How to Bust Chemtrails from the Ground, Very Simple

reply to post by Phage


Still you are insisting that all the chemical and biological soups that the UK government dumped on its civilians were all safe and everything is okay.


Again, let's review:

Millions were in germ war tests

Much of Britain was exposed to bacteria sprayed in secret trials

The Ministry of Defence turned large parts of the country into a giant laboratory to conduct a series of secret germ warfare tests on the public.

A government report just released provides for the first time a comprehensive official history of Britain's biological weapons trials between 1940 and 1979.

Many of these tests involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told.

While details of some secret trials have emerged in recent years, the 60-page report reveals new information about more than 100 covert experiments.

The report reveals that military personnel were briefed to tell any 'inquisitive inquirer' the trials were part of research projects into weather and air pollution.

The tests, carried out by government scientists at Porton Down, were designed to help the MoD assess Britain's vulnerability if the Russians were to have released clouds of deadly germs over the country.

In most cases, the trials did not use biological weapons but alternatives which scientists believed would mimic germ warfare and which the MoD claimed were harmless. But families in certain areas of the country who have children with birth defects are demanding a public inquiry.

www.guardian.co.uk...



You are trying to argue that this had nothing to do with testing chemical or biological agents? Then why does the article specifically call this release a history of "biological weapons trials"? Frankly Phage you have absolutely no credibility to me except as a government apologist and as little as I trust media sources, I have to say I trust you even less.


You immediately jumped onto the subject of the zinc cadmium sulphide mentioned in the article, that the article associates with cadmium and increased risk of lung cancer, at the expense of ignoring many other substances discussed in the article. For example:

E.coli:

In another chapter, 'Large Area Coverage Trials', the MoD describes how between 1961 and 1968 more than a million people along the south coast of England, from Torquay to the New Forest, were exposed to bacteria including e.coli

www.guardian.co.uk...

E.coli can be transmitted through air:

According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the faecal-oral cycle of transmission can be disrupted by cooking food properly, preventing cross-contamination, instituting barriers such as gloves for food workers, instituting health care policies so food industry employees seek treatment when they are ill, pasteurization of juice or dairy products and proper hand washing requirements.[35]

Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC), specifically serotype O157:H7, have also been transmitted by flies,[44][45][46] as well as direct contact with farm animals,[47][48] petting zoo animals,[49] and airborne particles found in animal-rearing environments.[50]

en.wikipedia.org...



Serratia marcescens:

The report also reveals details of the DICE trials in south Dorset between 1971 and 1975. These involved US and UK military scientists spraying into the air massive quantities of serratia marcescens bacteria

www.guardian.co.uk...

Bacteria Causes U.S. Flu Vaccine Shortage
UPDATED - Saturday October 09, 2004 12:54pm

Washington (AP) - The reddish bacterium to blame for this year's shortage of flu vaccine has a colorful history.

Until the 1960s, Serratia marcescens was considered harmless - so safe, in fact, that the military secretly dispersed it across U.S. cities in germ warfare studies. Today, Serratia is blamed for urinary tract infections, infected surgical wounds and pneumonia, usually spread among hospital patients.

The germ that tainted the flu vaccine at a British factory is a common contaminant in labs - and lots of other places. Serratia is found in people's intestines, and possibly growing as pinkish scum in the shower, too. "Most of us carry it every day of our lives," said Martin Blaser, chairman of medicine at the New York University School of Medicine. "A great paradox of life and health is we have all these bad organisms we carry around OK in our intestinal tracts, and if we move them over one inch to our bladder, for example, they make us sick."

During one such test in 1950 - "Operation Sea-Spray" - Navy vessels cruised the San Francisco coast, spewing huge amounts of the bacterium into the air over the city. At least one hospital noticed an increase in pneumonia patients. In the 1970s, when the military disclosed the tests, a San Francisco family sued over a pneumonia death they blamed on Serratia. Courts ruled the government was immune from such lawsuits.

www.vaccinetruth.org...

Until the 1950s, S. marcescens was erroneously believed to be a non-pathogenic "saprophyte",[3] and its reddish coloration was used in school experiments to track infections. It has also been used as a simulant in biological warfare tests by the United States Military.[9][10] On September 26 and 27, 1950, the United States Navy conducted a secret experiment named "Operation Sea-Spray" in which some S. marcescens was released by bursting balloons of it over urban areas of the San Francisco Bay Area in California. Although the Navy later claimed the bacteria were harmless, beginning on September 29 eleven patients at a local hospital developed very rare, serious urinary tract infections and one of these individuals, Edward J. Nevin, died. Cases of pneumonia in San Francisco also increased after S. marcescens was released.[11],[12]

Since 1950, S. marcescens has steadily increased as a cause of human infection, with many strains resistant to multiple antibiotics.[1] The first indications of problems with the influenza vaccine produced by Chiron Corporation in 2004 involved S. marcescens contamination.

en.wikipedia.org...


Phenol:

...with an anthrax simulant and phenol.

www.guardian.co.uk...


Phenol also happens to be very unhealthy, particularly to breathe:

Phenol and its vapors are corrosive to the eyes, the skin, and the respiratory tract.[17] Repeated or prolonged skin contact with phenol may cause dermatitis, or even second and third-degree burns due to phenol's caustic and defatting properties.[18] Inhalation of phenol vapor may cause lung edema.[17] The substance may cause harmful effects on the central nervous system and heart, resulting in dysrhythmia, seizures, and coma.[19] The kidneys may be affected as well. Exposure may result in death and the effects may be delayed. Long-term or repeated exposure of the substance may have harmful effects on the liver and kidneys."[20] There is no evidence to believe that phenol causes cancer in humans.[21] Besides its hydrophobic effects, another mechanism for the toxicity of phenol may be the formation of phenoxyl radicals.[22]

Chemical burns from skin exposures can be decontaminated by washing with polyethylene glycol,[23] isopropyl alcohol,[24] or perhaps even copious amounts of water.[25] Removal of contaminated clothing is required, as well as immediate hospital treatment for large splashes. This is particularly important if the phenol is mixed with chloroform (a commonly-used mixture in molecular biology for DNA & RNA purification from proteins).

en.wikipedia.org...

Phenol has also been used to execute people very quickly, albeit through injection.


So let's hear more government apologist ass-kissing about how it's perfectly safe to dump a bunch of chemical and biological agents, at least one of which can cause severe burns, lung edema, and effects on the heart, kidneys, and CNS including coma or death.

reply to post by bsbray11


Sure, everything is toxic in sufficient quantity. Even oxygen. A few grams of ibuprofen will kill you.

So what quantities of these "toxic" chemical would a person have been exposed to?

And what evidence is there that those spraying thought there was any risk to public health?

Dude, you know they were just spraying stuff to see how far it spread. That's all. Let it go.

reply to post by bsbray11

You are trying to argue that this had nothing to do with testing chemical or biological agents?

Birth defects happen for a wide variety of causes.

Then why does the article specifically call this release a history of "biological weapons trials"?

Because the dispersion characteristics of aerosols and bacteria which might be used in CBW was being studied. Instead of using the real thing, simulants which would mimic the dispersal characteristic were used.

Cadmium is not the same as zinc cadmium sulphide. I showed you the study which showed exposure was minimal, the same as to be expected as spending a fortnight in a city.

We are surrounded by e.coli. It is unavoidable. I showed you that most strains, including that used in the tests, are harmless.

I said that live S. marcescens is dangerous to people who are already ill. At the time of Operation Sea-Spray it was thought to be harmless. That was a mistake, not a test of a CBW agent. What good is a CBW agent which gets sick people sicker but does nothing to healthy people? I showed you that the S. marcescens which was used in the UK was dead.

I showed you that phenol was used to kill the S. marcescens. Yes, phenol was used for lethal injections in Auschwitz. What does that have to do with anything? Who in the UK was being injected? It's also used in

Agricultural chemicals
Disinfectants (nonagricultural)
General antibacterials and antieptics
Household hard surface cleaners (liquid)
Lubricating oils
Other automotive chemicals
Paint and varnish removers
Pharmaceutical preparations
Synthetic resin and rubber adhesives
Wood office work surfaces (modular systems)

scorecard.goodguide.com...
Are there reports of acute phenol reactions as a result of the testing?

I'm not an apologist. You claim that CBW agents were used against citizens of the UK. You have not shown a single case where that occurred. You have not shown a single case where there was any expectation or intent of harm. Except for the 1950 test (a matter of ignorance), you have not shown a single case of harm being done.

Originally posted by bsbray11

If you are concerned because you don't like the way white trails look in the sky then I can only imagine the immense amount of tears you must have shed when you learned that the UK government was using their own people as guinea pigs for chemical and biological warfare agents.

I am concerned about the environmental effect contrails have.

I am not concerned that in the past the UK govt conducted tests to help us prepare for a possible chemical or biological attack on Britain by the Soviets - an issue which has no more to do with what people call chemtrails than does a jam sandwich.

reply to post by bsbray11


So you can't answer about a single one of those chemicals? Can't say I'm surprised, it isn't the first time you've come up short on the evidence.

Originally posted by Uncinus
Sure, everything is toxic in sufficient quantity. Even oxygen. A few grams of ibuprofen will kill you.

Right, now compare what they were dumping to oxygen.

Face it, there is nothing anyone could possibly show you that would change your mind. Even if it was what you pretend to be looking for, shoved right in your face, you still wouldn't accept it.

Originally posted by Phage

You are trying to argue that this had nothing to do with testing chemical or biological agents?

Birth defects happen for a wide variety of causes.

Your argument is ridiculous. I suppose you also think the escalation of the illnesses in California mentioned above, coinciding with the military tests dumping toxic materials, were also pure coincidence and obviously nothing more. You also wouldn't accept what you claim to be asking for, even if it was shoved in your face. My take on it, is that you aren't allowed to change your mind.

reply to post by bsbray11

No. The increased illness in San Francisco hospitals was traced directly to the use of live s. marcescens. As I said, at the time it was not known that s. marcescens could have that effect.

As I said, what's the point of a "CBW agent" that make sick people sicker?

As I said, your claim that CBW agents were used on an unknowing public is false.

Originally posted by Phage
No. The increased illness in San Francisco hospitals was traced directly to the use of live s. marcescens. As I said, at the time it was not known that s. marcescens could have that effect.

The military has a funny way of figuring these things out by making us the guinea pigs, huh?

As I said, what's the point of a "CBW agent" that make sick people sicker?

Some people would ask, what's the point of killing at all? But all forms of it are business to the military, and as you should well know, the business of murder has been booming for the past several decades.

Thank you very much for posting this.
I had a good browse about the subject and its very interesting indeed.

I've watched more than ten videos on youtube, from making it and to how it works. And it works like a charm.
This might sound crazy but an american Ufo researcher Fred Gunn claims that cloudbuster or chembusters attracts ufo's because of the positive energy it releases. He has tons of these so-called orgone devices.

he has a couple of videos on youtube about this..
hers the link to the site www.planetaryhealingproject.org...

Star and Flag easily.
Thanks again for posting..

Originally posted by Primativeman
Thank you very much for posting this.
I had a good browse about the subject and its very interesting indeed.

I've watched more than ten videos on youtube, from making it and to how it works. And it works like a charm.
This might sound crazy but an american Ufo researcher Fred Gunn claims that cloudbuster or chembusters attracts ufo's because of the positive energy it releases. He has tons of these so-called orgone devices.

he has a couple of videos on youtube about this..
hers the link to the site www.planetaryhealingproject.org...

Star and Flag easily.
Thanks again for posting..

What an honest site, they aren't selling anything......Wait a minute, orgone healing devices? Guess the blood cleaning one can cure leukemia, funny how it's never worked, though.

Originally posted by Primativeman
Thank you very much for posting this.
I had a good browse about the subject and its very interesting indeed.

Even with all the trolling sympathetic to the government and military going on right from the start, a single response like this makes the whole thread worthwhile to me. Others have posted earlier about already experimenting with these devices and still others have expressed interest in beginning. I greatly appreciate you guys for taking personal responsibility for your planet's well-being. Let the FDA try to come and burn all this now.

reply to post by adeclerk


I get you but I was more interested in the cloud busting stuff. I only want to try what I saw that just might actually work. Its worth a try, if it helps us then why not? About healing I do not know if it does heal people. I never said anything about healing or curing anything at all.

reply to post by Primativeman


They don't bust clouds OR heal people. Don't you think meteorologists would have noticed odd patterns in areas where people have these cloudbusters? They haven't.

Originally posted by Primativeman
About healing I do not know if it does heal people. I never said anything about healing or curing anything at all.

I don't believe Wilhelm Reich himself ever claimed that it would heal people of anything, no more than massage therapy or stress-relief of those kinds of things, which are only proven to boost the immune system's functionality.

Originally posted by adeclerk
They don't bust clouds OR heal people.

And you're entitled to that opinion.

Originally posted by bsbray11
I don't believe Wilhelm Reich himself ever claimed that it would heal people of anything,

He made very specific claims regarding what happens to you in an orgone accumulator. Tests which should be easy to test, but in 80 years, it seems like nobody has.

That's pretty good evidence that the orgone accumulator does not work.

Originally posted by Uncinus
He made very specific claims regarding what happens to you in an orgone accumulator. Tests which should be easy to test, but in 80 years, it seems like nobody has.

Yes, now you are repeating yourself.

That's pretty good evidence that the orgone accumulator does not work.

Only if your "hobby" is using logical fallacies, and this seems to be your case.

reply to post by bsbray11


But you agree that there's no scientific evidence that it works?

And you think that this is not evidence that it does not work, but instead it's evidence of a 70 year long cover up?

Originally posted by Uncinus
But you agree that there's no scientific evidence that it works?

Have you ever read my posts?

And you think that this is not evidence that it does not work, but instead it's evidence of a 70 year long cover up?

I think the evidence for a cover-up is pretty obvious considering the extreme actions of the FDA.

Originally posted by bsbray11

I think the evidence for a cover-up is pretty obvious considering the extreme actions of the FDA.

You'd think someone would try to expose this. It seems like it would be pretty easy.

Originally posted by adeclerk
reply to post by Primativeman

 

They don't bust clouds OR heal people. Don't you think meteorologists would have noticed odd patterns in areas where people have these cloudbusters? They haven't.

You state that as a fact, not an opinion, so let's see your proof.