It's not nice to fool with Mother Nature [Archive] - Page 25

Insurrectionchemistry

02-08-2005, 06:05 PM

http://news.independent.co.uk/low_res/story.jsp?story=608209&host=3&dir=507

Apocalypse now: how mankind is sleepwalking to the end of the Earth

Floods, storms and droughts. Melting Arctic ice, shrinking glaciers, oceans
turning to acid. The world's top scientists warned last week that dangerous
climate change is taking place today, not the day after tomorrow. You don't
believe it? Then, says read this . . .

Future historians, looking back from a much hotter and less hospitable world,
are likely to play special attention to the first few weeks of 2005. As they
puzzle over how a whole generation could have sleepwalked into disaster -
destroying the climate that has allowed human civilisation to flourish over the
past 11,000 years - they may well identify the past weeks as the time when the
last alarms sounded.

Last week, 200 of the world's leading climate scientists - meeting at Tony
Blair's request at the Met Office's new headquarters at Exeter - issued the most
urgent warning to date that dangerous climate change is taking place, and
that time is running out.

Next week the Kyoto Protocol, the international treaty that tries to control
global warming, comes into force after a seven-year delay. But it is clear
that the protocol does not go nearly far enough.

The alarms have been going off since the beginning of one of the warmest
Januaries on record. First, Dr Rajendra Pachauri - chairman of the official
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - told a UN conference in Mauritius
that the pollution which causes global warming has reached "dangerous" levels.

Then the biggest-ever study of climate change, based at Oxford University,
reported that it could prove to be twice as catastrophic as the IPCC's worst
predictions. And an international task force - also reporting to Tony Blair, and
co-chaired by his close ally, Stephen Byers - concluded that we could reach
"the point of no return" in a decade.

Finally, the UK head of Shell, Lord Oxburgh, took time out - just before his
company reported record profits mainly achieved by selling oil, one of the
main causes of the problem - to warn that unless governments take urgent action
there "will be a disaster".

But it was last week at the Met Office's futuristic glass headquarters,
incongruously set in a dreary industrial estate on the outskirts of Exeter, that it
all came together. The conference had been called by the Prime Minister to
advise him on how to "avoid dangerous climate change". He needed help in
persuading the world to prioritise the issue this year during Britain's presidencies
of the EU and the G8 group of economic powers.

The conference opened with the Secretary of State for the Environment,
Margaret Beckett, warning that "a significant impact" from global warming "is
already inevitable". It continued with presentations from top scientists and
economists from every continent. These showed that some dangerous climate change was
already taking place and that catastrophic events once thought highly
improbable were now seen as likely (see panel). Avoiding the worst was technically
simple and economically cheap, they said, provided that governments could be
persuaded to take immediate action.

About halfway through I realised that I had been here before. In the summer
of 1986 the world's leading nuclear experts gathered in Vienna for an inquest
into the accident at Chernobyl. The head of the Russian delegation showed a
film shot from a helicopter, and we suddenly found ourselves gazing down on the
red-hot exposed reactor core.

It was all, of course, much less dramatic at Exeter. But as paper followed
learned paper, once again a group of world authorities were staring at a crisis
they had devoted their lives to trying to avoid.

I am willing to bet there were few in the room who did not sense their
children or grandchildren standing invisibly at their shoulders. The conference
formally concluded that climate change was "already occurring" and that "in many
cases the risks are more serious than previously thought". But the cautious
scientific language scarcely does justice to the sense of the meeting.

We learned that glaciers are shrinking around the world. Arctic sea ice has
lost almost half its thickness in recent decades. Natural disasters are
increasing rapidly around the world. Those caused by the weather - such as droughts,
storms, and floods - are rising three times faster than those - such as
earthquakes - that are not.

We learned that bird populations in the North Sea collapsed last year, after
the sand eels on which they feed left its warmer waters - and how the number
of scientific papers recording changes in ecosystems due to global warming has
escalated from 14 to more than a thousand in five years.

Worse, leading scientists warned of catastrophic changes that once they had
dismissed as "improbable". The meeting was particularly alarmed by powerful
evidence, first reported in The Independent on Sunday last July, that the oceans
are slowly turning acid, threatening all marine life (see panel).

Professor Chris Rapley, director of the British Antarctic Survey, presented
new evidence that the West Antarctic ice sheet is beginning to melt,
threatening eventually to raise sea levels by 15ft: 90 per cent of the world's people
live near current sea levels. Recalling that the IPCC's last report had called
Antarctica "a slumbering giant", he said: "I would say that this is now an
awakened giant."

Professor Mike Schlesinger, of the University of Illinois, reported that the
shutdown of the Gulf Stream, once seen as a "low probability event", was now
45 per cent likely this century, and 70 per cent probable by 2200. If it comes
sooner rather than later it will be catastrophic for Britain and northern
Europe, giving us a climate like Labrador (which shares our latitude) even as the
rest of the world heats up: if it comes later it could be beneficial,
moderating the worst of the warming.

The experts at Exeter were virtually unanimous about the danger, mirroring
the attitude of the climate science community as a whole: humanity is to blame.
There were a few sceptics at Exeter, including Andrei Illarionov, an adviser
to Russia's President Putin, who last year called the Kyoto Protocol "an
interstate Auschwitz". But in truth it is much easier to find sceptics among media
pundits in London or neo-cons in Washington than among climate scientists. Even
the few contrarian climatalogists publish little research to support their
views, concentrating on questioning the work of others.

Now a new scientific consensus is emerging - that the warming must be kept
below an average increase of two degrees centigrade if catastrophe is to be
avoided. This almost certainly involves keeping concentrations of carbon dioxide,
the main cause of climate change, below 400 parts per million.

Unfortunately we are almost there, with concentrations exceeding 370ppm and
rising, but experts at the conference concluded that we could go briefly above
the danger level so long as we brought it down rapidly afterwards. They added
that this would involve the world reducing emissions by 50 per cent by 2050 -
and rich countries cutting theirs by 30 per cent by 2020.

Economists stressed there is little time for delay. If action is put off for
a decade, it will need to be twice as radical; if it has to wait 20 years, it
will cost between three and seven times as much.

The good news is that it can be done with existing technology, by cutting
energy waste, expanding the use of renewable sources, growing trees and crops
(which remove carbon dioxide from the air) to turn into fuel, capturing the gas
before it is released from power stations, and - maybe - using more nuclear
energy.

The better news is that it would not cost much: one estimate suggested the
cost would be about 1 per cent of Europe's GNP spread over 20 years; another
suggested it meant postponing an expected fivefold increase in world wealth by
just two years. Many experts believe combatting global warming would increase
prosperity, by bringing in new technologies.

The big question is whether governments will act. President Bush's opposition
to international action remains the greatest obstacle. Tony Blair, by almost
universal agreement, remains the leader with the best chance of persuading him
to change his mind.

But so far the Prime Minister has been more influenced by the President than
the other way round. He appears to be moving away from fighting for the
pollution reductions needed in favour of agreeing on a vague pledge to bring in new
technologies sometime in the future.

By then it will be too late. And our children and grandchildren will wonder -
as we do in surveying, for example, the drift into the First World War - "how
on earth could they be so blind?"

con't---

Insurrectionchemistry

02-08-2005, 06:06 PM

WATER WARS

What could happen? Wars break out over diminishing water resources as
populations grow and rains fail.

How would this come about? Over 25 per cent more people than at present are
expected to live in countries where water is scarce in the future, and global
warming will make it worse.

How likely is it? Former UN chief Boutros Boutros-Ghali has long said that
the next Middle East war will be fought for water, not oil.

DISAPPEARING NATIONS

What could happen? Low-lying island such as the Maldives and Tuvalu - with
highest points only a few feet above sea-level - will disappear off the face of
the Earth.

How would this come about? As the world heats up, sea levels are rising,
partly because glaciers are melting, and partly because the water in the oceans
expands as it gets warmer.

How likely is it? Inevitable. Even if global warming stopped today, the seas
would continue to rise for centuries. Some small islands have already sunk for
ever. A year ago, Tuvalu was briefly submerged.

FLOODING

What could happen? London, New York, Tokyo, Bombay, many other cities and
vast areas of countries from Britain to Bangladesh disappear under tens of feet
of water, as the seas rise dramatically.

How would this come about? Ice caps in Greenland and Antarctica melt. The
Greenland ice sheet would raise sea levels by more than 20ft, the West Antarctic
ice sheet by another 15ft.

How likely is it? Scientists used to think it unlikely, but this year
reported that the melting of both ice caps had begun. It will take hundreds of years,
however, for the seas to rise that much.

UNINHABITABLE EARTH

What could happen? Global warming escalates to the point where the world's
whole climate abruptly switches, turning it permanently into a much hotter and
less hospitable planet.

How would this come about? A process involving "positive feedback" causes the
warming to fuel itself, until it reaches a point that finally tips the
climate pattern over.

How likely is it? Abrupt flips have happened in the prehistoric past.
Scientists believe this is unlikely, at least in the foreseeable future, but
increasingly they are refusing to rule it out.

RAINFOREST FIRES

What could happen? Famously wet tropical forests, such as those in the
Amazon, go up in flames, destroying the world's richest wildlife habitats and
releasing vast amounts of carbon dioxide to speed global warming.

How would this come about? Britain's Met Office predicted in 1999 that much
of the Amazon will dry out and die within 50 years, making it ready for sparks
- from humans or lightning - to set it ablaze.

How likely is it? Very, if the predictions turn out to be right. Already
there have been massive forest fires in Borneo and Amazonia, casting palls of
highly polluting smoke over vast areas.

THE BIG FREEZE

What could happen? Britain and northern Europe get much colder because the
Gulf Stream, which provides as much heat as the sun in winter, fails.

How would this come about? Melting polar ice sends fresh water into the North
Atlantic. The less salty water fails to generate the underwater current which
the Gulf Stream needs.

How likely is it? About

evens for a Gulf Steam failure this century, said scientists last week.

STARVATION

What could happen? Food production collapses in Africa, for example, as
rainfall dries up and droughts increase. As farmland turns to desert, people flee
in their millions in search of food.

How would this come about? Rainfall is expected to decrease by up to 60 per
cent in winter and 30 per cent in summer in southern Africa this century. By
some estimates, Zambia could lose almost all its farms.

How likely is it? Pretty likely unless the world tackles both global warming
and Africa's decline. Scientists agree that droughts will increase in a warmer
world.

ACID OCEANS

What could happen? The seas will gradually turn more and more acid. Coral
reefs, shellfish and plankton, on which all life depends, will die off. Much of
the life of the oceans will become extinct.

How would this come about? The oceans have absorbed half the carbon dioxide,
the main cause of global warming, so far emitted by humanity. This forms
dilute carbonic acid, which attacks corals and shells.

How likely is it? It is already starting. Scientists warn that the chemistry
of the oceans is changing in ways unprecedented for 20 million years. Some
predict that the world's coral reefs will die within 35 years.

DISEASE

What could happen? Malaria - which kills two million people worldwide every
year - reaches Britain with foreign travellers, gets picked up by British
mosquitos and becomes endemic in the warmer climate.

How would this come about? Four of our 40 mosquito species can carry the
disease, and hundreds of travellers return with it annually. The insects breed
faster, and feed more, in warmer temperatures.

How likely is it? A Department of Health study has suggested it may happen by
2050: the Environment Agency has mentioned 2020. Some experts say it is
miraculous that it has not happened already.

HURRICANES

What could happen? Hurricanes, typhoons and violent storms proliferate, grow
even fiercer, and hit new areas. Last September's repeated battering of
Florida and the Caribbean may be just a foretaste of what is to come, say scientists.

How would this come about? The storms gather their energy from warm seas, and
so, as oceans heat up, fiercer ones occur and threaten areas where at present
the seas are too cool for such weather.

How likely is it? Scientists are divided over whether storms will get more
frequent and whether the process has already begun.

Insurrectionchemistry

02-08-2005, 06:21 PM

BC writes:

Why don't you answer some of my general questions on those cut and pastes?

===========

BC,

I think when someone lists so extremely much for so long, that most just stop reading it. I did a long way back. I just looked at your snowstorm and said too damn much, and who is this person that seems to want to right all the world from her little view of sciences.

If you want to conduct your "run away housewife" self education program, then try not to coat everyone in your blizzards of cut and paste. There is no discussion in that sort of constant long long noise of a smathing of things that you don't stand any chance of ever connecting up into a continuity of causal events.

When you can fathom the importance of the GWP for HF and why that overcomes the natural vs manmade equation----then you might be making a start on thinking. Then, if you can tie that into the Earth's surface volcanic and earthquake issues, all the better. I doubt you can focus for the time that it would take to comprehind that, since your time-sharing concentration spans seem to jump around all over the place.

At the low level of house-wife science your are performing, it makes little sense to discuss the green issues pertaining to HAARP. I really doubt your concentration span could get past the first sentence.

I know Halva tuned out long ago, and others have too. Leaving only the debunkers trying to high five each others nonsense.

IMHO,
is

Boomer Chick

02-08-2005, 06:38 PM

http://admin.urel.washington.edu/uweek/archives/issue/uweek_story_small.asp?id=2378&paget=section

Research: Global warming not main cause of sea ice decline
Thursday, January 06, 2005

Extreme changes in the Arctic Oscillation in the early 1990s — and not warmer temperatures of recent years — are largely responsible for declines in how much sea ice covers the Arctic Ocean, with near record lows having been observed during the last three years, UW researchers say.
It may have happened more than a decade ago, but the sea ice appears to still "remember" those Arctic Oscillation conditions, according to Ignatius Rigor, a mathematician with the UW's Applied Physics Laboratory and a presenter at the American Geophysical Union's annual fall meeting in San Francisco in December.

The Arctic Oscillation is a seesaw pattern in which atmospheric pressure at the polar and middle latitudes fluctuates between positive and negative phases. The wind patterns associated with the Arctic Oscillation affect the surface winds and temperature over North America and Eurasia, as well as the Arctic.

The Arctic Oscillation was in an extreme "high," or positive, phase in the early '90s and is generally in a moderate phase today. Rigor and John M. Wallace, UW professor of atmospheric sciences, say the extreme high caused winds at the surface to circulate in ways that blew most of the thicker, older ice out of the Arctic Ocean into the Atlantic.

"It was as if winds generated in response to the Arctic Oscillation in those years became a far bigger 'broom' sweeping ice out of the arctic," Rigor says.

At the same time, changes in surface winds started causing the already thin ice to re-circulate back to the Alaska coast more quickly, decreasing the time it had to thicken before another melt season started. Today the ice in places remains just too thin to last through the summer melt, he says.

The result is that 70 percent of the ice is 3 years old or younger, Rigor says. In the 1980s, some 80 percent of the ice was 20 to 30 years old or more. As for ice extent — the area of the ocean covered by ice — last summer was again among the record low years, nearly 15 percent lower than average. With a wintertime ice pack roughly the size of the United States, that's like having areas equivalent to the states of Texas and Colorado melt away. In the 1980s, it was more an area the size of Rhode Island.

The melting in places was extensive even where local temperatures were colder than normal. This was the case in the summers of 2002 and 2003 for Alaskan coastal waters.

"The temperature itself doesn't explain it all," Rigor says, "but the age of sea ice explains more than half the variance in summer sea-ice extent in those coastal waters."

Just because warming temperatures may not be the key reason for declines in ice extent that doesn't mean greenhouse gases and warming are not contributing factors, Rigor says.

"The Arctic Oscillation has been in a primarily moderate to high phase during the last decade or more, and the only way to reproduce this tendency in the oscillation using a numerical climate model is if you include the observed increase in greenhouse gases in the model."

To estimate the age of sea ice, the researchers used a simple model that tracks a grid of ice parcels as they move about the Arctic Ocean. Data about the ice parcels comes from the International Arctic Buoy Program. Under way since 1979, the 40 buoys currently deployed in the ice are from 19 institutions in 10 countries.

The fluctuations in the Arctic Oscillation to its positive phase set the stage for the recent reductions in ice extent, and Rigor and Wallace think low summer sea-ice extents are likely to persist for at least a few years. It is conceivable that, given an extended interval of low-index Arctic Oscillation conditions, ice thickness and summertime sea-ice extent could gradually return to levels characteristic of the 1980s, they say.

The work is funded by the UW's Applied Physics Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Naval Research, National Science Foundation and NASA.

–Sandra Hines

______________________

ps---------- Anytime, you Jim, want to post some corroborating information regarding your theory, please feel free. Were those cut and pastes just too hard for you to read? Aw, poor baby.

Maybe you'd realize through reading them that your pet chemicals aren't even mentioned. Prove me wrong if you disagree. You might have realized as well, that the race to understand, mitigate, and control severe climate change itself is well underway. But no, you insist that everything's disaster. With the aid of satellites, aerosol testing, chemical anaysis, electronic beaming.... all I posted about.... you would certainly have realized the most obvious fact ...... the bead is aimed at the climate situation and maybe a bit too late, but nonetheless it's aimed and cocked.

I noticed Deborah chastized you over at CTC for not posting a credible article. Well, we all make mistakes. Let's see you post something really scientific that supports your theory. Come on, I dare ya!

BC :rolleyes:

Insurrectionchemistry

02-08-2005, 06:50 PM

Boomer Chick

02-08-2005, 06:52 PM

Yes, Virginia, the atmosphere is heating up! We knew that, though, didn't we? But just to let you know HOW we knew, I post this:

http://admin.urel.washington.edu/uweek/archives/issue/uweek_story_small.asp?id=2332&paget=section

Atmosphere warming claim validated by new study
Thursday, December 02, 2004

A new interpretation for temperature data from satellites, published earlier this year, raised controversy when its authors claimed it eliminated doubt that, on average, the lower atmosphere is getting warmer as fast as the Earth’s surface.
Now, in another study headed by the same researcher to be published Dec. 15 in the Journal of Climate, direct temperature data from other scientists has validated the satellite interpretation.

A team headed by Qiang Fu, a UW atmospheric sciences associate professor, earlier examined measurements collected from January 1979 through December 2001 by devices called microwave-sounding units on National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration satellites. Different channels of the microwave-sounding units measure radiation at different frequencies, providing data for different layers of the atmosphere.

In the case of the troposphere — the layer from the surface to an altitude of about 7.5 miles, where most weather occurs — it was believed there had been less warming than what was recorded at the surface. However, Fu’s team determined the satellite readings of the troposphere were imprecise because about one-fifth of the signal actually came from a higher atmosphere layer called the stratosphere, which for the last few decades has been cooling several times faster than the troposphere has been warming. The group devised a method to remove the stratosphere signal from the satellite data and was left with results that closely matched the warming at the surface. That work was published in May in the journal Nature.

However, critics contended the method overcompensated for the cooling effects of the stratosphere and thus overstated the amount of warming in the troposphere. The criticisms did not appear in peer-reviewed journals.

In the new study, Fu and Celeste Johanson, a UW atmospheric sciences graduate student, used direct stratosphere temperature measurements to examine the contamination from the stratosphere in the satellite channel that measures troposphere temperatures. They also used the same data to evaluate their method for removing the stratosphere contamination. The data they used came from scientists at NOAA and the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in England.

Using the direct stratosphere temperature trend profiles from 1979 through 2001, Fu’s team found that the stratosphere contamination in the satellite channel measuring the troposphere amounted to about a minus one-tenth of a degree Celsius per decade. They used their new method to remove the contamination, leaving an influence from the stratosphere of less than one-hundredth of a degree on troposphere temperature trends. The results match closely with what would be expected from the Fu team’s new interpretation of satellite data.

“These results are consistent with the results that the Nature paper gets,” Fu said. “It is an independent check of the problem because we used completely independent data sets. The independent observations agree with our conclusions, and that’s quite powerful evidence.”

The Fu team’s work indicates the troposphere has been warming at about two-tenths of a degree Celsius, or nearly one-third of a degree Fahrenheit, per decade. That closely resembles measurements of warming at the surface, something climate models have suggested would result if the warmer surface temperatures are the result of greenhouse gases.

The findings are important because, for years, satellite data inconsistent with warming at the surface have fueled the debate about whether climate change is actually occurring.

If contamination of troposphere signals by those from the stratosphere isn’t taken into account for the last 25 years, Fu said, estimates of how much warming actually occurred in the troposphere during that time would be off by 40 percent to 70 percent.

Fu’s work is supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and NOAA.

–VINCE STRICHERZ

Boomer Chick

02-08-2005, 07:04 PM

Greetings All,

The previous article's thesis sentence appears to be this sentence:

===
"First, Dr Rajendra Pachauri - chairman of the official
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - told a UN conference in Mauritius
that the pollution which causes global warming has reached "dangerous" levels."

===
The crux of the greenhouse blanket that contributes the lions share to global warming is the GWP contributed by the HF synergistic effect with hydrocarbons in the atmosphere. This creates the warm blanket of gases in the upper atmosphere that highly affect global warming. The temperature gradient in the atmosphere has been disasterously altered by man's careless chemical releases, and their special synergism.

When one takes this blanket to the poles, there is much more turbulence that brings the heat retaining gases closer to the surface and here accelerates the melting of both polar regions.

The magnitude of the greenhouse effect that HF contributes is second to none, and all the effects of a literal armageddon follow directly from the effect. Hence, why I put in so many religion connotations connected to the global warming effects also. And why this article from the UK appears to also emphasize the same wording and signicance.

Just as sciences and industry took note that Freon was only inert on the planets surface, they failed to take proper note that Freon is not stable or inert in the upper atmosphere where Sun's ionization effects contributed to a chemical catostropy with the Ozone Hole. Freon makes both HCl and HF, with the balance toward HCl chemically. Follow on Freon replacements shifted the trend toward HF.

Similarly, sciences and industry failed to take note of the rising Fluorine, Florine compounds, and HF were contributing to the formation of a much more worse effect from the catalytic effects of HF chemical effects on the rising hydrocarbon content in the air. Here the long ignored synergism of HF with Hydrocarbons formed an intensive global warming blanket in the upper atmosphere that is now leading to disasterous effects on climate.

Both, the Ozone Hole and the Upper Atmosphere's warming blanket have similar origins in the carelessness of industry to forcast radiation induced chemistry. The Ozone Hole is the effect of HCl and the Global Warming Blanket is the product of HF. HF being the worst of the effects in the long term because of its molecular weight being less than that of air, so it builds and builds and builds. It is now at critical levels producing the net effects of the bible narrative's armageddon.

In these end times, the guilt or innocence of these De-Bunkers here to conceil this fact will be directly determing by their methods to cover up this disasterous chemical effect, to which jet planes contribute both in the remediation and to the causality.

IMHO,
is

Fairly well written, Jim. Can you corroborate your thesis with independent research? This is the scientific way, you know. If you could do that, you would be right on target because logically, it makes sense. Please find something. And the Armageddon issue really might include a more spiritual aspect in my view, more like a battle between evil and good rather than a chemistry problem in our atmosphere. Another point to my posting all the research? To alleviate panic stricken folk who fear the kinds of things posted in your previous UK, scare mongering article. Fear used by anyone is distasteful to me, isn't it to you? So, let the scientists do their jobs, let populations get off fossil fuel, and for all we know technology might find a way to irradicate the nasties we produced. Measured faith, not blind faith, will get you through, Jim, that and the realization that the scientists working on this from the universities to the various space, oceanographic, atmospheric organizations, geologic, and environmental groups are seriously and dedicatedly more advanced and on top of things than even you can imagine. Give it some time and if we end up destroying our world, than so be it. We all die anyway. We all go home.

BC :shock:

Insurrectionchemistry

02-08-2005, 07:05 PM

Greetings All,

It would appear that the recent blizzards of cut and paste are directed at chilling the unmasking of the principle causal events for the global warming blanket. The information cut and paste blizzard seeks to cover, in this snow-storm, this dominate effect for the global warming blanket.

Science and Industry tossed all caution to the wind when DuPont came out with Freon and upped the production of Fluorine / HF in the work up years leading into WWII. It took world wide use and acceptance that Freon was harmless and inert for it to gain wide usage and careless losses into the atmosphere. Until one day in the 80's, someone noticed Freon was not inert in a radiation environment, then suddenly the Ozone Holes problems being tied to CFC came into world view.

In the very same decade, the problems of Freon containing fluorine were a little slower to appear, but appear the problems of DuPont's Fluorine problems did, only with a predicted damage factor more than a million times that from chlorines problems. HF was boyant, and HCl was not, and that was a formula for total world disaster. Oddly enough, both were connected to the Jewish Company called DuPont, which played a pivotal role in the Manhattan Project's uranium enrichment programs. As such, it was given protection by the US Govt. on most of these disasters for science in the twenth century.

Today, who contunues the conceiling is persons just like the ones that everyone is witnessing here. And the connections of the national labs to the big money bankers that will ultimately have to foot the bill for funding armageddon. The climate change disaster of global warming and the ozone hole both have tracks leading right back to DuPont and careless chemical emissions.

There is every indication that BC should be considered one of the Evil people seeking to continue the cover up of serious factors. The mechanisms presented are sound to any person with a good knowledge of chemistry and environmental science factors. The mechanisms are most apparent to the petro-chemical industries engineers that employ process analogies to the HF problems happening in the atmophere distillation column effects. The distillation column effect in the atmosphere and the HF effects are consider obvious. And the HF fractional distiallation factors generating the global warming blanket HC's in the high upper atmosphere and the rising HF concentration due to atmospheric float inherently obvious.

All the scientic data supports the thesis and has done so since the mid-1980's when the effect was discovered by one named Jim Phelps while working at the Oak Ridge National Labratory one HF factors in the environment and health. Jim Phelps discover the global warming blanket mechanism and a very similar catastropic mechanism for fluoride synergistic metal effects on human health.

The discoveries have been connected with religion forecasts from day one of their discovery back in the mid-1980's. It was a science understood by the alchemist of the old world, and played a principle role in the Jesus predictions on End-Times and Armeggon. It was a special time in the 1980's, when literally science met religion head on and all became clear. It was the National Lab's epiphany on Global warming and a scientific revelation of disaster from pure failings to understand religion and chemical sciences.

IMHO,
is

stuart_allsop

02-08-2005, 07:30 PM

Yes, for you, Jay, and Yaak and anyone reading, I have seen differences in contrails over the years. The contrails that linger for days at high altitudes and in any weather condition regardless of the humidity and form cirrus clouds ...... are questionable to me. Why? Because in comparison to the past, even the early nineties, we didn't see such formations. It may be newer jet fuels, it may be separate spray tanks (and I say MAY)Sure it, could be all of those ... but then again, it could just be that the far more likely cuase is the huge increase in air traffic since deregulation, combined with the huge switch from pure turbo-jet engines to the more efficient high-bypass turbo-fan engines, which produce a MUCH wider, thicker, slower, cooler exhaust trail that is much richer in water vapor, combined with the switch to larger aircraft that carry more passengers, flying longer distances at higher altitudes where contrails form better and last longer.... To me, it seems that any of those facts by itself is MORE than enough to explain the increase in persistant contrails, without resorting to complex convoluted conspiracies for which there is not the slightest evidence, and which would of necessity involve hundres of thousands of people, not one of whom has ever become disgruntled and turned whistle-blower...

Have you ever heard of Occam's razor, Boomer?

Since there have been press releases regarding mitigating the entering UV rays with reflective shieldsExcept that UV indices have not diminished even the slightest little bit over the last 5 years, so clearly that can't be the reason, now can it?

and NASA satellite pics showing the lasting trailing of contrails, especially over land, which scientifically as I've recently discovered is the general atmospheric region of most solar heat absorption,... and is therfore also the principle source of heat re-radiation, and therefore the source of most uplift of atmospheric moisture....

I do indeed accept that there's a helpful program going on.Why? Even though there is no evidence for such a program, and even though there are numerous perfectly valid, logical scientific explanations for all of the observations you mentiond? Why would you discard the valid scientific / logical explanations, in favor of a vast secret conspiracy that clearly isn't even doing what you think it is doing (reducing UV)?

In some instances regarding radiative forcing, I am finding that the use of spraying particulates at certain altitudes and then taking readings on the dispersement and mixing of those particulates can greatly help the scientists' ability to understand the atmosphere and its workings.What "spraying of particulates" are you referring to? Please provide links to the on-going large-scale world-wide research programs that are "spraying particualtes" in order to study the weather.

I know from satellite pics at government sites that spraying over battlefields has been done for various purposes involving both cloud cover, cloud dispersion, as well as providing an effective matrix for communications propagation.No you don't "know" that. You might SUSPECT it, but you don't KNOW it until you have proven it to be a fact. Now, I'd like to know how you can differentiate between the contrails left by AWACS aircraft over battlefields, the contrails left by refueling tankers over battlefields, the contrails left by fighters over battlefields, the contrails left by bombers over battlefields, the contrails left by missiles and rockets over battlefields, the contrails left by reconisance aircraft over battlefields, the contrails left by all the other types of aircraft over battlefields, and the "spraying" that you refer to. How do you managed to remove all of the other numerous sources of contrails over battlefields, and determine that waht is left over is "spraying"? And how do you do that based on nothing better than a low res satellite image whose pixel size is already larger that tne objects you are studying?

I need to get you those links to prove my points,Yes, I most certainly think that you DO need to do that! :) But in order to not confuse the issue and clutter the board, how about if we take ONE issue at a time? Chose one of the above, any one that you want, and we'll deal with it.

If fungi, as Cassani says, are filtering down from the troposphere...... then we should all have massive respiratory tract congestion from breathing it! How come we don't? How come respiratory tract infections are no more commen today, per capita, than they were 5, 10 or even 20 years ago, and are in fact LESS common than the were 50, 100 or 200 years ago?

It may seem like a government/pharm plot, but indeed, because X and Y happens and produces Z, it does not mean that X + Y = Z, if you get my drift.Excellent. That's a great start: Clearly, you are prepared to listen to reason, and to change your mind once the balance of solid, concrete facts and cold, hard evidence stacks up against yor current point of view.

incidences of asthma going up in areas of heavy persistent contrails often formed in gridlike patterns, And your proof of this claim would be...?

but this again, is second, third, or fourth hand information and unable to be verified.So you have no proof, and only heresay rumors?

If they wrote a letter to so and so at the CDC and claimed it to be true, how do we know this is a truth? One would have to talk directly to the CDC, someone in public relations, and verify that indeed Mr. X talked to Mrs. Z at CDC and indeed she ignored Mr. X's request or complaint. And wouldn't the first order of complaint be with one's own local county or city health department? Exactly. But only after checking the long-term statistcs to see if there is, in fact, any truth at all to the claims made by the ranting/raving chemmies.

[qoute]As I've shared here, I have contacted some local meteorologists regarding the persistent contrails and even talked to one who was open to discussing and was very positive in his helpful nature. He said that indeed many contrails form cirrus clouds and he accepted it as natural or at least something that happens,[/quote]... smart man, who understands meteorology!! He said that, because it is true: Contrails form at the same altitude, and under the same conditions, as ordinary cirrus clouds. In fact, the correct technical term for a contrail is "[/i]cirrus aviaticus[/i]", meaning "airplane cirrus", because it IS cirrus, plain and simple. It just happens to be forced into formation by the passage of an aircraft, but the conditions were ripe for normal cirrus formation anyway, because if they were NOT ripe, then the contrail would have sublimed fairly fast, or not formed at all. Contrails are just long-thin cirrus clouds formed by airplanes, so they behave exactly like any other cirrus cloud, spreading out, moving across the sky with the wind, and sticking around for hours, even days.

He would know a bit more about what is natural and what is unnatural in cloud formation given his meteorologist profession.Assuming that he is telling the truth about that. Did you notice that he did NOT post any information that would allow you to verify his background? No names of cities, towns, universities, courses, years, professors, classes... no reference to his thesis ... no clue at all ... nothing! Not a single hint as to VERIFIABLE data on when, where, how, or what formal training he recieved. Or didn't receive.

stuart_allsop

02-08-2005, 07:31 PM

... continues ...

On the days when contrails don't persist, the sky is as blue as it ever was. But, on those days and nights when they're there, a grey mist and cirrus cloud cover is formed and those clouds form no matter what the humidity.How woudl you know? Did you go over to where the clouds were forming and actually measure the humidity? Or did you just take the reading where your HOUSE is, where NO clouds were forming? I hate to say it, but it seems rather obvious that if you took a reading at a place where there were no clouds, well OF COURSE you would get a reading showing insufficient humidity for cloud formation!!!! Besides, you just mentioned that you live in mountainous terrain, which is IDEAL for complex weather patterns. Gravity waves and mountain wave are notorious for carrying moisture streams in precise patterns with hard edges, and uplift and downdrafts in those kind of geographical locations are perfect for forcing cloud formation. There is a reason why smart pilots stay WELL away from mountains: the winds around mountains are carefully carefully crouched, just waiting to leap out and swat the first unwary plane that comes by.... There are only two types of moutntain-terrain pilot: Those who like to fly close to the terrain and see what the weather is like, and those who are still alive...

Serioulsy, Boomer, from what you describe, you live in the perfect location for the type of weather conditions that you mentioned. Weather conditions vary abruptly over very short distances, quiote contrary to chemmie belief. The proof is any cloud that you care to look at: Notice the well-defined edges? That's becuase the conditions for cloud formation end SHARPLY a the edge of the cloud. If the conditions did not end sharply, then cloud edges would kind of fade out slowly over longs distances: they don't.

I've seen jets at similar altitudes where some form lasting trails and others form contrails that dissipate. Me too. Happens all the time. Contrail conditions usually occur in thin layers, just a few hundred to a few thousand feet thick. Two planes would only need to be maintainging normal legal separation in order for one of them to be in the best possible contrail conditions, leaving huge fat trails all across the sky, while the other left nothing at all.

My point is that these trails that last, spread, and form persistent clouds weren't there in the 80's Then probably the airways, traffic, airplanes, engines, and navaids also weren't there back in the 80's.

Let me say something about patterns, here, to get it all out. I've gone to airline sites and sites showing various airline routes and the patterns they make over cities and large areas of states.Wrong place to look. Airlines show stylized artists impressions of their routes, not the REAL shape and patterns of airways. Rather, go to an aviation store, and buy a couple of navigation charts for your area. They will show you the REAL location of the REAL airways, and I think you'll be shocked at just how many of them there are! Even though you live in a fairly remote location, I'll bet that there are literally dozens of airways within site of your house. Airlines offices and web sites are not the place to look for accurate navigation charts.

These patterns are more spokelike, from a satellite perspective than gridlike patterns over smaller areas.[/quote[Exactly. That's becuase each individual airline runs it's own "hub and spoke" system for getting pax around in the area they service, and even then their maps are nowehere near accurate: They are not meant to be. Ratherm, they are meant to show you what a huge variety of routes they offer, going every which way. They want to seel you on the idea that you can start from where youa re now, and go anywhere you want on their airline alone.

Get a REAL map if you want the REAL data.

[quote]Rarely are airline trails themselves either in major airport cities or over smaller towns that see the traffic --- small parallel lined grids. So that's my take on the grid pattern commentary. Time, dispersal rate, altitude, and flight patterns all come into play here. Actually, I can describe a scenario where you only need TWO airways with just four planes following each one, maybe ten or 20 minutes apart, in order to produce a really horrific "creaming-frothing-chemmie" type grid pattern... wanna hear about it? :)

I am still researching that "chemical" aspect. When and if I do find it, I will post it. ... When it comes up I'll post it, don't worry! Well, the active chemical is actually called DHMO, and it's really dangerous... :)

Boomer Chick

02-08-2005, 07:38 PM

Greetings All,

It would appear that the recent blizzards of cut and paste are directed at chilling the unmasking of the principle causal events for the global warming blanket. The information cut and paste blizzard seeks to cover, in this snow-storm, this dominate effect for the global warming blanket.

Science and Industry tossed all caution to the wind when DuPont came out with Freon and upped the production of Fluorine / HF in the work up years leading into WWII. It took world wide use and acceptance that Freon was harmless and inert for it to gain wide usage and careless losses into the atmosphere. Until one day in the 80's, someone noticed Freon was not inert in a radiation environment, then suddenly the Ozone Holes problems being tied to CFC came into world view.

In the very same decade, the problems of Freon containing fluorine were a little slower to appear, but appear the problems of DuPont's Fluorine problems did, only with a predicted damage factor more than a million times that from chlorines problems. HF was boyant, and HCl was not, and that was a formula for total world disaster. Oddly enough, both were connected to the Jewish Company called DuPont, which played a pivotal role in the Manhattan Project's uranium enrichment programs. As such, it was given protection by the US Govt. on most of these disasters for science in the twenth century.

Today, who contunues the conceiling is persons just like the ones that everyone is witnessing here. And the connections of the national labs to the big money bankers that will ultimately have to foot the bill for funding armageddon. The climate change disaster of global warming and the ozone hole both have tracks leading right back to DuPont and careless chemical emissions.

There is every indication that BC should be considered one of the Evil people seeking to continue the cover up of serious factors.

IMHO,
is

Drawing first blood again and freaking out in your paranoia? In no way am I an evil person. Sorry, Jim, distracting with a few elements of possible truth in your message, and then trying to blame others for not only your shortcomings in being able to prove anything you say, but then accusing me of underhanded government conspiracy as though all government-funded efforts are ALL and TOTALLY worthless. Then you assassinate my character, someone whom you don't even know.... well, you're slowly and surely becoming a pain in the a** to more than just Jay and the gang. And because I might agree with some of what they say does not mean I was totally against anything you had to say. You see the danger of black and white thinking and paranoia itself? Have you gotten a counselor, yet? I truly recommend one, unless of course, you've got an implant and no matter where you go they'll get you. You know, the Montauk mind control experiments and the implantation of those who might know too much? LOL! Keep posting your info, but I will file a complaint with the moderators from now on if you continue to flame. You need to find supportive evidence for others to find you credible. If you won't take that step and won't make the effort, you won't get the respect you so want. That's all. At one time I read your stuff at CTC and really thought you had something above and beyond. But now, it seems you're flailing. Get back on track. ;)

I remember what you wrote about the Hebrews and I have this to offer you for another perspective and one that might prove more real, more true, and more grounded than any theory you hold at the moment. and BTW, the U Book does say that the Jews are NOT the chosen people. The volcano aspect is also mentioned there too, regarding Moses. When I read what you wrote I went back to the book and looked it up. I'm starting you at the beginning of the section on Semites and Hebrews and each page you can click forward from there.

http://www.ubfellowship.org/newbook/ppr096_0.html

This link starts the next chapter on the Hebrews:

http://www.ubfellowship.org/newbook/ppr097_0.html

BC ;)

jayreynolds

02-08-2005, 07:51 PM

You have a website devoted to it and you really don't "take" to those who even investigate..... like Carnicom... and find even him somehow lacking in character. Right? Do you begrudge him his right to investigate? I doubt it. Maybe he is off in left field somewhere, but at least he's doing his best to compile whatever information he can in order to answer some basic questions regarding many aspects of what MAY be going on in our skies. Related to character judgments, he probably sincerely feels he's right or on some truthful trail, just like Bearden thinks he's right about his science, even though he may be hitting some dead ends. In refusing to take that second step in judgment, on "intention" regarding others, we stay out of the noman'sland of inappropriate boundary-crossing personal castigation. You are entitled to investigate his forms of investigation, prove them wrong or faulty, criticize even government documents as supportive of any stance, blow holes through any deductive reasoning theories, find fault in pictures, and anything that you deem..... untrue... and that is why I respect you. But I don't and never have respected character assassination, not that I've witnessed that coming from you. ;)

Carnicom. Begrudge, no, actually, I spent quite a bit of time checking out what he has had to say. Here is what I found-

Web samples- Carnicom still refuses to get these alleged samples properly analyzed, or to show an analysis at all. Carnicom isn't interested in the truth if it takes years to get an analysis done:
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/silk.html

Carnicom, Thomas, and David Peterson solicited money through their website and when I asked for a public accounting, as promised, none was forthcoming. $6,000.00 remains unaccounted for:
(see bottom of this link)http://www.carnicom.com/wilbrief.htm
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/aspenscam.html

Carnicom's "barium research" bogus:
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/bariumreport.html

This debunking of Carnicom's "Particulate research" got me banned at Carnicom's board:
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/particles.html

Finally, I spent a year hounding the EPA using multiple FOIA requests to get a response for Carnicom's "web sample", which he had sent inappropriately to EPA Administartor Carol Browner's office. I believed they handled it as terorist material, but eventually got them to acknowledge him and eventually sent it back so he could get it analyzed. He never has.
:http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/FOIA.html

After all my work getting EPA to respond, Carnicom never gave me a word of thanks, and mentioned me on the air as only "A Thrid Party"
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:p3-w-dneseYJ:boards.hbo.com/thread.jspa%3FthreadID%3D100000340%26start%3D60%26 tstart%3D0+carnicom+%22third+party%22&hl=en

PS: Carnicom does have a webpage in reserve so that he can eventually have "plausible denial" of participation in a hoax. It was written by me, but Clifford doesn't have it linked through any of his webpages:
http://www.carnicom.com/altcon1.htm

So, what I have done with carnicom is to debunk false information, assist him in determining excatly how he could prove his case, and even acted as his advocate in his fight against EPA.
What did I get in return? Banned form participation at his forum, and later banning so I cannot even read the forum(though I have found a way to do so anyway. See, Carnicom is dishonest, he lies, cheats, and after these years have passed, I feel no further obligation to play "Mr. Nice Guy" with Clifford Carnicom.

Boomer Chick

02-08-2005, 08:26 PM

... continues ...

How woudl you know? Did you go over to where the clouds were forming and actually measure the humidity? Or did you just take the reading where your HOUSE is, where NO clouds were forming? I hate to say it, but it seems rather obvious that if you took a reading at a place where there were no clouds, well OF COURSE you would get a reading showing insufficient humidity for cloud formation!!!! Besides, you just mentioned that you live in mountainous terrain, which is IDEAL for complex weather patterns. Gravity waves and mountain wave are notorious for carrying moisture streams in precise patterns with hard edges, and uplift and downdrafts in those kind of geographical locations are perfect for forcing cloud formation. There is a reason why smart pilots stay WELL away from mountains: the winds around mountains are carefully carefully crouched, just waiting to leap out and swat the first unwary plane that comes by.... There are only two types of moutntain-terrain pilot: Those who like to fly close to the terrain and see what the weather is like, and those who are still alive...

Serioulsy, Boomer, from what you describe, you live in the perfect location for the type of weather conditions that you mentioned. Weather conditions vary abruptly over very short distances, quiote contrary to chemmie belief. The proof is any cloud that you care to look at: Notice the well-defined edges? That's becuase the conditions for cloud formation end SHARPLY a the edge of the cloud. If the conditions did not end sharply, then cloud edges would kind of fade out slowly over longs distances: they don't.

Me too. Happens all the time. Contrail conditions usually occur in thin layers, just a few hundred to a few thousand feet thick. Two planes would only need to be maintainging normal legal separation in order for one of them to be in the best possible contrail conditions, leaving huge fat trails all across the sky, while the other left nothing at all.

Then probably the airways, traffic, airplanes, engines, and navaids also weren't there back in the 80's.

Wrong place to look. Airlines show stylized artists impressions of their routes, not the REAL shape and patterns of airways. Rather, go to an aviation store, and buy a couple of navigation charts for your area. They will show you the REAL location of the REAL airways, and I think you'll be shocked at just how many of them there are! Even though you live in a fairly remote location, I'll bet that there are literally dozens of airways within site of your house. Airlines offices and web sites are not the place to look for accurate navigation charts.

[quote]These patterns are more spokelike, from a satellite perspective than gridlike patterns over smaller areas.[/quote[Exactly. That's becuase each individual airline runs it's own "hub and spoke" system for getting pax around in the area they service, and even then their maps are nowehere near accurate: They are not meant to be. Ratherm, they are meant to show you what a huge variety of routes they offer, going every which way. They want to seel you on the idea that you can start from where youa re now, and go anywhere you want on their airline alone.

Get a REAL map if you want the REAL data.

Actually, I can describe a scenario where you only need TWO airways with just four planes following each one, maybe ten or 20 minutes apart, in order to produce a really horrific "creaming-frothing-chemmie" type grid pattern... wanna hear about it? :)

Well, the active chemical is actually called DHMO, and it's really dangerous... :)

Well, you do make excellent points, I must admit. I will have to find those satellite pics online and the maps you recommend, are they available online? I really don't fancy buying such things. The one point I have to disagree on is the gridlike formations done in practically simultanous time. I've seen the pics and read the testimonies and really must adhere to my conclusion on this one. But everything else you said made good sense. BTW, we're in a rather air popular space, actually, with flights from Denver to Phoenix, Denver to Las Vegas, all kinds of other flights from California east, and four Air Force Bases right here --- Peterson AFB, the Space Command Headquarters, the US Air Force Academy, and Ft. Carson which has air units, as well as a national Airport, and a couple of small craft airports. If there was ever a place a person could learn to fly, it's our community. I have not seen those gridlike cloud formations around here AT ALL.

And, yes, I have to get the links on the increased incidences of lung problems, which could also be due to pollution, especially in the urban areas. And yes, the particulate spraying for dispersal studies is pretty darn iffy, and I need to find experiments that prove this. Sometimes the experiments lead me to believe through their use of the terms (similar) "distributed particulates" and other ambiguous terms that I tend to read them as fight-dispersed.... my bad... until I find an absolute indication. I did post one today and asked for feedback on it.

Actually all your points are well taken except the grid formations and as far as the battlefield use of aerosols, I saw that on an overhead photograph on an online sight discussing the history of combat weather control. I never kept track of my links, so I guess I'll have to search on that one, too.

It's possible that air traffic is more congested now, of course, but the fuels must be different, too. That's all I can figure or did you mention that? And as far as the mountains, the tallest in our area Rocky Mountain terrain are only 14,000ft. and the traffic coming over and toward them daily is immense -- flying at more like 25,000 to 30,000 feet for the airliners passing over. Denver's only 60 miles to our north and the air traffic there is immense as well, more immense for international air traffic than here. I might add that military planes at all altitudes cruise our skies from jets and heliocopters, to air transport craft and many others. And of course training for the Air Force Academy with gliders, parachute jumps, small craft of all kinds always bustles in our skies, especially over our forest and in sight over the Air Force Academy. Might I mention that NORAD makes its home here, too, in Cheyenne Mountain just a few miles south of Pikes Peak? It's a bustling and growing city here as well with the fastest growing population of any city in Colorado, including Denver. We're just ten minutes from town.

Well, I bit off a pretty large chunk there, so expect some links in the near future. I'm researched out from this afternoon.

Two points? Grid patterns and battlefield weather control... those first. Then, lung problems research which could, even if rates are up, point to pollution in general. Increases in fungal infections will be my target then. Particulate dispersal in climate studies.... will have to find conclusive research on that.... but I might post suspect research just to get your spin on it. Did you read anything I posted as far as research?

Thanks for the logical feedback. It's truly appreciated and I respect you for taking the time!

BC :D

Insurrectionchemistry

02-08-2005, 08:56 PM

BC writes:
===
http://www.ubfellowship.org/newbook/ppr096_0.html

This link starts the next chapter on the Hebrews:

http://www.ubfellowship.org/newbook/ppr097_0.html

===

BC,

I have read that and about a thousand more besides that, including the Jewish source materials. You have a real problem with assuming you are an authority.

Lets get down to basics. I don't recall saying I wanted to be called "Jim" by you. My handle is "IS," nothing else. You are so slow and offensive that I may chose not to say much positive toward you.

Now, lets get into these women issues. I tread all people by the same criteria, and it is just based on how they present. If you will note, I give F_S complements on her research and dedication to finding pertinent articles. She is one that shows good sense and well knows the crooks involved in the game. The only bone headed thing that F_S has done is start a contrials thead, when she needed to stay steadfast with the chemtrail theme. Chemtrails because of the HF and hydrocarbon problems that come from jet chemical emissions.

One the other hand, I am real quick to give out bad press to even the good side when they don't think or process well. Halva has received a big load of that in recent times for ignoring the factors, which you recognize above.

Now, for You. You have presented yourself here as a housewife, who timeshares and jumps around all over the place. If your house is as trashed as this Forum here from your copy and pasteing every disconnected thing you can find----then I do feel sorry for hubbie. Your house would be a wreck like this Forum from your lack of concentration and commitment to doing things well. What kind of idiot thinks they can come in cold into something this deep and compete with a person with 20 plus years experence and who even holds the discoveries?

I don't know how this forum came to be so un-blessed with your pea brained arrogance on being an expert in the issues to which this forum likes to speak about using the scientific methods. Your level of understanding is about as useful as a block of granite.

Plus, you can't seem to figure out simple science concepts. So, you cannot even engage in the simple meaningful science discussions with any effectiveness. All you can do is say show me the science. Get one thing down, I am not here to educate you. I am not your education servent. If you want an education in the sciences to the degree needed to get deep into these issues, then go to college and take science. Stop making me the victum of your scientific illiterateness.

Get another thing straight, I won't be your errand boy to make up for your scientic knowledge shortcomings, nor will I let you get away with being a pea-brain-----while acting like you know everything.

Stop trashing this discussion with your wild rambling search for what is going on with chemtrails, global warming, and nature.

All I do is show the pathways toward the right conclusions-----and I am not going to be able to impart 20 years with of knowledge and a multiple degree education to you on this simple forum. You came here unprepared, with your choice to be a Eng Lit major followed by mom and housewife. That is your chosen highest level of achivement. I can't and won't change that impression that you have directly imparted to the list.

I am the very last person that is going to spend the infinite time trying to prove to someone that chose long ago not to be of the science mind or knowledge levels required to understand the deeper details.

I won't engage in trying to prove things to a simple pea brain of any type. It is a waste of my time. Takes too long. Don't even expect it.

Now, as for your associations with thieves. If you make your bed in the company of theives---then expect to be associated with said same. When you can't figure out that free speech should not protect things like De-Bunking to shield the truth of what industry has done to the environment-----then you endorse criminal racketeering. I don't think the De-Bunkers are so slow of mind as to not have long known the main factor in global warming-----which I just tossed out.

What I see is a pea-brained house wife butting in and assuming she can keep up. I see someone buttin in and making a mess of things and being to damn stupid to see it herself.

Thus, my opionion of you started out low and goes ever lower---based only on my observations of your actions and aptitudes. Halva must give up the dunce cap and you get it for eternity.

Halva may be slow at times, but he knows respect. You don't. You know only bloody blind arrogance and absolute stupidity toward the factors involved.

This is what you project here. Except for the De-Bunkers who like the dumb folks---they are had so easily with just a few strokes to their ego. You make an excellent pawn.

IMHO,
is

Boomer Chick

02-08-2005, 08:58 PM

Carnicom. Begrudge, no, actually, I spent quite a bit of time checking out what he has had to say. Here is what I found-

Web samples- Carnicom still refuses to get these alleged samples properly analyzed, or to show an analysis at all. Carnicom isn't interested in the truth if it takes years to get an analysis done:
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/silk.html

Carnicom, Thomas, and David Peterson solicited money through their website and when I asked for a public accounting, as promised, none was forthcoming. $6,000.00 remains unaccounted for:
(see bottom of this link)http://www.carnicom.com/wilbrief.htm
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/aspenscam.html

Carnicom's "barium research" bogus:
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/bariumreport.html

This debunking of Carnicom's "Particulate research" got me banned at Carnicom's board:
http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/particles.html

Finally, I spent a year hounding the EPA using multiple FOIA requests to get a response for Carnicom's "web sample", which he had sent inappropriately to EPA Administartor Carol Browner's office. I believed they handled it as terorist material, but eventually got them to acknowledge him and eventually sent it back so he could get it analyzed. He never has.
:http://worldzone.net/science/reality2u30/FOIA.html

After all my work getting EPA to respond, Carnicom never gave me a word of thanks, and mentioned me on the air as only "A Thrid Party"
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:p3-w-dneseYJ:boards.hbo.com/thread.jspa%3FthreadID%3D100000340%26start%3D60%26 tstart%3D0+carnicom+%22third+party%22&hl=en

PS: Carnicom does have a webpage in reserve so that he can eventually have "plausible denial" of participation in a hoax. It was written by me, but Clifford doesn't have it linked through any of his webpages:
http://www.carnicom.com/altcon1.htm

So, what I have done with carnicom is to debunk false information, assist him in determining excatly how he could prove his case, and even acted as his advocate in his fight against EPA.
What did I get in return? Banned form participation at his forum, and later banning so I cannot even read the forum(though I have found a way to do so anyway. See, Carnicom is dishonest, he lies, cheats, and after these years have passed, I feel no further obligation to play "Mr. Nice Guy" with Clifford Carnicom.

WOW! That puts a clearer light on everything! You really worked hard to nail him, didn't you? And you also worked to help him. I noticed his site isn't updated very often. Very disappointing after all the first couple of years of activity. Well, thanks so much for your work and you don't have to like the guy, obviously. I had no idea of your quite involved history with Clifford. Thank God I only paid 4 dollars for a DVD of his, copied by swampgas and distributed. It wasn't that good, but I liked the nature shots and his background music.... hehehehe!

I'm getting to truly like you, Jay! You're one committed and persistent guy! Stu has impressed me greatly as well, and I hope I can continue to count on you both to present logical cases regarding anything I post. Any feedback for me on the cutting & pasting of research articles?

Yaaky..... I've always liked you for some reason.... just can't get angry with you ever. :D

I was hoping to find a greater link to the sun in all of this climate stuff, but it seems it's only around 25% in the overall change equation.

Then there's the whole subject of weather modification and HAARP and I hope we can all get to the bottom of it somehow. Maybe I'll call up the local Space Command and ask to talk to someone there!! Yeah right! But I could try and see what happens! ;)

Thanks for sharing all this, Jay!

BC :mrgreen:

halva

02-08-2005, 09:05 PM

Halva, would you please explain what you're saying here? I'm lost. You might want to post exactly what you mean here. Are you saying that scientific development is somehow futureless, even regarding atmospheric studies? Your cryptic statement needs clarification.

Thank you.

BC :rolleyes:

The Manhattan Project, starting point of the career of Edward Teller, which closed with his 'chemtrails' climate mitigation proposals, was also starting point for a huge amount of what has since gone wrong with the world.

What I'm saying is that Stalin's henchman Beria was prescient in his intuition that the development of the atomic bomb was a futureless activity for the Soviet Union and that they should be extremely suspicious of the information on how to build atomic bombs that they were receiving from the United States.

In these misgiving of Beria, who is almost universally regarded as one of the most degraded of human beings on account of the way he treated those he saw as political opponents in the the Soviet Union, we see the other, rational, side of his extreme paranoia.

The Communist Soviet Union, like Castro's Communist regime in Cuba, would have had much greater chances of surviving if they had not embarked on the road of nuclear weapons construction and possession.

I have documented that in a number of articles, but the point here is slightly different.

What Beria thought was: not that it was wrong to pour so much energy and resources into building "weapons of mass destruction" as such, but that it was wrong to pour so much energy and resources into following instructions from the United States (albeit from clandestine sources). It could have been misinformation, deliberately designed to get the Soviets wasting their time building something that would not work.

As it turned out, the information they were receiving, (from Klaus Fuchs, and from Ted Hall, both Soviet sympathisers, [particularly the former] and working separately), was reliable at the technical level. It allowed the Russians to build nuclear weapons that....worked, in the sense of making a big bang.

Where they ultimately turned out not to 'work' was at the military and political level. Nuclear weapons did not protect the Soviet Union. They were probably the largest single element in its downfall.

As a footnote, should we read anything into the fact that neither Klaus Fuchs nor Ted Hall were ever punished for sending to the Soviet Union accurate information on how to build the atomic bomb?

Julius Rosenberg, who was executed, and David Greenglass, who avoided execution by fingering his sister Ethel Rosenberg, sent the Soviets INACCURATE information on how to build the atomic bomb, (i.e. the kind of information that Beria was afraid of using).

halva

02-08-2005, 09:15 PM

http://admin.urel.washington.edu/uweek/archives/issue/uweek_story_small.asp?id=2378&paget=section
With the aid of satellites, aerosol testing, chemical anaysis, electronic beaming.... all I posted about.... you would certainly have realized the most obvious fact ...... the bead is aimed at the climate situation and maybe a bit too late, but nonetheless it's aimed and cocked.

I noticed Deborah chastized you over at CTC for not posting a credible article. Well, we all make mistakes. Let's see you post something really scientific that supports your theory. Come on, I dare ya!

BC :rolleyes:

Boomer Chick, your thinking is too soft on this issue in my opinion.

I also think that you are handling our opponent Raynolds more skilfully than you are handling our friend Jim.

Insurrectionchemistry

02-08-2005, 09:20 PM

Boomer Chick

02-08-2005, 09:23 PM

BC writes:
===
http://www.ubfellowship.org/newbook/ppr096_0.html

This link starts the next chapter on the Hebrews:

http://www.ubfellowship.org/newbook/ppr097_0.html

===

Halva may be slow at times, but he knows respect. You don't. You know only bloody blind arrogance and absolute stupidity toward the factors involved.

IMHO,
is

Feel better now? Wow, what a load off your precious ego! Like to play the superior role, do we? Love to put down others to make yourself feel real good, and at the same time avoid linking any of your theories to anyone else's and WIDENING your true credibility gap! So blame it on the housewives of the world, who were once educators themselves. Nice touch. You must feel like a big man now. Whooo! So that's your excuse for not posting anything even relevant to your studies even when guys ask you, intelligent ones?

Great thesis! Housewife ruins board, ruins opportunity for scientist to accept any kind of peer review.... or find any kind of study related to his. Yes, it's all the fault of the curious housewife with the pea brain. I can see the headlines now! It was because of her that the world collapsed and Armeggedon progressed as far as it did. The scientist, unknown, and unrecognized, through his gems or pearls, if you will, thrown to the swine of the domestic female goddess, once choir director/Eng. teacher, and never again did the pearls appear, to be devoured by the profane and the stupid, especially so due to the female gender. Lacking any consideration in her cutting and pasting, she naturally keeps a messy house as well, never to be respected in the queendom of the Stepford Wive's hall of fame. Drawn and quartered, she deserves to be, this goddess of ill repute who dare question the king of the environmental truth warriors.... however lacking in his credibility, like Don Quixote, insisting on his reality vision yet offering empty swipes at windmills. Oh! The dread, the sheer dread of the proportions meated to those who fail to hear the death nell of the bells of the Black Tower. Fie on those who question! Fie on those who with vaginas would dare question the King of Quixoteland! Fie on the those who lack a science education (except oceanography, meteorology, anatomy and physiology and biology) beyond high school who seek to destroy all those who had committed their lives, their very lives, to the quest of scientific truth, even failing the tests of scientific certainly. Oh Fie!

God that was fun!

Thanks, IS, what is, that fails to be.

Signed:

Pea Brain Goddess .... PBG to you! :D

halva

02-08-2005, 09:44 PM

Halva,

If you know Communist Russia, then you know all the great leaders were Jewish. But Jews that rejected religion. Russia was athiets and did not want religion powers competing with Govt powers.

So, one factor to consider in the Russia equation for the close of WWII, is that Russia knew of the "state within state" problems of European religion. When the concentration camps yielded up the great numbers of homeless Jews, the first faction to toss out the holocaust issue were the Russians.

What happened was the Russians overplayed issues of gas chambers were used to leverage the UK into splitting Palestine, and the Jews of the concentration camps moved slowly there-----as well as Russia shed many more Jews into Israel. The Russians rebuilt the gas chambers and appear to be the original source of exaggeration on numbers.

The whole overplayed thing was a political contrivance to benefit the Russians delimma with religion power. The whole cold war dialectic was one based on athiest vs religion---which enables a power system connected to religion's royal reign.

Today, this issue with the poisoning of the Ukraine election with dioxin, is again of the Jewish factors attempting to gain control of Soviet ground.

IMHO,
is

Jim, I know that the Soviet Union played a key role in creation of the state of Israel. They judged that it was in their interest to get the Brits thrown out of Palestine, as indeed happened.

Certainly they are being amply punished for this help they gave 'the Jews'.

Applying the same logic one could say that the Bush II regime in the United States is God's punishment against Americans for their disloyalty to the British Crown when they rose in arms against it.

I like logic of this kind. The revolution for which I have most sympathy is the revolution of 1688 that brought William III to power in Britain.

From that viewpoint both the American revolution and the Zionist revolution in Palestine were insurrections against legitimate authority.

Boomer Chick

02-08-2005, 10:35 PM

Where they ultimately turned out not to 'work' was at the military and political level. Nuclear weapons did not protect the Soviet Union. They were probably the largest single element in its downfall.

As a footnote, should we read anything into the fact that neither Klaus Fuchs nor Ted Hall were ever punished for sending to the Soviet Union accurate information on how to build the atomic bomb?

Isn't this rather off topic?

http://olc.spsd.sk.ca/DE/history20/unit3/sec2_10.html

The nuclear project was codenamed "Manhattan." It included the combined efforts of American, British, and Canadian scientists. The work of many Jewish refugees from Europe was also crucial to the development program. Under the direction of Robert Oppenheimer, over 120,000 people were involved in the project. Through their efforts, a working bomb was ready by the summer of 1945. The German bomb program, on the other hand, had failed, and Germany was defeated before the Allied weapon was ready. Japan was the only enemy left to be defeated, and it became the target for this devastating bomb.

The entire development project was kept under incredible secrecy. The British and Americans shared secrets, but Stalin was kept out of the inner "atomic" circle. However, Stalin received information about the bomb from communist scientists working on the project. He was officially told of the device after it had been successfully tested. In reality, the Soviets had started their own bomb project in 1942, but Stalin never bothered to mention the Russian program to the Americans and British. Even though the Soviet Union and the West were allied against Germany, there was deep distrust.

I great site for the lead up and use of the Bomb, which I have always been against.

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/70-7_23.htm

Another great read with a lot about Russia:

http://www.redstone.army.mil/history/vigilant/chap1.html

According tho everything I skimmed here, the Russians had German scientists from post WWII to help them build their bomb. They detonated their first A bomb in 1949. No way were they going to stop and according to the first article, they were already in R & D in the early forties.

The whole fear mongering attitude toward Communism itself, although it looked as though Stalin was hell bent on overtaking all his neighboring countries, still, that fear.... that "enemy" mentality as always bothered me when reading the history.

Would Russia have been better off for not having developed the bomb? Maybe the world would have been better off if the US had not developed the bomb in the first place! Mutually assured destruction wasn't that fun, now was it? And now look what a mess we're all in? Damn the bomb and damn all those who felt they needed to use it.

The Rosenbergs? I don't know enough about them to say they were indeed guilty. Many say they were not, just foils for the government. I can't say.

Anyway, your thesis is interesting and maybe sometime you'd like to send it to me to read. I hope you read the links and get a better idea of what historians are saying about the era you refer to.

BC

Insurrectionchemistry

02-09-2005, 02:15 AM

Greetings,

There is definitly something upside down when a person with no science credentials thinks they can peer review the chemtrails science, global warming equations, and HAARP. Her actions here only show someone casting about wildly, with no idea where in the hell she is going and no end game in sight. She is the pawn of all pawns for Bunker exploitation.

It becomes really inverted thinking to assume that I would seek out her to review my inventions or sciences. It won't happen. The pea brained woman, whose work experience seems to only involve dust bunny control, thinks she should be deemed an academic genious able to review complex science.

She proposes to turn the academic world upside down and grant her zero level of academic performance in science as some kind of credential for herself to motor mouth to no end in sight. Bloody foul ignorance.

It is persons like this that cause everyone problems, the are butt ugly dumb and don't know when to shut up.

Now the curious thing is the pea brained dust bunny buster has picked up on some of my methods as being highly valid, while those bunk artists that like to pet her ego of ignorance are scrambling to deny these ideas are valid and sound science. That should get embarrasing for the bunk crooks, when a little pea brained housewife can see the science works and the mechanism and concepts all validated by science.

As we continue along the learning curve for the others that can pick up the fine details, we now jump into some HAARP issues. I named HAARP because of the vibrational effects in near space it sought to use to affect climate change. It is also a connection to the religion factors of the Manhattan Project and the armageddom effect, both of which I defined.

HAARP is a product of the follow projects from the Manhattan Project as we figured out the total disaster the fluorine emissions caused the planet. A second Manhattan Project follow on was designed by me, which was to deal with the problems.

HAARP uses ion heating from RF energy from the ground. This heating causes expansion of the ionized gas and can be modulated to make the gas layer respond like a drum head. The principle is just like the one of a flame speaker, where electric current in an ion column makes for sound waves in air.

The multifaceted HAARP project, which I invented, named, and got funded, is now a complex of many projects to study and probe the space above the Earth and learn more of the characteristics.

In the upper atmosphere, these effects can be used to look at Earth's crust vibrational modes and seek out the crusts resonant frequency. It likewise can be used to look at upper atmosphere's bulk gas resonant effects. HAARPs major intent is to deal with this upper layer of lighter than air gases than make up the global warming blanket problem that was induced by the HF's high GWP factor. The lite gas IR absobing compounds that resulted from the HF catalysic effects.

HAARP is a frequency adjile system so the layer in which the ion heating occurs can be changed, and the HAARP system can also pulse width modulate its power emissions so as to induce very low frequency component acoustic like waves. Using the HAARP as a research tool, one can find these resonant factors in this upper layer gas. HAARP can also induce a propagating direction pressure wave in the upper atmosphere, so it can cast off gases from the Earth's gravity confinement.

HAARP's real magic is going to be how well it can induce the latter effects, so as to clean up the upper atmospheres problem with the IR absorbing gases there. Ionized hydrogen can literally escape the Earth's gravity and go off into space all by itself. It is the hope of HAARP experiments that these little higher MW gases can be given the needed boost to kick them off into space also. This will allow mediation of the global warming equation and the global warming blanket.

HAARP's frequency adjile methods can induce an upward expanding pressure wave and provide the net effect of a coronal mass ejection from the Sun. Except in the Earth's case, man is providing the booster wave to correct for stupid oversights from the careless rush into the Manhattan Project and the F losses.

HAARP has many aspects for research and Gaia provided one of the ideas. It was my ideas that got HAARP funded and my name for the project stuck. It is bascially my little invention to clean up the global warming effects. The ideas came right from the Fusion Energy Division sciences that I used to work on with RF plasma heating methods used on ORNL's ISX and EBT Fusion Plasma machines.

All I did was design real world applications for the ion plasma heating system to be used in near space to achieve important goals for literally the existance of this little planet.

Now, do I need a dust bunny pilot to reveiw and comment on my projects the US Govt has invention billions of dollars into putting them into practice? I think not, Hell Not.

Dust bunny pilot is dumb as a rock and is just weighting things down with absolute stupidity.
Get out of the way of information progress and intelligence. Self aggrandizements of your stupidity just won't play well in this Forum. Your run at instant gratification as a self appointed science genious has fallen onto deaf ears. And your fall from grace is only exceeded by Reynolds acceleration into the Abyss.

IMHO,
is

jayreynolds

02-09-2005, 04:12 AM

Now as far as Deborah, I have been reading your big red letters and wondering what it is that "SHE MIGHT KNOW"...... what does that mean? THEY KNOW or SHE KNOWS??? I'm not following here. Could you please tell me what it is someone knows and why she would be privy to knowing it? No, I think you did that. I think you said she knows people who were linked to the CIA/NSA or something and she denied it. Whatever. Just linking CIA/NSA affiliation doesn't tell me anything. I think the WHAT is more important than the WHY at this time. [COLOR=red]WHAT is known? WHAT could be known?
BC ;)

Deborah participated in a group which was the very first to bring about the idea that barium was an ingredient in "chemtrails". That groups report said it included persons trained and associated with the CIA & the NSA. Thus far the identity of the individuals, the reasons why this was said, what these particular individuals said and what they did to prepare the report remains unknown.

Now that four years have passed since that report ws issued, and no actual proof of barium has come out, I feel it is time that Deborah, who should know at minimum SOME of these aswers needs to come forward and tell us what we want to know.

How many times have "chemtrail" believers cried out about government secrecy, whined about how there is a coverup, or when confronted about proof, maintained that it was impossible to get such information because government officials were "stonewalling"?

It is positively STUPIDITY to have YOUR OWN PEOPLE come tell you half a story, then depart and withhold the remaining portion. THIS IS ALSO THE CASE WITH JIM PHELPS.

Along with Deborah , the following people were also involved in the same group and need to comme froward and tell just as much as Deborah does:
'Sore Throat', Diane Harvey, A.C. Griffith, Clifford Carnicom, Kim Weber, Julie King, Tim O'Donnell, and others unnamed.

boomerchick, if you want the truth of this part of the "chemtrails" story, you should join me in asking these questions, as should everybody.I WANT TO KNOW THE WHOLE TRUTH

halva

02-09-2005, 04:18 AM

Isn't this rather off topic?

The topic of the thread is "the Pentagon's" view that climate change is a worse threat than terrorism to American national security.

Originally I wanted to make this the starting point of a discussion of what, in addition to saying that climate change is a threat, "the Pentagon" is actually doing to counter the threat.

But Raynolds came in arguing that I could not prove that they are doing anything.

After some months I conceded him this point, judging that in any case it was better to approach the whole problem in a different way.

Given that the Manhattan Project represents a starting point for a whole complex of policies and behaviours leading through the nuclear arms race and the Star Wars project to the idea of "the Weather as Weapon", I don't think the Manhattan Project is off topic. It is where a lot of what we are talking about started.

And it has been discussed many times before on this thread.

Boomer Chick, I read the first of the links you posted, and skimmed through the second.

Generally speaking I am impressed by the amount of material you are bringing into play, but also agree with Jim Phelps that there is a real danger of information overload and lack of focus.

Gladly I will give you links to what I have written on nuclear weapons, but I think the first thing to do is precisely this: to focus on what the objective of the discussion is here.

Once Raynolds intervened on this thread my objective was to prevent myself being driven away by him.

If we assume that this objective is now secured, i.e. that the debunkers are not going to drive us away and take over the board, then it might be opportune to set ourselves more ambitious, but also more specific, tasks.

According to everything I skimmed here, the Russians had German scientists from post WWII to help them build their bomb....

Would Russia have been better off for not having developed the bomb? Maybe the world would have been better off if the US had not developed the bomb in the first place!

Yes, maybe, but that is changing the subject, isn't it, if the question is would Russia have been better off for not having developed the bomb.

I have concluded that they would have been. And Ted Hall, who helped them get the bomb, said in 1997: "In 1944 I was nineteen years old - immature, inexperienced, and far too sure of myself. I recognize that I could easily have been wrong in my judgement of what was necessary, and that I was indeed mistaken about some things."

My conclusion is that there is one thing worse than a world where one state has weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear weapons, and that is a world where more than one state has weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear weapons.

Many of the people who made the atom bomb, being political liberals who didn't want Nazi Germany to be the first atomic weapons state, later thought that the prospect of a United States monopoly on nuclear weapons possession was too menacing, and that it would be far preferable for nuclear weapons to be under "international control", i.e. the control of the United Nations.

The political dispute between the American "conservatives" identifying the right to possess nuclear weapons with American "national sovereignty" and American "liberals" arguing that nuclear weapons should be under "international control" has for well over half a century been the primary driving mechanism of both vertical and horizontal nuclear arms proliferation.

I support the "conservative" viewpoint. Ted Hall's youthful mistake was that he did not.

The Rosenbergs? I don't know enough about them to say they were indeed guilty. Many say they were not, just foils for the government. I can't say.

Evidently Julius Rosenberg was involved in atomic espionage on behalf of the Soviet Union. But he was the smallest fish. His brother-in-law David Greenglass was low in the hierarchy at Los Alamos, with limited access to information.. Of all the Communist and Communist fellow-travelling atomic weapons spies, Greenglass and Rosenberg were the least useful to the Soviets (given the assumption, which I do not accept, that it was useful for the Soviets to learn how to build atomic bombs).

Ethel Rosenberg was apparently not guilty of spying. She was framed by her brother.

The fact that Julius Rosenberg was executed to me is not as interesting as the fact that the spies who actually gave the Soviets useable atomic weapons information were not executed.

Nuclear weapons are politically still very relevant bearing in mind that every new American war is justified by charges that the state about to be attacked is trying to build nuclear weapons.

Obviously they have a very important symbolic function.

In 1991 Yeltsin would gladly have almost entirely abolished, and perhaps even completely abolished, the Russian nuclear arsenal, in exchange for meaningful economic assistance.
But the American and international decision makers were not interested in making any deal of that kind.

jayreynolds

02-09-2005, 04:29 AM

In these misgiving of Beria, who is almost universally regarded as one of the most degraded of human beings on account of the way he treated those he saw as political opponents in the the Soviet Union, we see the other, rational, side of his extreme paranoia.).
Wayne, watch it. You follow in the footsteps of Beria and Stalin yourself.

halva

02-09-2005, 04:30 AM

jayreynolds

02-09-2005, 05:18 AM

I named HAARP because of the vibrational effects in near space it sought to use to affect climate change. It is also a connection to the religion factors of the Manhattan Project and the armageddom effect, both of which I defined.

HAARP is a product of the follow projects from the Manhattan Project as we figured out the total disaster the fluorine emissions caused the planet. A second Manhattan Project follow on was designed by me, which was to deal with the problems. The multifaceted HAARP project, which I invented, named, and got funded, is now a complex of many projects to study and probe the space above the Earth and learn more of the characteristics.

All I did was design real world applications for the ion plasma heating system to be used in near space to achieve important goals for literally the existance of this little planet.

Hey, Jimmy boy, if any of this is true, tellus who you worked for while designing HAARP, who got the funding for you, and who approved all this, up the chain of command.

What, can't do it?

Do you simply expect us to "believe"?

Are you starting a religion or something?

Insurrectionchemistry

02-09-2005, 08:09 AM

Halva writes:

Jim, Boomer Chick is our queen.

She is still learning how to be a proper queen.

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

Halva,

You should recall that I like equality and the imagery of the round table. Queens represent the old system, the cover ups in religion, the few the attempt to rule the many. In-equality is the imagery of a Queen. She certain thought that she could come in as some female and be immune to rules of science. She blundered about, make a fool out of herself, and was awarded the dunce cap. All via her poor action and lack of knowledge on science.

Queen domination is not something that I have an appreciation for. Not, blooming ignorance. Run away dust bunny chaser can't even figure out that her tax money supports my ideas from the 1980's that have become major projects in the 1990's and beyond. Global warming via man-made effects is what chemtrails and HAARP are most about. It is not even difficult for any science minded person to see the details and the simple facts of the matter leap right off the page at them.

BC, the queen of dust bunny containment, must be from Denver. CO., as this iis the armpit of the west and the sister city to Newark, NJ, the armpit of the East. Ignornace seems to rule in the areas.

American have become some of the dumbest people on the planet these days, simply because few of them learn science in school and they are so content to be fed a constant diet of American propaganda. They all think they need a pill for this and one for that. They like dead over processed food and think this is nutritional. They can't seem to fathom that fluoride are poisons. Then when it comes to understanding what their tax dollars are being spend for they can't tell you.

BC's tax dollars go right into HAARP and other projects, which gives her own tacit approval to my ideas and inventions of the 1980's. Then she has to compound the ignorance with her low level science on the Sun did it.

We don't want no crooked queens dictating science or religion.

IMHO,
is

halva

02-09-2005, 08:31 AM

Well, I would like to see her become a queen who is capable of disciplining you, her unruly subject.

Insurrectionchemistry

02-09-2005, 10:01 AM

Halva writes:

Well, I would like to see her become a queen who is capable of disciplining you, her unruly subject.

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

I rather doubt she will ever have any subjects, except for the Reynolds crime syndicate types.

To have subjects, one has to have the respect. She don't have my respect.

I dare say, the insurrection has begun. Most of it over bad chemistry.

This one is not capable of disciplining herself, let alone little ole me.

People just won't follow idiots, especially if they don't know their natural order sciences.

The queen for a day is being booted.

IMHO,
is

stuart_allsop

02-09-2005, 10:59 AM

I was hoping to find a greater link to the sun in all of this climate stuff, but it seems it's only around 25% in the overall change equation.
You might want to add in the contrail issue: That alone accounts for about 2% to 4% additional albedo, plus unknown effects on trapping heat underneath. There are several studies underway, but the jury is still out on most, last time I checked. Nobody really knows (yet) if contrails produce a net cooling effect or a net warming effect. I vote for net cooling, but I may be wrong.

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 11:25 AM

There is definitly something upside down when a person with no science credentials thinks they can peer review the chemtrails science, global warming equations, and HAARP.

First wrong assumption or goading tactic. Never has anyone claimed that this board is a platform for peer review for any kind of scientist or lonely mad scientist. But because you either cling to your notion of respecting any on this board to perform that task for you, or because I have a penchant for the classic mad scientist, I respond to this diatribe of illusion.

.....no idea where in the hell she is going and no end game in sight. She is the pawn of all pawns for Bunker exploitation.

Pawns are those who can be controlled without a will of their own. Nay, it has never been the case nor is the case now that I allow anyone to control me. I decide who holds the truth through my own analytical/intuitive processes, however unskilled in the mathmatics area, and over time they have served me well. Conceptual truths never allude me. The purpose for the cutting and pasting, however mislead IS interprets, is to reflect the top layer of scientific activity related to climate study. Most studies failed to resonate with IS's theories, though I am open to his further revelations on his molecular studies. All mad scientists, which the term connotes, deal with madness and genius simultaneously and for that very aspect, the doors to consideration remain open.

It becomes really inverted thinking to assume that I would seek out her to review my inventions or sciences.

Again, erroneous assumption. This is not a peer review board. Madness of the genius comes through again.

It is persons like this that cause everyone problems, the are butt ugly dumb and don't know when to shut up.

And what problems are you experiencing, pray tell? Is it the problem of just being heard, afraid you won't be heard? And who's ears can possibly listen, and how many ears are involved? 'Tis a tiny group, an intimate colloquium of far flung individuals who find themselves here and now. Who's to say it was not meant to be?

Now the curious thing is the pea brained dust bunny buster has picked up on some of my methods as being highly valid, while those bunk artists that like to pet her ego of ignorance are scrambling to deny these ideas are valid and sound science. That should get embarrasing for the bunk crooks, when a little pea brained housewife can see the science works and the mechanism and concepts all validated by science.

Indeed, the curiousness of this mad hatter's tea party prompts me to pour you another cup of tea!

As we continue along the learning curve for the others that can pick up the fine details, we now jump into some HAARP issues. I named HAARP because of the vibrational effects in near space it sought to use to affect climate change. It is also a connection to the religion factors of the Manhattan Project and the armageddom effect, both of which I defined.

Yes, daaaahling, you did indeed name the HAARP project? So why did you drop the "F" pray tell? Did you also involve yourself in the time travel experiments and the stargate? And of course the religious significance of both the Manhattan Project and the coming Armageddon no doubt continues to underly all world events and decisions beyond greed, beyond monied elite groups who might indeed possess defective DNA allowing the Dracos to insidiously control the world's markets and the various war scenarios -- via British, American & Euro monied elite Rothchild's, Rockefellers, et al including the CIA drug running support of the Black Ops both fighting with and colluding with the Dracos. And above and beyond that world scenario, the Pleiadeans continue to ready the world for the split in the time space continuum producing a dual planetary reality where the higher vibrational spiritual humans "ascend" into the peaceful planet and the lower vibrational folk remain in the third level density reality to work out their karmic debt in the more negative and warlike scenarios until they finally learn the lessons of God's universe.... love is the way.

How is flourine connected to nuclear atomic reactions?

[quote] A second Manhattan Project follow on was designed by me, which was to deal with the problems.

And the problems were? And your solution.... was?

HAARP uses ion heating from RF energy from the ground. This heating causes expansion of the ionized gas and can be modulated to make the gas layer respond like a drum head. The principle is just like the one of a flame speaker, where electric current in an ion column makes for sound waves in air.

So far understood. Read it many times. Indeed it seems to be factual truth.

The multifaceted HAARP project, which I invented, named, and got funded, is now a complex of many projects to study and probe the space above the Earth and learn more of the characteristics.

You, invented the multifaceted HAARP project? And you got it funded? Is there ANY way you can confirm this bevy of quite unbelievable statements? Just ANY at all?

In the upper atmosphere, these effects can be used to look at Earth's crust vibrational modes and seek out the crusts resonant frequency. It likewise can be used to look at upper atmosphere's bulk gas resonant effects. HAARPs major intent is to deal with this upper layer of lighter than air gases than make up the global warming blanket problem that was induced by the HF's high GWP factor. The lite gas IR absobing compounds that resulted from the HF catalysic effects.

How does a frequency of vibration have the ability to "look." Is it a process of bouncing off and receiving reflective vibrations as in sonar? The Aura satellite is able to measure the plasma ionic effect generated by vibrating geological structures in pre-earthquake conditions. (I posted such an article) The ionic plasma can be detected by the satellite probes. As far as the HAARP system itself being able to receive feedback based on its "sending only" apparatus I find this function not feasible without the assistance of satellite pick up or other receiving devices. HAARP can only send, not receive. Again, "looking" in terms of HAARP must be more clearly defined. "Looking" assumes a feedback mechansim. HAARP can beam, it can heat the ionesphere therebye, it can bounce off of areas which act as lenses or even as a transducers, but the array itself is not a receiver. In conjunction with various receivers I'm sure its vibrations can be received by submarines and even other measurement devices in other experiments. Since the Aura satellite can measure plasma energies, I would assume it may indeed be involved in measuring the various ionic plasma effects and beams the HAARP produces.

HAARP is a frequency adjile system so the layer in which the ion heating occurs can be changed, and the HAARP system can also pulse width modulate its power emissions so as to induce very low frequency component acoustic like waves. Using the HAARP as a research tool, one can find these resonant factors in this upper layer gas. HAARP can also induce a propagating direction pressure wave in the upper atmosphere, so it can cast off gases from the Earth's gravity confinement.

Sounds great! It resonates.

(continued)

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 11:27 AM

HAARP's real magic is going to be how well it can induce the latter effects, so as to clean up the upper atmospheres problem with the IR absorbing gases there. Ionized hydrogen can literally escape the Earth's gravity and go off into space all by itself. It is the hope of HAARP experiments that these little higher MW gases can be given the needed boost to kick them off into space also. This will allow mediation of the global warming equation and the global warming blanket.

It would be its saving grace. Even given my bereft knowledge of chemistry, what you say makes sense. I also have heard it from engineers who claim, as you, to have worked on various government projects. One who recently stated the precise same thing to me is located at
SOS@grandecom.net. I avoid using his real name for his protection. Please feel free to e-mail him and be prepared for another mad scientist who may indeed resonate with you. He worked on many secret projects and is way the fark out there. I love him. He's in his early 70's.

HAARP's frequency adjile methods can induce an upward expanding pressure wave and provide the net effect of a coronal mass ejection from the Sun.

You're sure about that? That would be quite the ionic stimulator! Are you sure the power factor is there? I posted on CME's and their quantitative power ratios. Can you go back and find those posts and clearly compare the power outputs?

Except in the Earth's case, man is providing the booster wave to correct for stupid oversights from the careless rush into the Manhattan Project and the F losses.

What are Flosses? Booster wave? The electro-magnetic pulses propagating ionic stimulation and plasma production? And did the atomic explosions create in themselves an imbalance?

HAARP has many aspects for research and Gaia provided one of the ideas.

Cool!

It was my ideas that got HAARP funded and my name for the project stuck. It is bascially my little invention to clean up the global warming effects. The ideas came right from the Fusion Energy Division sciences that I used to work on with RF plasma heating methods used on ORNL's ISX and EBT Fusion Plasma machines.

Quite fascinating! If you were to disclose your true connections, would that put you in harm's way? My friend who worked on projects won't join any boards because of his position. Do you feel the same? Is this why the tiny board involvement and the low profile? So actually you can't give proof to any of this because of your precarious position. Right? You are a kind of whistleblower but you can't come out for fear of your very life, probably. So the feds have you in their clutches as well. Maybe you should write a book and publish it anonymously. Then on your death bed you can confess that it was all true.

All I did was design real world applications for the ion plasma heating system to be used in near space to achieve important goals for literally the existance of this little planet.

Is THAT all you did? Well........ you had better march right back into the lab and tell those Saudi British owners of the system to clean up the atmosphere with that thang! Forget about the weaponry aspect, let's get this place cleaned up! ;)

Now, do I need a dust bunny pilot to reveiw and comment on my projects the US Govt has invention billions of dollars into putting them into practice? I think not, Hell Not.

Hell no! But in your position, you have to take what you can get. Flying under the radar isn't easy. So why don't you and my friend get together and plan a way to leak it out to the public. Leak it so the pressure is on, without your identities exposed? How sad to have to deal with lower level intellects and clandestine attempts to share your knowledge. What happened? Did they fire you? Have they threatened you? You simply must find like minds with which to share your outrage and your genius. Please e-mail my friend as he may indeed feel the same way as you. At least you can share your science (he's brilliant) and recognize eachother's genius, thus relieving weight off one another's burdens. You ex-engineers and creative geniuses need mutual support!

I admit to all that I have made the leap of faith with IS. I am well aware of it and will keep my positions open.... all of them. Time will tell.

Best wishes, IS.

BC

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 11:31 AM

Well, I would like to see her become a queen who is capable of disciplining you, her unruly subject.

Halva, for God's sake. You're projecting some kind of weird queen epithet on me, which again comes from your own mind, not mine. Please contain your fantasies. Thank you.

BC

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 11:37 AM

Jim, you keep talking about HF and showing us nothing. Jay and I have spent many hours attempting to prove that you are correct, but we can find nothing.

Let me repeat that - Jay and I have spent many hours attempting to prove that you are correct.

We're the best friends you have. Help us out a little, would you please? All of the data that we can find indicate that after rising into the atmosphere, HF is rained out. That's it. End of story.

You claim that synergism occurs between HF and what, CFC's? SF6?

Specifically, what happens? Do you have any kind of proof?

(synergism: the joint effect of agents that is increased beyond the effects of each agent separately.)

Yaak, I find this quite legitmate and reasonable. Just proving that little bit of science would truly add to the credibility quotient. I can't see, if it's true that he was an insider, that this little bit of supportive science would blow his cover.

IS, the jury is still out, basically. Open minds prevail so if you want to prove at least one tiny bit of your science, you can prove it to Yaak and the guys. It may go over my head in terms of knowing chemistry, but not theirs. So I will watch and see what happens. Call me a catalyst if you must, in chemistry terms. Perhaps that is my purpose here.

BC

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 12:06 PM

You might want to add in the contrail issue: That alone accounts for about 2% to 4% additional albedo, plus unknown effects on trapping heat underneath. There are several studies underway, but the jury is still out on most, last time I checked. Nobody really knows (yet) if contrails produce a net cooling effect or a net warming effect. I vote for net cooling, but I may be wrong.

Yes, you're right on the percentages, I saw that on the graphic. From what I read, the EXTRA warming occurs in the PM as heat attempts to radiate upward and is prevented, and the cooling occurs during the sunlight hours with the reflective and filtering nature of the cloud cover regarding the sun. One could cancel the other, or one could favor the other. It probably depends on the density of the cloud cover in the PM, as well as the various aerosol components and the heat-absorbing quality of the earth below. The more persistent the contrail cirrus, the more retaining of the earth's heat. DUH!

I'm sure the world's scientists can figure it out! That was my whole point in posting all the articles and research.

Another point I was making regarded the Arctic ice melting, specifically the 30-year old ice that had built up. The ice core evidence proved that wind changes created the melting, not the sun or the heat factor or even the global warming factor. In that study, the cyclic nature of the winds was primary to any heat factor. And they stipulated that the winds were cyclic in nature and that the former conditions would return and the ice would once again freeze up for another 30 years at some point in the future. The cycle seems to be one of several decades. Then the question comes up, why the wind change? And could that relate directly to the sun? Guess they'll figure it out.

Thanks!

BC :)

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 12:19 PM

Deborah Stark participated in a group which was the very first to bring about the idea that barium was an ingredient in "chemtrails". That groups report said it included persons trained and associated with the CIA & the NSA. Thus far the identity of the individuals, the reasons why this was said, what these particular individuals said and what they did to prepare the report remains unknown.

Now that four years have passed since that report ws issued, and no actual proof of barium has come out, I feel it is time that Deborah, who should know at minimum SOME of these aswers needs to come forward and tell us what we want to know.

How many times have "chemtrail" believers cried out about government secrecy, whined about how there is a coverup, or when confronted about proof, maintained that it was impossible to get such information because government officials were "stonewalling"?

It is positively STUPIDITY to have YOUR OWN PEOPLE come tell you half a story, then depart and withhold the remaining portion. THIS IS ALSO THE CASE WITH JIM PHELPS.

Along with Deborah Stark, the following people were also involved in the same group and need to comme froward and tell just as much as Deborah does:
'Sore Throat', Diane Harvey, A.C. Griffith, Clifford Carnicom, Kim Weber, Julie King, Tim O'Donnell, and others unnamed.

boomerchick, if you want the truth of this part of the "chemtrails" story, you should join me in asking these questions, as should everybody.I WANT TO KNOW THE WHOLE TRUTH

Thanks again! I can relate to your frustration here. Perhaps only one person in the group had the insider information and they are bound to secrecy? Perhaps Deborah used some obscure past reference of someone who really didn't know squat but gave the impression that they did just because they worked in some government facility, and then Deborah used the CIA/NSA as a credibility booster in their claims. Perhaps the connection to the government agencies are actually bogus. Have you tried listening and accepting what Deborah says? Maybe she just edited and the other individuals came and went and gave false credentials. We have to consider all scenarios, don't we?

Of course we want to get to the truth of the matter. That's a given, or we wouldn't be on this board or wouldn't have an interest either in debunking and/or researching.

And, yes, I feel the same frustration with IS.

Is there a way to go around this possible fallacy and get to the barium issue without these peeps or their claims?

BC :)

cikgu

02-09-2005, 01:35 PM

[QUOTE=halva]Arianna Huffington has just written an article called 'The Pentagon Sounds the Alarm on Global Warming'. At the end of it she says: 'The Democratic nominee needs to remind the White House — and the American people: It’s not nice to fool with Mother Nature.'

Hi Ariana,

Just to let you know the existance of Enviroman at http://enviromansays.blogspot.com

Would like to quote you there:

Arianna Huffington says: "The Democratic nominee needs to remind the White House — and the American people: It’s not nice to fool with Mother Nature."

plus provide a link back to this thread, and requesting for permission.

Or even better, hoping you would hop over there and make your comment about fooling with Ma Nature.

Insurrectionchemistry

02-09-2005, 01:36 PM

BC (the Colorado dust bunny collector) writes:

"Yaak and the guys. It may go over my head in terms of knowing chemistry, but not theirs. So I will watch and see what happens. Call me a catalyst if you must, in chemistry terms. Perhaps that is my purpose here. "

===========

You a catalysist, such blatant perfumery. Call you an idiot again is more the correct observation. Get Yaak the CAD system idiot to evaluate something chemical is like asking the janitor to be the astronaught. Doomed for instant disaster, such an idiot's suggestion. Janitors in Oak Ridge make more than CAD operators like Yaak. They would likely even know more about fluorine chemistry.

Moron Yaak is off trying to prove HF reacts with CFC and SF-6, when the fluorinated gases have zero reactivity with HF. Like always, they purposfully distort words. Neither CFCs or SF-6 are considered hydrocarbons.

I plainly said that HF reacts with the hydrocarbons in the atmopshere left over from billions and cars and jet plane exhausts. Incomplete combusion provides the sources of lots of hydrocarbons in the atmosphere.

I even used a specific industrial analogy to the problem using the HF catalysist in the oil refining distillation column process.

When idiots attempt to do even simple science what comes out it only increased idiocy. CAD operators can't even get the starting point criteria right. They evidently think CFCs and SF-6 are defined as hydrocarbons.

So, "Queen of the De-Bunkers," BC, has proven she is dumb as a block of stone one more time, and emphasized her pick of science expert that can't even listen to the point of repeating the simple HF and hydro-carbon catalytic synergism criteria.

Take your idiots, yourself, and your stupid suggestings somewhere else. Nobody would go get a CAD operator to do chemical sciences----but some dumb dust bunny from Colorado.

Like I said, the guilt or innocence of Jay Reynods and his gang---which includes BC----shall be determined by his admission or denial of this synergism process of HF with atmospheric hydrocarbons inducing the global warming blanket problem. Jay Reynolds can hardly deny the reactions take place as the HF process in refineries that he worked for used the same chemical method. Jay Reynolds cannot even claim the reactions don't take place in the atmosphere or the similarity of the atmosphere process to fractional distillation column processes.

BC's guilt or innocence in helping to cover up the process of the global warming equation by how well she supports the crooks.

At the moment, BC's guilt in the cover up appears very intentional. Even collaberation with those long intent on the cover up. Perhaps you and Reynolds would like a long term relational session in a nice Fed Prison someday, for aiding in the cover up processes.

IMHO,
is

stuart_allsop

02-09-2005, 01:50 PM

Well, you do make excellent points, I must admit. Thank you! Glad to know my efforts are appreciated.

I will have to find those satellite pics online and the maps you recommend, are they available online? I really don't fancy buying such things.They only cost a couple of dollars, but fair enough I can understand you not wanting to spend that: You'd only need them to see the point I'm trying to make, and then you'd have no further use for them (unless you decide to go to Flying School!!! :) )

Not sure if they are available on-line, but you might ask Dave (B1Blancer) over at Mav's place. He is currently a licensed pilot in the USA, whereas I live in Chile. He can probably tell you where to look, or maybe even scan one of his own and post it for you.

The one point I have to disagree on is the gridlike formations done in practically simultanous time. I've seen the pics and read the testimonies and really must adhere to my conclusion on this one.Why? What is it about the grids that you think is suspicious? Please try to explain as accurately as possible WHAT characteristcs bother you, and WHY you think they don't fit the pattern of normal airline contrails. If you can do that, then I'll have a go at laying your fears to rest.

we're in a rather air popular space, actually, with flights from Denver to Phoenix, Denver to Las Vegas, all kinds of other flights from California east, and four Air Force Bases right here --- Peterson AFB, the Space Command Headquarters, the US Air Force Academy, and Ft. Carson which has air units, as well as a national Airport, and a couple of small craft airports. If there was ever a place a person could learn to fly, it's our community. I have not seen those gridlike cloud formations around here AT ALL. Exactly! If you are surrounded by so MANY airports, then clearly MOST of the air traffic in your area is either coming or going: Ie., it is either taking off or landing, and is therefore too low to be producing contrails, under normal conditions. The only contrails you will see in your area are those made by planes that are NOT going to or coming from any of your your various local airports. Planes cruising at 30,000 feet and up need to start their landing descents at least a hundred or so miles out, probably more, and planes climbing out after take of won't reach their final cruise altitude until they are at least a couple of hundred miles away. So the only contrails you will see are overflights from elsewhere to elsewhere, or perhaps aircraft in holding patterns or the military on maneuvers.

Sometimes the experiments lead me to believe through their use of the terms (similar) "distributed particulates" and other ambiguous terms that I tend to read them as fight-dispersed.... my bad...Depending on the context, that most likely refers to a STATISTICAL distribution of particulates, such as on a bell curve, scatter-chart, or some such.

Actually all your points are well taken except the grid formationsOK, so let's start with that one. Grid patterns. That's actually one of the easiest to explain, but the hardest to grasp, because it involves thinking and visualizing in 3D, not 2D. Most people think of the sky like it was painted on the inside of a dome, and airways as a system of streets and avenues, also painted up there. It takes a conscious effort to forget that concept, and visualize it as being a VOLUME of space, with things happening at numerous levels, all at once... I'm sure you can do that, though, due to your artisitc background. PLEASE remember to think in 3D when I get into the grid explanations. That is the key.

and as far as the battlefield use of aerosols, I saw that on an overhead photograph on an online sight discussing the history of combat weather control. I never kept track of my links, so I guess I'll have to search on that one, too. Cool! Sounds interesting. Let me know when you find it.

It's possible that air traffic is more congested now, of course, You'd be surprised at just how MUCH more congested it is! It is not just "possible" that it is a bit more congested, it is cold hard fact:

http://www.people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch3en/conc3en/evolairtransport.html

Between 1977 and 2001, air traffic QUINTUPLED, ie, it increased by over 500%! So, on average, no matter where you are, there are at least FIVE TIMES as many planes above you today as there were back in the late 70's, and if you happen to be on a busy airway or close to a major navaid, then it could easily be ten or twenty times as much airtraffic....

..but the fuels must be different, too.Nope. Jet-A1 has remained essentialy unchanged over the decades. It's a litltle cleaner these days (less sulfur), but basically the same.

Now, what HAS changed, is the engines. In the 80's most new airliners were fitted with high-bypass turbofan engines, instead of the older pure turbo-jet engines, and many older airliners were also refitted with these same new engines in order to meet newer stricter noise-pollution regulations near airports. The newer engines are not only quieter, they are much mure fuel efficient, and the exhaust plume is MUCH broader, cooler, turbulent and non-laminar than with the older engines. In other words, the exhaust plumes of the high-bypass engines are ideal for making contrails, and the contrails they make are much larger than the older engines. And when I say larger, I mean MUCH larger, as in about 20 times the cross sectional area...

And as far as the mountains, the tallest in our area Rocky Mountain terrain are only 14,000ft.PLENTY high enough to produce abundant mountain waves, lenticular clouds, interference patterns, gravity waves, uplift, downdrafts, and numerous other weather effects.

and the traffic coming over and toward them daily is immense -- flying at more like 25,000 to 30,000 feet for the airliners passing over. Denver's only 60 miles to our north and the air traffic there is immense as well, more immense for international air traffic than here.If they are flying over at 30,000 feet, then they are very likely NOT going to land in Denver! They'd have to be dropping at something in excess of 4,000 feer per minute, which is beyond the absolute limit for most airliners, unless they do a few procedural turns on the way down (race-track patterns, etc.).

Two points? Grid patterns and battlefield weather control... those first.
OK. Grid patterns it is, then!

You shoot first, as outlined above. Remember: think in 3D!

Thanks for the logical feedback. It's truly appreciated and I respect you for taking the time!You are entirely welcome. And thank you for keeping an open mind, gracefully recognizing when one of the chemmie myths has been exploded, and being honest enough to admit it, cede the point, and go on to the next. That is, indeed, unusal in a chemmie. And if we keep it up like this, hopefully you won't even BE a chemmie just a few days from now!!! :)

halva

02-09-2005, 02:31 PM

Halva, for God's sake. You're projecting some kind of weird queen epithet on me, which again comes from your own mind, not mine. Please contain your fantasies. Thank you.

BC

Yes, alas and alack.

So sad having to rely on my own mind rather than yours.

And it would be nice to have not only Raynolds ignore-listed but also an orderly environment here where one could obtain an education.

So it goes.

Insurrectionchemistry

02-09-2005, 02:39 PM

Well, there we have it. Yaak does not have a college degree and likely went to a two week technical school to learn how to drive a mouse for a computer. It is his only talent.

Yaak knows nothing about chemistry and can't even get the basic thesis down and repeat it successfully.

Which likely means the PC boards the engineers get back don't ever work. Which is why he has the long list of all the companies he has worked for. Appears he can't hold down a job for any length of time.

Plus, he can only afford 2 gallons of gasoline every year.

Like I said-----a janitor from Oak Ridge is smarter.

IMHO,
is

Insurrectionchemistry

02-09-2005, 02:46 PM

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 03:47 PM

Here we go with more lies from Simon Stuart again.

Jet planes these days run dominately on JP-8, not A-1, and the JP-8 is the product of refineries that rely on aluminum and Zeolyte and other catalysists. These refineries conserve the hydrogen in the fuel refining process that is boosted by the Sulfur removal process using hydrogen.

JP-8 jet fuel is the highest hydrogen jet fuel made for the jet engines.

Someone said JP-8 jetfuel? I can confirm the above statement and add some concerns as well.

JP-8 jet fuel

Does NATO's New 'Dream Fuel'Cause Cancer?

By Bryant Furlow
Exclusive from New Scientist magazine:
http://www.newscientist.com/dail...=ns9999876
6-17-1
http://www.newscientist.com/ns/9...njets.html

A senator has demanded that the US Navy hand over documents that could reveal if a link exists between a military fuel and a cluster of 14 childhood leukaemia cases near a naval airbase in Nevada.

Concerns about health risks have mounted since the fuel, called JP-8, was introduced to American airbases in the 1990s after trials in Britain in the 1980s.

Animal tests have shown that it can cause lung, kidney and liver damage, and is highly toxic to the immune system. The Pentagon has even commissioned studies to determine whether JP-8 exposure contributed to Gulf
War syndrome.

Now Harry Reid, a senator for Nevada, has filed formal requests to the Navy, the federal Office of Pipeline Safety and pipeline company Kinder Morgan to disclose
records related to JP-8 leaks and spills around the airbase in Fallon, Nevada. "When we talk about causes of the leukaemia cluster, jet fuel is the number one thing mentioned," says Reid.

Universal fuel

JP-8 consists of a complex mixture of hydrocarbons, including polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and benzene, a known carcinogen. Its low freezing point means it can be used in all climates. {[and ALTITUDES ?]} The Pentagon sees JP-8 as a "universal battlefield fuel" for NATO, capable of powering trucks, tanks and even infantry stoves as well as planes.

But military personnel and people living near airbases can be exposed to a superfine mist, or aerosol, of unburnt JP-8 produced as a plane's engines warm up
before and during takeoff. {[Can it therefore be run through engines as an aerosol during flight?]lku}

In breath tests for PAHs, all airbase personnel studied
have tested positive for JP-8 exposure. Animal studies have shown that inhaling JP-8 increases lung permeability and can damage the DNA of lung
and liver cells--and thus potentially cause cancer (New Scientist, 28 March 1998, p 6).

Recent research has also shown that it is extremely toxic to the immune system.
Mark Witten, a toxicologist at the University of Arizona, Tucson, whose work is funded by the US Air Force, was astounded by what JP-8 does to mice
that inhale it. "It's just wrecking their immune systems," he says. "I've never seen a chemical that can so completely wipe out an animal's defences."

Breaking barriers

Part of the problem with JP-8 is that it doesn't readily evaporate, so it's more likely to soak into the skin and lungs. What's more, there's some evidence that
the performance-enhancing additives in the fuel disrupt the molecular arrangement of the outermost layer of skin {[and perhaps, LUNGS?]} poking holes in the body's main barrier against alien chemicals.

Even after brief exposure, the number of immune T cells in mice plummet and their thymus (where immune cells mature) shrinks, while B cells proliferate. So severe and sustained are the effects that Witten and his colleague David Harris, also at the University of Arizona, worry that repeated exposure could increase the risk of autoimmune diseases and cancer,
ESPECIALLY IN THE PRESENCE OF OTHER FACTORS SUCH AS
PESTICIDES.

Nightmare scenario

Witten is now studying whether JP-8 causes breaks in DNA strands in the animals' bone marrow cells, potentially triggering leukaemia. It's already known
that the children of parents who are exposed to hydrocarbons at work have a greater risk of developing acute lymphoblastic leukaemia - the type of childhood
leukaemia in 13 of the 14 confirmed cases in Fallon.

"My nightmare scenario is that there are fifty other clusters like Fallon out there," says Witten.

The effects of exposure to aerosols and spills on children and pregnant women have yet to be studied. But when pregnant mice are exposed, Harris recently
discovered, up to 70 per cent of offspring die and surviving pups have abnormal white blood cells.

The US Navy vigorously denies that JP-8 poses any risk.

But leukaemia experts such as Peter Domer of the University of Chicago agree that Witten's concerns are well founded. Hydrocarbons in JP-8 such as naphthalene or benzene are capable of causing the sorts of genetic damage seen in childhood leukaemia, Domer says.

___________________

Two more studies confirming lung conditions:

http://www.stormingmedia.us/53/5302/A530224.html

http://www.stormingmedia.us/89/8907/A890714.html

______________________

Yeah, I know it was a bit off topic to bring in the health factors, but hey, that's part of awareness and the environmental-health concerns related to jet JP-8 jet fuel itself.

BC

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 03:51 PM

Interesting bit of information kind of refuting the greater ICE CRYSTAL formation of JP-8 jet fuel:

http://www.csgnetwork.com/jetfuel.html/

JP-8

JP-8 is the military equivalent of Jet A-1 with the addition of corrosion inhibitor and anti-icing additives; it meets the requirements of the U.S. Military Specification MIL-T-83188D. JP-8 also meets the requirements of the British Specification DEF STAN 91-87 AVTUR/FSII (formerly DERD 2453). NATO Code F-34.

JET A-1

Jet A-1 is a kerosine grade of fuel suitable for most turbine engined aircraft. It is produced to a stringent internationally agreed standard, has a flash point above 38°C (100°F) and a freeze point maximum of -47°C. It is widely available outside the U.S.A. Jet A-1 meets the requirements of British specification DEF STAN 91-91 (Jet A-1), (formerly DERD 2494 (AVTUR)), ASTM specification D1655 (Jet A-1) and IATA Guidance Material (Kerosine Type), NATO Code F-35.

Fuel System Icing Inhibitors (Anti-icing additives) reduce the freezing point of water precipitated from jet fuels due to cooling at high altitudes and prevent the formation of ice crystals which restrict the flow of fuel to the engine. This type of additive does not affect the freezing point of the fuel itself. Anti-icing additives can also provide some protection against microbiological growth in jet fuel.

Corrosion inhibitors protect ferrous metals in fuel handling systems, such as pipelines and fuel storage tanks, from corrosion. Some corrosion inhibitors also improve the lubricating properties (lubricity) of certain jet fuels.

More "SUSPENDED PARTICLES" produced by additive JP-8 :

http://www.stormingmedia.us/39/3929/A392914.html

Authors:J. S. Ervin; D. Atkins; C. Obringer; AIR FORCE RESEARCH LAB WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OH

Abstract: The objective of this research is to obtain images of the freezing of hydrocarbon fuels within a simple flow to assist understanding of the interaction between the flow and phase change dynamics. Another objective is to describe a computational model of the freezing process. JPTS, Jet A, and additized Jet A samples were cooled in a rectangular, aluminum chamber with quartz viewing windows. Images and surface temperatures were recorded during the solidification process. The images tracked the advancing freezing front and the influence of the buoyancy-driven flow. Cooling of JPTS resulted in the lowest volume of solids. When cooled, Jet A fuel containing a low-temperature additive exhibited a smaller solid volume than did the neat fuel. In addition, the additized Jet A fuel developed a population of suspended particles that was greater than that of neat Jet A fuel.

Limitations: APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE NATO FURNISHED

Description: Conference paper

Something to consider!

BC

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 04:11 PM

Yes, alas and alack.

So sad having to rely on my own mind rather than yours.

And it would be nice to have not only Raynolds ignore-listed but also an orderly environment here where one could obtain an education.

So it goes.

Yes, it is indeed sad.... oh well. Es la vida. :p Oh dear H, anal retentiveness strikes us all at times. Why one time I was so excited to go see John Kerry and John Edwards one day that I simply stopped my bodily processes! Hmmm. So I can indeed relate. :shock: Mindal retentiveness might be a temporary condition as well that we all suffer from at times.

So, jump in the fray and make the best of your stay! You are the prime mover of you!

BC :D

airtankerpilot

02-09-2005, 04:41 PM

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 05:15 PM

Airliners are not fueled with JP-8, they are fueled on Jet A, or Jet A1.. Go to a civilian airport and see if you can buy JP-8. JP-8 is a military spec jet fuel. However the Navy uses JP-5, I think this has been covered already here.

Yes, you are correct about civilian jet airplane fuel!!!

http://www.csgnetwork.com/jetfuel.html/

AVIATION TURBINE FUEL (JET FUEL)

CIVIL JET FUELS

Aviation turbine fuels are used for powering jet and turbo-prop engined aircraft and are not to be confused with Avgas. Outside former communist areas, there are currently two main grades of turbine fuel in use in civil commercial aviation : Jet A-1 and Jet A, both are kerosine type fuels. There is another grade of jet fuel, Jet B which is a wide cut kerosine (a blend of gasoline and kerosine) but it is rarely used except in very cold climates.

JET A-1

Jet A-1 is a kerosine grade of fuel suitable for most turbine engined aircraft. It is produced to a stringent internationally agreed standard, has a flash point above 38°C (100°F) and a freeze point maximum of -47°C. It is widely available outside the U.S.A. Jet A-1 meets the requirements of British specification DEF STAN 91-91 (Jet A-1), (formerly DERD 2494 (AVTUR)), ASTM specification D1655 (Jet A-1) and IATA Guidance Material (Kerosine Type), NATO Code F-35.

JET A

Jet A is a similar kerosine type of fuel, produced to an ASTM specification and normally only available in the U.S.A. It has the same flash point as Jet A-1 but a higher freeze point maximum (-40°C). It is supplied against the ASTM D1655 (Jet A) specification.

JET B

Jet B is a distillate covering the naphtha and kerosine fractions. It can be used as an alternative to Jet A-1 but because it is more difficult to handle (higher flammability), there is only significant demand in very cold climates where its better cold weather performance is important. In Canada it is supplied against the Canadian Specification CAN/CGSB 3.23

BC ;)

Insurrectionchemistry

02-09-2005, 06:24 PM

If it is a gasoline blend fuel---it will have even more hydrogen content.

Kerosine fuels more hydrogen than naptha's.

The Navy likes the lower hydrogen fuels----seemingly so they don't draw a line to the carriers.

IMHO,
is

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 06:27 PM

Thank you! Glad to know my efforts are appreciated.

They only cost a couple of dollars, but fair enough I can understand you not wanting to spend that: You'd only need them to see the point I'm trying to make, and then you'd have no further use for them (unless you decide to go to Flying School!!!

Not sure if they are available on-line, but you might ask Dave (B1Blancer) over at Mav's place. He is currently a licensed pilot in the USA, whereas I live in Chile. He can probably tell you where to look, or maybe even scan one of his own and post it for you.

Could you please ask him since you post over there and I don't? T'would appreciate it. You brought up the map business, so you could at least provide the link. Yes?

Why? What is it about the grids that you think is suspicious? Please try to explain as accurately as possible WHAT characteristcs bother you, and WHY you think they don't fit the pattern of normal airline contrails. If you can do that, then I'll have a go at laying your fears to rest.

Like I said, Stu, I did not witness them myself but I've seen the pics and read the descriptions. They describe and I've seen, patterns laid by multiple craft at probably varying altitudes, simultaneously and within a one to two hour period. The patterns were not random like the patterns of air traffic, which I tried to describe to you as a first hand witness....no uniformity whatsover. The pics showed tic tac toe looking grids, very precise of which the final outcome was a very thick cloud cover.... saw both before and after pics. This is NOT normal flight patterns nor normal airliner aircraft behavior where the planes go back and forth in one geographic area, side to side if you will and with multiple planes. Of course it would have to be regulated according to altitude or they'd run into eachother, duh, and don't forget .... I'm quite well aware of 3D. Are you buying that pea brain crap? OMG! And, I might add, the airplanes themselves were unmarked and not of the airliner variety as per witness testimony and pics. How does one explain that away?

Exactly! If you are surrounded by so MANY airports, then clearly MOST of the air traffic in your area is either coming or going: Ie., it is either taking off or landing, and is therefore too low to be producing contrails, under normal conditions. The only contrails you will see in your area are those made by planes that are NOT going to or coming from any of your your various local airports. Planes cruising at 30,000 feet and up need to start their landing descents at least a hundred or so miles out, probably more, and planes climbing out after take of won't reach their final cruise altitude until they are at least a couple of hundred miles away. So the only contrails you will see are overflights from elsewhere to elsewhere, or perhaps aircraft in holding patterns or the military on maneuvers.

Yes, indeed.

Depending on the context, that most likely refers to a STATISTICAL distribution of particulates, such as on a bell curve, scatter-chart, or some such.

This is the only experiment I could find today: Definitive proof of one experiment regarding Barium released in the atmosphere, wow, 1971 ~~ ! Well, the implications of this paper implies, if not outright and brings to realization the fact that indeed experiements involving chemical releases into the air from aircraft have existed in the past, therefore they exist today. Might I add that the injected vapor is then translated into particulate form. Another implication of this old research? They're far beyond what many of us can imagine! Please read this, Stu and give me your take.

http://pubs.acs.org/ncw/2003/articles/j100680a009.pdf

OK, so let's start with that one. Grid patterns. That's actually one of the easiest to explain, but the hardest to grasp, because it involves thinking and visualizing in 3D, not 2D. Most people think of the sky like it was painted on the inside of a dome, and airways as a system of streets and avenues, also painted up there. It takes a conscious effort to forget that concept, and visualize it as being a VOLUME of space, with things happening at numerous levels, all at once... I'm sure you can do that, though, due to your artisitc background. PLEASE remember to think in 3D when I get into the grid explanations. That is the key.

;) Was always aware of that. It's not hard to imagine even when one is not a pilot. I have flown before quite a few times, so the view from above is often quite different, but visual clues such as size and type of air vehicle, noise level, etc. help one determine the various naked eye ground level estimations of altitude as well.

Cool! Sounds interesting. Let me know when you find it.

Whoops, can't remember what that was I said. Only quoted you, so I lost my text. Will go back and find it.

You'd be surprised at just how MUCH more congested it is! It is not just "possible" that it is a bit more congested, it is cold hard fact:

http://www.people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch3en/conc3en/evolairtransport.html

Between 1977 and 2001, air traffic QUINTUPLED, ie, it increased by over 500%! So, on average, no matter where you are, there are at least FIVE TIMES as many planes above you today as there were back in the late 70's, and if you happen to be on a busy airway or close to a major navaid, then it could easily be ten or twenty times as much airtraffic....

Nope. Jet-A1 has remained essentialy unchanged over the decades. It's a litltle cleaner these days (less sulfur), but basically the same.

Well, the military jet engines have changed. See my recent posts. In the instance of JP-8 jet fuel, the post combustion particulates are increased, the toxicity level at the pre-combustion stage is toxic to humans, and the ice particle formation is lessened. Many who have witnessed gridlike sprayings note that the vehicles are military issue. Not civic airliners.

Now, what HAS changed, is the engines. In the 80's most new airliners were fitted with high-bypass turbofan engines, instead of the older pure turbo-jet engines, and many older airliners were also refitted with these same new engines in order to meet newer stricter noise-pollution regulations near airports. The newer engines are not only quieter, they are much mure fuel efficient, and the exhaust plume is MUCH broader, cooler, turbulent and non-laminar than with the older engines. In other words, the exhaust plumes of the high-bypass engines are ideal for making contrails, and the contrails they make are much larger than the older engines. And when I say larger, I mean MUCH larger, as in about 20 times the cross sectional area...

Interesting.

PLENTY high enough to produce abundant mountain waves, lenticular clouds, interference patterns, gravity waves, uplift, downdrafts, and numerous other weather effects.

If they are flying over at 30,000 feet, then they are very likely NOT going to land in Denver! They'd have to be dropping at something in excess of 4,000 feer per minute, which is beyond the absolute limit for most airliners, unless they do a few procedural turns on the way down (race-track patterns, etc.).

Well, many airliners do descend over the mountains into Denver many times daily. Of course we can't view it. Yes, I agree with everything.

OK. Grid patterns it is, then!

You shoot first, as outlined above. Remember: think in 3D!

You are entirely welcome. And thank you for keeping an open mind, gracefully recognizing when one of the chemmie myths has been exploded, and being honest enough to admit it, cede the point, and go on to the next. That is, indeed, unusal in a chemmie. And if we keep it up like this, hopefully you won't even BE a chemmie just a few days from now!!! :)

Well, I never was a so-called "chemmie" remember? I was alwyas just me, a free agent and unable to classify. I joined CTC in order to learn and read. I got involved with 911 issues over there, mainly. Letxa joined the CTC board a few months after my joining. Thanks for seeing that I am not stubborn and entrenched in my views, and that I'm open to verified and accurate information. Very refreshing on my side, too!

Thanks, babe!

BC

jayreynolds

02-09-2005, 06:31 PM

Is there a way to go around this possible fallacy and get to the barium issue without these peeps or their claims?

Sure, lots of ways. I paid for access to the FAA Flight radar database and observed airplanes flying over my home. I identified them as ordinary commercial planes making ordinary contrails, which happen to look exactly like the ones people claim are barium. Anyways, the whole barium hoax was supposedly based on these "chemtrails" being used to provide "ducting" for radar.
If they are strong enough to "duct" radar they would be visible on ordinary TV or NOAA weather radar as straight lines emitting behind a pojnt source traveling at jet plane speed.

Guess what, Boomerchick?

They don't.

Read "Chemtrails Over America".
Think about it.

Insurrectionchemistry

02-09-2005, 06:33 PM

Someone said:

"Nope. Jet-A1 has remained essentialy unchanged over the decades. It's a litltle cleaner these days (less sulfur), but basically the same. "

=========

Now the people that know the sulfur reduction at refineries know they reduce the sulfur by injection of hydrogen gas to make hydrogen-sulfide. Not all the hydrogen comes back out in this process, which leaves the hydrogen content of the fuel elevated and the sulfur content reduced.

Those efforts to cut the sulfur, raise the hydrogen.

Which means someone appears to conceil the truth. Jet fuels have constantly evolved. Plus, with the admission of S removal, also must come the admission of H addition.

IMHO,
is

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 07:01 PM

Sure, lots of ways. I paid for access to the FAA Flight radar database and observed airplanes flying over my home. I identified them as ordinary commercial planes making ordinary contrails, which happen to look exactly like the ones people claim are barium. Anyways, the whole barium hoax was supposedly based on these "chemtrails" being used to provide "ducting" for radar.
If they are strong enough to "duct" radar they would be visible on ordinary TV or NOAA weather radar as straight lines emitting behind a pojnt source traveling at jet plane speed.

Guess what, Boomerchick?

They don't.

Read "Chemtrails Over America".
Think about it.

Well, that's great to know. I suppose I could have read this at you site, but the reading seems overwhelming and right now I'm getting into research on various points. I do believe many were mislead into suspecting barium because of previous documented tests AND Teller's recommendation in using it. One does not necessarily lead to the other. But I am still on the trail of Barium just to see what I can find, if you don't mind. After a few days I'll probably give up. But I did find one 1971 experiment that stated that barium had been used for fifteen years in atmospheric experimentation. I posted that one today in response to Stu.

http://pubs.acs.org/ncw/2003/articles/j100680a009.pdf

Of course one can say it's not ongoing anymore. But still the fact remains that way back when, they were laying down barium vapors to test which when activated upon produced particulates. But what exactly were those particulates? I also learned that Barium is water soluable and will rain down onto the earth or us, and that it's not the most toxic of chemicals, but it can in larger particulate form injure the lungs. If they were injecting things into the atmosphere then, don't you think they'd be doing it now, somewhere? I don't know, I'm just speculating.

Thanks again for the info. on radar and barium in your local area. I appreciate the knowledge. And so this is why you don't respect radarmatrix?

Always sluething for truth,

BC :)

jayreynolds

02-09-2005, 07:06 PM

I plainly said that HF reacts with the hydrocarbons in the atmopshere left over from billions and cars and jet plane exhausts. I even used a specific industrial analogy to the problem using the HF catalysist in the oil refining distillation column process.

Jay Reynolds can hardly deny the reactions take place as the HF process in refineries that he worked for used the same chemical method. Jay Reynolds cannot even claim the reactions don't take place in the atmosphere or the similarity of the atmosphere process to fractional distillation column processes.

Ok, maybe I can shed some light on what the hell Jimbo has gotten himself into.

He has ben creating this grand unifying "chemtrail" theory of his on-the-fly, and has gotten himself in deep enough that it's finally time to tell him, and everyone else, where he has gone wrong. In the process, I will reveal his ignorance.

Jimbo has come to claim that hydrofluoric acid(HF) is the biggest problem on earth. The biggest next to "hydrocarbons left in the atmosphere"[sure that wasn't CO2, jimbo????]

Anyways, his latest theory seems to be that HF '"reacts with hydrocarbons" in the atmosphere in the same way that it does in a refinery alkylation unit. Well, jimbo, maybe the atmosphere on Mercury, it might.

See, Jimbo, alkylation reactors operate at nearly 500 degreesF and over 200 psi pressure.
You still haven't completed your 'theory' yet, but I thought I might just point out that little snag you might encounter along the way...................

Insurrectionchemistry

02-09-2005, 07:23 PM

I just wanted to point out that Jay Reynolds appears to have sent dumb ole Yaak off looking into SF-6 and CFC reactions with HF, but now he is having to explain to Yaak and everyone of his deceptions. Yaak claims the two of them spend days on that deception.

Now, Reynolds is having to admit he does know that HF is used with hydrocarbons in the refinery business. In fact, there are hundreds of research papers on the subject of HF catalysist used with hydrocarbons.

Now one would think that even mentally challenged Yaak could find some of these papers, as they are all over the internet. Even more in research libraries. But then dumb ole Yaak can't even read or understand that SF-6 and CFC's are not hydrocarbons. Even in his long consultation with Reynolds, who just admits here that he knows the process---still did not admit it to Yaak.

Everyone knows when you have a reaction volume figured on the atmosphere around the planet that will more than offset any fluctuations with reactions doubling ever 10 degree C rule and the pressure.

The volume of the atmosphere equals billion-billions of catalytic cracking units and the HF cracking chemical effects still happen across this huge HUGE distributed volume.

And this huge catalytic cracking unit in the atmosphere running at lower temps and pressures is more than overwhelmed by the total volume of the reaction volume's size in comparison to any one oil refinery process.

Again, real simple physics and real obvious. The chemical reaction volume more than offsets the lower temp and pressure concerns.

What is going on in the atmopshere is more than equilavalent to what is going on in all the refineries on the surface of the planet----and then some.

Another intentional mislead from Reynolds, the deception and mislead artist.

One should look at Reynolds references. He worked for the largest Jewish owned oil company in the US. His job appeared to be construction of a turbine unit to pure oil lard. These are not the jobs of engineers. Neither is farming in Arkansaw. Reynolds appears one of these people that got a mail order degree, because his abilities here are not college level thinking.

Reynolds appears to know nothing on scaling of reactions for offset factors with temp and pressure by increasing in reaction volume astonomically. Over such a huge volume there is a huge number of HF and hydrocarbon chemical interactions, whose output goes to fill the upper atmosphere with dangerous levels of heat absorbing gases from this process.

Simple and obvious. The atmospheric reaction rates are highest on the seasonally warm side of the planet. And the chemtrails methods to wash the HF out of the air also track this seasonal temp.

IMHO,
is

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 08:52 PM

Interesting new technologies.

http://spie.org/Conferences/Programs/03/or/conferences/index.cfm?fuseaction=5086

Laser Radar Technology and Applications VIII

Conferences

Conference 5086
Room: Tallahassee 1-2
Tuesday-Friday 22-25 April 2003
Proceedings of SPIE Vol. #5086

Conference Chair: Gary W. Kamerman, FastMetrix, Inc.

Cochairs: Gary G. Gimmestad, Georgia Institute of Technology; Vasyl V. Molebny, Institute of Biomedical Engg (Ukraine); Christian Werner, DLR (Germany)

Program Committee: Ravil R. Agishev, Univ. Politecnica de Catalunya (Spain); Victor Baryakhtar, National Academy of Sciences (Ukraine); Mikhail S. Brodyn, Institute of Physics (Ukraine); Leonid Bulavin, Kiev Univ. (Ukraine); J. Martyn Chamberlain, Univ. of Leeds (United Kingdom); Reinhard R. Ebert, FGAN-Forschungsinstitut fuer Optronik und Musterer (Germany); G. Charmaine Gilbreath, Naval Research Lab.; Volodymyr Gouz, Institute of Radar Technologies (Ukraine); Jeffrey W. Grantham, U.S. Air Force; Boris V. Grinyov, Institute for Single Crystals (Ukraine); Victor H. Hasson, Textron Systems Corp.; Robert O. Hauge, DARPA; James E. Kalshoven, Jr., NASA Goddard Space Flight Ctr.; Hans H. Klingenberg, DLR (Germany); James C. Lamoreux, NASA Johnson Space Ctr.; Gennadii G. Matvienko, Institute of Atmospheric Optics (Russia); Mikhail M. Miroshnikov, S.I. Vavilov State Optical Institute (Russia); Ram M. Narayanan, Univ. of Nebraska/Lincoln; Vladimir L. Pavlovitch, Polyus Research and Development Institute (Russia); C. Russell Philbrick, The Pennsylvania State Univ.; Richard D. Richmond, Air Force Research Lab.; Michael W. Roth, Johns Hopkins Univ.; Andre Samberg, Helsinki Univ. of Technology (Finland); Jean-Robert Simard, Defence R&D Canada Valcartier (Canada); Upendra N. Singh, NASA Langley Research Ctr.; Ove K. Steinvall, Swedish Defence Research Agency (Sweden); Alexander A. Stepanov, State Research Institute of Aviation Systems (Russia); Winfried Stricker, Univ. Stuttgart (Germany); Sergey V. Svechnikov, Institute of Semiconductor Physics (Ukraine); Gennady I. Utkin, State R&D Ctr. for Science Instrumentation (Russia)

Edward M. Carapezza, DARPA

8:10 am: High-spectral resolution lidar measurements of aerosol backscatter cross-section, E. W. Eloranta, Univ. of Wisconsin/Madison [5086-47]

8:30 am: Development of a deployable aerosol/water vapor lidar to characterize the atmosphere, P. D. Dao, A. V. Dentamaro, Air Force Research Lab. [5087-19]

8:50 am: Measurements and models for the distribution of aerosol backscatter at near-infrared and visible wavelengths, J. D. Spinhirne, NASA Goddard Space Flight Ctr. [5086-48]

9:10 am: Airborne coherent Doppler lidar: investigation of the marine boundary layer and ocean surface motions, G. D. Emmitt, Simpson Weather Associates, Inc. [5086-49]

9:30 am: Modeled lidar aerosol ratios at 1 and 10 microns, C. Cattrall, J. Reagan, K. Thome, Univ. of Arizona [5086-50]

9:50 am: Raman lidar profiling of aerosols and water vapor over the Southern Great Plains, R. A. Ferrare, NASA Langley Research Ctr.; D. Turner, Univ. of Wisconsin/Madison; M. Clayton, Science Applications International Corp.; J. Ogren, E. Andrews, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; M. Chin, Georgia Tech Research Institute; V. G. Brackett, Science Applications International Corp. [5086-51]

Related:

Army Test & Evaluation Center (ATEC)

A04-075 Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Close-Formation Control System (CFCS)

A04-076 Chemical Cloud Tracking Through Hyperspectral Imaging

Laser Radar -- Lidar

http://www.swa.com/laser/index.html

FYI !

Thanks!

BC :?

Insurrectionchemistry

02-09-2005, 10:16 PM

Yaak writes:

I am an engineer, Jimmy Jerk, and you are an idiotic glassware washer from ORNL. In fact, during the mid 1960s, I invented computer aided design of printed circuit boards and integrated circuits at Collins Radio Company.

=========

Oh really, you sure don't show the level of intellect that most engineers show. Engineers are stickers for details. Details seem to allude you.

Engineer ah, where did you go to school. What is your state of registry and your PE number?

Now out here in Tennessee the Engineers just hand off the designs to the CAD system PC people, who are not enginners. What is an engineer doing with the low class game of PC boards anyway?

Now, Collin Radio made some real classics in radio. I have several of their products, even some 60's vintage stuff. I grew up with transmitters and making my own. Cut my teeth on vaccum tubes. Still can't beat that warm glow from nice big transmitter tube heat emissions.

Here I thought Collins was making vaccum tube stuff in the 60's and the computer used to PC's must have indeed been a huge undertaking. Computer were not too powerful back in them days.

IMHO,
is

Boomer Chick

02-09-2005, 10:19 PM

I am an engineer, Jimmy Jerk, and you are an idiotic glassware washer from ORNL. In fact, during the mid 1960s, I invented computer aided design of printed circuit boards and integrated circuits at Collins Radio Company.

Yaak, I knew you had an engineering background! It doesn't matter, though, obviously the mad scientist/janitor needs to feel superior once again.

IS, you truly don't have to put others down to feel good about yourself, honestly!

You can just work on liking yourself.

Sweet dreams good night all!

BC ;)

halva

02-10-2005, 01:06 AM

Yaak, I knew you had an engineering background! It doesn't matter, though, obviously the mad scientist/janitor needs to feel superior once again.

IS, you truly don't have to put others down to feel good about yourself, honestly!

You can just work on liking yourself.

Sweet dreams good night all!

BC ;)

Boomer Chick: everyone is into the feeling superior game.

When I was in the feel superior position you have now taken over I operated in terms of a basic dichotomy between those who acknowledge the reality of tailor-made aircraft emissions and those who choose to claim not to.

Of course a queen may have a different policy to mine, bringing those who we have called debunkers inside the polilty and not trying to exclude them from it.

But this is something quite different from singling out the specific eccentricities of Jim as being more worthy of censure than those of other people posting here.

Yes yes, I know, you don't want to be queen.

Do you then want to be referee?

If so, you are not refereeing well.

I am not saying this to you because I want your job.

jayreynolds

02-10-2005, 03:51 AM

This is the only experiment I could find today: Definitive proof of one experiment regarding Barium released in the atmosphere, wow, 1971 ~~ ! Well, the implications of this paper implies, if not outright and brings to realization the fact that indeed experiements involving chemical releases into the air from aircraft have existed in the past, therefore they exist today. Might I add that the injected vapor is then translated into particulate form. Another implication of this old research? They're far beyond what many of us can imagine! Please read this, Stu and give me your take.

http://pubs.acs.org/ncw/2003/articles/j100680a009.pdf

This release was by a rocket, at 60-120 miles high.
Is this what you are seeing?

jayreynolds

02-10-2005, 03:54 AM

I do believe many were mislead into suspecting barium because of previous documented tests AND Teller's recommendation in using it. BC :)

Teller never recommended any such thing

jayreynolds

02-10-2005, 04:10 AM

Everyone knows when you have a reaction volume figured on the atmosphere around the planet that will more than offset any fluctuations with reactions doubling ever 10 degree C rule and the pressure. The volume of the atmosphere equals billion-billions of catalytic cracking units and the HF cracking chemical effects still happen across this huge HUGE distributed volume.

And this huge catalytic cracking unit in the atmosphere running at lower temps and pressures is more than overwhelmed by the total volume of the reaction volume's size in comparison to any one oil refinery process.
is
Look, Jimbo, stop being a bozo. Nothing of the sort happens in our atmosphere. Our atmosphere in no way compares to an alkylation oil refining unit making high-grade gasoline at 500 degrees temperature over a bed of ceramic balls. It's some lame pipe-dream of yours, Jimbo. If your fellow chemmies want to get some atmospheric scientists laughing, just tell them to repeat this crap and they'll be rolling on the floor.

Speaking of atmospheric scientists, remember you promised to hire a booth at this conference down in Atlanta to lecture the world's finest aerosol scientists, right, Jimbo?
http://www.aaar.org/05Supersites/ConfInfo.htm

What, couldn't make it?
Too busy pulling meat with Wayne.
Too bad, those conferences get pretty dry, and the guys probably need a laugh..........

Insurrectionchemistry

02-10-2005, 04:38 AM

Greetings,

I do think thing we are all seeing much false advertising going on with BC--aka Queen catalysist of stupidity. That is about all she has contributed here.

BC is so slow of mind that she can't even call Simon Stuwart on the extremely heavy and thick jet trails not making Cirris Clouds, which is what he claimed previously. Such heavy thick jet emissions don't make the lite natural Cirrus Clouds. Such profuse jet emissions make big huge heavy particles that will begin to fall into the lower atmosphere. And if other cloud formations are below, trigger rain from other clouds. Cirrus clouds sublime, these heavy jet trails don't---they fall---rainout. This being what most call the chemtrials, especially when one rightly includes that jets release hydrocarbon trails that interact with HF to chemically make problems in the upper atmosphere.

BC operates from her platform of utter ignorance of science, yet tries to falsely promote she is a catalysist for truth. She has become the catalysist for the promotion of the scams of the Reynolds thugs and can't even tell the harm she does to everyone for allowing such to occur.

A bright person would quickly detect the untruths, deceptions, missing information coming from the Reynolds thugs, but here we see dumb ole BC promoting the deceptions. Giving the deceivers her platform because she is so dumb.

Then the queen of science bungling goes so far as to say persons that point out they are such science snails, as ones needing to feel better of themselves. The BC criteria here is the promotion of stupidity and there is no nice way to put it. She should hold her head down in absolute shame for what she is facilitating. She connects herself with persons that claim to be engineers but can't read words like HF and hydrocarbons and repeat the little sentence.

The bottom line is the headstrong dumb woman from colorado is about false claims on her part, being a catalysist for stupid thinking that helps to promote the Reynolds thugs scams upon the world. BC promotes the cover up better than anyone on the internet, even covets those that are the main sellers of bunk.

This level of stupidity linked with a run on mouth only makes for a mess----which totally obscures truth. She is not seeking truth, only obscuring it.

BC can't even recognize those that intentionally deceive others, instead she become one with them. Despite her claims otherwise, she promotes the deceivers. Obviously, purposefully doing it.

IMHO,
is

jayreynolds

02-10-2005, 05:41 AM

Now the people that know the sulfur reduction at refineries know they reduce the sulfur by injection of hydrogen gas to make hydrogen-sulfide. Not all the hydrogen comes back out in this process, which leaves the hydrogen content of the fuel elevated and the sulfur content reduced.

Those efforts to cut the sulfur, raise the hydrogen.

Which means someone appears to conceil the truth. Jet fuels have constantly evolved. Plus, with the admission of S removal, also must come the admission of H addition.

IMHO,
is
Again, Jimbo steps off the edge of fact and over into fantasy.

See, what Jimbo does is take ordinary things and weave them into his conspiracy theory.
The biggest problem comes when he gets into an area where he has no experience, and he makes big mistakes.

Now, you wold think that the guy "who is considered a God by DOE" and invented jet fuels for Oak Ridge national Lab would at least understand the basics, but those are all lies. Jim Phelps' only work at Oak Ridge Lab was to wash glassware for other people.

Now, his theory, above, says that oil refineries remove sulfur from jet fuels by adding hydrogen, which reacts with the sulfur to create H2S, hydrogen sulfide gas. He is correct in this, the process is called hydrotreating.

Jimbo falls off the wagon, however, when he adds that this process elevates the hydrogen content of the jet fuel.

NOTHING OF THE SORT HAPPENS!!!

After the hydrogen reacts with the sulfur to form H2S gas( VERY NASTY GAS, BTW), the gas is fed to a sulfur recovery unit. This unit uses the "Claus process" to produce elemental sulfur.
In the Claus process, the hydrogen sulfide is BURNED to produce heat which helps in chemical reactions which produce the molten elemental sulfur, which is then usually pelletized and sold as pretty yellow balls.

Here is a description of the claus process where the hydrogen sulfide gas is burned and sulfur is produced:
http://www.nelliott.demon.co.uk/company/claus.html

Here is a picture of the sulfur loading dock at the refinery where I used to work:
http://www.monolithic.com/domenews/2002spr_sum/dometech/stcroixx.jpg

Here is a nighttime view, hellish to some, I'm sure, but beautiful in a way.
This is only 1/10th of the whole refinery complex, not just the biggest Jewish refinery in the world, it is the third largest in the western hemisphere.
http://www.kingsnake.com/westindian/hovensa1.JPG

The idea that hydrogen would be wasted by somehow adding it to the jet fuel is ludicrous.
Refineries make products to specifications. Refineries are in business to make a profit.
Hydrogen is an expensive product, refineries don't simply add hydrogen to jet fuel, such a thing would be throwing money away.

IT'S NOT HAPPENING, JIMBO.

But don't believe me. Ask Jimbo to prove that what he says is true. He won't, just like he never proved that he ever worked at ORNL, invented haarp, invented Jet fuels, that hydrofuoric acid has global warming potential, or that anything out of specification was in jet fuels. In fact, Jimbo has never proven any of his crackpot theories whatsoever.

And that is that!

Jimbo's biggest problem, however, is that I usually let him jump over the edge before I debunk him. He's already copy/pasted all these claims across the internet and can't delete or modify them all. The neato thing about this is that what he has done is tie himself up in a tangle of lies from which he cannot free himself.

Cool how that works, and shows just how self-destructive lies can be!

jayreynolds

02-10-2005, 05:44 AM

Hey, Jimbo, I see you are posting here right now, come on big man, lets see some proof of any of your crackpot peabrain theories.

But you won't.
Because you can't.
They are just fantasies, after all...............

stuart_allsop

02-10-2005, 07:59 AM

Here we go with more lies from Simon Stuart again.

Jet planes these days run dominately on JP-8, not A-1, [/quote[
BBZZZZZZZTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wrong asnwer, but thanks for playing. JP-8 is MILITARY jet fuel, seldom used in civil aviation. Jet-A1 is what is used almost exclusively by CIVILIAN airlieners. Too bad for you, Jimmy boy. Your attempts at deciept are entirely transparent for those of us who DO know.

[quote]and the JP-8 is the product of refineries that rely on aluminum and Zeolyte and other catalysists. BBBBZZZZZZZZZTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!! Wrong answer again. That's strike two.

JP-8 is actually just Jet-A1 with the following 3 additives: Corrosion Inhibitor/Lubricity Enhancer, Fuel System Icing Inhibitor, and Static Dissipater. None of those have any aluminium, barium, titanium, or iodiotium in them.

These refineries conserve the hydrogen in the fuel refining process that is boosted by the Sulfur removal process using hydrogen.BBBBBBBBBBBBBZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZTTTTTTTTTTTT TTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Strike three!!! You are OUT. Thanks for playing.

JP-8 jet fuel is the highest hydrogen jet fuel made for the jet engines.OK, strike 4. Not a problem. JP-8 fuel actually has LESS hydrogen content per gallon than Jet-A1, because the additives add volume without adding hydrogen. Sorry, jimbo.

All the Reynolds mafia does one common thing---lie and mislead. Consistently day after day.Strike 5!!1 Amazing, So if we are LYING about this stuff, then how about providing some links to show that JP-8 contains more hydrogen per gallon than Jet-A1, or that Jet-A1 is refined differently than JP-8, other than the additives?

Then we have the moron from Colorado going yah yah. Cheering on more lies and shaking her pom poms.And your chauvinist machista views are almost as disgusting as your anti-semite views.

IMHO,

stuart_allsop

02-10-2005, 08:16 AM

Someone said JP-8 jetfuel?

Does NATO's New 'Dream Fuel'Cause Cancer?

By Bryant Furlow
...

Yeah, I know it was a bit off topic to bring in the health factors, but hey, that's part of awareness and the environmental-health concerns related to jet JP-8 jet fuel itself.
Bommer, that article was nothing but glaringly obvious scaremongering! JP-8 is EXACTLY the same as Jet-A1, except for three additives. OF COURSE it will scew up your immune system if you inhale it! It is JET FUEL!!!!! OF COURE it will kill you if you drink it! It is JET FUEL!!!!! OF COURSE it will ruin your skin if you swim in it!!!! IT IS JET FUEL!!!!!! Sheeesh! OF COURSE it contains Benzine! Sheesh! What did the jerk EXPECT ti find in JET FUEL!!!!

Sorry, boomer, but that author clearly has an agenda, and clearly did NOT present a balanced report.

The way he writes is similar to someone saying "Dynamite is dangerous! In every single study we have done, people who have been given both dynamite and fire were blown to bits!" Well DUH! if you drink, or inhale, or swim in ANY kind of hydrocarbon fuel, you are gonna get mighty screwed up!

That author took what might well be a legitiamte compalint about a fuel leak or fuel spill that may have affected the health of children, and he blew it up into a super-sized double-whopper rant-of-the-year, about nothing. If he had done a DECENT job of journalism, he would have focused on the issue that he started out with, investigating what leaked, where it leaked, how it leaked, tracing the reponsibility of who caused the leak, and written about that. Instead, he uses that tragedy as a springboard to rant and rave about some huge chip that he has on his shoulder regarding the military, simply in order to trash them, instead of doing his job and finsing the REAL guilt behind the illnesses of those kids.

In short, the article is worhtless. Go back and read it again, keeping my comments in mind, and you'll see just how much he resorts to heavily weighted adjectives, totally biased suggestions and claims with no supporting evidence, and outright scaremongering tactics and language.

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 08:39 AM

Teller never recommended any such thing

I'm sorry, Jay, here is his paper and recommendation from Stanford University:

http://www.rense.com/general18/scatteringEdTellerwithnotes.pdf

I honestly feel this is legitimate evidence for his condoning and recommending such processes. If you don't, please state why.

Thanks,

BC

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 08:49 AM

Bommer, that article was nothing but glaringly obvious scaremongering! JP-8 is EXACTLY the same as Jet-A1, except for three additives. OF COURSE it will scew up your immune system if you inhale it! It is JET FUEL!!!!! OF COURE it will kill you if you drink it! It is JET FUEL!!!!! OF COURSE it will ruin your skin if you swim in it!!!! IT IS JET FUEL!!!!!! Sheeesh! OF COURSE it contains Benzine! Sheesh! What did the jerk EXPECT ti find in JET FUEL!!!!

Sorry, boomer, but that author clearly has an agenda, and clearly did NOT present a balanced report.

The way he writes is similar to someone saying "Dynamite is dangerous! In every single study we have done, people who have been given both dynamite and fire were blown to bits!" Well DUH! if you drink, or inhale, or swim in ANY kind of hydrocarbon fuel, you are gonna get mighty screwed up!

That author took what might well be a legitiamte compalint about a fuel leak or fuel spill that may have affected the health of children, and he blew it up into a super-sized double-whopper rant-of-the-year, about nothing. If he had done a DECENT job of journalism, he would have focused on the issue that he started out with, investigating what leaked, where it leaked, how it leaked, tracing the reponsibility of who caused the leak, and written about that. Instead, he uses that tragedy as a springboard to rant and rave about some huge chip that he has on his shoulder regarding the military, simply in order to trash them, instead of doing his job and finsing the REAL guilt behind the illnesses of those kids.

In short, the article is worhtless. Go back and read it again, keeping my comments in mind, and you'll see just how much he resorts to heavily weighted adjectives, totally biased suggestions and claims with no supporting evidence, and outright scaremongering tactics and language.

Stu, calm down. I gave other links to studies run by the government and didn't even include a third of the government sponsored legitimate studies that confirmed what the cover article said. Please check those links. I also stipulated and so did the author, that the most affected populations were military based people in the local air space of the raw fumes of the fuel... not the post combustion phase. Many people on these military bases had complained, from pilots to families and so the studies were launched. It is not bogus and it is not exagerated.

Please review the gov. study links I posted with the article. If you click to the right on that site, you will see "jet fuel" as a search and on that page you will see the amazing amount of studies regarding its harmful affect on personel and animals...... yes some were topical experiments, but most were vapor related and in small doses to recreate the hazard that so many military personnel and families are exposed to.

Can we continue to dedicate ourselves to the truth here?

Thanks

BC

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 08:52 AM

[
And your chauvinist machista views are almost as disgusting as your anti-semite views.

IMHO,

Thanks for the whole post, and especially the last sentence! Appreciate it!

BC :D

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 09:13 AM

This release was by a rocket, at 60-120 miles high.
Is this what you are seeing?

Yes, Jay, this is the one --- 1971.

Excerpts:

Chemical releases have been made into the earth’s

upper atmosphere for geophysical measurements for

about 15 years. Released metal atom vapor reflects

sunlight at its resonance radiation wavelengths, and

can be photographed a t twilight against the dark sky

background. Injections of 1 kg of vapor can create a

trail 1 km in diameter and 100 km long, the distortion

and motion of which permit atmospheric winds to be

derived from observations over a period of 100-1000

sec.

The release of barium vapor is a method of generating

a high-density plasma in a sunlit upper atmosphere.

Both neutral and ionized components resulting from

the release may be separately tracked at twilight by

ground-based optics in the light of their visible spectral

emissions, The use of these releases to determine

electric and magnetic fields and the dynamics of the

atmosphere at altitudes from 160 km to several earth

radii has been described in the 1iterature.l The chem-

istry of the released barium vapor at high altitudes

(where interaction with sunlight is the only factor in

the kinetics) has also been discussed elsewherej2 but at

altitudes below 200 km oxidation processes are also

important. This paper will present recent data and

interpretation concerning the competition between

ionization and oxidation found in some 40 releases

made in the last 5 years at heights from 95 to 200 km.

The discussion is based on the time history of observed

spectral emissions of four components : barium neu-

tral, barium ion, barium oxide, and strontium neutral.

The structure and composition of the upper atmosphere

into which the barium vapor is released is defined by

Table I.3,4 These values are subject to variations due

to diurnal, seasonal, and solar effects, but serve to indi-

cate that electron densities of more than lo6

would constitute a detectable perturbation of the iono-

would be a minor constituent. In fact electron densi-

ties as high as lo7 to lo* ~m -~ have been achieved by

the barium release technique.

The major limitation to barium yield in the

thermite reaction mixture is that 80-90% of the "free"

barium is trapped in the solidifying droplets expelled

from the canister and significant increases in release

temperature are limited by materials used. The use of

larger payloads will not give a corresponding increase

in ion density since optical thickness effects limit the

rate of production of metastable barium.

It doesn't matter whether it was rocket deployed or aircraft deployed. It simply shows that experiments with chemicals in the atmosphere have a historic basis. That's all.

I hope you can at least admit this much.

Thanks, Jay.

BC

stuart_allsop

02-10-2005, 09:14 AM

Could you please ask him since you post over there and I don't? T'would appreciate it. You brought up the map business, so you could at least provide the link. Yes?

DONE! I just posted a general request over there. Someone will come up with something, I'll bet.

This is the only experiment I could find today: Definitive proof of one experiment regarding Barium released in the atmosphere, wow, 1971 ~~ ! Well, the implications of this paper implies, if not outright and brings to realization the fact that indeed experiements involving chemical releases into the air from aircraft have existed in the past, therefore they exist today. Might I add that the injected vapor is then translated into particulate form. Another implication of this old research? They're far beyond what many of us can imagine! Please read this, Stu and give me your take.

http://pubs.acs.org/ncw/2003/articles/j100680a009.pdfWell, either you didn't read it completely, or you didn't understand the significance of what you were reading:

"The use of these releases to determine electric and magnetic fields and the dynamics of the atmosphere at altitudes from 160 km to several earth radii has been described in the literature

There's the key: Altitudes of 160km up to several times the radius of the planet! In other words, starting at 520,000 feet, on up!!!! FIVE HUNDRED AND TWENTY THOUSAND FEET! No commercial airliner now flying EVER goes much higher than around 40,000 feet, and most fly in the range of about 25,000 to 35,000. You are talking about experiments that wre NOT doen in the lower atmosphere, and that were not even done done with AIRCRAFT! Your paper is not relevant AT ALL to the subject of contrails. The very lowest altitude the mention for this kind of release is 95 km, which is still 311,000 feet, or TEN TIMES the altitude at which airplanes fly. No airplane ever built can fly at that kind of altitude, SIMPLY BECAUSE THERE IS NO AIR UP THERE!!! It is already classifed as "space" by the time you get that high. These tests were NOT doen with aircraft: They were done with ROCKETS.

Not only were the altitudes liteterally orders of magnitude greater than what you implied, so too were the payloads MANY orders of magnitude smaller than what you inmplied. The absolute largest payload they EVER release was 6 kg, which is about enough to fill a 3 liter Coke bottle...

And it was NOT released over periods of hours, which is what chemmies claim to see every day, but rather was released in LESS THAN ONE TENTH OF ONE SECOND!

Sorry, but that paper you found is not "definitive proof" of anything even remotely related to contrails. Those experiments in that paper would have looked NOTHING AT ALL like a contrail, not even vaguely similar.

stuart_allsop

02-10-2005, 09:24 AM

Of course one can say it's not ongoing anymore. But still the fact remains that way back when, they were laying down barium vapors to test which when activated upon produced particulates. But what exactly were those particulates? Read the papaer, Boomer. It explains very celary exactly what the particulates were.

I also learned that Barium is water soluable and will rain down onto the earth or us,Not from 520,000 feet it wont! It is already way out in space, at least a hundred miles ABOVE the nearest cloud!!!! Sorry.

If they were injecting things into the atmosphere then, don't you think they'd be doing it now, somewhere? I don't know, I'm just speculating. Why would they? They knowledge has already been obtained. The experimetns were done, the results collected, analyzed and presented. Why would they need to do it again? The simple fact that you could find no further referecnes after 1971 tends to indicate that that's when it ended. Of course, it MIGHT still be going on, but even if it is, it has NOTHING AT ALL to do wioth contrails, now does it?

And so this is why you don't respect radarmatrix? Well, I can't speak for Jay, but the reason that I personally do not respect Electromojoman is becuase he is a certifiably nut job! His entire wenb site is a web of fantasy fabrications based on nothing but a demented, twisted, insane imagination. Did you see Letxa's outstanding debunk of Radarmatrix?

stuart_allsop

02-10-2005, 09:29 AM

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 09:30 AM

Boomer Chick: everyone is into the feeling superior game.

When I was in the feel superior position you have now taken over I operated in terms of a basic dichotomy between those who acknowledge the reality of tailor-made aircraft emissions and those who choose to claim not to.

This is the only thought worth my response. In order to state a "reality" you have to prove it. That is your job and that is mine. You assume I don't suspect something unusual? You assume I am not open to that possible reality of engineered fuels and/or even specially designed systems to expel particulates along with the jet fuel emissions? You are wrong. I am open to all possibilities and am looking for evidence and confirmation. Do you have any? Post it.

There is no superior or inferior.... only what is true and not true. GET IT?

Get over your ego duality trips, here, please. And IS has proven to be one sexist wacko! If you don't even see that, I feel sorry for your wife.

Please post something to support either weather manipulation or your take on fuel manipulation.

Your focusing on me is tiring and boring.

BC :roll:

stuart_allsop

02-10-2005, 09:36 AM

... you sure don't show the level of intellect that most engineers show. Engineers are stickers for details. Details seem to allude you.Well, Jimmy boy, I guess you have just conclusively proved that you are not an engineer then, haven't you? Because you seem to have missed the glaring details about using the word "sticker" where you should have used "stickler", and "allude" where you should have used "elude". Damn. Those details will get ya, every time!

Sorry Jimbo kid: You don't even measure up to your own standard of what an engineer should be, let alone to what a top physicist should be! However, I'd say that you do almost measure up to the level of what a bottle washer should be.

(Details, Jimbo, Details. As you say, they always give you away.... :) )

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 09:41 AM

DONE! I just posted a general request over there. Someone will come up with something, I'll bet.

Well, either you didn't read it completely, or you didn't understand the significance of what you were reading:

"The use of these releases to determine electric and magnetic fields and the dynamics of the atmosphere at altitudes from 160 km to several earth radii has been described in the literature

There's the key: Altitudes of 160km up to several times the radius of the planet! In other words, starting at 520,000 feet, on up!!!! FIVE HUNDRED AND TWENTY THOUSAND FEET! No commercial airliner now flying EVER goes much higher than around 40,000 feet, and most fly in the range of about 25,000 to 35,000. You are talking about experiments that wre NOT doen in the lower atmosphere, and that were not even done done with AIRCRAFT! Your paper is not relevant AT ALL to the subject of contrails. The very lowest altitude the mention for this kind of release is 95 km, which is still 311,000 feet, or TEN TIMES the altitude at which airplanes fly. No airplane ever built can fly at that kind of altitdem SIMPLY BECAUSE THERE IS NO AIR UP THERE!!! IT is already classifed as "space" by the time you get that high. These tests were NOT doen with aircraft: They were done with ROCKETS.

Not only were the altitudes liteterally orders of magnitude greater than what you implied, so too were the payloads MANY orders of magnitude smaller than what you inmplied. The absolute largest payload they EVER release was 6 kg, which is about enough to fill a 3 liter Coke bottle...

And it was NOT released over periods of hours, which is what chemmies claim to see every day, but rather was released in LESS THAN ONE TENTH OF ONE SECOND!

Sorry, but that paper you found is not "definitive proof" of anything even remotely related to contrails. Those experiments in that paper would have looked NOTHING AT ALL like a contrail, not even vaguely similar.

OK, I accept your points. They are good ones. However, the general statement at the beginning of the article and the actual concept of experimenting, even though it was in the HIGH altitudes with just a tiny bit of material..... still presupposes and sets a precedent of experimentation involving chemicals in the atmosphere in general. That's all I was stating. Yes, I read the article thoroughly and understood it. It's simply a precedent.

I didn't say that this directly implied that "chemtrails" are a reality. For me I still need more evidence and I'm open.

Great refutation, though. I like your mind when it focuses! LOL!

BC ;)

stuart_allsop

02-10-2005, 10:22 AM

OK, I accept your points. Excellent. Another bogeyman laid to rest.! :)

However, the general statement at the beginning of the article and the actual concept of experimenting, even though it was in the HIGH altitudes with just a tiny bit of material..... still presupposes and sets a precedent of experimentation involving chemicals in the atmosphere in general. That's all I was stating.[/quote]Well, that's not exactly a secret, is it? If you want to take that definition to extremes, then every high school science lab in the world is in the business of conducting chemical experiments in the atmosphere using particulates... You see, those school kids get to heat open test tubes of various chemical concoctions, releasing all kinds of wierd and wonderful compounds into the atmosphere.... :)

My point is that the only thinkg your article demonstrates is that scientists have sent rockets into space and released tiny clouds of barium, to study them. That's it. Nothing more. You get far, far more barium released every single month from your average friendly neighborhood coal-fired electrical power station then you do from the entire sum total of all such rocket experiments ever performed in all of recorded history! You get far more barium burned in the atmosphere at every single fireworks display at Disneyland that has ever been released in those rocket experiments.

Boomer. I'm not trying to beltittle your research, but I have to say that I think you are REALLY stretching if you want to use that paper to make a case for barium being released into the atmosphere. Why not just use your coal-fired power station as an example? Or Disney's fireworks?

Yes, I read the article thoroughly and understood it. It's simply a precedent. Yes it is, but a rather pointless and meaningless one, compared with the numerous REAL sources of barium in the atmosphere.

I didn't say that this directly implied that "chemtrails" are a reality. For me I still need more evidence and I'm open. Excellent! I'm working on the grid-issue, but today I have a stack of other stuff to get through, and I wanted to nip Mr. Rocket Barium in the bud before he flew too high, if you don't mind me totally screwing up a really bad mixed metaphor... :)

Great refutation, though. I like your mind when it focuses! LOL! My mind is ALWAYS focused!!! :)

jayreynolds

02-10-2005, 10:41 AM

I'm sorry, Jay, here is his paper and recommendation from Stanford University:

http://www.rense.com/general18/scatteringEdTellerwithnotes.pdf

I honestly feel this is legitimate evidence for his condoning and recommending such processes. If you don't, please state why.

Thanks,

BC

I just re-read the whole paper. You said he recommended barium.
The paper considers mirrors, silicon, aluminum, balls, etc. What is not
mentioned even once is barium.

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 10:42 AM

[font=arial][size=2]
I have a friend who was born and raised in Fallon, NV. He said that nuclear testing was conducted 30 miles from there. It might be worth investigating. Exposure to radiation is a more likely cause of leukemia than exposure to chemicals.

Certainly a possiblity, Yaak.

I didn't want to have to post this. These are lists of experiments mainly financed through gov. They give you an idea of the concern for jet fuel in terms of health and in terms of efficiency and emissions.

http://www.stormingmedia.us/keywords/jet_engine_fuels.html

JET ENGINE FUELS
Click on the titles below to find US government reports identified by the key word or phrase JET ENGINE FUELS.

Quantitating the Percutaneous Absorption of Mechanistically-Defined Chemical Mixtures - 03 MAY 2004
*Chronic Effects of JP-8 Jet Fuel Exposure on the Pulmonary System - 26 MAR 2004
Effect of Equivalence Ratio and G-Loading on In-Situ Measurements of Chemiluminescence in an Ultra Compact Combustor - MAR 2004
Technology Demonstration of Sensor Applications to Direct Push Platforms and Monitoring and Operations - 01 DEC 2003
*JP8+100 Jet Fuel Toxicity: Proteomic Analysis - 30 APR 2003
*Prediction of Cellular Dysfunction from Exposure to JP-8 - 23 APR 2003
US Navy Evaluation of the High Reynolds' Number Thermal Stability (HiReTS) Test Unit - 23 APR 2003
Simulations of the Freezing of Jet Fuel - MAR 2003
*Prediction of Cellular Dysfunction from Exposure to JP-8 - DEC 2002
Fuels Combustion Research: Supercritical Fuel Pyrolysis - NOV 2002
Cytotoxicity of the Murine Keratinocyte Line HEL30 Exposed to the JP-8 Jet Fuel Components M-xylene 1-Methylnaphthalene and N-nonane - OCT 2002
A Nonlinear Fuel Optimal Reaction Jet Control Law - 29 JUL 2002
Endothermic Heat-Sink of Hydrocarbon Fuels for Scramjet Cooling AIAA 2002-3871 - JUL 2002
Methodical Aspects of Investigation of Kerosene Ignition and Combustion in Scramjet Model - JUL 2002
Fuel-Cooled Thermal Management for Advanced Aero Engines GT-2002-30070 - JUN 2002
*Emissions Reduction by Catalytic Reformulation of Jet Fuel - 21 MAY 2002
*Immunosuppressive Effects of Jetfuel and Its Mechanism of Action - MAY 2002
Protocol of Test Methods for Evaluating High Heat Sink Fuel Thermal Stability Additives for *Aviation Jet Fuel JP-8+100 - APR 2002
*Characterization of Jet Engine Exhaust Particulates for the F404, F118, T64, and T58 Aircraft Engines - MAR 2002
*Immune Suppression Following Acute Exposure to Volatile Organic Chemicals - DEC 2001
*Fuel and Fuel System Materials Compatibility Test Program for A JP-8+100 Fuel Additive. *Volume 1: Thermal Stability Additive Package BetzDearborn Spec Aid(Registered) 8Q462 - OCT 2001
*Biological and Health Effects of JP-8 Exposure - 17 SEP 2001
Sensory Irritation Study in Mice: JP-4, JP-8, JP-8+100 - 29 AUG 2001
Investigation of a Possibility of Application of the Under-Critical Microwave Streamer Gas Discharge for Ignition of Fuel in Jet Engines - MAY 2001
JP-8+100LT: A Low Cost Replacement of JPTS as the Primary Fuel for the U-2 Aircraft? - 20 MAR 2001
JP-8 Volatility Study - MAR 2001
JP-8 Jet Fuel Induces CYP2B1, CYP2BE1, and GSTPI but not CYP1A1 in Murine Liver - MAR 2001
Concurrent Exposure to N, N-Diethyl-m-Toluamide (DEET), Pyridostigmine Bromide (PYR), and *JP-8 Jet Fuel Effects on Biomarkers of Immune Function in B6C3F1 Mice - MAR 2001
Advanced Laser Diagnostic Applications, Volume 3 - MAR 2001
Advanced Laser Diagnostic Applications, Volume 2 - MAR 2001
Advanced Laser Diagnostic Applications. Volume 1 of 3 (Pages 1 - 217) - MAR 2001
*Quantitating the Percutaneous Absorption of Mechanistically Defined Chemical Mixtures - 02 FEB 2001
Fuels Combustion Research: Supercritical Fuel Pyrolysis - 22 JAN 2001
*The Effects of JP-8 Jet Fuel on the Immune System of Tank Entry Workers - 2001
Trace Element and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Analyses of Jet Engine Fuels: Jet A, JP5, and JP8 - DEC 2000
*Immunotoxicology of JP-8 Jet Fuel - NOV 2000
Electrical Conductivity of JP-8+100 Additives in Hydrocarbons and Fuels - NOV 2000
Testing of Baker Flo-XS Pipeline Drag-Reducing Additive. Compilation of Tests and Results - NOV 2000
*Optical Supramolecules for Chemical and Physical Sensing - NOV 2000
*Determining Organic Vapor Cartridge Breakthrough Characteristics of JP-8During Aircraft Fuel Tank Entry Operations - 28 SEP 2000
Evaluation of Thermal Stability Improving Additives for Juel Fuel in Both Laminar and Turbulent Flow Test Units - 27 SEP 2000
Fuels Combustion Research: Supercritical Fuel Pyrolysis - 21 SEP 2000
Conductivity and Charging Tendency of JP-8 + 100 Jet Fuel - 18 SEP 2000
Development of Improved Flammability Criteria for Aircraft Thermal Acoustic Insulation - SEP 2000
Evaluation of Thermal Stability Improving Additives for Jet Fuel in Both Laminar and Turbulent Flow Test Units - SEP 2000
Fuel Degradation and Allied Studies Delivery Order 5 - JUL 2000
The Role of Substance P in a Model of Chronic JP-8 Jet Fuel - 09 JUN 2000
*Fuel Formulation Studies - MAY 2000
Simulations of Flowing Supercritical N-Decane - MAR 2000
Changes in Subsurface Catabolic Gene Frequencies during Natural Attenuation of Petroleum Hydrocarbons - 25 FEB 2000
Coal-Based Fuel Formulation and Engineering - FEB 2000
An Overview of Hydrogen Generation and Storage for Low-Temperature PEM Fuel Cells - NOV 1999
Fungal Influenced Corrosion of Metals in Humid Environments - OCT 1999
*Design and Current Status of Development of a Jet Fuel Thermal StabilityAdditive - 10 SEP 1999
*Evaporation of Jet Fuels - SEP 1999
Remediation by Natural Attenuation Treatability Study for Site SS-04, Langley Air Force Base, Virginia - SEP 1999
Development of a Test Method for the Determination of the Hydroperoxide Potential and Antioxidant Effectiveness in Jet Fuels During Long Term Storage - SEP 1999
*Biomarkers Toxicant Exposure - 01 MAY 1999
Final Confirmation Sampling and Analysis Report for the POL Yard, Sites SS-06 and ST-40, Wurtsmith AFB, Michigan - 23 APR 1999
*Repeated Dose Skin Irritation Study on Jet Fuels - A Histopathology Study - MAR 1999
*Dermal Absorption of JP-8 Jet Fuel and Its Components - MAR 1999
AASERT95/Science and Engineering Training in Combustion and Propulsion - 11 JAN 1999
*Repeated Dose Skin Irritation Study on Jet Fuels - Preliminary Dose Range Finding Study - JAN 1999
Petroleum Quality Information System Jet Fuels Data - 30 DEC 1998
Two-Year Soil Gas Sampling and Respiration Testing Results for the Bioventing System at Spill Site Number 1, Eaker AFB, Arkansas - 14 DEC 1998
Sampling and Analysis Plan to Support Recommendation for No Further Investigation of Petroleum Hydrocarbons at the Age Maintenance Area IRP Site SD-11 - DEC 1998
Evaluation of a Liquid-Fueled Pulse Detonation Engine Combustor - DEC 1998
Two-Year Soil Gas Sampling and Respiration Testing Results Report for Full-Scale Bioventing at the POL Yard, Sites SS-06 and ST-40, Wurtsmith AFB, Michigan - 19 NOV 1998
*Female Reproductive Effects of Exposure to Jet Fuel at U.S. Air Force Bases - NOV 1998
Enhanced Biodegradation Through Soil Venting - NOV 1998
Thermal Stability Enhancement of JP-5 - 15 SEP 1998
***A Pilot Study of Occupational Assessment of Air Force Personnel Exposure to Jet Fuel Before and After Conversion to JP-8 - SEP 1998
*Comparative Neurobehavioral Toxicity Assessment of Three Hydrocarbon Fuels - AUG 1998
Confirmation Sampling and Analysis Plan for Spill Site Number 1 - JUL 1998
Effects of Microbial Population Interactions on the Mobilization and Mineralization of Jet Fuel - 30 JUN 1998
Results of Bioventing System Monitoring at Installation Restoraton Program (IRP) Site 11, Beale Air Force Base, California - 24 JUN 1998
Survey of Jet Fuels Procured by the Defense Energy Support Center - 09 JUN 1998
A Review of the Flammability Hazard of Jet A Fuel Vapor in Civil Transport Aircraft Fuel Tanks - JUN 1998
*Characterization of Aerosols from JP-8 Fuels in Jet Engine Emissions - 29 MAY 1998
Confirmation Sampling and Analysis Plan for Building 457 Area - MAY 1998
Combustion and Heat Transfer; Volume 2 - Advanced Jet Fuels Data Sets - APR 1998
Combustion and Heat Transfer; Volume 1 - Advanced Jet Fuels Data Studies - APR 1998
Response Action Outcome Completion Report for Medical Training Facility, Westover Air Reserve Base, Massachusetts - APR 1998
___________________

Sorry for the long list! Just the reading of the projects give you an overall picture.

BC

[

jayreynolds

02-10-2005, 11:01 AM

Why not just use your coal-fired power station as an example? Or Disney's fireworks?
here is a link showing how much barium is ordinarily found in coal.
"The histogram of barium abundance in West Virginia coal beds show a near normal distribution skewed toward low values with a mean of 109.86 ppm on a whole coal basis with a high degree of variation (± 298.98 ppm). "
http://www.wvgs.wvnet.edu/www/datastat/te/Bahist.htm

In comparison, most coals contain from 1 to 4 parts per million URANIUM.
http://greenwood.cr.usgs.gov/energy/factshts/163-97/FS-163-97.html

jayreynolds

02-10-2005, 11:25 AM

Sorry for the long list! Just the reading of the projects give you an overall picture.

Sorry, these abstracts really give no picture at all. Not even the most dedicated chemmie I know
of is willing to pay this big money to actually read what the articles say. BC, five years ago I was in touch with the top researchers in the field of JP-8 health effects. Back then, the chemmies were all claiming that pure JP-8 was being sprayed out all over the world. I found a detector that could detect even minute traces of JP-8 and challenged Sore throat and Deborah to buy one and prove their case. This was on the Carnicom message board, the one I got banned for.

A far better source of Jp-8 health data is here.
http://jp8.org/

You can get many full text articles there for free.

However, none of this really has any baring at all on the "chemtrails" claim, unless you are claiming taht something is in jet fuel A-1, because those are the planes people photograph making putative "chemtrails'.

The whole onus then falls back on the chemmies, who have NEVER YET PRODUCED EVEN ONE LAB ANALYSIS OF JET FUEL OF ANY TYPE WHATSOEVER.

Any idea why that is, BC?????????
Think about it.

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 11:30 AM

I just re-read the whole paper. You said he recommended barium.
The paper considers mirrors, silicon, aluminum, balls, etc. What is not
mentioned even once is barium.

Excellent, you are right. I stand corrected on the specific element, "Barium," regarding Teller's paper. I must have been confused regarding Eastlund and Teller. Teller is also regarded as the father of the A bomb.

What I might remind you of, however, is that barium rocket test, which mentioned its reflectivity properties regarding the sun. Obviously it has conductive properties as well as excitation atomic properties as the experiment tested its plasma producing ability. It is a metal. Therefore the following general excerpts from Teller's paper could draw any logical person to conclude that Barium COULD be used as well.

In general, three basic types of scatterers exist, for scattering any type

of electromagnetic radiation, including sunlight. The simplest type is based on any material in

which the electric fields of light cause a displacement of electric charges; thus, any material at all

can be used. The magnitude of the displacement of charges by an electric field of unit strength is

measured by the dielectric constant e, where e=1 means there is no displacement. The scattering is

proportional to (e-1)2 , that is, highly polarizable materials generally will be more useful.

More effective scatterers can be realized by employing that subset of materials which exhibit high

electrical conductivity. In this special case, electrons may be separated from their original locations

by any distance, and it is the magnitude of the optical-frequency current carried by these electrons

that characterize the effectiveness of such scattering materials – which are generally metals.

I truly appreciate this last sentiment in his paper:

We believe that, prior to any actual deployment of any scattering system aimed at full-scale 1%

insolation modulation, completely transparent and fully international research in sub-scale

could result in public opinion conducive to a reasonable technology-based approach

to prevention of large-scale climatic failures of all types. International cooperation

in the research phase, based on complete openness, is necessary and may be

sufficient to secure the understanding and support without which any of these

approaches will fail.

Now, I realize I was wrong. But I can still see why investigators of a sun shield operation would logically connect Barium to other metallic particulates mentioned in the paper. And my statement about researchers' motivation for suspecting Barium usage still stands.

Peace,

BC ;)

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 11:36 AM

Sorry, these abstracts really give no picture at all. Not even the most dedicated chemmie I know
of is willing to pay this big money to actually read what the articles say. BC, five years ago I was in touch with the top researchers in the field of JP-8 health effects. Back then, the chemmies were all claiming that pure JP-8 was being sprayed out all over the world. I found a detector that could detect even minute traces of JP-8 and challenged Sore throat and Deborah to buy one and prove their case. This was on the Carnicom message board, the one I got banned for.

A far better source of Jp-8 health data is here.
http://jp8.org/

You can get many full text articles there for free.

However, none of this really has any baring at all on the "chemtrails" claim, unless you are claiming taht something is in jet fuel A-1, because those are the planes people photograph making putative "chemtrails'.

The whole onus then falls back on the chemmies, who have NEVER YET PRODUCED EVEN ONE LAB ANALYSIS OF JET FUEL OF ANY TYPE WHATSOEVER.

Any idea why that is, BC?????????
Think about it.

Jay, that site doesn't require payment, not to read the abstracts. I read many of them. The point was that JP-8 jetfuel in vapor form, not post combustion, posed health risks to those who worked around it or lived near it. That's no chemmie conspiracy. I was never part of that and just wanted to point out a reality. I did make my point that legimate studies have been made regarding this. This is NOT AT ALL related to the theory that jet fuel emissions might poison the population.

So we're on the same side and you just seem a little competitive in your link offering here. I do think the point was made.

Thanks!

BC

foot_soldier

02-10-2005, 12:01 PM

Sorry, these abstracts really give no picture at all. Not even the most dedicated chemmie I know
of is willing to pay this big money to actually read what the articles say. BC, five years ago I was in touch with the top researchers in the field of JP-8 health effects. Back then, the chemmies were all claiming that pure JP-8 was being sprayed out all over the world. I found a detector that could detect even minute traces of JP-8 and challenged Sore throat and Deborah to buy one and prove their case. This was on the Carnicom message board, the one I got banned for.

A far better source of Jp-8 health data is here.
http://jp8.org/

You can get many full text articles there for free.

However, none of this really has any baring at all on the "chemtrails" claim, unless you are claiming taht something is in jet fuel A-1, because those are the planes people photograph making putative "chemtrails'.

The whole onus then falls back on the chemmies, who have NEVER YET PRODUCED EVEN ONE LAB ANALYSIS OF JET FUEL OF ANY TYPE WHATSOEVER.

Any idea why that is, BC?????????
Think about it.
A lie.

Leave me out of this please.

You are lying, Reynolds.

I suppose everyone's enjoying this, yes?

For the record then.

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 12:07 PM

"However, the general statement at the beginning of the article and the actual concept of experimenting, even though it was in the HIGH altitudes with just a tiny bit of material..... still presupposes and sets a precedent of experimentation involving chemicals in the atmosphere in general. That's all I was stating." Well, that's not exactly a secret, is it? If you want to take that definition to extremes, then every high school science lab in the world is in the business of conducting chemical experiments in the atmosphere using particulates... You see, those school kids get to heat open test tubes of various chemical concoctions, releasing all kinds of wierd and wonderful compounds into the atmosphere.... :)

No, Stu. Sorry, the experimenting in the atmosphere with chemicals was clearly stated and at that time had been ongoing for 15 years. THAT is the point. It didn't matter how much or what kind of chemical.... it set a precedent for that KIND of experimentation. The fact that they were interested in studying Barium itself is another clue to its properties. In the article as I quoted before, they mentioned the reflectivity aspect of the metal and its other atomic properties. In retrospect regarding the sun shield theory, it does indeed pertain to our present discussion. No, the release of lab gases into the atmosphere by high school students or college are not done to specially study the atmospheric behavior nor the behavior of their substances in the atmosphere. You could have done better on this one, babes!

My point is that the only thinkg your article demonstrates is that scientists have sent rockets into space and released tiny clouds of barium, to study them. That's it. Nothing more.

I have to respectfully disagree. Experimentation had begun, and it had been ongoing for 15 years at that point and not necessarily with only one kind of material. Why would anyone assume from that one article that experimentation in the atmosphere no matter at what level would then suddenly stop? That is more of a supposition and less logical than that it would continue.

You get far, far more barium released every single month from your average friendly neighborhood coal-fired electrical power station then you do from the entire sum total of all such rocket experiments ever performed in all of recorded history! You get far more barium burned in the atmosphere at every single fireworks display at Disneyland that has ever been released in those rocket experiments.

So far I agree with you on this. I've researched various air sample studies from various countries and urban areas here, that indicate that you are precisely right in this. The Barium experiment mentioned merely reflected the scientist's interest in it. It doesn't imply that indeed Barium is raining down on everyone. When I said that it is dispersed by rain, that's what I meant and it's true. It is. But it doesn't mean that it is in a huge amount, or I think it's in a huge amount and therefore detrimental.

Boomer. I'm not trying to beltittle your research, but I have to say that I think you are REALLY stretching if you want to use that paper to make a case for barium being released into the atmosphere. Why not just use your coal-fired power station as an example? Or Disney's fireworks?

I'm not making that connection. I'm merely showing the experimentation in our atmosphere and logically supporting the notion that experimentation has continued as well as pointing out the interest in Barium at that time. Considering the shield theory, the use of Barium as a scattering metal element MIGHT indeed be feasible in that scenario. That's all I can conclude. I do not know at this time that it is indeed being used for that purpose. The jury is out for me, still, regarding Barium in the skies right now, used as a shield as such. I simply have to find more proof before I accept the Barium situation as fact. I can understand why people might connect the dots here, understand regarding Teller and Eastlund that metals might be used in ionization and plasma generating scenarios and even consider Barium as possible metal in Teller's shield idea, but the conductivity aspects regarding communications technologies is even iffier to me than the HAARP related scenarios.

Excellent! I'm working on the grid-issue, but today I have a stack of other stuff to get through, and I wanted to nip Mr. Rocket Barium in the bud before he flew too high, if you don't mind me totally screwing up a really bad mixed metaphor... :)

Smile!

My mind is ALWAYS focused!!! :)

Mine isn't! I have my clear moments and my fuzzy moments!

Always a delight!

BC ;)

jayreynolds

02-10-2005, 12:07 PM

Now, I realize I was wrong. But I can still see why investigators of a sun shield operation would logically connect Barium to other metallic particulates mentioned in the paper. And my statement about researchers' motivation for suspecting Barium usage still stands.

No, the chemmies that started the barium hoax included Deboarh.
THAT IS WHY HER STORY NEEDS TO BE TOLD!

Here is the history of the barium hoax. You need to read it to understand how flimsy the whole thing was that got that started.
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=65678#65678

Ever wonder why Deborah DOESN'T PROMOTE BARIUM ANYMORE????????

THINK ABOUT IT, AND HOLD HER FEET TO THE FIRE. You chemmies expect no less from the government, why give hoaxers like Deborah & Co. a free ride?????

jayreynolds

02-10-2005, 12:25 PM

A lie.
Leave me out of this please.
You are lying, Reynolds.
I suppose everyone's enjoying this, yes?
For the record then.

No, it's all true. I posted multiple times at Carnicom's first board the web address for the JP-8 detector that Dr. David Leith at UNC was developing and challenged you and Sore. Your crew always refused ALL my challenges, as you still do today. here is a link:
" A Personal Sampler for Aircraft Engine Cold Start Particles.."
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%22David+Leith%22+JP-8&btnG=Search

Listen, Deborah, don't try and pull any of your spook-'black bag' tricks. I get up early in the morning.

BY THE WAY, DEBORAH , WHERE IS THE INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR COHORTS AT CIA AND NSA WHO CAME UP WITH THE BARIUM HOAX IN THE FIST PLACE???? WE HAVE BEEN WAITING SEVERAL YEARS FOR YOU TO FINALLY GET THE GUTS TO TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT THAT!!!!!

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 12:28 PM

A lie.

Leave me out of this please.

You are lying, Reynolds.

I suppose everyone's enjoying this, yes?

For the record then.

No, I don't enjoy this, FS! I don't want to spend my time investigating you, when I'm on my own path of research which might indeed be way behind you! I need to make up my own mind, find my own evidence and go from there.

I don't know about your research, FS, and I will not get involved in this back and forth and be manipulated into criticizing you or anyone else.

Please post a link to your best lab studies and research, OK? I'm not familiar with your site!

I've been reading on the chemtrail trail for two years now and really would like to get into a more definate position. I'm stil vacillating on the fence created by DOD ops, like everyone else, and would simply like to know what's going on. My premise is that something different has to be going on besides just increased air traffic. I accept air traffic as part of the climate scenario, but HAARP looms in my mind as well as the other possible weather mod. scenarios.

I don't debunk chemtrail activists, I just look for legitimate evidence and proof. Please post your links to your lab tests so I can read them.

BC :)

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 12:31 PM

No, the chemmies that started the barium hoax included Deboarh Stark.
THAT IS WHY HER STORY NEEDS TO BE TOLD!

Here is the history of the barium hoax. You need to read it to understand how flimsy the whole thing was that got that started.
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=65678#65678

Ever wonder why Deborah Stark DOESN'T PROMOTE BARIUM ANYMORE????????

THINK ABOUT IT, AND HOLD HER FEET TO THE FIRE. You chemmies expect no less from the government, why give hoaxers like Deborah Stark & Co. a free ride?????

I'll read it and decide for myself, if you don't mind. I'm not interested in focusing on FS! Did you consider all the scenarios I mentioned before? Did you consider listening to her?

BC :?

halva

02-10-2005, 01:18 PM

This is the only thought worth my response. In order to state a "reality" you have to prove it. That is your job and that is mine.

It is not my job to prove anything. It is scientists' job to stop telling lies.

There is no superior or inferior.... only what is true and not true. GET IT?

Evasive nonsense.

And IS has proven to be one sexist wacko! If you don't even see that, I feel sorry for your wife.

What do you know about my wife?

Being a sexist and a wacko is not as bad as being a liar, or a 'chemtrails' debunker, which is the same thing.

Please post something to support either weather manipulation or your take on fuel manipulation.

I'm not going to post anything to support any of these things. I' m going to get on with what I'm doing in the real world, where the task is not to try from chat boards to do scientists' jobs for them.

Your focusing on me is tiring and boring.

And your sucking up to debunkers and demonising Jim Phelps is a soft option, and unprincipled.

halva

02-10-2005, 01:51 PM

airtankerpilot

02-10-2005, 03:11 PM

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 03:15 PM

Boomer Chick my proposal to have a roster system for us to monitor Raynolds in rotation still stands.

I feel unjustifiably privileged in having him ignore-listed so that you have to take all the pressure.

The inevitable result is infighting among non-debunkers.

He will have you fighting with Footsoldier soon. After all, she is the only non-debunker you have not attacked.

I tell it like it is, Halva. You have brought my responses to you because of YOU. IS has done the same thing. If you noticed, I didn't fall for the FS bait.

I post when I want and that is how it is. If Reynolds is here, so be it. I don't suck up to anybody, Halva. You just don't know how to handle yourself when you think you're being attacked, I do. I also know how to find common ground and use it .... it's called truth. I haven't caught any lies here, yet, and so far just normal debate

I have never attacked you on anything to do with your environmental views or your stance on anything except your ridiculous assumptions and side commentary on the social structure of this board. You remind me of the comic relief characters in Shakespeare tragedies. Why didn't you major in sociology? And that foray into history with the Russians? I asked you to send me something you wrote and you didn't. I showed respect to you and I would support you in any of your postings on something relevant to the topic at hand. If you can prove governments' spraying, governments' harming besides what we already agree upon..... the fossil fuel consumption/oil elitist agendas/ fascism .... I'll be glad and eager to support you. Where are your posts?

Why are you so upset or affected by my presence? Are you a masochist or something, as you seem to want to be on this board alone with Stu and Jay? Do you like to stay on boards where others attack you, especially guys? You begged me for months to join you here, now that I do, all you do is whine about me. I don't get it. Do you want to explain yourself?

If you continue to talk to me this way, and assume that IS is worthy of respect in my eyes just because you feel that his side is better than Reynold's, even beyond the fact that I told you I'm on nobody's "side" and that you have a problem with battlefield mentality....... I pity you. I pity your insensitivity to women, once again. So I suppose you like IS attacking me the way he has, on a personal level and playing into Reynold's so-called plan to divide and conquer? Well, excuse me, but IS hasn't performed very well since I got here and I only know him from his posts on CTC. And no, I don't know about your wife, I only know you have one. How on earth would I know about your wife? Is she a celebrity big enough in Greece that I'd know her here?

Halva, you are a very articulate and intelligent person. I can see that. But something is getting in the way here, and it's not Jay. Please work it out and get focused again.

I'm concerned about weather modification whether you are or not. I'm concerned about the use of HAARP, whether you're concerned or not. Those are MY two areas of concentration, just so you know what page I'm on. You are working on what again? Controlling people who want to control you? Is that the game? Controlling people on the internet who don't agree with you.

Well, guess what? I value their freedom, as I said, to debunk all they want. I value that back and forth, that energy of argumentation and debate. I LOVE IT!!!! As long as debate doesn't degrade into personal character assassination I'm here. And even though I never even debated with IS, he takes the low road with me. Do you like that? How would you like it if I were your wife? Or your daughter, if you were fortunate enough to have children? I LIKE DEBUNKERS! If they listen and are intelligent..... all the better, in fact if they don't listen to reason I don't need the battle game. No thanks! Not for me!

You want to battle, get into lobbying, get into writing your papers and getting them published in mainstream media. Good luck! You want to debate and prove your points, stay here! But don't focus on me.... focus on your stances and your evidence. Period. If you get sidetracked, yeah don't we all, but get back on track. I'll support you if I agree with what you post and most likely I will. So what's stopping you here?

Does objectivity bother you so much? Don't let it! And so what if I get along with your so-called arch enemies? They really aren't your enemies if you change your perspective.

Now, if you retain and actually read anything I wrote I'll be amazed! LOL! I've been repeating these same messages for quite awhile now!

Please let's move on. No amount of social restructuring will change things for you, only you can change things for you.

Take care,

BC

The Shadow

02-10-2005, 04:22 PM

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=239204

(To Halva) I pity your insensitivity to women, once again. So I suppose you like IS attacking me the way he has, on a personal level and playing into Reynold's so-called plan to divide and conquer?FYI, insensitivity to women and attacking them on a personal level happens to be one of Mr. Reynolds’ greatest “talents,” Boomer. In a particularly vicious and revealing post directed at F_S, his treachery, scheming, and use of psychological terror is particularly well showcased. Given the right circumstances, he will turn on you, as well. I know you can handle him, but it is always nice to be forewarned.

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=221758

Well, I know when I've lit a match under your ass, you whining little bitch.

Come, now, bring it on, I've been waiting for your people to up and do something for years now.

Of course, if you decide to act out against ME, what you are doing is admitting you have no intention of acting against that which you claim to REALLY BE AGAINST!

Deborah, what's got your claws out is the fact that I showed, by your own words, that YOU KNOW the whole Tellerian "deep shield" aluminum being sprayed hoax is false.

YOU KNOW that such a scheme must be done in the stratosphere.
YOU KNOW that the planes you see are in the troposhere.
YOU KNOW that what Wayne is pushing is NOT TRUE.
YOU KNOW that what Jimbo is saying reveals him to be a nutcase.
YOU KNOW that what you see aren't "chemtrails" at all.
YOU KNOW that they are just contrails.

Now, considering all these things that YOU KNOW, what sort of fantasy land do you really live in, to stay here alongside liars like Wayne, and wacko's like Jim Phelps, and then say:

"You are leaving out a crucial component of the total picture here and that is the absolutely necessary emergence of a critical mass of public will to face and begin to deal with reality where this issue is concerned. There is a great deal of reliable information out there but it is useful only in proportion to the general public’s willingness to at least consider it."

Deborah, you simply can't have it both ways. You can't live two contradictory lives and maintain sanity. This sort of cosmic conundrum is what drives you back here for your lesson again and again. It's why, despite Wayne's orders, you keep coming back for more. And the more you deny it the more the cognitive dissonance grows. You really can't blame me for it, when it's all inside YOUR head.

Sooner or later you are going to have to deal with the reality that you can't expect a "critical mass" to believe you are telling the truth when you associate with people like Wayne Hall, who you have stated promotes the "deep shield" hoax, and you won't find people considering you sane when you ally yourself with nutcases like Jim Phelps.

Cast off these millstones around your neck, Deborah Stark. Look around you, look in the mirror and see exactly who and what is holding you down. You won't find me among them. I've always been one of your best friends, even if I have some tough things to say it's all been for your benefit.

Get reality back in your life Deborah, and maybe once you learn a little about what reality really is, just maybe, then you might have a tiny little itsy-bitsy chance to see "the general public's willingness to at least consider" that you have anything at all worthwhile to offer.

Until you do, you are spinning in an ever-smaller circle here at arianna's, and squandering both momentum and credibility with each moment you waste.One moment, Mr. Reynolds screeches at F_S, calling her a “whining little bitch.” Then, like the horror movie monster he personifies, he rationalizes his crazed outburst with the “tender” consolation, “I've always been one of your best friends, even if I have some tough things to say it's all been for your benefit.” How many times have members of a jury listened to similar reasoning and testimony from an abusive husband or boyfriend as they convict him of assault and battery or even murder?

Sooner or later, I believe that it would be advantageous to have Mr. Reynolds’ own family examined for bruises and other signs of physical violence. For obvious reasons, they should at least be interviewed to obtain evidence of psychological abuse. It is only a matter of time before message boards no longer supply him with an ample thrill. At that time, he will snap and they will bear the brunt of his pathological cruelty.

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 04:44 PM

Ahh, 3 weeks ago, heh? Well, I had heard about his reputation, but had never witnessed him in action. Frankly, I find his brand of boundary-breaking far more acceptable than IS's, who rambles on and on with fantastical female put downs and associations. At least Reynold's is sticking to some kind of point he feels is valid that has to do with "chemtrails", even if he's on the wrong track (maybe) and yes, the "b" word isn't pleasant, but this is far less offensive to women than what I've already experienced with IS. Even women call eachother "b's". Guys call eachother "b's", too, for that matter. It's so common.

I just don't want to go into this territory. So far Reynold's has shown persistence and dedication to truth with me and I want it to stay that way. I think he does, too.

I'm not comfortable discussing others like this, I know what I experience and that's all I need to know, but since you posted this, I thought I should respond.

Going into Reynold's family life is going too far, sorry. I had a right to comment to Halva on this because he showed a lack of respect for women on this board and I mentioned his wife in regard to him -- TO HIM. One on one. I told IS what I thought and that is done.

Deborah seemed to handle it OK. She expressed herself. If she wants to report him, that is her business.

Still open to everyone but IS.

BC :neutral:

jayreynolds

02-10-2005, 04:45 PM

Well, one thing to consider is that my logic was irrefutable, and Deborah has taken my advice. For the most part, she has disassociated herself from Jim Phelps on this thread and started one pertaining to something with a hint of reality, ordinary contrails, on another thread.

She knows, and has known for some time, as you do, that what people have been calling "chemtrails" are just ordinary contrails, and they could not possibly be the result of implementation of Teller's idea of how to cool the atmosphere. She knows, as do all people who read and understand the paper THAT would only work in the stratosphere, and that what are seen are tropospheric.

Deborah is very good at holding her nose, but Jimbo simply got too racist, and Wayne too accomodating of it, for Deboarh to live beside them.

Hey, Shadow, what do you think Dbeorah should do about spilling the beans on those CIA and NSA folks she used to work with on that "Chemtrails Over America"?

Do you think it's strange that she would have been working with CIA and NSA people and the rest of you chemmies just bought the whole hoax?

Aren't you even the tiniest bit interested in the truth about who it waws, what they said, and why they have gone to ground ever since then?

Do you think that maybe those CIA and NSA people Debroah worked with might have gotten their job done?

Who do you think ordered them to do that, or who allowed it to be done?

After all, the group communicated using ordinary emails, no encryption or anything. I even have seen some of their emails. Very interesting..........Obviously, they weren't hiding anything from the spook agency, who I'm sure can read any damn emails they please.

Who were they hiding from........?

The obvious people they were hiding from, and the people they are still hiding from, are their fellow chemmies!

Think about THAT!

And who is holding the lid tight for them.......................???

Why it's Deborah, who doesn't even believe in
"chemtrails" anymore. Doesn't anybody else feel this is curious..................???????

I suppose I just can't understand why you chemmies don't seem to have the same level of curiousity I do. I guess that's what makes you chemmies, though!

Insurrectionchemistry

02-10-2005, 04:57 PM

Greetings,

One never knows how much one appraciates a garage door spring until one breaks and the cars get trapped by a 400 lb garage door. Such fun.

I suggest a new name for the lastest chump recruit for the forum. How about "Bungler Chump" for BC. I can't believe Halva recruited her. I was thinking it had to be Gaias games there.

Since BC just needs to do something, despite not being able to grasp the big pictues, maybe she can do some research. I am too lazy to look up obvous things that anyone can do with a search engine to show the trends of hydrogen in jet fuels.

Her pal Reynolds claims the HF process for sulfur removal leaves no added hydrogen in the refinery products. He claims the hydrogen content in refinery products have not risen. Yet, lots of those aluminum catalysits work by hydrogen catalytic bonding techniques.

Even the refineries moving to limit emissions, so they won't poison the area residents and give them cancer, has driven up the hydrogen retention in the refineries. All the new refineries work on hydrogen conservation methods these days and hydrogen appears in the products like jet fuels.

Perhaps the latest Chump recruit can also provide other incidental issues like the HF risks from oil refineries are the worst of all chemical industry risks, with kill zones out to 30 miles away. Nasty stuff this HF, poison.

Then she can work on the ravings of her other pal that says the HF reaction with hydrocarbons does not happen in the atmosphere. Chemistry says plainly that it does. But can the Chump woman find the lie----which is rather obvious.

There seems to be one hell of a rise in those trying to cover up the principle effect in making the global warming blanket that involves the HF effects on H-Cs. All the acids in the air sure are issues for most all the smog problems---but according to Chump's buddy from Chile---these reactions just don't happen.

Now, Bungler Chump needs to see if she can even read and comprehind a lie.

IMHO,
is

foot_soldier

02-10-2005, 05:30 PM

Jay "Talking Points" Reynolds wrote:
.....Well, one thing to consider is that my logic was irrefutable, and Deborah has taken my advice. For the most part, she has disassociated herself from Jim Phelps on this thread and started one pertaining to something with a hint of reality, ordinary contrails, on another thread......
You do not speak for me. You do not "advise" me. Please stop conveying that impression.

You have taken an incident about which you have, at best, second-hand knowledge, and inflated it into an absolutely ridiculous melange of lies, distortions and misrepresentations.

Your questions have been answered many times over. If you don't like the answers that's too bad.

For the record.

Boomer Chick

02-10-2005, 05:51 PM

For ANYONE:

http://www.stormingmedia.us/54/5447/A544783.html

Authors: Irvin Glassman; PRINCETON UNIV NJ DEPT OF MECHANICAL AND AEROSPACE ENGINEERING
Abstract: Present and anticipated variation in jet propulsion fuels due to advanced engine compression ratios and airframe cooling requirements necessitate greater understanding of chemical phenomena associated with the feed system and combustion aspects of the airbreathing propulsion systems under consideration by the U. S. Air Force. With AFOSR support an integrated. fundamental research program had been established at Princeton. The focus during the subject period was directed to understanding the pyrolysis and combustion of endothermic fuels under subcritical conditions and the pyrolysis of these fuels under supercritical conditions. Main consideration was given to methylcyclohexane, decalin and tetralin, which are not only endothermic fuels. but alkylcyclohydrocarbons. the naphthene component of JP fuels. The subcritical conditions in the study were 0.1 MPa (1 atm) and temperatures ranging between 900-1200 K. The supercritical conditions were between 4-9 MPa (40-90 atm) and 720-820 K. The Princeton Turbulent Flow Reactor was used for the subcritical studies and a newly designed coiled tubular reactor for the supercritical studies. Substantial experimentation and analytical evaluation revealed distinct differences between the subcritical and supercritical results. From the rate of fuel decay under the conditions described, it was determined that, although the activation energies were of the same order, the supercritical (4.5 MPa) pre- exponential factor A was two orders of magnitude greater than the subcritical (0.1 MPA) one. Further, not only were complete scission products of all these fuels found for both cases, but, interestingly, cyclo-intermediates were found under supercritical conditions as well. As the supercritical pressure was increased, the ratio of cyclo-intermediates to scission products increased. Additional experimentation revealed that these cyclo compounds lead to the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons which are the precursors to particulate formation. c

Limitations: APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

Description: Final technical rept. 1 Dec 1997-30 Nov 1999

Pages: 41

Report Date: 22 JAN 2001

Report number: A544783

***

Anybody know what cyclo-intermediates and scission products are?

***

Authors: R. Longjohn; B. Dacre; J. I. Hetherington; ROYAL MILITARY COLL OF SCIENCE SHRIVENHAM (UNITED KINGDOM)
Abstract: This report results from a contract tasking Royal Military College of Science as follows: The main objective of the proposed work is to examine candidate HITTs additives that have an ability to increase the electrical conductivity of hydrocarbons. In particular, the main emphasis will be on factors that adversely interfere with the conduction process and depress the conductivity response. The research program will aim to: A) establish baseline electrical conductivity for BP and Ethyl additives in a model hydrocarbon (dodecane); B) examine the influence of the factors considered in (A) for JP-8 fuel; C) comparisons of model and real fuel behavior and consideration of the implications for in field behavior. To achieve this, measurements will be made to examine factors, which determine the magnitude of the conductivity response in the model hydrocarbon: 1. The effects of concentration of HlTTs additives, 2. The effects of other fuel components on the behavior of HITTs additives. This will include naturally-occurring and refinery introduced components and certain coadditives, 3. The effects of certain physical properties of the bulk hydrocarbon and especially viscosity, on HlTTs additive behavior, 4. Additive batch-to-batch variation, 5. Incidences of conductivity dependence on time, 6. Influence of temperature, on conductivity for the working temperature range over which these additives will be used. Especially it is important to examine the temperature dependence of the most important observed effects, 7. There is evidence that certain HlTTs additives may cause the formation of microemulsions of water in fuel. The effects on electrical conductivity will be examined.

Limitations: APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

Description: Final rept. 31 Jan-30 Sep 2000

Pages: 35

________________________________

The implications of these two studies raise red flags for me, especially the conductivity experiment. Why find out if hydrocarbons, which were stated to be the byproduct of the burning of the fuels in the previous study, are electronically conductive? Heh? Anybody? Need I mention that they were concerned with particulate formations concerning the hydrocarbons in the above experiment? Now whether they WANT more particulates or fewer particulates is something we can't ascertain at this moment. But if they adopted the above technology, we can assume they WANTED more hydrocarbons that produce particulates.

Any better inferences from the engineer/scientist class?

Just some bait hanging out for you!

BC :rolleyes:

jayreynolds

02-10-2005, 06:16 PM

Her pal Reynolds claims the HF process for sulfur removal leaves no added hydrogen in the refinery products. is

Hey, Jimbo, where is the evidence you promised for THAT claim.
Lots of smoke, no beef, eh?
Still waiting, after all these years.........................?

jayreynolds

02-10-2005, 06:31 PM

You do not speak for me. You do not "advise" me. Please stop conveying that impression.

You have taken an incident about which you have, at best, second-hand knowledge, and inflated it into an absolutely ridiculous melange of lies, distortions and misrepresentations.

Your questions have been answered many times over. If you don't like the answers that's too bad.

For the record.
Well, Debbie precious. You've posted here, and only here, for almost a year. Jimbo shows up and turns your playground into a nasty place, and Wayne promotes the geoengoineering hoax you debunked with your own words which 'escaped' from thebama_Lahi forum.

I advise you to leave, and presently you do.

Cause =effect

Perhaps you just didn't realize who your real friend was.

Just remember, I'm the guy who advised you to leave the "chemtrails" hoax, what, five years ago? Look how much further you are than "rArK" or 'Sore' are. he ran away sulking from me, you have stuck to me like glue, sister. I advised you on SF6, and plenty of other things.

In the end, debunkers are all advisors. To debunk actually means to expose as false notions which are not factual, true, or correct. That is what i ahve set out to do and have been doing so for years now. Most chemmies with sense listen to my advice, checking it out for themselves as I suggest, and get over it when they find I'm correct.

Heck, even that stupid fool so-called 'friend' of yours Don Johnson finally gave up his ridiculous claims about ship tracks and admitted they were just that, and not some jets spraying along at 50 miles per hour. What a joke! I sure straightened his ass out!

So, whenever you see me asking questions, or giving answers, Deborah, remember one thing.
Questions and answers are the only way people learn, and anyone who isn't up to asking or receiving isn't interested in the truth. So, what are your answers on the CIA, NSA questions, Deborah????

Surely you must find something which keeps you coming back, following me across the internet...........................

halva

02-10-2005, 09:16 PM

I tell it like it is, Halva. You have brought my responses to you because of YOU. IS has done the same thing. If you noticed, I didn't fall for the FS bait.

And you are to be commended for that.

But it would be unwise to underestimate Raynolds.

Even someone as tough and smart as Chem 11 was not tough and smart enough to stop Raynolds wrecking his (Chem 11's) relationship with David Stewart through closely targeted, relentless slander.

As a result Chem 11 was not prepared to defend D.S. at a crucial point against Raynolds' accusations of his being a hoaxer.

David Stewart used to post at Megasprayer. I haven't noticed him doing so since.

I note that you have told Raynolds that you and he are 'on the same side'. This is untrue, and I wonder what you can be thinking when you say these things. It will not protect you from him.

If Reynolds is here, so be it. I don't suck up to anybody, Halva. You just don't know how to handle yourself when you think you're being attacked, I do. I also know how to find common ground and use it .... it's called truth. I haven't caught any lies here, yet, and so far just normal debate

Is that really so, Bummer Chick (sic!!)

I have never attacked you on anything to do with your environmental views or your stance on anything except your ridiculous assumptions and side commentary on the social structure of this board. You remind me of the comic relief characters in Shakespeare tragedies. Why didn't you major in sociology? And that foray into history with the Russians? I asked you to send me something you wrote and you didn't.

http://www.spectrezine.org/europe/Hall.htm

http://www.oi-ki-a.gr/hddf/nw.html

http://www.spectrezine.org/war/waynehall2.htm

I showed respect to you and I would support you in any of your postings on something relevant to the topic at hand. If you can prove governments' spraying, governments' harming besides what we already agree upon..... the fossil fuel consumption/oil elitist agendas/ fascism .... I'll be glad and eager to support you. Where are your posts?

I'm not going to post on subjects where other people here can do a much better job than I can.
Also, I don't consider that I have to prove anything.

Why are you so upset or affected by my presence? Are you a masochist or something, as you seem to want to be on this board alone with Stu and Jay? Do you like to stay on boards where others attack you, especially guys? You begged me for months to join you here, now that I do, all you do is whine about me. I don't get it. Do you want to explain yourself?

No, I am pleased that you decided to come here. It is certainly a more useful thing for you to do than hanging around at Mav's, as you said you were doing. But since you are here, and have de facto become the leader of the non-debunkers here (to be complimentary) I am now treating you as the authority figure, which means I am free to petition you, complain to you, whatever.

If you continue to talk to me this way, and assume that IS is worthy of respect in my eyes just because you feel that his side is better than Reynold's, even beyond the fact that I told you I'm on nobody's "side" and that you have a problem with battlefield mentality.......

You tell me that you are on nobody's side. You tell Raynolds that you are on his side.

I pity you. I pity your insensitivity to women, once again. So I suppose you like IS attacking me the way he has, on a personal level and playing into Reynold's so-called plan to divide and conquer? Well, excuse me, but IS hasn't performed very well since I got here and I only know him from his posts on CTC. And no, I don't know about your wife, I only know you have one. How on earth would I know about your wife? Is she a celebrity big enough in Greece that I'd know her here?

Halva, you are a very articulate and intelligent person. I can see that. But something is getting in the way here, and it's not Jay.

It is.

Please work it out and get focused again.

I'm concerned about weather modification whether you are or not. I'm concerned about the use of HAARP, whether you're concerned or not. Those are MY two areas of concentration, just so you know what page I'm on. You are working on what again?

Climate change and geoengineering (perhaps one should call it 'macroengineering').

Also 'global dimming' and geoengineering (perhaps one should call it 'macroengineering').

Controlling people who want to control you? Is that the game? Controlling people on the internet who don't agree with you.

Well, guess what? I value their freedom, as I said, to debunk all they want. I value that back and forth, that energy of argumentation and debate. I LOVE IT!!!!

So you are different from me. I want to defeat them. You want to incorporate them and co-opt them..

Do it, if you can.

As long as debate doesn't degrade into personal character assassination I'm here.

Set the example, then.

And even though I never even debated with IS, he takes the low road with me. Do you like that?

IS is a sincere eccentric with some scientific knowledge and a lot of fixed ideas. He is not a scheming, politically shrewd, cold-blooded manipulator.

How would you like it if I were your wife? Or your daughter, if you were fortunate enough to have children?

Whether you like it or not, BC, you are the queen here now. And the queen does not ask such questions of her subjects. She does her duty, with stiff upper lip.

I LIKE DEBUNKERS! If they listen and are intelligent..... all the better, in fact if they don't listen to reason I don't need the battle game. No thanks! Not for me!

OK. That can be a big plus for you, above all if you can apply the same stance with people whom, unlike debunkers, you do not like.

You want to battle, get into lobbying, get into writing your papers and getting them published in mainstream media.

If I do that, Raynolds has said quite explicitly here that he will intervene and chop off my head. He has already done so a few times. I first had the misfortune of making his acquaintance immediately after the appearance of an interview with me in the mainstream Greek press. I believe him when he says that he is going to continue to do this.

My strategy is not to lobby or to try to get published in the mainstream media. It is to activate the powers and the potential of the social forums.

Good luck! You want to debate and prove your points, stay here!

As I said, I am not going to attempt to prove anything here.

But don't focus on me....

I will continue petitioning you as de facto referee here if I don't like your refereeing.

focus on your stances and your evidence. Period. If you get sidetracked, yeah don't we all, but get back on track. I'll support you if I agree with what you post and most likely I will. So what's stopping you here?

Does objectivity bother you so much? Don't let it! And so what if I get along with your so-called arch enemies? They really aren't your enemies if you change your perspective.

Now, if you retain and actually read anything I wrote I'll be amazed! LOL! I've been repeating these same messages for quite awhile now!

Please let's move on. No amount of social restructuring will change things for you, only you can change things for you.

Take care,

BC

whitemajikman

02-10-2005, 09:41 PM

FYI, insensitivity to women and attacking them on a personal level happens to be one of Mr. Reynolds’ greatest “talents,” Boomer. In a particularly vicious and revealing post directed at F_S, his treachery, scheming, and use of psychological terror is particularly well showcased. Given the right circumstances, he will turn on you, as well. I know you can handle him, but it is always nice to be forewarned.

One moment, Mr. Reynolds screeches at F_S, calling her a “whining little bitch.” Then, like the horror movie monster he personifies, he rationalizes his crazed outburst with the “tender” consolation, “I've always been one of your best friends, even if I have some tough things to say it's all been for your benefit.” How many times have members of a jury listened to similar reasoning and testimony from an abusive husband or boyfriend as they convict him of assault and battery or even murder?

Sooner or later, I believe that it would be advantageous to have Mr. Reynolds’ own family examined for bruises and other signs of physical violence. For obvious reasons, they should at least be interviewed to obtain evidence of psychological abuse. It is only a matter of time before message boards no longer supply him with an ample thrill. At that time, he will snap and they will bear the brunt of his pathological cruelty.

The Shadow needs to get some couth

Insurrectionchemistry

02-10-2005, 11:39 PM

Greetings,

I am convinced that intelligence here has been superceeded by the need to do science for pot-heads, which means things a little mysterious need to be made easily solved.

Sometimes that is possible and sometimes it isn't, because the brain limitations for pot heads is a serious limitation. One simply cannot write advanced physics books for persons with 4th grade science abilties.

Case in point, lets look at the Yaak abilities where he seems to call attention to two of my comments on explaining the 1. problems with fluoride gases and 2..the problems with the HF GWP. Engineers are required to properly parse things and define dependence issues, which Yaak just can't do. Yaak's purposes and objectives are to confuse and mis-state.

For example, Yaak writes (or emphasizes):

1, "The formation of HF is an integral part of the SF-6
equation and why it is a potent global warming gas."

2, "Moron Yaak is off trying to prove HF reacts with CFC and SF-6, when the fluorinated gases have zero reactivity with HF. "

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

Yaak is one of the pot-head science types that really can't do simple science. To elaborate on the point to show his lack of simple science abilities, with what science ability he has on the par with pot-head abilties. The real story is he wants to intentionally misstate and mislead.

For Item 1:
SF-6 is a problem because of the radiolytic effects in the atmosphere that result in the formation of HF AND because the compound is rather complicated and has a large broad IR absorption spectra. It has an very large GWP because of these two factors. SF-6 is considered the source compound for which the comment one was made. That discussion was about the GWP for SF-6. Here, SF-6 is not a hydrocarbon and undergoes breakdown via radiation, not chemical reactivity.

For Item 2:
Here the discussion had turned toward the discussion of the GWP for HF as the source compound. Here HF has a GWP set by its IR absoption spectra AND its chemical reactivity with hydrocarbons in the atmosphere producing a sysnergism for catalytic production of higher IR absorbing and lighter compounds that float in the atmosphere. HF's GWP is not a function of SF-6. SF-6 will not react with HF, by defintion, it has already undergone F reactions. SF-6 is not a hydrocarbon. HF's GWP is not a function of SF-6 AND CFC's and neither are a hydrocarbon that undergoes reactions with HF.

Hence, both of my statements above are true in the context they were discussing, but Yaak appears to think that Item 2 shows that HF's GWP is a function of undergoing reaction with SF-6, CFCs. It is the logic of an insane person or someone on pot. Item two was about the syndrgism effect of HF with hydrocarbons, not SF-6 or CFC, neither of which are hydrocarbons.

It is like explaining chemistry to an absolute moron, for an intelligent person would never have origanated such a totally stupid functional assertion. The only ones that make such misleading associations are those attempting to confuse the issues and hide the issues from the public's eye. Their intentions are to mislead, to loose the original statements meanings. They take things out of context and assign wrong ideas. This happens nearly constantly with everything.

So, the issues of pot-head intellect Yaak pointing out how he and Reynolds spend days attempting to prove SF-6 and CFC interact with HF to make the problem of HF interacting with hydrocarbons and only make sense to someone insane. Or to someone that wants to intentionally screw up a simple discussion. Since, neither SF-6 or CFCs are hydrocarbons. Neither Yaak or Reynolds can even define the problem in a sensible fashion, nor follow the rather simple assertions.

Then we have their latest chump, the bungler chump, proclaiming just how intelligent she thinks Yaak is. She has taken up league with pot-head science and un-intelligent reasoning. Hence, she has the definite appearance of a chump and bungler, who could not spot a lie or bogus science if it bit her on the nose.

End--lastest case in point study on de-bunkers deliberate attempts to confuse simple assertions and the pot-head reasoning power of BC in spotting lies.

IMHO,
is

Insurrectionchemistry

02-11-2005, 02:07 AM

Halva's Queen has no clothes.

Seemingly the claims of the BC Queen on the Sun being the cause of the global warming issue have been shot down upon her own closer investigations. And going down with her assertions on the Sun radiance being the dominate global warming factor, also goes her buddies the De-Bunkers same claims. The nude Queen and her loyal following on the Sun radiance global warming issue have been shown to have no clothes. They claims are misguided and wrong. On par with a great lie to absolve industries emissions of HF and hydro-carbons involvement in the global warming prime factor.

The Naked Queen has become the chump of the false leads provided by her De-Bunker court. She has become mislead by them and now is naked, embarrased with no clothes for leadership.

What else did we expect, when someone follows the intentional baiting and misleading information provided by the Reynolds syndicate of lies----you fail. Fail means people don't respect your claims on Sun radiance dominated global warming.

Such a failing, then puts the other theme of global warming being dominated by IR absorbing gas factors--------and puts the Europeans opinions on global warming / Koyoto in the limelight of the greater truth.

Can the naked queen handle the truth. Can she see she was misquided? Or does she just like making a spectacle of herself. Time will tell. Will she continue to be the pawn of the De-bunkers falsehoods?

Will the naked queen be able to figure out the false claims of her loyal servent Allsops that HF won't react with anything in the air. Will the BC reality be that the rules of chemical interactions of acids in the air be suspended by her royal naked orders to support untruths?

Or do acids in air have no reaction threshold temps and pressure and the massivity of the reactions be governed by the massive size of the volume of the planet. Does smog happen or is even that to be fashioned as a figment of persons imaginations.

Shall the queens rule be so week that she takes away the right of man to object to natures pretty blue skies be obscured by uply lines and foggy skies?

Right now, we don't appear to have a queen-----------just a chump that does not have the experience to find the dominate factors or sift the information for these dominate factors. A queen with no experience, a queen with a corrupt de-bunker advisory .......... is doomed.

And the doomed queen lead the planet into disasters. So goes the naked queens inabilities to see the lies on the tip of her very nose.

Aging naked queens are not even fun to look at----more like a horror show. So goes the state of the state on the Forum for today.

IMHO,
is

The Shadow

02-11-2005, 02:43 AM

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=239239

Ahh, 3 weeks ago, heh? Well, I had heard about his reputation, but had never witnessed him in action. Frankly, I find his brand of boundary-breaking far more acceptable than IS's, who rambles on and on with fantastical female put downs and associations. At least Reynold's is sticking to some kind of point he feels is valid that has to do with "chemtrails", even if he's on the wrong track (maybe) and yes, the "b" word isn't pleasant, but this is far less offensive to women than what I've already experienced with IS. Even women call eachother "b's". Guys call eachother "b's", too, for that matter. It's so common.

I just don't want to go into this territory. So far Reynold's has shown persistence and dedication to truth with me and I want it to stay that way. I think he does, too.

I'm not comfortable discussing others like this, I know what I experience and that's all I need to know, but since you posted this, I thought I should respond.

Going into Reynold's family life is going too far, sorry. I had a right to comment to Halva on this because he showed a lack of respect for women on this board and I mentioned his wife in regard to him -- TO HIM. One on one. I told IS what I thought and that is done.

Deborah seemed to handle it OK. She expressed herself. If she wants to report him, that is her business.

Still open to everyone but IS.

BC :neutral:Boomer, you appear to be more put out by IS’s “boundary-breaking” because it is aimed at you. Your rationalization of that which belongs to Mr. Reynolds seems to minimize his repugnant character. The behavior of neither one is acceptable. The fact that you have not “witnessed him in action” is irrelevant and your contention that his “sticking to some kind of point he feels is valid” is a pretty poor defense of his overall conduct. Even the Green River Killer believed in the righteousness of his actions.

While you may not be comfortable in discussing others in this manner, I assure you that Mr. Reynolds has no compunction when it comes to talking behind the backs of others. Most of the “victories” that he claims are over people who do not even read his posts. How convenient for him.

It is a shame that you find the experiences of others to be of so little value. Employing your logic, should Mr. Reynolds turn out to be a serial killer, himself, it would be okay with you simply because he has not slit your throat. Do not be shocked by my analogies. They pale in comparison to the personal attacks that have accumulated over time from Mr. Reynolds and his sidekicks. All you have to do is go back and read, as I began to do, some time ago.

I only started posting in November. The verbal battery I witnessed against a woman (F_S, namely) became so sickening that I decided to start pitching some of it back – with some much deserved pointed commentary. Because bullies cannot stand being exposed, I became their newest “project.” At some point in December – without any proof whatsoever – Mr. Reynolds declared that I was a person named Diane Harvey. He used that claim as a license to post a series of hit pieces against her. With this woman unable to defend herself, the following was only the beginning from Mr. Reynolds:

The Shadow knows what evil lurks in the heart of Jay Reynolds. The Shadow knows...
But Jay Reynolds knows who the shadow is......................
Bingo!- Diane Harvey(aka.'Merak'; Sedona; Sedonadiane,etc.)
you old hag. I'd recognize you anywhereDespite a month and a half of challenges, the coward never did produce any evidence to support this revelation.

Boomer Chick, I said it before TO Mr. Reynolds and it still stands: If I were his neighbor, I would make certain that my firearms were always loaded and within arms reach. For his sake, it would be wise to have his locked away from his family.

I am sorry if that commentary does not meet with your approval. If anything, I have not gone far enough. He imposes no limits whatsoever on himself. FYI, here is what MaverickGoose thinks of Mr. Reynolds in post #3 of the following thread:

http://p090.ezboard.com/fcontrailsandchemtrails22884frm1.showMessage?topic ID=2766.topic

My question back at ya, Jay, is why don't you ask me yourself? Is this some type of high school thing where you can't address me personally? You aren't banned from my board, so what's the deal? I don't really care for you as a person since you decided to promote a known lie about me. You wouldn't listen to me when I was telling the truth all along, and now you're resorting to the intellectual equivalent of passing notes in grade school math class.

For any of your future "questions," you know damn well where to find me. Be a grown up and ask me yourself.

Insurrectionchemistry

02-11-2005, 03:04 AM

jayreynolds

02-11-2005, 03:54 AM

[He used that claim as a license to post a series of hit pieces against her.
The reason why this 'shadow' didn't link to the "hit pieces" is because they were simply direct quotes from Diane Harvey's own writings. THAT is what is being called a "Hit Piece'.
Ha!

jayreynolds

02-11-2005, 04:15 AM

The Curious Case of Yaak's Professional Credentials.

In most all places that I know about PC design system CAD operators are considered Draftspersons. It is a non-professional non-degreed type position and type job.

When challenged on this detail, all Yaak could supply is I won't comment. Yet, he braggs of being a PC board designer and can't seem to impart an engineerly level resonse toward technical topics. He screws things up worst than a gradeshooler might.

Which likely means no degrees, no enginner, else why is he doing drafting jobs?

IMHO,
is
No, he said he wouldn't give that information TO YOU.
The rest of us he said were free to contact him for his credentials.

See, Jimbo, he did that because YOU are the one who is short on credentials. For instance, despite having laid claim ti have invented haarp and chemtrails, in fact to have stated that you are "considered next to God at DOE", you've never actually cited even one bit of proof that you ever did anything other than wash glassware.

Oh, BTW, where is that figure for 100-year GWP(global warming potential) you promised us?
Remember, I even gave you the reference document werein you will find the method for calculating GWP. Here it is again:
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, World Meteorological
Organization, United Nations Environment Programme. Climate
Change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment (1990).

Oh, and that figure for the enhanced hydrogen content of hydrotreated jet fuel you promised us too. Where is that?????

The Shadow

02-11-2005, 05:46 AM

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=239387

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=239361

He used that claim as a license to post a series of hit pieces against her.
The reason why this 'shadow' didn't link to the "hit pieces" is because they were simply direct quotes from Diane Harvey's own writings. THAT is what is being called a "Hit Piece'.
Ha!There is no reason for you to feign innocence, Mr. Reynolds. Everyone knows that there is no end in sight to your misrepresentations. Tell the truth for once in your life. The reason I did not link to the hit pieces is because they were deleted from the Tampa Bay IndyMedia (http://www.tampaindymedia.org/phpbb2/index.php) discussion board. The entire thread was ditched because I posted an editorial that you wrote and posted at 13th Century Discussion Forums (http://com1.runboard.com/b13thcentury). It contained your mailing address and telephone number. Oddly enough, you make no attempt to hide your personal information. Are you inviting “guests” or are there those whose duty it is to cover your ass?

I did notice that you “forgot” to mention that before you posted what you are now referring to as “simply direct quotes from Diane Harvey’s own writings,” you managed to get in your customary below-the-belt commentary. THAT is what is RIGHTFULLY being called a “Hit Piece” – whether or not you agree with her composition.

Ha!

jayreynolds

02-11-2005, 05:48 AM

"Chemtrails" has fallen off the radar screen at the google news search, for the first time since
the service began.

Wayne, your hoax is dying, while you fiddle away here at arianna's.

The German service yields this little gem. Wayne, what do you think of it?
if you input the URL into the babelfish german/englisch translator, you get a rather satirical 'mad-hatter' sort of artikel!
http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/19/19383/1.html

jayreynolds

02-11-2005, 06:28 AM

Are you inviting “guests” or are there those whose duty it is to cover your ass? I did notice that you “forgot” to mention that before you posted what you are now referring to as “simply direct quotes from Diane Harvey’s own writings,” you managed to get in your customary below-the-belt commentary. THAT is what is RIGHTFULLY being called a “Hit Piece” – whether or not you agree with her composition.

Well, I have been inviting you to come for lunch for years now. You can bring my favorite dish very easily, I think.

Now, if all you want to do is discuss some purported 'hit piece', let's do it. What is your best recollection of the words I said that you consider a 'hit piece'? YOU made the contention that this took place, so YOU show the evidence for it. I do remember that I made comments about the words Harvey published, if you feel they were a 'hit' just tell us what you found so offensive and we can discuss it.

Oh, BTW, you didn't ever answer about whether you think Deborah should come clean and tell what she knows about the CIA/NSA people who she has admitted to working with as editor of "Chemtrails Over America"?
Here is the hilarious website her friend Don Johnson hosts the CIA/ NSA document on:
http://home1.gte.net/quakker/documents/chemtrails_over_america.htm

That Don Johnson was a real hoot. I corresponded with his friend Dede, who described him as the "head astrologer" of her coven of post-menopausal lesbian wiccans called the "Crones". He wasn't really proud of it.

The Shadow

02-11-2005, 07:48 AM

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=239449

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=239428

Are you inviting “guests” or are there those whose duty it is to cover your ass? I did notice that you “forgot” to mention that before you posted what you are now referring to as “simply direct quotes from Diane Harvey’s own writings,” you managed to get in your customary below-the-belt commentary. THAT is what is RIGHTFULLY being called a “Hit Piece” – whether or not you agree with her composition.
Well, I have been inviting you to come for lunch for years now. You can bring my favorite dish very easily, I think.That hardly seems possible since I only began posting this November. Not only that, I seriously doubt that you would get past the first bite of anything I would bring along for you to sample.

Now, if all you want to do is discuss some purported 'hit piece', let's do it. What is your best recollection of the words I said that you consider a 'hit piece'? YOU made the contention that this took place, so YOU show the evidence for it. I do remember that I made comments about the words Harvey published, if you feel they were a 'hit' just tell us what you found so offensive and we can discuss it.Not until you show everyone your irrefutable evidence that has allowed you to dub me Diane Harvey. I owe you nothing. I find you offensive in general and, like MaverickGoose, I do not care for you as a person – to put it mildly. Nobody can trust a chronic liar and a backstabber.

Oh, BTW, you didn't ever answer about whether you think Deborah Stark should come clean and tell what she knows about the CIA/NSA people who she has admitted to working with as editor of "Chemtrails Over America"?
Here is the hilarious website her friend Don Johnson hosts the CIA/ NSA document on:
http://home1.gte.net/quakker/documents/chemtrails_over_america.htmI really do not have any desire to move forward with ongoing conversations that include such an officious individual as you. But if you must know, I would be disappointed in foot_soldier should she divulge privileged information – especially to someone like you who knows absolutely nothing about of the concept of personal honor.

That Don Johnson was a real hoot. I corresponded with his friend Dede, who described him as the "head astrologer" of her coven of post-menopausal lesbian wiccans called the "Crones". He wasn't really proud of it.This sounds like another one of your fantasy hit pieces. Your demeaning description of a fictional group of women is highly questionable and is obviously intended to incite a certain group of people in some fashion. Again, it says volumes about your lack of any quality character traits. Anyone with a little cultural heritage knows that your use of the term “crones” is proof that you are blowing smoke out your rear end. But you already know that. Evidently, Don Johnson is just another in a long list of people on whom you enjoy making personal attacks, knowing full well that he is not here to defend himself. If Dede exists, tell me how to contact her so that I may verify your latest claim.

The beauty of it is that you are have behaved precisely as I have described you to Boomer Chick. She can choose for herself whether or not to witness you in action, this time.

I am willing to bet that when you look into a mirror that you see nothing but the background behind you.

Insurrectionchemistry

02-11-2005, 07:50 AM

It does appear that BC is using persons with false claims to the engineering profession.

Yaak advertised he was an engineer and when challenged for his school, his state of registry, and his PE license number. He bailed and ran. Which likely means he is not an engineer at all because all the PE's know when they advertise they are an Engineer they may be asked for their PE number.

Same thing goes with Yaak's buddy Reynolds, claims to be a chemical engineer with the biggest oil company in America. Yet, Reynolds show us no state of registry or PE number.

It is being suggested that BC has authorized persons with false claims to credentials on the order of persons playing being lawyers with no licences or police with no badge.

Show is the Engineer professional licenses. Else be consider not to be Engineers and providing false information to mislead everyone.

Isn't the queen suppose to use qualified persons? Will she check the credentials and claims of these two being Engineers?

IMHO,
is

Insurrectionchemistry

02-11-2005, 09:12 AM

I see we have more snale tracks from Ed Snall, the Draftsman. Opps, snale tracks released personal information. His real name and his occupation as a draftsman, plus all the companies he has worked for. Which is an extremely long list.

Well then, you have only qualified yourself as a Draftsman. A non-professional.

Who, BTW, seems to have designed a simple and obvious diversion with Jay Reynolds working closely with you for two whole hours. Two conspiring for a sticky little diversion move. The diversion was to confuse the HF GWP factor as being related to SF-6 and CFC. Two hours of plotting got you both nowhere, except exposed as frauds.

Since the SF-6 and CFC big scam plot of you two slick willies failed miserably, you two have been after disproving HF reacts with hydrocarbons in air. Spending a lot of days on that one and getting down right rediculous. Even got the Chile bubba down there telling HF reactions are suspended in H-C loaded air, total frauds you three have become.

But then, everyone knows you three are frauds, except a certain pea brain.

You can make a chump out of the slow minded person in Colorado, but that is where your story telling ends.

Slimey little thugs. Slimey little thugs. Whatcha gonna do when they [US Martials] come for U.

IMHO,
is

Insurrectionchemistry

02-11-2005, 09:51 AM

Speaking of Racketeering and Conspiracies:
http://rense.com/general62/letter.htm

jayreynolds

02-11-2005, 10:27 AM

Speaking of Racketeering and Conspiracies:
http://rense.com/general62/letter.htm
Well, I guess that debunks Jimbo's claim that Jews at Oak Ridge National Lab orchestrated the JFK asassination. There is no mention of it at the link Jimbo put out!

Now, Jimbo, we are still waiting for that figure for GWP of hydrofuoric acid you promised us.
I practically handed the calculation methodology to you on a silver platter.
Why are you stalled out on that???????

jayreynolds

02-11-2005, 11:05 AM

I really do not have any desire to move forward with ongoing conversations that include such an officious individual as you. But if you must know, I would be disappointed in foot_soldier should she divulge privileged information – especially to someone like you who knows absolutely nothing about of the concept of personal honor.

Your comment tells us something about your own character. It tells us that you have no desire to know the truth of the matter. Why? Because the information isn't necessarily privileged, it was already stated on Don Johnson's website that there were CIA/NSA associated people that wrote the report Deborah edited.

She would certainly not divulge privileged information by confirming or denying the veracity of that statement!

No, the problem YOU have is that YOU are also involved as a participant in the report yourself, 'Shadow'. YOU are subject to answering these questions, too!

Your demeaning description of a fictional group of women is highly questionable and is obviously intended to incite a certain group of people in some fashion. Again, it says volumes about your lack of any quality character traits. Anyone with a little cultural heritage knows that your use of the term “crones” is proof that you are blowing smoke out your rear end. But you already know that. Evidently, Don Johnson is just another in a long list of people on whom you enjoy making personal attacks, knowing full well that he is not here to defend himself. If Dede exists, tell me how to contact her so that I may verify your latest claim.

Well, I'll write Don Johnson and we'll see what he has to say about that, OK?

The last time he mentioned her, he claimed she was dying from AIDS.
She advertised that she taught 'Tantric sex". Go figure.......

If he is in a mood to be honest, which is not exactly a habit with him, he will confirm that Dede's website, which no longer exists, listed him as being her official astrologer, and detailed the wiccan lesbian movement known as the crones, to refer to them by the name they call themselves publicly couldn't be calle demeanng.

But don't believe me, check it out for yourself:
.http://www.ucmpage.org/articles/wicca_story5.html
http://www.elderflower.org/program/cronestuff.html
http://www.cronespeak.com/
http://www.elderflower.org/program/crones.html
http://www.pagancafe.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=45
I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried.

Jimbo might have a comment on these Methodists who have brought
a pagan ritual into their church. For Shame.
http://www.acfnewsource.org/religion/aging_ceremony.html
http://www.ucmpage.org/articles/wicca_story5.html

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 11:45 AM

Excellent, you are right. I stand corrected on the specific element, "Barium," regarding Teller's paper. I must have been confused regarding Eastlund and Teller. Teller is also regarded as the father of the A bomb.

What I might remind you of, however, is that barium rocket test, which mentioned its reflectivity properties regarding the sun. Obviously it has conductive properties as well as excitation atomic properties as the experiment tested its plasma producing ability. It is a metal. Therefore the following general excerpts from Teller's paper could draw any logical person to conclude that Barium COULD be used as well.

Now, I realize I was wrong. But I can still see why investigators of a sun shield operation would logically connect Barium to other metallic particulates mentioned in the paper. And my statement about researchers' motivation for suspecting Barium usage still stands.

Boomer, I was wondering just where this is going: Your line of research here seems to make no sense at all: Teller did not proporse using barium, there are no lab reports of barium-containing contrails to suggest barium is being dispersed in the atmosphere, all the literature on barium suggests that the amount found in ground level samples comes from power stations, fireworks and numerous other mundane sources, there is not a shred of evidence to suggest barium gets loaded into aircraft and sprayed in the sky, there isn't even the hint of any mechanism that could be used to disperse barium from planes... So why do you still insist that what you see up there is made of barium?

If you ask me, we have already gone WAY past the point where one could still reasonably hold that opinion. In fact, I'd say that there is just as much evidence to suggest that contrails are made of barium ,as there is to suggest that contrails are made of popcorn!

Don't you think it is time to concede the barium issue, and go on to whatever is next on your list?

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 11:54 AM

The point was that JP-8 jetfuel in vapor form, not post combustion, posed health risks to those who worked around it or lived near it.Well, if that was the point, Boomer, then I don't think that ANYONE ever said otherwise! I'd ,take it for granted that it is probably NOT a good idea to drink, breath, or bathe in anything that can be used to power aircraft, tanks, trucks, missiles and helicopters, and also to make Dynamite with. It kind of goes without saying. If that was your point, then I certainly won't be arguing against it.

This is NOT AT ALL related to the theory that jet fuel emissions might poison the population. OK, fair enough. But then why did you bring it up, if it isn't relevant?

The original point was a false claim by one of the resident nut jobs here, that the type of fuel used in jet aircraft was switched to JP-8 and that's where "chemtrails" come from. Truth is, JP-8 isn't the fuel used in most planes. Jet-A1 continues in that role, just as it has always done. The final point is that there has been NO change in the fuel used by the vast majority of airplanes flying over your head, so therefore fuel can be dropped as an issue in the "chemtrail" hoax.

I do think the point was made. Agreed! :)

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 12:11 PM

My premise is that something different has to be going on besides just increased air traffic. I accept air traffic as part of the climate scenario, Boomer, I gave you several more. The biggie is the huge difference in contrail emission between "pure jet" turbojet engines of the 50's, 60's and 70's, with the switch to hy-bypass turbo-fans in the 80's and 90's, combined with the retirement of older, smaller, short-haul airliners being replaced with newer, larger, long-haul planes that fly higher and faster, and therefore are to be found in contrail conditions more often.

So, you have a 5-fold increase in traffic, plus the debut of engines that produce 20 times the cross section of the olde ones, at cooler exhaust temperatures, flying at higher altitudes for longer periods with heavier loads... and that STILL isn't enough to explain what you see up there?

but HAARP looms in my mind as well as the other possible weather mod. scenarios. What could HAARP possibly have to do with contrails? Haarp points STRAIGHT UP, and is focused on the ionosphere, way, way WAY higher than any plane ever flew. What could that possibly have to do with contrails?

[quote]I don't debunk chemtrail activists, {/quote]Not yet, you don't but you will, I think... :) :) :)

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 12:16 PM

BC: "There is no superior or inferior.... only what is true and not true. GET IT?

Halva: Evasive nonsense..

Well, boomer, there you have it! Direct admission by Halva that he considers truth to be "evasive nonsense". In other words, don't bother showing him any truth, since he'll ignore it if it doesn not jibe with his agenda.

Go figure.

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 12:24 PM

Who is nuttier, Wayne or Jim?:confused:

I think it's Wayne.

Jim is here to amuse himself by spinning yarns and dreaming-up conspiracies.

Why is Wayne here?

I agree: Wayne is nuttier and uglier by far. but Jim is wackier and kookier, and is only here for kicks, to test out his new scams and hoaxes, and see if they'll fly, before he unleashes them in kookville.

Boomer Chick

02-11-2005, 01:00 PM

Boomer, I was wondering just where this is going: Your line of research here seems to make no sense at all:

It most certainly does.

Teller did not proporse using barium, Correct. I conceded that. I also quoted Teller showing he suggested using ANY kind of metal with similar properties. I linked that with the barium experiment in 1971 = extremely logical.

there are no lab reports of barium-containing contrails to suggest barium is being dispersed in the atmosphere,

Correct. I never said there were any. In fact, I agreed with your premise and Jay's as was proven to me through my own research that Barium indeed exists in the atmosphere due to the reasons you stated and more, one of which involves natural sea and rock formations on the coasts from a Canadian coastal study I read.

Lab reports are done on atmospheric aerosols and particulates. The samples are taken at various altitudes in varous crafts by various organizations (usually gov. funded) and are also collected at ground level. Soil samples are also taken as well as water samples by various groups and organizations. Barium exists in many of these and the reasons the chemists and observers give are precisely what you say, including paints, natural sources, industry, etc. And if the Barium exceeds previous levels in certain areas that have been monitored for years, I'm sure the reason for the elevation would be investigated. And that would be the condition that would raise a red flag for those who are hot on the trail of climate mitigation theories assuming the use of Barium. These studies are available online.

all the literature on barium suggests that the amount found in ground level samples comes from power stations, fireworks and numerous other mundane sources,

I have already agreed with you here.

there is not a shred of evidence to suggest barium gets loaded into aircraft and sprayed in the sky, there isn't even the hint of any mechanism that could be used to disperse barium from planes... So why do you still insist that what you see up there is made of barium?

I never said that, Stu. Find me my sentence and statement.

If you ask me, we have already gone WAY past the point where one could still reasonably hold that opinion. In fact, I'd say that there is just as much evidence to suggest that contrails are made of barium ,as there is to suggest that contrails are made of popcorn!

I agree.

Don't you think it is time to concede the barium issue, and go on to whatever is next on your list?

I was only defending the right of researchers to investigate Barium in terms of the global mitigation theory offered by Teller and mentioned by Eastlund in terms of those who suspect other HAARP related projects. I was defending THEIR LOGIC in INVESTIGATING Barium. I WAS NOT STATING THAT BARIUM EXISTS IN CONTRAILS. There's a big difference.

NOW, we can move on. I feel you put 2 & 3 together and came up with a conclusion that was not 5. Please read carefully. I've done my utmost to not paraphrase you and leave things out. I hope you could do the same in return.

If people want to investigate Barium levels in the atmosphere, there are certainly sites that show the studies and places to investigate. I am defending the right of people to research and defend the logic of investigating Barium. That's all.
I also posted many links to ongoing atmospheric research which is astounding in its thoroughness and detail and I'm proud that our government funded organizations are very carefully and meticulously measuring the skies and every minute gas and particle in it along with understanding the nature of winds, heat sources and convection currents, oceanic interplay, and continental land mass influence, among many other factors. It's fascinating and wonderful. For those who want to question and investigate global climate mitigation and exactly what goes on..... are free to do so. I applaud all efforts that lead to truth.

Does this satisfy you, Stu?

BC ;)

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 01:14 PM

Boomer, you are reading in to those studies huge volumes of stuff that just was never even there!

The obect of the first study was just exactly what it claims to be: "[/i]... advanced engine compression ratios and airframe cooling requirements necessitate greater understanding of chemical phenomena associated with the feed system and combustion aspects of the airbreathing propulsion systems".[/i] Translation: They want to get a better understanding of the chemical reactions that are going on in the fuel systems that feed high-compression engines, and also the chemical reactions in the combustion chambers themselves, because of the engine/airframe cooling and high compression issues. Period. That's it. High compression implies high temperatures, which requires improved cooling if you want to keep your engine core from melting, ans stop the exhaust from burning holes in your fusleage!

It is just a research paper detailing experiments they did to try to gain a better unsderstanding of chemical reactions in fuel systems and combustion chambers. That's IT! Where in there did you read that they were trying to increase the exhaust particle sizes?

Two sentences later they explain it even more clearly: "The focus during the subject period was directed to understanding the pyrolysis and combustion of endothermic fuels under subcritical conditions and the pyrolysis of these fuels under supercritical conditions.[/quote] Boomer, do you understand what they mean by "pyrolysis", "subcritical conditions", "endothermic fuels" and "supercritical conditions"? If not, then why did you link to the abstract of a scientific research paper that you don't understand, and then try to make it say things that it does not say?

Anybody know what cyclo-intermediates and scission products are? Yes.

:)

Similarly, the second paper also deals with what it says it deals with: "The main objective of the proposed work is to examine candidate HITTs additives that have an ability to increase the electrical conductivity of hydrocarbons."They were contracted to perform experiments that would determine the conductivity profiles of HITTs additives, period. End of story.

The implications of these two studies raise red flags for me, especially the conductivity experiment. Why find out if [i]hydrocarbons, which were stated to be the byproduct of the burning of the fuels in the previous study, are electronically conductive?I think you are somewhat confused by the chemistry here, boomer! Hydrocarbons are not the BYPRODUCTS of the fuel: they ARE the fuel!!!!!! Jet-A1 is a HYDROCARBON fuel, meaning that it consists mostly of molecuels that consist mainly of bonds between hydrogen atoms and carbon atoms (plus others). So no, you do not get hydrocarbons by burning fuel. The hydrocarbon IS the fuel.

But if they adopted the above technology, we can assume they WANTED more hydrocarbons that produce particulates. Huh? Sorry, but I don't follow your reasoning. You show us the abstracts from two entirely unrelated studies, one that deals with engine and airframe cooling, and the the other that deals with electrical conductivity in additives, and somehow you jump to the conclusion that this means that "they" (whoever that is) wants to make fuel that gives more hydrocarboin particles??????? Huh?????

Frankly, I don't think you understood ANYTHING about what those abstracts describe. I'm not belittling that you didn't understand, because you already freely admitted that Chemistry is not your strong point, but I am belittling your drawing of illogical conclusions from things that you yourself admit that you don't understand. It's fine to not understand stuff: There are NUMEROUS thangs that I don't understand (so I just don't comment on them), but it's not OK to try to draw conclusions from such stuff. If you want to know, just ask, but why invent concluiosns that do not follow from the premises?

Any better inferences from the engineer/scientist class? Sure: How about this: Two abstracts from unrelated studies, one dealing with airframe and engine cooling issues in high compression engines, and the other dealing with the electrical conductivity of a proposed additive.

By the way, you told Jay that you don't have to pay to read the papers, but I could not find any way of doing that. Please could you describe how to go about downloading the papers and reading them without having to pay. At 25 bucks a shot, I for one am not interested! How did you manage to download the papers without paying?

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 01:19 PM

The formation of HF is an integral part of the SF-6
equation and why it is a potent global warming gas.

...

Moron Yaak is off trying to prove HF reacts with CFC and SF-6, when the fluorinated gases have zero reactivity with HF.

Ouch! I'll bet he just HATES it when his own words come back and slap him in the face so terrible embarrasingly... I'll bet that must have hurt...

I guess you'd call that a resounding defeat. Not to mention a resounding WHUPPING!

:)

(Nice work, Yaak: I love it every single time you put him in his place...)

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 01:25 PM

.. all Yaak could supply is I won't comment. ...

He screws things up worst than a gradeshooler might.

...

no enginner ...

Does any one else think that this is hilarious? How Jimbo is trying so hard to back -peddle and berate Yaak for unscholarly conduct, then Jimbo comes up with wonderful little gems of TOTALLY unscholarly conduct, like "... worst than a gradeshooler " and "enginner:...

Yep, one truly does have to watch out for those who consdier themsleves "enginners" but only manage to communicate on a level that is far " worst than a gradeshooler "...
:) :) :) :lol !!

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 01:41 PM

Correct. I conceded that.

Correct.

I agreed with your premise and Jay's as was proven to me through my own research

I have already agreed with you here.

I agree.

I WAS NOT STATING THAT BARIUM EXISTS IN CONTRAILS.
OK. At least we have that straight. That's what I really wanted to get at in any case: That you discard barium as being a significant component of contrails, since your own research tells you that it is cannot be. That's where I was going.

NOW, we can move on.Cool by me!

Does this satisfy you, Stu? [/quoote] Yup!

[quote]I never said that, Stu. Find me my sentence and statement. My bad. Sorry. I assumed taht since you were making such a big thing out of rockets releasing grams of barium in space, that you still believed that it proved something about barium being part of contrails. Like I said, My bad. I'm glad to see that you no longer suspect barium as being part of contrails, and that's all I wanted to know, really.

Boomer Chick

02-11-2005, 04:18 PM

Jay, Stu, Yaak, Halva, FS, IS et al ,

I've been reading the archives on contrails/chemtrails here today. I'm attempting to get an overall view of Huffington's forum on this topic and who the players are and what they said and did before I arrived here. It's taking some time.

I thought I should do this before going any further with anything.

Then I want to capsulize where we are now and where we want to go with input.

So far I highly admire Reynolds as perniciously dedicated to his quest for truth in this area, and as bombastic as his passion dictates, he is the most focused on the truth as I've read so far. Yes, his rough edges can be offensive, but in the quest for scientific truths, do we spread peace and love or do we attend to the subject of verifiable investigation and committed logic? Well, personally, I like to combine the two, and not go out of my way to attack the very character of the person at the other end of my keyboard.... doesn't further anything much in terms of truth getting and can hurt our own spiritual development... and, like Gaiacom said, if we all agree to attend to the truth with respect among all.... we'll get more done for the sake of all.... well, I paraphrased and put it in my own words, but you get the gist. Thanks, G.

Reynolds is a hard driver, a nose-to-the-grindstone guy who has improved with age. Why he plays this role is really not up for discussion.... he just is and he enjoys it or he wouldn't be dedicated so much of his time to it. Hi Jay! And he does an excellent job for the most part.

He may search out those he finds offensively non-sensical and illogical, but people can do that on the net and so he does. Big deal. He wouldn't stalk anyone in real life. Hi Jay! LOL!

What I trust with the debunker gang now, is that they do listen to actual research. They do hear a logical premise, but most of all they want cold hard facts.... and that my friends, is what we all need to produce to find proof of ANY theory. Otherwise, it's a baseless illusion premised on nothing but supposition. Finding clues is good. But real research and facts have to follow. Period. This I know the debunkers respect. I respect that premise. Period.

Now, holding the debunkers back, ironically, is the same personal pecadillo that holds any global mitigation theorist back..... personal condemnation, ridicule, and overstepping boundaries. So far in my archival reading here, Halva seems to be the most guilty. Reynolds would ask questions and Halva and Sore Throat simply could not answer them. It's not that Reynolds was attacking, he was asking and pleading for some logic and some investigative work. Some girl from somewhere came on with character judgments regarding Reynolds and he lashed out at her. Human. Yeah, it happens now and then, the ridicule, the name-calling, kind of fun at times, but ulimately it undermines everyone's attempt to get at the truth and maintain their own personal credibility. And so what if Reynolds earned the reputation of the Rasputin of the "chemmie" movement? So what? He strongly followed through on his information and demanded that others follow his rigorous examination of researching for facts and being who someone said they were on the net. His recommended links were impeccable. Great information.

Jay, you could improve on your assumption that "hoaxing" (as I mentioned before) is actually a reality at work with the global climate mitigation theorists. I don't blame you, however, for feeling that those who "buy" the theory of population culling through secret ops of biologic contaminate dumping are fearmongering idiots! The logic in that assumption alludes me too, as poisoning one's own self, one's own air, defies any kind of logic whatsoever. But then again, insisting that these kind of people are "hoaxers" which implies deliberate deception of others knowing the otherwise truth.... goes into the realm of fanatasy as well. IMHO.Let's just give everyone the benefit of the doubt who question the theory of global climate mitigation involving whatever method or substance they want to investigate and go from there. OK? And might I add that on the internet, it's hard if not impossible to prove identities. I don't even bother going there. But if someone says..."I'm a physicist", yes I'd want proof of that, too. Better yet, if they belong to some public organization with which you can verify. Often knowledge levels will reveal themselves in dialogue or they won't. Some will willingly share their knowledge and others won't. Some are just big fakes and others are real. In cyberspace it's nearly impossible to truly "know" people. Oh well. So a whole new dynamic arises on how one handles such ambiquities.

And if the politics of the power elite is involved, who likes Bush who doesn't, we get into another realm of emotional laden endless pontificating. I am guilty. Yes, the military/industrial society is vast, the power structure focused on fossil fuels is vast, and the potential for the whole system moving toward global domination and space warfare is definately a consideration for all of us. The passing of legislation involving controlling the industrial and citizen production of harmful pollutive agents should be foremost in the government's agenda, but unfortunately it's not, at least not to the degree that it would actually stem the present levels of any pollutant agents. That is the political level. So, given the reality, we just have to dedicate our efforts to realizing that the studies and collection of data is definately ongoing, is being funded, and that worldwide the problems are being addressed. And more importantly, we have to become involved politically in order to change the direction and force political power to move even faster in the beneficial directions. That's a huge undertaking.

Just HOW these climate problems are addressed seems to be the focus of this group. Are they addressed out in the open for citizens to realize and partake? Are they addressed by covert ops? Are they solved by covert ops? This is the question.

The problem in untangling the various threads of cooperation and activity exists in the political top layer of power verses the underlayer of scientific research. One is not compatible at this time with the other and at the same time one synergizes with the other. The top political layer uses fear to incite war and constant funding for the military defense programs and budgets, and the underlying layers of scientists through other programs continue to research biological innovations, medical research, weather understanding, and quite humane and beneficial research, simultaneously. The inequality in the game occurs in the war game mindset continuing funding for defense related projects and research which MIGHT trickle down to humane usage, but tends to perpetuate the whole mindset of war and eventually space domination in preference to the humane applications, the research focusing on military/war applications-- greater funding. The other humane usages of government funding, in the realm of medical science, often perpetuates the synergism of the pharmacuetical companies with the funding they receive and in turn they funnel it back to the party in power, as all the gov. supported entities do. There's a loss of humanitarian concern in much of this due to greed, of course, but also due to simple survival, noting that all involved have families to support. But the rise in CEO salary and the decline in average middleincome workers points to greed.

The environmental studies go on, but funded at a lower level. The research and development in the energy area has also been funded with the stipulation that all science be dedicated to propping up the fossil fuel industry. The strings from the political/legislative to the energy domain are evidently quite tight. This answers the question: why no alternative energy production and projects advancing the nation into a non-fossil fuel age to the extent that was scientifically possible decades ago and could have bridged us nicely into energy independence and clean energy at that? This politcal power structure with its control of funding and its expectations on the kind of research and outright suppression of alternative research is the very reason why we find ourselves in the environmental perdicament of today. So politics and the nature of our huge system and its many tentacles should not be overlooked as one of the main driving forces affecting all of us, globally, but especially, nationally. Considering this political agenda and knowing that covert research and development exists, but not knowing, of course, what it is.... produces the other layer of concern. Most likely, we can assume from all surface indications, that the covert research is dedicated to a defense and war agenda.

continued....

Boomer Chick

02-11-2005, 04:25 PM

continued....

So for many of us who have been alarmed by the red flags in understanding this gov./scientist synergy we feel the need to get at the truth of it all. We know the structures, but we want the nation to turn its direction to humanitarian, not warlike agendas. We want the scientists to work for us, not for the corporations and the government, which should be "we the people". We want the government to work for the people, not the corporations that accept the funding and return parcels of it for continued funding. Corporate funding, of course, relates to legislative funding handouts, lack of accountability in terms of environmental laws, accounting practices and malfeasance laxity, tax breaks, and other forms of such in the realm of global trade. If the corporations involved in all the departments were indeed true to the people of the nation, we probably wouldn't mind the synergistic nature of the system. But in too many cases, as I pointed out and can be verified, the political/ scientific collusion has been stilted in favor of corporate interests that have held us back rather than moved us forward in the goals for better health, economic productivity, alternative energy transitional technologies and retrofitting of the infrastructure, and all in all putting our nation and our standard of living into a precarious and dangerous position as well as threatening the rest of the world on many levels.

For this reason, with the added element of propagandized fear and threatened civil rights and privacy, you have the "chemmies" as a result of the state of the nation as it is. This social phenomena represents a state of panic for a nation run amuck. This is also the reason for the proliferation of conspiracy theorists on the net. However, I might add, the rationale for hyper curiosity at this point is quite sane and aware in its nature. Although the spectrum of abilities and emotions run the gamut, the level of logic varying according to each personality, the underlying rationale for the curiosity and research directed at the skies (as a catch all term) is quite and utterly valid given the increased level of geo-political awareness.

This state of national affairs is exactly what Eisenhower warned us about in the early fifties.

Naturally, those who accept the system as it is would hold vehement views in favor of the status quo and against any who criticize it .... such as myself. But on a forum focusing in on just one aspect of a broad array of geo political concerns, namely " is there something unhealthy going on in our skies?" with dedication to just what is really going on, we need to suspend all of those political "beliefs" and attend to the topic at hand. The political concerns were the motivator of awareness.

I put out my political views because it is part of me, and I probably didn't express everything I needed to say, but it is enough to give you my motivating rationale for even being involved in this subject.

And what we all have in common is a desire to know the truth. This is our common ground.

1. What solutions for climate mitigation and pollution control exist and by what method are they being implemented by our government agencies or government funded businesses?

a. What exactly are lasting contrails? What causes them? How can that be mitigated?
b. Is weather control a reality and how is it being implemented?
c. Is HAARP involved in any way?
d. What role do satellites play?

2. What are the latest developments in warfare technology and how are they beneficial to humanity or detrimental?

a. Is HAARP involved and in what way?
b. What is the role of LIDAR technology in space weaponry?
c. What role do satellites play?

OK, I've said my peace for today. As far as those side commentaries on personalities, it's just a destraction. So far, this is my take on things here and if I see anything that changes my position in the archives, I'll post it here.

Note: Many assume that the debunkers are against truth, but I don't see that yet. I know that many of the debunkers disagree with my politics and I can accept that. I do however, insist that we focus on our mission here...... the truth, verified with fact and laser-like logic. I also expect each one of us to attend to our own personal growth and our own personal accountability in terms of our social conduct.

I have learned some very special human things here. You are my teachers. Stu, you especially impress me and you know why. Thank you. We have a history that only a few are aware of on this board. It shall remain our history.

Peace to all,

BC :)

Boomer Chick

02-11-2005, 04:33 PM

Boomer, you are reading in to those studies huge volumes of stuff that just was never even there!

The obect of the first study was just exactly what it claims to be: "[/i]... advanced engine compression ratios and airframe cooling requirements necessitate greater understanding of chemical phenomena associated with the feed system and combustion aspects of the airbreathing propulsion systems".[/i] Translation: They want to get a better understanding of the chemical reactions that are going on in the fuel systems that feed high-compression engines, and also the chemical reactions in the combustion chambers themselves, because of the engine/airframe cooling and high compression issues. Period. That's it. High compression implies high temperatures, which requires improved cooling if you want to keep your engine core from melting, ans stop the exhaust from burning holes in your fusleage!

It is just a research paper detailing experiments they did to try to gain a better unsderstanding of chemical reactions in fuel systems and combustion chambers. That's IT! Where in there did you read that they were trying to increase the exhaust particle sizes?

Two sentences later they explain it even more clearly: "The focus during the subject period was directed to understanding the pyrolysis and combustion of endothermic fuels under subcritical conditions and the pyrolysis of these fuels under supercritical conditions.

Boomer, do you understand what they mean by "pyrolysis", "subcritical conditions", "endothermic fuels" and "supercritical conditions"? If not, then why did you link to the abstract of a scientific research paper that you don't understand, and then try to make it say things that it does not say?

Yes.

:)

Similarly, the second paper also deals with what it says it deals with: "[i]The main objective of the proposed work is to examine candidate HITTs additives that have an ability to increase the electrical conductivity of hydrocarbons."They were contracted to perform experiments that would determine the conductivity profiles of HITTs additives, period. End of story.

I think you are somewhat confused by the chemistry here, boomer! Hydrocarbons are not the BYPRODUCTS of the fuel: they ARE the fuel!!!!!! Jet-A1 is a HYDROCARBON fuel, meaning that it consists mostly of molecuels that consist mainly of bonds between hydrogen atoms and carbon atoms (plus others). So no, you do not get hydrocarbons by burning fuel. The hydrocarbon IS the fuel.

Huh? Sorry, but I don't follow your reasoning. You show us the abstracts from two entirely unrelated studies, one that deals with engine and airframe cooling, and the the other that deals with electrical conductivity in additives, and somehow you jump to the conclusion that this means that "they" (whoever that is) wants to make fuel that gives more hydrocarboin particles??????? Huh?????

Frankly, I don't think you understood ANYTHING about what those abstracts describe. I'm not belittling that you didn't understand, because you already freely admitted that Chemistry is not your strong point, but I am belittling your drawing of illogical conclusions from things that you yourself admit that you don't understand. It's fine to not understand stuff: There are NUMEROUS thangs that I don't understand (so I just don't comment on them), but it's not OK to try to draw conclusions from such stuff. If you want to know, just ask, but why invent concluiosns that do not follow from the premises?

Sure: How about this: Two abstracts from unrelated studies, one dealing with airframe and engine cooling issues in high compression engines, and the other dealing with the electrical conductivity of a proposed additive.

By the way, you told Jay that you don't have to pay to read the papers, but I could not find any way of doing that. Please could you describe how to go about downloading the papers and reading them without having to pay. At 25 bucks a shot, I for one am not interested! How did you manage to download the papers without paying?

LOL! That was magnificent! Thanks! I was indeed jumping to all kinds of illogical conclusions!

I only said I read the abstracts for free! Just the abstracts! Sorry, I wasn't able, just like Jay, to read the whole paper, and frankly, if I had been able to, I don't think it would have helped me. Comprende, mi amigo? Yes, my chemistry is only high school and I've probably forgotten most of that, and when it comes to jet fuel, the vocabulary confuses me because I'm not familiar with that particular jargon. That's why I asked for help. And you did a great job and I'm thankful!

Like how I got your attention? ;)

Via con Dios!

BC :D

Boomer Chick

02-11-2005, 05:00 PM

Well, if that was the point, Boomer, then I don't think that ANYONE ever said otherwise! I'd ,take it for granted that it is probably NOT a good idea to drink, breath, or bathe in anything that can be used to power aircraft, tanks, trucks, missiles and helicopters, and also to make Dynamite with. It kind of goes without saying. If that was your point, then I certainly won't be arguing against it.

Agreed.

My point was to show exactly what the problem was with JP-8 fuel in its reality. It supported you and it supported truth. I was posting in order to let whoever it was who made a statement in regard to JP-8 fuel in particular, just where the concern was even if their statement concerned the combustion of it. I was showing what the news was reporting by reporting the facts.

You had said something about bathing in it. But from my posting, I showed the full spectrum of concern that went beyond direct skin contact into vapors in the air affecting pilots, and those who lived nearby. I was only responding to you and also to the other poster who had made a statement of concern but was not focused on just what the concern was all about.

OK, fair enough. But then why did you bring it up, if it isn't relevant?{/quote] It was relevant in terms of JP-8 and the actual reality of the environmental concern over it.

[quote]ginal point was a false claim by one of the resident nut jobs here, that the type of fuel used in jet aircraft was switched to JP-8 and that's where "chemtrails" come from. Truth is, JP-8 isn't the fuel used in most planes. Jet-A1 continues in that role, just as it has always done. The final point is that there has been NO change in the fuel used by the vast majority of airplanes flying over your head, so therefore fuel can be dropped as an issue in the "chemtrail" hoax.

Agreed! :)

Yes, and my posting confirmed the [tru reason for concern with JP-8, not the supposed concern regarding emissions. And yes, JP-8, as I learned, is mainly used in military craft. Do you see my reasoning now for posting? It was supporting the real issue with the fuel. And it does have an evironmental impact for those near it, but not in the way that some fear..... post combustion.

Dang my computer is acting up! Excuse the missed letters!

BC :D

Boomer Chick

02-11-2005, 05:19 PM

OK. At least we have that straight. That's what I really wanted to get at in any case: That you discard barium as being a significant component of contrails, since your own research tells you that it is cannot be. That's where I was going.

You tend to have a penchant for stating what I don't overtly state. I don't discard Barium release into the atmoshphere via jets either through jet fuel or spray dispersel as a theory. I have not researched the actual jet trails of ALL jets in the sky. Have you? I have researched atmospheric studies of particulates and Barium IS often a component, as I mentioned, to varying degrees in various areas. And I repeat, if Barium traces and particulates go UP in any study... that would raise a credible (not my chemistry lapses) red flag to investigate what the reason could be. If all terrestrial reasons could be ruled out, one would have to look in the skies, would not one? LOL! That is the kind of research I would expect. If the Barium count goes up in both the land, water, and air ..... one would have an even greater reason to investigate and suspect the air and all origins of the elevation in Barium. It's just science... that's all.

Cool by me!

"Does this satisfy you, Stu? " Yup!

My bad. Sorry. I assumed taht since you were making such a big thing out of rockets releasing grams of barium in space, that you still believed that it proved something about barium being part of contrails. Like I said, My bad. I'm glad to see that you no longer suspect barium as being part of contrails, and that's all I wanted to know, really.

Your graciousness accepted. No, I don't suspect it, but I would if I found elevated levels of it as I expressed above. That's all. So I am open, a little more than you my want me to be. But you can handle that, right?

BC :D

jayreynolds

02-11-2005, 06:22 PM

You tend to have a penchant for stating what I don't overtly state. I don't discard Barium release into the atmoshphere via jets either through jet fuel or spray dispersel as a theory. I have not researched the actual jet trails of ALL jets in the sky. Have you? I have researched atmospheric studies of particulates and Barium IS often a component, as I mentioned, to varying degrees in various areas.BC :D

Hey, you might want to take up barium with my buddy chem11. Looks like he's one of the top chemmies that did five years of research and couldn't come up with any evidence that Deborah Stark's NSA/CIA group was telling the truth about barium. I find it amusing that no one ever tried to prove him wrong. The chemmies have fought me tooth and nail over barium for years.

"The experiments your article references are troubling, and I am pretty well convinced that these attempts at creating an artificial ionosphere are ongoing, but there's a statement included here that needs to be addressed, Carolyn:
"When you throw barium powder into the upper atmosphere it just naturally or unnaturally starts forming clouds."
No, it really doesn't.
I have not once in the last five years been able to uncover a single piece of research that indicates that Ba would be useful in creating artifical cloud cover. The photos of barium releases I've seen look nothing like the super contrails and technoclouds we continue to observe on an almost daily basis.
I've been beating this particular pony mercilessly and within an inch of it's life for quite some time now and I've yet to be proven wrong. In fact no one has even tried, which is a bit surprising since it's one of the more widely-accepted fables in the chemtrail community.
'
http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=Discussion&action=display&num=1105837522

All the time what they really should have done was go to the source, just like I'm tellling everybody. The source, the very origin, of the barium hoax started with Deborah Stark's little group, and included Deborah, Sore Throat, Tom O'Donnell, A.C. Griffith, Julie King, Diane Harvey, and others unnamed who claim to be CIA and NSA trained and associated.

It seems to me that chem11, boomerchick, Wayne Hall, virtually the whole "chemtrail" cult have long needed to trace down the barium rumor to where it started. I tracked it back to July 6th, 2000.
I defy anyone to come up with any reference earlier, because THAT is where it started.
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=65678&sid=5464415ee5fda616b59f41432e05dea8#65678

The fact of the matter is that I created a website solely for the purpose of exposing the "Chemtrails Over America" hoax. The group of people who made the hoax lobbied hard against my online freesite host, and threatened the host with a lawsuit, which resulted in the host deleting the whole website. I know for a fact that Deborah and her cohorts ran multiple campaigns to get my websites deleted, I have files of secret forums where they discussed the plans and they eventually publicly promoted a letter-writing campaign against my site host as well. Deborah can't deny that it all happened exactly as I say, and I can document the whole thing.

You've got to ask yourself, why the hell are they so intent on keeping their involvement such a
STATE SECRET????

Insurrectionchemistry

02-11-2005, 07:05 PM

Well, my opinion of this boomer chick is that she shows pathological lying as her rule of operations. One can't do much with someone like that, they don't respond to reasons or facts.

IMHO,
is

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 07:18 PM

Curiously, even Chem-11 is giving up on barium!!!!

http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=Discussion&action=display&num=1105837522

"I have not once in the last five years been able to uncover a single piece of research that indicates that Ba would be useful in creating artifical cloud cover. The photos of barium releases I've seen look nothing like the super contrails and technoclouds we continue to observe on an almost daily basis."

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 07:45 PM

why no alternative energy production and projects advancing the nation into a non-fossil fuel age to the extent that was scientifically possible decades ago Boomer, once again you took a very valid question, and jumped straight into a "The Government Did It" asnwer without having any evidece that would lead you from here to there. Your conclusions do not follow logically from your premises.

There is, in fact, a much more reasonable, logica, and correct explanation: Money. As long as petroleum based fuels remaine cheap comapred to the very best that alternatives have to offer, there is no eonomic or political incentive to go there. When the cost of oil-based energy starts gettting up there with the cost of alternatives, then alternatives will suddenly bloom.

The other problem is that back in the 60's and 70's, some highly visible and vocal scientists did what they should not have done, and started making silly predictions based only on what they believed, not on what was actual reality. They prediced wonderful advances in the underlying science of many alternative energy sources, that simply never happened. For example, it proved to be MUCH tougher than any had expected to make photovoltaic cells (solar panels) that are more efficient than about 15 % to 18%. Even the very best commercial solar cells today hover around the 25% mark, and the absolute bleeding edge experimental ones don't do much better. The problem is that those scientists back then thought that the technical problems would be solved in a year or two, but they proved to be an awful lot tougher to solve than they expected. (Kind of like the predictions for artifical intelligence back in the 60's: "In five years well have a computer that thinks like a human." Then came the 70's, and "We've solved a bunch of issues, and we are getting really close now. We are only about ten years away from building a computer that thinks like a human." Then the eighties: "Amazing advances in artifical intelligence lead us to predict that it isuccess s just around the corner, and in about 20 years we'll be able to build a computer that thinks like a human." Then the 90's "We are on the verge of a breaktrhough! Just give us another 30 years or so, and we'll have a computer that thinks like a human"... same thing with alternative energy: it's much tougher to do than the big-mouth scientists thought it would be.)

Then you have the enviro-kooks that the scientists back then never counted on. The enviro-kook on the one hand tell us taht we have to stop burning coal, oil and gas to make electricity and switch to alternatives, but then they block every possible nuclear power plant that they can, they block the construction of wind farms on shore becuase they are ugly and off-shore becuase birds might fly into them and get killed by the sail blades, and they block tidal power stations and wave power stations becuase they might hurt the poor little fishies... So folks who invested a lot of money in those projects only to lose it all because of the nesting habits of some sewer rat that nobody everheard of, suddenly got tired of throwing money at alternative energy, and figured that it was more profitable to carry on building coal, oil, and gas fired power stations. Not surprising, is it?

There is no big poiltical conspiracy to promote oil and supress altarnatives: It is simply a matter of what makes economiuc sense, and alternative energy never has. But now that the price of oil is rising, and science continues advancing, there are some promising technologies on the horizon that might pan out.

Why jump to the "It must be a conspiracy" conclusion, when there is no need to do so?

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 08:05 PM

This social phenomena represents a state of panic for a nation run amuck. This is also the reason for the proliferation of conspiracy theorists on the net.I don't agree: there has ALWAYS been a small but significant percentage of the population that is uneducated in science, gullible, and paranoid. Those are the folks who used to fall for Nessie and big Foot hoaxes, but today fall for chemtrails, free energy, and crop circles.

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 08:17 PM

a. What exactly are lasting contrails? What causes them? How can that be mitigated? Now THOSE are good, valid scientific questions. Parts one and two have already been answerd, but the key is part 3...

b. Is weather control a reality and how is it being implemented? Yes it is a reality, and no it is not being implemetned because it is highly ineffective. The best attempts over the years have produced mediocre, debatable results that proved to be very expensive and not very effective. The weather is just to immensly large a system for Man to be able to affect it with present or even foreseeable technology.

c. Is HAARP involved in any way? [/quoteNope. HAARP acts on teh IONOSPHERE, hundreds of miles above the weather.

[quote]d. What role do satellites play? They produce mountains of data every minute, monitoring every possible aspect of the atmosphere, and they feed it to huge and complex computer models that then use it to predict the weather as it might be in a few days, with accuracy that is only slightly better than random chance.

Stu, you especially impress me and you know why. Thank you. We have a history that only a few are aware of on this board. It shall remain our history. Fine by me. But I think Yaak and Jay and Gaia also know about it. It's not a big secret. Either way, I don't mind. Its a non-issue.

stuart_allsop

02-11-2005, 08:29 PM

The group of people who made the hoax lobbied hard against my online freesite host, and threatened the host with a lawsuit, which resulted in the host deleting the whole website.Jay, if you ever need a web host that WONT delete your site, let me know. I own a small company that does web hosting, and it's located in Chile, quite a bit outside of the jurisdiction of what any chem-kook group might have... I'd be honored to host your site.

halva

02-11-2005, 08:53 PM

Speaking of Racketeering and Conspiracies:
http://rense.com/general62/letter.htm

It is not at all implausible to me that Kennedy's alleged opposition to Israel's atomic weapons programme could have been a factor behind his assassination. Also the idea that the elder Bush played a suspect role is not something that is hard to believe.

For me the political challenge is how to go about abolishing Israeli nuclear weapons and in this way overturning the one most powerful incentive for nuclear weapons proliferation to Arab and Islamic states.

The United States is already Israel's protector and I hope that it retains that role. I would not like to see Israel succeeding in any attempt to join the European Union.

One important step to take is to move away from the useless, even counter-productive bureaucratic United Nations approach to nuclear disarmament, which is dead and should be buried.

This whole 'multilateral' approach to nuclear disarmament reflects the psychosis of an Oppenheimer, who built the atomic bomb and then seemed to think he could undo his mistake, or rather sin, by bringing nuclear weapons under 'international control'. The Soviets then jumped on the 'international control' bandwagon and this was the basis of Soviet nuclear weapons diplomacy until Gorbachev effectively wrecked it by accepting a 'one rule for you and another rule for me' approach to nuclear weapons, embodied in the INF Treaty of 1987.

But after that nobody drew the logical conclusion, i.e. that the rest of the world should stop trying to interfere in US nuclear weapons policy, which is a question for Americans.

We have to drag this question out of the hands of the routine-bound, defeatist and self-deceiving international 'nuclear disarmament' bureaucracy. Nuclear disarmament of Israel is not going to happen unless the energy that goes into trying to force nuclear disarmament on the United States is redirected, even if only temporarily, into securing nuclear disarmament of Israel.

The other nuclear weapons states should at the same time disarm through bilateral agreement, on the Brazil/Argentina model, or unilaterally, on the Sweden/South Africal model.

If you agree with me on this, I would be willing to try to work out a joint strategy with you, for example in the context of groups such as the Observatory on International Organizations and Globalization. The things you say about Jews would be ignored there but you would not be stigmatized. Stigmatization operates at higher levels of the hierarchy.

halva

02-11-2005, 09:08 PM

halva

02-11-2005, 09:25 PM

Foot Soldier's "NormalContrails" thread also makes very good reading with Raynolds ignore-listed.

And I appreciate IS's input as a way of following what the debunkers are talking about. I hope that Jim does not get so impatient with the new regime here as to drop out.

Boomer Chick

02-11-2005, 09:29 PM

Stu, of course the system I described had to do with money.... remember the words "funding" (overused) and "greed?? Perhaps I forgot "lobbyists?" The dynamics I described in the system are generally just that way. I never once used the term "conspiracy" .... therefore your use of the term regarding my opinions is rather narrow-minded and spotty on your part. No offense intended. I described a system where the dollar rules according to who rules the dollar, so to speak. In the case of the DOE, the funding and legislation favors the oil companies. This is basic fact and knowledge. Legislation in Congress to inact clean air laws and force car makers to produce and sell alternative engines with alternative fuels has been rejected in Congress for years. And always when the Republicans were in power. That's just one example of recent legislative repression. Let's not forget the lobbyists here as well as connections from petro companies. As far as the other kind of energy suppression, although less publicly known, it has been written about and frankly, just about anyone who has followed energy development knows that in that same system some scientists are given funding and others aren't. The playing field has not been level. That is all I'll say about it because you can read the rest for yourself and prove through your own investigation your allegation that alternative energy suppression has NOT existed.

May I add that recently Dr. Eugene Mallove was found beaten to death? He was denied government funding and was going ahead with the support of Arthur C. Clarke. (sp?)

You're so right.... just about everything is follow the money .

First, for your enjoyment: http://www.ctio.noao.edu/~emond/lpc/h-pedersen.ppt

Evidence of cold fusion supression --- different writers and different sources:

http://www.padrak.com/ine/POLETT899.html

http://www.padrak.com/ine/WACF.html

financial energy:

http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_6_9_7.html

:) defining the new energy market:

http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_6_9_7.html

...."LADLED OUT DAILY IN OUR HIGH SCHOOLS"

An editorial in the New York Times, January 13, 1920 had the following statement about Professor Goddard and his waste of time playing with rockets: "...Professor Goddard ... does not know the relation of action to reaction, and of the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to react -- to say that would be absurd. Of course he only seems to lack the knowledge ladled out daily in our high schools. But there are such things as intentional mistakes ..."

The problem in 1920 appeared to be "the knowledge [or lack of it] ladled out daily in our high schools". Unfortunately, the same is true today! The exception is that it is the knowledge ladled out in many of our scientific academic institutions. The Journal of New Energy is a publication that is peer-reviewed. However, the peers are not chosen from major academic institutions (who, in some cases, appear to be dedicated to preservation of the status quo rather than advancement of science). Here are some examples:

An official in the Washington office of the American Physical Society delights in sending to his vast E-mail list, including many DOE officials, his highly misinformed and emotion-laden criticisms of cold fusion. The facts are that over 600 technical reports from over 200 laboratories in 30 countries have replicated or extended cold fusion. This person claims to be a scientist but his actions are those of a lobbyist.

Panos T. Pappas has challenged the traditional explanation of the well-known excess production of potassium, especially in the human body. Now Pappas has shown the excess potassium comes from a transmutation of calcium in some selected body cells. (His paper was presented at the recent INE-99 Symposium.) Pappas has measured the intercellular membrane potential and found that in terms of a voltage gradient (volts per cm.) it is very high and is probably the gradient required for nuclear transmutation.

One of the most important papers and announcements in the recent INE-99 symposium, was the technical paper by Dr. R. M. Santilli and the announcement by Leon Toups of Toups Technology Licensing company in Largo, Florida. The announcement is of a process that produces a new type of fuel from polluted water. The polluted water is treated with controlled and pulsed underwater arcing. The end product is a gas that burns and outputs more than 250% of the electrical energy used to produce the gas. The explanation of how this can possible occur is still being discussed. [This editor suggests that the controlled under-water arcing is producing charge clusters which return a higher-than-expected amount of gas production.]

Another paper (by Dr. S-X. Jin and given at INE-99) presents analytical information of making a particle accelerator in which a combination of high-density charge clusters and positive ions can be accelerated and controlled to bombard a target material with protons (or other positive ions) at ion densities up to one million times larger than current particle accelerators.

Another INE-99 paper marks the beginning of a modest revolution with the introduction of the first significant changes to the Maxwell-Heaviside electromagnetic equations in over 100 years. The New Maxwell Electromagnetic Equations now explain over 20 serious deficiencies in the currently-used Maxwell-Heaviside equations. Consider the impact on society made by electric power, radio, communications, television, computers, and the Internet using the old, less-effective Maxwell-Heaviside equations. What will be the future effect of new technologies of these new equations. It is predicted that entire new technologies will be developed. (This paper was written and presented by Dr. Lawrence B. Crowell.)

The problem now is to make the transition from current technology to the adoption and use of the New Maxwell Electromagnetic Equations. To help make that transition, the Journal of New Energy will publish a special issue (Vol 4, No 3) which will include over thirty papers discussing various aspects of these new equations. The changes appear to be modest but the impact is expected to be huge.

***

LEST WE FORGET!

http://www.padrak.com/ine/LESTWEFORGET.html

From: NEN, Vol. 3, No. 6, November 1995, pp. 4-5.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DID YOU KNOW . . .

* that Albert Einstein was considered retarded, Isaac Newton was thought to be a slow learner, Joseph Priestly (the discoverer of oxygen) never took a science course, and Louis Pasteur got a C in chemistry.

* that in 1876 when G. G. Hubbard learned of his future son-in-law's invention, he called it "only a toy." This daughter was engaged to a young man named Alexander Graham Bell.

* that in 1969 the New York Times published an apology for once printing derisive comments about an inventor's theory. Robert Goddard was on the receiving end of the Time's criticism of his contention that rockets could operate in outer space. The apology was printed the day after Apollo 11 left earth orbit for the moon.

* that in the early 1940's a GE engineer was charged with a task of utmost importance to the war effort: develop a cheap substitute for rubber that would be used to produce tires, gas masks, and a whole host of military gear. James Wright tackled the task diligently -- and wound up inventing Silly Putty. Good thing he didn't work on the artificial heart.

* that neither Wilber nor Orville Wright graduated from high school. However, they were both avid readers .

* that Charles Goodyear began his experiments on rubber in a debtors' prison. He was there so often that he referred to it as his "hotel."

* that Darryl F. Zanuck of 20th Century Fox thought TV was just a passing fancy. In 1946 he said, 'Video won't be able to hold any market after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night."

* that in the fall of 1989 the Cold Fusion panel of the Energy Research Advisory Board to the DOE concluded, "The panel recommends against special funding for the investigation of phenomena attributed to cold fusion."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just a few links for reading on supression. I guess they included HAARP because it's so
secret !!!

http://www.padrak.com/ine/SUBJECTS.html

Supression / Support of New Energy Technologies

Robert Parks Does Not Represent APS, NEN Vol. 6, No. 10, July 1999.

Senator Conrad Burns Supports New Technology, NEN Vol. 6, No. 10, July 1999.

Concerning The US Patent Office And New Energy Research Patents, Aug. 3, 1999.

Suppressed Inventions & Other Discoveries, NEN Vol. 6, No. 9, May 1999.

Even Sigmund Freud Commented On The Suppression Of Innovation By Science, NEN Vol. 6, No. 9, May 1999.

Freedom In Chains, The Rise Of The State And The Demise Of The Citizen, NEN Vol. 6, No. 9, May 1999.

Keeping America Un-Informed: Government Secrecy In The 1980s, NEN Vol. 6, No. 9, May 1999.

Letter From Anthony Sutton, NEN Vol. 5, No. 10, Feb. 1998.

The ZPE News Blackout - A National Shame, NEN Vol. 5, No. 8, Dec. 1997.

History and Applications of HAARP Technologies: The High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program, Paper, Oct. 1997.

continued...

Boomer Chick

02-11-2005, 09:30 PM

Benign Neglect, NEN Vol. 5, No. 5, Sept. 1997.

Stefan Marinov's Letter RE: The Arrest of BECOCRAFT, 1992

"An Open Letter To All Working On Alternate Energy," An Open Letter by Paul Brown, 1991

"Urgent Appeal: An Appeal To The American People," An Open Letter by William Hyde, 1992

"An Open Letter" by Bruce dePalma, 1992

________________________________

Now lets get back to our topics of investigation!

THANKS STU !!!! Sweet dreams and keep the faith !!!

BC :p

halva

02-11-2005, 10:12 PM

Seemingly the claims of the BC Queen on the Sun being the cause of the global warming issue have been shot down upon her own closer investigations. And going down with her assertions on the Sun radiance being the dominate global warming factor, also goes her buddies the De-Bunkers same claims. The nude Queen and her loyal following on the Sun radiance global warming issue have been shown to have no clothes. They claims are misguided and wrong. On par with a great lie to absolve industries emissions of HF and hydro-carbons involvement in the global warming prime factor.

The Naked Queen has become the chump of the false leads provided by her De-Bunker court. She has become mislead by them and now is naked, embarrased with no clothes for leadership.

What else did we expect, when someone follows the intentional baiting and misleading information provided by the Reynolds syndicate of lies----you fail. Fail means people don't respect your claims on Sun radiance dominated global warming.

Such a failing, then puts the other theme of global warming being dominated by IR absorbing gas factors--------and puts the Europeans opinions on global warming / Koyoto in the limelight of the greater truth.

I am glad of the agreement here, and would like more documentation on this, as would some of the people at the Ama Lahi forum, and another British correspondent.

Boomer Chick

02-11-2005, 10:18 PM

Hey, you might want to take up barium with my buddy chem11. Looks like he's one of the top chemmies that did five years of research and couldn't come up with any evidence that Deborah Stark's NSA/CIA group was telling the truth about barium. I find it amusing that no one ever tried to prove him wrong. The chemmies have fought me tooth and nail over barium for years.

http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=Discussion&action=display&num=1105837522

All the time what they really should have done was go to the source, just like I'm tellling everybody. The source, the very origin, of the barium hoax started with Deborah Stark's little group, and included Deborah, Sore Throat, Tom O'Donnell, A.C. Griffith, Julie King, Diane Harvey, and others unnamed who claim to be CIA and NSA trained and associated.

It seems to me that chem11, boomerchick, Wayne Hall, virtually the whole "chemtrail" cult have long needed to trace down the barium rumor to where it started. I tracked it back to July 6th, 2000.
I defy anyone to come up with any reference earlier, because THAT is where it started.
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=65678&sid=5464415ee5fda616b59f41432e05dea8#65678

The fact of the matter is that I created a website solely for the purpose of exposing the "Chemtrails Over America" hoax. The group of people who made the hoax lobbied hard against my online freesite host, and threatened the host with a lawsuit, which resulted in the host deleting the whole website. I know for a fact that Deborah Stark and her cohorts ran multiple campaigns to get my websites deleted, I have files of secret forums where they discussed the plans and they eventually publicly promoted a letter-writing campaign against my site host as well. Deborah can't deny that it all happened exactly as I say, and I can document the whole thing.

You've got to ask yourself, why the hell are they so intent on keeping their involvement such a
STATE SECRET????

Thanks, Jay. I'm sorry you had to go through that kind of hostility. And as I've already expressed, I respect your dedication and have seen your website which is quite nicely laid out and very artistically appointed. It's still working now, isn't it? It doesn't matter to me what went on in the past because I wasn't part of it and I know you must have anger connected to it, but we must move on and accept that times change, people change, and levels of knowledge change. Chem11 in his tireless search for Barium, proves this. It's good to know someone cared enough to really investigate and change his position with the knowledge he gained. It's actually comforting, too. Knowledge is power, right?

It's interesting that you have tracked the Barium issue down to a particular board. That's amazing in itself. I first heard about chemtrails in Feb. of 2002 and simply would not accept it. And of course, all that was available online were sources that now do not seem as credible as they once did. But, my mind was opened never to be closed again as far as being able to be wary to secret government operations. Was I ever aware that such things existed before? Actually not..... not the awareness of patents, not the awareness of scientists working on things in a classified manner regarding all manner of new science, as well as the awareness of weapons development. I am not and never was a member of a cult. In fact, I'm so ordinary that I can actually represent ordinary people with ordinary lives who have entered this cyber information vehicle and joined a public discussion which was never possible before. I am one of hundreds of thousands like me, just everyday people who are curious and able to realize things we've never realized before. So, many of the "chemmies" are just people like me, sitting at their computers at home and partaking in this world-wide discussion of so many various subjects. It's an amazing and wonderful thing. And you, finding a group of souls on the net who exagerrate and seem illogical to you, are performing a needed function. If you didn't, maybe someone else would have, but you were the one. That's special. Just as you cannot possibly be totally right neither can your polar opposite on the net be totally right. Somewhere in the middle is the truth, maybe a middle closer to your position? Perhaps. And again, the common ground is truth.

And my motivation was as a stated.

Appreciating YOU,

BC ;)

halva

02-11-2005, 10:53 PM

halva

02-11-2005, 11:31 PM

ANNOUNCING SOLARI TELESEMINARS

The folks at Solari are delighted to announce the first two tracks in our
upcoming series of teleseminars:

Understanding Tapeworm Economics at 6pm -7:15pm PT, 9pm -10:15pm ET
The Basics of Coming Clean at 6pm -7:15pm PT, 9pm -10:15pm ET

These two series are designed to complement one another. The first track
provides an understanding of economic warfare and market manipulation (i.e.,
the "Tapeworm Economy"); the second offers an introduction to the Solari
solution, beginning with the process of "coming clean."

HOW TELESEMINARS WORK

Broadcasting via telephone for training and education is now an established
method of presenting specialized information. Solari is launching its
teleseminars by reserving 200 lines on a first come-first served basis. To
participate in an audio-conferencing seminar, just dial in to a special
phone line, and enter a six-digit code at the appointed time.

Participants can post questions to Catherine ahead of time through the
forum at Solari Action Network, and the Solari team will select the best
questions to answer during the seminars. The events will be hosted by Byron
Belitsos, the CEO and Publisher of Origin Press.

The full announcements for the inaugural teleseminars are at this link:

Here's hoping we'll see you on the phone bridge!

For this announcement, registration and recommended links:
http://solari.com/outreach/telesem/index.htm

(N.B. from Halva. By the way, there is a charge for participation in these seminars, but I thought it best to erase it from the posting so that this would not come across totally as an advertisement.)

halva

02-12-2005, 12:26 AM

Originally Posted by jayreynolds
The fact of the matter is that I created a website solely for the purpose of exposing the "Chemtrails Over America" hoax. The group of people who made the hoax lobbied hard against my online freesite host, and threatened the host with a lawsuit, which resulted in the host deleting the whole website. I know for a fact that Deborah Stark and her cohorts ran multiple campaigns to get my websites deleted, I have files of secret forums where they discussed the plans and they eventually publicly promoted a letter-writing campaign against my site host as well. Deborah can't deny that it all happened exactly as I say, and I can document the whole thing.

You've got to ask yourself, why the hell are they so intent on keeping their involvement such a
STATE SECRET????

This really is the difference between American and European manners, isn't it?

Could you imagine President Chirac or Queen Elizabeth trying to market this crybaby-cum-avenging-Fury psychosis?

American role models are different.

This particular model, though, is structurally identical to the aggressive Zionist psychosis. To that extent Jim Phelps is right.

The Shadow

02-12-2005, 04:39 AM

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=239659

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=239511

I really do not have any desire to move forward with ongoing conversations that include such an officious individual as you. But if you must know, I would be disappointed in foot_soldier should she divulge privileged information – especially to someone like you who knows absolutely nothing about of the concept of personal honor.
Your comment tells us something about your own character. It tells us that you have no desire to know the truth of the matter. Why? Because the information isn't necessarily privileged, it was already stated on Don Johnson's website that there were CIA/NSA associated people that wrote the report Deborah Stark edited.

She would certainly not divulge privileged information by confirming or denying the veracity of that statement!

No, the problem YOU have is that YOU are also involved as a participant in the report yourself, 'Shadow'. YOU are subject to answering these questions, too!I understand that you are ethically challenged, Mr. Reynolds, so I am not the least bit surprised that I must spell things out for you. Moreover, you are clearly detached from reality and doing a fine job of misrepresenting what I wrote. Apparently, Boomer Chick’s research into your veracity has fallen way short in its accuracy.

Since you did not get it the first time, let me repeat it for you. Get this through your head: I would be disappointed in foot_soldier should she divulge privileged information – especially to someone like you who knows absolutely nothing about of the concept of personal honor. Since these CIA/NSA people, with whom you are so concerned, were apparently promised anonymity, like it or not, that is the way it goes. To anyone possessing analytical capabilities, THAT is the privileged information in question, NOT the mere existence of the statement, itself – and you know that. Whether or not I want to know their names, ranks, and serial numbers is not the issue and is immaterial. Your contention that that somehow makes me “involved as a participant in the report” and that I am “subject to answering [your] questions, too” is hilarious. I do not report to you, mister.

You are also a shameless liar, Mr. Reynolds. Your claim that all you are seeking is an acknowledgement of THE STATEMENT is an obvious and deliberate sham. The following post of yours is concrete evidence that you fancy yourself a bullying prosecuting attorney who can browbeat anyone he pleases into complying with his high and mighty demands.

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=236844

The question will continue to be asked.
Name the names, Deborah.

For the sixth time -- I copy-edited the first draft of the report and submitted one paragraph of my own regarding the ozone layer, which is, and always has been, my primary area of interest. http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=233447&postcount=35

This comment by Deboarh Stark admits to editing the report"Chemtrails Over America", and collaboration with those who claim to be CIA and NSA.

As for the website you claim I "helped create", 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, Stark, you cannot be a copy-editor of a document, 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, or what they said their qualifications were, or didn't care. You have already admitted to copy-editing the document. Your cohorts in the "chemtrail" cult deserve to know who and why you were assisting CIA AND NSA people to write this disinformation document.

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 STARK.

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."

Mr. Reynolds, you are insane and pathetic fraud.

The Shadow

02-12-2005, 04:50 AM

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=239659

http://www.ariannaonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=239511

This sounds like another one of your fantasy hit pieces. Your demeaning description of a fictional group of women is highly questionable and is obviously intended to incite a certain group of people in some fashion. Again, it says volumes about your lack of any quality character traits. Anyone with a little cultural heritage knows that your use of the term “crones” is proof that you are blowing smoke out your rear end. But you already know that. Evidently, Don Johnson is just another in a long list of people on whom you enjoy making personal attacks, knowing full well that he is not here to defend himself. If Dede exists, tell me how to contact her so that I may verify your latest claim.
Well, I'll write Don Johnson and we'll see what he has to say about that, OK?

The last time he mentioned her, he claimed she was dying from AIDS.
She advertised that she taught 'Tantric sex". Go figure.......

If he is in a mood to be honest, which is not exactly a habit with him, he will confirm that Dede's website, which no longer exists, listed him as being her official astrologer, and detailed the wiccan lesbian movement known as the crones, to refer to them by the name they call themselves publicly couldn't be calle demeanng.

But don't believe me, check it out for yourself:
.http://www.ucmpage.org/articles/wicca_story5.html
http://www.elderflower.org/program/cronestuff.html
http://www.cronespeak.com/
http://www.elderflower.org/program/crones.html
http://www.pagancafe.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=45
I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried.I am certain that you could not, Mr. Reynolds. You were too busy making up your own garbage above those links. Since, in the previous post, it was clearly established that you have a significant problem in handling the truth without employing your particular brand of spin, I cannot possibly take any of it seriously. In fact, the very links you cite prove that you are full of crap. As I stated previously, anyone with a little cultural background would know that a “crone” is not the name of a movement, a coven of witches, or anything else of the sort. In certain societies, the term “crone” is a title of respect for a woman who has reached the age of fifty, as it came into being long before the life expectancies of today. Indeed, Webster’s Dictionary defines a crone as “an old woman.”

It would appear that you have tripped up on your own ignorance, Mr. Reynolds. Admit it. Not only are you a liar, you are a very bad and obnoxious liar. Old habits, such as yours, die hard. I suggest that you pitch your “Wiccan lesbian crone movement” to one of the television networks for consideration as a sitcom. While you are at it, when you get around to contacting “Don Johnson,” do not forget to send your regards to Elvis.

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 05:06 AM

Halva writes:

American role models are different.

This particular model, though, is structurally identical to the aggressive Zionist psychosis. To that extent Jim Phelps is right.

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

Your concepts fall well short of how large America plays its political games and steers the public opinion.

Just like this list has a PAC faction that claims anything that will expose problems in their long term agenda is a hoax, so works much of public activism in America. The PAC group here is composed of Reynolds, Simon Stuart, Ed Snale, and it appears now BC. The PAC will act systematically to suppress the most serious problem to which big oil and coal burning impact synergistically toward the global warming equation. They will fight even more hard to cover up the jet planes catalytic effects long designed to reduce the HF in the air to combat the destructiv catalytic effects of HF with the H-C content in the air. Because any ground given up there exposes the larger process and then real citizen involvement comes into bearing.

In the US anti-nuclear movements, this is designed to suppress the move away from coal and oil. The reason is that it is cheep and the toxic effects force the money onto the GOP pharmacutical and big medicine sectors, while also allowing for them to reduce population via serious plagues to simple rapid attrition of the old. The national lab here in Tennessee stacked the deck there back in the early 80's on these issues and it works by them installing some people that talk a good line, but work with the national lab/GOP money power structures.

What you see as activism in the US is highly managed and controlled by the big money interests. This just like the news is so controlled in the US, because it is owned mainly by Jewish interests. These Jewish owned interests play ball with the big money GOP to game the public for their mutual profits. The Jews want the problems in their religion conceiled and the GOP despiratly wants this HF and H-C synergism factor to remain secret.

The secret fuels their pharmacy economy, because the F synergism with aluminum is so extreme a cumulative effect that it is the prime factor in illness and diseases.

Even when we look at the earthquake rates in the last 10 years or so, the rates of earthquakes are 30,000 times higher than in the period some 5,000 years before this last ten years. This is driven predominately by this global warming blanket and the HF / H-C synergism effect that also produces a long term cumulative effect on IR absorption.

All these factors were mapped out at ORNL in the 1980's, and the long term agendas set and PAC types put in place at strategic places to control the publics level of information.

This is what we see going on here on Arianna's crazy list.

When one gets into the massivity of the earthquakes, the massivity of the health plagues----it does get into the warnings from prophecy that these problems would occur. And these entire set of problems have one common factor, fluorine, which these ancient scholars in religion reform were all well aware. Who is not aware of these simple sciences that allowed these common sense predictions is the highly controlled American public, which is information controlled to funnel money into GOP coffers, push population reduction, and set up their version of world economy.

What you fail consistently to see and talk frankly about are the big picture issues of the End-Times effects being manipulated for GOP profit taking and their long standing collaberation with the Jewish factions despirate to not see their religion proved wrong and go poof into non-existance.

Halve likes to pretend these real and tangeble associations are not real----and this makes him almost worthless in the plight for public activism. Halva is squeched before he can even open his mouth--because he seeming won't recognize the magnitude of the problems and tell the European community the truth.

IMHO,
is

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 05:19 AM

Chemtrails intentions are real simple---the main goal is reduce the HF in the air. This is the main driver effect on global warming.

Generation 1 methods used the HF affinity toward metals [Al, Ti, Ba] to make heavier compounds and weigh the fluorine out of the air and rain it out also.

Generation 2 methods use the HF affinity toward solubility with water and then rain the HF out of the air.

The key to understanding the chemtrails is all about the HF and H-C synergism, and this is the key to breaking the PAC group here.

HAARP is about attacking the global warming blanket, for the HF problem has not been fully managed by chemtrails. HAARP is a direct attack on the IR blanket. HAARP works by using variable frequency RF energy to make heating zones that can be vectored into a propagating wave to push these lite IR absorbing pollutants in the space. HAARP's method is similar to the project Orion propulsion system, with successive heat blasts to set up a net vectored force.

It is all not that difficult, and each method has this common goal. Recognition of this goal is the clue to the end of the PAC dominance here.

IMHO,
is

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 05:31 AM

Halva writes:

And I appreciate IS's input as a way of following what the debunkers are talking about. I hope that Jim does not get so impatient with the new regime here as to drop out.

========

It appears your little plan to get some housewife from Co. into the fray here has made exposing things more difficult than ever.

So, it would appear that the problem is not only with the PAC, but with a faked up activism coming from Greece that intentionally walks around the truth on issues.

I dare say----the heat is going to increase on you each time you screw up to these extents.

IMHO,
is

jayreynolds

02-12-2005, 05:46 AM

Thanks, Jay. I'm sorry you had to go through that kind of hostility. And as I've already expressed, I respect your dedication and have seen your website which is quite nicely laid out and very artistically appointed. It's still working now, isn't it?
BC ;)

Well, what happened was that after their campaigns shut down the website you now see once, and two others as well, I told them that in the future, any further actions like that would result in a two for one multiplication of websites. It was like the myth of the Hydra, whose head grew back when decapitated, only this time multiplied by two!

That is, for each site they sought to get deleted, i would create two more.
In this posting Deborah says regarding my Vindicatum website:
"I think it's time these people were stopped."
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:PT9LM5Ido_8J:www.chemtrailcentral.c om/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001147-2.html+wisequakker+witches&hl=en

That is when they decided it was a losing game fighting the hydrax2 Jay Reynolds, and how I ended up having three websites:
http://goodsky.homestead.com/

I still have the two sites archived which they got deleted one called Vindicatum- The International Journal of Chemtrail Research, and one which was purely an expose of "Chemtrails Over America". I might just take Stuart's offer, because it seems these people fear websites quite a bit. After all, what does bunk fear most?

Debunk!

jayreynolds

02-12-2005, 06:06 AM

Chemtrails intentions are real simple---the main goal is reduce the HF in the air. This is the main driver effect on global warming.
Generation 1 methods used the HF affinity toward metals [Al, Ti, Ba] to make heavier compounds and weigh the fluorine out of the air and rain it out also.
Generation 2 methods use the HF affinity toward solubility with water and then rain the HF out of the air.
The key to understanding the chemtrails is all about the HF and H-C synergism, and this is the key to breaking the PAC group here.
HAARP is about attacking the global warming blanket, for the HF problem has not been fully managed by chemtrails. HAARP is a direct attack on the IR blanket. HAARP works by using variable frequency RF energy to make heating zones that can be vectored into a propagating wave to push these lite IR absorbing pollutants in the space. HAARP's method is similar to the project Orion propulsion system, with successive heat blasts to set up a net vectored force.
It is all not that difficult, and each method has this common goal. Recognition of this goal is the clue to the end of the PAC dominance here.

Just taking a poll here to let Jimbo know.

How many people reading this board actually believe that what Jimbo is saying is true?
Please answer if you do, to make things easier.

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 07:00 AM

jayreynolds

02-12-2005, 07:07 AM

As I stated previously, anyone with a little cultural background would know that a “crone” is not the name of a movement, a coven of witches, or anything else of the sort. In certain societies, the term “crone” is a title of respect for a woman who has reached the age of fifty, as it came into being long before the life expectancies of today. Indeed, Webster’s Dictionary defines a crone as “an old woman.”

It would appear that you have tripped up on your own ignorance, Mr. Reynolds. Admit it. Not only are you a liar, you are a very bad and obnoxious liar. Old habits, such as yours, die hard. I suggest that you pitch your “Wiccan lesbian crone movement” to one of the television networks for consideration as a sitcom. While you are at it, when you get around to contacting “Don Johnson,” do not forget to send your regards to Elvis.

This comment is strange. I never called Dede a WITCH, I called her a wiccan.

Now, Don Johnson(wisequakker) used to joke around about her being a witch. He wrote me once that she had cast a spell which would makea wart appear on my ass, and claimed I was scared of her. DON JOHNSON always called her a witch, though:
chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001147-2.html+wisequakker+witches&hl=en

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:PT9LM5Ido_8J:www.chemtrailcentral.c om/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001147-2.html+wisequakker+witches&hl=en

Curioser and curioser. Hmmmmmmmm??

Still, Don can't pull the wool over the facts of the matter. These women openly call themselves crones, as Dede did, and are wiccans, or "witches",
whatever Don wants to call them.
I didn't make these websites up, people:
http://www.ucmpage.org/articles/wicca_story5.html
http://www.elderflower.org/program/cronestuff.html
http://www.cronespeak.com/
http://www.elderflower.org/program/crones.html
http://www.pagancafe.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=45

halva

02-12-2005, 07:29 AM

What you fail consistently to see and talk frankly about are the big picture issues of the End-Times effects being manipulated for GOP profit taking and their long standing collaberation with the Jewish factions despirate to not see their religion proved wrong and go poof into non-existance.

Halve likes to pretend these real and tangeble associations are not real----and this makes him almost worthless in the plight for public activism. Halva is squeched before he can even open his mouth--because he seeming won't recognize the magnitude of the problems and tell the European community the truth.

This started with your link about the assassination of Kennedy and the role in the assassination that might have been played by him wanting to get the Israelis to abolish their nuclear arsenal.

That seems to me a good idea and I approve of what Kennedy was trying to do, if that is what it was.

It seems to me a more feasible objective than getting the Jewish religion to go poof into non existence.

What about the other issue of the sun vs atmospheric forcing as a cause of climate change?

jayreynolds

02-12-2005, 07:36 AM

Well, I guess that debunks Jimbo's claim that Jews at Oak Ridge National Lab orchestrated the JFK asassination. There is no mention of it at the link Jimbo put out!

Now, Jimbo, we are still waiting for that figure for GWP of hydrofuoric acid you promised us.
I practically handed the calculation methodology to you on a silver platter.
Why are you stalled out on that???????
Hey, Jimbo, where's the beef?

halva

02-12-2005, 07:39 AM

"Finally, I note that the Talmudic law of the moser, or the law of the Jewish
informer, is essentially a covenant prohibiting a Jew from informing on
another Jew to a non-Jew, which is diametrically opposed to the adversarial process
of our own legal system and therefore conducive toward obstruction of justice.
Furthermore, among employees at all levels in our intelligence and law
enforcement communities, the law of the moser constitutes an impediment to frank and
uninhibited exchanges of information in the discharge of their duties and
therefore poses a threat to our national security. I cannot overemphasize the
great importance of this very real issue of the law of the moser, or law of the
Jewish informer, the history of which you can read online at
www.JewishEncyclopedia.com. "

If all Jews operate in terms of this code, how do you explain David Greenglass's framing of his sister Ethel Rosenberg?

jayreynolds

02-12-2005, 07:43 AM

Since you did not get it the first time, let me repeat it for you. Get this through your head: I would be disappointed in foot_soldier should she divulge privileged information – especially to someone like you who knows absolutely nothing about of the concept of personal honor. Since these CIA/NSA people, with whom you are so concerned, were apparently promised anonymity, like it or not, that is the way it goes.

How would YOU know what they were promised, or not, 'Shadow'????

All I can tell is that the statement was made that THEY HAD THESE BACKGROUNDS. from the text itself, it could even be Deborah herself that was trained by CIA.
So, 'Shadow', I'm asking you flat out, HOW THE HELL WOULD YOU KNOW THEY WERE "PROMISED ANONYMITY"????? UNLESS YOU WERE PRIVY TO SUCH INFORMATION??

Your contention that that somehow makes me “involved as a participant in the report” and that I am “subject to answering [your] questions, too” is hilarious.

Your answer is rather 'Clintonesque'.

Are we to assume that you find my contention hilarious as meaning it is humorous, or is your statement just a dodge designed to appear to be a denial, when in fact you haven't yet denied being "involved as a participant"?

people need to see your public "final answer" on this subject.
HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN ANY WAY IN THE PUBLICATION OF "CHEMTRAILS OVER AMERICA"?? as seen at this website?
http://home1.gte.net/quakker/documents/chemtrails_over_america.htm#coa

No squishy-squashy answers, no evasions, no lies.

Remember, Deborah KNOWS and is watching to see how honest her defender is willing to be!

jayreynolds

02-12-2005, 07:47 AM

If all Jews operate in terms of this code, how do you explain David Greenglass's framing of his sister Ethel Rosenberg?

Look, Wayne, quit trying to incite Jimbo into another racist tirade. He knows all about your trickiness. Jimbo, remember, when you shake hands with a Greek, be sure to count your fingers afterwards.

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 07:47 AM

Halva writes [my commentary follows ==]:

This started with your link about the assassination of Kennedy and the role in the assassination that might have been played by him wanting to get the Israelis to abolish their nuclear arsenal.
======
Yes, that was only one of the issues he was after. JFK was going to hard line Israel on nuke weapons because he knew it would make a mess.

JFK also went after the Jewish dominated Fed Reserve, which has funded the big bomb for the Jews against Hitler.

JFK know that the war with Germany was about the Rothchilds getting booted out of German's financial control. They knew all of Europe was going to fall to Hitler and they'd loose their money. When JFK pulled the same thing against the big Jewish money Fed Reserve dominated by the Rothchilds----they offed him. And it was not LHO that did the offing.

That seems to me a good idea and I approve of what Kennedy was trying to do, if that is what it was.
==========
If you really approve of JFK, then you must include that he spotted the European banking games being used in the US to rob the citizens of their freedom. It is rather unrealistic to go around policing all these states of nuclear arms, they are going to get them one way or another.

The realistic solutions for peace making take center court now----which means we have to nip these Rothchilds Jewish power games in the butt.

Persons like the Bush dynasty need to be tossed in prison and the state within a state powers of the Jewish Mafia all broken up and many charged with racketeering.

It seems to me a more feasible objective than getting the Jewish religion to go poof into non existence.
========
That is just unrealistic thinking with what is going on in the big picture. If the current trends of creating false wars for Israel and oil continue to escallate there will be a huge war at the 33 parallel of Israel and a huge nuclear war will ensue.

What about the other issue of the sun vs atmospheric forcing as a cause of climate change?
======
Sun radiance change is minor compared to the IR gas blanket dominace of the global warming equations and polar ice melts.

The sun radiance issue is all about this Mars ice cap melt and Mars Ice caps are CO-2, which is a global warming gas. CO-2 makes the Mars issues drastically different than the Earth equation. Such high positive feedback factors due to CO-2 on Mars makes the Sun factor much much more hair triggered.

You really can't argue the same sensitivity factor here on Earth's frozen water poles as for Mar's CO-2 polar ice.

IMHO,
is

Boomer Chick

02-12-2005, 08:01 AM

BC, this is not prompted by your above flattery of Raynolds above. It was formulated before I read the above posting, but still applies.

If there were any justice in this world, and if Arianna Huffington really were the great lady of formidable intellect who is not afraid of coming to grips with some of the world's tougher problems, you would be receiving recognition from her for the task you have apparently taken on at this forum.

Halva,

I thank you, of course, as I'm interpreting this as positive. Really, it isn't a great task here at this forum, it's just finding common ground where we can meet. I'm not flattering as an empty pretense or to practice a form of control..... I actually mean what I say and say it as I see it. So I hope you realize I'm NOT using any kind of tactic here in terms of control of others. I have to say this because I'm well aware of your propensity to become involved in control issues.

And none of this lessens the truth that any of us can or will impart.... it actually increases the atmosphere of freedom and trust.

I do hope you view it in this way or at least can relate to where I'm coming from.

I appreciate your earlier response as well and thank you. I don't know why you and IS are getting into JFK stuff and other bits of history, but I'll read along and see what I can learn. But don't expect me to participate too much on that as there are quite enough geo-political reasons on the surface and in the near now to motivate a call to action for all citizens. BTW, I get the Solari action news in my inbox and am well aware and reading her messages, her truth, and her view on things. She and Ruppert have worked together for quite a few years, now. Catherine Austin Fitts will probably go down in history as one of the most influential inside-whistleblower/ mover and shaker of economic structure in America. She's truly a grassroots walk the walk, talk the talk person.

There are no sides, just truth.

BC :)

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 08:11 AM

Boomer Chick

02-12-2005, 08:50 AM

Wasting our tax dollars! Just an air study regarding bioterrorism.

Mr. Allwine said the six gases being used are collectively called perfluorocarbon tracers, which he said are colorless, odorless and entirely safe. These gases are ideal for the project because they can be detected at very low levels, he said. The same gases have also been used in meteorological tests since the late 1960's, he said, and more recently by utilities for detecting pipe leaks.

"Our aim is to begin to understand how atmospheric dispersion occurs," said Tony Fainberg, an official at the Directorate for Science and Technology, a division of the Department of Homeland Security. "

Antiterror Test to Follow Winds and Determine Airborne Paths

NY Times | February 11 2005

Jerry Allwine will probably receive some crooked stares next month as he traverses tall rooftops near Madison Square Garden and releases mysterious gases over Midtown Manhattan.

Not to worry. He is here to help.

Mr. Allwine, an engineer with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland, Wash., is one of the directors on a team of about 50 scientists and emergency planners that will release a harmless gas sometime between March 7 and March 21 to study how air might flow through the city in the event of a terrorist attack or an accident involving toxic chemicals.

The team, which began planning the study this week with the city's Office of Emergency Management, will place 31 battery-powered air samplers on rooftops and sidewalks within a half-mile of the Garden. The resulting data will be used to develop better computer models for simulating the movements of airborne hazards.

The study is part of the Urban Dispersion Program, a $10 million project sponsored by the Homeland Security, Defense and Energy Departments that began in 2004 and will end in 2007.

(read more)

http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pages/Feb05/100205_Antiterror.html

BC

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 09:26 AM

This "Fair and Balanced" reporting gambit from BC is about like the game the Fox News Network plays.

Every Day the emails from the Fox Command center go out to tell the local staff what issues to back and support. If the local staff does not follow their Jewish commanders they tell them to hit the street.

Fox News Fair and Balanced News is never fair and balanced as it is always pre-biased or slanted toward a desired outcome. Just like the Jews at FOX decided the war with Iraq would be nice, so they slanted all the reporting to make the US Citizen think they needed a war because there was a boggy man after them.

BC and her protege Reynolds slant the news so as to propose everything is fine on this side of things, aka the Jewish controlled US.

The first Gulf War was set off by Jewish Madeline Albrights signals to Iraq that the US would not be upset if they took Kuwait. Then Bush-41 had an excuse to start up the war for Israel there. That pretty well ended Iraq's threat to the world, until Condi and Bush needed a war for some oil fields and to boost the Texas Halliburton economic futures.

Madeline Albrights father trained Coni Rice, so we still have the same game players---just some color alterations.

The we get into this BC person, from the same state that Condi Rice related so well to Madeline Albrights daddy on supporting Jewish and Israel issues. The state run by one of the Bush Dynasty Mafia brothers.

And now BC is trying the same Fair and Balanced propaganda on this list.

Then we have her partner in crimes Reynolds playing the race thing for commenting of the Jewish power playing games. I suppose the Jewish race card played now has about the same merit as Al Capone trying to tell Hoover he was a Catholic Sicilian ethic race and expecting him to look the other way or be desuaded not to prosecute.

You kill our presidents----you go to jail. You attempt to use the same network to fool the US citizens on HF/H-C and chemtrails/Haarp and then to profit from them via the same racketeering methods--------you still go to jail----just longer.

Several of you would look very good in stripes.

IMHO,
is

Boomer Chick

02-12-2005, 09:30 AM

I don't agree: there has ALWAYS been a small but significant percentage of the population that is uneducated in science, gullible, and paranoid. Those are the folks who used to fall for Nessie and big Foot hoaxes, but today fall for chemtrails, free energy, and crop circles.

Actually, you do agree. Included in my term "proliferation" was the denotation that the amount of watchers and questioners has INCREASED. Of course the small percentage of those who were involved in falling for every theory that came down the pike are there, too, but normal people, skeptical people, intelligent and educated people became questioners, if you will, along with the tiny hardcore element. I'm proof of that and this holds true for those who do not "buy" the government's story on 911, also.

BC :p

whitemajikman

02-12-2005, 09:39 AM

Halva writes:

It is not at all implausible to me that Kennedy's alleged opposition to Israel's atomic weapons programme could have been a factor behind his assassination. Also the idea that the elder Bush played a suspect role is not something that is hard to believe.

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

Yeah, it is rather highly plausible. And the shrub is the chip off the old dad's crooked block trying to keep daddy out of prison. Shrub playing the support the Israel games and grab all the oil fields you can strategy.

What was the more important thing to take note of in that little peice, was something that has all the look and feel of the Mafia's Code---the don't tell on me code of the family.

There is another form of it represented in this:

======
"Finally, I note that the Talmudic law of the moser, or the law of the Jewish
informer, is essentially a covenant prohibiting a Jew from informing on
another Jew to a non-Jew, which is diametrically opposed to the adversarial process
of our own legal system and therefore conducive toward obstruction of justice.
Furthermore, among employees at all levels in our intelligence and law
enforcement communities, the law of the moser constitutes an impediment to frank and
uninhibited exchanges of information in the discharge of their duties and
therefore poses a threat to our national security. I cannot overemphasize the
great importance of this very real issue of the law of the moser, or law of the
Jewish informer, the history of which you can read online at
www.JewishEncyclopedia.com. "

=====

Now, once you know the Manhattan Project was the Jewish plot of incinerate Hitler and formed up by the highly Jewish money in New York City, then you know part of the story.

Add on that the Manhattan Project used lots of fluorides, which was supplied by another infamous Jewish company called DuPont. Then add on their oversights caused the Ozone hole issues, and really the global warming issue too.

So, you got two Jewish factions involved that were advising the Govt to do these things: 1. Make the bomb with any reckless persuit needed to overcome the laws of environment, and 2. The Jewish big money types in Govt. [Rothchilds/rockefeller fed res] and the Jewish controlled press acting to conceil these massive screw ups.

And really 3. how this ties into the Armageddon prodictions that go against the Jews and Israel.

And the above quotation is the Jewish Law authorizing the Racketeering aspects to suppress these crimes against nature and man.

That was the most valuable part of that article and one that defines what is going on today on the chemtrails, health, and Bush NWO stuff.

IMHO,
is

Jimbo You Have Distorted history Long Enough.........

JFK was PRO-Israel..........

He fought against Tyranny that was coming into it's own at the time........

The Alliance between Organized crime(The Italian Mafia which helped bring down mussolini's Fascism during world war 2) and the former Intelligence community Members of the U.S. and Britain who went rogue after WW2 who did not want to relinquish the power they had accumulated during the war.(The Reputed Shadow Government or in your case TPTB. )

During the Bootleg days Kennedy Sr. was in business with Mayer Lansky and supplied whisky to the Italians for years before Capone and Luciano Recognized Lansky had a gift for Management and recruited him into their Organization.......

Which left Kennedy Sr. out in the cold and having to go legitimate........

which he did....

Years Later and privy to the power structure that now secretly ran 2 countries from behind the scenes J.F.K. was elected as president.......

The only position that could threaten this young Shadow Government because of the Knowledge that J.F.K possessed......

so instead of Gambling that JFK could be leashed and because of Cuba who was the Alliances major Safe Haven because of a deal that was struck with Castro in helping him with his coup..........

He was killed.........

It was the same Story With Bobby because he proclaimed that he would get his vengeance if he was elected as president.........

When all was said and done........

The Alliance set there sights on the Golden Triangle(Unlimited Income to start their rise to legitimate corporate undertaking's) and securing it................

Hence Vietnam..........

And the start of the NWO........

Jim You need to stop blaming World Jewry and realize that the NWO is not an alliance between countries or ethnic groups or Religious Ideals.........neither is it a political alliance.......

It transcends all of this because of the wealth power and Influence that it has gained over the years.......to these individuals there are NO Borders and no Accountability.........

Because they are protected by the potential of Scandal and Ruin for any who oppose.......

There isn't a High Level Politician in the World that doesn't know of their Existence or has heard the rumours.....or seen the effects of what happens when the Alliance is opposed.......

And Jim maybe 10% are of Jewish Origin......which puts your Theory of Jewish Global Domination to Shame.........

By the way your Chemical Analysis for Flourine and climate Mitigation in the upper atmosphere is Flawed........

Because of the chemical reaction it would have in such large quantities.....

If you disagree show me the chemical composition which would be needed for bonding......

if you can't then your full of shit.........

because I can show it to you..........

and of couse it would all be hypothetical because of the chain reaction it would cause in the upper Atmosphere........

Your starting to be like Halva.......

All talk and no Action..........

so Mr. Chemist lets see if you really are worthy of anybodies attention.......

why is your theory Flawed.......?

and why would it not work chemically .......?

I gave you 2 reasons to ponder......

Lets see if you can figure it out.........

WMM

Boomer Chick

02-12-2005, 09:45 AM

whitemajikman

02-12-2005, 09:50 AM

Boomer Chick

02-12-2005, 10:16 AM

WMM,

What you don't know is that IS has personally attacked me for well over a week now in a most rude and harrassing way.

This is his warning. I have put up with it long enough and he knows what I'm talking about.

This is a democratic forum where we discuss issues and prove points, not women-bash!

I'm sorry, I gave him time, I let him express, and now it's accountability time!

I have reported all of his offending posts and I WILL NOT continue to be personally attacked here for no reason. What? I'm I supposed to accept the rantings of a lunatic and simply ignore his
paranoid delusions and obvious distain for women?

NO!

I won't !

He hasn't bothered answering the questions both Reynold's, Yaak, and Stu have queried of him, but instead obviously relishes his knowledge level so much so that he must make himself feel good by putting someone down who does not have chemistry knowledge. But it goes beyond that into quite a tirade expressing his profound hate for females along with his paranoid political views --- then I become the all-in-one enemy of his fantasy state.

WHY ME?

So he has his warning and like any other person, if he continues to harrass he will find himself on another board somewhere.

Sincere respect,

BC

Boomer Chick

02-12-2005, 10:23 AM

BC is an absolute Du-Fuss if she does not recognize one faction here is not about truth, it is soly about distractions and information mining tactics similar to that provided the fake basis for the Iraq war.

BC has flawed reasoning and thus her approach will only make for disasters like Iraq.

There are sides and there are obvious profound idiots.

IMHO,
is

Prove your points, IS. Why do you care what I think? Get off your high horse and prove your points.

You may know more about the so-called tactics, and I will see them in time. You are being watched.... by the mods, so watch your step.

BC

jayreynolds

02-12-2005, 10:47 AM

You have been reported and if you continue in this vein you will be banned from this list.
Sorry to tell you this, BC. There are actually no rules on this board, and really no moderation.
Nobody gets banned, except for extreme acts going far past what Jimbo does. He may be a nutcase and he may say hateful things, but he won't be banned because that's just the way this board is. I'm not making these statements from any position of authority here, but base my judgement on what I've seen across the board on all the forums, not just here.

Basically, you'll have to find another way to deal with it than banning. That's what free speech is all about, anyways. Consider this a street corner in which we all have the right to set up our soap-boxes and shout if we want to. No one get's banned on the street, right?

I'm sure that if you think hard you can come up with a way to handle him.

Boomer Chick

02-12-2005, 11:07 AM

Sorry to tell you this, BC. There are actually no rules on this board, and really no moderation.
Nobody gets banned, except for extreme acts going far past what Jimbo does. He may be a nutcase and he may say hateful things, but he won't be banned because that's just the way this board is. I'm not making these statements from any position of authority here, but base my judgement on what I've seen across the board on all the forums, not just here.

Basically, you'll have to find another way to deal with it than banning. That's what free speech is all about, anyways. Consider this a street corner in which we all have the right to set up our soap-boxes and shout if we want to. No one get's banned on the street, right?

I'm sure that if you think hard you can come up with a way to handle him.

Jay, this board is run and owned by Arianna Huffington. I have two of her books, I love her writing, and if I have to go to the top, here, I will. No woman deserves to be singled out and bashed.

There are moderators here.

I don't know why you would defend Jim in this. You could have let this stand to see if it would work, but now you're showing support for him and that only encourages his obnoxious behavior toward me. You may feel it is nothing, but imagine young girls and other women coming to view this board. Does this look right to you? I'm sorry, for the sake of myself and thus all women, I must issue the warning.

I will go above anyone's head here, believe me, I will. Arianna has e-mailed me privately, so I know I can get through to her.

Now please support me.

Thank you.

BC

Boomer Chick

02-12-2005, 11:14 AM

Jim Phelps A.K.A. Insurrectionchemistry, your attacks on Boomer Chick are unfounded. It appears that her sincerity and cheerfulness bother you. You need to ask yourself why, because you have a serious problem. Whether your problem is one of spousal abuse or having a very small penis, it is not a reason to continually insult Boomer.

In case you didn’t notice, Boomer has breathed new life into this dieing thread. The rest of us enjoy having her here and we are not going to allow you to drive her away. You are welcome to focus your aggression at me if will make you feel more adequate - I dish it out, I can take it - but leave Boomer Chick alone.

I am an avid proponent of free speech and like to have fun on forums. I find you to be highly amusing, Jim, and would hate to see you go, but if you are unable to restrain from harassing Boomer Chick, my conscience will force me to report you, also.

Thank you, Yaak !!!!!

You don't know how much I appreciate your input !

BC :grin:

jayreynolds

02-12-2005, 11:29 AM

Now please support me.
Sorry, I support free speech. Like I said, consider yourself on a street corner.
Who would you ask to ban him for saying anything short of bodily harm?
Come on, be a man.

I think you are just angry and need to sit and figure another way. Banning only puts off having to deal with things later. It's also un-American.

Sure you can pull strings and make somebody you like be shut out, but nothing is really gained by it. Besides, less than 10 people read this, and if you noted, even Wayne refused to speak on Jimbo's behalf when I asked if anybody believed him. He's a nobody, and nobody is taking anything he says seriously. He can't hurt you. He has nothing on you. Just rise above him.
You can do it!

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 12:42 PM

halva

02-12-2005, 01:44 PM

Some of Jim Phelps' recent postings have been disgraceful, but if Arianna bans him and not Raynolds I will lose every last gram of respect for her and thank my lucky stars that I don't live in that hell on earth the United States.

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 02:09 PM

Look at is this way Halva,

Perhaps Arianna will tune into the discussion and recognize the significance of the Hydrogen Fluoride emissions synergism with hydro-carbons in the atmosphere being the premier driver for the global warming blanket and global warming.

You have been wanting some personal attention from Arianna's voice on the networks.

Arianna and her investigators may well recognize the significance of the effect and how it explains all the Pentagons huge interests in controlling the weather. Arianna is fairly savy in terms of sniffing out rats in DC and the games of big money GOP interests.

I suspect Arianna will take note of the mutual goals for HAARP and the jet plane catalytic methods used push the global warming gases into space or the prevention technique to rain the dangerous hydrogen fluoride emissions out of the atmosphere.

How else can it be explained that Americas and the world are being forced to accept all these ugly marked up and defaced skies as being OK. She can sell a lot of books in disclosing these issues.

Arianna demonstrates the fair and balanced criteria of reporting and seems to go against some of the taboo subjects of the GOP control network.

And even Arianna herself can see why someone might cry wolfe, when that factor is being put before the public's eyes and European activists communities.

Hi Arianna and her staffers. I like your books too and watch you on the TV.

Several of us would like to speak with you on topics of importance, for which you can lend a hand, and a fair and balanced pen.

IMHO,
is

Boomer Chick

02-12-2005, 02:34 PM

Sorry, I support free speech. Like I said, consider yourself on a street corner.
Who would you ask to ban him for saying anything short of bodily harm?
Come on, be a man.

I think you are just angry and need to sit and figure another way. Banning only puts off having to deal with things later. It's also un-American.

Sure you can pull strings and make somebody you like be shut out, but nothing is really gained by it. Besides, less than 10 people read this, and if you noted, even Wayne refused to speak on Jimbo's behalf when I asked if anybody believed him. He's a nobody, and nobody is taking anything he says seriously. He can't hurt you. He has nothing on you. Just rise above him.
You can do it!

Now you sound like me! Since you're so aware, why can't you play along? You don't know if I would have banned him or not, but you could have supported me in the warning. If he had stopped at that point, there would have been no need to ban him.

If he was saying these things to my face, he would have had consequences. So there should be consequences for this kind of verbalization. The mods give complaint forms that include the words "harrassment" and "rude."

Notice, he's now kissing Arianna's butt!

Thanks for the words of wisdom.... you're right, but then again, it's debatable.

I'll consider what you said.

BC

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 02:46 PM

Halva,

Now you should begin to see the values of my research from ORNL in the 1980's. I did correlational synergism studies with fluorine.

Fluorine has a terrible health effect when combined with certain metals, and just long term exposure to it highly upset the human immune system and disease and illness response.

I found that problem by looking carefully at the emissions from Oak Ridge and the sickness patterns in worker job exposures. It turned into one of the most important discoveries for mankind.

However, that discovery cascaded into several others quickly. The ozone hole study turned up the radiolytic breakdown of Freon in the atmosphere trashed the ozone levels. Then one must quickly connect what an even more potent acid and radical effect from fluorine might do, as Freon was both Cl and F composition.

When the same radiolytic effects of fluorine and other sources of HF emissions from Oak Ridge and TVA were looked at carefully. What popped out was the HF synergism with the hydro-carbon emissions made interesting products that formed the global warming blanket. Just like photochemistry and radiochemistry drive the smog and Freon breakdown, so these drive the global warming blanket catalysed by HF.

That became another of the landmark important discoveries for mankind. Then, how to attempt to fix or remediate that effect become of high importance. This is how the chemtrails [what I called Air Pharmacology in those times] Gen 1 and 2 methods were suggested by me and the additional use of HAARP to dump these IR absorbing gases from the atmosphere. Everyone has always suspected HAARP and Chemtrail methods were related, they are, one is preventitive method and the other after the fact corrections.

The damage factors from the fluorine's two dominate effects that I isolated via the correlation studies of fluorine synergism effects then showed up the definite connection to the factors of the predictions of Revelations. In Fact, I had isolated the exact processes that set up these environmental and health problems forecast by these prophicies. Then, the Revelations part of the bible accords became more than good fictions, it became causally linked to real processes.

And the rest is history now, a highly secretive part of DOE history. But all that is about to change. Even if Halva can't handle the obvious associations. In the secret world of DOE, what you just read is well proven and me well known as the discovery person. I affected national security issues in the US via those discoveries and inventions and I still do. Even to the point of toppling corrupt empires.

Those are all my pet projects these days, and anyone with a high level access knows the inventor whose discoveries made Jesus's words reality.

IMHO,
is

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 03:01 PM

Now we have clear evidence of bc generating intentially false claims with the pure intent of intimidation. Isn't that called faked up black-mail, extortion, and so on.

Now it appears bc is in the realm of being one of Reynolds crooks and using trickster methods.

Honesty missing from the manipulative bc.

Perhaps Arianna needs to know how dishonest her contact is. And how this dishonest person is harrassing the fella that made all these discoveries that explain what is happening in the Pentagon's Weather Control magic. I think she would like to know about that.

IMHO,
is

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 03:14 PM

I like humor----all should watch DVD "South Park---The Passion of the Jews" for a realistic primer on the real meaning of religion.

IMHO,
is

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 03:23 PM

Archived:

Quote:
Originally Posted by jayreynolds
Sorry, I support free speech. Like I said, consider yourself on a street corner.
Who would you ask to ban him for saying anything short of bodily harm?
Come on, be a man.

I think you are just angry and need to sit and figure another way. Banning only puts off having to deal with things later. It's also un-American.

Sure you can pull strings and make somebody you like be shut out, but nothing is really gained by it. Besides, less than 10 people read this, and if you noted, even Wayne refused to speak on Jimbo's behalf when I asked if anybody believed him. He's a nobody, and nobody is taking anything he says seriously. He can't hurt you. He has nothing on you. Just rise above him.
You can do it!

Now you sound like me! Since you're so aware, why can't you play along? You don't know if I would have banned him or not, but you could have supported me in the warning. If he had stopped at that point, there would have been no need to ban him.

If he was saying these things to my face, he would have had consequences. So there should be consequences for this kind of verbalization. The mods give complaint forms that include the words "harrassment" and "rude."

Notice, he's now kissing Arianna's butt!

Thanks for the words of wisdom.... you're right, but then again, it's debatable.

I'll consider what you said.

BC

Boomer Chick

02-12-2005, 03:52 PM

BC,

Free speech is a great thing. It can be used for disagreement and even making fools of people.

The problem is your level of understanding of chemtrails and related issues [to which you admit--making my claims founded] only do one thing, confuse people and lead them into the clutches of the Reynolds gang.

So far you have made three erroneous assumptions. The first is based on your interpretation of what a forum's purpose is, and the next is based on your perception of my understanding of chemtrails and related issues. I only admitted I didn't know chemistry. That is not an overall judgment of my IQ nor my knowledge of "chemtrail" issues, nor my ability to analyse what I read. Your third mistake is assuming that I confuse people. Where is the data that leads you to believe this is true??? Who is confused here and what the heck are you talking about that somehow my posting of legitimate links, of questioning people if I have a question, and being open to various ops and theories is somehow confusing? ? HONK! Maybe you're the one who's confused here. So far, your theory on whatever the hell it is..... hasn't been proven to anyone's satisfaction here. And because I can't prove you right, maybe you're feeling frustrated. Maybe your perfect dream girl poster would be a chemist who could support YOU in your chemical fantasy. Because I can't do that for you, and I take up space on your precious little window to the cyber world, you whine and moan and start attacking me personally.

Free speech says the opposition can be heard, and the opposition can even make fun of those with lower mental processing powers. And use dismissive language toward them that points to their processing problems.

Free speech means whoever yells fire in a theater will have to pay the consequences! There's a limit to free speech in the adult world. The limits are respecting the rights of others, showing a semblance of respect, and sticking to points and real debate, not a sidetracking of assumptions and caustic belittling for no other purpose than your own self aggrandizement. Don't project onto me. I didn't attack you, didn't do anything to you, but respond that I was looking at what you said and thinking about it. Your expectations of someone coming onto your precious space here and somehow rescuing you by totally agreeing and KNOWING your chemical theory -- makes me think either you're an adolescent, a brain damaged adult, or a deliberately cruel person.

I am not against women, but I am fully against your views expressed here. I am similarly opposed to the Bush Adm views and corruption.

Your dopeness, I too am totally against Bush Adm views. What? Are you a crystal ball reader with absolutely no talent? Like I said to Halva, so far so good with Reynolds and if you experience something different, just because I admire Reynolds does not mean in the same breath that I love Bush. Does that get you off, IS? Hear me.... I worked hard to get them out, I would impeach them if I could. So don't go thinking you know everything about me, schmuck!

And it will continue to show, as long as you keep taking the low road and leading folks astray.

What low road? A different one from you? Is that your criteria? I take the high road of political activism, dillsquat! I phonebanked, I wrote letters ad infinitum, I wrote articles for the local rag, I knocked on doors and talked to people one on one, I donated money, I bought books to keep me current and up to date on behind the scenes political wrangling and CIA ops -- you name it -- and you accuse me of taking a low road here? You know nothing!

If you were "fair and balanced," the very first person to which you would complain about toward going against women would be Reynolds himself. He is the king of going to the edge of free speech in attempting to run people off from the list. Instead, what we all see is your typical ME, Me, me stuff. You can't see beyond yourself, which is a lot of your problems here. Nor can you stick to the fair and balanced, because the first person that you would have to attack would be Reynolds, then his fellow assocates.

Dillboy, Reynolds has been perniciously dedicated and maybe he's been rude himself, but on this board at this time I have not witnessed it! GET THAT? YOU are the one that has been rude and obnoxious toward me, not him. Take what's coming to you like a man! Does that get you off?
And keep your spongebob psychology to yourself because you're wrong, Mr. Toad!

So, holler and gripe all you want. Each time you demonstrate you lacking of fair and balanced. The Arianna moderators give good heed to free speech. And just the same as I use strongly dismissive Understatement of the year!

words against the scamming of Reynolds and company, so do I use equal level words against like sounding males or females. These are the times of equality, and even if some female comes to a list somewhere---there is just nothing wrong with holding her to the same level of accountability as a male. Your trying to use your sex as a weapon, holler wolfe when there is none. You are attempting a scam to support your level of ignorance and to force your ill founded research into the lists persona. I just supply the counter current that you are not well founded in you claims.

Scam, huh? What's a scam? You are projecting some sick version of your own battle mentality onto me! I don't accept it because it's not real. You are attempting to control, as Yaak said, and you will fail. No amount of controlling by any means works, except to ban someone who doesn't know the first thing about manners and general comportment or even debating. Ill founded research? So what was so ill founded? Anything government sponsored, is that it? If you're that much into conspiracy try to prove the research wrong, then. You're suppositions and fantasy based notions have no place. For all I know you could be sitting in a mental hospital with a computer and who would know the difference? If you disagree with any of the research I posted, post your own refuting links and oppose it with intelligence, not with the adolescent mindset that you are showing here. You can say " this link sucks because....." or " your data sucks .... because" but don't think attacking me as a person as an intellect cuts the mustard one iota or makes you look bright.

Boomer Chick

02-12-2005, 03:54 PM

IS said:
Wise up and stop misleading people because you can jump on a topic area and attempt a coup take over. The extensive uninformed motor mouthing just won't cut the mustard here. You talk a lot and supply lots of feelings and need to relate, but this is the report list. Truth rules and your not working on that venue well. Bush played the black and female cards with Condi----and your attempting the same games here. Women get held to the same accountability as men, that is the way today.

Again, simple inane attempts to control. Again, you are not a Beautiful Mind from the movie based on the true genious, you are only trying to control.

You cannot even conduct the level of research on the internet to solve many of these science problems, so even your premise here is flawed.

If you start getting things right in place of the blathering---you might even get positive comments.

All my comments, good and bad, are performance based. They go equally toward males and females, with no exception. Look in the mirror---the problem may well be yourself.

Performance based? And who are you to judge my performance in terms of credibility of presented back up evidence? Pot ... kettle. No. It's obvious I've had more back up evidence in most of my claims than you. And, if I am proven wrong by my own research.... I admit it. Believe it or not.... that's a good quality you could probably pick up from me.

Halva even started calling you the Queen---because you attempt to run in a take over. And I like humor so the pun on the King has no clothes seemed fitting for counter current use and point illustration. You used a tyrade of 10,000 word essays to clog up the list, and I use little short puns. Who is going to be heard more?

And did you read any of what I wrote and get an inkling of my political views? Did you visit my website? Did you do the research on me that would have educated you to my stances before you crystal balled your way into your pontificating wrong assumptions?

Get used to it, when you get into a hot topic sometimes. You take up position with ideals to which others don't agree --- you will get stern reactions and people putting you down.

Tune your position and a whole new paradigm can transpire. It is all based on you. If I think you are profoundly stupid, I tell people. If I think your overbearing, I tell people. If I think your attempting a cheep shot on the sexist claims, I also expose that. If I think you don't go by the expectations of fair and balanced, I call that. If I see you running a Cheer Leader campaign for your own self aggrandizement, then I shall illustrate that with your own actions. and so the saga goes.

I've already experienced stern opposition to my positions on boards. It's nothing new to me. But when it degrades into the realm of the unreal and the rude.... you will receive a consequence.

I don't care whether you think I'm stupid or not. You are entitled to your views, no matter how wrong or closed minded. But focusing in on any person in a belittling way and not focusing in on the subject of the thread... is more than counterproductive... it's distracting and enflaming. It does no one any good, especially the other posters. If all you want is to serve as entertainment for the guys.... go ahead and see what happens. I have warned you.

Someone must have severely verbally abused you at one or more times in your life for you to assume that somehow this is acceptable behavior. Perhaps you're staying on this board with Reynolds also speaks to this pattern in your life. If he has verbally abused you over the months, why would you put up with it? That's a question I think you should ask yourself.

This was better in terms of direct communication.

BC

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 04:42 PM

Yaak writes:

"Precisely what were those products?"
=======

You claim to be an engineer and for engineers all the equations are obvious. Draftsman---maybe not so clear.

You claim to understand radiolytic and photochemical pollutant factors. Same science involved. Different altitudes.

Just apply that simple science to the varied reactions on atmospheric hydrocarbons [there are many] that break them into lite molecules stimulated by the fluorine.

Details---follow the bounding conditions.

IMHO,
is
.

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 04:52 PM

bc writes:

" just because I admire Reynolds "

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

Now we have the real issue. BC admires a person that belittles and attacks women repeatedly on this list and supports that happening. Difficult to do that and be fair and balanced. It is more like BC ignoring serious problems.

She has been reading all the archives and seen these attacks.

Reynolds harrasses F_S unmercifully.

BC has even seen female F_S get onto Reynods for doing this, plus seen female Shadow get onto his attacks and deceptions.

So, it is good to know you endorse these methods and tactics and totally admire the person doing it.

Says a lot about you. It also says since you don't mind your buddy doing it to others---then you surely can't complain if you get just a tiny tiny bit of negative criticism, by comparison.

Tunnel Vision is nice, till others note your defective vision.

IMHO,
is

stuart_allsop

02-12-2005, 06:07 PM

DID YOU KNOW...

Boomer, I liked your "did you know" list, and I think I've seen ti before. At least, I had heard of some of the items on the list before. However, I fail to see the signifcance of the last item on the list: "* that in the fall of 1989 the Cold Fusion panel of the Energy Research Advisory Board to the DOE concluded, "The panel recommends against special funding for the investigation of phenomena attributed to cold fusion."" All of the other items deal with valid scientific discoveries. Cold fusion is a hoax.

stuart_allsop

02-12-2005, 06:13 PM

[/size]

Just taking a poll here to let Jimbo know.

How many people reading this board actually believe that what Jimbo is saying is true?
Please answer if you do, to make things easier.
Not me. Personally, I think Jimbo is a chronic hoaxster, using this venue as a sounding board to see what kind of scam he can fly next. I wonder if he moonlights as a snake-oil salesman somewhere?

stuart_allsop

02-12-2005, 06:20 PM

Wasting our tax dollars! Just an air study regarding bioterrorism.
What am I missing here, Boomer: Why do you think it is a waste of tax dollars to do research that might save your butt one day, if some terrorsit decides to explaode a dirty bomb upwind of you, or dump some anthrax in to the air? How could that possibly be a waste of tax dollars?

Insurrectionchemistry

02-12-2005, 06:22 PM

Must be a draftsman, since he can't seem to fathom that hydrocarbons are the key to photochemical smog and react with NOx compounds.

By the same criteria, hydrocarbons in the air also react with HF and its radiolytic products, producing more lite hydrocarbon compounds that form the GW blanket.

IMHO,
is

http://daphne.palomar.edu/calenvironment/smog.htm

Photochemical Smog
What follows is a brief description of photochemical smog formation, from a non-chemist. For those who want to pursue this topic, there are also some links to follow for more information.

Photochemical smog is brown smog, the gray-brown haze that fills the air in many cities. It is especially a problem in warm, sunny regions where there are lots of cars burning gasoline. Researchers in the 1940's and 1950's in Los Angeles noticed that the kinds of pollutants in the air varied over the course of the day. Some pollutants increased in the morning, as people started driving their cars. Other pollutants, including the visible, brown smoggy haze, were most common in the middle of the day. The mix of pollutants changed again in the late afternoon and evening. It became apparent that the chemical reactions among the various pollutants were related to sunlight. Smog is worse in Los Angeles--and everywhere--in the summer, because the light energy from the sun moves some of the reactions along.

To form photochemical smog, three main ingredients are needed: nitrogen oxides (NOx), hydrocarbons, and energy from the sun in the form of ultraviolet light (UV).

The first thing that starts the chain of events is that people start driving in the morning. As gasoline is burned, nitrogen (N2) in the atmosphere is also burned, or oxidized, forming nitric oxide (NO)

N2 + O2=2NO

Hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide (CO) will also be emitted by cars. Hydrocarbons are volatile organic compounds that may include acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, ethylene, and many other compounds.

In the air, nitric oxide combines with molecular oxygen to form nitrogen dioxide within a few hours.

2NO + O2--------->2NO2

Nitrogen dioxide absorbs light energy and splits to form nitric oxide and atomic oxygen:

NO2-->NO + O

Then, in sunlight, the atomic oxygen combines with oxygen gas to form ozone (O3):

O+ O2--->O3

If no other factors are involved, ozone and nitric oxide then react to form nitrogen dioxide and oxygen gas.

O3 + NO<------>NO2 + O2

This last reaction can go in either direction, depending on temperature and the amount of sunlight. If there is a lot of sunlight, the equation moves to the left, and more ozone is produced. If nothing else gets in the way, an equilibrium is reached, and the ozone level stabilizes.

However, there is something else involved. Remember that the cars are also emitting hydrocarbons as well as oxides of nitrogen. Hydrocarbons are the other main ingredient in photochemical smog. When hydrocarbons are present, nitric oxide reacts with them instead of the ozone. This reaction produces a variety of toxic products, such as a volatile compound known as PAN (peroxyacetyl nitrate).

NO + hydrocarbons----------------->PAN and various other compounds. Also,

NO2 +hydrocarbons------------------>PAN and various other compounds

So, there are two results (at least) from the reaction of nitrogen oxides with hydrocarbons. One is that a lot of volatile, reactive organic compounds are generated directly. The other is that when the nitric oxide (NO) is busy reacting with hydrocarbons, it is not reacting with ozone to break it back down to molecular oxygen. So the amount of ozone in the air increases. With nitric oxide reacting with hydrocarbons, ozone may accumulate to damaging levels. (Ozone may also be released into the air naturally by forest fires. But in a natural situation, ozone would react with nitric oxide and be broken down to oxygen, as noted above).

The result, then, is an accumulation of ozone and volatile organic compounds such as PAN. These are referred to as secondary pollutants, because they are formed by the reaction of primary pollutants, nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons, emitted by burning fossil fuels. The energy from the sun moves the reactions along. This forms photochemical smog, the brown gunk we see in the sky, especially on hot sunny days.

Photochemical smog can cause eye irritation and poor visibility. Strong oxidants such as ozone can damage the lungs. The oxidants irritate the linings of lungs. Damage to the lungs may stress the heart. Health damage is worse for people with existing lung and heart conditions. Other health implications may include loss of immune system function, increased susceptibility to infections, and fatigue. The damage can be caused by exposure to large amounts of the pollutant over a short time span, and also by chronic exposure to small amounts over long periods of time. Oxidants can kill plant cells, causing leaves to develop brown spots or drop off the plant, reduce plant growth, and make plants more susceptible to damage from other causes. Oxidants such as ozone can also corrode and destroy many materials such as rubber, nylon, fabric, and paint.

The above is a simplified discussion of photochemical smog formation. There are more reactions involved, and a number of loops and subloops in the sequence of reactions. Some of the links below can provide more detail about the reactions involved, or give a different point of view of the process.

stuart_allsop

02-12-2005, 06:36 PM

Sorry to tell you this, BC. There are actually no rules on this board, and really no moderation..Boomer, Jay is right. A while back I reported another individual here for making open and direct death threats: the reply I got basically said that threatening to kill somebody is not good enough reason to have them banned!!!! Yup. I kid you not. When I questioned this rather surprising reponse from teh "authorities" here, I got a very rude and condescending reply that frankly left me laughing at the infantile sillyness of the social misfit who signed it.

In short, the "moderators" here just do not give a damn what happens on their watch.

So don't expect that your complaint will get any action. I think the only two choice you have right now are: 1) Lash out just as stingingly hard as you feel like, and put jimbo well and truly in his place, if that will make you feel better (it works for me!!! :) ) and 2) Totally ignore him.

It's celar that he only does it get a rise out of you, so if you ignore him, like all annoyig little brats, he'll eventually get bored and give up.

But I'm sorry to say that the "moderatrs" on thios board will not be comming to your aid. In fact, just applying the title "moderator" to those who are supposedly enforcing the Terms Of Service here is a hilarious comedy act.

Boomer Chick

02-12-2005, 06:38 PM

Chemical information regarding Flourine, for anyone who's interested in knowing or reviewing about Flourine and its various molecular forms.

http://www.fluorocarbons.org/index.htm

More molecular atmospheric chemistry involving HCFC's and CFCs -- Flourine Cycle

http://biosci.cbs.umn.edu/cems/index2.html

More general information on flourine and hydrogen compounds:

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts11.html

Super Heated HF algorithm for computerized study:

http://www.chem.umn.edu/netstep/2000/november/29siepmann.html

Interesting article on cleaning industrial chlorofluorocarbons by sodium vapor reduction:
http://64.233.161.104/u/umn?q=cache:QuzrVHmbWXsJ:www.me.umn.edu/~mrz/pdf_papers/1997ES%26T_naCF4.pdf+hydrogen+fluoride&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

__________________________________

Just your basic chemistry on flourine and hydrogen in various composite forms. Hydrogen
flouride is extremely toxic, obviously. Just throwing this in for basic chemistry information for those who wish to peruse. Take it or leave it. I found it interesting especially regarding the atmosphere.

BC

jayreynolds

02-12-2005, 06:45 PM

And the rest is history now, a highly secretive part of DOE history. But all that is about to change. Even if Halva can't handle the obvious associations. In the secret world of DOE, what you just read is well proven and me well known as the discovery person. I affected national security issues in the US via those discoveries and inventions and I still do. Even to the point of toppling corrupt empires.
Those are all my pet projects these days, and anyone with a high level access knows the inventor whose discoveries made Jesus's words reality.

No, Jim Phelps is simply a pompous delusional monomaniacal self-aggrandizing idiot.
The people in your hometown laugh and snicker at you, your theories are half-baked illusions
dreamed up on-the-fly, and are, as a result, quite often self-contradictory. Examination of your writings, Jimbo, shows that you flip flop worse than a flounder, choke up when tough questions get asked, and are so easily proven incorrect it's become embarrassing to do so.

Just consider this, buddy. Yesterday I asked anyone on this board who felt your words had any merit to say so. Not one person did, NOT EVEN YOURSELF! Jimbo, nobody here is buying what you are selling, no one has shown up who buys it, and no one is coming who will. Perhaps you should consider those facts and move on to greener pastures.

Just in case you might want to imagine he does, even Wayne really has no use for what you say either, his only use for you is to be his whipping boy or to hold your finger in the dike. Haven't you noticed he isn't exactly writing essays expounding your theores and sending them worldwide, is he? You are his tool. Practically the only one he has left.

So, Jimbo. Better tone down the rhetoric a mite. You've got some real history down here on this board already. Enough of it has gotten on google to send a strong message to anyone wanting to check out Jim Phelps, the nutcase:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=Jim+Phelps+nutcase+&btnG=Search

Boomer Chick

02-12-2005, 06:51 PM

What am I missing here, Boomer: Why do you think it is a waste of tax dollars to do research that might save your butt one day, if some terrorsit decides to explaode a dirty bomb upwind of you, or dump some anthrax in to the air? How could that possibly be a waste of tax dollars?

Well, I read the article and it said there were already other gas detectors in place and various other organizations were already "on top of it." It's not that I don't want people to be safe in that kind of situation it just seemed to me that it was overkill and not necessary. Did you read the article? Should I reread it? I'll admit my interpretation was wrong if I can find the article again and find my mistake.

BC :confused:

OK, here's the part:

Paul J. Browne, a spokesman for the New York Police Department, said the study would be helpful but noted that the city already has extensive monitoring systems to catch problems before they occur. The national Biowatch system in the city consists of a number of machines, checked daily, that register biological hazards, he said. The city also has about 900 police sergeants who are assigned to carry pager-size devices that detect radioactivity, he added.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pages/Feb05/100205_Antiterror.html

And I wonder just how safe perfluorocarbons really are as well. Won't everything depend on the wind at the time of the biologic attack, if it ever occurs? Any change in winds would bring another scenario. Even cross winds would influence the dispersion direction and rate and suddenly changing winds would again affect the scenario. I just don't see how the study would help anything much more than they already have prepared. If something is released, EVERY citizen must beware, not just a couple of blocks of citizens. It's too risky to simply isolate some chemical that's airborne. That's just my take on it. Once the recognition of the substance is recorded --- ALL people in the city should go into protective mode.

Maybe I'm short sighted here.

Thanks for seeking to understand me.

BC ;)