Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-02-2009, 12:23 PM,
Quote:JAZZ ROC - this is for you. it amazes me that for an older guy, you just can`t figure out HAARP/Chemtrails. Peace Man !!

Halliburton - I'm a SCIENTIST. I understand physics. I have studied the subject for 54 years. You, on the other hand, read only PSEUDOSCIENCE. I have given you enough to pause for thought, but thinking isn't one of your strong points, obviously.

If it were, you would discover that the subject has been extensively researched since 1953, and it is ALL accessible to you.

All you have to is to use "-CHEMTRAIL" and "-AEROSOL" in your "advanced search" terms (MINUS before the words), and all PSEUDOSCIENCE is eliminated from your search.

Then read some PROPER TECHNICAL BOOKS, get yourself a SCIENTIFIC EDUCATION, before you open your mouth and spout idiocy.

02-02-2009, 01:35 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-02-2009, 07:05 PM by JazzRoc.)
Here are a few publications for you to study:

The difference between the above work and the "work" you espouse couldn't be more complete.

THIS work has an agenda which IS the topic under consideration, and has been carried out by scientifically-trained minds with the correct tools and attitude.

If your understanding can stretch that far, it will enable you to see that persistent contrails ARE a natural consequence of air transport, and their ability to turn skies white is apparent.

The fact that a plane can precipitate ONE THOUSAND TO TEN THOUSAND TIMES more ICE than its engines create MUST SINK IN to your thoughts - eventually!

This quote (from the first publication in the above list) is of interest:"Should aircraft activity increase as projected, the global effects would become significant by 2050.

NOT NOW, BUT THEN! (what will be more significant will be the complete absence of aviation kerosine).

HAARP bears NO relationship to the size or the power of the Earth.

Pushing a gigawatt into the HARD vacuum EIGHTY MILES UP and heating milligrams of ions in twenty square miles DOES NOTHING MORE THAN CREATE A LARGE DIM "LAMP" IN THE IONOSPHERE.


"Chicken Little" was a fairy story I never heard of as a kid. Now it's all over the web...and still a fairy story...
02-03-2009, 02:47 AM,
JazzRok[smoker] wrote in reply

Quote:Makes not the slightest difference to what happens in the stratosphere, where all these trails are. In between is the TROPOPAUSE, where the atmosphere is at its coldest extreme. The tropopause (at -40 to -80 degrees celsius!) is an almost complete separator of the troposphere and the stratosphere.

I'm just scanning thru your replies - no offence but your suffering from what happens to us at old age - we stop being able to detach ourselves from ingrained reality bubbles and thought processes.

You've missed the point above... you missed several points... I keep saying they are obvious. You see with your idea - we'd see long, persistant [like 4 hours?? 6 sometimes] trails ALL THE TIME as you are saying it's pollution from increased flights.... forget your sky/atmosphere weather seperations - this is totally irrelevant [we agree] because the weather does not change that much in a week. THUS [come on... its easy] we'd see the long trails nearly every day. We don't we observe them doing sessions from dawn till dusk - until there is a milky haze. Then the next day there can be ABSOLUTELY ZERO... just the odd civillian plane.

That is not atmospheric difference. You are deluded if you think so. Or you've not looked up and seen a sky being routinely gridded.

And how do you know we've not seen these planes - that's just absurd. We've identified the types they frequently use USING HOME TRANSPONDER SYSTEMS you can hire. And on top of this visually ID'd them as having NO MARKINGS. As I keep saying - you are 8 years late onto this issue - we've done the research along with many others. I don't even think you have much involvement with aircraft - if you did you'd have been onto this issues ages back.

Your problem is JazRok - your whole identity is so wrapped up in your previous career that you can't bar to think that anyone else could have a different idea of what's going on than you. So really you are the wrong person to be here on this thread. You can't see the data for the career blinkers. I guess this is a waste of time.

And we've not even started on the barium and aluminium readings that are now at toxic levels... since when???? Ahhhhhhhhhhh what a shock - since circa 2000... just at the peak of the early aerosol [black] operations.

Forget my site - go check - come back in a week when you've been through the lot. It's easier of course for you to knock his methods rather than read his data. Cliff has more experience with this arena than you'd get in 23 buddha lifetimes;)

Quote:The fact that a plane can precipitate ONE THOUSAND TO TEN THOUSAND TIMES more ICE than its engines create MUST SINK IN to your thoughts - eventually!

Well the seem to be precipitating barium and aluminium on our heads... or is that just a "natural" effect of "increased air traffic" ?!

Quote:All figures of barium concentration in water have been found to be within EPA limits.

Ah - caught you out. Complete and utter BS. - They are WAY over in many areas. Especially when taken AFTER the same spray days that we identified and traced to satellite imaging systems by date.

Of course if the EPA do the collecting I'm sure everything is fine.... BUT then the EPA said everything was fine after 9/11 too... and people are DYING NOW from their bullshit. You are no better than them is you claim that sort of thing.

I'm done with this.
"We are just glorified monkeys in suits.... show me where it's written we should be able to model the cosmos?!" -Terence McKenna, 21st Century Bard
R.I.P-ranks Terence. I miss your take on life.
02-03-2009, 03:25 AM,
02-03-2009, 05:08 PM,
The largest coordinated global engineering project in the history of our species. People across the world are noticing planes crossing back and forth in the sky leaving in their wake a trail of vapor that does not evaporate. These are not your normal commercial airlines following a preordained path from city to city. The mysterious unmarked planes leave smoke-like trails behind them that spread until by the afternoon they have blossomed and grown until the skies have become overcast. Officials from the Air Traffic Control the EPA and the Air Force will not respond to questions regarding this phenomenon.
02-03-2009, 08:45 PM,
Quote:The largest coordinated global engineering project in the history of our species.
No such thing. Global engineering is outside the budget of Man. (Pssst - the world is too big!) The proof of your assertion is?

Quote:People across the world are noticing planes crossing back and forth in the sky leaving in their wake a trail of vapor that does not evaporate.
And have been since the fifties. Strangely these lines match known air traffic routes exactly. (Vapor has always evaporated - that's why it's called vapor. Water vapor is completely invisible. Ice, on the other hand, is quite visible.) Your proof (that it isn't ice and doesn't evaporate) is?

Quote:These are not your normal commercial airlines following a preordained path from city to city.
Well, all those Youtube videos show commercial airliners. Satellite pictures show trails exactly matching transcontinental routes. Your proof (that they are not normal) is?

Quote:The mysterious unmarked planes leave smoke-like trails behind them that spread until by the afternoon they have blossomed and grown until the skies have become overcast.
Viewed from the ground (from seven miles benath) aircraft markings and colors become illegible due to a known physical phenomenon called "blue light scattering". "Smoke-like" aircraft trails have been recorded since 1921, and tested and analyzed since 1953. They were first known to cause overcast conditions in 1943 when the Allies conducted 1000-bomber raids over Germany. There's nothing new here, except for people making absurd claims.

Quote:Officials from the Air Traffic Control the EPA and the Air Force will not respond to questions regarding this phenomenon.
It's quite likely they've got tired of making the same replies, namely, GET YOURSELF AN EDUCATION IN SCIENCE.

Omega: "I'm done with this." Hilly: "Ditto." Is that a promise?

Well, I'm not "done with this". I will respond to your ridiculous posts until you read my posts properly, check my references, and enter into a proper dialogue.
02-03-2009, 09:21 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-03-2009, 09:33 PM by JazzRoc.)
Shuffle (off this mortal coil): "no offence - we'd see long, persistant trails ALL THE TIME - forget your sky/atmosphere weather seperations - totally irrelevant - the weather does not change that much in a week - Then the next day just the odd civillian plane - not atmospheric difference - sky being routinely gridded - And how do you know we've not seen these planes - We've identified the types USING TRANSPONDERS - having NO MARKINGS - we've done the research - to knock his methods rather than read his data - they seem to be precipitating barium and aluminium on our heads... or is that just a "natural" effect of "increased air traffic" - They are WAY over in many areas. Especially when taken AFTER the same spray days that we identified and traced to satellite imaging systems by date."

Missing out the ad homs (almost!):

Offence taken: I'd have to be a lot older than I am to drop to your power of reasoning - you wouldn't see persistent trails all the time at all. The weather is completely variable with respect to humidities, and tropospheric events rarely carry over to stratospheric events - separation of the two weather systems is almost complete - stratospheric weather is faster-moving and may change completely with unchanged tropospheric weather - the next day has in essence the same traffic as the day before. If you miss the planes it's because they aren't easy to see without their trails - I know because I know that people that aren't scientists (you are one of those) are relatively untrained in observation and reasoning - so you get a fix from your transponder, do you? - now you're invoking psychic powers - you wouldn't know "research" if it tapped you on the shoukler - his methods are NOT scientific, and that's the end to bothering to read him - more RAIN will wash out more DUST. Dusts occur from mining, agricultural activities, power generation, and manufacturing. They contain barium and aluminum - YES - I've NEVER seen you guys get a figure correct, yet.
02-04-2009, 02:45 AM,
A changing climate of opinion?

Sep 4th 2008
From The Economist print edition
Some scientists think climate change needs a more radical approach. As well as trying to curb greenhouse-gas emissions, they have plans to re-engineer the Earth

[Image: 3608ST1.jpg]

THERE is a branch of science fiction that looks at the Earth’s neighbours, Mars and Venus, and asks how they might be made habitable. The answer is planetary engineering. The Venusian atmosphere is too thick. It creates a large greenhouse effect and cooks a planet that is, in any case, closer to the sun than the Earth is to even higher temperatures than it would otherwise experience. Mars suffers from the opposite fault. A planet more distant from the sun than Earth is also has an atmosphere too thin to trap what little of the sun’s heat is available. So, fiddle with the atmospheres of these neighbours and you open new frontiers for human settlement and far-fetched story lines.

It is an intriguing idea. It may even come to pass, though probably not in the lifetime of anyone now reading such stories. But what is more worrying—and more real—is the idea that such planetary engineering may be needed to make the Earth itself habitable by humanity, and that it may be needed in the near future. Reality has a way of trumping art, and human-induced climate change is very real indeed. So real that some people are asking whether science fiction should now be converted into science fact.

Tinkering with the atmosphere or the oceans on the scale required to do this would be highly risky and extraordinarily complex. But the alternative, getting the world’s population to give up fossil fuels, is proving exceedingly hard. Geo-engineering, as it has come to be known, may be a way of buying time for the transition to a low-carbon economy to take place in an orderly manner.

In the past, geo-engineering was taboo because many felt that the very possibility of fiddling with the climate would create an excuse to avoid the hard choices a low-carbon economy would impose. However, the feeling is now growing that if politicians came to scientists for advice on the matter, it would be a good idea for them to have some to offer. To that end, the Royal Society, Britain’s oldest scientific academy, has published a series of papers in its Philosophical Transactions outlining some of the options, and suggesting a few experiments to test whether they would work.
Transactional analysis

Broadly, these ideas fall into two categories. One is to remove excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The other is to compensate for the climate-warming greenhouse effect this carbon dioxide and other gases cause, by reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the ground.

The most plausible way to remove carbon dioxide is to increase the amount of photosynthesis going on. Photosynthesis creates plant matter out of carbon dioxide and water. But rotting plant matter returns carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. So, if the gas is to be removed permanently, that rotting has to be avoided.

One widely discussed idea, which the Royal Society’s correspondents re-examine, is to fertilise the oceans with iron. The growth of plankton in the sea is always limited by something. It may be light, or a familiar nutrient such as nitrate or phosphate. In some places, though, iron is the limiting nutrient. Adding iron to such places should cause a bloom of planktonic algae, thus sucking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.

Several preliminary experiments have shown that plankton do, indeed, bloom when iron is added. What is not clear is what happens to the carbon. For the idea to work, some of it would have to sink to the ocean floor and stay there.

One reason to think this might happen is that during recent ice ages the cold, dry conditions caused a lot of iron-rich dust to blow around. Supporters of the iron-fertilisation theory believe this dust produced blooms of oceanic algae that then sank to the seabed, taking large amounts of carbon with them, which helped to reduce temperatures still further.

Victor Smetacek, of the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in Germany, and Wajih Naqvi, of India’s National Institute of Oceanography, therefore propose conducting experiments that look not only at how much carbon dioxide is sucked up, but also at what happens to it. In particular, they are interested in the fate of diatoms. These are single-celled algae which seem to absorb almost all of the extra carbon dioxide captured when the ocean is fertilised with iron. The crucial question is what happens to these diatoms when they die. If enough of them sink to the ocean floor and stay buried there, the idea should work. If they do not, it won’t. By reviewing studies of the ooze at the bottom of the sea (which is often made of the shells of diatoms) Dr Smetacek and Dr Naqvi reckon the best rate of burial is to be found in the south-west Atlantic, and they propose to carry out an experiment there next year.

The advantage of fertilising the oceans is that it could be done with existing technology. The disadvantage is the unknown knock-on effects. Planktonic algae are at the bottom of the food chain. If more of them are around, the rest of that chain will be affected. This could be a good thing, of course. More algae might mean more krill, and that might mean more whales and other large sea animals. On the other hand, shallow-water blooms caused by nitrate and phosphate pollution often swamp the local environment.

A second idea for scrubbing excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, alluded to in the Transactions but not much discussed, is to plant more trees. In principle, any old trees would do—although they die and rot, more forest cover would lock up more carbon dioxide. However, genetically modified trees might grow faster. Such trees are being developed to help the lumber, pulp and biofuel industries. But fast-growing forests could also be planted in order to capture carbon dioxide quickly.

Another possibility that the Royal Society’s writers consider is recycling carbon dioxide from the atmosphere into fuel, by reacting it with hydrogen. Of course, that would require a supply of hydrogen, and producing hydrogen takes energy—which would have to be generated in a way that produces no carbon dioxide.

Perhaps the most intriguing idea—which was published last year, though not discussed by the Royal Society—is to eject carbon dioxide from the atmosphere at the Earth’s poles, using the planet’s magnetic field. This may sound absurd, but oxygen already leaks out this way (the phenomenon is the subject of a paper just published by Hans Nilsson of Swedish Institute of Space Physics). Alfred Wong, a researcher at the University of California, Los Angeles, proposes that a system involving powerful lasers and finely tuned radio waves could encourage carbon dioxide to take the same route. His calculations suggested that using lasers to ionise molecules of carbon dioxide, and radio waves to get them to spin at the correct rate, would cause those molecules to spiral away from Earth along the lines of magnetic force until they were lost for ever in space.
Reflecting on the future

Space is likewise the destination in the other set of approaches. Reflecting sunlight back into outer space (increasing the Earth’s albedo, as it is known) would also cool the planet, and the Royal Society’s authors consider two ways of doing so.

One, which has been widely touted in the past is, perversely, to increase the amount of pollution in the atmosphere. Governments have spent the past half-century trying to reduce the amount of sulphur compounds in the air. These compounds are the main cause of acid rain. They also, however, have a tendency to form tiny particles that reflect sunlight back into space. That effect is most noticeable when a volcano erupts explosively, as Mount Pinatubo did in 1991, or Tambora did in 1815. Those eruptions put sulphate particles into the stratosphere, and because that is above the part of the atmosphere where weather occurs, these particles tended to stay there rather than being washed out by rain. That cooled the whole climate. The year after Tambora’s explosion was known for a long time as the “year without a summer”.

The reverse is also true. When civilian flights over the United States stopped in the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 2001, the lack of sulphur-laden contrails led to a perceptible rise in temperature. Philip Rasch, of the National Centre for Atmospheric Research, in Boulder, Colorado, and his colleagues are therefore exploring the idea of deliberately polluting the stratosphere with sulphate in order to reflect solar heat back into space.

To offset the rise in temperature expected by the middle of the century if things carry on as they are, the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface would have to be cut by just 1.1%. That is still a lot of energy in absolute terms, but the sums suggest it is within reach. It would require the addition of about 10m tonnes of finely divided sulphate particles to the stratosphere each year. These could be sprayed out of special aircraft-borne injectors, or produced by burning high-sulphur aviation fuel.

If aviation fuel were used in this way, and was 5% sulphur (between ten and 100 times today’s levels), it would require 1m flights a year to the middle of the stratosphere (between 15km and 25km up), assuming an average flight was four hours. Those flights alone would use up half as much fuel as civil aviation now consumes. However, you could achieve part of the effect by making civil aviation use dirty, high-sulphur fuel. It would not be a perfect solution. Civilian jets cruise at an altitude of 10km, the bottom of the stratosphere, and any sulphate they released would thus fall to earth faster. But it would be a lot cheaper than flying 1m special missions.

Besides polluting the stratosphere, there is another way of changing the atmosphere to make it more reflective. This is to tinker with cloud cover. One person working on this idea is Stephen Salter, a marine engineer at the University of Edinburgh best known for seeking to replace fossil fuels with Salter’s duck, a device for turning ocean waves into electricity. He has also been working on the geo-engineering end of climate change.

Dr Salter and his colleague at Edinburgh, Graham Sortino, together with John Latham, one of Dr Rasch’s colleagues at the National Centre for Atmospheric Research, have been looking into how clouds might be made more reflective. Their answer is to spray them with seawater. Particles of salt formed by the evaporation of ocean spray act as nuclei around which the droplets of water that form clouds can condense. Increasing the number of particles increases the number of droplets. That does not change the total amount of cloud (which is controlled by the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere). But having more, smaller droplets does increase a cloud’s reflectivity.
A drop in the ocean

Dr Latham led a team of climate modellers who wondered whether, in principle, this phenomenon might be used to increase the planet’s albedo enough to compensate for projected global warming. Their answer was that it could, but it would require 1.4 billion tonnes of seawater to be converted into spray each year.

Dr Salter and Dr Sortino then joined Dr Latham in trying to work out how to manage this. Their answer is a fleet of specially designed ships. These would be wind-powered—not by sails but by Flettner rotors, which are giant, rotating cylinders that extract energy from the wind using the Magnus effect. (This is the effect that causes cricket balls to swing in the air, among other things.) The ships would drag turbines through the sea to provide electricity that would both drive the cylinders and power pumps that sprayed the atmosphere with seawater, suitably broken up into droplets.

Such ships would weigh 300 tonnes. A fully operational system would require 1,500 of them. And it would have the advantage of an almost instant off switch. Stop spraying, and things would revert to normal within a couple of days.
Cui bono?

That reversibility is important. Many scientists are understandably nervous about tinkering on a grand scale with the atmosphere and the oceans. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—a scientific body appointed by the United Nations to assess the risks of a changing climate—has described geo-engineering as “largely speculative and unproven, and with the risk of unknown side-effects”.

Broadly, there are two types of fears. The first is of technological hubris. History is littered with plans that went awry because too little was known about complex natural systems. As with irrigating Soviet cotton fields from the Aral Sea in Central Asia or introducing rabbits to Australia, modifying the climate will have both physical and biological consequences. Some of these will be unpredictable and some of them may be worse than the harm they were intended to treat. Critics point out, for instance, that carbon dioxide does not just warm the atmosphere. It also makes the oceans more acidic. That is bad because many marine creatures rely on shells made of calcium carbonate to protect themselves. As every schoolboy knows, if you drop calcium carbonate (limestone, for example) into acid, it dissolves. The sea would not become so acidic that shells would actually dissolve, but the extra acidity would mean making them was harder work, which might upset the oceanic ecosystem quite badly. For this reason, approaches to geo-engineering that merely reflect heat back into space need to be viewed cautiously.

The other fear is of moral hazard—the possibility that people would see the promise of geo-engineering their way out of trouble, despite its risks and uncertainties, as an excuse to continue to pollute the atmosphere as usual.

It would be a mistake to think of geo-engineering as a substitute for curbing carbon-dioxide emissions—not merely because of the acidification of the oceans, but also because if you ever stop fertilising the oceans or spraying the atmosphere or whatever, the problem will rapidly return. Nevertheless, Brian Launder of the University of Manchester, who edited the Royal Society papers, argues that the sort of geo-engineering schemes they describe might buy the world 20 to 30 years to adjust. That breathing space would be useful if something really bad, such as the collapse into the sea of part of the Greenland ice-shelf, was in imminent danger of happening, and the realisation of the danger led to a political agreement that climate change had to be stopped rapidly.

So what now? The answer is probably to carry out preliminary trials of the sort proposed by Dr Smetacek and Dr Naqvi. Correctly done, they should help to indicate what could work, what would not, and what the financial and environmental costs might be.

Local schemes, particularly ocean fertilisation, need not be that expensive. They would be well within the budget of a small country, a large company or even a tycoon. Richard Branson, a British businessman, is already offering a prize of $25m for a workable way of removing a billion tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere every year. And at least one private firm has come in for criticism for attempting to sell carbon credits based on ocean fertilisation. And yet, the effects of geo-engineering would rarely be restricted to a single country—that is, after all, the whole point.

For this reason, if geo-engineering is to be done properly, it must be regulated properly. The world needs a way of deciding the size and scope of any project, who takes responsibility for any mistakes, and whether and how to compensate losers—of whom there will be many. Schemes designed to cool the climate could harm countries such as Canada and Russia. Global warming may make their northern wastes more habitable and allow them to exploit oil and gas located under what is now an ice-covered Arctic Ocean. Meanwhile a country such as Panama would prefer a cooler world in which ice continues to seal off the North-West Passage and to prevent competition with its canal.

Some tinkering to suit local needs may be possible. Ken Caldeira of Stanford University, another of the authors, reckons that it may be feasible to place sulphates in the stratosphere near the poles and thus cool the Earth in a place where global warming manifests itself most strongly, though that would scarcely please the Russians and the Canadians. Nor does it answer the question of how to decide whose interests such tinkering should serve.

Even its advocates think geo-engineering is not to be approached lightly. Nor, though, is it something to be ignored completely. Global warming is such a threat that all the options deserve to be explored. It would be a big experiment, but it would at least be a planned one—unlike the equally big, but unplanned experiment that is now being conducted by motor cars, power stations, cement factories and logging companies all across the planet.
02-04-2009, 02:56 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-04-2009, 02:59 AM by ---.)
Ten Years Into The

The Breakdown Of The Immune System
By Ilya Sandra Perlingieri, PhD
Ilya Sandra Perlingieri, Ph.D.

This winter of discontent, the New England states have been hit with one after another particularly strange snowstorms. The previous 2007-08 winter was also similar. The snow smells full of chemicals, as it comes down uniformly and looks like manufactured snow that is used on ski slopes (i.e., fluffy, packed powder). Sometimes, the falling snow stops abruptly, and does not trail off, as it used to do. It is definitely not the same snow that, for millions of years, used to be provided by Mother Nature, in all her magnificence.

Snow is now provided by the US military, the Pentagon, and commercial planes especially equipped to dump on us highly toxic aerosols, from various altitudes. No doubt, these chemical mixtures are created in some secret US bio-weapons laboratory. With enormous egotistical hubris, the Air Force is already on record as saying that they "want to own the weather by 2025."(1) No longer a Star Trek or Star Wars movie fantasy, some of this is already a reality with the now more than 60 Clandestine Weather Modification programs that assault us daily. Despite this, there is a weather news blackout about Chemtrails. The exception is meteorologist Kevin Martin who reports Chemtrails on his website.

There has been absolutely NO PUBLIC DISCUSSION about Chemtrails! Over the past 10 years, not one public official has replied to the countless concerned citizen phone calls or letters. That's due to these "programs [being] secret because the Federal EPA and State Environmental Quality Agencies need to 'not know' about the by-products of the metabolites of biological, illegal, and [extremely] harmful agents are. It is for that reason the projects [have] been declared secret from citizens. It is all illegal under federal and state law."(2) Congress is complicit in this cover-up. So, we are the unwitting guinea pigs in a now global military assault of such magnitude that they are massive war crimes. Federal agencies may deliberately want not to know, but, nevertheless, Chemtrails continue to affect us detrimentally.

According to United States Code, Title 50, Chapter 32, Section 1520a, it is illegal "to use a civilian population for testing of chemical or biological agents." Will Thomas, who also has been writing about Chemtrails for a decade, has a Chemtrail Petition to Congress posted on his onal_Petiti.html

This past year, there has been an increase in supposed "unexplained" spontaneous nosebleeds of such severity (as if a water faucet had been turned on full tilt) that they require emergency hospital care. I know of several instances where people (both on the East and West coasts) have been rushed to a hospital because the nose-bleeding would not stop. This seems to affect elderly as well as the very young. Allopathic doctors seem baffled and have no explanation as to why there is this increase.

These serious nosebleeds are not happening just for humans. All mammals are also affected. Several people I know with dogs and cats that have had water-faucet nosebleeds. Last year, I had to rush my own calico cat to the Vet, as her nose would not stop bleeding. The Vet had no explanation.

However, those who read the reliable Chemtrail literature ­most especially Clifford Carnicom's outstanding website [<>] and Will Thomas' website [<>]-- are aware of the link between breathing high levels of barium-laced air and what it is detrimentally doing to all of us, including its dangerous effect on our entire immune system Environmentally, among other things, Chemtrails are dramatically changing "the salt levels in our soils."(3) Mr. Carnicom (whom I have had the great pleasure of meeting and discussing this nightmare poisoning) has been one of the outstanding private citizen researchers who has been reporting for more than 10 years about the deadly effects of Chemtrails. Dr. Gwen Scott, ND, is also reporting some of the disastrous illnesses that now are linked to Chemtrail toxicity. A copyright free and highly informative documentary is available for a nominal fee on his website. This DVD should be required viewing for everyone.

Barium is an earth mineral; and, as numerous researchers have reported, it is known to be toxic to all mammals. Now, it is used to poison us. It is part of the aerosolized, chemical brew that is in our air, snow, and rain we breathe. Aerosol release of barium is associated with having less oxygen to breathe. It is also linked with increased sinus pressure and uncontrolled nosebleeds. This past week, several friends told me that they had had nosebleeds so severe that it took more than 20 minutes to stop. During this latest snowstorm, I believe possibly there were more chemicals added to the already toxic brew that was dumped on us. Two friends called me and said that several hours later, after blood had coagulated in their nostrils, when they blew their noses, another nosebleed the ensued. This may also mean that fibrinogen, essential for blood-clotting, has been compromised by the constant assault of breathing these illegal poisons for so many years.

This is not a one-factor issue. Rather, the multiple layers of harmful Chemtrail poisons multiply to dangerous levels that become life threatening. "No case data is available from the medical community on the long-term effects of barium on the human body."(4) We, as an entire population of millions/billions, are the guinea pigs for heinous secret military bio-warfare agendas.

Other illnesses linked to chronic exposure to Chemtrails also include [This list is expanded from Note #4, see below]:
1. Lung bleeds (in addition to nosebleeds), high rates of asthma [20-million Americans have it; and of those 6.8 million are children] and other pulmonary allergies. Lung cancer is at an all-time high with 196,252 cases reported in 2007 (the most recent CDC figures available).

2. Bronchitis, flu-like symptoms, and pneumonia (now at epidemic rates). These are not responding to the usual antibiotics [perhaps in part because of overuse for minor medical illnesses and, also, because it may not be the kind of pneumonia physicians are used to seeing]. "The EPA reports that sub-micron particles bypass lung filters and enter the blood stream, triggering high blood pressure that can cause heart attack within two hours of inhalation. Researchers document 'a significant increase' in the number of stroke victims when PM [particulate matter] pollutant levels rise."(5) Particulate matter air pollution is dangerous with those who have chronic lung diseases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD, which includes bronchitis and emphysema].

3. Night sweats and/or unexplained fevers [not related to menopause symptoms].

4. Gastro-intestinal problems (for all ages, and this also includes pets. This may be linked to unexplained chronic vomiting in cats and dogs that also is on the rise).

5. Skin: Extremely dry and cracked skin and lips (even during warm weather); sores that do not heal or suddenly appear and disappear; fungal infections that do not heal or take a long time to do so; accelerated aging of the skin (sometimes noticeable in a matter of weeks or months).

6. Hearing: an abrupt or sudden loss of hearing, sometime partial deafness, tinnitus, and dizziness often reported just before or right after storms or new weather fronts, including heavy fog).

7. Eyes: blurry vision (this, too, can be related to a new, Chemtrail-laden weather front coming in), and an increase in cataracts (even for the young).

8. Short-term memory loss (due to high rates of aerosol spraying of nano-particles of fiberglass-coated aluminum, a known link with brain dysfunction) and mental confusion or "being in a fog" for young and old alike, especially after heavy fog banks and mists filled with Chemtrail toxins.

9. Auto-immune disorders on the increase (Fibromyalgia/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Lyme disease, Rheumatoid Arthritis, LUPIS, thyroid disease).

A brand-new report in the current issue of the journal "Health Affairs"(6) indicates that more Americans are heavily burdened and "experiencing multiple chronic conditionswith three or more chronic illnesses."[see #9, above] "Chronic disease accounts for three-fourths of the more than $2 trillion spent on health care yearly in the United States."(7) While there is this multiple medical burden increase, there is no mention in journal reports of the Chemtrails toxicity links. Again, a massive cover-up and the need "not to know" continues to put us a high risk.

Obviously, this is an extremely complex problem. We are now living in a world heavily polluted with more than 100,000 chemicals, most of which have never been tested for human safety, as I have noted in my book, "The Uterine Crisis."(Cool All of this, quite literally, bodes an extremely grave situation for all of us. Much of these air-born toxins are filled with particulate matter that is highly injurious to our entire, already greatly compromised, immune system. Particulate matter also can target our lungs and cause havoc from asthma (now at record numbers) to cardio-pulmonary illnesses.(9)

Over the past eight years, we have witnessed the deliberate destruction of 30 years of environmental laws by the Bush Administration. This has greatly eased and/or eliminated any corporate accountability and responsibility ­but it comes at our expense. So, now we are living in a nation ­just barely- that has ignored or destroyed basic Constitutional laws ratified, more than 200-years ago, in 1787. Now, we have a third stolen election with support from a compliant and complicit Congress and Judiciary, with tremendous help from a corporate-controlled mass media. This situation leaves the majority of American's totally clueless as to what has actually is happening in our now lost country.

While the rule of law in our country is gone, Marshall Law is now set in place for nefarious and illegal reasons. Without our original Constitutional rules and environmental laws to guide us --many set in place for our safety and to protect us- it is a nonsense shot for any reliable, good health. Our immune systems are now under daily, toxic assault.

It is likely that medical journals will, in due course, report "unexplained" illnesses, including these serious nosebleeds.(9) To date, however, there appears to be no interest or awareness of our on-going crisis.

On a clear morning, after a three-day snowstorm, the sun has finally come out. My Winter Garden is completely covered with snow. The evergreens are draped in their white mantle. The blue jays, doves, chickadees, and goldfinches are perched high up in the oak, sugar maple, and pine trees. Spots of their blue, tan, and gold feathers stand out amidst the sparkling snow. Somewhere nearby, I hear a woodpecker tapping away. It looks like a picture-perfect, idyllic winter scene.

However, these days in our US Orwellian world, scenes from our daily lives can be greatly deceiving.

It is the day before an illegal US inauguration, made even tragically more so because this is the first black man in our history to supposedly "be elected" president. Although he may quote Dr. Martin Luther King on this day of remembrance, he is unfit to carry Dr. King's mantle forward.(10) Over the past few months many lawsuits have been brought forth about his questionable status as a Constitutionally "natural born citizen." They have been dismissed --even by our Supreme Court, the highest court in the land. Checks and balances are now gone. The Constitutional illegality of his assuming this role, means we have a third stolen election. What does it mean when he takes an oath of office "to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States"? Was it, perhaps, a guilty conscience, where the words of the Oath of Office were flubbed, as noted in The New York Times?(11) So, now we have another governmental sham. Henceforth, all laws that will be passed are, de facto, Constitutionally illegal. How many Americans know this, given that the media no longer is independent of deliberate bias and corruption?

For a short time, the Chemtrail artificial clouds in this morning's sky are nowhere to be seen. The blanket of white fluff that I shoveled this morning, so the birds could have some seeds to eat, has an unmistakable awful chemical smell. The air is no longer fresh and clean, as it used to be. Having tested my snow in 2007, I know that this smell comes from the poisons that invisibly cover my garden ­poisons that include barium, aluminum, and other toxic micro-organisms. I am not the only one who has had snow or rain tested. Reports are confirmed all over the US, as well as from Germany and Italy.(12) This no longer is the snow of my childhood in which I played all bundled up in my snowsuit and woolen mittens, sledded, made snowmen, and laughed with glee as I threw snowballs. This white "beauty" that surrounds my garden is a complete illusion. My garden, and every other one where the snow has fallen around New England, is now a poisoned blanket ­one that will eventually melt and then continue to poison the soil and ground water. It will continue to poison all the mammals in my garden: the squirrels, mice, rabbits, deer, moose, the hedgehogs, and even our neighborhood feral cats.

Within less than an hour, as I am writing this essay, the somewhat washed-out blue sky has been supplanted by a blanket of grey sky. Not individual clouds of a grey winter morning, these are a cover of Chemtrail poisons. Within less than two hours, from horizon to horizon, the sky is now a monochromatic, pearly white. The snow is no longer safe. It will poison all those children who love to play in the snow. I worry tremendously about the extreme dangers Chemtrail-laden snow poses to my innocent grandchildren. Chemtrails are poisoning everything.

Extrapolating from the New England states blanketed with heavy snowfall or torrential rains in the southeast, this means that we are completely covered in a poisonous brew of chemicals ­the exact composition of which is only known secretly to the US military and their malevolent researchers. These poisons enter our bodies, not just by breathing and the food we eat, but also though the untested heinous use of nanotechnology.

For those who know of the importance of eating a safer organic foods, these are now compromised (even with the now meaningless FDA organic seal), because they have been grown (or fed) in Chemtrail-laden soil that has covered us for more than 10 years. The poisons are now throughout the entire food chain and a complex, but rapidly deteriorating web of life.

Where is the entire organic community of farmers, companies, non-profit organizations, and millions of Americans who spend more for food that is supposedly safer? Why are they not demanding a total cessation of Chemtrail poisoning? The entire raison d'etre for this multi-billion dollar organics movement is to have a SAFER FOOD SUPPLY! Where is any real food safety with toxic Chemtrail aerosols? The FDA organic label no longer has any meaning when the soil and water are so heavily laden with Chemtrail poisons. Do we get it? We are eating poisoned "organic" food? It is an oxymoron. Why isn't this entire ORGANICS community with its huge financial clout pressuring those in charge to have this insanity stopped?

Now this toxicity is in food chain. We humans are at the very top of this deadly food chain ­deliberately poisoned by those in the military and other governmental agencies supposedly established to protect us. This invisible scenario is wrecking total havoc for our entire web-of-life. As I have repeatedly written:
So now, when it snows we have, I believe, a growing epidemic of uncontrollable nosebleeds and other illnesses that are directly attributable to the toxicity of these illegal Chemtrail aerosols. They continue to severely damage our now compromised "health," while those in charge are still not held accountable for this grave and deliberate damage! Dr. Joyce R. Young, ND, has told me on several occasions that: "Americans are not sick enough yet. That's why nothing is being done."

As illnesses are rapidly increasing, the time is exceeding short for any remedies. Is that the elite's plan? What kind of healthy, productive lives can any of us REALISTICALLY HAVE, when we are being deliberately poisoned every day? How will our children and grandchildren survive in this poisoned atmosphere? Millions of them are already critically ill. Can we yet wake up, DEMAND a cessation of this on-going poisonous nightmare, and gather together the urgently needed grassroots peaceful political will, while there are enough citizens who still have some health remaining? Where is our collective moral outrage?

Educator and environmental writer Dr. Ilya Sandra Perlingieri is the author of "The Uterine Crisis," which London's "The Ecologist" notes is "a must read."


1, An August 1996 paper presented to USAF, "Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025."See: .mil/2025/volume3/vo


2. See:,htm

3. See: Clifford E. Carnicom. "The Salts of our Soils."

4. See: "Biological Detection.",htm; and: "Chemtrails Update June 2008"

June_2008.html; and "MD Slams Chemtrails" Letter from Dr. J. Michael Pece:

5. "Tiny Airborne Particles Pose Grave Health Threat." "Idaho Observer" May/04. Posted Dec. 29, 2003, l

6."Health Affairs" The Policy Journal of the Health Sphere. January/February 2009, vol. 28, no. 1:]

7. Will Dunham. "More Americans getting multiple chronic illnesses." Jan. 6,

8. See also: Ruth Winter's books for listings of thousands of toxic chemicals: "A Consumer's Dictionary of Food Additives" and "A Consumer's Dictionary of Cosmetic Additives."

9. A cursory word check for "Chemtrails" or "nosebleeds" this week at various medical websites including, "JAMA" [Journal of the American Medical Association], "The Lancet" in London, Science News, Science Daily and several other medical site came up with nothing. However, JAMA has an article on particulate air pollution that could be linked to the toxicity of persistent Chemtrails. See: C.A. Pope, et al. "Lung Cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution." JAMA. March 6, 2002. Vol. 287, No. 9: 1132-1141.

10. See: Andrew Hughes. "Betraying the Legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King," Martin Luther King Day precedes the historic inauguration of America's first African American President.

11. Adam Liptak. "I Do Solemnly Swear(Line Please?)" The New York Times. Jan. 20, 2009: /?scp=1&sq=oath%20of


12. Dr. Hildegarde Staninger. "Texas Chemtrail Samples Compared to Samples From Venice, Italy." Nov. 27, 2007: www/

02-04-2009, 05:14 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-04-2009, 05:15 AM by hilly7.)
There are mountains of evidence of Chemtrails. With all the evidence I look at them with this in mind,

  Serial Killers and Mass Murders that are successful are never standing at the crime scene, weapon in hand, a business card, vials of the victim's blood, and a camera depicting each scene of the murders. So why would TPTB land a plane or give samples to anybody? Why would they allow somebody to fly along side the collecting samples? They wouldn't. How could it be kept a big secret? It's easy, use mules that do the work in stages, none know the other's work and should any scientist or chemist become too curious, make sure the message is clear. , , , well, just Google them. Then they hire people to good and place doubts and question people as to what they have seen, read, and evidence there of. Evidence gathered by professional and non profession people. Physical residue and optical residue. I look at the evidence like this.

I am not medically trained, especially in gastroenterology, not am I a botanist, I don't have official training in agriculture. I have no official training in zoology. Yet when I walk through a field and see a pile of shit with a kernel of corn, I know the animal eat at least some corn, intentionally or not. Now if I look closer and find many kernels of corn, I know the animal ate the corn intentionally. If I look at the pile of shit I can figure pretty much what animal left it. To confirm I can look at the tracks and know what animal shit it, and probably which way it was going. All this without "official" training.
02-04-2009, 03:13 PM,
Quote:A changing climate of opinion?
A good post, Nik.
02-04-2009, 03:16 PM,
Quote:Ten Years Into The Chemtrail Wars - The Breakdown Of The Immune System By Ilya Sandra Perlingieri, PhD
A CRAP post, Nik.
02-04-2009, 03:39 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-04-2009, 03:50 PM by JazzRoc.)
Quote:I have no official training in zoology. Yet when I walk through a field and see a pile of shit with a kernel of corn, I know the animal eat at least some corn, intentionally or not. Now if I look closer and find many kernels of corn, I know the animal ate the corn intentionally. If I look at the pile of shit I can figure pretty much what animal left it. To confirm I can look at the tracks and know what animal shit it, and probably which way it was going. All this without "official" training.
Well, if it's corn and shit, I would probably leave it up to you, Hilly. No, fuck, I wouldn't have to - I'd see for myself.

But with regard to matters you know nothing of - that's different. Scientists and engineers get trained for the work they do. No-one's come up to you, Hilly, and asked you to design a jet engine, have they? Why not - after all you can tell which animals have eaten your corn? Perhaps that ability isn't relevant, eh?

With your corn-detecting powers, how do you KNOW that aircraft release chemtrails? How do you know that the Earth rotates, it just LOOKS LIKE the Sun goes round the Earth? Because people have TOLD you so, and YOU BELIEVE THEM. In other words, you don't know at all.

Because we are busy people EVEN SCIENTISTS take things on trust from other scientists working in other disciplines. It really isn't possible to keep up - the scientific bookshelf of daily-added publications has reached ninety miles an hour...

But what we do to retain trust is submit our work to peer review and publication. Once our equals (in similar fields) assent to publication - it's SCIENCE. The work I have referred to you is SCIENCE.

None of the material you espouse has been through this process - it's ALL PSEUDOSCIENCE, and you are being GULLED, LIED TO, DECEIVED, MISLED, MISINFORMED, DEFRAUDED, and made a fool of.:(
02-04-2009, 05:10 PM,
Hate to let you in on the shocking information, but you are not the only scientist out there, German Scientist Exposes Chemtrails As Military Operations
Dr. Rosalie Bertell

Just to name a few...
02-04-2009, 07:10 PM,
Rosie Bertell video
Rosie Bertell is an award winning scientist, in the above video she explains what she has been able to find out about chemtrails. She talks about aerial pharmacopia, sky obscuration, biological and chemical warfare, and international collusion involved in the global chemtrail spraying programs.

Three stages of Truth
UK video expose
The video clip cited above tells how a British MP got the government to release details of spraying operation that they had conducted over Britain.

US video made by Drew
The video clip above iwas made by Drew, who is a US citizen, you can visit his website at He took the footage from his backyard one day.
An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.
Mohandas Gandhi

Each of us is put here in this time and this place to personally decide the future of humankind.
Did you think you were put here for something less?
Chief Arvol Looking Horse

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Thousands of strange 'Nazca Lines' discovered in the Middle East attariq 0 833 09-16-2011, 11:10 PM
Last Post: attariq
  Strange Underwater Anomalies: Florida, Cuba, Japan!, pinkfloyd 0 1,004 03-23-2011, 10:55 AM
Last Post: pinkfloyd
  Alien Forests, Oceans and Skies: Genetically Engineered Forests icosaface 12 5,059 10-15-2010, 02:07 PM
Last Post: JazzRoc
  Giant unmanned airships to patrol Afghanistan skies for up to three weeks at a time TriWooOx 0 952 07-13-2010, 03:51 PM
Last Post: TriWooOx
  Strangeness in the skies hilly7 2 1,192 07-28-2009, 02:50 PM
Last Post: JazzRoc
  Chemtrails from strange flying object TeslaandLyne 54 9,175 10-14-2008, 09:51 PM
Last Post: JazzRoc
  THE STRANGE STORY OF TMI......BEFORE AND AFTER SerialExpLain 1 1,177 10-03-2008, 08:13 AM
Last Post: yeti
  In Six Days! trueaim 8 1,605 05-27-2008, 08:54 AM
Last Post: humbug
  Qx: On days of contrails/chemtrails(?)...? SerialExpLain 10 2,930 03-12-2008, 05:42 AM
Last Post: hilly7
  Strange clouds - Phangan, Gulf of Thailand flatron 0 1,123 02-15-2008, 10:50 AM
Last Post: flatron

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)