It's not nice to fool with Mother Nature

[jayreynolds]

I have greater reserves than you, Raynolds, and I will bury you. You are a barbarian.

Strange how Wayne Hall mimics another communist who said exactly the same thing!
"I once said, "We will bury you," and I got into trouble with it."
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/n/nikitaskh115027.html

Guess who(and what) got buried?

Wayne, like it or not, your people are fast becoming the laughingstocks of Europe as they have long been in North America.

I, on the other hand, am proving durable and unassailable, and have had you on your back for nearly 250 pages so far.

I am quite content to go on giving you an ass-whup for some years to come, and in fact I've found that the more experience I get with a person, the far more I learn, the greater the volume of material I have to work with, and the more effective I can be. I can already frame you as a perfect idiot on each page, and evoke an ever more irrational response whenever I please, even though you continue to assert that you will not respond to me.

Every time you lie, you forge new chains which restrict your ability to speak the truth, and this in turn requires you to continue telling so damn many lies you have become bound by them like a grasshopper in a spider's web. So bound, your vision becomes obscured and you fall prey to ever more snares already set and waiting. The ridiculous notion that you have any reserves of lies at all is an illusion you might want to portray, but the fact is that your people have moved too far along the path of self-destruction to ever get back.

Don't forget that all your buddies still are claiming that ordinary contrails require -76 degreesF minimum to even form!

And you still claim that ordinary contrails only persist for a few minutes at most(oops, but doesn't 'foot soldier' say they can cloud the sky?)

And you still claim that aluminum is being sprayed, while the facts are clear enough on any weather radar that no radar reflective metals are being sprayed.

And you still claim that ozone is being produced by haarp and planes flying at six miles up, while all balloon measurements show this to be false.

It's anybody's guess just how long it might take for your cult to bury itself under a mountain of easily debunked lies, Wayne old bean!

[jayreynolds]

Way off subject,but an extension of the mostly hidden butter yellow skin cancer medical cover-up from the 1950s' that I openned a few days back. If the powers that be did decide to add oxybenzene to "sun screens " to induce more skin cancers.

Sorry to interrupt your "stream of rambling un-consciousness", but what is it about carbolic acid you don't understand?

Frankly, I don't take your word for it that any such "butter yellowskincancermedical coverup" ever existed.

I also don't take your word for it that you ever were a graduate student(unless it was from cosmetology school).

Before you spin a half-baked conspiracy theory involving everyone from cosmetics manufacturers and British aviators to cartoonists, cite documentable evidence that any such 'butter yellow' coverup ever occurred.

[gaiacomm]

First rule of interpersonal intercourse: Establish that you exist.

Ok you first, Wayne! You started the thread.

[gaiacomm]

Strange how Wayne Hall mimics another communist who said exactly the same thing!
"I once said, "We will bury you," and I got into trouble with it."
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/n/nikitaskh115027.html

Guess who(and what) got buried?

Wayne, like it or not, your people are fast becoming the laughingstocks of Europe as they have long been in North America.

I, on the other hand, am proving durable and unassailable, and have had you on your back for nearly 250 pages so far.

I am quite content to go on giving you an ass-whup for some years to come, and in fact I've found that the more experience I get with a person, the far more I learn, the greater the volume of material I have to work with, and the more effective I can be. I can already frame you as a perfect idiot on each page, and evoke an ever more irrational response whenever I please, even though you continue to assert that you will not respond to me.

Every time you lie, you forge new chains which restrict your ability to speak the truth, and this in turn requires you to continue telling so damn many lies you have become bound by them like a grasshopper in a spider's web. So bound, your vision becomes obscured and you fall prey to ever more snares already set and waiting. The ridiculous notion that you have any reserves of lies at all is an illusion you might want to portray, but the fact is that your people have moved too far along the path of self-destruction to ever get back.

Don't forget that all your buddies still are claiming that ordinary contrails require -76 degreesF minimum to even form!

And you still claim that ordinary contrails only persist for a few minutes at most(oops, but doesn't 'foot soldier' say they can cloud the sky?)

And you still claim that aluminum is being sprayed, while the facts are clear enough on any weather radar that no radar reflective metals are being sprayed.

And you still claim that ozone is being produced by haarp and planes flying at six miles up, while all balloon measurements show this to be false.

It's anybody's guess just how long it might take for your cult to bury itself under a mountain of easily debunked lies, Wayne old bean!


JR is ahead by 3 points, wayne!

[gaiacomm]

Way off subject,but an extension of the mostly hidden butter yellow skin cancer medical cover-up from the 1950s' that I openned a few days back. If the powers that be did decide to add oxybenzene to "sun screens " to induce more skin cancers, that would allow them to in turn tell their faithful honest , but dumb ,minnions in the sciences and military that we must do this massive aerosol spraying program to stop that "bad" UVb radiation from cancering out all life on earth; how would they go about promoting the increased use of these new "sun screens"? Average common sense should tell the population that we have existed since the beginning without the need for "sun screens" from that bad bad ole sol. Now this is going to take some real selling! Do you remember that charactor Zonker from the Doonesbury strip. What was his real message other than that long hairs were dirty useless slackers? Wasn't he a big promoter of "sun screens" after all was said and done? It's a funny thing when you look closely at Zonkers creator Garry Trudeau. Why,he was Skull and Bones at Yale 1970; his first strip there was about GWB branding his pledges with a red hot coat hanger; his senior thesis was about a nazi, he just happened to have a beheading strip out days before the Berg tape was released ; humm///// to help out on my research of the history air chem warfare i'm trying to track down a rumor that the Brits used aerosols from planes against the Iraq people to put down the uprising of 1919. does anyone here have any proof? I have the us army aerosol pattents from that year.


Hey Hoot where is my Fiber sample? Also why not give us the Army patent numbers!

[halva]

Strange how Wayne Hall mimics another communist who said exactly the same thing!
"I once said, "We will bury you," and I got into trouble with it."
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/n/nikitaskh115027.html

Guess who(and what) got buried?
Khruschev was a very bad leader of the USSR who makes Stalin look like a giant. An incredibly deluded nuclear-weapons fetishist, he thought exploding 100 megaton nuclear bombs in the atmosphere would help him 'liberalise' Soviet society. Sakharov was right about him.

Raynolds, you get out of your depth when you start talking politics. I was part of the current of the Left that helped bring about the dissolution of the Soviet Union. If you were familiar with Trotskyist traditions you would know that old Leon himself towards the end of his life moved away from his previous 'defense of the Soviet Union' stance. In the eighties I was in the current of 'the Left' supporting the politics, including 'Solidarity with Solidarity' and the Eastern European oppositions, that culminated in the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Also I had read Rudolf Bahro's predictions in 1986, that the Soviet Union was about to lose the Cold War. Bahro advocated that the positive aspect of this development be exploited. I translated the relevant sections of his book 'From Red to Green' into Greek, and they were published in the marginal press, but, unusually, also attracted the attention of mainstream journalists, who wrote crits of the translated text.



I am proving durable and unassailable, and have had you on your back for nearly 250 pages so far.


Quite the opposite. Your other identity Gaiacomm's Ping Pong characterization is much more apposite. Such durability as you possess comes from ignoring questions and comments that you don't wish to respond to. But in any case my objective is moving more towards having you removed from this thread than trying to win every round here.

By the way, Footsoldier has just restarted this thread to bring it back to topic. That was a good thing to do, but I am not going to say anything on her new thread. It defeats the whole purpose of setting up the parallel closed forum.



Every time you lie, you forge new chains which restrict your ability to speak the truth, and this in turn requires you to continue telling so damn many lies you have become bound by them like a grasshopper in a spider's web. So bound, your vision becomes obscured and you fall prey to ever more snares already set and waiting. The ridiculous notion that you have any reserves of lies at all is an illusion you might want to portray, but the fact is that your people have moved too far along the path of self-destruction to ever get back.


Nothing I have posted is comparable to this string of gibberish. I have told not a single lie, and I said nothing about having reserves of lies. 'Reserves' means political and psychological reserves equipping me to defeat you.



And you still claim that aluminum is being sprayed, while the facts are clear enough on any weather radar that no radar reflective metals are being sprayed.


I don't claim any such thing. I have data somewhere on that radar point you always bring up, but I think it's on my other computer. In any case the point is marginal. What I claim is that something is being sprayed. Chem 11 thinks that it is sulphates. What I want to know, from official lips, is what it is being sprayed, and why.

Your activity consists in trying to prevent me asking that question, and at the same time trying to prevent climate scientists from answering it, or starting to help to answer it.

This is something you can try to do with scientists you know we are contacting. But you know less and less nowadays.

[jayreynolds]

Khruschev was a very bad leader of the USSR who makes Stalin look like a giant. An incredibly deluded nuclear-weapons fetishist, he thought exploding 100 megaton nuclear bombs in the atmosphere would help him 'liberalise' Soviet society. Sakharov was right about him.

Wayne Hall is a very deluded chemmie who thinks he can remain ignorant of science, and influence scientists using "political methods". Jay Reynolds was right about him.


I translated the relevant sections of his book 'From Red to Green' into Greek, and they were published in the marginal press,

Wayne Hall once was proud to be know as a "RED", but when they became envious of free societies, the "REDS" decided to change their cloaks to GREEN.
Here in the US we call people like Wayne WATERMELONS, because they are green on the outside, but red in the inside.
Now isn't that pretty!


By the way, Footsoldier has just restarted this thread to bring it back to topic. That was a good thing to do, but I am not going to say anything on her new thread. It defeats the whole purpose of setting up the parallel closed forum.

Deborah was recently stymied when the CTC "science" forum became verboten to her copy/pastes. She also found that no one read her stuff at Wayne's ama_lahi yahoo group, because it is closed tighter than the "Great General's" ass in Pyongyang. No one posts there but Wayne himself now, so she's got some time on her hands.......



I have told not a single lie, and I said nothing about having reserves of lies. 'Reserves' means political and psychological reserves equipping me to defeat you.

But of course I have caught you in many many lies, Wayne. On the very first page of this thread I exposed you trying to pawn off a faked picture. You claimed that eminent scientists in Greece, Drs. Nikos Katsaros and Christos Zerefos were on your side, but whenn contacted they denied any belief in "chemtrails". You claimed that Tyndall centre scientists were on your side, that turned out to be a lie as well. I'll admit most of what you do is repeat the lies of others, then when caught you beg ignorance, but you can't lie your way out of lies, fool.


I don't claim any such thing[that planes spray aluminum]. I have data somewhere on that radar point you always bring up, but I think it's on my other computer. In any case the point is marginal. What I claim is that something is being sprayed. Chem 11 thinks that it is sulphates. What I want to know, from official lips, is what it is being sprayed, and why.

Wayne, you continually cite chemmie literature by such "dim-bulb luminaries" as "deep shield", William Thomas, Brian Holmes, Gabriel Setter, et al., when proselytizing. When you cite a source this means you agree with them, old bean. You can't cite them and then deny sharing their claims! I'll say that you are wrong about 'Chem11"(aka. Val Valerian). He has dropped reference to "spraying" altogether and now falsely claims sulfur levels have been increased in jet fuel being burned through the engines, NOT BEING SPRAYED. Better keep current, Wayne old bean. By the way, how many alias' do you post under when you are using your other computers, eh, Wayne?????

And yes, I challenge you to explain why a plane emitting a persistent visible trail of aluminum would not also leave an indelibly crisp, white echo progressing across a weather radar screen at mach .75 from a point source. No explanation will be forthcoming.


Your activity consists in trying to prevent me asking that question[what is being sprayed], and at the same time trying to prevent climate scientists from answering it, or starting to help to answer it. This is something you can try to do with scientists you know we are contacting. But you know less and less nowadays.

Wayne, I have never prevented you or anyone else from exercising your free speech, and have never shirked from exercising my own. Above, and numerous times before, you have declared that my speech requires censoring.

It is preposterous hypocrisy for you to now falsely assert that I have ever attempted to restrain your speech without citing a single example, while declaring that censoring my speech is your primary goal!
What an idiot.

[gaiacomm]

Ok you first, Wayne! You started the thread.


Wayne I am waiting! Also would someone contact Hollywood and get a movie on this. Michael Moore should make a movie about Chemtrails! And JR too!

[halva]

Some people have asked me what I think it is that motivates Raynolds to do what he does, and has been doing for so many years now.

It is not very interesting to say one doesn't know, so that is not what I say. I admit that I indeed do not know whether every day Raynolds walks into the office, punches the time-clock, hangs up his hat and sets to work on the latest of the chain of masterpieces we have been reading over the last months.

If he is an employee, he is an unusually motivated one, and would be the envy of most employees. Few other wage-earners would enjoy their work as much as he does.

I am inclined to believe his claim that he has other sources of income and that harassing 'chemmies' and climate scientists is something he does for a hobby. Why?

My view, and it is not the first time I have said it, though it IS the first time I say it publicly, is that Raynolds has a reference group in his mind in which he seeks membership. It is an exclusive club of 'insiders' and 'winners', who are rich, ruthless and powerful.

I do not know how marginal Raynolds is to this reference group. That is to say, I do not know that he is ABSOLUTELY marginal: a poor bum sitting in an unfurnished tenement room with a whisky bottle at his side, fuming at 'chemmies' and pounding away at his computer keyboard.

But obviously he is not as much accepted by his fantasy reference group as he wants to be. Otherwise he would have no motivation for pursuing his hobby.

How realistic is it to imagine that he can win the admiration and respect of ANYONE with what he does?

I don't know. I don't know how much he is being monitored by his reference group. How many claps on the back, and free martinis he scores for socking it to Sore Throat or humiliating Deborah or making mincemeat of Dona.

Moreover his cheer squad of low-IQ misfits and his stonewalling sidekick Letxa have been conspicuous by their absence lately.

But there must be somebody. Otherwise he wouldn't do it.

Would he?

In conclusion, a note for Raynolds:

Raynolds, you will be happy to know that Gabriel Stetter wants me to hurry up with the Kafantaris transation, so you will be an unintended beneficiary.

If having the full text is to your benefit, that is.

[halva]

Continuing and concluding the Kafantaris article from p. 244 (posting 2432)

Again according to the source, the World Health Organization revealed secretly to governments of the most technologically advanced countries the findings of its studies, according to which climatic developments, in conjunction with reduction of ozone in the atmosphere, will eliminate life from the face of the earth within the next 75 years! The governments agreed to a secret plan for intervening in the climate known as 'Shield' (The Shield Project), so that on a case-by-case basis the most sensitive regions can be inoculated with artificially created ozone. The objective is gradually, by the year 2050, to reverse the Earth's downward trajectory. For this to be accomplished, he says, the atmosphere of the earth is being sprayed by aircraft from the collaborating countries (and these include the USA, Canada, the European Union and Russia) with particles of barium, aluminium and titanium. This creates the required second pole, the first being that of the ionosphere. HAARP discharges into the ionosphere the necessary energy which, recycled, returns into the atmosphere to the 'pole' of the sprayed particles. From the electrical stimulation produced there is artificial production of ozone, blocking the carcinogenic effects of the sun in the area unprotected by nature...

If this is being done, why the secrecy? On the one hand, says the anonymous source, because panic from knowledge of what is about to happen would trigger uncontrollable situations, on the other hand because the particles are claiming, and will continue to claim over coming decades, millions and even billions of victims, chiefly from diseases of the respiratory system.

As breathtaking as this scenario may seem, in the absence of charges from an identifiable source and corroboration of evidence, we are obliged to regard it as a figment of the imagination. But we cannot ignore an identifiable and official allegation that was lodged in August 2002. The Russian parliament, the Duma, presented to President Putin the findings of a study by commissioners of international relations and defence, signed by 90 parliamentarians, in which the following statement is made: 'The United States is developing new integrated geophysical weapons which can affect the atmosphere of the earth. The importance of this qualitative leap is comparable only with the transition from the age of iron to the age of gunpowder, or from conventional weapons to nuclear weapons. This new type of weapon differs from previous types of weapon in that the atmosphere is instantly transformed into both an object directly influenced by and a component part of the weapon. " What happened in the wake of this denunciation and what the reason is for Moscow's current silence, is not known to us. Was it persuaded of the superior importance of the wider goal and indeed now participates in the secret spraying of the world that is slowly dying? Does the silence have some connection with the recent news of 29th March 2004 that Russia has developed a 'revolutionary weapon' that can neutralize the United States 'anti-missile shield'?
Also unknown is the role of China in this story. Is it true what some are whispering that the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was bombed because some antennas equivalent to those of HAARP were hidden there, which would have helped to shoot down the Stealth bombers of the US? Or, even more far-fetched the scenario according to which the decision for intervention in Yugoslavia was taken in the 1980s when emissions of this type were detected coming from there? According to the whisperers, the secret notes of Tesla found their way to his native land and....someone read them zealously. Very many questions, to which we will perhaps start to get some answers in the immediately coming years. And in the meantime we will continue to look suspiciously at the once innocent lines behind aircraft in the sky'.

P.S. Eastlund has worked since 1998 for the European Space Agency, on a satellite project. Named Thunderstorm Solar Power Satellite, this satellite will transform solar radiation into microwaves to disperse typhoons and break up storms. A HAARP in outer space.

[halva]

Wayne Hall once was proud to be known as a "RED", but when they became envious of free societies, the "REDS" decided to change their cloaks to GREEN.
Here in the US we call people like Wayne WATERMELONS, because they are green on the outside, but red in the inside.
Now isn't that pretty!


It is a shame in a way that Raynolds is so uncurious about politics because his remarks here are so autistic and cliched that they can't even hope that they are going to get an answer (or care that they are not).

If Raynolds suspected that Rudolf Bahro was a name that he might be able to use to score points against chemmies he would already have done a Google and by now would know a few things about him.

There is much to be said about reds and greens and transparent glass sheets, but I think that one point that can definitely made is the following.

Unlike in more traditional societies, which can solve basic identity problems simply by relying on sloth, inertia and tradition, 20th century capitalism in the United States has run up against the problem that it can't link itself to ANY coherent, desirable identity.

By trial and error, as the twentieth century progressed, a solution was found. After waiting for one's interlocutor to declare an identity, one could say: 'You have no right to be that.'

If one's interlocutor had some objection to this censorious stance, and wanted one to stop one from having it, one could then say that he was denying one the right of free speech.

From this viewpoint, the big mistake that Communists made was to say they were Communists. That allowed Americans to define themselves as anti-Communists, an identity which stood them in good stead for the entire twentieth century.

It took Soviet Communists seventy years, a world war and a nuclear arms race to discover what a terrible mistake they had made in declaring an identity and so solving the identity problems of their enemies.

Communists did their best from the mid-eighties onwards to be nothings, in the hope that this forcing Americans to become somethings would plunge the American political class into crisis through horror at the prospect of taking responsibility for its own actions.

Twelve years and more after the end the Cold War there has been a new temporary crystallisation of American identity in the sense that to be an American today means to be a non-terrorist non-Muslim.

Rudolf Bahro is no longer with us to give us the answer to what one becomes in the fourth stage following red, green and transparent.

We'll have to improvise.

[jayreynolds]

P.S. Eastlund has worked since 1998 for the European Space Agency, on a satellite project. Named Thunderstorm Solar Power Satellite, this satellite will transform solar radiation into microwaves to disperse typhoons and break up storms. A HAARP in outer space.

I believe this statement is false or translated incorrectly.

Wayne, why are you not translating the first part of the article?

[jayreynolds]

An American simply cannot know what to be until his interlocutor has declared an identity. Then the American can be the opposite of that.


It makes us Americans laugh to see foreigners who say the world hates us. The irony we see is when the camera shifts to the US embassy in any given country wordwide, and we see the lines going around the block full of people wanting to get in to our country.

Funny, isn't it, Wayne?

[halva]

Raynolds, the Greek is translated correctly.

The first part of the article is on p. 244 (posting 2432)

[jayreynolds]

Some people have asked me what I think it is that motivates Raynolds to do what he does, and has been doing for so many years now.
It is not very interesting to say one doesn't know, so that is not what I say. I admit that I indeed do not know whether every day Raynolds walks into the office, punches the time-clock, hangs up his hat and sets to work on the latest of the chain of masterpieces we have been reading over the last months.
If he is an employee, he is an unusually motivated one, and would be the envy of most employees. Few other wage-earners would enjoy their work as much as he does.
I am inclined to believe his claim that he has other sources of income and that harassing 'chemmies' and climate scientists is something he does for a hobby. Why?
My view, and it is not the first time I have said it, though it IS the first time I say it publicly, is that Raynolds has a reference group in his mind in which he seeks membership. It is an exclusive club of 'insiders' and 'winners', who are rich, ruthless and powerful..

Wayne, most of my writing is done over a morning cup of coffee. This morning after my posting, I went out and gathered hay to use in mulching my vegetable crops, and this afternoon will begin planting fall greens. Right now I'm taking lunch.

No, I've never received any renumeration whatsover for any of my writing, and no, I don't do it for homage to any group, or seeking entrance to any group. I actually don't get along with many group settings, I am a little too independant for most, but when I do it is usually in a leadership position. Yes, I do great work simply for it's own sake, and work as hard to design a complicated mechanical project as I would to clean a toilet or plant a field of beans. I enjoy doing things well.

You, on the other hand, have such low self esteem that you can only find comfort in a group setting, where you can be a parasite while others do grunt work and then again you can always find easy scapegoats to blame your troubles on when something goes terribly wrong, and from what I've seen you muck up most things in your life. You probably fit well as a mid-level bureac-rat with perhaps a well chosen meek subordinate you can lord over unmercifully.

[gaiacomm]

Refer Tesla patents: #645,576, System of transmission of electrical energy, patented March 20, 1900. #649,621. Apparatus for transmission of electrical energy, patented May 15, 1900, #1,119,732 Apparatus for transmission of electrical energy, patented December 1, 1914.

Antennae would be used to focus an intense beam of electromagnetic energy into the upper atmosphere where it would collide with the ionosphere to create a phenomenon called the "mirror force." Bernard Eastlund was granted a US Patent (# 4,686,605) for this invention on August 11, 1987. In addition, it can be modified to become a wireless communications device.

[jayreynolds]

I believe this statement is false or translated incorrectly.
Wayne, why are you not translating the first part of the article?

Thanks for finishing the translation. Looks like 'Tassos' is way over the edge, and has eaten the whole gyro in one bite.

No reputable science magazine accepts undocumented claims from anonymous 'whisperers'. The whole thing is a piece of crap created to satisfy conspiracy seekers. Your people will eat it up in one big gulp, then regurgitate it as if it were all facts. This sort of mess got you to repeating "contrails only persist for 2 minutes", and "contrails require a minimum of -76F to form", and makes you look like utter fools when someone knowledgeable sees it..

Should I bother to debunk it all now, or just wait till the worst bits get deeply embedded in your cult's texts and then use them to discredit you?

The truth-seeking Jay Reynolds has long tried to correct your errors, only to get banned for doing you a favor. In my more vindictive moments, I am happy to then dredge up the sort of sludge you try to pass off as fact, even though I tried my best years earlier to correct it at the outset.

Remember, Wayne, a bell once rung is impossible to 'un-ring'. When you pass along incorrect factual information you discredit yourself and all others who might unknowingly repeat your mistakes.

Worst of all, people who habitually pass along such glaring factual inaccuracies eventually arouse in their peers the suspicion that they might be feeding others the disinformation intentionally, and for the express purpose of discrediting them!

But don't listen to me, who am I but the fellow who tries to take your car keys away when all you've done is drink a mere litre of ouzo......

[jayreynolds]

Refer Tesla patents: #645,576, System of transmission of electrical energy, patented March 20, 1900. #649,621. Apparatus for transmission of electrical energy, patented May 15, 1900, #1,119,732 Apparatus for transmission of electrical energy, patented December 1, 1914.

Antennae would be used to focus an intense beam of electromagnetic energy into the upper atmosphere where it would collide with the ionosphere to create a phenomenon called the "mirror force." Bernard Eastlund was granted a US Patent (# 4,686,605) for this invention on August 11, 1987. In addition, it can be modified to become a wireless communications device.

Well, you could just buy a satellite phone off the shelf. Seems to work well enough already.
So, where's your patent, Lance?

[gaiacomm]

Well, you could just buy a satellite phone off the shelf. Seems to work well enough already.
So, where's your patent, Lance?


Did not need to apply for one. Trade Secret clause and something called USC Title 35, section 181-185. But you know that already JR!

Here is something:

Terahertz waves transmit music
22 March 2004

Audio signals get their first airing at terahertz frequencies.

Researchers in Germany have transmitted audio signals via terahertz waves for the first time. This development could lead to a new type of high-speed short-range wireless communication network.



Terahertz team

Terahertz (THz) radiation falls in the gap between infrared radiation and the high frequency radio waves currently used for mobile phones and other wireless communications systems. Apart from a few applications in biological imaging and spectroscopy, the technology has been relatively unexplored. However, as the demand for high data rate wireless communication continues to grow, researchers are turning to higher frequencies and starting to consider the THz region.

In the latest research, a team from the Technical University of Braunschweig built a new room-temperature semiconductor THz modulator. The researchers combined the modulator with a modified THz time-domain spectroscopy set-up to transmit audio signals at up to 25 kHz over a 75 MHz train of broadband THz pulses.

Music from a CD player was transmitted over the system. According to the researchers, the quality of the music that was played back via a loudspeaker was similar to that produced in a telephone.

As THz radiation is strongly absorbed by the atmosphere it suits short-range communication, such as picocells that cover single rooms. “THz communications will not replace cell phones,” said Martin Koch, who is one of the researchers. However, he does predict that wireless THz networks could one day replace wireless local area networks or Bluetooth, which is a short-range cable-replacement.

Sounds like Gaiacomm technology to me!

[jayreynolds]

As THz radiation is strongly absorbed by the atmosphere it suits short-range communication, such as picocells that cover single rooms.
-Sounds like Gaiacomm technology to me!

Sounds pretty "short-range" to me.
Nice to see you finally answering to "Lance", Lance.
tee-hee-hee

[jayreynolds]

FROM THE GOTTA MAKE YOU LAUGH DEPARTMENT:
(click and read the links from oldest to newest)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chemtrailtrackingusa/messagesearch?query=fuzzies
====================================
GREEN MAGAZINE ON CONTRAILS/CHEMMIES-


"Chemtrails: 18,600 hits on Google. A lunatic fringe of dittoheads, convinced Doom is wafting down on the populace via 747s and DC-10s. A whole subculture of contrail conspiracy freaks. God bless 'em, at least they're looking up."[/i]

READ AND WEEP, CHEMMIES!

http://www.oriononline.org/pages/om/03-5om/Rasmussen.html

[gaiacomm]

Sounds pretty "short-range" to me.
Nice to see you finally answering to "Lance", Lance.
tee-hee-hee


What else would you like to know JR?

[lava]

You guys need to take a break. Check out some cartoons.
See inside the Bush Whitehouse.
On "AMERIKA In The BUSHES" at:

http://lavastream.tv

It's free to stream or download.

[jayreynolds]

here's another cartoon, on topic, too!
http://www.carnicom.com/reynolds1.htm

[gaiacomm]

Wayne:

I hope that some of your olympic team members when the gold medal!

[gaiacomm]

FROM THE GOTTA MAKE YOU LAUGH DEPARTMENT:
(click and read the links from oldest to newest)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chemtrailtrackingusa/messagesearch?query=fuzzies
====================================
GREEN MAGAZINE ON CONTRAILS/CHEMMIES-



READ AND WEEP, CHEMMIES!

http://www.oriononline.org/pages/om/03-5om/Rasmussen.html


Its amazing what is allowed on the internet...but freedom of speech once again prevails. Truth or Dare!

[jayreynolds]

So, Wayne, did you get poisoned, or rounded up and gassed?

"Another senior RSPCA official added: "If the Greeks continue to poison dogs they can't consider themselves civilised."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14416209&method=full&siteid=50143&headline=greeks--to-gas-15-000-dogs-before-olympics--name_page.html

I understand almost all the dogs are gone, and a guy named Kostas has set up skewered souvlaki grills all around the Olympic Village, serving some 'special' meat for the tourists!

[jayreynolds]

SO MUCH FOR GLOBAL WARMING

We've got a chilly 45 degrees outside this morning, quite unseasonable for Mid- August, and records are falling nationwide. For many, this is one of the coolest summers on record.

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&tab=nn&q=coolest+summer+on+record&btnG=Search+News

Worldwide, fairly good weather seems to be the rule.
http://www.agweb.com/news_show_news_article.asp?file=AgNewsArticle_2004 812927_2612&articleid=110783&newscat=WW

[jayreynolds]

Here's a blast from the past about Haarp.
Read and weep.
http://web.archive.org/web/20040215135619/http://bltn.com/epona/HAARP.htm

[gaiacomm]

Here's a blast from the past about Haarp.
Read and weep.
http://web.archive.org/web/20040215135619/http://bltn.com/epona/HAARP.htm


And now there is Gaiacomm a blast from the present!
www.gaiacomminternational.com

[jayreynolds]

Arianna Huffington has just written an article called 'The Pentagon Sounds the Alarm on Global Warming'. At the end of it she says: 'The Democratic nominee needs to remind the White House — and the American people: It’s not nice to fool with Mother Nature.'
There would be nothing wrong with a Democratic Party candidate doing that, but it should not be ignored that there are by now very large numbers of Americans who realise that 'fooling with Mother Nature' is something currently proceeding on a gigantic, planetary, scale, with the blessings of not only of the Bush regime but also of many opponents of Bush who are genuinely concerned about global climate change and are supporters of 'geoengineering'.
To Americans like this, Arianna's remarks about fooling with Mother Nature may seem to be underrating their intelligence, or knowledge.
The geoengineering issue has now been addressed by the activists of ATTAC-Hellas in Greece, which is Arianna Huffington's native land also:
See
http://www.attac-hellas.org/seminars/geoengineering/programmeenglish.htm
Further information at:
http://www.spectrezine.org/global/Hall.htm
The genuinely grave situation of the planet should not become an excuse for manipulative danger-mongering and for acceptance of classification of climatic change as a 'national security' question, if this is going to mean a continuation of the dishonesty and lack of transparency with which the Pentagon has so far operated on this question, and characteristically operates on all questions.

It is time for there to be exposure, and honest public debate, about what is ALREADY being done by the proponents of geoengineering 'solutions'."

Well, Folks, it's time for a recap.

The above post was the opening post for this thread, which has now gone to 253 pages.
In the ensuing six months, the invitation by Wayne Hall to debate his theories has taken place.
During that time, Hall and his chemmie cultists had ample opportunity to display evidence and proof of their claim that "geoengineering is "ALREADY BEING DONE", as "chemtrail" lines in the sky.

I will say that the scientists Wayne Hall once touted as his friends, say it best:

Dr. Nikos Katsaros, Research Director of the Demokritos Institute:

"As you probably know there is no scientific evidence whatsoever concerning
chemtrails and there composition."

Dr. Christos S. Zerefos, Laboratory of Climatology and Atmospheric Environment
University of Athens:

"Responding to your request, I herewith would like to clarify that we should not mix contrails with chemtrails. I never stated that chemtrails frame over Greece are coming from military jets using aluminum oxides. Contrails usually seen in the cloudless Greek skies are of course results of contrails."

Dr Sarah Cornell, CChem MRSC CMarSci MIMarEST , Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research ZICER, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich – UK

"Very briefly, my answers are that scientists are looking at the feasibility of geoengineering on various scales, and bio- and geo-sequestration of carbon dioxide can be construed as current practical geoengineering efforts. We know human activity has changed how the planet’s systems function, so it is a valid research question to ask whether and how we can control our effects. For climate control, we certainly wouldn’t start by trying to tweak the clouds and atmosphere, though. Aircraft contribute to warming, not cooling; contrails aren’t easily engineerable; and there is no evidence - despite decades of systematic aerosol and atmospheric analysis - that we are doing anything other than perfectly ‘normal’ pollution, which is of course a serious enough societal problem to address."

There you have it, folks, the consensus among the very scientists Wayne Hall considers his best friends is "NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER".

For my part, I challenged Hall to test his hypothesis, that aluminum was being sprayed for geoengineering. The fact of THAT matter is that were such a thing taking place, the aircraft involved "spraying" the metal, known to be highly radar reflective, would leave behind a persistent track visible on ordinary weather radar. If his hypothesis were true, he could prove it by showing the evidence on radar whenever his cult saw their "chemtrails". No evidence was ever shown, and my question was brushed aside. Hall did begin to call for my banning from this forum, however...................

Secondly, I challenged Hall to test yet another of his hypotheses, that ozone levels were so low in the stratosphere that they could no longer protect earth, and that airplanes were spraying chemicals into the upper troposphere to produc ozone there, where it normally wasn't present.
I provided a location in Greece where he could go and witness ozone measurements being taken and present the results. He sidestepped that challenge, too...............

At every turn, however, Wayne Hall provided instance after instance of bogus information, provably false, faked photos, photos of ordinary skywriting declared to be "chemtrails", photos of planes documented to be ordinary contrails from commercial jetliners claimed to be "spraying", anonymous "sources" found to be whack-o's spouting easily debunked error ridden claims, and on and on.............

The result of all this magnificent exercise was that Hall exhorted his cohorts to leave this thread, and move to his personal messageboard. THAT board, which was formerly dedicated to "direct democracy", became a closed society, members only, and curtains were drawn tightly so that not even visitors could see what transpires inside, a mockery of "democracy".

And in the end, after all of this was said and done, now Wayne Hall has disappeared, slunk back to whatever hole he emerged from, beaten, bloody, and defeated, in full retreat from the debate he started.
RIP

I hope that he will one day be able to learn from his experience, but that day may be some time in coming. For ego is involved, and to recover he will have to fall all the way downhill and realize what a complete fool he has been, how he has fooled others as he himself was fooled.
Once he deals with those realities, and only then, will he be able to rejoin the company of those who hold their heads high, can prove that what they say is true, and walk in the light of truth.
Selah,
Jay Reynolds

[gaiacomm]

Wayne Hall is a Trailblazer and we all should be glad that at least he tries to help us. And that is a very difficult first step to take.

[halva]

Raynolds, see if you can get another response from any of those people you mentioned: Katsaros, Zerefos, Cornell.

[jayreynolds]

Wayne, I have published exact quotes from those persons stating their positions on the matter.
I responded to the questions asked of me by Dr. Katsaros, but have not had any continuing correspondence with the others, nor do I see a need to do so.

If anyone wishes to confirm with Katsaros, Zerefos, or Cornell the accuracy of my quotes, they are free to do so for themselves. If Wayne Hall wishes to publish denials or changes in their positions, you are free to do so as well.

I predict that Wayne Hall will not show any change in the positions of those scientists, though he may have belabored their patience to respond regarding the matter.

Wayne Hall is not a "trailblazer", he is merely a garbage collector, picking up the detritus others have refused, and attempting to resell that which is already unwanted.

[jayreynolds]

Wayne Hall, who claims to be an "activist" regarding "chemtrails geoengineering", has failed to respond to the following questions. I have been asking them for six months now, basic questions central to the issue he claims to be active in.

Ask yourself,
"WHY IN THE WORLD WILL WAYNE HALL NOT RESPOND TO THESE BASIC QUESTIONS IN A DEBATE?
WHAT IS HE SO AFRAID OF?
WHAT WOULD BE REVEALED IF HE RESPONDED?"

-What is your personal definition of 'chemtrails"?

-What are ordinary contrails, how are they formed, and what determines whether they persist, or not?

-In what way are alleged "chemtrails" different from ordinary contrails?

-What is the best scientific proof available that "chemtrails" are anything other than ordinary contrails?

-Could you please direct our attention to a photo of an
archetypical "chemtrail", one which you would attribute to "chemtrails"?

-Wayne Hall cites William Thomas, Gabriel Stetter, and Brian Holmes in his case for "chemtrails". Those persons have all stated the following: "the formation of condensation trails requires temperatures lower than about minus 76 F". Is that statement correct, and if not, do you personally consider any of those persons as accurate sources of information?

COME ON WAYNE, EVERYONE IS WATCHING YOU TO FIND OUT WHY THESE QUESTIONS ARE SO HARD TO ANSWER. BRING IT ON........

[gaiacomm]

Wayne: Why not answer the questions to the best of you ability and end the reign of JR!

[jayreynolds]

I found this a rather interesting look back in history, relevant for today:
http://swift1.he.net/~swiftvet/index.php?topic=SwiftVetQuotes

[halva]

I see that Raynolds is trying to influence my vote in the American presidential elections. That is as pertinent and well-focused an intervention as the warning against the dogmeat souvlakia being sold outside the Olympic Games I told him I would not be attending.

Raynolds-Ben Hur, I did at one point start answering this catalogue of questions so as to earn the right to ask some questions of Raynolds myself. When I had gained acknowledgement of having earned that right I asked him why he takes it upon himself to protect climate scientists from the views of 'chemmies' when by his own acknowledgement they need no protection, as they will never espouse 'chemmie' views.

His reply was that I should bugger off and that he does this because he feels like it and I can't stop him.

Having extracted from Raynolds this admission that his methodology consists in using climate scientists to intimidate chemmies and chemmies to intimidate climate scientists I saw no more reason to humour the fiction of disinterested scientific inquiry by which Raynolds claimed/claims to be motivated at the same time as he pursues his war of nerves against both 'chemmies' and scientists..

Raynolds has brought back into this discussion the names of certain scientists whom he claims to be on his side in the largely off-topic (to this thread, and to their own interests) 'chemtrails' dispute. If they are as much on his side as he claims then I am sure they will/would have provided him with all the information he seeks on the recent discussions to which they have had access, exclusion from which Raynolds by implication protests about when he speaks of my having returned to the hole from which I initially emerged.

If it is indeed the case that Reynolds has obtained no information concerning these discussions from the scientists he named, or from anywhere else, then it would seem that my policy in relation to him, i.e. that of minimising the amount of information he is obtaining so as to make continuing harassment as difficult for him as possible, is bearing fruit, and that is extremely gratifying.

[halva]

21 July 2004
Clash of the Titans
An excerpt from 'Boiling Point' highlights a clash of interests over climate change
By Ross Gelbspan
http://www.gristmagazine.com/cgi-bin/printify-2.pl

Under the administration of George W. Bush, the White House has become the East Coast branch office of ExxonMobil and Peabody Coal, and climate change has become the preeminent case study of the contamination of our political system by money.

With its heavy bankrolling of the Bush campaign in the 2000 presidential election, the fossil-fuel industry won a victory beyond its wildest dreams. That industry's long-running campaign of climate-change denial and public deception rapidly became presidential policy. In short order, President Bush reneged on his campaign promise to cap emissions from coal-burning power plants, unveiled the fossil fuel-friendly Cheney energy plan (a fast track to climate chaos), and withdrew the U.S. from the Kyoto negotiations. Then, in a truly Orwellian stroke, the White House altered a U.S. EPA report, removing all references to the dangerous impacts of climate change on the United States.

Apologists for the administration have justified its climate policies by citing politically conservative principles -- the withdrawal of onerous regulations, a belief in unencumbered free markets, and the appeal of corporate voluntarism.

In fact, the Bush climate policies have nothing to do with political conservatism. Rather, they represent corruption disguised as conservatism.



For starters, many White House watchers have already documented this administration's strong ties to the fossil-fuel lobby. The president tops the list of past oil company executives, followed by Vice President Dick Cheney, former CEO of Halliburton, the country's largest oil-field services firm. National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice served on Chevron's board of directors, while Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans worked for a Denver oil and gas company, Tom Brown, Inc. Philip Cooney, chief of staff for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, was formerly head of the climate unit of the American Petroleum Institute, the main lobbying arm of the oil industry, and a group that is among the most rabid critics of climate science.

Bush's electoral success, moreover, was heavily funded by big coal and oil. His 2000 presidential win can in large measure be traced to his victory in West Virginia, a state no other Republican presidential candidate had ever won. That win resulted from the substantial support of the state's coal industry. One coal executive alone, James Harless, raised $275,000 for the Bush campaign in West Virginia, five times more than Al Gore raised there.

Five months after Bush's inauguration, a West Virginia Coal Association official told a meeting of the organization: "You did everything you could to elect a Republican president. Now you are already seeing in his actions the payback ... for what we did."

That "payback" came in the form of an about-face on a campaign promise Candidate Bush made in 1999 -- to repeat nationally what he had done as governor of Texas, imposing a carbon dioxide emissions cap on the state's coal-fired power plants. In a letter to four Republican senators, Bush said he was backing away from the cap because of the "incomplete state of scientific knowledge of the causes of, and solutions to, global climate change and the lack of commercially available technologies for removing and storing carbon dioxide."

Particularly pleased by Bush's flip-flop was Irl Englehardt, chair of the Peabody Group, the country's biggest coal company. Englehardt had donated $250,000 to the Republican National Committee, and served as an adviser to the Bush-Cheney Energy Transition Team. On May 17, 2001, when the Cheney task force unveiled its new energy plan, it not only called for an expanded role for nuclear power and the opening of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration, but for the construction of between 1,300 and 1,900 new power plants, most of them powered by coal. Within a week of the plan's unveiling, the Peabody Group -- a privately held entity for its entire 120-year life -- made an initial public offering (IPO) of shares and went public. Overnight, its stock jumped from $24 to $36.

Exxon, Exx Off

If the administration's energy plan was covered with the fingerprints of the country's biggest coal company, its climate policies appear to have been directly dictated by the planet's largest oil company.



Just weeks after Bush assumed office, ExxonMobil official Randy Randol sent a memo to the White House, which was subsequently obtained by the Natural Resources Defense Council through a series of Freedom of Information Act requests. The memo cited a quote from Robert Watson, chair of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: "The United States is way off meeting its targets. A country like China has done more, in my opinion, than a country like the United States to move forward in economic development while remaining environmentally sensitive." Clearly, Watson's assertion did not sit well with the memo's authors, who went on to ask: "Can Watson Be Replaced Now At the Request of the United States?"

ExxonMobil recommended that the Bush administration remove Watson, along with two officials instrumental in producing the U.S. National Assessment on Climate Change, an EPA document that the White House would seek to eviscerate in the spring of 2003. In their place, the oil giant recommended appointing longtime climate "skeptics" John Christy and Richard Lindzen.

Ultimately, the Bush administration did scuttle Watson's reappointment. But, apparently fearing a major backlash, it decided not to back such vocal contrarians as Christy and Lindzen.

[halva]

ExxonMobil achieved an even greater success in directing Bush administration climate change diplomacy. Urged on by the company, the White House hired Harlan Watson (no relation to Robert) as its chief climate negotiator. In May 2002, Watson announced that the U.S. would not participate in the Kyoto process for at least 10 years, saying that the White House "wanted no part" of a 2005 international review of greenhouse gas reductions. "The next time we take stock on climate change," he said, "has been set by the president at 2012."

In November 2002, in an effort to improve its environmental image, ExxonMobil trumpeted its investment in hydrogen fuel research. But the company's disingenuous plan was not to derive hydrogen from water, a process that generates no carbon emissions, but to make it from oil and coal -- a process that emits so much carbon dioxide as to virtually neutralize the climate-friendly benefits of the new fuel. Two months later, in his 2003 State of the Union address, Bush revealed his own petroleum-based hydrogen initiative. It exactly embraced the ExxonMobil strategy, preserving America's oil infrastructure at the expense of climate destabilization.

ExxonMobil and the Bush administration have also united in sowing climate change disinformation and deception among U.S. citizens. By 2001, ExxonMobil had replaced the coal industry as the major funder of prominent "greenhouse skeptics," a handful of "experts" who spout bogus science, raising doubts about climate change to preempt the public's demand for action. By 2003, ExxonMobil was giving more than $1 million a year to an array of right-wing organizations opposing action on climate change -- including the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Frontiers of Freedom, the George C. Marshall Institute, the American Legislative Exchange Council, and the American Council for Capital Formation Center for Policy Research.

The striking success of the fossil-fuel lobby's disinformation strategy is reflected in two Newsweek polls. The first, in 1991 -- prior to the industry's global-warming misinformation campaign -- found that 35 percent of Americans saw global warming as a serious problem. By 1996, that share shrank to 22 percent -- despite the advent of far more conclusive science, documenting human-caused global warming.

The usefulness of bogus science was not lost on the Luntz Group, a private consulting firm advising Bush on climate policy presentation. "Americans ... believe all environmental rules and regulations should be based on sound science and common sense," said a Luntz memo. "Similarly our confidence in the ability of science and technology to solve our nation's ills is second to none. Both perceptions will work in your favor if properly cultivated."

Sure enough, a new effort by the "skeptics" surfaced in spring 2003. A study by lead authors Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and published in an obscure journal, Climate Research, concluded that the 20th century is neither the warmest century, nor the century with the most extreme weather, of the past 1,000 years. Both researchers had previously contended that the recent warming was due, almost entirely, to solar variations -- a finding long since disproved by peer-reviewed scientific studies.

As it turns out, the report by Baliunas and Soon was funded in part by the American Petroleum Institute. It was also coauthored by Craig Idso and Sherwood Idso, whose Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide has been funded by the coal industry and ExxonMobil.



Predictably, the study was seized upon by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, who asserted that this new science showed that natural variability, not human activity, was the "overwhelming factor" influencing climate change. Inhofe received double the campaign contributions from energy companies during the 2002 election than from any other business sector.

In short order, 13 leading climate scientists from the U.S. and U.K. declared in a letter to the American Geophysical Union that the anomalous late 20th century warmth cannot be explained without taking into account the contributions of human activities.

Most telling, perhaps, was another piece of fallout from the Soon-Baliunas controversy that received little news coverage. Three editors of the journal that published the skeptics' study resigned in protest after they were forbidden from writing an editorial pointing out the methodological errors of the flawed paper by the industry-funded researchers.

While Inhofe attempted to disguise the administration's fossil fuel-friendly policies under the cloak of "sound science," the White House worked to scuttle the most thoroughly researched projections of coming climate impacts inside the United States.

The report, known as the "U.S. National Assessment of the Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change," is a meticulously peer-reviewed document, drafted during the Clinton administration. The National Assessment details a range of anticipated, mostly harmful, impacts across U.S. geographical regions and ecosystems.

When previous Bush administration efforts failed to discount and discard the document, the politically conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute, which is partly funded by ExxonMobil, sued the White House Council on Environmental Quality to remove the National Assessment from circulation. In a press release, the CEI dismissed the assessment as "junk science" being used "by global warming alarmists" to hamstring business.

Then, in August 2003, the attorneys general of Maine and Connecticut made an extraordinary discovery. Through a Freedom of Information Act request, they unearthed emails indicating that the White House had secretly urged the private, right-wing CEI to sue it -- the White House -- in order to have the National Assessment withdrawn.

"It appears that certain White House officials conspired with an anti-environmental special interest group to cause the lawsuit to be filed against the federal government," said Maine Attorney General Steven Rowe, who complained to the U.S. Department of Justice along with Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal.

Survival of the ...?

Stepping back, it becomes clear that the climate crisis represents a titanic clash of interests. It pits the survival, as we know it, of the biggest commercial enterprise in history -- big coal and oil -- against the survival of the planet and its people. It also pits the fossil fuel industry-dominated Bush administration against the rest of the world.



As of this month, 123 countries have ratified or acceded to the Kyoto Protocol. Several industrial nations have also committed themselves to carbon cuts greater than those mandated by the protocol. Moreover, a substantial number of developing countries that are not required to cut their emissions in the first round of the protocol have begun to do so anyway. Clearly these governments would not be undertaking such massive and wrenching changes if they had any doubt about the climate crisis.

When Bush withdrew the U.S. from the Kyoto Protocol in 2001, he triggered a profound swell of outrage throughout the rest of the world. Given the accelerating momentum of climatic instability -- and the willingness of the rest of the world to begin addressing it -- the rage against the United States' indifference to humanity's common future will only grow worse.

In the early 1990s, when the science was still uncertain, denial and resistance by the fossil-fuel lobby could be excused as a predictable, business-as-usual response. But with the science now so robust, and negative impacts so visible, this behavior is inexcusable. In 2003 alone, 35,000 people died as the result of Europe's worst heat wave ever, while the World Health Organization reported that climate change is already claiming 160,000 lives annually. If temperatures climb as projected, then the corrupt policies embraced by U.S. industry and government could put the future of civilization at risk.

The industry-driven campaign goes far beyond traditional public relations spin. It has led to the capture of the White House, to gross distortions of science and truth, and to the corporate dictation of public policy. Not that such corruption of the political process by powerful special interests is new to our republic. But the magnitude of the potential consequences is unprecedented.

Our fossil fuels have brought us to a level of abundance and prosperity that was unimaginable a century ago.

Today they are propelling us forward into a century of disintegration.

===============

'Boiling Point' by Ross Gelbspan
Published by Basic Books, August 2004
http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/biblio?inkey=8-046502761x-0&partner_id=25450

[jayreynolds]

Wayne Hall, who claims to be an "activist" regarding "chemtrails geoengineering", has failed to respond to the following questions. I have been asking them for six months now, basic questions central to the issue he claims to be active in.

Ask yourself,
"WHY IN THE WORLD WILL WAYNE HALL NOT RESPOND TO THESE BASIC QUESTIONS IN A DEBATE?
WHAT IS HE SO AFRAID OF?
WHAT WOULD BE REVEALED IF HE RESPONDED?"

-What is your personal definition of 'chemtrails"?

-What are ordinary contrails, how are they formed, and what determines whether they persist, or not?

-In what way are alleged "chemtrails" different from ordinary contrails?

-What is the best scientific proof available that "chemtrails" are anything other than ordinary contrails?

-Could you please direct our attention to a photo of an
archetypical "chemtrail", one which you would attribute to "chemtrails"?

-Wayne Hall cites William Thomas, Gabriel Stetter, and Brian Holmes in his case for "chemtrails". Those persons have all stated the following: "the formation of condensation trails requires temperatures lower than about minus 76 F". Is that statement correct, and if not, do you personally consider any of those persons as accurate sources of information?

COME ON WAYNE, EVERYONE IS WATCHING YOU TO FIND OUT WHY THESE QUESTIONS ARE SO HARD TO ANSWER. BRING IT ON........

Readers are advised that once again that, as he has done for six long months, Wayne Hall refuses to answer basic questions in debate, even after his only adherent here begs him to do so.
So, what REALLY, is it about these questons that makes them so unanswerable, Wayne?
If you are not going to answer them, at LEAST tell us why?

[halva]

I have already made it perfectly clear why.

I reject disingenuous parodies of scientific debate.

The 'science' paradigm is introduced into this thread on false pretenses. Really the metaphor of commerce would be much more apposite.

Exclusion of Raynolds from transactions between 'chemmies' and climate scientists is like the exclusion of middlemen in economic transactions.

All that the middleman does is to obstruct direct contact between the parties to the transaction, raising prices and pocketing the increment himself.

In this case the higher price can be calculated in terms of labour: the increased labour involved in establishing and maintaining contact with climate scientists in the face of obstruction from the middleman.

Raynolds, if you continue to merely repeat your postings mechanically, I will reintroduce my old custom of spamming in foreign languages.

I was under the hopeful impression for a day or two that you had found some more productive way of employing your time, but I see that this is not so.

[jayreynolds]

Perhaps readers need to become more familiar with MS Diane Harvey's(aka sedona, sedonadiane) other beliefs, which by many accounts are indeed lunatic. Try this:

http://www.rense.com/general8/golden.htm

Or if her views about the battle between humans and Grey aliens isn't clear enough, check out this chemtrail site:

"Yes, the Greys are very nasty little "handmaidens" of darkness, working to establish ever-new levels of totalitarianism, in total accord with the purposes of the human dark ones. Whatever the actual relationship is: when different forces act on the same wavelength, out of the same general motive, they support and strengthen each other.

I live in a town full of "cute" (!) little images of the Greys- on bumper stickers, as posters, on t-shirts: it's quite the blatant indoctrination going on. THIS IS CHILLING."

"Whatever torments human beings in the ways the Greys do... is not being invited to do so subconsciously or otherwise by the human soul. We humans have our natural range of genuine spiritual difficulties, which are lovingly designed to stimulate growth away from ego. These are not imposed by totalitarian measures, do not involve mind control by other beings, the imposition of superior force by extraterrestrials, or paralyzing fear.
(For example: the higher orders of angels are awesome, but not terrifying.)

Greys may as well be demons for all the difference there is: in fact- I suspect they are actually worse. In any case, they are materially powerful PARASITES."
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000016.html

Diane Harvey has, publicly at least, become disengaged with the chemtrail issue and is no longer a player, under that screen name.
Invoking her as a reference in debate is a mistake Mr 'Sore' would have advised you to not do, halva.

Her reputation was partially destroyed by her own lunatic views on aliens, and her self-destruction, along with Mr 'Sore' against chemtrail promoter Clifford Carnicom was memorable, to say the least.


Hey, Wayne, I missed Diane Harvey's response over at megasprayer news till today.
http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=Fight&action=display&num=1078830194
Looks like she read this thread a month ago and decided to join up at chem11's house of nuts to make her first post directed at me! I am indeed flattered, and note that while she says I am lying about her whack-o beliefs about gray aliens running the world, she offered no denial, and carefully chose to NOT link to the very thread where I exposed it.

So here she is yet again, tying "chemtrails" and cattle mutilating Gray "handmaidens of darkness" aliens together in one neat package:
"From Diane Harvey
If I may, for what it's worth, I'd like to add a comment to the concept of there being a chemtrail connection in this mess. Certainly, the world is so frankly bizarre right now that even the most skeptical person is learning to think twice before dismissing any possibility. But based on all that we have seen in the way of research, I still think that chemtrails show the earmarks of being an all-too-stupidly-human operation. I do not discount the presence of aliens on this planet in the least. It is too illogical to suppose that so many reasonable and normal people would suddenly be taken with the peculiar desire to fabricate such abysmal stories as we read and hear about. And no one untampered with by such creatures, either directly or by their astonishingly successful public relations campaign, could possibly doubt their hideously parasitical nature. An alien species which would perpetrate such abominable abuses of human free will speaks loudly and clearly for itself through its own actions, despite all sophisticated efforts at disguise. It is an enormous tragedy that so many become so confused, and can no longer see the blazingly obvious in this slow stealthy nightmare. But then, that so many do not see what any human retaining free will can see is the entire point of what the Grays are doing here"
http://www.rense.com/general32/beef.htm

[jayreynolds]

I have already made it perfectly clear why.
I reject disingenuous parodies of scientific debate.
The 'science' paradigm is introduced into this thread on false pretenses. Really the metaphor of commerce would be much more apposite.

In post #1 of this thread, Wayne Hall opened debate with these words;

"It is time for there to be exposure, and honest public debate, about what is ALREADY being done by the proponents of geoengineering 'solutions'."

The debate teachers association defines "debate" as being, "A deliberative discussion with presentation of arguments for and against. Academic debate involves a competitive format with a preset topic, in-depth research, organizing ideas into persuasive presentations, cross examination, and defense against attack."

What has occurred here is that once Wayne Hall realized he was LOSING the debate he had declared open, he implemented damage control, which has included:
-NOT ANSWERING CROSS EXAMINATING QUESTIONS
-calling on the moderators to ban my participation
-spamming the debate thread with foreign text messages

And now he has the gall to say, "I reject disingenuous parodies of scientific debate."????

It is clear that a participant who uses the tactics enumerated above is the one being disingenuous and making a parody of the very debate he opened!


Raynolds, if you continue to merely repeat your postings mechanically, I will reintroduce my old custom of spamming in foreign languages. I was under the hopeful impression for a day or two that you had found some more productive way of employing your time, but I see that this is not so.

Yes, Wayne was enjoying his hope of all hopes, that I had decided to allow him to stop posting here, but indeed I have not given him permission to stop yet. Nice of him to confirm that, rather than answer basic questions central to his claims, he has made a practice of spamming rather than exposing the intellectual poverty of his argument. Let the reader be aware of his confirmation.

Ask yourself,
"WHY IN THE WORLD WILL WAYNE HALL NOT RESPOND TO THESE BASIC QUESTIONS IN A DEBATE?
WHAT IS HE SO AFRAID OF?
WHAT WOULD BE REVEALED IF HE RESPONDED?"

[gaiacomm]

Well I am proud to say that I am a Neocon! Wayne got any tickets to fill the seats at the Games?

[gaiacomm]

Come on wayne answer the questions so we can move to the next sqaure of the gameboard!

[halva]

Look, it's quite simple: you tell me to bugger off and don't answer when I ask certain questions. I tell you to bugger off and don't answer the question when you ask certain questions.

I reserve the honour to others to help fill in any gaps as may exist in my scientific knowledge.

Not you.

There is an inevitable built-in monotony and repetitiveness to this exchange, but who am I to get bored if you don't.

Thank you anyway for putting me on to the thread at Megasprayer, which I had not seen. It would be cruel and not altogether accurate to say that you yourself match the description of those grey extraterrestrials whose discovery you attribute to Diane Harvey. It would be more correct to say that these creatures would comprise your natural audience.

So that it is a pity you don't devote more time to amusing them. They would certainly appreciate you more than I do.

Ho hum.

[halva]

Of course you would locate the thread at Megasprayer. They are talking about you there.

[jayreynolds]

Look, it's quite simple: you tell me to bugger off and don't answer when I ask certain questions. I tell you to bugger off and don't answer the question when you ask certain questions.

Now, hold on there a minute, Wayne Hall. You can't accuse me falsely like that. Let's revisit the question and answer session in which you falsely claim I did not answer:
http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=58033&postcount=2077


"Dear Jay Reynolds,
Thank you for answering the first of the three questions I asked you.
The question was:
"1. Why do you play the self-appointed intermediary between "chemmies" and environmental scientists, given your claim that scientists are anyway perfectly capable of protecting themselves from the contagion of what you identify as "chemmie" viewpoints?"
Your answer was:
Well, Wayne, I do it because I damn well feel like doing it, and there isn't a hell of a lot you can do about it, so bugger off.

Wayne, you can't in one post say,

"Thank you for answering the first of the three questions I asked you,"
and now claim that I did not answer.
You simply cannot have it both ways, Wayne!
The proof is right there in black and white, folks!

Wayne Hall is either:
- knowingly attempting to lie his way out of answering basic questions about his claims in a debate, hoping against hope that he wouldn't get caught(should've known better, fella)
or
-he is so absent-minded he doesn't recall his own past statements

So, which is it, Wayne?

stay, Wayne, stay

[jayreynolds]

Ok, Wayne, now that I've shown how I provided, and you accepted(with thanks) my answer, it is your turn to answer these basic and central questions about your own claims. The clock is ticking, Wayne, everyone is watching how you perform. Give the answers to the best of your ability, or admit that if you answer it becomes obvious you know you are promoting a falsehood!


Wayne Hall, who claims to be an "activist" regarding "chemtrails geoengineering", has failed to respond to the following questions. I have been asking them for six months now, basic questions central to the issue he claims to be active in.

Ask yourself,
"WHY IN THE WORLD WILL WAYNE HALL NOT RESPOND TO THESE BASIC QUESTIONS IN A DEBATE?
WHAT IS HE SO AFRAID OF?
WHAT WOULD BE REVEALED IF HE RESPONDED?"

-What is your personal definition of 'chemtrails"?

-What are ordinary contrails, how are they formed, and what determines whether they persist, or not?

-In what way are alleged "chemtrails" different from ordinary contrails?

-What is the best scientific proof available that "chemtrails" are anything other than ordinary contrails?

-Could you please direct our attention to a photo of an
archetypical "chemtrail", one which you would attribute to "chemtrails"?

-Wayne Hall cites William Thomas, Gabriel Stetter, and Brian Holmes in his case for "chemtrails". Those persons have all stated the following: "the formation of condensation trails requires temperatures lower than about minus 76 F". Is that statement correct, and if not, do you personally consider any of those persons as accurate sources of information?

COME ON WAYNE, EVERYONE IS WATCHING YOU TO FIND OUT WHY THESE QUESTIONS ARE SO HARD TO ANSWER. BRING IT ON........

[gaiacomm]

Wayne: We are all waiting! Come on and get the Gold!

[halva]

-What is your personal definition of 'chemtrails"?


I don't have a personal definition, so bugger off.



-What are ordinary contrails, how are they formed, and what determines whether they persist, or not?


What do you mean by 'ordinary'? My personal view is that all contrails are extraordinary. And in any case bugger off.



-In what way are alleged "chemtrails" different from ordinary contrails?


This question cannot be answered in the absence of acceptance of the concept of 'ordinary', so bugger off.



-What is the best scientific proof available that "chemtrails" are anything other than ordinary contrails?


This question cannot be answered in the absence of acceptance of the concept of 'ordinary' so bugger off.



-Could you please direct our attention to a photo of an
archetypical "chemtrail", one which you would attribute to "chemtrails"?


No, I couldn't, so bugger off.



-Wayne Hall cites William Thomas, Gabriel Stetter, and Brian Holmes in his case for "chemtrails". Those persons have all stated the following: "the formation of condensation trails requires temperatures lower than about minus 76 F". Is that statement correct, and if not, do you personally consider any of those persons as accurate sources of information?


I don't know if the statement is correct and I consider those persons accurate sources of information, [no 'as' after 'consider': 'as' follows 'regard', not 'consider'] though I am often not inspired by William Thomas's aesthetic sense and 'mode of presentation. So bugger off.

I thanked you for giving me an answer of this kind. So now you thank me.

[halva]

Raynolds, I have seen the fanatic defined as the person whose determination is in inverse relation to his consciousness of his aims, i.e. the person who, the less he knows what he is trying to do, the more determined he is to do it.

Think back to what your objectives were when you first invaded this thread. The alleged 'honest debate' you wished to pursue was for a specific audience, in whose eyes you were seeking to discredit me.

You are no longer even thinking about how you might win the hearts and minds of Arianna Huffington and/or her supporters, and turn them against me and in favour of you.

To be brutally frank, you have forgotten what your initial purpose was in coming here.

That you are still here merely reflects your own intellectual and practical inertia and absence of ideas about what might be an appropriate next step for you to take.

You do not try to connect with the problematic of those who are convinced of the reality of anthropogenic climate change (i.e. the present-day mainstream of respectable scientific and popular opinion) but who have perhaps not yet been entirely persuaded of the reality of what some have chosen to call 'chemtrails'.

You have been evicted from the discussion between chemtrail activists and climate scientists, are no longer informed of its content and are thus forced to resort to reheating old squabbles between other arbitrarily chosen people and based on texts from 2000 and 2001.

Like the fanatic in the definition, you have persistence and stubbornness, but these characteristics alone are not sufficient to enable you to prevail in the present confrontation.

After all, the simple fact is that the the sum total of your energy for years has been harnessed to defending a politically motivated lie, whose expedience may in any case only be temporary.

To me this seems like a loser's game, but you obviously have different conceptions about this, presumably based on belief that the makeshift political improvisations being resorted to by those at present misgoverning the United States and the world can be relied upon to keep working forever.

[jayreynolds]

Quote:
Originally Posted by jayreynolds:
-What is your personal definition of 'chemtrails"?
Wayne Hall- I don't have a personal definition, so bugger off.[/]
JR- Rather strange answer, Wayne. You call yourself a "chemtrail activist", yet when asked what "chemtrails are, you can't even define what the word means? Have any idea how stupid that sounds?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jayreynolds:
-What are ordinary contrails, how are they formed, and what determines whether they persist, or not?
Wayne Hall- [i]What do you mean by 'ordinary'? My personal view is that all contrails are extraordinary. And in any case bugger off.

JR- Stranger yet, Wayne. You describe yourself as a translator of the English language, yet you know no definition for the adjective "ordinary"(it means 'commonly encountered, usual')? Sounds like you are dodging the answer bub, an answer central to your thesis, a question which is inescapable in any discussion by someone who calls himself an activist. Without a clear understanding of how ordinary contrails appear, form, and persist, how can you describe "chemtrails"? You really aren't an activist, are you, Wayne? You are a failure who can't even explain his own hoax. What a laugh.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jayreynolds:
-In what way are alleged "chemtrails" different from ordinary contrails?
Wayne Hall- This question cannot be answered in the absence of acceptance of the concept of 'ordinary', so bugger off.
JR-See above response. This is another evasion, Wayne. Everyone on earth has seen contrails. It's folly to spend 256 pages in debate over the subject, and then not be able to define it when challenged. Yes, you admit here that you are a failure.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jayreynolds
-What is the best scientific proof available that "chemtrails" are anything other than ordinary contrails?
Wayne Hall-This question cannot be answered in the absence of acceptance of the concept of 'ordinary' so bugger off.
JR- Well, Wayne, only by accepting that you are unable to define both contrails and "chemtrails", as well as the adjective describing them, can you wiggle past this question. So what you are admitting to here is that you are a failed "chemtrail" activist who can't define either what "chemtrails" or contrails are, and you have such poor command of the english language that you can't understand the word 'ordinary, thus you are an incompetent translator as well!

Quote:
Originally Posted by jayreynolds
-Could you please direct our attention to a photo of an
archetypical "chemtrail", one which you would attribute to "chemtrails"?
Wayne Hall-No, I couldn't, so bugger off.
JR-
well, I've got you there, Wayne, you already did this, at least once. Here is an example:

http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=Discussion&action=display&num=1069283108
"Look at those smoke rings in the sky. That's not traditional skywriting. Look at the mare's tails hanging down from them.They're chemtrails. In your face. The associations are with health, fitness and sport, not Alzheimer's, respiratory diseases and premature death. The image is what matters, and don't ask questions, like what they are and why they are being projected in this way.
Ah, but the picture is missing, even though you uploaded it to two websites. Funny how that happens, isn't it, Wayne?At any rate, not only are you unable to define the word which describes what you claim to be an activist against, you are unable to even point out aphoto of one! Don't you have any idea what a fool you are making yourself appear to be, Wayne Hall?



Quote:
Originally Posted by jayreynolds:
-Wayne Hall cites William Thomas, Gabriel Stetter, and Brian Holmes in his case for "chemtrails". Those persons have all stated the following: "the formation of condensation trails requires temperatures lower than about minus 76 F". Is that statement correct, and if not, do you personally consider any of those persons as accurate sources of information?

Wayne Hall-I don't know if the statement is correct and I consider those persons accurate sources of information, [no 'as' after 'consider': 'as' follows 'regard', not 'consider'] though I am often not inspired by William Thomas's aesthetic sense and 'mode of presentation. So bugger off.
JR-
Of course you know the statement is incorrect, and that all those guys got it wrong. If you admit it, however, you admit that all your sources are assholes who either haven't a clue what they are talking about, or who know they are lying, and do so anyways.
Wayne hall-I thanked you for giving me an answer of this kind. So now you thank me.

Yes, Wayne, thank you. I knew you were an ignorant failure, but now you have publicly confirmed it for all to see. Thanks indeed!

[halva]

O.K., so now you've got the chemtrails/contrails stuff out of your system for the moment, we'll go back to the more pertinent issues that you ignore. (I couldn't be bothered explaining the reasons for the absence of the skywriting pictures at Megasprayer, etc. etc., which have nothing to do with me.)

The more pertinent issues that you systematically ignore:

The reason you are on this thread has no bearing at all on any well-thought-out strategy for discrediting 'chemmies'.

It is purely opportunistic. You simply exploit the liberalism and indifference to the subject of chemtrails of the moderators of this forum, as a means of appearing to cope with the harsh fact that at any forums run by people who care about 'chemtrails', you are now inevitably excluded.

There is no reason at all for Arianna Huffington to be of any interest to you. You could not influence her political views on anything. Whether or not she decided to be interested or not interested in 'chemtrails' would never be predicated in any way on your views or your existence.

You sit in her forum purely and simply because I am here. You sit here despite knowing that I do not imagine the route for establishing political contact with Arianna Huffington passes through membership of this forum.

The fact that I personally and not 'chemmies' are your target is verified by the fact that you give no indication of successful harassment of any other 'chemtrail' activist or writer, notwithstanding your repeated claims to be preparing some such harassment. The fact is that
you have grown comfortable with debunking me and are shy of approaching others, or of trying to find a point of entry to the 'chemtrail' subject that does not pass through me.

Something that is of minor, and mainly symbolic, importance to me, namely not surrendering this thread to you, has become the centerpiece of your strategy. In the meantime I elaborate an approach to these questions in which the postings made here play a smaller and smaller role and in which your significance steadily diminishes to the point of invisibility.

Please continue wasting your time here.

[gaiacomm]

Wayne has answered the questions so now what is the next move on the board?

[jayreynolds]

Please continue wasting your time here.

Yeah, right, Wayne. As if you really don't care, huh?

After your answers, everybody now knows what the real Wayne Hall is made of, and it ain't substance, is it?

-A translator who can't even define the word 'ordinary'.
-A chemmie who can't define what a "chemtrail" is.
- A Thomasite who stands by his man as the ship sinks below the waves!

Not exactly the poster-child portrait of a "chemtrail activist", you present the image of adamn fool before your colleagues, Wayne, and a valuable resource to use against yourself for the future my dear fellow.

What else? oh, yeah, a 'direct democracy' advocate who closes his forum to the concept of democracy!

All so funny, all so sad.

It's true, Wayne, that I got banned years ago from the chemie forums.
Guess what, I got over it!
It's also true, Wayne, that you banned me from your own forum, but I got over that, too!

But don't think they don't come around looking at what I have to say. They always have, and always will. The evidence rolls in month after month that it's true, so why the hell do I need to belong to their cult boards when they are so damn bored with their own do-nothings they come here to see the latest Jay Reynolds ass-whupping on Wayne Hall ?

This thread didn't get 30,000 page views from the participants here alone, bub. This thread is the longest running and most viewed "chemtrails" related thread in the history of the internet, bar-none, perhaps the longest thread to ever run on vbulletin. It broke the view counter about a month ago, LOL!

Invisible, my arse. What's invisible is anything new from you chemmies. Word is, enthusiasm lags after a few months with no 'breakthroughs'. When was the last "chemtrail" breakthrough, now, Wayne?

You people had better find some new material.

[halva]

You are a heap of crap Raynolds. Just bugger off.

[jayreynolds]

You are a heap of crap Raynolds. Just bugger off.

But yesterday you told me to continue, Wayne. That's rather ambivalent.

It's not like you didn't have six month's time and 255 pages sitting on my questions to at least make up some more valid answers for them. By dodging them totally, you didn't gain a damn thing, just made yourself look like a damn fool, a liar, and a make-believe 'activist' who can't even define the thing he says he's active against!

[gaiacomm]

Wayne:

Why not close this thread which will force JR and me to stop posting here!

Continue your Chemtrail debate somewhere on the internet. This thread is just a waste of space and its boring now. Ping Pong!

[gaiacomm]

I think that each of us should make a closing remark. Wayne or JR can jocky for the last post!

[halva]

I am not a moderator, Gaiacomm, so I cannot close the thread.

[gaiacomm]

I am not a moderator, Gaiacomm, so I cannot close the thread.


Then lets have a closing remark from you and JR and me! Then the thread will die from lack of use!

[Lil_girl_2004]

THIS IS FOR WHITEMAJIKMAN ONLY TO REPLY TO AND IF HES DOSENT THEN.... WELL IM NOT GOING TO GO THEIR BUT... I DARE YOU WMM.... DO YOU ACCEPT??????????

You know what whitemajikman.... your either scared shitless of Dave or your just plain stupid... and honestly im going for both... why not contact him too see the documents and everything else he offered you (a free lunch) and everything!!! That makes me think that you have nothing, i repeat, NOTHING on him ( or me for that matter ) that everyone doesnt already know... hes a good guy so why are you threating him... but when he calls YOU out you back away like a scared lil kid... my son has more balls than you and hes three.... so ya let me know if your willing to play with FIRE again WMM....
Lil_girl_2004
I hope to hear from you soon...

[gaiacomm]

THIS IS FOR WHITEMAJIKMAN ONLY TO REPLY TO AND IF HES DOSENT THEN.... WELL IM NOT GOING TO GO THEIR BUT... I DARE YOU WMM.... DO YOU ACCEPT??????????

You know what whitemajikman.... your either scared shitless of Dave or your just plain stupid... and honestly im going for both... why not contact him too see the documents and everything else he offered you (a free lunch) and everything!!! That makes me think that you have nothing, i repeat, NOTHING on him ( or me for that matter ) that everyone doesnt already know... hes a good guy so why are you threating him... but when he calls YOU out you back away like a scared lil kid... my son has more balls than you and hes three.... so ya let me know if your willing to play with FIRE again WMM....
Lil_girl_2004
I hope to hear from you soon...


Interesting post!

[jayreynolds]

even more interesting.
Now they tell us?
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn07292004.html

[gaiacomm]

even more interesting.
Now they tell us?
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn07292004.html

Good book!

[jayreynolds]

Be sure to check back tomorrow, Wayne. Gotta run for now...........
Jay

[jayreynolds]

Wayne, for the first time in a long while, I'm speechless and at a loss for words. You guys have gone to ground so tight, and simply aren't producing hoax material like you used to. There really isn't anything to debunk at the moment. I'll let you know the minute there is anything new.
bye,

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ama_lahi/
"Description Category: Greece
Ama lahi is a direct democracy discussion group continuing the dialogue begun on 24th June 2000 at the Ama Lahi taverna in Athens, Greece.
What's New
Nothing new within the last 7 days"

[halva]

Thank you for this confirmation that my policy in relation to you has been successful.

There will be a new posting at Ama Lahi in a day or two (the e-mail messages there are grouped in bundles of up to ten or twelve. Most participants - with a few exceptions - send private e-mail messages rather than posting directly at the Ama Lahi forum.) And not everyone has joined Ama Lahi.

Perhaps you could use this hiatus to think about how, since you would be opposed to chemtrails if they were a reality, you will go about opposing them if it turns out that they are.

[hoot]

Aw Gee, are you guys going to let this die; it was such an interesting fight. I've been out in the bush doing a little "birding" and haven't been following the match at all. Must dig back a few pages and find the turn-off point.////// I have been hunting that very very very elusive creature the elf woodpecker first discoverd on 7/4/76 and sighted often till the mid-90's but now seems to be as extinct, in the queens' world, as the dodo bird. Very very very interesting this complete lack of sightings. One wonders if all those 40 megawatt elf woodpeckers could be hiding somewhere. Why, those crafty russkies were claimed to have 30 of them in 93 and were hatching more as fast as we could send them the money. Oh well, maybe my google is broke. Just that spanish report of those bloody bantycock Cubans haarping on and on about how they had seemlessly replaced the 2500 russkies that operated "their" woodpecker with local talent, except for just a few rosa chin advisors, ta ta all

[jayreynolds]

Aw Gee, are you guys going to let this die; it was such an interesting fight. I've been out in the bush doing a little "birding" and haven't been following the match at all. Must dig back a few pages and find the turn-off point.//////

The turn off for Wayne was when he was forced to admit he was a fake "activist".
http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=100401&postcount=2554

That's why nobody posts at ama_lahi anymore. He failed miserably in the debate here and all his cultic brothers saw it happen. They agree he is an idiot and does more harm than good.


"There will be a new posting at Ama Lahi in a day or two (the e-mail messages there are grouped in bundles of up to ten or twelve. Most participants - with a few exceptions - send private e-mail messages rather than posting directly at the Ama Lahi forum.) And not everyone has joined Ama Lahi."

Wayne, that is a lie. Anyone can go to your message board and see that there were only 3 messages in August.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ama_lahi/
You personally destroyed yourself, Wayne, and no one participates there. It is a joke.
During July I monitored and saw no such 'bundling'. The fact is that you are dead in the water, along with your brethren. While I doubt it even happens, if you are down to merely sending emails around, and restrict youself to that, then you are defeated.

What was the last 'breakthrough' in your hoax? There hasn't been a flap for a looooooong time, old bean!

[halva]

Raynolds you know nothing.

[hoot]

Come on jr, give the guy a break, he's got The games in his town this week

[gaiacomm]

Aw Gee, are you guys going to let this die; it was such an interesting fight. I've been out in the bush doing a little "birding" and haven't been following the match at all. Must dig back a few pages and find the turn-off point.////// I have been hunting that very very very elusive creature the elf woodpecker first discoverd on 7/4/76 and sighted often till the mid-90's but now seems to be as extinct, in the queens' world, as the dodo bird. Very very very interesting this complete lack of sightings. One wonders if all those 40 megawatt elf woodpeckers could be hiding somewhere. Why, those crafty russkies were claimed to have 30 of them in 93 and were hatching more as fast as we could send them the money. Oh well, maybe my google is broke. Just that spanish report of those bloody bantycock Cubans haarping on and on about how they had seemlessly replaced the 2500 russkies that operated "their" woodpecker with local talent, except for just a few rosa chin advisors, ta ta all


Next month follow Gaiacomm and you will find the woodpecker!

[halva]

Hoot, would you like the kind of exchange that has gone on with Raynolds here over the last months to CONTINUE?

Or would you like him to reflect on why he has been excluded from all relevant dialogue and debate and perhaps seek to come back into the game as the opponent of 'chemtrails' that he claims he would be if they really existed?

[jayreynolds]

Hoot, would you like the kind of exchange that has gone on with Raynolds here over the last months to CONTINUE?

Or would you like him to reflect on why he has been excluded from all relevant dialogue and debate and perhaps seek to come back into the game as the opponent of 'chemtrails' that he claims he would be if they really existed?


"IF THEY REALLY EXISTED?"

Gosh-oh-golly-me. Wayne made a slip-up and admitted he knows "chemtrails" really don't exist after all.......

It was obvious that you knew that fact when you were unable to answer this question in any fashion whatsoever:

"-What is the best scientific proof available that "chemtrails" are anything other than ordinary contrails?"

[halva]

Hoot?

[jayreynolds]

Hoot, would you like the kind of exchange that has gone on with Raynolds here over the last months to CONTINUE?
Or would you like him to reflect on why he has been excluded from all relevant dialogue and debate and perhaps seek to come back into the game as the opponent of 'chemtrails' that he claims he would be if they really existed?

You know, looking back this isn't the first time Wayne Hall has let it slip out that he knows "chemtrails" are a hoax.

On another mesage board, Wayne was trying(unsuccessfully) to proselytize the membership into the chem-cult. I responded with an opposing viewpoint, but promised to post no more if Wayne stopped. here is a post by Wayne Hall answering me:

"jayreynoldsisreal" wrote:

1. I will discontinue posting here at CICDD when Wayne stops
promoting the hoax here.
> Selah,
> Jay Reynolds

Wayne Hall wrote:
"Comments from halva:

On 1. I have not stopped promoting the hoax."
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cicdd/message/8176

THERE YOU HAVE IT, FOLKS.
WAYNE HALL KNEW 11 MONTHS AGO THAT HE WAS PROMOTING A HOAX!
NOW THE QUESTION IS, "WHY DOES HE CONTINUE DOING IT, AND WHEN WILL HE STOP???

[halva]

Any comment from you Hoot?

[gaiacomm]

Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem

[halva]

I don't have my Latin dictionary with me, gaiacomm, and I forget (or don't know) what 'entia' and 'praeter' mean.

Guessing, though, I could take your comment as meaning that I am right to address you as Raynolds/Ben Hur.

But I must say, vis a vis Hoot, it seems frivolous to drop posts at this forum if one is not focused enough to follow them up.

[gaiacomm]

Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem


"Entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity"

[halva]

So my guess was right.

[gaiacomm]

So my guess was right.

Yes!

[jayreynolds]

You know, there is a lot to be said against generalization of a culture, a race, or a nationality.
There are always the exceptions, those who run against the tide, and who don't fit some broad category.

That said, the events which transpired during last night's 200 meter race in Athens got me wondering. In case you didn't see it, as the runners got in position, the crowd, who were mostly Greeks, began booing and whistling and shouting. It seems that their favorite son, one Kostas Kenteris, had dropped out of the competition, and coincidentally had also failed to show up for a drug test before the race.

Those in the crowd appeared to be doing their best to disrupt the contestants, of which the most favored were three Americans. The hullabaloo continued through two false starts and despite pleas by officials and the racers themselves for peace and quiet.

It seems that rather than taking out their wrath on the Greek most responsible for his own failures, Kenteris, a large portion of the Greek population has fallen into the same sort of trap Wayne Hall is in. They know damn well Kostas Kenteris has no one to blame but himself for his problems, and they damn well know that he bears responsibility for his own actions. For their part, it is understandable that the Greeks would be shocked, even ashamed that the man they had 'believed in', would turn out to be less a 'god' than they had thought. He may have always been a fraud, who knows?

Here is a prevalent theme:
A disgrace to some, still loved at home

"Through an interpreter, the mayor expressed a popular view on the island.
"I feel he was double-crossed."
The conspiracy theory goes something like this: The international press and the IOC tried to make it look like Greece would fail at the huge task of staging the Olympics. When Greece pulled it off, the media and officials needed a target. They went after Kenteris.
Otherwise, the thinking goes, why nail Kenteris on a technicality?
At Saliaris' Barbershop, customer Nikolaos Kontos said, "We are quite bitter about what happened. He's a very good lad and he gave everything for his country. He wouldn't do (the alleged misdeeds) himself, or to his people. I believe it was a plot created against him to not run in the Olympic Games, to spoil the Games because they're happening in Greece."
They feel cheated. Kenteris lifted up this island and the people want to believe it wasn't all a sham, he really did run like a god, and that he's still the kid they grew up with.
As Fotis Kouloumarietos said, "Even if Kostas does not run in the Olympics, we will believe that he is the winner of the 200."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/08/19/SPGHH8AH011.DTL
==========================
Lest anyone think this sort of criticism is unfair needs only to see the partly apologetic, but contradictorily accusative report in today's Greek press to see a whole nation in a state of denial, inventing a conspiracy theory to explain away their reasons for supporting a hoax they all know is false:

"Why did so many people choose to ignore this and show solidarity with Kenteris? Why did the doping allegations and his violation of fair play fail to make people shun the former champion? It was not just out of respect for a great athlete. More importantly, people know the long hard road that champions must take and thus feel condemnation is unfair. In addition, they know that the use of performance-enhancing drugs is the rule among top-class athletes. Winning medals is not a question of hard training alone."
http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_columns_100020_27/08/2004_46582

It seems that Wayne both lives and plows fertile ground in Greece. By it's own words and actions, Greece is a country whose very essence as demonstrated for all the world to see on satellite TV includes not only being 'The last Communist nation in Europe", but also a nation able to pull the Golden Fleece over it's own collective eyes rather than admit it believed in a hoax.

[jayreynolds]

Recall that an ally of Wayne Hall's "chemtrail" cult, "Liakopoulos", who formerly posted on this thread, was revealed as being employed by TV station widely known for it's transmission of blatantly racist propaganda.

Liakopoulos even promoted on his TV show the preposterous rumor that "4000 Jews stayed home from the World trade center on 9/11".

It appears that there is no end to the gullibility and poor ethics prevalent among the Greek press. The Greek TV station called "MEGA" is also in the habit of transmitting rumor as if it were fact. Probably yet another symptom of how far Greece has gone into self-deception over the fall of their god Kenteris from the clouds...........

This explains a lot about where Wayne Hall is at, were he's been, and where he's going:

Irate agent slams TV rumor mill
Jos Hermens, agent to several Olympic gold medal athletes, such as Ethiopia’s Kenenisha Bekele, slammed Greece’s private TV station Mega yesterday for spreading rumors about failed drug tests.

Hermens was angry that Mega had implied that one of his clients, Cameroon’s women’s triple jump winner, Francoise Mbango Etone, had failed a drug test following her victory on Monday.

“I spoke with Dr Gabriel Dolle of the IAAF this morning and he told me that, as of this morning, there were no new doping cases,” said the former world record-breaking runner. “This is all coming from a Greek TV station that no one knows. The rumors start, and then it becomes real, and goes all over the world.” Hermens said he did not plan to sue Mega.

He revealed that Mbango had been extremely distressed when the rumors started circulating on Wednesday. “There’s personal damage and also financial damage,” said Hermens, acknowledging that it will be harder now to convince sponsors and meeting promoters that Mbango Etone is clean." (AFP)
Irate agent slams TV rumor mill
Jos Hermens, agent to several Olympic gold medal athletes, such as Ethiopia’s Kenenisha Bekele, slammed Greece’s private TV station Mega yesterday for spreading rumors about failed drug tests.

Hermens was angry that Mega had implied that one of his clients, Cameroon’s women’s triple jump winner, Francoise Mbango Etone, had failed a drug test following her victory on Monday.

“I spoke with Dr Gabriel Dolle of the IAAF this morning and he told me that, as of this morning, there were no new doping cases,” said the former world record-breaking runner. “This is all coming from a Greek TV station that no one knows. The rumors start, and then it becomes real, and goes all over the world.” Hermens said he did not plan to sue Mega.

He revealed that Mbango had been extremely distressed when the rumors started circulating on Wednesday. “There’s personal damage and also financial damage,” said Hermens, acknowledging that it will be harder now to convince sponsors and meeting promoters that Mbango Etone is clean. (AFP)

ONE SICK BUNCH OF PEOPLE!

[hoot]

Next month? Thought it was suposed to be an Octobeer surprise. Humm, must speed up production of lead helmuts. Or,will it be woodpecker along the lines of the test on 5/31/98? Nasty, that storm!!! Anyhow, giaicomms' going to show us./////// jr, 911 was a religious holiday for all those kind of people, thats the only reason why they didn't go to work.

[gaiacomm]

Next month? Thought it was suposed to be an Octobeer surprise. Humm, must speed up production of lead helmuts. Or,will it be woodpecker along the lines of the test on 5/31/98? Nasty, that storm!!! Anyhow, giaicomms' going to show us./////// jr, 911 was a religious holiday for all those kind of people, thats the only reason why they didn't go to work.


Lets see how about the last week in September 2004! Only the Whales will hear it and the Elephants, etc.

[halva]

Some more precisely targeted input from Raynolds, showing a fearsome capacity to insert that wedge between Arianna and those who would use her forum.

There is even worse to say about Kenteris. They even named one of the new tram-lines after him. Blush blush. Someone's head is going to fall for that when the games are over. Whose I don't know. Probably some innocent person in a weak position politically..

Given the well-known realities of doping, i.e. that everyone does [or at least very many do] it but the thing is not to get caught, and given that Kenteris' - or his trainer's - real mistake was believing the off-the-record reassurances that Kenteris would not be spot-checked if he turned up at the Olympic village, the attitude of those Greeks who are still defending him is naive and perverse - a losers' attitude - but nothing worse than that.

I suppose athletes who dope and get away with it are more admirable than Kenteris. If you would like to admire them, Raynolds, go ahead.

The whole mess strengthens the position of those who have kept as far away from the Olympics as possible. There will be a reaction when it is all over.

Many Greeks are too sentimental about all these things, but every weakness can also be a strength.

[jayreynolds]

Given the well-known realities of doping, i.e. that everyone does [or at least very many do] it but the thing is not to get caught, and given that Kenteris' - or his trainer's - real mistake was believing the off-the-record reassurances that Kenteris would not be spot-checked if he turned up at the Olympic village, the attitude of those Greeks who are still defending him is naive and perverse - a losers' attitude - but nothing worse than that.

I suppose athletes who dope and get away with it are more admirable than Kenteris. If you would like to admire them, Raynolds, go ahead.


In addition, they know that the use of performance-enhancing drugs is the rule among top-class athletes. Winning medals is not a question of hard training alone."

Sounds like an echo in here, eh, Wayne?

Amazing confluence of opinion there in Greece, but totally wrong.

There is no truth to the notion that top-class athletes, as a rule, or as Wayne, put's it, "everyone does", use drugs. To the contrary, it is more likely that lesser competitors might try them, but in the top classes, doing so is pratically a guarantee of disgrace.

If you cheat and win, you will fall down hard- very hard!

The reality of the situation is that the top four finishers of any event, plus at least one other chosen randomly, are all tested for drugs. This makes it impossible for top- class athletes
to use drugs and be successful.

The reality is that Kenteris has failed to show for drug tests before and has been evading testing for some time. His faked "accident" was like your chemmie stunt posting faked "chemtrail" pictures, or William Thomas' misquoting atmospheric scientists.

Just like a chemmie, Wayne, that you would parrot a pile of lies to explain away your own and your country's failures. didn't work for Kenteris, hasn't worked for you, and it never will work, lies just make things worse.
--------------------------
"The IOC is planning 400 random Out-of-Competition tests (using the In-Comp menu) and 2500 In-Competition tests. Expect the top four (4) finishers plus at least one (1) random test for individual events. Teams should expect one (1) or two (2) random tests per team from 25% of the teams for the preliminaries, quarters and semi-finals, and at least two (2) tests for the top 4 teams. Anyone breaking an Olympic or World record will be tested. The IOC may also select athletes or teams for target testing. All endurance events will include tests for EPO and HBOC (hemoglobin-based oxygen carriers). If a test is available for hGH, it will be used. If the test is not available, samples will be stored "
http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:FzLKXJN9qfoJ:www.usoc.org/summary_of_IOC_antidoping_rules.pdf+IOC+drug+testi ng+rules&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[jayreynolds]

As if yesterday's preposterous rationalization for their own olympic hopeful Kenteris' failure to stay off drugs, as Wayne Hall puts it, because "everyone does it", the Greek Press has put out the latest version of hide the baloney:

Blinded by the sun
By Antonis Karakousis

"The boos from the crowd during the men’s Olympic 200-meters final on Thursday is incomprehensible to the Protestant ethic of northern Europeans, as the public failed to respect the athletes’ need to concentrate."

The foreign media saw the disruption as a display of contempt, a nationalist outburst that prevents people from following rules and distinguishing good from bad. Such criticism is based on the Manichean perspective about good and evil — an idea that dominates Western culture and rejects gray areas (as manifested in the chorus of ancient Greek theater).

It is about the difference between the north and the south as captured in the work of the French existentialist Albert Camus. People in the north live and work in a gloomy environment. They descend to the Mediterranean in search of light — and that shapes their temperament. Mediterranean people live under the sun, and are thus intrigued by the mysterious, the otherworldly. This relationship tilts us off the tracks of rationalism, making us waver between condemnation and absolution."
http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_columns_9975385_28/08/2004_46633

What the hell, Wayne, blame it on the sun???
---------------------
Now, adding injury to insult, come those Greeks who "live under the sun":

Black Secretary of State welcomed to Athens, greeted by riots
August 28, 2004

"POLICE used tear gas overnight to disperse hundreds of demonstrators who lit fires, smashed windows and beat up journalists as they marched through Athens to protest a visit by US Secretary of State Colin Powell."
http://foxsports.news.com.au/olympics/story/0,9744,10594386-34056,00.html
-------------------
So, Wayne, smash some windows and set the city on fire, some way to welcome a black man to Athens, eh?

Oh, and BTW, why is the news about the riot entirely absent from the Greek press?
http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/news/politics_9976572KathiLev&xml/&aspKath/politics.asp?fdate=28/08/2004
Who's running the show over there, some junta, a bunch of marxists? Or are all Athenians just assholes?

[jayreynolds]

Antonis Karakousis- "People in the north live and work in a gloomy environment. They descend to the Mediterranean in search of light — and that shapes their temperament. Mediterranean people live under the sun, and are thus intrigued by the mysterious, the otherworldly. This relationship tilts us off the tracks of rationalism, making us waver between condemnation and absolution."
http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_columns_9975385_28/08/2004_46633


Um... er.... perhaps this hell-ass hole flunked his geography.
Sorry to disappoint you there, Antonis Karakousis, but Athens lies at the same lattitude as Washington, DC. Greece is about the size of Florida, if you count the water between the islands, but for sure Florida has every bit as much sun as Greece does. Texas alone has four times more sun than Greece, and that's not to mention New Mexico, Nevada, or Arizona. Don't give me that bullshit that latitude has anything at all to do with rationalism. Rationalism requires a rational mind informed with facts. Greece is a swamp of superstition and rumor. The damn 'evil eye' symbol dominates artwork and even personal jewelry. The press there is no more than a printed rumormill.

From what I've seen so far, the preponderance of evidence points towards a reliance in Greece on rumor, and a brain in which rationalism has been replaced by a tumor called rationalization!

You are a prime example of it, Wayne.

That's not to say there aren't logical and factual people there, but they seem drowned out, minimized, and perhaps discriminated against.

[jayreynolds]

Hmmmm, what was it those Greeks were saying?
Something like, "everybody does it"?
Could be they are onto something...............
The deciedly left-wing American magazine "Salon" is looking into it in this four page article, which I'll excerpt below.
======================

Salon Magazine
The serious buzz in Athens
American sprinters are booed. Greek runner Fania Halkia comes out of nowhere to win the 400-meter hurdles. Don't look now -- but doping scandals are beginning to color the Games.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Gary Kamiya

I witnessed some of the passions that are roiling Greece two nights ago at one of the more bizarre -- for an outsider -- athletic events I've ever seen: Greek runner Fania Halkia's already-legendary, but eyebrow-raising win in the 400-meter hurdles.

It should have been the feel-good race of the Olympics. A little-known Greek runner runs the race of her life and wins gold, restoring honor and pride to her wounded nation.


The only problem is that was the story line for Kenteris and Thanou, too -- and there are just a few too many similarities between the stories for comfort.

They're calling Halkia's triumph the signature event for Greece in these Games, the equivalent of Cathy Freeman's victory in the 400 at Sydney. People in the crowd went bananas. It's as loud as any crowd I've ever heard. "Hellas! Hellas!" they roared at the top of their lungs for several minutes, while a sea of blue and white Greek flags waved. Late into the evening, people were waving flags out car windows and honking their horns, celebrating the triumph.

The press went wild, too. In the English edition of Kathimerini, a leading newspaper, a photo of Halkia throwing her arms out in triumph after winning was splashed across the front page. The article said, "After the shock of the withdrawal from the Games of top sprinters Costas Kenteris and Katerina Thanou after they missed a drug test, this was supreme consolation for the Greeks." The tabloids had a field day. "Fania, Fania, Fania," one moaned. Another called her a "winged goddess" -- hokey comparisons to figures from classical Greece being just as popular here as abroad -- while yet another whinnied that she was a "wild steed that could not be controlled."

One paper's headline read simply, "Redemption."

But under the circumstances, redemption for Greece, of course, wouldn't just come from winning -- it would have to come from winning clean. And even as I stood there in the middle of the frenzied crowd, a little voice was saying, "Uh ... " And believe me, it's a drag to feel like the only one at the mass communal epiphany and national redemption-fest who's wondering if the whole thing is a scam.

Halkia's story is almost too good to be true -- and that's where that exasperating little voice comes in. She started out as a high-jumper, then took up the 400 but had little success. Frustrated by injuries and her limited success, she quit athletics to become, among other things, a broadcast journalist. Then she reentered the sport. As recently as six months ago, she was an unknown and mediocre runner. Her lifetime best in the 400 hurdles at the start of this year was 56.40 -- which would have left her dead last in last night's race. Even more remarkably, in March, the best she could do running a flat 400 was 52.90 -- slower than she ran over the hurdles last night!

Then, Halkia somehow got really good, really fast. In qualifying, she broke an Olympic record that had stood for eight years, smoking the field with a 52.77, as we all stood there with our mouths agape. She ran 52.82 for the gold. That means that in less than a year she improved her time by three and two-thirds seconds -- in a sport that measures improvement in half-second or even tenth-of-a-second increments, and where victory is often measured in hundredths of seconds.

Of course, it's possible that Halkia is simply a prodigy, a naturally gifted runner who trained hard and happened to develop extraordinary speed. There are probably other cases of top-tier track stars who cut 7-plus percent off their personal bests in less than a year, as she did. But not many.

As I watched Halkia's come-out-of-nowhere victory, it reminded me of nothing so much as Kenteris and Thanou's races in Sydney -- which were also touted as redemptive, miraculous and evidence of the great Greek spirit.

I'm all for the great Greek spirit. But maybe it would be better to kind of not talk about it for a while.

Halkia does not use Kenteris and Thanou's coach. She hasn't failed any drug tests (all the medalists are tested immediately after the event). And of course everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

However, it's not just Halkia's extraordinary improvement, but the fact that the whole Greek athletic system, from top to bottom, appears to have been caught up in a win-at-all-costs mentality, that leaves a sour and lingering suspicion.

Next page | Run! The drug testers are here
1, 2, 3, 4
http://www.salon.com/news/sports/olympics/2004/08/27/dope/index.html

[gaiacomm]

Moderators this thread is finished. There is just nothing positive to write about anymore.

Wayne, shut it down!

[halva]

What are you talking about Gaiacomm. I can't shut it down.

If Raynolds wants to keep blathering on about Greeks in general, or about the dopy Olympic Games, for which I couldn't give a pinch of sh..t, let him do so. The more time he wastes here talking about Greeks and the Olympics the less time he has for harassing 'chemmies'.

[foot_soldier]

Reynolds just has to keep pumping up his 2-foot schlong and sticking it in people's faces. He's a congenital bully and can't help himself.

Meanwhile the world goes on and time keeps moving.

[halva]

Cunning diversionary tactics here from Footsoldier with her flattering references to two-foot schlongs to lead Raynolds even farther away from what we all actually talk about these days.

By the way, to continue the other diversion, I believe Fani Halkia when she says she doesn't and didn't take dope.

[jayreynolds]

to lead Raynolds even farther away from what we all actually talk about these days..

Don't be silly, Wayne, there has been nothing new put forward by the chemtrails cult for many months now. Your people are stuck, mired real bad. Your people don't have anything new to say.

Wayne, 'footsoldier'(Deborah) is just bitter because nobody is interested in her other thread, which had nothing to say and went nowhere, just like everything related to your "chemtrail" cult. Your people have pretty much shot your wad, exhausted your audience's patience as time has taught rational people that what you have been claiming for these five years can't possibly have any truth behind it.

Over the past years, chemmies would always come up with some new element, some new theory, even some new bhoddisatva messiah come to lead them all "into the light".

These promises were used to keep prospective members 'on the hook', hoping upon hope for some "breakthrough", but nothing ever became of it.

They were all empty promises.

Time after time these all ended up being revealed as scam artists, con-men, frauds, or idiots.

Remember A.C Griffith, Deborah, where is your man now?
Remember Jim Phelps, Wayne, where is your man now?
Remember Carnicom, Throatee, where is your man now?

Deborah is also ticked off because of the poor showing you made in answering my questions.

By not answering you showed that her new position, that even 'ordinary contrails are baaaaaaaa-d for mother earth', debunks what all your leaders have been saying all these years. That is why she never was willing to answer the questions, either! She still won't answer them because if she did, it would reveal her as a long time deceiver.

She knows that William Thomas, Brian Holmes, and Gabriel Stetter and all her friends are all boldface liars when they say ordinary contrails can only form at below -76 degreesF!

She knows that ordinary contrails fit, to the most minute details, the exact description of what she used to so vehemently call "chemtrails".

She knows she was lied to, she knows she then lied to others, she knows you lie, Wayne, and how she must carry on the weight of the lie, and by now she is getting sick over it!

[jayreynolds]

Meanwhile the world goes on and time keeps moving.[/b]

Yes, Deborah, the world goes on indeed.
Yes, Deborah, the time clock is stil ticking.

Yes, Deborah, for years now you've been claiming to be a "chemtrail activist".

I SAY NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH

If you were truly an activist, and not just another con-(wo)man, you would not hesitate to factually answer these basic questions which would define the factual basis supporting your rationale for said "activism".

NOW IS YOUR CHANCE, DEBORAH, TO BE A BIG GIRL.
WILL YOU STAND FOR YOUR CONVICTIONS, OR WILL YOU SIMPLY RUN AWAY AND HIDE YET AGAIN AS YOU HAVE SO MANY TIMES BEFORE?

NOW ANSWER THE QUESTIONS!===>>


1.Do you have a background in a technical field? If not, whom do you consider to have such a background who would state the case for "chemtrails" being a case of "geoengineering"? If no one with such a background exists after five years of interest(enough time for a baccalaureate degree to be earned) why not?

2.Which resource do you depend upon for accurate, sound scientific informaton about "chemtrails"? If none can be relied upon, why not?

3.Several meetings were held this past year which were unparalleled opportunities for you to present papers or exhibits to distinguished scientists in fields relevant to "aerosol research" and "aviation emissions". I have examined the proceedings and found no evidence that such a presentation was made. Did you, or any other"chemtrail" interest person present at these conferences? If not, why not?

4. What is your personal definition of 'chemtrails"?

5. What are ordinary contrails, how are they formed, and what determines whether they persist, or not?

6. In what way are alleged "chemtrails" different from ordinary contrails?

7.What is the best scientific proof available that "chemtrails" are anything other than ordinary contrails?

8.Could you please direct our attention to a photo of an
archetypical "chemtrail", one which you would attribute to "geoengineering"?

9. William Thomas, Brian Holmes, and Gabriel Stetter have stated the following: The formation of condensation trails requires temperatures lower than about minus 76 F. Is that statement correct, and if not, do you personally consider them to be accurate sources of information?
---------------------------
IF SHE IS A REAL "ACTIVIST", SHE WILL ANSWER. IF SHE DOES NOT SHE IS REVEALED AS A FAKE.

[gaiacomm]

Ok Wayne, I will wait and watch. But after the end of next month we all will have to be serious because the history clock will start.

[halva]

Crying wolf again Raynolds/Ben Hur.

[jayreynolds]

Wayne, give Deborah a chance to answer.
If she's able to be a real activist, that is.......


Yes, Deborah, the world goes on indeed.
Yes, Deborah, the time clock is stil ticking.

Yes, Deborah, for years now you've been claiming to be a "chemtrail activist".

I SAY NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH

If you were truly an activist, and not just another con-(wo)man, you would not hesitate to factually answer these basic questions which would define the factual basis supporting your rationale for said "activism".

NOW IS YOUR CHANCE, DEBORAH, TO BE A BIG GIRL.
WILL YOU STAND FOR YOUR CONVICTIONS, OR WILL YOU SIMPLY RUN AWAY AND HIDE YET AGAIN AS YOU HAVE SO MANY TIMES BEFORE?

NOW ANSWER THE QUESTIONS!===>>


1.Do you have a background in a technical field? If not, whom do you consider to have such a background who would state the case for "chemtrails" being a case of "geoengineering"? If no one with such a background exists after five years of interest(enough time for a baccalaureate degree to be earned) why not?

2.Which resource do you depend upon for accurate, sound scientific informaton about "chemtrails"? If none can be relied upon, why not?

3.Several meetings were held this past year which were unparalleled opportunities for you to present papers or exhibits to distinguished scientists in fields relevant to "aerosol research" and "aviation emissions". I have examined the proceedings and found no evidence that such a presentation was made. Did you, or any other"chemtrail" interest person present at these conferences? If not, why not?

4. What is your personal definition of 'chemtrails"?

5. What are ordinary contrails, how are they formed, and what determines whether they persist, or not?

6. In what way are alleged "chemtrails" different from ordinary contrails?

7.What is the best scientific proof available that "chemtrails" are anything other than ordinary contrails?

8.Could you please direct our attention to a photo of an
archetypical "chemtrail", one which you would attribute to "geoengineering"?

9. William Thomas, Brian Holmes, and Gabriel Stetter have stated the following: The formation of condensation trails requires temperatures lower than about minus 76 F. Is that statement correct, and if not, do you personally consider them to be accurate sources of information?
---------------------------
IF SHE IS A REAL "ACTIVIST", SHE WILL ANSWER. IF SHE DOES NOT SHE IS REVEALED AS A FAKE.

[halva]

Quote:

"The genuinely grave situation of the planet should not become an excuse for manipulative danger-mongering and for acceptance of classification of climatic change as a 'national security' question, if this is going to mean a continuation of the dishonesty and lack of transparency with which the Pentagon has so far operated on this question, and characteristically operates on all questions.

It is time for there to be exposure, and honest public debate, about what is ALREADY being done by the proponents of geoengineering 'solutions'."

But this debate is being conducted away from the influence of individuals whose ONLY concern is to sow distrust and misunderstanding between the parties to the debate, i.e. climate scientists on the one hand and chemtrail activists on the other, who has no loyalty to either side, regularly betraying their confidences and making them look ridiculous (e.g. Dr. Sarah Cornell). And who erroneously thinks he has a god-given right to participate in each and every discussion of whether 'chemtrails' are a reality, even if his record is one of showing nothing but contempt for all other participants in the debate.

[jayreynolds]

Quote:
It is time for there to be exposure, and honest public debate, about what is ALREADY being done by the proponents of geoengineering 'solutions'.".

Wayne, it is dishonest to say you wanted "exposure, and honest public debate", but then try to exclude the public, and refuse to debate honestly.
You know that, everyone can see that.
And once tasting defeat in debate, you know that you don't want a public debate, anymore.
You got your dishonest wish.
There is no public debate, it is over.
In fact, there is no debate at all, anymore,
because you lost and gave up in defeat!


You got exposure, however, which you didn't really want, not really, did you?.
You got so damn much exposure it blew your socks off.
Now you're finished with exposure, you want to scurry under a rock like an insect.
You lost.
The truth has prevailed.
End of story.

[halva]

Wayne, it is dishonest to say you wanted "exposure, and honest public debate", but then try to exclude the public, and refuse to debate honestly.
You know that, everyone can see that.
And once tasting defeat in debate, you know that you don't want a public debate, anymore.
You got your dishonest wish.
There is no public debate, it is over.
In fact, there is no debate at all, anymore,
because you lost and gave up in defeat!

You got exposure, however, which you didn't really want, not really, did you?.
You got so damn much exposure it blew your socks off.
Now you're finished with exposure, you want to scurry under a rock like an insect.
You lost.
The truth has prevailed.
End of story.

When I decided to initiate this thread, the debate that I was seeking -logically - was the debate that flowed from the orientation of Arianna Huffington's original article. It was a debate with people who [like Arianna herself probably] do not need to be convinced of the reality of anthropogenic climate change but who are/were perhaps insufficiently alert
i) to the possibility of politically motivated danger-mongering in the so-called 'Pentagon report' on climate change
ii) to the desire of people in and around the 'national security' establishment to colonise the climate change issue
iii) to the whole spectrum of 'geoengineering' -type solutions that have been advocated (and I contend are also practised) in response to climate change.

You have never been interested in discussing these issues COMPREHENSIVELY from the starting point of recognition of anthropogenic climate change. You do not acknowledge the reality of anthropogenic climate change.

( Even President Bush, as I hear, has had to acknowledge that anthropogenic climate change is a fact!!)

My view from the outset has been that I AM UNDER NO OBLIGATION to discuss climate change and/or geoengineering with a person who - like you - fails to recognize the reality of anthropogenic climate change. If you object to this, bear in mind that the Tyndall Centre similarly claims that its policy is not to hold one-to-one discussions with anthropogenic climate change sceptics.

If you disapprove of me, you must also disapprove of them.

It is true that the Tyndall Centre's past practice in relation to you shows that it has not always had the steadiness and courage to adhere to its own declared policy.

That is not surprising, because scientists are frequently not shrewd politically. They can be disoriented by opponents who through their political skills and other more disreputable forms of pressure can prevent scientists from acting effectually in defence of the policies they subjectively favour.

This is one reason for the existence of activist 'observatories' and monitoring networks.

Despite my persistent conviction that you should be thrown off this forum, finally, because I was not able to throw you off, after extracting a concession from you that you would answer some questions I put to you, I agreed to answer the questions you put to me. It turned out that all of our answers to each other's questions were of a similar low quality, reflecting contempt for the questioner.

But we have both now agreed that the questions have been answered. We have appropriately thanked each other for answering. THE QUESTION/ANSWER ISSUE IS NOW CLOSED.

Your tactic since the closing of the questions and answers has been to reopen debate on a number of irrelevancies such as the nature of the Greek people or of the Olympic Games, and then, having got your leg in the door that way, proceeded to steer discussion back to the QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.

I was familiar with you and your methods before you invaded the debate on this thread. This of course is why my position has always been that you are to be excluded from the discussion.

You must be excluded so that the issue of the reality or otherwise of chemtrails can be ironed out - without distractions - among people recognizing the reality of anthropogenic climate change.

After that it will be time to invite you to join the debate again to see if, as you claim, you really will be against 'chemtrails' if they are proved to be a reality.

[gaiacomm]

I think that you Wayne and you JR should recieve a gold medal for this thread! Maybe the greeks have a spare one!

[jayreynolds]

Wayne, you are indeed beatinga dead horse by trying to recant and dissemble again with some phony rationalizations.

You said, "It is time for there to be exposure, and honest public debate, about what is ALREADY being done by the proponents of geoengineering 'solutions'.".


Honest public debate and exposure doesn't exclude anyone, or anybody from the debate, or exempt anyone from exposure.

You aren't some sort of potentate who can silence anyone he wants to, buddy, much as you wish it to be true it's not.

You are just a pitiful excuse for a man who got what he wanted, but changed his mind when the going got tough.

You are a debased coward, an intellectual midget, and an effete snob who, if he can't get his way, wants to ban-bully anyone who stands against him. You've tried it at every forum where I've challenged you so far, and don't try to deny it.

Lastly, at this forum, you have found yourself outside the confines of your cultic circle of friends, and are powerless to take the cowards way out and have me banned simply for speaking out against you. Simply by my presence alone here, I have been able to demonstrate the complete and total poverty of your "chemtrails" hoax.

And so, once again, you are defeated, and now your girlfriend Deborah is also found lacking, unable to answer even basic questions about ordinary contrails, or even her precious "chemtrails". She is, of course, able to anser the questions just as well as you are, but those answers would expose her, Wayne Hall, and all their hoax buddies for what they really are. Deborah, too, tried to silence me by persuading a web host to delete my website. She got what she wanted, for awhile. Like Hydra, however, I answered her challenge and built three websites to replace the one which was lost! Some victory, eh, Debbie? Sort of spoiled your fun, eh?

They are liars first and foremost, liars to the public at large, likely private liars to each other, and perhaps most importantly, they lie to themselves. For to tell yourself a lie is to live a lie, a sad, sad, way to live one's life. It'sa dead-end to beat all dead-ends because one lie begets another, they can't all be kept straight, and the lies weigh heavily on one's conscience.

DON'T THEY WAYNE, DEBORAH??

Yes, it all boils down to lies.
Wayne lied when he said he wanted honest exposure and public debate.
He never wanted any such thing.

Deborah lied when she said she wanted the truth.
What she has always wanted was to have her lies turn into truth, which can never happen.

Be careful, you two, when you lie about what you really want.

Sometimes you get what you ask for!

[halva]

Honest public debate and exposure doesn't exclude anyone, or anybody from the debate, or exempt anyone from exposure.


Tell this to whoever is responsible for the state of the skies over wide swathes of this planet and simultaneously so concerned that the public at large should deny the evidence of its senses. 'The public' is excluded from the debate about what is really happening up there. All that you are is a subsidiary petty agent of censorship whose task is to make sure that nobody but nobody escapes to tell the tale.

Well, you are failing, and will fail more comprehensively.



You aren't some sort of potentate who can silence anyone he wants to, buddy, much as you wish it to be true it's not.


Obviously I am not, otherwise you would have been kicked out of here as you have been kicked out of everywhere else where people actually care about this subject.

Everything else you say in your posting is just personal abuse and undocumented assertion, Raynolds, absolutely lacking in idea content.



Wayne, for the first time in a long while, I'm speechless and at a loss for words.


You have acknowledged that you have nothing more to say, Raynolds. Why do you keep forgetting what, in all due honesty, you realise.

[jayreynolds]

Wayne, all your lies must have addled your brain.
You are contradicting yourself again.
First you said:

It is time for there to be exposure, and honest public debate, about what is ALREADY being done by the proponents of geoengineering 'solutions'.".

Then, when I started to debate you, you said:

"Anyone familiar with the Chemtrails Central Forum, of which I was a member of the Council when such a Council existed), will know that I have advocated banning from discussion groups any individual persistently denying that aerosol spraying from aircraft (or at least some kind of activity of aircraft that results in unprecedented clouding of skies necessitating public discussion of the phenomenon) is occurring. And any individual showing by irony or innuendo that such is his belief or claimed belief."

And then you said:

"'The public' is excluded from the debate about what is really happening up there. All that you are is a subsidiary petty agent of censorship whose task is to make sure that nobody but nobody escapes to tell the tale."


Wayne, you can't
1. Invite the public to a debate,
then
2. Advocate banning, "any individual persistently denying that aerosol spraying from aircraft is occurring,"
then
3. Complain that I am a "subsidiary agent of censorship excluding the public" from debate!.

YOU HAVE GONE MAD, WAYNE. THIS IS THE RESULT OF LIVING A LIE, FOLKS, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A LIAR TELLS TOO MANY LIES. HE GETS THEM MIXED UP AND FORGETS THEM, THEN CONTRADICTS HIMSELF.

[halva]

Yes, I do indeed support banning of such views from 'chemtrail' forums.

And I support the banning of climate change sceptics from threads like this thread at Arianna's forum.

Imagine a debate on the subject of whether cars could run as efficiently on hydrogen as they could on gasoline. What would you do with a person whose participation in the debate centred on the assertion that no such thing as cars existed? Or that there was no such thing as hydrogen or gasoline?

Freedom of association is a more basic right than freedom of speech.

[jayreynolds]

Imagine a debate on the subject of whether cars could run as efficiently on hydrogen as they could on gasoline. What would you do with a person whose participation in the debate centred on the assertion that no such thing as cars existed? Or that there was no such thing as hydrogen or gasoline?

Well, Wayne, if a basic premise is challenged in debate, the proponent is obligated to defend his premise. If I were challenged to produce proof of the existence of cars, I could provide photos, historical and modern, I could demonstrate how thousands of people are employed in the industry, show the annual reports of Ford, Chrysler, etc,.

If cars really existed, I could blow such challenges off the page easier than pie.

You, on the other hand, when challenged to provide the best scientific proof available for "chemtrails", said,

"That question cannot be answered".

HOW STUPID IS THAT, WAYNE?

Now, if I was then asked in debate for proof that hydrogen or gasoline existed, I could show them a periodic table or experimentation that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that hydrogen exists. I could also show the process by which crude oil is refined to produce gasoline, show the annual production of gasoline by Exxon/mobil, the profits made from the sale, even show photos of a gas station selling gasoline.

I could simply blow away with overwhelming proof any contention that gasoline or hydrogen didn't exist.

That's the way it is in debate, Wayne, if challenged, you must respond, or else you lose!

YOU ARE THE LOSER, WAYNE, BECAUSE WHEN CHALLENGED YOU COULDN'T EVEN ANSWER BASIC QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR PREMISE. FACE IT, WAYNE, YOU WENT TO WAR WITH AN EMPTY GUN, AND GOT BLOWN AWAY.

THAT'S THE WAY IT IS, THE WAY IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN, AND THE WAY IT WILL ALWAYS BE WHEN YOU TRY TO LIVE A LIE, WAYNE.

GET USED TO IT.
GET OVER IT.
GET OUT OF IT.
END THE HOAX.

[halva]

If I want to discuss whether hydrogen is as efficient a fuel as gasoline, I am not going to get into a discussion with any f....cker who wants to debate whether cars exist, gasoline exists or hydrogen exists, even if I have irrefutable arguments that they all exist.

If I possibly can I am going to remove the source of distraction.

You like telling me I "can't" answer questions.

You "could not" answer the following question I asked you:

Why, since - as you say - climate scientists would not believe 'chemmies' anyway, do you constantly supervise them so that they don't fall for 'the hoax'?

YOU "COULD NOT" ANSWER THIS QUESTION.

I thanked you, of course, for the answer you DID give. You said that you engaged in this kind of behaviour because you felt like it and because I could not stop you.

Just just as you thanked me for similarly valuable answers I gave you.



Raynolds, face it, when a state of war exists between two individuals or two sides, NOBODY IS OBLIGED TO DO ANYTHING, ANSWER ANYTHING OR SAY ANYTHING.

YOU SHOWED YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THIS IN THE ANSWER YOU GAVE TO MY QUESTION.

I ANSWER YOU IN THE SAME SPIRIT.

WHY ARE YOU SUCH A HYPOCRITE THAT YOU WANT TO PRETEND THE RULES OF DEMOCRACY or of scholarly debate APPLY BETWEEN THE TWO SIDES OF A WAR?

ANSWER THIS PLEASE, OR ELSE YOU WILL HAVE SHOWN THAT THERE IS YET ANOTHER QUESTION YOU "CAN'T" ANSWER.

[gaiacomm]

Sticks and Stones!

[jayreynolds]

You "could not" answer the following question I asked you:
Why, since - as you say - climate scientists would not believe 'chemmies' anyway, do you constantly supervise them so that they don't fall for 'the hoax'?
YOU "COULD NOT" ANSWER THIS QUESTION.
I thanked you, of course, for the answer you DID give. You said that you engaged in this kind of behaviour because you felt like it and because I could not stop you.
Just just as you thanked me for similarly valuable answers I gave you.

Raynolds, face it, when a state of war exists between two individuals or two sides, NOBODY IS OBLIGED TO DO ANYTHING, ANSWER ANYTHING OR SAY ANYTHING. YOU SHOWED YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THIS IN THE ANSWER YOU GAVE TO MY QUESTION.
I ANSWER YOU IN THE SAME SPIRIT.
WHY ARE YOU SUCH A HYPOCRITE THAT YOU WANT TO PRETEND THE RULES OF DEMOCRACY or of scholarly debate APPLY BETWEEN THE TWO SIDES OF A WAR?
ANSWER THIS PLEASE, OR ELSE YOU WILL HAVE SHOWN THAT THERE IS YET ANOTHER QUESTION YOU "CAN'T" ANSWER.

Wayne, all this digression does nothing to defend your premise. You challenged the public at large to a debate.


"It is time for there to be exposure, and honest public debate, about what is ALREADY being done by the proponents of geoengineering 'solutions'."

The same day, but at another messageboard, you made another public invitation to this thread:

I have started a thread at Arianna Huffington's forum entitled: 'It's not nice to fool with Mother Nature" -
http://www.ariannaonline.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=56903#56903
Please join in.

These are public records establishing beyond a shadow of a doubt that you invited the public at large to debate, not just here, but at three other messageboards. When you saw that I had entered the debate and that you had no defense against my arguments, THEN you began to call for my banning, just like any fascist hypocrite would do. That is what you revealed yourself top be.

Debate IS verbal warfare. Debate is a battle of wits and words as much as war is a battle of heads and hands. In debate, the side which prevails is the side which has ammunition, consisting of facts which support his side of the proposition. The weapons used are words, which control and direct the presentation of the facts.. You came to debate with no facts whatsoever, thus you entered into verbal warfare with an unloaded weapon. It's that simple, Wayne.

You never put up a defense for your proposition, you lost the debate by default.

All the rest has been amusement, for me, that is......you've been treated to a good ol'fashioned ass-whuppin, and everybody else has got a little entertainment!

[halva]

What I invited was honest public debate.

Your input is not honest. It systematically ignores the whole political dimension of this question, in particular the role of public agencies such as the IPCC. It is aligned with their dishonesty.

If I were the moderator of this forum I would not have to prove your dishonesty in order to ban you. I could ban you because I wanted to and I would be entitled to do so on the basis of the principle of freedom of association.

But the moderators here are apparently not so very interested in the subjects we have been "discussing". Doubtless they are interested in climate change. But they obviously have a 'hands off' attitude in relation to 'chemtrails'/geoengineering.

Thus they tolerate your presence.

I don't believe that the way to win the political struggle with you is to debate with you on your terms on this thread. That is why I have tried to avoid doing so, without going away and leaving you to post whatever you like here.

The point is to address the wider phenomenon of disinformation and censorship of which you are merely one little representative. In doing this I focus on political players who unlike you recognize the reality of anthropogenic climate change and purport to be concerned about it.

The most important priority is to prevent you from intervening in discussions we have with such people, where you play a spoiling role, trying to play each side against the other.

I am pleased at the progress we have made on that front.

[jayreynolds]

What I invited was honest public debate.
Your input is not honest. It systematically ignores the whole political dimension of this question, in particular the role of public agencies such as the IPCC. It is aligned with their dishonesty..

Ok, let's debate.
You say the IPCC is dishonest "in this question".

Phrase your contention as a debateable proposition, and let's debate!

Let's have honest debate about that, Wayne.

I am willing to engage in such a debate.

Let's roll. Bring it on.


I don't believe that the way to win the political struggle with you is to debate with you on your terms on this thread. That is why I have tried to avoid doing so, without going away and leaving you to post whatever you like here.

Wayne, the debate has already happened. You failed to present any proof whatsoever for your proposition. You lost. It's that simple. The balance of the other 250 pages have been devoted to me giving you more opportunities to debate, and you failing to do so over and over again.


The point is to address the wider phenomenon of disinformation and censorship of which you are merely one little representative.

Ah, the hypocrisy! Wayne now is trying to spin his call for my banning into me trying to censor him.

WHERE'S THE LOGIC IN THAT, WAYNE??


I focus on political players who unlike you recognize the reality of anthropogenic climate change and purport to be concerned about it.
The most important priority is to prevent you from intervening in discussions we have with such people, where you play a spoiling role, trying to play each side against the other.
I am pleased at the progress we have made on that front.

Well Wayne, you had better get on with it. here we are six months on, and every time you have laid claim to have inculcated your hoax into a person with credibility, that person has ended up coming out against you. This was the case with Drs. Christos Zerefos, Nikos Katsaros, and Sarah Cornell, and will be the case whether I play any role at all. Still, if you wish to try, likely you will find the truth again and again, which is that what your people see are ordinary contrails.

Either way, debating me publicly, or others privately, the result is always the same. About the only difference is that by making your tries in private, you avoid public humiliation when you get a personal debunking. Frustrating, isn't it?

[halva]

Ok, let's debate.
You say the IPCC is dishonest "in this question".

Phrase your contention as a debateable proposition, and let's debate!


I have already told you that I am not going to debate anything of substance with you here.

I have other priorities, and more worthwhile ways of investing my time.



Ah, the hypocrisy! Wayne now is trying to spin his call for my banning into me trying to censor him.

WHERE'S THE LOGIC IN THAT, WAYNE??


The logic is political. There are perfectly proper reasons for anybody concerned about chemtrails to deny you a platform, and turn off your microphone, wherever possible. You have finally admitted that there is a war going on, and you (J. Raynolds, not America) are at war with 99% of the human race.



Well Wayne, you had better get on with it. here we are six months on, and every time you have laid claim to have inculcated your hoax into a person with credibility, that person has ended up coming out against you. This was the case with Drs. Christos Zerefos, Nikos Katsaros, and Sarah Cornell, and will be the case whether I play any role at all. Still, if you wish to try, likely you will find the truth again and again, which is that what your people see are ordinary contrails.


All this shows is how very much you rely on bluffing the ignorant. And how little you are bothering whether you actually are informed on the matters you would like people to think you know about.

[gaiacomm]

Ping.............................................. .................................................. ....Pong.......................................

[jayreynolds]

You have finally admitted that there is a war going on, and you (J. Raynolds, not America) are at war with 99% of the human race. All this shows is how very much you rely on bluffing the ignorant. And how little you are bothering whether you actually are informed on the matters you would like people to think you know about.

Um, Wayne, weren't you the one who was so ignorant you couldn't answer even basic questions about what you would like people to think you know about?

Wayne, don't try and say that 99% of the world believes in your "chemtrails" hoax. Ask the average man on the street, all they know are contrails.
Get over it.

[halva]

Ask the average man on the street, all they know are contrails.


Ask the average man on the street. Ask the experts. These vain errands you keep sending me on. One could be forgiven for thinking that your aim is to disillusion me (i.e. make me disillusioned).

But in any case, Raynolds, my commendations for your self-restraint in not misusing this thread as a vehicle for sounding off about some of our recent postings at CTC and Megasprayer.

[jayreynolds]

Wayne, sometimes it's better to let children make fools of themselves without correction.
The best lessons are self-taught, in other words.
The city boy so stupid to walk in the pasture looking at clouds deserves to step in manure.
After they realize what they've done, then the more mature voice can chime in........"I told you so!"

"Barium myth", eh?

I told you so.

[halva]

Wayne, sometimes it's better to let children make fools of themselves without correction.
The best lessons are self-taught, in other words.

Precisely the point I was making, Raynolds, when I asked you what you saw as your purpose in intervening here.

I hope, now that you have understood this, that you draw the appropriate and obvious conclusion.

[jayreynolds]

Precisely the point I was making, Raynolds, when I asked you what you saw as your purpose in intervening here.

I hope, now that you have understood this, that you draw the appropriate and obvious conclusion.

Well, Wayne, what I've learned is that over 99% of the members of your cult drop out in less than one year. They learn quickly.

The other 1% may never learn. That is sad, but the willfully ignorant will probably always be with us.

Looks like you got no response at all from chemcultUSA and CTC, and a debunking at mega.

So what lesson does that teach you, Wayne?

Where are your friends now?

[halva]

Raynolds, my orientation has always been Eurocentric.

[jayreynolds]

Raynolds, my orientation has always been Eurocentric.

Yeah, I am getting a kick out of seeing the euro-watermelons getting all smashed up by your hoax.

Think of it, Greenpeace losing monied backers, IPCC being accused of deceit, 'global warming' activists discrediting themselves by association with a hoax.
What more could an oil company shill wish for?

[halva]

Yeah, I am getting a kick out of seeing the euro-watermelons getting all smashed up by your hoax.

Think of it, Greenpeace losing monied backers, IPCC being accused of deceit, 'global warming' activists discrediting themselves by association with a hoax.
What more could an oil company shill wish for?

You think about it. Phonies on two fronts. Phoney watermelons on one front and phoney patriots-cum-opponents of UN undermining of US national sovereignty on the other.

Pleased to hear of your offer to defend me from oil company shills.

If you were IPCC how would you feel about the prospect of depending on Jay Reynolds to defend your good name?

[jayreynolds]

You think about it. Phonies on two fronts. Phoney watermelons on one front and phoney patriots-cum-opponents of UN undermining of US national sovereignty on the other. Pleased to hear of your offer to defend me from oil company shills.
If you were IPCC how would you feel about the prospect of depending on Jay Reynolds to defend your good name?

Hee-hee-hee.
You haven't a clue about what's happened, have you, Wayne?
'Super contrails' indeed!
Dude, you are finished, you just don't know it yet.
Get back to yerp where you belong, Wayne.
Get over it.

[halva]

You think about it. Phonies on two fronts. Phoney watermelons on one front and phoney patriots-cum-opponents of UN undermining of US national sovereignty on the other.

Pleased to hear of your offer to defend me from oil company shills.

If you were IPCC how would you feel about the prospect of depending on Jay Reynolds to defend your good name?

[halva]

You had better get back to grooming your own constituency, Raynolds.

You are over-extended and you are not going to win bunny points from your own peer group by defending the United Nations and its agencies.

[jayreynolds]

You have delusions of adequacy, Wayne.
Europe is already mine.
Jay

[gaiacomm]

PING..........PONG.............................PIN G..............................

[halva]

You have delusions of adequacy, Wayne.
Europe is already mine.
Jay

And you have delusions that you can win the present war using the weapons (and the politics) of the last.

But I do acknowledge that using the word 'mine' rather than 'ours' you show awareness that most Americans are not reliably with you, whatever the result of the coming presidential 'election'.

[halva]

Are you happy to keep up this nose-thumbing forever, Raynolds?

Not getting bored?

[jayreynolds]

Are you happy to keep up this nose-thumbing forever, Raynolds?
Not getting bored?
Wayne, I'm getting a crick in my neck from looking backwards as I leave you in my dust,
but bored?
Nope.
I've got a life, remember?

[halva]

Having a life seems to me a reason for getting bored, not for not getting bored.

However, unlike the show you were trying to provoke before on your own terms, this kind of skirmishing is no more difficult or time-consuming for me than it is for you.

[jayreynolds]

Having a life seems to me a reason for getting bored, not for not getting bored.
However, unlike the show you were trying to provoke before on your own terms, this kind of skirmishing is no more difficult or time-consuming for me than it is for you.

Maybe your life bores you, Wayne. Is that part of the reason you entered the hoax?
Maybe being a closet-totalitarian in the "direct democracy" movement got boring for you?

I've had chemmies beg me to stop before, saying:
"Please just leave us alone and let us have our fun."

That's definitely the way it is with the 'cloud-buster' faction of your cult. The majority of that crowd is really just interested in a role-playing game where they pose as "etheric freedom
fighters" battling demonic(but mythical) alien reptilian beasties and cell phone 'death-ray towers'. For the most part, I do just leave them alone. The worst actors there are the cynical manipulators who aren't even interested in the fun aspects of such play-acting, the profiteers like Don Croft &Co. I keep close enough tabs on them, but among rational people, that whole crowd discredits itself. They are also useful in debate, because by association with the hoax, they discredit you also.

The funny part is, while they discredit you, you discredit people like Deborah Stark(aka 'footsoldier'), who would like to be rid of the albatross "chemtrails" hoax which dogs her efforts to become legitimate.

Funny, the way that works out.

[halva]

The funny part is, while they discredit you, you discredit people like Deborah Stark(aka 'footsoldier'), who would like to be rid of the albatross "chemtrails" hoax which dogs her efforts to become legitimate.


What you attempt to do with footsoldier is what the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, in the papers it delivered last January at the Tyndall Centre's conference, attempts to do with the 'Third World', whose environmental spokesman it has appointed itself, 'for its own good'. Of course there is an additional psychopathic element in the Raynolds/footsoldier case, on which a clinical psychiatrist might be better qualified to comment than me.

As far as the cloudbusters are concerned, the Don Croft faction is only one element in that movement, whose uncontrolled activities are damaging the environment of the planet like a swarm of mini-HAARPs, complementing the damage wrought by their larger-scale 'official' counterparts. Like the big cloudbusters, the little cloudbusters are unpoliced because officialdom considers their activities as ridiculous and perhaps 'non-existent' as that of the 'professionals' doing the same thing (i.e. environmental modification) on a larger scale and using taxpayers' money.

You merely condemn yourself further by bringing in this aspect of the story. Your stance vis a vis the cloudbusters is as full of cr..p as everything else you do and say. You just want to make a noise about them, or drop their names for some other demagogic purpose. You are not the slightest bit interested in participating in any attempt to bring their activities under rational public scrutiny.

[jayreynolds]

As far as the cloudbusters are concerned, the Don Croft faction is only one element in that movement, whose uncontrolled activities are damaging the environment of the planet like a swarm of mini-HAARPs, complementing the damage wrought by their larger-scale 'official' counterparts. Like the big cloudbusters, the little cloudbusters are unpoliced because officialdom considers their activities as ridiculous and perhaps 'non-existent' as that of the 'professionals' doing the same thing (i.e. environmental modification) on a larger scale and using taxpayers' money.

Wayne Hall believes that "cloudbusters" "are damaging the environment of the planet"!
Can I quote you on that, Wayne?
Nevermind, I'll quote whatever I damn well please.

What a joke. Here is the "cloudbuster clique" in action, LOL:
http://www.byerleyart.com/cbuster.gif

[gaiacomm]

Ping (Wayne) Pong (JR)

Ping................................Pong.......... .........................ping..................... .......pong........................

[halva]

The purpose of mentioning names, when saying that someone is behaving wrongly, is that one is proposing to try to do something about the activity of the named person. 'Doing something' about anything is not the motive for my remaining on this thread, so the person to whom the anti-environmental activities are attributed below will just be known as X.

WH

(This file was originally presented on the KeelyNet BBS as CLOUDBST.ASC on
02/24/96 courtesy of Chuck Henderson.)

Our global ecology already has more than enough problems from pollution,
deforestation and faulty land management without compounding sensitive
ecosystems through irresponsible and indiscriminate redirection of moisture
by using cloudbuster principles.

Some things are better left alone at the current stage of human evolution
and responsible people will understand and support this position.
-------------------------

In 1989, X, then living in the San Francisco Bay area, conducted a
series of cloudbusting operations in the Arizona desert. As recounted in
his article in "The Journal of Orgonomy", he first visited Arizona in
March, two months before the rainy season starts, and within 3 days had
produced rain.

He subsequently visited Arizona one weekend each month during the 5-month
rainy season and brought rain each time for a seasonal total of 5 times the
normal rainfall for the area in which he was working.

Now, in any area with a well-defined wet season and dry season, all native
plant and animal species are adapted to the normal dry season and need it.

Small burrowing mammals such as pocket mice, kangaroo rats, gophers, etc.
give birth underground in the dry season; if it rains unexpectedly at the
wrong time of year, the burrows flood and the infants drown; reptiles such
as snakes, lizards, the desert tortoise, which is on the endangered species
list, the gila monster, found only in Arizona, lay their eggs in the dry
season under a thin coat of sand, just enough to hide them but allow the
sun to incubate them.

If it rains out of season, the sand is washed away and they lose a clutch
of eggs. These small mammals and reptiles are the base of the food chain
and if their population crashes so will that of the owls, coyotes, badgers,
and other predators that depend on them.

X produces rain on an artificial
schedule only to create impressive charts and graphs, ignoring the
catastrophic effects of 5 times normal rainfall on all plant and animal
species.

In more recent years X has undertaken two trips to Namibia to break
droughts there with a cloudbuster. He also trained local operators and left
equipment with them so that Namibia now has a permanent drought-abatement
program in place. Under normal conditions -- normal for the last 5-6000
years, that is -- Southern Africa has a regular cycle of 3 or 4 good years
followed by a drought year.

In the dry years, the prevailing winds pick up millions of tons of dust and
carry it out over the ocean. About half of it falls into the ocean where it
provides silica and phosphates -- essential nutrients -- to the
phytoplankton which are the base of the marine ecosystem food chain.

So in years when Southern Africa has droughts, life in the South Atlantic
flourishes and in years Southern Africa has good rains, the South Atlantic
marine life dies back. The remainder of the dust is carried over to Brazil,
where it is the sole source of trace elements not found in Brazilian soils
which are essential nutrients for many tropical rainforest plant species.

Like the sea-life, the Brazilian rainforest therefore flourishes in years
when Namibia has a drought and declines in years when Namibia has plenty of
rain. By establishing a permanent drought abatement facility in Namibia,
X has contributed to irreparable harm to the global environment. He
simply doesn't know -- or care -- anything about ecology.

In another case of ecological ignorance and irresponsibility, he reports in
one of his publications that to make up a water deficit during a recent
series of dry years in California, he extended the rainy season by a month
one year and 6 weeks another year.

I have spoken to a biologist at the Point Reyes Bird Observatory who tells
me that in both years in question they lost a significant percentage of
baby birds due to inclement weather during the normally dry nesting season.

Baby birds get pneumonia in wet weather. Incidentally, some of the birds
affected were on the endangered species list.

X has also done cloudbusting operations in the Middle East. I have
documentation in my files showing numerous deaths of people in the region
as a result of catastrophic weather during this period.

The cloudbuster was also used to prevent fire in another way besides increasing rainfall:
it was used to decrease the number of lightning strikes in the area. Now,
aside from its role in creating useful and necessary fires, lightning fixes
atmospheric nitrogen into compounds plants can utilize.

For plant species that lack a symbiotic nitrogen-fixing bacteria on their
roots, including many temperate-zone forest trees, lightning plays an
essential role as a source of fertilizer, so this application of the
cloudbuster, far from benefiting the environment, amounts to mere vandalism
of Oregon's forests.

Artifically increasing rainfall to the point of creating "lush pastures"
will doom many of them to extinction. The increase in pasturage of the type
that will support domestic cattle will result in the exploitation for
cattle grazing of habitat of many native life-forms now protected by the
fact that they live in regions too dry for humans to exploit.

It should be noted that although there are no laws specifically regulating
cloudbusting, The National Environmental Policy Act requires that any
project that will affect the environment prepare a environmental impact
study and have a means -- such as public hearings -- by which members of
the public can voice objections and exercise some input into decisions that
can affect their lives.

The Endangered Species Act prohibits any project that would destroy members
of a listed species or their habitat. And The Wilderness Act prohibits any
action that would modify the natural conditions of a designated wilderness
area, which in the Western United States would be impossible to avoid,
given the extent of the area covered by a typical cloudbusting operation.

The authorities, of course, make no effort to enforce such laws in the case
of cloudbusting because they regard it as ineffective. It is extremely
hypocritical to take advantage of their disbelief to violate laws with
impunity while simultaneously denouncing them for their refusal to believe
in the cloudbuster's effectiveness. In spite of the failure of the
environmental protection to enforce the laws, those laws are reasonable and
justified for the protection of the environment and a responsible person
who cares about the Earth and its creatures would voluntarily comply.

[jayreynolds]

Another anonymous "Mr-X", making undocumented claims, in a 10 year old hoax document.
Hmmm, reminds me of Jim Phelps, DOE whistleblower, inventor of haarp, air pharmacology, bible prophet of the end times message of Revelations, and savior of the modern world..
You bought into his hoax for a full year, till your chem-cult buddies got tired of being discredited by his lunatic claims.
Just how deep are you into this "cloudbuster" crap, Wayne?
When will you ever learn?

[halva]

X is not making claims. Claims are being made about X.

But small-time cloudbusters hide under the shadow of the big-time cloudbusters, who don't exist either, so how can the public be informed of what any of them are doing?

You are not going to say anything, Raynolds, because drawing public attention to the little ones draws public attention to the big ones too. And it is your job or personal mission to prevent that.

The only people you mention cloudbusters to are 'chemmies', for purposes of ridicule. Ha ha ha.

By the way, this dreaded Mr. X. would agree with you that chemtrails don't exist. So to be true to your credo you should be supporting him.

As I said, not all cloudbusters are of the Don Croft school.

[halva]

This is what "X" says to Don Croft on the use of 'cloudbusters' to disperse chemtrails:

"Surely, jet fuel has nasty stuff in it, but that's a stretch from claiming the US Government is using this method to deliberately poison its citizens, as some of the "chemtrail" advocates claim. Also, even if jet fuel has toxic stuff in it, dissipating the water-vapor component of that contrail won't eliminate any chemical toxins -- same with any weather-modification chemicals. They would simply drift towards the ground as tiny particulates."

[gaiacomm]

Ping (Wayne) Pong (JR)

Ping................................Pong.......... .........................ping..................... .......pong........................


PING.....................PONG>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>;

[jayreynolds]

Hey, wayne. I have had a look at the Greman chemmie site you are touting:
http://www.chemtrails-info.de/

Some good material there for debunking.
I always like to check these kook site's disclaimers, this one's a doozie, looks like they take no responsibility for anything at all. Funny, that:
(machine translation)

Contents of the on-line offer
The homepage operator does not?rnimmt any Gew? f?die Aktualit? Correctness, Vollst?igkeit or Qualit?der made available information and left on other sides.
Haftungsanspr?e against the publisher of the homepage and/or Beitr? of authors therein, who kind idealistic material on Sch?n or refer, which were caused by the use or Nichtnutzung of the dargebotenen information and/or by the use of incorrect and unvollst?iger information, are grunds?lich impossible, if on the part of the publisher and/or author no as can be prove vors?liches or roughly fahrl?iges being to blame for is present.
All contents and/or offers are not-binding and noncommittal. The publisher and/or the authors reserves themselves ausdr?lich to stop parts of the sides or the entire offer without separate Ank?igung too ver?ern to erg?en to l?hen or the Ver?entlichung occasionally or endg?ig.




References and left
With direct or indirect references to strange web page ("hyper+on the left of"), which au?rhalb the area of responsibility of the homepage publisher and/or author lie, a w?e adhesion obligation ausschlie?ich in the case into strength step, in that the homepage publisher and/or author of the contents of knowledge has and it it technically m?ich and reasonable w?, to prevent the use in the case of illegal contents.
The homepage publisher and/or respective author of an article erkl? hereby ausdr?lich that at the time of the link setting no illegal contents on the sides which can be linked were recognizable. On the current and zuk?tige organization, contents or the authority of the gelinkten/verkn?ten sides the homepage publisher and/or author does not have any influence. Therefore it dissociates itself hereby ausdr?lich from all contents of all linked /verkn?ten sides, which were ver?ert after the link setting. This statement applies f?alle within the own InterNet offer set left and references as well as f? Fremdeintr? in link listings furnished by the author, mailing lists and in all other forms of data bases, on whose contents external write accesses are m?ich. F?illegale, incorrect or unvollst?ige contents and f?Sch?n, which develop from the use or Nichtnutzung kind of such of dargebotener information, clings in particular alone the offerer of the side, to which one referred, that, which refers?r left to the respective Ver?entlichung only.




Author and characteristic right
The homepage operator and/or Autor(en) is anxious, in all publications copyrights of the used texts, Textausz? or diagrams to consider to use of it provided diagrams and texts or on license-free diagrams and texts zur?zugreifen.
All and if necessary through third gesch?ten mark and registered trade marks specified within the InterNet offer are subject uneingeschr?t to the regulations of the g?igen in each case characteristic right and the possession rights of the respective registered Eigent?r. However due to blo?n the denomination the conclusion is not to be drawn that brand names are not gesch?t by rights third!
The copyright f?ver?entlichte, objects provided by the author remains alone with the author of the sides. A Vervielf?igung or a use of such texts or diagrams in other electronic or printed publications is not permitted without ausdr?liche agreement of the author.


Data security
If within the InterNet offer the M?ichkeit exists for the input of pers?icher or gesch?licher data (email addresses, name, addresses), then giving up these data takes place on the part of the user on ausdr?lich freiwilliger basis. The recourse to and payment of all offered services are permitted - so far technically m?ich and reasonable - also without indication of such data and/or under indication of anonymizated data or an alias.
The use in the context of the imprint, the purchase order form or comparable instructions ver?entlichten contact contacts such as postal addresses, telephone and fax numbers as well as email addresses through third to?ersendung of not ausdr?lich not requested information is not permitted. Legal steps against the senders of so-called Spam Mails with Verst?en against this prohibition are ausdr?lich reserved.



Legal force of this non-liability

This non-liability is to be regarded as part of the InterNet offer, from which to this side one referred. If parts or individual formulations of this text of the valid legal situation should not correspond, to no more or not vollst?ig, the?igen parts of the document remain in their contents and its G?igkeit of it unber?t.

[halva]

If you want to argue with me, as opposed to the Germans [if you can get them to talk to you, in any language, good luck to you] I would prefer to continue the exchange on the cloudbusters, since you introduced the subject.

What's the matter? Don't you like discussions where the internal contradictions are on your side? A bit of cognitive dissonance is good for one. Conducive to opening of the mind. That's always been your view, hasn't it?

[halva]

Here is some more from Mr. X, the anti-Don-Croft cloudbuster. How about sending him a solidarity message?

"If you consider the wide variety of air pollutants which we are exposed to -- automobile, bus, truck and industrial pollutants, real toxic chemicals in ordinary jet exhaust (they burn kerosene, which leaves a dirty exhaust plume), some cloudseeding chemicals, airborne dusts from desert regions and soots from agricultural burning, along with bioenergetic disturbances which affect cloud growth patterns, as from nuclear power plants and underground nuclear explosions -- it is no surprise that some people are complaining about respiratory problems and dirty air. But all of this has been widely discussed previously, going back many decades, and is nothing new (except that maybe some people are observing it all for the first time!). To claim that ordinary jet contrails are suddenly "toxic chemtrails", and to talk only about the claimed "chemtrails" as the source of all health problems, without reference to all these other well-known and proven sources of air pollution and atmospheric disturbance, strikes me as both evasive and hysterical.

As you may know, I am a long-time observer of clouds and the atmosphere from the viewpoint of Reich's findings. When I was studying classical meteorology in the university back in the 1970s, there was open discussion about the possibility of jet contrails, because of their tendency to spread across the sky under certain meteorological conditions, creating cooler conditions at the ground surface and thereby affecting some kind of long-term climatic cooling (more on this below). Jet contrails, it is well known, can either dissipate rapidly, persist in a narrow band, or persist and spread widely -- it all depends upon the prevailing meteorology, and factually they are composed of ice-crystals just as are cirrus clouds at similar altitudes. The jet engine exhaust has a highly turbulent effect, with the air going from very hot compressed air (in the jet engine) to very expanded and cold air at the rear of the exhaust, allowing ice crystals to form in a rapid manner. The spiral-form movement of air off the wake of wing-tips or rudders creates a similar contrail -- if you have flown in jets, as I have considerably, you'd see these effects from both jet engines and wing tips. To claim the clouds making up contrails are suddenly toxic, beyond ordinary air pollutants, is simply paranoiac.

Also, in years past, there has been plenty of discussion about the effects of air pollution from jet exhaust in urban regions close to airports, and also of the exhaust from the SST, which flies at higher altitudes than most jets, affecting the ozone layer. All of these issues have open discussion within the scientific literature going back many decades. But none of this is mentioned by the "chemtrail" advocates, who seem to have a theological need to fabricate some government conspiracy, that ordinary jet contrails are something far more sinister and threatening. In the worst cases, advocates of chemtrail theory are deeply theological in their belief-system. Some have adopted the views of the old Nazi Guy Ballard, who founded the Saint Germaine cult in the 1940s (the "I Am" movement), and claim evil demons in other dimensions have taken over US government officials, making them deliberately spray toxic chemicals added to ordinary jet fuel, in an effort to poison the rural countryside. Others are followers of David Icke, whose fairy-tale books claim the world has been taken over by "shape-shifting reptilian aliens" from outer space, and those aliens are trying to poison everyone through secret air-spraying programs. It all requires secret government programs with vast armies of demon-possessed or alien-substituted government officials and aviation pilots, ground-crews and petroleum workers who are all in on the big secret, and conspiring to poison their own families and countrymen. (Not surprisingly, some of the same people who have written books about "chemtrails" and demonic-aliens-in-government also claim the CIA or Mossad, or anyone except the Islamic fanatics of Al-Qaeda, were responsible for the terror attacks of 9-11.)

There are also some references to weather-modification experiments, or climate-modification, and I would imagine that in a few places, people have seen cloudseeding aircraft, which do put out a stream of toxic materials -- as do ground-based silver iodide generators. But these are not ubiquitous around the country, and are small aircraft, not the size of commercial airliners. They also fly at lower altitudes close to the base of clouds, and not at typical jet cruising altitudes.

Ordinary jet air pollution can be considerable, so I don't wish to dismiss that aspect, but this has been known about since the first days of the airplane, and is nothing conspiratorial or deliberate. A jet will burn a considerable percentage of its fuel load just taking off and climbing to its cruising altitude, so there is much to be concerned about in the regions close to big airports. But that is not what the chemtrail advocates are claiming. What evidence is there for marked or unmarked jets making deliberate spraying of toxic materials beyond ordinary air pollution? Dig into the claimed evidence, and you'll find nothing except ordinary things being misrepresented as something dramatic and sinister, much like the tale of chicken-little (hit on the head by a bit of falling wood from a tree, chicken-little ran around hysterically claiming the sky was falling, and got the whole chicken-coop into a panic). Reich's observations are also being interjected and misrepresented into this mix by some persons, namely his findings on deadly orgone - dor. But Reich's more central observations from the 1950s that ordinary jet contrails were a sign of a good cloud-forming atmosphere, a healthy condition, are totally ignored by those same persons who abuse his name. In the video you sent, notice that the days with good jet contrails are characterized by clear atmospheric conditions at the lower surface. Good days, not the ones where the lower atmosphere is literally choked up with hazy smog, pollutants and such. I've lived in the SF Bay area many years, and so have some feeling about this. And the idea of cris-crossing jet contrails is nothing dramatic or unusual -- it is expected in urban regions close to international airports, where there is a lot of jet traffic coming and going, heading off this way and that.

None of the chemtrail advocates I know of have much interest in these more ordinary explanations, which do not require a vast government conspiracy, or evil demons or shape-shifting aliens, and possibly the reasons spring from that alone -- a theological belief that only they, with inside knowledge of this conspiracy, are the only truly caring and concerned people, while everyone else is either oblivious to the problem, or a wicked part of the conspiracy themselves. Air pollution, cloudseeding experiments, and atmospheric haze and contaminants are a big problem, and they should demand people's attention -- but this "chemtrail" business is a big evasion, and will only direct people's attention away from the real sources, and guide them towards imaginary problems, and therefore away from the real and effective solutions.

Having said all the above, I am quite willing to completely reverse my position if some really solid and incontrovertible evidence is forthcoming. The few anecdotal reports of unidentified materials falling from the sky are insufficient, as are claims of microorganisms, heavy metals or metallic particles contained in some atmospheric dusts. These reports are so isolated, or often made without clear scientific protocols, or being made anonymously, such that they raise more questions than they answer, and in any case are not so highly unusual to anyone who has, as I have, studied ordinary airborne dusts, air-pollution chemistry and the microbiology of airborne materials. It could be that some people have observed some of the more outrageous cloudseeding experiments of genuinely mad scientists like Edward Teller, who proposed atmospheric spraying of metal dusts to lower solar radiation and oppose global warming, but so far there is nothing solid to validate this idea -- to my knowledge, nobody has demonstrated that such experiments are really going on today, which would be fairly easy to determine by checking with the NOAA offices who monitor weather modification experiments across the USA. This idea remains totally hypothetical. Maybe some experiments being done at a few isolated military bases could escape public disclosure, but not across the nation involving a high percentage of commercial jet aircraft -- unless, of course, one wants to invoke the dramatic unproven hypothesis of evil demons or shape-shifting aliens having taken over the industry and government. Rational logic, and good natural scientific method, demands that we cannot claim to solve one set of unknowns by invoking another equally or even more far-fetched and unproven hypothesis."

[halva]

Raynolds, if you want to work together with X you can have Don Croft's balls for breakfast.

[halva]

Raynolds, get your translation machine to work on this one:

Das Echo der Himmelsspuren

Leser-Reaktionen zu Chemtrails

Selten wurde die raum&zeit-Redaktion von einem solchen Sturm von Anrufen und Leserbriefen όberrollt wie nach dem Artikel „Die Zerstφrung des Himmels“ von Gabriel Stetter (raum&zeit Nr. 127). Dies hat uns gezeigt, dass wir mit dem Artikel wichtige Aufklδrungsarbeit leisten konnten, und dass unsere Leser sich fόr ihre Umwelt und ihre Lebensumstδnde auίergewφhnlich stark engagieren. Wir mφchten hier die Gelegenheit nutzen, uns bei unseren Lesern fόr ihre rege Beteiligung und auch ihre anregende Kritik zu bedanken.

[halva]

Raynolds, in the time remaining to you before we catch up with you, devote yourself to educating your collaborators in realism. The politically successful deceive their enemies, not each other and themselves.

[jayreynolds]

Raynolds, in the time remaining to you before we catch up with you, devote yourself to educating your collaborators in realism. The politically successful deceive their enemies, not each other and themselves.
Hey, Wayne, I've been waiting five years so far.
I can wait five more.
That's how long Chem11 says it could take us to finish debunking your barium "myth".
As far as Aluminum, well there's that problem of not finding any radar signatures, isn't there.
Realism.
Word.
Get over it.

[gaiacomm]

blah blah blah.............................................. ......

[halva]

Raynolds, do you see Mr. X as a potential ally against the chemmies?

And have you deciphered the message about developments in Germany?

[jayreynolds]

Raynolds, do you see Mr. X as a potential ally against the chemmies?
And have you deciphered the message about developments in Germany?

Your 'Mr. X' at one time posted at CTC.
He is just another "cloudbuster" idiot, a follower of a hoax debunked seventy years ago.
Of course I would never associate with sucha person.

Wayne, one of the big differences between me and you is that I have scruples. You appear willing to hitch your wagon to that of creeps and kooks like Liakopoulos and Carnicom, people who you know are sick bastards. This is because you have a 'gang' mentality, one in which the individual feels inadequate and must subvert his own moral and ethical standards in the hope that he can rely on the mutual support of the others.

What you feel makes you more powerful, however, is one of your greatest weaknesses.

See, Wayne, all of you are wrong, fundamentally wrong, plus you are all believing in a lie, something that is false, this idea of "chemtrails". Individually, you all must lie, even if just a little to maintain your gang intact, to keep the common "chemtrail" lie alive. Collectively, however, when looked at in aggregate, the lie is compounded, multiplied by however many chemmies join together.

This is why your people continue to spout bullshit like "Contrails cannot form above -76 degrees F", which is totally false.

This is why your gorup isn't self-correcting. It's as if someone in an elevator/lift broke wind bad enough to gag a maggot, but nobody says a damn thing!

The combined weight of all the lies becomes unsustainable in the end, and the truth goes out the window, ALL credibility is lost through association, and the foolhardiness of all participants is shared, rather than the strengths!

As far as "space and time", they got lots of critical letters about Stetter's article, but held their nose, just like you.

[halva]

Raynolds. It is abundantly clear that you are in no way serious in your opposition to Don Croft. Otherwise you would be prepared to ally yourself on a single-issue basis with a fellow-thinker such as Mr. X (not only on the subject of chemtrails but also politically) in order more effectively to put an end to put an end to them.

Your stance towards Don Croft is hypocritical. Objectively you are one of his allies. Please spare us any more righteous indignation or humour at his expense.

Here is some more input from Mr. X:

"3. For those who are unaware, there is a growing network of people who are using cloudbuster-type devices on a continuous basis, setting them up and operating them around-the-clock, day after day, and in the process over-exciting the atmosphere and creating oranur-like effects which yield widespread cloud-dissipating tendencies. These individuals have very little knowledge of Reich's work, but toss around his name as if they were intimate experts in the field, with the blind leading the blind. Their goal with this madness is to "dissipate chemtrails", and "chemtrails" are vaguely defined as being roughly equal to any jet contrail. In the process of attempting to dissipate jet contrails, other clouds are affected. The network of "chembusters" as they are called, has several hundred members, with an internet presence, and have caught the attention of somewhat alarmist conspiracy-theorists with large web sites and radio talk shows, getting a kind of publicity never afforded to scientists following and investigating Reich's work more directly. Many of them believe toxic chemtrails are being deliberately sprayed into the Earth's atmosphere by humans who have been influenced by either the United Nations, or by evil demons or aliens from outer space, in a macabre plot to poison people across the countryside. Reich's name is being injected into this confused mish-mash. Efforts to warn this group of the dangers of untrained and prolonged use of cloudbusters -- that they are actually increasing weather chaos and enhancing drought tendencies in the atmosphere -- have led to only dismissive contempt-reactions, and slander being directed at those who gave the warning."

[gaiacomm]

blah blah blah.............................................. ......


ping...........pong..........

[halva]

Look here, Raynolds. This guy is a kindred spirit and an ally for you. What a snob you are!!!

I would even say that your attitude to cloud busters is racist. You don't appreciate having friends.

"Attack Against X in a Greek Newspaper,
and on Subsequent Email/Internet Groups

Most recently, a provocative attack against X appeared in a Left-Wing Greek Newspaper. The article was then translated into English and circulated onto the Yahoo "Orgonomy Mailing List" and also on the "Orgone Star" distribution network -- both of which are email/internet discussion groups -- in further attempts to spread the attack. A friend informed X about the materials, and the following letters were composed in response. They are being made public, given the rather permanent nature of internet materials, to set the record straight.

[halva]

(continuing)

++++++

8 Jun 2004

Dear -------------,

Thank you for informing me about the recent postings to the Yahoo "Orgonomy Mailing List" (OML). I know of the half-accurate article in the Greek paper Eleftherotypia (see below) which attempts to tarnish me, as well as the additional provocative distribution of the article by Mr. Dimitris Tsimperis, who added his own commentary but distorted and concealed the context entirely. Perhaps we can use this incident as an opportunity to expose some important issues?

These materials are the consequence of my having written an article critical of anti-American and anti-Israel extremism, and 9-11 "conspiracy" ideology ("Masters of Deception" see below), as well as my having posted articles to the OBRL-News-Bulletin which suggest the Israelis have the right to defend themselves against extermination from the collective might of the Islamic nations, and that the USA was correct to go after those who attacked our nation on 9-11, declaring war against us, and who stood as supporters of growing international terrorism. While those articles have elicited many well-reasoned and rational responses from various persons, with whom I sometimes had lengthy and productive discussions, I also received a series of hateful and enraged emails, including several dozen from Mr. Tsimperis. Initially, I exchanged emails with him, but ended communications after his emails degenerated into what I consider to be an anti-American and anti-Jewish fanaticism, complete with curses. In his email to the OLM, "exposing" me, he puts on his best "suit and tie" to show what a rational fellow he is, as he attempts to throw me into some dark pit. Here are some quotes from emails he previously sent to me, and why I ended all communications with him:

From D. Tsimperis to X:

* "We, the Greeks don't like your moron and criminal President.... I am the first who would be glad to see some "madmen" to disappear from this planet. How about starting with Mr.Bush, Mr. Donald Rumsfeld and Mrs.Contoliza Rais?" (21-2-03)

* "Don't they cloak their agenda of controlling the land, the oil and the waters of Iraq for their political reasons by smashing down and murdering ordinary people by the millions under the claiming of "doing good" (i.e. disasarmament of Sadam?) (22-2-03)

* "please provide with a ... list with the crimes that all the USA's administrations have done to humanity since 1945." (22-2-03)

* "Is there a bigger Hitlerite today than George Bush Jr. and his gang? Is there another country that has murdered more than the fucking USA in the last 50 years(starting with Hirosima and Nagasaki?)" (31-3-03)

* "wait for more to be revealed little fascist!" (13-7-03)

* "And two fucking American helicopters down in a week. No bad. No bad at all. Be sure, much more will come." (6-11-03)

* "stop the bullshits about "democratic West " as opposed to "Islamic Law". All we have in the West is" pseudo-democracies"... (11-11-03)

* "You are right to say that we are living a Deja Vu. With the difference that the Palestinians are the today Jews of the Jews." (15-11-03)

* "So, when will you hung the Hitlerites of the Bush/Cheney junta that cheated in the elections of 2000 and now rule the USA (following the orders of their higher bosses) [The Jews?] and destroy, rape and loot the rest of the world little American?" (21-1-04)

* "Now, a terroristic attack during the Olympic games wouldn't be a consequence of the external policy of your 'big Democracy' and its "willing" allies? And the "massacred Greek people" wouldn't be paying exactly the cost of it as it happened with the"massacred Spanish people" and so many other peoples before? [in other words, America is responsible for all the terror attacks by the Islamists, and if the Olympic games are attacked, America will be responsible for that as well.] (25-3-04)

* "X you are a bastard of the worst kind!" (6-5-04)

These quotes speak for themselves, and one can only imagine what kind of misrepresentations he makes of Reich's orgonomy into Greece.

Ms. Frantseska Romanou, mentioned in the Greek newspaper article, forwarded to the newspaper one short and angry email I had sent to her, fulfilling the dictum of the poet William Blake, that "a truth that's told with bad intent, beats all the lies you can invent". Neither Tsimperis, Romanou nor the Greek newspaper mention the context. Ms. Romanou had earlier sent to me an unsolicited email containing the most awful photographs of dead Palestinian children, accompanied by words which blamed their deaths on Jews and Americans, as if they were deliberately murdered (instead of being unfortunate casualties of a 50-year Arab war of aggression, which has also claimed the lives of many Jewish children, who by contrast to any Palestinian children were deliberately murdered by terror bombers and shooters). The implication was, that anyone who supports Israel's right to defend itself against terror attacks, defending its right to exist, must be a hater and murderer of Palestinian children; the Palestinian leaders and parents, by extension, bore no responsibility whatsoever, for encouraging their children to go into shooting war-zones, acting as rock-throwing "human shields" for armed Jihadis, and also as suicide-homicide bombers. I reacted to her email and the unsolicited photos of dead children much as anyone would to unsolicited grotesque photos emerging on their computer screen, with a natural and quite healthy outrage about her nerve to do this, and also the incredible hypocrisy and "revisionist history" underlying that argument. Rather than simply deleting the material and ignoring it, as I usually do, in that one case, my rational anger overshadowed my better judgement, and I dashed off a few angry sentences -- and so, wouldn't you know, while my well-composed and footnoted writings, several Press Releases about OBRL publications, etc., are totally ignored by the mainstream press for decades, but that one short angry email gets international circulation in one of Greece's largest newspapers! For those who know something about the emotional plague in "journalism", this is a pretty good example. For clarity's sake, here are some other emails I got from Greeks, immediately after the ''Eleftherotypia'' article appeared, which help to reveal the social climate:

[halva]

(continuing)

From (name withheld#1)
Thanks for the interesting article about 80,000 Jewish community of Thessaloniki, exterminated by Nazis with help from Greek people. It was really sad to read the end of their history. You know what I know about Jews of Thessaloniki comes from people who don't really like them. I am alarmed when I listen to people -- mostly leftists, 'educated' - saying all the more that ''Hitler did one good thing: he exterminated the Jews''.

From (name withheld#2)
It was a surprise for me too, to see that ''Eleftherotypia'' writes about you. Maybe, after all, your voice is stronger than i thought. Or maybe your enemies have strong connections with the press. ''Eleftherotypia'' has the first or second biggest circulation in Greece. It is considered ''progressive'' and is certainly leftist. All the communists i happen to know, read ''Eleftherotypia'' and ''Rizospastis'' a newspaper owned by the Greek Communist Party. This same newspaper -''Eleftherotypia''- is the one that the other day had a headline ''Bush-SS'' for the Abu Graib tortures, and in the 28th page, or something like that, [mentions] the slaughter of the Israeli mother and her four kids, with no relative headline on the article. About the ''Jew'' accusation: it is quite alarming that just the Jew label will place someone in the list of ''unwanted'' or criminals-supporter. The writer of the article knows for good that writing that you are a Jew gains a positive reaction from the readers for his comments. It is really sad. Your contribution in the spreading of the ''other'' news regarding politics, Iraq war and the palestinian-israel conflict to greeks is invaluable. Please keep doing so. I feel really obliged to you for the information i get from you.

The above email makes reference to a particularly nasty Palestinian terror-massacre, of a pregnant Jewish mother and her four daughters, age 4 to 11. Two Palestinian gunmen stopped their car on a rural road, and then with horrified witnesses looking on from a short distance, shot them dead at close range, one by one, putting a final bullet into the belly of the mother to kill the unborn child. Two days later, during the funeral for the woman and her children, Palestinian snipers opened fire with machine-guns, trying to kill even more civilians, and kept everyone pinned down for hours until the IDF was able to drive them away. It was those events, and my recent reading of a new book about a Palestinian woman who survived an "honor killing" attempt by her brothers -- she was doused with gasoline and set ablaze (see "Burned Alive: A Victim of the Law of Men" by Souad) -- which triggered my angry reaction to the Romanou photos of dead Palestinian children, and the self-righteous accusatory notes which came with it. But... to continue with the Greek emails of recent days:

From (name withheld#3)
"First of all X, Ph.D. are you from Israel? Are u Jew? "

From (name withheld#4)
"u fucking jew"

From (name withheld#5)
I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT YOU HAVE TO CONTINUE NO MATTER HOW YOUR RESEARCHES AND PRESSURE TO EVERYONE!! PLEASE INFORM EVERYONE ABOUT YOUR RESEARCH AND KNOWLEDGE,MOST OF THE PEOPLE DON'T BOTHER TO READ BOOKS AND EVEN MORE TO MAKE EXPERIMENTS SO THEY FIND THE TRUTH!! PEOPLE NEED YOUR HELP MORE AND MORE!!

I am withholding the names of these individuals, firstly because I don't want my supporters in Greece to become the subject of personal attacks and abuse, and secondly because I don't care to help my enemies to organize and link up with each other. But I am grateful at least that the Greek paper gave the web-link for my "Masters of Deception" article (see below), which does present my views in a clear manner. I encourage people to read it themselves, and not rely upon second-hand accounts, at least one of which on the OML was totally off the mark.

It may also be of interest, I am neither Jewish nor Israeli, being an American of very mixed ethnicity, though if I was Jewish or Israeli I would proudly say so. I have been to Israel on several occasions, and find the people and culture there to be lively and vibrant, a healthy democracy composed of Jews, Arabs, Christians and Druze, by comparison to the totalitarian repressive conditions I also observed in various parts of the Arab-Islamic world (especially as regarding sex-economic factors, such as the rights of youth to a sexual life, women's status and family law, etc.) Israel always was a light-year beyond even the most "progressive" of Islamic nations, such as Jordan or Turkey -- where "honor killings" are still frequent, and the status of women very low -- in the direction of the "Sex-Pol" reforms Reich was advocating in Germany prior to Hitler. The attempt to label me as Jewish within a social climate of extreme prejudice against Jews, is clearly an effort to suggest, that if you are Jewish, then you must be a liar or untrustworthy person -- these are exactly the kinds of offensive ideas which were widespread in Europe during the Hitler years, and they remain widespread today within the Muslim world, as well as among Holocaust-deniers and other Jew-haters of both Left- and Right-wing politic. It hardly seems necessary to bring up this issue on e-mail groups devoted to Wilhelm Reich -- but perhaps people do have to be reminded: Reich was of Jewish ancestry, and Reich studied with the Jewish Freud, and many of the orgonomists and scientists who have kept Reich's work alive over the decades are of Jewish ancestry as well. Anti-Jewish sentiment among "Reichians" is thereby doubly repellent, given the incredible discoveries which the "Jew" Reich brought into the world. If orgonomy ever became "Judenrein" it would nearly cease to exist.

[halva]

(continuing)

Shall we forget what Reich wrote in "Mass Psychology of Fascism", which exposed the roots of this kind of scapegoating -- of Jews and now Americans also -- in people's own armoring and pent-up emotional rage? Do we ignore his relevant observations that the Red-Fascists were just as sick and deadly as the Black-Fascists? (The "Black Book of Communism" by Courteois, et al, proves Red Fascism is factually much deadlier, having claimed 100 million victims during the 20th Century!) My research demonstrates Islamic Fascism to be an older historical variant of human armoring and totalitarian ideology, more purely "Saharasian" in its nature, and out of which the other two "modern" Left- and Right-wing expressions have emerged. My analysis on these issues has upset many persons from the radical Left politic, and the pro-Muslim terrorism-apologism "blame the USA" or "blame Israel" ("blame the Jew") camps. Sometimes, a factual analysis of an issue supports the conclusions of the liberals, while at other times, the conservatives. Neither side of the political split has a monopoly on truth or fact, and the clearest and strongest representations of truth and fact are sometimes found overwhelmingly on one side; it is not always the case, that the truth stands in between the two extremes, as a CFP. As Reich noted, the healthy character stands "on the side of life" without reference to where they will land on the political spectrum. The "political character" always sits on one side only, interpreting things via political ideology irrespective of the facts -- which is why purely "political" solutions are of limited value.

It would be appreciated if second-hand accounts of "what X said" or "what X believes" were treated as rumor. One can rely more directly upon what I have written at the OBRL website and in my publications, and those certainly are fair game for anyone's open critique. Newspaper accounts regarding Reich and orgonomy, or anyone engaged in this line of controversial work, should always be treated with a healthy dose of skepticism, given the big problem of the emotional plague in journalism.

I appreciate being kept informed about this matter. Please forward this full email to the OML news group, in reply to the recent materials from Greece. Permission to post is granted only in full; please, no partial or edited posting.

Kind regards,

X, Ph.D.
Director, Orgone Biophysical Research Lab


"Masters of Deception: Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore and the 9-11 Conspiracy Industry", by X

[halva]

(continuing)

"Saharasia: The 4000 BCE Origins of Child-Abuse, Sex-Repression, Warfare and Social Violence, In the Deserts of the Old World", by X

"Faces and Masks" by Christos Michailidis

+++++

13 June 2004

Dear Dr. -------,

If the newspaper journalist Michailidis has written something positive about my work, I am unaware of it, and would like to obtain a specific citation as to when this happened. And if what he wrote about my work was true and factual, then I'd certainly thank him (if anyone has his email, please provide it!). But I must disagree with the assertion that, in the case of his "Faces and Masks" article, that I was treated "with great fairness and respect". In fact, reporter Michailidis appears to have written his article only after some third-party alerted him to my "Masters of Deception" article, and after receiving a private email of mine as presented to him by Ms. Romanou. Certainly what he wrote about the "MoD" article itself was mild. But his other comments -- the suggestion that I was a bad guy who did not care about dead children, for expressing upset feelings with Ms. Romanou in a private email, and that I was "a Jew" -- were both unfriendly and unprofessional. Firstly, even in Greece it is probably customary for newspapers to obtain permissions from the author before reprinting private email correspondence -- for him to have used that email without checking with me took the risk that the entire thing might have been a fabrication, and at minimum showed an absence of concern about my side of the story. Secondly, he never contacted me to inquire why I wrote such an angry email to Ms. Romanou -- as mentioned in my prior email to the OML, the context was very important given her provocation, and my anger about it was rational. Third-party assertions are always treated as "hearsay". Third, the only possible motivation I can imagine for his asserting that I was "a Jew" in the article was to inflame existing anti-Jewish prejudices within the readership of his newspaper, as a method to try and undermine my credibility (ie, that "Jews cannot be trusted"). Assuming Mr. Moussouliotis is correct, that journalist Michailidis has a "deep sense of humanity" then for this particular article he lad a clear lapse of judgement. And my last email letter which went to the OML was no "attack" against him, but rather my defense against being attacked, repeatedly, by Mr. Tsimperis and quite a few others who also invoked their own bad words against Jews, as well as against the unfriendly things said about me in the newspaper article.

One can certainly debate whether or not this incident was an expression of "emotional plague in journalism". I referred to the general absence of interest in my writings, letters to the editor and Press Releases over many years by popular journalists, only to have my private email suddenly appear without permission or investigation in a oveseas national newspaper. Certainly if journalist Michailidis wrote some favorable things about my Saharasia, then it remains doubly curious that he would not try to contact me before accepting what he heard from Romanou without critical consideration. What kind of evasion and scheming was going on, behind the curtain, to organize this newspaper article? What poison about me was poured into journalist Michailidis' ears, which might have blocked him from contacting me, to double-check things and get my side before going to press? How did he learn about my "Masters Of Deception" article in the first place, as it is only posted to my internet site, and is hardly known outside of the subscribers to my OBRL-News? Clearly, someone informed him to "take a look" at the article. And who told him I was "a Jew", and why would he consider this to be either factual or relevant? Important questions, but on another level, this really is a tempest in a teapot, not worthy of spending additional time (and so, barring some additional new revelations, this will be my last letter on the subject).

Assuming the translation of the article from the Greek newspaper was accurate, then nobody in Greece was misled about Reich and orgonomy -- unless one wishes to presume that Reich and orgonomy are the intellectual property of those whom I criticize in my "MoD" article -- the radical Leftists, neo-Nazis, Islamo-fascists and 9-11 anti-American conspiracy advocates -- and therefore that my critical "MoD" article might "mislead" people away from them. Certainly, I hope it does cause people to reconsider their alliances with those groups! But more to the point, it was not Reich who was tarnished in the Greek newspaper article, only me.

Best wishes,

X
Director, Orgone Biophysical Research Lab


+++++

11 July 2004

New Information on the Greek Newspaper Eleftherotypia

Some weeks ago, X wrote an Open Letter which was posted to OBRL-News-Bulletin, in response to antisemitic hate mail received at OBRL, and a subsequent attack against him in a left-wing Greek newspaper, Eleftherotypia. One Greek letter-writer, who had previously sent engraged hate-mail to OBRL, posted the Eleftherotypia article to at least two international orgonomy mailing lists, one in the USA and another in Germany. Another Greek letter-writer, posting to at least one international orgonomy mailing list, described Eleftherotypia as a rational and reliable source of information, further attempting to make X appear like a bad person who was misrepresenting Reich, and who was therefore properly criticized by a responsible Greek reporter. These false contentions have already been fully exposed and rebutted by Dr. X. (See "Greek Newspaper Article - Clarification" )

Since then, the following new information has emerged, suggesting this entire affair may have been orchestrated by a group of "Reichian" racist antisemites (an oxymoron to be sure), who are at the very least engaged in an "emotional conspiracy" to somehow make Wilhelm Reich suitable for integration into a radical-left neo-fascist ideology.

The Simon Wisenthal Foundation (SWF), named after the intrepid Nazi-hunter of the 20th Century, recently published a report on Twenty-Five Months of Antisemitic Invective in Greece, documenting an ongoing problem which describes Greece as the "greatest net producer of antisemitism today in Europe". Of significance, the SWF report repeatedly identifies, with a long list of specific examples, this very same left-wing newspaper, Eleftherotypia (the second largest one in Greece), as a major distributor of Jew-hatred. Eleftherotypia is shown to print accusatory racist libels against Jews and Israelis on a fairly regular basis, in printed stories, political cartoons and letters to the editor, many of which are reminiscent of Der Stuermer during the Hitler years. These include political cartoons showing Israeli and American political leaders with hooked noses, looking like monkeys and dressed up as Nazis, while shooting Arab civilians. They also published a favorable book review of the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" which was described as "historically accurate", and some of the "letters" openly suggest -- sometimes obliquely, othertimes directly -- of Hitler being justified in the Holocaust. Eleftherotypia has additionally attracted criticism from other international human rights groups monitoring racism in the media, such as the Helsinki Greek Monitor Project, leading to attention by the Athens Public Prosecutor regarding violations of Greece's laws against racial incitement. And Eleftherotypia is not alone in these activities. The situation appears bad enough that the SWF issued a travel advisory for Jewish people visiting Greece.

It seems clear enough, the attack against Dr. X -- who has posted articles to OBRL News Bulletin critical of Islamic fascism and terrorism, and the Palestinian "culture of death", and others supportive of the rights of Israelis to security and self-defense -- was only a small example of a much larger problem.

Orgone Biophysical Research Lab

[halva]

Now what, I ask you, Raynolds, could prevent YOU from being friends with a man like this Dr. X?

He even has a 'network' in Greece, which I am sure he would be glad to put at your disposal.

[jayreynolds]

Now what, I ask you, Raynolds, could prevent YOU from being friends with a man like this Dr. X? He even has a 'network' in Greece, which I am sure he would be glad to put at your disposal.

Wayne, you are spamming again. I must have hit a nerve.

James DeMeo is just as much a kook as the rest of the cloudbuster faction of the 'chemtrail' cult. Like I said, you commies(and chemmies) can't seem to get enough of 'the mob' mentality.
You are so weak that you glom onto anyone else that you feel has more power than you do.

You are no different from the whore who clings to the pimp that beats crap out of her.

I was raised in Texas, possibly the world's last refuge of rugged individualism, and can stand on my own. This is good, for while I am solely responsible for all the good and bad I do, I don't have to rely on some other bastard who carries the heavy baggage of lies your people in 'the mob' must bear collectively.

Oh, and by the way, you could have just posted the link to the webpage you cut/pasted your last five posts from, adwouldn't have had to erase his name so many times:
http://www.orgonelab.org/GreekNewspaper.htm

Also, maybe you need to bone up on Reich and his merry men of pseudoscience:
http://skepdic.com/orgone.html

[jayreynolds]

Oh, and be sure to read up about the baggage the 'cloudbuster' crew carries.
A sobering story indeed.
http://home.netcom.com/~rogermw/Reich/personal.html

[halva]

It seems to me that there is very little solidarity in your world, Jay Raynolds. You have absolutely everything in common with the man whose identity you have now cunningly tracked down, except for his views on cloudbusting.

If you were a normal human being, or if you even were true to your own declared priorities, which is that the important hoax is the chemtrail hoax, you would see that the 99% you have in common with this man is more important than the 1% that distinguishes you from each other. You would build a relationship on what you have in common and on that basis perhaps discreetly persuade him of the error of his ways in relation to cloudbusting, which after all is so much less important than the fact that he's got it right about chemtrails, not so?

Are only people who agree with you about absolutely EVERYTHING acceptable to you?

And isn't the chemtrail hoax the most important thing in the world for people not to be deceived by? This man you spurn is not deceived by it..

[halva]

Hey, Wayne, I've been waiting five years so far.
I can wait five more.
That's how long Chem11 says it could take us to finish debunking your barium "myth".
As far as Aluminum, well there's that problem of not finding any radar signatures, isn't there.
Realism.
Word.
Get over it.

Happy with the response from Megasprayer, Raynolds, from the other half of the
Chem 11/Raynolds "us"?
http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=Fight&action=display&num=1078830194
(Reply 11)

[halva]

You attempt unsuccessfully to bloc with a 'chemmie' on the single issue of Barium, but you refuse to bloc against chemmies with an anti-chemmie who happens to be a cloudbuster.

1. What, after all, is the more important issue for you? Cloudbusting or chemtrails?

2. Having answered Question 1, answer Question 2: why is Chem 11 part of your would-be fantasy reference group and James DeMeo not?

[gaiacomm]

Wayne:

What are doing? Why do you promote such information that just wastes space. You are too intelligent to spend your time ranting and promoting these people that live in the twilight zone!

You are a socialist and should promote and further the cause for change rather than to be distracted by fantasy.

Use your brain for more useful debate and not waste it on nonsense.

[halva]

Do you think I should promote the cause of socialism to Raynolds, Gaiacomm?

[halva]

Answer the questions Raynolds.

[jayreynolds]

Wayne, I never would include Chemii(aka. Val Valerian) as a peer. That doesn't mean I haven't understood his position has been, for quite some time, that "megasprayers" aren't "spraying" any aluminum or Barium whatsoever.

He still hasn't gotten over my complete rubbishing of his claims about "Megasprayers" being actually aerodynamic contrails, even though I provided multiple closeup photos of ordinary
photo-identifiable commercial planes making them.

On top of that, when I asked him to show me radar signatures of planes "spraying" aluminum or barium, which would undoubtedly be visible on ordinary weather radar just like smoke plumes are, he choked and stopped all pretense about supporting his past three year's claims.
He flip-flops worse than a squid on a ship's deck.

I could never trust the guy anyways, because I know who he really is, just a con-man-kook formerly a newage huckster, now reinvented as a chem-cult leader of a ship of fools. It seems he has reached the pinnacle of his career indeed!

Chemii hasn't got the guts to come out and correct any of you, any more than you've got the bollocks to correct William Thomas, Brian Holmes, or Gabriel Stetter about their own misinformation regarding ordinary contrail formation temperatures. There are NO chemmies who seem able to correct the group as a whole, and so you all fall into common errors. The only honest chemmies are former chemmies, and even they have skeletons in their closets they'd rather forget.

Now don't go blaming me for your troubles. I posted accurate information years ago on my website. William Thomas even agreed live on the James Whale show across england that MY website had exactly the BEST description of ordinary contrails. But what did you do with that information?

You banned me!

As for what's more important, "chemtrails" or "cloudbusters"?

Since "cloudbusters" were debunked long before the turn of the century, of course, "chemtrails deserve my attention.

[jayreynolds]

"But, in the end, that's all it amounted to. It all boils down to this, and I've made the point before (and at much greater length), but Barium releases would not create the siganture ultra-persistant fulminating super contrails that we call 'chemtrails' for short (and certainly not the white-out conditions and long-lasting artificial cloud cover that originates from the supertrails.

An increase in the sulfate levels of jet fuel would, and does. Said increase has been documented on this forum and it is this increase that geo-engineers specifically discussed prior to the apperance of the super contrails (find me a reference to Barium being used to create artificial cloud cover to combat global warming, and then documents it's dramatic increase in emissons from jet aircraft and we'll talk)."
http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=technosphere&action=display&num=1094017218



Hey, Wayne, let's put chem11 to the test on his claim that "chemtrails" are caused by an "increase in sulfate levels of jet fuel".
I say his claim is bullshit, and so does science. Let's debate the issue right here right now.

BRING IT ON!

[gaiacomm]

Do you think I should promote the cause of socialism to Raynolds, Gaiacomm?


Yes, I really think you should!

[halva]

Hey, Wayne, I've been waiting five years so far.
I can wait five more.
That's how long Chem11 says it could take us to finish debunking your barium "myth".
As far as Aluminum, well there's that problem of not finding any radar signatures, isn't there.
Realism.
Word.
Get over it.

None of what you say explains why you included Chem 11 and yourself in an "us" and you don't wish to construct any similar "us" to include yourself and James DeMeo, who have much much more in common than you have with Chem 11. Your politics is identical with DeMeo's.

If your explanation for more readily allying yourself with a political enemy chemmie than with a political ally cloudbuster is that cloudbusting has already been sufficiently debunked whereas chemmie ideas have not, why until now have you been persistently debunking cloudbusting as a subtext to your overall debunking of chemmies?.

Are you now going to stop debunking the cloudbuster Don Croft, given that you now decide after years of debunking him that his activities were sufficiently debunked a hundred years ago, so that there was no need to debunk him in the first place?

Do you know why I think you are more ready to include yourself in the company of your political enemies than you are of your political allies?

It is because you and the people around you cannot stand each other. You despise each other as much as the rest of the world despise all of you together.

You really want to be accepted by the 'chemmie' crowd' , but you have no way of attracting attention other than pouring vitriol on 'chemmies' at every opportunity. Or without opportunity, since you are a gatecrasher and don't wait to be invited.

I once lived in an apartment building in which the president of the tenant's committee was like you. She used to puncture my bicycle tyres regularly and then when I went to her to complain (because building security was her responsibility) she pretended that she didn't know who was doing it. Really, as I slowly discovered, her reasons for doing this was that she wanted to be friends, and couldn't think of any other way of attracting my attention. And she didn't know how to be friends either. She was creepy.

So you will understand that I am not going to help you in your endeavour to become better friends with Chem 11 by debunking his belief that 'chemtrails' contain sulphates. There are indeed questions about all these issues that are unresolved in my mind, but I am not going to be enlightened about any of them by you. And I am not going to help you regain the access to Chem 11 that he himself has terminated. I agree entirely with what he said at Megasprayer, namely:

"If he'd have said "Gee, maybe you're right... there issomething very strange about about planes blanketing the entire sky with artificial cloud cover, but I looked into barium releases and I don't think that Ba could be the active ingredient. Here's why...", then maybe people would have looked into it instead of dismissing everything he says as the rantings of a cyber-megalomaniac."

Puncturing the tyres of my bicycle was not the way for the president of the tenants' committee to become friends with me. You have failed in your attempt to become friends with Chem 11, in your attempt to make the "us" you evoke to impress me exist in the real world, and not just in the fantasy world of this thread at Arianna's where you can be something bigger and more impressive than than the nonentity you must be in real life.

I asked two questions in this posting also.

Answer them.

[halva]

Yes, I really think you should!

Gaiacomm, this is just ridiculous.

Why don't you shed some light on the scientific issues on which Raynolds wants to be our teacher?

[jayreynolds]

If your explanation for more readily allying yourself with a political enemy chemmie than with a political ally cloudbuster is that cloudbusting has already been sufficiently debunked whereas chemmie ideas have not, why until now have you been persistently debunking cloudbusting as a subtext to your overall debunking of chemmies?.Are you now going to stop debunking the cloudbuster Don Croft, given that you now decide after years of debunking him that his activities were sufficiently debunked a hundred years ago, so that there was no need to debunk him in the first place?

Wayne, I cannot recall ever actively "debunking cloudbusters". I have emntioned the concept derisively, that is all. Yet since you make such a claim, saying that I have done so for years. If that were true(and it isn't), you should be able to easily find an example of me doing so. Prove your point by showing us proof that I have "been persistently debunkng cloudbusting".
You won't.





]"If he'd have said "Gee, maybe you're right... there issomething very strange about about planes blanketing the entire sky with artificial cloud cover, but I looked into barium releases and I don't think that Ba could be the active ingredient. Here's why...", then maybe people would have looked into it instead of dismissing everything he says as the rantings of a cyber-megalomaniac.".

Dear readers,
Here is evidence of my contributions towards the barium debate:

http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=65678#65678

As the record shows, chem11 had no rebuttal whatsoever. In fact, as you can see at the link above, no chemmie has ever responded to my debunking of the origins of the barium hoax, because the participants know it is all too true.

Here is yet more evidence of my contribution towards the barium debate, in the form of a webpage I wrote in THE YEAR 2000:
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/bariumreport.html

Note that Thermit's discussion about Carnicom's spectral data was taken directly from my work.
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=65665#65665

What the reader will find, if he examines the record, is that I laid out my objections to the barium hoax four years ago. For my efforts, I was banned, my website came under attack by a group of chemmies who began an email campaign to have my website deleted, and my warnings about the falsity of the barium claims were ignored by nearly all chemmies. Chem11, 'sore throat' and Deborah were all on board when this happened. As of now, all of them know the barium idea was false, and watch silently as people like Thomas, Holmes, Wayne Hall, Gabriel Stetter and many more carry on as if nothing ever has been said about it.

Lastly, it won't surprise me if Chem11 doesn't take me up on the challenge to debate his false claim about sulfate being increased in jet fuel. He knows it was just a lie he concocted to buy some time as the "chemtrails" hoax winds down.

[halva]

I do not get the impression, from my Eurocentric perspective, that the 'chemtrail hoax' is winding down.

[gaiacomm]

Gaiacomm, this is just ridiculous.

Why don't you shed some light on the scientific issues on which Raynolds wants to be our
teacher?


Wayne:

You are doing a fine job. You do not need my help.

[halva]

Raynolds, are you going to stop mentioning the cloudbuster Don Croft derisively , given that you have decided that his activities were sufficiently mentioned derisively a hundred years ago, so that there was no need to mention him derisively in the first place?

Also kindly stop making comments about politics, because politics are obviously unimportant to you, not rating at all among the factors that condition your relations with others.

All that matters is hoaxes, and whether one believes in them or not.

[Ghost Story]

Funny how anyone in their right minds and not living a delusional corporate fantasy, would not be concerned about 'fooling with mother nature'. This is typical of the ego-centricity of mankind in that they think they can do whatever the fuck they want to the planet(as if the planet had less 'value' then themselves, hah!). Rush Limbaugh mocks the whole 'save the planet' thing too- one of the myriad of reasons he is a punk to the Corporate Fascists.
If you want to mock the original Poster, then you mock all who wish to make our world better.
Would you turn Earth into Heavens Junkie?

Facts are that there is constant experimentation of many types going on with 'jet sprayed immuno therapies' that we inhale.
Also, did anyone know that Enron had a project into Weather Manipulation? I wonder how that is done?
So, when you see a 'chem trail' wonder.

[halva]

Hi Ghost Story. Good to get some new input.

Raynolds doesn't want people to act on the basis of what their eyes and common sense tell them, but rather on the basis of what HE tells them, namely that when they see a chemtrail, what they are seeing is an 'ordinary contrail'.

Also, he is punting on being able to emigrate to Mars.

[halva]

Wayne, I never would include Chemii(aka. Val Valerian) as a peer. That doesn't mean I haven't understood his position has been, for quite some time, that "megasprayers" aren't "spraying" any aluminum or Barium whatsoever.

Chemii hasn't got the guts to come out and correct any of you, any more than you've got the bollocks to correct William Thomas, Brian Holmes, or Gabriel Stetter about their own misinformation regarding ordinary contrail formation temperatures. There are NO chemmies who seem able to correct the group as a whole, and so you all fall into common errors. The only honest chemmies are former chemmies, and even they have skeletons in their closets they'd rather forget.

Now don't go blaming me for your troubles. I posted accurate information years ago on my website. William Thomas even agreed live on the James Whale show across england that MY website had exactly the BEST description of ordinary contrails. But what did you do with that information?

You banned me!


Raynolds, I would be very glad to see any false statements any of us are making being corrected by OUR COUNTRIES' LEGITIMATE AUTHORITIES. But all we get from them is fairy stories about 'nothing abnormal occurring'. If we are less than zealous in correcting each other's mistakes (and I am not going to correct Gabriel Stetter's 'mistakes' on the sayso of Chem 11, because I don't know whether he is right or not) this is because the priority is on obtaining transparency for the whole issue. What is the subtitle to Gabriel Stetter's second article in 'Raum und Zeit': 'Das Chemtrail-Thema muss offiziell werden': The chemtrail subject must become official. There must be at least as much open debate as there is today, for example about genetically modified products, which nobody claims do not exist, (though many try to conceal their existence, as for example in the United States where compulsory labelling of genetically modified foods is outlawed.)

If we manage to achieve transparency in public discussion of the subject it will probably be impossible to exclude people like you from the debate, but of course you will be progressively marginalized as our side gains ground. And of course we (or I, at any rate) will do our utmost to have you excluded from the beginning. You made an enemy of me from the moment you took the position you did with the Ethnos photomontage.

[jayreynolds]

Raynolds, I would be very glad to see any false statements any of us are making being corrected by OUR COUNTRIES' LEGITIMATE AUTHORITIES. But all we get from them is fairy stories about 'nothing abnormal occurring'.

The US government created a fact sheet about contrails, Wayne. The US military created a whole website debunking "chemtrails". All this was done specifically in response to the 'chemtrails" hoax. Chemmies are simply lying when they say they have had no official response, or "fairy stories".

This was done by the US Federal Aviation Administration, Environmental Protecton Agency and the National Aeronautical and Space Administration:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/aviation.htm


The USAF has stated the following:
"The term "chemtrail" is a hoax that began circulating approximately
three years ago which asserts the government is involved in a joint
federal program of covert spraying of the public. The "chemtrails" are
most often described as "unusual contrail or contrail patterns" seen
coming from military and civilian aircraft. The "chemtrail" hoax has
been investigated and refuted by many established and accredited
universities, scientific organizations and major media publications.
The Air Force is not conducting any weather modification
experiments or programs and has no plans to do so in the future.

In short, there is no such thing as a "chemtrail" -the actual contrails
are safe and are a natural phenomenon. They pose no health hazard of any
kind. We thank you for this opportunity to address your concerns and
trust you find this information helpful."

Contrails Facts
• Introduction
• Background
• Contrail
• Wingtip Condensation Trails
• Exhaust Gases
• Chaff and Flares
• Aerial Spraying
• Cloud Seeding and Fire Suppression
• In-flight Emergency Fuel Release
• The "Chemtrail" Hoax
• Link to Related Sites
• References
• Layman’s Library
http://www.af.mil/environment/contrails_chemtrail.asp
============

If it's fairy stories you want, your chem-cult buddy Don Croft has quite a few about how your people fight reptilian alien poltergeists, etc.:
http://educate-yourself.org/dc/adcepisodeindex.shtml
"I jumped out of the car and put three earthpipes in the ground close to the the Old Villain's hole while Carol drove up the road a hundred yards or so to turn around. Each time she stopped the car the temperature gauge pegged out in the red zone and she said that the reptilians and draconians underground were furious at us, spinning enormous amounts of DOR at the car's engine in hopes of stranding us there, miles from anyone."
"We know there's plenty of moisture in the atmosphere because much of the desert of Nevada is covered with green in August, thanks to the cloudbusters and other orgonite around the Western US. Until recently, due to long term HAARP-induced drought, the whole region looked like it had just experienced a nuke strike. Mt Charleston, just outside of Las Vegas, has an ancient pine forest and the ground is covered with thick, green grass. 'Las Vegas,' means, 'the meadows,' and was named by the early Spanish explorers, apparently just before the occult world order, likely via the genocidal, sourpuss Jesuits, induced desertification in this region, partly through ritual human sacrifice and genocide."
"On the way to that spot, I was bitten by a rattlesnake and the wound was bleeding. I had a sense that I was going to be fine, so I continued on around the giant sandstone outcrop to find Ryan (and the two other fellows) and when I got back to the Jeep I was going to put my zapper on the snakebite to take care of the poison, which is what happened."

[jayreynolds]

If we manage to achieve transparency in public discussion of the subject it will probably be impossible to exclude people like you from the debate, but of course you will be progressively marginalized as our side gains ground. .

been waiting for five years now for your side to gain ground, Wayne. None gained so far, in fact, 99% of chemmies are former chemmies, you are in a free-fall position, man.

[halva]

As a Greek citizen, I expect an explanation from the Greek state, not the US federal state, when I ask about what is happening in Greek air space.

I was not thinking of the United States government in any case when I referred to legitimate authorities. But that is a problem for Americans. I respect the principle of national sovereignty.

Greece still has a political system, admittedly embattled, but there are still enough activists against the 1967-74 US-backed Greek military junta in mainstream politics for it to remain possible for ordinary people in Greece to hope that the political process (not necessarily meaning the parliamentary political process) can provide solutions.

[halva]

Raynolds, are you going to stop mentioning the cloudbuster Don Croft derisively , given that you have decided that his activities were sufficiently mentioned derisively a hundred years ago, so that there was no need to mention him derisively in the first place?

[halva]

To jog your memory:



As for what's more important, "chemtrails" or "cloudbusters"?

Since "cloudbusters" were debunked long before the turn of the century, of course, "chemtrails deserve my attention.

[halva]

99% of chemmies are former chemmies

What a huge reservoir of frustrated internal opposition in the USA this points to.

By the way, the meter at the Chemtrail Central Forum indicates that the most users ever online (455) were on Sun Sep 05, 2004 11:17 pm

[gaiacomm]

Enron did not do any research on weather mod. They did research on manipulative energy control and lost.

Weather mod was conducted by APTI then owned by ARCO now by EDS.

[jayreynolds]

What a huge reservoir of frustrated internal opposition in the USA this points to.

By the way, the meter at the Chemtrail Central Forum indicates that the most users ever online (455) were on Sun Sep 05, 2004 11:17 pm
Wayne, sorry to tell you the truth of the matter. The majority of 'users' at CTC are machines, internet "spiders" sent out looking for keywords by search companies. They simply love sites with large archives of words like messageboards, and return quite often. They have archived all of the 268 pages of this thread, for instance, and read it regularly to keep up with what's being said!
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22by+halva%22&btnG=Search

What reallly matters, when it comes to 'activism', are the number of active members. A quick glance at the CTC member profiles shows that 99% of members are, for some reason, joining up but never posting at all, perhaps they are phantoms, who knows?
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/memberlist.php

The bottom line is that of the 2882 members, only a score or two keep up with the events there.
Today's tally shows only 14 members, a drop in a bucket, certainly not a huge reservoir, especially when yur quality posters include the 'Julian Penrods', the mad poet 'mark sky', and the obligatory watermelon man 'sore throat', who never posts about 'chemtrails" anymore.
Basically, your people are going nowhere fast, Wayne.

But perhaps you could correct me.
What's the biggest single sign of progress for the chem-cult during 2004?
I'd like to know, wayne.

[halva]

I'd say that the emerging of the subject in semi-mainstream media and public debate in Germany and German-speaking countries is an important development.

And 2004 is not yet over.

What has been the greatest event in the debunkers' world?

[jayreynolds]

For me, it was the defeat and neutralization of Sore Throat and Deborah, the removal of Thermit from the scene, the disbanding of the CTC council, and Chem11's rejection of barium and aluminum as myths. Oh, and getting you stuck in the web of this thread, too. That's been endless fun.

You've got big problems in Germany, bub. They are much more serious about science education over there, and aren't buying the hoax nearly as well as they did over here.

[halva]

I don't see that I am more stuck than you, unless my time is more valuable than yours. Or unless you are being paid to do this, which you claim you aren't.

By the way, you still haven't explained why you want to belong to an 'us' including your political opponent Chem 11 but you don't want to belong to an 'us" including your political ally DeMeo.

Both of them are hoaxers, according to you, but the cloudbusting hoax - by your own admission -is less heinous than the chemtrail hoax.

There is no obvious reason you should favour a major hoaxer who is your political opponent over a minor hoaxer who is on your side politically. Why do you?

As for the disbanding of the CTC Council. It amuses me that you should attach importance to something so insignificant. In any case, one side effect of the disbanding was a stricter policy on debunkers. Not perhaps as strict as it would have been if I had won, but certainly stricter than it had been before.

[halva]

The other question I wanted to ask was why politics are so unimportant to you?

When I cited what I saw as positive developments I mentioned the awakening of many individuals unknown to me in a great nation. A political event.

When you cited your positive developments all you gave us was a bit of gossip about a few people known to you and me but not known to the general public.

Who are you addressing? Just me?

[gaiacomm]

Wayne:

This thread is closed...why not you and JR give your final thoughts. This is going nowhere....tit for tat!

[halva]

Gaiacomm, who says this thread is closed?

It is closed when the moderators close it (leaving it accessible as an archive because it contains many valuable links) or when Raynolds goes away.

I must admit that there are much more interesting dialogues going on elsewhere.

[gaiacomm]

Gaiacomm, who says this thread is closed?

It is closed when the moderators close it (leaving it accessible as an archive because it contains many valuable links) or when Raynolds goes away.

I must admit that there are much more interesting dialogues going on elsewhere.


Wayne:

I understand. But JR is not going away and you will never convince him of your position. His path is set and will not change until he comes across the truth himself. All you can do is point the way!

[halva]

Gaiacomm, do you think that my reason for staying here is that I hope to convince him of anything, other than that he doesn't always have stronger nerves than his opponents, even with all the weight of the status quo behind him.

Since we are discussing anyway, what was the point of that silly intervention you made on the other thread?

[halva]

Whatever Raynolds decides to do, stay here or go away, I think this thread could perhaps continue on the "Mother Nature" theme with postings like the following. Forget about chemtrails here. We can deal with that subject off-line, politically.

WH

When 'Balance' Is Bias - Global Warming Coverage

Source: University of California Santa Cruz
[Aug 26, 2004]

Top U.S. newspapers' focus on balance skewed coverage of global warming, analysis reveals


SANTA CRUZ, CA--Reporters and editors at four of the nation's top newspapers adhered to the journalistic norm of balance at the expense of accurately reporting scientific understanding of the human contributions to global warming, according to an analysis that appears in the current issue of the journal Global Environmental Change.
The new study, "Balance as Bias: Global Warming and the U.S. Prestige Press," examined coverage of human contributions to global warming in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the Wall Street Journal from 1988 to 2002 to assess how scientific findings were conveyed to readers.

"By giving equal time to opposing views, these newspapers significantly downplayed scientific understanding of the role humans play in global warming," said researcher Maxwell T. Boykoff, a doctoral candidate in environmental studies at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who coauthored the paper with his brother, Jules M. Boykoff, a visiting assistant professor of politics at Whitman College.

"We respect the need to represent multiple viewpoints, but when generally agreed-upon scientific findings are presented side-by-side with the viewpoints of a handful of skeptics, readers are poorly served," added Boykoff. "In this case, it contributed to public confusion and opened the door to political maneuvering."

In a thorough analysis of 636 articles, the Boykoffs found that:


52.7 percent gave "roughly equal attention" to the views that humans contribute to global warming and that climate change is exclusively the result of natural fluctuations.

35.3 percent emphasized the role of humans while presenting both sides of the debate, which the Boykoffs said more accurately reflected scientific thinking about global warming.

6.2 percent emphasized the dubious nature of the claim that anthropogenic global warming exists.

5.8 percent contained exclusive coverage of human contributions to Earth's temperature increases.
Although some media analysts assert that coverage improved as scientific understanding grew, the study suggests otherwise. Recognizing the challenges of characterizing the views of the scientific community on a controversial topic, the Boykoffs focused on the findings of groups like the United Nations-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which was created in 1988. The scientific community reached general consensus by late 1990 that immediate action should be taken to combat global warming, yet media coverage lagged through 2001, according to the Boykoffs.

The researchers chose 1988 as the beginning of the sample period because events that year sensitized the public to the idea of global warming: NASA scientist James Hansen testified to the U.S. Congress about the presence of anthropogenic global warming and the immediate need for action; British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher warned in a speech that with global warming, "we may have unwittingly begun a massive experiment with the system of the planet itself"; and a major heat wave and drought hit North America.

In compiling their sample, the researchers focused on news stories. Of 3,543 articles, approximately 41 percent came from the New York Times, 29 percent from the Washington Post, 25 percent from the Los Angeles Times, and 5 percent from the Wall Street Journal. The Boykoffs randomly selected 636 articles, representing 18.4 percent of the total, then analyzed the content on two subjects: anthropogenic global warming, and what should be done about global warming; they then rated articles according to the dominant themes of each one.

"We were not exploring ideological bias in the news media--whether reporters are liberal or conservative," said Boykoff. "We looked at how the journalistic norm of presenting competing points of view contributed to informational bias and the disconnect between scientific findings and public understanding."

The researchers also documented trends in coverage, attributing one shift--from a focus on anthropogenic contributions in 1988-1990 to "balanced" accounts--to the "increasingly complex politicization of the global warming issue" and the "well-publicized research efforts of skeptics."

They also note the role of concerted "disinformation" campaigns funded by carbon-based industries that catered to journalists' need to represent opposing viewpoints. One proposal, leaked to the press, advocated recruiting a "cadre of scientists who share the industry's views of climate science and to train them in public relations so they can help convince journalists, politicians and the public that the risk of global warming is too uncertain to justify." With a $600,000 media-relations budget, the campaign was designed to target science writers, editors, columnists, and television reporters with the explicit goal of undercutting prevailing scientific wisdom in the press, according to the Boykoffs.

The Boykoffs found that in 1989 and 1990, government officials, armed with the assertions of skeptics, surpassed scientists as the most cited source in prestige-press articles. Calling for more research as a precursor to taking mandatory action, these politicians contributed to coverage that indicated an even split within the scientific community, at a time of general agreement among scientists about the existence of anthropogenic influences on global warming.

Boykoff reports that coverage of "what to do about global warming" reflects a similar balance-as-bias gulf, with 78 percent of articles from 1988 through 2002 featuring "balanced" coverage of courses of action that ranged from cautious to urgent and from voluntary to mandatory, even as pleas from scientists became more urgent. In 1990, more than 700 scientists at the World Climate Conference urged countries to "take immediate actions to control the risks of climate change," and an agenda of mandatory action came out of the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro.

"In light of general agreement in the international scientific community that mandatory and immediate action is needed, coverage has been seriously and systematically deficient," said Boykoff. "In effect, the press has provided 'balanced' coverage of a very unbalanced issue."

-------------------------------------------

Editor's Note: Max Boykoff may be reached at (831) 247-5771, via e-mail at max@duyure.org, or through Jennifer McNulty in the UCSC Public Information Office (831) 459-4399; jmcnulty@ucsc.edu.

[gaiacomm]

Gaiacomm, do you think that my reason for staying here is that I hope to convince him of anything, other than that he doesn't always have stronger nerves than his opponents, even with all the weight of the status quo behind him.

Since we are discussing anyway, what was the point of that silly intervention you made on the other thread?

Well just to have some fun and support the President!

[halva]

Diane Harvey (with others joining in) has taken issue with Gabriel Stetter's recent Greenpeace article,

http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/r+z-gp.html

in particular the section on the Lucis Trust.

I have circulated the text of the debate/dispute to my e-mail group and posted it as usual at Ama Lahi:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ama_lahi/message/845

Sorry about the archives being closed. I'm fed up with debunkers sticking their snouts into these matters.

If you want to read it you have three choices (other than trying to obtain it otherwise through deployment of your own resources)

1. Apply to join Ama Lahi.

2. E-mail me and say you would like to join my e-mail group.

3. E-mail me and say you would like me to send you the text of the Diane Harvey-Gabriel Stetter dispute.

[gaiacomm]

Diane Harvey (with others joining in) has taken issue with Gabriel Stetter's recent Greenpeace article,

http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/r+z-gp.html

in particular the section on the Lucis Trust.

I have circulated the text of the debate/dispute to my e-mail group and posted it as usual at Ama Lahi:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ama_lahi/message/845

Sorry about the archives being closed. I'm fed up with debunkers sticking their snouts into these matters.

If you want to read it you have three choices (other than trying to obtain it otherwise through deployment of your own resources)

1. Apply to join Ama Lahi.

2. E-mail me and say you would like to join my e-mail group.

3. E-mail me and say you would like me to send you the text of the Diane Harvey-Gabriel Stetter dispute.


Wayne, you are doing a fine job in informing. I wish you all the best!

[halva]

White House report says people cause global warming

13:10 27 August 04

NewScientist.com news service

People are responsible for the spike in global warming in the last 30 years, says a new US government report. The verdict, long accepted by most scientists, has encountered resistance from the Bush administration in the past, prompting experts to question if the president will now enact policies to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

The report, titled Our Changing Planet, is part of a regular series that summarises recent and planned climate change research by 13 government agencies. It was released on Wednesday with a covering letter to Congress signed by the president's secretaries of commerce and energy, along with his science adviser.

The document reports that global warming in the first half of the 20th century, estimated at 0.2°C above pre-industrial temperatures, "was likely due to natural climate variation", including increased solar activity.

But the approximate 0.5°C rise over the second half of the century, most pronounced in the last 30 years, can only be explained when factors related to human activity, such as carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions, are taken into account.

Simulating change

"There's nothing else we can blame it on, really," says Kevin Trenberth, head of the climate analysis section at the US National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, where computer simulations produced the result. "If we don't put the changes in carbon dioxide into our models, we don't get global warming out."

Thomas Graedel, an industrial ecologist at Yale University, has reviewed the US government's climate change research strategy and says the report's acknowledgment of a human influence on global warming is encouraging.

"Well over 98% of scientists competent in this area would agree with that," he told New Scientist.

But when a 2002 US government report to the United Nations drew the same conclusion, President Bush "pulled back" from the document, says biologist Anthony Janetos. He is director of the global change program at The Heinz Center, a non-profit environmental policy think-tank, which has some ties to Teresa Heinz Kerry, wife of presidential candidate John Kerry.

"The big question is what effect this will have on climate policy," Janetos told New Scientist. "The administration has been pretty consistent in saying they believe in voluntary actions [to cut greenhouse gas emissions]. I haven't seen any indication they've changed their mind, but if they had, that would be big news indeed."

Trenberth agrees, saying Bush's policy thus far has been to "take whatever nature throws at us, whether it's Hurricane Charley or droughts or the melting of permafrost" – events that global warming can intensify.

"Bush has said that if we do something about emissions, it will hurt the economy," Trenberth continues, and suggests developing renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power. Others experts have lobbied the government to regulate carbon dioxide through the Clean Air Act.

Administration officials could not be reached for comment, but James Mahoney, assistant secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere, said in a statement released with the report: "This research will help decision makers and managers in the US and other countries evaluate and respond to climate change."


Maggie McKee

[jayreynolds]

Diane Harvey (with others joining in) has taken issue with Gabriel Stetter's recent Greenpeace article,
http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/r+z-gp.html
in particular the section on the Lucis Trust.
Sorry about the archives being closed. .

"Eph 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove [them].
Eph 5:12 For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret."

SURE DO HAVE A LOT TO HIDE, WAYNE!
WHAT'S THE MATTER, SCARED OF REPROVAL, OLD MAN?

[halva]

I'm not keeping anything from you (or attempting to) because I'm scared of anything, Raynolds.

I'm keeping everything possible from you because it is my policy to do so.

[gaiacomm]

I see you two children are still busy with each other! The world still turns!

[halva]

Are you blaming me for Raynolds coming back Gaiacomm?

[gaiacomm]

Are you blaming me for Raynolds coming back Gaiacomm?

No I am not. JR has the right as you do to your opinion and that is all.

You two will always be cyber friends!

[halva]

Gaiacomm does Raynolds have a right to his "opinion" that Gaiacomm is Lance Haubrick?

Perhaps in cyberspace the distinction between friend and enemy can seem elusive to an observing third party.

But surely this is not so in what we call reality. Or in our consciences, i.e. subjectively.

[gaiacomm]

Gaiacomm does Raynolds have a right to his "opinion" that Gaiacomm is Lance Haubrick?

Perhaps in cyberspace the distinction between friend and enemy can seem elusive to an observing third party.

But surely this is not so in what we call reality. Or in our consciences, i.e. subjectively.

Yes JR has that right! But soon he will have the proof he needs to understand that I am not lance. But until then he has the right to believe it until proven otherwise.

Cyberspace is a place for the weak and fearful to be gods!

[halva]

Gaiacomm are you Dr. Jekyll or Mr Hyde?

I would like to come to a better understanding of the psychology of Raynolds-Ben Hur.

[jayreynolds]

Diane Harvey (with others joining in) has taken issue with Gabriel Stetter's recent Greenpeace article,
http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/r+z-gp.html
in particular the section on the Lucis Trust..

Wayne, Harvey should be taking issue with Stetter about the preposterous assertions he makes that contrails only form at temperatures below -76 degrees F, and his reliance on the bogus "deep shield", who is in fact, David G. Stewart, a handyman from California, not a scientist at all.

Come to think of it, aren't all of your people guilty of the same thing as CBS and Dan Rather?

[halva]

Raynolds if you want to be an advisor to Diane Harvey you will have to learn to start insulting her less.

[gaiacomm]

Gaiacomm are you Dr. Jekyll or Mr Hyde?

I would like to come to a better understanding of the psychology of Raynolds-Ben Hur.


I am neither, I am Dr. Judah Ben-Hur.

[halva]

If Raynolds has a right to think that you are Lance Haubrick, do I have a right to think that you are Jay Raynolds?

[halva]

Earth warned on 'tipping points'

By Alex Kirby
BBC News Online environment correspondent


The world has barely begun to recognise the danger of setting off rapid and irreversible changes in some crucial natural systems, a scientist says.
Professor John Schellnhuber says the most important environmental issues for humans are among the least understood.

He told a briefing in Sweden that the Asian monsoon was one of the "tipping points" that could change very quickly.

He said a better understanding of the risks was as important as the programme to prevent collisions with asteroids.

Professor Schellnhuber is research director of the UK's Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research.

High stakes

He was speaking at the EuroScience Forum in Stockholm, at a briefing by the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme entitled Beyond Global Warming: Where On Earth Are We Going?

If we can afford to gaze up at the sky looking for asteroids, we should be able to watch our own planet with as much care
Professor John Schellnhuber

Professor Schellnhuber said 12 "hotspots" had been identified so far, areas which acted like massive regulators of the Earth's environment.
If these critical regions were subjected to stress, they could trigger large-scale, rapid changes across the entire planet. But not enough was known about them to be able to predict when the limits of tolerance were reached.

"We have so far completely underestimated the importance of these locations," he said.

"What we do know is that going beyond critical thresholds in these regions could have dramatic consequences for humans and other life forms."

One example of a hotspot was the North Atlantic current, the ocean circulation pattern responsible for bringing warmer air to northern Europe, the collapse of which could lead to a very large regional climate shift.

Faltering monsoon

Others were the West Antarctic ice sheet, the Sahara desert, and the forests of the Amazon basin. Yet another hotspot, Professor Schellnhuber said, was the Asian monsoon system.

He told BBC News Online: "Modelling has shown that if air pollution and land use change, this could alter the albedo, the reflectivity, of the land.


"This in turn could weaken or even suppress the monsoon, and there is evidence that several times in the last few years it has in fact been weaker.

"We're investing too much in things like improving the accuracy of our weather forecasts, while the really vital elements in the Earth's system are the unstable phenomena like the monsoon.

"We should have a much better understanding of these tipping points, and we have to do everything we can to stop short of triggering these instabilities.

Unforeseen speed

"That means we have to know where they are, and they've been off the radar screen for far too long.

"Scientists have begun to realise that change could be sudden, not gradual - in some cases it could happen within a few decades."

Professor Schellnhuber urged a coordinated global effort to improve understanding and monitoring of Earth's "Achilles' heels".

He said: "Such an effort is every bit as important as Nasa's valuable asteroid-spotting programme designed to protect the planet from collisions.

"If we can afford to gaze up at the sky looking for asteroids, we should be able to watch our own planet with as much care."


Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/3597584.stm

[jayreynolds]

Professor Schellnhuber is research director of the UK's Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research.

He was speaking at the EuroScience Forum in Stockholm, at a briefing by the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme entitled Beyond Global Warming: Where On Earth Are We Going?

Hey, Wayne, these Tyndall people have never supported your claims about "chemtrails". This is what they said:
" Aircraft contribute to warming, not cooling; contrails aren’t easily engineerable; and there is no evidence - despite decades of systematic aerosol and atmospheric analysis - that we are doing anything other than perfectly ‘normal’ pollution, which is of course a serious enough societal problem to address.


Besides that, exactly which airline did Dr. Schellnhuber take to this global warming conference? Here are the list of airlines that were suggested as "low cost" to make contrails into the meeting:
http://www.esof2004.org/registration/low_cost_flights.asp

And why were no chemmies presenting evidence for their claims at this meeting?

[gaiacomm]

Frost & Sullivan Honors Gaiacomm International with 2004 Wi-Max Technology Innovation of the Year Award


Date Published: 22 Sep 2004




Las Vegas, Nev – September 22, 2004 – Frost & Sullivan will recognize Gaiacomm International Corporation, a front-runner in the development of fourth generation (4G) wireless delivery platform, as the recipient of 2004 Wi-Max Technology Innovation of the Year Award at tonight’s Excellence in Mobile Communications Awards Banquet. Gaiacomm receives the Award for its determined efforts toward developing the innovative Global Wireless Communications (GWC) Technology for advanced wireless applications.

The inability of third generation (3G) networks to live up to expectations in providing full-fledged broadband services has hampered the progress of sophisticated wireless applications that require speed and reliability. The absence of a robust delivery platform is compelling users to make a leap to 4G networks and this is exactly why Gaiacomm’s GWC venture assumes immense significance.

Gaiacomm’s 4G GWC technology, with its ability to provide increased signal speed and accessibility from literally anywhere on the planet, is expected to fill the void. It promises to deliver high quality, low-cost Internet protocol-based services, fiber-optic wireless connections, and thereby power a highly versatile global wireless communications system that could operate in the terahertz frequency regime.

Potential applications of Gaiacomm’s GWC are enormous and include business-to-business transmission as a ‘private’ network; service to metropolitan areas where fiber rings are located; and the enabling of access points that provide ultra-high-speed wireless access from the ring to neighboring buildings and businesses located within a radius of 15 miles. With such tremendous capabilities, it finds extensive use in military communications, homeland security, and a host of other mission-critical applications.

"Gaiacomm is one of the few survivors of the telecommunications business meltdown, and it is amongst a handful of companies that can boast of a breakthrough technology in its true sense," says Frost & Sullivan research analyst, Sivakumar. "With adequate funding and proprietary technology, Gaiacomm is well poised to expand the accessibility of the GWC technology space and become a major force in this sector."

For being a visionary in wireless communications technology and achieving technical excellence in its chosen field, Gaiacomm is the worthy recipient of Frost & Sullivan’s 2004 Technology Innovation of the Year Award. The award not only underlines the quality and depth of Gaiacomm’s R&D program, but also its ability to take calculated risks in pursuit of a path-breaking endeavor.

Frost & Sullivan’s Technology Innovation of the Year Award is presented annually to a company that has carried out new research, leading to pioneering innovation that already have or are expected to provide significant changes in the industry in terms of market adoption and competitive landscape.

Held in Las Vegas, Frost & Sullivan’s 2004 Excellence in Mobile Communications Awards Banquet honors world-class companies for outstanding performance and achievements in wireless and mobile strategy, technology, platforms, and services. An annual event, the banquet recognizes the quality and merit of distinguished individuals and companies.

When notified of their selection as the winner of this year’s award, Gaiacomm International Corporation President and CEO David H. Horne, Jr. expressed his gratitude and appreciation by saying, "Thanks so much. You have changed our lives forever and given us the credibility we have been seeking and altered our future in a way that simply could not be purchased or achieved otherwise. Dr. Ben-Hur, the physicist and genius behind this technological innovation will be thrilled."

About Gaiacomm International Corporation

Gaiacomm International Corporation was formed to secure contracts with all agencies and entities, private and public sector concerns, for the use of a special venture of high technological significance, the "Global Wireless Communications" Technology. This "GWC" technology primarily deals with a global network of land-based communications systems that use the magnetic field of the earth as a means to carry, reflect, and redistribute the signal, a modulated helix protocol, and a dedicated continuous power output, which will allow the use of newly designed wireless devices that are built around the new wireless protocol. Military communications will be greatly enhanced with a secure band exclusively dedicated for the entire gamut of military operations under water, on land, and in the air, at a reasonable cost. For detailed information, visit www.gaiacomminternational.com.

About Frost & Sullivan

Founded in 1961, Frost & Sullivan is recognized as a global leader in growth consulting. Frost & Sullivan Awards are presented to companies that demonstrate excellence in their industry, commending the diligence, commitment, and innovative business strategies required to advance in the global marketplace. Frost & Sullivan rigorously analyzes specific criteria to determine award recipients in a vast variety of industries. For further information, visit www.frost.com.

Contact:

Stacie Jones
210.247.2450
stacie.jones@frost.com

[halva]

Hey, Wayne, these Tyndall people have never supported your claims about "chemtrails". This is what they said:
" Aircraft contribute to warming, not cooling; contrails aren’t easily engineerable; and there is no evidence - despite decades of systematic aerosol and atmospheric analysis - that we are doing anything other than perfectly ‘normal’ pollution, which is of course a serious enough societal problem to address.


Besides that, exactly which airline did Dr. Schellnhuber take to this global warming conference? Here are the list of airlines that were suggested as "low cost" to make contrails into the meeting:
http://www.esof2004.org/registration/low_cost_flights.asp

And why were no chemmies presenting evidence for their claims at this meeting?

You are out of the loop Raynolds, and you are not going to get back in again by repeating the same tired old crap, and reiterating the same tired old questions I've answered a dozen times before. I have explained why I at least (I am not talking for all 'chemmies') seek to get atmospheric scientists coming to OUR meetings rather than us gatecrashing theirs.

In the meantime, you are not answering MY questions.

[halva]

Raynolds why don't you try to get in touch with Professor Schellnhuber again and pursue your discussion on how his institute's geoengineering proposals are a load of old cow droppings?

[halva]

You still haven't explained why you want to belong to an 'us' including your political opponent Chem 11 but you don't want to belong to an 'us" including your political ally DeMeo.

Both of them are hoaxers, according to you, but the cloudbusting hoax - by your own admission -is less heinous than the chemtrail hoax.

There is no obvious reason you should favour a major hoaxer who is your political opponent over a minor hoaxer who is on your side politically. Why do you?

[halva]

"Thanks so much. You have changed our lives forever and given us the credibility we have been seeking and altered our future in a way that simply could not be purchased or achieved otherwise. Dr. Ben-Hur, the physicist and genius behind this technological innovation will be thrilled."


Gaiacomm, if Raynolds has the right to think (and say) that you are Lance Haubrick, do I have the right to think (and say) that you are Raynolds?

[halva]

Which airline did Dr. Schellnhuber take to this global warming conference? Here are the list of airlines that were suggested as "low cost" to make contrails into the meeting:
http://www.esof2004.org/registration/low_cost_flights.asp


Raynolds, if you would like to start doing some systematic research into this subject it will be a good way of making yourself indispensable for the time when, to save your skin, you are obliged to change sides.

You will have in the meantime, though, to work hard to overcome your reputation for unreliability and untruthfulness. No more Lance Haubrick stories, for example.

[jayreynolds]

Frost & Sullivan Honors Gaiacomm International with 2004 Wi-Max Technology Innovation of the Year Award
Frost & Sullivan rigorously analyzes specific criteria to determine award recipients in a vast variety of industries. For further information, visit www.frost.com.


"Disclaimer
Frost.com is provided "as is" and "as available". These pages contain general information only and do not address any particular circumstances or requirements. Frost & Sullivan do not give any warranties, representations or undertakings, express or implied, about the content of this website, including, without limitation any as to quality or fitness for a particular purpose or any that information provided is accurate, complete or correct. In these respects, you must not place any reliance on any information provided by Frost.com for any purpose."
http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/disclaimer.pag

Lance, my research has revealed that Frost will say anything, for a price.

Good try, but money wasted, bub.

[halva]

No more Lance Haubrick stories, for example.

You are reckless to rely on the world's innumerable Lance Haubricks keeping their mouths shut to avoid contamination by the do-it-yourself 'virtual reality' in which you live.

One day they will all converge on you at once, in real reality.

[gaiacomm]

Readers:

Now that the cat is out the bag! and of course JR will alsways be a skeptic it is time for me to move on once again. As you have read I have been busy and I now need the time spent on the new 4G system. As for the Lance thing, let JR think what he thinks, it really makes no difference to me. Wayne keep up the fight! Someone will be right in the end. JR keep being a skeptic it keeps people honest!

I will dial in from time to time but as you all will soon read I will be a busy bee!

Signing off.........

[jayreynolds]

MEET THE REAL 'GAIACOMM'


'giacomm' AKA 'Dr.Judah Ben-hur' is a fraud and a liar. His real name is Lance Haubrick.
One look at his face will easily show that he is mentally unstable.


Though he graduated from Oregon State University with a master's degree in environmental engineering, his career has been a failure. Sensing this, before graduation, he fabvricated a grandiose delusion in which he was employed by Giacomm, a fictional corporation whose business has nothing whatsoever to do with environmental engineering.
http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ncs/newsarch/2002/Jan02/water.htm

He has, since then fabricated ever-more grandiose proclamations which have been posted on free 'press release websites-
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22gaiacomm+corporation%22&btnG=Google+Search

Haubrick suffers from Multiple Personality Disorder, which is usually produced as a result of violent childhood sexual trauma so horrible that it has to be dissociated from the host consciousness and lodged in an alternate personality. His main 'public mouthpiece'
alternate personality is "Dr, Judah Ben-hur", supposedly a physicist, who however, is inept at making any physics sense.

The reality is that Haubrick never has risen past being a sewer inspector on an Indian Reservation employed by Indian Health Services in Martin, South Dakota.
http://engr.oregonstate.edu/mailman/archives/public/jobs/2003-December/000553.html

After receiving continued threats from Lance Haubrick, many of which were made during working hours on a government owned computer, I contacted his supervisor, Albert Berreth, who was interested to read the threats made, and agreed that Haubrick was indeed a very disturbed individual. Berreth agreed to monitor Haubrick's antics and had his computer security manager contact me, who stated that they would cooperate fully with law enforcement officials if I wished to have him charged criminally.

The threats were stopped.

The fact is that Hubrick has been, and currently is, a very sick person in desperate need of psychiatric help. The most friendly gesture I could make is to tell him to immediately commit himself to a psychiatric hospital for diagnosis and treatment. He might find sanity and justice for the homosexual abuse he suffered as a child, but not by submerging his own distorted personality beneath a fake one. Get help now, Lance.

There are no misunderstandings between us but there is also no possibility of myself or anyone else ever "working together" with Haubrick until he is able to become sane again.

[halva]

This is not my fight, and it is the last thing I am interested in, but since Gaiacomm expects other people to conduct his battles for him, I will say this: I have spoken to Lance Haubrick on the telephone. A chemtrail activist who Raynolds succeeded in driving away from the cicdd forum has spoken to Dr. Judah Ben-Hur on the telephone. It is not so difficult to judge from a telephone conversation whether one is talking to one and the same person.

[halva]

Raynolds why don't you try to get in touch with Professor Schellnhuber again and pursue your discussion on how his institute's geoengineering proposals are a load of old cow droppings?

[halva]

You still haven't explained why you want to belong to an 'us' including your political opponent Chem 11 but you don't want to belong to an 'us" including your political ally DeMeo.

Both of them are hoaxers, according to you, but the cloudbusting hoax - by your own admission -is less heinous than the chemtrail hoax.

There is no obvious reason you should favour a major hoaxer who is your political opponent over a minor hoaxer who is on your side politically. Why do you?

[halva]

If he is Lance Haubrick he must be a fantastic mimic because Lance Haubrick was nothing at all like this. He sounded as he looks, a low-key, non-committal laid-back young American working guy who wouldn't have a clue about all this craziness. If Gaiacomm has the acting talent to pretend to be this guy he makes Peter Sellers look like an amateur.

WH

----- Original Message -----
From: M.D.
To: halva
Sent: Saturday, September 25, 2004 1:31 AM
Subject: [Fwd: Gaiacomm and Lance Haubrick]


All I can tell you Wayne is that the gaicom I spoke too sounded like a fat
eddy murphy, he also gave me the impression he was in a nut house.

M.

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Gaiacomm and Lance Haubrick
From: "Wayne Hall"
Date: Fri, September 24, 2004 8:49 pm
To: "M.D.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi M.

At Arianna's

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=137164#post137164

I wrote this:

"This is not my fight, and it is the last thing I am interested in, but
since Gaiacomm expects other people to conduct his battles for him, I will
say this: I have spoken to Lance Haubrick on the telephone. A chemtrail
activist who Raynolds succeeded in driving away from the cicdd forum has
spoken to Dr. Judah Ben-Hur on the telephone. It is not so difficult to
judge from a telephone conversation whether one is talking to one and the
same person."

[jayreynolds]

Raynolds why don't you try to get in touch with Professor Schellnhuber again and pursue your discussion on how his institute's geoengineering proposals are a load of old cow droppings?

I have not corresponded with him, Wayne.
However, don't expect me to argue your case for you.

his assistant has already told you that:
-what you are saying is mere "speculation"

-"This particular geoengineering
option [aerosol spraying] isn't excluded because it is "science
fiction" – on the contrary, our knowledge of the science facts
tell us unambiguously that trying to manipulate the atmosphere will
not lead to climate optimisation. If you wanted to cool the planet by making clouds, you would be very ill-advised to choose a mechanism (laying jet contrails) that made
clouds with such a short effective life, of the wrong type and in the
wrong place (indeed, contrails are likely to contribute to warming not
cooling), and that was also much more likely to add to the warming of
the planet by increasing the concentrations of climate-active
greenhouse gases."

-"Your concern seems to be that
emissions from aircraft are being altered deliberately to "sunscreen"
the planet. First of all, as I said, the radiative and chemical
effects of the contrails tend to work in the wrong direction for
cooling, and the net effects globally are uncertain or indeterminate.
Secondly, there is no evidence at all in the atmospheric chemistry
that chemically altered emissions are being generated."

Wayne, it's been a couple of months since Tyndall told you this. I'm sure that if you had succeeded in persuading them otherwise, you'd be crowing about it, so it's abundantly clear that they still don't believe your quackery.

Sorry, you lose.
Get over it.

[gaiacomm]

Wayne:

I just couldn't stay away and let JR get the last word. JR contact Frost and send them a picture of Lance for ID. When you get the word that I am not Lance that should finish you on this forum.

Of course you won't will you, it would solve the riddle and put you away for a hoax and force a lawsuit from Lance to you...and that would make Karen sad!

JR you have the data so put an end to this story if you dare! LOL

[gaiacomm]

JR...in case you forget!!!!



Search - Finance Home - Yahoo! - Help
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Welcome [Sign In] To track stocks & more, Register
Financial News
Enter symbol(s) BasicPerformanceReal-time MktDetailedChartResearchOptionsOrder Book Symbol Lookup







Press Release Source: Frost & Sullivan


Frost & Sullivan Honors Gaiacomm International with 2004 Wi-Max Technology Innovation of the Year Award
Wednesday September 22, 7:45 am ET


LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 22, 2004--Frost & Sullivan will recognize Gaiacomm International Corporation, a front-runner in the development of fourth generation (4G) wireless delivery platform, as the recipient of 2004 Wi-Max Technology Innovation of the Year Award at tonight's Excellence in Mobile Communications Awards Banquet. Gaiacomm receives the Award for its determined efforts toward developing the innovative Global Wireless Communications (GWC) Technology for advanced wireless applications.
ADVERTISEMENT


The inability of third generation (3G) networks to live up to expectations in providing full-fledged broadband services has hampered the progress of sophisticated wireless applications that require speed and reliability. The absence of a robust delivery platform is compelling users to make a leap to 4G networks and this is exactly why Gaiacomm's GWC venture assumes immense significance.

Gaiacomm's 4G GWC technology, with its ability to provide increased signal speed and accessibility from literally anywhere on the planet, is expected to fill the void. It promises to deliver high quality, low-cost Internet protocol-based services, fiber-optic wireless connections, and thereby power a highly versatile global wireless communications system that could operate in the terahertz frequency regime.

Potential applications of Gaiacomm's GWC are enormous and include business-to-business transmission as a 'private' network; service to metropolitan areas where fiber rings are located; and the enabling of access points that provide ultra-high-speed wireless access from the ring to neighboring buildings and businesses located within a radius of 15 miles. With such tremendous capabilities, it finds extensive use in military communications, homeland security, and a host of other mission-critical applications.

"Gaiacomm is one of the few survivors of the telecommunications business meltdown, and it is amongst a handful of companies that can boast of a breakthrough technology in its true sense," says Frost & Sullivan research analyst, Sivakumar. "With adequate funding and proprietary technology, Gaiacomm is well poised to expand the accessibility of the GWC technology space and become a major force in this sector."

For being a visionary in wireless communications technology and achieving technical excellence in its chosen field, Gaiacomm is the worthy recipient of Frost & Sullivan's 2004 Technology Innovation of the Year Award. The award not only underlines the quality and depth of Gaiacomm's R&D program, but also its ability to take calculated risks in pursuit of a path-breaking endeavor.

Frost & Sullivan's Technology Innovation of the Year Award is presented annually to a company that has carried out new research, leading to pioneering innovation that already have or are expected to provide significant changes in the industry in terms of market adoption and competitive landscape.

Held in Las Vegas, Frost & Sullivan's 2004 Excellence in Mobile Communications Awards Banquet honors world-class companies for outstanding performance and achievements in wireless and mobile strategy, technology, platforms, and services. An annual event, the banquet recognizes the quality and merit of distinguished individuals and companies.

When notified of their selection as the winner of this year's award, Gaiacomm International Corporation President and CEO David H. Horne, Jr. expressed his gratitude and appreciation by saying, "Thanks so much. You have changed our lives forever and given us the credibility we have been seeking and altered our future in a way that simply could not be purchased or achieved otherwise. Dr. Ben-Hur, the physicist and genius behind this technological innovation will be thrilled."

About Gaiacomm International Corporation

Gaiacomm International Corporation was formed to secure contracts with all agencies and entities, private and public sector concerns, for the use of a special venture of high technological significance, the "Global Wireless Communications" Technology. This "GWC" technology primarily deals with a global network of land-based communications systems that use the magnetic field of the earth as a means to carry, reflect, and redistribute the signal, a modulated helix protocol, and a dedicated continuous power output, which will allow the use of newly designed wireless devices that are built around the new wireless protocol. Military communications will be greatly enhanced with a secure band exclusively dedicated for the entire gamut of military operations under water, on land, and in the air, at a reasonable cost. For detailed information, visit www.gaiacomminternational.com.

About Frost & Sullivan

Founded in 1961, Frost & Sullivan is recognized as a global leader in growth consulting. Frost & Sullivan Awards are presented to companies that demonstrate excellence in their industry, commending the diligence, commitment, and innovative business strategies required to advance in the global marketplace. Frost & Sullivan rigorously analyzes specific criteria to determine award recipients in a vast variety of industries. For further information, visit www.frost.com.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact:
Frost & Sullivan, San Antonio
Stacie Jones, 210-247-2450
stacie.jones@frost.com



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Frost & Sullivan


Email Story
Set News Alert
Print Story






Sponsor Results
Wj Communications: In-Depth Company Info
Go to Hoover's Online for in-depth, first-hand, company coverage provided by business experts. Get an overview, key executive bios, financials, news, industry trends, and competitor info.
www.hoovers.com

(What's This?)



Top Stories
· Energy Worries Becoming Hard to Shake - Associated Press (8:33 am)
· Delta Stock Drops Amid Bankruptcy Fears - Associated Press (Fri Sep 24)
· Oil Prices Rise Again As Production Lags - Associated Press (3:10 am)
· Stock Market's Woes Weigh on Mutual Funds - Associated Press (Fri Sep 24)
More...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

· Most-emailed articles
· Most-viewed articles








--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright © 2004 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Copyright Policy - Ad Feedback
Copyright © 2004 Business Wire. All rights reserved. All the news releases provided by Business Wire are copyrighted. Any forms of copying other than an individual user's personal reference without express written permission is prohibited. Further distribution of these materials by posting, archiving in a public web site or database, or redistribution in a computer network is strictly forbidden.

[jayreynolds]

JR...in case you forget!!!!.

Hey, Lance, in case you forgot, you were exposed two years ago as a fraud and a nutcase.
Even Wayne's pad'na man ovum evacuator says so:
http://forums.orgonite.com/postview/1423/

[gaiacomm]

Hey, Lance, in case you forgot, you were exposed two years ago as a fraud and a nutcase.
Even Wayne's pad'na man ovum evacuator says so:
http://forums.orgonite.com/postview/1423/


Hey JR contact Frost and find out for yourself. You took the time to contact Lance's employer so why not submit the photo for ID. After all they know what Ben-Hur looks like.

I wonder if you will publish the results or just go away in shame?

We will be waiting for your results, JR! LOL

[halva]

-"Your concern seems to be that
emissions from aircraft are being altered deliberately to "sunscreen"
the planet. First of all, as I said, the radiative and chemical
effects of the contrails tend to work in the wrong direction for
cooling, and the net effects globally are uncertain or indeterminate.
Secondly, there is no evidence at all in the atmospheric chemistry
that chemically altered emissions are being generated."

Wayne, it's been a couple of months since Tyndall told you this. I'm sure that if you had succeeded in persuading them otherwise, you'd be crowing about it, so it's abundantly clear that they still don't believe your quackery.

Sorry, you lose.
Get over it.

Dr. Sarah Cornell is clearly quite embarrassed about you leaking to this forum her personal correspondence with you, which contradicts Tyndall's stated policy of not engaging in private communication with anthropogenic climate change debunkers.

As for crowing: I would not be crowing on this forum about any breakthroughs achieved anywhere, since that woud provide you with information. My policy is to oblige you as much as possible to rely on speculation and knowledge obtained in the increasingly remote past.

[halva]

Hey JR contact Frost and find out for yourself. You took the time to contact Lance's employer so why not submit the photo for ID. After all they know what Ben-Hur looks like.

I wonder if you will publish the results or just go away in shame?

We will be waiting for your results, JR! LOL

Gaiacomm, Raynolds employs lies in pursuit of political objectives. If you can't stop him lying about you, face this fact, and see if you can find a more effective way of dealing with it.

For him it makes no difference whether he can prove you are Lance Haubrick or prove you are a nutcase.

As long as there is no intervention here from Lance Haubrick, these assertions amount to the same thing.

Raynolds gambles entirely on the Lance Haubricks of the world staying out of these matters, going to work every day and not caring about what is said about them by people they can safely pretend do not exist as long as they stay in their private world and don't start meddling in public affairs.

You too, it seems, don't feel right about trying to involve Haubrick. There must be too much contradiction between your internet life and your real life.

I rang him once or twice, but I confess that I feel ashamed about luring people into the sewers in which we do battle with this Raynolds.

[halva]

Reiterating:


You still haven't explained why you want to belong to an 'us' including your political opponent Chem 11 but you don't want to belong to an 'us" including your political ally DeMeo.

Both of them are hoaxers, according to you, but the cloudbusting hoax - by your own admission -is less heinous than the chemtrail hoax.

There is no obvious reason you should favour a major hoaxer who is your political opponent over a minor hoaxer who is on your side politically. Why do you?

[halva]

Errors for Gaiacomm to correct:

1. Wishful thinking and resultant ineffectuality


Wayne:

I just couldn't stay away and let JR get the last word. JR contact Frost and send them a picture of Lance for ID. When you get the word that I am not Lance that should finish you on this forum.

[halva]

2. Ideologically-driven 'idee fixes'

Originally Posted by halva:
Gaiacomm does Raynolds have a right to his "opinion" that Gaiacomm is Lance Haubrick?


Yes JR has that right! But soon he will have the proof he needs to understand that I am not lance. But until then he has the right to believe it until proven otherwise.


Gaiacomm, Raynolds does NOT have the right to say that you are Lance Haubrick if you are not, and he does NOT have the right to say that chemtrails do not exist if they do.

Do you persist in your view that he does? Are lies of this kind really examples of a valuable 'scepticism' needed for the health of public debate?

Would you not be ashamed if you made such elementary errors in your scientific/technical work?

[gaiacomm]

Gaiacomm, Raynolds employs lies in pursuit of political objectives. If you can't stop him lying about you, face this fact, and see if you can find a more effective way of dealing with it.

For him it makes no difference whether he can prove you are Lance Haubrick or prove you are a nutcase.

As long as there is no intervention here from Lance Haubrick, these assertions amount to the same thing.

Raynolds gambles entirely on the Lance Haubricks of the world staying out of these matters, going to work every day and not caring about what is said about them by people they can safely pretend do not exist as long as they stay in their private world and don't start meddling in public affairs.

You too, it seems, don't feel right about trying to involve Haubrick. There must be too much contradiction between your internet life and your real life.

I rang him once or twice, but I confess that I feel ashamed about luring people into the sewers in which we do battle with this Raynolds.



Wayne,

I always have been someone else but Lance. But I have once again challenged JR to prove thru Frost who I am which will stop him from ever posting here or anywhere else om the net.

We have beat him together, he has lost his way in the matrix and will soon fade into the shadows and live his life with Karen! Just wait a bit more to see.

[gaiacomm]

2. Ideologically-driven 'idee fixes'

Originally Posted by halva:
Gaiacomm does Raynolds have a right to his "opinion" that Gaiacomm is Lance Haubrick?



Gaiacomm, Raynolds does NOT have the right to say that you are Lance Haubrick if you are not, and he does NOT have the right to say that chemtrails do not exist if they do.

Do you persist in your view that he does? Are lies of this kind really examples of a valuable 'scepticism' needed for the health of public debate? (

Would you not be ashamed if you made such elementary errors in your scientific/technical work?
In short Wayne, This is the internet where snakes and demons play and pretend to be gods, preditors of sex and deciet fill these walls of truth. The internet should be used as an information exchange of truth and goodwill towards all humans.

I would not be ashamed if I made a mistake with my current research because if I did I would be dead anayway. My work requires no mistakes at all. Plus if we all fear mistakes then we never will progress forward.

[jayreynolds]

Reiterating:You still haven't explained why you want to belong to an 'us' including your political opponent Chem 11 but you don't want to belong to an 'us" including your political ally DeMeo.
Both of them are hoaxers, according to you, but the cloudbusting hoax - by your own admission -is less heinous than the chemtrail hoax.
There is no obvious reason you should favour a major hoaxer who is your political opponent over a minor hoaxer who is on your side politically. Why do you?

Wayne, I already explained that I don't support any hoaxers whatsoever.

Nevertheless, some hoaxers may make statements which agree with the facts, as Chem11 did when he stated that the claims about barium are a myth:

"I wish people would do a little more independant research before jumping on the Ba bandwagon, though. It's a dead-end and it's throwing an enormous barricade in front of the eventual resolution of the problem; if you could somehow nullify the very existance of Ba and wipe it off of the periodic table, you still have aerosol trails and cirrus aviaticus."

"I would really like to see you giving some more backup to your 'barium and aluminium as red herring' thesis because I can't understand it, and I suspect that many others here can't either."

"It's a frustrating topic for me, because it took me years of researching and chin-stroking to seprate the wheat from the chaff, and it's easier for many people to simply accept something they read on another site as the de facto truth than to do their own homework. This apllies to token environemental orgs as much as it does to the casually chemtrail aware, I suppose. Or even the not so-casual. It's a fairly complex topic and it could easily take another five years to debunk (and I mean this in the original and true sense of the word) the barium myth. Which is why I kept my mouth shut until I was damn sure I had my facts straight on this."

In that respect, and almost solely in that respect, chem11 and I agree. I have offered to debate his current "chemtrail" claim, for instance, that there has been an increase in jet fuel sulfate levels for the purpose of geoengineering. He has failed to defend his claim, because it has no merit. He is and always has been, a has-been hoaxer, a liar, and no ally of mine.

[halva]

I can't comment on Chem 11's views on barium or sulphates or whatever. We shouldn't have to speculate or make theories about these questions. There is no good reason for what is happening in the skies to be secret. The reason for the secrecy is that that the shitty political 'system' through which the rulers of this planet exercise their power cannot be relied upon to process the reality in a way that they are willing to risk. That is why they have employed, or drawn on the voluntary services of, animals such as yourself to do what you do.

As a long-term strategy it's not a goer.

[gaiacomm]

JR, Frost is waiting for you! LOL

[halva]

Wayne,

I have once again challenged JR to prove thru Frost who I am which will stop him from ever posting here or anywhere else om the net.

We have beat him together.

Gaiacomm, you have not beat him. You are a neurotic.

[jayreynolds]

Wayne,I always have been someone else but Lance. But I have once again challenged JR to prove thru Frost who I am which will stop him from ever posting here or anywhere else on the net.


Readers, I find it extremely satisfying to see that Lance Haubrick, faced with the exposure of his "Dr. Judah ben-hur' hoax identity across the internet, has been forced to spend a great deal of money hiring a public relations agency to prop himself up. For that is exactly what Frost is in the business of doing, publicizing people by creation of self-serving "press releases", being a paid mouthpiece for hire to anyone, at a price. To rely on a paid PR firm for accurate information on a hoaxer who has made a practice of deception is the pinnacle of folly.


Don't believe me? have a look for yourselves at what they do, day in-day out:
http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/press-en-releases-index.pag?mkt=CI

Lance Haubrick, AKA 'gaiacomm', and his pseudonym 'Dr. Judah ben-hur' is fooling no-one except himself if he believes he can gain credibility since his past exploits are just a goggle away. This lets you know exactly how shallow the depth of "Frost.com's" commitment towards accuracy really is:
http://www.google.com/search?q=gaiacomm&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&start=20&sa=N

[gaiacomm]

JR;

Its so nice to see that you take the time away from Karen and spend it attempting to debunk data that you know very little about. Your insistence with this Lance is a key indication of your denial syndrome of the truth. Why could i not be any other person with gaiacomm...why lance is because o a photo avaliable? You have the ability to contact all of the members of gaiacomm but you won't because you are afraid of the dark!

I amuse myself with you JR and enjoy the fun! But I know this is only the internet and you could be anyone, anywhere. In short you are the HOAX that got caught in your net!

Wayne beleives in something and you don't! Go back to Karen and spend some quality time with her rather than the boys here on the net!

LOL