me think this is absolute disinformation. It raises a flag as to why are they trying to provide disinformation?


Originally posted by pianopraze
Agreed gardens change, but the data is for the whole region, not just his garden. They should have never mentioned his garden as it confuses the subject. So what could cause ph for the region to go from an average of 5.x to close to 7 in the last 5 years? They maintain it is the elements in the chemtrials. They do not prove this claim, there could be other like vulcanism as suggested by WW but there has been none in the last 5 years. So what is causing the rise in pH? I have asked an expert to come join the discussion, hopefully he will come and be able to answer.

*grin* I grew up in Alaska and we knew which color snow to avoid... As to toxicity there are quite a few different scientific opinions coming out. Almost every source states different conclusions. I think there is a mass coverup to downplay the impact of mankind on the environment by the corporations who are trashing our planet. I tend to believe the studies that say there is a health risk. Most of those standards are CYA rules, not good guidelines for real safety. Rats are dieing from aluminum in laboratories with kidney failure and cancer. Just like GMO, there are lots of studies showing the danger but they are being overlooked.

Good data and good source for the soil information. This needs to be addressed by chemtrail supporters. I am more neutral and playing "devils advocate" here and am willing to examine all good data. This data is substantial. I have called in an expert, let's hope he comes and addresses this.

I have seen geo-engineering proposals with barium and strontium, let me go find links.

Hughes Aircraft Patent #5,003,186 - In 1991 a U.S. patent was issued to Hughes Aircraft Company; the Stratospheric Welsbach Seeding For Reduction of Global Warming Patent (#5,003,186). It proposed injecting into the upper atmosphere, a “very fine, white talcum-like” powder of aluminum oxide, barium oxide and other oxides for the stated purpose of reducing Global Warming”.

source

Good point, if this was published before the movie, the movie should have addressed it if they were aware of it. I thought the article was after and addressing the movie. I will write the movie people and see if they were aware of this data. Done, I wrote a letter to both the scientist and movie people.

There is a discrepancy because it is listed under controlled for health purposes. Seems like a backdoor admission that there is a health risk. It is clearly found under health risk chemicals on California's website and has been linked to health risks by science. You are clearly correct that it has a footnote saying it is secondary however.

I am at the end of what I can defend on this one.

Their point about the soil change is still valid, but you are showing clear questions with the publish figures which they need to address. The numbers and conversions are making my head spin. You have not addressed the Hawaii data, please do. It starts at 45:46. The girl has extremely high aluminum content in the test results.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


Sorry, but......RE: your contrail photographs.

Normal. I diagnose them as quite understandable, and certainly not anything out of the ordinary.

Perhaps you have not yet encountered this study that was undertaken to investigate the phenomenon of persistent contrails, and how it relates to modern engine design and technology?? (Yes, it's a "link"....ATS frowns on a copy/paste of more than three paragraphs, and this PDF is five pages....):

www.bragwebdesign.com...

I suggest you take the proper amount of time to absorb its information.



new topics

top topics



 
53
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join