It's not nice to fool with Mother Nature

[halva]

Another question for Letxa: Would it be unreasonable to implement the following recommendations contained in this prestigious study by the American Academy of Sciences:

Yes, I think it would be unreasonable. I believe the amount of "dust" that would have to be placed in the atmosphere would be prohibitively expensive and probably not even possible using airplanes, in part due to the very caveats mentioned by the report you cited. I also do not think that it is reasonable to try to address the supposed effects of increases in CO2 by increasing the content of other chemicals in the atmosphere. Further, the supposed solution would effectively reduce the amount of sunlight reaching our planet which could impact plants that depend on photosynthesis which would certainly reduce the amount of CO2 they consume and the amount of oxygen they produce. If CO2 is really a problem (which I don't believe it is) then CO2 emissions have to be decreased or, preferably, CO2 sinks have to be increased.

Now that I've answered your question, would you please answer the questions we've been asking you for the better part of 100 pages?

No, I won't. I'll ask you another question.

Is your view that such a course of action would be unreasonable a factor in your belief that such attempts at mitigation are not in fact occurring?

In exchange for this I will endeavour to answer one question you ask me, if you repeat it.

[whitemajikman]

What is the Mission Statement of the Chemtrail Believer Sect and why do you discourage open discussion and debate?

Well ,finally we get to the meat of the matter,I think I will shed some light on this if I may.....lol

In the beginning before the time of the debunker,The Chemtrail sect had a monopoly on a phenomena which they seen as a threat to human life,and to the biosphere,even going as far as selling snake oil type remedies which would make the seller's of aluminum beanies a bit nervous.

In the end they made a profit,purely by taking The phenomena(chemtrail's),to a new level ........they made it into a government backed conspiracy which has orwellian undertones. The conspiracy theory flourished,more websites dedicated to this phenomena started popping up
all over the internet.
Well folks at the same time the green party which previously had power in the 80's and early 90's because of their global warming theories and their militant environmental movements. Started taking note of the response the public was having regarding (chemtrail's).

So The green party decides to mate with conspiracy which in my oppinion is not a huge leap considering the Tainted and inconclusive data which they were trying to pass off as factual ,regarding Global warming.

Now as I said this was before the debunker.

When Jay Reynold's and many other's after him decided to take it upon themselves to fight the growing panic and paranoia this new chemtrail sect was spewing out to the mass global population,The chemtrail sect could not deal with logic and reason,neither could the green party which by now had a huge stake in the phenomena known as chemtrails.

Jay Reynold's in a matter of a year totally decimated the chemtrail conspiracy and had proven to many a believer that chemtrail's were sham.......thus causing a global exodus on this subject.

But as is the case with many whom have fallen victim to cult's or sect's in the past.The core group of believer's who could not look beyond their own paranoia and self-induced blurring of the facts.........have refused to take logic or the facts of their folly to heart,they still insist that even with all the evidence contrary to their own admission's that they shall one day find that holy grail of the chemtrail sect.

MAIN STREAM MEDIA.




So you see that is why they ban anyone who is not a believer,or anyone who question's their data.

To do otherwise would compromise their very existence,because they know that if Debunker's as Jay,Lexta,Bonehead and many others have their say they will undoubtedly make the sect accept what they truly are,
A bunch of politically motivated, delusional ,brainwashed,pathologically inept bunch of spindoctors who care little for the truth and who would sell their own mother's to be heard.

So again that is why they ban,and have 2 set's of values.......one for the debunker........and one for the believer.

But again not is all well in chemmie nirvana,presently they are now at each other's throats,and why......? because when you have that many little hitler's trying to run the show it is inevitable that the power mongering ego's of the sect must fight for supremacy and domination in effect guaranteeing their own downfall from subversive elements from with-in........as is the case this time.

too many ego's not enough power to feed those ego's.

So Halva I must ask you what is at stake for you if you cannot answer these simple questions that have been asked of you over and over again.

1.) Chemtrails cause global warming, contrails prevent it
2.) Chemtrails prevent global warming, contrails cause it
3.) Chemtrails and contrails cause global warming
4.) Chemtrails and contrails prevent global warming
5.) Chemtrails are a hoax, and contrails may eventually contribute to global warming
6.) It doesn't really matter because the Earth is going into a cooling cycle (which will no doubt be blamed on geo-engineering / chemtrails

Here are but a few........

so when you cannot come to terms with your own deluded perception of what you claim is happening.......will you admit defeat or will this thread be the longest "HALVA IS A BLIND FOOL WHO WILL NOT ADMIT DEFEAT"
thread in the long history of your delusional career.......?

It seems to me that Jay and the debunker's have won this thing hands down.

and have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that your "DEADLY CHEMTRAILS".......are in fact CONTRAILS.
And they also have proven beyond a reasonable doubt how playing with an idiot as yourself can lead to revelation for some of your believer's who have now decided to subvert your entire plan of action.

how does it feel Halva to have a mutiny on your hands.

You planned it that way Halva,didn't you......?

Well when the senior members at CTC finally figure out why and who,you can be sure that this post will have relevance in your last remaing cells of that thing you call a brain.

[halva]

Another question for Letxa: Would it be unreasonable to implement the following recommendations contained in this prestigious study by the American Academy of Sciences:

Yes, I think it would be unreasonable. I believe the amount of "dust" that would have to be placed in the atmosphere would be prohibitively expensive and probably not even possible using airplanes, in part due to the very caveats mentioned by the report you cited. I also do not think that it is reasonable to try to address the supposed effects of increases in CO2 by increasing the content of other chemicals in the atmosphere. Further, the supposed solution would effectively reduce the amount of sunlight reaching our planet which could impact plants that depend on photosynthesis which would certainly reduce the amount of CO2 they consume and the amount of oxygen they produce. If CO2 is really a problem (which I don't believe it is) then CO2 emissions have to be decreased or, preferably, CO2 sinks have to be increased.

Now that I've answered your question, would you please answer the questions we've been asking you for the better part of 100 pages?

No, I won't. I'll ask you another question.

Is your view that such a course of action would be unreasonable a factor in your belief that such attempts at mitigation are not in fact occurring?

In exchange for this I will endeavour to answer one question you ask me, if you repeat it.

[halva]

Actually last I heard Whitemajikman you were knocking on doors as if you wanted to change sides. What happened?

[whitemajikman]

So halva you Ignore what you cannot fight,is that not your nature...?

To run when you cannot defend.....?

You see Halva,your world view is a dangerous one,as is your politics.

You seem to think that you can keep getting away with spewing your idiodicy all over the net and not be accountable.

Arriana is being held accountable for her book.

why should you be any different.....?

HALVA THE WORLD IS WATCHING YOUR INEPT DELUSIONAL PARODY OF A HUMAN BEING AND YOUR LACK OF PROOF REGARDING YOUR BELIEF'S SO I SAY LET'S CHANGE THE NAME Of THIS THREAD
TO THE ......HALVA HAS LOST ALL OF HIS SENSE TO A CHEMTRAIL HOAX
THERE BY LENDING CREEDENCE TO A SUCKER BEING BORN EVERY MINUTE.

[foot_soldier]

The following isn't just popping up out of nowhere. Take it or leave it. And mark my words, this is definitely one component of the TRAILING issue that people like "jayreynolds" don't want to see on the table for open public discussion:

Public release date: 28-Apr-2004

NASA /Goddard Space Flight Center – EOS Project Science Office
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-04/nsfc-ccb042804.php

NASA scientists have found that cirrus clouds, formed by contrails from aircraft engine exhaust, are capable of increasing average surface temperatures enough to account for a warming trend in the United States that occurred between 1975 and 1994.

"This result shows the increased cirrus coverage, attributable to air traffic, could account for nearly all of the warming observed over the United States for nearly 20 years starting in 1975, but it is important to acknowledge contrails would add to and not replace any greenhouse gas effect," said Patrick Minnis, senior research scientist at NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. The study was published April 15 in the Journal of Climate. "During the same period, warming occurred in many other areas where cirrus coverage decreased or remained steady," he added.

"This study demonstrates that human activity has a visible and significant impact on cloud cover and, therefore, on climate. It indicates that contrails should be included in climate change scenarios," Minnis said.

Minnis determined the observed one percent per decade increase in cirrus cloud cover over the United States is likely due to air traffic-induced contrails. Using published results from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (New York) general circulation model, Minnis and his colleagues estimated contrails and their resulting cirrus clouds would increase surface and lower atmospheric temperatures by 0.36 to 0.54 degrees Fahrenheit per decade. Weather service data reveal surface and lower atmospheric temperatures across North America rose by almost 0.5 degree Fahrenheit per decade between 1975 and 1994.

Minnis worked with colleagues Kirk Ayers, Rabi Palinkonda, and Dung Phan from Analytical Services and Materials, Inc., of Hampton, Va. They used 25 years of global surface observations of cirrus clouds, temperature and humidity records from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) reanalysis dataset. They confirmed the cirrus trends with 13 years of satellite data from NASA's International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project.

Both air traffic and cirrus coverage increased during the period of warming despite no changes in the NCEP humidity at jet cruise altitudes over the United States. By contrast, humidity at flight altitudes decreased over other land areas, such as Asia, and was accompanied by less cirrus coverage, except over Western Europe, where air traffic is very heavy.

Cirrus coverage also rose in the North Pacific and North Atlantic flight corridors. The trends in cirrus cover and warming over the United States were greatest during winter and spring, the same seasons when contrails are most frequent. These results, along with findings from earlier studies, led to the conclusion that contrails caused the increase in cirrus clouds.

"This study indicates that contrails already have substantial regional effects where air traffic is heavy, such as over the United States. As air travel continues growing in other areas, the impact could become globally significant," Minnis said.

Humidity is the amount of water vapor in the air and determines how long contrails remain in the atmosphere. Contrails that persist for an extended period of time are most likely to impact the climate.

Contrails form high in the atmosphere when the mixture of water vapor in the aircraft exhaust and the air condenses and freezes. Persisting contrails can spread into extensive cirrus clouds that tend to warm the Earth, because they reflect less sunlight than the amount of heat they trap. The balance between Earth's incoming sunlight and outgoing heat drives climate change.

NASA's Earth Science Enterprise funded this research. NASA's Earth Science Enterprise is dedicated to understanding the Earth as an integrated system and applying Earth System Science to improve prediction of climate, weather, and natural hazards using the unique vantage point of space.

[halva]

Letxa I'm ready to continue the dialogue. One point at a time. Are you going to chide your colleagues for spamming our vitally important debate?

[whitemajikman]

Actually last I heard Whitemajikman you were knocking on doors as if you wanted to change sides. What happened?



Oh REALLY.......and where would you have heard such a rediculous notion....?

THE only side I AM ON is MINE.......

DO you not realize this by now.....?

Do you not realize that I have tried to fit in to both philosophies there by being able to see where both sides are wrong about some things and where the debunker's have the edge regarding the subject of chemtrail's.

Sorry Halva Chemtrail's Are contrail's nothing more.

The problem here is that you will not let it rest.

If you wish to be taken seriously or your cause for that matter,you must first rid yourself of the quagmire that Chemtrail's has become.

Now if we were talking aerosol Operations then you might be able to make a case based upon Geo-engineering which is something that every scientist has heard of and many have dedicated their respective careers to.

But you instead are trying to prove the existence of something that cannot be proven right or wrong it is in itself a vicious circle.

In fact we might as well be talking about the existence of santa claus or the tooth fairy......they are both well known entities but can you prove or disprove their existence.

You know you can't.

This is why the debunker's will always win when it come to chemtrails.

Because they have realized what you shun the truth of the matter.

Why dedicate 100 pages of discourse to a myth.....?

Especially when Jay has had you cornered from the beginning....?

It is your pride Halva that blinds you ........and binds you.

When will you finally see the light for what is ......?

Jay has given you as has the rest of the debunker's many oppertunities to walk away in disagreement but with knowledge that chemtrail's do not exist.

But instead you keep "beatng a dead horse".......

Have you ever thought of the revelation's we could all be having if we were to show tolerance based upon a partnership between the ex-chemmies and the debunker's......?

LET CHEMTRAIL'S DIE HALVA WITH THIS THREAD SO AS TO OPEN A NEW CHAPTER IN THE PURSUIT OF TRUTH,MANY WHO HAVE BEEN BANNED NEED TO BE RE-INSTATED BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY BRING TO THE TABLE,IN MATTER'S OTHER THAN CHEMTRAIL'S.

NOT EVERYONE WILL AGREE ON ALL SUBJECT MATTER BUT AT LEAST THE RIFT THAT HAS GROWN INTO A CHASM CAN BE OVERCOME.

INSTEAD OF BEING A FOLLOWER HALVA BE A LEADER AND START A NEW CHAPTER WHERE YOU MAY SWALLOW YOUR PRIDE FOR THE GOOD OF THE MANY ........NOT THE FEW.

IT"S CALLED A CLEAN SLATE.

DO YOU HAVE THE MIND CAPABLE OF ENVISIONING WHAT A CLEAN SLATE FOR THE BANNED DEBUNKER'S AND THE CHEMMIES COULD ACCOMPLISH TOGETHER.......WITHOUT TRHE POLITICS AND SUBVERSION BOTH SIDES NOW EMPLOY.......?

THE SKIES THE LIMIT HALVA..................ARE YOU MAN ENOUGH TO TAKE FLIGHT.......?

OR WILL CHEMTRAIL'S BE THE CHAIN THAT CONTINUALLY BIND'S YOU FROM INVESTIGATING MORE IMPORTANT MATTERS SUCH AS GEO-ENGINEERING,OR GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE.

THERE IS HOPE HALVA FOR RESOLUTION.

BUT ONLY IF THE CHEMTRAIL HOAX AND THE COLLATERAL DAMAGE THAT IT HAS DONE TO BOTHSIDES OF THIS DEBATE....................


DIES WITH THIS THREAD,SO I ASK YOU ONE MORE TIME,ARE YOU A VISIONARY OR A FOLLOWER.......?

[halva]

Another question for Letxa: Would it be unreasonable to implement the following recommendations contained in this prestigious study by the American Academy of Sciences:

Yes, I think it would be unreasonable. I believe the amount of "dust" that would have to be placed in the atmosphere would be prohibitively expensive and probably not even possible using airplanes, in part due to the very caveats mentioned by the report you cited. I also do not think that it is reasonable to try to address the supposed effects of increases in CO2 by increasing the content of other chemicals in the atmosphere. Further, the supposed solution would effectively reduce the amount of sunlight reaching our planet which could impact plants that depend on photosynthesis which would certainly reduce the amount of CO2 they consume and the amount of oxygen they produce. If CO2 is really a problem (which I don't believe it is) then CO2 emissions have to be decreased or, preferably, CO2 sinks have to be increased.

Now that I've answered your question, would you please answer the questions we've been asking you for the better part of 100 pages?

No, I won't. I'll ask you another question.

Is your view that such a course of action would be unreasonable a factor in your belief that such attempts at mitigation are not in fact occurring?

In exchange for this I will endeavour to answer one question you ask me, if you repeat it.

[whitemajikman]

SO WHAT SAY YOU.............?


HALVA..........?

[whitemajikman]

HALVA ALL I HAVE ASKED YOU IS TO SWALLOW YOUR PRIDE.

ARE YOU SAYING YOU WOULD FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL BECAUSE OF A
HOAX........?

Just to keep coming back ..........repeatedly "beating a dead horse"....?

You have an oppertunity that most could only dream of........To once and for all end the HOAX.......

And to start with a clean slate.

If you were to Let Chemtrail's Die.......Then the rest of The Chemmies would probably follow suit.

And even if they don't........At least your pride and integrity would then be restored........

And then you would finally be able to move on to more important matter's.

[jayreynolds]

Deborah quoted:
""This result shows the increased cirrus coverage, attributable to air traffic, could account for nearly all of the warming observed over the United States for nearly 20 years starting in 1975, but it is important to acknowledge contrails would add to and not replace any greenhouse gas effect," said Patrick Minnis, senior research scientist at NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va."

Sounds to me like Deborah should drop all pretense to the chemtrail hoax and jump on the bandwagon of science.

Whitey has some good points about clean slates and all.

Deborah knows much about the lies and the liars involved in the hoax, she(and 'Sore" throat too) could blow it wide open because they know the insiders view, which contains the dirty little secrets about who has lied, who has profited, who zoomed who, etc.

So, what do you say, Deborah(foot soldier)?

Ready to tell-all?

[letxa2000]

No, I won't. I'll ask you another question. Is your view that such a course of action would be unreasonable a factor in your belief that such attempts at mitigation are not in fact occurring? In exchange for this I will endeavour to answer one question you ask me, if you repeat it.

That I perceive chemtrails as unreasonable, both economically and scientifically, is part of the reason I don't believe it is occurring. The other reason is that I have seen no evidence that it is occurring. That's the big issue: there is no evidence. Hypothetical and scientific papers contemplating the possibility of chemtrail-like operations are not, of themselves, evidence that they are actually occurring. If I were to see evidence that it is happening then it would be irrelevant what I think. But in absence of evidence and given what I believe is rational skepticism, I see no reason to believe that "chemtrails" are anything but normal contrails.

I've now answered two of your questions so I'd ask that you answer the following two questions:

1. What is your personal definition of 'chemtrails'?

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

[halva]

No, I won't. I'll ask you another question. Is your view that such a course of action would be unreasonable a factor in your belief that such attempts at mitigation are not in fact occurring? In exchange for this I will endeavour to answer one question you ask me, if you repeat it.

That I perceive chemtrails as unreasonable, both economically and scientifically, is part of the reason I don't believe it is occurring. The other reason is that I have seen no evidence that it is occurring. That's the big issue: there is no evidence. Hypothetical and scientific papers contemplating the possibility of chemtrail-like operations are not, of themselves, evidence that they are actually occurring. If I were to see evidence that it is happening then it would be irrelevant what I think. But in absence of evidence and given what I believe is rational skepticism, I see no reason to believe that "chemtrails" are anything but normal contrails.

I've now answered two of your questions so I'd ask that you answer the following two questions:

1. What is your personal definition of 'chemtrails'?

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

Thank you very much.

In your previous communication on this subject you indicated that one reason for the unreasonability of aerosol spraying as a means of mitigating undesirable effects of climate change would be the great cost. What do you think it may have been that led Edward Teller to believe (or at least to claim) that his "Sunshield" proposal would be a better economic proposition than trying to move the international economy away from over-dependence on fossil fuels?

Now, as I said, I will attempt to answer ONE question. What is my personal definition of "chemtrails"?

"Chemtrails" is a term that I have inherited from Internet discussion of a subject that corresponds to my own experience of seeing large numbers of aircraft moving backwards and forwards in the sky leaving behind them trails that eventually merge and often make the whole sky overcast. I do not remember seeing this phenomenon in the early years that I lived in Greece. I also note that the aircraft taking off from and landing at Athens international airport do not leave behind them such trails. I see that these observations correspond with the reported experiences of large numbers of people in the United States and elsewhere who write about them at sites such as chemtrailtrackingusa, and many other sites, so I am told.

[letxa2000]

Chemtrails" is a term that I have inherited from Internet discussion of a subject that corresponds to my own experience of seeing large numbers of aircraft moving backwards and forwards in the sky leaving behind them trails that eventually merge and often make the whole sky overcast. I do not remember seeing this phenomenon in the early years that I lived in Greece.

The only thing I got out of this definition is that a "chemtrail" is a "trail that eventually merges and often makes the whole sky overcast." Since you didn't want to answer the other question let me say that a contrail is capable of doing the exact same thing. The rest of your definition (about what you do or don't remember) is subjective and isn't useful for defining what a "chemtrail" is.

I see nothing in your definition of "chemtrail" that uniquely defines it nor differentiates it from a normal contrail.

[halva]

Chemtrails" is a term that I have inherited from Internet discussion of a subject that corresponds to my own experience of seeing large numbers of aircraft moving backwards and forwards in the sky leaving behind them trails that eventually merge and often make the whole sky overcast. I do not remember seeing this phenomenon in the early years that I lived in Greece.

The only thing I got out of this definition is that a "chemtrail" is a "trail that eventually merges and often makes the whole sky overcast." Since you didn't want to answer the other question let me say that a contrail is capable of doing the exact same thing. The rest of your definition (about what you do or don't remember) is subjective and isn't useful for defining what a "chemtrail" is.

I see nothing in your definition of "chemtrail" that uniquely defines it nor differentiates it from a normal contrail.

What about the other half of the deal, i.e. answering MY question?

[letxa2000]

What about the other half of the deal, i.e. answering MY question?

I already answered two of your questions and you are now asking me to answer a third. I will do so after you answer the second question I asked you:

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

[halva]

What about the other half of the deal, i.e. answering MY question?

I already answered two of your questions and you are now asking me to answer a third. I will do so after you answer the second question I asked you:

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

WH: I don't know what the "best" scientific proof available would be, because I am not a scientist. I could ask a number of things here about the pertinence of this third question of yours, but since we are measuring questions I had better not waste my ration by introducing too many new ones.

So answer MY already formulated third question.

[whitemajikman]

HALVA GIVE IT UP ALREADY.......

YOU know that you are now stalling and trying to come up with some way to counter Lexta's Logical question.

Don't you think it's TIME to put this Hoax to rest already.

In a Nutshell The answer is quite simple really ,There is no shame in admitting that you were once taken with a conspiracy theory it happens eventually to all of us ........It is practically inevitable.

But the smart thing to do when you dont have all the answers or the scientifically verifiable proof is to admit your error and move on........

Wipe chemtrails from your plate there by cleansing yourself of the burden of proof.
Then we can Begin on A Clean Slate .

[/quote]

[halva]

Letxa I would appreciate it if you could reprove your colleagues for their spamming.

As you said in relation to my previous spamming here, it reflects on all of "your side".

[jayreynolds]

Wayne, what a fool.
1. What is your personal definition of 'chemtrails'?

First you give a definition for "chemtrails" that coincides exactly with the definition of an ordinary contrail.

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

You just admitted that in more than a year of involvment in this hoax you don't know of any scientific proof that "chemtrails" are anything other than ordinary contrails. :lol:

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

You also admitted you have no scientific background.

You previously answered the second part of question #1, but made boo-boos when you:
- cited Liakopoulos, who turned out to be an ignorant
anti-semite

-Dr. Katsaros of Greece who insisted to me via email that "there is no proof whatsoever of chemtrails"

-cited Dr. Zerefos, who said, "Contrails usually seen in the cloudless Greek skies are of course results of contrails."

-cited Aspasia Beta who writes articles assailing pollution while she chain smokes one cigarette after another.

The pattern that emerges here is one of a VERY LAME LOSER.
It seems that every time you cite someone in Greece as being on your side, they turn out to be a flake or against you. On top of your threats to spam foreign text messages, and your doing so, your two coup attempts over at chemtrailcentral, and all the other embarassments to the cause, I'm awarding you the "Debunker's Best Friend" prize this week!

[halva]

Jay Reynolds.

Please accept my grateful thanks for the assistance you have so far provided in building our movement.

With best wishes,

Halva

[jayreynolds]

Just so we stay on target, here I repeat the ten deadly questions.

One thing for the other chemmies to think about as halva bombs the answers to these questions, how would you answer any differently, and why don't you have the guts to do so?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

9. halva cites William Thomas in his case for "chemtrails". William Thomas has stated the following: "the formation of condensation trails requires temperatures lower than about minus 76 F". Is that statement correct, and if not, do you personally consider Thomas an accurate source of information?

10. In five years, no actual effort has gone into taking an in-situ sample of a "chemtrail". If those who believe "chemtrails" to be fact aren't even willing to go find what lies a mere six miles overhead, why should anyone else believe them?

[jayreynolds]

Jay Reynolds.

Please accept my grateful thanks for the assistance you have so far provided in building our movement.

With best wishes,

Halva

Hey, Wayne, when I think of you I keep getting the image of a band playing on bravely as the Titanic slipped beneath the sea.

BTW, you already answered question #3:

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

You refused to go because as Dr. Nikos Katsaros said, "No proof whatsoever exists for chemtrails"

[halva]

What about the other half of the deal, i.e. answering MY question?

I already answered two of your questions and you are now asking me to answer a third. I will do so after you answer the second question I asked you:

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

WH: I don't know what the "best" scientific proof available would be, because I am not a scientist. I could ask a number of things here about the pertinence of this third question of yours, but since we are measuring questions I had better not waste my ration by introducing too many new ones.

So answer MY already formulated third question.

Third question:


In your previous communication on this subject you indicated that one reason for the unreasonability of aerosol spraying as a means of mitigating undesirable effects of climate change would be the great cost. What do you think it may have been that led Edward Teller to believe (or at least to claim) that his "Sunshield" proposal would be a better economic proposition than trying to move the international economy away from over-dependence on fossil fuels?

[jayreynolds]

Teller is an idea-man. Here is the problem with the geoengineering claims of the chemtrail hoax, which is quoted directly from page 1 of this 102 page thread:

"Finally, the "Lightwatcher" website 'halva' directs us to is substantively misleading. The premise on that site is that 'chemtrails' are military tanker jets spraying "dust" to combat global warming. That conspiracy theory is based on speculative research which considers various 'what-if' scenarios such as building giant "space parasols" to shield the earth from the sun.

Lightwatcher, however, misleads the readers by stating the following-

"In 1987, domestic airlines flew 4,339 million ton-miles of freight and express, for a total express and freight operating revenue of $4,904 million (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1988). This gives a cost of slightly more than $1 per ton-mile for freight. If a dust distribution mission requires the equivalent of a 500-mile flight (about 1.5 hours), the delivery cost for dust is $500/t, and ignoring the difference between English and metric tons, a cost of $0.50/kg of dust. If 1010 kg must be delivered each 83 days, (provided dust falls out at the same rate as soot), 5 times more than the 1987 total ton-miles will be required."


NOTE: "Lightwatcher" says that only 1010 kg(2027 lbs.) of dust would stop global warming. What kind of magic pixie-dust is this?

Folks, the actual research is available here:
http://books.nap.edu/books/0309043867/html/454.html#pagetop

The actual amount of "dust" stated in the article was 10 to the tenth power kilograms, or 10 BILLION kilograms!

One 747 cargo jet can carry 100,000 kg, so to loft 10 billion kg would take 100,000 flights, and this must be repeated every 83 days!

A rather big difference from the 1010 kg the liars of the chem-cult wanted you to accept as true.

Pretty obvious why "Lightwatcher" didn't want you to know the real figure, isn't it? There is no end to the sophistry, false and misleading propaganda this cult puts out. Thankfully, if free and open discussion is possible, liars can be outed as such, and few will fall for the chemtrail hoax. "

[superliberal]

Link has a close up.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16528

[letxa2000]

Halva: I don't know what the "best" scientific proof available would be, because I am not a scientist.

In your first answer you defined a chemtrail in such a way that it could apply to any contrail. In the second question you admit you don't know what scientific proof is available. Your answers are inadequate and don't really merit a response to your third question, but I'll answer it so that I've held up my side of the bargain:


Halva: What do you think it may have been that led Edward Teller to believe (or at least to claim) that his "Sunshield" proposal would be a better economic proposition than trying to move the international economy away from over-dependence on fossil fuels?

Politics.

I'm done doing a question/answer exchange with you. My first two answers were thoughtful while your first two answers were completely inadequate cop-outs that didn't define chemtrails nor provided any scientific explanation of the supposed difference between a contrail and a chemtrail. If/when you answer those questions adequately I'll be happy to continue with a question/answer exchange, but not until then.

[gaiacomm]

Dear Dr. Ben-Hur,

Thank you for your interest in the Quadrennial Ozone Symposium QOS2004. If you wish to participate, please visit the web site www.QOS2004.gr (in order to submit your registration and reservation form) and of course you are most welcome.

Kind regards
Christos Zerefos
******************************************
Professor Christos S. Zerefos
Laboratory of Climatology
and Atmospheric Environment
Faculty of Geology
University of Athens
15784 Athens, Greece

Tel. +30 210 7274133
Fax +30 210 7274157
e-mail: zerefos@geol.uoa.gr
mobile: +30 6944570099


----- Original Message -----
From: gaiacomm
To: zerefos@geol.uoa.gr
Cc: Wayne Hall
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 5:45 PM
Subject: Ozone


Dear Professor Zerefos

I am considering the attendance of the Ozone Symposium this June. I am probably to late to present a paper on wireless communications and its effects on the global environment. If you feel that my attendance or participation would ad some credit to the cause please inform me at your leisure.


Sincerely,
Dr. Judah Ben-Hur
CTO
Gaiacomm International Corporation
www.gaiacomminternational.com
gaiacomm@sbcglobal.net

[halva]

Halva: I don't know what the "best" scientific proof available would be, because I am not a scientist.

In your first answer you defined a chemtrail in such a way that it could apply to any contrail. In the second question you admit you don't know what scientific proof is available. Your answers are inadequate and don't really merit a response to your third question, but I'll answer it so that I've held up my side of the bargain:


Halva: What do you think it may have been that led Edward Teller to believe (or at least to claim) that his "Sunshield" proposal would be a better economic proposition than trying to move the international economy away from over-dependence on fossil fuels?

Politics.

I'm done doing a question/answer exchange with you. My first two answers were thoughtful while your first two answers were completely inadequate cop-outs that didn't define chemtrails nor provided any scientific explanation of the supposed difference between a contrail and a chemtrail. If/when you answer those questions adequately I'll be happy to continue with a question/answer exchange, but not until then.

Well, I don't mind if you stop the debate.

I didn't want to debate with you in the first place anyway.

[whitemajikman]

THis is the only relevance from the photo to this thread.

It says in the left hand top corner of this photo........

Aircraft Contrails


Now getting back to you Halva......

You still seem to not realize that you have been duped......

And instead of taking our very generous offer of wiping the slate clean and starting with a fresh attitude about the danger's of Geo-engineering.

you decide to keep propagating The hoax of chemtrails.....

Do you realize that if you were to dedicate even a smidgeon of your pride and resources on something other than a Hoax like chemtrails.

The entire world would already know about geo-engineering.

Your biggest flaw is that you cannot get beyond the dreaded "chemtrail" hoax,and see it for what it is........A political tool with no basis in reality.

You are now Totally enslaved by the notion of this hoax.

You say I am spamming you,But if you were to stop and think for a minute and use your brain for something other then being obsessed
with the "chemtrail" Hoax .......your rationality might be able to fathom what I am trying to convey not just to you but to all of the believers of the "chemtrail" Hoax.


HALVA,GAIACOM,SORETHROAT,FOOTSOLDIER,CLIFFIE,MARK SKY,MECH,SWAMPGAS,The list goes on and on..................

Do you all realize that Most if not all of the current Debunkers at one time or another Believed in the "Chemtrail" Hoax.

This TIT FOR TAT bullshit is getting old and stale in fact I don't think Jay has had to really work to prove to you all that "Chemtrails" are a hoax.

All he really has to do is post the ten questions of truth.

and bam........your all stumped .

Thats because all the speculation and investigation the world has to offer
will not MAKE......Chemtrail's real........they are simply a hoax that has gone on longer than it's intended life span.

So HALVA Spread the word.............

It is time to lay to rest Chemtrails for good.

And to start a new chapter in the Continuing saga that is Geo-engineering.

Get rid of the Damn Chemtrails for they have no basis in fact.

And lets be honest here ........can you do this for once in your life Wayne...?


For you this isn't about The Hoax that is "chemtrails",this is now about your selfish pride.
You wish to be the champion of a cause that is based upon a Hoax.

But cannot seem to be able to defeat Logic and reason.

There should have been warning bells going off in your head years ago when you couldn't defeat the debunker's 10 question's of truth.

But instead you let your pride take over and turn you into a bitter close-minded,individual with a one-track mind.

The same type of Individual now found on most sites dedicated to the Chemtrail Hoax.

Stale,bitter,untrusting,paranoid,with one hand on the ban button if you even question their authority.

You have become your own worst nightmare,always questioning your viability and your mortality of course in a philosophical sense,but none the the less devastating.

When really there is light at the end of the tunnel,and all you have to do is WIPE chemtrail's off of your plate, only then can you be free of the bondage that is Chemtrail's.

Halva what if I told you That I know For a fact that Chemtrail's were suppose to be a joke ,an experiment in dark humour....... until the public
drove it's creator's to cash in on all of the media hype that surrounded that canadian piece of journalism.

And how will you feel when the perp's of this hoax finally come out and let the world in on the hoax.......

And HALVA it is a safe bet that in the near future this will occur,especially with all the people who have first hand knowledge of of how and why this hoax was allowed to flourish.

Where will your credibility and your selfish pride be then......?

Who will ever take you serious again...........?

Because let's be honest If you were to change your tune and quit being the "public defender of the CHEMTRAIL HOAX"........you could do so much more for the environment with your knowledge.

And Geo-engineering is a viable target one which is based in fact not fiction.

So Halva I ask you ARE YOU A VISIONARY OR A FOLLOWER IF YOU CHOOSE FOLLOWER......THEN THE ONLY THING WE SHOULD BE QUESTIONING IS WHETHER A HOAX BASED ON DARK HUMOUR NOW HAS IT'S OWN CULT.

And THAT would make you a CULTIST.

Are you a CULTIST.....?

OR do you still have some semblence of a free will..............?

So HALVA DROP THE CHEMTRAIL CRAP AND SPEAK TO ME AS ONE HUMAN BEING TO ANOTHER.

If You cannot do this the you are truly HOPELESS............And are ONE OF THE CHEMMIE CULT ELITE........JUST ANOTHER COG IN THE HIVE MIND.

DO yourself a favor.......FREE YOURSELF FROM BONDAGE.

[halva]

Whitemajikman, the representative of the debunker "viewpoint" that I agreed to debate with was Letxa, not you.

[superliberal]

CHEMTRAIL SUNSCREEN TAUGHT IN US SCHOOLS

by

William Thomas




A is for Apple.

B is for Boy.

C is for Chemtrails.


At least this is what one American father found while paging through his child's science book. SmT was astonished to find seventh graders being taught about chemtrails. And geoengineeering their home planet.

Anyone with question about the "spray programs" he now says, "should perhaps just ask their kids."

The chemtrails section is found in the Centre Point Learning Science I Essential Interactions science book. Under "Solutions for Global Warming", section 5.19 features a photo of a big multi-engine jet sporting a familiar orange/red paint scheme.

The caption reads: "Figure 1- Jet engines running on richer fuel would add particles to the atmosphere to create a sunscreen".

The logo on the plane says: "Particle Air".

"I kid you not," SmT insists. "Why did I spend all of that time doing research when I could have just asked my kids?"

Helping habituate children to a life under lethal sunshine and "protective" spray planes, this trippy textbook urges young readers to "Use Sun Block". But its authors are referring to a sunscreen spread across the sky.

"Could we deliberately add particles to the atmosphere?" asks the text, before helpfully suggesting that "Burning coal adds soot to the air."

You might be old enough to recoil at such a notion. But in a country where down is up and wrong is right, your kids could be learning that what used to be bad and a bummer is a now good thing!


RUNNING ON EMPTY
"Be real interesting to see the politics of the folks putting this out." SmT suggests.

In the current White House, those politics are as "crude" as invading oil-rich Iraq over a bogus nuclear threat - while permitting Pakistan to export atom bomb materials to terrorist organizations in return for the chance at an election-boosting capture of Osama bin Laden by US forces in the Hindu Kush later this month. [New Yorker Mar1/04]

Why shouldn't the same petrol politics produce textbooks for children inheriting a nightmare? Led by a piggish petroleum president, with most major nations cutting back, US oil consumption is rising as steeply as supplies of cheap crude are collapsing.

The coal connection is this: In order to briefly "stretch the glide" of the fast-looming end of cheap oil that will utterly transform life as we know it, America's unelected oil president recently revoked pollution regulations on more than 2,000 of the nation's biggest polluting coal-fired power plants.

Ironically, this move - like so many others made by an oil-addled White House - will only hasten an Earthwreck as shattering to all onboard as a lurching square-rigger striking a rocky reef. Except our spaceship is surrounded by the cold, irradiated vacuum of deep space.

It turns out that a single 150-megawatt coal-burning power plant produces more emissions than 300,000 cars. Termed an "Extreme Human health Hazard" by the EPA, microscopic coal particles also rot lungs, stop hearts, kill lakes, choke cities - and stunt the lives of school kids with deadly sulphuric acid rain. [AP Aug27/03; LA Times Aug28/03]

Airborne soot also blocks sunlight, lowering greenhouse temperatures. Volcanic eruptions like Krakatoa and Pinatubo - and globe-circling soot from 1,000 burning oil wells during Desert Storm - belched enough sulphur into the stratosphere to cause a plunge in world temperatures, temporarily slowing global warming.

World scientists looking at deliberately putting megatons more sulphur into a closed, recirculating atmosphere already smoggy enough to depresses orbiting astronauts, decided that a sulphur sunscreen is not a swift idea.

But not this Jr. High science text. "Creating either kind of sunscreen would be cheap," it tells young readers. As if "cheap" is the only consideration.

Even this claim is bogus. SmT says he looked, but the section on the downstream costs associated with the health and environmental effects of massive coal pollution - or the 10 million tons of a chemical sunscreen suggested by the late Edward Teller - "seemed to have been left out."

Ditto "the cost to the solar industry". Or cumulative impacts on kids, critters and plants on which our future depends.


DIMMING PROSPECTS
Sunlight is already on the way out. Repeatedly expressing shock at how quickly our space colony's life-support systems are failing, scientists are finding levels of solar radiation reaching the Earth's surface decreasing by almost 3% a decade.

"Global Dimming" is too small to detect with the eye. "But it has implications for everything from climate change to solar power and even the future sustainability of plant photosynthesis," reports the Guardian.

All those jet-propelled vacations and car trips to the corner store add up. Since 1960, 10% less sunlight has reached Earth's inhabitants. Levels of solar radiation reaching parts of the former coal-belching Soviet Union are down almost 20%.

In any greenhouse, the rule of a green thumb is that every 1% decrease in solar radiation results in a 1% drop in plant productivity.

"It's actually quite a big deal,” says Graham Farquhar, a climate scientist at the Australian National University in Canberra. But get this: Farquhar doesn't think that identified pollutants, "by themselves would be able to produce this amount of global dimming." [Guardian Dec18/03]

The baffled Aussie should check out the role of contrails in turning off sunlight. Since the Jet Age took off in the 1960s, normal condensation trails from five million jet flights every year have been found to block 10% of sunlight across Europe and the USA. Over heavily trafficked Atlantic and American air-routes, artificial cloud cover caused by jet engine pollutants has increased 20%. [Chemtrails Confirmed '04]

Chemtrails are another major sunblock. Measurements taken with a calibrated photometer by Clifford Carnicom in Santa Fe show a rapid reduction in sunlight - from a value of 97% on a “clear day” to around 80% during the early stages of heavy chemtrailing. Using a simple UV radiation meter, this reporter has confirmed similar drops in sunlight beneath artificial "chemcasts" on Canada's west coast.


WHAT JANE AND thingy DIDN'T LEARN IN SCHOOL TODAY
In a country whose self-appointed regime routinely censors scientific studies, at least some 7th grade science are more focused on indoctrinating kids with risky techno "quick-fixes" than conscious conservation and common sense.

Forget science. SmT gazed in disbelief at another schoolbook picture showing a helicopter seeding the ocean with iron particles. These desperate "IronX" experiments did indeed trigger plankton "blooms" that, in turn, transferred tons of atmospheric C02 underwater as those carbon-inhaling critters eventually died and sank to the seafloor.

But – oops! – his kid's science book fails to mention that the resulting ocean blooms also sucked all available oxygen from the seawater, suffocating all marine life in massive, spreading "dead zones". [Chemtrails Confirmed '04]

Where are the picture, SmT wonders, "of people planting trees, or turning down thermostats, or bicycling, or any of the other ways not to add to the problem?"

Though his family gave up the idea of home schooling, he says, "it's perhaps time to reconsider."

Perhaps it's also time to reconsider state-sponsored brainwashing. And other escalating consequences of our carbon addiction, as well.

LINKS TO TO THIS STORY

Centrepoint Science 1 textbook (http://www.cplearning.com/SEIe.html)

Original Story (http://www.skyhighway.com/~chemtrail/science_book.htm)

Email Will Thomas (http://willthomas.net/Articles/deleteantispamhere_rwt@telus.net?Subject=message%2 0for%20Will%20Thomas&cc=Carbon%20copy&body=Your%20message%20goes%20here)

[whitemajikman]

I am hardly a debunker........

I am trying to convey to you that the last 4 years is all but a dreaded circle based upon a Hoax.

One which has taken up most of your time.

What I am trying to do is probably against my better judgement but it needs to be addressed.

IT IS TIME TO CALL A TRUCE BETWEEN THE DEBUNKERS AND THE CHEMMIES.

I Think 5 Years of TIT FOR TAT debating of the CHEMTRAIL HOAX which always leads to "THE TEN QUESTIONS OF TRUTH"........that Jay first asked himself when he started to investigate this hoax years ago.

And which nobody seems to be able to answer is a good indicator that CHEMTRAILS are a hoax.


DO you realize the only thing that seperates all of us is this damn hoax....?

Do you realize that we could all learn from each other and take on Geo-engineering full tilt as a group not a splintered band of individuals whose only reason's for hatred are ...........a damn hoax.

I am trying to throw you a life line........but you see it as a weakness.

Wayne are you not tired of bickering over the existence of something that at this moment cannot be proven.....?

That is what I mean when I say that YOU could be a visionary,if you could only drop the Chemtrail hoax and deal with it as a hoax until there is proof positive......there by breaking the chains of bondage that now binds you.

You would be better suited to take on Geo-engineering.

Also if Chemtrails were dropped and looked upon as a hoax until there is proof,Most if not all the debunkers would get on the Geo-engineering bandwagon.

And you would find that we are not as bad as you portray us.

Also in doing this you would be setting an example for the rest of the CHEMTRAIL ELITE.

Wayne just do this Discuss it with the council,and all the other Elite,and please try and make them understand that the chasm that now exist's can be overcome with understanding,tolerance,and vigilance.

of course there will be many who will challenge you.

But in the end if I have not Miss judged you.......you could truly be a force that could lead to discovery.



SO ,ONCE AGAIN WAYNE WE COME TO THIS,ARE YOU A VISIONARY OR A FOLLOWER........?


Sincerely in the hope of Re-unification of the two factions

WMM

[letxa2000]

Superliberal: CHEMTRAIL SUNSCREEN TAUGHT IN US SCHOOLS

Do you have the text of the material and photographs available for review? I've seen a lot made of this textbook but have yet to see more than a sentence or two actually quoted, and without context it's hard to know what to make of it. SMT said on CTC that she couldn't scan it. It was never clear to me why she couldn't scan it.


WMM addressing Halva: SO ,ONCE AGAIN WAYNE WE COME TO THIS,ARE YOU A VISIONARY OR A FOLLOWER........?

In reality, I think that all of them believe they are each leaders and visionaries. That's why it appears chemtrails is more about who has control of the "flock" than about science. Even mech called chemtrail believers the flock (http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000108.html#23). Everyone wants to lead this rag-tag flock, no-one wants to be a part of the flock, and they spend more time flocking from one message board to the next for internal political reasons than actually learning about science.

Chemtrails is all about egos and who controls the chemtrail hoax, not about doing any real science.

[superliberal]

Superliberal: CHEMTRAIL SUNSCREEN TAUGHT IN US SCHOOLS

Do you have the text of the material and photographs available for review? I've seen a lot made of this textbook but have yet to see more than a sentence or two actually quoted, and without context it's hard to know what to make of it. SMT said on CTC that she couldn't scan it. It was never clear to me why she couldn't scan it.


WMM addressing Halva: SO ,ONCE AGAIN WAYNE WE COME TO THIS,ARE YOU A VISIONARY OR A FOLLOWER........?

In reality, I think that all of them believe they are each leaders and visionaries. That's why it appears chemtrails is more about who has control of the "flock" than about science. Even mech called chemtrail believers the flock (http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000108.html#23). Everyone wants to lead this rag-tag flock, no-one wants to be a part of the flock, and they spend more time flocking from one message board to the next for internal political reasons than actually learning about science.

Chemtrails is all about egos and who controls the chemtrail hoax, not about doing any real science.


I believe you can buy the book or maybe email them to confirm. I'm not sure why someone would make that up.

[letxa2000]

I believe you can buy the book or maybe email them to confirm. I'm not sure why someone would make that up.

I have emailed the publisher and asked for a PDF sample of that section for research and debate purposes. Hopefully I'll get a response. I don't, however, plan to spend $48 on a textbook to verify the claims made by some chemtrailers.

As for why, well, William Thomas does it for financial gain (http://www.willthomas.net/orderpage.htm). But I wonder if Thomas actually saw the material in question or just duplicated SMT's report? There are only two or three partial sentence fragments cited in the Thomas text from the textbook in question. That leaves out a lot of context... It's that missing context that I'm very hopeful I'll see soon.

[superliberal]

I believe you can buy the book or maybe email them to confirm. I'm not sure why someone would make that up.

I have emailed the publisher and asked for a PDF sample of that section for research and debate purposes. Hopefully I'll get a response. I don't, however, plan to spend $48 on a textbook to verify the claims made by some chemtrailers.

As for why, well, William Thomas does it for financial gain (http://www.willthomas.net/orderpage.htm). But I wonder if Thomas actually saw the material in question or just duplicated SMT's report? There are only two or three partial sentence fragments cited in the Thomas text from the textbook in question. That leaves out a lot of context... It's that missing context that I'm very hopeful I'll see soon.

I agree. I would not want to pay that amount either. Hopefully they can send you that section so it can be validated.

[whitemajikman]

Chemtrails is all about egos and who controls the chemtrail hoax, not about doing any real science.

Lexta You truly are Good at observation........and again you have hit the nail on the head.


Definition of a Cult

Every cult can be defined as a group having all of the following 5 characteristics:
1. It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and retain its members

2. It forms an elitist totalitarian society

3. Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable and has charisma

4. It believes 'the end justifies the means' in order to solicit funds
recruit people

5. Its wealth does not benefit its members or society


Now let's take a look at what Chemmies have truly become because of their unwillingness to see the light of day.......or the realities that surround The "Chemtrail Hoax".

Lets start with #1 on the list of 5 things that define a Cult.

1. It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and retain its members

Most Chemmies are now doing these exact things on a daily basis......They use coercion to retain it's membership not thru good will or understanding but with their finger on the ban button.
They also indoctrinate Like-minded individuals after they recruit them.

2. It forms an elitist totalitarian society

Well low and behold the exact same premise that is now being employed by most if not all Chemmie boards.

And Wayne's wet dream.
in fact you could replace wayne's name with any of the chemtrail hoax elite,and it would hold water against all scrutiny.

3. Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable and has charisma

Any Mod or owner of a Chemtrail propagation site fit's this description to a.... t.

4. It believes 'the end justifies the means' in order to solicit funds
recruit people
And of course this one is the one that best suits Lexta's Obsevation and my own as well as anybody who has half a brain....that.......

Chemtrails is all about egos and who controls the chemtrail hoax, not about doing any real science.

Science and logic matter little to the purveyors of The Dying Chemtrial Hoax .........Because of their own words that can be found all over the net.

And I Quote....It DOESN"T MATTER WHOM I QUOTE BECAUSE THEY HAVE ALL MADE THIS CLAIM.

"THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS AND PUBLICITY GOOD OR BAD IS STILL PUBLICITY."

5. Its wealth does not benefit its members or society

Well,Well,Well the last and final nail in your coffins is truly symbolic of how you have let an Internet Hoax become A CULT.

Because Let's face it Your research and info is cut off from scrutiny by any member of your "FLOCK".......and is basically closed off to all of Society that questions the validity of your admission's.

USUALLY BY BANNING.


SO ALL YOU CHEMMIE ELITIST CULT MEMBER'S BE FORE-WARNED YOU WILL NOW ALL BE TREATED AS YOU SO DESIRE.

AS A CULT AND I SHALL TRY AND DE-PROGRAMME AS MANY OF YOU AS POSSIBLE.

BECAUSE WHEN YOU GET RIGHT DOWN TO IT.........ISN"T THAT WHAT DEBUNKER'S DO...........

NOW HALVA INSTEAD OF HIDING OR INSULATING YOURSELF FROM THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER,BE A MAN AND ACKNOWLEDGE WHAT HAS TRANSPIRED HERE TODAY.

For YOU it should be a revelation of monumental proportion's as it should be with rest of the cult member's...........For today is the day CHEMMIE ACTIVISM IS SHOWN FOR WHAT IT TRULY IS..........A CULT BASED UPON AN INTERNET HOAX.

If YOU cannot make the connection then there is a problem with your neurons for they are not firing properly.

AGAIN I ASK YOU..........

ARE YOU A VISIONARY WHO CAN ADMIT TO BEING WRONG THERE BY BEING FREED TO MOVE ON.........OR WILL YOU BE BOUND TO THIS CULT FOR THE REST OF YOUR BRIEF TIME ON THIS PLANET.......?


CAN YOU BE A FREE THINKER WHO CAN THINK OUTSIDE OF THE HIVE-MIND YOU ARE NOW CURRENTLY BOUND TOO.......?



AGAIN I ASK YOU TO RETHINK YOUR POSITION...... AS A HUMAN BEING NOT A DEBUNKER.

SAVE YOURSELF BEFORE IT TRULY IS TOO LATE.

WMM

[whitemajikman]

ALSO HERE IS ANOTHER DEFINITION COMPLIMENTS OF MERRIAM-WEBSTER..........IF THERE IS ANY DOUBT.



CHEMMIES FIT THE 5TH DEFINITION.........


2 entries found for cult.
To select an entry, click on it.
cultcargo cult

Main Entry: cult
Pronunciation: 'k&lt
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: French & Latin; French culte, from Latin cultus care, adoration, from colere to cultivate -- more at WHEEL
1 : formal religious veneration : WORSHIP
2 : a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents
3 : a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents
4 : a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator <health cults>
5 a : great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b : a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion
- cul·tic /'k&l-tik/ adjective
- cult·ish /-tish/ adjective
- cult·ish·ly /-lE/ adverb
- cult·ish·ness /-n&s/ noun
- cult·ism /'k&l-"ti-z&m/ noun
- cult·ist /'k&l-tist/ noun
- cult·like /-"lIk/ adjective

For More Information on "cult" go to Britannica.com

AND PLEASE DONT MAKE ME GO TO BRITANNICA......I THINK MY POINT IS QUITE CLEAR.

EVEN TO ARRIANA.

[halva]

Whitemajikman, the representative of the debunker "viewpoint" that I agreed to debate with was Letxa, not you.

[foot_soldier]

Keeping in mind that the Bush adminstration's one concession to the reality of pollution-driven climate change is to fund R&D for disposing of excess atmospheric carbon dioxide in underground reservoirs or in the deep ocean, and that these carbon dioxide sequestration projects ARE IN FACT CURRENTLY UNDERWAY, here is yet another reference by someone in the science community to the possible necessity of additional forms of macro-engineering, highlighted in bold:

April 29, 2004
World 'must have carbon stores'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3667979.stm

The cuts the world will have to make in emissions of carbon dioxide are so huge it will have to find other ways to deal with the gas, a British scientist says.

He is Professor John Shepherd of the UK's Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, a leading scientific group.

Professor Shepherd says this will mean studying ways to store carbon and alter the Earth's albedo (its reflectivity).

He also believes nuclear power may be needed to fill the gap until cleaner sources can replace most fossil fuels.

Professor Shepherd was speaking at a seminar on emergency responses to climate change held by the Green College Centre for Environmental Policy and Understanding, Oxford.

Daunting prospect

While the historical record showed the climate had been fairly stable, he said, it had sometimes been highly and rapidly variable.

He said: "It's almost certain climate change won't be gradual, but will proceed by fits and starts and jerks and bumps."

But to stay near the bottom end of the range of warming forecast for the next century would mean cutting emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the main greenhouse gas caused by human activities, by more than half.

For industrialised countries, cuts of 90% or more would probably be needed, Professor Shepherd believes.

Renewable energy could produce only about a fifth of the cuts needed, and so the world should research other methods, including possibly nuclear power and macro-engineering solutions.

Protocol inadequate

Professor Shepherd said these could range from storing ("sequestering") CO2 in deep aquifers or at depths of more than 3,000m (9,850ft) in the oceans to mixing it with serpentine to produce magnesite and burying the resultant solid waste.

He put the cost at $50 (42 euros) per tonne, and falling.

Storing CO2 in trees and soils, as envisaged by the Kyoto Protocol, the international climate treaty, he estimated, could probably cope with no more than about 100 billion tonnes of carbon.

But the amount likely to be burnt this century was at least 10 times as great.

Another possibility, Professor Shepherd said, was to increase the Earth's albedo so as to reflect more heat back out into space: a 1% albedo increase would roughly balance a doubling of CO2.

Negligible burden

Methods could include releasing reflecting micro-balloons into the stratosphere, enhancing low-level clouds, or putting a very large mirror in space.

But Professor Shepherd said none of these would reduce the growing acidification of the oceans' surface by CO2, something he said was harming creatures like corals and increasingly worrying scientists.

Economic incentives would be needed to encourage change, and the cost would be modest. A carbon tax of 50 euros ($59) a tonne would probably be enough to make sequestration attractive.

Prodigious effort

That would correspond to about 100 euros ($118) per person per year for the UK and the rest of Europe, or about three pence (five cents) per litre on the price of fuel in the UK. And it could be made revenue-neutral by reducing value-added tax from 17.5% to 15%.

Professor Shepherd said his proposals were an insurance policy in case there were no technological breakthroughs within the next 50 years, like the development of a hydrogen economy.

He said the investment needed over the next two or three decades would be on the scale of that required to send men to the Moon.

[whitemajikman]

halva wrote:
Whitemajikman, the representative of the debunker "viewpoint" that I agreed to debate with was Letxa, not you.



WHY DO YOU ALL FEAR MY WISDOM.......?

WHY cant you Quit beating that dead horse and talk to me like a human being not a chemtrail activist......?

I have Proved to you today thru logic that your cause is a CULT.

Do YOU have any clue how sucked in by this hoax you truly are.....?

You CANNOT EVEN DEFEND AGAINST MY PLAIN WORDS OR OBSERVATION'S.

Is it because you cannot Converse on anything OTHER than The CHEMTRAIL HOAX.......or your Wasted ATTEMPTS AT ACIDIC HUMOUR.

SHOW YOUR HUMANITY WAYNE,NOT YOUR CULT TEACHING'S OR THE PARTY LINE.

HOW can YOU NOT SEE that WHAT YOU BELONG TO IS NOTHING MORE Than AN INTERNET BASED CULT.......SOLEY TO PROPAGATE AN ALREADY DEBUNKED HOAX.

The GAIACOM'S AND JUDAH'S OF THIS WORLD CARE LITTLE FOR YOUR WELL BEING AND ONLY WISH TO USE YOU FOR THEIR OWN LITTLE PUPPET.

SAME WITH THE MOJOMAN .......WHO WAS TALKING ABOUT FORMING HIS OWN CULT A YEAR AGO.

SAME WITH THERMIT WHO ONLY CARES ABOUT ADVERTISING AND HIS OWN SITES VIABILITY AND MORTALITY.

SAME WITH ALL OF THEM WAYNE.

TRY AND DENY THIS,IF YOU REALLY TRULY THINK THAT THEY GIVE A DAMN OF WHAT YOU BELIEVE.........THEN THEIR WOULD NOT BE SO MUCH IN-FIGHTING AND CENSORSHIP.

WAYNE I AM SENDING YOU A LIFELINE WHERE YOUR THOUGHTS AND IDEA'S WILL BE LOOKED UPON AS NOT A PART OF SOME CULT,BUT WILL HAVE RELEVANCE TO THE PURSUIT OF ANSWER'S.

I THINK YOU HAVE OUTGROWN THE CHEMMIE CULT AND TRULY SEE IT FOR WHAT IT HAS BECOME.

CHAOS.

And NOT VERY PRODUCTIVE.

WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO TAKE THE LIFE LINE AND WORK TOGETHER IN MAKING OTHER's REALIZE THE TRAP THEY ARE IN.....?

YOU CAN STILL LEAVE YOUR INTEGRITY AND REPUTATION INTACT.


IF ONLY YOU WERE TO SEE THE LIGHT OF THE TRUTH THAT I AM TRYING TO CONVEY.

NOW ALL THAT I REQUEST IS THAT YOU TALK TO ME AS 2 RATIONAL HUMAN BEINGS SHOULD BE ABLE TO CONVERSE.

WITHOUT CHEMTRAIL'S OR THE CHAINS THAT BIND YOU.

IN OTHER WORDS WAYNE IS THERE ANYTHING IN THAT HEART OF YOURS LEFT THAT RESEMBLES HUMANITY.......?

[lynn george]

THis is the only relevance from the photo to this thread.

It says in the left hand top corner of this photo........

Aircraft Contrails


Now getting back to you Halva......

You still seem to not realize that you have been duped......

And instead of taking our very generous offer of wiping the slate clean and starting with a fresh attitude about the danger's of Geo-engineering.

you decide to keep propagating The hoax of chemtrails.....

Do you realize that if you were to dedicate even a smidgeon of your pride and resources on something other than a Hoax like chemtrails.

The entire world would already know about geo-engineering.

Your biggest flaw is that you cannot get beyond the dreaded "chemtrail" hoax,and see it for what it is........A political tool with no basis in reality.

You are now Totally enslaved by the notion of this hoax.

You say I am spamming you,But if you were to stop and think for a minute and use your brain for something other then being obsessed
with the "chemtrail" Hoax .......your rationality might be able to fathom what I am trying to convey not just to you but to all of the believers of the "chemtrail" Hoax.


HALVA,GAIACOM,SORETHROAT,FOOTSOLDIER,CLIFFIE,MARK SKY,MECH,SWAMPGAS,The list goes on and on..................

Do you all realize that Most if not all of the current Debunkers at one time or another Believed in the "Chemtrail" Hoax.

This TIT FOR TAT bullshit is getting old and stale in fact I don't think Jay has had to really work to prove to you all that "Chemtrails" are a hoax.

All he really has to do is post the ten questions of truth.

and bam........your all stumped .

Thats because all the speculation and investigation the world has to offer
will not MAKE......Chemtrail's real........they are simply a hoax that has gone on longer than it's intended life span.

So HALVA Spread the word.............

It is time to lay to rest Chemtrails for good.

And to start a new chapter in the Continuing saga that is Geo-engineering.

Get rid of the Damn Chemtrails for they have no basis in fact.

And lets be honest here ........can you do this for once in your life Wayne...?


For you this isn't about The Hoax that is "chemtrails",this is now about your selfish pride.
You wish to be the champion of a cause that is based upon a Hoax.

But cannot seem to be able to defeat Logic and reason.

There should have been warning bells going off in your head years ago when you couldn't defeat the debunker's 10 question's of truth.

But instead you let your pride take over and turn you into a bitter close-minded,individual with a one-track mind.

The same type of Individual now found on most sites dedicated to the Chemtrail Hoax.

Stale,bitter,untrusting,paranoid,with one hand on the ban button if you even question their authority.

You have become your own worst nightmare,always questioning your viability and your mortality of course in a philosophical sense,but none the the less devastating.

When really there is light at the end of the tunnel,and all you have to do is WIPE chemtrail's off of your plate, only then can you be free of the bondage that is Chemtrail's.

Halva what if I told you That I know For a fact that Chemtrail's were suppose to be a joke ,an experiment in dark humour....... until the public
drove it's creator's to cash in on all of the media hype that surrounded that canadian piece of journalism.

And how will you feel when the perp's of this hoax finally come out and let the world in on the hoax.......

And HALVA it is a safe bet that in the near future this will occur,especially with all the people who have first hand knowledge of of how and why this hoax was allowed to flourish.

Where will your credibility and your selfish pride be then......?

Who will ever take you serious again...........?

Because let's be honest If you were to change your tune and quit being the "public defender of the CHEMTRAIL HOAX"........you could do so much more for the environment with your knowledge.

And Geo-engineering is a viable target one which is based in fact not fiction.

So Halva I ask you ARE YOU A VISIONARY OR A FOLLOWER IF YOU CHOOSE FOLLOWER......THEN THE ONLY THING WE SHOULD BE QUESTIONING IS WHETHER A HOAX BASED ON DARK HUMOUR NOW HAS IT'S OWN CULT.

And THAT would make you a CULTIST.

Are you a CULTIST.....?

OR do you still have some semblence of a free will..............?

So HALVA DROP THE CHEMTRAIL CRAP AND SPEAK TO ME AS ONE HUMAN BEING TO ANOTHER.

If You cannot do this the you are truly HOPELESS............And are ONE OF THE CHEMMIE CULT ELITE........JUST ANOTHER COG IN THE HIVE MIND.

DO yourself a favor.......FREE YOURSELF FROM BONDAGE.


SmT- Do you realize how REDICULOUS your post sounds? The only HOAX is in a bunkies mind. They created the hoax when there was NO hoax. Atmospheric researchers and others interested in the applications and effects of the aerosol operations LONG AGO realized that what some were calling CHEMTRAILS (short for chemical trails) were in fact very likely IDENTICAL to the GEOENGINEERING methods widely discussed, advocated and funded by many many in government and private industry. ANd what MILLIONS are now seeing spread above their skies. And whether one chooses to address them as chemtrails, geoengineering trails, aerosol trails, or perhaps even bunkie trails, they are still PART of the whole. So WMM I think your just tryin like your bunkie friends to stir the S*$T. If yu are REALLY interested in this subject than how about some RATIONAL comments regarding this link. THis info is going to come out eventually into the MAINSTREAM it's just a matter of time.

http://www.lightwatcher.com/chemtrails/smoking_gun.html

[halva]

I can understand the enthusiasm that led Gaiacomm to post the Zerefos correspondence, and agree that he did post it at a psychologically effective moment,

BUT

bear in mind that the fact that the debunkers appear to be cracking up and going to pieces on this board does not mean that they are not going to keep up the same old debunking tune elsewhere with the uninitiated, and with each other.

So, if tempted to reveal here information that the debunkers would probably not find out about otherwise, think carefully: does revealing this information to them here assist us in our wider struggle as well as in the microcosmic struggle we are waging on this forum.

[lynn george]

CHEMTRAIL SUNSCREEN TAUGHT IN US SCHOOLS

by

William Thomas




A is for Apple.

B is for Boy.

C is for Chemtrails.


At least this is what one American father found while paging through his child's science book. SmT was astonished to find seventh graders being taught about chemtrails. And geoengineeering their home planet.

Anyone with question about the "spray programs" he now says, "should perhaps just ask their kids."

The chemtrails section is found in the Centre Point Learning Science I Essential Interactions science book. Under "Solutions for Global Warming", section 5.19 features a photo of a big multi-engine jet sporting a familiar orange/red paint scheme.

The caption reads: "Figure 1- Jet engines running on richer fuel would add particles to the atmosphere to create a sunscreen".

The logo on the plane says: "Particle Air".

"I kid you not," SmT insists. "Why did I spend all of that time doing research when I could have just asked my kids?"

Helping habituate children to a life under lethal sunshine and "protective" spray planes, this trippy textbook urges young readers to "Use Sun Block". But its authors are referring to a sunscreen spread across the sky.

"Could we deliberately add particles to the atmosphere?" asks the text, before helpfully suggesting that "Burning coal adds soot to the air."

You might be old enough to recoil at such a notion. But in a country where down is up and wrong is right, your kids could be learning that what used to be bad and a bummer is a now good thing!


RUNNING ON EMPTY
"Be real interesting to see the politics of the folks putting this out." SmT suggests.

In the current White House, those politics are as "crude" as invading oil-rich Iraq over a bogus nuclear threat - while permitting Pakistan to export atom bomb materials to terrorist organizations in return for the chance at an election-boosting capture of Osama bin Laden by US forces in the Hindu Kush later this month. [New Yorker Mar1/04]

Why shouldn't the same petrol politics produce textbooks for children inheriting a nightmare? Led by a piggish petroleum president, with most major nations cutting back, US oil consumption is rising as steeply as supplies of cheap crude are collapsing.

The coal connection is this: In order to briefly "stretch the glide" of the fast-looming end of cheap oil that will utterly transform life as we know it, America's unelected oil president recently revoked pollution regulations on more than 2,000 of the nation's biggest polluting coal-fired power plants.

Ironically, this move - like so many others made by an oil-addled White House - will only hasten an Earthwreck as shattering to all onboard as a lurching square-rigger striking a rocky reef. Except our spaceship is surrounded by the cold, irradiated vacuum of deep space.

It turns out that a single 150-megawatt coal-burning power plant produces more emissions than 300,000 cars. Termed an "Extreme Human health Hazard" by the EPA, microscopic coal particles also rot lungs, stop hearts, kill lakes, choke cities - and stunt the lives of school kids with deadly sulphuric acid rain. [AP Aug27/03; LA Times Aug28/03]

Airborne soot also blocks sunlight, lowering greenhouse temperatures. Volcanic eruptions like Krakatoa and Pinatubo - and globe-circling soot from 1,000 burning oil wells during Desert Storm - belched enough sulphur into the stratosphere to cause a plunge in world temperatures, temporarily slowing global warming.

World scientists looking at deliberately putting megatons more sulphur into a closed, recirculating atmosphere already smoggy enough to depresses orbiting astronauts, decided that a sulphur sunscreen is not a swift idea.

But not this Jr. High science text. "Creating either kind of sunscreen would be cheap," it tells young readers. As if "cheap" is the only consideration.

Even this claim is bogus. SmT says he looked, but the section on the downstream costs associated with the health and environmental effects of massive coal pollution - or the 10 million tons of a chemical sunscreen suggested by the late Edward Teller - "seemed to have been left out."

Ditto "the cost to the solar industry". Or cumulative impacts on kids, critters and plants on which our future depends.


DIMMING PROSPECTS
Sunlight is already on the way out. Repeatedly expressing shock at how quickly our space colony's life-support systems are failing, scientists are finding levels of solar radiation reaching the Earth's surface decreasing by almost 3% a decade.

"Global Dimming" is too small to detect with the eye. "But it has implications for everything from climate change to solar power and even the future sustainability of plant photosynthesis," reports the Guardian.

All those jet-propelled vacations and car trips to the corner store add up. Since 1960, 10% less sunlight has reached Earth's inhabitants. Levels of solar radiation reaching parts of the former coal-belching Soviet Union are down almost 20%.

In any greenhouse, the rule of a green thumb is that every 1% decrease in solar radiation results in a 1% drop in plant productivity.

"It's actually quite a big deal,” says Graham Farquhar, a climate scientist at the Australian National University in Canberra. But get this: Farquhar doesn't think that identified pollutants, "by themselves would be able to produce this amount of global dimming." [Guardian Dec18/03]

The baffled Aussie should check out the role of contrails in turning off sunlight. Since the Jet Age took off in the 1960s, normal condensation trails from five million jet flights every year have been found to block 10% of sunlight across Europe and the USA. Over heavily trafficked Atlantic and American air-routes, artificial cloud cover caused by jet engine pollutants has increased 20%. [Chemtrails Confirmed '04]

Chemtrails are another major sunblock. Measurements taken with a calibrated photometer by Clifford Carnicom in Santa Fe show a rapid reduction in sunlight - from a value of 97% on a “clear day” to around 80% during the early stages of heavy chemtrailing. Using a simple UV radiation meter, this reporter has confirmed similar drops in sunlight beneath artificial "chemcasts" on Canada's west coast.


WHAT JANE AND thingy DIDN'T LEARN IN SCHOOL TODAY
In a country whose self-appointed regime routinely censors scientific studies, at least some 7th grade science are more focused on indoctrinating kids with risky techno "quick-fixes" than conscious conservation and common sense.

Forget science. SmT gazed in disbelief at another schoolbook picture showing a helicopter seeding the ocean with iron particles. These desperate "IronX" experiments did indeed trigger plankton "blooms" that, in turn, transferred tons of atmospheric C02 underwater as those carbon-inhaling critters eventually died and sank to the seafloor.

But – oops! – his kid's science book fails to mention that the resulting ocean blooms also sucked all available oxygen from the seawater, suffocating all marine life in massive, spreading "dead zones". [Chemtrails Confirmed '04]

Where are the picture, SmT wonders, "of people planting trees, or turning down thermostats, or bicycling, or any of the other ways not to add to the problem?"

Though his family gave up the idea of home schooling, he says, "it's perhaps time to reconsider."

Perhaps it's also time to reconsider state-sponsored brainwashing. And other escalating consequences of our carbon addiction, as well.

LINKS TO TO THIS STORY

Centrepoint Science 1 textbook (http://www.cplearning.com/SEIe.html)

Original Story (http://www.skyhighway.com/~chemtrail/science_book.htm)

Email Will Thomas (http://willthomas.net/Articles/deleteantispamhere_rwt@telus.net?Subject=message%2 0for%20Will%20Thomas&cc=Carbon%20copy&body=Your%20message%20goes%20here)


SmT- Hey, Hey, that's great, Will Thomas certainly conveyed many of my concerns just from reading my original post at Chemtrail Central (an excellent site IMO). It is interesting my childrens school quit using that book a week ago and never even did cover the section (two pages) on Global Warming. Both of the kids were ready however to share their OWN observations of aerosol spraying that they have witnessed some days with the dozens of planes that come out and literally saturate the sky with THE HAZE that results from what looks like military acrobatics in SOME cases with planes that LOOK like they are (or WERE at one time) commercial. Others were too.

In a way though even though parts of the text that suggested dirtier air was a 'solution' for global warming seemed INSANE, still I think it probabaly is a good thing that things like "particle air" are being taught in grade school to get interactive response, and I'm sure many teachers could use that as a great way to educate the children as to the global warming and pollution issue and what paths and options are available. BUt that the book appeared SLANTED to ONLY discussing geoengineering options as well as advocating ADDING to air pollution makes one wonder as I said about the POLITICAL affilliations and considerations of the source of the SLANT. Let's talk about ways to REDUCE the SOURCE of the problem not see how many bandaids we can stick on a sinking life raft and expect to stay afloat indefinately.

SmT

[Sore Throat]

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2857080


Aircraft Vapour Trails 'Could Be Causing Global Warming'

By Mark Sage, PA News, in New York


Cloud-like white trails left by aircraft may be playing a significant role in global warming, a scientist said today.

The exhaust plumes contain carbon dioxide and chemicals which can lead to the production of ozone – which creates smog.

At the same time, the vapour trails, in the right conditions, can form feathery cirrus clouds which warm the surface of the Earth’s by trapping heat.

The report is likely to stir interest in Britain, particularly in the south east, which has a high concentration of air traffic.

Patrick Minnis, of the USA’s National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Langley Research Center in Virginia, studied how the average temperature of the US increased by one degree from 1975 to 1994.

While acknowledging that it was difficult to tell exactly how much of the warming was due to vapour trails, he said their contribution was “significant”.

Dr Minnis found that as air traffic in the US rose by more than 500% from 1970 to 1995, the number of cirrus clouds in the sky also increased.

Until now scientists have been unable to say whether they increased for natural reasons or because of aircraft.

According to the Minnis study the conditions needed to create natural cirrus clouds did not become more common from the 1970s to the 1990s.

He concluded, therefore, that aeroplane vapour trails – also known as contrails – which are clouds of ice crystals mixed with exhaust gases, must be responsible.

Andrew Carleton, a climate expert at Pennsylvania State University, who was not involved in the study, said: “It suggests we may be having a double whammy here.

He told the USA Today newspaper: “It’s not good news for the Earth when you’ve got greenhouse gas increases and you’ve got ... contrails (that) seem to warm the surface of the Earth.”

[foot_soldier]

"lynn george" wrote:

BUt that the book appeared SLANTED to ONLY discussing geoengineering options as well as advocating ADDING to air pollution makes one wonder as I said about the POLITICAL affilliations and considerations of the source of the SLANT. Let's talk about ways to REDUCE the SOURCE of the problem not see how many bandaids we can stick on a sinking life raft and expect to stay afloat indefinately.
I agree. And I can't imagine that anyone in their right mind WOULDN'T agree, given what is at stake if we don't start thinking about what we're leaving to those coming up behind us. We don't have the right to just burn everything out and leave the results of that for succeeding generations to deal with.

[Sore Throat]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1083275751324_3/?hub=Health

Asthma linked to global warming, experts say

The health of millions of children worldwide is threatened by global warming and air pollution. The world's poorest kids are at highest risk, experts say, of getting caught in a growing asthma epidemic.

In a report released Thursday, researchers at the Harvard Medical School's Center for Health and the Global Environment said the warming global climate is releasing more allergens into the air.

Once floating in the sky, the allergens combine with pollutants such as ozone and soot, resulting in a recipe for a health crisis.

"The combination of air pollutants, aeroallergens, heat waves and unhealthy air masses -- increasingly associated with a changing climate -- causes damage to the respiratory systems, particularly growing children," Harvard's Dr. Paul Epstein told a news conference.

Hardest hit will be children from "poor and minority groups in the inner cities" where the effects of automobile emissions are worst.

"These children get hit with a powerful one-two punch: exposure to the worst air quality problems and the additional allergen exposure arising from global warming," Harvard School of Public Health researcher Christine Rogers said in a statement.

According to the report, "Inside the Greenhouse: The Impacts of CO2 and Climate Change on Public Health in the Inner City," the effects can already be seen among American preschoolers.

The rate of asthma among kids age 3 to 5 grew by 160 per cent between 1980 and 1994 -- more than double the rate reported among the general population.

Figures like that, experts say, should shock people.

"This is a real wake-up call for people who think global warming is only going to be a problem way off in the future or that it has no impact on their lives in a meaningful way," Rogers said.

Something can be done to help those most at risk of this looming epidemic, Epstein told reporters.

"Green" buildings with rooftop gardens, improved public transportation and promotion of hybrid vehicles that rely less on fossil fuels would all reduce the exacerbating factors, he said.

Asthma is a chronic lung condition characterized by sometimes severe difficulty breathing. Common symptoms include wheezing, coughing, shortness of breath and chest tightness

According to the Canadian Lung Association, approximately one in 10 children in Canada suffer from asthma. About 20 children and 500 adults die of the disease each year.

[whitemajikman]

SmT- Do you realize how REDICULOUS your post sounds? The only HOAX is in a bunkies mind. They created the hoax when there was NO hoax. Atmospheric researchers and others interested in the applications and effects of the aerosol operations LONG AGO realized that what some were calling CHEMTRAILS (short for chemical trails) were in fact very likely IDENTICAL to the GEOENGINEERING methods widely discussed, advocated and funded by many many in government and private industry. ANd what MILLIONS are now seeing spread above their skies. And whether one chooses to address them as chemtrails, geoengineering trails, aerosol trails, or perhaps even bunkie trails, they are still PART of the whole. So WMM I think your just tryin like your bunkie friends to stir the S*$T. If yu are REALLY interested in this subject than how about some RATIONAL comments regarding this link. THis info is going to come out eventually into the MAINSTREAM it's just a matter of time.



WEll LYNN You want Rational.......HOW about this for starters.

The entire CHEMTRAIL HOAX can be traced back to an article written by the infamous Will Thomas........who is the first person to coin the phrase "CHEMTRAIL".

Which I might add started as an article trying to use Dark Humour to explain what he was seeing.

Don't take my word for it ......get in touch with the Editor who authorized the article in the first place.

Also Not once did I say Geo-engineering does not Exist.

Because quite frankly it does.

The whole point of my posting is to make you all realize That the use of the term CHEMTRAIL has no basis in scientific fact or In regards to Geo-engineering as a whole.

In Fact The CHEMTRAIL Hoax has led to the entire breakdown of real study and investigation into Geo-engineering and has Led most of it's
Believers on a wild goose chase of unprecedented proportions.

It has single handedly subverted the minds of all who profess it's existence.

And in doing so has had a profound Impact to the point that most of the Believers of this hoax now act as a working CULT.

Instead of treating CHEMTRAILS as A HOAX until there is enough data to prove unequivocally otherwise.

They have adopted a Mindset of Chemtrails being factual and have closed off all avenues of scrutiny.

This is a dangerous presidence.

Considering I for one oppose Geo-Engineering.

BUT if THE Chemtrail Hoax is not stopped and the cycle not broken.

Who will Take Geo-Engineering seriously.....? if it is always intertwined with the CHEMTRAIL HOAX.

You SEE .......You must drop this elaborate Hoax to have any hope what so ever of taking Geo-engineering Mainstream.

AND LET"S BE HONEST ......CAN YOU DO THIS LYNN......?


Places like ctc and megasprayer are no matter what you say.......in effect working CULTS.

Based UPON an internet hoax which should never have gotten this far along.

So I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE 10 QUESTION's of TRUTH.

HERE IS YOUR SHOT.

BUT AGAIN THE RESULTS WILL STILL BE THE SAME.

1.) Chemtrails cause global warming, contrails prevent it
2.) Chemtrails prevent global warming, contrails cause it
3.) Chemtrails and contrails cause global warming
4.) Chemtrails and contrails prevent global warming
5.) Chemtrails are a hoax, and contrails may eventually contribute to global warming
6.) It doesn't really matter because the Earth is going into a cooling cycle (which will no doubt be blamed on geo-engineering / chemtrails"

In fact all you have to do is answer these 6 questions and back it up with reputable sources of info.....

If you can't then please lay this Hoax to rest.

AT LEAST UNTIL YOU HAVE THE IRON CLAD PROOF That THIS HoaX is something more than mere myth.

[letxa2000]

SMT/Lynn: Atmospheric researchers and others interested in the applications and effects of the aerosol operations LONG AGO realized that what some were calling CHEMTRAILS (short for chemical trails) were in fact very likely IDENTICAL to the GEOENGINEERING methods widely discussed, advocated and funded by many many in government and private industry. ANd what MILLIONS are now seeing spread above their skies.

Can you provide evidence of an ongoing chemtrail program in the private sector or government? I'm not talking about advocates, I'm not talking about theories, and I'm not talking about chaff releases during military exercises. I'm talking about proof of a a real functioning chemtrail program being conducted on such a widespread scale that "millions are now seeing spread above their skies."


THis info is going to come out eventually into the MAINSTREAM it's just a matter of time.

I admit I'm new to the chemtrail debate, but my understanding is that the chemtrail believers have been saying this for some time. For how many years has "the mainstream is eventually going to know about it" been the slogan? And how many years must pass before it is recognized that the slogan is wrong?

[lynn george]

Link has a close up.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16528

WOW!!! SuperLiberal, I like that. Every picture tells a story don't it? I'm gonna print that one, the one with the lovely clouds! :shock: Thanks,

SmT

[foot_soldier]

"whitemajikman" wrote:

Who will Take Geo-Engineering seriously.....? if it is always intertwined with the CHEMTRAIL HOAX.
So let's hear what you have to say regarding your stated "opposition" to climate engineering.

[whitemajikman]

According to the Canadian Lung Association, approximately one in 10 children in Canada suffer from asthma. About 20 children and 500 adults die of the disease each year.

Well Sore again you amaze me with your false propaganda,The problem in canada is not because of ChemTrails or even Geo-engineering,The problem arises from Pollution..... as well as geographical location.

HERE in western canada specifically Alberta has the highest per capita asthma rate in canada,quebec and ontario are a distant second.

Wanna know why Sore......?

Because of our refinery emmisions and the burn off.

Also because Klein has decided that the pursuit of oil is more important than the general population.

in fact Sore.....I challenge you to come up with a canadian location with a high asthma rate that can't be proven to be something other than your hoax.

It is quite easy to google information to your hearts content,it is a whole different story to be able to put that information into perspective.

And instead of you investigating other reason's for the high rate of asthma you instead cry CHEMTRAILS.......and propagate more paranoia and hysteria by doing so.

Sore you are a poor excuse for a researcher because your conclusions have already been drawn before the investigation has been started never mind completed.

NEXT...........

[whitemajikman]

So let's hear what you have to say regarding your stated "opposition" to climate engineering.

Unless your going to Drop Chemtrails from the docket what would be the point......?

Because eventually when you are in disagreement with something I state you will rehatch the entire CHEMTRAIL HOAX to prove you are right.

Can you Gaurantee me that you will not USE the word CHEMTRAIL in our discussion.....if so then we will be on the right track of discovery.

[letxa2000]

SMT: WOW!!! SuperLiberal, I like that. Every picture tells a story don't it? I'm gonna print that one, the one with the lovely clouds!

Is it your belief that the satellite image posted by superliberal and then reposted by you shows something other than contrails?

[foot_soldier]

To add to the article posted earlier by "Sore Throat", here is an article from another source and an excerpt that was not included in the other piece:

April 29, 2004
Report Predicts Asthma Epidemic from Pollution
http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/400494|top|04-29-2004%3A%3A16%3A05|reuters.html

Excerpt:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Poor and minority children are likely to develop asthma at worsening rates due to global warming and air pollution, environment experts predicted on Thursday.

They released a report showing that as the climate gets warmer, allergens such as pollen and mold will flood the air, interacting with urban pollutants such as ozone and soot to fuel an already growing epidemic of asthma.

"It is affecting the trees, the molds, the subsurface organisms," Dr. Paul Epstein of Harvard Medical School's Center for Health and the Global Environment, told a news conference.....cont.

[whitemajikman]

They released a report showing that as the climate gets warmer, allergens such as pollen and mold will flood the air, interacting with urban pollutants such as ozone and soot to fuel an already growing epidemic of asthma.

"It is affecting the trees, the molds, the subsurface organisms," Dr. Paul Epstein of Harvard Medical School's Center for Health and the Global Environment, told a news conference.....cont.




That report is only a prediction by whom........?

Well it says right in the article doesn't it.......?
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCHER"S........Would you not agree.......?


Now That we have established that the leading purveyor's of this article and the result's are are all based upon funding......?

NO FUNDING ...............NO SERIOUS RESEARCH FOR LACK OF FUNDS.

Are you Starting to get the picture here Foot Soldier ..........The very people who are warning us of this Global warming threat........Are the same people whom rely upon the government and the private sector for their funding.

So this Totally makes your article null and void and to be viewed as propaganda at best........The Article's author's have a motive to lie........SURVIVAL.

So do you have an alternate......?

[gaiacomm]

With all of the energy put on this forum you would think that some of it could be directed at congressmen and senators that can at least look into this debate. But it is too easy to post nonsense here to feel important and not attempt to change the environment. Your water and air is posioned and you just accept it. Your food supply is also tainted with poisons. It is a slow death to the body...but what do you care! There are millions of people that die everyday because we don't care! Maybe death should knock on your door for you to wake up and see again!

[whitemajikman]

GAIACOM,

You and your larceny on the brain,It is always larceny with you isn't that right.........?

I was wondering when you would rear your ugly mug.

[whitemajikman]

But it is too easy to post nonsense here to feel important and not attempt to change the environment.

AHH...Excuse me but Were you not the one who started the un-needed spamming of this thread .......In fact I hope those spamming attempts were cut and paste because if they weren't .......You are obviously suffering from tourette's syndrome.


Oh and Gaiacomm Have you told these fine folks here on this forum how you have been debunked for the fraud you are.....?

Not just once and from many sources.

So why do you continue to try and decieve us with your admissions of "top-Secret" status .........?

Why not come on out and be free of your chains of bondage and wipe that slate clean.

It's a very hard thing to have to face your own demons.........isn't it Gaiacomm.......?

But just remember You will now and always be known as a Debunked Man.

[foot_soldier]

"whitemajikman" wrote:

The very people who are warning us of this Global warming threat........Are the same people whom rely upon the government and the private sector for their funding.

So this Totally makes your article null and void and to be viewed as propaganda at best........The Article's author's have a motive to lie........SURVIVAL.
You're doing great there, Sparky. Parroting the Litany perfectly. God, if you only knew how pathetically ignorant you sound.

You don't have a serious point of view on the climate change/geoengineering issue or the facts to back it up. All you have is a well-developed knee-jerk reactionary response to any information that doesn't fall in with your extremely limited frame of reference.

Not everyone agrees with your perspective on this matter. Get over it.

[gaiacomm]

But it is too easy to post nonsense here to feel important and not attempt to change the environment.

AHH...Excuse me but Were you not the one who started the un-needed spamming of this thread .......In fact I hope those spamming attempts were cut and paste because if they weren't .......You are obviously suffering from tourette's syndrome.


Oh and Gaiacomm Have you told these fine folks here on this forum how you have been debunked for the fraud you are.....?

Not just once and from many sources.

So why do you continue to try and decieve us with your admissions of "top-Secret" status .........?

Why not come on out and be free of your chains of bondage and wipe that slate clean.

It's a very hard thing to have to face your own demons.........isn't it Gaiacomm.......?

But just remember You will now and always be known as a Debunked Man.


The case for regime change in the USA

By Judah Ben-Hur

Al-Jazeerah, April 22, 2004



"Strange times are those in which we live when old and young are taught in falsehoods school. And the one man that dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and a fool" - Plato

"And those who perform jihad for us, we shall certainly guide them in our ways, and God is surely with the doers of good." (Quran XXXIX; 69)

"You have returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad." (Hadith)

To all who read and understand: it is time to take the next step in understanding. After careful and meticulous research, including access to files and data guarded by the United States Government, I have uncovered information that has been written about, talked about, read about, and in many cases silenced to protect and to confuse those who wish to uncover its not so guarded secrets.

Careful and planned exposure of this information seems to be the only way to begin the process of enlightenment of not just the American people but all peoples of this planet who are considered common men and women.

We cannot blame the "United States Government" for our woes, but ourselves for allowing our own Constitution to manipulate and control not just us but others in its path towards imperial rule, which by the way was why some people left England to come to the Americas to rid themselves of that tyranny. True democracy does not impede growth or dominate others. It was established to be a beacon for those who wish to call on its existence and only that. We do not have the right to impose democracy on nations or peoples who do not truly ask for it.

The United States in its own right is imposing pseudo-democratic policies through crafty methods - controlling without regard to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness! Regime change within the United States should be seriously considered.

Fact: the United States has in its possession weapons of mass destruction, so why does not the United Nations impose restrictions against the United States?

Fear is the reason why no nation or individual will want to go up against this Goliath! Well I have a small stone, I know where to throw it, and if I have to by myself so be it.

The fact that Thomas Jefferson who co-authored the now infamous doctrine of democracy himself was an advocate of slaves.

Hypocrisy runs through the veins of the elite American people who control the destinies and lives of so many people.

What we all must learn is that the power in change is in the people that make up the majority of the civilized and so-called uncivilized world.

What gives this small group of people their control over us is the fact that they know we all will not collectively give up our lives to get back control of the government and rid ourselves of the self-serving politicians and business executives that control what we eat, where we sleep, who to like and not like, what to read, what to write, how to dress, how and who to love, who to hate, what race is superior, who gets education, who not, where to travel, who lives, who dies, who eats, who does not eat, who gets elected in office, who does not get elected, who is popular and who is not, who is "in" who is not, what clothes to wear, what not, what movie or music star is in, which one is not, who to disrespect who to not, who to be prejudice to and who to not, what freedoms we have and have not, who gets destroyed, who not, who must accept the "way" and who not, who goes to prison, and who not, and the list goes on into infinity.

Remember that in the Constitution it does allow for bloodless regime change within the government as long as we stand together and collectively vote for our freedoms back. Rid ourselves of the electoral college and other manipulative organizations that are self-serving their own agendas at the expense, hard work and lives of so many innocent and misguided people that are here within the borders of despair.

The French Government should formally request that the Statue of Liberty be returned to France. We all know what it was for.

The United States has over many years systematically infiltrated other nations to "weed" out the non-conformers to the so-called Democratic process and replace those with the showroom dummies of democracy. Granted, the United States has some freedom of movement for its people but not the way it was originally intended. Look at Africa, South America, and parts of Europe, Asia and other nations that are sucking the teat of the cow and its sour milk.

Collectively, we the people of the world should stand up and be counted on to rid ourselves of individuals who are ignorant of their own ignorance and replace this Constitution with one that includes all religions, all peoples, all races, all nations and all who feel left out and want to be what they want to be without the constraints of prejudice and restrictive law. Not to run lawless but have the right to be an individual and collectively correct this turmoil we are in.

The Earth is trying to warn us that we are spinning out of control and that we need to correct ourselves soon or the earth will rid itself of this infection and parasite called mankind that is slowly destroying its primary intent to allow its inhabitants the freedom to live be fruitful and multiply to the extent of finding a way to leave this planet and journey to others and spread some sort of reason rather than an infectious spore.

I am a physicist and a patriot who, through years of being silent, had almost forgotten my obligations. It is high time I and others like me use our intellect and technology to stand up against an oppressor and rid ourselves of this infection. We are a legion that wants to live a life of peace and respect for all living things and have considerations for those who are different and look for ways to truly accommodate those who are slow in understanding.

We do not need your help just your patience and understanding of what we are about.

We are America's best-kept secret that just got out of the "keep".

Judah Ben-Hur, Physicist, Gaiacomm Corporation http://www.gaiacomm.org Technology for peace

A president and physicist of a Californian technologies company dips into journalism to make his case for a more transparent United States of America.

[gaiacomm]

I think you should leave well enough alone!

[whitemajikman]

You're doing great there, Sparky. Parroting the Litany perfectly. God, if you only knew how pathetically ignorant you sound.

You don't have a serious point of view on the climate change/geoengineering issue or the facts to back it up. All you have is a well-developed knee-jerk reactionary response to any information that doesn't fall in with your extremely limited frame of reference.

Not everyone agrees with your perspective on this matter. Get over it.


Oh Really .....Now your telling me I'm an idiot because I want an Un-Biased View.

Do you know how stupid that sounds.

Also because you use the Internet almost soley as your Base of Knowledge,The information you are getting is old by the time an update appears.

Scientist's are now more concerned about globally cooling.....Which is an even bigger threat than originally thought.

[letxa2000]

Does anyone think this image depicts anything other than contrails?

[lynn george]

SmT- Do you realize how REDICULOUS your post sounds? The only HOAX is in a bunkies mind. They created the hoax when there was NO hoax. Atmospheric researchers and others interested in the applications and effects of the aerosol operations LONG AGO realized that what some were calling CHEMTRAILS (short for chemical trails) were in fact very likely IDENTICAL to the GEOENGINEERING methods widely discussed, advocated and funded by many many in government and private industry. ANd what MILLIONS are now seeing spread above their skies. And whether one chooses to address them as chemtrails, geoengineering trails, aerosol trails, or perhaps even bunkie trails, they are still PART of the whole. So WMM I think your just tryin like your bunkie friends to stir the S*$T. If yu are REALLY interested in this subject than how about some RATIONAL comments regarding this link. THis info is going to come out eventually into the MAINSTREAM it's just a matter of time.



WEll LYNN You want Rational.......HOW about this for starters.

The entire CHEMTRAIL HOAX can be traced back to an article written by the infamous Will Thomas........who is the first person to coin the phrase "CHEMTRAIL".

Which I might add started as an article trying to use Dark Humour to explain what he was seeing.

Don't take my word for it ......get in touch with the Editor who authorized the article in the first place.

Also Not once did I say Geo-engineering does not Exist.

Because quite frankly it does.

The whole point of my posting is to make you all realize That the use of the term CHEMTRAIL has no basis in scientific fact or In regards to Geo-engineering as a whole.

In Fact The CHEMTRAIL Hoax has led to the entire breakdown of real study and investigation into Geo-engineering and has Led most of it's
Believers on a wild goose chase of unprecedented proportions.

It has single handedly subverted the minds of all who profess it's existence.

And in doing so has had a profound Impact to the point that most of the Believers of this hoax now act as a working CULT.

Instead of treating CHEMTRAILS as A HOAX until there is enough data to prove unequivocally otherwise.

They have adopted a Mindset of Chemtrails being factual and have closed off all avenues of scrutiny.

This is a dangerous presidence.

Considering I for one oppose Geo-Engineering.

BUT if THE Chemtrail Hoax is not stopped and the cycle not broken.

Who will Take Geo-Engineering seriously.....? if it is always intertwined with the CHEMTRAIL HOAX.

You SEE .......You must drop this elaborate Hoax to have any hope what so ever of taking Geo-engineering Mainstream.

AND LET"S BE HONEST ......CAN YOU DO THIS LYNN......?


Places like ctc and megasprayer are no matter what you say.......in effect working CULTS.

Based UPON an internet hoax which should never have gotten this far along.

So I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE 10 QUESTION's of TRUTH.

HERE IS YOUR SHOT.

BUT AGAIN THE RESULTS WILL STILL BE THE SAME.

1.) Chemtrails cause global warming, contrails prevent it
2.) Chemtrails prevent global warming, contrails cause it
3.) Chemtrails and contrails cause global warming
4.) Chemtrails and contrails prevent global warming
5.) Chemtrails are a hoax, and contrails may eventually contribute to global warming
6.) It doesn't really matter because the Earth is going into a cooling cycle (which will no doubt be blamed on geo-engineering / chemtrails"

In fact all you have to do is answer these 6 questions and back it up with reputable sources of info.....

If you can't then please lay this Hoax to rest.

AT LEAST UNTIL YOU HAVE THE IRON CLAD PROOF That THIS HoaX is something more than mere myth.


SmT-What part of "chemtrails" being used by some people to describe "geoengineering trails" do you not understand? So I take it what you are saying is the following: That researchers of the geoengineering aerosol operations should stop using the slang term 'chemtrails' as it makes one think of the open air tests above the U.S. that occurred for decades over millions, spreading carcinogens, chemicals (chemtrails), pathogens, and other pollutants. Alright. So what do you prefer. Aerosol releases? Atmospheric enhancement aids? Cloud beautification projects? And what of the trails now being spread that deal with communications or human health and not necessarily with climate modification? I doubt any Fed/corporate lackey shills that are out here running cover for industry are ready to go there yet. Are they?

SmT

[foot_soldier]

"whitemajikman" wrote:

Scientist's are now more concerned about globally cooling.....Which is an even bigger threat than originally thought.
I see you're right on the cutting edge there. Reading NewsMax and Fred Singer, right?

When's the last time you read an actual STUDY?

[lynn george]

SMT/Lynn: Atmospheric researchers and others interested in the applications and effects of the aerosol operations LONG AGO realized that what some were calling CHEMTRAILS (short for chemical trails) were in fact very likely IDENTICAL to the GEOENGINEERING methods widely discussed, advocated and funded by many many in government and private industry. ANd what MILLIONS are now seeing spread above their skies.

Can you provide evidence of an ongoing chemtrail program in the private sector or government? I'm not talking about advocates, I'm not talking about theories, and I'm not talking about chaff releases during military exercises. I'm talking about proof of a a real functioning chemtrail program being conducted on such a widespread scale that "millions are now seeing spread above their skies."


THis info is going to come out eventually into the MAINSTREAM it's just a matter of time.

I admit I'm new to the chemtrail debate, but my understanding is that the chemtrail believers have been saying this for some time. For how many years has "the mainstream is eventually going to know about it" been the slogan? And how many years must pass before it is recognized that the slogan is wrong?


SmT-Can you provide evidence that you are in fact a living breathing human being and not a machine? Is Letxa2000 a computer program?

http://reason.com/9711/fe.benford.shtml

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/21stC/issue-2.1/huyghe.htm

If you're waiting for FoxSnooze of Corporate News Network or any of the other In Bed reporters don't hold your breath. The Free Press will be the only avenue for info still for awhile as to coverage of applications. However, the two links I posted as well as the recent article of the scientists meeting in Britian to discuss the Sky Shield option as a viable option (to some) are everywhere, with other somewhat conventional news sources starting to "hint" geoengineering our skies has been going on for some time. The new geoengineering stamps are the most comicallly sadistic attempt at either familiarizing the public about geoengineering or worse trying to pull the wool over The collective publics eyes. With the lie now as The Pillar of The State somehow I think it's the latter.

SmT

[lynn george]

SMT: WOW!!! SuperLiberal, I like that. Every picture tells a story don't it? I'm gonna print that one, the one with the lovely clouds!

Is it your belief that the satellite image posted by superliberal and then reposted by you shows something other than contrails?

SmT- I believe it is very POSSIBLE. This coincides quite nicely with what many are seeing from the ground. While one can not see the spreading characteristics, colors, halos, light diffusing characteristics, or the jet activity as to how they were spread again there sure is alot of very persistant ones isn't there. Are you saying this is ALL from jet pollution? I noticed the length of the trails are very similiar in most cases and that there are some circular trails. While this does not PROVE that these are for weather modification it does not prove it isn't? Do the trail lines that run parallel and stop about the same time suggest any noticably significant patterns to anyone? At the least we can say: THESE trails are STEALING our sun NO DOUBT regardless if they are enhanced to do that and they ARE modifying the waether including it seems causing draught.And if you believe they are NOT intentional then are you saying we don't have the technology to PREVENT this? Or the Will? Or the Desire?

Geoengineering our skies is real, the evidence is everywhere, believe what you wish, or until you come up with what you feel is the ability to see "beyond a resonable doubt". (You realize of course I am speaking to "you" in case any newbies are here and believe you to be a corporate shill at the worst or an ego addict at best and realize the "futility" of any efforts otherwise as I fully suspect you are VERY aware of the military/gov./corporate designs to 'Own The Weather'. No offense just trying to be up front.) :D

Show-me Truth

[foot_soldier]

Re: the trails shown in the satellite image of the southeastern U.S., "lynn george" wrote:

And if you believe they are NOT intentional then are you saying we don't have the technology to PREVENT this? Or the Will? Or the Desire?
That is a great question.

[letxa2000]

Letxa2000: Can you provide evidence of an ongoing chemtrail program in the private sector or government?

SMT/Lynn: Can you provide evidence that you are in fact a living breathing human being and not a machine? Is Letxa2000 a computer program?

I'll take that as a "no," that you cannot provide evidence of an ongoing chemtrail program in the private sector of government. Changing the subject to avoid answering a question is a silly debating trick.


http://reason.com/9711/fe.benford.shtml

Nice speculation and regurgitation of past studies that we've already discussed here and elsewhere. No evidence of an ongoing chemtrail program in the private sector or government, though.


http://www.columbia.edu/cu/21stC/issue-2.1/huyghe.htm

Same. No evidence of an active chemtrail program and this link goes so far as to say "Of course, no one suggests that such schemes be implemented any time soon--just that we should be aware of the options and perhaps explore them further, so that if the need arose, such dramatic efforts to save the Earth would be available to us."

Both of your links are to theories or academia. Neither are evidence of ongoing chemtrail programs.


Letxa2000: Is it your belief that the satellite image posted by superliberal and then reposted by you shows something other than contrails?

SMT: I believe it is very POSSIBLE. This coincides quite nicely with what many are seeing from the ground.

You are aware that the contrails shown in that satellite image are completely consistent with contrails in an air mass conducive to persistent contrails? Why do you think the contrails pretty much stop just south of the northern borders of Alabama and Georgia?


Are you saying this is ALL from jet pollution?

Not all of it. The contrails seem pretty well-defined in the image which suggests that they weren't spreading out as they sometimes do--thus the general haze is almost definitely naturally occurring cirrus and is not jet pollution.


I noticed the length of the trails are very similiar in most cases and that there are some circular trails.

Those are interesting observations. How are you measuring the length of these trails? I see many trails in different directions--some are short, some are long. I can't say that I agree that they are very similar in length.

As for the circular trails, I just don't see them. Could you point a few of them out for me?


While this does not PROVE that these are for weather modification it does not prove it isn't?

We've discussed this before, but you need to prove that your assertion (that weather modification through chemtrails) is occurring. Suggesting that just because this satellite image doesn't disprove your assertion does not add any credibility to your theory nor does it increase the probability that your theory is correct.


At the least we can say: THESE trails are STEALING our sun NO DOUBT

That's a completely different issue that atmospheric scientists are debating. I'm not saying that contrails are invisible and completely harmless (though I do personally believe their effect is quite neglible). But the possibility that contrails are impacting the environment is a far cry from claiming that someone is intentionally spraying chemicals into the atmosphere for some unknown purpose.

[whitemajikman]

That researchers of the geoengineering aerosol operations should stop using the slang term 'chemtrails' as it makes one think of the open air tests above the U.S. that occurred for decades over millions, spreading carcinogens, chemicals (chemtrails), pathogens, and other pollutants. Alright. So what do you prefer. Aerosol releases? Atmospheric enhancement aids? Cloud beautification projects? And what of the trails now being spread that deal with communications or human health and not necessarily with climate modification? I doubt any Fed/corporate lackey shills that are out here running cover for industry are ready to go there yet. Are they?

[halva]

By the way, is Reynolds - or is any other debunker - going to reassert the allegation that gaiacomm is Lance Haubrick?

[jayreynolds]

lance haubrick being gaiacomm is old news.
Debunked.
http://p090.ezboard.com/fcontrailsandchemtrails22884frm1.showMessageRange? topicID=2334.topic&start=21&stop=40

http://com1.runboard.com/b13thcentury.fthenewdebunkatorium.t62

[halva]

What will happen if Lance Haubrick turns up at Zerefos's symposium claiming to be Dr. Judah Ben Hur?

[gaiacomm]

Referenced:
New York Times article, December 8, 1915
New York Times article, September 22, 1940
United States Air Force, Record of Decision, High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), Final Environmental Impact Statement, dated October 18, 1993
Fact sheet issued by the Office of Naval Research and the Phillips Laboratory about HAARP dated November 4, 1993

A Few Notes by Dr. Nick Begich, co-author of "Angels Don't Play This HAARP: Advances in Tesla Technology"

::: From Tesla to Starwars :::

The United States military denies that the HAARP project has anything to do with the Tesla/Eastlund patents mentioned below. However, a careful review of the government documents leading to the contract with Arco's subsidiary (APTI) to build HAARP lead one to the conclusion that once again the military is deliberately attempting to mislead. While it is true that the device being built will not produce the full effects described in the patents, it is a necessary step in proving the effectiveness of the technology in advance of construction of a larger antenna array which is scheduled to begin construction in the summer of 1996 in Alaska. The intention of the military is to complete construction of the larger second system by 1997. The contract for construction of the second phase of the project has been awarded and is awaiting funding.

This initial project does present risks to communications according to the United States Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee. Other risks are unclear in the literature related to this project however the risks to human physiology from high frequency electromagnetic radiation is well known. What is really going on with this technology? What will the government do when they put into practice the larger antenna array?

Having read the article in Nexus magazine initially reporting upon HAARP, my next stop was to the Anchorage Municipal Library. I pulled the Eastlund patent records and a cold chill ran through me as I realized that the diagrams I was seeing were reminiscent of patents issued to Nikola Tesla in the late 19th and early 20th century. I next noted the reference sources in the patent itself, two articles from the New York Times. When I reviewed the articles they were about Tesla. The articles referenced in the U.S. patent were extremely interesting in that they were, in part, the basis for the research into this current technology.

::: Tesla Saw it Coming :::

The first article from the New York Times, December 8, 1915, contained:

"Nikola Tesla, the inventor, has filed patent applications on the essential parts of a machine the possibilities of which test a layman's imagination and promise a parallel of Thor's shooting thunderbolts from the sky to punish those who had angered the gods...Suffice it to say that the invention will go through space with a speed of 300 miles a second, a manless ship without propelling engine or wings, sent by electricity to any desired point on the globe on its errand of destruction, if destruction its manipulator wishes to effect."

"It is not a time, said Dr. Tesla yesterday, 'to go into the details of this thing. It is founded upon a principle that means great things in peace; it can be used for great things in war. But I repeat, this is no time to talk of such things.' 'It is perfectly practicable to transmit electrical energy without wires and produce destructive effects at a distance. I have already constructed a wireless transmitter which makes this possible, and have described it in my technical publications, among which I refer to my patent number 1,119,732 recently granted.'

'With a transmitter of this kind we are enabled to project electrical energy in any amount to any distance and apply it for innumerable purposes, both in war and peace. Through the universal adoption of this system, ideal conditions for the maintenance of law and order will be realized, for then the energy necessary to the enforcement of right and justice will be normally productive, yet potential, and in any moment available, for attack and defense. The power transmitted need not be necessarily destructive, for, if distance is made to depend upon it, its withdrawal or supply will bring about the same results as those now accomplished by force of arms."

The next article referenced in the patent also ran in the New York Times, on September 22, 1940 and reads as follows:

"Nikola Tesla, one of the truly great inventors who celebrated his eighty-fourth birthday on July 10, tells the writer that he stands ready to divulge to the United States Government the secret of his 'teleforce,' with which, he said, airplane motors would be melted at a distance of 250 miles, so that an invisible Chinese Wall of Defense would be built around the country...This 'teleforce,' he said, is based on an entirely new principle of physics that 'no one has ever dreamed about,' different from the principle embodied in his inventions relating to the transmission of electrical power from a distance, for which he has received a number of basic patents.'

'This new type of force, Mr. Tesla said, would operate through a beam one one hundred-millionth of a square centimeter in diameter, and could be generated from a special plant that would cost no more than $2,000,000 and would take only about three months to construct. The beam, he states, involves four new inventions, two of which already have been tested. One of these is a method and apparatus for producing rays 'and other manifestations or energy' in free air, eliminating the necessity for a high vacuum; a second is a method and process for producing 'very great electrical force'; the third is a method for amplifying this force, and the fourth is a new method for producing 'a tremendous electrical repelling force.'

"This would be the projector, or gun, of the system. The voltage for propelling the beam to its objective, according to the inventor, will attain a potential of 50,000,000 volts. With this enormous voltage, he said, microscopic electrical particles of matter will be catapulted on their mission of defensive destruction. He has been working on this invention, he added, for many years and has recently made a number of improvements in it."

There was a third reference which was apparently authored by Tesla which could not be obtained. The ideas expressed by Tesla, in these articles, raises more questions about the version of 'law and order' likely to rise from any military organization controlling such technology. In recent days we have seen many of the excesses of the military establishment in testing their 'peace keeping' technologies to the detriment of individuals in the population. If this technology is to be implemented anywhere it should be done so openly and honestly and only when it can be demonstrated as safe and worthwhile for improving the human condition. The idea of unleashing such power into our planet's ionosphere is disturbing at a minimum. Since originally researching this subject for publication in Nexus a good deal of additional information has come forward regarding other potential uses of the HAARP transmitter.

These additional applications are currently being researched by this writer and others to confirm the possible uses and will be the subject of future reporting on the project.

::: Eastlund Brings Tesla into the Modern Age :::

The patent number 4,686,605 issued August 11, 1987 to Bernard J. Eastlund and assigned to APTI, Inc. is one of three related patents by the same inventor; one of which was locked up under a Navy National Security Order for six years in the late 1980s. In the text of the patent a number of issues of concern are raised. These patents revisit and go beyond the technical applications envision by Tesla. The patent is quoted as follows:

"In the past several years, substantial effort has been made to understand and explain the phenomena involved in belts of trapped electrons and ions, and to explore the possible ways to control and use these phenomena for beneficial purposes. For example, in the late 1950's and early 1960's both the United States and the U.S.S.R. detonated a series of nuclear devices of various yields to generate large numbers of charged particles at various altitudes, e.g. 200 kilometers or greater."

"This can cause confusion of or interference with or even complete disruption of guidance systems employed by even the most sophisticated of airplanes and missiles. The ability to employ and transmit over very wide areas of the earth a plurality of electromagnetic waves of varying frequencies and to change same at will in a random manner, provides a unique ability to interfere with all modes of communication, land, sea, and/or air, at the same time. Because of the unique juxtaposition of usable fuel source at the point where desirable field lines intersect the earth's surface, such wide ranging and complete communication interference can be achieved in a reasonably short period of time."

"Thus, this invention provides the ability to put unprecedented amounts of power in the earth's atmosphere at strategic locations and to maintain the power injection level, particularly if random pulsing is employed, in a manner far more precise and better controlled than heretofore accomplished by the prior art, particularly by detonation of nuclear devises of various yields at various altitudes."

"Further, by knowing the frequencies of various electromagnetic beams employed in the practice of this invention it is possible not only to interfere with third party communications but to take advantage of one or more such beams to carry out a communications network even though the rest of the world's communications are disrupted. Put another way, what is used to disrupt another's communications can be employed by one knowledgeable of this invention as a communication network at the same time. In addition, once one's own communication network is established, the far-reaching extent of the effects of this invention could be employed to pick up communication signals of others for intelligence purposes."

"This invention has a phenomenal variety of possible ramifications and potential future developments. As alluded to earlier, missile or aircraft destruction, deflection, or confusion could result, particularly when relativistic particles are employed. Also, large regions of the atmosphere could be lifted to an unexpectedly high altitude so that missiles encounter unexpected and unplanned drag forces with resultant destruction or deflection of same. Weather modification is possible by, for example, altering upper atmosphere wind patterns by constructing one or more plumes of atmospheric particles which will act as a lens or focusing device."

"Also as alluded to earlier, molecular modifications of the atmosphere can take place so that positive environmental effects can be achieved. Besides actually changing the molecular composition of an atmospheric region, a particular molecule or molecules can be chosen for increased presence. For example, ozone, nitrogen, etc., concentrations in the atmosphere could be artificially increased. Similarly, environmental enhancement could be achieved by causing the breakup of various chemical entities such as carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrous oxides, and the like."

While the H.A.A.R.P. device being constructed is not large enough to cause all of these effects it is of sufficient size to test the ideas of Dr. Eastlund as expressed in parts of the patent. The military denies that they are using any of the Eastlund ideas; however, careful review of the materials lead to the inescapable conclusion that the military is misleading the public again. Moreover, it was reported by Dr. Eastlund in a National Public Radio broadcast in 1988 that the military had tested some of the ideas presented in the patents prior to removing the secrecy orders.

::: Oil, Defense, and the Projection of Power :::

In a press release by the United States Air Force dated November 3, 1993 the military announced that the prime contractor on the HAARP Program was Arco Power Technologies, Incorporated. The press release indicated that the project was designed for auroral and ionospheric research. They indicate, "The first phase of the program is underway to develop and test a low power high frequency (2.8-10.0 MHz) prototype transmitter array."

Arco Power Technologies, Incorporated (APTI) was a subsidiary of Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) which owned the Eastlund patent rights at the time the HAARP project was put out to bid. In researching APTI, I utilized the directory America's Corporate Families, which is a Dun & Bradstreet publication (1993, Volume I, page 156). The record indicates that this firm had a President in Los Angeles and a CEO and staff of 25 employees in Washington D.C. with sales of $5,000,000 U.S. a year.

ARCO, the parent company, is the largest employer in Alaska primarily involved in the North Slope where it controls trillions of cubic feet of natural gas and billions of barrels of oil. The natural gas on the North slope has been injected into the earth rather than 'flared' off as in most parts of the world. The gas has been injected in order to maintain oil field production while pumping up to 1.6 million barrels of crude oil a day. No market for this gas currently exists although significant interest in building a $12 billion pipeline remains on the drawing boards. A market for the gas is in the interests of ARCO.

How does a small subsidiary company acquire a military contract for such a project? According to the records, it won the right to build the project through exemptions in the military procurement process. The contract with APTI was over five times the organizations annual sales. It is the assertion of this writer that the only way a virtually unknown company, in the military contracting environment, could get such a contract is if they possessed proprietary information of use in the project, i.e. the Eastlund patents.

::: A Most Versatile and Capable Facility :::

Since the contract was awarded APTI has been sold to E-Systems of Dallas, Texas, U.S.A. This company reports annual sales of $1.7 billion a year, has over 18,000 employees and is one of the biggest military contractors in the United States. In a fact sheet issued by the Office of Naval Research and the Phillips Laboratory about HAARP dated November 4, 1993 the following is indicated:

"The proposed research will be undertaken using high power radio transmitters to probe the overhead ionosphere, combined with a complement of modern scientific diagnostic instruments to investigate the results of the interactions. HAARP will be constructed at auroral latitudes in Alaska. A unique feature of the research facility would be a high power high-frequency radio transmitter with the capability of rapidly steering a narrow beam of energy toward a designated region in the sky. Similar, though less capable, research facilities exist today at many locations throughout the world and are operated routinely for the purpose of scientific investigation of the ionosphere. In the U.S. such systems are located in Arecibo, Puerto Rico, Fairbanks, Alaska. Other installations are at Tromso, Norway; Moscow, Nizhny Novgorod and Apatity, Russia; Kharkov, Ukraine and Dushanbe, Tadzhikistan. None of these existing systems, however, have the combination of frequency capability and beam steering agility required to perform the experiments planned for HAARP."

"Investigations to be conducted at the HAARP facility are expected to provide significant scientific advancements in understanding the ionosphere. The research facility would be used to understand, stimulate and control ionospheric processes that might alter the performance of communication and surveillance systems. This research would enhance present civilian capabilities because it would facilitate the development of techniques to control ionospheric processes..."

"Potential applications of the HAARP research include developing DoD technology for detecting cruise missiles and aircraft and for communicating with submarines. Although HAARP is being managed by the Air Force and Navy, it is purely a scientific research facility which represents no threat to potential adversaries and would therefore have no value as a military target."

"...The beam would be several degrees wide, depending on frequency, and thus would influence a region several miles in diameter in the lower ionosphere, expanding to several tens of miles in the upper ionosphere."

"...The transmissions would be accomplished through the design and construction of a world-class ionospheric research instrument (IRI)...The IRI would consist of an antenna array and associated transmitters...The antenna would occupy a rectangular area roughly 1000 ft. x 2000 ft. and would consist of a 12 x 15 array of antenna masts, each supporting two horizontal crossed dipole antennas, stacked one above the other. The masts would reach a maximum height of 72 ft... As a result of a competitive procurement the Air Force and Navy has awarded a contract to ARCO Power Technologies, Inc. (APTI) for the design and construction of the IRI and associated support facilities."

"...The current schedule anticipates construction at the Gakona site would begin November 1993 and conclude the fall of 1994 with the demonstration prototype. Construction for the full size IRI is anticipated to begin early 1995 and conclude late 1997."

The following was taken from the United States Air Force, Record of Decision, High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), Final Environmental Impact Statement, dated October 18, 1993:

"The data obtained from the proposed research would be used to analyze basic ionospheric properties and to assess the potential for developing ionospheric enhancement technology for communications and surveillance purposes...The research facility would be used to understand, stimulate and control ionospheric processes that might alter the performance of communications and surveillance systems...Furthermore, and possibly more significant, is the potential for new technology that could be developed from a better understanding of ionospheric processes. A potential DoD application of the research is to provide communications to submerged submarines. These and many other research applications are expected to greatly enhance present DoD technology."

"The Air Force and Navy proposes to build and operate the most versatile and capable ionospheric research facility in the world. The government intends to utilize the unused Over-the-Horizon Backscatter site near Gakona, Alaska for this program...Research requirements stipulated that the selected site must fall in the range of latitudes between 61 and 65 degrees, either north or south. This latitude provides the proper mix of active and inactive auroral states. Siting constraints included that the site must be: on U.S. soil, on DoD land to the maximum extent practical..."

::: "Full, Global Shield" :::

This project is more particularly described in the Joint Services Program Plans and Activities , February 1990, issued by the Navy and Air Force. It becomes clear that the military has no intention of looking at the Northern lights as the aurora is call in Alaska. This project is intended for one purpose, and one purpose only: to learn how to manipulate the ionosphere in a manner exceeding the capabilities of similar facilities operating in the Soviet Union. This facility will be the largest of its type in the world and will be located in a latitude most conducive to the practice of the invention developed by Eastlund.

The bill went to the Senate House Defense Appropriations Conference Committee, which then waived both the Competition in Contracting Act and a 1988 law requesting merit review of defense grants to Universities. The initial project costs are between $25 and $30 million U.S. and it appears that those informing the Alaskan Senator about this project may have not given him clear and complete information. Full funding of the second phase of the project has varied from $90 to $150 million. The result was that the project got a reputation as a 'pork' project and was declared by the press a waste of money. The Senator was mislead by information distorted perhaps by those seeking his help in funding the work. Nonetheless, the project got the money needed to make it a reality.

In the May/June 1994 issue of Micro Wave News, Eastlund describes 'a full, global shield' of accelerated electrons created with RF transmitters. The HAARP project 'obviously looks a lot like a first step towards this', Eastlund said. He noted, however, that the applications he has described would require a significantly more powerful device with a much larger antenna - perhaps 20 square kilometers - than the full scale HAARP IRI.

The impact of RF on human physiology is well known to the Air Force and has been described in publications dating back to 1986. The use of RF in 'non-lethal' weapons systems is become increasingly a part of the military's public disclosures. It is clear to this researcher that the use of electromagnetic systems for high impact, low cost, low intensity military or police actions is the direction our government is heading. The research indicates that HAARP will provide additional information to military planners in terms of delivery systems which, in fact, will facilitate the full implement- ation of new Star Wars technologies. These technologies will raise new questions of ethics in terms of deciding what are appropriate weapon systems for use in our modern world.

Dr. Eastlund, after reviewing the HAARP proposal issued by the military, concluded, "...review of the HAARP RFP has convinced me that the planned antenna could be considered a first step towards the antenna described in the patents." He stated further, "The beneficial civilian uses of the antenna are as interesting as the military applications. For example, I am working on the use of the antenna for replenishment of ozone in the ozone holes over the Arctic and Antarctic."

Could it be that the systems already operating in the former USSR could in fact be contributing to the ozone depletion in the Southern hemisphere? Could this be one of the 'secret' weapons systems referenced by soviet radicals in recent international media reports?

"Angels Don't Play this HAARP" and related text (c) 1995 by Nicholas J. Begich and Jeane Manning

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[gaiacomm]

HAARP
[High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program]
A Case Study in Ultra-Modern Warfare


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Introduction
Recent advances in geophysical research, communication, and computerization have led to substantial technological changes in military weaponry. Under the rubric of national security, the U.S, military is utilizing this technology to strengthen control over its spheres of influence. Included in this endeavor is a proposed "revolution in military affairs" driven by a belief that while conventional armed warfare is still a necessary component of military strategy, a compelling new p riority is how to quell insurgencies, terrorist attacks, and social unrest overseas and at home.

One example of this new technology is the U.S. Air Force and Navy's development of HAARP, a 'High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program' under construction in Gakona, Alaska. The major component of HAARP is a radio wave transmitter utilizing powerful high frequency (HF) transmissions and a variety of associated observational instruments "...to investigate naturally occurring and artifically induced ionospheric processes that support, enhance, or degrade the propagation of radio waves." Scheduled to b e completed in approximately five years, HAARP is presently running at about ten percent of projected power levels.

In a 1993 Environmental Impact Statement [EIS] addressing possible environmental impacts of HAARP, the Air Force indicated that the study of the ionosphere was being initiated "...to better understand and use it to enhance communications and surveilla nce systems for both civil and defense purposes."


The Problem
Opposition to the project was immediate. Initial fear raised by ham operators and airline pilots over possible disruption of radio communication, was followed by environmentalists concerned over unforeseen radio frequency [RF] effects on animals and huma n beings. Soon, individuals and groups ranging from university scientists to followers of the paranormal, voiced their criticisms - a few even suggesting that this military technology would not only destroy communications, but might actually manipulate global weather systems and influence ways in which people think and behave. Still, given the esoteric nature of the topic, public expression of this criticism was largely limited to the Internet and letters to the editor of Alaska newspapers.

In 1994, a series of articles appearing in the environmental publication Earth Island Journal bought wider attention. Shortly thereafter, HAARP was selected as an important chapter in the book The Ten Top Censored Stories of 1994. In response, the Air Force placed its own HAARP Home Page on the world wide web, explaining the project's scientific goals and addressing criticisms raised in opposition to it. As public consciousness was heightened, more articles appeared in the press; ra dio talk show hosts invited guests to present opposing sides of the issue; TV networks devoted segments to it; and in Alaska, the legislature held hearings to learn more about HAARP and its potential environmental impact.

Then in 1996, the litigation director of Trustees for Alaska - representing the interests of major environmental organizations including Greenpeace, National Audubon Society, Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation, and others - submitte d a detailed memorandum to the Air Force urging it to prepare a supplemental Environmental Impact Statement [EIS] for public review and response.

The stated reasons for this request included the following:


That substantial changes have been made over the course of HAARP's development;

That extensive questions remain over the military's current intended uses for the project;

That additional scientific evidence raises new questions about its possible effects;

That under such circumstances, the regulations and spirit of the National Environmental Policy Act [NEPA] call for a supplemental EIS.
Examples of significant changes occurring in the description of HAARP research included a newly described emphasis on earth-penetrating tomography permitting the detection of tunnels, underground shelters and other forms of 'counterproliferation;' along with increased government funding allocated to HAARP based on a new budgetary designation listing it as an "advanced military weapon."

Responding to these and similar criticisms, the Air Force reiterated that although HAARP is managed by the Air Force and Navy, "it is purely a scientific research facility posing no threat to potential adversaries and has no value as a military target."


The Assignment

Overview
Like other case studies in our continuing series on ' Social Equity and Environmental Justice,' this one raises important questions about the impact of social institutions on the natural environment - more specifically, the role of the military.

Over the past half century, the Arctic, the Pacific, and similar isolated regions have served as proving grounds for the testing of the world's most powerful nuclear weapons. Fortunately, the signing of international test ban treaties significantly redu ced the threat of nuclear warfare. Now, space weaponry has become a new issue of contention. As stated by retiring NORAD General Joseph Ashy:


"It's politically sensitive, but it's going to happen. Some people don't want to hear this, and it sure isn't in vogue...but absolutely, we're going to fight in space. We're going to fight from space and we're going to fight into space..." [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 5 August 1996]
Criticism of statements by the military regarding the use of advanced weaponry is not new. Indeed, one of its sharpest challengers was Albert Einstein, who warned Americans in 1949:

"We should be on our guard not to overestimate science and scientific methods when it is a question of human problems, and we should not assume that experts are the only ones who have the right to express themselves on questions affecting the organization of society."
These two quotes offer up a host of questions far too complex to be addressed in our assignment. That does not mean, however, that they should be completely set aside, for as stated in the Introduction to our Virtual Classroom, the initial step in solvi ng large problems is to break them down into smaller, managable units. Once these elements are grasped more clearly, then the various parts can be rejoined and the whole issue seen with greater understanding.


Questions to be Addressed
Taking HAARP as our case in point, we can begin by asking: "Of what might these smaller segments consist?" Numerous possibilities exist. For the purpose of this discusison, two examples will suffice. First, Why has HAARP drawn so much negative a ttention by the press and among the public?

The References section to follow includes numerous sites on the Internet in which individuals express concern over possible risks to humans and the environment stemming from the use of HAARP's "ionospheric heater." The most extreme commentaries refer t o HAARP as an evil weapon able to alter people's minds and control weather over much of the hemisphere. Others, listing various coverups engaged in by the military in the past, ask whether this same military can be trusted today. Still others, accepting the government's assurances on the larger issues, worry over HAARP's potential hazard to birds and aircraft.

An entirely different kind of question concerns the role of universities in military research. In World War II, the development of atomic weapons required the active involvement of university scientists, prompting a new relationship between the government and academia. During the Cold War this link expanded dramatically. In 1952, for example, 90 percent of all federal funds for university research in the 'hard sciences' came from either the Defense Department or the Atomic Energy Commission. Obvously, this is no longer the case, Still, the legacy of such funding remains in the form of academic institutes and individual entrepreneurs who tailor their research to meet the expressed needs of the military. Whether such support is helpful or harmful in meeting the educational requirements of today's universities is a question over which there is co ntinuing disagreement.

The above two examples are illustrative of the broad range of questions that can be addressed regarding HAARP, its objectives and future. Others are of equal or greater importance. There is also the immediate issue whether a new EIS document should be drafted for public review. However, in this exercise, what is essential is not the specific question or questions to be raised, but that their formation and exploration be undertaken by the participants themselves.


Classroom Participation
For the assignment, students are urged to work in teams representing the differing positions taken on the issues selected for debate. How many teams are selected will depend on the number of available participants. At minimum, at least three teams should be formed representing the views of: (a) the Military; (b) an Environmental Coalition; and (c), a Review Committee of academically based scientists. Inclusion of a fourth group representing the 'pubic interest' will encourage an even greater expression of opinion.

After joining specific teams, members should first review, and then analyze the differing perspectives taken on the questions selected. Although a data base is available in the Reference section of this case study, students are encouraged to explore oth er sources we well - including their own searches on the world wide web and in their own libraries. With this material in hand, each team should meet separately to plan their strategies and develop position papers for the forthcoming debate.

Once the available information has been obtained and position papers written and distributed, the participants should come together in a conference or classroom setting with chairs and tables arranged so as to represent an 'opening hearing.' Following su mmary presentations by the members of each team, further expressions of opinion can be invited from other members of the class, or visitors to the class.

A brief reminder: the purpose of the assigment is not to make a final judgment as to the 'rights' or 'wrongs' of the HAARP Project. Rather, it is to assist the participants in deepening their understanding of the issues that are involved.


References on the World Wide Web
I. HOME PAGE
HAARP Main Page



II. EDUCATIONAL, SCIENCE and ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS
Washington's New World Order Weapons Have the Ability to Trigger Climate Change - Michael Chossudovsky
Background on the HAARP Project - Rosalie Bertell
HAARP Now Running at Full Power - Marshall Smith [July 14, 2001]
HAARP Home Page - University of Alaska
HAARP: Detection and Image of Underground Structures Using ELF/VLF Radio Waves - American Federation of Scientists
Alaska Conservation Foundation - 1996 [includes reprint of Popular Science article]


III. ONLINE JOURNAL, MAGAZINE, AND NEWSPAPER ARTICLES
U.S. HAARP Weapon Development Concerns Russian Duma - Interfax News Agency [August 9, 2002]
ARCO, Eastland, and the Roots of HAARP - Gar Smith/Earth Island Journal [1994]
HAARP...Knocking on Heaven's Door Popular Science [1995]
Is HAARP associated with Star Wars - SSIMICRO [Canada}


IV. INDIVIDUAL WEB SITES
Holes in Heaven - A Docuumentary
HAARP Updates
Weapons of Total Destruction
HAARP Rumors Fly - Dreamland [2001]
Project HAARP"The Pentagon's Provocative Plan to Superheat the Earth's Inosphere - Jonathan Vankin and John Whalen

[gaiacomm]

What will happen if Lance Haubrick turns up at Zerefos's symposium claiming to be Dr. Judah Ben Hur?


Halva;

Let them have their fun. This is the internet and anything goes!!!!

The work we do will not be found on the internet and the location of the office will always be a storefront office. We just wanted to be on the internet for documentation purposes. Our work is and will remain classified, period. The debunker patrol can continue their claims and chatter. They will NEVER uncover the truth because they live in AMERICA!

[halva]

Gaiacomm, when you last left this forum you were frustrated at your inability to prove to debunkers that you were not Lance Haubrick.

Show a little awareness of the work that is needed for us to transform that situation into one where debunkers have to show that you ARE Lance Haubrick.

An odd cut-and-paste from you from time to time would be O.K.

Nothing more is required at this forum.

Thank you.

[letxa2000]

Halva: Show a little awareness of the work that is needed for us to transform that situation into one where debunkers have to show that you ARE Lance Haubrick.

Show a little awareness that who giacomm is is supremely unimporant. He is simply a person that copy/pastes large article that we have to use the "page down" key to skip.

What is important is that no-one here has yet adequately defined what a chemtrail is, how it is different from a normal contrail, provided any scientific proof that they exist, nor provided any evidence of an ongoing chemtrail program.

You want to debunk the debunkers? You can start by answering these very basic questions and providing evidence. Until then, it will continue to be just nonsense based on an Internet hoax.

[halva]

Is this a signal that you want to resume the debate that you withdrew from, Letxa?

[gaiacomm]

Gaiacomm, when you last left this forum you were frustrated at your inability to prove to debunkers that you were not Lance Haubrick.

Show a little awareness of the work that is needed for us to transform that situation into one where debunkers have to show that you ARE Lance Haubrick.

An odd cut-and-paste from you from time to time would be O.K.

Nothing more is required at this forum.

Thank you.


I understand. Its ok for all to assume I am Lance, its ok. I prefer that anyway. It makes no difference either way.

As for my cut and paste posts....well everyone else does it and the answers to chemtrails will be taken care of in europe and not in a backward thinking america where americans think that excess is normal!

I just came back for a moment to play! I am done!

[letxa2000]

halva: Is this a signal that you want to resume the debate that you withdrew from, Letxa?

You never really engaged in the debate. Your answers were inadequate and in no way differentiated what you consider a chemtrail from a normal contrail. It is impossible to debate with you when there is no clear definition of what we're talking about. That's why I addressed others, including footsolider and Lynn/SMT, in the hopes that someone would step up to the plate and address the matters that need to be addressed.

While it'd be great if someone answered the famous "10 questions" that have been repeated throughout this thread, it's pretty clear no-one is going to address them in any serious fashion. But to debate this issue I think I'd settle for one well-answered question:

Define what a chemtrail is. The answer should not be subjective and should provide sufficient definition such that a neutral observer looking up at the sky could use the definition to distinguish a chemtrail from a contrail.

The answer to the above question is the absolute minimum needed to have any intelligent discussion on the topic. Otherwise, we may all be talking about different things and not even know it.

[whitemajikman]

They will NEVER uncover the truth because they live in AMERICA!

Well,we are about to find out Lance........

In the next couple of days make sure to have coffee ready.

And make sure you have your pants on when you get a knock on your door.

we wouldn't want to have to post a pic of you and your natural environment.......with you half naked........now would we........?



The work we do will not be found on the internet and the location of the office will always be a storefront office. We just wanted to be on the internet for documentation purposes. Our work is and will remain classified, period. The debunker patrol can continue their claims and chatter. They will NEVER uncover the truth because they live in AMERICA!



Your work will always remain classified in your schizophrenic mind.......Lance.

Also Judah is not going to make any appearance,because quite frankly Judah himself is a scam.

Also I'm sick and tired of your refusal to admit to your elaborate deception.

So keep an eye out for the shutterbug patrol ,they are very effective at getting to the truth.


When we are done Lance proving to you that you are indeed a fraud and in need of medication,you would be wise to go get help for your split personality disorder.

[whitemajikman]

Geoengineering our skies is real, the evidence is everywhere, believe what you wish, or until you come up with what you feel is the ability to see "beyond a resonable doubt". (You realize of course I am speaking to "you" in case any newbies are here and believe you to be a corporate shill at the worst or an ego addict at best and realize the "futility" of any efforts otherwise as I fully suspect you are VERY aware of the military/gov./corporate designs to 'Own The Weather'. No offense just trying to be up front.)

Weather as a Force Multiplier:
Owning the Weather in 2025



A Research Paper

Presented To

Air Force 2025

by

Col Tamzy J. House
Lt Col James B. Near, Jr.
LTC William B. Shields (USA)
Maj Ronald J. Celentano
Maj David M. Husband
Maj Ann E. Mercer
Maj James E. Pugh

August 1996



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer

2025 is a study designed to comply with a directive from the chief of staff of the Air Force to examine the concepts, capabilities, and technologies the United States will require to remain the dominant air and space force in the future. Presented on 17 June 1996, this report was produced in the Department of Defense school environment of academic freedom and in the interest of advancing concepts related to national defense. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or the United States government.


This report contains fictional representations of future situations/scenarios. Any similarities to real people or events, other than those specifically cited, are unintentional and are for purposes of illustration only.
This publication has been reviewed by security and policy review authorities, is unclassified, and is cleared for public release.



Well Smt did you happen to read the disclaimer before taking everything you read as Gospel....?



The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or the United States government.


And what do you make of this little tidbit from the same disclaimer....?





This report contains fictional representations of future situations/scenarios. Any similarities to real people or events, other than those specifically cited, are unintentional and are for purposes of illustration only.


Or how about this one......?


You see there are government think tanks all over the place dreaming up "what if" scenario's......


And let's be honest you don't want me to start posting the "First contact with aliens" scenario's.....................

Or the "If the moon were to leave it's orbit" scenario's........

Or the Thermo nuclear war Scenario's.......

Damn They pretty much have a scenario for every crackpot unimaginable thing that could possibly happen......and then some.


Do you know what you are guilty of here.......Smt.......?

You are guilty of believing in a hoax that should have died out long ago, and also of taking everything you read and mating it with your hoax.

instead of questioning.........why would the military put it out on to the internet for People to peruse it.....?

And why is it that in 1996 at the time of this articles writing .......that the Green's were on there way to oblivion.

Well it's because Global warming and it's data were inconclusive and contradictory.

Just as it is today.....8 years later.

But let's get back to owning the weather.

You see Smt another bit of logic is that the enemies of the U.S. also are literate in using technology and the internet,So again why would the U.S. government warn all of their enemies that by 2025 we will own the weather......?

You have taken what you have read, and made it into what you want to believe, there by tainting yourself with bias.

Next.........[/quote]

[superliberal]

whitemajikman, I have sat back and watched you attack for a while now. You have been labeling these people every step of the way. I think a good question would be how much time do you and these other people go after the likes of Halva? How many groups are you on that follow them? That could be considered a cult! And the definition of a stalker can be applied considering your quotes about showing up at someones door and taking a picture.

I think that Halva and the others truely believe in chemtrails and want to stop it. If what they say is true then it is a pretty honorable thing. It is not as if they are harming you or anyone else. So while I can understand disagreeing with them, your demeanor and chastising is really unwarranted.

In no way do I think the people who follow chemtrails are bad people. So
Lets show a little class here!




halva wrote:
Whitemajikman, the representative of the debunker "viewpoint" that I agreed to debate with was Letxa, not you.



WHY DO YOU ALL FEAR MY WISDOM.......?

WHY cant you Quit beating that dead horse and talk to me like a human being not a chemtrail activist......?

I have Proved to you today thru logic that your cause is a CULT.

Do YOU have any clue how sucked in by this hoax you truly are.....?

You CANNOT EVEN DEFEND AGAINST MY PLAIN WORDS OR OBSERVATION'S.

Is it because you cannot Converse on anything OTHER than The CHEMTRAIL HOAX.......or your Wasted ATTEMPTS AT ACIDIC HUMOUR.

SHOW YOUR HUMANITY WAYNE,NOT YOUR CULT TEACHING'S OR THE PARTY LINE.

HOW can YOU NOT SEE that WHAT YOU BELONG TO IS NOTHING MORE Than AN INTERNET BASED CULT.......SOLEY TO PROPAGATE AN ALREADY DEBUNKED HOAX.

The GAIACOM'S AND JUDAH'S OF THIS WORLD CARE LITTLE FOR YOUR WELL BEING AND ONLY WISH TO USE YOU FOR THEIR OWN LITTLE PUPPET.

SAME WITH THE MOJOMAN .......WHO WAS TALKING ABOUT FORMING HIS OWN CULT A YEAR AGO.

SAME WITH THERMIT WHO ONLY CARES ABOUT ADVERTISING AND HIS OWN SITES VIABILITY AND MORTALITY.

SAME WITH ALL OF THEM WAYNE.

TRY AND DENY THIS,IF YOU REALLY TRULY THINK THAT THEY GIVE A DAMN OF WHAT YOU BELIEVE.........THEN THEIR WOULD NOT BE SO MUCH IN-FIGHTING AND CENSORSHIP.

WAYNE I AM SENDING YOU A LIFELINE WHERE YOUR THOUGHTS AND IDEA'S WILL BE LOOKED UPON AS NOT A PART OF SOME CULT,BUT WILL HAVE RELEVANCE TO THE PURSUIT OF ANSWER'S.

I THINK YOU HAVE OUTGROWN THE CHEMMIE CULT AND TRULY SEE IT FOR WHAT IT HAS BECOME.

CHAOS.

And NOT VERY PRODUCTIVE.

WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO TAKE THE LIFE LINE AND WORK TOGETHER IN MAKING OTHER's REALIZE THE TRAP THEY ARE IN.....?

YOU CAN STILL LEAVE YOUR INTEGRITY AND REPUTATION INTACT.


IF ONLY YOU WERE TO SEE THE LIGHT OF THE TRUTH THAT I AM TRYING TO CONVEY.

NOW ALL THAT I REQUEST IS THAT YOU TALK TO ME AS 2 RATIONAL HUMAN BEINGS SHOULD BE ABLE TO CONVERSE.

WITHOUT CHEMTRAIL'S OR THE CHAINS THAT BIND YOU.

IN OTHER WORDS WAYNE IS THERE ANYTHING IN THAT HEART OF YOURS LEFT THAT RESEMBLES HUMANITY.......?

[letxa2000]

So while I can understand disagreeing with them, your demeanor and chastising is really unwarranted.

I agree that whitemajikman's demeanor is not appropriate and has been over the top. Such aggressiveness and unwarranted responses can be seen on both sides of the debate. Believe me, I've been subjected to much more aggressive chastising by chemtrail believers in the past. If you have any doubts, just check out this thread (http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum6/HTML/001912.html). Let me tell you up front it's 15 pages long and probably not very interesting to you, but the language, attitude, and vulgarities I was subjected to in that thread far exceeds anything whitemajikman has dished out in this thread.

I stress that this is not justification for whitemajikman's comments in this thread nor do they excuse them, but do be aware that there are people on both sides of the issues that get very worked up over the topic.


It is not as if they are harming you or anyone else.

That's not always entirely true.

An example can be seen on this conspiracy site (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=32727&page=4&sort=) where a gullible reader ("TrueLies") asks on February 16th what are in "chemtrails", she is flooded with silly theories, and then later reports a list of ailments including "paranoia." Even her husband told her she shouldn't visit such conspiracy sites, and yet the fact that she did caused her to have a hypochondriac-style response to non-existant chemicals.

Another example when people get too wrapped up in conspiracy theories are events like this (http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20040214_1037.html) where a man, fearing alien clones and a CIA conspiracy, killed two people before surrendering.

I've also seen quotes of a chemtrail believer posting a message on Yahoo groups advocating the shooting-down of planes suspected of spraying chemtrails. That message has been deleted and most chemtrail believers rejected that kind of response--but the fact remains that some crazy person out there read the chemtrail conspiracy, got worked up, and seemed ready to shoot down planes he thought were "spraying."

I personally don't think that most chemtrail believers actually want to hurt anyone, but there are lots of crazy people out there. You give them a push in the wrong direction with a scary conspiracy story and they can react in very unpredictable ways. Spreading unsubstantiated rumors without evidence is always dangerous.

[halva]

[quote]Halva: Show a little awareness of the work that is needed for us to transform that situation into one where debunkers have to show that you ARE Lance Haubrick.



Show a little awareness that who giacomm is is supremely unimportant.


Letxa, it has been very important for your colleagues to tell the world that he is Lance Haubrick, irrespective of whether or not this is true.



What is important is that no-one here has yet adequately defined what a chemtrail is, how it is different from a normal contrail, provided any scientific proof that they exist, nor provided any evidence of an ongoing chemtrail program.

You want to debunk the debunkers? You can start by answering these very basic questions and providing evidence. Until then, it will continue to be just nonsense based on an Internet hoax.

Letxa, I don't want to debunk the debunkers. I don't want to talk to you at all or have anything to do with you. It is you who want to debunk. You barge into the middle of a discussion between myself and Gaiacomm in order to change the subject and return it to what YOU want to talk about. And what you want to talk about is something you and I had already been discussing (after repeated insistence from you). I answered your questions to the best of my ability, but then when I asked YOU a question you found too hard to answer, you terminated the discussion.

You chickened out.

Y0UR CHICKENING OUT IS DIFFERENT FROM MY REFUSING TO HOLD A DISCUSSION WITH YOU. I MADE IT CLEAR FROM THE OUTSET THAT I DON'T WANT TO TALK TO YOU.

YOU INSIST ON TALKING UNTIL I ASK YOU A QUESTION YOU CAN'T ANSWER AND THEN YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND AND REFUSE TO TALK.

YOU TERMINATE DISCUSSION, AND THEN RESUME IT AGAIN BY INTERRUPTING WHEN I AM TALKING TO SOMEONE ELSE. YOU CHANGE THE SUBJECT TO BRING IT BACK TO WHAT INTERESTS YOU, ALTHOUGH I HAD TOLD YOU I WOULD DISCUSS WHAT INTERESTS YOU ONLY ON THE CONDITION THAT YOU ALSO DISCUSS WHAT INTERESTS ME.

Make up your mind. Do you want to talk to me or don't you?

Yes or no. If you say yes, the debate continues with whatever answers you get. I accepted your inadequate answer to my question on why you thought Teller said his sunshield was economically viable. I didn't say I am not debating with you any more: your answer is inadequate.

If you say no, then don't talk to me, and don't interrupt when I am talking to others as if you want me to talk to you instead.

So do we continue the dialogue? YES or NO?

[letxa2000]

halva: Letxa, it has been very important for your colleagues to tell the world that he is Lance Haubrick, irrespective of whether or not this is true.

I have no idea who Lance Haubrick is nor do I care if it's the same person as some else. If someone else is obsessed with that, whatever. I don't see that it makes his copy/paste spamming runs any more or less important. All I know about giacomm is that when I see his name I immediately scroll to the next message.


You barge into the middle of a discussion between myself and Gaiacomm in order to change the subject and return it to what YOU want to talk about.

Private discussions are normally held via email. If you don't want someone in the middle of your discussion with Gaiacomm, go discuss it in private. That's what email is for. The topic here, as far as I can tell, has been chemtrails for almost a hundred pages.


I answered your questions to the best of my ability, but then when I asked YOU a question you found too hard to answer, you terminated the discussion.

Don't flatter yourself. The problem is that "the best of your ability" was not up to snuff compared to the two first questions I answered. My first two answers were very specific, concise, and to the point. You, however, didn't define chemtrail and pointed to no scientific evidence which basically means you didn't answer the questions. Having received two non-answers I certainly didn't see any reason to continue putting any effort into my responses to you. It has nothing to do with chickening out.


Y0UR CHICKENING OUT IS DIFFERENT FROM MY REFUSING TO HOLD A DISCUSSION WITH YOU. I MADE IT CLEAR FROM THE OUTSET THAT I DON'T WANT TO TALK TO YOU.

Hmmm... I thought I was the "representative" that you agreed to debate?

"halva (Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2004 1:35 pm): Whitemajikman, the representative of the debunker "viewpoint" that I agreed to debate with was Letxa, not you."


Make up your mind. Do you want to talk to me or don't you?

I couldn't care less if I'm talking with you, Sore Throat, SMT, or anyone else. I simply want someone to answer what should be a very simple question:

Define what a chemtrail is. The answer should not be subjective and should provide sufficient definition such that a neutral observer looking up at the sky could use the definition to distinguish a contrail from a chemtrail.

[halva]

Third question:


In your previous communication on this subject you indicated that one reason for the unreasonability of aerosol spraying as a means of mitigating undesirable effects of climate change would be the great cost. What do you think it may have been that led Edward Teller to believe (or at least to claim) that his "Sunshield" proposal would be a better economic proposition than trying to move the international economy away from over-dependence on fossil fuels?

[halva]

My "Strategies against Climate Change" is to be published in the best-known Greek political ecology magazine "Oikotopia".

[halva]

[quote="letxa2000"]
I have no idea who Lance Haubrick is nor do I care if it's the same person as some else. If someone else is obsessed with that, whatever. I don't see that it makes his copy/paste spamming runs any more or less important. All I know about giacomm is that when I see his name I immediately scroll to the next message.
[quote]

WH:
If that's all you know, and you don't have a clue what people are talking about, that is another reason for not barging in.

You may notice that Reynolds has gone rather quiet lately.

[letxa2000]

You may notice that Reynolds has gone rather quiet lately

And you may have notice that no-one has answered what should be a very simple question: Define what a chemtrail is. The answer should not be subjective and should provide sufficient definition such that a neutral observer looking up at the sky could use the definition to distinguish a contrail from a chemtrail.

Why is it that you, SMT/Lynn, footsoldier, and others seem so eager to avoid answering that question?

[halva]

Why have you avoided THIS question?


Third question:


In your previous communication on this subject you indicated that one reason for the unreasonability of aerosol spraying as a means of mitigating undesirable effects of climate change would be the great cost. What do you think it may have been that led Edward Teller to believe (or at least to claim) that his "Sunshield" proposal would be a better economic proposition than trying to move the international economy away from over-dependence on fossil fuels?

[Bonehead9]

You may notice that Reynolds has gone rather quiet lately.

Probably because he is not sitting in front of his computer every waking moment, like you.

[letxa2000]

halva: Why have you avoided THIS question?

I already told you why. I asked you two questions and answered two questions. I answered your questions very concisely while your responses weren't even answers to my questions. We're no closer to knowing what a chemtrail is nor what the scientific basis for them are and yet you expect me to continue answering other questions. Why didn't I answer your third question? I did. I said "politics" which is about the same level of effort you put into your first two "answers."

I'm fine with a one-question-at-a-time and a question-for-a-question process, but I expect a little more effort on your part. Just answering "I don't know" is not an acceptable answer and certainly doesn't "earn" you anything towards asking me the next question.

[halva]

I did not reject your answer: "politics". I may, if we had continued the exchange of questions and answers, have asked for more elaboration. But I did not say: "This answer is not good enough. I'm not continuing."

You are the one who did that.

You do not merely ask me to elaborate. You threaten me if you don't get the kind of answer you want.

I have not done that to you.

[letxa2000]

Halva: You do not merely ask me to elaborate. You threaten me if you don't get the kind of answer you want.

When in the world have I ever threatened you or anybody?


I did not reject your answer: "politics". I may, if we had continued the exchange of questions and answers, have asked for more elaboration. But I did not say: "This answer is not good enough. I'm not continuing." You are the one who did that.

You just asked the same question again which suggests to me you rejected it the first time I answered it.

But the only question that really matters is Define what a chemtrail is. The answer should not be subjective and should provide sufficient definition such that a neutral observer looking up at the sky could use the definition to distinguish a contrail from a chemtrail. I'm still mystified why you and others that seem so concerned about the topic would go to such lengths to avoid answering this simple question. I'm sure that others here are wondering, too, what in the world a chemtrail is and why those that are most concerned about them don't want to tell us what they are and how to identify them.

[gaiacomm]

whitemajikman and other debunker wanttabe's I hope and pray that you all as you post have very strong firewalls!

[lynn george]

Link has a close up.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16528

WOW!!! SuperLiberal, I like that. Every picture tells a story don't it? I'm gonna print that one, the one with the lovely clouds! :shock: Thanks,

SmT

SmT-So yes, look at this MESS! Why exactly are these planes being allowed to pollute the clear blue skies and turn it into a thick ChemHaze. The aerosol releases from these planes can cut the sunlight out into that familiar erie ChemGlow that one might find on a geoengineering stamp. :D

Are you really saying we can't prevent this destruction of our skies? If that is REALLY what it is rather than as many believe a purposeful shield to Modify the weather and climate, along with providing ducting for communications and possibly weather control etc. etc. then we should all be saying STOP THE POLLUTION NOW!!! But if as I said this is on purpose and intended to be Geoengineering technology then THe People need to be made aware so that they don't end up opposing all technology misinterpreting it as pollution rather than mitigation. That is if the mitigation is not pollution itself. Time to come clean and stop the Bunkie BS. Take a HARD look at that picture. I was recently out at Earth Day last week with some folks that spent the day discussing "geoengineering" with dozens of very interested people. WE visited booths set up by many many Earth conscience and other Spiritual people and shared ideas all day long. If those hundred reach another hundred and those ect. many people will become informed enough to take a more active role in their own health and lives. I couldn't believe the number of people that had ASTHMA as we talked of the aerosol programs with different folks. About every other person was saying "yeah I have asthma" or "yeah I have to use an inhaler", it was absolutely unexpected by me and I found it very bizarre. Here in Mid Missouri there is really no industry and the air while having high pollen often is relatively clean from city pollution. I am not sure what to attribute it to. I DO realize these huge aerosol dispersions and cloud banks formed from plane "exhaust" clould be raining particulates down on the masses and causing some of the reaction. Of course it may not be having an affect either and I admit entirely it may be due to other complete or partial concerns. I do think however with the very large concern over this seemingly sudden rise in lung disease we should perhaps pay more attention to our air. I almost wonder if economics is playing a vastly more important role in the ever on going debate where to draw the line in cost (lives lost or damaged) vs profits(wealth gained or other lives enhanced). Is it really possible that as some have claimed these geoengineering proposals of blocking the sun will continue to be enacted even as some of the countries continue to ignore the root causes of climate change. What happens when the Shield can no longer be maintained. A Die-off. A population "correction"? It gets amazingly hot here when the "chemplanes" don't come and put out there "clouds". I'm not kidding. I don't know for sure what they're spreading but it DEFINATELY coools down the day when they come out and though we get a very ChemHazey day it really does cool it down. I'm not advocating this but just reporting. God help us if the Earth should become addicted to planes coming out and laying down an artificial cloud clover to compensate for our massive "uncontrollable" pollution!

Show -Me Blue Skies

[halva]

Factor in the content of SmT's posting, Letxa, before you reiterate to me that all that is important is definitions, and before you demand again that if we continue our individual discussion it will be on the proviso that I accept that your own obsessive denial syndrome should be given priority over what I and other non-debunkers believe to be important, otherwise you may terminate the discussion at any point you choose (that, by the way, is a THREAT).

So, Letxa, do you want to continue the point by point debate, or not?

[superliberal]

I briefly went thru the first couple pages and did not see much wrong. That thread is rather long winded and hard to follow. 15 pages is a long time to debate other peoples beliefs so if there was some anger or such thing I can't say I wouldn't blame them. Halva is taking all this like a trooper.

It is one thing to believe something that you think is harming people and another over aliens or such conspiracies. I do not see the connection. Environmentalist are labeled as kooks and a bunch of other things as well. But much of current news bares out their concerns. Californians are seeing it a lot. We are top of the list in the latest EPA warnings.

I got into this forum because it kept staying at the top. It seems a lot of people are ganging up on one person and to be honest, this thread would have dropped out of site without all of it. Are you trying to bring the subject at hand to light or the people who care about it? I do not understand the reasoning here.

Really, it seems that you have spelled out your points on the forum you presented. To keep argueing over and over seems to be a waste of time on something you obviously believe to not be true. I also see that Halva is a member of that forum as well and that you 2 have had discussions before.

So now you're here doing it again? Not sure your whole motivation here.



So while I can understand disagreeing with them, your demeanor and chastising is really unwarranted.

I agree that whitemajikman's demeanor is not appropriate and has been over the top. Such aggressiveness and unwarranted responses can be seen on both sides of the debate. Believe me, I've been subjected to much more aggressive chastising by chemtrail believers in the past. If you have any doubts, just check out this thread (http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum6/HTML/001912.html). Let me tell you up front it's 15 pages long and probably not very interesting to you, but the language, attitude, and vulgarities I was subjected to in that thread far exceeds anything whitemajikman has dished out in this thread.

[letxa2000]

SmT-So yes, look at this MESS! Why exactly are these planes being allowed to pollute the clear blue skies and turn it into a thick ChemHaze. The aerosol releases from these planes can cut the sunlight out into that familiar erie ChemGlow that one might find on a geoengineering stamp.

What makes you think that this day was a clear blue sky before the contrails appeared? The "haze" you see is almost definitely naturally occurring high altitude cirrus. I assume you understand that there can be hazy days without contrails, that not all hazy days are caused by contrails, and just because you have a hazy day the same day you have contrails that that doesn't mean that contrails caused the haze. Haze, naturally occurring cirrus, and contrails all can form in similar atmospheric conditions. They are all caused by the atmospheric conditions, not by the contrails.


Are you really saying we can't prevent this destruction of our skies? If that is REALLY what it is rather than as many believe a purposeful shield to Modify the weather and climate, along with providing ducting for communications and possibly weather control etc. etc. then we should all be saying STOP THE POLLUTION NOW!!!

First, it's not pollution. It's water vapor. It's as much pollution as your common every day cloud.

Second, yes, the frequency of contrails can be reduced by avoiding air masses that are conducive to persistent contrails. I don't have the link handy but I believe I read somewhere in the last couple of weeks that the estimate is that we could reduce persistent contrails but we'd end up increasing jet fuel consumption by about 6%. Now that is pollution and a higher price for plane tickets. If the decision is made that persistent contrails are affecting the atmosphere in a way that people don't want and people are willing to increase real pollutants by 6% and probably see airfare increase proportionally, sure, reroute the planes. I have no problem with that issue being discussed and considered.


But if as I said this is on purpose and intended to be Geoengineering technology then THe People need to be made aware so that they don't end up opposing all technology misinterpreting it as pollution rather than mitigation.

That's a big if. IF you are right, then I do agree with you--they should tell us. But I've seen no evidence that you are right. That's where my interest lies, separating the fact from speculation.


Take a HARD look at that picture.

I did, and I'm still curious where the circular contrails are and how you determined they are similar in length.


I couldn't believe the number of people that had ASTHMA as we talked of the aerosol programs with different folks.

I've had asthma since I was 7 years old. I almost died during an attack when I was 15. But that doesn't mean I blame it on someone spraying us from 30,000 feet.

I can also speak from first-hand experience that asthma is the new "catch all." If someone has a problem breathing they get diagnosed with asthma and given an inhaler. I've lived with asthma almost all my life and know what it is--and it's amazing how many people claim to have asthma and have an inhaler and most definitely don't have asthma. They tell me their symptoms and I just shake my head because they're not describing asthma; thank God most of these people have never experienced a real asthma attack. But the inhaler is a miracle drug and it'll fix just about any respiratory problem you can imagine. Heck, if you're just out of breath from doing exercsie the inhaler will get you back to 100% in 10 seconds flat.


Here in Mid Missouri there is really no industry and the air while having high pollen often is relatively clean from city pollution.

Asthma is triggered by all kinds of things and I dare say most of them are natural, such as pollens and sudden changes in temperature. I've been to Mexico City (pure contamination)--my eyes watered, but my breathing was fine. Every day I go out for a bike ride in the late afternoon here in Monterrey--lots of contaminants, tons of traffic within 30 feet of me on each side, and dust but no problem breathing. I can be in a smoke-filled room and I'm fine. But get a little pollen in the air or if I walk into a one-cat house and I'm toast. I for one would be much healthier, breathing-wise, in a dirty city than in the middle of the "clean" midwest.


superliberal: I briefly went thru the first couple pages and did not see much wrong.

It gets worse as you go. The first few pages are relatively tame. But let me quote a few for you--I'll censor them myself so as not to get banned here, but if you read the thread you will find them in all their uncensored glory: "Your a sh*t disturber and you know it", "You are on crack my man!", "Your such a dork", "your pulling so much cr*p out of your *ss right now it is laughable", "You really are a cluster nut", "I could give 2 sh*ts about your ego", "Your so anal retentive", "Just a bunch of f*cking retards!", "F*cking move on you little panty waste", "NOT CLOUDs ***HOLE", "You're such an arrogant prick", "Chicken sh*t!", "No offense dude but your a moron". This is all in that 15-page thread and doesn't even count the slightly more tame accusations of being a disinformant, neocon, Bushite, incapable of common sense, etc. plus the other things I was called on that website.


Really, it seems that you have spelled out your points on the forum you presented.

The thread I linked to was on a completely separate topic: The NEXRAD radar anomaly conspiracy. We're talking about chemtrails here. Different topic, although most of those that believe in them think they're linked at some level.


So now you're here doing it again? Not sure your whole motivation here.

The topic was brought here by chemtrail believers and was found by someone who shares my belief that this is an Internet conspiracy theory with no basis in fact. I can't speak for the motivation of others, but I find it stimulating to debate issues and, in this case, I believe it is in the best interest of the public that speculation not be passed off as established fact.

This thread is also different in that most discussions are held on message boards such as the one I linked to. I was eventually banned because my views weren't popular. This board is unique for both the chemtrail believers and the skeptics because neither of us control the board so no-one is going to get banned for their beliefs.

[halva]

Before you get round to answering my question, Letxa, to fill you in on the Lance Haubrick story, since you don't pay much attention to whatever falls outside of the range of your own particular neurosis, this is what happened:

Reynolds told us that if we chemmies were serious we would send someone to participate in a symposium on ozone to be held on Kos in Greece in June, convened by the distinguished Greek atmospheric physicist Christos Zeferos. There we would draw the scientists' attention to what they are ignorant of, or are deliberately ignoring, in relation to "chemtrails".

Gaiacomm immediately said he would go there.

The debunkers proceeded to embark on a campaign of allegations that Gaiacomm is not Dr. Judah Ben-Hur, but a young man called Lance Haubrick. They plastered photographs of Haubrick all over this forum if you want to check thirty or forty pages back.

Gaiacomm has written to Dr. Zerefos and said that he wishes to participate in the symposium, and Dr. Zerefos has invited him to submit the relevant forms.

Reynolds has also drawn Dr. Zerefos' attention to himself (Reynolds) by embarking on correspondence with him. So Dr. Zerefos now knows Reynolds.

The debunkers, with Reynolds at their head, insist that Gaiacomm is a phoney, that he is not Dr. Judah Ben Hur, but Lance Haubrick.

If Gaiacomm goes to Kos and it turns out that he is not Lance Haubrick but Dr. Judah Ben Hur, then it is Reynolds who will be exposed as the phoney, and the other debunkers who vigorously participated in the Lance Haubrick allegations (i.e. most of the debunkers on this forum) will be exposed as people who have been duped by the phoney Jay Reynolds.

This will also become abundantly evident to Dr. Christos Zerefos, who is the foremost expert in Greece on atmospheric physics.

[jayreynolds]

Let's optimize a hypothetical train of events.

A reasonable person in Greece who genuinely sought knowledge about aviation related atmospheric issues would have gone to an local authoritative source and sought out his expertise. A pilot or someone who knows about the atmosphere would be able to provide invaluable information that a logical mind required.

A simple google search should have immediately led the truth seeker this way:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&q=atmospheric+physics+greece

To the Laboratory of Atmospheric Physics at Thessaloniki.
http://lap.physics.auth.gr/index.asp?lang=en

a search on the 'in-house'' search engine using keyword 'aviation' takes you to this abstract of research headed by Dr. Christos Zerefos:

"Evidence of impact of aviation on cirrus cloud formation
Zerefos C. S., K. Eleftheratos, D. Balis, P. Zanis, G. Tselioudis, and C. Meleti
http://lap.physics.auth.gr/researchDetails.asp?id=85

Another google search using keywords zerefos and aviation
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&q=zerefos+aviation

finds the whole text of the Zerefos paper:
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:QT-89UtCAqwJ:www.copernicus.org/EGU/acp/acpd/3/3335/acpd-3-3335.pdf+zerefos+aviation&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Ah, so an internationally recognized atmospheric scientist named Christos Zerefos exists!
The reasonable person would have contacted him and asked about the lines he saw in the skies over Greece.

I did exactly that, and Zerefos responded:
"Contrails usually seen in the cloudless Greek skies are of course results of contrails."

But no, foolish Wayne Hall went off the deep end into a vast conspiracy into which tens of thousands of atmospheric scientists seem totally blind to a massively obvious worldwide geoengineering project!

A massive worldwide geoengineering project through which ordinary planes are constantly flown by commercial pilots who are all oblivious to the visible trails made by fleets of US Air Force KC-135 air tankers through which they fly day-in-day-out for years, and never say a word about!

Are we starting to find the chemtrail idea rather unsupported here, people?

And what is the best scientiifc proof Wayne can cite in support for his claim?

Well, he can't cite any!

He can't cite any because he failed in the first place to learn about his premise, which are simply ordinary contrails, something Dr. Zerefos could have told him plenty about, if he had been genuinely interested.

And so now, a bogus "scientist" using the obviously fake name of "Dr. Judah Ben-hur" is trotted out. This fraud couldn't come up with any scientiifc proof for chemtrails, either. Supposedly this person will speak for the hoax at a conference of real scientists in a month or so.

Guess what, folks, it won't happen.

Are things getting clearer in regards to how this hoax and the people involved work their plot yet, people?

It's really time for you people to give up the hoax, you've 'outed' yourselves as much as time or myself could have ever 'outed' you. The hoax hangs by a thread of coercion, behind a wall of lies, subterfuge, and bannings of those who tell the truth.

All that's left of "chemtrails" is a hollow shell riddled with holes, leaking like a seive, sinking like alead balloon. SMT is almost apologetic as she waxes contradictions, footsoldier and 'sore' know they are licked and that they should be moving towards dumping the hoax, they also know just how stupid and foolish halva is making them appear.

Time to give it up, all of you.

[jayreynolds]

I have asked halva numerous times over the 108 pages of this thread to display an archetypical image of chemtrails.

He has refused to comply here, but at a "chemmie" only board which denies non-believers access, he posted a photo of skywriting and called it "chemtrails". I really think that this is what halva believes are "chemtrails", he is sooooooo confused!

Well, some of his fellow chemmies jumped right on the bandwagon, but he was eventually debunked, as always.

I notice he has now removed the photo in a lame attempt to cover up his stupidity. Read all about it:

http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=Discussion&action=display&num=1069283108

[lynn george]

Lex-" What makes you think that this day was a clear blue sky before the contrails appeared?"

SmT-Look at the picture once again. There is little if any cloud cover. It is odd you take a trivial point such as this and ignore totally the HUGE MESS caused by the planes I mentioned. Those are pure shill tactics. Perhaps the sky as shown by the "reasonably clear looking spaces" between the HUGE MESS caused by the aerosol trails as shown on the image, can only be assumed to be "reasonably blue" or"reasonably clear". Can you by the way prove there are invisable pockets of moisture or clouds that are not showing up on the image? For the record I have PERSONALLY witnessed a CRYSTAL CLEAR BLUE SKY here in Mid-Missouri be turned into an almost solid sheet of milkey white transluscent haze, in a matter of hours with ONLY the trails fusing together to coat the entire sky. And this was caused by dozens of planes coming out within hours flying in x's, right at each other, doing 180's etc. etc. in what can only be described as "military" looking flight manuevers.

Lex-" The "haze" you see is almost definitely naturally occurring high altitude cirrus."

SmT-Where do you come up with that? The HAZE I see looks like older trails that have fused together and the newer trails have yet to do so. That would be the logical assumption. Again how is it you assume this is "naturally" ocurring when what BLATANTLY stands out in the picture is the HUNDREDS of easily discernable aerosol trails from planes? Are we even looking at the same picture. You look for the speck but ignore the log.


Lex-" I assume you understand that there can be hazy days without contrails, that not all hazy days are caused by contrails, and just because you have a hazy day the same day you have contrails that that doesn't mean that contrails caused the haze. Haze, naturally occurring cirrus, and contrails all can form in similar atmospheric conditions. They are all caused by the atmospheric conditions, not by the contrails."

SmT- Straw man. The FACT is now clearly witnessed on the image posted aerosol trails realeased from planes are fusing together forming solid sheets of light reducing haze that often stretches from horizon to horizon and can cover entire states. Go back and look at the image of the trails fusing together that Sore Throat posted. This is being observed all over the world. This Sky Shield (whether one chooses to believe it is being purposely caused or just "allowed to happen") is blocking out the sun for days at a time over much of the Earth now.

Lex- First, it's not pollution. It's water vapor. It's as much pollution as your common every day cloud.

SmT-Prove it's only water vapor. I believe you are absolutely incorrect here as I have even heard even bunkies admit their are all sorts of pollutants in even jet exhaust. You have no more proof about what is in these aerosol releases than anyone else. As I mentioned before and you know quite well even grade school science books are teaching kids the way to counteract global warming is simply to burn a richer fuel mixture or one that puts out more PARTICLES for cloud nuclei. It's a dirty type of cloud seeding. What part of "Particle Air" do you fail to comprehend? Prove it's only water vapor. You can't.

SmT

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Second, yes, the frequency of contrails can be reduced by avoiding air masses that are conducive to persistent contrails. I don't have the link handy but I believe I read somewhere in the last couple of weeks that the estimate is that we could reduce persistent contrails but we'd end up increasing jet fuel consumption by about 6%. Now that is pollution and a higher price for plane tickets. If the decision is made that persistent contrails are affecting the atmosphere in a way that people don't want and people are willing to increase real pollutants by 6% and probably see airfare increase proportionally, sure, reroute the planes. I have no problem with that issue being discussed and considered.


But if as I said this is on purpose and intended to be Geoengineering technology then THe People need to be made aware so that they don't end up opposing all technology misinterpreting it as pollution rather than mitigation.

That's a big if. IF you are right, then I do agree with you--they should tell us. But I've seen no evidence that you are right. That's where my interest lies, separating the fact from speculation.


Take a HARD look at that picture.

I did, and I'm still curious where the circular contrails are and how you determined they are similar in length.


I couldn't believe the number of people that had ASTHMA as we talked of the aerosol programs with different folks.

I've had asthma since I was 7 years old. I almost died during an attack when I was 15. But that doesn't mean I blame it on someone spraying us from 30,000 feet.

I can also speak from first-hand experience that asthma is the new "catch all." If someone has a problem breathing they get diagnosed with asthma and given an inhaler. I've lived with asthma almost all my life and know what it is--and it's amazing how many people claim to have asthma and have an inhaler and most definitely don't have asthma. They tell me their symptoms and I just shake my head because they're not describing asthma; thank God most of these people have never experienced a real asthma attack. But the inhaler is a miracle drug and it'll fix just about any respiratory problem you can imagine. Heck, if you're just out of breath from doing exercsie the inhaler will get you back to 100% in 10 seconds flat.


Here in Mid Missouri there is really no industry and the air while having high pollen often is relatively clean from city pollution.

Asthma is triggered by all kinds of things and I dare say most of them are natural, such as pollens and sudden changes in temperature. I've been to Mexico City (pure contamination)--my eyes watered, but my breathing was fine. Every day I go out for a bike ride in the late afternoon here in Monterrey--lots of contaminants, tons of traffic within 30 feet of me on each side, and dust but no problem breathing. I can be in a smoke-filled room and I'm fine. But get a little pollen in the air or if I walk into a one-cat house and I'm toast. I for one would be much healthier, breathing-wise, in a dirty city than in the middle of the "clean" midwest.


superliberal: I briefly went thru the first couple pages and did not see much wrong.

It gets worse as you go. The first few pages are relatively tame. But let me quote a few for you--I'll censor them myself so as not to get banned here, but if you read the thread you will find them in all their uncensored glory: "Your a sh*t disturber and you know it", "You are on crack my man!", "Your such a dork", "your pulling so much cr*p out of your *ss right now it is laughable", "You really are a cluster nut", "I could give 2 sh*ts about your ego", "Your so anal retentive", "Just a bunch of f*cking retards!", "F*cking move on you little panty waste", "NOT CLOUDs ***HOLE", "You're such an arrogant prick", "Chicken sh*t!", "No offense dude but your a moron". This is all in that 15-page thread and doesn't even count the slightly more tame accusations of being a disinformant, neocon, Bushite, incapable of common sense, etc. plus the other things I was called on that website.


Really, it seems that you have spelled out your points on the forum you presented.

The thread I linked to was on a completely separate topic: The NEXRAD radar anomaly conspiracy. We're talking about chemtrails here. Different topic, although most of those that believe in them think they're linked at some level.


So now you're here doing it again? Not sure your whole motivation here.

The topic was brought here by chemtrail believers and was found by someone who shares my belief that this is an Internet conspiracy theory with no basis in fact. I can't speak for the motivation of others, but I find it stimulating to debate issues and, in this case, I believe it is in the best interest of the public that speculation not be passed off as established fact.

This thread is also different in that most discussions are held on message boards such as the one I linked to. I was eventually banned because my views weren't popular. This board is unique for both the chemtrail believers and the skeptics because neither of us control the board so no-one is going to get banned for their beliefs.[/quote]

[lynn george]

[quote="lynn george"][quote=superliberal]

Link has a close up.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16528

Compare this picture with the image progression Sore Throat posted showing how these aerosol trails fuse into one solid mass.

[lynn george]

Reynolds, Bonehead and airtankerpilot are clearly promoting an agenda of disinformation, denying a reality that is so obvious to anyone taking the time to observe.

"airtankerpilot" wrote:

[quote]
.....Planes do not make a sky full of cirrus.....


contradicted by Reynolds who responds to a William Thomas claim,


"-Normal contrails dissipate less than one minute after formation."
FALSE

So why don't you bunkers get your story straight...and while you're at it come to grips with the reality of aircraft emissions:



Source: http://www.skyhighway.com/~chemtrails/


Hi Sore Throat,

Yes, your mini film clip there does an excellent job showing what millions worldwide in many countries are seeing: Aerosols being released from planes- ususally it seems in conjunction with military type maneuvers- that can spread out within hours to completely obscure the sky and 'Turn down the sun'.


Yep, some bunkies it seems are going to remain in denial forever no matter that the evidence is pouring in as to what these aerosol trails are doing. I think it shows alot when a researcher looks at that image with hundreds of trails they focus on that, and when a bunkie sees such images of what these planes are doing they either run away or focus on non-issues. Typical head in the sand bunkie behavior. Denial, denial, denial.

Here's another link for bunkies to ignore and for climate engineering researchers that don't have it:

http://alberta.indymedia.org/news/2002/08/4138.php

SmT

[halva]

I see that Reynolds is continuing to punt on a statement made to him by Dr. Zerefos in a political context which he, unlike me

http://www.spectrezine.org/global/Hall.htm

has not subjected to analysis, and in a situation of possible off-the-record communication with which he would not be familiar if he is depending on public sources for his information.

He is also persisting in an assertion of the fraudulence of a person known to this forum as Gaiacomm, who claims to be Dr. Judah Ben-Hur, but who Reynolds claims is really a young man called Lance Haubrick.

The truth about Gaiacomm is likely to emerge well before the truth about 'chemtrails'. What effect is this going to have on the reputation of Reynolds, and of his followers?

Dr. Christos Zerefos is programmed to speak on climate change at a meeting of the Ecological Movement of Athens in late May, before the Kos symposium.

[halva]

Reynolds, in relation to the procedure you say I should have followed to find out the truth about "chemtrails", I have told you before, and will tell you again, to read the essay by Catherine Austin Fitts entitled "The American Tapeworm":

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0304/S00228.htm

At the end of the essay there are memorable lines:

"All solutions are found when we realize that this is something you and I can correct without wasting more time trying to find someone in charge of the tapeworm to persuade them to change its ways. It can’t change..."

Scientists are not in charge of the tapeworm. Mostly they despair of the ability of government to provide solutions. They like to meet activists who can tell them how to solve political problems, not ask them how to solve political problems.

[whitemajikman]

whitemajikman and other debunker wanttabe's I hope and pray that you all as you post have very strong firewalls!

Lance I hope and pray that you keep thinking that you are something that you are not.

You are most entertaining.

And if you knew anything about the "ART" of liberating Information,you would not have made such a stupid comment as the one up there between the quotation marks.

Because quite honestly a firewall ......or many, does not make the least bit of difference.......especially in this day and age.

so please keep talking.......you are proving our point for us that you are just a sham just like your alter ego Judah.

In fact quit taking your schizophrenic meds so The Great Judah can appear.

But he won't because just like chemtrails Judah is a figment of your imagination.

[gaiacomm]

whitemajikman and other debunker wanttabe's I hope and pray that you all as you post have very strong firewalls!

Lance I hope and pray that you keep thinking that you are something that you are not.

You are most entertaining.

And if you knew anything about the "ART" of liberating Information,you would not have made such a stupid comment as the one up there between the quotation marks.

Because quite honestly a firewall ......or many, does not make the least bit of difference.......especially in this day and age.

so please keep talking.......you are proving our point for us that you are just a sham just like your alter ego Judah.

In fact quit taking your schizophrenic meds so The Great Judah can appear.

But he won't because just like chemtrails Judah is a figment of your imagination.




You are a funny person and yet you seem intelligent, at least it seems that way!

Your fixation with Lance is quite amusing and demostrates the lack of intelligence and diligence to be able to seperate fact from fiction.

But if you insist on this shadow effect then there is no sense of debate.

Your IP address is already public as well as the device you use to access the internet!

[whitemajikman]

[size=18]Halva you failed to provide any evidence that The Chemtrail Hoax is in fact anything but the hoax it is. You cannot keep using chemtrails entertwined with geo-engineering to keep propagating this hoax.

Contrails cause pollution, always have always will until a better form of air transportation not based upon fossil fuels can be viable.

If you were to strictly do Geo-engineering research and investigation which is a reality unlike Chemtrails ,you would have more support because geo-engineering is based upon science not fiction as is the chemtrail hoax.

Also Halva your politics are suspect as is evident in your attempts to post your views that Canada Should BE ANNEXED,by the U.S.

You are a hypocritical politcal peon,Most of the sites that you post at are ANTI-NEW WORLD ORDER,ANTI-CORPORATE,AND TEND TO ILLICITE CONSPIRATORIAL OVERTONES.

BUT you THE HYPOCRITE HAS A VISION TO MAKE NORTH AMERICA INTO ANOTHER EUROPEAN UNION CONTRARY TO THE BELIEFS OF THE FINE PEOPLE WHO POST AT THESE SITES.

INSTEAD YOU WISH FOR ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT WITH YOU IN THE BACKGROUND PEDDLING YOUR HOAX.

YOUR SOCIALISTIC COMMUNIST AGENDA IS STILL BEING REALIZED BECAUSE YOU PREY ON INDIVIDUALS WHOM ARE THEMSELVES EASY VICTIMS BECAUSE OF THEIR ALREADY BIASED CONSPIRATORIAL VIEWS.

YOU TELL THEM THAT THEIR CAUSE IS YOUR CAUSE,WHEN IN FACT YOU SIT IN THE SHADOWS AND DREAM UP WAYS TO SUBVERT THESE POOR INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE BLINDED, FEEDING THEM WHATEVER IS NECESSARY TO APPEASE THEM .

NOT UNLIKE LANCE WHO SITS AT HIS TERMINAL DAILY AND TRIES TO SEE HOW MANY SUCKERS WILL BELIEVE HIS "TOP-SECRET SECURITY CLEARANCE" B.S.

AND PLEASE TELL ME WHY IN ALL THE DEBATE ON THE NET REGARDING THE EXISTENCE OF THE CHEMTRAIL HOAX,THE EXACT SAME PEOPLE KEEP POPPING UP TO PROPAGATE THIS HOAX......?

PLEASE TELL ME WHY YOU CANNOT ANSWER LEXTA'S VERY REAL, VERY GENERIC QUESTION THAT HAS BEEN ASKED OF YOU THOUSANDS OF TIMES NOT JUST BY HIM BUT MANY OTHERS..........?

PLEASE TELL ME WHY MOST IF NOT ALL OF THE OTHER CHEMMIE ELITE ,ONLY TOLERATE YOU BECAUSE YOU HAVE LIED TO THEM REGARDING YOUR SCIENTIFIC CONTACTS AND YOUR OWN IMPORTANCE,JUST LIKE LANCE DOES ON A DAILY BASIS.....?

PLEASE TELL ME WHY YOU HAVE CREATED AN INSULATED CULT WHICH HATES SCRUTINY SO MUCH THAT THEY ARE NOW CONVERSING ABOUT CLOSED FORUMS AND BANNING ANYONE WHO QUESTIONS THEIR SUPPOSED KNOWLEDGE.........?


PLEASE TELL ME HALVA WHAT IS AT STAKE FOR YOU PERSONALLY IN PROPAGATING THIS HOAX......?


PLEASE TELL ME HALVA WHY YOU THINK ARRIANA WOULD SIDE WITH A KNOWN SUBVERSIVE ELEMENT AS YOURSELF........WHEN YOU CAN"T EVEN ANSWER THE ONE QUESTION THAT IS PARAMOUNT TO YOUR HOAX.......?

PLEASE TELL ME WHY ARRIANA HAS NOT MADE ONE SINGLE POST ON THIS FORUM.........?

IN SUPPORT OF YOUR VIEWS........?


PLEASE TELL ME WHY YOU SEEM TO THINK YOU ARE THE SCOREKEEPER ON THIS THREAD......?

PLEASE TELL ME WHY YOU TALK OF SPAMMING BUT YOUR OWN COLLEAGUES COULD NOT HOLD THEIR TONGUES.........?

PLEASE TELL ME WHY THERE IS ONE HUNDRED PLUS PAGES DEDICATED TO YOUR EGO......?

PLEASE TELL ME WHY YOU ARE VERY VERY AFRAID OF OPEN SCRUTINY........?

PLEASE TELL ME WHY YOU FEAR THE DEBUNKERS WHEN SCIENCE EMBRACES THEM.......?

PLEASE TELL ME HOW YOU WILL BE ABLE TO INSULATE ALL THE FLAWS IN YOUR PROPAGATION OF A HOAX,WHEN AND IF THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA DO START TO TEAR APART YOUR THEORY......?

OR THE SCIENCE COMMUNITY......?

PLEASE TELL ME WHY YOU ARE JUST ANOTHER OPPERTUNIST WHO WISHES TO BE EMPEROR IN HIS OWN MIND BUT IS A PAUPER IN REALITY....?

PLEASE TELL ME WHY CLIFFIE IS NOW PRACTICING SELF MUTILATION BECAUSE HE CAN"T SEEM TO FIND THE PROOF.......?


PLEASE TELL ME IF YOU GOT ANY OF MARK SKY'S SHITTY POETRY.....?


PLEASE TELL ME WHY MECH TOLERATES A LITTLE HITLER LIKE YOU WHEN ALL YOU WISH TO DO IS SUBVERT HIM.........?

PLEASE TELL ME WHY ............


YOU SEE HALVA BEFORE WE CAN EVEN ENTERTAIN THE IDEA THAT YOU ARE NOTHING MORE THAN WHAT WE SAY YOU ARE.....

YOU NEED TO START EXPLAINING A FEW OF YOUR MANY TRAITS .......

WHICH DO NOT PAINT A PRETTY PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILE FOR YOURSELF.

PLEASE TELL ME WHY...........?

[whitemajikman]

Your IP address is already public as well as the device you use to access the Internet!

SO ..........

YOU SEE I HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE UNLIKE YOU.

AND MAY I ADD ...........FEAR.

[gaiacomm]

Your IP address is already public as well as the device you use to access the Internet!

SO ..........

YOU SEE I HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE UNLIKE YOU.

AND MAY I ADD ...........FEAR.



You have been debunked!!!!

[whitemajikman]

You have been debunked!!!!

OH REALLY YOU THINK SO.......?

OK MR. DEBUNKER POST YOUR FINDINGS I GIVE YOU PERMISSION.....FULL PERMISSION.

AGAIN YOU ARE CAUGHT IN A LIE.


SO IF YOU LIE THIS MUCH WHAT OF HALVA.........?

[whitemajikman]

COME ON LANCE I'M WAITING .........



AND PROBABLY TILL THE NEXT ICE-AGE.


YOU ARE SO TRANSPARENT.

[whitemajikman]

SINCE THE PURVEYORS OF THIS HOAX CANNOT JUSTIFY THEIR MOTIVATIONS AND STILL CANNOT ANSWER........OR EVEN...........

Define what a chemtrail is. The answer should not be subjective and should provide sufficient definition such that a neutral observer looking up at the sky could use the definition to distinguish a contrail from a chemtrail.

5 YEARS AFTER THE START OF THIS HOAX.........

AND HAVE SHOWN THEIR UTTER DISREGARD FOR SCIENCE AND LOGIC.

I PROCLAIM THIS THREAD DEAD!

ALONG WITH THE CHEMTRAIL HOAX.


OH AND HALVA I WOULD TAKE NOTE THAT IN THE LAST 108 PAGES .......


YOU STILL CANNOT DEFINE WHAT A CHEMTRAIL IS.....

YOU STILL CANNOT REALIZE THE IDIODICY OF YOUR CLAIMS......

YOU STILL CANNOT REALIZE THAT YOU ARE A GUPPIE IN A SEA OF SHARKS.......

YOU STILL CANNOT UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WERE BEATEN FAIRLY NOT BY US...........BUT BY YOURSELF AND YOUR NOTION'S OF GRANDEUR.

YOU STILL CANNOT COME TO TERMS WITH THE FACT THAT YOU ARE ONE MENTALLY FLAWWED INDIVIDUAL WHO LIKES TO SUBVERT ANYTHING THAT CROSSES YOUR PATH......


AND THE KICKER OF COURSE IS THAT LANCE THE LIAR........WHO YOU SAY YOU HAVE PLANS FOR .......HAS BEEN PROVEN TO BE THE SHAM HE IS.

AND SO ARE YOU BY ASSOCIATION..............

ONE BIG POWER HUNGRY, MANIACAL,ANTI-AMERICAN,INTERNET TERRORIST WHO LIKES TO HIDE BEHIND HOAXES TO HIDE YOUR PREJUDICE AND HATE FOR DEMOCRACY..........IF THESE 108 PAGES HAVE DONE NOTHING AT ALL IT HAS AT LEAST SHOWN YOU FOR WHAT YOU ARE..................THX FOR OUTTING YOURSELF TO THE PUBLIC AND MORE IMPORTANTLY TO THE REST OF YOUR CHEMMIE CHEMMIE CULT MEMBER'S


ALSO I THINK ANY HOPES OF ARRIANNA OR ANY OTHER POLITICAL PLAYER ACTUALLY TAKING YOU SERIOUSLY.........

HAS GONE OUT THE WINDOW..........

JUST LIKE YOUR HOAX.

[jayreynolds]

[quote=lynn george][quote=superliberal]

Link has a close up.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16528

Compare this picture with the image progression Sore Throat posted showing how these aerosol trails fuse into one solid mass.

Isn't it wonderful when foolish chemmies try to use well-documented NASA studies of CONTRAILS to try and support their claims about "CHEMTRAILS". The silly fools have come full circle and are actively debunking their own hoax!

1.SMT, do you really think that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of KC-135 tankers?

2.SMT , do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
all in clear sky conditions in full view of the entire southeastern US population, and that ordinary commercial planes fly right through all of this and only leave dissipating contrails?

3.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
that none of those commercial pilots find any of this suspicious or ever talks about it?

4.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
and that thousands of civilian air traffic controllers and many USAF fighter jet pilots on homeland defense patrols never speak out?

5.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers and that hundreds of scientists at NASA, thousands more US scientists reading the peer reviewed research and thousands more highly trained scientists worldwide never speak out?

6.SMT, isn't the likelihood of all the above scenarios are preposterous, and the truth is that what is shown in the photo are just ordinary contrails, like the caption at the link states?

7. SMT, if you are claiming that the photo shows such a geoengineering program in operation, the likelihood that a mentally stable person ever
accepting it is nil, and you have indeed gone off the deep end yourself.

[jayreynolds]

Wayne Hall wrote:
""All solutions are found when we realize that this is something you and I can correct without wasting more time trying to find someone in charge of the tapeworm to persuade them to change its ways. It can’t change..."

Scientists are not in charge of the tapeworm. Mostly they despair of the ability of government to provide solutions. They like to meet activists who can tell them how to solve political problems, not ask them how to solve political problems."
===================
Wayne, the tapeworm is the parasitic "chemtrails" hoax. It has embedded itself into mentally addled people, like you, who have acted as intermediate hosts and are trying to transfer the worm into the environmentalist community.

The parasite cares not about the effect on the host, because it feels it can always find another. The "chemtrail" parasite has already tried to feed on the conspiracy crowd, where it found hosts willing to tolerate it's drain. It similarly found succor in the UFO and newage communities.

The one domain in which the parasite will never become comfortable is the scientific community, which holds both the ultimate cure and sufficient prophylaxis to keep it at bay.

The "chemtrails" parasite is, after all, not true at all, and cannot exist within a community which relies on fact and logic as it's precepts, because fact and logic removes untruth as surely as a surgeons scalpel dissects
flesh.

That is why, when you embarked on your journey into "chemtrails" without first determining what normal contrails were, as I suggested you should have, you became a loser. "Chemtrails", like other belief based cults, have no place in the world of science, and never will.

If pressed, Zerefos will debunk your claims about "chemtrails", because he is a man of science.

As for Lance Haubrick, he will get what's coming to him, and he knows what I'm talking about.

[lynn george]

[quote=lynn george][quote=superliberal]

Link has a close up.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16528

Compare this picture with the image progression Sore Throat posted showing how these aerosol trails fuse into one solid mass.

Isn't it wonderful when foolish chemmies try to use well-documented NASA studies of CONTRAILS to try and support their claims about "CHEMTRAILS". The silly fools have come full circle and are actively debunking their own hoax!

1.SMT, do you really think that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of KC-135 tankers?

2.SMT , do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
all in clear sky conditions in full view of the entire southeastern US population, and that ordinary commercial planes fly right through all of this and only leave dissipating contrails?

3.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
that none of those commercial pilots find any of this suspicious or ever talks about it?

4.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
and that thousands of civilian air traffic controllers and many USAF fighter jet pilots on homeland defense patrols never speak out?

5.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers and that hundreds of scientists at NASA, thousands more US scientists reading the peer reviewed research and thousands more highly trained scientists worldwide never speak out?

6.SMT, isn't the likelihood of all the above scenarios are preposterous, and the truth is that what is shown in the photo are just ordinary contrails, like the caption at the link states?

7. SMT, if you are claiming that the photo shows such a geoengineering program in operation, the likelihood that a mentally stable person ever
accepting it is nil, and you have indeed gone off the deep end yourself.


SmT-Nope I'm not claiming any of that. What I'm saying simply is that as has been suggested in so many scientific papers and now widely advocated by both business and government, that the suggestion to simply burn a richer mixture or perhaps to slightly modify the fuel of some planes may now be being performed. Why would anyone find that so hard to accept? Since we now have documented evidence of government military spraying above millions of U.S. citizens spanning decades using various chemicals and pathogens why would one doubt other programs are still on going? As I said this very science of producing more carbon ON PURPOSE to provide nuclei for cloud growth is even being taught at the grade school level. Perhaps back when you were in school they didn't teach it. That's understandable. Now there is major money going into climate engineering and link after link after link the bunkies either ignore, switch topics, or post huge lists of ridiculous questions for endless busy work that further tries to discourage people from looking into this new science. The main point I made before is undeniable. The hundreds of aerosol trails shown covering the southeast showed the same act of fusing together that Sore Throat's picture showed. Airplanes are creating huge unbroken blankets of CheMHaze that covers entire portions of the country and remains for days and days if not weeks stealing the sunshine from the citizens. Is this on purpose? Many many many scientific papers and institutions now suggest it very well may be. So do hundreds of thousands of citizens reporting from the ground.

And as Mr. Matthews asked so succinctly in his article that I posted the link to: "And do we really want to live under a constant haze in the sky to keep cool"? .....and "Do a few scientists and policy makers have the right to impose this on all other life on the planet?" Now THOSE are reasonable questions worth asking. Perhaps our bunkie friends have some answers for that. :D

http://alberta.indymedia.org/news/2002/08/4138.php

SmT

[jayreynolds]

A notice to all "chemtrail" cult promoters:

CEASE AND DESIST PROMOTING THE "CHEMTRAIL" HOAX

The longer it continues the more opportunities that exist for this hoax, already a magnet for nutcases, to find a mass murderer fit to cause the terrorist threats frequently made at "ChemtrailtrackingUSA".

The most recent threats were made in posts #110676 and 110677, now deleted.

The moderator is now begging members to stop making threats, because I have already notified yahoo that they have made a practice of allowing such threats to be posted and to remain on their board in the past.

I will personally do my best, if such an incident ever occurs, to encourage state and Federal prosecution for as many "chemtrail" promoters as I can.
I will recommend they be tried under federal RICO and state criminal syndicalism laws if US citizens, and as enemy combatants if non-US.

I have previously written personally to Chem11, Dona Terry, Clifford Carnicom, Lorie Kramer, Mark Steadham, and William Thomas notifying them of my determinatiion to name them as the major players.

Take my words to heart, folks, and if you think some silly pseudonym hides your identity from the feds, guess again. The only people you hide from with a handle such as "foot soldier" or "sore" are your fellow citizens, your identities, if not already known, can be had in a heartbeat.

This thing is wrong and eventually you could find your name attached to somone getting hurt or being put in jail. Will you bear responsibility for your negligence in determining what normal contrails are?
Jay
====================
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chemtrailtrackingusa/message/110680
From: "i_dont_chat" <i_dont_chat@y...>
Date: Sat May 1, 2004 8:47 pm
Subject: This Group does not advocate shooting down planes


ADVERTISEMENT


To whom it may concern:

This Group does not in any way advocate shooting down planes with
missiles.

If members persist in posting these threating messages, we might very
well find ourselves without a Message Board. I believe it is
contrary to Yahoo's terms of conditions.

Moderator

[foot_soldier]

Excerpt from "Acts of Resistance", an essay by Elaine Scarry published in the May 2004 issue of Harpers Magazine:

"In distilled form, the logic of the Patriot Act and its defense involves four steps: Maximize the power of the Justice Department; erase the public record of Justice Department actions; respond with indignation if anyone protests that the Justice Department might actually be using its newly expanded powers; point out that the protestors are speaking without any hard evidence or facts without mentioning that the executive branch has withheld these very facts from the public."

The May 2004 issue of Harpers is well worth purchasing for this essay and also for the essay "Carbon Nation" by Jennifer Kahn in the "Briefings" section, and for "Buffalo Dances", a political analysis by Lewis Lapham.

[foot_soldier]

Study: Global warming linked to severe allergies, asthma

By JOAN LOWY
Scripps Howard News Service
April 29, 2004
http://www.knoxstudio.com/shns/story.cfm?pk=CLIMATEDISEASE-04-29-04&cat=AS

WASHINGTON - Global warming may be increasing the severity of allergies and asthma, particularly among inner-city children, according to a report released Thursday by Harvard University researchers and the American Public Health Association.

Increases in atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide combined with warmer temperatures are having profound effects on plant growth, causing some plants in the United States and elsewhere to flower earlier in the spring and to release greater amounts of pollen while in flower, the report said.

Most scientists believe that pollution from coal-fired power plants and automobiles are responsible for the increase in atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas chiefly responsible for global warming.

Plants breathe carbon dioxide much the way people breathe oxygen. The more carbon-rich atmosphere is spurring fungal growth, which results in the release of more mold allergens, and increases the growth of "opportunistic weeds" like ragweed and poison ivy that flourish in cities, scientists said.

Pollen and mold don't cause asthma, but they can exacerbate the condition, the report said. At the same time, diesel particulates from trucks and buses in traffic-congested cities help deliver pollen and mold to the immune system in the lungs, the report said.

Between 1980 and 1994, asthma among preschool children increased 160 percent and 75 percent in the general population, the report said. The highest incidence of asthma is found among low-income, African-American toddlers, a large share of whom live in urban areas, the report said.

Asthma rates are also strikingly high along inner-city bus routes and areas with high traffic congestion, scientists said.

"This is a real wake-up call for people who mistakenly think global warming is only going to be a problem way off in the future or that it has no impact on their lives in a meaningful way," said Christine Rogers, a senior scientist at the Harvard School of Public Health and co-author of the report.

About 40 million Americans have hay fever and an estimated 318 million workdays are lost each year as the result of allergies, Rogers said.

While carbon dioxide is a natural part of the atmosphere, CO2 levels have increased from about 280 parts per billion at the start of the industrial revolution to 379 parts currently.

The atmosphere directly above cities may be even richer in carbon dioxide. Domes of carbon dioxide of between 400 and 600 parts have been measured above Baltimore and Phoenix, and there are indications the same may be true of other cities, said Dr. Paul Epstein, associate director of the Harvard public health school.

"The inner cities have become harbingers of global change," Epstein said.

On the Net: http://www.med.harvard.edu/chge

[foot_soldier]

(Fair Use for informational purposes only)

April 30, 2004
Aviation and Environment News
NASA Links Aircraft Exhaust To Regional Climate Change
http://noisereport.com/_wsn/page3.html

Exhaust from jet engines can trigger enough cloud cover to account for North America’s 20-year warming trend, according to scientists at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Langley Research Center. Cirrus clouds that evolve from aircraft condensation trails, or contrails, correlate with a nearly one degree increase in lower atmospheric and surface temperatures across the continent from 1975-1994.

"The increased cirrus coverage, attributable to air traffic, could account for nearly all of the warming observed over the United States for nearly 20 years starting in 1975," said NASA senior research scientist Patrick Minnis. "This study demonstrates that human activity has a visible and significant impact on cloud cover, and therefore, on climate. It indicates that contrails should be included in climate change scenarios."

Contrails are the long, thin clouds of ice crystals often produced when water vapor in jet engine exhaust meets low temperatures at high altitude. They can evaporate, or persist and grow into cirrus clouds if the atmospheric humidity is high enough. Cirrus clouds contribute to warming because they trap more heat than they reflect.

Limited Options

Without new technology to decrease the amount of water vapor in engine exhaust, options for reducing contrail formation are limited. Lowering flight altitudes to levels of warmer temperature would reduce contrail formation, but increase resistance, fuel burn, flight times, and CO2 emissions. "I'd like to see improved modeling of contrails and research into realistic and economically feasible measures to minimize them," Minnis told AENews in an exclusive interview.

Minnis and his colleagues analyzed temperature, humidity, and global cirrus observations over the past 25 years. They concluded that the two percent increase in cirrus cloud coverage over the United States "is likely due to air traffic-induced contrails." Their findings present the most compelling evidence of the effects of contrails on climate to date.

Global Significance

"Both air traffic and cirrus coverage increased during the period of warming despite no changes in…humidity at jet cruise altitudes over the United States," according to the study. "By contrast, humidity at flight altitudes decreased over other land areas, such as Asia, and was accompanied by less cirrus coverage." During winter and spring, when contrails are most prevalent, cirrus coverage and warming over the United States were at their highest.

"It is important to acknowledge contrails would add to and not replace any greenhouse gas effect," said Minnis. "During the same period, warming occurred in many other areas where cirrus coverage decreased or remained steady."

"This study indicates that contrails already have substantial regional effects where air traffic is heavy, such as over the United States. As air travel continues growing in other areas, the impact could become globally significant."

[whitemajikman]

LYNN IF YOU WISH TO CUT AND PASTE SO SHALL I........

Global Warming: The Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus
Richard S. Lindzen
Richard S. Lindzen is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.



Most of the literate world today regards "global warming'' as both real and dangerous. Indeed, the diplomatic activity concerning warming might lead one to believe that it is the major crisis confronting mankind. The June 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, focused on international agreements to deal with that threat, and the heads of state from dozens of countries attended. I must state at the outset, that, as a scientist, I can find no substantive basis for the warming scenarios being popularly described. Moreover, according to many studies I have read by economists, agronomists, and hydrologists, there would be little difficulty adapting to such warming if it were to occur. Such was also the conclusion of the recent National Research Council's report on adapting to global change. Many aspects of the catastrophic scenario have already been largely discounted by the scientific community. For example, fears of massive sea-level increases accompanied many of the early discussions of global warming, but those estimates have been steadily reduced by orders of magnitude, and now it is widely agreed that even the potential contribution of warming to sea-level rise would be swamped by other more important factors.

To show why I assert that there is no substantive basis for predictions of sizeable global warming due to observed increases in minor greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, and chlorofluorocarbons, I shall briefly review the science associated with those predictions.

Summary of Scientific Issues

Before even considering "greenhouse theory,'' it may be helpful to begin with the issue that is almost always taken as a given--that carbon dioxide will inevitably increase to values double and even quadruple present values. Evidence from the analysis of ice cores and after 1958 from direct atmospheric sampling shows that the amount of carbon dioxide in the air has been increasing since 1800. Before 1800 the density was about 275 parts per million by volume. Today it is about 355 parts per million by volume. The increase is generally believed to be due to the combination of increased burning of fossil fuels and before 1905 to deforestation. The total source is estimated to have been increasing exponentially at least until 1973. From 1973 until 1990 the rate of increase has been much slower, however. About half the production of carbon dioxide has appeared in the atmosphere.

Predicting what will happen to carbon dioxide over the next century is a rather uncertain matter. By assuming a shift toward the increased use of coal, rapid advances in the third world's standard of living, large population increases, and a reduction in nuclear and other nonfossil fuels, one can generate an emissions scenario that will lead to a doubling of carbon dioxide by 2030--if one uses a particular model for the chemical response to carbon dioxide emissions. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group I's model referred to that as the "Business as usual'' scenario. As it turns out, the chemical model used was inconsistent with the past century's record; it would have predicted that we would already have about 400 parts per million by volume. An improved model developed at the Max Planck Institute in Hamburg shows that even the "Business as usual'' scenario does not double carbon dioxide by the year 2100. It seems unlikely moreover that the indefinite future of energy belongs to coal. I also find it difficult to believe that technology will not lead to improved nuclear reactors within fifty years.

Nevertheless, we have already seen a significant increase in carbon dioxide that has been accompanied by increases in other minor greenhouse gases such as methane and chlorofluorocarbons. Indeed, in terms of greenhouse potential, we have had the equivalent of a 50 percent increase in carbon dioxide over the past century. The effects of those increases are certainly worth studying--quite independent of any uncertain future scenarios.

The Greenhouse Effect.

The crude idea in the common popular presentation of the greenhouse effect is that the atmosphere is transparent to sunlight (apart from the very significant reflectivity of both clouds and the surface), which heats the Earth's surface. The surface offsets that heating by radiating in the infrared. The infrared radiation increases with increasing surface temperature, and the temperature adjusts until balance is achieved. If the atmosphere were also transparent to infrared radiation, the infrared radiation produced by an average surface temperature of minus eighteen degrees centigrade would balance the incoming solar radiation (less that amount reflected back to space by clouds). The atmosphere is not transparent in the infrared, however. So the Earth must heat up somewhat more to deliver the same flux of infrared radiation to space. That is what is called the greenhouse effect.

The fact that the Earth's average surface temperature is fifteen degrees centigrade rather than minus eighteen degrees centigrade is attributed to that effect. The main absorbers of infrared in the atmosphere are water vapor and clouds. Even if all other greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide and methane) were to disappear, we would still be left with over 98 percent of the current greenhouse effect. Nevertheless, it is presumed that increases in carbon dioxide and other minor greenhouse gases will lead to significant increases in temperature. As we have seen, carbon dioxide is increasing. So are other minor greenhouse gases. A widely held but questionable contention is that those increases will continue along the path they have followed for the past century.

The simple picture of the greenhouse mechanism is seriously oversimplified. Many of us were taught in elementary school that heat is transported by radiation, convection, and conduction. The above representation only refers to radiative transfer. As it turns out, if there were only radiative heat transfer, the greenhouse effect would warm the Earth to about seventy-seven degrees centigrade rather than to fifteen degrees centigrade. In fact, the greenhouse effect is only about 25 percent of what it would be in a pure radiative situation. The reason for this is the presence of convection (heat transport by air motions), which bypasses much of the radiative absorption.

What is really going on is schematically illustrated in Figure 1. The surface of the Earth is cooled in large measure by air currents (in various forms including deep clouds) that carry heat upward and poleward. One consequence of this picture is that it is the greenhouse gases well above the Earth's surface that are of primary importance in determining the temperature of the Earth. That is especially important for water vapor, whose density decreases by about a factor of 1,000 between the surface and ten kilometers above the surface. Another consequence is that one cannot even calculate the temperature of the Earth without models that accurately reproduce the motions of the atmosphere. Indeed, present models have large errors here--on the order of 50 percent. Not surprisingly, those models are unable to calculate correctly either the present average temperature of the Earth or the temperature ranges from the equator to the poles. Rather, the models are adjusted or "tuned'' to get those quantities approximately right.

It is still of interest to ask what we would expect a doubling of carbon dioxide to do. A large number of calculations show that if this is all that happened, we might expect a warming of from .5 to 1.2 degrees centigrade. The general consensus is that such warming would present few, if any, problems. But even that prediction is subject to some uncertainty because of the complicated way the greenhouse effect operates. More important, the climate is a complex system where it is impossible for all other internal factors to remain constant. In present models those other factors amplify the effects of increasing carbon dioxide and lead to predictions of warming in the neighborhood of four to five degrees centigrade. Internal processes within the climate system that change in response to warming in such a manner as to amplify the response are known as positive feedbacks. Internal processes that diminish the response are known as negative feedbacks. The most important positive feedback in current models is due to water vapor. In all current models upper tropospheric (five to twelve kilometers) water vapor--the major greenhouse gas--increases as surface temperatures increase. Without that feedback, no current model would predict warming in excess of 1.7 degrees centigrade--regardless of any other factors. Unfortunately, the way current models handle factors such as clouds and water vapor is disturbingly arbitrary. In many instances the underlying physics is simply not known. In other instances there are identifiable errors. Even computational errors play a major role. Indeed, there is compelling evidence for all the known feedback factors to actually be negative. In that case, we would expect the warming response to carbon dioxide doubling alone to be diminished.

It is commonly suggested that society should not depend on negative feedbacks to spare us from a "greenhouse catastrophe.'' What is omitted from such suggestions is that current models depend heavily on undemonstrated positive feedback factors to predict high levels of warming. The effects of clouds have been receiving the closest scrutiny. That is not unreasonable. Cloud cover in models is poorly treated and inaccurately predicted. Yet clouds reflect about seventy-five watts per square meter. Given that a doubling of carbon dioxide would change the surface heat flux by only two watts per square meter, it is evident that a small change in cloud cover can strongly affect the response to carbon dioxide. The situation is complicated by the fact that clouds at high altitudes can also supplement the greenhouse effect. Indeed, the effects of clouds in reflecting light and in enhancing the greenhouse effect are roughly in balance. Their actual effect on climate depends both on the response of clouds to warming and on the possible imbalance of their cooling and heating effects.

Similarly, factors involving the contribution of snow cover to reflectivity serve, in current models, to amplify warming due to increasing carbon dioxide. What happens seems reasonable enough; warmer climates presumably are associated with less snow cover and less reflectivity--which, in turn, amplify the warming. Snow is associated with winter when incident sunlight is minimal, however. Moreover, clouds shield the Earth's surface from the sun and minimize the response to snow cover. Indeed, there is growing evidence that clouds accompany diminishing snow cover to such an extent as to make that feedback factor negative. If, however, one asks why current models predict that large warming will accompany increasing carbon dioxide, the answer is mostly due to the effect of the water vapor feedback. Current models all predict that warmer climates will be accompanied by increasing humidity at all levels. As already noted, such behavior is an artifact of the models since they have neither the physics nor the numerical accuracy to deal with water vapor. Recent studies of the physics of how deep clouds moisturize the atmosphere strongly suggest that this largest of the positive feedbacks is not only negative, but very large.

Not only are there major reasons to believe that models are exaggerating the response to increasing carbon dioxide, but, perhaps even more significantly, the models' predictions for the past century incorrectly describe the pattern of warming and greatly overestimate its magnitude. The global average temperature record for the past century or so is irregular and not without problems. It does, however, show an average increase in temperature of about .45 degree centigrade plus or minus .15 degree centigrade with most of the increase occurring before 1940, followed by some cooling through the early 1970s and a rapid (but modest) temperature increase in the late 1970s. As noted, we have already seen an increase in "equivalent'' carbon dioxide of 50 percent. Thus, on the basis of models that predict a four degree centigrade warming for a doubling of carbon dioxide we might expect to have seen a warming of two degrees centigrade already. If, however, we include the delay imposed by the oceans' heat capacity, we might expect a warming of about one degree centigrade--which is still twice what has been observed. Moreover, most of that warming occurred before the bulk of the minor greenhouse gases were added to the atmosphere. Figure 2 shows what might have been expected for models with differing sensitivities to a doubling of carbon dioxide. What we see is that the past record is most consistent with an equilibrium response to a doubling of about 1.3 degrees centigrade--assuming that all the observed warming was due to increasing carbon dioxide. There is nothing in the record that can be distinguished from the natural variability of the climate, however.

If one considers the tropics, that conclusion is even more disturbing. There is ample evidence that the average equatorial sea surface has remained within plus or minus one degree centigrade of its present temperature for billions of years, yet current models predict average warming of from two to four degrees centigrade even at the equator. It should be noted that for much of the Earth's history, the atmosphere had much more carbon dioxide than is currently anticipated for centuries to come. I could, in fact, go on at great length listing the evidence for small responses to a doubling of carbon dioxide; there are space constraints, however.

Consensus and the Current "Popular Vision''

Many studies from the nineteenth century on suggested that industrial and other contributions to increasing carbon dioxide might lead to global warming. Problems with such predictions were also long noted, and the general failure of such predictions to explain the observed record caused the field of climatology as a whole to regard the suggested mechanisms as suspect. Indeed, the global cooling trend of the 1950s and 1960s led to a minor global cooling hysteria in the 1970s. All that was more or less normal scientific debate, although the cooling hysteria had certain striking analogues to the present warming hysteria including books such as The Genesis Strategy by Stephen Schneider and Climate Change and World Affairs by Crispin Tickell--both authors are prominent in support of the present concerns as well--"explaining'' the problem and promoting international regulation. There was also a book by the prominent science writer Lowell Ponte (The Cooling) that derided the skeptics and noted the importance of acting in the absence of firm, scientific foundation. There was even a report by the National Research Council of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences reaching its usual ambiguous conclusions. But the scientific community never took the issue to heart, governments ignored it, and with rising global temperatures in the late 1970s the issue more or less died. In the meantime, model calculations--especially at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory at Princeton--continued to predict substantial warming due to increasing carbon dioxide. Those predictions were considered interesting, but largely academic, exercises--even by the scientists involved.

The present hysteria formally began in the summer of 1988, although preparations had been put in place at least three years earlier. That was an especially warm summer in some regions, particularly in the United States. The abrupt increase in temperature in the late 1970s was too abrupt to be associated with the smooth increase in carbon dioxide. Nevertheless, James Hansen, director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, in testimony before Sen. Al Gore's Committee on Science, Technology and Space, said, in effect, that he was 99 percent certain that temperature had increased and that there was some greenhouse warming. He made no statement concerning the relation between the two.

Despite the fact that those remarks were virtually meaningless, they led the environmental advocacy movement to adopt the issue immediately. The growth of environmental advocacy since the 1970s has been phenomenal. In Europe the movement centered on the formation of Green parties; in the United States the movement centered on the development of large public interest advocacy groups. Those lobbying groups have budgets of several hundred million dollars and employ about 50,000 people; their support is highly valued by many political figures. As with any large groups, self-perpetuation becomes a crucial concern. "Global warming'' has become one of the major battle cries in their fundraising efforts. At the same time, the media unquestioningly accept the pronouncements of those groups as objective truth.

Within the large-scale climate modelling community--a small subset of the community interested in climate--however, the immediate response was to criticize Hansen for publicly promoting highly uncertain model results as relevant to public policy. Hansen's motivation was not totally obvious, but despite the criticism of Hansen, the modelling community quickly agreed that large warming was not impossible. That was still enough for both the politicians and advocates who have generally held that any hint of environmental danger is a sufficient basis for regulation unless the hint can be rigorously disproved. That is a particularly pernicious asymmetry, given that rigor is generally impossible in environmental sciences.

Other scientists quickly agreed that with increasing carbon dioxide some warming might be expected and that with large enough concentrations of carbon dioxide the warming might be significant. Nevertheless, there was widespread skepticism. By early 1989, however, the popular media in Europe and the United States were declaring that "all scientists'' agreed that warming was real and catastrophic in its potential.

As most scientists concerned with climate, I was eager to stay out of what seemed like a public circus. But in the summer of 1988 Lester Lave, a professor of economics at Carnegie Mellon University, wrote to me about being dismissed from a Senate hearing for suggesting that the issue of global warming was scientifically controversial. I assured him that the issue was not only controversial but also unlikely. In the winter of 1989 Reginald Newell, a professor of meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, lost National Science Foundation funding for data analyses that were failing to show net warming over the past century. Reviewers suggested that his results were dangerous to humanity. In the spring of 1989 I was an invited participant at a global warming symposium at Tufts University. I was the only scientist among a panel of environmentalists. There were strident calls for immediate action and ample expressions of impatience with science. Claudine Schneider, then a congressman from Rhode Island, acknowledged that "scientists may disagree, but we can hear Mother Earth, and she is crying.'' It seemed clear to me that a very dangerous situation was arising, and the danger was not of "global warming'' itself.

In the spring of 1989 I prepared a critique of global warming, which I submitted to Science, a magazine of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The paper was rejected without review as being of no interest to the readership. I then submitted the paper to the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, where it was accepted after review, rereviewed, and reaccepted--an unusual procedure to say the least. In the meantime, the paper was attacked in Science before it had even been published. The paper circulated for about six months as samizdat. It was delivered at a Humboldt conference at M.I.T. and reprinted in the Frankfurter Allgemeine.

In the meantime, the global warming circus was in full swing. Meetings were going on nonstop. One of the more striking of those meetings was hosted in the summer of 1989 by Robert Redford at his ranch in Sundance, Utah. Redford proclaimed that it was time to stop research and begin acting. I suppose that that was a reasonable suggestion for an actor to make, but it is also indicative of the overall attitude toward science. Barbara Streisand personally undertook to support the research of Michael Oppenheimer at the Environmental Defense Fund, although he is primarily an advocate and not a climatologist. Meryl Streep made an appeal on public television to stop warming. A bill was even prepared to guarantee Americans a stable climate.

By the fall of 1989 some media were becoming aware that there was controversy (Forbes and Reader's Digest were notable in that regard). Cries followed from environmentalists that skeptics were receiving excessive exposure. The publication of my paper was followed by a determined effort on the part of the editor of the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Richard Hallgren, to solicit rebuttals. Such articles were prepared by Stephen Schneider and Will Kellogg, a minor scientific administrator for the past thirty years, and those articles were followed by an active correspondence mostly supportive of the skeptical spectrum of views. Indeed, a recent Gallup poll of climate scientists in the American Meteorological Society and in the American Geophysical Union shows that a vast majority doubts that there has been any identifiable man-caused warming to date (49 percent asserted no, 33 percent did not know, 18 percent thought some has occurred; however, among those actively involved in research and publishing frequently in peer-reviewed research journals, none believes that any man-caused global warming has been identified so far). On the whole, the debate within the meteorological community has been relatively healthy and, in this regard, unusual.

Outside the world of meteorology, Greenpeace's Jeremy Legett, a geologist by training, published a book attacking critics of warming---especially me. George Mitchell, Senate majority leader and father of a prominent environmental activist, also published a book urging acceptance of the warming problem (World on Fire: Saving an Endangered Earth). Sen. Gore recently published a book (Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit). Those are just a few examples of the rapidly growing publications on warming. Rarely has such meager science provoked such an outpouring of popularization by individuals who do not understand the subject in the first place.

The activities of the Union of Concerned Scientists deserve special mention. That widely supported organization was originally devoted to nuclear disarmament. As the cold war began to end, the group began to actively oppose nuclear power generation. Their position was unpopular with many physicists. Over the past few years, the organization has turned to the battle against global warming in a particularly hysterical manner. In 1989 the group began to circulate a petition urging recognition of global warming as potentially the great danger to mankind. Most recipients who did not sign were solicited at least twice more. The petition was eventually signed by 700 scientists including a great many members of the National Academy of Sciences and Nobel laureates. Only about three or four of the signers, however, had any involvement in climatology. Interestingly, the petition had two pages, and on the second page there was a call for renewed consideration of nuclear power. When the petition was published in the New York Times, however, the second page was omitted. In any event, that document helped solidify the public perception that "all scientists'' agreed with the disaster scenario. Such a disturbing abuse of scientific authority was not unnoticed. At the 1990 annual meeting of the National Academy of Sciences, Frank Press, the academy's president, warned the membership against lending their credibility to issues about which they had no special knowledge. Special reference was made to the published petition. In my opinion what the petition did show was that the need to fight "global warming'' has become part of the dogma of the liberal conscience--a dogma to which scientists are not immune.

At the same time, political pressures on dissidents from the "popular vision'' increased. Sen. Gore publicly admonished "skeptics'' in a lengthy New York Times op-ed piece. In a perverse example of double-speak he associated the "true believers'' in warming with Galileo. He also referred, in another article, to the summer of 1988 as the Kristallnacht before the warming holocaust.

The notion of "scientific unanimity'' is currently intimately tied to the Working Group I report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued in September 1990. That panel consists largely of scientists posted to it by government agencies. The panel has three working groups. Working Group I nominally deals with climate science. Approximately 150 scientists contributed to the report, but university representation from the United States was relatively small and is likely to remain so, since the funds and time needed for participation are not available to most university scientists. Many governments have agreed to use that report as the authoritative basis for climate policy. The report, as such, has both positive and negative features. Methodologically, the report is deeply committed to reliance on large models, and within the report models are largely verified by comparison with other models. Given that models are known to agree more with each other than with nature (even after "tuning''), that approach does not seem promising. In addition, a number of the participants have testified to the pressures placed on them to emphasize results supportive of the current scenario and to suppress other results. That pressure has frequently been effective, and a survey of participants reveals substantial disagreement with the final report. Nonetheless, the body of the report is extremely ambiguous, and the caveats are numerous. The report is prefaced by a policymakers' summary written by the editor, Sir John Houghton, director of the United Kingdom Meteorological Office. His summary largely ignores the uncertainty in the report and attempts to present the expectation of substantial warming as firmly based science. The summary was published as a separate document, and, it is safe to say that policymakers are unlikely to read anything further. On the basis of the summary, one frequently hears that "hundreds of the world's greatest climate scientists from dozens of countries all agreed that.|.|.|.'' It hardly matters what the agreement refers to, since whoever refers to the summary insists that it agrees with the most extreme scenarios (which, in all fairness, it does not). I should add that the climatology community, until the past few years, was quite small and heavily concentrated in the United States and Europe.

While the International Panel on Climate Change's reports were in preparation, the National Research Council in the United States was commissioned to prepare a synthesis of the current state of the global change situation. The panel chosen was hardly promising. It had no members of the academy expert in climate. Indeed, it had only one scientist directly involved in climate, Stephen Schneider, who is an ardent environmental advocate. It also included three professional environmental advocates, and it was headed by a former senator, Dan Evans. The panel did include distinguished scientists and economists outside the area of climate, and, perhaps because of this, the report issued by the panel was by and large fair. The report concluded that the scientific basis for costly action was absent, although prudence might indicate that actions that were cheap or worth doing anyway should be considered. A subcommittee of the panel issued a report on adaptation that argued that even with the more severe warming scenarios, the United States would have little difficulty adapting. Not surprisingly, the environmentalists on the panel not only strongly influenced the reports, but failing to completely have their way, attempted to distance themselves from the reports by either resigning or by issuing minority dissents. Equally unsurprising is the fact that the New York Times typically carried reports on that panel on page 46. The findings were never subsequently discussed in the popular media--except for claims that the reports supported the catastrophic vision. Nevertheless, the reports of that panel were indicative of the growing skepticism concerning the warming issue.

Indeed, the growing skepticism is in many ways remarkable. One of the earliest protagonists of global warming, Roger Revelle, the late professor of ocean sciences at Scripps Institution of Oceanography who initiated the direct monitoring of carbon dioxide during the International Geophysical Year (1958), coauthored with S. Fred Singer and Chauncy Starr a paper recommending that action concerning global warming be delayed insofar as current knowledge was totally inadequate. Another active advocate of global warming, Michael McElroy, head of the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Harvard, has recently written a paper acknowledging that existing models cannot be used to forecast climate.

One might think that such growing skepticism would have some influence on public debate, but the insistence on "scientific unanimity'' continues unabated. At times, that insistence takes some very strange forms. Over a year ago, Robert White, former head of the U.S. Weather Bureau and currently president of the National Academy of Engineering, wrote an article for Scientific American that pointed out that the questionable scientific basis for global warming predictions was totally inadequate to justify any costly actions. He did state that if one were to insist on doing something, one should only do things that one would do even if there were no warming threat. Immediately after that article appeared, Tom Wicker, a New York Times columnist and a confidant of Sen. Gore, wrote a piece in which he stated that White had called for immediate action on "global warming.'' My own experiences have been similar. In an article in Audubon Stephen Schneider states that I have "conceded that some warming now appears inevitable.'' Differences between expectations of unmeasurable changes of a few tenths of a degree and warming of several degrees are conveniently ignored. Karen White in a lengthy and laudatory article on James Hansen that appeared in the New York Times Sunday Magazine reported that even I agreed that there would be warming, having "reluctantly offered an estimate of 1.2 degrees.'' That was, of course, untrue.

Most recently, I testified at a Senate hearing conducted by Sen. Gore. There was a rather arcane discussion of the water vapor in the upper troposphere. Two years ago, I had pointed out that if the source of water vapor in that region in the tropics was from deep clouds, then surface warming would be accompanied by reduced upper level water vapor. Subsequent research has established that there must be an additional source--widely believed to be ice crystals thrown off by those deep clouds. I noted that that source too probably acts to produce less moisture in a warmer atmosphere. Both processes cause the major feedback process to become negative rather than positive. Sen. Gore asked whether I now rejected my suggestion of two years ago as a major factor. I answered that I did. Gore then called for the recording secretary to note that I had retracted my objections to "global warming.'' In the ensuing argument, involving mostly other participants in the hearing, Gore was told that he was confusing matters. Shortly thereafter, however, Tom Wicker published an article in the New York Times that claimed that I had retracted my opposition to warming and that that warranted immediate action to curb the purported menace. I wrote a letter to the Times indicating that my position had been severely misrepresented, and, after a delay of over a month, my letter was published. Sen. Gore nonetheless claims in his book that I have indeed retracted my scientific objections to the catastrophic warming scenario and also warns others who doubt the scenario that they are hurting humanity.

Why, one might wonder, is there such insistence on scientific unanimity on the warming issue? After all, unanimity in science is virtually nonexistent on far less complex matters. Unanimity on an issue as uncertain as "global warming'' would be surprising and suspicious. Moreover, why are the opinions of scientists sought regardless of their field of expertise? Biologists and physicians are rarely asked to endorse some theory in high energy physics. Apparently, when one comes to "global warming,'' any scientist's agreement will do.

The answer almost certainly lies in politics. For example, at the Earth Summit in Rio, attempts were made to negotiate international carbon emission agreements. The potential costs and implications of such agreements are likely to be profound for both industrial and developing countries. Under the circumstances, it would be very risky for politicians to undertake such agreements unless scientists "insisted.'' Nevertheless, the situation is probably a good deal more complicated than that example suggests.

The Temptation and Problems of "Global Warming''

As Aaron Wildavsky, professor of political science at Berkeley, has quipped, "global warming'' is the mother of all environmental scares. Wildavsky's view is worth quoting. "Warming (and warming alone), through its primary antidote of withdrawing carbon from production and consumption, is capable of realizing the environmentalist's dream of an egalitarian society based on rejection of economic growth in favor of a smaller population's eating lower on the food chain, consuming a lot less, and sharing a much lower level of resources much more equally.'' In many ways Wildavsky's observation does not go far enough. The point is that carbon dioxide is vitally central to industry, transportation, modern life, and life in general. It has been joked that carbon dioxide controls would permit us to inhale as much as we wish; only exhaling would be controlled. The remarkable centrality of carbon dioxide means that dealing with the threat of warming fits in with a great variety of preexisting agendas--some legitimate, some less so: energy efficiency, reduced dependence on Middle Eastern oil, dissatisfaction with industrial society (neopastoralism), international competition, governmental desires for enhanced revenues (carbon taxes), and bureaucratic desires for enhanced power.

The very scale of the problem as popularly portrayed and the massive scale of the suggested responses have their own appeal. The Working Group I report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change suggested, for example, that a 60 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions might be needed. Such a reduction would call for measures that would be greater than those that have been devoted to war and defense. And just as defense has dealt with saving one's nation, curbing "global warming'' is identified with saving the whole planet! It may not be fortuitous that this issue is being promoted at just the moment in history when the cold war is ending.

Major agencies in the United States, hitherto closely involved with traditional approaches to national security, have appropriated the issue of climate change to support existing efforts. Notable among those agencies are NASA, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Energy. The cold war helped spawn a large body of policy experts and diplomats specializing in issues such as disarmament and alliance negotiations. In addition, since the Yom Kippur War, energy has become a major component of national security with the concomitant creation of a large cadre of energy experts. Many of those individuals see in the global change issue an area in which to continue applying their skills. Many scientists also feel that national security concerns formed the foundation for the U.S. government's generous support of science. As the urgency of national security, traditionally defined, diminishes, there is a common feeling that a substitute foundation must be established. "Saving the planet'' has the right sort of sound to it. Fundraising has become central to environmental advocates' activities, and the message underlying some of their fundraising seems to be "pay us or you'll fry.''

Clearly, "global warming'' is a tempting issue for many very important groups to exploit. Equally clearly, though far less frequently discussed, are the profound dangers in exploiting that issue. As we shall also see, there are good reasons why there has been so little discussion of the downside of responding to "global warming.''

A parochial issue is the danger to the science of climatology. As far as I can tell, there has actually been reduced funding for existing climate research. That may seem paradoxical, but, at least in the United States, the vastly increased number of scientists and others involving themselves in climate as well as the gigantic programs attaching themselves to climate have substantially outstripped the increases in funding. Perhaps more important are the pressures being brought to bear on scientists to get the "right'' results. Such pressures are inevitable, given how far out on a limb much of the scientific community has gone. The situation is compounded by the fact that some of the strongest proponents of "global warming'' in Congress are also among the major supporters of science (Sen. Gore is notable among those). Finally, given the momentum that has been building up among so many interest groups to fight "global warming,'' it becomes downright embarrassing to support basic climate research. After all, one would hate to admit that one had mobilized so many resources without the basic science's being in place. Nevertheless, given the large increase in the number of people associating themselves with climatology and the dependence of much of that community on the perceived threat of warming, it seems unlikely that the scientific community will offer much resistance. I should add that as ever greater numbers of individuals attach themselves to the warming problem, the pressures against solving the problem grow proportionally; an inordinate number of individuals and groups depend on the problem's remaining.

In addition to climatologists, are there other groups that are at risk? Here, one might expect that industry could be vulnerable, and, indeed, it may be. At least in the United States, however, industries seem to be primarily concerned with improving their public image, often by supporting environmental activists. Moreover, some industries have become successful at profiting from environmental regulation. The most obvious example is the waste management industry. Even electric utility companies have been able to use environmental measures to increase the base on which their regulated profits are calculated. It is worth noting that about 1.7 trillion dollars have been spent on the environment over the past decade. The environment, itself, qualifies as one of our major industries.

If Wildavsky's scenario is correct, the major losers would be ordinary people. Wealth that could have been used to raise living standards in much of the world would be squandered. Living standards in the developed world would decrease. Regulatory apparatuses would restrict individual freedom on an unprecedented scale. Here too, however, one cannot expect much resistance to proposed actions--at least not initially. Public perceptions, under the influence of extensive, deceptive, and one-sided publicity, can become disconnected from reality. For example, Alabama has had a pronounced cooling trend since 1935. Nevertheless, a poll among professionals in Alabama found that about 95 percent of the participants believed that the climate had been warming over the past fifty years and that the warming was due to the greenhouse effect. Public misperceptions coupled with a sincere desire to "save the planet'' can force political action even when politicians are aware of the reality.

What the above amounts to is a societal instability. At a particular point in history, a relatively minor suggestion or event serves to mobilize massive interests. While the proposed measures may be detrimental, resistance is largely absent or coopted. In the case of climate change, the probability that the proposed regulatory actions would for the most part have little impact on climate, regardless of the scenario chosen, appears to be of no consequence.

Modelling and Societal Instability

So far I have emphasized the political elements in the current climate hysteria. There can be no question, however, that scientists are abetting this situation. Concerns about funding have already been mentioned. There is, however, another perhaps more important element to the scientific support. The existence of modern computing power has led to innumerable modelling efforts in many fields. Supercomputers have allowed us to consider the behavior of systems seemingly too complex for other approaches. One of those systems is climate. Not surprisingly, there are many problems involved in modelling climate. For example, even supercomputers are inadequate to allow long-term integrations of the relevant equations at adequate spatial resolutions. At presently available resolutions, it is unlikely that the computer solutions are close to the solutions of the underlying equations. In addition, the physics of unresolved phenomena such as clouds and other turbulent elements is not understood to the extent needed for incorporation into models. In view of those problems, it is generally recognized that models are at present experimental tools whose relation to the real world is questionable.

While there is nothing wrong in using those models in an experimental mode, there is a real dilemma when they predict potentially dangerous situations. Should scientists publicize such predictions since the models are almost certainly wrong? Is it proper to not publicize the predictions if the predicted danger is serious? How is the public to respond to such predictions? The difficulty would be diminished if the public understood how poor the models actually are. Unfortunately, there is a tendency to hold in awe anything that emerges from a sufficiently large computer. There is also a reluctance on the part of many modellers to admit to the experimental nature of their models lest public support for their efforts diminish. Nevertheless, with poor and uncertain models in wide use, predictions of ominous situations are virtually inevitable--regardless of reality.

Such weak predictions feed and contribute to what I have already described as a societal instability that can cascade the most questionable suggestions of danger into major political responses with massive economic and social consequences. I have already discussed some of the reasons for this instability: the existence of large cadres of professional planners looking for work, the existence of advocacy groups looking for profitable causes, the existence of agendas in search of saleable rationales, and the ability of many industries to profit from regulation, coupled with an effective neutralization of opposition. It goes almost without saying that the dangers and costs of those economic and social consequences may be far greater than the original environmental danger. That becomes especially true when the benefits of additional knowledge are rejected and when it is forgotten that improved technology and increased societal wealth are what allow society to deal with environmental threats most effectively. The control of societal instability may very well be the real challenge facing us.


AND THIS IS WHY YOUR PARANOIA SHOULD BE KEPT IN CHECK........

BECAUSE YOU BASE YOUR CONCLUSIONS ON PARANOIA AND FEAR.

[whitemajikman]

OR HOW ABOUT THIS ONE LYNN........?



WMO Report Cites Uncertainties About
Greenhouse Gas Sources, Sinks
Copyright 1998 Bureau of National Affairs
Daily Environment Report (February 12, 1998)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


GENEVA--Long-term predictions about the impact of increased greenhouse gas emissions on climate will remain seriously flawed as long as uncertainties remain about the workings of global greenhouse gas sources and sinks, according to a report from the World Meteorological Organization made available Feb. 6.

The uncertainties ''present a major scientific challenge,'' the report said. There ''is much to be learned about the processes regulating the sources and sinks of greenhouse gases and about techniques to mitigate their increase,'' it added.

One of the most significant gaps is an understanding of the distribution and dynamics of agriculture and forestry in both producing and absorbing gases such as carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and methane.

The report said that ''standardized methods have been used worldwide to calculate CO2 produced by fossil fuels ... but not for agriculture and forestry. Lack of a standardized methodology and the episodicity of environmental related emissions are the principal causes of the high uncertainties of greenhouse gases from terrestrial ecosystems.''

Major Contributor


Agriculture and forestry ecosystems accounted for approximately 23 percent of total CO2 equivalent greenhouse gas emissions in the 1980s, the third leading source of global warming emissions behind fossil fuel combustion and CFC releases. CFCs have higher global warming potential than CO2.

Agriculture alone accounts for around 14 percent of CO2-equivalent emissions, WMO said. Methane from rice cultivation, animal waste, and biomass burning is the biggest contributor in this sector at 8 percent, with CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels from farm equipment, land cultivation and biomass burning and nitrous oxide (N2O) from cultivation, fossil fuel/biomass burning, and fertilizer use each accounting for 3 percent of the emissions total.

In addition, an estimated 30 percent of the current annual increase in atmospheric CO2 is attributable to carbon loss in soil associated with deforestation and the clearing of land for agricultural and other purposes. The loss is estimated at 40 percent to 60 percent in the first meter for soil converted from forest to cropland and 25 percent to 40 percent for soil converted from grassland to cropland.


Methane From Agriculture


In regards to other greenhouse gases, approximately 45 percent of methane emissions are attributable to agricultural activities, while 90 percent of N2O emissions originate from nitrification and denitrification processes in soils due in part to the increased use of agricultural fertilizers. Methane emissions alone could be reduced by 10 percent to 30 percent through better irrigation and better fertilizer choice and use, and changes in rice production, WMO said.

Studies concerning the impact of increased greenhouse gas concentrations on agricultural and forestry ecosystems indicate that not all the effects would be negative. Many major crops would experience stimulated growth rates, improved water efficiency, and probable increased tolerance to drought stress.

A doubling of CO2 concentrations by 2100 as predicted under the ''business as usual scenario'' of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change could lead to a reduction in transpiration (release of water vapor) for many crops of 23 percent to 46 percent, in effect lengthening the growing season and increasing yields for crops where moisture availability limits growth. On the other hand, lower transpiration could increase the leaf area of the crops and offset these advantages on a ground area basis.

Ultimately, the report concluded, a successful greenhouse gas abatement strategy cannot rely on management techniques focusing on percentage reduction of emissions. ''It is essential that such strategies outweigh the effect of increased population and production areas such that net global rather than relative emissions be reduced,'' WMO said. ''Technologies now exist where greenhouse growth rate can be reduced.''

The report, Climate Variability, Agriculture and Forestry: An Update is available from the Secretariat of the World Meteorological Organization, 41 Avenue Giuseppe-Motta, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland.

[whitemajikman]

AND HOW ABOUT THIS LITTLE SNIPPET LYNN.......?



The Fake Consensus on 'Global Warming'
Jarret Wollstein
Tuesday, July 3, 2001
During President Bush’s recent trip to Europe, he was incessantly pressured to implement the Kyoto environmental accords.
Bush was repeatedly harangued by European politicians and the liberal U.S. press, which claimed that the theory of global warming is an established fact supported by a consensus of scientists, and unless we take immediate action to limit CO2 emissions, the environmental consequences would be disastrous – including deadly temperature rises, flooding of coastal cities and devastating climate changes.

To his credit, Bush demurred and insisted that alleged global warming requires more scientific study, that the economic costs for the U.S. of Kyoto would be too high, and that exemptions in Kyoto for Third World countries such as China would negate the benefits of any cuts by advanced industrial countries. Give the man an A+ for science and political courage.

Bush was right on all counts. Contrary to the insistence of the mainstream press and career bureaucrats, there is no scientific consensus on "global warming" or that – if it exists at all – it is caused by human activity.

A Merriam-Webster dictionary defines "consensus” as "1) general agreement: unanimity; 2) group solidarity in sentiment and belief.” There is no unanimity or even general agreement among scientists that global warming is even taking place.

For instance, no less an authority than MIT meterology professor Richard S. Lindzen who was named in a recent National Academy of Sciences study purporting to "prove” global warming – in fact disagrees with most claims about global warming.

As commentator Thomas Sowell has pointed out, "as the [National Academy of Sciences] report itself stated clearly, these scientists not only did not write the report, they didn’t even see it before it was published – and were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release.” (Thomas Sowell, "Global Hot Air,” Jewish World Review, 6-21-01.)

How can a major government think tank, such as the National Academy of Sciences, claim there is now "consensus on global warming” when the very people supposedly making up that consensus have even never read or necessarily endorsed their studies? The shocking answer is that the entire modern process of "scientific consensus building” repeatedly cited by the establishment press is a fraud concocted by political hacks, to bamboozle the public and unsympathetic politicians - while stifling dissenting scientific voices.

Civil Defense Perspectives newsletter describes the process:

"Consensus building is carried out by trained ‘facilitators’ who ask questions designed to elicit silence or to force individuals who might be opposed to a policy to identify themselves.

"If the facilitator is unable to quiet objections, the process can be delayed until troublemakers are replaced by more cooperative individuals.

"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) declared that a consensus by 2,000 scientists had determined that global warming was caused by human activity. The consensus stands in the public perception despite the vocal disagreement of thousands of scientists.

"Head-to-head debate is increasingly being characterized as ‘childish’ and as leading to ‘gridlock.’ It is frequently being replaced with the consensus process, which predetermines outcome and removes accountability to the people affected by it.” ("Consensus v. Agreement,” Civil Defense Perspectives, July 1997.)

According to the free-market environment organization PERC (Political Economy Research Center) in Bozeman, Mont., a majority of climate scientists have never endorsed the notion that human activity is causing global warming or that warming is a crisis that requires immediate urgent action, such as that demanded by the Kyoto Protocol.

Implementing the Kyoto accords in the U.S. – which requires the approval of the U.S. Senate, not a decree by the president, and was rejected 95-0 by the Senate – would be a real disaster, not an imagined one. Drastically reducing CO2 emissions in the U.S. (7 percent below 1990 levels is mandated by Kyoto) would curtail auto use, cause major reductions in industry, and bring industrial development and prosperity to a screeching halt.

However, while mandating drastic reductions in CO2 emissions in developed, trade-deficit countries such as the U.S., rapidly industrializing Third World countries such as China, India and Mexico (which have much weaker environmental laws than the U.S.) are exempted from any CO2 reductions.

The bottom line: Implementing the Kyoto Protocol would give us the worst of both worlds: a de-industrialized America and a polluted world. Fortunately, Bush has – so far - had the courage to reject the fake "global warming consensus.”



YOU SEE FOR EVERY CUT AND PASTE YOU SUPPLY I CAN.........COUNTER.

BECAUSE THERE IS NO CONCENSUS AMONG THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY.

AND THE ONLY CONCENSUS YOU WILL FIND ...........IS THE CHEMMIE CULT CONSENSUS AND THE POLITICAL LOBBY THAT CONDONES USE OF A INTERNET HOAX TOO PROPAGATE MORE SUPPORT BASED UPON LIES AND INNUENDO.

NOT SCIENCE OR REAL FACTS.

LYNN I AM STARTING TO THINK THAT YOU ARE A CULTIST.

WHO HAS BEEN DUPED BY YOUR OWN PARANOIA AND TOO MUCH CONSPIRACY THEORY.

[foot_soldier]

"whitemajikman" wrote:

LYNN I AM STARTING TO THINK THAT YOU ARE A CULTIST.
No, "lynn" is a concerned parent and responsible citizen who like the rest of us is trying to find some answers.

Take your witch hunt someplace else. No one here is in violation of any law or statute for simply trying to solve a problem.

[whitemajikman]

Take your witch hunt someplace else. No one here is in violation of any law or statute for simply trying to solve a problem.

The noun "subversion" has 2 senses in WordNet.

1. corruption, subversion -- (destroying someone's (or some group's) honesty or loyalty; undermining moral integrity; "corruption of a minor"; "the big city's subversion of rural innocence")
2. subversion, subversive activity -- (the act of subverting; as overthrowing or destroying a legally constituted government)

You are absolutely correct Lynn.........If your intentions were simply to solve a problem.

But You have had ample proof PRESENTED TO YOU THAT CHEMTRAILS ARE AN INTERNET HOAX.

BUT STILL YOU CUT AND PASTE AWAY........TRYING EVER SO VIGILANTLY TO UNDERMIND SCIENTIFIC MORAL INTEGRITY,WITH HALF-FACTS,PSEUDO-SCIENCE AND A WILLINGNESS FOR YOUR ASSERTIONS TO BE THE CORRECT ONES........ALL ALONG IGNORING THE TRUTH ALONG THE WAY.

YOU ARE THE ONE WHO DECIDED TO TRY AND COME TO THE AID OF HALVA.........A KNOWN ANTI-AMERICAN ,ANTI-SCIENTIFIC BULLSHITTER
WHO DOES NOT CARE ONE IOTA REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENT AND IS USING AN INTERNET HOAX FOR COVER.

TO PERPETUATE HIS NEED FOR POWER AND RECOGNITION,THRU SUBVERSION.

SO LYNN IF YOU LIE DOWN WITH FILTH WOULD YOU NOT SAY THAT MAKES YOU FILTH BY ASSOCIATION.....?

OR ARE YOU GOING TO GIVE US THAT "SEEKER OF KNOWLEDGE AND OF TRUTH" BULLSHIT.......?

BECAUSE QUITE FRANKLY IF YOU ARE NOT A CULTIST YET YOU ARE DEFINITELY ON YOUR WAY.

SO REALLY DOESN'T THAT MAKE YOU FAIR GAME........?

PLEASE ENLIGHTEN ME WITH ALL OF YOUR LEARNED KNOWLEDGE AND TRUTH.......

IF I AM MISTAKEN

[lynn george]

[quote=lynn george][quote=superliberal]

Link has a close up.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16528

Compare this picture with the image progression Sore Throat posted showing how these aerosol trails fuse into one solid mass.

Isn't it wonderful when foolish chemmies try to use well-documented NASA studies of CONTRAILS to try and support their claims about "CHEMTRAILS". The silly fools have come full circle and are actively debunking their own hoax!

1.SMT, do you really think that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of KC-135 tankers?

2.SMT , do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
all in clear sky conditions in full view of the entire southeastern US population, and that ordinary commercial planes fly right through all of this and only leave dissipating contrails?

3.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
that none of those commercial pilots find any of this suspicious or ever talks about it?

4.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
and that thousands of civilian air traffic controllers and many USAF fighter jet pilots on homeland defense patrols never speak out?

5.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers and that hundreds of scientists at NASA, thousands more US scientists reading the peer reviewed research and thousands more highly trained scientists worldwide never speak out?

6.SMT, isn't the likelihood of all the above scenarios are preposterous, and the truth is that what is shown in the photo are just ordinary contrails, like the caption at the link states?

7. SMT, if you are claiming that the photo shows such a geoengineering program in operation, the likelihood that a mentally stable person ever
accepting it is nil, and you have indeed gone off the deep end yourself.


SmT-Nope I'm not claiming any of that. What I'm saying simply is that as has been suggested in so many scientific papers and now widely advocated by both business and government, that the suggestion to simply burn a richer mixture or perhaps to slightly modify the fuel of some planes may now be being performed. Why would anyone find that so hard to accept? Since we now have documented evidence of government military spraying above millions of U.S. citizens spanning decades using various chemicals and pathogens why would one doubt other programs are still on going? As I said this very science of producing more carbon ON PURPOSE to provide nuclei for cloud growth is even being taught at the grade school level. Perhaps back when you were in school they didn't teach it. That's understandable. Now there is major money going into climate engineering and link after link after link the bunkies either ignore, switch topics, or post huge lists of ridiculous questions for endless busy work that further tries to discourage people from looking into this new science. The main point I made before is undeniable. The hundreds of aerosol trails shown covering the southeast showed the same act of fusing together that Sore Throat's picture showed. Airplanes are creating huge unbroken blankets of CheMHaze that covers entire portions of the country and remains for days and days if not weeks stealing the sunshine from the citizens. Is this on purpose? Many many many scientific papers and institutions now suggest it very well may be. So do hundreds of thousands of citizens reporting from the ground.

And as Mr. Matthews asked so succinctly in his article that I posted the link to: "And do we really want to live under a constant haze in the sky to keep cool"? .....and "Do a few scientists and policy makers have the right to impose this on all other life on the planet?" Now THOSE are reasonable questions worth asking. Perhaps our bunkie friends have some answers for that. :D

http://alberta.indymedia.org/news/2002/08/4138.php

SmT


SmT-So I agree rather than using the word "chemtrails" that seems to bother so many bunkies, perhaps chemically enhanced contrails or CEC's would work better. I agree none or nearly noone in the so called "scientific community" uses the term chemtrails they always say contrails even if they have had chemicals, metals, pathogens, etc. etc. added. So perhaps it is best to get the terminology down as I think there is still some disagreement. What would be a better term than chemtrails say when such things are added and "distributed" above citizens? Suggestions? And if the institutions advocating putting additional carbon into the atmosphere for "sunblocking" are in fact providing for jets to run "dirtier" to produce this "shielding/Haze" then what shall we refer to these "purposeful aerosol releases" as? If not chemtrails what?

SmT

[lynn george]

[quote=lynn george][quote=superliberal]

Link has a close up.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16528

Compare this picture with the image progression Sore Throat posted showing how these aerosol trails fuse into one solid mass.

Isn't it wonderful when foolish chemmies try to use well-documented NASA studies of CONTRAILS to try and support their claims about "CHEMTRAILS". The silly fools have come full circle and are actively debunking their own hoax!

1.SMT, do you really think that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of KC-135 tankers?

2.SMT , do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
all in clear sky conditions in full view of the entire southeastern US population, and that ordinary commercial planes fly right through all of this and only leave dissipating contrails?

3.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
that none of those commercial pilots find any of this suspicious or ever talks about it?

4.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
and that thousands of civilian air traffic controllers and many USAF fighter jet pilots on homeland defense patrols never speak out?

5.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers and that hundreds of scientists at NASA, thousands more US scientists reading the peer reviewed research and thousands more highly trained scientists worldwide never speak out?

6.SMT, isn't the likelihood of all the above scenarios are preposterous, and the truth is that what is shown in the photo are just ordinary contrails, like the caption at the link states?

7. SMT, if you are claiming that the photo shows such a geoengineering program in operation, the likelihood that a mentally stable person ever
accepting it is nil, and you have indeed gone off the deep end yourself.


SmT-Nope I'm not claiming any of that. What I'm saying simply is that as has been suggested in so many scientific papers and now widely advocated by both business and government, that the suggestion to simply burn a richer mixture or perhaps to slightly modify the fuel of some planes may now be being performed. Why would anyone find that so hard to accept? Since we now have documented evidence of government military spraying above millions of U.S. citizens spanning decades using various chemicals and pathogens why would one doubt other programs are still on going? As I said this very science of producing more carbon ON PURPOSE to provide nuclei for cloud growth is even being taught at the grade school level. Perhaps back when you were in school they didn't teach it. That's understandable. Now there is major money going into climate engineering and link after link after link the bunkies either ignore, switch topics, or post huge lists of ridiculous questions for endless busy work that further tries to discourage people from looking into this new science. The main point I made before is undeniable. The hundreds of aerosol trails shown covering the southeast showed the same act of fusing together that Sore Throat's picture showed. Airplanes are creating huge unbroken blankets of CheMHaze that covers entire portions of the country and remains for days and days if not weeks stealing the sunshine from the citizens. Is this on purpose? Many many many scientific papers and institutions now suggest it very well may be. So do hundreds of thousands of citizens reporting from the ground.

And as Mr. Matthews asked so succinctly in his article that I posted the link to: "And do we really want to live under a constant haze in the sky to keep cool"? .....and "Do a few scientists and policy makers have the right to impose this on all other life on the planet?" Now THOSE are reasonable questions worth asking. Perhaps our bunkie friends have some answers for that. :D

http://alberta.indymedia.org/news/2002/08/4138.php

SmT


SmT-So I agree rather than using the word "chemtrails" that seems to bother so many bunkies, perhaps chemically enhanced contrails or CEC's would work better. I agree none or nearly noone in the so called "scientific community" uses the term chemtrails they always say contrails even if they have had chemicals, metals, pathogens, etc. etc. added. So perhaps it is best to get the terminology down as I think there is still some disagreement. What would be a better term than chemtrails say when such things are added and "distributed" above citizens? Suggestions? And if the institutions advocating putting additional carbon into the atmosphere for "sunblocking" are in fact providing for jets to run "dirtier" to produce this "shielding/Haze" then what shall we refer to these "purposeful aerosol releases" as? If not chemtrails what?

SmT

[lynn george]

[quote=lynn george][quote=superliberal]

Link has a close up.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16528

Compare this picture with the image progression Sore Throat posted showing how these aerosol trails fuse into one solid mass.

Isn't it wonderful when foolish chemmies try to use well-documented NASA studies of CONTRAILS to try and support their claims about "CHEMTRAILS". The silly fools have come full circle and are actively debunking their own hoax!

1.SMT, do you really think that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of KC-135 tankers?

2.SMT , do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
all in clear sky conditions in full view of the entire southeastern US population, and that ordinary commercial planes fly right through all of this and only leave dissipating contrails?

3.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
that none of those commercial pilots find any of this suspicious or ever talks about it?

4.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers
and that thousands of civilian air traffic controllers and many USAF fighter jet pilots on homeland defense patrols never speak out?

5.SMT, do you really claim that what you see in the photo is a massive geoengineering program flown by hundreds of USAF KC-135 tankers and that hundreds of scientists at NASA, thousands more US scientists reading the peer reviewed research and thousands more highly trained scientists worldwide never speak out?

6.SMT, isn't the likelihood of all the above scenarios are preposterous, and the truth is that what is shown in the photo are just ordinary contrails, like the caption at the link states?

7. SMT, if you are claiming that the photo shows such a geoengineering program in operation, the likelihood that a mentally stable person ever
accepting it is nil, and you have indeed gone off the deep end yourself.


SmT-Nope I'm not claiming any of that. What I'm saying simply is that as has been suggested in so many scientific papers and now widely advocated by both business and government, that the suggestion to simply burn a richer mixture or perhaps to slightly modify the fuel of some planes may now be being performed. Why would anyone find that so hard to accept? Since we now have documented evidence of government military spraying above millions of U.S. citizens spanning decades using various chemicals and pathogens why would one doubt other programs are still on going? As I said this very science of producing more carbon ON PURPOSE to provide nuclei for cloud growth is even being taught at the grade school level. Perhaps back when you were in school they didn't teach it. That's understandable. Now there is major money going into climate engineering and link after link after link the bunkies either ignore, switch topics, or post huge lists of ridiculous questions for endless busy work that further tries to discourage people from looking into this new science. The main point I made before is undeniable. The hundreds of aerosol trails shown covering the southeast showed the same act of fusing together that Sore Throat's picture showed. Airplanes are creating huge unbroken blankets of CheMHaze that covers entire portions of the country and remains for days and days if not weeks stealing the sunshine from the citizens. Is this on purpose? Many many many scientific papers and institutions now suggest it very well may be. So do hundreds of thousands of citizens reporting from the ground.

And as Mr. Matthews asked so succinctly in his article that I posted the link to: "And do we really want to live under a constant haze in the sky to keep cool"? .....and "Do a few scientists and policy makers have the right to impose this on all other life on the planet?" Now THOSE are reasonable questions worth asking. Perhaps our bunkie friends have some answers for that. :D

http://alberta.indymedia.org/news/2002/08/4138.php

SmT


SmT-So I agree rather than using the word "chemtrails" that seems to bother so many bunkies, perhaps chemically enhanced contrails or CEC's would work better. I agree none or nearly noone in the so called "scientific community" uses the term chemtrails they always say contrails even if they have had chemicals, metals, pathogens, etc. etc. added. So perhaps it is best to get the terminology down as I think there is still some disagreement. What would be a better term than chemtrails say when such things are added and "distributed" above citizens? Suggestions? And if the institutions advocating putting additional carbon into the atmosphere for "sunblocking" are in fact providing for jets to run "dirtier" to produce this "shielding/Haze" then what shall we refer to these "purposeful aerosol releases" as? If not chemtrails what?

SmT

[superliberal]

Who is more paranoid here? Those who think their skies are being covered with excessive contrails or those of you willing to attack them and make such accusations as to clump them all as terrorist?

There is clear science interest from NASA no less, that contrails have been producing wider cloud cover and also trapping in UV rays. Now wether it is from additives or from the frequency of planes, people have a right to be concerned. Many people in the science field have presummed that this may be a part of the reason for global warming. The green house effect.

These people, along with environmentalist, do not scare me as much as what this Mr. Reynolds just annouced. To think that someone in this country would shoot down a plane in this matter shows a willingness to prey on people's fears.

You should be a ashamed!



A notice to all "chemtrail" cult promoters:

CEASE AND DESIST PROMOTING THE "CHEMTRAIL" HOAX

The longer it continues the more opportunities that exist for this hoax, already a magnet for nutcases, to find a mass murderer fit to cause the terrorist threats frequently made at "ChemtrailtrackingUSA".

The most recent threats were made in posts #110676 and 110677, now deleted.

The moderator is now begging members to stop making threats, because I have already notified yahoo that they have made a practice of allowing such threats to be posted and to remain on their board in the past.

I will personally do my best, if such an incident ever occurs, to encourage state and Federal prosecution for as many "chemtrail" promoters as I can.
I will recommend they be tried under federal RICO and state criminal syndicalism laws if US citizens, and as enemy combatants if non-US.

I have previously written personally to Chem11, Dona Terry, Clifford Carnicom, Lorie Kramer, Mark Steadham, and William Thomas notifying them of my determinatiion to name them as the major players.

Take my words to heart, folks, and if you think some silly pseudonym hides your identity from the feds, guess again. The only people you hide from with a handle such as "foot soldier" or "sore" are your fellow citizens, your identities, if not already known, can be had in a heartbeat.

This thing is wrong and eventually you could find your name attached to somone getting hurt or being put in jail. Will you bear responsibility for your negligence in determining what normal contrails are?
Jay
====================
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chemtrailtrackingusa/message/110680
From: "i_dont_chat" <i_dont_chat@y...>
Date: Sat May 1, 2004 8:47 pm
Subject: This Group does not advocate shooting down planes


ADVERTISEMENT


To whom it may concern:

This Group does not in any way advocate shooting down planes with
missiles.

If members persist in posting these threating messages, we might very
well find ourselves without a Message Board. I believe it is
contrary to Yahoo's terms of conditions.

Moderator

[Sore Throat]

SmT,

Thanks for the geoengineering link.

http://alberta.indymedia.org/news/2002/08/4138.php

Very interesting.

What has often amazed me is is how, despite the millions being spent on publicly acknowledged geoengineering activities around the world, that somehow the bunkers persist in their blind faith that it is absolutely impossible that ANY of the widely discussed proposals for atmospheric modifications are actually occuring.

Just what is it that allows them to overlook the realities confronting the world today?

Are they also blind to the fact of human induced climate change?

A population of over six billion humans and their collective consumption of limited resources and increasing production of wastes?

They definitely have trouble admitting that increasing air traffic emissions are having negative climatic impacts.

Yes, apparently they haven't bothered to look at the growing body of information regarding geoengineering.

As they say, denial is not just a river in Egypt.

But thanks again Smt for the interesting link.

[lynn george]

A notice to all "chemtrail" cult promoters:

CEASE AND DESIST PROMOTING THE "CHEMTRAIL" HOAX

The longer it continues the more opportunities that exist for this hoax, already a magnet for nutcases, to find a mass murderer fit to cause the terrorist threats frequently made at "ChemtrailtrackingUSA".

The most recent threats were made in posts #110676 and 110677, now deleted.

The moderator is now begging members to stop making threats, because I have already notified yahoo that they have made a practice of allowing such threats to be posted and to remain on their board in the past.

I will personally do my best, if such an incident ever occurs, to encourage state and Federal prosecution for as many "chemtrail" promoters as I can.
I will recommend they be tried under federal RICO and state criminal syndicalism laws if US citizens, and as enemy combatants if non-US.

I have previously written personally to Chem11, Dona Terry, Clifford Carnicom, Lorie Kramer, Mark Steadham, and William Thomas notifying them of my determinatiion to name them as the major players.

Take my words to heart, folks, and if you think some silly pseudonym hides your identity from the feds, guess again. The only people you hide from with a handle such as "foot soldier" or "sore" are your fellow citizens, your identities, if not already known, can be had in a heartbeat.

This thing is wrong and eventually you could find your name attached to somone getting hurt or being put in jail. Will you bear responsibility for your negligence in determining what normal contrails are?
Jay
====================
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chemtrailtrackingusa/message/110680
From: "i_dont_chat" <i_dont_chat@y...>
Date: Sat May 1, 2004 8:47 pm
Subject: This Group does not advocate shooting down planes


ADVERTISEMENT


To whom it may concern:

This Group does not in any way advocate shooting down planes with
missiles.

If members persist in posting these threating messages, we might very
well find ourselves without a Message Board. I believe it is
contrary to Yahoo's terms of conditions.

Moderator


SmT- You are an absolute raving nutcase Reynolds, it is YOU that definately needs psychological help FAST!!! Stick your threats right up your bunkie ass and get help fast. NO AMERICAN is going to be THREATENED by your NAZI BROWN SHIRT TACTICS to try and STOP FREEDOM OF INFORMATIONAL EXCHANGE! THIS DISCUSSION of THE SCIENCE OF GEOENGINEERING will go on despite your lame threats. Pack up pal and get the hell away from us AMERICANS that will NEVER surrender our 1st AMENDMENT rights to any NAZI BROWN SHIRTED THUGS that piss on our BIll of Rights! Already this board is being hacked just like the last and the one before that when bunkies start LOSING the debate they start behaving like CRIMINALS it is the only way they can keep their Bill of Rights HATING agenda alive.Already may last post took a full 15 minutes to finally be accepted and I am sure soon I will not be able to post here EITHER!!! You NAZI TOTALITAIAN BASTARDS! YOu can't win by TRUTH!! You have to resort to censorship. That's fine. Every time were cut off we'll find another channel THE TRUTH WILL GET OUT despite YOUR THREATS. GO TO HELL NAZIS!!!

a pissed off SmT!

[halva]

Letxa, you were rather disapproving of the methods of Whitemajikman.

Do you have any comments on the methods of Reynolds, now that he is apparently beginning to feel, shall we say.....threatened?

[halva]

Really, what will the effect be as the penny begins to drop?

Will the authorities who have the ability to start putting into practice the provisions of the Patriot Act really start taking their cue from the likes of Jay Reynolds?

And what of dear deluded asthmatics like Letxa?

Will they suddenly turn into more fearsome militants than the more well-adjusted and self-controlled "chemmies"? Or will they sink into apathy and withdrawal?

Are there going to be debunkers plugging on like those Japanese soldiers who refuse to believe World War II is over?

Any comments, Letxa?

[superliberal]

Importance of Student Data in the Study of Contrails


Why is it important to study contrails?
Clouds are the largest variable controlling Earth's atmospheric temperature and climate. Any change in global cloud cover may contribute to long-term changes in Earth's climate. Likewise, any change in Earth's climate may have effects on natural resources. Contrails, especially persistent contrails, represent a human-caused increase in the Earth's cloudiness, and are likely to be affecting climate and ultimately our natural resources.

What type of contrail is most interesting to scientists?
Scientists are most interested in persistent contrails because they form long-lasting and sometimes extensive clouds that would not normally have formed in the atmosphere. Persistent contrails can last for hours to days, and spread over thousands of square kilometers, becoming indistinguishable from naturally occurring cirrus clouds. Scientists are concerned about contrails because predicted increases in air-traffic could result in a continued increase in cloud cover. Knowing when and where contrails form is key to determining their contribution to cirrus cloud cover and their effect on the energy balance. Thus, collecting information on short-lived contrails is also of interest.

How can students help with the study of contrails?
Student observers can collaborate with scientists by observing contrails in their area and reporting on the amount and type of contrails present. The results could help atmospheric scientists determine the atmospheric conditions when persistent contrails form and thus help them predict where they will form and possibly assist air traffic managers in planning different flight-paths or altitudes to avoid contrail formation.


--------------------------------------

April 20, 2004

NASA and GLOBE Launch Earth Day Experiment
NASA, in collaboration with GLOBE, an international student program in Earth Science, is holding the Earth Day 2004 Contrail Count-a-Thon.

The event, a worldwide experiment on Earth Day, April 22, will provide the opportunity for anyone interested in developing a better understanding of the Earth a chance to join in a hands-on, real-world science experiment.

Participants will observe contrails, cirrus clouds formed from water vapor in aircraft exhaust, and report their findings to scientists. Observations will be tallied and reported state-by-state and country-by-country to illuminate contrail activity patterns.

“Contrails are one change in the Earth’s system that are without a doubt caused by human activity, so it is appropriate on Earth Day we assess how people are impacting the state of our planet,” said Lin Chambers, director of the Contrail Education project at NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Va.

Contrails represent a human-caused increase in the Earth’s cloudiness. They also impact the atmosphere and climate. Observations in the U.S. and around the globe may help scientists better understand the atmospheric conditions that enable the formation of contrails. “We thought spotting contrails would be a fun and educational activity that could include more schools and the general public since no instruments are required,” said Peggy LeMone, chief scientist for the GLOBE program, based at the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR), Boulder, Colo.

“The distribution of sightings tells us about where jets are flying and where weather conditions favor contrails forming. We can also compare the contrail patterns to satellite images,” LeMone added.

If no contrails are visible, participants may observe other clouds and report their findings. Participants in the Earth Day 2004 Contrail Count-a-Thon do not have to be members of GLOBE outreach projects. GLOBE members should follow their normal instructions for reporting observations on April 22.

This activity also marks the GLOBE program’s 10th anniversary. GLOBE brings together students, teachers, and scientists to support improved achievement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics and to gather important data for the global Earth science community. Since 1994, more than a million primary and secondary students, in more than 14,000 schools worldwide, have taken part in this international program. As of October 2003, students reported more than 10 million scientific measurements using protocols developed by scientists.

GLOBE is an international student observation campaign managed as a partnership between UCAR and Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colo., through a cooperative agreement with NASA, with sponsorship from the National Science Foundation and the U.S. Department of State.

NASA works with GLOBE to help achieve its mission of inspiring the next generation of Earth explorers. Funding is provided by NASA’s Earth Science Enterprise. The Enterprise is dedicated to understanding the Earth as an integrated system and applying Earth System Science to improve prediction of climate, weather, and natural hazards using the unique vantage point of space.

For information about the Earth Day event on the Internet, visit:
http://www.globe.gov/earthday2004

For more information about Contrail Education on the Internet, visit:
http://asd-www.larc.nasa.gov/GLOBE

For more information about NASA’s Earth Science Enterprise on the Internet, visit:
http://www.earth.nasa.gov

For information about NASA on the Internet, visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/home/index.html

[lynn george]

Letxa, you were rather disapproving of the methods of Whitemajikman.

Do you have any comments on the methods of Reynolds, now that he is apparently beginning to feel, shall we say.....threatened?

SmT- Hi Halva,

I don't know if this will post but I have some comments on the "methods of Reynolds" myself, now that you asked. I would say they fall right into the catagory of a very dangerous extremist type individual, one that lies and decieves in order to stir the Sh*T. You know the type. A shill. A corporate lackey. An ego addicted know nothing that enjoys pretending he is something by putting others down. Chemmies. They love that word chemmies. I have responded with "bunkies" only to show them the absurdity of the "name calling" but to no avail. Geoengineering is real. I don't know if the bunkies are of the "paid" type or not but I HIGHLY suspect it. Can you imagine someone putting out the efforts at BS that these guys do just as a hobby? Think about it. The Dept of Disinfo is a reality here in the U.S. paid for by the tax payers. A Dept. funded to lie to the People. War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. You bet. Stop The Madness.

SmT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[superliberal]

How long has Mr. Reynolds been at this? Most especially with the threats.

[lynn george]

“The distribution of sightings tells us about where jets are flying and where weather conditions favor contrails forming. We can also compare the contrail patterns to satellite images,” LeMone added.

SmT-What about though where the actual aerosol trail is composed of something as to aid it to persist? As we have witnessed pictures of planes roughly the same size in photos where one is leaving a huge white smokey trail and the other absolutely nothing it is hard to imagine with the well known mixing of air in the 30K ft. or so range of many commercial planes that it is not the small difference in altitude that makes the difference but rather the type of "exhaust" coming from the respective plane.



If no contrails are visible, participants may observe other clouds and report their findings. Participants in the Earth Day 2004 Contrail Count-a-Thon do not have to be members of GLOBE outreach projects. GLOBE members should follow their normal instructions for reporting observations on April 22.

This activity also marks the GLOBE program’s 10th anniversary. GLOBE brings together students, teachers, and scientists to support improved achievement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics and to gather important data for the global Earth science community. Since 1994, more than a million primary and secondary students, in more than 14,000 schools worldwide, have taken part in this international program. As of October 2003, students reported more than 10 million scientific measurements using protocols developed by scientists.

GLOBE is an international student observation campaign managed as a partnership between UCAR and Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colo., through a cooperative agreement with NASA, with sponsorship from the National Science Foundation and the U.S. Department of State.

NASA works with GLOBE to help achieve its mission of inspiring the next generation of Earth explorers. Funding is provided by NASA’s Earth Science Enterprise. The Enterprise is dedicated to understanding the Earth as an integrated system and applying Earth System Science to improve prediction of climate, weather, and natural hazards using the unique vantage point of space.

For information about the Earth Day event on the Internet, visit:
http://www.globe.gov/earthday2004

For more information about Contrail Education on the Internet, visit:
http://asd-www.larc.nasa.gov/GLOBE

For more information about NASA’s Earth Science Enterprise on the Internet, visit:
http://www.earth.nasa.gov

For information about NASA on the Internet, visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/home/index.html[/quote]



SmT-I hope they were teaching the students about geoengineering as well rather than making it look like all of the trails in the sky were simply "accidents". I am concerned with the geoengineering stamp hoax that citizens might be mislead into thinking those are "natural" clouds and conditions when clearly that is not the case rather the stamps show man-made conditions. We really need to each start considering our impact here. Don't you agree?

Show-me Truth

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please no more lies that only serve to promote the advance of The System of The AntiChrist

[lynn george]

How long has Mr. Reynolds been at this? Most especially with the threats.


SmT- Not sure how long he's been threatening people, but I actually read a post dated about 2000 where he was out there putting down colloidal silver as dangerous. While there appeareed tons of info as to it's historical effectiveness as an anti pathogen aid, he chose to focus on one story about some gal that had taken too much of some type of "elixar' that MAY have contained some amount of silver and had a skin color change. Again focusing on the speck and ignoring the log. Typical bunkie mentality.

SmT

[superliberal]

I would agree yes. NASA and many other agencies actually have aerosol research programs. The fact that scientist are alarmed at the increase of persistant contrails gives good reason to want to find out why and who may be doing research without yours and my knowledge.

[gaiacomm]

whitemajikman;

You are an idiot! And you are ignorant of your ignorance!

Just my opinion!

[foot_soldier]

"Sore Throat" wrote:

What has often amazed me is is how, despite the millions being spent on publicly acknowledged geoengineering activities around the world, that somehow the bunkers persist in their blind faith that it is absolutely impossible that ANY of the widely discussed proposals for atmospheric modifications are actually occuring.
What amazes me even more is that most of the proposals for geoengineering (i.e. technological) approaches to climate change mitigation are motivated in the first place by years of research which repeatedly validates the unfortunately imminent NEED for such measures in the apparent absence of political will to deal with the problem at its source - in other words, to commit to some modicum of restraint in regard to emissions generation of all kinds.

I just don't see what the big deal is. Why are so many people so openly hostile to the fact that it's clearly time to think very seriously about the level of waste we're pumping into our life-support systems? It just doesn't make sense to keep adding more and more when it's already obvious that we're overloading, overheating and destabilizing the very systems upon which we depend for survival.

FYI:

April 30, 2004
Energy Secretary Abraham to Address Third Annual Conference on Carbon Capture and Sequestration

News Advisory:

Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham will give a keynote address at the Third Annual Carbon Capture and Sequestration Conference, to be held May 3-6, 2004, in Alexandria, Va. The conference is being held in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Commerce, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and will include participation by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, various international entities, environmental groups, the U.S. Department of State, U.S. energy companies and Department of Energy National Laboratories.

The 3rd Annual Carbon Capture and Sequestration Conference will include panels and discussions on topics including:

-- President Bush's Strategic Plan for the U.S. Climate Change Science Program;

-- Major Challenges Facing the Development and Ultimate Deployment of Carbon Capture, Separation, Transport and Sequestration Systems;

-- Risk Sharing to Promote the Development of Clean Coal Power;

-- How A Carbon Credits Market Can Facilitate Government Acceptance and Investment in Carbon Capture/Sequestration Technologies; and

-- The Need to Define Just What A Carbon Credit Is.

WHO: Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham
WHAT: Keynote Speech
WHEN: Tuesday, May 4, 11 a.m.
WHERE: Hilton Alexandria Mark Center, 5000 Seminary Rd., Alexandria, Va. 22311

http://www.usnewswire.com/

[halva]

How long has Mr. Reynolds been at this? Most especially with the threats.

Superliberal, take a look here (and following)
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000056-2.html

if you want to see him in action against one of his early victims, Toni Thayer, who - along with her Blue Skies International - he succeeded in hounding off the scene, admittedly not singlehanded; he had help.

Toni Thayer lay low for a while, but resurfaced last year, admittedly not with "chemtrails" as her number one priority issue.

Reynolds found me early in 2003, after the Greek mainstream press published an interview I gave, along with a young scientist, on 'chemtrails' over the island of Aigina.

http://www.willthomas.net/Articles/greekreport.htm

Reynolds accused me of conspiring with Will Thomas to defraud the public by publishing a fake photomontage photograph of a 'chemtrail' aircraft. The subsequent chain of deranged accusations is recorded in the Chemtrail Central Forum's 'Rumpus Room' archive, no longer on open access. The Rumpus Room was finally closed down to get rid of Reynolds.

No mainstream newspaper in Greece has touched the 'chemtrails' issue since, so I guess that may be a victory of a kind for Reynolds. I don't know, of course, if there is a cause-effect relation.

Probably, anyway, it is better for the 'chemtrails' issue to emerge the way it is indeed now beginning to emerge, as a 'controlled hangout', rather than as a media-driven hysteria campaign.

If Reynolds could just lay off now he could possibly save himself by saying that the techniques he used were necessary during the period that he used them. But he does not appear to have the self-knowledge required to make this transition. He is going to be a Noriega/Saddam Hussein-type figure, to be used to do the dirty work and then thrown away.

[halva]

Here is another highly dramatic exchange from last year following the incursion of Reynolds and other debunkers into the direct democracy discussion forum CICDD:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cicdd/message/8025

(and following month, approximately)

[halva]

One moment of light relief in the CICDD battle was provided by Mark Davey's (sucking eggs') posting of this satirical video on Reynolds:

http://mm.dfilm.com/mm2s/mm_route.php?id=1237228

But Reynolds was not amused:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cicdd/message/8101

The debunker pressure finally proved too much for Mark's nerves and he left CICDD.

He seems to have felt better protected from debunkers working with Don Croft on tower-busting and orgone generating.

Of course, having driven Mark away from a milieu ostensibly devoted to rational political activity, Reynolds would then use this victory as further evidence that only kooks and lunatics could support the chemtrail hoax.

This was Mark Davey's last post at CICDD:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cicdd/message/8162

and this was Reynolds' reply:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cicdd/message/8164

[jayreynolds]

Ok, superliberal, here are a slew of documented threats to shoot down airplanes made by chemmies. I know some of their real names and have made the reports to the FBI mentioned in the several pages of this thread.

But don't take my word for it, Dona Terry(i_don't_chat) knows all about the threats, that's why she begged her fellow cultists to stop,she knows their free messageboard is at risk because of the consistent susstained nature of then threats.

Here are six pages of archived threats against aircraft:
http://p090.ezboard.com/fcontrailsandchemtrails22884frm3.showMessage?topic ID=38.topic

If you want the short version, I summarized it for yahoo(see quote below):
http://p090.ezboard.com/fcontrailsandchemtrails22884frm3.showMessageRange? topicID=38.topic&start=101&stop=107

Think long and hard superliberal. Remember what happened when when the cult of Jim Jones went berserk, when the Heaven's Gate opened up, or the Solar Temple people got burned.

1.Superliberal, if you read these threats, you would have to report them, yes or no?

2.Superliberal, if one of these threats were acted out as the result of known false and misleading propaganda put out by an identifiable person, shouldn't that person be held responsible, yes or no?

3. Superliberal, if such persons could be proven to have colluded to mislead in order to achieve personal profit, shouldn't they be held responsible, yes or no?
=======================
jayreynolds
Illumi~Naughty
Posts: 1033
(7/28/03 7:50 pm)
Reply | Edit message just sent to yahoo-abuse
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Sirs,
Over the past years this group(chemtrailtrackingusa) has been the venue of many terrorist threats to shoot down airplanes. This group promotes the hoax of "chemtrails", that passenger jet planes people see making contrails are actually military jets spraying poison on people. What do you suppose this makes those foolish enough to believe it want to do?

The moderators/owners are aware of it and have deleted some of the terrorist threats. These terrorist threats have been repeatedly reported to the FBI. Think long and hard about the increasing possibility of some deranged person taking the actions suggested and Yahoo being identified as sponsoring the group. You have been made aware of the problem. Check with your legal department and see if they find this group risky. I am continuing to archive these posts and this message to you for future reference.
Jay Reynolds
=====================
Message 80722
"I would love to acquire a Grail SA-7 S.A.M. and just pull over on the side of the road one day and take out one of these freakin things!!! BOOM !!!"

message 87783
"I will commend anyone who actually takes one of these chemplanes out with a heatseeker. I mean I've noticed them for like ever now!! And am getting sick and tired of seeing this shit! It's obvious nobody seems to give a shit so that puts us in the worst and last resort type position. So I say nab one these fuckers outta the sky! And you succeed then I commend you!"

Message 89199
"My house was buzzed for ten minutes on Sunday afternoon by a small helicopter flying at tree-top level. The helicopter was low enough that it could have been brought down with a rifle and I have some friends who would not have hesitated to do so."

Message 90353
"Here at the
Grand Canyon they seem to be giving us a
break. Only very light spraying every few
days. Perhaps if one of us had a Stinger
we would have a few more tangible clues.
Did I say that?? Not my fault."

Message 96005
"hey, I got an idea: how about having an anti airplane gun, surely someone might have one, and wait for an heavy chemtrailed day with at least 5 airplanes at once and SHOOT them (in the gas tank, so it will not crash on people or houses) and have to mind the spraying mechanism to disable the pilot from stopping the spraying so the airplane will continue to spray as it lands, then the land around the plane will form giant cloud that will spread miles and miles and miles nobody will miss this one! but if its impossible to make them to press the spraying button to
make the landing look normal, then go ahead, shoot to make the planes EXPLODE in the air, so there will be a GIANT thick chemical nasty cloud every place there was the plane, and that cloud will surely fall down and everyone will notice it for sure"

Message 98015
"WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING NOW! IF WE CAN PROVE THESE PLANES ARE SRPAYING US< THEN WE HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO DEFEND OURSELVES AND SHOULD TAKE IT UPON OURSELVES TO INDENTIFY AND DISMANTLE THESE PLANES! WHILE WE ARE AT IT, LETS JUST GET RID oF THE WHOLE DAMN COMMERCIAL AIRLINE INDUSTRY!! THERE NEEDS TO BE A RADICAL CHANGE, THINK ABOUT IT...WE CAN STOP THIS. SABOTAGE AND DESTROY ALL AIRCRAFT UNDER
OPERATION BY THE MILITARY AND COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT INVOLVED IN COVERT AEROSOL SPRAYING AND OPERATION CLOVERLEAF. iT IS A WEAPON AGAINST US AND THERE IS NOTHING SAYING OR STOPPING US FROM TAKING CARE Of THIS ON OUR OWN"

[halva]

If Reynolds could just lay off now he could possibly save himself by saying that the techniques he used were necessary during the period that he used them. But he does not appear to have the self-knowledge required to make this transition. He is going to be a Noriega/Saddam Hussein-type figure, to be used to do the dirty work and then thrown away.

[halva]

Letxa, you were rather disapproving of the methods of Whitemajikman.

Do you have any comments on the methods of Reynolds, now that he is apparently beginning to feel, shall we say.....threatened?

[gaiacomm]

It seems that JR wishes to insight a war on words and felony threats of terrorisim.

If in fact JR has contacted the FBI and we can prove it then there smells a lawsuit for false accusations and other civil and penal counts.

We are at war...legally according to congress and if a person claims that others are a threat to national security then that person or persons can be charged and held without trail for a bit.

So I suggest that JR and others stick to the slander and idle threats of doom rather than to mix it with Bush's war!

Someone somewhere will sue JR and others for something I am sure!

And don't think that someone isn't plotting that as we write!

All of this on Arianna's message board!

[gaiacomm]

ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING FIELD GROWING RAPIDLY
01-10-02

By Stephen Swanson, 541-737-0789
SOURCE: Lance Haubrick, 541-757-2395

CORVALLIS - When Oregon State University graduate student Lance Haubrick was a teenager, he was interested in chemistry, physics and engineering, but he wasn't certain where those interests would lead him.

While casting about for a career path, Haubrick, a 1996 Corvallis High School graduate, discovered environmental engineering - a field that many say is poised for rapid global expansion.

Lance Haubrick
Click on image to go to downloadable photo


"I've always liked those subjects, and I was looking for a way to combine chemistry, physics and engineering, and environmental engineering is what I discovered," Haubrick said.

After researching the field, Haubrick became enthused about getting involved and working on projects that address both practical and environmental concerns. "So, I started the environmental engineering program at Oregon State University because OSU has a very good program."

After earning a bachelor's degree in environmental engineering in June 2000, Haubrick first went to work for the Indian Health Services.

"This was a good experience to apply myself and to gain a variety of skills," he said, but added that he soon decided to go back to school. He is now on-track to graduate from OSU with his master's degree in environmental engineering in March.

Haubrick is working with Peter Nelson, an OSU associate professor of civil, construction and environmental engineering on a Salem project investigating levels of pharmaceutical products in water.

"This is an emerging area that we are just starting to look into," Nelson said. "Our work is currently unfunded, so we are at the level of preliminary investigation. Many investigators have reported finding trace levels of pharmaceutical compounds in rivers, groundwater, and wastewater effluents. This indicates possible low level, long-term exposure to compounds that is unintended.

"We would like to see whether one commonly used low technology water treatment process - slow sand filtration - is effective in removal of representative pharmaceutical compounds, such as antibiotics," Nelson added. "It is too early to tell whether specific treatment measures will be required to protect our drinking waters on a routine basis."

Haubrick said he believes that the availability of safe, good quality drinking water will become "a big concern in the future, especially since the water demand keeps growing."

After graduation, Haubrick already has a job waiting for him with Gaiacomm Corp., a wireless telecommunication company now in the development stage of fourth generation global wireless technology. The position may take him all over the world.
"As an environmental engineer, my job is to assess the impacts of this new technology, which uses different frequencies not currently used by the communication industry. In addition, my job is to insure the company meets environmental regulations, minimizes the impacts onsite and obtains the necessary permits." Environmental engineering offers many choices and job opportunities, Nelson said.
"Environmental engineering prepares students for a wide variety of career opportunities," he said. "Our students work for large manufacturing companies like Hewlett Packard and Intel, government agencies like the EPA and Oregon's Department of Environmental Quality, and private consulting firms that design treatment processes and hazardous waste clean-up facilities such as CH2M-Hill. A few students choose to go into the Peace Corps or non-governmental environmental organizations."

The U.S. Department of Labor notes in their 2001 survey that the base starting salary for new engineering graduates in 2000 was $43,331, but the number of degrees granted in engineering may not increase as rapidly as job opportunities. Many of those opportunities will occur overseas where the annual growth rate for environmental engineering is predicted at about 10 percent.

Of the 330 universities and colleges offering accredited undergraduate degrees in engineering, 34 offer programs in environmental engineering or related fields, the Department of Labor report said.

"Our environmental engineering program at OSU, as an example, provides both a strong undergraduate engineering degree and an excellent graduate program for master's and doctoral students," Nelson said. "The two go hand-in-hand. Our undergraduate coursework benefits tremendously from the knowledge faculty gain through their research."

Haubrick also feels strongly about working to improve science education in public schools. He believes that everyone should have a lifelong involvement in education, and spends a portion of his time in OSU's K-12 Graduate Teaching Fellowship Program, which is sending 14 OSU graduate students into school districts throughout the state where the OSU scholars become adopted scientists.

Haubrick is working at Portland's Harvey Scott Elementary School where he teaches and demonstrates scientific principles to the children. "This is an opportunity for them to experience science from real scientists who have in-depth knowledge and understanding in a particular field. It also allows me to experience being a teacher and allows me to give back to the community.

"The children are our future and at the same time this builds a bridge between OSU and the Oregon public schools."

[gaiacomm]

Since this article and the reorg of gaiacomm...Lance does not work with gaiacomm at all and has no more ties to the organization. Since then a environmental company has been retained to do the required tasks at hand.

Ripleys believe it or not!

[gaiacomm]

The Outpatient Clinic

The Neurology Clinic is used for diagnosis, advice and treatment for all the diseases of the central and peripheral nervous system, and for clinical disturbances in the function of the brain, spinal cord, peripheral nerves and muscles. All the doctors of the Department of Neurology accept patients within the framework of the clinic.



In the clinic widespread neurological conditions are treated including: headaches, backaches, muscle aches, weakness and dizziness, loss of consciousness. The entire spectrum of nervous system diseases including other neurological diseases is also covered, for example, epilepsy, Alzheimer's disease and memory disturbances, Parkinson's disease and movement disturbances, diseases of blood vessels in the brain, multiple sclerosis, muscular atrophy and Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease (mad cow disease). Patients may be hospitalized from the clinic in the hospital neurology department.



Designated Subclinics are included within the framework of the Neurology Clinic:



General Neurology (Head: Dr. Ben-Hur);



Movement Disturbance Diseases (Head: Prof. Reches);



Nerve and Muscle Diseases (Head: Prof. Argov);



Brain Convulsion Diseases (Head: Dr. Leker);



Neurooncology (Heads: Prof. Segal and Dr. Lossos);



Multiple Sclerosis and Neuroimmunology (Heads: Prof. Abramsky and Dr. Karussis);



Epilepsy (Head: Dr. Eckstein);



Behavior Disturbances (Head: Dr. Biran);



Infectious Diseases (Head: Ein Kerem: Dr. Ben-Hur; Head at Har HaTsofim: Prof. Steiner);



Neurogeriatrics and Memory Disturbances (Head: Dr. Meiner, Har HaTsofim).



Sharap: Private Medical Service provided by departmental doctors:



Prof. Oded Abramsky (Head of the Department)

Prof. Avinoam Reches

Prof. Zohar Argov

Prof. Shaul Feldman

Dr. Tamir Ben-Hur

Dr. Alexander Lossos

Prof. Israel Steiner (Har HaTsofim)

Dr. Zeev Meiner (Har HaTsofim)



Clinic Days:



Sunday-Wednesday - 8:00-16:00

Thursdays - 12:00-16:00





Clinic Location:



Hadassah Hospital Ein Kerem - Clinical Building, Floor 6

Hadassah Hospital Har HaTsofim - Clinical Wing, Floor 2





List of Doctors in the Clinic:



Head of the Department and the Clinic - Prof. Oded Abramsky

Clinic Nurse - Ms. Ruth Peniri

Doctors at the Ein Kerem Hospital -

Prof. Shaul Feldman

Prof. Avinoam Reches

Prof. Avizohar Argov

Dr. Tamir Ben-HurDr. Dimitrius Karussis

Dr. Alexander Lossos

Dr. Ronen Leker

Dr. Yiftach Biran

Dr. Netta Levin

Dr. Ezra

Dr. Dana Eckstein

Dr. Dmitri Khaitov



Doctors at the Har HaTsofim Hospital - Prof. Israel Steiner, Dr. Zeev Meiner

Clinical Neuropsychologists - Dr. Yehoshua Ne'eman, Ms. Aya Gal.



Har HaTsofim - Neurology Clinic




Prof. Israel Steiner

Dr. Zeev Meiner (see Neurogeriatrics Unit)




I wonder if they are brothers?


Ripley's believe it or not!

[gaiacomm]

Asa Ben-Hur

My CV and teaching statement.

I'm now a postdoc at the Brutlag Bioinformatics Group at Stanford.

Contact information
email: asa.benhur at stanford.edu

Areas of interest:

Bioinformatics: protein sequence analysis, analysis of gene and protein expression data.
Unsupervised learning: clustering algorithms and model selection for clustering.
Applications of kernel methods and SVMs in bioinformatics.
Projects
PyML - a machine learning environment in Python

Download code for stability-based clustering model selection and the paper that describes the method.

A cis-regulation module analysis and visualization tool: CREME

Publications

Bioinformatics / machine learning:

R. Sharan, A. Ben-Hur, G. Loots and I. Ovcharenko. CREME: cis-regulatory module explorer for the human genome. accepted, NAR special web server issue. See also the Creme website.
A. Ben-Hur and D. Brutlag. Remote homology detection: a motif based approach. In: Proceedings, eleventh international conference on intelligent systems for molecular biology. Bioinformatics 19 Suppl. 1: i26-i33, 2003.
R. Sharan, I. Ovcharenko, A. Ben-Hur and R.M. Karp. CREME: A framework for identifying cis-regulatory modules in human-mouse conserved segments. In: Proceedings, eleventh international conference on intelligent systems for molecular biology. Bioinformatics 19 Suppl. 1: i283-i291, 2003.
A. Ben-Hur and I. Guyon. Detecting stable clusters using principal component analysis. In Methods in Molecular Biology, M.J. Brownstein and A. Khodursky (eds.) Humana press, 2003 pp. 159-182.
A. Ben-Hur, A. Elisseeff and I. Guyon. A stability based method for discovering structure in clustered data. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing, 2002.
A. Ben-Hur, D. Horn, H.T. Siegelmann and V. Vapnik. Support vector clustering. Journal of Machine Learning Research 2:125-137, 2001.
A. Ben-Hur, D. Horn, H.T. Siegelmann and V. Vapnik. A support vector method for clustering. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 13, 367-373, 2001.
A. Ben-Hur, D. Horn, H.T. Siegelmann and V. Vapnik. A kernel clustering method. 15th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR), 728-731, 2000.
Analog computation:
A. Ben-Hur, J. Feinberg, S. Fishman and H.T. Siegelmann. Probabilistic analysis of a differential equation for linear programming . Journal of Complexity 19(4) : 474-510, 2003.
A. Roitershtein, A. Ben-Hur and H.T. Siegelmann. On probabilistic analog automata . Submitted, Theoretical Computer Science.
A. Ben-Hur, H.T. Siegelmann and S. Fishman. Complexity for continuous time systems. Journal of Complexity 18(1) : 51-86, 2002.
H.T. Siegelmann, A. Ben-Hur and S. Fishman. Computational complexity for continuous time dynamics. Physical Review Letters, 83(7):1463-1466, 1999.
A. Ben-Hur and H.T. Siegelmann. Computation in gene networks. in: M. Margenstern and Y. Rogozhin (Eds.): MCU 2001, LNCS 2055, pp. 11-24, 2001.
H.T. Siegelmann, A. Roitershtein, and A. Ben-Hur. Noisy neural networks and generalizations. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 12, Cambridge, MA, 2000. MIT Press.

Physics:

A. Ben-Hur, R. Hallgass and V. Loreto. A renormalization procedure for directed self-organized critical models. Physical Review E, 54:1426-1432, 1996.
A. Ben-Hur and O. Biham. Universality in sandpile models. Physical Review E, 53:1317-1321, 1996.





Or maybe this is his brother!

[halva]

Gaiacomm, although I was trying to get on with my other work, something in my subconscious told me that you are posting here.

It is not on this forum that you have to establish your credentials.

Or advance the debate.

[gaiacomm]

Gaiacomm, although I was trying to get on with my other work, something in my subconscious told me that you are posting here.

It is not on this forum that you have to establish your credentials.

Or advance the debate.


Just to have some harmless fun! And that is all!

[lynn george]

If Reynolds could just lay off now he could possibly save himself by saying that the techniques he used were necessary during the period that he used them. But he does not appear to have the self-knowledge required to make this transition. He is going to be a Noriega/Saddam Hussein-type figure, to be used to do the dirty work and then thrown away.

Halva,

Have you had an opportunity to review the research in the publication: "Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming:Mitigation,Adaptation, and the Science Base Panel on Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming" sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and The Institute of Medicine? Have any researchers had time to read this 994 page study?

Here is a link:

http://books.nap.edu/books/0309043867/html/index.html

Or this link is a repeat but has some excellent sources on climate engineering:

http://www.lightwatcher.com/chemtrails/smoking_gun.html

SmT

[lynn george]

If Reynolds could just lay off now he could possibly save himself by saying that the techniques he used were necessary during the period that he used them. But he does not appear to have the self-knowledge required to make this transition. He is going to be a Noriega/Saddam Hussein-type figure, to be used to do the dirty work and then thrown away.

Halva,

Have you had an opportunity to review the research in the publication: "Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming:Mitigation,Adaptation, and the Science Base Panel on Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming" sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and The Institute of Medicine? Have any researchers had time to read this 994 page study?

Here is a link:

http://books.nap.edu/books/0309043867/html/index.html

Or this link is a repeat but has some excellent sources on climate engineering:

http://www.lightwatcher.com/chemtrails/smoking_gun.html

SmT


SmT-Not sure why my first link won't work, however if one acceses the second link here (The Lightwatcher Article) there is also a link(that works for now, I tried it) to the full text of the Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming study. I would encourage anyone interested in these geoengineering programs to save the text before it disappears.

SmT

[superliberal]

Hi Halva,

My father is an Environmentalist and also a Lawyer. I told him about this board and I showed him Mr. Reynold's threats. My father told me that all of you should do a FILE/SAVE AS/ and save the page with his threats as a web page. He said that if any of you were to lose a job or some kind of hardship from the actions of Mr. Reynolds, you should give his last post to a lawyer.

He has shown a track record and any lawyer will be pleasantly suprised to see what he has just said!




Here is another highly dramatic exchange from last year following the incursion of Reynolds and other debunkers into the direct democracy discussion forum CICDD:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cicdd/message/8025

(and following month, approximately)

[foot_soldier]

This link works fine:

Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation, and the Science Base (1992)

National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine

http://books.nap.edu/books/0309043867/html/index.html

[gaiacomm]

Hi Halva,

My father is an Environmentalist and also a Lawyer. I told him about this board and I showed him Mr. Reynold's threats. My father told me that all of you should do a FILE/SAVE AS/ and save the page with his threats as a web page. He said that if any of you were to lose a job or some kind of hardship from the actions of Mr. Reynolds, you should give his last post to a lawyer.

He has shown a track record and any lawyer will be pleasantly suprised to see what he has just said!




Here is another highly dramatic exchange from last year following the incursion of Reynolds and other debunkers into the direct democracy discussion forum CICDD:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cicdd/message/8025

(and following month, approximately)

It seems that JR wishes to insight a war on words and felony threats of terrorisim.

If in fact JR has contacted the FBI and we can prove it then there smells a lawsuit for false accusations and other civil and penal counts.

We are at war...legally according to congress and if a person claims that others are a threat to national security then that person or persons can be charged and held without trail for a bit.

So I suggest that JR and others stick to the slander and idle threats of doom rather than to mix it with Bush's war!

Someone somewhere will sue JR and others for something I am sure!

And don't think that someone isn't plotting that as we write!

All of this on Arianna's message board!

[superliberal]

1.Superliberal, if you read these threats, you would have to report them, yes or no?

2.Superliberal, if one of these threats were acted out as the result of known false and misleading propaganda put out by an identifiable person, shouldn't that person be held responsible, yes or no?

3. Superliberal, if such persons could be proven to have colluded to mislead in order to achieve personal profit, shouldn't they be held responsible, yes or no?

You, Mr. Reynolds, are praying on the fears of people by doing what you are doing. The people in here are not represented by the kooks you seem to be so attentive to. The people in here, as well i would say MOST who follow this, are concerned citizens. What is your reasoning for producing these threats when in fact none of these people have crossed the line in the form you speak?

Those threats should be directed AT those who suggest shooting down a plane or illegal activity. However, let us put your questions into context. How many chemtrail forums are out there? How many post and threads? Of those, how many were of a serious nature that you provided?

You seem to have annointed yourself a watch dog for kooks when in fact you may be the kook. Are you seriously fearful of the extreme minority of post you have provided? Do you really think they meant it and or capable of it? I highly doubt it!

If you wish to sit and prey on these people and watch for the ones who say questionable things so be it. But leave these other concerned citizens alone and free from YOUR OWN THREATS.

You destroying someones life is highly more likely than someone shooting a plane down. I think you have proven that in your threat letter. You are a stalker in many ways.


"that's why she begged her fellow cultists to stop"

Mr. Reynolds, you have now taken one or 2 examples and labeled the whole mass of people involved as "cultist"? You have just lost any credibility of being a concerned citizen yourself! Are environmentalist cultist? Are concerned citizens now cultist just because you do not agree with them? You have shown yourself to be a zealot and very unreasonable with your threats and labeling. You are preying on people's fears and bullying them. There is no denying that!

[lynn george]

All,

If researchers give in for any lengthy time to bunkie rambling and topic switching they fall into the exact snare set by the bunkies, which is simply to disrupt 'chemtrail'/geoengineering and climate engineering research and discussion. Neither their lies, manipulations, slanders, insults, inuendos, false associations, demonization attempts, or outright threats will slow us down one inch, if we FULLY recognize them for what they are. To give into little bunkie J's latest threats and tirades for more than just a couple of posts is to give this no nothing attention seeker and DISRUPTER exactly what he's after. And at the expense of continuation of meaningful dialogue and info sharing. So on that note:

Here a a couple of links to Rense.com discussing the topic of fibers which some question as to if they are "Aerosol Polymers". I'm sure the bunkies will jump on this with their usual BS, but I post these links ONLY as food for thought and NOT as PROVEN SCIENCE!

http://www.rense.com/general39/chem.htm

http://www.rense.com/general39/b%20lacklite.htm

SmT

[lynn george]

[quote="lynn george"]Lex-" What makes you think that this day was a clear blue sky before the contrails appeared?"

SmT-Look at the picture once again. There is little if any cloud cover. It is odd you take a trivial point such as this and ignore totally the HUGE MESS caused by the planes I mentioned. Those are pure shill tactics. Perhaps the sky as shown by the "reasonably clear looking spaces" between the HUGE MESS caused by the aerosol trails as shown on the image, can only be assumed to be "reasonably blue" or"reasonably clear". Can you by the way prove there are invisable pockets of moisture or clouds that are not showing up on the image? For the record I have PERSONALLY witnessed a CRYSTAL CLEAR BLUE SKY here in Mid-Missouri be turned into an almost solid sheet of milkey white transluscent haze, in a matter of hours with ONLY the trails fusing together to coat the entire sky. And this was caused by dozens of planes coming out within hours flying in x's, right at each other, doing 180's etc. etc. in what can only be described as "military" looking flight manuevers.

Lex-" The "haze" you see is almost definitely naturally occurring high altitude cirrus."

SmT-Where do you come up with that? The HAZE I see looks like older trails that have fused together and the newer trails have yet to do so. That would be the logical assumption. Again how is it you assume this is "naturally" ocurring when what BLATANTLY stands out in the picture is the HUNDREDS of easily discernable aerosol trails from planes? Are we even looking at the same picture. You look for the speck but ignore the log.


Lex-" I assume you understand that there can be hazy days without contrails, that not all hazy days are caused by contrails, and just because you have a hazy day the same day you have contrails that that doesn't mean that contrails caused the haze. Haze, naturally occurring cirrus, and contrails all can form in similar atmospheric conditions. They are all caused by the atmospheric conditions, not by the contrails."

SmT- Straw man. The FACT is now clearly witnessed on the image posted aerosol trails realeased from planes are fusing together forming solid sheets of light reducing haze that often stretches from horizon to horizon and can cover entire states. Go back and look at the image of the trails fusing together that Sore Throat posted. This is being observed all over the world. This Sky Shield (whether one chooses to believe it is being purposely caused or just "allowed to happen") is blocking out the sun for days at a time over much of the Earth now.

Lex- First, it's not pollution. It's water vapor. It's as much pollution as your common every day cloud.

SmT-Prove it's only water vapor. I believe you are absolutely incorrect here as I have even heard even bunkies admit their are all sorts of pollutants in even jet exhaust. You have no more proof about what is in these aerosol releases than anyone else. As I mentioned before and you know quite well even grade school science books are teaching kids the way to counteract global warming is simply to burn a richer fuel mixture or one that puts out more PARTICLES for cloud nuclei. It's a dirty type of cloud seeding. What part of "Particle Air" do you fail to comprehend? Prove it's only water vapor. You can't.

SmT

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[lynn george]

[quote=lynn george][quote=superliberal]

Link has a close up.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=16528

Compare this picture with the image progression Sore Throat posted showing how these aerosol trails fuse into one solid mass.

C'mon bunkies, pay attention. LOOK what is happening to our skies. End The Denial.

SmT

[lynn george]

Reynolds, Bonehead and airtankerpilot are clearly promoting an agenda of disinformation, denying a reality that is so obvious to anyone taking the time to observe.

"airtankerpilot" wrote:

[quote]
.....Planes do not make a sky full of cirrus.....


contradicted by Reynolds who responds to a William Thomas claim,


"-Normal contrails dissipate less than one minute after formation."
FALSE

So why don't you bunkers get your story straight...and while you're at it come to grips with the reality of aircraft emissions:



Source: http://www.skyhighway.com/~chemtrails/


Hi Sore Throat,

Yes, your mini film clip there does an excellent job showing what millions worldwide in many countries are seeing: Aerosols being released from planes- ususally it seems in conjunction with military type maneuvers- that can spread out within hours to completely obscure the sky and 'Turn down the sun'.


Yep, some bunkies it seems are going to remain in denial forever no matter that the evidence is pouring in as to what these aerosol trails are doing. I think it shows alot when a researcher looks at that image with hundreds of trails they focus on that, and when a bunkie sees such images of what these planes are doing they either run away or focus on non-issues. Typical head in the sand bunkie behavior. Denial, denial, denial.

Here's another link for bunkies to ignore and for climate engineering researchers that don't have it:

http://alberta.indymedia.org/news/2002/08/4138.php

SmT

C'mon bunkies, LOOK what is happening in our skies. All of these trails fusing together forming a solid CheMCloud that can cover many ENTIRE sections of the country.

Here is something to think about for the researchers here though. Papers like those by Michaelson/Stanford Law School (Climate Change Manhatten Project) and Teller (Global Warming and Ice Ages)- among many other scientific papers- recommend scattering particulates and suspending them in the atmosphere to BLOCk heat/UV etc. But Minnis at NASA is claiming these aerosol trails would TRAP heat it seems in direct contrast to all of the papers like the ones I mentioned. Is Minnis being disingeous to try and lead people in the exact opposite direction of what is actually occuring? I found Minnis's quotes about being "surprised" by the "60 mile long" *contrails* they created in their experiments to sound VERY FAKE. Thoughts?

SmT

[letxa2000]

There has been a lot of talk about the following NASA imagery that shows a lot of contrails. It has been suggested that there is something suspicious about it and the general haze. The image below is specified as being "the morning of January 29th."



First, let's take a look at visible satellite imagery at daybreak.

The following image is from 29-Jan-004 13:00Z (8:00am EDT) and we can faintly see there are already clouds and haze over the southeastern U.S. It's not perfectly visible because the sunlight is just starting to hit the area.



Now, an hour later...



In the image above the sun is fully up and at 14:00Z (9:00am EDT) we can clearly see the clouds ("haze") over the same area of Alabama and Georgia that appear in the contrail picture. It's the same haze and you can follow the movement of that haze (clouds) from daybreak on through the day. They pushed out of Louisiana and Mississippi ahead of a much larger system in Louisiana and Texas and continued to move east with the wind throughout the day.

Now, below, we have a plot from the NASA contrail forecast program for the morning of January 29th.



As you can see above, by 7am EDT (12:00Z) it was already predicted that contrail formation was very possible off the southern Gulf coast and in the middle of Alabama. But consider the wind conditions as described in the following image.



Looking at this wind chart we can see that the wind really picks up the further east it goes. So any contrail that forms in that area is bound to be blown east pretty quick. If you have plane after plane running on the same flight routes you're going to see the typical pattern of parallel contrails as the wind blows them: these parallel contrails are visible in the original NASA picture, just as expected. Also, the air mass that NASA forecasted to be conducive to contrail formation over Mississippi and off the Gulf coast very probably moved east and northeast based on the prevailing winds. These winds would take that air mass right over the area of contrail formation pictured in the original image.

Contrail formation was expected in the southeastern United States the morning of January 29th and the "haze" was pre-existing. The original image in question shows many parallel contrails which is consistent with contrails along flight routes being blown to the east by the relatively strong winds that were present aloft that morning. Clouds and moisture, accounting for the haze, were already present by 8:00am suggesting that the haze in the original image was almost certainly naturally occurring and present in the atmosphere before the contrails started forming later that morning. NASA's contrail forecasting program forecast contrails for the general area in question several hours before the contrails were observed.

In short, the satellite image with all those contrails, while impressive, is not at all unexpected and is completely consistent with normal contrails made of water vapor. There is nothing suspicious about the satellite imagery in question. Lacking solid evidence to the contrary it is entirely reasonable to conclude that the contrails observed in the original image were nothing but typical contrails, granted, seen in larger numbers than on a typical day. Any other conclusion without supporting evidence has to be treated as nothing more than speculation.


Again how is it you assume this is "naturally" ocurring when what BLATANTLY stands out in the picture is the HUNDREDS of easily discernable aerosol trails from planes?

Contrails are not "aerosol trails." They are water vapor. You have yet to demonstrate or prove that any of these contrails contain anything but water vapor and, to a much lesser degree, the trace chemicals (pollution) that results from burning jet fuel. If these are "aerosol trails" or intentional spraying, simply prove it. Pointing to a satellite photo that contains, admittedly, a lot of contrails is not proof of any intentional aerosol spraying--at best it demonstrates that the effect of water vapor created by air traffic on the atmosphere should be studied.

[lynn george]

Letxa you can post all the charts and graphs you want, they hardly make your case. First bunkies were claiming "contrails" were spreading out and doing all of the things that 'chemtrail' researchers were witnessing. Now your trying to tell me that contrails DOn't spread out and form the horizon to horizon HAZE that the World is witnessing. WHICH IS IT? Get your story straight!

I personally KNOW through personal observation that chemtrail spraying can take a solid crystal blue sky and through the use of dozens of chemplanes within hours turn it into horizon to horizon ChemHaze. Your photos don't tell how much of the haze shown over Georgia and Florida, etc. is from plane emissions at all. I don't see how ANYBODY that is attempting to be realistic can look at that picture and not see the HUGE pollution problem coming from these planes. And that is ASSUMING it is not intentional which many many scientific papers and institutions now suggest it IS to mitigate global warming among other programs. Again for anyone to KNOW conclusively what is being sprayed from those planes one needs to have access to upper level atmospheric sampling data that one can KNOW is not comprimised. Do you have access to such data?

SmT

[halva]

Gaiacomm,

I'm sure Dr. Zerefos is looking forward to meeting you when you go to Kos.

This is what we are waiting to see from you.

The rest is NOISE.

And I would kindly ask you to desist from it.

[lynn george]

Spray Tankers Tracked By Radar

http://pages.ivillage.com/innerconnections/gathering-of-love-for-global-peace/spray_tankers_tracked_by_radar.html

Read what The Citizens are saying.

[lynn george]

Reynolds, Bonehead and airtankerpilot are clearly promoting an agenda of disinformation, denying a reality that is so obvious to anyone taking the time to observe.

"airtankerpilot" wrote:

[quote]
.....Planes do not make a sky full of cirrus.....


contradicted by Reynolds who responds to a William Thomas claim,


"-Normal contrails dissipate less than one minute after formation."
FALSE

So why don't you bunkers get your story straight...and while you're at it come to grips with the reality of aircraft emissions:



Source: http://www.skyhighway.com/~chemtrails/


Hi Sore Throat,

Yes, your mini film clip there does an excellent job showing what millions worldwide in many countries are seeing: Aerosols being released from planes- ususally it seems in conjunction with military type maneuvers- that can spread out within hours to completely obscure the sky and 'Turn down the sun'.


Yep, some bunkies it seems are going to remain in denial forever no matter that the evidence is pouring in as to what these aerosol trails are doing. I think it shows alot when a researcher looks at that image with hundreds of trails they focus on that, and when a bunkie sees such images of what these planes are doing they either run away or focus on non-issues. Typical head in the sand bunkie behavior. Denial, denial, denial.

Here's another link for bunkies to ignore and for climate engineering researchers that don't have it:

http://alberta.indymedia.org/news/2002/08/4138.php

SmT

C'mon bunkies, LOOK what is happening in our skies. All of these trails fusing together forming a solid CheMCloud that can cover many ENTIRE sections of the country.

Here is something to think about for the researchers here though. Papers like those by Michaelson/Stanford Law School (Climate Change Manhatten Project) and Teller (Global Warming and Ice Ages)- among many other scientific papers- recommend scattering particulates and suspending them in the atmosphere to BLOCk heat/UV etc. But Minnis at NASA is claiming these aerosol trails would TRAP heat it seems in direct contrast to all of the papers like the ones I mentioned. Is Minnis being disingeous to try and lead people in the exact opposite direction of what is actually occuring? I found Minnis's quotes about being "surprised" by the "60 mile long" *contrails* they created in their experiments to sound VERY FAKE. Thoughts?

SmT


Cmon bunkies what is happening in that picture Sore Throat posted. Let's discuss it shall we? Why ignore this? It's your air too.

SmT

[halva]

Letxa, you wrote:



I agree that whitemajikman's demeanor is not appropriate and has been over the top.

You also wrote:

quote="letxa2000"]
This board is unique for both the chemtrail believers and the skeptics because neither of us control the board so no-one is going to get banned for their beliefs.[/quote]

Jay Reynolds wrote:

A notice to all "chemtrail" cult promoters:

CEASE AND DESIST PROMOTING THE "CHEMTRAIL" HOAX

The longer it continues the more opportunities that exist for this hoax, already a magnet for nutcases, to find a mass murderer fit to cause the terrorist threats frequently made at "ChemtrailtrackingUSA".

I will personally do my best, if such an incident ever occurs, to encourage state and Federal prosecution for as many "chemtrail" promoters as I can.
I will recommend they be tried under federal RICO and state criminal syndicalism laws if US citizens, and as enemy combatants if non-US.

I have previously written personally to Chem11, Dona Terry, Clifford Carnicom, Lorie Kramer, Mark Steadham, and William Thomas notifying them of my determinatiion to name them as the major players.

Take my words to heart, folks, and if you think some silly pseudonym hides your identity from the feds, guess again.


Letxa, you say that whitemajikman’s demeanor is not appropriate and has been over the top.

Would you like to venture a comment on Reynolds’ demeanor as evidenced here?

Is it a praiseworthy indication of how great it is that neither side controls the board that Reynolds, with impunity, speaks and behaves like this?

Does this set the scene for the cosy chat about definitions of chemtrails that you would like us all to have?

Has Reynolds, whom you have not yet criticised, perhaps not behaved more inappropriately than whitemajikman, whom you have criticised?

[gaiacomm]

Gaiacomm,

I'm sure Dr. Zerefos is looking forward to meeting you when you go to Kos.

This is what we are waiting to see from you.

The rest is NOISE.

And I would kindly ask you to desist from it.


Seperate the noise into specific channels and the message is embedded within!

Soon there will be an answer to the chemtrail issue and it will be before the election this year. Something wonderful is about to happen thanks to the efforts of all who support the chemtrail arena.

The info posted here and all thru the internet has been compiled and is almost ready for presentation. Alot classified and alot not. It will expose some and insight others to run before legal action is levied.

But the end result will expose the global warming, chemtrail, geo-engineering, weather control, oil control, electric power control, water control, and a few others.

JR and his group have already been "debunked". The others are just leaves in the wind!

So continue the cause!

[letxa2000]

lynn george: Letxa you can post all the charts and graphs you want, they hardly make your case.

"All the charts" I'm posting make my case a lot more than the nothing you've provided in support of your position. You have simply provided no reason to believe that the contrails observed in the imagery from January 29th are anything but normal contrails while I've provided compelling scientific/meteorological information that supports my case that they were simply contrails.


First bunkies were claiming "contrails" were spreading out and doing all of the things that 'chemtrail' researchers were witnessing. Now your trying to tell me that contrails DOn't spread out and form the horizon to horizon HAZE that the World is witnessing. WHICH IS IT? Get your story straight!

First, I never said they never spread out. My only point of contention is that no-one has provided any evidence that there is actually any wide-spread "spraying" program being conducted and that the NASA contrail photo certainly isn't proof of anything. The images I provided from January 29th strongly indicate that the "hazy" appearance on satellite that day was not caused by contrails since the day began with a haze on satellite imagery.

If you are concerned about the persistent contrails (clouds of water vapor created by the addition of water to the atmosphere as a result of jet fuel burning) and their effect on the environment, fine. I'm not going to argue that because there are people with more knowledge than either you or me on the topic that aren't in agreement yet. But my understanding of what you're claiming is that you think there is an intentional program to "spray" exotic chemicals into the atmosphere in a clandestine fashion--and if that's what you're claiming I want proof. I've seen none yet but I have provided proof that even that "suspicious" NASA contrail photo can be completely explained as contrails.

There's no need to point to some unprobable conspiracy theory to explain what is adequately explained by conventional science and meteorology.

[halva]

Letxa, you wrote:



I agree that whitemajikman's demeanor is not appropriate and has been over the top.

You also wrote:

quote="letxa2000"]
This board is unique for both the chemtrail believers and the skeptics because neither of us control the board so no-one is going to get banned for their beliefs.

Jay Reynolds wrote:

A notice to all "chemtrail" cult promoters:

CEASE AND DESIST PROMOTING THE "CHEMTRAIL" HOAX

The longer it continues the more opportunities that exist for this hoax, already a magnet for nutcases, to find a mass murderer fit to cause the terrorist threats frequently made at "ChemtrailtrackingUSA".

I will personally do my best, if such an incident ever occurs, to encourage state and Federal prosecution for as many "chemtrail" promoters as I can.
I will recommend they be tried under federal RICO and state criminal syndicalism laws if US citizens, and as enemy combatants if non-US.

I have previously written personally to Chem11, Dona Terry, Clifford Carnicom, Lorie Kramer, Mark Steadham, and William Thomas notifying them of my determinatiion to name them as the major players.

Take my words to heart, folks, and if you think some silly pseudonym hides your identity from the feds, guess again.


Letxa, you say that whitemajikman’s demeanor is not appropriate and has been over the top.

Would you like to venture a comment on Reynolds’ demeanor as evidenced here?

Is it a praiseworthy indication of how great it is that neither side controls the board that Reynolds, with impunity, speaks and behaves like this?

Does this set the scene for the cosy chat about definitions of chemtrails that you would like us all to have?

Has Reynolds, whom you have not yet criticised, perhaps not behaved more inappropriately than whitemajikman, whom you have criticised?[/quote]

[halva]

If Letxa doesn't feel the need to respond to the previous post, would other non-debunkers here not agree that this is sufficient evidence that we are dealing here not with some deluded asthmatic with whom, since he begs us so insistently, it is arguably acceptable to discuss his problem of how a chemtrail is defined and what evidence there is that there is nothing but water vapour and the good old-fashioned exhaust fumes we have always known in those trails we see in the sky.

It is evidence that we are dealing with someone who is cold-bloodedly wasting our time.

I said some time ago that if all other non-debunkers agreed, and showed it by ceasing their postings here, I would simply spam in Hebrew, Chinese and whatever other incomprehensible language is available, everything the debunkers put up here.

There are alternative venues available, including those we can control ourselves.

I am certainly going to show Reynolds' threats to Dr. Zerefos, and not only to him.

If Letxa gives no answer to the previous posting and other non-debunkers keep arguing with him and other debunkers, I therefore take it as an indication that you/they WANT us to keep wasting our time here.

I am not going to leave this forum, and I am not going to confine myself merely to spamming mechanically if there are others who want to keep arguing with the debunkers (though of course I may resort to spamming as well as argument).

But I don't want to lose any more of my time arguing with them, particularly if Letxa is not willing to dissociate himself from Reynolds at least to the extent he dissociated himself from Whitemajikman.

[halva]

So Letxa, are you supporting Reynolds in his threats to us, and can we show this statement of support to Zerefos and others also?

Or are you going to ignore this question, while at the same time condemning anyone who tries to ignore some question you ask?

[superliberal]

http://www.registerguard.com./news/2004/05/02/ol.contrails.0502.html

May 2, 2004

Contrails do count

By Karen McCowan
The Register-Guard

Cue "X-Files" music: Maybe we do need to worry about those contrails snaking through the skies overhead.

For years, contrail conspiracy theorists have competed with UFOsighters and alien abduction survivors for air time on late-nightradio's "Art Bell Overnight."

Their claim: Those puffy, white jet wakes are no mere water vapor, butchemicals sprayed by the government to (a) kill us, or (b) activatemind control chips secretly implanted in our bodies.

Laughable? Why then has NASA launched a project to engage ordinarycitizens - even schoolkids - in monitoring the jet fuel leavings?

In a word: climate.

NASA scientist Lin Chambers is a principal investigator with CERES, asatellite project that monitors the impact of contrails - essentiallyman-made clouds - on the Earth's radiant energy systems. Early evidencesuggests that lingering contrails affect surface conditions in twoways, particularly in areas below major air corridors.


NASA is studying contrails such as these seen over the Willamette Valley last summer.

Photo: Chris Pietsch / The Register-Guard


"Duringthe daytime, less sunlight gets to the Earth," Chambers said. "And atnighttime, more heat is trapped so temperatures are warmer."

Chambers also directs a program called S'COOL, or "Students' CloudsObservations On-Line," in which thousands of schoolchildren all overthe globe chart contrails and cloud formations in their own corner ofthe sky, then send the data to NASA. The ground-based reporting isdesigned to verify the contrail tracking conducted by NASA satellitesTerra and Aqua, she said.

But the agency also made a special appeal on Earth Day - April 22 - forcontrail reports from anyone, anywhere. NASA posted a simplifiedreporting form on its Web site: Observers were to count the contrailsthey saw that day and classify them into one of three categories:short-lived (dissipating just behind the plane); persistent (lingeringfor hours); or persistent-spreading (essentially, morphing into cirrusclouds).

Perhaps for lack of publicity, the response was "quite disappointing," said Chambers, who is now analyzing that data.

"We got maybe 200 reports," she said. "We hope to try again next year and let more people know about it ahead of time."

While the Earth Day project was intended as a one-day snapshot ofglobal contrail patterns, NASA welcomes volunteers of any age who'dlike to become contrail reporters on an ongoing basis. Prospectivecloud watchers can contact the S'COOL Web site, and Chambers willrespond from her office at NASA Langley.

Wait just a minute.

NASA Langley? As in, CIA headquarters? Where her colleagues are Agents Scully and Mulder?

Chambers laughed. She gets that a lot. "It's a common mistake," she said. "We're in Hampton, Virginia, near Virginia Beach. We're named Langley not for the town, but after Smithsonian founder Samuel Pierpoint Langley."

Yeah, right.

And that wasn't an alien spaceship hovering outside my window last night.

COUNTING CONTRAILS

Here's where to find information on becoming a NASA contrail "reporter."

• NASA Contrail Project Web site:www.globe.gov/fsl/html/templ.cgi?earthday2004

• Project scientist: Lin.H.Chambers@nasa.gov

[halva]

I take it, then, superliberal, you want to continue the debate with letxa before he answers the question I asked him.

[superliberal]

Sorry Halva, my mouth is closed! :lol:

Please restate the question if you like.

[halva]

Let's get our act together a little better, superliberal.

The other side is quite well co-ordinated, you know.

[halva]

So Letxa, are you supporting Reynolds in his threats to us, and can we show this statement of support to Zerefos and others also?

Or are you going to ignore this question, while at the same time condemning anyone who tries to ignore some question you ask?

An answer please Letxa.

[halva]

While we're waiting for Letxa, can I just make this appeal to all non-debunkers here that with the exception perhaps of long, boring cut-and-pastes we read what others are posting here before we post ourselves?

We can't effectively deal with the debunkers in the "free society" of this forum unless we do this.

That's another problem of not having territory of our own from which they can be just kicked off.

So, yes, Letxa, we are waiting.

[halva]

Hopefully I will get the green light soon to announce an alternative venue as an OPTION for those who wish us to continue together the dialogue we were having here before debate was prohibited by Reynolds.

[jayreynolds]

1.Superliberal, if you read these threats, you would have to report them, yes or no?

2.Superliberal, if one of these threats were acted out as the result of known false and misleading propaganda put out by an identifiable person, shouldn't that person be held responsible, yes or no?

3. Superliberal, if such persons could be proven to have colluded to mislead in order to achieve personal profit, shouldn't they be held responsible, yes or no?

You, Mr. Reynolds, are praying on the fears of people by doing what you are doing. The people in here are not represented by the kooks you seem to be so attentive to. The people in here, as well i would say MOST who follow this, are concerned citizens. What is your reasoning for producing these threats when in fact none of these people have crossed the line in the form you speak?

Those threats should be directed AT those who suggest shooting down a plane or illegal activity. However, let us put your questions into context. How many chemtrail forums are out there? How many post and threads? Of those, how many were of a serious nature that you provided?

You seem to have annointed yourself a watch dog for kooks when in fact you may be the kook. Are you seriously fearful of the extreme minority of post you have provided? Do you really think they meant it and or capable of it? I highly doubt it!

If you wish to sit and prey on these people and watch for the ones who say questionable things so be it. But leave these other concerned citizens alone and free from YOUR OWN THREATS.

You destroying someones life is highly more likely than someone shooting a plane down. I think you have proven that in your threat letter. You are a stalker in many ways.


"that's why she begged her fellow cultists to stop"

Mr. Reynolds, you have now taken one or 2 examples and labeled the whole mass of people involved as "cultist"? You have just lost any credibility of being a concerned citizen yourself! Are environmentalist cultist? Are concerned citizens now cultist just because you do not agree with them? You have shown yourself to be a zealot and very unreasonable with your threats and labeling. You are preying on people's fears and bullying them. There is no denying that!

'superliberal', rather amusing how you couldn't answer my questions, eh?
Your response was to try and minimize the actual threats that were made to shoot down airplanes, because they were a small percentage of total posts. If one person out of the thousands who walk the mezzanines of DFW or O'hare airports were to make such threats, even though they were only a small percentage of the people who walked through the airport, shouldn't the threat be reported? Your failure to answer leaves the reader that by default, you would not report such a threat.

'Superliberal', there is no debate that much of the "chemtrail" hoax is based on personal profit, and that the promoters knowingly put out false propaganda.

2.Superliberal, if one of these threats were acted out as the result of known false and misleading propaganda put out by an identifiable person, shouldn't that person be held responsible, yes or no?

3. Superliberal, if such persons could be proven to have colluded to mislead in order to achieve personal profit, shouldn't they be held responsible, yes or no?

Rather than answer the direct question, you fabricated some anonymous 'lawyer' story, and said I should be sued for supposed "threats". I have made no threats, I have made a solemn promise to seek prosecution against people who induce others to commit terrorist acts, if they occur. Your failure to answer leaves the reader with the impression, by default, that you would not hold such inducement to account for it's part in causing the terrorist action.

'Superliberal', be aware that real people, perhaps even some of your relatves or loved ones ride in airplanes making contrails. at the same time those real people dine or watch a movie, some nutcase chemmie is dreaming of shooting down the plane with a missile. Those dreams are really no different than those of any other terrorist, or criminal, even if they are different from many "chemtrail" cult members. Insofar as those who created those thoughts through false inculcation, they will be held accountable criminally in no less a way than the perpetrators and sponsors
of the Lockerbie shootdown.

I stand firm in my pledge to assist justice being served by being able and willing to show exactly who said what, to whom, when, and where, the specifics

Perhaps in your mind you can rationalize an excuse for the perps and those who induce them for profit. If that is so, I suggest you need to rethink the ethics of your position, and get some moral compass.

If you or anybody else doesn't like it, sue me.

[superliberal]

Mr. Reynolds,

Your questions are obviously answered but your intentions are as well. And I do not believe they are to help or save mankind. No one in this forum has made such a declaration in which you refer to. You have refered to 1 or 2 out of millions of post. You are searching for a needle in a hay stack and I do not believe that is your purpose here. Again, intent is everything. If no one here has made such a statement and has only expressed concern, you sending out a warning with a rap sheet of people you have attacked shows that you are the attacker. So your verbal fear mongering is unwarranted.

Just recently a couple of our US troops did some very terrorist like things to some Iraqie prisoners. Is the whole US Army a cult now? Should we clump their activity to all of the US military?A terrorist can sprout out of any organization, it does not mean the whole of the organization is bad. Try taking on guns and gun trafficing instead of bullying people on the internet.

[halva]

Superliberal, Reynolds has forbidden us to promote the chemtrail hoax.

Why are you talking to him? (i.e. promoting the hoax)

The next thing we know letxa will be joining in the debate again without making it clear whether or not he supports Reynolds' prohibition on discussion.

[gaiacomm]

It seems that JR wishes to insight a war on words and felony threats of terrorisim.

If in fact JR has contacted the FBI and we can prove it then there smells a lawsuit for false accusations and other civil and penal counts.

We are at war...legally according to congress and if a person claims that others are a threat to national security then that person or persons can be charged and held without trail for a bit.

So I suggest that JR and others stick to the slander and idle threats of doom rather than to mix it with Bush's war!

Someone somewhere will sue JR and others for something I am sure!

And don't think that someone isn't plotting that as we write!

All of this on Arianna's message board!


JR: AS A MATTER OF FACT A WELL PLACED PHONE CALL AND LETTER HAS BEEN SENT TO THE JUSTICE DEPT. TO CHALLENGE FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND TERRORIST THREATS ON THE INTERNET. YOUR NAME AND DATA WITH OTHERS HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE FBI, JUSTICE DEPT, YOUR STATE ATTORNEY AND FEDERAL ATTORNEY.

A PHONE CALL AND LETTER HAS ALSO BEEN SENT TO ARIANNA TO PREPARE HER FOR THE EXPOSURE.

I STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT YOU KEEP THE DIALOGUE HERE CIVIL AND NOT CROSS ANYMORE LINES. THREATS OF ANY KIND ARE CONSIDERED PUNISHABLE IF INTENT CAN BE PROVEN. WITH PRESSURE FROM WOMEN AND CHILDREN GROUPS WHO FREQUENT THE INTERNET AND ARE EXPOSED TO THIS TYPE OF INSULT ARE ALREADY HEADING TO WASHINGTON TO HIRE LOBBYISTS FOR THE CAUSE. THEY AND THEIR LAWYERS ARE LOKKING FOR LANDMARK CASES TO PROMOTE THEIR FIRMS.

BUSH IS VERY BUSY WITH OTHER MATTERS AND WOULD PREFER TO NOT HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH ISSUES BE A PART OF HIS RE-ELECTION PROCESS...SO A QUICK FIX AND CONVICTIONS OF CHARGES PLACED ON YOU AND OTHERS WOULD BE TO HIS AND OTHERS BEST INTEREST...IN SHORT MAKE AN EXAMPLE OF YOUR TYPE OF SLANDER REMARKS AND THREATS ON THE INTERNET A TOKEN WIN.

I KNOW BECAUSE I HAVE ALREADY BEEN THRU IT!

[halva]

Thank you Gaiacomm.

I wish you all the best in your collaboration with Dr. Zerefos. Hopefully no further interventions by you will be necessary here.

[gaiacomm]

Here is a start to contacts to also file your complaints. So far there are few filed so far!




https://tips.fbi.gov/

Office of the Attorney General - 202-353-1555

BY MAIL:

Correspondence to the Department, including the Attorney General, may be sent to:

U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Contacting the White House [En Español]

Mailing Address

The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500


Phone Numbers

Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
FAX: 202-456-2461

TTY/TDD

Comments: 202-456-6213
Visitors Office: 202-456-2121
E-Mail
President George W. Bush: president@whitehouse.gov
Vice President Richard Cheney: vice.president@whitehouse.gov

https://irf.cc.cert.org/


To reach DHS headquarters by standard mail, please write to:


U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, D.C. 20528

http://www.aclu.org/

[halva]

Gaiacomm, this is the strategy you yourself are pursuing.

I don't know that there is anyone else here wishing to follow the line of action you propose.

It does not seem to me that it is necessary for you to announce all these moves at this forum.

[gaiacomm]

Information on JR and others has been turned over to lawyers and authorities for evaluation. This website owner has also been asked to turn over the database on this forum for investigation.

JR says to sue him.....it will not happen....the US District and Federal District courts will first have a crack at it.

There are people that do not like Arianna and will also use this as a way to get back at her!

The internet has always been challenged in court....but we are legally at WAR! So the rules change... and JR and others have just now got their tails caught in a crack!

There will be others that will fall. Now if JR and others are convicted then you all can file civil charges against them and recieve monetary damages.

In other words now you can sue JR!

[gaiacomm]

Gaiacomm, this is the strategy you yourself are pursuing.

I don't know that there is anyone else here wishing to follow the line of action you propose.

It does not seem to me that it is necessary for you to announce all these moves at this forum.


What is done is done!

It's not nice to fool with Mother Nature!


I will see you in Greece! I hear the food is great!

[halva]

Gaiacomm, it would have been much better for you to have done all this behind the scenes without making such a fuss about it in public.

There is one strategy to be pursued through the official channels, and another rank-and-file strategy expressed in forums like this.

The way that Reynolds has damaged the autonomy of discussion here is not improved by importation of the whole litigative process into the ideas debate we have been trying to have here.

I don't want to get involved in the way you play politics.

[superliberal]

Thanks gaiacomm. I too sent a letter to the FBI to let them know about John Jay Reynolds. In todays climate, labeling someone a terrorist is a very huge charge that could ruin someone's life and also cause them extreme pain and suffering. The FBI should know that someone is out there labeling concerned citizens as "cults" and preying on them with all their might. Internet bullies need to be reported as well! There are different forms of terrorism!

Thanks again!

[halva]

I don't want Arianna Huffington's forum to be hit by scandal. I would like her to be a successful politician, not a politician dragged into a stupid scandal because of a nutcase like Reynolds.

[gaiacomm]

I don't want Arianna Huffington's forum to be hit by scandal. I would like her to be a successful politician, not a politician dragged into a stupid scandal because of a nutcase like Reynolds.



Welcome to America Wayne! What is done is done!

Government without representation!

Arianna is finished in politics here in America. She does not have enough money!

[gaiacomm]

Thanks gaiacomm. I too sent a letter to the FBI to let them know about John Jay Reynolds. In todays climate, labeling someone a terrorist is a very huge charge that could ruin someone's life and also cause them extreme pain and suffering. The FBI should know that someone is out there labeling concerned citizens as "cults" and preying on them with all their might. Internet bullies need to be reported as well! There are different forms of terrorism!

Thanks again!


I agree...keep up the great work!

[gaiacomm]

Gaiacomm, it would have been much better for you to have done all this behind the scenes without making such a fuss about it in public.

There is one strategy to be pursued through the official channels, and another rank-and-file strategy expressed in forums like this.

The way that Reynolds has damaged the autonomy of discussion here is not improved by importation of the whole litigative process into the ideas debate we have been trying to have here.

I don't want to get involved in the way you play politics.


Wayne this exposure has been in the works for months and was felt to leak a little blood in the water to attract the sharks!

Now we will sit on the shore and watch them feed!

[halva]

What exactly do you have in mind doing in Kos, if you go there?

The climate change/'chemtrails'/geoengineering/weather modification debate needs a little more subtlety than has been evident here in the last day or two.

I don't imagine there will be much opportunity for politics in Kos. And to tell you the truth I myself don't want to get involved in politics of the kind you are apparently trying to use against Reynolds in the United States.

Perhaps you'd better work out if you're trying to be a scientist or a political activist.

[gaiacomm]

What exactly do you have in mind doing in Kos, if you go there?

The climate change/'chemtrails'/geoengineering/weather modification debate needs a little more subtlety than has been evident here in the last day or two.

I don't imagine there will be much opportunity for politics in Kos. And to tell you the truth I myself don't want to get involved in politics of the kind you are apparently trying to use against Reynolds in the United States.

Perhaps you'd better work out if you're trying to be a scientist or a political activist.


In Kos I will assist in the understanding of weather mod and geo-engineering. I also will educate on wireless communications and its effects on the environment and the truth about HAARP!

I am a Patriot and a Physicist, period!

[gaiacomm]

The USA PATRIOT Act: Preserving Life and Liberty
(Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism)


Congress enacted the Patriot Act by overwhelming, bipartisan margins, arming law enforcement with new tools to detect and prevent terrorism: The USA Patriot Act was passed nearly unanimously by the Senate 98-1, and 357–66 in the House, with the support of members from across the political spectrum.

The Act Improves Our Counter-Terrorism Efforts in Several Significant Ways:

1. The Patriot Act allows investigators to use the tools that were already available to investigate organized crime and drug trafficking. Many of the tools the Act provides to law enforcement to fight terrorism have been used for decades to fight organized crime and drug dealers, and have been reviewed and approved by the courts. As Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) explained during the floor debate about the Act, “the FBI could get a wiretap to investigate the mafia, but they could not get one to investigate terrorists. To put it bluntly, that was crazy! What’s good for the mob should be good for terrorists.” (Cong. Rec., 10/25/01)

Allows law enforcement to use surveillance against more crimes of terror. Before the Patriot Act, courts could permit law enforcement to conduct electronic surveillance to investigate many ordinary, non-terrorism crimes, such as drug crimes, mail fraud, and passport fraud. Agents also could obtain wiretaps to investigate some, but not all, of the crimes that terrorists often commit. The Act enabled investigators to gather information when looking into the full range of terrorism-related crimes, including: chemical-weapons offenses, the use of weapons of mass destruction, killing Americans abroad, and terrorism financing.
Allows federal agents to follow sophisticated terrorists trained to evade detection. For years, law enforcement has been able to use “roving wiretaps” to investigate ordinary crimes, including drug offenses and racketeering. A roving wiretap can be authorized by a federal judge to apply to a particular suspect, rather than a particular phone or communications device. Because international terrorists are sophisticated and trained to thwart surveillance by rapidly changing locations and communication devices such as cell phones, the Act authorized agents to seek court permission to use the same techniques in national security investigations to track terrorists.
Allows law enforcement to conduct investigations without tipping off terrorists. In some cases if criminals are tipped off too early to an investigation, they might flee, destroy evidence, intimidate or kill witnesses, cut off contact with associates, or take other action to evade arrest. Therefore, federal courts in narrow circumstances long have allowed law enforcement to delay for a limited time when the subject is told that a judicially-approved search warrant has been executed. Notice is always provided, but the reasonable delay gives law enforcement time to identify the criminal’s associates, eliminate immediate threats to our communities, and coordinate the arrests of multiple individuals without tipping them off beforehand. These delayed notification search warrants have been used for decades, have proven crucial in drug and organized crime cases, and have been upheld by courts as fully constitutional.
Allows federal agents to ask a court for an order to obtain business records in national security terrorism cases. Examining business records often provides the key that investigators are looking for to solve a wide range of crimes. Investigators might seek select records from hardware stores or chemical plants, for example, to find out who bought materials to make a bomb, or bank records to see who’s sending money to terrorists. Law enforcement authorities have always been able to obtain business records in criminal cases through grand jury subpoenas, and continue to do so in national security cases where appropriate. These records were sought in criminal cases such as the investigation of the Zodiac gunman, where police suspected the gunman was inspired by a Scottish occult poet, and wanted to learn who had checked the poet’s books out of the library. In national security cases where use of the grand jury process was not appropriate, investigators previously had limited tools at their disposal to obtain certain business records. Under the Patriot Act, the government can now ask a federal court (the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court), if needed to aid an investigation, to order production of the same type of records available through grand jury subpoenas. This federal court, however, can issue these orders only after the government demonstrates the records concerned are sought for an authorized investigation to obtain foreign intelligence information not concerning a U.S. person or to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such investigation of a U.S. person is not conducted solely on the basis of activities protected by the First Amendment.
2. The Patriot Act facilitated information sharing and cooperation among government agencies so that they can better “connect the dots.” The Act removed the major legal barriers that prevented the law enforcement, intelligence, and national defense communities from talking and coordinating their work to protect the American people and our national security. The government’s prevention efforts should not be restricted by boxes on an organizational chart. Now police officers, FBI agents, federal prosecutors and intelligence officials can protect our communities by “connecting the dots” to uncover terrorist plots before they are completed. As Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) said about the Patriot Act, “we simply cannot prevail in the battle against terrorism if the right hand of our government has no idea what the left hand is doing.” (Press release, 10/26/01)

Prosecutors can now share evidence obtained through grand juries with intelligence officials -- and intelligence information can now be shared more easily with federal prosecutors. Such sharing of information leads to concrete results. For example, a federal grand jury recently indicted an individual in Florida, Sami al-Arian, for allegedly being the U.S. leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, one of the world’s most violent terrorist outfits. Palestinian Islamic Jihad is responsible for murdering more than 100 innocent people, including a young American named Alisa Flatow who was killed in a tragic bus bombing in Gaza. The Patriot Act assisted us in obtaining the indictment by enabling the full sharing of information and advice about the case among prosecutors and investigators. Alisa’s father, Steven Flatow, has said, “When you know the resources of your government are committed to right the wrongs committed against your daughter, that instills you with a sense of awe. As a father you can’t ask for anything more.”
3. The Patriot Act updated the law to reflect new technologies and new threats. The Act brought the law up to date with current technology, so we no longer have to fight a digital-age battle with antique weapons—legal authorities leftover from the era of rotary telephones. When investigating the murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, for example, law enforcement used one of the Act’s new authorities to use high-tech means to identify and locate some of the killers.

Allows law enforcement officials to obtain a search warrant anywhere a terrorist-related activity occurred. Before the Patriot Act, law enforcement personnel were required to obtain a search warrant in the district where they intended to conduct a search. However, modern terrorism investigations often span a number of districts, and officers therefore had to obtain multiple warrants in multiple jurisdictions, creating unnecessary delays. The Act provides that warrants can be obtained in any district in which terrorism-related activities occurred, regardless of where they will be executed. This provision does not change the standards governing the availability of a search warrant, but streamlines the search-warrant process.


Allows victims of computer hacking to request law enforcement assistance in monitoring the “trespassers” on their computers. This change made the law technology-neutral; it placed electronic trespassers on the same footing as physical trespassers. Now, hacking victims can seek law enforcement assistance to combat hackers, just as burglary victims have been able to invite officers into their homes to catch burglars.
4. The Patriot Act increased the penalties for those who commit terrorist crimes. Americans are threatened as much by the terrorist who pays for a bomb as by the one who pushes the button. That’s why the Patriot Act imposed tough new penalties on those who commit and support terrorist operations, both at home and abroad. In particular, the Act:

Prohibits the harboring of terrorists. The Act created a new offense that prohibits knowingly harboring persons who have committed or are about to commit a variety of terrorist offenses, such as: destruction of aircraft; use of nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons; use of weapons of mass destruction; bombing of government property; sabotage of nuclear facilities; and aircraft piracy.


Enhanced the inadequate maximum penalties for various crimes likely to be committed by terrorists: including arson, destruction of energy facilities, material support to terrorists and terrorist organizations, and destruction of national-defense materials.


Enhanced a number of conspiracy penalties, including for arson, killings in federal facilities, attacking communications systems, material support to terrorists, sabotage of nuclear facilities, and interference with flight crew members. Under previous law, many terrorism statutes did not specifically prohibit engaging in conspiracies to commit the underlying offenses. In such cases, the government could only bring prosecutions under the general federal conspiracy provision, which carries a maximum penalty of only five years in prison.


Punishes terrorist attacks on mass transit systems.


Punishes bioterrorists.


Eliminates the statutes of limitations for certain terrorism crimes and lengthens them for other terrorist crimes.
The government’s success in preventing another catastrophic attack on the American homeland since September 11, 2001, would have been much more difficult, if not impossible, without the USA Patriot Act. The authorities Congress provided have substantially enhanced our ability to prevent, investigate, and prosecute acts of terror.

[gaiacomm]

Wayne and all readers, you now have your answers!

If you play you have to pay!

[whitemajikman]

Gaiacomm, this is the strategy you yourself are pursuing.

I don't know that there is anyone else here wishing to follow the line of action you propose.

It does not seem to me that it is necessary for you to announce all these moves at this forum.



But of course it is neccessary Halva,Because Gaiacomm is all about shock and awe too feed his own ego.........

Even tho Gaiacomm is a compulsive Liar.......

Also I think he has design's on stealing all of your thunder..........

You see if you were to go back a few pages ,I think I spelled it out for all of you in black and white.

On how The "chemtrail" CULT ELITE .......Are constantly at each other's throats in public and how behind closed doors they secretly try to subvert each other..........

All The recent events of Halva And Gaiacomm's disagreement on this forum is intensified exponentially on sites as CTC,MegaSprayer, Cliff's Aerosol Operations message board.......etc.....etc......The list goes on........

The "Chemtrail" Hoax is dead But a new avenue of pursuit by debunker's has been Identified ........The "Chemtrail CULT".......


quote]Wayne this exposure has been in the works for months and was felt to leak a little blood in the water to attract the sharks!

Now we will sit on the shore and watch them feed![/quote]

Now Does this sound like words of a rational Physicist ..........?

What this all sounds like to me is that Gaiacomm,Halva and the Chemtrail elite........Have fallen victim to their own conspiracy,They now believe that They are more IMPORTANT than REAL SCIENTIFIC DATA,OR Common Sense.

They have proven to all that can read that ...........Anyone who disagrees with them is an enemy and shall be treated as such.

Is this not how Many Cult's Of this Kind Operate.......?

Do they not see conspiracy in every dark corner.......?

Do they not use fear and Paranoia to hook more believer's......?

Do they not operate on a hive mind set .......as Halva wish's too,But Gaiacomm,REFUSES TOO.

Do they not operate as far from public scrutiny as to not draw unwanted attention..........?

That is why Halva wishes to start his own Forum,So he can have all the control and no scrutiny,In effect Proclaiming himself king Over all the poster's on his NEW CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC message board.

And what of people like SuperLiberal When faced with Real truth regarding the Photo that was posted....and the undeniable scientific truth presented By Lexta .............

Who refuses to even ponder the possibility that What has been perceived has already been Explained......And not by bunkies but by Science.......

How long Before SuperLiberal Has A closed Forum on Chemtrails ,And is a working member of this CULT......?



I don't want Arianna Huffington's forum to be hit by scandal. I would like her to be a successful politician, not a politician dragged into a stupid scandal because of a nutcase like Reynolds.

Well for one J.R is no nutcase,And he definitely has you all pegged for what you truly are and represent.

For two ,YOU HALVA are guilty of bringing this Hoax to Arriana's forum.

and it is you who is responsible if this forum get's hit with scandal and ruin's her carreer because she believed in a hoax and has lent an ear to a well known cult.

And IT is YOU who is Guilty If even one act of Terrorism is commited because of the paranoia and pseudo-science you peddle all based upon a hoax that you keep propagating.



Welcome to America Wayne! What is done is done!

Government without representation!



And what of this anti-american quote....?






What exactly do you have in mind doing in Kos, if you go there?

The climate change/'chemtrails'/geoengineering/weather modification debate needs a little more subtlety than has been evident here in the last day or two.

I don't imagine there will be much opportunity for politics in Kos. And to tell you the truth I myself don't want to get involved in politics of the kind you are apparently trying to use against Reynolds in the United States.

Perhaps you'd better work out if you're trying to be a scientist or a political activist.


You CAN"T even agree what your goals or motivation's are.........

But again can you tell us how to Identify A chemtrail from a contrail......?

ALMOST A HUNDRED AND TWENTY PAGES DEDICATED TO THE CHEMTRAIL HOAX AND THEIR CULT........................

AND THEY CAN'T EVEN TELL US HOW TO IDENTIFY THE HOAX THEY ARE PROPAGATING WHICH LEADS ONE TO WONDER IF THIS IS A FAITH BASED CULT BUILT UPON THE FOUNDATION'S OF FEAR AND PARANOIA.

NO MATTER WHAT YOU CLAIM YOU ARE NOW AND ALWAYS ........THE CHEMTRAIL CULT.

AND WILL BE DEALT WITH AS SUCH.


Thanks gaiacomm. I too sent a letter to the FBI to let them know about John Jay Reynolds. In todays climate, labeling someone a terrorist is a very huge charge that could ruin someone's life and also cause them extreme pain and suffering. The FBI should know that someone is out there labeling concerned citizens as "cults" and preying on them with all their might. Internet bullies need to be reported as well! There are different forms of terrorism!

Thanks again!


I HOPE SO......

BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THEM SINCE THE BEGINNING.....

AND THAT UNLIKE THE HOAX YOU ARE TRYING TO PROPAGATE.......IS BASED UPON REALITY.........

NOT THE RANTINGS OF A LIAR AND CULT MEMBER

LIKE GAIACOMM.

YOUR CULT'S DAYS ARE NUMBERED.............

[gaiacomm]

whitemajikman:

You have no idea what you are writing about! You have been debunked along time ago and your rantings have been added to the pile!

I strongly suggest that you cease from posting negative chatter and become more civil.

This board in a short time will be closed anyway and other boards that insight and promote ignorance, threats and slander!

Leave this place...you have been warned!

[gaiacomm]

whitemajikman:

Oh yes...Wayne and I are two men who can disagree with each other and still live in peace!

I respect opinion when it comes from intelligence like Wayne!

You are a cybershadow who lives on a ip string with a number attached!

You hide in cyberspace because of fear of the unknown!

[Bonehead9]

Gaiacomm,

I'm sure Dr. Zerefos is looking forward to meeting you when you go to Kos.

This is what we are waiting to see from you.

The rest is NOISE.

And I would kindly ask you to desist from it.


So let it be written, so let it be done.

:D

[whitemajikman]

whitemajikman:

You have no idea what you are writing about! You have been debunked along time ago and your rantings have been added to the pile!

I strongly suggest that you cease from posting negative chatter and become more civil.

This board in a short time will be closed anyway and other boards that insight and promote ignorance, threats and slander!

Leave this place...you have been warned


WELL Gaiacomm show me where I have been debunked......

I actually am better informed then even you.........

It always help's to have a mole.

If this board does close down it will be your own fault's for trying to subvert it to your Hoax.........

And YOU Gaiacomm have........ No POWER, NO TOP SECRET SECURITY CLEARANCES, NO INSIDE INFORMATION WHAT SO EVER.

WHAT YOU DO HAVE IS AN OBSESSIVE COMPULSION TO LIE AND DECIEVE ...........

SO AS TO FEED YOUR OWN EGO AND MAKE YOURSELF INTO SOMETHING THAT YOU ARE NOT............

YOUR USE OF SMOKE AND MIRRORS ........AND IDLE THREATS ARE A SYMPTOM OF WHAT YOU HAVE BECOME........


AN INTERNET HOAX CULT MEMBER WHO LIKE HALVA AND THE REST OF THE CHEMMIE CULTIST ELITE ........CARE LITTLE OF THE FACTUAL AND MORE FOR THE SUBLIME.

AND DO NOT CARE WHO YOU HURT OR HOW.

NOW GAIACOMM THE TABLES HAVE TURNED........

WE HAVE BEEN WATCHING AND MONITORING FOR 5 YEARS.........

WE HAVE INFILTRATED YOUR CULT AND NOW NOTHING IS A SECRET.

AND THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION IS THAT YOU WHOM FEAR ME ......TRY SO DILLIGENTLY TO TRY AND MAKE ME LEAVE ......BECAUSE YOU ARE THREATENED.

SO GAIACOMM YOUR WARNING MEANS LITTLE IF NOT TO PROVE YOUR OWN FEAR OF ME..........

AND THE TRUTH THAT I REPRESENT........

BY THE WAY HOW DOES ONE WHO HAS BEEN FLAGGED AS YOURSELF ........THINK THAT HE WILL BE ABLE TO EVEN LEAVE THIS COUNTRY ......TO GO TO GREECE.

AGAIN TIME WILL PROVE YOU FOR THE LIAR YOU ARE.....

OH AND CON-ARTIST EXTRODINAIRE.......

BEWARE FOR I AM NOW FULLY COMMITTED TO SUBVERTING YOUR CULT AND ALL WHO WORSHIP THE "chemtrail hoax".

AND I HAVE 2 MOLES IN YOUR CULT TO HELP ME.........

AIN'T THE TRUTH BRUTAL........?

[halva]

I will not be appreciative if this forum is closed down.

I would have preferred that Reynolds and company be neutralised through the action of intelligent activists, without involving the state.

I will also regret the loss of the large amount of valuable information on this thread.

[whitemajikman]

Posted: Mon May 03, 2004 11:31 am Post subject: whitemajikman

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

whitemajikman:

Oh yes...Wayne and I are two men who can disagree with each other and still live in peace!

I respect opinion when it comes from intelligence like Wayne!

You are a cybershadow who lives on a ip string with a number attached!

You hide in cyberspace because of fear of the unknown!



YOU ARE SUCH AN IDIOT WHEN IT COMES TO HYPOCRISY.

YOU ARE ALSO ATTACHED TO A NUMBER AND A IP STRING.

COME ON GAIACOMM GIVE US ALL YOUR PERSONAL INFO........

PROVE NOW THAT YOU ARE NOT A HYPOCRITE.......WHO HIDES IN CYBERSPACE......BECAUSE YOU FEAR..............?

COME GAIACOMM TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR WORDS,CAN YOU DO THIS......?

OR WILL YOU TRY ANOTHER SPAM RUN.......?

OR WILL YOU THREATEN WITH HACKING.....?
OR WILL YOU COME BACK WITH ANOTHER LIE......?

OR WILL YOU PROVE TO ALL THESE FINE PEOPLE THAT YOU ARE A LIEING HYPOCRITE WHEN YOU DO NOT POST YOUR PRIVATE INFO AFTER
ACCUSING ME OF THE SAME.........?

YOU SEE GAIACOMM YOU WILL PROVE BY YOUR OWN ACTIONS THAT YOU ARE A FRAUD AND A HOAX.........


jUST LIKE YOU HAVE SINGLE HANDEDLY SUBVERTED WHAT HALVA WAS TRYING TO DO.......

WHEN HE TRIED TO SUBVERT THIS BOARD TO HIS POLITICAL AGENDA BASED UPON A HOAX......


IF I WERE HALVA I WOULD SERIOUSLY BE QUESTIONING YOUR MOTIVATION'S BECAUSE QUITE FRANKLY YOU HAVE BEEN MORE OF A HINDRANCE TO HALVA THEN AN ASSET........

[whitemajikman]

I will not be appreciative if this forum is closed down.

I would have preferred that Reynolds and company be neutralised through the action of intelligent activists, without involving the state.

I will also regret the loss of the large amount of valuable information on this thread.


SO HALVA DO YOU NOW CONCEDE THAT WE ARE DONE ...........

IF NOT I HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO CONTINUE......?

[Bonehead9]

I will not be appreciative if this forum is closed down.

I would have preferred that Reynolds and company be neutralised through the action of intelligent activists, without involving the state.

I will also regret the loss of the large amount of valuable information on this thread.

:D :D :D

Do you honestly think that “the state” is going to close this forum down?

You are even more deluded than I thought you were. :D

The forum moderators might eventually shut this thread down, however. I wonder how many pages this thing can get before it begins to affect the server performance.

[halva]

"IF I WERE HALVA I WOULD SERIOUSLY BE QUESTIONING YOUR MOTIVATION'S BECAUSE QUITE FRANKLY YOU HAVE BEEN MORE OF A HINDRANCE TO HALVA THEN AN ASSET........"

What do you care, Whitemajikman?

I really think you should stop posting here.

It would seem to me that your postings here increase the likelihood of the forum, or at least the thread, being closed.

[gaiacomm]

whitemajikman:

You and your other cyberjunkies are just that! You have no desire to destroy the chemtrail arena. You and others have no power other than the power that drives your computers and that is all and you cannot even control that!

Your threats are airware and serve no purpose. This board will be shut down because of political and social pressures coming from forces that have been led to this place.

Wayne and his group have made excellent points and claims and all you do is slander it with your childlike remarks.

You have not been following this for 5 years!

I am not a chemtrail cultist either! I support their cause however!

And there are federal agencies that have to respond to claims if presented in the format that forces the issue. It is the law! And since a formal compliant has been filed with the State and Federal agencies and we are at WAR they have to followup no matter how stupid the claim is.

No more mistakes from the FBI,,,especially after 911 and Mr Clarke.

So you see you and others like you will be used as an example of freedom of speech and the Patriot Act. A test case!

I warned you to cease to post and I will not do it again!

You and all of your kind have been legally put on notice!

[whitemajikman]

What do you care, Whitemajikman?

I really think you should stop posting here.

It would seem to me that your postings here increase the likelihood of the forum, or at least the thread, being closed.
_________________



OH,YOU SEE HALVA THAT IS YOUR MISTAKE YOU SEEM TO THINK THAT NO ONE CARES.....

JUST LIKE EVERY ISSUE EVERY HOAX HAS DIFFERING VIEW POINTS....

AND MY VIEWPOINT IS THAT YOU CARE LITTLE ABOUT CHEMTRAILS AND MORE ABOUT WHERE THE CHEMTRAIL HOAX WILL TAKE YOUR AGENDA.

AND HOW YOU HAVE TAKEN CHEMTRAIL HOAX CONSPIRACY AND TURNED IT INTO A CULT.......

IF YOU WISH ME TO STOP POSTING TRUTH REGARDING YOU AND YOUR FELLOW CHEMTRAIL CULTIST'S..................

AND IF YOU CARE ABOUT ARRIANA AND HER POLITICAL VIABILITY.

WHY BRING A INTERNET HOAX ONTO HER WEBSITE.......?

AND IF YOU CARE ABOUT ALL THOSE THINGS WHICH YOU PROCLAIM TO CARE ABOUT........

THEN WHY NOT CONCEDE ........AND MOVE ON......?

WHY KEEP BEATING A DEAD HORSE.......?

AND WHY KEEP LOOKING MORE FOOLISH AND MORE AMATEURISH AS THE THREAD GROWS......

YOU WISH THIS ALL TO GO AWAY......

THEN CONCEDE AND MOVE ON.......

UNTIL THEN .......

YOU CAN COUNT ON MY VIEWPOINT,BECAUSE JUST LIKE YOU ......I AM ENTITLED TO IT................

AND I DO NOT FEAR YOU....... AS YOU FEAR ME ............

SO WHAT WILL IT BE........CONCEDE............ OR ANOTHER 100 PAGES OF YOU TRYING TO FEED YOUR EGO .....AND ME PUTTING YOU INTO YOUR PLACE.

YOU SEE YOU ARE THE ONE WHO HAS TO MAKE THE TOUGH DECISION ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW ALL OF YOUR CULT'S DIRTY LITTLE SECRET'S.......AND RISK COMPLETE EXPOSURE.....

OR TO CEASE AND DESIST .......THERE BY .......GAURANTEEING ANOTHER CONFRONTATION ON SOME OTHER FORUM WHERE YOU WILL TRY AND SPREAD YOUR HOAX AND RECRUIT OTHER "LIKE MINDED" CULT MEMBER'S........AND WHERE I WILL CONFONT YOU........

SO YOU CAN STOP NOW.......AND REGROUP ...OR YOU CAN FACE YOUR DELUSION'S.......NOW......

IN THE END YOU WILL BE MADE ACCOUNTABLE.............

NO MATTER IF IT'S HERE ........ON ARRIANA'S OR ON SOME OTHER BOARD THAT YOU WILL TRY AND SUBVERT FOR YOUR MALICIOUS AGENDA.


THE DAYS OF YOU GETTING AWAY WITH THIS ARE OVER........

[gaiacomm]

whitemajikman:

You and your other cyberjunkies are just that! You have no desire to destroy the chemtrail arena. You and others have no power other than the power that drives your computers and that is all and you cannot even control that!

Your threats are airware and serve no purpose. This board will be shut down because of political and social pressures coming from forces that have been led to this place.

Wayne and his group have made excellent points and claims and all you do is slander it with your childlike remarks.

You have not been following this for 5 years!

I am not a chemtrail cultist either! I support their cause however!

And there are federal agencies that have to respond to claims if presented in the format that forces the issue. It is the law! And since a formal compliant has been filed with the State and Federal agencies and we are at WAR they have to followup no matter how stupid the claim is.

No more mistakes from the FBI,,,especially after 911 and Mr Clarke.

So you see you and others like you will be used as an example of freedom of speech and the Patriot Act. A test case!

I warned you to cease to post and I will not do it again!

You and all of your kind have been legally put on notice!

[gaiacomm]

whitemajikman:

Oh yes...Wayne and I are two men who can disagree with each other and still live in peace!

I respect opinion when it comes from intelligence like Wayne!

You are a cybershadow who lives on a ip string with a number attached!

You hide in cyberspace because of fear of the unknown!

[gaiacomm]

Information on JR and others has been turned over to lawyers and authorities for evaluation. This website owner has also been asked to turn over the database on this forum for investigation.

JR says to sue him.....it will not happen....the US District and Federal District courts will first have a crack at it.

There are people that do not like Arianna and will also use this as a way to get back at her!

The internet has always been challenged in court....but we are legally at WAR! So the rules change... and JR and others have just now got their tails caught in a crack!

There will be others that will fall. Now if JR and others are convicted then you all can file civil charges against them and recieve monetary damages.

In other words now you can sue JR!

[gaiacomm]

It seems that JR wishes to insight a war on words and felony threats of terrorisim.

If in fact JR has contacted the FBI and we can prove it then there smells a lawsuit for false accusations and other civil and penal counts.

We are at war...legally according to congress and if a person claims that others are a threat to national security then that person or persons can be charged and held without trail for a bit.

So I suggest that JR and others stick to the slander and idle threats of doom rather than to mix it with Bush's war!

Someone somewhere will sue JR and others for something I am sure!

And don't think that someone isn't plotting that as we write!

All of this on Arianna's message board!


JR: AS A MATTER OF FACT A WELL PLACED PHONE CALL AND LETTER HAS BEEN SENT TO THE JUSTICE DEPT. TO CHALLENGE FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND TERRORIST THREATS ON THE INTERNET. YOUR NAME AND DATA WITH OTHERS HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE FBI, JUSTICE DEPT, YOUR STATE ATTORNEY AND FEDERAL ATTORNEY.

A PHONE CALL AND LETTER HAS ALSO BEEN SENT TO ARIANNA TO PREPARE HER FOR THE EXPOSURE.

I STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT YOU KEEP THE DIALOGUE HERE CIVIL AND NOT CROSS ANYMORE LINES. THREATS OF ANY KIND ARE CONSIDERED PUNISHABLE IF INTENT CAN BE PROVEN. WITH PRESSURE FROM WOMEN AND CHILDREN GROUPS WHO FREQUENT THE INTERNET AND ARE EXPOSED TO THIS TYPE OF INSULT ARE ALREADY HEADING TO WASHINGTON TO HIRE LOBBYISTS FOR THE CAUSE. THEY AND THEIR LAWYERS ARE LOKKING FOR LANDMARK CASES TO PROMOTE THEIR FIRMS.

BUSH IS VERY BUSY WITH OTHER MATTERS AND WOULD PREFER TO NOT HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH ISSUES BE A PART OF HIS RE-ELECTION PROCESS...SO A QUICK FIX AND CONVICTIONS OF CHARGES PLACED ON YOU AND OTHERS WOULD BE TO HIS AND OTHERS BEST INTEREST...IN SHORT MAKE AN EXAMPLE OF YOUR TYPE OF SLANDER REMARKS AND THREATS ON THE INTERNET A TOKEN WIN.

I KNOW BECAUSE I HAVE ALREADY BEEN THRU IT!

[halva]

สถานการณ์ล่าสุด

กรีนพีซร่วมมือเครือข่ายสากลฯ จัดกิจกรรมต้านโรงงานเผาขยะ
เร่งรัฐบาลหาทางออกที่ยั่งยืนในการกำจัดและลดปริมาณข ยะ
กรุงเทพฯ 16 กรกฏาคม 2546 -- กรีนพีซจัดงานแถลงข่าวแจ้งข้อมูลล่าสุดเรื่องผลกระทบ จากโรงงานเผาขยะ และการให้สัตยาบันแก่อนุสัญญาสต็อกโฮล์มของรัฐบ าลไทย เพื่อร่วมสนับสนุนกลุ่มองค์กรภาคประชาชนมากกว่า 200 กลุ่มจาก 62 ประเทศ ที่รวมตัวกันจัดกิจกรรมเร่งรัดรัฐบาลของแต่ละปร ะเทศ ในการหาทางออกที่ยั่งยืนของการกำจัดขยะ แทนโรงงานเผาขยะที่เป็นแหล่งกำเนิดแหล่งใหญ่ที่สุดขอ งมลพิษ ที่ให้ข้อมูลบิดเบือนแก่ประชาชน ว่าผลิตความร้อนและกระแสไฟฟ้า
แอน เลียวนาร์ด ผู้ประสานงาน เครือข่ายสากลเพื่อยุติเทคโนโลยีเผาขยะและส่งเสริมทา งเลือกในการจัดการของเสีย ประกอบด้วยสมาชิกจากกลุ่มองค์กรภาคเอกชนมากกว่า 375 กลุ่มจาก 77 ประเทศ ที่รวมตัวกันเพื่อระงับมลพิษและการสูญเปล่าจากการเผา ขยะ กล่าวว่า "เนื่องจากกระแสการต่อต้านโรงงานเผาขยะที่รุนแรงมากขึ ้น ทำให้กลุ่มผู้ได้รับผลประโยชน์จากโรงงานเผาขยะพยายาม หาทางออกด้วยวิธีต่างๆ เช่นการปรับรูปแบบและวิธีการของโรงงานเผาขยะ สร้างภาพว่ามีการใช้เทคโนโลยีใหม่มาทดแทนวิธีเดิมที่ ถูกปฎิเสธ เช่นการใช้พลังงานทดแทนอื่นๆ การใช้พลัง&