It's not nice to fool with Mother Nature

[jayreynolds]

Thank you, Jay. That is truly fascinating. So, one can then conclude that Jim Phelps is of Jewish decent. How do you explain his behavior, then - his animosity toward Jews?
Hitler was at least part Jewish, and look what he did!
I think the anti-semitic thing happened for Jim in the same way it did for Hitler.
A transference of his personal failures onto a scapegoat.
These sorts all have very simple psyches, nothing complicated here.
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/nuremberg/NurembergFrank.html.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Seemingly the infamous Jay Reynolds mob have distroyed themselves, proving they can't do simple science. Ruined they are. Discredited to the maximum. Nothing they have become. Even unable to sense the differences between god and God--following the yellow bricked road to perdition-----they seek and found the abyss.

Now Jay Reynolds' grand diversion plan lies in the open ready to be exposed. He hoaxed everyone with the statement that there is no such thing as chemtrails. He even screws up and manipulates long accepted definitions.

Jet engines have always have exhaused chemtrails, by definition. They don't even emit pure water or form pure condensates ever, as they are a complex of chemical emissions involving varied states from frozen liquids, to liquids, to gases, to nanoparticles.

The question has been do these Jet Chemtrails change the amount of condensate that forms in the chemtrail plume and the YES answer there comes from a million photos in the internet. The answer is yes that catalytic changes in the jet fuel can change the water amounts in the chemtrail plume, and its water gathering abilities from the surrounding air too.

We can also see well how they do this by the refinery engineering making more environmentally compliant fuels that results in higher hydrogen content in the fuels than the old straight run jet fuels of the old days. JP-8 has the highest added hydrogen content ever and it is made in refinery processes that conserve the added hydrogen.

The first inventions that did the catalytic cloud making were based upon the high sulfur content of the fuel and used aluminum as a catalysist. As emissions regulations and the technologies changed the sulfur content was lowered and my second generation plan for chemtrails came into vogue with the high hydrogen JP-8 and jet engine technology changes. The aluminum concerns of the jet fuel process moved into the refineries, and the much much more significant problem of the acids liberating aluminum from the soil became even larger from the much more prolific cloud making happening from human engineered jet chemtrails.

Lowering the sulfur in jet fuels, the SOx component, increased global warming, so the hydrogen cloud making compensates and titanium has to be air spayed around areas with high NOx and associated ozone problems to compensate.

The toxicity issue for chemtrails from jet planes has always been there, by defintion jets emit chemicals. The issue is do these chemtrails with human engineered growing levels of cloud making poison the planet, aka humans and animals. And the answer is yes they do via raining down the acids with poisons in them like HF and the acids liberating more toxic metals, like aluminum.

Thus, it is shown, with zero doubt, that chemtrails do contribute and slowly poison animals and man. It is also shown that the chemtrail term is more correct and less misleading from the problems at hand. The term chemtrail is inclusive of even the cloud making combinations with the acids in the air and the rain out process.

Jay Reynolds has been shown to be a fraud, by all the claims on chemtrails just being water and being safe. Jay Reynolds sciences don't follow even the simple definitions on jet emissions and via that simple process get to the relevant points.

Jay Reynolds and his entire discredited mob are in denial----and the panic that they lost the debate consumes them----as they fall faster and faster into the abyss of nothingness. Their yellow brick road to perdition comes to an abrupt end----as the people all around the world wake up to the fraud attemped upon them by Reynolds.

IMHO,
is

[stuart_allsop]

Simon Stuart asserts:

"Ummm... if they increade the amount of H in the fuel, then how on earth did that increase the N and the O? You are not making any sense! "

==========

If anyone has to explain that one to you-----you are definitely deep well below the dumb-ass criteria. Down around chemical illiterate. (Note to others: I guess he never heard of what goes up his nose.)

Excellent! Just what I was hoping for! The exact reaction I wanted to proved that jimbo is actually dumbo.

Simple excercise in math: Let's say that, for argument's sake, JP-8 normally has 15% hydrogen. obviously, all the other components combined make up the remaining 85%. So, if by some act of magic someone where to increase the content of H up to 20%, then OBVIOUSLY all the rest combined now add up to only 80%!!! Duh!

Yet jimbo wants us to believe that the act of increasing the total volume of H in the fuel, also increase the total volume of O and N? Are we to believe that this new fuel somehow defies the laws of math, and that the total of all the compaounds actually adds up to MORE then 100% That would be a NEAT trick!

QED.

jimbo is a clown that likes to blather tehcno-babble.

[jayreynolds]

Simple excercise in math: Let's say that, for argument's sake, JP-8 normally has 15% hydrogen.

jimbo is a clown that likes to blather tehcno-babble.

Stuart, JP-8 is basially kerosene, it's constituent is nominally decane, C10H22.


The first inventions that did the catalytic cloud making were based upon the high sulfur content of the fuel and used aluminum as a catalysist. As emissions regulations and the technologies changed the sulfur content was lowered and my second generation plan for chemtrails came into vogue with the high hydrogen JP-8 and jet engine technology changes.

Jim has never specified the specific aluminum compound "Used as a catalyst" he claims is in JP-8. NO PROOF, REMEMBER, JIMBO? THAT ALWAYS SEEMS TO BE YOUR PROBLEM!

Now, it's real interesting he remains consistent about "chemtrails" being HIS OWN INVENTION.
BUT NO PROOF, NAMES, ETC, JIMMY BOY, RIGHT?

He says, "my second generation plan" and then infers that JP-8 hydrogen content was increased.

OK, JIMBO, how was hydrogen increased in JP-8 jet fuel, what is it's new chemical formulae, and where is the proof that what you say is true? Certainly you don't expect anybody to just "believe"(well maybe Brian Holmes,tee-hee-hee) you without proof?

After all, you claim to be a "whistleblower". Are you a real whistleblower who shows PROOF, or are you just another pipe-dream blower who blows smoke up people's ass????

Are you going to become a "Wayne Hall" and sit at the cafe swilling Ouzo and sucking olives all day?

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Just excellent Chemtrail photos. If anyone finds more like these, please list them.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/428117/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/718260/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/698544/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/637287/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/613921/M/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/569626/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/556243/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/709166/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/709165/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/508401/M/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/287638/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/556245/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/425455/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/680392/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/684854/M/

Many thanks to all who helped call everyones attention to these. The interest has been tremendous.

I would encourage all pilots to take photos like these and share them in varied ways. Be sure to patronize those that host these images.

IMHO,
is

[airtankerpilot]

Chemtrails are not defined as normal jet exhaust.

According to those who came up with the conspiracy, chemtrails are an intentional release of added chemicals, besides what is normal.

They dont know exactly what chemicals, or exactly how it is being released, or even who is doing it (each chemtral believer has their own idea), but they sure know it is going on :)

I have seen the following listed as what is being released intentionally

Red Blood cells
"fibrils"
SARS
Barium
Aluminum
Gel
Flu and cold viruses

I am sure there is more, thats all I can remember right now

THere is no unified chemtrail theory, basically its a big free for all conspiracy

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Lets not forget titanium dioxide. It was one of my best ideas.

IMHO,
is

[jayreynolds]

Jimbo,
Are these "chemtrails"?
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/wwiitrails.html

[jayreynolds]

Wayne, I see my debunker buddy chem11 is berating you and Brian Holmes about the misinformation regarding those ordinary contrail images ripped off from airliners.net.


If someone is running around deliberatley disinforming people, then the public should made aware of this activity (unless you, yourself, wish to be counted among the ranks of the John Reynolds, Patrick Minnis, Deb Phalen and 'Sprayplane Pilot').
Hint, hint, Wayne, all of the last mentioned people are banned from the Megasprayer forum.
watch your back!

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Its called wartime obscurant methods. Germans used obscurants to conceil airfield, factories, oil refineries. Saddam used obscurants (oil fires) to hide Iraq targets.

US and UK used it to hide trailing planes from fighters and ground targeting.

Method: Combat Multiplier. Compound was often "Titanium tetrachloride." (replaced white phosphoros due to toxicity problems)

http://www.stormingmedia.us/13/1338/A133893.html


It was not used to induce rain or compensate for toxic environmental factors. However, both chemtrails and obscurant can be considered defensive measures. Chemtrails obscure the sun and produce rain, and obscurants just obscure visibility down the vector of interest.



http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/doctrine/dod/fm8-9/3ch8.htm

Titanium Tetrachloride (FM).
This is a yellow non-inflammable and corrosive fluid which on contact with damp air gives off a heavy dense white cloud. It is disseminated by aircraft for the production of vertical smoke curtains extending down to ground and sea level. The smoke consists of fine particles of free hydrochloric acid and titanium oxychloride. The smoke is unpleasant to breathe. Goggles or a respirator should be worn when the spray is falling due to the risk of droplets entering the eyes. Full protective clothing should be worn when handling the liquid to avoid contamination of eyes and skin.



Similar to chemtrails in appearances--but not quite the same purpose. Both chemically induced by man.

Using such photos and such a web page is called deception, as WWII bombers ran on gas and new jets run on jet fuel. One needs to formally disclose that.

IMHO,
is

[airtankerpilot]

Did you noticed the part in the FAS reference about "in contact with damp air".

Air in the upper 20K to 40s is not damp air by any means. Its extremely cold, very thin too. And there would be no point to leaving long trails that just get blown across the country

And is it a coincidence much of it is on high altitude jet airways, and coming from airliners?

[jayreynolds]

I displayed photos of Us bombers and fighter escorts from WWII making contrails, and asked Jimbo if they were 'chemtrails:
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/wwiitrails.html

This was Jim Phelps response:

Its called wartime obscurants. Germans used obscurants to conceil airfield, factories, oil refineries. Saddam used obscurants (oil fires) to hide Iraq targets.
US and UK used it to hide trailing planes from fighters and ground targeting.
Method: Combat Multiplier. Compound was often "Titanium tetrachloride." (replaced white phosphoros due to toxicity problems)
http://www.stormingmedia.us/13/1338/A133893.html


Jim Phelps must think everybody else is even stupider than he. Jim, B-17 bombers did their best to avoid making contrails. Those contrails in the pictures were considered "giant fingers in the sky" pointing out the flights to anti-aircraft batteries and enemy fighters. The idea that such contrails would serve as "obscurants" is ludicrous. The contrails in some cases actually DID obscure the skies, however, and caused problems for planes flying further back in the formation, sometimes causing them to lose visual contact with the lead planes, whose job it was to sight the target for the rest of the formation.

The link you directed us to says nothing about such uses as Jim Phelps claims, except that the Air Force used smoke to mark targets and to distinguish lead planes while forming up en-mass after take-off. Jimbo is bogus as a three dollar bill!






http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/doctrine/dod/fm8-9/3ch8.htm
Titanium Tetrachloride (FM).
This is a yellow non-inflammable and corrosive fluid which on contact with damp air gives off a heavy dense white cloud. It is disseminated by aircraft for the production of vertical smoke curtains extending down to ground and sea level. The smoke consists of fine particles of free hydrochloric acid and titanium oxychloride. The smoke is unpleasant to breathe. Goggles or a respirator should be worn when the spray is falling due to the risk of droplets entering the eyes. Full protective clothing should be worn when handling the liquid to avoid contamination of eyes and skin.

Jimbo, before you said the contrails behind the B-17s at my webpage were "wartime obscurants", now you cite a link which describes "vertical smoke curtains descending down to the ground"
JIMBO, THAT IS DEFINITELY NOT WHAT IS SHOWN IN THE PHOTOS!


Using such photos and such a web page is called deception.

No, Jimbo, it's called documentation of ordinary contrails which, other than being from far smaller gasoline powered piston engines, are identical in all respects to the airliners.net contrail photos you called "chemtrails". Jimbo, you aren't fooling anyone. No one is falling into any abyss except you. Your claims fail to be supported in any respect whatsoever by anything other than your own delusions. Day by day they become more disjointed, more extravagant, more magical, and more preposterous.

You are building a tomb of lies around yourself from which there is no escape. Tell enough lies and you virtually disappear behind the wall, Jimbo. Despite your grand hyperbolic opinion of yourself, this sort of stupidity doesn't go unnoticed. You've sealed your fate, buddy.
Sad but true.

IMHO,
is[/QUOTE]

[airtankerpilot]

So every WW2 plane leaving a trail was actually using some kind of obscuring agent?

WRONG.

Sorry, but I know more about WW2 history and WW2 aircraft than you ever will. None of them used it. Besides the whole idea of it is silly.

Aircraft move too fast for it, and besides, IT POINTS RIGHT TO THE AIRCRAFT, MAKING IT MORE VISIBLE.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

If old B-17's make such huge trails, then all those passenger planes would to the same after the war.

I've never seen any passenger planes making such in the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's. No one else has either. Where are the old Delta prop plane photos with these trails?

Only in the 90's.

If there is no moisture in the air for making TiCl4 reactions, then there exist no condensate trails. Interesting logic so far. Sure you know WWii stuff.

IMHO,
is

[airtankerpilot]

Yes, I have flown a WW2 era aircraft.

And yes, there are photos of contrails from later on, its just not in the same because you dont have airliners in formations of over 1000, with hundreds of escort fighters, and then hundreds of attacking aircraft, and then with some bomber crewmen carrying cameras.

Can you find any mention of any WW2 aircraft carrying anything like that? No, you cant.
Do you have any evidence for it? No you dont.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

More irrational science on Cirrus Cloud formation. Cirrus Clouds are formed above 18,000 Ft by natural processes of making ice crystals. They are thin and wispy and tend to stay up there and sublime. Natural Cirrus Clouds are small particle size and don't reflect much IR by Mie Scattering.

However, Jet Chemtrals are not formed by natural processes. They look white like Cirrus Clouds, but they are larger particles that reflect IR. Chemtrails observations show the particles are heavy and fall to lower altitudes, picking up more mass as they fall. They are large and fall to quickly to sublime. They are not produced by equilibrium conditions as a natural currus cloud are formed and the chemtrail clouds won't follow the same patterns as natural cirrus clouds.


This is another trick to tell these chemtrails are "Cirrus Clouds" that are produced by equilibrium states, forming slowly--naturally.

Chemtrials forms these cloud particles almost instantly and they are heavy particles and begin to fall. This does not meet the Cirrus definition well. Chemtrails are after IR scattering and seeding of rainfall below as they fall.

So, someone is doing stupid misleading sciences again. More like Idiots at play again.

When heavy Chemtrails fall to lower altitudes they don't stay above 18,000 Ft and they unfreeze. They make / seed rain.

More lies abound from the Reynolds idiots mob.

IMHO,
is

[airtankerpilot]

So in other words, they saw Cirrus Uncinus. "Mares Tail Cirrus"

They made an observation and had no idea what it was, so they attributed it to some government spraying conspiracy.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Drunken tank pilot:

So in other words, they saw Cirrus Uncinus. "Mares Tail Cirrus"

They made an observation and had no idea what it was, so they attributed it to some government spraying conspiracy.

========

Who is they? Are we talking some random sample of the population, specific persons, or the idiots associated with Reynolds?

Chemtrails don't do normal weather things. They make heavy particles that fall slowly and don't stay suspended well.

Chemtrail methods are several. Some use commercial jets for the Sun shield, and others are dedicated flights to spray chemicals.

Somehow I think cameras have been around a long long time and the civilians have lots of them---where are the photos of Delta prop planes with dense long persistent trails?

IMHO,
is

[airtankerpilot]

DC-4 6 7 models typically did not fly that high, especially the 4 model. WW2 combat was a different story, than B-17 24 and 29s flying over Germany or Japan, and there was no consideration for "comfort" for the aircrew.

You are going to have more photos of lots of contrails, when you have thousands of aircraft in close proximity like what happened in WW2

You still have no evidence of WW2 aircraft releasing any chemicals. Nor do you have any evidence of any modern transport category aircraft doing it either.

Well you mentiond people making observations of falling chemicals and thats what i was referring to earlier. Its mares tail cirrus.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Drunken Tank Pilot:

Well you mentiond people making observations of falling chemicals and thats what i was referring to earlier. Its mares tail cirrus.

====

Yes, those photos are examples of Mare's tail cirris. And one appears triggered by a chemtrail fall.

Still, chemtrails are not normal Mare's tails-----enhanced perhaps. They promote deeper and faster falls.

If these falls fell into Nimbus at lower altitudes-----that is the same as seeding methods for rain. They, the chemtrails, will cause rain. Acid rain. And this is a problem, because it modifies rainfall patterns and drags down acids from the air.


Now you going to have to make up your mind on a number of things. First, if these WWII planes had no moisture up there------where did those trails come from?

Then explain your excuse on TiCl4 not having any moisture. Opps. Logical your not.


Your also going to have to explain how all those 1000 bombers went anywhere without being seen 300 miles away with trails like those. They would all be shot out of the skies by your criteria. Did you flunk logic somewhere. Either they could run without these trails or they could not.



You also going to have to explain in your vast WWII expertise, why most all those bombing runs were done at night to use the best obscurant of all----darkness. You don't sound like you know WWII bombers too well. They also liked to run missions with cloud cover and use instruments to get to the target.


Besides all that, the Germans had RADAR and they could tell close to where the bombers were going and fire up the batteries and search lights ahead of time. Now, if you were up there----would you like the batteries to see you clearly or some clouds to fly in?


Did the WWII bombers trails persist from horizon to horizon? Were the fuels of the WWII bombers modified from the straight run process. Were the engines modified to make denser trails?

U ever fly a KC-135?


imho,
is

[jayreynolds]

Look, Jimbo, you are really going behind the Pale here trying to claim that B-17's couldn't make ordinary contrails, or carried some fuel other than gasoline, etc.
You are making yourself into a real idiot meathead here.
Jimbo, ordinary contrails formed from B-17's.
They followed the laws of physics then, and the same laws apply now.

Is it any wonder Wayne and Deborah have abandoned you here?

[jayreynolds]

Your also going to have to explain how all those 1000 bombers went anywhere without being seen 300 miles away with trails like those. They would all be shot out of the skies by your criteria. Did you flunk logic somewhere. Either they could run without these trails or they could not.
Jimbo, they did their best to avoid making contrails. They didn't have much fuel to waste and so it was sometimes unavoidable.


You also going to have to explain in your vast WWII expertise, why most all those bombing runs were done at night to use the best obscurant of all----darkness. You don't sound like you know WWII bombers too well. They also liked to run missions with cloud cover and use instruments to get to the target.

Jimbo, you have zero knowledge of WWII. My father flew his full thirty missions and has told me excatly what all those pilots knew.

The bombsights were optical devices, and so the targets were usually not visible at night. For that reason they were forced to do precision bombing during the daylight. They could not acquire targets in clouds or instruments and sometimes were forced to drop elsewhere or abort the mission.
"However, when the US entered the war against Germany, its official air policy was to strike at military targets--submarine pens, ballbearing plants, fighter aircraft factories. The US therefore bombed their targets during daylight. In contrast, the British Royal Air Force (RAF), like the Luftwaffe, bombed cities at night, imprecisely, to slaughter civilians and to terrorize, although this was denied by Bomber Command."
http://www.afsc.org/pwork/1100/112k04b.htm

"The idea of daylight bombing was implemented by the Americans who thought this was the only way to win the war. The British bombed at night and caused equal damage and considered daylight raids suicidal. The Americans thought that if they could see the target during the daylight hours, they could maintain pinpoint precision, and accidental bombings of heavily populated civilian areas could be avoided. All historical accounts have shown that just the opposite was true. Daylight raids were suicidal until after the invasion of Normandy because only then could fighter escorts travel with the bombers for the entire mission instead of turning around and returning to England to refuel."
http://www.epcc.edu/ftp/Homes/monicaw/borderlands/13_crew_members_B-17.htm


Besides all that, the Germans had RADAR and they could tell close to where the bombers were going and fire up the batteries and search lights ahead of time. Now, if you were up there----would you like the batteries to see you clearly or some clouds to fly in?
Here are missions that were aborted due to clouds:
" Feb 6 7:00 Nancy, France Clouds; brought bombs back.
Feb 22 8:40 Aalborg, Denmark Clouds; no bombs dropped. 2 a/c lost.
Mar 3 7:15 Berlin Ball bearing plant. Clouds; recalled. 1 a/c lost.
If the weather had cooperated, this would have been the first raid on Berlin,
the capital of the Third Reich, by the Eighth AAF, a momentous and morale
boosting achievement.
Mar 20 7:15 Frankfurt am Main Clouds; aborted.
http://www.jmi.com/WWII/missions.html

"Mission 20
“This mission was known as ‘Pandemonium over Pilsen’, or ‘the big mix-up’. This was the final mission of the 8th Air Force, which took place on April 25, 1945. Our target was the Scoda Works armament plant at Pilsen, Czechoslovakia. [/u]We were to only bomb the target visually, however, clouds drifted over the target, so we had to go around.[/u] We had to keep circling, there was a lot of confusion, plus, we were getting peppered by flak. Our number 3 engine was hit; it started to smoke, so we feathered it."

"The target was hidden by low clouds, so we bombed the alternate target which was the railroad marshaling yards at Offenburg (near Strausbourg). As you may recall, old 4725 only carried about 1560 gallons of gas, while the later models had another 1400 gallons of gas in the wing tips, or a total of 2960 gallons of gas"
http://www.aafo.com/library/history/B-17/b17part4.htm


Did the WWII bombers trails persist from horizon to horizon?
" Contrails were so thick that they became clouds. We often said that we created weather over Europe. They would persist for many hours, maybe days. We flew a different route coming back than going in partly to avoid the contrail clouds that we created."- Willard Reese 457th bomb group
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/deception5.html


Were the fuels of the WWII bombers modified from the straight run process. Were the engines modified to make denser trails?
U ever fly a KC-135?
No, No, and No.

Jimbo, the bottom line is, if you are going to claim anything to the contrary, you are going to have to PROVE that your claims have merit, as I did above.

You won't, Jimbo.
YOU HAVE NEVER SHOWN PROOF OF ANY OF YOUR CLAIMS.

[halva]

What was causing it? Scientists knew that there was nothing wrong with the sun itself. The culprit had to be here on Earth.

If I may be allowed to articulate a strategic objective, let it be this:

When the shit hits the fan about chemtrails, it must be the Crichtons and Raynolds that are designated scapegoats for the coverup, not Greenpeace, the BBC, the Guardian or the IPCC.

Let Raynolds get to work on plotting his counter-strategy now.

He won't be able to find one.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Reynolds quotes:

" Contrails were so thick that they became clouds. We often said that we created weather over Europe. They would persist for many hours, maybe days. We flew a different route coming back than going in partly to avoid the contrail clouds that we created."- Willard Reese 457th bomb group
http://worldzone.net/science/realit...deception5.html

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

Now I could have sworn I was addressing tanker bubba. Who is tank anyways? You fly sky tanks?

Yes, planes can affect the weather and rainfall.

Interesting---it is good to know that these low powered WWII planes were making the weather from their trails over Europe. That is a major part of my thesis, which you just admit and support fully.

Now, we have the same problems--only much worse with many more planes running much greater HP---and jet planes making trails and making their own weather patterns will increase rainfall patterns in some regions and make droughts in others.

It appears Jay Reynolds himself has just supported that the many jet planes that jam the skies cause weather change around the world.

Jay Reynolds has been withholding the clear evidence and proof of planes upsetting the weather patterns. Plus, clouds are more a toxic soup these days---so when the chemtrails merge with the air's toxic soup they make chemtrails and chemtrail induced clouds.

It would be wrong to use a dated term like contrail, which is more about pure ice, when the real story is all the skies are heavily polluted and lots of it attaches to clouds.

I am pleased you are beginning to tell the truth-----that appears to have been known since WWII. When the planes emissions change the weather and set up acid rain---these become chemtrails.

And naturally today these plane trails would pull down even more acids from the air, which go on to pollute areas with HF and free up toxic metals from the soils. Hence, clear toxic damage connections to animals and man due to chemtrails making weather.

Hence the name chemtrails. Also that the fuel in modern jet planes has been engineered to make bigger--thicker chemtrails to change the weather patterns.

Chemtrails are not Cirris Clouds, and they are heavier than Cirris cloud particles and fall over the couse of a day to make rain in many areas. People that use the Cirris Cloud example lie, cause these are not made by nature Cirris Clouds---they are made by man and jet plane catalytic effects to produce huge thick clouds in the skies to shield the sun.

The chemtrails issues are not limited to only these visible cloud formations, they also include other planes spraying many other materials to change the toxic factors from the acid rain effects or modify the weather so more intense storms won't form.

Also, chemtrails techniques go through improvements over time and what was in use a decade ago are improved by technology and the second generation methods in vogue for today. Which means, that Reynolds cannot and has not disqualified persons like Carnicom with all his aluminum and other stuff in the air. Cliff Carnicom has always been a much more stand up guy than any of the Reynolds mob, who are tying to take advantage of the chemtrails technology generational shift in recent times.

Chemtrails are engineered to make great big particles that make Mie Scattering for IR wavelengths. Which means chemtrails methods make thick clouds with heavy particles to change the global warming IR reflection back into space.

Now, we have to finish off Reynolds latest scam of trying to compare the effects of gasoline bombers with jet fuel driven jet planes (which must include the rise in H content up to JP-8 ). They don't run on the same fuel and the hydrogen content is different.

IMHO,
is

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Greetings all,

I think it is just great that Jay Reynolds now freely says that ole slow planes can change the weather from their emissions and their catalytic effects make persistent trails and clouds.

These trails do set up weather effects and since they are not just simple clouds made by nature, what they do is quite different than natural clouds.

These plane trails as they turn into clouds pull in all kinds of acids in the air---making them chemtrails and chemtrail created clouds, which go on to drive toxic material loading on the ground due to rainfall pattern changes.

Now, the weather modification issues and toxic issues of jet made chemtrails existance are well supported by Jay Reynolds and all his mob.

Jay Reynolds now supports that jet planes are associated with HF poisoning patterns and liberation of toxic metals into the food chain. This effect he now supports are the roots of man's health effects via their dangerous G-protein mimic effects.

Which means Reynolds and his mob have formally implicated the Jet plane and Jet fuels industry, plus the coal fossil fuel industries, to causing near catastopic harm to animal and human health. Reynolds acknowledgements of these effects means these industries can be exposed and held accountable for the damage.

Simply wonderful. Anybody know the hydrogen content of WWII Avgas?

IMHO,
is

[airtankerpilot]

Jet fuel has not been been changed to make bigger trails.

Water is a byproduct of the combustion of gasoline or jet fuel.

USAAF flew daylight missions. RAF flew night time.

No I have not flown a KC-135.

Can you find ONE reference of WW2 aircraft carrying "obscurants"??

[Insurrectionchemistry]

So, what do you fly? Paper airplanes, desks, or parachutes? Introduce thyself.

Tanker writes:

"Jet fuel has not been been changed to make bigger trails.

Water is a byproduct of the combustion of gasoline or jet fuel. "

=======

Jet fuel has been changed over time. JP-8 has the highest hydrogen content.

True that water is the by-product of combusion of gas or jet fuel.

BUT, the amount of water is a strong function of the fuel's hydrogen content.

And hydrogen content sets the plume density for water and the formation of trails that quickly evaporate or sublime OR the much larger and heavier particles that are the interests for chemtrails and IR reflection methods of Mie Scattering.

Your going to have to keep up now----because knowing the hydrogen content is a critical factor for what altitudes the persistent large particles form that stop acting like Cirris Clouds and act like little bombs that fall and seed rainfall below.

IMHO,
is

[airtankerpilot]

So can you decide whether it is hydrogen content of the fuel, or was it obscurants that caused the trails?

You still have provided ZERO references for your obscurant assertions, or did you change your mind and now think it is the fuel that does that.

JP-8 was not engineered for trails, it is changed to be less of a fire hazard. Its a standard USAF/NATO fuel. Most navies do not use it though.

JP-8 is actually much closer to normal civilian Jet A than JP-4 was, which is what JP-8 replaced. So actually military jet fuel is now much closer to commerical jet fuel.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Tank,

What was the hydrogen content of WWII avgas?

Have refineries undergone emission cuts that keep more of the hydrogen and VOCs in the system, so it does not screw up the health of the neighborhoods around refineries?

How did the refineries do this lowering of their emissions?

Let's let you pin Reynolds to the mat with those answers.

Then all of you can tell us if chemtrails are IR obscurant methods.

IMHO,
is

[stuart_allsop]

Yes, I have flown a WW2 era aircraft. Wow! I'm envious. Best I ever got to fly was a Tiger Moth. What did you fly?


And yes, there are photos of contrails from later on, its just not in the same because you dont have airliners in formations of over 1000, with hundreds of escort fighters, and then hundreds of attacking aircraft, and then with some bomber crewmen carrying cameras.

Can you find any mention of any WW2 aircraft carrying anything like that? No, you cant.
Do you have any evidence for it? No you dont.I'm not quote sure that I follow you. What is your point? That WWII aircraft did not make contrails? That later airlienrs did not make contrails? Are you saying that no WWII bomber crew had cameras? Sorry, but your posts are a bit ambiguous and hard to follow. Could you try to be more specific and clear, please?

[stuart_allsop]

Why did you change yor post, Jimbo? This is wahtrt it said at first:


More irrational science on Cirrus Cloud formation. Cirrus Clouds are formed above 18,000 Ft by natural processes of making ice crystals. They are thin and wispy and tend to stay up there and sublime.

However, Jet Chemtrals are not formed by natural processes. They look white like Cirrus Clouds, but they are larger particles. Chemtrails observations show the particles are heavy and fall to lower altitudes. They are not produced by equilibrium conditions as a natural currus cloud are formed and the chemtrail clouds won't follow the same patterns as natural cirrus clouds.

This is another trick to tell these chemtrails are Cirrus Clouds that are produced by equilibrium states, forming slowly--naturally.

Chemtrials forms these cloud particles almost instantly and they are heavy particles and begin to fall. This does not meet the Cirrus definition well.

So, someone is doing stupid misleading sciences again.

When heavy Chemtrails fall to lower altitudes they don't stay above 18,000 Ft and they unfreeze. They make rain.

More lies abound from the Reynolds idiots mob.

IMHO,

But then you changed it to this:



More irrational science on Cirrus Cloud formation. Cirrus Clouds are formed above 18,000 Ft by natural processes of making ice crystals. They are thin and wispy and tend to stay up there and sublime. Natural Cirrus Clouds are small particle size and don't reflect much IR by Mie Scattering.

However, Jet Chemtrals are not formed by natural processes. They look white like Cirrus Clouds, but they are larger particles that reflect IR. Chemtrails observations show the particles are heavy and fall to lower altitudes, picking up more mass as they fall. They are large and fall to quickly to sublime. They are not produced by equilibrium conditions as a natural currus cloud are formed and the chemtrail clouds won't follow the same patterns as natural cirrus clouds.


This is another trick to tell these chemtrails are "Cirrus Clouds" that are produced by equilibrium states, forming slowly--naturally.

Chemtrials forms these cloud particles almost instantly and they are heavy particles and begin to fall. This does not meet the Cirrus definition well. Chemtrails are after IR scattering and seeding of rainfall below as they fall.

So, someone is doing stupid misleading sciences again. More like Idiots at play again.

When heavy Chemtrails fall to lower altitudes they don't stay above 18,000 Ft and they unfreeze. They make / seed rain.

More lies abound from the Reynolds idiots mob.

IMHO,
is


How come you saw the need to do such extensive editing? Is that honest?

[stuart_allsop]

Now you going to have to make up your mind on a number of things. First, if these WWII planes had no moisture up there------where did those trails come from? Well DUH! How about fron the HYDROCARBON FUEL that they burned in the OXYGEN RICH atmosphere? Jimbo, ANY time that you burn a hydrocarbon fuel you ARE going to produce water, plain and simple. it is the LARGEST (by mass) by product of combustion.

For a chemsit, you really are stunningly ignorant of how combustion works...



Then explain your excuse on TiCl4 not having any moisture. Opps. Logical your not.
Well, first you are going to have to come up with some evidence to support your newest hoax, Jimbo. Nobody is buying your Titanium Oxide scam.


Your also going to have to explain how all those 1000 bombers went anywhere without being seen 300 miles away with trails like those. They would all be shot out of the skies by your criteria. Did you flunk logic somewhere. Either they could run without these trails or they could not. Yup. That was EXACTLY why so many of them WERE shot down. They were easy targets, with those huge white arrows pointing right at them. There are several unlassified documents now available on this major issue.



You also going to have to explain in your vast WWII expertise, why most all those bombing runs were done at night to use the best obscurant of all----darkness. You don't sound like you know WWII bombers too well. They also liked to run missions with cloud cover and use instruments to get to the target.Yup! For the same reason. Contrails are less visible at night, and totally obscured by good cloud cover. That's why they preferred those condtions! Duh!


Besides all that, the Germans had RADAR and they could tell close to where the bombers were going and fire up the batteries and search lights ahead of time. No, the BRITISH had Radar. The Gernmans did not, for most of the war.


Did the WWII bombers trails persist from horizon to horizon? yup


Were the fuels of the WWII bombers modified from the straight run process. Nope. Just plain old avgas.


Were the engines modified to make denser trails?Huh? Why would the modify them to make MORE contrails, when it was such a huge problem for them already? That makes no sese AT ALL!!!!

[airtankerpilot]

Wow! I'm envious. Best I ever got to fly was a Tiger Moth. What did you fly?

I'm not quote sure that I follow you. What is your point? That WWII aircraft did not make contrails? That later airlienrs did not make contrails? Are you saying that no WWII bomber crew had cameras? Sorry, but your posts are a bit ambiguous and hard to follow. Could you try to be more specific and clear, please?

My post was that there were thousands of prop aircraft at high altitudes making contrails, all in close proximity on missions, which is why there are photos of a sky full of hundreds of contrails from these aircraft, compared to later on. And many of those bomber crewmen took pictures too

The chemist person asked why there were not photos of lots of contrails by prop aircraft after the war.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Hummm

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/gen/page782.html

[jayreynolds]

Now, the weather modification issues and toxic issues of jet made chemtrails existance are well supported by Jay Reynolds and all his mob.
Jay Reynolds now supports that jet planes are associated with HF poisoning patterns and liberation of toxic metals into the food chain. This effect he now supports are the roots of man's health effects via their dangerous G-protein mimic effects.
Which means Reynolds and his mob have formally implicated the Jet plane and Jet fuels industry, plus the coal fossil fuel industries, to causing near catastopic harm to animal and human health. Reynolds acknowledgements of these effects means these industries can be exposed and held accountable for the damage.

Jimbo, don't try to put words in my mouth which I didn't say. I disagree with each and every thing quoted above. None of what you say there is true, none of his has any basis in fact whatsoever.
It is all Jim Phelps nonsense, a complete fabrication.

[jayreynolds]

Hummm

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/gen/page782.html

Jimbo, there is no use claiming that any of the "haik" hoax is anything else.
Everybody knows.
The people like you, Wayne Hall, and Brian Holmes who are trying to get mileage out of such a hoax, even after it has been exposed as such and is widely known to be false, are cutting your own throats.
Your own people are calling it disinformation.
They have already started calling Wayne a disinformant, and you have been implicated over at megasprayer as being part of the disinformation.

I predict that if you even try to register at megasprayer news forum, you will not be allowed to post any of the sort of trash you try on us here, and they supposedly even believe in "chemtrails"(just that they are only due to high sulfur jet fuel)!!!

[jayreynolds]

If I may be allowed to articulate a strategic objective, let it be this:
When the shit hits the fan about chemtrails, it must be the Crichtons and Raynolds that are designated scapegoats for the coverup, not Greenpeace, the BBC, the Guardian or the IPCC.
Let Raynolds get to work on plotting his counter-strategy now.
He won't be able to find one.
Wayne, closing in on one year since you last said "I WILL BURY YOU" to me.
You said you could get me banned.

Guess what, I'm still here, and in one year you've done absolutely nothing to further your hoax.

To the contrary, you've allied yourself with gaiacomm, a nutcase whose claim to fame was becoming the first and only person to get banned!

Your greek friends Dr. Nikos Katsaros and Dr. Christos Zerefos have both denounced any proof for "chemtrails" WHATSOEVER.

Your other-white-meat friend Liakopoulos revealed himself a s a racist nincompoop on this thread.

Even YOU, Wayne Hall, conceded that you had NO PROOF WHATSOEVER for "chemtrails".

You've made an enemy out of the whole Tyndall centre who is the world's forum for geoengineering theory.

You have made an enemy out of one of the most prolific "climate change" authors on the planet, Ross Gelbspan, who is now my ally.

Your ally David G. Stewart came and went, in the process admitting he was a liar, and getting himself debunked by Chem11 among others.

Your ally Deborah actually came out and debunked your whole "chemtrails are geoengineering" hoax, in public, and refuses to say she has any further belief in "chemtrails" whatsoever.

Your ally Brian Holmes has been exposed to be, at minimum, an exteremly gullible person unable to verify an anonymous hoax in the making, and then unable to admit his error when it was exposed publicly. To the contrary, his low-brow example of a coverup didn't pass muster even among "chemtrail" believers, who saw it as "dishonesty".

Your last ally, Jim Phelps, probably takes the cake, fruitcake, that is. If he had any sense at all, he would have applied some self-control. Rather than take it easy, in a few shor weeks he has become the laughingstock of the whole "chemtrail" milieu, widely seen as a racial and religious fanatic who claims to be considered as a God.
He also calls you "DUMBASS".
So much for allies, eh?

And so we come down to Wayne's little hissy-fit, "When the shit hits the fan about chemtrails, it must be the Crichtons and Raynolds that are designated scapegoats for the coverup...Let Raynolds get to work on plotting his counter-strategy now. He won't be able to find one."

Well, Wayne, from looking at your own list of achievements over the past year, it looks like YOU are the one who better start planning a counter-strategy, because your present one has gotten you pretty far up shit-creek, and you've got no paddle, old bean!

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Greetings Dirty Rotten Scoundrels,

Just why is it that all of you can't seem to tell about the hydrogen content of Avgas in WWII.

Inquiring minds want to know the number.

Somebody going "Oh Shit" or what? Something to hide?

IMHO,
is

[jayreynolds]

Greetings Dirty Rotten Scoundrels,

Just why is it that all of you can't seem to tell about the hydrogen content of Avgas in WWII.

Inquiring minds want to know the number.

Somebody going "Oh Shit" or what? Something to hide?

IMHO,
is
I don't have WWII era milspecs in my files, Jimbo.
Enlighten us, you are the "chemist".
Oh, and quote chapter and verse, gotta have that proof doncha know!

[halva]

If I may be allowed to articulate a strategic objective, let it be this:

When the shit hits the fan about chemtrails, it must be the Crichtons and Raynolds that are designated scapegoats for the coverup, not Greenpeace, the BBC, the Guardian or the IPCC.

And not Arianna Huffington.



Let Raynolds get to work on plotting his counter-strategy now.

He won't be able to find one.

And yes debunkers. I am responding to my own posts. The only other current poster I can read is Jim Phelps.

Last night I saw Pantelis Voulgaris' film "Brides", about a boatload of mail-order brides sailing across the Atlantic in 1922 from Greece and Russia (or rather Ukraine) to New York.

See it and understand.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/oil/story/0,11319,1399419,00.html

Oil firms fund campaign to deny climate change

David Adam, science correspondent
January 27, 2005
The Guardian

Lobby groups funded by the US oil industry are
targeting Britain in a bid to play down the threat
of climate change and derail action to cut
greenhouse gas emissions, leading scientists have
warned.
Bob May, president of the Royal Society, says a "a
lobby of professional sceptics who opposed action
to tackle climate change" is turning its attention
to Britain because of its high profile in the
debate.

Writing in the Life section of today's Guardian,
Prof May says the government's decision to make
global warming a focus of its G8 presidency has
made it a target. So has the high profile of its
chief scientific adviser, David King, who
described climate change as a bigger threat than
terrorism.

Prof May's warning coincides with a meeting of
climate change sceptics today at the Royal
Institution in London organised by a British
group, the Scientific Alliance, which has links to
US oil company ExxonMobil through a collaboration
with a US institute.

Last month the Scientific Alliance published a
joint report with the George C Marshall Institute
in Washington that claimed to "undermine" climate
change claims. The Marshall institute received
£51,000 from ExxonMobil for its "global climate
change programme" in 2003, and an undisclosed sum
this month.

Prof May's warning comes as British scientists
publish new research in the journal Nature showing
that emissions of the greenhouse gas carbon
dioxide could have a more dramatic effect on
climate than thought. They say average temperature
could rise 11C, even if carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere is limited to the levels expected to be
reached in 2050.

David Frame, who coordinated the climate
prediction experiment, said: "If the real world
response were anywhere near the upper end of our
range, even today's levels of greenhouse gases
could already be dangerously high."

Emission limits such as those in the Kyoto
protocol would hit oil firms because the bulk of
greenhouse gases come from burning fossil fuel
products.

Prof May writes that during the 1990s, parts of
the US oil industry funded (through the so-called
Global Climate Coalition) sceptics who opposed
action to tackle climate change. The GCC was
"deactivated" in 2001 once Mr Bush made clear he
intended to reject the Kyoto protocol."But the
denial lobby is still active and today it arrives
in London."

The Scientific Alliance was set up in 2001 and is
run by Mark Adams, a former private secretary for
parliamentary affairs at No 10 and a private
secretary to Tony Blair for six months after the
1997 election.

An alliance spokesman said today's meeting was
sponsored but its policy was not to reveal its
funders. ExxonMobil said it is not involved. The
alliance spokesman said funders do not influence
policies.

One adviser is Sallie Baliunas, an astrophysicist
at the Harvard Smithsonian Centre, a noted global
warming sceptic and senior scientist with the
Marshall Institute. In 1998 Dr Baliunas co-wrote
an article that argued for the release of more
carbon dioxide. It looked like a paper of the US
National Academy of Sciences and was mass-mailed
to US scientists with a petition asking them to
reject Kyoto.

Prof King said several speakers at today's event
have been to briefings he attended, including a
summit meeting he organised in Moscow last July.
"Astonishingly, when I arrived the programme had
been dramatically altered. This was in the run up
to the ratification of Kyoto by Putin and clearly
the same group of people had decided to target our
attempt to explain the current science."

Larry Elliott in Davos adds:

Tony Blair yesterday softened his stance on
climate change to persuade President Bush to sign
a global accord. Giving the keynote address at the
World Economic Forum, Mr Blair said climate change
was not universally accepted. With chief
executives of many US firms in the audience, he
said: "The evidence is still disputed."

Evidence of climate change dangers had been
"clearly and persuasively advocated" by a very
large number of "entirely independent voices ...
they are the majority, the majority is not always
right but they deserve to be listened to".

[Insurrectionchemistry]

http://www.heatisonline.org/contentserver/objecthandlers/index.cfm?id=5056&method=full

Pachauri: Climate Approaching Point of "No Return"
Global Warming Approaching Point of No Return,
Warns Leading Climate Expert

The Independent (U.K.), Jan. 23, 2005

Global warning has already hit the danger point
that international attempts to curb it are
designed to avoid, according to the world's top
climate watchdog.

Dr Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the official
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),
told an international conference attended by 114
governments in Mauritius this month that he
personally believes that the world has "already
reached the level of dangerous concentrations of
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere" and called for
immediate and "very deep" cuts in the pollution if
humanity is to "survive".

His comments rocked the Bush administration -
which immediately tried to slap him down - not
least because it put him in his post after Exxon,
the major oil company most opposed to
international action on global warming, complained
that his predecessor was too "aggressive" on the
issue.

A memorandum from Exxon to the White House in
early 2001 specifically asked it to get the
previous chairman, Dr Robert Watson, the chief
scientist of the World Bank, "replaced at the
request of the US". The Bush administration then
lobbied other countries in favour of Dr Pachauri -
whom the former vice-president Al Gore called the
"let's drag our feet" candidate, and got him
elected to replace Dr. Watson, a British-born
naturalised American, who had repeatedly called
for urgent action.

But this month, at a conference of Small Island
Developing States on the Indian Ocean island, the
new chairman, a former head of India's Tata Energy
Research Institute, himself issued what top United
Nations officials described as a "very courageous"
challenge.

He told delegates: "Climate change is for real. We
have just a small window of opportunity and it is
closing rather rapidly. There is not a moment to
lose."

Afterwards he told The Independent on Sunday that
widespread dying of coral reefs, and rapid melting
of ice in the Arctic, had driven him to the
conclusion that the danger point the IPCC had been
set up to avoid had already been reached.

Reefs throughout the world are perishing as the
seas warm up: as water temperatures rise, they
lose their colours and turn a ghostly white.
Partly

as a result, up to a quarter of the world's corals
have been destroyed.

And in November, a multi-year study by 300
scientists concluded that the Arctic was warming
twice as fast as the rest of the world and that
its ice-cap had shrunk by up to 20 per cent in the
past three decades.

The ice is also 40 per cent thinner than it was in
the 1970s and is expected to disappear altogether
by 2070. And while Dr. Pachauri was speaking,
parts of the Arctic were having a January
"heatwave", with temperatures eight to nine
degrees centigrade higher than normal.

He also cited alarming measurements, first
reported in The Independent on Sunday, showing
that levels of carbon dioxide (the main cause of
global warming) have leapt abruptly over the past
two years, suggesting that climate change may be
accelerating out of control.

He added that, because of inertia built into the
Earth's natural systems, the world was now only
experiencing the result of pollution emitted in
the 1960s, and much greater effects would occur as
the increased pollution of later decades worked
its way through. He concluded: "We are risking the
ability of the human race to survive."

[Insurrectionchemistry]

http://www.heatisonline.org/contentserver/objecthandlers/index.cfm?id=5064&method=full

Countdown to Climate Catastrophe: Study
CLIMATE CHANGE: REPORT WARNS POINT OF NO RETURN
MAY BE REACHED IN 10 YEARS, LEADING TO DROUGHTS,
AGRICULTURAL FAILURE AND WATER SHORTAGES

The Independent (U.K.), Jan. 24, 2005

The global warming danger threshold for the world
is clearly marked for the first time in an
international report to be published tomorrow -
and the bad news is, the world has nearly reached
it already.


The countdown to climate-change catastrophe is
spelt out by a task force of senior politicians,
business leaders and academics from around the
world - and it is remarkably brief. In as little
as 10 years, or even less, their report indicates,
the point of no return with global warming may
have been reached.

The report, Meeting The Climate Challenge, is
aimed at policymakers in every country, from
national leaders down. It has been timed to
coincide with Tony Blair's promised efforts to
advance climate change policy in 2005 as chairman
of both the G8 group of rich countries and the
European Union.

And it breaks new ground by putting a figure - for
the first time in such a high-level document - on
the danger point of global warming, that is, the
temperature rise beyond which the world would be
irretrievably committed to disastrous changes.
These could include widespread agricultural
failure, water shortages and major droughts,
increased disease, sea-level rise and the death of
forests - with the added possibility of abrupt
catastrophic events such as "runaway" global
warming, the melting of the Greenland ice sheet,
or the switching-off of the Gulf Stream.

The report says this point will be two degrees
centigrade above the average world temperature
prevailing in 1750 before the industrial
revolution, when human activities - mainly the
production of waste gases such as carbon dioxide
(CO2), which retain the sun's heat in the
atmosphere - first started to affect the climate.
But it points out that global average temperature
has already risen by 0.8 degrees since then, with
more rises already in the pipeline - so the world
has little more than a single degree of
temperature latitude before the crucial point is
reached.

More ominously still, it assesses the
concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
after which the two-degree rise will become
inevitable, and says it will be 400 parts per
million by volume (ppm) of CO2.

The current level is 379ppm, and rising by more
than 2ppm annually - so it is likely that the
vital 400ppm threshold will be crossed in just 10
years' time, or even less (although the two-degree
temperature rise might take longer to come into
effect).

"There is an ecological timebomb ticking away,"
said Stephen Byers, the former transport
secretary, who co-chaired the task force that
produced the report with the US Republican senator
Olympia Snowe. It was assembled by the Institute
for Public Policy Research in the UK, the Centre
for American Progress in the US, and The Australia
Institute.The group's chief scientific adviser is
Dr Rakendra Pachauri, chairman of the UN's
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The report urges all the G8 countries to agree to
generate a quarter of their electricity from
renewable sources by 2025, and to double their
research spending on low-carbon energy
technologies by 2010. It also calls on the G8 to
form a climate group with leading developing
nations such as India and China, which have big
and growing CO2 emissions.

"What this underscores is that it's what we invest
in now and in the next 20 years that will deliver
a stable climate, not what we do in the middle of
the century or later," said Tom Burke, a former
government adviser on green issues who now advises
business.

The report starkly spells out the likely
consequences of exceeding the threshold. "Beyond
the 2 degrees C level, the risks to human
societies and ecosystems grow significantly," it
says.


"It is likely, for example, that
average-temperature increases larger than this
will entail substantial agricultural losses,
greatly increased numbers of people at risk of
water shortages, and widespread adverse health
impacts. [They] could also imperil a very high
proportion of the world's coral reefs and cause
irreversible damage to important terrestrial
ecosystems, including the Amazon rainforest."

It goes on: "Above the 2 degrees level, the risks
of abrupt, accelerated, or runaway climate change
also increase. The possibilities include reaching
climatic tipping points leading, for example, to
the loss of the West Antarctic and Greenland ice
sheets (which, between them, could raise sea level
more than 10 metres over the space of a few
centuries), the shutdown of the thermohaline ocean
circulation (and, with it, the Gulf Stream), and
the transformation of the planet's forests and
soils from a net sink of carbon to a net source of
carbon."

[Insurrectionchemistry]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4210629.stm


Alarm At New Climate Warning
By Richard Black
BBC Environment Correspondent
1-26-5

Global temperatures could rise by as much as eleven degrees Celsius, according to one of the largest climate prediction projects ever run.

This figure is twice the level that previous studies have suggested.

The scientists behind the project, called climateprediction.net, say it shows there's no such thing as a safe level of carbon dioxide.

The results of the study, which used PCs around the world to produce data, are published in the journal Nature.

Climateprediction.net is run from Oxford University, and is a distributed computing project; rather than using a supercomputer to run climate models, people can download software to their own PCs, which run the programs during downtime.

More than 95,000 people have registered, from more than 150 countries; their PCs have between them run more than 60,000 simulations of future climate.

Each PC runs a slightly different computer simulation examining what happens to the global climate if levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere double from pre-industrial levels - which may happen by the middle of the century.

What vary most between the simulations are the precise nature of physical processes like the extent of convection within tropical clouds - a process which drives the transport of heat around the world.

Lowest rise

So no two simulations will produce exactly the same results; overall, the project produces a picture of the possible range of outcomes given the present state of scientific knowledge.

The lowest rise which climateprediction.net finds possible is two degrees Celsius, ranging up to 11 degrees.

The timescale would depend on how quickly the doubling of CO2 was reached, but large rises would be on a scale of a century at least from now.

"I think these results suggest that our need to do something about climate change is perhaps even more urgent," the climateprediction.net chief scientist David Stainforth told BBC News.

"However, with our current state of knowledge, we can't yet define a safe level in the atmosphere."

On Monday, the International Climate Change Taskforce, co-chaired by the British MP Stephen Byers, claimed it had shown that a carbon dioxide concentration of over 400 ppm (parts per million) would be 'dangerous'.

The current concentration is around 378 ppm, rising at roughly 2ppm per year.

Dangerous warming

Next week the UK Meteorological Office hosts an international conference, Stabilisation 2005, announced by Tony Blair late last year.

Its aim is to discuss what the term "dangerous" global warming really means, and to look at ways to stabilise greenhouse gas levels.

Myles Allen, the principal investigator of climateprediction.net, said the focus on stabilisation might not be appropriate.

"Stabilisation as an exclusive target may not be adequate," he told BBC News.

"Stephen Byers claims to know that 400 ppm is the maximum 'safe' level; what we show is that it may be impossible to pin down a safe level, and therefore we should not focus exclusively on stabilisation."

Distributed computing has been used before, notably by the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence or Seti, where several million people have downloaded software enabling them to analyse data from observations of distant galaxies for signs of alien life.

The scientists behind climateprediction.net believe their project, because it is distributed to individual PCs, can help inform people about climate change - and that, in turn could bring political change.

"It's very difficult to get politicians to collaborate, not only across the globe but also over sustained lengths of time," Bob Spicer from the Earth Sciences Department at the Open University, told BBC News.

"The people who can hold politicians to account are the public; and with this project we are bringing cutting-edge science to the stakeholders, the public."

[jayreynolds]

http://www.heatisonline.org/contentserver/objecthandlers/index.cfm?id=5064&method=full

I think it's quite amusing to see you reduced to quoting Ross Gelbspan's website. Ross is my buddy, since I gave him the heads-up about how Wayne Hall misquoted him to make it appear(falsely) that he supported the "chemtrails" hoax.

BTW, where's that proof you promised that avgas used in WWII to make those contrails in my photos was anything out of the ordinary, Jimbo?

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Dirty Rotten Scoundrels,

Since no one has the WWII data on Avgas, perhaps the hydrogen percentage data on current 100 octane Avgas will do.

IMHO,
is

[jayreynolds]

WELL, WAYNE, IF YOU ARE GOING TO PRETEND YOU AREN'T READING EVERYTHING ON THIS THREAD(YEAH, RIGHT) YOU WON"T MIND IF I RESPOND AGAIN TO YOUR RESPONSE TO MY STATEMENT!

Wayne, closing in on one year since you last said "I WILL BURY YOU" to me.
You said you could get me banned.

Guess what, I'm still here, and in one year you've done absolutely nothing to further your hoax.

To the contrary, you've allied yourself with gaiacomm, a nutcase whose claim to fame was becoming the first and only person to get banned!

Your greek friends Dr. Nikos Katsaros and Dr. Christos Zerefos have both denounced any proof for "chemtrails" WHATSOEVER.

Your other-white-meat friend Liakopoulos revealed himself a s a racist nincompoop on this thread.

Even YOU, Wayne Hall, conceded that you had NO PROOF WHATSOEVER for "chemtrails".

You've made an enemy out of the whole Tyndall centre who is the world's forum for geoengineering theory.

You have made an enemy out of one of the most prolific "climate change" authors on the planet, Ross Gelbspan, who is now my ally.

Your ally David G. Stewart came and went, in the process admitting he was a liar, and getting himself debunked by Chem11 among others.

Your ally Deborah actually came out and debunked your whole "chemtrails are geoengineering" hoax, in public, and refuses to say she has any further belief in "chemtrails" whatsoever.

Your ally Brian Holmes has been exposed to be, at minimum, an exteremly gullible person unable to verify an anonymous hoax in the making, and then unable to admit his error when it was exposed publicly. To the contrary, his low-brow example of a coverup didn't pass muster even among "chemtrail" believers, who saw it as "dishonesty".

Your last ally, Jim Phelps, probably takes the cake, fruitcake, that is. If he had any sense at all, he would have applied some self-control. Rather than take it easy, in a few shor weeks he has become the laughingstock of the whole "chemtrail" milieu, widely seen as a racial and religious fanatic who claims to be considered as a God.
He also calls you "DUMBASS".
So much for allies, eh?

And so we come down to Wayne's little hissy-fit, "When the shit hits the fan about chemtrails, it must be the Crichtons and Raynolds that are designated scapegoats for the coverup...Let Raynolds get to work on plotting his counter-strategy now. He won't be able to find one."

Well, Wayne, from looking at your own list of achievements over the past year, it looks like YOU are the one who better start planning a counter-strategy, because your present one has gotten you pretty far up shit-creek, and you've got no paddle, old bean!

[jayreynolds]

Regarding the Haik photo hoax, Wayne Hall (Halva) philosophized at this web site (http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=Discussion&action=display&num=1105495181), Reply #11:


“Misplaced trust and misplaced distrust can both lead to mistakes.”


It is no mistake to trust us, Wayne. You don’t have to like us, but you would do well to believe us.

In this case, I say that both of you are wrong.
Trust no one.
Research the matter at hand for yourself.

That is how the "Haik" hoax was uncovered. My first instinct was to write "haik" and ask him for credentials, which I did. Got no response.

Second was to check out rumors that the photos were copyrighted, which I did.

Third was to write Holmes and tell him "Haik" had hoaxed him.
Here's how to do it:

http://p090.ezboard.com/fcontrailsandchemtrails22884frm1.showMessageRange? topicID=2925.topic&start=1&stop=20

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Chemtrails---the intelligent venetian blinds for the planets global warming problems:

"Chemtrail methods tend to follow the moisture in the air and the heat of the Sun. So the Southern Hemishere is getting the most cooling effect from the chemtrails effects now. The Northern Hemisphere is getting very little cooling by chemtrail shading, and the global warming temp rise is keeping the winter here in Tennessee as very very mild. It is like spring here most of the time, this winter.

Where the moisture is high, the chemtrail methods shield the Sun's IR radiation during the days, and makes for shielding the Earth' radiation into space at night. The temp. of the Sun dominates the equation--so chemtrail methods tend to cool the Earth in dominate effect. This is true over most the Earth's surface. It breaks down at the poles, where the global warming factors hit the hardest and speed the melting of the poles. "

imho,
is

[jayreynolds]

I see my "geoengineering" debunker buddy Chem11 has made a statement about me which is false:


"Since Mr. Reynolds has finally acknowledged that:
A) Sulfate aerosols create artifical clouds and
B)That the sulphur content of jet fuel HAS increased in accordance with the timeline of the 'chemtrail' phenomena
http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=Discussion&action=display&num=1105495181


My responses:
A. "Sulfate aerosols create artifical clouds"
Clouds can only form if sufficient water vapor is present to condense into crystals or droplets.
Artificial clouds could conceivably be formed from practically anything, but to date, no evidence has emerged that any such deliberate artificial geoengineering clouds are being formed.
Lots of hoopla, false claims and misattributed photos, as the balance of the quoted thread explains.

B."That the sulphur content of jet fuel HAS increased in accordance with the timeline of the 'chemtrail' phenomena"
I never said THAT. I said that according to a webpage cited by Jim Phelps that was the case.

There is documented evidence that jet fuel sulfur levels, almost always far below spec, has been decreasing, and further decreases are planned.

Further, whether or not sulfur in jet fuel causes contrails to be long-lived in the troposphere is still a subject for which Chem11 has not shown any evidence.

I'd be happy to debate this here with Chem11, whom I've challenged before on this subject.
he knows he would lose and so he concedes the floor to me, and banned me from his forum. Note that he will never show documentary proof of his claims of deliberate or actual increases in jet fuel sulfur levels, and refuses to expose himself in open debate.

Why is that, do you suppose?

[Insurrectionchemistry]

It appears to me another Dirty Rotten Scoundrel just got list banned from meaningful chemtrails discussion list. Excellent---wonder what took them so long.

Banned---Most likely for causing disruption and setting up a pattern of wrong information. Reynolds is in a free fall into the Abyss and no one is going to slow his fall.


It appears the person that answers to the title of "Dirty Rotten Scoundrel" by name still can't seem to talk about the amount of hydrogen in gasoline. When he and his disciples of deceit are always the fountain of all knowledge in times past.


Is there something about the hydrogen levels in gasoline that can't be openly exposed?
Like that thing about how to geoengineer the environment. Tank appears to have gotten Reynolds into a real bind. He just can't seem to find the hydrogen data for gas.

Is there something about the hydrogen levels in gasoline that can't be openly exposed? Looks that way.

imho,
is

[jayreynolds]

Is there something about the hydrogen levels in gasoline that can't be openly exposed?
Jimbo, before you wanted WWII avgas specifications.

NOW you want to know "hydrogen levels in gasoline". Like has been said many times before, even by Deborah, "Do your own research."

Jimbo, if you want to create yet another bogus conspiracy theory, just state it so it can be knocked down. Don't expect anyone to step-and-fetch-it at your beck and call.

Like you told Wayne, anyone not willing to learn the science is a "DUMBASS".

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Dirty Rotten Scoundrel,

I already know the hydrogen percent in gasoline.

I just want you to state the numbers. Then we can let Tanker Bubba drop you faster and faster into the great abyss.

Since when is the geatest scoundrel scared to quote gas H numbers?

Come on perdition "Thumper-Boy," fess up, as your screams are becoming fainter as you fall into the great Abyss weighted down by your own bloody morass of lies.

Reminds me of the Johnny Cash song called "Ring of Fire:" "He went Down, down, down and the flames went higher. That ring of Fier."

Feeling the heat? Come on thumper--scream---jump from the pan into the Fier. Incinerate your ugly ass thumper-boy.

Menu today is blackened scoundrels. Huge servings free to buzzards.

I hear the applause rising.

IHMO,
is

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Come on Thumper Boy, stop hiding, and get in here and finish F*ckin yourself.

Your caught in our trap. Screaming? Fier rising higher?

Defeated, silenced, out manouvered?

IMHO,
is

[jayreynolds]

Come on Thumper Boy, stop hiding, and get in here and finish F*ckin yourself. Your caught in our trap. Screaming? Fier rising higher?
Defeated, silenced, out manouvered?

Just got back from town and it looks like somebody is worked up.
Jimbo, you are raving, buddy.
Calm down and take your pill.
If you want to make another of your ridiculous claims about gasoline, go right ahead.
When you do it can be evaluated and most probably shot down.

In the final evaluation, you have not yet produced any evidence of your cockamamie
claims whatsoever, so give one good reason why anyone should jump to help you out?
bye

[halva]

'Scary' science finds Earth heating up twice as fast as thought

By Leigh Dayton, Science writer
The Australian
27 January 2005
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/printpage/0,5942,12063396,00.html

The largest ever climate-change experiment reveals that scientists may have dramatically underestimated the threat of global warming.

The study by British scientists, which is published today, found the planet's global temperature could climb by between 2C and 11C because of skyrocketing levels of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.

That more than doubles the current prediction of a 1.4C to 4.5C rise this century.

"When we started out we didn't expect anything like this," said Oxford University's David Stainforth, chief scientist for climateprediction.net.

The project is a collaboration of experts at Oxford and Reading universities, The Open University, London School of Economics, Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, and Rutherford Appleton Laboratory.

The findings are published in the journal Nature.

"If this is the case, it's very dramatic and very scary," Mr Stainforth said.

Even rises that are more modest are expected to trigger disastrous changes, including melting glaciers, sea-level rises, shut-down of the Gulf Stream, and increases in droughts, cyclones and other extreme weather events. The new results follow two reports in last week's edition of Science, showing that global warming probably caused the "Great Dying".

Although that was the worst extinction in Earth's history - wiping out more than 90 per cent of all life - it involved gradual extinctions over about 10 million years, culminating in a sharp extinction pulse 250 million years ago. Further concern comes from an international report released in London last Monday. It warned that climate change could kick in within 10 years, unless greenhouse gas emissions are cut.

The initial goal of climateprediction.net was to evaluate the sensitivity and variables of the Hadley computer model of climate change.

In order to obtain their findings, Mr Stainforth and his colleagues ran 50,000 climate simulations.

Because so much computing power was needed, they relied on help from 90,000 people from 150 countries to run the programs on their personal computers.

More than 1200 Australians, such as Melbourne academic Nick Hoffman, participated. "I'm interested in the dynamics of planetary atmospheres, so it was well worth supporting (the project)," Dr Hoffman said.

According to Neville Nicholls, head of climate forecasting at the Bureau of Meterology in Melbourne, climateprediction.net is a "terrific project" that tackles the uncertainty of climate predictions. He agreed with CSIRO climate modeler Tony Hirst that: "This may mean that the world could warm up faster than most of us are happy anticipating."

[jayreynolds]

Wayne, congratulations on coming up with an article that epitomizes the world of the "global scaremongers". The wording is classic hyperbole and is quite sure to set your people's hearts to racing.


"TERRIFYING"
"SCARY"
"VERY SCARY"
"THREAT"
"SKYROCKETING"
"MELTING GLACIERS"
SEA LEVEL RISES"
"SHUT-DOWM OF THE GULF STREAM"
DROUGHT"
"CYCLONES"
"GREAT DYING"
"WORST EXTINCTION"
"WIPING OUT"
========================
jUST LOOKING AT THE TITLE, YOU WOULD THINK THAT SCIENCE HAS FOUND THAT THE EARTH IS HEATING UP TWICE AS FAST AS THOUGHT.

Yes, most science illiterates(like DUMBASS Wayne hall) just read the headlines and blunder through. Few of them caught the fact that this is just another computer model run. Computer models fail to predict weather about seven days in advance as often as they succeed. And these people expect you to take their word for weather ten years from now?

C'mon, you gotta be kidding.

[halva]

I think it is about time we started developing the view that it is climate change sceptics of the Michael Crichton (and of course J. Raynolds) variety that have to be scapegoated for the chemtrails cover-up.

Not Greenpeace, not the IPCC, not anyone who is honestly trying to find solutions to anthropogenic climate change.

We need extenuating arguments to help e.g. Greenpeace defend itself against accusations that its silence about chemtrails has been reprehensible.

We should start making these extenuating arguments on their behalf, pre-emptively.

This strategy will in any case facilitate exposure of the full chemtrails story.

I think the fact that honesty on chemtrails would expose its practitioners to private litigation is an acceptable excuse.

"Chemmies" who want to sue those who are making the chemtrails but at the same time remain sceptics on the subject of anthropogenic climate change potentially cause more problems than they solve.

This is a subject which definitely has to be taken up with climate change campaigners, even if they are complicit in the chemtrails coverup.

In defence of the above thesis, N.B. following from 'The Guardian' (posted by footsoldier at the other thread. Thank you):

January 27, 2005

Oil firms fund climate change 'denial'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/oil/story...1399419,00.html

Lobby groups funded by the US oil industry are targeting Britain in a bid to play down the threat of climate change and derail action to cut greenhouse gas emissions, leading scientists have warned.

Bob May, president of the Royal Society, says that "a lobby of professional sceptics who opposed action to tackle climate change" is turning its attention to Britain because of its high profile in the debate.

Writing in the Life section of today's Guardian, Professor May says the government's decision to make global warming a focus of its G8 presidency has made it a target. So has the high profile of its chief scientific adviser, David King, who described climate change as a bigger threat than terrorism.

Prof May's warning coincides with a meeting of climate change sceptics today at the Royal Institution in London organised by a British group, the Scientific Alliance, which has links to US oil company ExxonMobil through a collaboration with a US institute.

Last month the Scientific Alliance published a joint report with the George C Marshall Institute in Washington that claimed to "undermine" climate change claims. The Marshall institute received £51,000 from ExxonMobil for its "global climate change programme" in 2003 and an undisclosed sum this month.

Prof May's warning comes as British scientists, in the journal Nature, show that emissions of carbon dioxide could have a more dramatic effect on climate than thought. They say the average temperature could rise 11C, even if atmospheric carbon dioxide were limited to the levels expected in 2050.

David Frame, who coordinated the climate prediction experiment, said: "If the real world response were anywhere near the upper end of our range, even today's levels of greenhouse gases could already be dangerously high."

Emission limits such as those in the Kyoto protocol would hit oil firms because the bulk of greenhouse gases come from burning fossil fuel products.

Prof May writes that during the 1990s, parts of the US oil industry funded sceptics who opposed action to tackle climate change. A Scientific Alliance spokesman said today's meeting was sponsored but funders did not influence policies. ExxonMobil said it was not involved.

One adviser is Sallie Baliunas, an astrophysicist at the Harvard Smithsonian Centre, who is linked to the Marshall Institute. In 1998 Dr Baliunas co-wrote an article that argued for the release of more carbon dioxide. It was mass-mailed to US scientists with a petition asking them to reject Kyoto.

· Tony Blair yesterday attempted to urge George Bush to sign a climate change accord. At the World Economic Forum he said climate change was "not universally accepted", but evidence of its danger had been "clearly and persuasively advocated" by a very large number of "independent voices".

***
Industry-funded Organizations
http://www.sourcewatch.org/wiki.pht...d_organizations

[Insurrectionchemistry]

It is way past time for these Greenpeace and other organization to mentally connect global warming to the chemtrails or DOE Project "Global Shield," which is designed to mitigate global warming by increasing reflection of IR and washing HF and HCl out of the air.

Global Warming and Chemtrails go hand in hand. Global warming affects the weather. Chemtrails affect the weather.

IMHO,
is

[halva]

I am canvassing generally for arguments that will make it possible to pin the blame for the chemtrails coverup on the likes of Raynolds rather than on the environmental organizations that have also been complicit in it.

[jayreynolds]

I think it is about time we started developing the view that it is climate change sceptics of the Michael Crichton (and of course J. Raynolds) variety that have to be scapegoated for the chemtrails cover-up.
Thanks, Wayne, for putting me in such honorable company. I was in the library yesterday and tried to check out Crichton's new book, "State of Fear". All four copies were already checked out. There weren't any books on "chemtrails" in the card catalog.
Funny, that.


We need extenuating arguments to help e.g. Greenpeace defend itself against accusations that its silence about chemtrails has been reprehensible. We should start making these extenuating arguments on their behalf, pre-emptively. This strategy will in any case facilitate exposure of the full chemtrails story.
Now hold on there a minute, "DUMBASS". You say you are preparing to argue, on behalf of groups who already DON'T BELIEVE IN "CHEMTRAILS" that they should watch out for Dr. Chricton and me????
This is going to be fun to watch


I think the fact that honesty on chemtrails would expose its practitioners to private litigation is an acceptable excuse. "Chemmies" who want to sue those who are making the chemtrails but at the same time remain sceptics on the subject of anthropogenic climate change potentially cause more problems than they solve.

You mean people like 'Mark Sky', right?

http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6072&start=135

I found the 'tension' at that thread almost palpable.
See, Wayne, 'Sore Throat' and Mark were once best of friends.
They parted company along the way, with Mark heading down the "aliens are out to get us"
road to nowhere. He has gone quite mad as a hatter. It's not nice to throw yourself in between
that fight and try to stir things up.


This is a subject which definitely has to be taken up with climate change campaigners, even if they are complicit in the chemtrails coverup.

[b]Wayne, no amount of 'stroking' Green peace' or other enviro orgs will get them on your side because you have no proof!.
The bottom line for you people is that you have had five years to make your case, and still sit there twiddling your thumbs holding NO CARDS WHATSOEVER.
Hell of a way to expect to TRUMP a worldwide conspiracy, don'cha know?

[jayreynolds]

Hey, Wayne.
Checkmate

http://www.crichton-official.com/~adara/cgi-bin/messageboard-mc/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=18;t=000006;p=1

Over the past five years I have been actively debunking an internet hoax in which the proponents allege that when they see white lines in the sky they are observing jets "spraying" nefarious chemicals on behalf of a vast international conspiracy. Of course, what they see are merely ordinary contrails, linear clouds left behind when hydrocarbon fuel burns and forms visible ice crystals six miles high.

You can find out the details on my website link below.

A recent development in this hoax is that a majority faction has taken the stance that the purpose of "chemtrails" is to spray various substances for 'geoengineering' to ameliorate "global warming". This belief, though not supported by any empirical data whatsoever, came about when "chemtrail" believers ran across some actual think-tank proposals for such a project.

The "chemmies", as I call them, have been shopping their idea around to quite a few climate scientists and green orgs, being rebuffed time and again, and are getting discouraged. You'd think they would understand they need some actual evidence, eh?

From time to time, I have, in my role of "debunker", inserted myself between these global warming orgs and individuals and the "chemmies", with the predictable result that I have become known as a 'spoiler' of sorts.

Most recently, an individual, Wayne Hall, aka. "halva" has begun a campaign to scapegoat not only myself, but Dr. Crichton in the role of participants in the "cover-up".

From what I can gather, and their logic is sometimes perversely convoluted, the goal is to persuade climate change people that Dr. Crichton and myself should be held civilly liable for being skeptical of both GW and "chemtrails". Never mind that Dr. Crichton has probably never heard of "chemtrails", these people smelt blood when they read "State of Fear".

Over the years, these "chemmies", as I call them, have shopped their hoax around to one GW group after another(ie: Greenpeace, Tyndall Centre, Earth Island, Ross Gelbspan), yet have always been rebuffed. They have decided that they were most likely rejected because these orgs are "in-the-know" about "chemtrails", and are afraid of being implicated for their foreknowledge.

This new gambit appears designed to allay the fears of the enviro orgs by scapegoating Dr. Crichton and myself, thus allowing the enviro orgs to be reassured they won't be held accountable. Hope this explains what is in play.

Here are three message boards where the idea is being floated.
On these two, I am, of course, banned:
http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=Discussion&action=display&num=1106893502
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=79459#79459
On this one I can post rebuttals:
http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=229895#post229895

I'd like to discuss this with Dr. Crichton or anyone else here, or via email at reality2u30@hotmail.com

"Happy trails",
Jay Reynolds

--------------------
Jay Reynolds website:
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/

[jayreynolds]

Michael Crichton's "State of Fear" Takes on Global Warming Alarmists

Michael Crichton is taking on the global warming industry in his latest thriller, "State of Fear."

Crichton told ABC's John Stossel that the controversy the book will engender almost kept him from writing it: "I'm 62 years old. I've had a good life. I'm happy and I'm enjoying myself. I don't need any of the flak that would come from doing a book like this."

Yet Crichton thought the message of the book, in which he says that environmental organizations are "fomenting false fears in order to promote agendas and raise money," was important enough to do anyway.

The book is a rare thriller: It has footnotes. (Which means that Michael Crichton's fiction has better documentation than many environmental organizations' websites.)

Crichton, however, warns people not to believe anyone who says they know for sure if the Earth is warming and, if so, how much and why.

As reported by the Guardian, Crichton says in an "author's message" in the book:

* In every debate, all sides overstate the extent of existing knowledge and its degree of certainty

* Nobody knows how much of the present warming trend might be a natural phenomenon

* Nobody knows how much warming will occur in the next century. The computer models vary by 400%, de facto proof that nobody knows. But if I had to guess - the only thing anyone is doing, really - ... the increase will be 0.812436 degrees C

* For anyone to believe in impending resource scarcity, after 200 years of such false alarms, is kind of weird. I don't know whether such a belief today is best ascribed to ignorance of history, sclerotic dogmatism, unhealthy love of Malthus, or simple pigheadedness

* Most environmental "principles" (such as sustainable development or the precautionary principle) have the effect of preserving the economic advantages of the west and thus constitute modern imperialism toward the developing world. It is a nice way of saying: "We got ours and we don't want you to get yours, because you'll cause too much pollution"

* We desperately need a nonpartisan, blinded funding mechanism to conduct research ... Scientists are only too aware of whom they are working for
Here's a review of the book from the Globe and Mail. The review says it is good, except for the injection of the scientific facts.

For me, that's a plus.

Reading this one is going to be fun.

http://www.nationalcenter.org/2004/12/michael-crichtons-state-of-fear-takes.html

[jayreynolds]

Michael Crichton's new world of environmental doom
December 13, 2004

By Colleen Long

Michael Crichton is a big man with big ideas, a storyteller of nearly
7 feet who turns popular science into popular fiction.

In Timeline, he sends characters back in time using quantum physics. Aliens deliver a threatening disease to the world in The Andromeda Strain, and in Jurassic Park, perhaps his most accessible novel, dinosaurs are created from ancient DNA.

Now he's questioning global warming in his new thriller, State of Fear, about eco-terrorists who plot a series of natural disasters - earthquakes, underwater landslides, a tsunami - to prove that global warming is a threat to humanity
'He has a gift to translate science for the reader, and not only translate it but work it into the midst of an exciting novel'
. A ragtag band of scientists and lawyers uncovers the scheme.

State of Fear sounds like a typical Crichton thriller, but this time he's using the novel as a platform, tacking on a five-page message stating his notion that the theory of global warming is speculative at best, and a 14-page bibliography of works supporting his views.

"It was very difficult to get my head around the idea that this widely held belief may not be true, and I thought, if I'm going to do a book, how would I structure it so that someone could even hear it a little bit?" he says, his youthful face dimpled as he yanks out different graphs to illustrate his point.

Crichton, with more than 100-million copies of his books in print, is ready to defend his view - he's armed with a tape recorder, a steep pile of colourful graphs, scientific data and text books. Pushing rimless glasses up higher on his nose, he's eager to discuss the environment and he's certain his ideas are right. But he doesn't allow ego to swallow him and is quick to laugh at himself and back off when his lecture becomes overbearing.

More than three years ago, the tall author read about global warming and grew curious. Having a conventional view that global warming is a threat, he began to study climate data, expecting to find proof. However, the more he hunted, the more unsatisfied he became with the evaluations and speculations.

"I have a lot of trouble with things that don't seem true to me," Crichton says, his large, manicured hands gesturing to his graphs. "I'm very uncomfortable just accepting. There's something in me that wants to pound the table and say, 'That's not true'."

He spoke to a few scientists about his questions, convinced that he could interpret the data himself. "If we put everything in the hands of experts and if we say that as intelligent outsiders we are not qualified to look over the shoulder of anybody, then we're in some kind of really weird world," he says.

Crichton, though, may have more experience than most in working with science. The 62-year-old writer grew up in Roslyn, Long Island. His father was a journalist and young Michael spent much of his childhood writing extra papers for teachers. In third grade, he wrote a nine-page play that his father typed using carbon paper so the other kids would know their parts. He was tall and awkward, and used writing as a way to escape; Mark Twain and Alfred Hitchcock were his role models.

Figuring he would not be able to make a living as a writer, he decided to become a doctor. He studied anthropology at Harvard College, and later graduated from Harvard Medical School. During medical school, he cranked out books under pseudonyms. (One that he used was Jeffrey Hudson, a 17th-century dwarf in the court of King Charles II of England.) He had modest success with his writing and decided to pursue it.

Some books take a long time to write, like Disclosure, which took five years. Others require less time, but Crichton has a rigid writing schedule: he gets up early and writes from about 6am to 3pm, with a break for lunch.


Many of Crichton's books have been made into movies, including Rising Sun, Coma and Jurassic Park, which was directed by Steven Spielberg. Crichton created the TV hospital series ER in 1994. Now in its 11th season, ER has won 21 Emmy Awards and the George Foster Peabody Award. He's even had a dinosaur named after him, Crichton's ankylosaur.

He is the kind of celebrity celebrities want to be: rich, famous and prolific but not too recognisable - although his staggering height does attract attention.

"Of course, the celebrity's nice. But when I go do research it's more difficult now. The kind of freedom I had 10 years ago is gone," he says. "You have to have good table manners. You can't have spaghetti hanging out of your mouth at a restaurant."

His HarperCollins editor, Marjorie Braman, says Crichton's books are a joy to edit, even with the science tinge.

"He has a gift to translate science for the reader, and not only translate it but work it into the midst of an exciting novel," said Braman, who has never before seen an author's message like Crichton's.

"I think it's entirely appropriate because it is a novel of ideas," she said. "Michael Crichton, because of his stature and fame for not only writing books, but TV and movies - well people do wonder what he thinks."

Crichton's books are a guaranteed sell, which is good news for independent book sellers such as Books & Books in Miami. "I think when people are buying fiction, they're buying authors who they can feel confident in the entertainment value of their work," Mitchell Kaplan, owner of Books & Books, said. "At the same time, they can learn about subjects they may not know a lot about."

Crichton's author's statement is new even for Crichton. In it, he argues that a political agenda, not scientific evidence, is the foundation for predictions that the planet's climate could warm by up to 5 degrees Celsius over the next century. World powers, he says, use global warming to keep citizens in a state of fear, just as they did with the Cold War. But Crichton is noticeably vague about who these powers are.

Yet many climate scientists have endorsed climate change predictions. Climate records continue to be broken as many different regions experience warmer temperatures than they have in centuries. While it is always possible that the experts are wrong, that possibility diminishes with each passing year as evidence mounts for a connection between carbon dioxide emissions and climate warming.

Crichton considers himself an environmentalist, no matter what. "Why are we not feeding people in this world who are hungry? Why are we not giving clean water to the almost billion people who don't have clean water? The greatest sources of environmental degradation is poverty. Why aren't we cleaning up poverty?" That's a mystery for someone else to solve, he says; he's just content having brought it to the masses.

Crichton expects critics will jump on him for his views on global warming but it won't be the first time. In 1992, he was called a "racist" for his novel, Rising Sun, which spotlighted US-Japan relations amid fretfulness about the Japanese incursion into the American economy.

"The initial response from the (Japanese) establishment was, 'You're a racist'," he recalls. "So then, because I'm always trying to deal with data, I went on a tour talking about it and gave a very careful argument, and their response came back, 'Well you say that but we know you're a racist'."

But in the end, State of Fear, like Rising Sun, Jurassic Park and other Crichton works, are stories - although the author says that inevitably someone will think the story true in a War of the Worlds sort of way.

"Somebody was going to pass a law preventing research leading to the creation of a dinosaur after Jurassic Park, he says. I was just holding my breath hoping it would happen, but I guess somebody finally whispered to him, 'It's a novel'."

http://www.pretorianews.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=2343511&fSectionId=670&fSetId=521

[jayreynolds]

http://wiredforbooks.org/michaelcrichton/

http://www.usdreams.com/AchieversPhotosCrichton.html

[gaiacomm]

JR says: To the contrary, you've allied yourself with gaiacomm, a nutcase whose claim to fame was becoming the first and only person to get banned!

Gaiacomm says: The first and only person to get banned and return!

[jayreynolds]

JR says: To the contrary, you've allied yourself with gaiacomm, a nutcase whose claim to fame was becoming the first and only person to get banned!
Gaiacomm says: The first and only person to get banned and return!

We'll see about that.

[gaiacomm]

We'll see about that.

JR, I guess I made history once again.... but you can't do that!

You Lose!

[halva]

JR says: To the contrary, you've allied yourself with gaiacomm, a nutcase whose claim to fame was becoming the first and only person to get banned!

Gaiacomm says: The first and only person to get banned and return!

Gaiacomm if you and I are allies as Raynolds claims, ask him to apologize for claiming for almost a year that you are Lance Haubrick.

[gaiacomm]

Gaiacomm if you and I are allies as Raynolds claims, ask him to apologize for claiming for almost a year that you are Lance Haubrick.

I did...but his ego is greater than that. JR knows.... the fact that I came back from the dead makes him nervous anyway.

[halva]

I did...but his ego is greater than that. JR knows.... the fact that I came back from the dead makes him nervous anyway.

You have also said that the war is over, Gaiacomm, because the other side has lost, so now we should all be friends.

But the other side does not acknowledge that it has lost.

[gaiacomm]

You have also said that the war is over, Gaiacomm, because the other side has lost, so now we should all be friends.

But the other side does not acknowledge that it has lost.


I know, wayne...It would be nice if they could at least listen...but they don't. JR and Company are now worried because of my return which has never been done...as a matter of fact I have plans for JR and company....while away I did my homework!

[gaiacomm]

JR and Company will continue to post their rants until they reach their goal. After that wayne that is when your truth will be known!

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Amazing---Gaia is back in town. Hopefully, with a mouth better in check.
How about the truth being known today?


Halva,

How about using some of those powers of deduction that come to some, when they don't sit upon the grey matter at the Cafe.

Chemtrails affecting the weather is easy to establish. All the photos show chemtrails in the summertime that are thick and start to drop or fall. Chemtrials are not cirris clouds as some say and they don't sublime. Chemtrails linger and go from horizon to horizon often. They are not natural and they fall. You can see the chemtrails fall distribution from the ground during the summer humid climate periods.

So, when you get chemtrail ice falling it gains more mass as it falls and if there are nimbus clouds below, it sets up cloud seeding for rain. Chemtrails can and do induce rain.

Simple jet contrials from the 11% fuels and old engine designs do make the more cirris like clouds that don't fall and they do sublime rapidly. Contrails don't make weather..

With the fall effects of chemtrails, comes the acids being pulled out of the atmosphere, with HF and HCl that do upset the polar region's global warming factor. Chemtrails attempt to offset the more intense warming over the poles.


Chemtrails were designed to act just like the greenery over some earth sheltered house sky windows. In the summer, the vines grow and shield the windows from heat. Chemtrails do the very same thing. In the warmer and more humid month they make the larger particles that will reflect IR wavelengths and add cooling to the hemisphere of the planet in the summer season. The hemisphere in winter does not have the high moisture levels and thus less chemtrail density and the winters stay net warmer. Chemtrail techniques are intentionally selective in their reflection of IR based on seasonal variations.


The first ideas for chemtrail technique used the catalysists in the low hydrogen fuels to attract water vapor. The second generation chemtrail technique moved the catalysists back into the refineries and upped the hydrogen to the point that chemtrails of the correct densities form. It is about rain, IR warming weather control, and pulling acids from the skies. It is basically called the DOE Global Shield Project.


Back when jet planes came into being in WWII, the jets used "naptha" based fuels that were down in the 11 % hydrogen range. These were selected because the military did not want these vapor trails pointing to bombers or fighters. They also had some sense about marking up the skies even from commercial aircraft---so the low hydrogen naptha grade was the choice.

With the advent of problems from man-made pollution issues----the jet fuels were modified to remove more sulfur and cut the SOx problems. The method that did this was via hydrogen to make hydrogen sulfide that could be removed in the refining process. It also left more hydrogen in the products.

Refineries also lost a lot of gases that also came into regulation, so they were forced to seal these off and cut the emissions of VOC's and all the emissions. They did this with the help of catalysists. And they also used catalysists to up amount of the heavies in the distillation column that could be converted to lighter fuels.

As this happened the jet fuels were switched from the contrail type 11 % hydrogen naptha based fuels to the chemtrail 14% hydrogen kerosine based jet fuels. Ask anyone that has ever used kerosine to heat how much water these things make and literally make the walls wet. All this has been carefully guided by regulatory methods to shape the hydrogen content in the fuels to that best suited to chemtrail shading methods.

The chemtrails are the direct effects of catalysists to change the refinery systems, so as to increase the hydrogen content in the fuels and up the jet plume water content to the point that they make these more dense plumes with large particles that reflect IR wavelengths to deal with global warming. The large dense particles mean you get heavy particles that fall and induce weather/ rain effects in the lower cloud formations.


First generation chemtrails were from catalysist in the fuel, and so are second generation chemtrails. It is just a matter of where they were added in the process. The net intent has always been to use jet planes as catalysists for mediation of the IR absorption of heat from the Sun, aka global warming. And to use the heavy particles as rain makers to get some of the heat absorbing acids out of the air and to keep things like Cl and F from being able to collect to higher concentrations at the poles. Chemtrail methods go after even the polar ice melt rates.


I think, if you can stop sitting on the grey matter and apply some rather simple logic that is is very easy to explain how chemtrails do affect the weather, make for rain seeding, and do mediate the global warming effects.

Once you know that gasoline is around 15% hydrogen content----then you can see also that gas planes flying the same altitudes of jets, also make chemtrails that do more serious affect the weather and they don't dissipate. Contrails do dissipate and they do sublime rapidly and in the history of jets using naptha fuels (sans chemtrail additive methods), they did not affect the weather---nor did they mark up the skies and screw up the soil acid induced metals and fluoride levels.

First generation chemtrails methods were aimed at the dry naptha type fuels and second generation chemtrails methods is the wet kerosine JP-8 type fuel.

IMHO,
is

[gaiacomm]

Amazing---Gaia is back in town. Hopefully, with a mouth better in check.


Halva,

How about using some of those powers of deduction that come to some, when they don't sit upon the grey matter at the Cafe.

Chemtrails affecting the weather is easy to establish. All the photos show chemtrails in the summertime that are thick and start to drop or fall. Chemtrials are not cirris clouds as some say and they don't sublime. Chemtrails linger and go from horizon to horizon often. They are not natural and they fall. You can see the chemtrails fall distribution from the ground during the summer humid climate periods.

So, when you get chemtrail ice falling it gains more mass as it falls and if there are nimbus clouds below, it sets up cloud seeding for rain. Chemtrails can and do induce rain.

Simple jet contrials from the 11% fuels and old engine designs do make the more cirris like clouds that don't fall and they do sublime rapidly. Contrails don't make weather..

With the fall effects of chemtrails, comes the acids being pulled out of the atmosphere, with HF and HCl that do upset the polar region's global warming factor. Chemtrails attempt to offset the more intense warming over the poles.


Chemtrails were designed to act just like the greenery over some earth sheltered house sky windows. In the summer, the vines grow and shield the windows from heat. Chemtrails do the very same thing. In the warmer and more humid month they make the larger particles that will reflect IR wavelengths and add cooling to the hemisphere of the planet in the summer season. The hemisphere in winter does not have the high moisture levels and thus less chemtrail density and the winters stay net warmer. Chemtrail techniques are intentionally selective in their reflection of IR based on seasonal variations.


The first ideas for chemtrail technique used the catalysists in the low hydrogen fuels to attract water vapor. The second generation chemtrail technique moved the catalysists back into the refineries and upped the hydrogen to the point that chemtrails of the correct densities form. It is about rain, IR warming weather control, and pulling acids from the skies. It is basically called the DOE Global Shield Project.


Back when jet planes came into being in WWII, the jets used "naptha" based fuels that were down in the 11 % hydrogen range. These were selected because the military did not want these vapor trails pointing to bombers or fighters. They also had some sense about marking up the skies even from commercial aircraft---so the low hydrogen naptha grade was the choice.

With the advent of problems from man-made pollution issues----the jet fuels were modified to remove more sulfur and cut the SOx problems. The method that did this was via hydrogen to make hydrogen sulfide that could be removed in the refining process. It also left more hydrogen in the products.

Refineries also lost a lot of gases that also came into regulation, so they were forced to seal these off and cut the emissions of VOC's and all the emissions. They did this with the help of catalysists. And they also used catalysists to up amount of the heavies in the distillation column that could be converted to lighter fuels.

As this happened the jet fuels were switched from the contrail type 11 % hydrogen naptha based fuels to the chemtrail 14% hydrogen kerosine based jet fuels. Ask anyone that has ever used kerosine to heat how much water these things make and literally make the walls wet. All this has been carefully guided by regulatory methods to shape the hydrogen content in the fuels to that best suited to chemtrail shading methods.

The chemtrails are the direct effects of catalysists to change the refinery systems, so as to increase the hydrogen content in the fuels and up the jet plume water content to the point that they make these more dense plumes with large particles that reflect IR wavelengths to deal with global warming. The large dense particles mean you get heavy particles that fall and induce weather/ rain effects in the lower cloud formations.


First generation chemtrails were from catalysist in the fuel, and so are second generation chemtrails. It is just a matter of where they were added in the process. The net intent has always been to use jet planes as catalysists for mediation of the IR absorption of heat from the Sun, aka global warming. And to use the heavy particles as rain makers to get some of the heat absorbing acids out of the air and to keep things like Cl and F from being able to collect to higher concentrations at the poles. Chemtrail methods go after even the polar ice melt rates.


I think, if you can stop sitting on the grey matter and apply some rather simple logic that is is very easy to explain how chemtrails do affect the weather, make for rain seeding, and do mediate the global warming effects.

Once you know that gasoline is around 15% hydrogen content----then you can see also that gas planes flying the same altitudes of jets, also make chemtrails that do more serious affect the weather and they don't dissipate. Contrails do dissipate and they do sublime rapidly and in the history of jets using naptha fuels, they did not affect the weather.

IMHO,
is


Nothing will change...as for my words will remain the same, I just got stronger thats all!

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Gaia writes:

"Nothing will change...as for my words will remain the same, I just got stronger thats all!"

========

Oh really----then list the moderators name and Email address again and lets see what happens.

Less window dressing Gaia, less BS too.

IMHO,
is

[gaiacomm]

Gaia writes:

"Nothing will change...as for my words will remain the same, I just got stronger thats all!"

========

Oh really----then list the moderators name and Email address again and lets see what happens.

Less window dressing Gaia, less BS too.

IMHO,
is

You are the one that is the fool!

[halva]

Gaiacomm, Jim Phelps and I looked as if we were beginning to work together rather than against each other. Have you come here to stir the pot and sow discord?

[gaiacomm]

Gaiacomm, Jim Phelps and I looked as if we were beginning to work together rather than against each other. Have you come here to stir the pot and sow discord?

No, not at all. I just defend my position when attacked! Proceed!

[gaiacomm]

I could hear that slap all the way down here in Terlingua.

Terlingua is an interesting name. Most should be able to figure out its meaning.

Welcome back, gaiacomm.

Thanks, Yaak...I guess I beat the odds!

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Gaia,

How come my truth meter keeps reading negative when you speak? Must be the Mason thing in you attempting to follow the grand masters corrupted game plan.

IMHO,
is

[gaiacomm]

Gaia,

How come my truth meter keeps reading negative when you speak? Must be the Mason thing in you attemption to follow the grand masters corrupted game plan.

IMHO,
is

Maybe you should consider becoming a Mason....I can help you!

[gaiacomm]

I know who JR is, but which characters do you consider "company" to be?

His supporters!

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Chemtrails affecting the weather is easy to establish. All the photos show chemtrails in the summertime that are thick and start to drop or fall. Chemtrials are not cirris clouds as some say and they don't sublime. Chemtrails linger and go from horizon to horizon often. They are not natural and they fall. You can see the chemtrails fall distribution from the ground during the summer humid climate periods.

So, when you get chemtrail ice falling it gains more mass as it falls and if there are nimbus clouds below, it sets up cloud seeding for rain. Chemtrails can and do induce rain.

Simple jet contrials from the 11% fuels and old engine designs do make the more cirris like clouds that don't fall and they do sublime rapidly. Contrails don't make weather..

With the fall effects of chemtrails, comes the acids being pulled out of the atmosphere, with HF and HCl that do upset the polar region's global warming factor. Chemtrails attempt to offset the more intense warming over the poles.


Chemtrails were designed to act just like the greenery over some earth sheltered house sky windows. In the summer, the vines grow and shield the windows from heat. Chemtrails do the very same thing. In the warmer and more humid month they make the larger particles that will reflect IR wavelengths and add cooling to the hemisphere of the planet in the summer season. The hemisphere in winter does not have the high moisture levels and thus less chemtrail density and the winters stay net warmer. Chemtrail techniques are intentionally selective in their reflection of IR based on seasonal variations.


The first ideas for chemtrail technique used the catalysists in the low hydrogen fuels to attract water vapor. The second generation chemtrail technique moved the catalysists back into the refineries and upped the hydrogen to the point that chemtrails of the correct densities form. It is about rain, IR warming weather control, and pulling acids from the skies. It is basically called the DOE Global Shield Project.


Back when jet planes came into being in WWII, the jets used "naptha" based fuels that were down in the 11 % hydrogen range. These were selected because the military did not want these vapor trails pointing to bombers or fighters. They also had some sense about marking up the skies even from commercial aircraft---so the low hydrogen naptha grade was the choice.

With the advent of problems from man-made pollution issues----the jet fuels were modified to remove more sulfur and cut the SOx problems. The method that did this was via hydrogen to make hydrogen sulfide that could be removed in the refining process. It also left more hydrogen in the products.

Refineries also lost a lot of gases that also came into regulation, so they were forced to seal these off and cut the emissions of VOC's and all the emissions. They did this with the help of catalysists. And they also used catalysists to up amount of the heavies in the distillation column that could be converted to lighter fuels.

As this happened the jet fuels were switched from the contrail type 11 % hydrogen naptha based fuels to the chemtrail 14% hydrogen kerosine based jet fuels. Ask anyone that has ever used kerosine to heat how much water these things make and literally make the walls wet. All this has been carefully guided by regulatory methods to shape the hydrogen content in the fuels to that best suited to chemtrail shading methods.

The chemtrails are the direct effects of catalysists to change the refinery systems, so as to increase the hydrogen content in the fuels and up the jet plume water content to the point that they make these more dense plumes with large particles that reflect IR wavelengths to deal with global warming. The large dense particles mean you get heavy particles that fall and induce weather/ rain effects in the lower cloud formations.


First generation chemtrails were from catalysist in the fuel, and so are second generation chemtrails. It is just a matter of where they were added in the process. The net intent has always been to use jet planes as catalysists for mediation of the IR absorption of heat from the Sun, aka global warming. And to use the heavy particles as rain makers to get some of the heat absorbing acids out of the air and to keep things like Cl and F from being able to collect to higher concentrations at the poles. Chemtrail methods go after even the polar ice melt rates.


I think, if you can stop sitting on the grey matter and apply some rather simple logic that is is very easy to explain how chemtrails do affect the weather, make for rain seeding, and do mediate the global warming effects.

Once you know that gasoline is around 15% hydrogen content----then you can see also that gas planes flying the same altitudes of jets, also make chemtrails that do more serious affect the weather and they don't dissipate. Contrails do dissipate and they do sublime rapidly and in the history of jets using naptha fuels (sans chemtrail additive methods), they did not affect the weather---nor did they mark up the skies and screw up the soil acid induced metals and fluoride levels.

First generation chemtrails methods were aimed at the dry naptha type fuels and second generation chemtrails methods is the wet kerosine JP-8 type fuel.

IMHO,
is

[gaiacomm]

Chemtrails affecting the weather is easy to establish. All the photos show chemtrails in the summertime that are thick and start to drop or fall. Chemtrials are not cirris clouds as some say and they don't sublime. Chemtrails linger and go from horizon to horizon often. They are not natural and they fall. You can see the chemtrails fall distribution from the ground during the summer humid climate periods.

So, when you get chemtrail ice falling it gains more mass as it falls and if there are nimbus clouds below, it sets up cloud seeding for rain. Chemtrails can and do induce rain.

Simple jet contrials from the 11% fuels and old engine designs do make the more cirris like clouds that don't fall and they do sublime rapidly. Contrails don't make weather..

With the fall effects of chemtrails, comes the acids being pulled out of the atmosphere, with HF and HCl that do upset the polar region's global warming factor. Chemtrails attempt to offset the more intense warming over the poles.


Chemtrails were designed to act just like the greenery over some earth sheltered house sky windows. In the summer, the vines grow and shield the windows from heat. Chemtrails do the very same thing. In the warmer and more humid month they make the larger particles that will reflect IR wavelengths and add cooling to the hemisphere of the planet in the summer season. The hemisphere in winter does not have the high moisture levels and thus less chemtrail density and the winters stay net warmer. Chemtrail techniques are intentionally selective in their reflection of IR based on seasonal variations.


The first ideas for chemtrail technique used the catalysists in the low hydrogen fuels to attract water vapor. The second generation chemtrail technique moved the catalysists back into the refineries and upped the hydrogen to the point that chemtrails of the correct densities form. It is about rain, IR warming weather control, and pulling acids from the skies. It is basically called the DOE Global Shield Project.


Back when jet planes came into being in WWII, the jets used "naptha" based fuels that were down in the 11 % hydrogen range. These were selected because the military did not want these vapor trails pointing to bombers or fighters. They also had some sense about marking up the skies even from commercial aircraft---so the low hydrogen naptha grade was the choice.

With the advent of problems from man-made pollution issues----the jet fuels were modified to remove more sulfur and cut the SOx problems. The method that did this was via hydrogen to make hydrogen sulfide that could be removed in the refining process. It also left more hydrogen in the products.

Refineries also lost a lot of gases that also came into regulation, so they were forced to seal these off and cut the emissions of VOC's and all the emissions. They did this with the help of catalysists. And they also used catalysists to up amount of the heavies in the distillation column that could be converted to lighter fuels.

As this happened the jet fuels were switched from the contrail type 11 % hydrogen naptha based fuels to the chemtrail 14% hydrogen kerosine based jet fuels. Ask anyone that has ever used kerosine to heat how much water these things make and literally make the walls wet. All this has been carefully guided by regulatory methods to shape the hydrogen content in the fuels to that best suited to chemtrail shading methods.

The chemtrails are the direct effects of catalysists to change the refinery systems, so as to increase the hydrogen content in the fuels and up the jet plume water content to the point that they make these more dense plumes with large particles that reflect IR wavelengths to deal with global warming. The large dense particles mean you get heavy particles that fall and induce weather/ rain effects in the lower cloud formations.


First generation chemtrails were from catalysist in the fuel, and so are second generation chemtrails. It is just a matter of where they were added in the process. The net intent has always been to use jet planes as catalysists for mediation of the IR absorption of heat from the Sun, aka global warming. And to use the heavy particles as rain makers to get some of the heat absorbing acids out of the air and to keep things like Cl and F from being able to collect to higher concentrations at the poles. Chemtrail methods go after even the polar ice melt rates.


I think, if you can stop sitting on the grey matter and apply some rather simple logic that is is very easy to explain how chemtrails do affect the weather, make for rain seeding, and do mediate the global warming effects.

Once you know that gasoline is around 15% hydrogen content----then you can see also that gas planes flying the same altitudes of jets, also make chemtrails that do more serious affect the weather and they don't dissipate. Contrails do dissipate and they do sublime rapidly and in the history of jets using naptha fuels (sans chemtrail additive methods), they did not affect the weather---nor did they mark up the skies and screw up the soil acid induced metals and fluoride levels.

First generation chemtrails methods were aimed at the dry naptha type fuels and second generation chemtrails methods is the wet kerosine JP-8 type fuel.

IMHO,
is


And in short?

[gaiacomm]

I hope you realize they are many, in fact, most of the general population. I say that, because most people prefer the truth; most people do not like to be hoaxed or lied to.

You are a scientist gaiacomm. Does it not disturb you that chemtrail proponents have not been able to produce any scientific evidence that chemtrails are anything other than contrails?


Yes, that is true,,,but as scientist I must look at all of the data. I am still doing that. So far I have found some truth on both sides.

[gaiacomm]

So. you have data that indicates that the contrails that fill Earth's skies everyday are something more than contrails. This will be a first. We all anxiously await your data.

I'm sure you realize that if you insist on sitting on the fence, you are going to be hit by mud from both directions.:D


Yaak, I know. But I am not finished yet!

[gaiacomm]

All right.

Well, regardless of what prevails, I hope you enjoy yourself.:)

I will, thanks...Yaak.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Gaia,

In short, the defintion for contrail is for 50 years they came from naptha based jet fuels that formed short lived trails that acted more like cirris clouds.

And the defintion for chemtrails is kerosine based formed large particle trails dense enough to compensate for global warming and to affect the weather by rainout.

And Jim Phelps invented both methods in the mid-1980's at ORNL.

And Gaia still needs to fully explain just how he came to be in posession of all this 1980's sciences from ORNL's interest in plasma, HAARP, the Earth's dialetric and Potential gradient processes.

IMHO,
is

[gaiacomm]

Gaia,

In short, the defintion for contrail is for 50 years they came from naptha based jet fuels that formed short lived trails that acted more like cirris clouds.

And the defintion for chemtrails is kerosine based formed large particle trails dense enough to compensate for global warming and to affect the weather by rainout.

And Jim Phelps invented both methods in the mid-1980's at ORNL.

And Gaia still needs to fully explain just how he came to be in posession of all this 1980's sciences from ORNL's interest in plasma, HAARP, the Earth's dialetric and Potential gradient processes.

IMHO,
is


Maybe this will suffice for a moment:

The DR. was not directly involved with haarp but in the early 1980's was an independent consultant for a group connected to APTI a then division of ARCO. His responsibilities were to design the antenna elements only. With that said,,,he left and went on his own way. Years later he surfaced back into the system and began to promote the refined technology again as a communications system based on part by Tesla and the works of Eastlund, Maxwell and a few others.

There is no pretending or hoax...there was a public letter sent to the office of FBI and other technology funding programs in the early days. That is not needed now.

There has never been an attempt made to publically solicit monies from the general public for funding,,,because that is not the intent...there are no peer reviewed journals with the data of this technology because of the nature of the technology and the dishonest academia ethics.

What you see on the internet is what is allowed. What letters and essays the DR has written has created a stir worldwide, but there will never be an attempt to defraud the public at large...like Enron, Worldcom and others...

The DR is promoting the technology only as a pre course to what is going to occur shortly.

There is nothing to publically hide and all that is allowed is posted on the internet for all to see. The FBI, NSA and other agencies are quite aware of the DR and his ethics and will not interfere for the moment because of the amount of feedback from many sources and many people that are curious and hopeful that the words and technology that the Dr. promotes is the truth...Its ok to hope...also at least the Dr. is trying to do something new!

I wonder if tesla, maxwell, faraday, Abe Lincoln, Jesus, William Gilbert, Plato, and others had listened to you all and decided to follow rather than to lead would the world be a better place?

Being a trail blazer is difficult but not impossible.

[jayreynolds]

Gaia,

In short, the defintion for contrail is for 50 years they came from naptha based jet fuels that formed short lived trails that acted more like cirris clouds.

And the defintion for chemtrails is kerosine based formed large particle trails dense enough to compensate for global warming and to affect the weather by rainout.

And Jim Phelps invented both methods in the mid-1980's at ORNL.

And Gaia still needs to fully explain just how he came to be in posession of all this 1980's sciences from ORNL's interest in plasma, HAARP, the Earth's dialetric and Potential gradient processes.

IMHO,
is

Hey, Jimbo, if you "invented both methods in the mid 1980's at ORNL", which includes the naptha-based jet fuels you speak of firstly, what sort of math gets you back fifty years? Sounds like twenty years to me, but what's thirty years or so between friends, eh?

BTW, since you "invented these methods", how come you can't spell kerosene?
Oh, and weren't you saying last week that "Chemtrails" were titanium dioxide and barium?
Don't want to forget anything, now, do we?
tee-hee-hee

[gaiacomm]

Hey, Jimbo, if you "invented both methods in the mid 1980's at ORNL", which includes the naptha-based jet fuels you speak of firstly, what sort of math gets you back fifty years? Sounds like twenty years to me, but what's thirty years or so between friends, eh?

BTW, since you "invented these methods", how come you can't spell kerosene?
Oh, and weren't you saying last week that "Chemtrails" were titanium dioxide and barium?
Don't want to forget anything, now, do we?
tee-hee-hee


Readers:

JR is just having fun....its the pretender in him...its hard to break!

[stuart_allsop]

Yaak, I know. But I am not finished yet!Gee, that's strange.. I thought you were finished a long time ago!

[gaiacomm]

Gee, that's strange.. I thought you were finished a long time ago!

No I was raised from the dead and must begin my work! (smile)

[gaiacomm]

Sure is quiet here now...now that I am back.. I guess this makes JR look like a fool now...Lance issue is gone and the banning issue gone...2 strikes JR...just one more to go and your out!

[stuart_allsop]

No I was raised from the dead and must begin my work! (smile)Ahhh! OK. I thought something smelled pretty dead and decomposed around here. Now I know what it was. (smile-smile :) :) )

[gaiacomm]

Ahhh! OK. I thought something smelled pretty dead and decomposed around here. Now I know what it was. (smile-smile :) :) )

SMILE....

[stuart_allsop]

SMILE....By the way, Judah, does your Grandad know that you use his house as your business address? And what about your school? Do they know?

[gaiacomm]

By the way, Judah, does your Grandad know that you use his house as your business address? And what about your school? Do they know?


Everyone knows!

[halva]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/dimming_qa.shtml

Why would particles in the atmosphere cause global dimming?
It's very simple - they reflect sunlight back into space. This fact has been well-known for many decades (it is why volcanoes, which can throw vast numbers of sulphate particles into the upper atmosphere, can have a strong temporary cooling effect on the Earth).

What came as a surprise was the so-called indirect effect, whereby particles in the atmosphere change the optical properties of clouds. This happens because the presence of man-made particles in the atmosphere increases the number of sites where water droplets can form. The effect is that up to six times as many water droplets form in a polluted air mass as would naturally, but since the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere does not change, the droplets have to be smaller than they would naturally be.

Since the reflectivity of the clouds depends on the surface area of the droplets, these polluted clouds are more reflective than unpolluted ones (since many small droplets have a bigger surface area than fewer big ones). By reflecting more sunlight back into space these more reflective clouds cut down the sunlight reaching the surface - hence contributing to global dimming.

Is global dimming a daytime/daylight phenomenon or a round-the-clock greenhouse/infra-red phenomenon?
Dimming is a daytime effect. At night the sun's radiation is obviously completely blocked by the Earth!

How does anthropogenic particle emission compare with natural sources, for example volcanoes, deserts, sea salt etc?
That is very difficult to say. Emissions from volcanoes can have a big global effect on the climate, but it is transitory - the Earth may go many decades between major eruptions. Sea salt and natural sulphur compounds emitted by plankton are also very important for cloud formation. But the results from the Indian Ocean Experiment suggest that the effects of anthropogenic particles in the atmosphere dominate natural effects, in the Indian Ocean at least.

At the moment the scientific consensus is that global dimming is a man-made phenomenon. Another important aspect of man-made particle pollution is that the evidence is growing that its direct impact on human health is very serious - causing literally hundreds of thousands if not millions of deaths annually. Sea salt doesn't give you cancer!

If the 9/11 contrail evidence suggests warmer nights due to the air travel, isn't that global warming rather than dimming?
The 9/11 study showed that removing contrails resulted in a large increase in the daily temperature range - in other words warmer days and cooler nights. The study does not really provide a clear-cut answer to the question of whether the overall effect of the contrails is a net warming or a net cooling averaged over the whole 24 hours. This question is controversial. But what seems clear is that contrails contribute to a reduction in the amount of daytime solar radiation reaching the surface, and that this has significant effects on temperature.

Given the effect of the air traffic, is there any way to reduce the pollution they cause? For example, changing altitude, fuels and engines or economic measures?
Contrails form at altitude, so in theory flying lower would reduce them - but at the cost of burning even more aviation fuel and therefore making a still greater contribution to global warming.

Why has progress been made on particulate emissions more easily than gaseous emissions?
There are several reasons. Firstly, people can see, smell and taste particle emissions and they have very obvious damaging effects on human health. Also, sulphate emissions cause acid rain, which again has very obvious and immediate effects on vegetation and fish. So the political pressure to reduce particle emissions is strong. Then, the cure for particle emissions is technologically fairly straightforward - it is a question of adding equipment to existing plant rather than replacing plant.

This is a big contrast with what is required to tackle greenhouse gas emissions. Firstly, carbon dioxide is invisible and tasteless, and its catastrophic long-term effects on the environment are not immediately apparent. Secondly, tackling the problem means changing some of our behaviours and radically re-tooling our energy generation systems. These issues have yet to be properly confronted. But the good news is that we already have the technologies needed to solve the problem of greenhouse gases (principally energy conservation measures and nuclear power); what we so far lack is the political will to use them.

Are scientists often sceptical of findings that go against the current orthodoxy?
Yes, for good reason - usually the orthodoxy is correct. A famous physicist once told me that if you doubt every new idea in science you will be right 90% of the time, but you will be wrong the only time it matters.

Is there a possibility that the pan-evaporation method is too crude to be reliable?
Rather the reverse. It is the very simplicity of the pan-evaporation experiments that makes them reliable and comparable between different locales and over long periods of time. That is why many climate scientists regard the pan-evaporation data as the most convincing evidence of solar dimming.

What's the range in the figures on global dimming? Is there a consensus or are they as open to interpretation as global warming figures?
I don't think the figures on global warming are open to interpretation. It is an established fact that global temperatures have risen by 0.6°C over the past century. It is also an established fact that carbon dioxide levels have risen by about 100 parts per million over the same period due to human activity. It is a matter of the basic laws of physics that an increase in carbon dioxide will trap more heat in the Earth's atmosphere, which is why almost no respectable and independent scientist doubts the causal link between these two established facts.

The only surprise is that the warming has not been greater - which is where global dimming comes in. Unfortunately, there is still a very large range in the estimates of the cooling effect of dimming - by up to a factor of four. What seems to have been established already, however, is that the cooling effect of dimming is far larger than previously thought. This may explain why the world has not already warmed more strongly - the cooling effect of particle pollution has been offsetting the warming from carbon dioxide. If so, then we are in for far faster warming in the future as particle emissions are brought under control while greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise.

[halva]

The only role that anthropogenic climate change sceptics can have in the global dimming debate is the role of scapegoats.

[gaiacomm]

Come out come out wherever you are......

[stuart_allsop]

Stick a fork in it: this board is done.

[gaiacomm]

Stick a fork in it: this board is done.

It seems that way,,,oh well!

[halva]

Global Dimming

Author and Page informationSkip this section and go straight to the main content
by Anup ShahThis Page Created Saturday, January 15, 2005
This page: http://www.globalissues.org/EnvIssues/GlobalWarming/globaldimming.asp.

http://www.globalissues.org/EnvIssues/GlobalWarming/globaldimming.asp?p=1

On January 15, 2004, the BBC broadcast its weekly acclaimed Horizon documentary. This one was about a dangerous phenomenon called Global Dimming.


Burning of fossil fuels is creating two effects

What is global dimming?

Impacts of global dimming: millions already killed by it?

Health and environmental effects

Millions from Famines in the Sahel in the 70s and 80s

Billions are likely to be affected in Asia from similar effects

As well as fossil fuel burning, contrails is another source
Global Dimming is hiding the true power of Global Warming
Addressing global dimming only will lead to massive global warming
Root causes of global warming also must be addressed

More Information

Burning of fossil fuels is creating two effects

Two effects of fossil fuel productions are:

Greenhouse gases that cause global warming

By-products which are pollutants that cause global dimming

What is global dimming?Fossil fuel use, as well as producing greenhouse gases, creates other by-products. These by-products are also pollutants, such as sulphur dioxide, soot, and ash. These pollutants however, also change the properties of clouds.

Clouds are formed when water droplets are seeded by air-borne particles, such as pollen. Polluted air results in clouds with larger number of droplets than unpolluted clouds. This then makes those clouds more reflexsive. More of the sun's heat and energy is therefore reflected back into space.

This reduction of heat reaching the earth is known as Global Dimming.

Impacts of global dimming: millions already killed by it?Global warming results from the greenhouse effect caused by, amongst other things, excessive amounts of greenhouse gases in the earth's atmosphere from fossil fuel burning. It would seem then, that the other by-products which cause global dimming may be an ironic saviour.

A deeper look at this, however, shows that unfortunately this is not the case.

Health and environmental effects

The pollutants that lead to global dimming also lead to various human and environmental problems, such as smog, respiratory problems, and acid rain.

The impacts of global dimming itself, however, can be devastating.

Millions from Famines in the Sahel in the 70s and 80s
The death toll that global dimming may have already caused is thought to be massive.

Climatologists studying this phenomenon believe that the reflection of heat have made waters in the northern hemisphere cooler. As a result, less rain has formed in key areas and crucial rainfall has failed to arrive over the Sahel in Northern Africa.

In the 1970s and 1980s, massive famines were caused by failed rains which climatologists had never quite understood why they had failed.

The answers that global dimming models seemed to provide, the documentary noted, has led to a chilling conclusion: “what came out of our exhaust pipes and power stations [from Europe and North America] contributed to the deaths of a million people in Africa, and afflicted 50 million more” with hunger and starvation.

Billions are likely to be affected in Asia from similar effects

Scientists said that the impact of global dimming might not be in the millions, but billions. The Asian monsoons bring rainfall to half the world's population. If this air pollution and global dimming has a detrimental impact on the Asian monsoons some 3 billion people could be affected.

As well as fossil fuel burning, contrails is another source

Contrails (the vapour from planes flying high in the sky) were seen as another significant cause of heat reflection.

During the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, all commercial flights were grounded for the next three days.

This allowed climate scientists to look at the effect on the climate when there were no contrails and no heat reflection.

What scientists found was that the temperature rose by some 1 degree centigrade in that period of 3 days.

Global Dimming is hiding the true power of Global WarmingThe above impacts of global dimming have led to fears that global dimming has been hiding the true power of global warming.

Currently, most climate change models predict a 5 degrees increase in temperature over the next century, which is already considered extremely grave. However, global dimming has led to an underestimation of the power of global warming.

Addressing global dimming only will lead to massive global warming

Global dimming can be dealt with by cleaning up emissions.

However, if global dimming problems are only addressed, then the effects of global warming will increase even more. This may be what happened to Europe in 2003.

In Europe, various measures have been taken in recent years to clean up the emissions to reduce pollutants that create smog and other problems, but without reducing the greenhouse gas emissions in parallel. This seems to have had a few effects:

This may have already lessened the severity of droughts and failed rains in the Sahel.
However, it seems that it may have caused, or contributed to, the European heat wave in 2003 that killed thousands in France, saw forest fires in Portugal, and caused many other problems throughout the continent.

The documentary noted that the impacts of addressing global dimming only would increase global warming more rapidly. Irreversible damage would be only about 30 years away. Global level impacts would include:

The melting of ice in Greenland, which would lead to more rising sea levels. This in turn would impact many of our major world cities

Drying tropical rain forests would increase the risk of burning. This would release even more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, further increasing global warming effects. (Some countries have pushed for using “carbon sinks” to count as part of their emission targets. This has already been controversial because these store carbon dioxide that can be released into the atmosphere when burnt. Global dimming worries increase these concerns even more.)
These and other effects could combine to lead to an increase of 10 degrees centigrade in temperature over the next 100 years, not the standard 5 degrees which most models currently predict.

This would be a more rapid warming than any other time in history, the documentary noted. With such an increase,

Vegetation will die off even more quickly

Soil erosion will increase and food production will fail
A Sahara type of climate could be possible in places such as England, while other parts of the world would fare even worse.

Such an increase in temperature would also release one of the biggest stores of greenhouse gases on earth, methane hydrate, currently contained at the bottom of the earth's oceans and known to destabilize with warming. This gas is eight times stronger than carbon dioxide in its greenhouse effect. As the documentary also added, due to the sheer amounts that would be released, by this time, whatever we would try to curb emissions, it would be too late.

“This is not a prediction,” the documentary said, “it is a warning of what will happen if we clean up the pollution while doing nothing about greenhouse gases.”

Root causes of global warming also must be addressedIf we were to use global dimming pollutants to stave off the effects of global warming, we would still face many problems, such as:

Human health problems from the soot/smog

Environmental problems such as acid rain

Ecological problems such as changes in rainfall patterns (as the Ethiopian famine example above reminds us) which can kill millions, if not billions.

Climatologists are stressing that the roots of both global dimming causing pollutants and global warming causing greenhouse gases have to be dealt with together and soon.

We may have to change our way of life, the documentary warned. While this has been a message for over 20 years, as part of the climate change concerns, little has actually been done. “Rapidly,” the documentary concluded, “we are running out of time.”

[halva]

This is just speculation, but perhaps Raynolds is discovering he has an educational mission in the Crichton milieu.

Or perhaps not. He may in his wisdom think he has more to gain from flattering them than telling them what he knows and they quite possibly don't.

[jayreynolds]

This is just speculation, but perhaps Raynolds is discovering he has an educational mission in the Crichton milieu. Or perhaps not. He may in his wisdom think he has more to gain from flattering them than telling them what he knows and they quite possibly don't.

Yes, Wayne. Michael Crichton and I are rallying our minions to head your way with the pitchforks and torches. We are most afraid, however, of the mastermind Jim Phelps who was able to work at ORNL in the mid-1980's and travel back in time thirty years to invent naptha based jet fuels.
The prospect of battling such a Prometheus of Science with his catalysist methods and kerosine effects frankly has us both pooping in our pants.

[gaiacomm]

Wayne..I knew you would not leave...good...stay until hell is cold!

[whitemajikman]

Here is the Entire Thread in a nutshell.........

The Premise......


Is the phenomenon known as 'global warming' the result of man or is man's impact of far less importance than the normal dynamics of the planet?

Now here is an interesting NEWSWEEK Article from April 28, 1975

Which talks of Global Cooling and the Normal Dynamics of the Planet.......

FROM
Newsweek
April 28, 1975 Studies

The Cooling World

There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production– with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.

The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars' worth of damage in 13 U.S. states.

To scientists, these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world's weather. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.”

A survey completed last year by Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reveals a drop of half a degree in average ground temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 1968. According to George Kukla of Columbia University, satellite photos indicated a sudden, large increase in Northern Hemisphere snow cover in the winter of 1971-72. And a study released last month by two NOAA scientists notes that the amount of sunshine reaching the ground in the continental U.S. diminished by 1.3% between 1964 and 1972.

To the layman, the relatively small changes in temperature and sunshine can be highly misleading. Reid Bryson of the University of Wisconsin points out that the Earth’s average temperature during the great Ice Ages was only about seven degrees lower than during its warmest eras – and that the present decline has taken the planet about a sixth of the way toward the Ice Age average. Others regard the cooling as a reversion to the “little ice age” conditions that brought bitter winters to much of Europe and northern America between 1600 and 1900 – years when the Thames used to freeze so solidly that Londoners roasted oxen on the ice and when iceboats sailed the Hudson River almost as far south as New York City.

Just what causes the onset of major and minor ice ages remains a mystery. “Our knowledge of the mechanisms of climatic change is at least as fragmentary as our data,” concedes the National Academy of Sciences report. “Not only are the basic scientific questions largely unanswered, but in many cases we do not yet know enough to pose the key questions.”

Meteorologists think that they can forecast the short-term results of the return to the norm of the last century. They begin by noting the slight drop in overall temperature that produces large numbers of pressure centers in the upper atmosphere. These break up the smooth flow of westerly winds over temperate areas. The stagnant air produced in this way causes an increase in extremes of local weather such as droughts, floods, extended dry spells, long freezes, delayed monsoons and even local temperature increases – all of which have a direct impact on food supplies.

“The world’s food-producing system,” warns Dr. James D. McQuigg of NOAA’s Center for Climatic and Environmental Assessment, “is much more sensitive to the weather variable than it was even five years ago.” Furthermore, the growth of world population and creation of new national boundaries make it impossible for starving peoples to migrate from their devastated fields, as they did during past famines.

Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve. But the scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food or of introducing the variables of climatic uncertainty into economic projections of future food supplies. The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.

Reprinted from Financial Post - Canada, Jun 21, 2000



WMM

[whitemajikman]

Is the phenomenon known as 'global warming' the result of man or is man's impact of far less importance than the normal dynamics of the planet?

It's too early to say. Without a control planet without man-made "greenhouse gas" emissions but with all other factors equal, will will not be able to say which is true with certainty.

However, there is a thought experiment that covers the options.

The first two scenarios assume that the real global warming (that is happening*) is not man-made, and the second pair assume that it is.

* It is interesting to note that nobody now seriously disputes that global warming is happening at all. Since the theory was first posited, most of it's opponents concentrated on denying it's existence. As they now seem to have accepted that they were wrong and it really is happening, and admitted that the doomsayers were right about the effects (if not yet agreeing with the cause), I think we can afford to be at least as sceptical about the "it's a natural phenomenon" crowd as they are about the tree-huggers.

1)Global warming is a natural phenomenon that is outside man's control. Whatever happens will happen anyway, so we do nothing to prevent it, simply mitigating the effects of each environmental catastrophe as best we can, while burning as much oil, coal and gas as we can dig out of the ground. The planet becomes quite different, there are mass extinctions, conceivably including our one of more of main food species and possibly even ourselves. We carry on as best we can, adapting where we can. Eventually fossil fuels run out altogether, and if we survive we find another way of fuelling our progress. In the very long term the planet may cool again, perhaps even to the point of an ice age, and we'll have to deal with that in much the same way when it comes. RESULT = We carry on having fun now and still LOSE later.


2)Global warming is a natural phenomenon that is outside man's control, but we try and cut our greenhouse emissions dramatically because that's what we think is the cause. We hurt our economies badly for several decades, mitigating the effects of each environmental catastrophe as best we can. The planet still becomes quite different, there are mass extinctions, conceivably including our one of more of main food species and possibly even ourselves. We carry on as best we can, adapting where we can. In the very long term the planet may cool again, perhaps even to the point of an ice age, and we'll have to deal with that in much the same way when it comes. This time, tough, we'll know it isn't our fault and won't feel guilty about knowing we could have prevented it, or about ignoring doomsayers. RESULT = We deny ourselves some fun now and still LOSE later.


3)Global warming is a man-made phenomenon, but whatever happens will happen anyway, so we do nothing to prevent it, simply mitigating the effects of each environmental catastrophe as best we can, while burning as much oil, coal and gas as we can dig out of the ground. The planet becomes quite different, there are mass extinctions, conceivably including our one of more of main food species and possibly even ourselves. We carry on as best we can, adapting where we can. Eventually fossil fuels run out altogether, and if we survive we find another way of fuelling our progress. In the very long term the planet may cool again, perhaps even to the point of an ice age, and we'll have to deal with that in much the same way when it comes. RESULT = We carry on having fun now and still LOSE later. (But rather sooner than in scenario 1)
Global warming is a man-made phenomenon, and we try and cut our greenhouse emissions dramatically because that's what we think is the cause. We hurt our economies badly for several decades, mitigating the effects of each environmental catastrophe that is already set in train as best we can. However, after maybe as much as a century of discomfort, it becomes clear that the world is beginning to cool again and return to "normal". We cause a great deal of damage to our natural environment, and lose many species forever, but step back from the brink of total disaster. We finally learn that our actions always have unforeseen consequences and we are careful to think rather harder about what we do in future. RESULT = We deny ourselves some fun now and stand a good chance of WINNING later.


This is the flip answer - of the possible worst-case scenarios, only one gives us the possibility of continued and relatively untroubled survival, and it involves behaving as if global warming is anthropogenic.

We may still lose, of course - for all we know the environmental change we've seen so far is the result of the first ten days of the industrial revolution, and the billions of car exhausts and thousands of power stations across the world may not take full effect for another 300 years. In which case we're hip deep in the slurry and arguing over what shoes to wear.

But since all the other possible outcomes mean we lose anyway, what (literally) do we as a species have to lose? Answer: The short-term "fun now" of scenarios 1 and 3. Are we young bulls or old bulls? Ants or grasshoppers?

Damage to the Western economy in general and the American economy (the most profligate user of energy) in particular is as nothing compared to potential extinction, isn't it? You may prefer to go out in a blaze of glory, but unless you can find a way to do it without taking the rest of the world with you I suggest you go with the majority.

One other question I have - why are people arguing that the real phenomenon of global warming gives us carte blanche to carry on regardless? Are you so sure that this is a minor blip that we don't have do do anything? Even the shortest of the (naturally occurring) Ice Ages lasted several thousand years - what makes you think that this naturally occurring Hot Age will not last as long? Surely the environmental damage likely to be wrought on our way of life will be as bad whether the cause is our own actions or sunspots/volcanoes/cosmic death rays/whatever?

Everything I've seen from the tree-huggers (and I'm not talking about Kyoto here) says that at least half the economic costs of global warming come from dealing with the damaging effects of the warming that is already happening and shows no signs of slowing down. That warming will happen, and therefore those costs will be necessary, whether GW is anthropogenic or not, right? Yet are the proponents of the natural phenomenon argument saying we need to start radically restructuring our economies and way of life to cope with the warming that they all (now) agree is coming? Er, no, they aren't.


WMM

[halva]

Thick clouds, pollution may be darkening world

By ROBERT S. BOYD

Knight Ridder Newspapers


WASHINGTON — Scientists call it “global dimming,” a little-known trend that might be making the world darker than it used to be.

Thanks to thicker clouds and growing air pollution, much of the Earth’s surface is receiving about 15 percent less sunlight than it did 50 years ago, said Michael Roderick, a climate researcher at Australian National University in Canberra.

“Global dimming means that the transmission of sunlight through the atmosphere is decreasing,” Roderick said.

“Just look out the window when you fly into New York or to California — it’s dimmer,” said Beate Liepert, a climatologist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University in New York.

Researchers say global dimming, also known as solar dimming, partially offsets the global warming that most scientists agree is produced by “greenhouse gases” such as auto exhaust and emissions from coal-burning power plants.

The solar dimming effect is “about half as large as the greenhouse gas warming,” said James Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.

In global warming, gases in the atmosphere, such as carbon dioxide, trap some of the sun’s heat and keep it from radiating back out to space, thereby raising the Earth’s temperature. Clouds and air pollution, on the other hand, block a portion of the heat energy that is coming from the sun, just as it is cooler sitting under a beach umbrella than under a bright sky.

Although global warming has been widely accepted, global dimming remains controversial. The theory has been advanced in recent years by a handful of researchers who measure the decline of solar radiation at hundreds of sites around the globe.

Liepert, Roderick and several other scientists will discuss their findings at an international geophysical conference in Montreal later this month.

“Initially, people were very skeptical, but now there’s other pieces of evidence that all fit together,” Roderick told a radio interviewer last December. Reductions in sunlight of 10 percent to 20 percent have been observed in many places during the past 50 years, he said.

“We still face a lot of controversy, but it’s (solar dimming) getting accepted,” Liepert said in a telephone interview. “We’ve found it in the United States, Europe, Israel and Asia. Already, major research institutions are changing their point of view.”

NASA, the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, Calif., and the National Center for Atmospheric Research, a university-sponsored organization in Boulder, Colo., among others, are showing interest in global dimming.

Support for the theory comes from two types of data collected in recent decades:

• Radiation meters — black metal plates that absorb the sun’s rays — are not heating up as rapidly as they previously did.

• The rate at which water evaporates from special measuring pans placed in the sunlight has slowed during the years.

Roderick, for example, measures the height of the water in his pans at 9 a.m. each day, subtracts any rain that might have fallen and calculates how much has evaporated from the day before.

“There’s less evaporation out of pans of water all around the world, and that’s consistent with global dimming,” he said.

[jayreynolds]

OH, NO, IT'S GLOBAL DIMMING, THE WORLD IS THREATENED!!!!

Wayne, ask Deborah to tell us who wrote this just three years ago:


"But the *intensity* I am referring to is not the same thing. I have noticed since December 1999 that the sun appears more intense - and much brighter - than usual - at ALL times of the year.

This last year - especially since fall 2001 - this amplification of brightness and intensity has been particularly noticable.

I am not the only one making this observation.

I don't have time for superficial chat about trivial matters. I'm genuinely concerned about the increasing intensity of the sun and am simply sharing consistent, direct observation on the subject.

I cannot currently occupy a particular section of my studio at a certain time of day because the sun is too intense. I've been living here for 14 years now. This is something new THIS YEAR.

Just like the fact that I start to burn in less than 5 minutes under direct sunlight on a clear [sic] day *this time of year* is something NEW.

Wayne, are you people even concerned at all about being consistent?
It almost looks like your goal is GLOBAL CONFUSION. Let me tell you something, old bean, global confusion really gets you nowhere, in fact, it generally leads you towards GLOBAL APATHY! Be careful what you ask for.

[jayreynolds]

What can you tell us about barium sulphate?
Ed, don't go there.

[halva]

This posting is for the sake of variety.

The issue it touches on remains, of course, unlike mainstream trigger issues such as global dimming, far too radical for most Europeans and for e.g. Arianna.

But it is there - the elephant in the sitting room - and is not proposing to go away.

The New Pearl Harbor
By David Ray Griffin
Olive Branch Press 2004
Book Review By Ira Einhorn

Americans appear to have an attention span that is relevant to
the flicker on MTV.

Remember ENRON?

I grew up in a slower time when focus and concentration was the
rule and multi-tasking, which research has shown to be counterproductive,
was unheard of let alone desired.

The assassination of J.F.K. brought my American bred innocence
to an end. I spent two years (1964-65) working with an international
team of researchers, helping to develop the unwanted facts that
made it clear that our young president was gunned down by a group
of men, as part of a conspiracy that included parts of our own
intelligence community.

The researchers I worked with focused on forensic minutia, failing,
at least in the beginning, to focus on the larger picture: the
context of politics and economics that led to Kennedy's death.

Facts are important; they are essential to proving any assertion
or raising questions about incorrect assertions. And facts you
will get in The New Pearl Harbor, but as the title's reference
to Pearl Harbor indicates: today's researchers are not neglecting
the broader context.

9/11 was a great crime. It was done for reasons that the title
indicates: to provide the rationale for previously planned invasions
of Afghanistan and Iraq. Invasions that the American people would
not have approved without the anger fuelled by 9/11.

We have a tradition of such events: The Maine, Tonkin Bay, Pearl
Harbor, and now 9/11.

9/11 allowed previously desired invasions of Afghanistan and
Iraq to go ahead. Invasions that have to do with 'Peak Oil' (we
are running out of oil: the petroleum age is coming to an end;
America is positioning itself to grab what it can). There is
also the small matter of this year's opium harvest: $7,000,000,000.
Money which is often laundered through the New York Stock Exchange.

9/11 allowed for the hurried passage of The Patriot Act, elevating
national security above all of our Constitutional due process
and other rights; rights that our fore-fathers spent their blood
to achieve. It made toilet paper of the Constitution.

It created a large pork barrel called Homeland Security which
has a Nazi ring to it, and in an emergency is allowed to end
all of our disappearing freedoms. The rather dim leader of this
department of fear created a color alert system that has nothing
to do with the natural spectrum. His pronouncements have been
ludicrous. He acts like a character out of Alice in Wonderland
who has produced mainly fear and confusion. And, alas, laughter
with his famous duck tape suggestion.

We also have an endless war on terrorism that a misinformed and
heavily stressed-out populace has allowed itself to be taken
in by, thus allowing an incompetent presidential administration
to continue the war in Iraq, the killing of our young and the
bankruptcy of our future.

All of the above and more is a direct outcome of 9/11: a traumatic
event that has so many eager to give up precious liberty to guarantee
an elusive security that is nowhere to be found. Such cowardice
is despicable, portending ills for us all:

Waving the American flag became a substitute for critical and
independent thought, and slogans such as 'united we stand' were
used as blankets to smother whatever critical impulses existed.
(Richard Falk, Foreword, p. IX)

Thus 9/11 deserves a scrutiny equal to the Kennedy assassination.

But 2004 is not 1964. A major technology has intervened: the
Internet.

It allows teams of people to communicate effortlessly and often.
It allows new facts to be quickly shared, checked out and discarded
when found to be wanting.

It allows official lies to be quickly brought into the sunshine.
It is a marvellous new form of the Rousseauian General Will when
utilised in an open, sharing manner. It provides a means by which
the perps can be flushed out before the issues go cold.

The New Pearl Harbor is a worthy contribution to this task.

Anyone who looks at some of the basic facts has to be suspicious:

1. The President sat and read to school children for 20 minutes,
though he knew, for quite a while, that the nation was under
attack, and that he was therefore in danger. A danger that he
evaded for the rest of the day.

2. The hole in the Pentagon could no have been made by a Boeing
757.

3. The Pentagon is the most protected building in the world.
How did anything get by that protection?

4. Why were planes not scrambled to shoot down at least two of
the hijacked planes?

5. How did steel frame buildings suddenly collapse from fire?

6. All indications are that buildings 1,2 &7 were brought down
by carefully placed explosions.

7. Why was the forensic evidence — the steel members — immediately
sold and shipped out of the country? 9/11 was a crime scene.
Those steel beams were evidence.

These are a few of the basic questions that Griffin raises and
discusses. Questions that patriotic handwaving or loose talk
about conspiracy theory can't dispel.

They are questions that official reports avoid.

In addition, there are a number of individuals within the intelligence
and law enforcement communities who are being gagged, for they
have information that would upset the applecart.

The book, now in its second edition, is just 200 pages.

It is clear and to the point.

It makes a devastating case in a calm and logical way.

Griffin has been a professor of philosophy of religion at the
Claremont School of Theology in California for over 30 years.
He is the author and editor of over 20 books.

His book is essential reading for anyone troubled by the present
direction of the USA: over 50% of the nation according to the
polls.

If The New Pearl Harbor convinces you that 9/11 must not be
allowed to be buried, you are then ready to read Mike Ruppert's
Crossing the Rubicon, which details the context in which 9/11
operated, in much greater detail, and points a long finger in
the direction of those responsible.

[jayreynolds]

For anyone who is not a DUMBASS sitting in a cafe sucking olives all day, here is the actual paper on reductions of solar radiation. BTW, it found only a 4% dimming and has the largest dataset.
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~liepert/papers/liepert_GRL2002.pdf

I predict that science will not fall head over heels into apocalyptic zeal the way the BBC and so amny others have. Much of the record is influenced by urban conditions. Ever see the brown haze that hangs over a city? Warming induced water vapor increases and uncertainty due to statistical error bring the probable significance of this idea down from the 4% claim.

Lastly, my network tells me that recent as-yet-unpublished data shows the dimming trend has reversed itself in the last decade, when the published paper ended.

Strange how BBC didn't discuss that.................

That doesn't look good for chemmies, whose claims of cloudy skies(except for madameX who says the sun is brighter!) started around 1999.

Folks the BBC is what, the State owned broadcasting arm of Britain. The British want to pull down America a little, that's what this latest GW eruption seems to be.

[halva]

Of course the above posting does not mean that I favour focusing energy anywhere else than on the main transatlantic fault line: i.e. global warming/dimming and in that context also peak oil and the dangers of coal.

[jayreynolds]

This posting is for the sake of variety..

No, it's just spam.
Typical.
Even Ruppert said it: Forget 9/11.
There is no merit whatsoever in the 9/11 conspiracy theories, Wayne.
Wait till it comes to your country, you'll understand.
Don't give me any excuses. If it happened in Turkey,
it can DEFINITELY happen in Greece.

[jayreynolds]

Chemmies, time for a reality check.

Deborah XXXXX aka. 'Footsoldier' no longer believes in "chemtrails".

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=231186&postcount=12

[halva]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/4218441.stm

Climate change 'disaster by 2026'

Polar bears are at risk of dying out if the Arctic summer sea ice melts

Dangerous levels of climate change could be reached in just over 20 years if nothing is done to stop global warming, a WWF study has warned.

At current rates, the earth will be 2C above pre-industrial levels some time between 2026 and 2060, says the report by Dr Mark New of Oxford University.

Temperatures in the Arctic could rise by three times this amount, it says.

It would lead to a loss of summer sea ice and tundra vegetation, with polar bears and other animals dying out.

Polar bears will be consigned to history, something that our grandchildren can only read about in books

It would also mean a fundamental change in the ways Inuit and other Arctic residents live.

Dr New said: "A very robust result from global climate models is that warming due to greenhouse gases will reduce the amount of snow and ice cover in the Arctic, which will in turn produce an additional warming as more solar radiation is absorbed by the ground and the ocean."

Ice and snow reflect more solar radiation back to space than unfrozen surfaces.

According to the WWF, the perennial ice, or summer sea ice, is currently melting at a rate of 9.6% per decade and will disappear completely by the end of the century if this continues.

Birds affected

Boreal forests would spread north and overwhelm up to 60% of dwarf shrub tundra, a critical habitat and vital breeding ground for many birds.

"If we don't act immediately the Arctic will soon become unrecognisable," said Dr Catarina Cardoso, head of climate change at WWF-UK.

"Polar bears will be consigned to history, something that our grandchildren can only read about in books."

Dr New's paper - Arctic Climate Change with a 2 degree C Global Warming is one of four papers contributing to report by WWF.

They will be presented at the Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change conference in Exeter between 1 and 3 February, which has been organised by the government.

[halva]

If everyone else has gone away, and all debunkers are ignore-listed, the objective will have been achieved of making this thread a notice board for climate change news.

[foot_soldier]

January 30, 2005
New York Times Sunday Book Review

'State of Fear': Not So Hot

Excerpts:

There's a problem with Michael Crichton's new thriller, and it shows up before the narrative even begins. In a disclaimer that follows the copyright page, Crichton writes: ''This is a work of fiction. Characters, corporations, institutions and organizations in this novel are the product of the author's imagination, or, if real, are used fictitiously without any intent to describe their actual conduct. However, references to real people, institutions and organizations that are documented in footnotes are accurate. Footnotes are real.''

Footnotes?

Yes, there will be footnotes. Although ''State of Fear'' comes dressed as an airport-bookstore thriller, Crichton's readers will discover halfway through their flight that the novel more closely resembles one of those Ann Coulter ''Liberals Are Stupid'' jobs. Liberals, environmentalists and many other straw men endure a stern thrashing in ''State of Fear,'' but Crichton's primary target is the theory of global warming, which he believes is a scientific delusion. In his zeal to expose the emperor's nudity the author cites, ad nauseam, actual studies that seem to contradict the conventional wisdom on global warming. Hence, footnotes.

( ... )

This might all be good if not screamingly clever fun -- but for the footnotes. The annoying citations make it apparent that the author desperately wants to be taken seriously on the global warming stuff. That would be perfectly fine in a Weekly Standard cover story. In a thriller, it's a little like having the author interrupt the story to insist that Dr. Evil actually has a death ray. Crichton's proof is itself laughably rigged. Kenner cites study after study but Drake, the scheming NERF leader, is allowed no evidence. ''Just trust me, it's happening,'' Drake says of global warming. ''Count on it.'' There are, of course, thousands of scientific studies that raise disturbing questions about climate change and the human role in its cause. To claim that it's a hoax is every novelist's right. To criticize the assumptions and research gaps in global warming theory is any scientist's prerogative. Citing real studies to support the idea of a hoax is ludicrous.

In case anybody misses his point, Crichton tacks a bibliography and two ''author's message'' essays to the end of the book. In these the author compares global warming to the early 20th-century belief in the ridiculous theory of eugenics, and treats us to a bullet-point presentation of his thoughts about science and the environment. One of those thoughts bemoans the lack of ''rational'' and ''systematic'' research on wilderness preservation. For this sorry state of affairs, he writes, ''I blame environmental organizations every bit as much as developers and strip miners.'' Crichton thus leads his readers to one of two possible conclusions: one, there exists a world yet unrevealed in which strip miners wrestle with the issue of proper wilderness management; or two, this fellow has completely lost all sense of perspective. The evidence in ''State of Fear'' forces this reader to embrace the latter.

Full review:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/30/books/review/30BARCOTT.html?pagewanted=all&position=

[halva]

The annoying citations make it apparent that the author desperately wants to be taken seriously on the global warming stuff.


There are others too who are desperate that Crichton should be taken seriously.

The recent BBC/Guardian 'Global Dimming' line is something these people have not assimilated. Probably many of them are sincerely ignorant of the whole global dimming element in the climate change story, and the chemtrails/geoengineering revelations that lurk behind it.

Any SOS to them from Raynolds could turn out to be a boomerang, drawing their attention to matters that will weaken his credibility with them, not strengthen it.

Here in Greece it is the right-wing politician Andrianopoulos, a provocative neo-liberal (in American terms neo-conservative) who doesn't fit well into the sleep-inducing mainstream conservative style of the New Democracy government here, that is trying to jump onto the Crichton bandwagon.

I can think of other politicians here that could cut him to pieces if they mentioned 'global dimming'.

[foot_soldier]

Crichton will never be taken seriously by those who know what is in fact going on and why. I would not be concerned about him. He has already made a royal fool of himself in the eyes of the research community. They aren't giving him a second thought beyond their last few days' passing commentary on the publication of his book.

[halva]

Raynolds would have made a more intelligent career move to stick with his old role model Patrick Minnis, refraining from knee-jerk reactions to the 'global dimming' rhetoric and being more nuanced.

Jumping over to tail end someone like Crichton, who is on a quite different ideological trajectory, shows just how impressionistic Raynolds truly is. He follows a simplistic tactic of reflexive denial, totally reactive, with no evidence of any underlying strategic purpose.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Everyone knows that BaSO4 is part of the chemtrails methods. I invented this chemtrail method in the mid-80's along with the aluminum and titanium catalysts ideas for cloud making and health effects damage control from acid rain.

Just like AlSO4 is aluminum alum and is hygroscopic, so is BaSO4.

BaSO4 is the contrast element used in X-rays, which means it is lesser toxic form for Ba.


BaSO4's hygroscopic properties are useful for the ducting methods of RADAR systems, as it will tend to form the cirrus level clouds or complex with existing cirris particles that tend to form a lingering layer at concentrations that don't form too heavy a particle and drop. Ba will photoionize with just sunlight to set up ionosphere type ionization layer that will guide EM waves.

BaSO4 will make or turn a cirris layer into a EM wave mirror or duct. The key is the hygroscopic and photoionization of BaSO4. It makes a big "strip line" type guide. (Strip line is a waveguide like method at most PC board designers recognize)

Other Barium compounds that don't gather water or striate are used in killing major storms that gain their power via the Earth's potential gradient dielectric effects.


The key to persistent cloud making is to introduce an nonevaporating nucleating agent, like BaSO4, which won't evaporate/sublime. The nucleating agent's hygroscopic effect overwhelms the tendency for evaporation or sublimation. So, when one introduces this catalyst, one gets persistent clouds. This is why high sulfur jet fuels tend to form chemtrails and the basis for the first chemtrail methods with metal sulfides.

IMHO,
is

[jayreynolds]

Raynolds would have made a more intelligent career move to stick with his old role model Patrick Minnis, refraining from knee-jerk reactions to the 'global dimming' rhetoric and being more nuanced. Jumping over to tail end someone like Crichton, who is on a quite different ideological trajectory, shows just how impressionistic Raynolds truly is. He follows a simplistic tactic of reflexive denial, totally reactive, with no evidence of any underlying strategic purpose.

Hey, Wayne, you are the one who brought up forming a campaign against Crichton on THREE messageboards. That would seem to indicate IT IS YOU who are indeed frigtened of what this best-selling author is quite nicely doing to the debate over global warming.

There are hundreds of fantasy websites about "chemtrails", you write essays about this fantasy every few months, but Crichton writes a book, even calls it fiction, you don't do your readers even that courtesy!

From the responses I've gotten after posting at Crichton's board, I'm right on target. Most of the respondents had some trouble actually understanding the logic behind your intentions. Neither Michael or myself is worried about any chemmie campaign. Such a time-waster for your people actually runs in my favor, so bring it on!

Crichton's Tv series, "ER"(emergency room) this past week focused on drug interactions. the show is the biggest medical drama of all time.

A young girl had seizures, and was given a new medication which allowed her to live a full normal life. There was a problem, however. She had undergone a kidney transplant, and the drug which allowed her a normal life also damaged the kidney, which she had gotten from her father because there was no other suitable donor found in four years of searching. The girl was near death and the father was distraught because he only had one kidney left, and his body needed it to survive. he was even willing to donate it and live the rest of his life in dialysis to save the girl.

A young doctor in the ER began an internet campaign against the drug to publicize the interaction, and was called o the carpet by his superiors, who correctly demonstrated that ALL drugs have interactions and risks, some of which aren't foreseen until their release to the public. They also correctly said that progress always entails some risk, however, taking NO ACTION BECAUSE OF RISK bears a burden of risk as well.

In the end, the father blew his brains out in front of the young doctor after asking that his remaining kidney be used to save her. The girl got the transplant. As the show closed, an old man was being treated by the young doctor. The man remarked that, even though he knew there were risks in taking an anti-arthritic drug, using it had enabled him to walk again, he called it a "miracle drug".

Crichton's message in the show ran directly to the recent VIOXX controversy in which a perfecty useful drug was found to have a very small statistical risk for heart patients. Rather than risk lawsuits and simply list the drug as not suitable for heart patients, VIOXX was taken off the market by it's maker. The move did protect heart patients, for whom VIOXX could have simply been eliminated, but as a result of the action, VIOXX's benefits were also denied to those for whom it posed no risk.

This is an example of how Crichton can use his talents as a writer and director to examine social issues, and he does it very well.

Crichton is always looking for a good story line. If I were you, I wouldn't be too surprised
to find the doctors of ER dealing with a freaked out "chemmie" some day..........................

[jayreynolds]

Everyone knows that BaSO4 is part of the chemtrails methods. I invented this chemtrail method in the mid-80's along with the aluminum and titanium catalysts ideas for cloud making and health effects damage control from acid rain.
Now see what you've gone and done, Yaak? You been sitting down at the cafe too long with Wayne, and turned DUMBASS.

[halva]

Everyone knows that BaSO4 is part of the chemtrails methods. I invented this chemtrail method in the mid-80's along with the aluminum and titanium catalysts ideas for cloud making and health effects damage control from acid rain.

Just like AlSO4 is aluminum alum and is hygroscopic, so is BaSO4.

BaSO4 is the contrast element used in X-rays, which means it is lesser toxic form for Ba.


BaSO4's hygroscopic properties are useful for the ducting methods of RADAR systems, as it will tend to form the cirrus level clouds or complex with existing cirris particles that tend to form a lingering layer at concentrations that don't form too heavy a particle and drop. Ba will photoionize with just sunlight to set up ionosphere type ionization layer that will guide EM waves.

BaSO4 will make or turn a cirris layer into a EM wave mirror or duct. The key is the hygroscopic and photoionization of BaSO4. It makes a big "strip line" type guide.

Other Barium compounds that don't gather water or striate are used in killing major storms that gain their power via the Earth's potential gradient dielectric effects.

IMHO,
is

Barium vs sulphates has been a subject for non-eristic discussion at Megasprayer.

[halva]

[Crichton is always looking for a good story line. If I were you, I wouldn't be too surprised
to find the doctors of ER dealing with a freaked out "chemmie" some day..........................[/b]

I will bet you a hundred dollars that Crichton will continue to stay away from the subjects of either chemtrails or 'global dimming'.

[gaiacomm]

Footnote:

My work here is about done. I have learned so much from all of you: how to hate, love,
disrespect others, bigotory, racist hate, politics, comic jokes, food reccomendations, places to see, religious differences, homophobia, gay pride, democracy, murder, terrorist threats, Jesus, Nazisim, White Power, spam, all sorts of descriptive curse words and phrases, socialisim, female surpression, male ignorance, ignorance, fun, frolic, compassion, the Bible, The Quran, and other literary book reviews, pediphile's, sexual preversion, Hating Women, Christianity, Hope, Respect, paranoia, lies, deciet, greed, movie reviews, essays and current events of the world, government, and FREEDOM!

And yes the difference between Chemtrails and Contrails... and now I know the truth of the causes of both!


My days are numbered and not because of any of you...its a choice that I make.

I have enjoyed my stay here and wish to apoligize to anyone that I offended or disrespected in any way... my intent all of these months was to learn so that I could understand and better my life. All of you have taught me a great deal about myself and others that exist around me.

It is so difficult to be Human when others are pulling at you to stay down..its like crabs in a jar!

I know alot of you could care less about what I say and will mock me..after all this is the internet for pretenders... But this is an excellent tool to be used by the entire planet to get to know one another and learn from each other the many stories and ideas that all of us have to share without the fear of being lied to. There is so much hate and mistrust in the world today and I know that all of you have fresh new ideas and also have the wisdom to know the truth. Take your combined talents and use them to help others.

There is nothing wrong with trying.. after all the choice is yours!

[halva]

I can't understand how this expression 'could care less' has caught on.

The expression is 'couldN'T care less', meaning care as little as conceivably possible. 'Couldn't care less' is understandable to a non-native speaker. 'Could care less' is not.

'Could care more' would be a comprehensible alternative.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Gaia,

Perhaps you left out the largest of problems, the intentional dialectic imposed by crooked Govts to unsurp the power of the people to control Govt and make it controlled by polluting industries.

It is the central ideal of your crooked buddy Bush and Company. It is achieved via the complexity of things these days and the failure to report what is going on to the people, the citizens of the US. Who, BTW, would quickly put a stop to it.

The citizens are learning to become involed, because that knowledge will set them free.

When they get down to the connections of chemtrails and the end-times----they will have arrived at the really big picture and that of how to see the fake god concepts and the better concepts of science and religion becoming as one.

Take away from the discussions one thing. Don't threaten to kill Jews or anyone for that matter. You can threated to reform the Jews bad god concepts and the chosen people stuff. And do remember that when the Govt. and industry partner to conceil these acid rain effects, that they do in essence seek to kill people. You can even note the Jews and the Jews industry and news domination of Govt. are behind a lot of this.

And that when you come to these End-Times, it is reformation that is much needed and with that comes the long held visions of Jesus.

IMHO,
is

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Don't go where---here:


Everyone knows that BaSO4 is part of the chemtrails methods. I invented this chemtrail method in the mid-80's along with the aluminum and titanium catalysts ideas for cloud making and health effects damage control from acid rain.

Just like AlSO4 is aluminum alum and is hygroscopic, so is BaSO4.

BaSO4 is the contrast element used in X-rays, which means it is lesser toxic form for Ba.


BaSO4's hygroscopic properties are useful for the ducting methods of RADAR systems, as it will tend to form the cirrus level clouds or complex with existing cirris particles that tend to form a lingering layer at concentrations that don't form too heavy a particle and drop. Ba will photoionize with just sunlight to set up ionosphere type ionization layer that will guide EM waves.

BaSO4 will make or turn a cirris layer into a EM wave mirror or duct. The key is the hygroscopic and photoionization of BaSO4. It makes a big "strip line" type guide. (Strip line is a waveguide like method at most PC board designers recognize)

Other Barium compounds that don't gather water or striate are used in killing major storms that gain their power via the Earth's potential gradient dielectric effects.


The key to persistent cloud making is to introduce an nonevaporating nucleating agent, like BaSO4, which won't evaporate/sublime. The nucleating agent's hygroscopic effect overwhelms the tendency for evaporation or sublimation. So, when one introduces this catalyst, one gets persistent clouds. This is why high sulfur jet fuels tend to form chemtrails and the basis for the first chemtrail methods with metal sulfides.

IMHO,
is

[gaiacomm]

Gaia,

Perhaps you left out the largest of problems, the intentional dialectic imposed by crooked Govts to unsurp the power of the people to control Govt and make it controlled by polluting industries.

It is the central ideal of your crooked buddy Bush and Company. It is achieved via the complexity of things these days and the failure to report what is going on to the people, the citizens of the US. Who, BTW, would quickly put a stop to it.

The citizens are learning to become involed, because that knowledge will set them free.

When they get down to the connections of chemtrails and the end-times----they will have arrived at the really big picture and that of how to see the fake god concepts and the better concepts of science and religion becoming as one.

Take away from the discussions one thing. Don't threaten to kill Jews or anyone for that matter. You can threated to reform the Jews bad god concepts and the chosen people stuff. And do remember that when the Govt. and industry partner to conceil these acid rain effects, that they do in essence seek to kill people. You can even note the Jews and the Jews industry and news domination of Govt. are behind a lot of this.

And that when you come to these End-Times, it is reformation that is much needed and with that comes the long held visions of Jesus.

IMHO,
is

Perhaps....

[jayreynolds]

Barium vs sulphates has been a subject for non-eristic discussion at Megasprayer.
Yes, here are the eructations that Wayne seems unwilling to link us to:

http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=technosphere&action=display&num=1102564780

It's quite clear to me that Wayne introduced Jimbo's Barium sulfate hoax over there at megasprayer for a reason. Wayne wants to have Chem11, who he knows has looooong debunked the barium hoax, to do some back-stabbing for him while he sits at the cafe sipping his Ouzo and spitting out olive pits..


"Okay, this damn thing has been sitting here, at the top of this very fine section of our site, for days... and it's slowly but surely driving me crazy.
Why? Why do people people insist on latching onto Ba when the overwhelming weight of the evidence points elsewhere?
White Powder? With all due respect to IZAKOVIC, what 'white powder' is he talking about? What I see, and what every photograph of every CT ever taken depicts, are artificial clouds. People have photographed all manner of phenomena associated with aerosol trails (webstrands, silver spheres, active camouflage systems, etc, etc) but never once have I seen a damn thing about 'white powder'... until now.
For pity sake, how hard is it to understand? Barium relseases wouldn't create the kind of artificial cloud cover we continue to observe.
One of the reasons I created the Technosphere section was to attempt to move this discussion into the 21st century. Now here I am looking at anonymous letters and barium and white powder like it's 1999 again."
http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=technosphere&action=display&num=1102564780

Now, Jimbo, maybe I can see why Yaak has come over to your side. It's becoming clear what is taking place. Wayne has always wanted to keep religion out of this, that's why he always tries to censor anything at all that bears on Revelations. He must be trying to get rid of you by using Chem11 as his proxy. Watch your back.

Here is an old Bulgarian adage: "When you shake hands with a Greek, be sure to count your fingers afterwards, and while in Greece NEVER bend over to pick up the soap in the shower!"

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Poor Reynolds----he is accelerating into the Abyss.

His efforts to set up a knowledge dialectic between the People and industry cover ups have failed.

All we hear are muted screams, getting more and more faint.

Reynolds is history, as all his rats leave the bunk loaded Reynolds sinking ship.

IMHO,
is

[jayreynolds]

Poor Reynolds----he is accelerating into the Abyss.

His efforts to set up a knowledge dialectic between the People and industry cover ups have failed.

All we hear are muted screams, getting more and more faint.

Reynolds is history, as all his rats leave the bunk loaded Reynolds sinking ship.

IMHO,
is
You may have yaak on your side, Jimbo, but Chem11 is mine, and Wayne knows it.

[halva]

You may have yaak on your side, Jimbo, but Chem11 is mine, and Wayne knows it.

I dare you to make this claim somewhere where he can answer.

Of course you're banned from Megasprayer, so it can't be there, and I'm not going to be your messenger boy.

But where there's a will there's a way.

[halva]

Now, Jimbo, maybe I can see why Yaak has come over to your side. It's becoming clear what is taking place. Wayne has always wanted to keep religion out of this, that's why he always tries to censor anything at all that bears on Revelations. He must be trying to get rid of you by using Chem11 as his proxy. Watch your back.


Actually you are wrong again. It's mainly the Germans I am thinking about.

[jayreynolds]

Actually you are wrong again. It's mainly the Germans I am thinking about.
Ok, translate the Jerry stuff that came out in Der Spiegel:
Metall am Himmel

Von Sebastian Knauer

Verschwörungstheoretiker nerven Behörden und Politiker: Mit geheimen Experimenten versuche die US-Regierung, das Weltklima zu manipulieren.

Eigentlich gelten die Menschen im oberbayerischen Wolfratshausen als äußerst bodenständig. In den örtlichen Gasthäusern gibt es immer ordentliche Schweinshaxen mit Knödeln, und um die Ecke wohnt Ministerpräsident Edmund Stoiber (CSU), der am Wochenende gern mal die Landschaft durchwandert.

Nur aus einem langgestreckten Haus kommen seltsame Botschaften. Hier sitzt der Ehlers Verlag, der die Öko-Zeitschrift "raum&zeit" herausgibt. Unter Überschriften wie "Grauen hinter dem Regenbogen" schreiben die Redakteure derzeit besonders gern über geheime Experimente mit sogenannten "Chemtrails", die das Weltklima manipulieren sollen.

Demnach versprühen Düsenflugzeuge im Auftrag der US-Regierung feine Partikel aus Metallverbindungen, die ahnungslose Bürger für Kondensstreifen am Himmel halten.

Das "weltgrößte Geheimprojekt" seit der Entwicklung der Atombombe, so die Autoren, solle Washingtons Klimapolitik absichern. Denn die Metall-Kondensstreifen würden helfen, die Erde abzukühlen - damit könnten die USA weiterhin bei der Ablehnung einer vorsorgenden Klimapolitik bleiben.

Die Chemtrails sind das derzeit liebste Steckenpferd deutscher Verschwörungstheoretiker und Spökenkieker, die auch auf Web-Seiten und in zahlreichen Newsgroups ihrem Spleen frönen. "Die rauben uns den Schlaf", sagt Karsten Klenner vom Berliner Umweltbundesamt (UBA), das mit Anfragen bombardiert wird. UBA-Präsident Andreas Troge (CDU) muss inzwischen besorgte Bundestagsabgeordnete beruhigen, deren Wähler alles über die vermeintlichen Geheimstreifen am Himmel wissen wollen.

Ein Klimaexperte des Amts wurde beauftragt, eine Stellungnahme ("Chemtrails - Gefährliche Experimente mit der Atmosphäre oder Fiktion?" zu erarbeiten. Im Internet gehört sie zu den meistgelesenen Seiten des UBA-Angebots. Auch andere ernst zu nehmende Experten mussten den Unsinn schon prüfen - Ergebnis: Weder kann das Deutsche Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt die Theorien zum "Phänomen Chemtrail" bestätigen, noch verzeichnet die Deutsche Flugsicherung "auffällige Flugbewegungen".

Selbst die US-Streitkräfte sahen sich schon genötigt zu reagieren. So teilte Stephen T. Cochrane, US-Verbindungsoffizier im europäischen Hauptquartier in Stuttgart, dem baden-württembergischen Umweltministerium mit, dass es keine Geheimprojekte der US-Luftwaffe in Europa gebe.

Für die Öko-Verschwörer sind das natürlich nur weitere Beweise der großen Vertuschung. Sie beklagen eine "Mauer des Schweigens".

Als Beleg für das "weltumspannende Sprayprojekt" offerieren die Verschwörungsfreaks geschickt montierte Versatzstücke seriöser Klimastudien sowie wissenschaftliche Halbwahrheiten. Tatsächlich können von Ballons oder Flugzeugen aus versprühte Substanzen etwa begrenzt Regen auslösen, was beispielsweise schon regional im Obstanbau oder bei Großveranstaltungen wie den Olympischen Spielen in Moskau 1980 genutzt wurde.

Doch solide Indizien für George W. Bushs Klima-Bomber gibt es natürlich nicht. Kein Wunder, so glauben Verschwörungstheoretiker, würden die Flieger doch ohne Kennzeichen und, so heißt es bei "raum&zeit", "im Schutz der Dunkelheit" fliegen. Deshalb gebe es auch keine Fotos von den angeblichen Klimajets: "Die Bevölkerung wird im Schlaf übertölpelt."

"Wir versuchen, Sorgen ernst zu nehmen", seufzt der UBA-Beamte Klenner, "aber manches ist einfach Spinnkram."

[jayreynolds]

Metal in the sky
by Sebastian Knauer

Conspiracy theoretician nerves authorities and politicians:
With secret experiments the US government tries to manipulate the world climate. Actually humans in the Upper Bavarian wolf advice living are considered as extremely native. In the local hotels there is always tidy Schweinshaxen with Knoedeln, and around the corner Prime Minister Edmund Stoiber (CSU) lives, which wanders through the landscape on weekend gladly times. Only from an elongated house strange messages come.

Here sits the Ehlers publishing house, which publishes the Oeko magazine "raum&zeit". Under headings like "grey ones behind the rainbow" the editors write at present particularly gladly over secret experiments with so-called "Chemtrails", which are to manipulate the world climate. Therefore jets on behalf of the US government spray fine particles from metal connections, which regard notionless citizens as vapor trails at the sky. The "world largest secret project" since the development of the atom bomb, so the authors, is to secure Washington's climatic politics. Because the metal vapor trails would help to cool the earth down - thus the USA could remain further with the refusal of taking precautions climatic politics.

The Chemtrails is the at present dearest hobby of German conspiracy theoreticians and Spoekenkieker, who froenen also on web pages and in numerous newsgroup their Spleen. "those rob the sleep" from us, say Karsten Klenner of the citizen of Berlin Federal Office for Environment Protection (UBA), which is bombarded with inquiries. UBA president Andreas troughs (CDU) must calm in the meantime anxious Members of the Bundestag down, whose voter everything wants to know about the alleged secret strips in the sky. A climatic expert of the office was assigned, a statement ("Chemtrails - dangerous experiments with the atmosphere or fiction?" to compile. In the InterNet it belongs to the most widely read sides of the UBA offer. Also different experts who can be taken seriously had to examine nonsense - result: Neither the German center for air and space travel can confirm the theories to the "phenomenon Chemtrail", nor the German air traffic control registers "remarkable flight movements". Even US armed forces saw themselves reacting already forced.

Thus Stephen T. Cochrane, US-Verbindungsoffizier in European headquarters communicated to the Department of the Environment of Baden-Wuerttemberg in Stuttgart, that it does not give secret projects of the US Air Force in Europe. For the Oeko conspirators is naturally only further proof of the large cover-up. They deplore a "wall of the silence". As voucher for the "global spray project" the Verschwoerungsfreaks offers skillfully installed pieces of disalignment of respectable climatic studies as well as scientific half truths. Sprayed substances can about actually limit rains to release from balloons or airplanes, which was used for example already regionally in the cultivation of fruit or with large meetings like the olympic plays in Moscow 1980.

_ but solid indication for George W. Bushs bomber it be natural not. , then conspiracy theoreticians believe, became no miracle the fliers nevertheless without characteristics and, then it means with "raum&zeit", "in the protection of the darkness" to fly. Therefore give it also no photos of the alleged climatic jets: "the population is uebertoelpelt in the sleep." "we try to take concerns seriously", sigh the UBA official Klenner, "however some are simply spin stuff."

[jayreynolds]

The following is qa machine translation of a press release to be found at the website of the German Environmental Protection Agency
http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/uba-info-presse/themendienst/td04-3.htm
Chemmies should ask themselves why Wayne hasn't shown this information to you, which is a pretty solid but brief debunking of "chemtrails" in Germany.

Topic service 03/2004
Chemtrails - dangerous experiments with the atmosphere or fiction?

Since then in the magazine to space & time 127/2004 the article "the destruction of the sky", the Federal Office for Environment Protection (UBA) appeared a multiplicity of inquiries of anxious citizens and citizens for the topic of the Chemtrails in such a way specified - alleged by airplanes in the atmosphere sprayed chemicals - received. In the article among other things that in the context of secret projects of the USA military and civilian airplanes discharge aluminum and barium connections into the atmosphere, from those this Chemtrails, similarly the formation of vapor trails, is maintained would develop. Thus is to be worked against to the heating up caused by the anthropogenen greenhouse effect. In addition the UBA takes to position as follows: For mentioned bringing of aluminum connections into the atmosphere and the education, mentioned in the article, Chemtrails so mentioned does not give it any scientific vouchers. Also in the German center for air and space travel (DLR) the described phenomena are not well-known. In Institut for physics of the atmosphere of the DLR for many years investigations for the effect of the emissions of air traffic on the atmosphere - including the measurement gas and partikelfoermiger emissions of airliners in a multiplicity of cases - are accomplished. If there were the Chemtrails in such a way specified, over it information would have to be present with the DLR; the measurements contain however no referring to it. The German air traffic control GmbH confirmed that in the context of the air traffic control no remarkable flight movements were observed, which could have to do something with described circumstances. Beyond that the German weather service communicated that in the observation data no characteristics are discoverable, which could point on deviating forms of vapor trails. Also the Federal Ministry of the defense does not have large realizations. The headquarters of the US Air Force Europe communicated that there are nor gave the described projects at the US Air Force neither. The UBA followed also to the statement spoken in letters, according to which the World Health Organization of the United Nations (WHO) would have undertaken allegedly a risk analysis over possible consequences of the Chemtrails. On demand of the UBA the WHO, neither over then insured Chemtrails mentioned knowledge still another study to the topic to have undertaken.

Indeed and give there were different theoretical conceptions within the scientific range of bringing for the protection of the climate different materials (for example alumina, aluminum, soot, eisenverbindungen) into the atmosphere. However knew itself these beginnings from the range geo engineering - those are largefull-scale interferences into natural procedures - do not intersperse (also not in the experimental yardstick). Because: Apart from the question of the effectiveness there are large doubts and uncertainties, which unexpected further effects could be connected with such interferences. Beyond that the costs of such measures would be substantial, because bringing the connections into the atmosphere would have, in order to ensure a global effect, sequentially and to global extent to be made. Over the InterNet an abundance from material is spread to the keyword Chemtrails. However no source works really convincingly, since no convincing vouchers are stated. Rather sources with names are as "spirithelp", "conspiracyplanet" to find "aliendave" and "ufoseek". In these sources to photos partially shown of any Chemtrails give no cause to assume behind it something else than usual vapor trails or clouds (mostly the different forms of zirruswolken, from ice crystals exist). Also in the different photos, which sent citizens and citizen the UBA, long-lived vapor trails and zirruswolken are to be seen after our realization. Usually as vapor trails only those are obviously noticed, which form briefly and which dissolve - because of to small relative dampness - rapidly again.

Institut for physics of the atmosphere of the DLR gives the following detailed information over the formation of vapor trails: Vapor trails develop in sufficiently cold atmosphere as consequence of the water vapour missions from airplane engines. With low dampness vapor trails dissolve rapidly again. If the atmosphere is however sufficiently damp, vapor trails can exist longer and grow further. Under suitable conditions they can develop to wide zirruswolken (in the case of such a developing history Contrail Cirrus to be called). The latters are then no more from natural Zirren distinguishable, if their entire developing history was not observed. Take if zirruswolken, which can be optically very thin, a large surface in, appears to the observer of the skies milchig white. On the average are approximately 0.06 per cent of the earth with (linienfoermigen) vapor trails covered. In areas with high air traffic arising clearly higher degrees of coverage are reached; thus in the middle of the nineties the value for Europe was with 0,5 per cent. One does not know the degree of coverage by Contrail Cirrus yet. First estimations supply values, which are about ten times as large as the degree of coverage with linienfoermigen vapor trails. If vapor trails age, they remain not smooth, but form forms, as is to be seen in many photos. This procedure is a long well-known phenomenon and a consequence of the turbulence, which is pervasive in the atmosphere. These forms can be reproduced also by numeric Simulationen. Several vapor trails next to each other result for example from the fact that airplanes firm routes follow and the wind direction in the height deviates from the air lane. Then the vapor trails are laterally shifted. At junctions of the air lanes vapor trails of different orientation can form. As consequence of the shift of the vapor trails then in photos held develop for rhombic samples. Since wind direction and speed are practically never alike, curved forms develop from before times straight samples. In addition fly airplanes not always only straightforward, but also curves, in particular during waiting loops to airport proximity. That regards one then also the vapor trails. So far the Chemtrail topic in the media found mainly over the magazine space & time spreading. If one looks at the tables of contents of the last years more exactly, contributions, those are sequential by the present scientific in this magazine and medical level of knowledge deviate (for example Gegenthesen to relativity theory, which causes of AIDS and BSE). Also several articles, which deny the anthropogenen greenhouse effect and the associated climatic change, are contained. This appears particularly contradictory, in view of the statement in same place, Chemtrails are to be moderated the attempt, the effects of the human being-made climatic change.

Finally it is to be noted that the formation of Zirrusbewoelkung from vapor trails contributes after newer realizations in particular to the climatic effectiveness of the air traffic. Vapor trails and Zirren warm up the climate. It would be thus counter productive to want to work against with the help of additional Zirren or zirrenaehnlicher clouds of the climatic heating up due to the anthropogenen emissions of greenhouse gases. On the basis of our present level of knowledge and the synopsis of all aspects described above we conclude that the statements set up in the article "the destruction of the sky" are not reliable. Further information to the effects of air traffic on the composition of the atmosphere and the climate is to be found in the InterNet: IPCC report to air traffic: http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/av(E).pdf conference volume of the AAC Konfererenz: http://www.pa.op.dlr.de/aac/ Berlin, the 15.09.2004

[jayreynolds]

I dare you to make this claim somewhere where he can answer.

Wayne, this is an open forum. I'm sure Chem11 will come when you tell him it's time for him to implement your "final solution" for My Buddy, Jim Phelps.

[jayreynolds]

The following is a machine translation of a press release to be found at the website of the German Environmental Protection Agency
http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/uba-info-presse/themendienst/td04-3.htm
[i]So far the Chemtrail topic in the media found mainly over the magazine space & time(Raum & Zeit) spreading. If one looks at the tables of contents of the last years more exactly, contributions, those are sequential by the present scientific in this magazine and medical level of knowledge deviate (for example Gegenthesen to relativity theory, which causes of AIDS and BSE). Also several articles, which deny the anthropogenen greenhouse effect and the associated climatic change, are contained. This appears particularly contradictory, in view of the statement in same place, Chemtrails are to be moderated the attempt, the effects of the human being-made climatic change.

WAYNE, it appears that RAUM &ZEIT(Space & Time), the magazine that pushes the "chemtrail" hoax in Germany, is a GLOBAL WARMING DENYING MAGAZINE!!! YOU HAVE BEEN HIDING QUITE A BIT FROM US, WAYNE!!! WHAT IS YOUR EXPLANATION FOR THIS?????

[Insurrectionchemistry]

BaSO4 is the big ingredient in oil well blow out protection. It uses the weight of the Barium fluid to keep oil wells from blowing out.

If it were very toxic, lots of oil rig drillers would be sick. It is used widely and stored in open ponds on oil well drilling sites.

Drillers get it everywhere.

IMHO,
is

[gaiacomm]

Please tell us gaiacomm, will Earth's atmosphere need to be laced with barium or other metals for your communications equipment to function properly

No, because it relies on a section of the earths magnetic field to create a OTH signal.

[gaiacomm]

So JR can Karen send me some cookies? I hear she is a great cook!

[jayreynolds]

BaSO4 is the big ingredient in oil well blow out protection. It uses the weight of the Barium fluid to keep oil wells from blowing out.is

Sounds like you are just now starting to google up something on barium sulfate, Jimbo.

Jimbo, I was debunking Barium sulfate five years ago, when your website said nothing at all about "chemtrails", because you hadn't even heard of the hoax yet.

This webpage is from 2000:
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/bariumreport.html

[gaiacomm]

Hey, JR how is Lance doing?

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Hummm. This is embarrasing, if not scarry.

Belligerant nasty ole Yaak is beginning to see the logic of chemtrails magic, but seeming Halva has not.

This is not good for the home team.

I guess I can't expect Halva to know what a strip-line EM guide technique is or how it works. Hard to teach persons past a certain point.

IMHO,
is

[stuart_allsop]

If everyone else has gone away, and all debunkers are ignore-listed, the objective will have been achieved of making this thread a notice board for climate change news.
If everyone else has gone away, and Halva is still pretending to ignore us debunkers, I rather don't see the point here! In fact, if that is true, then I rather think that Halva must be having one hell of a time talking to himself!

[airtankerpilot]

And barium is released from coal burning too.

In one of my previous jobs, I have worked on drilling rigs and analyzed samples from the drilling from 10 ft intervals (lithology, presence of petroleum, charting geologic formations being penetrated, etc), and yes barium sulfate can be used.

Bentonite/Montmorillonite seals the sides of the formation during drilling, and also lubricates and cools the drill bit, thats the drilling mud.

Barium Sulfate/Barite is used to add weight and thereby hydrostatic pressure to prevent natural gas pressure from a formation being penetrate from blowing the drillling pipes and bit right back out.

The idea of Barium/Barite/Barium sulfate being released from aircraft is just silly, and of course there is no evidence to corroborate it

[stuart_allsop]

Footnote:

My work here is about done. !

I guess my recent line of questioning was getting too close. Just like las time, hey, Judah? Well, that's OK. I'm sure you have work to do, devising a new hoax, so I'll let you get on with it. By for now. I'm sure we'll meet again. Good luck!

[stuart_allsop]

I can't understand how this expression 'could care less' has caught on.

The expression is 'couldN'T care less', meaning care as little as conceivably possible. 'Couldn't care less' is understandable to a non-native speaker. 'Could care less' is not.

'Could care more' would be a comprehensible alternative.I gues the subtlties of irony are lost on Halva: "could care less" is an ironic parody of "couldn't care less". Since it is irony, it means the exact opposite of what it says.

But I do agree with your sentiments, Halva: Unless it is used correctly, in an context of ironic parody ("Oh yeah, right, like I could care less!"), it makes no sense, and "couldn't care less" is the correct phrase.

[stuart_allsop]

Na, Jim, I was just pulling your leg, having a little fun.You had me worried there for a minute, Yaak! I thought that that the HAARP mind altering waves were working in reverse on you!


(You really need to learn how to use a spell checker, Jimmy. Your posts make you look like an idiot.:D )Actually, I thought it was the posts themslves that accomplished that! Teh spelink pribloms was just icink on de kake.

[halva]

Actually humans in the Upper Bavarian wolf advice living are considered as extremely native.


Wow, those humans in wolf advice living must be laughing their heads off.

[halva]

Wayne, this is an open forum. I'm sure Chem11 will come when you tell him it's time for him to implement your "final solution" for My Buddy, Jim Phelps.

Raynolds originally you were condemning me for tolerating the presence of Jim Phelps and not merely denouncing him.

Now you accuse me of wanting, for some reason best known to yourself, to throw him off this forum.

All par for the course with your methodology.

Should I report you now for defending anti-Semitism?

It seems to me that one by one you are losing the tools you rely on in your trade.

[halva]

WAYNE, it appears that RAUM &ZEIT(Space & Time), the magazine that pushes the "chemtrail" hoax in Germany, is a GLOBAL WARMING DENYING MAGAZINE!!! YOU HAVE BEEN HIDING QUITE A BIT FROM US, WAYNE!!! WHAT IS YOUR EXPLANATION FOR THIS?????[/b]

I don't know. Perhaps you should ask Crichton and then get him to start a campaign against chemmies.

[halva]

Originally Posted by jayreynolds
[Crichton is always looking for a good story line. If I were you, I wouldn't be too surprised
to find the doctors of ER dealing with a freaked out "chemmie" some day..........................[/b]



I will bet you a hundred dollars that Crichton will continue to stay away from the subjects of either chemtrails or 'global dimming'.

Reiterating.

[halva]

Raynolds would have made a more intelligent career move to stick with his old role model Patrick Minnis, refraining from knee-jerk reactions to the 'global dimming' rhetoric and being more nuanced.

Jumping over to tail end someone like Crichton, who is on a quite different ideological trajectory, shows just how impressionistic Raynolds truly is. He follows a simplistic tactic of reflexive denial, totally reactive, with no evidence of any underlying strategic purpose.

Reiterating.

[halva]

Hummm. This is embarrasing, if not scarry.

Belligerant nasty ole Yaak is beginning to see the logic of chemtrails magic, but seeming Halva has not.

This is not good for the home team.

I guess I can't expect Halva to know what a strip-line EM guide technique is or how it works. Hard to teach persons past a certain point.

IMHO,
is

I am not reading Yaak's postings, Jim. What would you like me to learn?

[halva]

Perhaps you should ask Crichton and then get him to start a campaign against chemmies.

What are the Raynolds of the world going to do when they can no longer play on the contradictions between their various victims?

What are they going to do when their former victims start playing on THEIR contradictions?

[jayreynolds]

What are the Raynolds of the world going to do when they can no longer play on the contradictions between their various victims? What are they going to do when their former victims start playing on THEIR contradictions?

If you think you're man enough, BRING IT ON!

Maybe you've got more balls than Mr 'Castrato'(Sore Throat).
Which is worse, Jimbo, sitting at the cafe in Athens, or driving to work at the pharmaceutical company in your hybrid bragging about 45 miles/gallon?
Surprised you haven't taken this 'sore throat' dork on.......
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=79528#79528

[jayreynolds]

Wow, those humans in wolf advice living must be laughing their heads off.

From what I understand, they are so native their sense of humor is not so refined. Rather like chemmies, I suppose.


"As voucher for the "global spray project" the Verschwoerungsfreaks offers skillfully installed pieces of disalignment of respectable climatic studies as well as scientific half truths."

Just so no one missed the true meaning, Der spiegel, one of the most popular publications in Germany, uses the word verschwoerungsfreaks, which means "conspiracy freaks".

So this is where you chemmies stand in Europe, eh, Wayne,
CONSPIRACY FREAKS
SKILLFULLY INSTALLED PIECES OF DISALIGNMENT OF RESPECTABLE CLIMATIC STUDIES
SCIENTIFIC HALF TRUTHS

Yes, the machine gets it right on well enough.

Europe is mine!

Even German dictionaries get it:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kondensstreifen
Kondensstreifen sind künstliche Wolken, die durch Abgase von Flugzeugen oder Raketen erzeugt werden.

[Bearbeiten]
Entstehung
Bei der Verbrennung von Kerosin in den Triebwerken von Flugzeugen entstehen im wesentlichen Kohlendioxid, Wasserdampf, Stickoxide und Ruß. Bei den kalten Temperaturen im Bereich von -40 °C kann die Luft nur wenig Feuchtigkeit aufnehmen. Daher kondensiert und gefriert der Wasserdampf bereits einige Meter hinter dem Flugzeug zu einer Eiswolke die in der Form auch Cirruswolke genannt wird. Die Rußteilchen wirken dabei als Kondensationskeime und beschleunigen den Vorgang. Auch bei der Verbrennung von Raketentreibstoffen entstehen im wesentlichen - je nach Art des Treibstoffs- Wasserdampf und ggf. auch feste Bestandteile wie Ruß. Kondensstreifen von Raketen zeigen wegen des meist senkrechten Flugverlaufs dieser Flugkörper wegen der Abhängigkeit von Windichtung und Windstärke oft einen zickzackförmigen Verlauf.

Im Bild rechts ist ein Passagierflugzeug zu sehen, das einen Kondensstreifen erzeugt.

[Bearbeiten]
Auswirkungen auf das Klima
Die künstlichen Kondensstreifen bedecken einen kleinen Teil des Himmels und reduzieren damit tagsüber die Sonneneinstrahlung und nachts die Abkühlung der Erde. Zudem können sie auch die Kondensation von weiterem natürlich vorhandenem Wasserdampf stimulieren. Daher wird vermutet, dass der Flugverkehr nicht nur durch den Treibhauseffekt, sondern auch durch die Kondensstreifen das Klima beeinflusst. Die Stärke dieses Effekts ist bisher allerdings unbekannt.

Eine Untersuchung ergab, dass die Temperaturdifferenz zwischen Tag und Nacht während des dreitägigen Flugverbots vom 11. bis 14. September 2001 um 1,1 °C größer war als im Durchschnitt früherer Jahre. Die Aussagekraft einer einzigen Messung über einen derart kurzen Zeitraum ist jedoch sehr zweifelhaft. Wenn das Wetter tatsächlich von einem Tag auf den anderen so stark reversibel beeinflussbar wäre, wäre allerdings kaum mit einer langfristigen Klimaänderung zu rechnen.

[halva]

Raynolds you are an anthropogenic climate change 'sceptic'. Europe is not yours and soon the USA will not be yours either.

[halva]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/feature/story/0,13026,1108853,00.html

Goodbye sunshine

Each year less light reaches the surface of the Earth. No one is sure what's causing 'global dimming' - or what it means for the future. In fact most scientists have never heard of it. By David Adam

Thursday December 18, 2003
The Guardian

In 1985, a geography researcher called Atsumu Ohmura at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology got the shock of his life. As part of his studies into climate and atmospheric radiation, Ohmura was checking levels of sunlight recorded around Europe when he made an astonishing discovery. It was too dark. Compared to similar measurements recorded by his predecessors in the 1960s, Ohmura's results suggested that levels of solar radiation striking the Earth's surface had declined by more than 10% in three decades. Sunshine, it seemed, was on the way out.
The finding went against all scientific thinking. By the mid-80s there was undeniable evidence that our planet was getting hotter, so the idea of reduced solar radiation - the Earth's only external source of heat - just didn't fit. And a massive 10% shift in only 30 years? Ohmura himself had a hard time accepting it. "I was shocked. The difference was so big that I just could not believe it," he says. Neither could anyone else. When Ohmura eventually published his discovery in 1989 the science world was distinctly unimpressed. "It was ignored," he says.

It turns out that Ohmura was the first to document a dramatic effect that scientists are now calling "global dimming". Records show that over the past 50 years the average amount of sunlight reaching the ground has gone down by almost 3% a decade. It's too small an effect to see with the naked eye, but it has implications for everything from climate change to solar power and even the future sustainability of plant photosynthesis. In fact, global dimming seems to be so important that you're probably wondering why you've never heard of it before. Well don't worry, you're in good company. Many climate experts haven't heard of it either, the media has not picked up on it, and it doesn't even appear in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

"It's an extraordinary thing that for some reason this hasn't penetrated even into the thinking of the people looking at global climate change," says Graham Farquhar, a climate scientist at the Australian National University in Canberra. "It's actually quite a big deal and I think you'll see a lot more people referring to it."

That's not to say that the effect has gone unnoticed. Although Ohmura was the first to report global dimming, he wasn't alone. In fact, the scientific record now shows several other research papers published during the 1990s on the subject, all finding that light levels were falling significantly. Among them they reported that sunshine in Ireland was on the wane, that both the Arctic and the Antarctic were getting darker and that light in Japan, the supposed land of the rising sun, was actually falling. Most startling of all was the discovery that levels of solar radiation reaching parts of the former Soviet Union had gone down almost 20% between 1960 and 1987.

The problem is that most of the climate scientists who saw the reports simply didn't believe them.

"It's an uncomfortable one," says Gerald Stanhill, who published many of these early papers and coined the phrase global dimming. "The first reaction has always been that the effect is much too big, I don't believe it and if it's true then why has nobody reported it before."

That began to change in 2001, when Stanhill and his colleague Shabtai Cohen at the Volcani Centre in Bet Dagan, Israel collected all the available evidence together and proved that, on average, records showed that the amount of solar radiation reaching the Earth's surface had gone down by between 0.23 and 0.32% each year from 1958 to 1992.

This forced more scientists to sit up and take notice, though some still refused to accept the change was real, and instead blamed it on inaccurate recording equipment.

Solar radiation is measured by seeing how much the side of a black plate warms up when exposed to the sun, compared with its flip side, which is shaded. It's a relatively crude device, and we have no way of proving how accurate measurements made 30 years ago really are. "To detect temporal changes you must have very good data otherwise you're just analysing the difference between data retrieval systems," says Ohmura.

Stanhill says the dimming effect is much greater than the possible errors (which anyway would make the light levels go up as well as down), but what was really needed was an independent way to prove global dimming was real. Last year Farquhar and his group in Australia provided it.

The 2001 article written by Stanhill and Cohen sparked Farquhar's interest and he made some inquiries. The reaction was not always positive and when he mentioned the idea to one high-ranking climate scientist (whose name he is reluctant to reveal) he was told: "That's bullshit, Graham. If that was the case then we'd all be freezing to death."

But Farquhar had realised that the idea of global dimming could explain one of the most puzzling mysteries of climate science. As the Earth warms, you would expect the rate at which water evaporates to increase. But in fact, study after study using metal pans filled with water has shown that the rate of evaporation has gone down in recent years. When Farquhar compared evaporation data with the global dimming records he got a perfect match. The reduced evaporation was down to less sunlight shining on the water surface. And while Stanhill and Cohen's 2001 report appeared in a relatively obscure agricultural journal, Farquhar and his colleague Michael Roderick published their solution to the evaporation paradox in the high-profile American magazine Science. Almost 20 years after it was first noticed, global dimming was finally in the mainstream. "I think over the past couple of years it's become clear that the solar irradiance at the Earth's surface has decreased," says Jim Hansen, a leading climate modeller with Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.

The missing radiation is in the region of visible light and infrared - radiation like the ultraviolet light increasingly penetrating the leaky ozone layer is not affected. Stanhill says there is now sufficient interest in the subject for a special session to be held at the joint meeting of the American and Canadian geophysical societies in Montreal next May.

So what causes global dimming? The first thing to say is that it's nothing to do with changes in the amount of radiation arriving from the sun. Although that varies as the sun's activity rises and falls and the Earth moves closer or further away, the global dimming effect is much, much larger and the opposite of what would be expected given there has been a general increase in overall solar radiation over the past 150 years.

That means something must have happened to the Earth's atmosphere to stop the arriving sunlight penetrating. The few experts who have studied the effect believe it's down to air pollution. Tiny particles of soot or chemical compounds like sulphates reflect sunlight and they also promote the formation of bigger, longer lasting clouds. "The cloudy times are getting darker," says Cohen, at the Volcani Centre. "If it's cloudy then it's darker, but when it's sunny things haven't changed much."

[halva]

More importantly, what impact could global dimming have? If the effect continues then it's certainly bad news for solar power, as darker, cloudier skies will reduce its meagre efficiency still further. The effect on photosynthesis, and so on plant and tree growth, is more complicated and will probably be different in various parts of the world. In equatorial regions and parts of the southern hemisphere regularly flooded with light, photosynthesis is likely to be limited by carbon dioxide or water, not sunshine, and light levels would have to fall much further to force a change. In fact, in some cases photosynthesis could paradoxically increase slightly with global dimming as the broken, diffuse light that emerges from clouds can penetrate deep into forest canopies more easily than direct beams of sunlight from a clear blue sky.

But in the cloudy parts of the northern hemisphere, like Britain, it's a different story and if you grow tomatoes in a greenhouse you could be seeing the effects of global dimming already. "In the northern climate everything becomes light limiting and a reduction in solar radiation becomes a reduction in productivity," Cohen says. "In greenhouses in Holland, the rule of thumb is that a 1% decrease in solar radiation equals a 1% drop in productivity. Because they're light limited they're always very busy cleaning the tops of their greenhouses."

The other major impact global dimming will have is on the complex computer simulations climate scientists use to understand what is happening now and to predict what will happen in the future. For them, global dimming is a real sticking point. "All of their models, all the physics and mathematics of solar radiation in the Earth's atmosphere can't explain what we're measuring at the Earth's surface," Stanhill says. Farquhar agrees: "This will drive what the modellers have to do now. They're going to have to account for this."

David Roberts, a climate modeller with the Met Office's Hadley Centre, says that although the issue of global dimming raises some awkward questions, some of the computer simulations do at least address the mechanisms believed to be driving it. "Most of the processes involving aerosols and formation of clouds are already in there, though I accept it's a bit of a work in progress and more work needs to be done," Roberts says.

Another big question yet to be answered is whether the phenomenon will continue. Will our great grandchildren be eating lunch in the dark? Unlikely, though few studies are up to date enough to confirm whether or not global dimming is still with us. "There's been so little done that nobody really understands what's going on," Cohen says. There are some clues though.

O hmura says that satellite images of clouds seem to suggest that the skies have become slightly clearer since the start of the 1990s, and this has been accompanied by a sharp upturn in temperature. Both of these facts could indicate that global dimming has waned, and this would seem to tie in with the general reduction in air pollution caused by the scaling down of heavy industry across parts of the world in recent years. Just last month, Helen Power, a climate scientist at the University of South Carolina published one of the few analyses of up-to-date data for the 1990s and found that global dimming over Germany seemed to be easing. "But that's just one study and it's impossible to say anything about long-term trends from one study," she cautions.

It's also possible that global dimming is not entirely down to air pollution. "I don't think that aerosols by themselves would be able to produce this amount of global dimming," says Farquhar. Global warming itself might also be playing a role, he suggests, by perhaps forcing more water to be evaporated from the oceans and then blown onshore (although the evidence on land suggests otherwise). "If the greenhouse effect causes global dimming then that really changes the perspective," he says. In other words, while it keeps getting warmer it might keep getting darker. "I'm not saying it definitely is that, I'm just raising the question."

Ultimately, that and other questions will have to be considered by the scientists around the world who are beginning to think about how to prepare the next IPCC assessment report, due out in 2007. "The IPCC is the group that should investigate this and work out if people should be scared of it," says Cohen. Whatever their verdict, at least we are no longer totally in the dark about global dimming.

Further reading

Global Dimming: A Review of the Evidence, G Stanhill and S Cohen Agricultural and Forest Meteorology Volume 107 (2001), pages 255-278

The Cause of Decreased Pan Evaporation Over the Past 50 Years, M Roderick and G Farquhar Science Volume 298 (2002), pages 1410-1411

Observed Reductions of Surface Solar Radiation at Sites in the US and Worldwide, B Liepert Geophysical Research Letters Volume 29 (2002), pag

[jayreynolds]

"Tiny particles of soot or chemical compounds like sulphates reflect sunlight and they also promote the formation of bigger, longer lasting clouds

Sorry, Wayne, those folks at Guardian must be spending too much time at the cafe like you.
The reality is that soot causes warming, not reflective at all.

Is it really surprising to anyone that air pollution over the Soviet Union dimmed the air?
After all, their industry was the world's greatest source of air pollution.
It's good that Guardian mentioned the 'trend' of putative dimming has changed, and what the data shows now is a brighter future!

To ride the "global dimming" bandwagon, for you, Wayne, is like riding the tiger.

Frankly speaking, you are way out of your league, and any hope for your people amongst aerosol scientists is a preposterous fantasy. You think your cafe-talk can persuade scientists?
Tosh! Science requires evidence, which you know simply isn't here, or ever will be.

First, you've got to realize it can't be tamed. That is, you will never hoodwink ANY of these scientists who study aerosols each and every day, into believing in "chemtrails". You might hope to do so, but you will fail, and you know it.

Second, if you try to trick or insinuate yourselves into their company, as you tried with the Tyndall Centre or Ross Gelbspan, you will eventually provoke the tiger into biting you in the ass.

[stuart_allsop]

Raynolds you are an anthropogenic climate change 'sceptic'. Europe is not yours and soon the USA will not be yours either.
Now how on Earth did Halva know what Jay wrote in his post, if Halva has Jay ignore-listed? What a very strange occurance...

[stuart_allsop]

Sorry, Wayne, ... To ride the "global dimming" bandwagon, for you, Wayne, is like riding the tiger. ... Second, if you try to trick or insinuate yourselves into their company, as you tried with the Tyndall Centre or Ross Gelbspan, you will eventually provoke the tiger into biting you in the ass.Ouch! Resounding bitch slap! That must have stung pretty bad... (I even heard it over here, from this far away!)

[Insurrectionchemistry]

I see Reynolds Chile gangster is now advocating for criminal assalt toward persons.

IMHO,
is

[jayreynolds]

I see Reynolds Chile gangster is now advocating for criminal assalt toward persons.
Jimbo, what I said for Wayne is just as true for you. You tried to ride the anti-nuclear tiger, and were booted out of all associations local and nationwide. Sure, it's easy to fool a bunch of DUMBASS chemmies like Wayne who sit in cafes all day. I see you aren't even man enough to head in and debate chem11 who has actively debunked you at his megasprayer forum.

You know you wouldn't stand a chance up against any aerosol scientist, but just for the record I challenge you to hire a booth and present your claims before the
American Association for Aerosol Research International Specialty Conference, to be held
February 7-11, 2005, in Atlanta Georgia.
http://www.aaar.org/


Jimbo, you haven't the guts to go, because you know everything you've told us was all a complete fabrication. That's it!.

[halva]

Frankly speaking, you are way out of your league, and any hope for your people amongst aerosol scientists is a preposterous fantasy. You think your cafe-talk can persuade scientists?
Tosh! Science requires evidence, which you know simply isn't here, or ever will be.

First, you've got to realize it can't be tamed. That is, you will never hoodwink ANY of these scientists who study aerosols each and every day, into believing in "chemtrails". You might hope to do so, but you will fail, and you know it.

Second, if you try to trick or insinuate yourselves into their company, as you tried with the Tyndall Centre or Ross Gelbspan, you will eventually provoke the tiger into biting you in the ass.

You are a heap of shit Raynolds.

You don't know anything about what can be done or is being done.

[halva]

I will bet you a hundred dollars that Crichton will continue to stay away from the subjects of either chemtrails or 'global dimming'.

Raynolds, if you are so sure of yourself, accept my bet.

You know yourself that you' ve got your wires crossed and your room for manoeuvre is narrowing.

[halva]

This outrageous American upstart caste society that assumes it can swing everything through deployment of relative social status.

The decadent ancien regime of Western Europe is a thousand times more open and democratic.

[jayreynolds]

This outrageous American upstart caste society that assumes it can swing everything through deployment of relative social status.

The decadent ancien regime of Western Europe is a thousand times more open and democratic.
Wayne, my father
http://www.seething.org.uk/448th.html
and my grandfather
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/grandpapics.html
were two of the "UPSTART AMERICAN CASTE SOCIETY men who set Europe free from the totalitarian tyranny they got themselves into, at full risk of theirs and their descendants lives.

Now, 25 million Iraqis won't forget who demonstrated against their freedom and failed to come to their aid as they cried out for help.

America bore the brunt of defending the entire world against communist expansion, including in Greece. America brought the Soviet Union to it's knees through economic might, which cost us dearly, and our president just pledged to continue expanding freedom further than ever before.

Face the facts, Wayne, you and your puny bunch of nitwits never stood a chance, even your former squeeze Deborah now debunks "chemtrails", which she no longer believes in. You and your cohorts have been involved in so many hoaxes you have ZERO credibility, you have ZERO evidence, and your numbers fall day-to-day.

I'm sure Crichton is fully capable of pushing you just as hard as you push him. I doubt if you will bring it to him to see, however.

Frankly, I'm not concerned whether, or not, Michael Crichton takes you on. I am personally confident I can handle you all by myself!

[jayreynolds]

You are a heap of shit Raynolds.

You don't know anything about what can be done or is being done.

No, Wayne, I know in both cases. You can skulk around behind my back as much as you wish, but your end game is publicity, and that means sooner or later you've got to stick your head up somewhere for air. When you do, it'll be just like it was for Tyndall, Gelbspan, Holmes, Phelps.

You will be countered, cornered, and decapitated. Schwartzkopf taught me how to do it.

[halva]

My end game is not publicity.

The problem with the political system is not at the transmitting end but at the receiving end.

[halva]

Most recently, an individual, Wayne Hall, aka. "halva" has begun a campaign to scapegoat not only myself, but Dr. Crichton.

The new gambit appears designed to allay the fears of the enviro orgs by scapegoating Dr. Crichton and myself.

I'd like to discuss this with Dr. Crichton or anyone else here.


Hah!!

Raynolds, Crichton will never touch either you or 'chemtrails' with a bargepole.

He realises what it is in his interest to keep his mouth SHUT about.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Reynolds quoted:

"When you do, it'll be just like it was for Tyndall, Gelbspan, Holmes, Phelps.
You will be countered, cornered, and decapitated. Schwartzkopf taught me how to do it."
====
A short review of the thugs present:

First it was Reynolds Chile ally talking physical assault.
Now it is Reynolds himself speaking of murder against chemtrail and global warming activists by decapitation.

IMHO,
is

[Boomer Chick]

:) Gawd, you guys, do you ever let up and just discuss like rational HBs? That's human beings!

Well, I didn't want to jump in, disturbing the waters or anything, but now's as good a time as any.

As some of you may know, I'm quite well read on the subject of weather manipulation. And as you know and someone knowledgable on another open-minded board coined: "it's a many-headed hydra." Indeed it is. My purpose in being here is to let you know that sane and intelligent people are indeed inquiring, indeed noticing weather anomolies, and sooner rather than later, the meteorologists will form underground groups themselves to discuss the gridlike systems that control the oddly formed clouds and air masses in our skies.

My activism at this point regards contacting meteorologists in light of the recent India Daily publication which I use as an introduction and probe to the meteorologists as well. Some will be prompted privately by their own curiosity and others will poo poo the question.


http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/01-30b-05.asp

In every country of the world, all on a sudden the weather forecasting computer models are failing ....
Staff Reporter
January 30, 2005


Over the past years, China has installed 74 sets of the world's advanced Doppler weather radar with 87 per cent put into operation. But in the last year all on a sudden the weather forecasting computer models have failed so badly that China has decided to install thirty more of the devices rapidly this year with a satellite launched later last year expected to start its operations soon.

This is the same story echoed in every part of the world from India to America. Weather forecasting models are just failing and the variation patterns are so obvious that forecasters all over the world are scratching their heads.

World is experiencing some extreme weathers and weather forecasters in all parts of the world are just failing for reasons unknown to all.



In India, for example, scientists were astonished at the National Center for Medium Range Weather Forecasting were perplexed by the deviation of the weather from the that predicted by the Doppler reports.

In Russia, authorities are just perplexed with bizarre patters of snow falls.

In America, the weather forecasters are similarly perplexed in their inability to tell people what will happen next day.

The recent hurricanes and typhoons all over the world have taken irregular patterns and unpredictable paths defying all established computer models.

In India, China, Africa, Europe, all over the world the same story is repeating. In every country the meteorologists are thinking that these anomalies are just present in their region. But it is global and increasing every day.

The intensity of the storms and the paths all over the world especially in America’s Florida and South East including Gulf of Mexico are just bizarre.

Bureau of Meteorology, Australian Government is also perplexed with what is going on.

Another interesting phenomenon that is becoming very obvious is that many of the storms all over the world last year went into merry-go-round patterns and pick up speed and force before the landfall.

There is a possibility that massive weather manipulation experimentation is taking place which are totally classified. Military research projects involving weather manipulation is nothing new – many countries are racing towards achieving the capabilities.

What is perplexing is that the same unusual patterns are also present in Artic and Antarctic regions. British Antarctic Survey (BAS), the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR), the World Meteorological Organization (WMO, the International Commission on Polar Meteorology and the Council of Managers of National Antarctic Programs (COMNAP) are involved in modeling the polar weather patterns.

The massive scale of the same problem gives rise to the fact that there may be some bigger hand involved. In South America and Central America native Indians believed that their Gods used to control the weather on a daily basis. We may be looking the same pattern where “Someone” is controlling the worldwide weather.




Web www.indiadaily.com

***

One American national weather forecaster/meteorologist, Scott Stevens, has broached the subject regarding his professional frustration with weather forecasting considering his computer based projections holding to basic meteorology tenets and science regarding all parameters of the atmospheric air masses.

His website asks serious questions and presents many sound scientific observations as well as pics.

http://www.weatherwars.info

About Steve from his site:

Hi, I'm Scott Stevens. Weather has been a fascination of mine since I started keeping a weather diary for a Scouting merit badge. That was July 1978. I had to watch the local weathercast, log the forecast, and the daily conditions for 30 days. By that months end. I was hooked! I was 12. I earned the weather merit badge, then later my Eagle. Within the year I was reporting our small town's daily conditions to the area TV stations. That became my in. By my senior year in high school I was working at KIFI TV the NBC affiliate in Idaho Falls as a studio camera operator. I soon was a photographer for the news department, as time allowed. During that year I figured out that I would be doing weather for a career even though my first weather casting takes stank! So much so I thought I'd end up in the business school.
I chose the University of Kansas to study meteorology. these Idaho winters were just too rugged for me. Snow in May, yuck! That and the math requirements weren't too tough.

During my sophomore year at KU I auditioned for one of three openings at KTKA in Topeka. I was not yet good enough. I was 20, a little young still, and scared. Five months later I received a call back, this time I landed a job that would cost me twice as much to keep as it paid. I had to buy a car. Ah, the glory of TV! But 13 months later I had gone from a 2-hour/5 day a week job to the main guy. It felt good. Not long afterwards a phone call came from Omaha Nebraska, and RFD-TV. It was a start-up satellite delivered agricultural focused news and weather station and a very tough job in many aspects.

Storm chasing, at KJRH in Tulsa Oklahoma, came during the early 90's where I worked the morning show. I enjoyed that job just about the most of all. The weather there was the easiest to forecast. I didn't even mind-too much-the 3:50am alarm.

I spent a little more than a year in the Capital District of New York as the chief for WRGB. What beautiful country! And they know how to clear the roads after a big snowstorm!

I returned home in 1996 to eastern Idaho and to KPVI. Without question, forecasting here is a challenge. I suppose even more so now with all that is going on in the skies.

This is my first attempt at a web site. I just wanted to get the 'bones' of this thing up and going so I can now learn Dreamweaver and watch this project grow.

Send me your pictures and thoughts. I am especially interested to hear from others employed in the weather industry.

Thanks for stopping by and reading.

--Scott
weatherwars@cableone.net

For you skeptics, a look at Scott's awesome pics and satellite pic studies could enlighten you! I'm not saying WHO or WHY at this point, just bringing the obvious to the attention of those professionals who scan the skies with their eyes and their computers as well as radar and satellite imagery. I've started with my local TV stations and daily will work out into the whole state and then to other states. It'll take some time, but this is my committment to raising awareness and questions regarding our clouds and weather manipulation. There is no belief, here, just evidence, so read it for yourself. Soon, those of you who have been fighting this knowledge will find yourself left in the dustbin of "What the ......? "

BC

[jayreynolds]

:
As some of you may know, I'm quite well read on the subject of weather manipulation.
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/01-30b-05.asp
In India, for example, scientists were astonished at the National Center for Medium Range Weather Forecasting were perplexed by the deviation of the weather from the that predicted by the Doppler reports.

Hilarious, this chemmie actually believes doppler radar forecasts weather!
What will they dream up next?
Who is this new quack, anyways?
Nice to have agood laugh before bedtime.

[halva]

Reynolds quoted:

"When you do, it'll be just like it was for Tyndall, Gelbspan, Holmes, Phelps.
You will be countered, cornered, and decapitated. Schwartzkopf taught me how to do it."
====
A short review of the thugs present:

First it was Reynolds Chile ally talking physical assault.
Now it is Reynolds himself speaking of murder against chemtrail and global warming activists by decapitation.

IMHO,
is
Well they are thugs. That is the reality. And that thug government of yours is not going to protect us against them. And neither are lady Arianna and her liberal democratic moderators. And neither are our gutless European governments. So one has to find where these thugs are likely to come into conflict with other thugs, and help the process along.

Plus make use of whatever scientific knowledge you have, including helping non-debunker newcomers.

[halva]

The government will also shut down enterprises that consume too much energy.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-01/28/content_2517944.htm

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

BEIJING, Jan. 28 -- China will face electricity shortages this year, as pressure on the country's energy resources continues to outpace production.

An official at the National Development and Reform Commission predicts an electricity shortage this year of 25 million kilowatts.

He says the country will work on opening up alternative energy channels including the construction of large coal manufacturing bases, speeding up its development of petroleum, natural gas and water as well as electricity.

The government will also shut down enterprises that consume too much energy.


Coal shortage worsening

Xinhuanet
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-01/28/content_2517944.htm

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

BEIJING, Jan. 27 -- Coal shortage will take the place of electricity shortage to be the most prominent challenge to China's economy this year, an official with the State Reform and Development Commission (SRDC) said here Thursday.

"China faces overall power shortages of coal, oil and electricity, among which coal shortage will rise to be the first concern," said Cao Yushu, deputy secretary-general of the commission, said at a regular news conference, "To balance the demand and supply of coal will be the major task for China's economic control in 2005."

[stuart_allsop]

My end game is not publicity.

The problem with the political system is not at the transmitting end but at the receiving end.Say! Hows that for a coincidence! Halva can read Jay's posts after all! I thought he said he had ignore-liested everyone except himself?

[halva]

The problem with the political system is not at the transmitting end but at the receiving end.

This is something that has become more easily comprehensible now that elections in the United States have become an entirely 'virtual reality' process.

[stuart_allsop]

:) Gawd, you guys, do you ever let up and just discuss like rational HBs? That's human beings! Hi Boomer! Ready for more, I see? Thanks for popping in: We needed another target to practice on. The ones here were getting stale and jaded, and were so thoroughly riddled with holes as to be useless. Thanks for volunteering!


Well, I didn't want to jump in, disturbing the waters or anything, but you did. anyway, right? Even though you didn't want to, you still did it. Is that obsessive-compulsive disorder, or something?


As some of you may know, I'm quite well read on the subject of weather manipulation. Wrong! You are well read on conspiracy theory, but poor read amd emtirely untrained on weather manipulation. You really should be more careful about what you claim...



My purpose in being here is to let you know that sane and intelligent people are indeed inquiring, indeed noticing weather anomolies,So why do you refuse to listen to them, then?


... and sooner rather than later, the meteorologists will form underground groups themselvesI hate to mention this, but a meteorologist underground is rather pointless: Very little weather happens underground.



to discuss the gridlike systems that control the oddly formed clouds and air masses in our skies. Translation: Boomer is worried about contrails spreading and persisting, becuase she does not understand anyhting at all about meteorology.


in light of the recent India Daily publication which I use as an introduction and probe to the meteorologists as well. Some will be prompted privately by their own curiosity and others will poo poo the question. And as for me, I think I'll just poo poo the answer. Especially that article you C&P'd: it was obviously written by someone without the faintest idea of waht he is talking about. Number one, Doppler radar systems are NOT launched as satellites: They are grourd based. Numerb 2, Doppler radar does NOT predict anything: It just analyzes rainfall patterns in real time.


Over the past years, China has installed 74 sets of the world's advanced Doppler weather radar with 87 per cent put into operation. But in the last year all on a sudden the weather forecasting computer models have failed so badly that China has decided to install thirty more of the devices rapidly this year with a satellite launched later last year expected to start its operations soon. Ooops! Strike one.


In India, for example, scientists were astonished at the National Center for Medium Range Weather Forecasting were perplexed by the deviation of the weather from the that predicted by the Doppler reports.Ooops!!! Strike two.


Nope. They have behaved more or less as the normally do. Strike three! You're out!

Sorry, Boomer. nice try.

[quote]Another interesting phenomenon that is becoming very obvious is that many of the storms all over the world last year went into merry-go-round patterns and pick up speed and force before the landfall.Well DUH! What did you EXPECT! That's what large storm systems ALWAYS do! And have been doing for the last few million years, at least!


There is a possibility that massive weather manipulation experimentation is taking place which are totally classified. Military research projects involving weather manipulation is nothing new ? many countries are racing towards achieving the capabilities.And there is also the possibility that a kook journalist with zero understanding of meterology tried to make a power play for his agenda here... and failed miserably... (PS. Most countries have long since abandonded all large-scale attempts at weather mod, as unfeasible and amazingly expensive, given the ambiguous results.)


The massive scale of the same problem gives rise to the fact that there may be some bigger hand involved. In South America and Central America native Indians believed that their Gods used to control the weather on a daily basis. We may be looking the same pattern where ?Someone? is controlling the worldwide weather. And here in South America there are very, very few "native indians", most of whom work in high rise office blocks and worship either the Christian God, or money. Where on earth do you find these hack journalists, boomer?



For you skeptics, a look at Scott's awesome pics and satellite pic studies could enlighten you!What am I supposed to be loooking for, Boomer? All I see is normal weather patterns.


I've started with my local TV stations ...Did they laugh very loud? Or was it more like polite titters, stiffled guffaws, and muffled giggles behind your back, as you walked past?


There is no belief, here, just evidence, so read it for yourself.Evidence? Of WHAT? Of normal weather patterns doing the exact same thing they've been doing for millions of years?


Soon, those of you who have been fighting this knowledge will find yourself left in the dustbin of "What the ......? " Nope. But those of you who continue to promote this hoax will find yourselves in the soft pink clouds of cukoo-land...

[Boomer Chick]

Welcome Boomer Chick,

I have been an astute observer of the weather for the past 27 years.

Generally speaking, weather patterns have changed, and the sky looks nothing like it did 15 years ago.

For the past 3 years when I have looked at satellite images of the U.S. they have been foreign to me.

Why do people believe that these changes are intentional manipulations? Why wouldn’t their first suspicion be that they are natural changes. In fact, why would they be suspicious at all.

The sun, which is the cause of our weather, has changed. I remember in the early 1970’s scientists observed that solar activity had been relatively calm for the past 100 years, and predicted that that was about to change, and that Earth’s weather was going to become more radical.

They were correct!

Surely, you are aware of the tremendous quantity of energy Earth receives from the sun and that this energy creates and controls Earth’s weather. To alter the weather as is being theorized would require energy comparable to that of the sun’s.



How'ya doin' Yaak? :) Well, I hear you loud and clear and I don't doubt the sun has affected weather masses. Of course it has and as the sun changes or fluctuates, so does the whole earth system, including the oceans and the air masses that are affected by them, the earth radiating, heating, cooling, etc. But what the meteorologist, Scott Stevens, has found, CANNOT, be explained by the sun's behavior alone.

I'm sorry to play the game, "show and tell" with you, Yaak, but I must in order for you to SEE what he SEES. Without taking the time to view his pages, his pics, his satellite pics, I'm afraid you'll not be able to be on the "same page." He, too (not that he's the guru to end all guru's in weather observation) credits the sun as well as the normal influences of contrails in their polluting contributions among other influences. But it's more than the sun, it's the evidence of scalar wave action, 90 degree angles, cloud cutting, unnatural cloud formations, odd clouds over dry air masses and land masses, unusual movements, and the most outstanding pics on his sight show cloud patterns from the satellite views with arrows pointing to unnatural directions and striations that show a definate pattern of manipulation or intervention. Could the sun manipulate clouds and air masses in such a way? Wouldn't Stevens be more qualified, more than a mere "weather watcher", to interpret what he sees as abnormal? Please view his site ..... doesn't take long.... and then give me some honest feedback on it?

Thanks!

BC

[stuart_allsop]

... I don't doubt the sun has affected weather masses.Affect the weather massess? That'sa beaut that is, boomer! The sun does not just "affect" the weather! It DRIVES the weather! The ONLY source of power that drives ALL of the weather on the entire planet, is the sun. Can you tell me how much power the sun provides per square meter of surface? Can you multiply that by the surface area of the Earht? Can you compare that with the ENTIRE power output of EVERY SINGLE man-made power sourece of any kind? Guess what? the entire power output of all man-made power sources is MANY ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE smaller than the amount of sunlight the reaches the Earth.


But what the meteorologist, Scott Stevens, has found, CANNOT, be explained by the sun's behavior alone. Why not? Explain the pyhsics, please.


I'm sorry to play the game, "show and tell" with you, Yaak,...I thought that in order to play "ahow and tell" you actually had to understand what you were showing and telliing about?


But it's more than the sun, it's the evidence of scalar wave action,Still haarping on that scam I see, Boomer? You never did manage to explain to me, last time I called you on this, how it is that a scalar wave can be directed and modulated, when the very nature of "scalar" waves demands that they CANNOT be withere direced or controlled. You can ONLY direct something that has a vector component, since the very definition of :scalar" means that it specifically excludes vectors, clearly it is a physical imposibility that anything "scalar" can have any kind of direction associated with it. To even make such a claim demonstrates a deep-seated and thorough lack of understanding of physics.



Could the sun manipulate clouds and air masses in such a way?Well yes of COURSE it could! After all, it's been doing so since the dawn of recorded history: Why would it stop now? Please explain the physics behind your contention that the sun is no longer able to drive and direct the weather.


Please view his site ..... doesn't take long.... and then give me some honest feedback on it? we just did


Thanks!

You are welcome. Anything else that you need debunking?



BC[/QUOTE]

[Boomer Chick]

Well thanks, Stu, for your feedback on the India article.

Tell me, did you bother to look at Stevens's site? No, I didn't think so. :rolleyes:

That comment about "underground....." :p cute as ever!

Like I asked Yaak, take a look at this man's website and then come back and tell me he (not me) is on the wrong track. Better yet, why don't you drop him a line and see what he says in response!

And IF I get any honest feedback from the meteorologists with whom I query, I will be sure to post their legitimate responses.

From a Doppler radar information site:

http://www.stuffintheair.com/Doppler-radar-weather.html

Serious outlook severe weather ahead.
What is the data used for? Normally the device shows, and the people only care about horizontal wind, but it can be configured for vertical as well.
The wind blows faster at higher atmosphere levels, so a display that is not at constant altitude will also reveal this effect. Also if there is nothing dense to reflect the signal, such as rain, we collect no wind or cloud information.

The scientists learn to recognize patterns in the Doppler radar weather display, and combine them with data from additional sources such as satellites, models, observations and their extensive understanding of meteorological processes, to make sense of the whole picture.

After learning to read a wind field, they then figure out how to pinpoint Doppler radar anomolies and identify deviations from a uniform wind, convection examples such as tornados, rotation, divergence/convergence areas, distinct bulls-eye and theoretical "D" patterns added to a constant flow.

It even gets better (more complicated) when these effects are combined and occur at a remote distance. Doppler radar weather meteorologists require intense training in this field.



***

Obviously, a trained and skilled meteorologist would know how to interpret the Doppler radar information along with the satellite information, various computer programs, and other related skills. Scott Stevens notices anomolies and he explains about them quite clearly. It doesn't take a physicist, nor another meteorologist to view his site and agree that something indeed is awry.

http://www.weatherwars.info


BC

[Boomer Chick]

Affect the weather massess? That'sa beaut that is, boomer! The sun does not just "affect" the weather! It DRIVES the weather! The ONLY source of power that drives ALL of the weather on the entire planet, is the sun. Can you tell me how much power the sun provides per square meter of surface? Can you multiply that by the surface area of the Earht? Can you compare that with the ENTIRE power output of EVERY SINGLE man-made power sourece of any kind? Guess what? the entire power output of all man-made power sources is MANY ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE smaller than the amount of sunlight the reaches the Earth.

Why not? Explain the pyhsics, please.

I thought that in order to play "ahow and tell" you actually had to understand what you were showing and telliing about?

Still haarping on that scam I see, Boomer? You never did manage to explain to me, last time I called you on this, how it is that a scalar wave can be directed and modulated, when the very nature of "scalar" waves demands that they CANNOT be withere direced or controlled. You can ONLY direct something that has a vector component, since the very definition of :scalar" means that it specifically excludes vectors, clearly it is a physical imposibility that anything "scalar" can have any kind of direction associated with it. To even make such a claim demonstrates a deep-seated and thorough lack of understanding of physics.


Well yes of COURSE it could! After all, it's been doing so since the dawn of recorded history: Why would it stop now? Please explain the physics behind your contention that the sun is no longer able to drive and direct the weather.

we just did



You are welcome. Anything else that you need debunking?



BC[/QUOTE]

YES, of course the sun rules the planet. Chopping and mincing is not convincing, however.

Not good enough, Stu. Scott Stevens gives vectors and directions on his satellite pics. Scott points them out. I am pitting you against a meteorologist and you refuse to even view his site. Too bad. This is not "debunking" it's donkey with his foot in the mudhole. Either view his site and prove HIS observations wrong, or be silent. My knowledge is not at stake here, a meteorologist's is. Give HIM your best shot, not me. Attacking the messenger is about as looney as Elmer Fudd shooting Bugs because Bugs Bunny brought him a map with Foxy Loxy's hiding place on it! Yeah, he needed to shoot the heck out of the map while Foxy Loxy was stealing the chickens out of the henhouse!

Best wishes and let's read some great and real debunking! On your mark.... get set .... GO! :D

BC

[gaiacomm]

YES, of course the sun rules the planet. Chopping and mincing is not convincing, however.

Not good enough, Stu. Scott Stevens gives vectors and directions on his satellite pics. Scott points them out. I am pitting you against a meteorologist and you refuse to even view his site. Too bad. This is not "debunking" it's donkey with his foot in the mudhole. Either view his site and prove HIS observations wrong, or be silent. My knowledge is not at stake here, a meteorologist's is. Give HIM your best shot, not me. Attacking the messenger is about as looney as Elmer Fudd shooting Bugs because Bugs Bunny brought him a map with Foxy Loxy's hiding place on it! Yeah, he needed to shoot the heck out of the map while Foxy Loxy was stealing the chickens out of the henhouse!

Best wishes and let's read some great and real debunking! On your mark.... get set .... GO! :D

BC[/QUOTE]


Keep up the good work I will handle these idiots my own way!

[halva]

Sooner or later you've got to stick your head up somewhere for air. When you do, it'll be just like it was for Tyndall, Gelbspan, Holmes, Phelps.

You will be countered, cornered, and decapitated.

What Raynolds threatens to do is to chop down every petitioner.

This leaves the petitioner with no choice but to cease petitioning authority and become authority.

[halva]

Keep up the good work I will handle these idiots my own way!

It's about time you started showing some credentials Gaiacomm.

[halva]

Sure, it's easy to fool a bunch of DUMBASS chemmies like Wayne who sit in cafes all day. I see you aren't even man enough to head in and debate chem11 who has actively debunked you at his megasprayer forum.


I don't know whether it is Jim or Chem 11 that is more reluctant to debate, whether it is just a question of time, priorities, etc, or whatever.

I do have the impression that Jim's rhetoric about Jews makes it very easy for others (unjustifiably) to write off and disregard what he says when he is not talking about Jews at all.

Whether geoengineering 'chemtrails' contain aluminium, barium, sulphates, or whatever is under discussion, and should be under discussion.

And the discussion should not be required to pass through the Raynolds filter.

[halva]

Arctic ozone may drop to new low
By Richard Black
BBC environment correspondent

The coming weeks could bring the most severe thinning of the ozone layer over northern Europe since records began.

The conditions are being driven by unusual weather in the high atmosphere above the Arctic, says the European Ozone Research Coordinating Unit.

The stratosphere, where the ozone layer lies, has seen its coldest winter for 50 years; there have also been an unusually large number of clouds.

These factors hasten the rate at which man-made chemicals destroy ozone.

"The meteorological conditions we are now witnessing resemble and even surpass the conditions of the 1999-2000 winter, when the worst ozone loss to date was observed," said Dr Neil Harris, from the Cambridge University-based unit.

Broken balance

Ozone is a molecule that is composed of three oxygen atoms. It is responsible for filtering out harmful ultra-violet radiation (less than 290 nanometres) from the Sun.

The molecule is constantly being made and destroyed in the stratosphere, which exists from about 10km to 40km above the Earth.

In an unpolluted atmosphere, this cycle of production and decomposition is in equilibrium.

But a number of human-produced chemicals, such as the chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) used as refrigerants, in aerosol sprays, as solvents and in foam-blowing agents, have risen into the stratosphere where they are broken down by the Sun's rays.

Chlorine atoms released from these chemicals then act as catalysts to decompose ozone.

Long return

At the moment, the area where the ozone layer is particularly thin is constrained by winds, which to some extent isolate the Arctic from the rest of the global climate system.

Scientists say this natural barrier will break down in the coming weeks, and the low ozone area will spread southwards over northern Europe, including the UK.

This will mean more of the Sun's ultra-violet rays reaching ground level, potentially increasing the risk of skin cancer.

The incidence of malignant melanoma, the worst kind of skin cancer, is rising; but to what extent that has been caused by decades of ozone depletion is far from clear.

"We will watch the development closely from day to day, and will inform the public and our authorities if the situation becomes worrying," said Dr Harris

The use of ozone-depleting chemicals is now restricted by an international treaty, the Montreal Protocol; but it may be half a century before levels of these chemicals have fallen sufficiently in the atmosphere to allow the northern ozone layer to be fully repaired.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/4217329.stm

Published: 2005/01/29 03:54:30 GMT

[jayreynolds]

I took another look at the weatherwars site. What a joke.
I emailed Stevens a few weeks ago. Either he is a genuine kook, or he is a pretty good
pretender leading the chemmies on a wild goose chase. He has the whole Haik hoax photo set, along with an "anonymous pilot" conspiracy theory about fuel additives:
http://www.weatherwars.info/pilotsview.htm

He says:


Some scientists, and sadly that seems a generous use of the term considering their curious absence from this debate, have de ridded the possibility of chemtrails and simply refuse to examine the skies above them and therefore have--so far--excluded themselves from this debate.

No, many scientists better than myself have debated, and beaten, every chemmie claim evr put out there. Now Stevens needs to put HIS OWN words to the test. I watch this subject very closely, and have noticed that it is Scott Stevens who has a "CURIOUS ABSENCe" and who has --"SO FAR--EXCLUDED [HIM]SELF FROM THIS DEBATE."

Accordingly, I've just sent him the following challenge to come here and debate:

From Jay Reynolds, reality2u30@hotmail.com
To: Scott Stevens, weatherwars@cableone.net, wxwarsinfo@yahoo.com
. Dear Scott,
At your website, you wrote:
"Some scientists, and sadly that seems a generous use of the term considering their curious absence from this debate, have de ridded the possibility of chemtrails and simply refuse to examine the skies above them and therefore have--so far--excluded themselves from this debate."

This sounds like a debate challenge, Scott, which I am happy to tell you is accepted.
Actually, from what I've seen, YOU are the one absent from debate, and I definitely don't want you to feel "excluded".

Well, here's your chance. Let's give it a go. We can just run wild or you can think up any rules you like for such a debate. It can be on this chemtrail debate thread, or we can start another one. I'm game, and there are commercial and military pilots, engineers, scientists, even other meteorologists available who would be happy to oblige.
http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=397&page=576&pp=10
http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=232705&postcount=5760

You certainly have nothing to lose by participating in debate, unless you really don't mean what you said on that webpage. Let's roll.


Jay Reynolds

[jayreynolds]

Hey, Jimbo. Your claim that Castro's mother was from a jewish family is bunk.
Castro is merely the illegitimate son of his father's housemaid, a woman of no consequence or influence in Cuban society at all. The farm he grew up on was one of the first to be expropriated, infuriating his mother. There is every evidence that she was Catholic.

"His father, Angel Castro Argiz, was of Spanish descent. He came to Cuba for the first time to fight with the Spanish army during the Spanish-American war in 1898. In Cuba, he recognized a land of great opportunity, and despite being deported after the end of the war, Angel Castro returned to the island in 1905. Angel Castro built his empire slowly with hard work and shrewd investments. By the time Fidel was born, Angel was one of the richest men in the province.

Castro's mother first worked as a maid in Angel's household. When she became pregnant with Angel's child, his first wife, Maria Louisa, left him. The couple had three children, Angela, Ramón and Fidel, out of wedlock. Fidel's other siblings, Juana, Raúl, Emma and Augustina arrived after the couple married. The stigma of being born "illegitimate" would follow Castro throughout his life, affecting him on both social and psychological levels."
http://www.historytelevision.ca/features/articles/article.asp?aid=ht_bi0008
"Angel Castro even built a movie theater. There was no church – and he planned none, Leyva said, though the bedroom of Fidel Castro's mother, Lina Ruz, is adorned with portraits and statuettes of saints.

The Cuban leader has written of happy memories of his countryside childhood, but he has shown little attachment to the place itself.

It was the first farm expropriated as Castro's government pushed into collectivized agriculture."

http://havanajournal.com/travel_comments/A724_0_6_0_M/

Jimbo, if you want to point towards who might actually have been large influences on Castro, you might look towards the Jesuits and their "Liberation Theology":
"Jesuit Influence
At Havana's exclusive El Colegio de Belén, Fidel Castro studied under Jesuit priests. It was the 1940s, and the experience of the Spanish Civil War was still fresh. Spanish Nationalists under Francisco Franco had identified with the Fascists, and anti-Americanism ran high within their ranks. Castro's Jesuit teachers imbued the young Fidel with the idea of Hispanidad, stressing the superiority of Spanish values of honor and pride as opposed to the materialistic values of the Anglo-Saxon world. Once he entered the University of Havana, Castro came in contact with the writings of nationalist professors who believed Cuba's destiny had been thwarted by the intervention of the United States. The intervention of 1898, the Platt Amendment and U.S. economic domination had combined to strip Cuba of its independence and national pride. In Castro's belief system, Cuba's political failure was America's fault."
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/castro/peopleevents/p_castro.html

[halva]

Neither Michael or myself is worried about any chemmie campaign. Such a time-waster for your people actually runs in my favor, so bring it on!


Neither Michael or myself.........oh, lah de dah.

Face it Raynolds, Crichton needs you and your chemtrails about as much as he needs a hernia.

[jayreynolds]

Neither Michael or myself.........oh, lah de dah. Face it Raynolds, Crichton needs you and your chemtrails about as much as he needs a hernia.
Yep, maybe. One thing is certain, not a single chemmie on the three boards you posted your "fatwa" on Jay Reynolds and Michael Crichton has any intention of following you. You are not, nor have you ever been, leadership material. One after another you have alienated all who have come to know you, Wayne. You have essentially buried yourself.
http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=Discussion&action=display&num=1106893502

[stuart_allsop]

I am pitting you against a meteorologist Sorry, boomer, but I already explained that we don't do second hand battles for you. If YOU haev a question or a claim then YOU bring it to the table. Don't expect us to go running off at your beck and call to fight your battles for you! Sheesh!


and you refuse to even view his site. How could you know if I did or do not view his site? Truth is, I did. What was I supposed to see? All I saw were lots of photos of normal clouds and contrails, many of them mis-captioned and mis-identified. For example, Since when is an A380 even vageuly similar to a 747?


Too bad.Yes, it reall is bad. "TOO" bad as you put it. I agree that Scott's site is REALLY bad. I mean, I only needed to get as far as the thrd paragraph to determine that he is a conspiracy kook with no understanding of physics. Please note : "Visit the site of Tom Bearden. His work is pioneering in this field. His latest paper is absolutely essential in understanding how this scalar technology works,..." I have already shown you that Tom Bearden is a scam artist and hoaxster, that his famous "paper" is absolute pig swill, full of glaring errors, and that his basic claims are a logical imposibility. The most basic proof of this is simple: In effect he claims that scalar waves can be oriented, directed and modulated. That is exactly saying that you can orient a perfectly symetrical sphere so that it points in a certain direction. How can you orient a sphere, Boomer? No matter which way you turn it, it is NEVER pointing ain any specific direction. By definition it CANNOT "point" in any direction at all, becuase the sphere itslef is the same in ALL directions. So too scalar waves. If you distort the sphere so that it CAN be oriented, then you no longer have a scalar wave: you know have vector wave, which behvaes in the exact same mammer as all other vector waves. So, saying that you can orient, focus, direct and modulate a scalar wave is an ABSOLUTE LOGICAL CONTRADICTION IN TERMS. It is impossible. Anyone who believes in such trash is clearly NOT a scientist, and his opinion on anything involving is worthless.

Sorry, Boomer, but if you want to point to web sites that support your hoax, you will need to do a better job of coming up with stuff that is even half believable, and stuff that is at least VAGUELY based on science.


This is not "debunking" it's donkey with his foot in the mudhole. he he he... nice try! But I think the Boomer donkey actually has just put her hoof in her mouth. (so to speak).


Either view his site and prove HIS observations wrong, or be silent. I just did prove him wrong. He believes in Tom Bearden. Tom Bearden's work is loony kook stuff, with no basis in sciecne, long since thoroughly debunked, You didn't do your research very well if you did not find the numerous pages by REAL scientists who have taken the time to debunk Tom Bearden.


My knowledge is not at stake here, Yes it is, now that you have been taught something of the basis of EM theory. Since you now have new knowledge that you did not have before, you can no longer accept Tom Bearden and hence Scott as valid scientific resources. Are you honest enough to admit that, now? Or do we need to get into Maxwell's equations again?


[quote]Best wishes and let's read some great and real debunking! On your mark.... get set .... GO! :D /QUOTE]SWOOSH! .... puff puff puff puff ..... DING! First place goes to honest scientific debunking. The booby prize goes to those who ran the wrong race in the wrong direction, and still managed to get lost.

:)

[The Shadow]

You will notice Mr. Reynolds’ latest bid to call attention to himself by posting in a bold format. In this case, I shall reduce his visual exhibition to reflect the true importance of his words.



http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=232705

From Jay Reynolds, reality2u30@hotmail.com
To: Scott Stevens, weatherwars@cableone.net, wxwarsinfo@yahoo.com
. Dear Scott,
At your website, you wrote:
"Some scientists, and sadly that seems a generous use of the term considering their curious absence from this debate, have de ridded the possibility of chemtrails and simply refuse to examine the skies above them and therefore have--so far--excluded themselves from this debate."

This sounds like a debate challenge, Scott, which I am happy to tell you is accepted.
Actually, from what I've seen, YOU are the one absent from debate, and I definitely don't want you to feel "excluded".

Well, here's your chance. Let's give it a go. We can just run wild or you can think up any rules you like for such a debate. It can be on this chemtrail debate thread, or we can start another one. I'm game, and there are commercial and military pilots, engineers, scientists, even other meteorologists available who would be happy to oblige.
http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=397&page=576&pp=10
http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=232705&postcount=5760

You certainly have nothing to lose by participating in debate, unless you really don't mean what you said on that webpage. Let's roll.


Jay Reynolds
In comparison to his correspondence with people to whom he wishes to suck up, his challenge to Scott Stevens is quite adversarial in tone, if not outright rude and disingenuous. This is all too typical of his ill temperament, lack of character, and overall dishonesty. It is also quite comical his call to arms and suggestion that “my sources are better than your sources.” This is a major problem with people whose formal educations and technical backgrounds have gone to their respective heads. For some odd reason, they find themselves under the impression that they are in sole possession of only facts and do not profess opinions, as does everyone else.

Mr. Reynolds continues to ignore the reality that groups of credentialed scientists routinely place their stamps of approval on pharmaceuticals that predictably kill people. With sickening regularity, “expert witnesses” lie in court. Terri Schiavo would not now be classified as existing in a “persistent vegetative state” and under a court-sanctioned death sentence if this were not the case. The motivations of these types of “authority figures” are crystal clear, as are the driving forces behind those who ally themselves with Mr. Reynolds.

As far as we know, Mr. Reynolds is not on anybody’s payroll. Mr. Stevens, on the other hand, does have a legitimate profession that occupies his time. So do not be too surprised if he does not immediately seize the opportunity to “debate” with the Reynolds horde.

As far as Mr. Reynolds’ subtle attempt at libel goes, Mr. Stevens states at his web site:
http://www.weatherwars.info/pilotsview.htm

“I have recently learned that an unknown quantity of these images may have originally been posted at airliners.net with the owners permission and some possibly without. Airliners.net has a very nice collection of aircraft images if that might be something that interests you.”

Unlike Mr. Reynolds, I have received a reply from Mr. Haik concerning one of the contested photos. I will be sharing that information with Mr. Stevens and hopefully we can arrive at some conclusions.

I honestly hope that Scott Stevens agrees to do the impossible and attempt to educate the “scholars” on this board, such as Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Allslop, Yaak, and a host of others.




_________________________________________________

[gaiacomm]

It's about time you started showing some credentials Gaiacomm.

Yes, I am working on a project that will help!

[stuart_allsop]

It's about time you started showing some credentials Gaiacomm.That's probably the first smart thing Halva has said in a LONG time!

[gaiacomm]

That's probably the first smart thing Halva has said in a LONG time!

Just like your 229 posts of nonsense: http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/search.php?searchid=41708

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Castro is Jewish by mother's liniage and so is Castro's intelligence expert Israel Baja.

The fear promoting Reynolds thug, who wants to behead all that don't follow his criminal insanity, poor research on Castro and Chemtrails pull him deeper and deeper into the abyss.

Thugs are crooks and their crooked methods are deceit.

IMHO,
is

http://www.angelfire.com/fl/cubabrains/castro.html

Business went well and Angel met his second wife a Jewess. Castro's mother Lina Rus moved to his farm Mana-acas and became his friend. Mr. Rus, Lina’s father, was a second-generation immigrant, from Kirklisse Turkey. This was a suburb of Edirne. Lina Rus had that peculiar hate, Jews had against Spaniards who expelled their families from Spain in 1492. Lina begot Fidel, Raul, Emma, Juana, Angela and Ramon. Catholic Schools, for admission, required children to baptize, and parents to marry in a Catholic Church. Angel and Miss Rus must have married in a Catholic Church in 1918. Angel Castro was an important figure in Provincial politics in Las Villas and Oriente provinces. In Villas, he owned a brick factory. He was a liberal republican. In his house, Fidel learned to drive luxury automobiles at a young age. The United Fruit Company controlled politics in Mayari and Banes. Fidel’s godfather was Fidel Pino-Santos a liberal politician who strongly opposed laws against illegal immigrants. They have blurred Castro’s biographical data with low-brow-snubbing because the desire to have a popular appeal with the masses.


The greatest trauma in Fidel's life was the rough treatment Angel Castro gave Lina his beloved mother. He emotionally attached himself to his mother, a "Jewish Princess." For the rest of his life he despised anything resembling to be Spaniard or Catholic. They sent Fidel to Havana University to learn about politics and terrorism in the capital. Wealthy children in Havana University, when their parents paid professors, got their grades even if they did not attend classes. It was the same as Harvard, when Theodore Roosevelt attended. Angel Castro bought his son the grades, an automobile and rented him an apartment in luxurious Vedado neighborhood where his sisters lived. He got a monthly allowance equal to the salary of an engineer in Florida $5,400 a year

[Insurrectionchemistry]

What should Halva learn---things like below. Plus, that discussing the real history of the Jews is not called anti-Semetic----except in the minds of Jews that want to hide from reality.

IMHO,
is


http://rense.com/general62/MAINS.HTM

Are We Doomed? Insanity
Now Mainstream
There Is No Tomorrow
By Bill Moyers
The Star Tribune
2-1-5

One of the biggest changes in politics in my lifetime is that the delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the fringe, to sit in the seat of power in the Oval Office and in Congress. For the first time in our history, ideology and theology hold a monopoly of power in Washington.

Theology asserts propositions that cannot be proven true; ideologues hold stoutly to a worldview despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality. When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind. And there is the danger: voters and politicians alike, oblivious to the facts.

Remember James Watt, President Ronald Reagan's first Secretary of the Interior? My favorite online environmental journal, the ever-engaging Grist, reminded us recently of how James Watt told the U.S. Congress that protecting natural resources was unimportant in light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ. In public testimony, he said, "after the last tree is felled, Christ will come back."

Beltway elites snickered. The press corps didn't know what he was talking about. But James Watt was serious. So were his compatriots out across the country. They are the people who believe the Bible is literally true - one-third of the American electorate, if a recent Gallup poll is accurate. In this past election several million good and decent citizens went to the polls believing in the rapture index.

That's right - the rapture index. Google it and you will find that the best-selling books in America today are the 12 volumes of the "Left Behind" series written by the Christian fundamentalist and religious-right warrior Timothy LaHaye. These true believers subscribe to a fantastical theology concocted in the 19th century by a couple of immigrant preachers who took disparate passages from the Bible and wove them into a narrative that has captivated the imagination of millions of Americans.

Its outline is rather simple, if bizarre (the British writer George Monbiot recently did a brilliant dissection of it and I am indebted to him for adding to my own understanding): Once Israel has occupied the rest of its "biblical lands," legions of the antichrist will attack it, triggering a final showdown in the valley of Armageddon.

As the Jews who have not been converted are burned, the messiah will return for the rapture. True believers will be lifted out of their clothes and transported to Heaven, where, seated next to the right hand of God, they will watch their political and religious opponents suffer plagues of boils, sores, locusts and frogs during the several years of tribulation that follow.

I'm not making this up. Like Monbiot, I've read the literature. I've reported on these people, following some of them from Texas to the West Bank. They are sincere, serious and polite as they tell you they feel called to help bring the rapture on as fulfillment of biblical prophecy. That's why they have declared solidarity with Israel and the Jewish settlements and backed up their support with money and volunteers. It's why the invasion of Iraq for them was a warm-up act, predicted in the Book of Revelations where four angels "which are bound in the great river Euphrates will be released to slay the third part of man." A war with Islam in the Middle East is not something to be feared but welcomed - an essential conflagration on the road to redemption. The last time I Googled it, the rapture index stood at 144 - just one point below the critical threshold when the whole thing will blow, the son of God will return, the righteous will enter Heaven and sinners will be condemned to eternal hellfire.

So what does this mean for public policy and the environment? Go to Grist to read a remarkable work of reporting by the journalist Glenn Scherer - "The Road to Environmental Apocalypse." Read it and you will see how millions of Christian fundamentalists may believe that environmental destruction is not only to be disregarded but actually welcomed - even hastened - as a sign of the coming apocalypse.

As Grist makes clear, we're not talking about a handful of fringe lawmakers who hold or are beholden to these beliefs. Nearly half the U.S. Congress before the recent election - 231 legislators in total and more since the election - are backed by the religious right.

Forty-five senators and 186 members of the 108th Congress earned 80 to 100 percent approval ratings from the three most influential Christian right advocacy groups. They include Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Assistant Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Conference Chair Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Policy Chair Jon Kyl of Arizona, House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Majority Whip Roy Blunt. The only Democrat to score 100 percent with the Christian coalition was Sen. Zell Miller of Georgia, who recently quoted from the biblical book of Amos on the Senate floor: "The days will come, sayeth the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land." He seemed to be relishing the thought.

Con't--

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Con't

And why not? There's a constituency for it. A 2002 Time-CNN poll found that 59 percent of Americans believe that the prophecies found in the book of Revelations are going to come true. Nearly one-quarter think the Bible predicted the 9/11 attacks. Drive across the country with your radio tuned to the more than 1,600 Christian radio stations, or in the motel turn on some of the 250 Christian TV stations, and you can hear some of this end-time gospel. And you will come to understand why people under the spell of such potent prophecies cannot be expected, as Grist puts it, "to worry about the environment. Why care about the earth, when the droughts, floods, famine and pestilence brought by ecological collapse are signs of the apocalypse foretold in the Bible? Why care about global climate change when you and yours will be rescued in the rapture? And why care about converting from oil to solar when the same God who performed the miracle of the loaves and fishes can whip up a few billion barrels of light crude with a word?"

Because these people believe that until Christ does return, the Lord will provide. One of their texts is a high school history book, "America's Providential History." You'll find there these words: "The secular or socialist has a limited-resource mentality and views the world as a pie ... that needs to be cut up so everyone can get a piece." However, "[t]he Christian knows that the potential in God is unlimited and that there is no shortage of resources in God's earth ... while many secularists view the world as overpopulated, Christians know that God has made the earth sufficiently large with plenty of resources to accommodate all of the people."

No wonder Karl Rove goes around the White House whistling that militant hymn, "Onward Christian Soldiers." He turned out millions of the foot soldiers on Nov. 2, including many who have made the apocalypse a powerful driving force in modern American politics.

It is hard for the journalist to report a story like this with any credibility. So let me put it on a personal level. I myself don't know how to be in this world without expecting a confident future and getting up every morning to do what I can to bring it about. So I have always been an optimist. Now, however, I think of my friend on Wall Street whom I once asked: "What do you think of the market? "I'm optimistic," he answered. "Then why do you look so worried?" And he answered: "Because I am not sure my optimism is justified."

I'm not, either. Once upon a time I agreed with Eric Chivian and the Center for Health and the Global Environment that people will protect the natural environment when they realize its importance to their health and to the health and lives of their children. Now I am not so sure. It's not that I don't want to believe that - it's just that I read the news and connect the dots.

I read that the administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has declared the election a mandate for President Bush on the environment. This for an administration:

a.. That wants to rewrite the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act protecting rare plant and animal species and their habitats, as well as the National Environmental Policy Act, which requires the government to judge beforehand whether actions might damage natural resources. b.. That wants to relax pollution limits for ozone; eliminate vehicle tailpipe inspections, and ease pollution standards for cars, sport-utility vehicles and diesel-powered big trucks and heavy equipment. c.. That wants a new international audit law to allow corporations to keep certain information about environmental problems secret from the public. d.. That wants to drop all its new-source review suits against polluting, coal-fired power plants and weaken consent decrees reached earlier with coal companies. e.. That wants to open the Arctic [National] Wildlife Refuge to drilling and increase drilling in Padre Island National Seashore, the longest stretch of undeveloped barrier island in the world and the last great coastal wild land in America.

I read the news just this week and learned how the Environmental Protection Agency had planned to spend $9 million - $2 million of it from the administration's friends at the American Chemistry Council - to pay poor families to continue to use pesticides in their homes. These pesticides have been linked to neurological damage in children, but instead of ordering an end to their use, the government and the industry were going to offer the families $970 each, as well as a camcorder and children's clothing, to serve as guinea pigs for the study.

I read all this in the news.

I read the news just last night and learned that the administration's friends at the International Policy Network, which is supported by Exxon Mobil and others of like mind, have issued a new report that climate change is "a myth, sea levels are not rising" [and] scientists who believe catastrophe is possible are "an embarrassment."

I not only read the news but the fine print of the recent appropriations bill passed by Congress, with the obscure (and obscene) riders attached to it: a clause removing all endangered species protections from pesticides; language prohibiting judicial review for a forest in Oregon; a waiver of environmental review for grazing permits on public lands; a rider pressed by developers to weaken protection for crucial habitats in California.

I read all this and look up at the pictures on my desk, next to the computer - pictures of my grandchildren. I see the future looking back at me from those photographs and I say, "Father, forgive us, for we know not what we do." And then I am stopped short by the thought: "That's not right. We do know what we are doing. We are stealing their future. Betraying their trust. Despoiling their world."

And I ask myself: Why? Is it because we don't care? Because we are greedy? Because we have lost our capacity for outrage, our ability to sustain indignation at injustice?

What has happened to our moral imagination?

On the heath Lear asks Gloucester: "How do you see the world?" And Gloucester, who is blind, answers: "I see it feelingly.'"

I see it feelingly.

The news is not good these days. I can tell you, though, that as a journalist I know the news is never the end of the story. The news can be the truth that sets us free - not only to feel but to fight for the future we want. And the will to fight is the antidote to despair, the cure for cynicism, and the answer to those faces looking back at me from those photographs on my desk. What we need is what the ancient Israelites called hochma - the science of the heart ... the capacity to see, to feel and then to act as if the future depended on you.

Believe me, it does.

-------

Bill Moyers was host until recently of the weekly public affairs series "NOW with Bill Moyers" on PBS. This article is adapted from AlterNet, where it first appeared. The text is taken from Moyers' remarks upon receiving the Global Environmental Citizen Award from the Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School.

[halva]

Yep, maybe. One thing is certain, not a single chemmie on the three boards you posted your "fatwa" on Jay Reynolds and Michael Crichton has any intention of following you. You are not, nor have you ever been, leadership material. One after another you have alienated all who have come to know you, Wayne. You have essentially buried yourself.
http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=Discussion&action=display&num=1106893502

Raynolds wants to believe that all his opponents live on, and lead from, boards.

[halva]

What should Halva learn---things like below. Plus, that discussing the real history of the Jews is not called anti-Semetic----except in the minds of Jews that want to hide from reality.



I'm not making this up. Like Monbiot, I've read the literature. I've reported on these people, following some of them from Texas to the West Bank. They are sincere, serious and polite as they tell you they feel called to help bring the rapture on as fulfillment of biblical prophecy. That's why they have declared solidarity with Israel and the Jewish settlements and backed up their support with money and volunteers. It's why the invasion of Iraq for them was a warm-up act, predicted in the Book of Revelations where four angels "which are bound in the great river Euphrates will be released to slay the third part of man." A war with Islam in the Middle East is not something to be feared but welcomed - an essential conflagration on the road to redemption. The last time I Googled it, the rapture index stood at 144 - just one point below the critical threshold when the whole thing will blow, the son of God will return, the righteous will enter Heaven and sinners will be condemned to eternal hellfire.


Jim, if you want me to graduate out of the cafe why do you insist that I should believe what every half-baked coffee drinker in Athens or Paris believes about the USA, i.e. that it is run by religious fanatics and Zionists.

Really and truly I beg for exemption from your Judaism IB class. Give me straight physical sciences to get my teeth into. Starting with atmospheric chemistry.

[halva]

[Well, here's your chance. Let's give it a go. We can just run wild or you can think up any rules you like for such a debate. It can be on this chemtrail debate thread, or we can start another one. I'm game, and there are commercial and military pilots, engineers, scientists, even other meteorologists available who would be happy to oblige.
http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=397&page=576&pp=10
http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=232705&postcount=5760

You certainly have nothing to lose by participating in debate, unless you really don't mean what you said on that webpage. Let's roll.


I have a feeling that no-one is going to come to the party Raynolds is inviting them to.

He thinks that other people are like me and will talk to him.

Forgetting that this is my house and I only talk to him because he came here and I can't get him out.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Halva,

Like it or not, US national labs were born of the big Jewish bomb push and the GOP support these days and the Jewish controlled money supply in the US. The US national security system thinks a lot like the article by Bill Moyers.

So Halva, What part of we are not going to half the baby did you fail to comprehind? Chemtrails science and physics comes with the full Jewish traditions of national labs and US money power. They are inseperable.

Halva you can continue to go to the Cafe and sit on your head and screw up the gravity feed system and fill your head with crap and let the highest ideas exit your hind-end held high in the air like some ostrich.

OR you can wise up and sit upright, and let the good ideas rise and stick in the brain and the crap go down and get expelled.


Halva looks are the more like a place holder with the intentions to styme the exposing of the chemtrails issues than any serious activist.

How many times have you said you don't understand the sciences or physics, now suddenly the toothless one wants something to chew on. You are either going to have to spend more time in the library and away from the Cafe sitting on your head.

What I have seen from you so far leaves me in debate of what level of intellecutal challenge definition that needs to define your dunce cap corner.

I really don't think you are capable of addressing the chemtrials and global warming issues effectively using physics or science, mainly because all you can do is copy and paste.

Your forte seems to be keeping an ongoing thread with some of the US's cover up gang going into perpetuity.

Else, if there was some level of intelligence down at the Cafe something should have clicked when someone mentions the effect of cloud persistence is chemically set up by seeding with hygroscopic compounds that offset the sublimation effects. A key point totally alluded your butt sticking up high at the Cafe.

When your not being illogical there your playing some non-sense on well I read everyone's listings at the Cafe, but I don't read them at the office.

You do know what that makes you look like? Remember that Dumb-Ass word. Wear it with pride, with perhaps the sign of the beast too.

IMHO,
is

[jayreynolds]

The site you are quoting from is exactly what the Internet is infamous for, Jimmy. Anybody can post anything on the Internet. Kooks parroting kooks parroting kooks. What a laugh!:rolleyes:

The guy had no idea that Castor's mother wa a housemaid.
The guy says:
http://www.angelfire.com/fl/cubabrains/castro.html
"He[Casto's father] named his farm “Mana-Acas” or Manna here."
Bullshit. The spanish word for 'here' is aqui.
The word Manacas is an old place name for a region near Villa Clara, on the southern coast.
Manacas is also the name of a Cuban cerveza:
http://www.stefanos.fr/as/lendroit/logo_manacas.html

[halva]

Jim, if you direct your fire at me again rather than at Raynolds I am going to ignore-list you.

[gaiacomm]

There is a report that is coming out from a government and private agency that will disclose the Chemtrail versus Contrail problem. From what I gather it will support all sides!

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Halva writes:

"Jim, if you direct your fire at me again rather than at Raynolds I am going to ignore-list you."

========

The same rule applies to you Halva. I told ya up front to cut the shit out.

I can likely do 2000 % better if you ignore list me, and I even highly recommended it in the very beginning. You are worse than a ball and chain.

So, just do it and shut up.

IMHO,
is

[halva]

This is your last chance.

I told you this thread is no good at all as an educational environment, but I was and am prepared to give it a go if you educate and do not try to humiliate.

It is my job to attack Raynolds and yours to tell me what I don't know and should know in order to attack him more effectively.

The less actual content he is given the better, because as you can see he just gets overexcited if someone like Boomer Chick comes here feeding him with scientific data and goes around issuing challenges, as if it is a privilege to come here and argue with him.

The ideal would be just to have straight abuse all the time, or even Chinese and Hebrew as we had here previously.

[halva]

One thing that I am asked in the real world is whether the spraying we see over our heads in Athens is sulphates or barium and/or aluminium. I assume that what we see here is mainly climate mitigation and not HAARP or whatever.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Halva writes:

"This is your last chance.

I told you this thread is no good at all as an educational environment, but I was and am prepared to give it a go if you educate and do not try to humiliate.

It is my job to attack Raynolds and yours to tell me what I don't know and should know in order to attack him more effectively."

========

Halva,

Like I told ya--cut the crap. You started up with your nonsense again about halfing the issues to suit your religion ineptitudes.

You don't dictate how I educate on the US involvement with chemtrails --- nor try to have me remove the Jewish linked issues.

You need to decide how many people you want on your butt and who your perceived enemies are.

I told you very plainly to cut the snipping. If you want to take it to the wall-----do it.

It won't hurt my little feelings one tiny bit, if you play this silly non-sense game on ignore listing. Even I consider that bull crap.

You decide----the line in the sand is being made real obvious.

IMHO,
is

[jayreynolds]

Jim, if you direct your fire at me again rather than at Raynolds I am going to ignore-list you.
Well hot damn Wayne is havinga little prissy-hissy fit here now!

Be a man and quit acting like a spoiled little brat.
Get off your face and out of the cafe, You claim to have two PhD friends, one is achemist, and one a meteorologist. You should have been educated long before this Wayne.

And Wayne, stop with the damn ignore-list bullshit.
You've never given the slightest indication you've ever ignored anything or anyone, though you've tried to bully everyone else into doing so.

I think Jim has finally seen through to what you are really trying to do, Wayne.
He sees that everywhere he'd like to go, Wayne has been there already, sapping and mining,
distorting and misleading. He pretty much spoiled Chemtrailcentral for you, Jim.
And he's been hard at work making you look bad at Megasprayer too. I can just imagine the underground campaign he has going via e-mail to discredit anything of a religious nature.

Wayne moves behind your back, Jim. Watch yourself.

[jayreynolds]

Jimbo, what Wayne is really worried about is whether or not
HE can pretend to be a leader, and how he can get everybody else under his thumb.
He doesn't give a damn about you, he must actually consider you a fool to expect you would believe he is ignore-listing anything.
Wayne has been, and always will be, just another dictator that couldn't make the grade......

He has pretty much written off this forum a long time ago, but is hung up on his incredibly swollen ego. His actual ego is microscopic, but to him it's positively elephantine!
It's time for Wayne Hall to move on.

[halva]

Raynolds is really against anti-Semites too, Jim. Do you know that?

He writes in big red letters twice the above size when he is putting anti-Semites in their place.

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Halva writes:

"One thing that I am asked in the real world is whether the spraying we see over our heads in Athens is sulphates or barium and/or aluminium. I assume that what we see here is mainly climate mitigation and not HAARP or whatever."

======

Halva,

I am just about ready to rank you as a blithering idiot. You go around in circles--mindlessness.

How many times does one have to tell there are Gen 1 chemtrail methods and Gen 2 chemtrails methods. Both aim at global shading, but use different methods with jet planes.

Cliff Carnicom exposed the Gen 1 methods, and is caught in the middle as the game was shifted to Gen 2 methods. Reynolds exploits this change.

Gen 2 chemtrail methods, having been explained in great detail already, leave one wanting for asking what kind of moron are you for asking this question above.

IMHO,
is

[Insurrectionchemistry]

Halva writes:

"Raynolds is really against anti-Semites too, Jim. Do you know that?

He writes in big red letters twice the above size when he is putting anti-Semites in their place."

=====

Halva,

You and Reynolds are teamed up about like Jerry Lewis and Dean Martin act. Neither of you can get off the stage.

The Jews have serious problems with the validity of their religion claims, which is largely behind this looming armegeddon isssue. One cannot defend the Jews position based upon the validity of their religion claims. Nor can one defend the mess the Jews have set up in the NWO effects by getting the help of their rich relatives to pressure the US into doing their biddings.

You need to learn the history of the Jews and enlighten yourself to what is truth and what is fabrication. All the Chosen People stuff is fabrication, man attempting to play god.

Anyone that knows the driver factors for the End-Times and Armageddon knows that the only way to keep down a major conflagation is just to lay the truth cards on the table. Getting to the lies is half the problem, then getting to the money to support those lies is a key point.

Your playing into Reynolds anti-Semetic crap----shows you are team playing with the very groups that support the cover ups of chemtrails and denial of responsibity by GOP dominated industry.

Halva, what difference does anything Reynolds claim matter. Reynolds is always going to play the GOP cards, everytime. Reynolds will always deny chemtrails. Reynolds will always support the GOP/ Bush position. Reynolds will always support the mil / ind network in the US pusing for NWO power. Reynolds will want to decapitate anyone that does not follow that line. Reynolds will always support the Jewish dominated money system and Fed Res in the US.

Now, we have you following that line to a larger and larger extent. I really doubt that you can even understand the Moyers article or its relevance, just as you can't even put together the Gen 1 and Gen 2 chemtral methods.

You are a ball and chain to the interests of exposing these issues.

IMHO,
is

[halva]

You are a ball and chain to the interests of exposing these issues.
IMHO,
is

What I could do is just lurk for a while.

But I suspect that discussion here will soon become unfocused.

Or everyone will continue talking about me.

Prove me wrong.

[jayreynolds]

From what I see, the "Ball and Chain" analogy is particularly apt to get the most applause.

Let's examine the score so far?

Wayne made his debut into the "chemtrails" hoax at chemtrailcnetral.com. he was eventually elected onto the "Council of (Nine)Swine, and lobbied hard for a full clamp-down on freedom of expression. He got his way, mostly, but in the end, his insistence on HAVING HIS OWN WAY NO WAY AT ALL proved SO DIVISIVE that the 'Council" broke up and the message board owner abdicated to the Mech/swampgas faction which currently controls the board with an iron fist.
Wayne sometimes posts there, but seldom gets any substantial response. His reputation at CTC is very poor, and few even respond to his posts.

Next, Wayne tried to insinuate himself at the Megasprayer board. He does make psotings there, but get's regularly debunked by regular posters who NEVER debunk any of their own peers, except fro Wayne, of course.

I probably shouldn't mention it, but Wayne used to be known as a 'Direct Democracy' activist of sorts. Well, his foray into "chemtrails" proved disastrous there as well. He became unwelcome on the main direct democracy forum for his spamming the board with "chemtrails" stuff, and his own personal "democracy" forum became a sham, with Wayne summarily banning all other posters without a vote, until he was left practicing his own peculiar style of democarcy all by himself. He eventually was forced to withold any public scrutiny of his "democracy" by closing the forum to 'members only'.

The same sort of democracy is practiced in a place called North Korea.

So, yes, Jim Phelp's determination is quite correct, that Wayne's usefulness ends pretty much where he starts his day, at the cafe. He uses his brain to sit on, and what Wayne posts as something valid on all the boards he visits is what most people flush down the toilet.

Taken as a whole, I can't think of any trait or indeed any accomplishment Wayne Hall has made which has advanced the "chemtrails" cause at all. In fact, my close association with him these years has been precisely because I recognized early on the potential he had as a "spoiler".

Wayne has been useful to the debunker cause precisely because he is a divider, not a uniter. He is exteremly easy to manipulate using juvenile psychology to which he remains vulnearble. His value lies most especially because he is essentially a collectivist. The common trait which colectivists share, and which makes them useful idiots, is that they are very insecure on a personal level, and seldom, if ever, make independent moves. Their psyche is keyed to interaction and mass movement, and thus their movements eventually make noise, become public, and may be easier tracked.

Subsequent intervention is practically always effective in thwarting any gambit they may be attempting, because of the advance warning which ALWAYS gives away their position. I'm not even afraid to speak publicly here about Wayne's achilles heel, which I have exploited many times, because he will not correct the vulnerability, he is hard-wired into that role and unable to change it however hard he may try. Besides, the further he might try to turn inwards and maintain cover, the less effective he can be, unti he walls himself in and totally neutralizes any effectiveness he may falsely believe he has.

Many have asked me why I have stayed here at Arianna's for almost 600 pages and one year.

Here it is in a nutshell-
Wayne is a debunker's best buddy, and a conspiracy theory's worst nightmare.

So, there you have it, that is that!.

[Boomer Chick]

The Obstacle in Our Path.
In ancient times, a King had a boulder placed on a roadway.
Then he hid himself and watched to see if anyone would remove the
huge rock. Some of the king´s wealthiest merchants and courtiers
came by and simply walked around it. Many loudly blamed the King
for not keeping the roads clear, but none did anything about
getting the stone out of the way. Then a peasant came along
carrying a load of vegetables. Upon approaching the boulder, the peasant laid down his burden and tried to move the stone to the side of the road. After much pushing and straining, he finally succeeded. After the peasant picked up his load of vegetables, he noticed a purse lying in the road where the boulder had been. The purse contained many
gold coins and a note from the King indicating that the gold was
for the person who removed the boulder from the roadway. The
peasant learned what many of us never understand! Every obstacle
presents an opportunity to improve our condition. ;)




There is a report that is coming out from a government and private agency that will disclose the Chemtrail versus Contrail problem. From what I gather it will support all sides!

Good news. Hope you post it with links and all! ;)

Yaak -- Thanks for the Power Hour link. He'll be on tonight, from what I could gleen. ;)

I heard most of his interview on Coast to Coast Sat. night.

http://www.coasttocoastam.com

As most of us know, the Tesla - Eastlund technology is well documented. It's useless for me to reexplain and try to understand the physics itself... I'm not a math/science person in my training, just the arts... BUT I have a logical mind and an open and inquiring one.

To educate others on the relative facts of science does not necessitate one's teaching the subject in a college classroom. Messengers and reporters are rarely skilled to the degree of scientists. If they were, they'd be off in some lab or busy in research.

For proof that Eastlund still works on weather modification projects and contributes, I offer you his site. His patents are listed on carnicom.com, the HAARP science and related ELF science is also located there. And his patents are listed on his site as well.

May 2004 http://www.eastlundscience.com/currentd.html

WEATHER MODIFICATION WITH HIGH POWER ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIOTION
ESEC has recently completed a contract with the European Space Agency to review the weather modification potential of the HAARP facility in Alaska and to perform numerical simulations of tornado suppression with high power electromagnetic radiation produced with Solar Power Satellites. Two papers, available below, have been published. They are:

SYSTEMS CONSIDERATIONS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION EXPERIMENTS USING HIGH POWER ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION, published in Proceedings of "Workshop on Space Exploration and Resources Exploitation-EXPLOSPACE," 20-22 October, 1998, Cagliari, Sardinia, Italy.


MESOCYCLONE DIAGNOSTIC REQUIREMENTS FOR THE THUNDERSTORM SOLAR POWER SATELLITE CONCEPT, Published in the Proceedings of "The Second Conference on the Applications of Remote Sensing and GIS for Disaster Management," January 19-21, 1999.
Some of the highlights contained in these reports are:

HAARP
MISSILE SHIELD ANTENNA (terrawatt phased array antenna)
NORTH SLOPE GAS CONCEPT WEATHER MODIFICATION
OZONE HOLE MITIGATION
HIGH POWER SOLAR SATELLITES FOR WEATHER MODIFICATION
POWER RELAY IONOSPHERIC MIRROS
INTERVENTION IN TORNADOGENESIS
SAFETY

Both papers can be downloaded in .zip format or viewed on-line.

SYSTEMS CONSIDERATIONS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION EXPERIMENTS USING HIGH POWER ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION

Download in .zip files (2248K)
View On-line

MESOCYCLONE DIAGNOSTIC REQUIREMENTS FOR THE THUNDERSTORM SOLAR POWER SATELLITE CONCEPT
Download in .zip files (851K)
View On-line


About Dr. Eastlund:

ABOUT THE FOUNDER
Dr. Bernard J. Eastlund holds a B. S. in physics from MIT and a Ph.D. in physics from Columbia University. He received a Special Achievement Certificate from the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission in 1970 for co-invention of the "Fusion Torch."

In 1974, his invention of an electrodeless microwave ultraviolet lamp received an IR 100 award from Industrial Research magazine. He is a member of the American Physical Society, of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and of the Society of Petroleum Engineers. (See "Prospects of Fusion Power, by William C. Gough and Bernard J. Eastlund, Scientific American, 1971.)

From 1996 to the present, he is the CEO and President of Eastlund Scientific Enterprises Corporation.

From 1994 to 1995 he was president of Production Technologies Company, L. L. C. PTC is an oil field technology company located in Houston, Texas.


He organized Production Technologies International, Inc., and was president and CEO from 1984 to 1989 and again from 1992 to 1994. He conceptualized, designed and developed "cable-free" technology for delivering electrical power downhole in oil and gas wells without the use of cables.

From 1979 to 1984 he was Vice President for Energy Technology with the BDM Corporation in McLean, Virginia. He developed and executed substantial contracts with Exxon, Shell Development, Camco, Atlantic Richfield, Lodge Cottrell and other international oil industry factors. Independently, as a consultant for the Atlantic Richfield Corporation between 1984 and 1987 he developed new civilian and military uses of North Slope natural gas.

Three patents were issued and a new corporation, APTI, was organized by ARCO to pursue various concepts within the patents. APTI has promoted two aspects of the patents that have resulted in DOD sponsored projects. The first is HAARP (HF Active Auroral Research Program) which is a small version of the antenna discussed in the patents. The second is AIM (Artificial Ionospheric Mirror) which is a claim in the patents related to a new method of reflecting radar.


He co-founded, and from 1974 to 1979 was Vice President and Chief Technical Officer of Fusion Systems Corporation, Rockville, Maryland, a successful venture capital supported firm whose core technology and initial products he co-invented. Fusion Systems Corporation was recently purchased by the Eaton Corporation of Cleveland, Ohio. Spinoffs of Fusion Systems Corporation include (1) Fusion UV Systems, Inc. of Gaithersburg, Maryland and Fusion Lighting Inc. of Rockville, Maryland.


From 1966 to 1974 he managed research programs for Controlled Thermonuclear Research for the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission.

His hobby is astrophysics. Recently he has co-authored two papers regarding pulsars in the Astrophysical Journal and has presented a paper on Gamma Bursters.

E-Mail Dr. Eastlund at eastlund@eastlundscience.com

________________________

note: live links and pics on site

patents are also included on the site

***

If one is intelligent and kind, perhaps one could e-mail the man and ask him a pertinent question? I have no need to, as what I read is sufficient to alert me to weather control projects. I have also read the Air Force document on owning and controlling the weather.

[Boomer Chick]

Now, whether the aerosol particulates, from jet fuel or other particulate spraying intersects with the weather modification systems through HAARP or other active wave frequency systems.... we still investigate, but like Scott Stevens expresses, he doesn't know WHO generates the wave formations he just knows they exist and he's connecting the dots. He reveres Bearden in the realm of physics as well respecting him for his knowledge of wave physics in relationship to HAARP. Is Stevens of the same caliber scientist as Bearden, probably not. It doesn't matter who Stevens read or who is his conduit for the knowledge. It could have been Tesla readings, or Eastlund readings, but he was able to make the connection and use his common sense and his meteorological ability to see and question what he sees in order to make minimal conclusions -- that something unnatural and purposeful is happening in the weather. Then deductive reasoning kicks in. HOWEVER, I don't agree with him that ALL weather is controlled and created.

HOW TO STEER A HURRICANE - BEARDEN

Posted By: billym <Send E-Mail>
Date: Friday, 10 September 2004, 10:35 p.m.

In Response To: BREAKING: IVAN BEGINS TO POUND JAMAICA (PROZZAK)

How to Make Weather

"Engineering the weather is duck soup; they tested that over the U.S. in 1967, and entered upon continuing operations over North America on July 4, 1976 as a grim kind of KGB "Bicentennial Gift" to the United States. Here's how it is done with several interferometers.

"First, the interferometers can deliberately make "high pressure areas" (cool the air so it shrinks and its "footprint" pressure on the ground increases because its density increases) and "low pressure areas" (heat the air so that expands and its "footprint" pressure on the ground decreases because its density decreases). Well, if one makes the highs and lows where one wishes them, and judiciously and somewhat slowly moves them along a given path, these highs and lows will entrain the jet streams and thus "steer" the weather.

"So if you wish a very cold snap or attack, go up into Canada and start these actions to steer down some streams that bring some very frigid air. Establish other highs and lows judiciously to "block" or "slow" other jet streams and flows as desired. In this way, one can pull the "large cold air masses coming down from Canada" deep into the southern U.S. at will. They do it regularly. If you wish an ice storm, add an additional current of warm moist air you bring up (steer up by using artificial highs and lows) from the ocean. Where they meet, you will get freezing rain, then sleet, then severe icing accumulating. This type of attack does rather large damage to the struck area."

http://www.earthchangestv.com/ufo/0209gandor.htm

Whole websites have now sprung up showing weather radar anomalies which may well be indications of scalar weather engineering. One list of over 500 images is here Cheniere has its own collection here .

Here is an animated anomaly with cloud formation.

In another section at Cheniere are many photos of cloud anomalies which reveal the underlying grid along which the clouds are forming or un-forming. Bearden relates a startling incident in these ongoing "weather wars."

"During the spring of 1986, abnormally strong Soviet weather engineering occurred over the U. S., causing a drastic drought in the southeastern U.S. This drought was broken by a colleague who used an extremely powerful scalar EM device to redirect jetstreams. A most unusual and unique signature of the "blocking" against the Soviet scalar EM actions resulted: Two huge circulations developed in the atmosphere, clearly showed as two adjacent giant "holes" in the swirling cloud cover over the middle and eastern U.S.

"Between these two giant holes, the cloud circulations formed a stream of clouds, moving to the south, looking very: much like a giant vertical "bar" of a huge "Y-shaped" cloud flow.* Several national weathermen commented on this unusual pattern, which had not been observed before. The pattern continued, day after day, as the blocking continued."

* On the weather maps.

<http://www.cheniere.org/books/analysis/history.htm>

DOE Utah experiment:

http://www.pnl.gov/VTMX/index.html


Cool site with realtime and archived contrail formation information:

http://www-pm.larc.nasa.gov/sass/contrail_forecast/contrail_prediction.html

page provides access to both real time and archived contrail formation forecasts from Rapid Update Cycle (RUC) model data.

The RUC model data are representations of the complete 3-dimensional structure of wind, temperature, and humidity over the USA at a resolution of 25 mb and 40 km. The horizontal resolution has been degraded to 1° latitude x 1° longitude to facilitate the computations. Because they are based on a sparse number of actual in situ (balloon sonde) data taken every 12 hours and satellite measurements, the RUC data are not a perfect representation of the various meteorological parameters, especially water vapor. The model humidity at upper levels of the atmosphere is often too low, reflecting the current biases known to exist in our measurement system. Persistent contrails require a relative humidity with respect to ice (RHI) that exceeds 100%. We know that contrails are sometimes observed in areas where estimates of the RHI are less than 100%. The existence of contrails in those locations highlights the "dry-bias" in the humidity fields.

Because the input data do not perfectly characterize the meteorological conditions, the diagnoses of persistent contrail conditions are only estimates and will not detect all of the areas where persistent contrails will form and may also add areas of formation that do not exist. All estimates of persistent contrail formation conditions are based on a modified Appleman curve using three different engine propulsion efficiencies. To give some idea of where contrails may form, but are not diagnosed, we have included information about RHI for values above 70% for single-level plots.

Two forms of results are presented.

Favorable contrail conditions, for a range of pressure levels between 125 and 400 mb, are represented as concentric circles - color coded with reducing diameter for each level. These results can be displayed for engine efficiencies of 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4.
Favorable contrail conditions at each level, represented by 'X', along with relative humidity w.r.t ice (RHI). These results are only available for engine efficiencies of 0.3.
The contrail forecast software was developed by Dr. David Duda of Hampton University with Patrick Minnis (NASA), with support from the NASA Office of Earth Science Pathfinder Program. The near-real time display was constructed by Rabindra Palikonda (AS&M, Inc.). For more information contact Dr. Duda ( d.p.duda@larc.nasa.gov ) or Dr. Minnis (p.minnis@larc.nasa.gov).

The relative humidity data from the RUC 40km model are suspect since 18 April, 2002. Therefore, all contrail forecasts since April 18, 2002 are suspect.To obtain a better estimate of potential contrail formation, examine the 'Individual level (mb)' results. Select a pressure value between 200 and 250 mb for the best estimate. Relative humidity values above 80% are good indicators of contrails in the new RUC data. You can use any pressure level , but the large values may be too warm for contrail formation.

__________________________________________________ _____________________

The obvious fact related to this mapping of persistent contrails is WHO would use it and WHY. And by its very existence it represents a new paradigm of weather clouds.... non water vapor clouds produced by aircraft. Of course the substances or particulates are not discussed, but their use and their existence must be important for some reason.

Continuing on the trail.....


BC ;)

[gaiacomm]

The Obstacle in Our Path.
In ancient times, a King had a boulder placed on a roadway.
Then he hid himself and watched to see if anyone would remove the
huge rock. Some of the king´s wealthiest merchants and courtiers
came by and simply walked around it. Many loudly blamed the King
for not keeping the roads clear, but none did anything about
getting the stone out of the way. Then a peasant came along
carrying a load of vegetables. Upon approaching the boulder, the peasant laid down his burden and tried to move the stone to the side of the road. After much pushing and straining, he finally succeeded. After the peasant picked up his load of vegetables, he noticed a purse lying in the road where the boulder had been. The purse contained many
gold coins and a note from the King indicating that the gold was
for the person who removed the boulder from the roadway. The
peasant learned what many of us never understand! Every obstacle
presents an opportunity to improve our condition. ;)





Good news. Hope you post it with links and all! ;)

Yaak -- Thanks for the Power Hour link. He'll be on tonight, from what I could gleen. ;)

I heard most of his interview on Coast to Coast Sat. night.

http://www.coasttocoastam.com (http://www.coasttocoastam.com/)

As most of us know, the Tesla - Eastlund technology is well documented. It's useless for me to reexplain and try to understand the physics itself... I'm not a math/science person in my training, just the arts... BUT I have a logical mind and an open and inquiring one.

To educate others on the relative facts of science does not necessitate one's teaching the subject in a college classroom. Messengers and reporters are rarely skilled to the degree of scientists. If they were, they'd be off in some lab or busy in research.

For proof that Eastlund still works on weather modification projects and contributes, I offer you his site. His patents are listed on carnicom.com, the HAARP science and related ELF science is also located there. And his patents are listed on his site as well.

May 2004 http://www.eastlundscience.com/currentd.html

WEATHER MODIFICATION WITH HIGH POWER ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIOTION
ESEC has recently completed a contract with the European Space Agency to review the weather modification potential of the HAARP facility in Alaska and to perform numerical simulations of tornado suppression with high power electromagnetic radiation produced with Solar Power Satellites. Two papers, available below, have been published. They are:

SYSTEMS CONSIDERATIONS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION EXPERIMENTS USING HIGH POWER ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION, published in Proceedings of "Workshop on Space Exploration and Resources Exploitation-EXPLOSPACE," 20-22 October, 1998, Cagliari, Sardinia, Italy.


MESOCYCLONE DIAGNOSTIC REQUIREMENTS FOR THE THUNDERSTORM SOLAR POWER SATELLITE CONCEPT, Published in the Proceedings of "The Second Conference on the Applications of Remote Sensing and GIS for Disaster Management," January 19-21, 1999.
Some of the highlights contained in these reports are:

HAARP
MISSILE SHIELD ANTENNA (terrawatt phased array antenna)
NORTH SLOPE GAS CONCEPT WEATHER MODIFICATION
OZONE HOLE MITIGATION
HIGH POWER SOLAR SATELLITES FOR WEATHER MODIFICATION
POWER RELAY IONOSPHERIC MIRROS
INTERVENTION IN TORNADOGENESIS
SAFETY

Both papers can be downloaded in .zip format or viewed on-line.

SYSTEMS CONSIDERATIONS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION EXPERIMENTS USING HIGH POWER ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION

Download in .zip files (2248K)
View On-line

MESOCYCLONE DIAGNOSTIC REQUIREMENTS FOR THE THUNDERSTORM SOLAR POWER SATELLITE CONCEPT
Download in .zip files (851K)
View On-line


About Dr. Eastlund:

ABOUT THE FOUNDER
Dr. Bernard J. Eastlund holds a B. S. in physics from MIT and a Ph.D. in physics from Columbia University. He received a Special Achievement Certificate from the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission in 1970 for co-invention of the "Fusion Torch."

In 1974, his invention of an electrodeless microwave ultraviolet lamp received an IR 100 award from Industrial Research magazine. He is a member of the American Physical Society, of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and of the Society of Petroleum Engineers. (See "Prospects of Fusion Power, by William C. Gough and Bernard J. Eastlund, Scientific American, 1971.)

From 1996 to the present, he is the CEO and President of Eastlund Scientific Enterprises Corporation.

From 1994 to 1995 he was president of Production Technologies Company, L. L. C. PTC is an oil field technology company located in Houston, Texas.


He organized Production Technologies International, Inc., and was president and CEO from 1984 to 1989 and again from 1992 to 1994. He conceptualized, designed and developed "cable-free" technology for delivering electrical power downhole in oil and gas wells without the use of cables.

From 1979 to 1984 he was Vice President for Energy Technology with the BDM Corporation in McLean, Virginia. He developed and executed substantial contracts with Exxon, Shell Development, Camco, Atlantic Richfield, Lodge Cottrell and other international oil industry factors. Independently, as a consultant for the Atlantic Richfield Corporation between 1984 and 1987 he developed new civilian and military uses of North Slope natural gas.

Three patents were issued and a new corporation, APTI, was organized by ARCO to pursue various concepts within the patents. APTI has promoted two aspects of the patents that have resulted in DOD sponsored projects. The first is HAARP (HF Active Auroral Research Program) which is a small version of the antenna discussed in the patents. The second is AIM (Artificial Ionospheric Mirror) which is a claim in the patents related to a new method of reflecting radar.


He co-founded, and from 1974 to 1979 was Vice President and Chief Technical Officer of Fusion Systems Corporation, Rockville, Maryland, a successful venture capital supported firm whose core technology and initial products he co-invented. Fusion Systems Corporation was recently purchased by the Eaton Corporation of Cleveland, Ohio. Spinoffs of Fusion Systems Corporation include (1) Fusion UV Systems, Inc. of Gaithersburg, Maryland and Fusion Lighting Inc. of Rockville, Maryland.


From 1966 to 1974 he managed research programs for Controlled Thermonuclear Research for the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission.

His hobby is astrophysics. Recently he has co-authored two papers regarding pulsars in the Astrophysical Journal and has presented a paper on Gamma Bursters.

E-Mail Dr. Eastlund at eastlund@eastlundscience.com

________________________

note: live links and pics on site

patents are also included on the site

***

If one is intelligent and kind, perhaps one could e-mail the man and ask him a pertinent question? I have no need to, as what I read is sufficient to alert me to weather control projects. I have also read the Air Force document on owning and controlling the weather.


I will keep you posted... keep up the good work on TESLA!

[Boomer Chick]

Thanks, G ! :)

I thought posting the Bibliography to the public domain paper written by :

Col Tamzy J. House
Lt Col James B. Near, Jr.
LTC William B. Shields (USA)
Maj Ronald J. Celentano
Maj David M. Husband
Maj Ann E. Mercer
Maj James E. Pugh

August 1996

Weather As a Force Multiplier

http://www.au.af.mil/au/2025/volume3/chap15/v3c15-1.htm

Might be interesting and quite revealing!!!

Appleman, Herbert S. An Introduction to Weather-modification. Scott AFB, Ill.: Air Weather Service (MAC), September 1969.

AU-18, Space Handbook, An Analyst's Guide Vol. II. Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air University Press, December 1993.

AWS PLAN 813, Appendix I, Annex Alfa. Scott AFB, Ill.: Air Weather Service (MAC), 14 January 1972.

Banks, Peter M. "Overview of Ionospheric Modification from Space Platforms." In Ionospheric Modification and Its Potential to Enhance or Degrade the Performance of Military Systems, AGARD Conference Proceedings 485, October 1990.

Batton, Louis J. Harvesting the Clouds. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1969.

Brown, William. "Mathematicians Learn How to Tame Chaos." New Scientist, 30 May 1992.

Byers, Horace R. "History of Weather-modification." In Wilmot N. Hess, ed., Weather and Climate Modification. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1974.

Centner, Christopher, et al., "Environmental Warfare: Implications for Policymakers and War Planners." Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air Command and Staff College, May 1995.

Coons, Capt Frank G. "Warm Fog Dispersal-A Different Story." Aerospace Safety 25, no. 10 (October 1969).

CJCSI 3810.01, Meteorological and Oceanographic Operations, 10 January 1995.

Dawson, George. "An Introduction to Atmospheric Energy." In Wilmot N. Hess, ed., Weather and Climate Modification. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1974.

Duncan, Lewis M., and Robert L. Showen "Review of Soviet Ionospheric Modification Research." In Ionospheric Modification and Its Potential to Enhance or Degrade the Performance of Military Systems AGARD Conference Proceedings 485, October 1990.

Dwyer, Maj Roy. Category III or Fog Dispersal, M-U 35582-7 D993a. Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air University Press, May 1972.

Eisenhower, Dwight E. "Crusade in Europe" quoted in John F. Fuller, ed., Thor's Legions. Boston: American Meterology Society, 1990.

Facts on File 55, No. 2866 (2 November 1995).

Frisby, E. M. "Weather-modification in Southeast Asia, 1966-1972." The Journal Of Weather-modification 14, no. 1 (April 1982).

Frisby, E. M. "Weather-modification in Southeast Asia, 1966-1972." Journal of Applied Meteorology 15 (April 1976).

Gray, William M., et al. "Weather-modification by Carbon Dust Absorption of Solar Energy." Journal of Applied Meteorology 15, (April 1976).

Halacy, Daniel S. The Weather Changers. New York: Harper & Row, 1968.

Hall, J. Storrs. "Overview of Nanotechnology" Adapted from papers by Ralph C. Merkle and K. Eric Drexler. Internet address: http://nanotech.rutgers.edu/nanotech/-intro.html (Rutgers University, November 1995).

Horner, Gen Charles. "Space Seen as Challenge, Military's Final Frontier" (Prepared Statement to the Senate Armed Services Committee) Defense Issues, 22 April 1993.

Hume, Capt Edward E., Jr. Atmospheric and Space Environmental Research Programs in Brazil (U), March 1993. Foreign Aerospace Science and Technology Center, AF Intelligence Command, 24 September 1992. (Secret) Information extracted is unclassified.

James, G. E. "Chaos Theory: The Essentials for Military Applications" ACSC Theater Air Campaign Studies Coursebook, AY96, Vol. 8. Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air University Press, 1995.

Jiusto, James E. "Some Principles of Fog Modification with Hygroscopic Nuclei" Progress of NASA Research on Warm Fog Properties and Modification Concepts, NASA SP-212. Washington, D.C.: Scientific and Technical Information Division of the Office of Technology Utilization of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1969.

Johnson, Capt Mike. Upper Atmospheric Research and Modification-Former Soviet Union (U) supporting document DST-18205-475-92, Foreign Aerospace Science and Technology Center, AF Intelligence Command, 24 September 1992. (Secret) Information extracted is unclassified.

Kasemir, Heinz W. "Lightning Suppression by Chaff Seeding and Triggered Lightning." In Wilmot N. Hess, ed., Weather and Climate Modification. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1974.

Keaney, Thomas A., and Eliot A. Cohen, Gulf War Air Power Survey Summary Report. Washington D.C.: GPO, 1993.

Klein, Milton M. A Feasibility Study of the Use of Radiant Energy for Fog Dispersal Abstract. Hanscom AFB, Mass.: Air Force Material Command, October 1978.

Kocmond, Warren C. "Dissipation of Natural Fog in the Atmosphere," Progress of NASA Research on Warm Fog Properties and Modification Concepts, NASA SP-212. Washington, D.C.: Scientific and Technical Information Division of the Office of Technology Utilization of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1969.

Kossey, Paul A., et al. "Artificial Ionospheric Mirrors (AIM) A. Concept and Issues," In Ionospheric Modification and its Potential to Enhance or Degrade the Performance of Military Systems, AGARD Conference Proceedings 485, October 1990.

Maehlum, B. N., and J. Troim, "Vehicle Charging in Low Density Plasmas" In Ionospheric Modification and Its Potential to Enhance or Degrade the Performance of Military Systems AGARD Conference Proceedings 485, October 1990.

McLare, James. Pulp & Paper 68, no. 8, August 1994.

Meyer, William B. "The Life and Times of US Weather: What Can We Do About It?" American Heritage 37, no. 4 (June/July 1986).

Petersen, Rear Adm Sigmund. "NOAA Moves Toward The 21st Century." The Military Engineer 20, no. 571 (June-July 1995).

Riley, Lt Col Gerald F. Staff Weather Officer to CENTCOM OIC of CENTAF Weather Support Force and Commander of 3d Weather Squadron. In "Desert Shield/Desert Storm Interview Series," interviewed by Dr William E. Narwyn, AWS Historian, 29 May 1991.

Seagraves, Mary Ann, and Richard Szymber "Weather a Force Multiplier." Military Review, November/December 1995.

SPACECAST 2020. Space Weather Support for Communications White paper G. Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College/2020, 1994.

Stuart, Gene S. "Whirlwinds and Thunderbolts," In Nature on the Rampage. Washington D.C.: National Geographic Society, 1986.

Sullivan, Gen Gordon R. "Moving into the 21st Century: America's Army and Modernization" Military Review. July 1993. Quoted in Mary Ann Seagraves and Richard Szymber "Weather a Force Multiplier" Military Review, November/December 1995.

Sutherland, Robert A. "Results of Man-Made Fog Experiment," In Proceedings of the 1991 Battlefield Atmospherics Conference. Fort Bliss, Tex.: Hinman Hall, 3-6 December 1991.

Tascione, Thomas F. Introduction to the Space Environment. Colorado Springs: USAF Academy Department of Physics, 1984.Tomlinson, Edward M., Kenneth C. Young, and Duane D. Smith Laser Technology Applications for Dissipation of Warm Fog at Airfields, PL-TR-92-2087. Hanscom AFB, Mass.: Air Force Materiel Command, 1992.

USAF Scientific Advisory Board. New World Vistas: Air and Space Power for the 21st Century, Summary Volume. Washington, D.C.: USAF Scientific Advisory Board, 15 December 1995.

US Department of State. The Department of State Bulletin 76, no. 1981 (13 June 1977.

[Boomer Chick]

I found the NOTES to be revealing as well. ;)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Notes

1. The weather-modification capabilities described in this paper are consistent with the operating environments and missions relevant for aerospace forces in 2025 as defined by AF/LR, a long-range planning office reporting to the CSAF [based on AF/LR PowerPoint briefing "Air and Space Power Framework for Strategy Development (jda-2lr.ppt)]."

2. General Gordon R. Sullivan, "Moving into the 21st Century: America's Army and Modernization," Military Review (July 1993) quoted in Mary Ann Seagraves and Richard Szymber, "Weather a Force Multiplier," Military Review, November/December 1995, 75.

3. Gen Gordon R. Sullivan, "Moving into the 21st Century: America's Army and Modernization," Military Review (July 1993) quoted in Mary Ann Seagraves and Richard Szymber, "Weather a Force Multiplier," Military Review, November/December 1995, 75.

4. Horace R. Byers, "History of Weather-modification," in Wilmot N. Hess, ed. Weather and Climate Modification, (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1974), 4.

5. William B. Meyer, "The Life and Times of US Weather: What Can We Do About It?" American Heritage 37, no. 4 (June/July 1986), 48.

6. Byers, 13.

7. US Department of State, The Department of State Bulletin. 74, no. 1981 (13 June 1977): 10.

8. Dwight D Eisenhower. "Crusade in Europe," quoted in John F. Fuller, Thor's Legions (Boston: American Meterology Society, 1990), 67.

9. Interview of Lt Col Gerald F. Riley, Staff Weather Officer to CENTCOM OIC of CENTAF Weather Support Force and Commander of 3rd Weather Squadron, in "Desert Shield/Desert Storm Interview Series," by Dr William E. Narwyn, AWS Historian, 29 May 1991.

10. Thomas A. Keaney and Eliot A. Cohen. Gulf War Air Power Survey Summary Report (Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1993), 172.

11. Herbert S. Appleman, An Introduction to Weather-modification (Scott AFB, Ill.: Air Weather Service/MAC, September 1969), 1.

12. William Bown, "Mathematicians Learn How to Tame Chaos," New Scientist, 30 May 1992, 16.

13. CJCSI 3810.01, Meteorological and Oceanographic Operations, 10 January 95. This CJCS Instruction establishes policy and assigns responsibilities for conducting meteorological and oceanographic operations. It also defines the terms widespread, long-lasting, and severe, in order to identify those activities that US forces are prohibited from conducting under the terms of the UN Environmental Modification Convention. Widespread is defined as encompassing an area on the scale of several hundred km; long-lasting means lasting for a period of months, or approximately a season; and severe involves serious or significant disruption or harm to human life, natural and economic resources, or other assets.

14. Concern about the unintended consequences of attempting to "control" the weather is well justified. Weather is a classic example of a chaotic system (i.e., a system that never exactly repeats itself). A chaotic system is also extremely sensitive: minuscule differences in conditions greatly affect outcomes. According to Dr. Glenn James, a widely published chaos expert, technical advances may provide a means to predict when weather transitions will occur and the magnitude of the inputs required to cause those transitions; however, it will never be possible to precisely predict changes that occur as a result of our inputs. The chaotic nature of weather also limits our ability to make accurate long-range forecasts. The renowned physicist Edward Teller recently presented calculations he performed to determine the long-range weather forecasting improvement that would result from a satellite constellation providing continuous atmospheric measurements over a 1 km2 grid worldwide. Such a system, which is currently cost-prohibitive, would only improve long-range forecasts from the current five days to approximately 14 days. Clearly, there are definite physical limits to mankind's ability to control nature, but the extent of those physical limits remains an open question. Sources: G. E. James, "Chaos Theory: The Essentials for Military Applications," in ACSC Theater Air Campaign Studies Coursebook, AY96, 8 (Maxwell AFB, Ala: Air University Press, 1995), 1-64. The Teller calculations are cited in Reference 49 of this source.

15. SPACECAST 2020, Space Weather Support for Communications, white paper G (Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College/2020, 1994).

16. Rear Adm Sigmund Petersen, "NOAA Moves Toward The 21st Century," The Military Engineer 20, no. 571 (June-July 1995): 44.

17. Ibid.

18. William Brown, "Mathematicians Learn How to Tame Chaos," New Scientist (30 May 1992): 16.

19. A pilot program known as Project Popeye conducted in 1966 attempted to extend the monsoon season in order to increase the amount of mud on the Ho Chi Minh trail thereby reducing enemy movements. A silver iodide nuclei agent was dispersed from WC-130, F4 and A-1E aircraft into the clouds over portions of the trail winding from North Vietnam through Laos and Cambodia into South Vietnam. Positive results during this initial program led to continued operations from 1967 to 1972. While the effects of this program remain disputed, some scientists believe it resulted in a significant reduction in the enemy's ability to bring supplies into South Vietnam along the trail. E. M. Frisby, "Weather-modification in Southeast Asia, 1966-1972," The Journal of Weather-modification 14, no. 1 (April 1982): 1-3.

20. William M. Gray et al., "Weather-modification by Carbon Dust Absorption of Solar Energy," Journal of Applied Meteorology 15 (April 1976): 355.

21. Ibid.

22. Ibid.

23. Ibid., 367.

24. AWS PLAN 813 Appendix I Annex Alfa (Scott AFB, Ill.: Air Weather Service/(MAC) 14 January 1972), 11. Hereafter cited as Annex Alfa.

25. Capt Frank G. Coons, "Warm Fog Dispersal-A Different Story," Aerospace Safety 25, no. 10 (October 1969): 16.

26. Annex Alfa, 14.

27. Warren C. Kocmond, "Dissipation of Natural Fog in the Atmosphere," Progress of NASA Research on Warm Fog Properties and Modification Concepts, NASA SP-212 (Washington, D.C.: Scientific and Technical Information Division of the Office of Technology Utilization of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1969), 74.

28. James E. Jiusto, "Some Principles of Fog Modification with Hygrosopic Nuclei," Progress of NASA Research on Warm Fog Properties and Modification Concepts, NASA SP-212 (Washington, D.C.: Scientific and Technical Information Division of the Office of Technology Utilization of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1969), 37.

29. Maj Roy Dwyer, Category III or Fog Dispersal, M-U 35582-7 D993a c.1 (Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air University Press, May 1972), 51.

30. James McLare, Pulp & Paper 68, no. 8 (August 1994): 79.

31. Milton M. Klein, A Feasibility Study of the Use of Radiant Energy for Fog Dispersal, Abstract (Hanscom AFB, Mass.: Air Force Material Command, October 1978).

32. Edward M. Tomlinson, Kenneth C. Young, and Duane D. Smith, Laser Technology Applications for Dissipation of Warm Fog at Airfields, PL-TR-92-2087 (Hanscom AFB, Mass.: Air Force Material Command, 1992).

[Boomer Chick]

WHOOPS! There's more:


33. J. Storrs Hall, "Overview of Nanotechnology," adapted from papers by Ralph C. Merkle and K. Eric Drexler, Internet address: http://nanotech.rutgers.edu/nanotech-/intro.html, Rutgers University, November 1995.

34. Robert A. Sutherland, "Results of Man-Made Fog Experiment," Proceedings of the 1991 Battlefield Atmospherics Conference (Fort Bliss, Tex.: Hinman Hall, 3-6 December 1991).

35. Christopher Centner et al., "Environmental Warfare: Implications for Policymakers and War Planners" (Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air Command and Staff College, May 1995), 39.

36. Louis J. Battan, Harvesting the Clouds (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1960), 120.

37. Facts on File 55, no. 2866 (2 November 95).

38. Gene S. Stuart, "Whirlwinds and Thunderbolts," Nature on the Rampage (Washington, D.C.: National Geographic Society, 1986), 130.

39. Ibid., 140.

40. Heinz W. Kasemir, "Lightning Suppression by Chaff Seeding and Triggered Lightning," in Wilmot N. Hess, ed., Weather and Climate Modification (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1974), 623-628.

41. SPACECAST 2020, Space Weather Support for Communications, white paper G, (Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College/2020, 1994).

42. Gen Charles Horner, "Space Seen as Challenge, Military's Final Frontier," Defense Issues, (Prepared Statement to the Senate Armed Services Committee), 22 April 1993, 7.

43. Lewis M. Duncan and Robert L. Showen, "Review of Soviet Ionospheric Modification Research," in Ionospheric Modification and Its Potential to Enhance or Degrade the Performance of Military Systems,(AGARD Conference Proceedings 485, October, 1990), 2-1.

44. Ibid.

45. Peter M. Banks, "Overview of Ionospheric Modification from Space Platforms," in Ionospheric Modification and Its Potential to Enhance or Degrade the Performance of Military Systems (AGARD Conference Proceedings 485, October 1990) 19-1.

46. Capt Mike Johnson, Upper Atmospheric Research and Modification-Former Soviet Union (U), DST-18205-475-92 (Foreign Aerospace Science and Technology Center, AF Intelligence Command, 24 September 1992), 3. (Secret) Information extracted is unclassified.

47. Capt Edward E. Hume, Jr., Atmospheric and Space Environmental Research Programs in Brazil (U) (Foreign Aerospace Science and Technology Center, AF Intelligence Command, March 1993), 12. (Secret) Information extracted is unclassified.

48. Paul A. Kossey et al. "Artificial Ionospheric Mirrors (AIM)," in Ionospheric Modification and Its Potential to Enhance or Degrade the Performance of Military Systems (AGARD Conference Proceedings 485, October 1990), 17A-1.

49. Ibid., 17A-7.

50. Ibid., 17A-10.

51. B. N. Maehlum and J. Troim, "Vehicle Charging in Low Density Plasmas," in Ionospheric Modification and Its Potential to Enhance or Degrade the Performance of Military Systems (AGARD Conference Proceedings 485, October 1990), 24-1.

52. Hall.

53. Mary Ann Seagraves and Richard Szymber, "Weather a Force Multiplier," Military Review, November/December 1995, 69.

54. Daniel S. Halacy, The Weather Changers (New York: Harper & Row, 1968), 202.

55. William Brown, "Mathematicians Learn How to Tame Chaos," New Scientist, 30 May 1992, 16.

56. AU-18, Space Handbook, An Analyst's Guide Vol. II. (Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air University Press, December 1993), 196.

57. Thomas F. Tascione, Introduction to the Space Environment (Colorado Springs: USAF Academy Department of Physics, 1984), 175.

58. SPACECAST 2020, Space Weather Support for Communications, white paper G, (Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College/2020, 1994).

59. Referenced in ibid.

_________________________________________

I think anyone reading the Bibliography alone would realize the level of R & D regarding weather modification as ongoing even then. And it's been almost ten years since this paper was written.

To deny the obvious is to deny oneself, one's mind, and one's place in the universe.

:p

[gaiacomm]

JR and company cannot win this one.....yea for Tesla and Boomer Chick! Just let the dam of info just keep coming and drown JR and Company!

[Boomer Chick]

Thanks, Yaak! You had the correct info! No need to apologize! It is just replaying tonight !

I missed it this morning! I'm listening!

:D

[halva]

JR and company cannot win this one.....yea for Tesla and Boomer Chick! Just let the dam of info just keep coming and drown JR and Company!

JR and company cannot win on geoengineering front either.

There is no way they can intervene effectively in the 'global dimming' debate.

[Boomer Chick]

Hello! Halva! :D

Do you like the information I posted today? I thought the bibliography quite conclusive of the various experiments and writings related to the R & D of military weather mod. technologies.

The big picture of the work with aerosols is that it's multipronged. The DOD works in certain arenas and the DOE works in other arenas. One involves spaced-based weaponry and communications devices in conjunction with HAARP or satellite laser type weaponry and the other departments work on mitigating and monitoring natural and man-made pollutants in the various layers of the atmosphere. The picture isn't all white or all black. The large picture is so huge that those working in one area have no idea what the other area works in, or is not allowed to comment or study those particles that might exist in the aerosol studies say, of particulate matter located over industrial areas, even if the other introduced military project particulates exist. After reading the various DOE articles, the studies look benign and helpful but what's strickingly missing are the particulates that many have found in the contrail/chemtrail lab analysis studies. Where are the barium and aluminum particulate percentages in the DOE studies? They obviously choose to report and collect certain aerosol particulates and gases. When studying the DOD areas, the secretiveness and implications of pulse/ low frequency and high frequency as well as laser and radar applications create logical suspician combined with knowledge of the suspended particulate matter often sprayed, which tends to increase conductivity of the electro magnetic frequencies.

The BIG PICTURE includes both the good and the bad or if you will, the more destructive verses the mitigative and helpful. The DOD experiments with biologicals and their dispersement as well as the weather modification programs and weapons programs exist simultaneously and parallel to the DOE experiments in collecting and compiling data on the man-made industrial aerosols. One experiment I found especially wasteful of our taxpayer dollars was to study the sea salt water dispersion and aerosal forming behavior and consequent cloud formation on the organic/sea salt particulates. For God's sake, don't they know that stuff already?

And another consideration involves the possible control of our weather by extra national entities. If this indeed is happening, then our DOD needs to attempt to offset those mechinations. Example: Yakusa, and Russian factions--- Operation Woodpecker?

The question remains, as well, WHO benefits from certain controlled weather patterns? IF only our weather ops control OUR weather space, what would the PTB choose for weather patterns? Who benefitted from the hurricanes? Who would benefit from the drought situation over the breadbasket? What if the weather was controlled to benefit the farmers? Would the glut in grain production be a good thing or a bad thing? I don't know all the economic ramifications, but Scott Stevens brought the subject up and it makes sense to reflect on the follow-the-money realities.

And concerning Europe and the various entities involved in monitoring.... what is the agenda there and in Greece? I suggest, Halva, that you research the various DOD and DOE ongoing experiments and joint EU projects. There might be more online than you suspect.

Just rambling while I listen tonight.....

BC ;)

[JimPhelps]

JR and company cannot win on geoengineering front either.

There is no way they can intervene effectively in the 'global dimming' debate.

Debate? What debate, you idiot? There cannot be a debate while you sit on your head at the cafe with your fingers stuck in your ears. How can you debate with people you have ignore-listed, "DUMB-ASS'?

Get off this thread and don't come back, you spineless worm.

[halva]

The disengagement I proposed applied to the front with the genuine Jim Phelps (i.e. "Insurrection Chemistry"), not with any fake Jim Phelpses or with Raynolds, to whom I am not going to concede one inch here or anywhere.

In the curriculum vitae Raynolds drew up for me, note that his benchmark for success is preservation of good relations with a number of forums of sites for which he himself never fails to express absolute contempt at every available opportunity.

But his leitmotiv is of course "freedom of expression":


He (i.e. I) was eventually elected onto the "Council of Nine, and lobbied hard for a full clamp-down on freedom of expression.


Which is preferable: to take an uncompromising stand from the outset against Raynolds' "freedom of expression" or to defend it and then be driven off a forum by Raynolds?

That was the ignominous experience of one of the CTC Council members who did not support my proposed clampdown at CTC but who then came here to Arianna's at my request and finally could not take it any longer here and left.

Fortunately whatever my personal fate at CTC, the final result was a tightening of the rules on debunking and the treatment of debunkers. That is my gift to them.

In itself it was not enough to correct the basic theoretical problem at CTC, which as Raynolds has acknowledged, is the continuing scepticism about 'anthropogenic climate change' of many key decision makers there.

(Just as an aside on 'freedom of speech'.

A historical by-product of capitalist development and universal commodification, freedom of speech is predicated on the idea that you should leave yourself open to every idea because, who knows, there might be a market for it somewhere.

It is inseparable from the historical process of devaluation of signification in language which may well end in destruction of human and higher animal life on this planet.)

Proceeding with the curriculum vitae:



Next, Wayne tried to insinuate himself at the Megasprayer board. He does make postings there, but gets regularly debunked by regular posters who NEVER debunk any of their own peers, except for Wayne, of course.


Megasprayer gets approval from Raynolds because of his achievement of successful slandering of David Stewart in the eyes of key people there. I take flak from Raynolds because I stood up to him in his defamation of Stewart.

My refusal to go with the dominant line on this subject at Megasprayer is evidence for Raynolds of my lack of self-confidence and habit of trying to hide behind 'collective decisions'.

Of course I am sorry about how Raynolds succeeded in damaging collective morale and self-confidence at Megasprayer and I try to be conciliatory in my approach to them now. This meets with only very partial success. Raynolds has got his way there.

To a point of course. They don't allow him 'freedom of speech' on their turf.



I probably shouldn't mention it, but Wayne used to be known as a 'Direct Democracy' activist of sorts. Well, his foray into "chemtrails" proved disastrous there as well....


The CICDD direct democracy forum's pathetic inability to deal with Raynolds' intrusion is a source of deep shame to me. I am ashamed, not for myself, but for them.

But it is paralleled by their inability to link up with the world wide Social Forum movement which, for all its ideological blinkers, remains the most promising present-day direct-democratic initiative.

CICDD dates from before the present flourishing of the 'altermondialiste' movement. Raynolds successfully destructive intervention at CICDD must be paralleled by many similar successes he has scored by exploiting the incompatibilities between 'chemtrails activism' and other forms of environmental activism.

But the wheel has come full circle on that now. He cannot expect any more easy victories of that kind.

[halva]

Hello! Halva! :D
Do you like the information I posted today? I thought the bibliography quite conclusive of the various experiments and writings related to the R & D of military weather mod. technologies.


Boomer Chick hi.

I'll try to keep up with what you're posting on military weather control but of course there are more possibilities for action around non-military subjects.

[jayreynolds]

Deborah has some explaining to do about her involvement with CIA and NSA people in creating the barium and aluminum hoax document called "Chemtrails Over America"..

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=233593&postcount=40
================================================== ==========

For the sixth time -- I copy-edited the first draft of the report[Chemtrails Over America"-see link below] and submitted one paragraph of my own regarding the ozone layer, which is, and always has been, my primary area of interest.

This comment by Deboarh admits to editing the report[see link below], and collaboration with those who claim to be CIA and NSA.


As for the website you claim I "helped create"[see link below], that is not true. Period.
I don't know about the "CIA" or "NSA" connections of any people involved in doing research for this report. You know who to ask about that.

Deborah, you cannot be a copy-editor of a document[see link below], and then claim to have not helped create it. Nobody reading this is so stupid to fall for that. Even a fool can see that if you edited it, you helped in it's creation!

Deborah, in the same way, don't ask us to believe that you don't know who wrote the document[see link below], or what they said their qualifications were, or didn't care. You have already admitted to copy-editing the document[see link below]. Your cohorts in the "chemtrail" cult deserve to know who and why you were assisting CIA AND NSA people to write this disinformation document[see link below].

THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN MISLED INTO BELIEVING THAT CHEMTRAILS ARE BARIUM AND ALUMINUM BEING SPRAYED NEED TO KNOW WHY THEY WERE MISLED BY YOUR HANDIWORK. YOU HAVE THE INFORMATION.

THEY NEED TO KNOW WHO THE CIA AND NSA PEOPLE WERE WHO WROTE THIS MISINFORMATION. YOU KNOW WHO IS RESPONSIBLE.

YOU HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENED.

THIS QUESTION IS NOT GOING AWAY, DEBORAH .

WHO WERE THE CIA AND NSA PEOPLE YOU WORKED WITH TO CREATE "CHEMTRAILS OVER AMERICA"????

ANSWER THE QUESTION!!

http://home1.gte.net/quakker/documents/chemtrails_over_america.htm#Investigators
"Researchers assigned to this project have diverse backgrounds and are trained in and associated with a variety of disciplines including electronics, communications and environmental engineering, general medicine, biomedical research, chemistry, government/political, NSA/CIA, and military theory and technology."

[gaiacomm]

All of us have seen all of this info before. So, what's the point? I'm guessing that you meant "flood" of info, gaiacomm.

Do you want disinfo and misinfo included in that flood? Let's try to stick to truth and facts, and leave the theories, wild ideas and opinions for Carnicom's and Chemtrail Central.

If we do that, then everybody wins.

Actually there is a report that will be published soon by both sides. It was financed by some left over grant money. I hear that it will answer the questions. It was not sanctioned by the government but was co-financed. I will fill in more as I get it!

[gaiacomm]

Debate? What debate, you idiot? There cannot be a debate while you sit on your head at the cafe with your fingers stuck in your ears. How can you debate with people you have ignore-listed, "DUMB-ASS'?

Get off this thread and don't come back, you spineless worm.

Another Pretender I see...

[halva]

US encouraged to act on climate change
The World Today - Wednesday, 2 February , 2005 12:26:00
Reporter: Marie Scoutas

KAREN PERCY: In one of the biggest gatherings of the world's top climate scientists for several years, researchers from 30 countries are in the English city of Exeter for talks on the threats of global warming.

What they decide will be presented to a meeting of G8 nations later this year in a move orchestrated by the British Prime Minister Tony Blair to try to prompt the United States into more urgent action.

Australian scientists have made their own submission on what that will mean for human health with one Canberra-based scientist claiming climate change has already caused 160,000 deaths a year.

Marie Scoutas reports.

MARIE SCOUTAS: In two years, the United Nations group the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change will have to update its forecast on the effects of global warming. One of the scientists helping the group identify the danger levels is Professor Stephen Schneider, a climatologist from California's Stanford University.

STEPHEN SCHNEIDER: If we know that small island states and mountain ecosystems and other things are already becoming of concern, we know that there's going to be an increase in ocean temperatures, therefore a plausible case for increasing the intensity of cyclones and hurricanes, drought and flood, frequency extremes are projected to increase.

I think that should be sufficient already to motivate politicians to say well, how can we slow this down while we study it.

MARIE SCOUTAS: Professor Schneider's among 200 researchers gathered in Exeter to assess the climate change threat. Their conclusions will be presented to a meeting of the Group of Eight rich nations later this year.

Among the submissions to the conference is one from the World Health Organisation, co-authored by Tony McMichael from the Australian National University. Professor McMichael says about 160,000 people have died because of the effects of climate change in the last year.

TONY MCMICHAEL: We've been able to make estimates for each of the 14 regions in the world as to how they would have been affected by that extent of initial climate change.

MARIE SCOUTAS: But Professor, how can you make that direct link between climate change and a death?

TONY MCMICHAEL: It's a statistical exercise and if somebody dies in a heat wave, that is in part caused by the background increase in average temperatures, they don't die with a little flag sticking out of them saying I was killed by climate change, but we can actually see that there is an excess of death as occurred in 2003 in Europe when they had that massive heat wave that was attributed by the climate science experts to the background climate change process.

MARIE SCOUTAS: So we're talking about unseasonal or more frequent extreme events.

TONY MCMICHAEL: We are for the impacts of floods and for the impacts of heat waves. But for things like malnutrition, diaorrheal disease, the wider spread and the intensification of malaria, we're not talking about extreme events.

We're talking about the impact of a change in average temperature and a change in patterns of rainfall and how these in turn influence those more complex and environmentally-based diseases.

In the case of malaria it's a questions of what happens to mosquito populations. In the case of malnutrition we're asking how will local and regional food production be affected by a change in temperature and a reduction in soil moisture.

MARIE SCOUTAS: You estimate in this World Health Organisation Report that two to three billion people would be at risk under a two degree rise in average global temperatures.

During what period of time are you estimating that that could happen?

TONY MCMICHAEL: Well, on the current trajectory, unless we're able to reign in Greenhouse Gas emissions, pretty quickly. I think the best estimates of the climate scientists is that we're likely to reach that within this next half century.

We're losing the Arctic sea ice, we're seeing the melting of the Greenland Glacier and the Antarctic ice sheets considerably faster than we predicted 10 years ago. We're seeing coral reefs around the world being stressed and damaged faster than we'd expected. We'd better get serious about anticipating the need for action now, not in 25 years time.

KAREN PERCY: Professor Tony McMichael from the Australian National University ending that report from Marie Scoutas.

[jayreynolds]

Australian scientists have made their own submission on what that will mean for human health with one Canberra-based scientist claiming climate change has already caused 160,000 deaths a year.


Bullcrap

[stuart_allsop]

BOOMER: I guess you missed my previous response to you, since you never did comment on it, and afterwards even cited more trash from Bearden, so I'm assuming that you never saw this. Therefore I'll repeat it here:





I am pitting you against a meteorologist Sorry, boomer, but I already explained that we don't do second hand battles for you. If YOU haev a question or a claim then YOU bring it to the table. Don't expect us to go running off at your beck and call to fight your battles for you! Sheesh!


and you refuse to even view his site. How could you know if I did or do not view his site? Truth is, I did. What was I supposed to see? All I saw were lots of photos of normal clouds and contrails, many of them mis-captioned and mis-identified. For example, Since when is an A380 even vageuly similar to a 747?


Too bad.Yes, it reall is bad. "TOO" bad as you put it. I agree that Scott's site is REALLY bad. I mean, I only needed to get as far as the thrd paragraph to determine that he is a conspiracy kook with no understanding of physics. Please note : "Visit the site of Tom Bearden. His work is pioneering in this field. His latest paper is absolutely essential in understanding how this scalar technology works,..." I have already shown you that Tom Bearden is a scam artist and hoaxster, that his famous "paper" is absolute pig swill, full of glaring errors, and that his basic claims are a logical imposibility. The most basic proof of this is simple: In effect he claims that scalar waves can be oriented, directed and modulated. That is exactly saying that you can orient a perfectly symetrical sphere so that it points in a certain direction. How can you orient a sphere, Boomer? No matter which way you turn it, it is NEVER pointing ain any specific direction. By definition it CANNOT "point" in any direction at all, becuase the sphere itslef is the same in ALL directions. So too scalar waves. If you distort the sphere so that it CAN be oriented, then you no longer have a scalar wave: you know have vector wave, which behvaes in the exact same mammer as all other vector waves. So, saying that you can orient, focus, direct and modulate a scalar wave is an ABSOLUTE LOGICAL CONTRADICTION IN TERMS. It is impossible. Anyone who believes in such trash is clearly NOT a scientist, and his opinion on anything involving is worthless.

Sorry, Boomer, but if you want to point to web sites that support your hoax, you will need to do a better job of coming up with stuff that is even half believable, and stuff that is at least VAGUELY based on science.


This is not "debunking" it's donkey with his foot in the mudhole. he he he... nice try! But I think the Boomer donkey actually has just put her hoof in her mouth. (so to speak).


Either view his site and prove HIS observations wrong, or be silent. I just did prove him wrong. He believes in Tom Bearden. Tom Bearden's work is loony kook stuff, with no basis in sciecne, long since thoroughly debunked, You didn't do your research very well if you did not find the numerous pages by REAL scientists who have taken the time to debunk Tom Bearden.


My knowledge is not at stake here, Yes it is, now that you have been taught something of the basis of EM theory. Since you now have new knowledge that you did not have before, you can no longer accept Tom Bearden and hence Scott as valid scientific resources. Are you honest enough to admit that, now? Or do we need to get into Maxwell's equations again?



Best wishes and let's read some great and real debunking! On your mark.... get set .... GO! :D SWOOSH! .... puff puff puff puff ..... DING! First place goes to honest scientific debunking. The booby prize goes to those who ran the wrong race in the wrong direction, and still managed to get lost.

:)

[jayreynolds]

[b]"I am pitting you against a meteorologist."
Where is this meteorologist? Are you Scott Stevens? I wrote the man and he seems unable to acccept the challenge to debate. Your meteorologist complained that he didn't get a debate, well I am here waiting and have been doing some preparatory work. By all means let's get someone in here that's not a dumbass and roll!

[jayreynolds]

You need to learn the history of the Jews and enlighten yourself to what is truth and what is fabrication.
WHAT DO YOU SAY ABOUT THIS, JIMBO???
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory?id=463597

[Boomer Chick]

Urinalysis again, Stu?

Jay, you are free to e-mail Scott Stevens or invite him yourself. I e-mailed him with some questions. Will post if and when I receive them.

Eastlund patents, bibliography of military weather control studies and programs, and existing Eastlund science capabilities....... excellent evidence of ongoing weather manipulation and HAARP related science.

Just a review:


http://www.annexed.net/freedom/haarp.html

High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program
HAARP

Referenced:
New York Times article, December 8, 1915
New York Times article, September 22, 1940
United States Air Force, Record of Decision, High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), Final Environmental Impact Statement, dated October 18, 1993
Fact sheet issued by the Office of Naval Research and the Phillips Laboratory about HAARP dated November 4, 1993

A Few Notes by Dr. Nick Begich, co-author of "Angels Don't Play This HAARP: Advances in Tesla Technology"

::: From Tesla to Starwars :::

The United States military denies that the HAARP project has anything to do with the Tesla/Eastlund patents mentioned below. However, a careful review of the government documents leading to the contract with Arco's subsidiary (APTI) to build HAARP lead one to the conclusion that once again the military is deliberately attempting to mislead. While it is true that the device being built will not produce the full effects described in the patents, it is a necessary step in proving the effectiveness of the technology in advance of construction of a larger antenna array which is scheduled to begin construction in the summer of 1996 in Alaska. The intention of the military is to complete construction of the larger second system by 1997. The contract for construction of the second phase of the project has been awarded and is awaiting funding.

This initial project does present risks to communications according to the United States Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee. Other risks are unclear in the literature related to this project however the risks to human physiology from high frequency electromagnetic radiation is well known. What is really going on with this technology? What will the government do when they put into practice the larger antenna array?

Having read the article in Nexus magazine initially reporting upon HAARP, my next stop was to the Anchorage Municipal Library. I pulled the Eastlund patent records and a cold chill ran through me as I realized that the diagrams I was seeing were reminiscent of patents issued to Nikola Tesla in the late 19th and early 20th century. I next noted the reference sources in the patent itself, two articles from the New York Times. When I reviewed the articles they were about Tesla. The articles referenced in the U.S. patent were extremely interesting in that they were, in part, the basis for the research into this current technology.

::: Tesla Saw it Coming :::

The first article from the New York Times, December 8, 1915, contained:

"Nikola Tesla, the inventor, has filed patent applications on the essential parts of a machine the possibilities of which test a layman's imagination and promise a parallel of Thor's shooting thunderbolts from the sky to punish those who had angered the gods...Suffice it to say that the invention will go through space with a speed of 300 miles a second, a manless ship without propelling engine or wings, sent by electricity to any desired point on the globe on its errand of destruction, if destruction its manipulator wishes to effect."

"It is not a time, said Dr. Tesla yesterday, 'to go into the details of this thing. It is founded upon a principle that means great things in peace; it can be used for great things in war. But I repeat, this is no time to talk of such things.' 'It is perfectly practicable to transmit electrical energy without wires and produce destructive effects at a distance. I have already constructed a wireless transmitter which makes this possible, and have described it in my technical publications, among which I refer to my patent number 1,119,732 recently granted.'

'With a transmitter of this kind we are enabled to project electrical energy in any amount to any distance and apply it for innumerable purposes, both in war and peace. Through the universal adoption of this system, ideal conditions for the maintenance of law and order will be realized, for then the energy necessary to the enforcement of right and justice will be normally productive, yet potential, and in any moment available, for attack and defense. The power transmitted need not be necessarily destructive, for, if distance is made to depend upon it, its withdrawal or supply will bring about the same results as those now accomplished by force of arms."

The next article referenced in the patent also ran in the New York Times, on September 22, 1940 and reads as follows:

"Nikola Tesla, one of the truly great inventors who celebrated his eighty-fourth birthday on July 10, tells the writer that he stands ready to divulge to the United States Government the secret of his 'teleforce,' with which, he said, airplane motors would be melted at a distance of 250 miles, so that an invisible Chinese Wall of Defense would be built around the country...This 'teleforce,' he said, is based on an entirely new principle of physics that 'no one has ever dreamed about,' different from the principle embodied in his inventions relating to the transmission of electrical power from a distance, for which he has received a number of basic patents.'

'This new type of force, Mr. Tesla said, would operate through a beam one one hundred-millionth of a square centimeter in diameter, and could be generated from a special plant that would cost no more than $2,000,000 and would take only about three months to construct. The beam, he states, involves four new inventions, two of which already have been tested. One of these is a method and apparatus for producing rays 'and other manifestations or energy' in free air, eliminating the necessity for a high vacuum; a second is a method and process for producing 'very great electrical force'; the third is a method for amplifying this force, and the fourth is a new method for producing 'a tremendous electrical repelling force.'

"This would be the projector, or gun, of the system. The voltage for propelling the beam to its objective, according to the inventor, will attain a potential of 50,000,000 volts. With this enormous voltage, he said, microscopic electrical particles of matter will be catapulted on their mission of defensive destruction. He has been working on this invention, he added, for many years and has recently made a number of improvements in it."

There was a third reference which was apparently authored by Tesla which could not be obtained. The ideas expressed by Tesla, in these articles, raises more questions about the version of 'law and order' likely to rise from any military organization controlling such technology. In recent days we have seen many of the excesses of the military establishment in testing their 'peace keeping' technologies to the detriment of individuals in the population. If this technology is to be implemented anywhere it should be done so openly and honestly and only when it can be demonstrated as safe and worthwhile for improving the human condition. The idea of unleashing such power into our planet's ionosphere is disturbing at a minimum. Since originally researching this subject for publication in Nexus a good deal of additional information has come forward regarding other potential uses of the HAARP transmitter.

These additional applications are currently being researched by this writer and others to confirm the possible uses and will be the subject of future reporting on the project.

[Boomer Chick]

More history:

::: Eastlund Brings Tesla into the Modern Age :::

The patent number 4,686,605 issued August 11, 1987 to Bernard J. Eastlund and assigned to APTI, Inc. is one of three related patents by the same inventor; one of which was locked up under a Navy National Security Order for six years in the late 1980s. In the text of the patent a number of issues of concern are raised. These patents revisit and go beyond the technical applications envision by Tesla. The patent is quoted as follows:

"In the past several years, substantial effort has been made to understand and explain the phenomena involved in belts of trapped electrons and ions, and to explore the possible ways to control and use these phenomena for beneficial purposes. For example, in the late 1950's and early 1960's both the United States and the U.S.S.R. detonated a series of nuclear devices of various yields to generate large numbers of charged particles at various altitudes, e.g. 200 kilometers or greater."

"This can cause confusion of or interference with or even complete disruption of guidance systems employed by even the most sophisticated of airplanes and missiles. The ability to employ and transmit over very wide areas of the earth a plurality of electromagnetic waves of varying frequencies and to change same at will in a random manner, provides a unique ability to interfere with all modes of communication, land, sea, and/or air, at the same time. Because of the unique juxtaposition of usable fuel source at the point where desirable field lines intersect the earth's surface, such wide ranging and complete communication interference can be achieved in a reasonably short period of time."

"Thus, this invention provides the ability to put unprecedented amounts of power in the earth's atmosphere at strategic locations and to maintain the power injection level, particularly if random pulsing is employed, in a manner far more precise and better controlled than heretofore accomplished by the prior art, particularly by detonation of nuclear devises of various yields at various altitudes."

"Further, by knowing the frequencies of various electromagnetic beams employed in the practice of this invention it is possible not only to interfere with third party communications but to take advantage of one or more such beams to carry out a communications network even though the rest of the world's communications are disrupted. Put another way, what is used to disrupt another's communications can be employed by one knowledgeable of this invention as a communication network at the same time. In addition, once one's own communication network is established, the far-reaching extent of the effects of this invention could be employed to pick up communication signals of others for intelligence purposes."

"This invention has a phenomenal variety of possible ramifications and potential future developments. As alluded to earlier, missile or aircraft destruction, deflection, or confusion could result, particularly when relativistic particles are employed. Also, large regions of the atmosphere could be lifted to an unexpectedly high altitude so that missiles encounter unexpected and unplanned drag forces with resultant destruction or deflection of same. Weather modification is possible by, for example, altering upper atmosphere wind patterns by constructing one or more plumes of atmospheric particles which will act as a lens or focusing device."

"Also as alluded to earlier, molecular modifications of the atmosphere can take place so that positive environmental effects can be achieved. Besides actually changing the molecular composition of an atmospheric region, a particular molecule or molecules can be chosen for increased presence. For example, ozone, nitrogen, etc., concentrations in the atmosphere could be artificially increased. Similarly, environmental enhancement could be achieved by causing the breakup of various chemical entities such as carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrous oxides, and the like."

While the H.A.A.R.P. device being constructed is not large enough to cause all of these effects it is of sufficient size to test the ideas of Dr. Eastlund as expressed in parts of the patent. The military denies that they are using any of the Eastlund ideas; however, careful review of the materials lead to the inescapable conclusion that the military is misleading the public again. Moreover, it was reported by Dr. Eastlund in a National Public Radio broadcast in 1988 that the military had tested some of the ideas presented in the patents prior to removing the secrecy orders.

::: Oil, Defense, and the Projection of Power :::

In a press release by the United States Air Force dated November 3, 1993 the military announced that the prime contractor on the HAARP Program was Arco Power Technologies, Incorporated. The press release indicated that the project was designed for auroral and ionospheric research. They indicate, "The first phase of the program is underway to develop and test a low power high frequency (2.8-10.0 MHz) prototype transmitter array."

Arco Power Technologies, Incorporated (APTI) was a subsidiary of Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) which owned the Eastlund patent rights at the time the HAARP project was put out to bid. In researching APTI, I utilized the directory America's Corporate Families, which is a Dun & Bradstreet publication (1993, Volume I, page 156). The record indicates that this firm had a President in Los Angeles and a CEO and staff of 25 employees in Washington D.C. with sales of $5,000,000 U.S. a year.

[Boomer Chick]

And still more history:

ARCO, the parent company, is the largest employer in Alaska primarily involved in the North Slope where it controls trillions of cubic feet of natural gas and billions of barrels of oil. The natural gas on the North slope has been injected into the earth rather than 'flared' off as in most parts of the world. The gas has been injected in order to maintain oil field production while pumping up to 1.6 million barrels of crude oil a day. No market for this gas currently exists although significant interest in building a $12 billion pipeline remains on the drawing boards. A market for the gas is in the interests of ARCO.

How does a small subsidiary company acquire a military contract for such a project? According to the records, it won the right to build the project through exemptions in the military procurement process. The contract with APTI was over five times the organizations annual sales. It is the assertion of this writer that the only way a virtually unknown company, in the military contracting environment, could get such a contract is if they possessed proprietary information of use in the project, i.e. the Eastlund patents.

::: A Most Versatile and Capable Facility :::

Since the contract was awarded APTI has been sold to E-Systems of Dallas, Texas, U.S.A. This company reports annual sales of $1.7 billion a year, has over 18,000 employees and is one of the biggest military contractors in the United States. In a fact sheet issued by the Office of Naval Research and the Phillips Laboratory about HAARP dated November 4, 1993 the following is indicated:

"The proposed research will be undertaken using high power radio transmitters to probe the overhead ionosphere, combined with a complement of modern scientific diagnostic instruments to investigate the results of the interactions. HAARP will be constructed at auroral latitudes in Alaska. A unique feature of the research facility would be a high power high-frequency radio transmitter with the capability of rapidly steering a narrow beam of energy toward a designated region in the sky. Similar, though less capable, research facilities exist today at many locations throughout the world and are operated routinely for the purpose of scientific investigation of the ionosphere. In the U.S. such systems are located in Arecibo, Puerto Rico, Fairbanks, Alaska. Other installations are at Tromso, Norway; Moscow, Nizhny Novgorod and Apatity, Russia; Kharkov, Ukraine and Dushanbe, Tadzhikistan. None of these existing systems, however, have the combination of frequency capability and beam steering agility required to perform the experiments planned for HAARP."

"Investigations to be conducted at the HAARP facility are expected to provide significant scientific advancements in understanding the ionosphere. The research facility would be used to understand, stimulate and control ionospheric processes that might alter the performance of communication and surveillance systems. This research would enhance present civilian capabilities because it would facilitate the development of techniques to control ionospheric processes..."

"Potential applications of the HAARP research include developing DoD technology for detecting cruise missiles and aircraft and for communicating with submarines. Although HAARP is being managed by the Air Force and Navy, it is purely a scientific research facility which represents no threat to potential adversaries and would therefore have no value as a military target."

"...The beam would be several degrees wide, depending on frequency, and thus would influence a region several miles in diameter in the lower ionosphere, expanding to several tens of miles in the upper ionosphere."

"...The transmissions would be accomplished through the design and construction of a world-class ionospheric research instrument (IRI)...The IRI would consist of an antenna array and associated transmitters...The antenna would occupy a rectangular area roughly 1000 ft. x 2000 ft. and would consist of a 12 x 15 array of antenna masts, each supporting two horizontal crossed dipole antennas, stacked one above the other. The masts would reach a maximum height of 72 ft... As a result of a competitive procurement the Air Force and Navy has awarded a contract to ARCO Power Technologies, Inc. (APTI) for the design and construction of the IRI and associated support facilities."

"...The current schedule anticipates construction at the Gakona site would begin November 1993 and conclude the fall of 1994 with the demonstration prototype. Construction for the full size IRI is anticipated to begin early 1995 and conclude late 1997."

The following was taken from the United States Air Force, Record of Decision, High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), Final Environmental Impact Statement, dated October 18, 1993:

"The data obtained from the proposed research would be used to analyze basic ionospheric properties and to assess the potential for developing ionospheric enhancement technology for communications and surveillance purposes...The research facility would be used to understand, stimulate and control ionospheric processes that might alter the performance of communications and surveillance systems...Furthermore, and possibly more significant, is the potential for new technology that could be developed from a better understanding of ionospheric processes. A potential DoD application of the research is to provide communications to submerged submarines. These and many other research applications are expected to greatly enhance present DoD technology."

"The Air Force and Navy proposes to build and operate the most versatile and capable ionospheric research facility in the world. The government intends to utilize the unused Over-the-Horizon Backscatter site near Gakona, Alaska for this program...Research requirements stipulated that the selected site must fall in the range of latitudes between 61 and 65 degrees, either north or south. This latitude provides the proper mix of active and inactive auroral states. Siting constraints included that the site must be: on U.S. soil, on DoD land to the maximum extent practical..."