Ok, now we may proceed. Although this information was not addressed in the OP, I am willing to discuss it. I assume the moderator doesn't mind. I am aware that aluminum is not in contrails and it is in water. Upon that we can agree. It is in CHEMTRAILS. Also, being that aluminum is one of the most abundant elements on Earth and the most abundant metal, it shows up routinely in surface water as it comes from dirt. So, what are you getting at?Quote by: minorwork
The truth is an offense, but not a sin.
Maybe not in the OP, but here you mention it:
Chemtrails and contrails are different. My OP consisted mostly of evidence. The government has been caught time and time again launching psy ops and biological tests against the American people. I did not write Chemtrails 101 for the sake of argumentation; I wrote it to inform people about a genocide. I also wrote the article so that people may read what I wrote and look into it for themselves. The main ingredients in chemtrails are Aluminum, Barium and Strontium; I will get into that more later. I've got TONS of evidence but for some people I am sure it will never be enough.It's later. Alum is added to water supplies intentionally without your permission. Do you intentionally allow flouride too? Maybe flouride is in the chemtrails as well.Look out! They're making another pass.
1960S Aerial US Military Airplanes Spraying Agent Orange… News Footage | Getty Images UK | 822-64
If the terrain and the map do not agree, follow the terrain.
When motherhood becomes the fruit of a deep yearning, not the result of ignorance or accident, its children will become a new race.
Yo X, you continue to ignore the absurdity of your original claim that contrails are only short lived.
The irony here is that aircraft contrails may indeed be posing a serious environmental threat, but this threat may be overshadowed by ridiculous claims and conspiracy theories related to fictitious "chemtrails."
Rick
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." Sinclair Lewis
This installment of the 'Chemtrails 101' series is comprised of excerpts from the 2004 book 'Chemtrails Confirmed' by William Thomas (Bridger House Publishers / ISBN 1-893157-10-5). William Thomas is an award winning Canadian journalist. Thomas’ writing and photography have appeared in more than 50 publications in eight countries, including translations into French, Dutch and Japanese. His editorial commentaries have appeared in The Globe and Mail, The Toronto Star, The Vancouver Sun and Times-Colonist newspapers. A frequent radio talk-show guest, William Thomas has also appeared on the CBC and New Zealand’s national television. He currently lives and works among the Gulf Islands of British Columbia:
It was nearly noon when S.T. Brendt awoke and entered the kitchen of her country home in Parsonfield, Maine. As she poured her first cup of coffee, the late night reporter for WMWV radio could not guess that her life was minutes away from drastic change.
Her partner Lou Aubuchont was already up, puzzling over what he had seen in the sky a half hour before. The fat puffy plumes arching up over the horizon were unlike any contrail he had ever seen, even during his hitch in the Navy.
Lou got up and looked. What kind of clouds run exactly side-by-side in a straight line? He wondered. It's just too perfect to happen naturally. When he said he wasn't sure, S.T. stopped smiling and went outside.
Looking up towards the southeast over West Pond, she spotted the first jet. A second jet was laying billowing white banners to the north. Both aircraft appeared to be over 30,000 ft. Turning her gaze due west, Brendt saw two more lines extending over the horizon. She called Lou. Within 45 minutes the couple counted 30 jets.
This isn't right, S.T. thought. We just don't have that kind of air traffic here. While Lou kept counting, she went inside and started calling airports. One official she reached was guarded but friendly. He had relatives in West Pond.
The Air Traffic Control manager told Brendt her sighting was "unusual". His radars showed nine commercial jets during the same 45-minuite span. From her location, he said, she should have been able to see one plane.
And the other 29? The FAA official confided off the record that he had been ordered "by higher civil authority" to re-route inbound European airliners away from a "military exercise" in the area. "Of course they wouldn't give me any of the particulars and I don't ask," he explained. "I just do my job."
Excited and puzzled by this information, S.T. and Lou got into their car and headed down Route 160. Looking in any direction they could see 5 or 6 jets flying over 30,000 ft. Never in the dozen years they'd lived in rural Maine, had they seen so much aerial activity. As a former U.S. Navy intelligence courier, Aubuchont was used to large-scale military exercises. But he told S.T. he had never seen anything this big.
"It looked like an invasion," he later recounted. Another driver almost went off the road as he leaned over his dashboard trying to look up. As they passed, he acknowledged them with a nod.
As far as they could see stretched line after line. Two giant grids were especially blatant. In stead of dissipating like normal contrails, these sky trails grew wider and wider and began to merge. Looking towards the sun, Aubuchont saw what looked like "an oil and water mixture" reflecting a prismatic band of colors.
At approx. 3:55 they headed home to Parsonfield. They (the jets) were still up there. What's worse is that these grids were now merging to the point of greying their beautiful skies... By 5:30 their beautiful day had turned dingy and hazy like air pollution and the sunset was dirty. Lou remembers seeing the last jets at about 5:15 pm leaving chemtrails. They were spaced further apart then the earlier jets.
Richard Dean called back. After receiving S.T.'s message, the assistant WMWV news director had gone outside with other news staff and counted 370 lines in skies usually devoid of aerial activity. The most jets they could see at any one time was 17.
~
A story published by WorldNetDaily in 2001 - "Californians Concerned Over Chemtrails" - was one of the first to take eyewitnesses seriously.
Reporter Lance Lindsay interviewed David Oglesby. Just after sun-down two months previously, the World War II veteran spotted nearly a dozen white trails, dissipating slowly over his home. "The trails formed a grid pattern," Oglesby told Lindsay. "Some stretched from horizon to horizon; some began abruptly and others ended abruptly. They hung in the air for an extended period of time and gradually widened into wispy clouds, resembling spider webs. I counted at least II different trails."
Lindsay also examined dozens of photos taken over l2-months by Paula Glick. Her father Gene Shimer served four years as a radar technician during the Korean War. The retired U.S. Air Force sergeant does not believe the patterns over his Coarsegold home are normal contrails.
"l was talking to my dad," Glick remembers, "and he said, 'They're gridding us up here'. I thought, 'Yeah, right dad. Sure they are.' I didn't believe him."
Four months after moving from Ventura to Coarsegold, Glick had to reassess her father's assessment. "I had to watch them do it," Glick told Lindsay. "And as I watched them everyday doing it, it became apparent that we were being sprayed. And so I had to believe. I saw what was normal and I saw what was abnormal."
Shimer contacted the Military Operation Control at Travis Air Force Base, which controls all military operations in Central California. Shimer asked the colonel to identify three planes flying over his home at that very moment. "What would you say if I said there are three aircraft up there right now?" Shimer asked. "Are they there?"
The colonel replied, "No. They are not there."
Navy operations told Shimer there were no operations at all. The flight-control office at Fresno Yosemite International Airport said no flight plans had been filed.
But lra Plumber is a retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Air Force who regularly watches the sky over his Coarsegold home. Several times a week, he sees planes emitting significant sky trails that do not appear to be normal contrails, Plumber says.
As Lindsay chronicles:
One morning, about two years ago, Shimer spotted a long, thin string resembling a spider web floating in the sky, he said. It was about 20 feet in length and could only be seen in the reflection of the sun. He looked up, saw trails, and then saw something that appeared to be a glob of foam falling from the sky. "It came floating down, free-floating," Shimer says. "I caught it with a spatula, scooped it off the ground, and I watched it as it shrank. It was about the size of my fist when it first started. It looked like a cross between soap bubbles and cotton candy." He placed the substance in a plastic bag and kept it. It is now about the size of his thumbnail, he says. It has hardened' now appearing to be made of plastic. He did not have it lab tested. He doesn't have enough faith in any lab to give them his only sample, he says. He believes it is probably a polymer.
~
The following unedited transcript is a recorded message from a Dec. 8, 2000 call by a Canadian aviation authority from the Victoria International Airport to a local resident.
Stewart was responding to a call the previous day demanding to know why intense aerial activity had left lingering X's, circles and grid-like plumes over the British Columbia capitol on Dec. 6 and 7.
"Mark, it's Terry Stewart, Victoria Airport Authority. Just calling you back from your comment. From what I gather, it's a military exercise; U.S. and Canadian air force exercise that's goin' on. They wouldn't give me any specifics on it. Hope that helps your interest. Very odd. Thanks a lot. Bye bye now."
All this and much, much more can be found in William Thomas' groundbreaking book 'Chemtrails Confirmed' available at his website willthomasonline.net Click on the 'bookstore' tab and you will be taken to a page where you can order a copy of 'Chemtrails Confirmed,' download an electronic copy of 'Chemtrails Confirmed' or order the 'Chemtrails Confirmed' companion DVD which contains a copy of William's documentary video 'Mystery Lines in the Sky'. You can find all this and more at willthomasonline.net
The truth is an offense, but not a sin.
In this, the third and final installment of the 'Chemtrails 101' series, we will examine scientific data supporting the chemtrail hypothesis. Hundreds of independent lab test results from around the world too numerous to mention here have formed a consensus. The main ingredients in chemtrails are Aluminum, Barium and Strontium. As you are about to see, professional scientists have corroborated these findings.
Frances Mangels has a Bachelor of Science in Forestry from the International School of Forestry at Missoula, spent 35 years with the U.S. Forest Service as a wildlife biologist and worked several years with the USDA Soil Conservation Service as a soil conservationist. Today he lives in Mt. Shasta, CA and works as a master gardener. He took a sample of water from his backyard rain gauge on Feb. 1, 2009 and submitted it to Basic Laboratory of Redding, CA on Feb. 2, 2009. This sample showed Aluminum at a level of 1010 micrograms per liter (ug/l). This same sample also showed Barium at a level of 8 ug/l. Using the same sample method and laboratory, he took a sample on Oct. 14, 2009 which showed Aluminum at a level of 611 ug/l. The Barium should not be there in any amount. Barium carbonate is used in rat poison. The normal level of Aluminum in rainwater is .5 ug/l. These samples show levels of Aluminum at 2020 times and 1222 times the normal levels. There is no heavy industry in the Mt. Shasta area. There is no reason, other than chemtrails, for this stuff to be showing up at these levels.
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) produced data showing elevated levels of Barium in surface water between 1988-2001. Along with other elevated readings, a sample from the East Verde River near Payson, AZ taken on July 19, 1999 showed Barium at a level of 340 micrograms per liter (ug/l). This is significant because, unlike such elements as Aluminum, Barium is not commonly found in our soils and water.
The ADEQ analyzed many water samples taken at different times from the Nogales Wash Channel between 1993 and 2002. Among other elevated readings, they found Barium at levels of: 850 ug/l, 950 ug/l and 900 ug/l.
The ADEQ analyzed many water samples taken at different times between 1988-2004 at the Verde River Below Horseshoe Dam. Among many other elevated readings, a sample taken on July 19, 1990 showed Barium at a level 560 ug/l and another sample taken within a year showed Barium at a level of 700 ug/l.
In June of 1996, the ADEQ analyzed water samples taken from the Buckeye Canal. The lab report showed Barium at a level of 570 parts per million.
Data produced by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) shows elevated levels of chemtrail toxins. Between 1990 and 2002, CARB ambient air statewide average data shows elevated and increasing levels of Aluminum and Barium. From 1990 to 2002, Aluminum was detected in the range of 1500 to 2000 nanograms per cubic meter. Even more concerning is Barium which between 1990 and 2002 consistently trended upwards, reaching a peak of 50.8 nanograms per cubic meter in 2002. The CARB classifies Aluminum and Barium as toxic compounds. The CARB website says, "For toxics compounds, there is generally no threshold concentration below which the air is healthy. For toxics compounds, the greater the quantified health risk, the more unhealthy the air is." In other words, ANY Aluminum or Barium is unhealthy. There ARE NO SAFE LEVELS except zero. These Aluminum levels are disturbing, but the Barium levels are totally inexplicable except in the light of the chemtrail hypothesis. Remember, these are STATEWIDE AVERAGES. God forbid you might be living in an area that increased the average.
You may ask why I am only referencing data up to 2002. This is 2011. Where is the missing data? The answer is that data from between 1990 and 2002 is the only data which the CARB has widely distributed. As far as statewide averages for ambient Aluminum and Barium are concerned, these years are the only years which their website and their 'California Ambient Air Quality Data' DVD show. Their Public Information Officer Dimitri Stanich curiously refused to answer questions about the missing data. He referred me to documents which did not address the issue. After discussions with staff, Mike Miguel, the chief of the Quality Management Branch of the Monitoring and Laboratory Division, wrote me saying, "It is my understanding that the toxics air monitoring network (samples collected in Summa canisters) stoped analyzing for these compounds due to the low concentrations. However, the PM2.5 network does analyze for these compounds and that data was provided in the analyses and CD."(sic) A statewide average of Barium at 50.8 nanograms per cubic meter and Aluminum at 2000 are low concentrations?! A yearly statewide average should not show ANY Barium and any levels of detectable Aluminum or Barium have been classified as unhealthy. The concentrations were trending upwards. They stopped analyzing for these compounds?! I have scoured their website, written letters and made many phone calls to the CARB and I have not heard of or seen this missing data presented in any CD. Thankfully, other people have been asking for this missing data as well. The organization known as Environmental Voices requested the missing data and on September 15, 2010 they got it. Amazingly, after data showing many years of elevated and increasing levels of Aluminum and Barium, this newly produced data showed MUCH LOWER levels. That's good news, right? I want to believe that everything is as it has always been. The only problem is that, upon scrutiny of the numbers, you will find that the newly released data contradicts the previously released data.
Let us look at data for the year 2002 both new and old. 2002 is a year for which the CARB widely distributed data AND it is a year for which they have provided data to only a select few researchers such as I due to the efforts of Environmental Voices. I will refer to the widely distributed data as the 'old' data and the thinly distributed data as the 'new' data. The old data says that in 2002 the statewide average for ambient Aluminum was 1980 nanograms per cubic meter. The new data says that the statewide average in 2002 was 67.5 nanograms per cubic meter. The new data also says that statewide average Aluminum concentrations generally remained at this level through to 2009. As far as Barium goes, the old data says that the statewide ambient air average Barium concentration for 2002 was 50.8 nanograms per cubic meter. The new data says it was 27.5 nanograms per cubic meter. The new data says that statewide average Barium concentrations only trended lower from 2002 to 2009. Why does the new data contradict the old data?
Are certain people at the CARB trying to hide something? Why does their Public Information Officer, whose job is to answer questions from the public, refuse to answer questions about missing data? Why does he obfuscate the truth by referring me to documents that don't answer the question? Why does one of their division chiefs' response not make sense? How is it that data released to only a select few magically makes the problem go away? Why don't they post this new data on their website? All their answers so far only leave me with more questions.
So, that is it for Chemtrails 303. Again, there are hundreds, maybe thousands of other scientific confirmations of chemtrail toxins available. I have left those out in favor of only the most reputable data. Although the logical subject matter of Chemtrails 404 would be the health effects of exposure to chemtrail toxins, I do not feel the need to write that paper. Aside from the fact that it is difficult to prove; I don't need to tell you that. I don't need to tell you that breathing particulate toxins all day and night is bad for you. I don't need to tell you that adding to the myriad of toxins in our food, water and air is bad for us. We know it is. There are many scientific papers supporting this position, but it is just common sense. We need to reduce the amount of toxins in our ecosystem, not increase them. The chemtrail phenomenon is nothing short of genocide. Whether or not that was the intention, that is exactly what it is. I have now proven to you that chemtrails are real. Do not live in denial. Denial equals death. Our collective ignorance is what is killing this society. Ignorance causes chemtrails. I ask that you reverse this trend. Ask the questions. Demand answers. I have armed you with the verifiable truth; now go out there and shake the trees. Call and write your local office of: the Federal Aviation Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the California Air Resources Board, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, ALL your government representatives, talk radio shows, and television stations. You are the one you have been waiting for. Thank you.
Last edited by Thanatos; 29th August 2011 at 02:27 AM. Reason: Resurrected by Thanatos on user request.
The truth is an offense, but not a sin.
Too long, didn't read.
You need to block your posts better. It's impossible to look at such a large wall of text.
Ty/Tyc/Tyke/Tyster/Tycoon
My water I drink comes in with barium at 22.72 ppb average to 42 ppb high. They don't even bother checking for aluminum as it is used to treat the water. Flouride is in there too. You'd make fun of me if I told you how much dihydrogen monoxide was in my average glass of tea made from the city water here. I'm not happy about it either but water is water, eh? Used to be I drunk from mud puddles as a kid. 6 towns use the same lake water and treatment plant. Do I have naything to worry about with those levels of barium? I'm having trouble converting ppb to ug/l. Must be the aluminum, you think? I'm over 60 now and could be it's accumulating. Been drinking this water here since 1976. It's about over for me, ain't it? I can take it. Just tell me.
If the terrain and the map do not agree, follow the terrain.
When motherhood becomes the fruit of a deep yearning, not the result of ignorance or accident, its children will become a new race.
You should get yourself a reverse osmosis water filtration system. Reverse osmosis is the only thing that takes out all impurities. I got mine at Costco for under $200. A good HEPA air filter will remove chemtrail particulates from the air. Some HEPA air filters are better than others. I paid about $250 at Home Depot for mine. As far as I know it is as good as they come.
Last edited by The Real Mr. X; 29th August 2011 at 12:07 PM. Reason: addition and a subtraction
The truth is an offense, but not a sin.
Aw, come on! It's blocked fine. Bear down and realize that chemtrails are real.
The truth is an offense, but not a sin.
I use a distiller for water for the CPAP. When water from the commission tasted like dirt for a couple of years, they said from algae blooms, we used distilled for drinking, but it made very weak tea. Something about deonized water maybe. The treatment plant started using activated charcoal, a lot of it, and maybe some other process, the taste improved, and not the distilled water is just for the CPAP and the wife's iron.
Was wondering how the ppb numbers compared to your cited figures expressed in ug/l. No help there?
If the terrain and the map do not agree, follow the terrain.
When motherhood becomes the fruit of a deep yearning, not the result of ignorance or accident, its children will become a new race.
I didn't give any ppb numbers. There was only one reference to PPM referencing ADEQ numbers from the Buckeye Canal. A quick web search tells me that ppm = mg/l. 1 mg/l = 1000 ug/l.
The truth is an offense, but not a sin.
This is a very, very old conspiracy. I've known about it for a long time and I believe I've seen this very article several years before.
I am also a biology major with a strong interest in soil chemistry. I build self-contained ecosystems for fun, and I have a bit of a reputation for being able to produce explosions out of whatever I have on hand essentially on demand. My science is strong.
____________________________
Your first clue that this article was written by gibbering morons should be the capital letters. There are a lot of them. This is the number one, universal sign that the author did not really know what they were talking about. Ignore the lack of paragraph breaks; I believe that at one time there were paragraph breaks in this tract but they've been lost as it's been copied and pasted through the ages.
The second clue should be the dire warnings, especially the capitalized dire warnings, such as there being no safe levels of barium.
The third clue is the lack of citations. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality produced data on stuff and things, but... where can I read it to check to see if the numbers in the article even match the numbers in the report? While citations do not equal truthiness a lack of citations in a document purported to prove a scientific point should be a red flag.
____________________________
As a young scientist I am also aware of several other critical flaws. What kind of barium compounds did all these various laboratories detect? Barium sulfate is a stable mineral that's used as an x-ray dye. I've had a barium sulfate smoothie for an upper GI exam and it tasted about like what you'd expect but it had no effect.
Francis Mangels detected barium carbonate in his back yard rainwater. Francis Mangels also does not know how to use a pH test strip and is probably mentally ill, but I don't need to go into those details. Barium carbonate rates as a "2" health hazard on the fire diamond; this makes it slightly dangerous.
The EPA thinks the safe dose of soluble barium compounds is somewhere around 0.2 mg ingested per kilogram of bodyweight per day. They have little interest in the safe limits of barium carbonate in water because barium carbonate does not dissolve in water.
Barium and Compounds (CASRN 7440-39-3) | IRIS | US EPA
____________________________
For fun, let's dig through government archives to check just one of the studies "cited" here. I choose the unknown CARB study between 1990 and 2002.
Error: there was no study at CARB that ran from 1990 to 2002, at least that I could find. None of the CARB data I reviewed while looking for it mentions barium and some raw spectrometer data I found does not show a peak from it. To correct this error, don't post articles that obviously are completely and utterly made up. Shutting down due to excessive bullshit.
The more you complain, the less I care about your problems.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks