Are chemtrails making agricultural production decline?

page: 1
4

log in

join

posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 07:13 PM
link   
In a post on another thread a statement was made:


Poison the soil, and you can't plant a garden, grow your own food, let alone think straight.


I think this was a claim that chemtails are poisoning the soil, so I wondered what the basis is for this, and were there any specific claims about agricultural production being affected "out there"?

well Francis Mangles is a prominent chemtrail "scientist" with a swag of YT videos, credits on WITWATS, etc. who makes a lot of claims about agriculture and soil pH, and as is often the case many of his claims have bbeen examined at Metabunk

Here is one of his videos (as you can see it is part 3 of 5 - feel free to check out the others)



In this video at about 4 minutes he says:


Ok, now what happens and what has happened in California? Well, the most dramatic thing that has happened in California is our tomato crops just went to pieces. We raised the pH so high in California that the bottom fell out of the tomato growers, and now they are raising other crops instead of tomatoes, that's one major thing."


Well there's a whole heap of tabulated data on the California tomato crop here. Table 8 has total tomato acreage & harvest from 1960-2009.

Guess what's been happening since chemtrails "started" about 1997??


Year Acreage Value
1997 300,800 817,497
1998 323,000 912,513
1999 384,000 1,335,377
2000 333,000 948,469
2001 296,000 779,174
2002 336,000 946,761
2003 323,000 895,394
2004 343,500 1,180,357
2005 308,000 919,360
2006 324,400 1,165,992
2007 339,000 1,223,435
2008 319,000 1,316,155
2009 348,500 1,509,647


Not quite the bottom falling out of anything as I read it.

The 2010 harvest was reported as being a "near record", and2011 & 2012 harvests are also reported as being very good.

So that specific claim - that the California tomato harbvest has dropped - is clearly nonsense - DEBUNKED!

I wonder where else the claim about agriculture suffering comes from? Are there any specific claims that have been made that anyone is aware of?
edit on 1-11-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


While your thread presents a great case for debunking I have questions about the 'official' statistical information. Is the information audited to ensure it is correct? Are farmers spoken to personally and randomly by non government, completely independent investigators/assessors to ascertain whether the statistics are correct?

It is just that with so much government control over information - I am not always secure with what is presented. When the government is in a position of losing face with the public - it is always in their best interests to present information that suggests - nothing is wrong. Yet there is ample information available that suggests there are problems. Many people sharing information particularly via the internet suggests that there are problems.

Much Peace...



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Amanda5
 


I am not in a position to answer your questions in regard of the USDA statistics - yuo would have to ask them how they gather them and what their quality assurance procedures are.

However the 2010 "near record" comment/article is credited to:


This outlook report was presented at the recent 29th annual Agribusiness Management Conference in Fresno, Calif. sponsored by the Center for Agricultural Business, California Agricultural Technology Institute and the Jordan College of Agricultural Sciences and Technology at California State University Fresno)


The Centre for Agriultural business says of itself:


As an independent research facility, the Center for Agricultural Business (CAB) plays a vital role in helping California's agribusinesses meet the challenges posed by a changing and increasingly competitive world.


And if the figures were startlingly wrong then one would think there might be news out there somewhere of Farmers questioning why they apparently aren't getting any of this increase themselves - but all teh articles you see aer about how much more productive agriculture is now vis previously in this area.

so either you're going to include the whole of the California tomato industry as potential chemtrail conspirators, or you have to think there is something wrong with Mangel's conclusions.

And of course Mangels does not even do us the courtesy of proving ANY basis for his assertion at all - he has no figures that can be questioned, no study that you can ask whether it was audited or not - just his say so.
edit on 1-11-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: spelling





new topics
 
4

log in

join