This blog is dedicated to the memory of David Weintraub, who took on insidious astroturfers and won.

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

An Article With No Apology by Carole Pellatt

This is a cross-post from AAANI. I think this was well put together by one of my internet friends. To check out my introduction and follow up responses, please go to that link. There are a few things I don't agree with her, but I'm not going to copy and paste that here.


CAROLE PELLATT PRESENTS A NEW ARTICLE NEW PAGE OF REPORTS/DOCUMENTATION
ALL INFO IS AVAILABLE AT www.iseelines.com ( I SEE LINES )

AN ARTICLE WITH NO APOLOGY


SPRAYING THE SKIES:
An Article With No Defense
By Carole Pellatt

I’m writing this article for a few reasons. The first and most obvious reason is that I haven’t published a photo essay in over a year. Due to this fact, I have received many enquiries from people who frequent my website as to my reasons for seemingly falling off the radar. I feel that a lot of people have counted on my voice to speak honestly regarding the issue of spraying by airplanes, and I want to assure them that I haven’t changed my position or hypothesis one iota.

Another reason for this article is that over the years I have been careful and responsible in publishing research to back up any claims or accusations I’ve made with numerous sources of indisputable factoids ie; published scientific research papers, military reports, government oversight reports, facts dredged up during lawsuits, etc. This was done because that’s how all good research is published, and I wanted to give the benefit of the doubt to all my readers that they earnestly were seeking to get to the bottom of this.



It seems that in this day and age of “cut and paste” arguing and publishing, and the complete breach of the internet as a place to acquire free information, my corroborating evidence has been ignored by many people who inevitably accuse me of being a “kook”, “conspiracy theorist”, and just plain stupid. Apparently, many of the people who dogpile onto the “chemtrail” debate are merely sharks trolling the internet seeking their next engagement of anonymous aggression. These people are self proclaimed “experts”. Proclaimed so because they can win arguments from the bully pulpit of an internet forum hiding behind an anonymous name.

These being the facts of my own experience, I decided to write an article that breaks all the rules of a good researcher: I’m going to address the many enquiries as to what I am currently doing in regards to the spraying and what I think the spraying is all about. But this time I will discuss what my gut feelings are and what my instincts tell me regarding what is going on in the sky. And I’m not going to back it up with any evidence. All my claims can be substantiated with a little research, which is how I came to these conclusions. As my guitar teacher Joe used to tell me about learning to play, “No one can do it for you.” The facts of my research are indisputable and easy to find, so you don’t need my help for that.



SAME AS IT EVER WAS

One of my major concerns during this publishing hiatus has been people who need guidance, corroborating evidence, a hypothesis, or serious background information on dangerous, damaging, and proven lethal government, corporate, and military programs. I encourage you to read my article “CONNECTIONS, Yes We Are Being Sprayed.” This paper represents hundreds of hours of research from scores of sources that are independent from one another. There you will find all the defense, and corroborating evidence for my “outrageous” claims. I stand by the conclusions I reached after the years of exhaustive research that went into that article. Please use the link provided or one linked from my website to access "Yes We Are Being Sprayed", as this article has been plagiarized on the internet and the wording changed. This includes sites like "Educate Yourself", who refuse after 2 communications to use my original words. The version currently being "cut and pasted" around the internet had been edited by the Idaho Observer and the end product did not represent my feelings, words, or intentions. I hold no malice towards them for interpreting my words to represent their feelings, but what came out at the other end was a shock to me.

As well, I did a short film called "WHO ARE YOU" which is bursting with my photos of aerial assaults, obvious examples of weather modification, and the movement of barium clouds by electro-magnetic waves. One complaint my detractors had was how quickly the written information passed. For all their "tech savvy" on internet forums, it's too bad they don't know how to use the pause button on "youtube".



Good people who have supported me over the years, I am still here. Mostly researching. And also checking that what I wrote in the article, “Connections”, stands the test of time. I do not need to keep publishing the same conclusions over and over again.

I also have spent countless hours updating my I SEE LINES website. To aid in research, I have updated the downloadable reports" page. The links were constantly being compromised by the Mac server and I apologize for any inconvenience it caused. All reports should be easily accessed now.



LET'S DISCUSS THE WORD "NORMAL"

There are a few reasons why I haven't published new photo essays. One thing is that I was starting to feel like I was publishing the same photos over and over again. There are over 50 photo essays on my site http://www.iseelines ( I SEE LINES ). If I see something new, I will publish it. But we are well into the scientific programs that involve spraying the globe with metallic based aerosol conductors. And, over the period of 50 or so photo essays featuring hundreds of photos, I think I’ve covered the different faces of our fake sky. I encourage you to go back to these photo essays, TODAY'S WEATHER, and read them. And please continue to share them. They are as relevant today as when I first published them.

Another thing I noticed about my photos over time is that they no longer seemed "horrible" to the general public. They looked "normal", or even, routine. There was a window of time when it went from sporadic-although regular spraying of the sky for more decades than most people realize, to full blown checker-board, plaid, and mostly horrifying spraying patterns. That was before the situation became normalized after so many years, so many tv shows, films, commercials, ads, weather channel graphics, news station graphics, credit card graphics and talk show set designs. These images featured new patterns that were merely there when new media was being created. However, there is a legitimate question as to whether or not there had been a backstage machination within the media to rush these images along. This type of "power of suggestion" propaganda is not a new tool of civilization.



Now, our fake sky is a normal sight. These patterns have been burned into the right hemispheres of those who have grown up with a different memory of the sky. Some people notice and don't care, some people never see it. And a whole new generation of children has grown up seeing lines and "X"'s being sprayed, completely unnatural cloud formations, pollution, and unnatural weather patterns that they perceive as "normal" cycles of the earth they live upon. Just as every generation obliviously inherited a landscape that was more damaged and less organic than it's predecessor's. It’s everywhere, and my photos merely depict what the new “normal” is.

I must qualify at this point, that when I use the term “normal” to describe the sky, that doesn’t mean it’s okay. The term "water pollution" is “normalized”, but it’s not okay with me. Just as water privatization is considered a "normal business practice", it's not okay with me. Air pollution is a “normal sight,” but it horrifies me. Clear cutting old growth forests is “normally practiced”, but it’s not okay with me. Oil spills are a “normal occurrence”, but they’re not okay with me. I'm sure every living creature that is not human would agree with my gut instincts on this.

And if we add humans to this train of thought; Banks stealing money from hardworking people is “normal” but it’s not okay with me, nor is homelessness, or poverty by design, racism, perpetual war, refugee-ism or slavery. Nothing is as it seems and "normal" is further and further from the kind milk of mother nature every day.



BACK TO THE SKY

Well, is the sky "normal", or is it a "conspiracy of normalcy"? Unfortunately, I feel that what we are currently witnessing is the new "normal". The tragedy of the rape of the our sky could only be considered a "conspiracy" or "conspiracy theory" if the facts, the reports, the books, the patents, the statistics, the profitable industries, and the scientific papers describing these occurrences and practices were kept a big "secret". But they're not. There are literally thousands upon thousands of papers, books, and articles on weather modification and other actions that span more than a century.

There is an endless supply of legitimate information on experiments, research, events, practices, drills, and occurrences of anomalies such as military chaff, man-made aerosols, liquid droplets, vapors, gasses, electromagnetic waves, lethal frequencies-both audible and inaudible, weather modification-both extreme and benign, poisonous chemicals and biological agents that have been created in labs and strewn about the earth, in bodies of water, in clouds, in the troposphere, the stratosphere, the mesosphere, and the atmosphere. These toxic mimics have been harvested, injected, propelled, detonated, leaked, beamed, spilled, and sprayed into our environment. We've eaten them, and they have eaten us.

You could spend a lifetime reading technical papers on heinous crimes against man and nature. This should put to rest any discussion of conspiracy theories. And it should remind us that anyone who uses this expression is merely displaying an abysmal ignorance of reality.



YOU CALL IT CHEMTRAILS, HE CALLS IT CONTRAILS,
Let’s Call The Whole Thing Off

Let’s discuss a few of the arguments regarding what people call chemtrails. First of all, I do my best to never call them “chemtrails”. I hold no resentment for those that do, but I choose my words differently. For many reasons. The first being, that I don’t see them referred to as “chemtrails” in the scientific papers I have read. Yes, I know about Dennis Kucinich’s bill HR2977 where “chemtrails” are mentioned as an exotic weapon.

But there are some problems associated with using a word that is connected to such a phrase; exotic weapon. It negates the implications of it's current uses on a daily basis as a missile guidance system, military communications superhighway, radar jammer, the finest tuned internet and international communications satelite destroyer, delivery system of lightning storms, wind storms, sand storms, biological weapons, and perfect plane of existence for launching nuclear weapons over a curved earth with excellent accuracy. That is only to name a few of the current uses of this "spray". You see, when you say to someone “Look, there’s this scary new weapon technology called chemtrails, and it’s a huge plot to spray the sky all over the world.", you're being a little vague. Using a word that was created decades and decades after the government started spraying the skies with military chaff and silver iodide-to name a couple of aerosol conductors- expresses an ignorance of the history of aerosol and metal particulate spraying. These multipurpose technologies allow us to create a "plasma shield" around the earth and dominate the new electromagnetic superhighway created in the sky. Basically, the cold war has migrated into space.



“Chemtrails” may have shown up in a Senator’s bill, but the spraying of the skies, or the injecting of aerosols and particulates known and unknown into the atmosphere predates World War I. It’s also important to remember that the potential for weather modification has been investigated and practiced by ancient peoples, from indigenous tribes to the Egyptians and ancient Greeks.

Next, I never enter into those inane arguments centered around “contrail science”. People who have never read a lick of a science report in their lives are now quoting what temperature the ionosphere has to be in order for "contrails" to be created by aircraft. This is the explanation for their denial. If someone cuts and pastes that argument to me one more time I'll scream. It's astounding to me that you can "know" that much about physics, yet still be completely oblivious to the current standards of modern science and technology. If people want to argue that the portrait of horror up in the sky is merely aircraft contrails, so be it. Contrails; toxic, engineered, succinctly sprayed, contrails. End of argument. After all, it did begin with "contrail" studies. Really, call them what you want, they're toxic to life on earth.

And why is it that these junior scientists can never explain to me-or even attempt to explain how clouds can fill the sky in the desert when the humidity is 6%? And how is it that they can suddenly appear and then mysteriously vaporize? "Chemtrails", "Contrails", let's call the whole thing off....

Another issue brought up by apologists is the accusation that “some kook is making outrageous claims that all over the world, there is a synchronized conspiracy of hundreds of jets spraying every day.” “How can there be such a huge conspiracy and yet no one knows about it?”, they ask, sarcastically. Start reading military documentation and you’ll see that it’s not a secret. You’ll see that every military that has planes, sprays the skies. If it’s not a secret, it’s not a conspiracy. They claim it’s for “military exercises”, but basically, that’s become a code for “it’s there all the time”. That’s where our technology is. That’s where the war is being fought. If one country has the technology, eventually every other country will have it. And people from all over the world are seeing these spray patterns. They're not going unnoticed by the public.



Need I mention how many American Military bases exist world-wide, and how many allied bases exist worldwide? Now let’s add the non-allied nations who also have the technology because they have airplanes. Do I have to go on? Wherever there are military planes and radar there is spraying. So you don’t need one centralized evil force involved in a huge world-wide conspiracy. You just need militaries with planes and the same high tech weapons technology and/or the potential for exploration and experimentation. No defense. Do the research.



Also, I will have to pass on the altruistic notion that geo-engineers just love us and the earth so much that they are trying to combat "global warming" with this spray around the earth to protect us from the sun's harmful UV rays. The concept is akin to putting out a forest fire with oil. This theory and this practice may be a by-product of high tech plasma experimentation, but it is only a small component of the playground above the earth, and one of the latter experiments-if we look at this theory in light of the early contrail experiments of the 1940's.

So, before we even talk about what is "global warming", can we please admit to the scores of decades of weather modification, industrial pollution, corporate rape of the environment, nuclear explosions-above ground, below ground, under water, and in space? Can we admit to the almost complete destruction of the world's forests-the climate regulators, and the construction of excessive numbers of calamitous dams that have crippled the eco-system's circulatory system? Perhaps before we have a debate about whether "global warming" exists and who is to blame, we can acknowledge our consumer and profit driven lifestyle that promulgates a complete lack of respect for all living organisms and their reproductive and migratory needs. If we open our eyes, maybe we can see all the damage that pavement and cement cause to natural environments. Then, we can talk about the heat....

HOW DO WE LOOK AT THIS?



For those of you who merely look up, and don’t notice anything, or never look up, and therefore have no point of reference regarding a real sky-one that exists free of man’s intervention-you are blind and ignorant. And if you choose to look upon those that do see the sky for what it is and ridicule them, I accuse you of criminal negligence. Your ignorance gives tacit collusion to all that you refuse to see is wrong. You are part of the problem. No defense. It’s that simple. How do you argue with someone like that? You don’t.

There's no way to change a world that we are oblivious to. Ignorance keeps us believing that we have no power to change anything. Convenient fairy tale. And for those of you who haven't the time or the interest to research what is going on in the world around you, please stop asking, "Why are they spraying?".

Whether we are talking about "chemtrails", or any other legitimate concern that elicits anger, accusations, and overtly contemptible reactions from the mainstream, it is important to remember that the issue remains not one of "conspiracy", but one of "truth". And in research, truth is often proven with patterns and connections.



One of the most disturbing patterns that has manifested itself to me in 20 years of researching scores of topics from thousands of sources, is the deeply convoluted and profoundly corrupt relationships that exist between institutions that we were taught to hold in high esteem. Ironically, these patterns of collusion, criminal activity, mutual support, protectionism and conniving, exist in contradiction to the public images that these institutions proudly flaunt. Ironically, their actions display tragic and humiliating conflicts of interest that well exceed the standard of criminal and malicious behavior.

In order to truly begin to understand what is going on in the sky, it helps if you have a clue about the relationships that exist between multinational corporations, the military, politicians, lobbyists, local governments, universities, university deans, research laboratories-both publicly and privately funded, the mass media, public relations firms, law enforcement agencies, private contractors, banks, philanthropic organizations, NGO's, statisticians, and other institutions that we were taught had been established to protect us from the evil out there.

For example, in regards to weather modification, aerosol programs (including chemtrails), electromagnetic experimentation and sonar experimentation-to name a few-this is not a conspiracy of a small group of people trying to hide the facts of their dangerous little foray into science. The white elephant in the room is the blurry, gloating, overfed, budgetary and technological lines of collusion that exist between NOAA (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration), who is also NWS (The National Weather Service), whose front is the Weather Channel ( public access goes Hollywood bad ), who is the shill for NASA (National Atmospheric and Space Administration), who is also HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program), who is the darling of the military industrial complex, who happen also to be the defense contractors, who are also the pharmaceutical monoliths, who is the pesticide industry, who are also the biotech giants, and the energy corporations, who are all propped up, financed, and spoon- fed by the very "politicians" that people vote into office to advocate for their needs and their quality of life. Keep following the poisons down the chain, you will see your dollars at work.

LOOK ON THE BRIGHT SIDE-It's Worse Than You Thought



So everyone is "researching" on the internet. We're all learning that our lives are laced with thousands of horrible involuntary chemicals. We're looking at air, soil, and water samples, and seeing dangerously high levels of barium, strontium, silver, cadmium, manganese and aluminum. It's a varitable toxic cocktail of heavy metals, VOC's, and PCB's. For those who have been sleeping all their lives, the sudden knowledge of chemtrails coinciding with their new knowledge of our shiny phosphorescent drinking water and metal-laced air, there is only one conclusion: CHEMTRAILS. "Maybe it's depopulation, maybe it's germ warfare." Those darn chemtrails are killing us. If not for chemtrails we could be happy-go-lucky once again, like the good old days before the spraying and deception.

But in reality, we are dying the death of a thousand cuts. This is not the first rape of the Nile. For those of us who from the time we were children, could never accept the fact that there was water we couldn't drink or swim in, this depressing slap in the face is nothing new. We grew up seeing schools of dead fish, toxic smoke billowing from smokestacks, breathing exhaust, overdosing on freon and smelling rotting water. We played in the woods, only to see every inch of natural life paved over for cookie cutter houses and strip malls. We were taught by authorities that this was called "progress". "Progress" was programmed to mean "good for us".

For those of us who have seen clearcuts, mountain-top removal, oil in the Amazon, and for those of us who know that every community in North America sits upon toxic plumes of groundwater, this affront to the sky is no surprise. Many of the chemicals we find in our food, soil, air, water, and bodies belong to the spray from jets, but they also belong to every microchip maker, mining company, natural gas company, oil company, nuclear power plant, landfill, defense contractor, factory, dry cleaner, and every military base, to name a few. You need only read some "Superfund" reports to get to know the criminals in your neigborhood.




"Chemtrails" are not ruining our lives. Blinders are ruining our lives. This is not just about the spraying of the sky. It's about civilization's aversion to reality. It's about our deeply programmed, "business as usual" demeanor in the face of the domination of our natural domain. We are taught to be obedient as we are deliberately displaced and isolated from the natural world. As a society, we are passively witnessing the re-setting of our eco-system rhythms, while all life sustaining systems are hijacked by those in power who feel "entitled" to ownership and control of them. Once nature's miracles are stolen, harnessed, "dominated", legislated, domesticated, privatized, patented, fenced off, and completely exploited, the ruins are sold back to us; spoiled, rotting, toxic, overpriced, and valueless. It's a truly psychotic transaction.



Ignorance May Be Bliss, but KNOWLEDGE IS POWER

Okay, so we can lay down and feel powerless, overwhelmed and depressed. Yes, that can be a reasonable reaction. We can bury ourselves on our computers, distract ourselves with our electronic toys, anesthetize ourselves by staring at screens of fantasy worlds all day and night. We can self-medicate our way out of this predicament of reality. Or we can look the other way and focus on our next big purchase. After all, we work so hard, we've earned the right to "veg" when we are not serving our relentless, faceless master with every ounce of energy we can muster up. I could never grasp the phrase "ignorance is bliss", because blindness incapacitates the spirit.

Reading will help you to understand the materialization of events, of anomalies created by mankind, and deeds that are completely foreign to the natural world and catastrophic to our eco-system. These "proceedings" are lethal to life on earth. These traumatic and intrusive medelings are morally toxic and spiritually bankrupt. They materialize regularly, and are deliberate, coordinated, and succinct.

Please start reading books. A large percentage of my research comes from books. Another great source is documentaries. And another is personal interviews. Get to know people with knowledge that you want. That may even be your next door neighbor. Get to know the smaller yet legitimate sources of independent news. The internet can be a great research tool, but it only does certain things well. I really use the internet for reference purposes. Almost as a librarian would. I can use it to learn what I'd like to read next, which author or scientist, or documentary I want to study next. I can use it to see where a particular person may be giving a lecture. I can use the internet to cross reference concepts I'm studying. It's also a great instantaneous communications tool. I can also utilize it the way the government does, to surveil what people are thinking and saying to each other about a specific topic. But I never let the internet tell me what I should think. And for god's sake, step away from your computer and go for a walk.

It's essential that you learn to cross reference your facts from independent sources, from all countries, and all political leanings. But most importantly, you must get out there in the world and seek your knowledge. You must walk in your neighborhood. You must walk in natural areas. You MUST speak with indigenous people, you must speak with researchers, you must speak with the elderly-they can answer a lot of questions about skies and weather. And start speaking to homeless people. They possess a very high awareness of natural and unnatural patterns in our society.



Now, how did I get so far away from "chemtrails"? I didn't. What we choose to see every day is based on how much reality we feel we can handle. This should give you some insight as to why some people can look up at the sky and see nothing wrong.

Nature continues to teach us every day that we can rise to our highest potential as humans when we are connected to a miraculous eco-system. Remember this: KNOWLEDGE IS POWER. Knowledge is power. Don't let anyone tell you that you can't be effective.

YES, BUT WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT IT

When I'm asked, "What can we do about it?", I respond internally with other questions, "Do you mean what can be done?", "Can we ever stop it?", "Who is the person we need to contact in order to stop this?", or, "Is there such a thing as damage control in this situation?"

Stopping "chemtrails" or programs that spray the sky is akin to trying to stop the way coal is mined, or the way wood is produced, animals harvested, or weapons designed. It's like trying to change the way power,ownership, security, and weapons of mass destruction are idolized and prioritized in our society. This simple, innocent question of, "How do we stop the spraying?", invariably leads us to such questions as, "How do we stop civilization from valuing humans-and only certain groups of them-over the needs of other humans, and those of the natural world?". How can we make those in power realize that the happiness of humans is tied directly to the health and abundance of our eco-system?



Have you ever tried to stop a freeway from being built? A trade agreement from being signed? Have you ever tried to save an old building from demolition? Have you ever tried to get one homeless person off the streets and back into society? You are now stepping onto the ruthless, treacherous, all too familiar turf that environmentalists and activists tread upon daily. Who is an "activist" or an "environmentalist"? Well, these people are teachers, lawyers, writers, scientists, students, caregivers, artists, researchers, grandparents, farmers, waiters, and anyone you may encounter on your daily walks. They are people from all walks of life. What they have in common is a knowledge and deep understanding of the exploitation of our earth, the pain inflicted upon it's inhabitants, and it's causes and effects. And they are so moved by these injustices that they react to them with action. That's what an "activist" is. Someone who cares enough to put the time and energy into changing something that feels so wrong. So now, when someone asks of chemtrails, "What can we do to stop them?", we must understand the machinery from which they emanate. It is a long, merciless road to change. And one you will have to walk alone a lot of the time. If you sincerely ask, "How can we stop them?", you have two choices; you can become a knowledgeable activist, or you can walk away and join the rest of civilization dancing to the fiddle as Rome burns.

LEARNING TO LEARN

A good way to learn the different methods for expressing your knowledge of the subjects you have researched, or learning how to take direct action to change a destructive force, is to read books by people who have done just that. There is a great book by author/activist Derrick Jensen called, "How Shall I Live My Life?". It discusses the destructive dominant culture with ten people who have devoted their lives to undermining it. It is an inspiring, enlightening, collection of interviews.There are many other beautiful, intelligent people out there who care about the earth and it's inhabitants, and possess great scientific, historical, and practical knowledge. They write books, create cartoons, make documentaries, build websites, or start research groups. Some coordinate community action groups or are involved in many other forms of direct action. Others do independent radio or tv broadcasts-for which the internet is a very useful tool- and they help to educate others. There are also many artists, sculptors, musicians, actors, poets and photographers who have found beautiful and powerful ways to communicate very complex and socially unpopular messages quite successfully. It's a delicate balance between true knowledge and our ability to function effectively in the world. Only you can formulate the equation between anger and inspiration.



One thing is for sure, there is no moving forward, there is no action, without knowledge. And I will repeat myself and say, "To those of you who don’t have the time or inclination to find out what is going on in the world, please stop asking, "Why?". " The way I see it, there's no getting away from the destruction mankind has wrought upon this earth. And ignoring things-especially in order to pacify the people around us- only makes things worse.

Hopefully, you've learned a little more about what is going on up in the sky. You see that people of all kinds can be made to open their eyes to ugly situations by using an imaginative toolbox of approaches. We understand that this brutal education of both us and them, is the beginning of growth and action. Action must take place all over the globe if we are to be able create a tidal wave of opposition strong enough to shatter the current power structure. Ultimately, if you really want to know what's going on in your world, you're going to have to do a lot of researching, and have a lot of conversations with people from all walks of life.

This article is linked to my website http://www.iseelines. There, you will find all my downloadable reports, photos essays, video, and articles. I'm helping you start your research off with a few of my favorite reports that do contain proof of the spraying. If you've seen these, please click to go to I SEE LINES and you can start your research from there.

I'd like to end this article with a quote from Ramsey Clark, who was a high ranking government official who consistently takes the side of the oppressed. In an interview with Derrick Jensen for Derrick's book, "Resistance Against Empire", he said, "We have to realize that we won't be happy unless we try to do our part. And if a small portion of us simply do our part, that will be enough. If even 1 percent of the people of this country could break out of the invisible chains, they could bring down this military-industrial complex-this tyranny of corporations, this plutocracy- overnight. That's all it would take: 1 percent of the people." He continues further on, "Any fool can be unhappy; in fact, we make whole industries out of being unhappy, because happy people generally make lousy consumers." And at the end of the interview, he said something I truly want to leave you with; He said that despite the horrors they had experienced, he noticed an exceptional joy amongst the poor, amongst indigenous peoples, the persecuted, and the victims of genocide. People who struggle daily for their existence. He said, "They sing and dance and have fun. They can't see life as so much drudgery. I saw that same joy among the civil rights protesters in the 1960's. Watching them sing as they marched, I couldn't help but realize that you feel better when you're doing something you feel is right-no matter how hard it is."

• • • • • •




RESEARCH MATERIALS

Linked to this page is my website which contains a research page filled with official reports and research papers.This is where I store some of the research reports I have read that have really helped me understand what is going on out there.

A few words about reading reports: They can seem intimidating. But words are just words, and dictionaries and background information that provide context are easily found with a little patience. Knowledge takes time and commitment. Start with one sentence at a time and keep reading it until you start to understand it. You may have to read a whole report numerous times before you begin to grasp the concepts. That's okay. Since when are we "grown-ups" supposed to stop figuring out how to understand things?

I have posted a few reports here that I consider to be of importance in regards to what is going on in the sky. All of these are on the full downloadable reports page.

REPORTS: These Are A Good Place To Start

First of all if you want to download a copy of this report for easy printing, click here: NO APOLOGIES PDF

••••• The first item is an article I wrote called:
"Connections: Yes We Are Being Sprayed"

If you haven't read it, please do, it will provide some background on the history of dangerous government sanctioned programs and experiments.
LINK: CONNECTIONS, YES WE ARE BEING SPRAYED

•••••This next report is about spraying the sky. It's called:
"Intense Convective Storms with Little Or No Lightning Over Central Arizona: A Case Of Inadvertent Weather Modification?"

It is from 1996 from the JOURNAL OF APPLIED METEOROLOGY. As I said, there is so much documentation out there that the military is spraying the sky. It's presented by researchers from NOAA (always go to the source) National Severe Storms Laboratory in Norman Oklahoma. It's only 13 pages and it discusses how all the chaff being sprayed from military planes (during "training exercises") was possibly modifying the weather over Arizona. There are so many reports like this one, so many smoking guns. When you get to the source, no one is asking "Are they spraying the sky?", they're studying what effects the spraying is having.
LINK: A CASE OF INADVERTENT WEATHER MODIFICATION

•••••The next report is longer but it is another smoking gun. It's called:
"ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION - DOD (Department of Defense) Management Issues Related To Chaff"

It's a report done in 1998 by the United States General Accounting Office that discusses the impacts that the spraying of chaff is having on the environment. It also mentions a specific case of the rediculously dense spraying of CHAFF over Arizona and how it created false radar readings with the National Weather Service (false radar reading is one of the purposes of CHAFF spraying during war time). The report also mentions the potential for chaff to disrupt communications that control air traffic. It discusses CHAFF's toxicity-and it is agreed in the report that it's toxic, although the military experts downplay this fact. There are many other issues related to CHAFF discussed in this report. They are of course, "chemtrail" issues.
LINK: DOD MANAGEMENT ISSUES RELATED TO CHAFF

•••••This next report is from the INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND RESEARCH. It's called: "EXPLORING FUTURE TRAINING OPTIONS"

According to their charter, "The Institute offers scientifically supported recommendations to the Ministers of Environment and National Defence on the policy issues relating to the impacts of low-level flying". It's from a workshop they gave in Goose Bay Newfoundland in 2005. Once again, this should put to rest any doubt that toxic stew is being sprayed from airplanes.
LINK: EXPLORING FUTURE TRAINING OPTIONS

•••••This report is amazing. It is a medical hypotheses. It was written by a researcher named Mark Purdey. It's called:
"ELEVATED SILVER, BARIUM, STRONTIUM IN ANTLERS, VEGETATION AND SOILS SOURCED FROM CWD CLUSTER AREAS"

It may take a dictionary and a bit of time to digest, but everything he writes is worth reading. Mark Purdey was a British Organic farmer who became a researcher. He called himself an "eco-researcher". He started studying Mad Cow disease (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy), BSE. He correctly theorized that the disease was not infectious but had environmental causes. He found elevated silver, barium, and strontium in antlers, vegetation, and soil sourced from areas where animals suffered from CWD (Chronic Wasting Disease). He mentions both weather modification and military spraying as sources of the heavy metals. His theory goes one step further; he believed that the buildup of these heavy metals in the system, specifically the brain, collect and the piezoelectric crystals lay dormant until they are exposed to loud noises i.e. munitions factories, military bases, airports etc. The decibels essentially "wake up" the disease and transmit it. He traveled all over the world taking samples from animals, soil, and vegetation and found a pattern in the animals' diseases: weather modification spraying or military chaff, pesticides, and high decibel noises. To oversimplify, he also felt there was the same connection to Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease. His web site is no longer accessible, but you can still find his reports on various sites.

This report is not a quick read. But I would read everything he ever wrote. He, like a disproportionate amount of "eco- researchers" died of a brain tumor.
LINK: ELEVATED SILVER, BARIUM, STRONTIUM IN ANTLERS, VEGETATION AND SOILS SOURCED FROM CWD CLUSTER AREAS

I put in a couple of bonus reports:
ARIZONA WEATHER MODIFICATION WORKSHOP CONFERENCE- Statutes Rules And Regulations In The West/Flagstaff 2008

CHAFF AND THE WSR-88D PRECIPITATION PROCESSING SYSTEM

ESTERLINE DEFENSE GROUP FLARE AND COUNTERMEASURES

TO VIEW ALL REPORTS, Photo Essays, Articles, and other research tools:
http://www.iseelines.com
and please pass this information along...
CONTACT ME

13 comments:

the_last_name_left said...

I don't get it.

The increase in trails is an obvious consequence of the empirical fact that plane-travel has greatly increased.

It pisses me off that my sky is perpetually filled with trails, more than it ever used to be, for sure. People fly over, leaving visual, nosie and chemical pollution. And they never even set foot in Wales - never contribute a thing in return. It really infuriates me.

But I see absolutely no reason to suspect anything more nefarious. That's what I don't get. Where does the concern come from? I've never understood it.

All the pictures that get posted? It's the oldest game in the book, looking at clouds and finding stuff.

imo the chemtrails thing also detracts from the simpler and definite concerns of pollution from plane travel -- chemtrail concerns seem to implicitly accept that regular plane travel is fine, it's just something additional unknown and malevolent that's a problem. Reduce plane flights and you'd reduce "chemtrails"......

Still, I've no wish to wee on your strawberries......just giving my POV.

socrates said...

I'm glad you chipped in, TLNL. You link prominently to DFQ2 at your blog. You have every right, indeed it's a responsibility, to show where you don't agree with those you have been associating with.

In my responses to Carole's paper at AAANI (my other blog), I come straight out and say I find it hard to believe anyone can doubt there is anthropogenic global warming. I know where you're coming from, TLNL.

However, saying excessive air travel is the obvious explanation for all cirrus aviaticus is not proof.

We need to get into some nooks and crannies.

Here's one. Please check out this story. This is proof you need to explain, or it's not obvious what's really going on up there.

Former Marine Corps Weatherman Admits Fake Clouds Are Being Produced

Now it's in the nooks and crannies that disagreements emerge. I don't think chemtrails are primarily military chaff. Carole appears to.

Here's another nook and cranny for you, TLNL. There is something called the Appleman Contrail chart. Basically, there are necessary conditions for persistent contrails. One of the them is coldness, which is primarily available. Another, however, is relative humidity. That needs to usually be approximately from 60-70%.

There is a website out of Wyoming which gives the weather readings. They are called radiosondes. On a number of occasions, I have seen that the relative humidity was not present to account for the sky activity. So to use your word obvious, why are ordinary contrails turning into cirrus aviaticus when a necessary, scientific condition isn't present?

I even troll-busted this famous guy named Patrick Minnis who works for NASA. Anyone interested in that, go to the AAANI link at the top of Carole's essay and those Minnis links are provided in my first response not the intro.

To have a conversation on this topic, we need to be clear what we are discussing. So I am trying to address your specific post. Now when things devolve into two rigid blocks of believer versus debunker, that's where the internet goes crazy. We see it with Israel-Palestine, global warming, things like that.

socrates said...

*** The trails as a result of an increase in traffic explanation is not obvious. It doesn't appear that you have any awareness of weather modification, patents, plans for geoengineering, environmental modification, proof of synthetic cloud manufacturing, radar applications, etc.. You make this all seem outrageous, like we're pulling this out of nowhere. You'll need to do better than this.

I know you're busy, but there's tons of stuff in the top section of my other blog you nicknamed as Aircraft Wings. Until you bring down that mountain of data, you lose this debate. p:>

*** No one's sticking up for regular guy airline pollution. I sold my stocks and bonds in airlines, after the chemtrail astroturf destroyed that market. Ok, just kidding on this last part. Seriously, I agree we need to go back to au naturale. Carole articulated that very well in her paper.

*** I think the "chemtrails" are primarily for blocking out uv-b rays. That's a very plausible theory. The military aspects as in enmod and enhancing radar are also very plausible. And if you don't know about the debate over geoengineering, you need to check that out to see this isn't as off the wall as it appears to you.

*** TLNL, I've seen completely blue skies get lit up white. Clear blue skies means no humidity. I've seen planes make the craziest turns. I've woken up early and seen suspicious white-outs and trails to the East. People who work or spend time outside are able to make much better observations over periods of hours. It's not what the trails look like at first, though sometimes it is, when some jackass makes a bent, horseshoe pattern between the sun and the earth. It's about what they turn into.

Just look at HAARP. The ptb's claim it is a small, experimental station. They won't let you in on the fact that its inventor was planning on it having weather modification and radar applications.

Those are some nooks and crannies. If you can't deal with those, then I suspect you really don't want to learn about why some of us have spoken out. It's much easier to believe we heard about this from the internet and are in some benign form of cult.

If you really want to know what some plausible explanations are for taking this topic seriously, please check out the top section at Aircraft Wings. Seek out the more technical stuff with verifiable links and proof. Skim and whatnot to find the best stuff. I was into this for a couple years. It's too difficult to compress all of that into a presentation of a post or two.

the_last_name_left said...

I was just giving my opinion, that of a skeptic. I am happy to concede I know nothing about the subject and I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from their own positions. I mean, I don't even see that there's an issue, so I don't have any position to hold to as such.

I'm not unaware of interest in and concern over weather-engineering and such stuff, nor of HAARP. I just discount it all tbh, as I have no reason for concern over any of it. I don't find HAARP threatening - other than in a very vague way which I attribute to regular unease over science I don't understand.

I can't accept people would be seeking to harm the (entire) environment. Why would they? Maybe some surreptitious effort at ameliorating global warming, say? If GW is much worse in some way than we've been led to think, or some other as yet untold calamity is upon us, then maybe peeps are undertaking secret programs for some reason or other. But still.....if it were that widespread I don't see that secrecy would cover it. Small things can be kept secret, but if chemtrails are so prevalent it becomes very hard/impossible to imagine it could be kept under wraps for long.

I have nothing to offer on specifics, as I simply don't know anything about it. And without meaning to be rude, I just don't see any reason to get into it. ;)

Sorry to make such an essentially negative and disinterested post, but I trust that with so many people interested in the issue already, I am content and trusting that should anything worthy of real concern be happening, it will be found. [Just not by me. ;)]

The charge against me would be that "there is something happening, but you won't look!" Guilty as charged, I guess, though there has to be a threshold and I don't think chemtrails reach it. Like I said, I just don't get it. I don't even see a cause for concern. Because I won't look? ;) Maybe, but why would I - why would anyone without a reason to look into it do so? For one thing, it's supposed to be ubiquitous and yet I've never had the least gut-concern over the appearance of contrails (other than the obvious concerns over pollution.) I can't even see the least evidence (in the sky, with my own eyes) for what is supposed to be an obvious problem. Nor do I find any pictures of clouds or series of contrails to be suspicious either. That's an issue for the proponents of chemtrails (chemmies?) - why would people be concerned when they don't even see anything to concern them? It's very hard to give credence to a thesis explaining something you can't even see needs explaining.

911, vaccinations causing autism, flouride in water.....whatever. Such things have a definite physical existence - something around which concerns can gather and multiply. But chemtrails? There isn't a definite cause for concern? What is the phenomena that Chemmies are trying to explain?

Anyway, as I have nothing to offer on the topic apart from skepticism I'll just shutup. :)

socrates said...

You asked where the concern is coming from, that it's obvious the trails are from ordinary air traffic. Answers have been provided. Instead of checking out any of that, you admit that you have no knowledge about it, yet that's ok, because according to you, there's no issue to begin with.

No one said anything about attempts being made to harm the environment. If you had read my response more closely, you'd see that I believe the trails are primarily dispersed with the intention of blocking out harmful uv-b rays getting through a compromised, protective ozone layer. This has nothing to do with global warming.

This is the problem with debunkers like TLNL. I gave him a specific example of a weatherman admitting that clouds had been deliberately produced. Has TLNL addressed this? No, he hasn't.

He says he doesn't worry about HAARP. Has he addressed my point that its inventor had intended it to be used for weather modification and radar applications? No, he hasn't. I offered him proof that I have observed cirrus aviaticus that were lacking the necessary conditions to form. Has he addressed this? No, he hasn't.

TLNL doesn't mean to be rude, and I don't either, but for someone who has nothing to add to this topic nor any inclination to address even a limited number of points, I don't understand why he feels the need to debunk something which he admittedly has no clue about. He isn't willing to dialogue fairly in this regard, so why did he post what he just did?

What TLNL has done is try to put this into black and white terms. He's lumped all the chemtrail curious into the same camp. If he had any guts at all, he'd take a looksie through the top section of my other blog. He'd take a look at some of Carole's materials. He'd try to at least reach a common subtopic by which we could focus. I provided a few. He ignored every one of them.


I'm disappointed in him. I took a good chunk of time to answer his original post as directly as possible. It's as if he didn't read one word of it.

socrates said...

Just to make it clear, the plans for geoengineering gloabl warming through the dispersals of metal particulates would take place much higher up than where the "chemtrails" are being observed. This geoengineering idea has hit mainstream science blogs. They are concerned about such plans. What nailed it for me going with the uv-b ray mitigation theory for chemtrails was info put out by Paul Crutzen. He and some other bloke I can't remember the name wrote that ozone in the troposphere is more effective in attenuating harmful solar rays than that found in the stratosphere. Fake clouds created to offset global warming will have to placed far up there, because the point of that Frankensteinian endeavour is to knock the heat back into space.

the_last_name_left said...

You're so touchy. :D

"S: *** I think the "chemtrails" are primarily for blocking out uv-b rays."

Why? what would the purpose be?

socrates said...

I'm not being touchy. I thought I showed a lot of grace in pointing out what you did.

I don't mind if you think there are no deliberate contrails being produced.

I'm not mad, just disappointed that you didn't acknowledge even one clear point I made.

Maybe now you are trying to. Are you seriously asking why it would be nice to block out harmful uv-b rays? You haven't heard about holes in the ozone layer or increases in melanoma? The sun isn't just attacking our skin either. It's fricking up all biological forms.

Yes, there are contrails. There are even persistent contrails. No one here is saying otherwise. At Aircraft Wings, I have a whole section devoted to the crazy chemmies. I exposed them as the dumbass strawmen they are for debunkers who run the gamut from those like yourself who know nothing to those who think they have all the answers and don't. I even exposed the Big Kahuna, Pat Minnis of NASA, and some doofus owner of Chemtrail Central who by chance also worked for NASA. The latter never admitted to working at NASA at CTC while he was protecting Minnis' troll presence. I found that out from cybersleuthing some backwash website, just like I did the same to Tinoire with her claim of being in military intelligence and to her buddy Mike Rivero who's never explained why he worked for McDonnell Douglas.

With someone like yourself who is an extreme debunker of chemtrails, though an apathetic one, I would try to start you off with some little nuggets. Check out the link I posted in my first comment. You don't even have to watch the video. I screenshot and typed in the quotes of a former marine weatherman saying precisely what you don't believe ever happens.

Did you hear how the Chinese guarranteed no rain for their Olympics?

Have you ever heard of environmental modification techniques?

I'm telling you, TLNL. You're a good guy. But myself, Carole, and some others can't be lumped in with the crazies.

This is gonna sound off the wall, but I figured this thingie out, and unless someone is willing to debate on particular nuggets, there's no point.

Last Debunker Left, we are the best of the best chemmies. We're throwing 100 mph fastballs, while you're sipping tea and eating scones.

the_last_name_left said...

S: Instead of checking out any of that, you admit that you have no knowledge about it, yet that's ok, because according to you, there's no issue to begin with.

Yeah - like I said, there's a threshold, else everything is equally deserving of limited time.

S: No one said anything about attempts being made to harm the environment.

Really?

What about these quotes from the post:

---Another thing I noticed about my photos over time is that they no longer seemed "horrible" to the general public.

---... horrifying spraying patterns.

---The tragedy of the rape of the our sky

---These toxic mimics have been harvested, injected, propelled, detonated, leaked, beamed, spilled, and sprayed into our environment. We've eaten them, and they have eaten us.

---the portrait of horror up in the sky

---you don’t need one centralized evil force involved in a huge world-wide conspiracy. You just need militaries with planes .....

---Keep following the poisons down the chain, you will see your dollars at work.

---For those of us who have seen clearcuts, mountain-top removal, oil in the Amazon, and for those of us who know that every community in North America sits upon toxic plumes of groundwater, this affront to the sky is no surprise. Many of the chemicals we find in our food, soil, air, water, and bodies belong to the spray from jets

---How can we make those in power realize that the happiness of humans is tied directly to the health and abundance of our eco-system?
----

It surely isn't a surprise that all that and more leads one to believe the author is suggesting chemtrails are environmentally damaging.


S: This is the problem with debunkers like TLNL. I gave him a specific example of a weatherman admitting that clouds had been deliberately produced. Has TLNL addressed this? No, he hasn't.

What of it?

S: He says he doesn't worry about HAARP.

I don't. I am not in the least worried by HAARP - other than a vague unease which accompanies any science I don't understand.

But I'm extremely skeptical about fearful claims others make about such things - the people making the claims generally have no more scientific qualification than I do, and far less than the scientists involved.

If there's a good reason for real concern scientists will bring it to attention. Paranoid non-scientists don't cut it. I am happy to acknowledge people have concerns, about HAARP, say. But are those concerns well-founded? How can they be? Where's the mainstream scientific opposition?

the_last_name_left said...

S: Has he addressed my point that its inventor had intended it to be used for weather modification and radar applications? No, he hasn't.

Hmm - how is HAARP connected to chemtrails?

Are you sure he intended it to be used for weather modification? That it is used for that? That it works?

Why should anyone be worrying about its use for radar? I lived near Gatwick airport - radar didn't bother me.

S: I offered him proof that I have observed cirrus aviaticus that were lacking the necessary conditions to form. Has he addressed this? No, he hasn't.

Proof?

I don't see it has any bearing - how do you know what the exact conditions are all the way up there? You can't tell on the ground.

S: for someone who has nothing to add to this topic nor any inclination to address even a limited number of points, I don't understand why he feels the need to debunk something which he admittedly has no clue about.

I'm not debunking anything, I'm giving my opinion which is that of a total skeptic. I don't see anything to debunk. I don't see the issue that this chemtrail stuff is supposed to address. I just don't get it.

I took the time to respond to something I am completely skeptical about. And you know I don't believe in it, but you want me to respond more explicitly to points. And then attack me for "debunking" it? What's the point? I just don't believe in it at all, but whatever happens I antagonise you - if i respond I'm a debunker, if I don't respond it's suspicious or something? Well, you know, I just don't believe in it. I don't see it as a big deal - just being honest.

S: What TLNL has done is try to put this into black and white terms.

No, I'm just saying it is black and white for me. I don't see anything in it - my opinion, that's all.

S: He's lumped all the chemtrail curious into the same camp.

Because it's black and white to me. I can't even see the cause of concern, I can't see what the issue is. So, yes, black and white - can see a cause for concern/can't. I can't.

S: If he had any guts at all, he'd take a looksie

I've spent more effort on this topic here than I ever have elsewhere. This is a looksie?

S: I'm disappointed in him. I took a good chunk of time to answer his original post as directly as possible. It's as if he didn't read one word of it.

I did read it, as this post makes clear? I just don't see what the issue is. You could easily have taken my post as it was meant - an honest response from a skeptic. I don't see what's so wrong with it as a jumping-off point. Better I just not respond at all?

socrates said...

You're trying too hard to debunk without actually accomplishing that.

Here's something for you.

Weather Station Readings

If a relative humidity condition isn't reached, persistent contrails cannot form. When you ask so what about the weatherman link, then perhaps it is better for you to not keep going on with the closed-minded, debunker schtick, at least here thank you.

I won't censor you. We've got enough in common in other areas, been blogging side by side a bit, that I do respect you as a person.

What you need to do, if you wish to continue with this topic is seek answers to your questions first through researching the top section of my other blog. I'm not going to reinvent that wheel here.

Taking time to check out this one web page is not the same as taking a good look. Sorry, not even close.

Just beware of this. You think there's nothing wrong with lumping everyone into the same boat on certain topics. Well, the same can be applied to someone like yourself when you sound like any other closed-minded Randi cultist. People can see you're cherrypicking what to reply to. They can see how you frame such responses.

Just look at how you asked about my take on uv-b rays. I answered, and then you didn't follow up. Why should I spend time answering your questions, when they don't seem to have any real purpose behind them to begin with?

As for HAARP being tied in with weather modification via 'chemtrails', I admit there's no cut-and-dried proof they are linked. But am I to be expected to back up obvious truths about the inventor of HAARP wanting to use it for weather modification? No chance in hell I'm going to run around in circles proving things that are obviously true. If someone says the world is flat, am I supposed to take time to find links and argue the opposite?

By the way, there's no need to copy and paste so much. I don't delete my posts. We're the only two here right now, so it kind of turns into spam, albeit I'm sure there's no deliberate intent on your part to do that. Have you ever read forums where every post in a discussion is repeated over and over again with each new post added to the fray? What's up with that? I know you're just trying to make clear what specifically you're replying to, but I still think it's unnecessary.

I'm honest, smart, and have good research skills. I was never into debate club. Debate Club equals a Wanker's Club, imho.

the_last_name_left said...

Well, what about the UV-b?

your reply suggests there's perhaps very good reasons for blocking it but the tone of the blog is completely the opposite ie that blocking it with chemtrails is very bad.

And what about it anyway? Is that what chemtrails are supposed to be? or might be? or what?

Even as Copenhagen fails and industrial and commercial concerns works to undermine action on global warming, you are suggesting there's a secret/covert operation going-on anyway to ameliorate UVb? Neither the article or yourself make it clear.

And what about the weatherman? How does what he said relate? It's no secret that silver has been used in attempts to seed clouds (the silver particles act as dust, and can help encourage rain - as the Chinese apparently attempted to do downwind of the Olympics.) I don't see the connection to chemtrails. Nor to HAARP. It's a very crude form of weather manipulation, but so what? Nobody disputes people have tried seeding clouds, but it's a long way from there to some organised plan to surreptitiously spray the world's skies with "poison", as your blog's author appears to suggest is happening. On the other hand, every single plane flight spews poison - that isn't controversial.

So what are the claims? It isn't clear. Sure, I am ignorant of the arguments, but why isn't there a clear thesis here? What is this about? Your blogger seems to think it is about poison and detrimental to the environment, but you seemingly discount that it's about harming the environment, and even suggest it might have positive motivation - to prevent UVb.

You said

"No one said anything about attempts being made to harm the environment."

Yet the blogger seems to take the view it certainly is about pumping poison into the atmosphere - why else does she refer to it as "horrifying" etc?

It's confusing - what are the claims about this chemtrail business? It isn't clear. And as I said, I don't even see an issue, and from the confused signals I'm getting it's only being confirmed. What is this about?

On relative humidity being some prerequisite for contrails - maybe it is. But how does one know what the humidity is at the height of any particular plane flight? There just isn't the possibility of complete confidence about the situation re humidity at any particular level, at any particular geographic location. Unless you go up there at that time and test it thoroughly. Otherwise there's no place for absolute confidence. And even then I'd imagine humidity isn't the only factor.

On Eastland, in my cursory examination I don't see how HAARP can be considered the tool he envisaged as it's way smaller and lower powered. Does that make me a Randi cultist? What is that, btw? :D

I suspect I must have missed addressing something which will doubtless cause you to imagine it's a wilful omission on my part which must betray some malicious intent. IF I (suspiciously) missed anything, do tell me, so I can address it? ;)

socrates said...

Nothing personal, but these exchanges are a huge waste of time.

You take everything as if you are in some debate club.

You put words in Carole's mouth. She never wrote that the activities are intended to hurt anyone. That they do is horrible.

what about UV-b rays? Come on, this is as lame a dialogue as one can get. There are holes in the ozone layer. It's not my fricken responsibility to explain the obvious.

The article was written by Carole. I'm the only one here who mentioned uv-b rays as a possible motivation behind the chemtrailing. Please, enough already. If you want to zoom in on specifics, fine, but it appears you are just posting for posting sake.

About the weatherman- You've been saying how obvious cirrus aviaticus is clearly the result of ordinary aircraft emissions. That weatherman was explaining that a batch of clouds were deliberately created by US military. Deal with that. Don't keep asking what about uv-b rays or what about the weatherman, etc.. Because you are the one not looking good, not me.

Take your comment about HAARP and Bernard Eastlund. You didn't even spell his name correctly.

I agree with the writer that chemtrails have harmful effects, and it's ok to describe them as poison. That doesn't mean either of us is saying we think some dastardly plan is in effect to depopulate or some other lame theory that they are weakening our systems to sell us drugs or mind control.

I don't like your approach to this topic. I didn't like it when I first heard it a couple years ago. I find it just as irrelevant in the present.

It's not our problem you as an individual are not up to speed. You know nothing about HAARP being created for weather modification and radar applications. You have no awareness of environmental modification. You seem incredibly out of touch in regards to the ozone layer. You make no sense when you say there might be necessary conditions for contrails to develop and persist. There's no might about it.

I didn't start this diary for it to be turned into a lame debunker exercise. Nothing is ever going to be fully explained on any one thread. You need to get off your ass and spend hours looking into our specific presentations. You say you're not into pissing into our corn flakes, but that's precisely what you're doing.


You ask how one can know the specific relative humidity at certain altitudes. I provided the damn link. They're called radiosonde readings.

And by the way, HAARP isn't the only station where high chunks of energy are being used to bounce off the ionisphere and thus alter the jet stream. There are plenty of other ones.

There are billions perhaps many trillions going into the military. You're looking quite foolish not understanding that they wish to own the weather. They even put out a document a few years back called owning the weather by 2025.


You're like someone coming into the middle of a movie where everyone else is fully into it and you're asking all these questions that are nowhere on target.

I'm not trying to start trouble, but maybe your intuition earlier on was spot on, that maybe it's best if you dropped out of this one. For anyone interested, Carole has made an appearance at my other blog, and I've made some posts that aren't in this debate club mode.