EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Mon Oct 20, 2014 12:33 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 7:55 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:27 am
Posts: 5776
Location: USA
Some folks are affected by peanuts.

I see peanut butter and peanut-containing products all over supermarket and gas station shelves.

Conspiracy or just hypersensitivity?

_________________
TANG SOO!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 8:48 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20561
Location: Southeastern US
http://contrailscience.com/chemtrail-myths/

Some people believe that the government is spraying something into the air, and this creates unsual looking contrails. They call these “chemtrails”. Now, there is no real evidence that “chemtrails” are real, but there are several myths on the internet about “chemtrails”. All these myths can very easily be shown to be false, and I’ve gathered the most popular myths here as a little time-saver for the person who has encountered “chemtrails” for the first time.

http://contrailscience.com/how-to-debunk-chemtrails/

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 8:51 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 5:17 am
Posts: 9576
Is there any peer-reviewed papers on this whole deal?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 12:27 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20561
Location: Southeastern US
Iowanic wrote:
Is there any peer-reviewed papers on this whole deal?


None of which I am aware. Kind of like a peer reviewed paper on the alien autopsy at Area 51 where there just is not a lot of study. The lack of study is then attributed by some to the conspiracy rather than the lack of scientific basis.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:40 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:59 am
Posts: 2289
Location: Central Colorado
Johhny Electriglide wrote:
deb wrote:
Thank you, Wayne and Johhny, for your comments.

After considering both, and further investigating the matter, there is no question in my mind that Johhny has hit home with the link http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd257.htm.
If I didn't know better, I would swear that this report was describing me...every aspect of it is right on to the very detail of the pictures, the daily patterns of the planes, the physical symptoms from the spraying-even the adjectives that are used to depict the eye's view are identical to those I've been using to describe the sky above my home here in Florida. I just signed on and read this account only minutes ago, but it eerily describes exactly everything I've witnessed and experienced in the past month since I've taken notice above.

Quite frankly, this is life-changing, and I will surely earnestly press for answers and accountability in the midst of all the unknown, as one thing is for sure...these trails are ugly, unhealthy, and are rapidly wiping out one of the simplest and most beautiful pleasures of life...contemplating a clear blue sky!

Thank you, Johhny, for connecting me to this resource.

You are welcome Deb. I am glad I live in an area of a lot less of this top secret activity, denied by so many except the witnesses and others affected.

For disbelievers; I dare you to take 6 hours and read all of the articles and links at both sites, then come back and say it is a conspiracy theory. (just saying you've "read enough" is NOT enough!)
I have, and am not into conspiracy theories that abound the internet.
As a former professional pilot and advanced teacher I explained regular contrails.
There are just too many witnesses and victims of respiratory problems with it. The patterns of flight are part of "the Shield" and longer term clouding effect are from the chemically enhanced contrails. Documented aluminum oxide and barium salt spikes in water supplies and farmers' fields over a wide area, and polymer threads.
Some of it is mistaken real contrails in humid conditions at altitude. It is mixed with other real BS conspiracy theories, sometimes, but that does not mean aerial spraying is not being done to change the albedo of the Earth(Teller's last book was VERY influential). There were experiments with other things, and I don't believe at present the government has enough money to mask as much as in the past.
Geo-engineering is doomed to eventual failure and the jet exhaust does more harm producing large amounts of CO2 and water vapor than good effects of shading.
Eventually, oil will be far too expensive for much jet flight, and the enhanced and regular contrails will disappear with a far worse temperature spike than 9-12-2001.
The jet age should be phased out over the next 3 years, and coal plants replaced with GenIV reactors within the next ten years. Reactors or sails only, on all ships, and hybrid or electric vehicles only, no slash and burn allowed, MORE EARTHSHIPS!!!. We can no longer avoid the mass die-off of mid century or before, but there is hope of time to prevent total methane turnover in a short time geologically (ten times faster than PETM) and the completion of the Sixth Great Extinction. Maybe it is too late like "Deep Throat" says(insider informant from the holmestead article), but Hansen gave us until 2016 back in 2006, the Post Carbon Institute until 2020, and McKibben and 350.org give us until 2024. Time is of the utmost essence and you know that whether or not you think there is an albedo change project going on.
More on the difference;
deb wrote:
I am familiar with contrails and these tracks appear to be quite different.
What I am seeing is literally a relentless assault on the sky with planes zooming chaotically,
dropping thick veils of material. I have also experienced profound headaches and coughing that seem to coincide with the heavy spraying.


Amplified and long lasting expanding contrails sprayed in patterns, generally containing aluminum oxides and barium sulfides and other salts with very thin polymer threads to help keep them aloft, often with anti-mold chemicals to counter that effect from earlier trials.

Go to link 4 at the bottom of this article;
http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd257.htm

Some people are more sensitive to it that others. To the gov't it is acceptable collateral damage to cool the planet. That part is at the holmestead.ca link. There is even more pictures there and pictures of the spray apparatus with testimony from several that were in the program. Not the illogic of conspiracy theory sites at all. It is real. It has a "good" purpose(to them). It is top secret with practiced suppression of witnessed events and measured aluminum and barium. It is denied as a matter of policy.
It is either that or actually stop using fossil fuels 90% like what should be done. Covering symptoms won't hide it all.

http://www.wunderground.com/climate/PETM.asp
Note that in Fig 2 and Table 1 the current rate is BEFORE the tipping points of open ocean self warming, tundra (then oceanic several hundred years later) methane hydrate deposits self release positive feedback loops are established in 3 to 11 years. AFTER, it will go up even faster in rate of warming!!!
There is at least 20% more carbon now than PETM ("Storms of My Grandchildren", Hansen 2009).

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle
“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:49 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:59 am
Posts: 2289
Location: Central Colorado
deb wrote:
Thanks, Johhny. No doubt that the toxic metals and chemicals are causing the headaches and sneezing. They were at it again this afternoon, laying trails from 2 PM until sunset, all the way from the coast inland to central Florida. Found another excellent site: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org. Have you viewed Michael Murphy's film "Why in the World Are They Spraying?


I went to the site and signed up for the newsletter. I haven't seen the film only because I can't stand the fat POS lib.

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-c ... 00x200.jpg

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle
“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 5:46 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20561
Location: Southeastern US
Johnny,

Where exactly are the results for these lab results from anywhere? Just claiming there have been spikes is not proof of anything other than the ability to make a claim.

What is the chemistry supposed to be for these programs? How is it supposed to be applied? Do you add it to the fuel or is it a a completely additional weight, which is far from insignificant in either case.

The KC-135 family is often claimed to be the source. Well, there were only 417 in the entire air force in 2010, including the reserve and guard units. The flight hours per year are generally less than one hour per day per unit on average. So, how do we get these huge numbers of "chemtrails" every day without similarly huge numbers of planes which can be dedicated for that operation?

The theory fails the math test and has no evidence outside of unsupported claims on a blog.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 8:08 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20561
Location: Southeastern US
More information:

http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/ ... hemtrails/

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 11:24 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20561
Location: Southeastern US
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/pdfs/factsheet ... barium.pdf

Barium is found in waste streams from a large number of manufacturing plants in quantities that seldom exceed the normal levels found in soil. Background levels for soil range from 100-3000 ppm barium. Occurs naturally in almost all (99.4%) surface waters examined, in concentration of 2 to 340 ug/l, with an average of 43 ug/l. The drainage basins with low mean concentration of barium (15 ug/l) occur in the western Great Lakes, & the highest mean concentration of 90 ug/l is in the southwestern drainage basins of the lower Mississippi Valley. In stream water & most groundwater, only traces of the element are present.

There are limited survey data on the occurrence of barium in drinking water. Most supplies contain less than 200 ug/l of barium. The average concentration of barium in USA drinking water is 28.6 ug/l (1977 data). The drinking water of many communities in Illinois, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, & New Mexico contains concentrations of barium that may be 10 times higher than the drinking water standard. The source of these supplies is usually well water. Currently 60 ground water supplies and 1 surface water supply exceeds 1000 ug/l.


http://rais.ornl.gov/documents/eco-ssl_aluminum.pdf

Aluminum (Al) is the most commonly occurring metallic element comprising eight percent of the earth's crust (Press and Siever, 1974). It is a major component of almost all common inorganic soil particles with the exceptions of quartz sand, chert fragments, and ferromanganiferous concretions. The typical range of aluminum in soils is from 1% to 30% (10,000 to 300,000 mg Al kg-1) (Lindsay, 1979 and Dragun, 1988) with naturally occurring concentrations variable over several orders of magnitude.

EPA recognizes that due to the ubiquitous nature of aluminum, the natural variability of aluminum soil concentrations and the availability of conservative soil screening benchmarks (Efroymson, 1997b), aluminum is often identified as a contaminant of potential concern (COPC) for ecological risk assessments. The commonly used soil screening benchmarks (Efroymson, 1997b) are based on laboratory toxicity testing using aluminum solution amendments to test soils. Comparisons of total aluminum soil concentrations to solution based screening values are deemed by EPA to be inappropriate.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 2:48 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:59 am
Posts: 2289
Location: Central Colorado
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Johnny,

Where exactly are the results for these lab results from anywhere? Just claiming there have been spikes is not proof of anything other than the ability to make a claim.

What is the chemistry supposed to be for these programs? How is it supposed to be applied? Do you add it to the fuel or is it a a completely additional weight, which is far from insignificant in either case.

The KC-135 family is often claimed to be the source. Well, there were only 417 in the entire air force in 2010, including the reserve and guard units. The flight hours per year are generally less than one hour per day per unit on average. So, how do we get these huge numbers of "chemtrails" every day without similarly huge numbers of planes which can be dedicated for that operation?

The "theory" fails the math test and has no evidence outside of unsupported claims on a blog.
False!
http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/shieldproject.html
This is not a blog, and you will find chemicals used and experimented with, apparatus photos, along with aircraft including civilian it is used in(a LOT more than KC135s!). You'll have to follow a lot of links, it is all there. The pictures, including the one below and on site are part of the proof. Like they say a picture is worth a thousand words. :-k
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-c ... 00x200.jpg
here is another site, not blog;
http://www.agriculturedefensecoalition. ... a-skywatch
BTW, it isn't everywhere all the time, either. Who pays for this enormous expense? Well we all do, especially at the pump.
http://climaterealityproject.org/the-pr ... bon_launch

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle
“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 7:23 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20561
Location: Southeastern US
Johhny Electriglide wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Johnny,

Where exactly are the results for these lab results from anywhere? Just claiming there have been spikes is not proof of anything other than the ability to make a claim.

What is the chemistry supposed to be for these programs? How is it supposed to be applied? Do you add it to the fuel or is it a a completely additional weight, which is far from insignificant in either case.

The KC-135 family is often claimed to be the source. Well, there were only 417 in the entire air force in 2010, including the reserve and guard units. The flight hours per year are generally less than one hour per day per unit on average. So, how do we get these huge numbers of "chemtrails" every day without similarly huge numbers of planes which can be dedicated for that operation?

The "theory" fails the math test and has no evidence outside of unsupported claims on a blog.
False!
http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/shieldproject.html
This is not a blog, and you will find chemicals used and experimented with, apparatus photos, along with aircraft including civilian it is used in(a LOT more than KC135s!). You'll have to follow a lot of links, it is all there. The pictures, including the one below and on site are part of the proof. Like they say a picture is worth a thousand words. :-k


Sure looks like what is called a blog source to me. So, it is your belief that the conspiracy is so large that civillian planes are used more than the military planes and all of the civillian workers never question the process or talk to outsiders about it? That is impressive.

From your source.

Why not spray more from individual jetliners? That is one of the problems. Jetliners do not carry much material (100 to 500 gallons) because the material has to be spread out thinly.

For background estimates, the variants of the KC-135/707 generally use more than 10,000 lbs/hour in fuel, which is ~1200 gallons of the least dense (0.8 kg/L) fuel. This provides enough water vapor to form a condensation trail that we see when contrails form. This is natural condensation of aersols as opposed to the 100 to 500 gallons being sprayed as an aerosol. The spray is going to consume a greater weight of liquid since the addition of metals would increase the density proportionally. At 1200 gallons per hour fuel consumption that is 20 gallons a minute, which if we assume is similar to the slower application of the mystery spray that is more dense, giving us a 5 minute application with 100 gallons and a maximum of 25 minutes of application. Neither of which would seem to give the coverage attributed to this mechanism, especially given the chemtrails are supposedly bigger in diameter than contrails.

Now, if we look at the application rate of ultra-low volume sprayers, we see 4 oz/min minimum which does make the spraying possible. With 128 oz per gallon a 100 gallon tank could spray 32 minutes per gallon minimum. The problem then becomes the volume being insufficient to appear larger than the vapor trail to which it is being compaired.

The math does not work any way you try to do it. Too many people would have to be involved to keep it quiet, too much material is required for commercial aircraft to create a chemtrail of any size, and there are too few planed which could be dedicated to such a program.


Quote:
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/chemtrails4-300x200.jpg


Why exactly are these not contrails?

Quote:


Again, it is more of a blog than anything else, especially when most of the information presented comes from just one person.

Quote:
BTW, it isn't everywhere all the time, either. Who pays for this enormous expense? Well we all do, especially at the pump.
http://climaterealityproject.org/the-pr ... bon_launch


A completely different subject.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 2:46 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:59 am
Posts: 2289
Location: Central Colorado
I guess if I can't pull your head out of the sand, no one can. Your mind is rigid and made up, and fails to see connections. The miss-information and denial campaign has worked with you. There are so many conspiracy theories, it is easy to throw some factual things in with them, to give you credit for other denialism you don't grab at in the AGW field.

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle
“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 2:52 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20561
Location: Southeastern US
Johhny Electriglide wrote:
I guess if I can't pull your head out of the sand, no one can. Your mind is rigid and made up, and fails to see connections. The miss-information and denial campaign has worked with you. There are so many conspiracy theories, it is easy to throw some factual things in with them, to give you credit for other denialism you don't grab at in the AGW field.


My head is not in the sand as I have given the math calculations, the background levels of barium and how abundant aluminum is in the biosphere to show the claims made do not add up. In response I am asked to take several hours and read unsupported ramblings that are supposed to make up my mind.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 8:32 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:33 am
Posts: 67
Deb what you are seeing is simply pollution. I have flown gliders for many years in Australia, and on occasions I have hit pollution layers that were so thick, that they stung my eyes, and smelt real bad. Now the areas I have encounter these effects were well over a hundred miles from the nearest large population, and we only see the occasional con trails or for that matter any large aircraft.

Con trails are just water vapour or ice crystals. How quickly they dissipate depends on the temperature and the level of water vapour in the air, when a cold front approaches, the level of relative humidity rises, and the temperature at height falls this promotes the formation and spreading of con trails. Under some conditions the con trials disappear within minutes, in the example above they may last many hours so seeing a lot of con trials doe not mean there are more aircraft than usual, it simple means you are seeing the the trails made over many hours. It is also worth pointing out that the upper winds will bend the trails into into long curves. The same cold front is likely going to give you northerly winds which will be carrying a larger load of pollution than from most other directions.

Sorry but the theories about deliberate spraying are just rubbish. You would have to put thousands of aircraft into the air, to produce an effect on the air quality, that was noticeable at ground level. What is a very serious problem is the level of pollution, that is being produced by our ever increasing use of fossil fuels. so much so that it is causing a a global dimming effect.

Image
Image

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming

_________________
Pollution is not the solution


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 11:56 pm 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:49 pm
Posts: 5
Warmair,

What I'm seeing is pollution for sure...chemtrail pollution! The who, what and why is debatable at this stage, until we can discover more, but my observation of increased aircraft spraying volumes of material in the sky is not. I see the planes, I see the "stuff", I see the "consequences". And I see the urgent need to do something about it!

Deb


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group