Operation Truth: Toxic Rain Reality Check Testing

I am still waiting!! Is (or was there) news that I might have missed??

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
guys (cloud and pax) I have to tell you its getting pretty hard to believe any of this was ever real. I am very disappointed in you both.

Agreed.



I think the two who started this thread owe the 'community' some sort of explanation. Likely an apology for wasting everyone's time, and for calling the skeptics all kinds of names, too.

It's threads like this that make BOLD claims but never deliver that make this sort of information a joke.

Originally posted by paxnatus
reply to post by Mercenary2007

 

It couldn't possibly be oil rising to the surface of the road from the road itself?

its been awhile since it has rained in Joplin. most of the roads in joplin are either asphalt or concrete with several layers of slurry seal. both types of roads are made with oil products. not to mention all the cars leaking oil on the road as they travel down said roads.

No it couldldn't possibly be oil rising to the surface of the road from the road itself! That is unless the OP doused his house in Oil! Did you not see the run off coming through the gutters and pooling? There is a white creamy looking foam forming! How do you explain that? Don't bother you can't

There is something in the rain I am sure of this. Why is it so hard to believe this is true? Someone has actual video footage of this taking place, and the deniers and skeptics are some of the first to respond.

If you can't handle the truth, then perhaps you should look for a forum that pulls the wool over your eyes!

The lab results will be posted and the truth will stand by itself!

This post and MANY< MANY more that belittle those who had the intelligence to be skeptical about these claims only highlights your own 'wool over eyes'.

After reading this thread and seeing the lack of any substance, I feel like I should just put some rain water in a tube and some sea water in a tube and get it tested myself

reply to post by 9Cib27


But to be truly ATS about it, make sure you call anyone who disagrees with you a 'sheep'. Then, when you cant find ANY evidence to support your claims, just hope the thread goes away...

Originally posted by paxnatus
Pax here,

....

Look for some results to be posted in the next few days.. You will find them on test the rain dot com and here.

Thank you for your time,

Pax

edit on 20-1-2011 by paxnatus because: fixed link

edit on 20-1-2011 by paxnatus because: grammar

Well, that was well over a 'few days ago' ...... and i just looked at the website...... still nothing...

Is there a specific thread to post these kinds of snipe hunts?

Hi Everyone,

I have been in contact with CloudsintheSky over this weekend. They are getting results back, but the results are trickling in, they have raised new questions, the University Lab Scientist suffered a heart-attack during the testing, the students lost some important data that had to be redone, etc., etc. I have seen the emails back and forth from the University that verifies all of this information is factual, it is not excuses. As many of you know, it was difficult in the first place to even find a lab that wasn't under contract with BP and had the sensitive equipment to verify Corexit. Clouds and Pax kind of got around that hurdle by organizing the double blind study so the lab would not be breaking any confidentiality agreements.

Now, with all of that said, the results have been interesting. I have only see a couple of results come back, so please don't hold me to this, but from what Clouds sent me regarding my sample, apparently there are the markers for dispersant use, although it didn't say conclusively yet for Corexit (that may be coming later). There were also other interesting chemical contaminants not related to the oil spill, but very interesting and surprising none the less.

I don't want to steal any thunder, or post anything incorrectly, so I will leave it at that for now. I just wanted to get something up here verifying that Clouds and Pax have had many hoops and setbacks in dealing with this, but they are continually working at it, and they are getting interesting results that have made the endeavor worthwhile. They have also amassed considerable expense beyond just their time. If I were them I would be seeking donations, but they haven't so far.

I hope that helps everyone. I know their time estimates have come and gone a couple of times, and I know this thread has died off a couple of times, but their efforts have not stopped. Clouds forwarded me many of the communications back and forth with the University, so that I could see how things were being delayed. I can vouch for their efforts, and the truth of their problems and delays.

Thanks, getready.... very informative and helpful.

Wish more posts were like yours.

I'll remain 'patient' for a few more weeks.

reply to post by getreadyalready


I too appreciate your posting and letting us know that there is indeed progress being made. As I have said many times I am very interested in the results of this test.

I do feel the need to point out that the testtherain.com site does have a link to donate money to the cause; that being said I don't think we can honestly say Pax and Clouds have not asked for donations to assist with this endeavor.

reply to post by getreadyalready


I noticed that as of today the link to accept donations at www.testtherain.com has been removed. Given that I have made repeated statements contradicting the notion that no donations were sought I felt it prudent to post this screen shot from only a few days ago that proves they were seeking donations.

It would seem that some sort of data has been "released" relating to this study. I couldn't help but to notice that for some odd reason pax and clouds did not post the revelation in this thread. Odd that they would post it in over in a thread that has only four pages and 23 flags than in the thread here in a thread with 56 flags and 14 pages. I say its odd because it would seem to me that they would want this information posted in a thread which would garner the most attention for the information. There is also the fact that there has been far more activity recently on this thread than on the other by the two OPs (clouds and sky) which makes me wonder why the results are not posted here. Last post by one of the OPs in the other thread before the "results" came out was on 09/22/10 with the last post in this thread by one of the dual OPs being 01/20/11.


Pax and Clouds I have two questions regarding the results that you are so seemingly hesitant to release on this thread. Do you have any tests from before the spill that show there wasn't a metabolite in the water at that time and have you tested rain from any other water systems than the gulf to show that this metabolite is not also present there?

I have other questions of course but feel that these two warrant immediate posting.

reply to post by Dilligaf28

Odd that they would post it in over in a thread that has only four pages and 23 flags than in the thread here in a thread with 56 flags and 14 pages.

I dont come here to ATS for points or flags

testtherain.com...

reply to post by Cloudsinthesky


Better yet would you like to call me? If so I will give you my number

reply to post by Cloudsinthesky


I prefer our communication stay open and observable by all and I would hope that you would too. I mean if we talk in private either of us could distort what the other says and even make up falsities whereas if we carry on a dialogue here there is absolutely no chance of that occurring from either side.

I also feel that since so much information has already been conveyed in this thread that is a very appropriate venue in which to continue on conveying information in.

If you would be so kind as to please address my questions regarding the metabolite? I feel that the answer to that question must be had before any sort of further dialogue can occur.

reply to post by Cloudsinthesky


As I said in my post my logic for thinking this is where you announce any "results" is that more people are aware of this thread than the other as evidenced by the number of pages and flags. Logically the most effective thread in which to convey information to those interested would be the thread with the most pages and flags as it is most viewed.

It has nothing to do with stars or flags and I"m not sure why you thought it did. It has everything to do with getting information out effectively and efficiently.

reply to post by Dilligaf28


why not call him up, tape the recording and post it here . why isnt the results posted here, someone could easily post the links. if you dont have means to measure dirty and polluted water, do you have geiger meters now to tel radioactivity ? wrong coast maybe..just thinking its probably soon time to keep track of the environment when you open your front door. looks like downfall could bring more than just the water itself.


so much work for just 'S&F'. can they ever be taken away again i wonder ? all talk about labs and science and urges to 'wait'. oh well..was what it was.

Posted here as well, since there are two threads on this subject:

So, to clarify, you guys never found any evidence that there is oil or any compounds from the crude found in the rain?

That WAS the initial point, right?

So we can now officially consider ourselves correct if we thought the notions was highly unlikely, and the videos alleging such were complete nonsense?

reply to post by incrediblelousminds

So, to clarify, you guys never found any evidence that there is oil or any compounds from the crude found in the rain? That WAS the initial point, right? So we can now officially consider ourselves correct if we thought the notions was highly unlikely, and the videos alleging such were complete nonsense?

I have one question, did you bother to read the results listed in the full article? i don't believe so otherwise you would not have stated the above quote.

From the article itself:

“I am so taken by the results I want to make sure that nothing was done wrong. What have been some of the materials you all have found in water in the past?”

Sent: Oct 20, 2010 Subject: Re: samples To: ali “We used GCMS and AA. The GC MS gave us five organics in the mix, three of which we cannot identify. The other two are interesting and have been identified using the NIST database.

We checked the solvent for contamination and found none. We found triethylene glycol and Ecogoine methyl ester. You can do your own research, but I do not for the life of me see how the latter got in the rain………..”

So lets look at triethylene glycol:

TEG is also used as a liquid desiccants for natural gas and in air conditioning systems. It is an additive for hydraulic fluids and brake fluids for this purpose as well. Applications: TEG is used by the oil and gas industry to “dehydrate” natural gas.. The waste TEG produced by this process has been found to contain enough benzene to be classified as hazardous waste[2] (benzene concentration greater than 0.5 mg/L).

wikipedia

testherain.com

This clearly states it is used by the oil industry. What more "proof " do you need?

Read the article in it's entirety, you may learn something new.

Thanks,
Pax(Ali)

reply to post by paxnatus


I stand corrected.

Thanks for your reply.

How many samples were tested over-all?

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


There were 10 samples tested in the first batch. Nine of the samples were sent to the lab under a double blind. The report states that 28 samples were tested which include the double blinds. The lab never knew the lot codes for the doulbe blinds.

We have roughly 20 samples that have yet to be tested........