posted 05-11-2003 06:13 AM               

..................

Points to Ponder: The Shield Project.


Here we quote the communication from "Deep Shield":

Having read your email, I must say that you are full of questions. These questions I would dismiss immediately as being the frustrated attempts of fringe groups to bring a halt to the project, however these reports of biological material being part of the spray should be addressed. Therefore I will give as much attention to all of your questions as possible.


1. What purpose do polymer threads imbedded with biological material serve in this scenario?

Polymers are part of the mixture and they do form in threads and in `tufts'. The idea is simple and comes to us from the spider. As you may know spider webbing is very light, some newborn spiders spin a `parachute' to catch the prevailing breeze to travel far from their place of birth. Spiders have been able to attain high altitudes and travel great distances for long periods of time. Most of the elements used in the spray are heavier than air, even in their powdered form they are heavier and will sink quickly. Mixing them with the polymers suspends the particles in the atmosphere high above the surface for longer periods of time, therefore in theory we do not need to spray as often or as much material. Since the suspended particles eventually do settle into the lowest part of the atmosphere and are inhaled by all life forms on the surface there is an attempt to counter the growth of mold by adding to the mixture mold growth suppressants - some of which may be of biological material.

Mold comes in spores that travel on the winds; the polymers can attract mold spores through static charges created by the friction of the polymer threads and the atmosphere. Add a bit of warmth and moisture and mold begins to grow. The polymer is stored in a liquid form as two separate chemicals. When sprayed they combine behind the plane `spinning' long polymer chains (threads). Much tinkering has been done which the chemical matrix in past years. Many polymers (plastics) are non-biodegradable thus add to the problem of pollution. Various formula have been used, some which even use biological agents. It would be great if we could reproduce the same web material that spiders make, it is extremely strong, extremely lightweight and breaks down relatively fast in the ecology.


2. If this spraying is to mitigate global warming, why does so much of it take place at night?

Though it would appear that the dispersal rate of the spray is fast, it is actually takes much longer to be an effective shield. There is a desired concentration being sought. One that is thick enough to stem the UV and the Infrared, while being thin enough to allow visible light through. A perpetual cloud cover would have disastrous effects on plant life; the food chain thus disrupted would soon collapse. The desired effect wanted is a thin cover that would theoretically create a daytime haze that allows plenty of sunlight while providing protection. From UV radiation and also reflect enough infrared to maintain nominal temperatures.

The optimal condition is to use the least amount of material to provide the maximum amount of shielding. Ideally that would be a one-time application which would stay suspended for years, however, as noted, barium and aluminum and other trace elements are far heavier than air and they sink rather rapidly. The different temperatures between day and night causes massive volumes of air to rise during the night, the warm air trapped at the surface rises above the cooling air above. By strategically spraying in certain areas at night, we get the advantage of the rising air, which not only pushes the material higher, but also causes the material to disperse into a thin layer.

I would suggest studying on the subject of weather, namely highs and lows and how air moves to fully understand the times of spraying. I note, it is not just global warming we are combating here, we are also combating UV Summer. Global warming could effectively be treated by applications during the night, when the warm air rises. However the UV needs to be treated during the day. This is why on some days one finds that more spraying is done during the day. The UV indexes are monitored constantly for local areas. If the problem were simply cooling the earth, rockets would have been used to suspend particles in the high atmosphere. However the delicate nature of the Ozone Layer precludes this method of shielding. More on this in the answer to Question 6.


3. What other military programs are in place involving the spraying of barium and what are their purposes? Do you know and understand the chemical make up of the element?

A little knowledge will go a long way to understanding the need to use barium: Barium is often used in barium-nickel alloys for spark-plug electrodes and in vacuum tubes as a drying and oxygen-removing agent. Barium oxidizes in air, and it reacts vigorously with water to form the hydroxide, liberating hydrogen. In moist air it may spontaneously ignite. It burns in air to form the peroxide, which produces hydrogen peroxide when treated with water. Barium reacts with almost all of the nonmetals; all of its water-soluble and acid-soluble compounds are poisonous. Barium carbonate is used in glass, as a pottery glaze, and as a rat poison. Chrome yellow (barium chromate) is used as a paint pigment and in safety matches. The chlorate and nitrate are used in pyrotechnics to provide a green color. Barium oxide strongly absorbs carbon dioxide and water; it is used as a drying agent. Barium chloride is used in medicinal preparations and as a water softener. Barium sulfide phosphoresces after exposure to light; it is sometimes used as a paint pigment. Barite, the sulfate ore, has many industrial uses. Because barium sulfate is virtually insoluble in water and acids, it can be used to coat the alimentary tract to increase the contrast for X-ray photography without being absorbed by the body and poisoning the subject.

Note what Barium Oxide can do, absorb carbon dioxide - one of the chief gasses causing the green house effect. In my answer to Question 4 I will discuss the need to carry a current in the shield. I would like to point out that barium and aluminum work together to diffuse and strengthen an electrical charge. Somewhat like the current produced when acid is introduced between two dissimilar metals, such as iron and copper. There are military applications for everything you can think of, can not a butter knife be used as a weapon? The same concept holds true here.


4. What is the connection between ELF, EMF, VLF and Chemtrails spraying? Or is there one?

To understand the use of radio waves in the shield, one first understands how ozone is created. I cannot stress to you how dire the situation really is. The shield in place is only a partial solution; we must counter the depletion of the ozone- this means we must make ozone in the stratosphere. Ozone at ground levels does no good; indeed, ozone pollution at ground levels it what is used to determine the air quality. Higher levels of ground level ozone mean that air quality is bad. Pure ozone is an unstable, faintly bluish gas with a characteristic fresh, penetrating odor. The gas has a density of 2.144 grams per liter at standard temperature and pressure. Below its boiling point (-112?) ozone is a dark blue liquid; below its melting point (-193?) it is a blue-black crystalline solid. Ozone is triatomic oxygen, O3, and has a molecular weight of 47.9982 atomic mass units (amu). It is the most chemically active form of oxygen. It is formed in the ozone layer of the stratosphere by the action of solar ultraviolet light on oxygen. Although it is present in this layer only to an extent of about 10 parts per million, ozone is important because its formation prevents most ultraviolet and other high-energy radiation, which is harmful to life, from penetrating to the earth's surface. Ultraviolet light is absorbed when its strikes an ozone molecule; the molecule is split into atomic and diatomic oxygen: 03+ ultraviolet light ->0+02. Later, in the presence of a catalyst, the atomic and diatomic oxygen reunite to form ozone.

Ozone is also formed when an electric discharge passes through air; for example, it is formed by lightning and by some electric motors and generators. Ozone is produced commercially by passing dry air between two concentric-tube or plate electrodes connected to an alternating high voltage; this is called the silent electric discharge method. Since UV radiation is the problem, we can not use UV to produce more stratospheric ozone. Another method must be found. The shield acts like one plate of the electrode, when tickled with certain radio waves; it produces an opposite charge to stratospheric layers producing low atmosphere to stratosphere lightening. Creating ozone where it is needed.


5. If this is being done for the reasons you say, then why are other chemicals being used, why are different sprays being used?

Correcting the ecological damage that mankind has done has NEVER BEEN DONE BEFORE. We are relatively new to this notion of terraforming on a real scale. That is what we are doing, Terraforming. We are trying to recreate the ideal life-sustaining conditions on a dying planet. We have never done this before, not intentionally. We are testing and trying different methods. Granted, if we do nothing 89% of all species will go extinct and humanity stands a high chance of not surviving through two more generations (or less). However the idea of 2 billion casualties death and permanent injury is not easy to swallow either.

Several attempts to improve the application of Shielding material and getting the most out of each application are taking place all the time. The combined resources of the nations of earth are not enough to allow constant spraying. Though we have achieved a high level of technology, there is a great surface area that needs to be covered nearly daily. Large sections of ocean are all but ignored; the remaining land masses are more than what can be covered effectively. The Shield would work best if it was a single thin layer with out interruption, however due to the movement of air, weather patterns and the sad fact that we do not have the means to place ample amounts of material at the same level at the same time we are getting a small fraction of the effectiveness from our applications.


6. Why is spraying found before storm fronts? Is it to cause drought?

Before a storm there is a front, the front clears the air before a storm, pushing particulate matter ahead of it, leaving a space relatively clear of particulate matter. UV radiation levels rise in these areas, sometimes to dangerous levels. The shield must be maintained. Since barium absorbs water as well as carbon dioxide, precipitation has been affected. Other kinds of sprays are in development and testing which may reduce the affects on precipitation. As I stated above, this is a new technology we are working with, it is still in its infancy and there are some problems with it.


7. Why are UFO's and disappearing spray planes reported?

I do not know.


8. What about the reports of sickness after spraying?

There are several causatives for this. Some people are more sensitive to metals, whiles others are sensitive to the polymer chemicals. As stated in a previous email, people will get sick, and some will die. It is estimated that 2 billion worldwide will be affected to some degree by the spraying. Without spraying we have a 90% + chance of becoming extinct as a species with in the next 20 years.


9. What is the relationship between these spraying programs and One World Order?

Personally I am against the move for globalization, and yes, there is potential to use the Shield to speed up the process of globalization, there are several countries that are involved in this project: European Union Nations, USA and Russia are the largest contributors to the project, many of the allied nations and UN Members participate to one extent or another. The material (chemical spray as you may call it) comes from all of these nations.

To insure that the chemicals are not tampered with, they are mixed and sprayed over random nations. This means that chemicals produced in the USA has a good chance of being sprayed over Russia, England and the USA. This random spray of material means that no nation would be certain that their chemicals will be sprayed over a nation which they have issues with. Russian planes may be seen in USA skies, but so too will USA planes be seen in Russian skies. The canisters used are sealed in a third nation that has no idea where its canister is going. Participating nations have their observers at every station where canister loading is done. All of this to insure that the shield is not used as a weapon. To further insure that the shield is not used as a weapon, non participant nations are sprayed by participants who must spray in order to get enough material to maintain their nations shield. It is understood that not spraying is as much a military offense as shooting at them.

Without the shield, UV poisoning would cause great death. The threat is a common one, which has brought nations together in defense. The natural outcome of having a common enemy is to strengthen international ties - a step toward globalization.


10. Is the Spraying related to terrorism?

Yes and no. Recent terrorist activity can be traced to resistance groups who feel that we should not interfere with the natural order of things. As you know, there are many rumors out there as to what the Shield Program is. Some believe that this is a population reduction scheme, designed to kill off 'undesirable' peoples. While others hold that this is a mind control program. There are many theories which have sinister plots in them these are propagated by the resistance groups in an attempt to stop the shield regardless of the consequences.

The same delivery method could be used for biological and chemical warfare. It could also be used to inoculate large populations, the effectiveness of these uses are low, there are better methods that can be used. As a means to fight terrorism it is ineffectual, it is far easier to inoculate a population individually and would insure full inoculation against germ warfare.


11. Why all the secrecy?

Due to the severity of the situation it is mandatory to maintain public calm for as long as possible. The Earth is dying. Humanity is on the road to extinction - without the Shield mankind will die off with in 20 to 50 years. Most people alive today could live to see this extinction take place. This means that an announcement of the situation we face boils down to telling every man, woman and child on earth that they have no future, they are going to be killed. People would panic. There would be economic collapse, the production and movement of goods would collapse. Millions would die in all cities on earth, riots and violence would reduce civilian centers to rubble within days. Half of the population in dense metropolitan areas would try to leave the cities seeking 'safety' in the rural areas thinking that they would be safe. Those left behind in the cities would be at war with their neighbors, fighting for the remaining supplies. We would be telling the world that the world is coming to an end, and even with the Shield the chances of survival are small.

UV Summer and Global Warming are the immediate problems we face, there are far greater problems that are raising their ugly heads and will present new problems which in some cases have no viable solutions at this time. Ecologies are collapsing. The extinction rate of species is climbing. The amount of chemical pollutants in the water and soil are fast approaching and in many places has surpassed the earth's ability to heal itself. Crop failure is on the rise, even in the USA the returns on crops are smaller than they were 10 years ago. Even with the advances in genetically altered food crops, we are falling behind in our ability to produce enough to go around. Throughout the 20th century chemical fertilizers and pesticides were used to insure the best yields. Unfortunately many of these have contaminated ground water, killed beneficial insects along with the undesirable insects. These chemicals have gotten into the food chain and are affected other species besides mankind. It is only a matter of years before famine spreads like a cancer throughout the world.

Clean fresh water is in short supply, in many places well water is nonpotable, containing the run off of pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers that have been used on crops and lawns. The water treatment facilities we have are unable to scrub out all of the toxins we have placed in the soil and water supply. Many of the toxins we find build up over time in the body, a long slow poisoning which has been making its presence felt in many areas of the world in the form of cancers, leukemia, sterility, birth defects, learning disorders, immune deficiency problems, etc. These are on the rise, any good researcher can find the records. For decades there was public outcry for the end to pollution. For every small step we made to clean up our production, millions where born who added to the problem. Yes, pollution is down per individual, however there are a couple more billion individuals producing pollution, thus the real numbers have an increase in over all pollution produced. Name a city that does not have problems with smog. You would be hard pressed to find one. Though smog controls on automobiles is higher than ever before, the number of autos on the road has increased thus the amount of smog producing pollutants is higher than ever before. All the clean air acts passed to curb individual factory and auto emissions did not address the production of more factories and more autos. Here an uneasy compromise was made between the need to maintain the economy against the need to maintain the ecology. The ecology lost since it was estimated to be a problem decades from now. The economy was a problem that would have dire effects today.

All of these factors combined have produced a scenario that in shorts boils down to the end of the world in 50 to 75 years. Even if we were to stop all emissions of pollution today, the inertia of past decades is enough to carry us over the brink in 100 years. However we cannot stop the production of pollution, to do so would mean shutting down every factory, every auto, every train, truck, ship and every household on the planet. Electricity is used to heat many homes in the Western World. The production of electricity produces fewer pollutants than heating all homes with wood or coal. Cutting our power generation abilities down to hydroelectric and fission reactors would leave a good chunk of the world in the dark. It is an impossible situation, our civilization is geared to the use of energy, take away our energy and civilization will collapse.


12. When will spraying stop?

There are several factors governing this:

A. Should the Ozone layer repair itself or our active attempts at repair reduces the amount of ground level UV to acceptable levels, spraying will stop. Present calculations place this between 2018 and 2024.

B. Should another method be found which is more effective, less costly or presents us with long-term solutions the Shield project would be replaced.

C. When the other problems become too big to make the maintenance of the shield worth the effort. The estimated date for this is 2025 to 2050.


13. Since Global Warming and UV summer are the problem, why is the Government backing down on its pollution controls?

Because they are ineffectual and will cause more economic problems than they would solve ecological problems. We surpassed the threshold of Earth's ability to absorb pollutants in the 1970's. Since that time the earth's population has nearly doubled. Emerging Industrial nations have come into being, more pollutants are produced now than back then, even with the stringent controls in place. The world is heading for economic depression, more emission controls would add to the economic problems. This translates into our being unable to do anything to start solving the problems.

Unfortunately our technologies require a strong economy to advance. We need that advancement, we need the trillions of dollars spent on research that a strong economy causes. Each corporation that produces a product has a product development program in place. Many of the past products invented came by accident through other unrelated products. There is a corporate drive to find methods to clean up the ecology, to reduce emissions, etc. These goals have been in place for decades, many of the large corporations are in the know when it comes to the ecological problems we face thus they are spending a great deal of money and time on finding solutions to the problems we face. Take away the economy and their research stops.


14. How are you related to the Chemtrails? How do you know that this is what is happening?

I would prefer to not state who I am or how I am related to all of this. To validate what I say, would require a bit of research on your behalf. I would recommend the following subjects to look up and study:

A. Population numbers for industrial nations and the tons of pollutants produced annually. Start with 1975 and work your way up.

B. Number of emerging Industrial Nations.

C. Number of cases of Skin cancers worldwide.

D. Crop Production vs. land area dedicated to crop production. Simple math will show that more acreage is needed to produce food per individual.

E. Automobile production from 1975 to present, estimated number of autos on the road and the average emissions of later model cars produced as compared the emissions of earlier model cars. A little math will show that though individual autos produce less emissions, the amount of emissions has risen due to the number of autos on the road. Remember that many autos are the road that were built before present emission control standards. 1980 is a cut off date - anything put on the road before then produces more pollutants than autos produced today. I would include research in the number of diesel autos produced, diesel has not been under the emissions control acts.

F. Severity of storms and the number of severe storms. Also include heat waves and droughts in that research, you will find that the numbers are staggering when compared to data from 1950, 1960 and 1970.

G. Research how naturally occurring Ozone is produced in the stratosphere. Compare to how it is produced industrially.

H. Research political reforms in the past 30 years, see which political institutions have changed, which nations have joined with whom. Concentrate more on these from 1982 onward. This would include the fall of the Wall and Iron Curtain.

I. Research polymers and how they are made, look at recent research done in biological polymers, medical polymers and filaments.

J. Check out spiders and spider web and the way spiders use their different webs and threads.

K. Research clean fresh water estimates as compared to the 1970's to today - world wide.

L. Research the following medical conditions per capita: Birth Defects Cancers Leukemia Immune deficiency diseases (excluding virus borne ID illnesses such as HIV) Occurrences of Learning disabilities, including dyslexia, ADD, and over all IQ tests Sterility for both male and females world wide Instances of glaucoma and cataracts.

M. Compare the history of UV indexes from 1970 to present. You may note that it was on sharp rise until 1997-99.

N. I would strongly recommend researching the reactions of different barium and aluminum compounds and how they are used. Research how long it takes for these metals in pure form to oxidize, how they combine with nitrates, carbon monoxide carbon dioxide and fluorocarbons and hydrocarbons and water vapor.

O. Research how mold propagates, the conditions it needs to grow and just how abundant it is in the atmosphere.

If you pursue these lines of inquiry, you will see the Shield Project as it really is.

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

At the time of the US-lead invasion of Iraq I had the opportunity to ask a few supplementary questions. There has been no attempt to integrate these questions and answers into the previous section therefore some may appear somewhat out of logical order.

A couple of the questions have a Canadian approach. By the way, I came up with the name - have to call the source something!

Here we quote the further communication from "Deep Shield":

15. Could you, "Deep Shield" - be described as a scientist or...?

Scientist is a good generic term. I do study and research in a scientific manner. I carry papers and degrees. My official capacity is in direct research of atmospheric issues in relation to pollutants. I also create models of potential long-term effects of green house gasses on the climate. Predict wind patterns, weather patterns, etc.

I have spent a good many years working on the project calculating the amount of material needed and creating models for dispersion patterns. I work other members who know the chemicals used and their interactions with the atmosphere, pollution and water vapor. I am part of a team which itself is part of a larger team, which is part of still a larger team. Government work with many chiefs and levels above the workers.


16. Are you prepared to comment upon your personal motives for sharing this information?

Not at this time, no.


17. Have you signed a non-disclosure or Secrets Act document that specifically relates to this project?

Yes.


18. To your knowledge what categories of individuals officially know of the Project and are expected to remain silent? For example, my list of suspects includes government down to the county level, military especially air force, meteorologists, health specialists, mainstream media etc.

All those who know are expected to remain silent. All of those who suspect are either faced with trying to prove the virtually unprovable or are faced with good enough reasons to remain silent. I would assume that this situation is worldwide and could be considered one of the dangers of this project.

It was presented to me as a matter of national security. I can see the reasons why there is a desire to repress the information not that spraying is taking place but the hard little fact that we are facing a period of human history which might be the end of civilization.


19. Is the mainstream controlled media specifically ordered to avoid any mention of chemtrails? If so, have you anything further to add such as how was this done?

I would assume that the Media is controlled by its own desire to make money from what it reports. Since there is enough debunking out there, which says that contrails are part of the normal use of jet engines in the atmosphere, this would leave a reporter with very little to report unless there was solid evidence or pictures or something that could not be explained away.

You must know by now all the debunking methods that have been employed. The 'official' announcements are the media's main dish. The rest they regulate to the realm of the National Enquirer.


20. What government agency or agencies control this program? Is it under international control?

It is an international program. Many nations contribute in different ways. Measures have been taken to insure that what is sprayed over all countries is the same through triple blind deliveries; which include not knowing where a certain canister will end up, not knowing which aircraft a certain canister will be flown, and not even knowing who (in military craft) will be piloting a craft which has the purpose of spraying (Note: in today's world there is usually a mixed crew of different nationalities flying any one military aircraft on a Shield mission). I believe the Media caught Canadians in Iraq recently when Canada's official say on the matter was that Canada was not giving any support to the military might.

The fact remains that there were Canadian military with the USA forces. Some on aircraft carriers most being pilots. I think you can connect the dots.


21. How is the project funded - who pays for it? Have you any idea of the total direct operating cost? Also, does Canada make a funding contribution for the activities in our skies?

Most governments tend to over charge themselves to cover for their black operations (unofficial operations). That money comes out of the collection of taxes. So in effect the taxpayers of the world are paying for this project.

I would assume Canada does contribute funding to the Project. Canada is one of the top nations contributing time, material and funding to this project. Most of the Free World, the Western World, has taken on most of the burden of the costs.


22. Is the Shield Project the only such aerial spraying program?

Is it the only project designed to avert ecological disaster? Then yes. There are countless other projects that could be taking place which include spraying of some sort or another. Pesticides are usually sprayed. There has been great interest in weather control such as bringing rain to arid regions and taking the punch out of hurricanes and typhoons.

Weather control may be one of the final options left to us. Considering the amount of global warming that has taken place. There is a strong need to deflect a storm's fury, or to bring rain back to those regions which have been suffering drought.

What Mother Nature has done for millions of years automatically may now require mankind's hand to keep the schedule.


23. There are reports of four different chemtrail programs and other "code" names. For example, see: Holmestead: Chemtrails - what are they? Any comments?

It is possible that the Military does have a use for similar sprays. I cannot speak for the Military. However, my own personal research has come across these things as well. Are they possible? Yes. Are they practical? Only in the small scale say over the battlefield, or in the case of say the Iraq War, over Baghdad. Global application would be far too expensive and would require an obvious flight pattern of grids, circles and other heavy spray patterns.


24. Is all the spraying done using the "tank kits" described earlier or are the KC-135R and KC-10 types filled to the brim? Such aircraft have a load capacity of 200,000 pounds or more for refueling missions.

No. Several types of craft are used. Commercial jet airliners are used and they are not diverted from their flight paths to do so. How the canisters and the spraying is done on this kind of craft is unknown to me exactly. I do have my suspicions. I know best that which is my field; this is not to say that we do not talk around the water tank. So I know more than just my area and am able to think the matter through to its logical end.

I do know that even all the commercial jetliners in use are not enough to insure complete coverage all of the time. My computer models require knowing how much material needs to be sprayed. Certain conditions cause wide areas to suddenly (over hours) open up in the Shield. Then and only then is mass spraying done - and would be done with the most logical craft, a tanker.

Why not spray more from individual jetliners? That is one of the problems. Jetliners do not carry much material (100 to 500 gallons) because the material has to be spread out thinly.

Look at the kinds of material being used, aluminum, barium, titanium, etc. Most are highly reflective; in some instances the material is an absorber of gasses. In the case of reflection the desire is to reflect X amount of heat and X amount of UV while still maintaining acceptable (nominal) levels of UV and heat reaching the planet's surface.

Life requires a certain amount of both UV and Heat too much will kill - so will too little. The apparent amount looks like a lot more than what is actually being sprayed per volume of air it is covering. Most of the whitening of the sky is not the material per se, but the collection of water vapor, which forms into suspended ice crystals. The introduction of the material causes the water vapor to collect like rain collects on individual particles of dust.

Too much material would cause a "mud fall" of sorts where the naturally occurring water vapor would precipitate carrying the material with it.

Spraying is done in such away as to "layer" the material through a volume that will allow an acceptable level of UV and heat through along with all the other wavelengths of light. Photosynthesis is the foundation of life on our planet.

Only when all the material is removed in a local area does it require a massive spray, this is usually in the front of a weather system, or after a heavy period of precipitation. Then a tanker is flown, fully loaded.


25. Is there any truth in the story that some of the spraying is done by jetliners with modifications in the "honey" or waste compartment? For example, see mechanic story: Mechanic.

The technology used for spraying is rather simple. It requires at least two tanks under pressure, each carries half of the mixture which is sprayed at the same time forming a complete compound which is designed to be lightweight (so as to be suspended for longer periods of time).

There have been attempts to incorporate the materials in jet fuel, however the material binds with unburned jet fuel, water vapor, etc and does not have the added buoyancy of the polymer threads. The end result is a spray that is less than half as effective and is more dangerous since it can lead to sulfates, acids and other mixtures, which are more lethal than the spray.

It is very possible that the "honey" compartment is used. The amount of material needed is small compared to the payload of any given commercial airliner.

However, there is a good deal of fuel tank that is not used. Airliners only fuel their craft for the journey ahead of them; they rarely top off the tank. This has become public knowledge in light of 9-11. It was this small fact that caused the terrorists to pick pan-continental flights so they would have a plane fully loaded.

The majority of flights are short range and do not require the full capacity of an airliners fuel tanks. Any adaptations needed could easily be done during routine maintenance, and could be easily explained away as being a modification for safety and-or pollution controls.

This last is my own theory.

We can assume that any means possible to deliver the material is tried. Independent nations may favor one way of doing so over another.


26. Where are the official sources that state that a certain number of people (worldwide?) will sicken and possibly die as a result of the spraying? In other words, what *internal* studies have been done on the health issues and who carried them out?

WHO (World Health Organization) carried out most of the studies. Other nations have carried their own research on the matter. Some have said the ill effects will be minimal - along the lines of a million or so, while others have found the numbers to be far higher - 3 to 4 billion.

Some of the organizations include the CDC and independent labs. We are dealing with a situation where the amount of contamination is estimated to be far higher than what would normally take place but is far lower than historical instances of industrial contamination. This is important to note, the only real history we have with barium/aluminum/titanium etc. contamination is through factory workers, miners, etc, who receive a far greater dosage of the material than what is to be experienced by the populace under the Shield.

The amount of spray is very small compared to the volume of the space that is covered. Most of the harmful chemicals that are used are being dissipated over vast areas. Near coastal regions the fall out is not reaching land at all, but is being carried out to the oceans. The addition of polymers to make the material remain suspended in the air longer means that less material is being used.

Today the material used and its application is nothing like in the early days when it was sprayed in greater quantities and settling far faster to be inhaled by all.

The accepted Estimated Casualties (from WHO) is 2 billion over the course of 6 decades. The majority will be either the elderly, or those who are prone to respiratory problems. These numbers are based on the current estimates of the general health of the population, the average age and the occurrence of respiratory problems as a health issue. All are estimates since there are no solid numbers to work with.


27. Could you summarize the root causes of the initial destruction of the atmosphere that requires this "repair" work? Did it perhaps result in part from fluorides released/produced by the nuclear weapons programs?

In a word - Industry. Most fail to understand that the products we use, wear and live with are made in a manner that dumps CFC's and green houses gasses into the atmosphere. There is no one single causative in this issue. It goes way back to the Industrial Revolution and the use of coal to power steam engines. Since that time we have consumed greater and greater energy resources, dumping the waste where ever we wanted.

Up until very recently refrigeration was a big contributor, imagine all those hundreds of millions of households that owned and operated freon cooled refrigerators from 1940 to 1970. Not just one refrigerator per household, but over the course of time often multiple freon units. This doesn't include the various air conditioner systems or industrial refrigeration systems.

For a long period when the refrigerator or air conditioner unit was replaced, the old one was taken to the dump and thrown into the heap - the freon was free to escape and make its way up into the stratosphere to eat away at the ozone layer.

You can add to that list. Think of all the cars that had air conditioners, think of all those hair spray cans with their propellant gasses - the amount of those alone were enough to do great damage.

Styrofoam is another industry and product that has contributed to the problem. In the scheme of things atomic energy has contributed little compared to the consumer goods that have been manufactured during the past century.

Think of all the cars on the road today. In the late 1970's smog controls started getting stronger. Think of all the pre-1978 cars on the road - they are still producing a good many chemicals that leech into every corner of the globe.


28. Have you any comment on the use of so-called "CloudBusters" based upon the theories of Wilhelm Reich? For an example of this see: CloudBuster.

I could go on for hours about the particular errors of this site. Let us just cut to the chase: I seriously doubt that this machine does as it is reported to do. I could be wrong, but then I do not work with alternative energy sources such as Orgone energy.

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

Points to Ponder: Conroy Penner, British Columbia.


Here is the second item mentioned above:

Conroy Penner, of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada contacted me directly with his story. He told me that some years ago he used to work for a certain company in Western Canada and along with another person who was a qualified aerospace welder/fabricator he was assigned to work on construction of some special spray equipment for the United States Air Force.

The workers were told that the USAF contract involved equipment to be used to spray insects at airforce bases in the States. The spray systems incorporated exotic alloys and specially machined parts with large holding, pressure and surge tanks along with pumps. Penner became suspicious of the actual purpose of the whole project as, in his opinion, things simply did not "add up". He resigned after there were confrontations with the US military people and the management over the true purpose of the equipment.

Penner provided this photograph, that was taken in 1988 of some finished spray equipment on a flat bed trailer. There are parts carts in the foreground.

The description states that the green tank sections are coated aluminum and the others are stainless steel for certain other chemicals. The smaller tanks are for the solution for purging the system. The large tanks are some 15 feet long and approximately 3 feet in diameter. The box seen at the right side of the photograph is the control panel, and the plumbing and pumps are underneath the tanks. It is said that these units were designed for use with Hercules C-130 aircraft and it is understood that in total eleven systems were to be made, this being the first.

I have on hand many other specifics from Penner but that is the general outline. All of this took place in 1988/89.


Comments: There are obviously some problems with this - it would be great to have the exact dates along with the names of the company management involved. Also the names and rank of the US military personnel involved is lacking.

As for the equipment itself - it looks much as if it could be ordinary aerial spraying systems - that is because indeed it may be just that with suitable modifications for the specialized USAF requirements. At this time the aerial spraying programme (chemtrails) was in the early stages of experimental development. Certainly at first it was reported that the C-130 was seen being used for aerial spraying (of unknown substances) and only later were the large refuelling tankers seen spraying "chemtrails".


Further comments: Added 26 March 2003 - is an addition from (and confirmed by) the source of the main item above.

The canisters that are shown above are similar to what is known to be incorporated into this programme.

Two large ones are carried, one carrying one part of the chemical mix, the other carrying the other part, when combined they form long polymer chains - threads if you will. Even the green tint finish is typical.

However, the way it is understood here, is that the small tank provides the propellant (compressed gas) which is released into the larger tank. Much like a large aerosol can, except the compressed gas is stored in a separate tank which is much stronger, and able to sustain a far greater pressure than a larger tank.

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

There are ongoing efforts to confirm and clarify certain aspects of all of the above information. Updates will be made when any new material is available.

Holmestead.ca does not necessarily endorse the views expressed in this web page. We present this in the interests of research and for the relevant information we believe it contains relating to the aerial spraying of unknown substances commonly referred to as chemtrails.

At 26 March 2003 some updates have been made and again 4 April 2003.

posted 05-13-2003 07:25 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeanie:
Halva: First, may I say thankyou for finding and posting this piece. I strongly recommend everyone read it. It makes sense and answers many things I've been wondering about in connection with areosol spraying.

---

I feel SO much safer now!

Really? Most doubtful. This is (imo) disinformation. Yeah, this spraying is for your own good. We're not going to tell you publicly what we're doing (as you might panic)... What crap!

So Jeanie thinks this makes sense?

Try http://davidicke.www.50megs.com/icke/magazine/vol10/chem/billings1.html

And you no doubt believe that those twisters over Oklahoma are NATURAL events?

posted 05-13-2003 08:18 AM            

taken from:
http://www.psychops.com/Research_Links/research_links.html

"The site makes reference to the Russian Human Genome Program and the Department of Energy's Human Genome Program. According to a biologist who works on the Department of Energy's Genome Program, part of the project's "research" includes experimenting on the general public with aireal spraying. For more information on how this aireal spraying ties in with the biochips, refer to the information contained in the video and audios listed in the products section."

posted 05-15-2003 03:33 PM               

I have already seen evidence that this is so.

posted 05-17-2003 03:41 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by halva:
Hornblower, if you thought a little more you would appreciate that "We are doing this for your own good" is the most significant crack yet in the debunker stance.

I have already seen evidence that this is so.

---

Pretty dumb reply if you ask me but you're not asking me, you're telling me, right?

posted 05-21-2003 04:13 AM               

May 20/2003

The Chemtrail Report currently circulating by a proclaimed project insider is an excellent compendium of current chemtrails evidence set forth in Chemtrails Confirmed, the video "Chemtrails: Mystery Lines In The Sky, as well as the work of Clifford Carnicom in Santa Fe, Bob Fitrakis and Kim Weber in Ohio and other prominent chemtrails investigators.

Santa Fe, NM Jan 5 02


The email report also offers details on the project timetable and frightening warnings of a two billion-person cull and total collapse of our spaceship's unraveling biosphere "within 20 years".

The notion of an even more drastic cull of Earth's human populations have been put forward by White House advisers for decades – without acknowledging that the most dire population threat comes from the planet-threatening consumption, waste and pollution by overdeveloped nations– not teeming the "Two-Thirds World" whose indignant, indigent indigenous populations aspire to the West's profligate lifestyle.

The imminent crackup of Space Colony Earth within 20 to 30 years continues to be predicted by eminent scientists, as well as orgs as prestigious as the World Wildlife Fund. We are currently in the midst of a "Sixth Great Extinction Event" which is seeing species disappearing into permanent extinction even faster than the last Great Extinction, which eliminated dinosaurs and most other species from this planet over a span of millennia, not mere decades.

The originator of this report could have drawn on all of this readily available information to compile her/his responses to an email correspondence for which no identification or return e-address was given.

He or she could also be speaking from direct, first-hand knowledge of the chemtrails project.

Let's take a closer look at some of the statements made by these latest "inside" revelations:

Santa Cruz, CA '02 (Will Thomas)

CLOUD BUSTERS
Insider: "I seriously doubt that this machine does as it is reported to do." So do I. At least I have seen no convincing evidence that "cloud busters" disperse chemtrails – and a compelling first-hand, next-door demonstration that they do not.


BARIUM
With its characteristic brilliant white color, barium is also highly reflective. So chemtrail perpetrators could achieve a "two-for-the-price-of-one-application" by spraying a material that acts as an electrolyte to conduct radar and radio waves – as well as weather-changing and subterranean x-raying HAARP transmissions, and ever-present electromagnetic smog – while also reflecting the sunlight heating up the "greenhouse" gases trapped in Earth's atmosphere. Barium has nearly double the refractive index of water – and is even higher in reflectivity than glass. It has turned up in chemtrail-contaminated precipitation samples taken last winter in Edmonton, Alberta.


POLYMERS
Using gossamer polymers to drift on the upper winds and keep relatively heavy chemtrail particulates suspended in the atmosphere make sense. But I wonder about the assertion of polluting "non-biodegradable polymers" allegedly used in chemtrails. Since this phenomenon burst into public purview in 1998, one of the biggest obstacles to sampling chemtrail "cobwebs" continues to be the degradation of these fine, rapidly biodegradable strands, draped in 40-foot lengths over porches, power lines and police cruisers. HAARP's inventor Bernard Eastlund has identified Ohio-produced polymers that can be tuned to HAARP's specific frequencies. [see also Chemtrails Confirmed]

night spraying over Florida 11/02 (Danny)


NIGHT SPRAYING:
The explanation given for frequently reported night chemtrail spraying also "tracks". Remember, too, that when discussing our living planet's daily cycles of respiration, the biggest heat differentials in the atmosphere occur after dark. Spraying a "Welsbach seeding" material that changes the wavelength of trapped solar heat into frequencies capable of radiating into space should work well at night. [See Chemtrails Confirmed]


TWO BILLION KILLED BY CHEMTRAILS - "HARD TO STOMACH"?
According to this "insider", the CDC is complicit in a WHO plot to kill two billion people over the next six decades – mostly the elderly and those prone to respiratory problems – through exposure to chemtrails.

Where does this freakish figure come from? While severe illnesses and even deaths have been attributed to respiratory and/or gastrointestinal, and even heart complications following exposure (particularly among the elderly) – there are no current health statistics showing a genocidal jump in state or provincial mortalities.
Nor have any documented, lab-tested samples of chemtrail-contaminated snow and rainfall revealed deliberately induced pathogens in the spray.

A 10% dieback in population, which is the definition of genocide, would see bodies stacked in the streets.

This unnamed source could forward the referenced WHO report without revealing their identity. Documentation is absolutely essential for this assertion of a two billion-person chemtrail cull to be credible. And repeatable.

(In contrast, the "Deep Sky" source interviewed by radio reporter S.T. Brendt on three occasions – twice in front of radio station WMWV witnesses – did reveal his name to Brendt and has been thoroughly checked out as a high-level FAA air traffic control manager. His chemtrail observations have been corroborated by eye-witnesses including, and other than Brendt, who has also spoken personally to controllers confirmed by her primary source regarding their continuing chemtrail radar observations.)

If the long-rumored and never substantiated chemtrail cull is true, whether fatalities from chemtrail spraying are intentional or an "unintended consequence" of the program – why not go for it?

Policy makers Kissinger, Prince Philip and similar dim-bulb luminaries have called for a cull of a significant portion of Earth's human population in order to prevent ecological and economic meltdown. So it can only be assumed that killing low-income "useless eaters" and elderly "human weeds" (to quote early American eugenicists) would be quite easy to stomach by elite exploiters concerned by the continuing crackup of our spaceship's life-support systems.

Wuerzburg, Germany Oct/02

MANY NATIONS ARE ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report cited in Chemtrails Confirmed calls for 10 million tons of chemtrail particulates to be spread on the atmosphere. If participating countries are "randomizing" deliveries of chemicals to chemtrail spray-plane bases, as this source alleges, transport of megatons of raw material across oceans, national and interior boundaries must be "trackable". I have been unable to track such large-scale commodity movements, or sales of barium and aluminum oxide on the Net. Perhaps a professional stock analyst could spot "spikes" in commercial barium and aluminum oxide production. Except for meeting the size requirements of 10 microns called for by the Hughes Patent, neither material requires commercial refining. http://willthomas.net/greekreport.htm


RUSSIAN CHEMTRAILS
Another problem is that there are no chemtrails reports coming out of Russia, as claimed by this "Deep Shield" correspondent. Nor are chemtrails being photographed over the former Soviet Union, Central or South America.


BIOWAR AND INNOCULATIONS
Another problem with this "insider's" response is the assertion that chemtrails "could be used for biological and chemical warfare. It could also be used to inoculate large populations." Though the writer goes on to admit that "the effectiveness of these uses are low" – they are in fact zero. Spraying biowarfare agents and inoculations against "cocktails" of biowar terror agents is also contrary to established biowar practice and common sense.

Chemical and biological agents such as those used during Desert Storm [see Bringing The War Home] are dispersed at night from low altitudes to assure adequate concentrations – and delay rapid degradation by daylight UV, rain and wind.

A second consideration is that there are not enough chem/bio agents available to load a squadron of KC-10 tanker planes – each capable of dispensing 320,000 pounds of fuel or other chemicals – never mind hundreds of tankers over decades.

Ditto expensively stockpiled and suspect "vaccines" delivered by the tanker-load. The "aerosol inoculations" now being produced and patented for the US military are intended for nasal ingestion – like an asthma spray. Spraying vaccines from airplanes flying in the stratosphere would be as useless as deliberately spraying fragile bugs or chemical agents from those freezing, nearly airless and irradiated altitudes to cull a population on the ground. As Dr. Len Horowitz has so thoroughly documented, contaminated vaccines are the best bet for infecting targeted populations. [See Emerging Viruses, also Death In The Air]

Nanaimo, BC Canada 1/2/03 (Terry Attard)

OH CANADA
While some 38 Canadian soldiers served alongside US forces in Iraq as part of an ongoing military personnel exchange – and were not recalled despite Ottawa's professed non-involvement in that illegal invasion – Canadian Forces pilots are not "carrier qualified". Canada operates no aircraft carriers and its few fighter pilots have no need to be carrier-capable, as this writer alleges.

But "Canuckistan", with its high-latitude vulnerability to ozone depletion and a toasted Prairies breadbasket, would indeed be keen on supporting a chemtrails program. And keeping it quiet. Ottawa already has a record of secretly collaborating with the Pentagon on conducting "open air" biowar experiments on Canadian schoolchildren in Winnipeg and other cities.


COMMERCIAL AIRLINER CHEMTRAILS
This source claims that "Commercial jet airliners are used" - as recommended in the original Hughes patent. S/he admits, "how the canisters and the spraying is done on this kind of craft is unknown to me exactly" – before going on to claim, "The technology used for spraying is rather simple. It requires at least two tanks under pressure."

Once again, unlike federal air traffic controllers and military flight crews, airline mechanics are not bound by strict secrecy oaths. A practice that might expose innocent passengers to toxic chemicals or unsafe flight procedures would surely be exposed – to the press, or at least to airline captains supposedly ignorant of modifications the FAA says must be logged in the mechanical logbooks of all modified aircraft.

It's hard to believe that any airline captains apprised of the non-standard installation of pressurized chemical tanks in the back of their airplanes capable of venting aerial pollutants in direct contravention of EPA and FAA regulations while possibly endangering the lives of all onboard would do not raise hell and refuse to take-off.

The Hughes patent calls for aluminum oxide and other sunlight-reflectant materials to be put directly into jet fuel for disbursement through the engine exhaust. Hardly negligible, as this source claims, some 15 million flights per year (before 911) would see chemtrails disbursed around the globe.

But the Hughes patent "For The Reduction Of Global Warming" also warns that this concept probably won't fly due to opposition by some nations, and by citizens angered over the visual whitening appearance of the sky.

Our anonymous correspondent confirms that plastic polymers cannot be sent through the intense heat of a jet engine – hence the need for special spray apparatus readily visible on any crowded airport ramp in the country. To date we have seen zero photographs of any type of spray apparatus on US Air Force tankers or commercial airliners. Small executive jet Cessna Citations have been photographed close-up revealing spray nozzles to dispense chemicals used in atmospheric tracking and research.

As Sid writes of these FAA-registered jets in white NOAA paint schemes:
"I've watched the Citation and Lear type jets destroy the oncoming storms for the last three years. KCs also! I immediately sent copies of the photos to Cessna Corporate headquarters and to Pratt & Whitney corporate offices in Canada and
Connecticut P&W responded with a phone call and subsequent emails. What I can tell you now is that the engineers had no
idea what the modifications were for. I think they do now!"

Cessna Citation Deer Valley AZ - current photos by S.P.

UV SUMMER?
If the dire solar radiation warnings relayed in this report are real – we've had it. The reason is because, as these revelations reiterate, "large sections of ocean are all but ignored" by chemtrail sprayers.

Which means bye-bye sunfried phytoplankton.

This may seem like no major deal. But just as microscopic microbes are making world headlines, these tiny marine critters anchor the entire marine food web – while acting as bigger CO-2 scrubbers and oxygen suppliers than all the forests ashore. We've already seen disaster around Antarctica a few years ago, where the krill die-off from solar radiation streaming through an Antarctic-wide ozone hole was followed by the starvation-extinction of entire penguin colonies, and a lot of hungry whales.

Ozone depletion is true planetary emergency. But is it dire enough to call for a continuous chemtrail screen laid down by squadrons of big jets tearing apart the ozone layer with their own emissions? (Not to mention constant missile launches.)

In 2001, alarm bells rang throughout our spaceship as a record ozone hole larger than the combined area of the United States, Canada and Mexico opened above the entire Antarctic. [USA Today 11/24/02]

But according to the WMO Antarctic Ozone Bulletin #7, issued on Nov. 14, 2002, the most recent Antarctic ozone hole has remained "well below season norms… less than half of its maximum size in late August and early September" and "the smallest in at least two decades."

USA Today explained that the smallest Antarctic ozone hole since 1988 occurred "after abnormal weather patterns in Earth's upper atmosphere interfered with the chemical reactions that break down ozone molecules in the stratosphere."

It turns out that as Earth's weather-making troposphere pumped energy into the stratosphere, the size and strength of the polar vortex was diminished - something frequently observed in the Arctic, but seldom around the South Pole.

2002's weird weather pattern appeared to be a "self-correcting" confirmation of Lovelock's "Gaia Hypothesis" of an awakening Earth's complex web of feedback interactions. But shrinking Antarctic ozone holes "should not be viewed as a long-term trend," scientists cautioned. [http://www.gcrio.org/ozone/unep2000summary.html]

The latest ozone hole measurements are coming from Antarctic weather stations operated by Argentina, Finland, Italy, Spain, Australia, France, Germany, Japan, New Zealand, Russia, the UK and USA – augmented by ozone data from NASA/TOMS, NOAA/TOVS, NOAA/SBUV/2 and ESA/GOME satellites.

Since 1990 WMO has arranged for the preparation of daily maps of total ozone distribution over the Northern Hemisphere during the period 1 November to 31 March.

But we are still in deep trouble. According to the WMO, recent updates on the state of the ozone over the Northern mid- to polar latitudes show "Strong ozone deficiency persists pole ward of 60N from Northern Scandinavia over the Russian Arctic and Northern Siberia."

The trend toward the natural regeneration of our spaceship's protective ozone shielding is now being reversed as stratospheric temperatures low enough for the formation of big high-altitude ice clouds of frozen CFCs are "continuing to be much below normal" according to the World Met Org.

In fact, this year's "ozone decline has accelerated" – with a 20% drop in normal ozone layer levels appearing, "for a short time, over the Canadian Arctic, and nearly continuously over Northern Siberia where, in early March, they exceeded 30%."

Multiply by two for the percentage increase in skin cancers for organisms exposed to increased UVB. That is, a 20% drop in the ozone layer = a 40% increase in skin cancer; 30% = 60%.

These are big numbers. While world attention was focused on the invasion and occupation of Iraq, an even more serious emergency was taking place overhead. At –20% and –30%, ozone depletion for the coldest February 20 to March 10, 2003 period, "stretched from Northern Scandinavia eastward over the Russian Arctic up to the river Lena in Northern Siberia. Over Europe, from Spain to Ukraine the deviations were -10 to -12%," says the WMO. Readings over North America they -6 to -10%."

Drastic. But not dire.

chemtrails off California coast Jan 5/03

KILLER UV?
"Without the shield," claims this correspondent, "UV poisoning would cause great death."

Not true. Not at this time. While still a significant human health hazard, according to the WMO, this year's Ozone Mass Deficiencies are "about a fifth less than in the record setting springs of 1993,1995 or 1996." [http://www.wmo.ch/web/arep/gawozobull02.html]

UNEP concurs. The United Nations Environment Programme reported on the "Environmental effects of ozone depletion" in an interim update issued August 2000.
UNEP says overall ozone loss "seems to have leveled off".

But don't go cooking yourself in the sun too soon. "Due to uncertainties in instrument calibrations and natural year-to-year variability," UNEP cautions, "we cannot yet be sure whether global ozone has reached a minimum."

While atmospheric chlorine concentrations are beginning to decrease, UNEP projects "the prospects for ozone recovery remain uncertain." Part of this perplexity comes from high halogen levels in the atmosphere (even worse ozone-depleters than CFCs) – plus the likelihood of volcanic eruptions launching megatons of ozone-eating ejecta into the stratosphere as earthquake activity continues to escalate worldwide

Things won't be back to "normal" soon, if ever. "Interactions between global warming and ozone depletion could delay ozone recovery by more than a decade," UNEP says. At least one increasingly sophisticated climate model predicts differences in ozone recovery patterns, "with larger ozone depletions being expected in the Northern European sector."

Interestingly, "locations with largest ozone depletion are not necessarily those where recovery will be seen earliest," UNEP notes. "Based on statistical considerations of ozone variability, southern mid-latitudes are the first location at which ozone recovery may be detectable."

Which would seem to point to Antarctica's incredible shrinking ozone hole as part of this early recovery. Until, that is, we recall that last year's split ozone holes1 over Antarctica were caused by freakish weather conditions – not a recovering levels of stratospheric ozone.

Stay tuned. Whether or not it is the priority of some 14 nations to secretly shield their citizens and crops from fluctuating solar radiation levels, UNEP says, "Even with the expected decreases in atmospheric chlorine, it will be decades before the ozone recovery can be unambiguously identified at individual locations."

Faced with imminent curtailment of petroleum pollution and profits in the face of global climate change, the chance to cool global warming while at the same time shielding large swaths of the wealthy nations of the northern hemisphere would be compelling to an "oil president" and his corporate cabal.


GROUND LEVEL OZONE (SMOG)
This "insider" further states that "ozone at ground levels does no good" in protecting us from ultraviolet sunlight.

On the contrary, UNEP points out that "In Mexico City, poor air quality has been shown to be responsible for reductions of about 20% in skin-reddening UV in the city centre compared with the suburbs."

In Moscow, similar changes in atmospheric opacity from clouds and/or aerosol pollution "were also probably responsible for a reported gradual decrease in UV from the 1960s to the mid 1980s."

Ground-level ozone does act as a partial sunshield. Also known as smog, street-level ozone is unfortunately often lethal to individuals susceptible to industrial air pollutants in the 10-micron range, or smaller. (A human hair is 100 microns across.)

It is particularly worrying that the Hughes Patent calls for chemtrails to be sprayed at 10 microns – a size of particulate the EPA calls "an extreme health hazard". [See Chemtrails Confirmed] These microscopic irritants are the primary health hazard presented by chemtrails – along with barium toxicity and microorganisms precipitated out of the upper atmosphere and brought down into human tissues by chemtrails.

SARS and West Nile are just the beginning. UNEP predicts "changes in climate due to global warming could lead to alterations in the distribution of insects and other vectors that carry human and animal pathogens. Such alterations, combined with increased UV-B-induced immunosuppression from ozone depletion, could increase the incidence and/or severity of the diseases these pathogens induce."

Scientists also say that besides severely depressing human immunity to disease, continued UV irradiation could also render vaccines to novel pathogens ineffective.

Sidney, BC Canada 3/7/03 (Terry Attard)

MY CONCULSIONS
This unidentified report strongly echoes the findings and surmises presented in Chemtrails Confirmed and "Chemtrails: Mystery Lines In The Sky". So much so, it is either a strong validation or directly sourced from this book and video – as well as drawing strongly from Clifford Carnicom, Kim Weber, Columbus Alive reporter Bob Fitrakis and others who blew loud whistles on the barium component of chemtrails. [See also Earth Island Journal Summer '02 "Stolen Skies" by William Thomas]

If this report was put together from Internet sources and the work done by the researchers listed above, it does provide an accurate summary of the evidence unearthed to date.

If it is genuine, many of its remarks are corroborated by the researchers listed above, and many others who have devoted years or personal effort and expense to this investigation.


FLAWS AND RUMORS
The report's speculations, flaws and contradictions resurrect longstanding and stubborn objections without satisfactorily addressing them – including the technical and security nightmare of fitting pressurized spray-tanks to commercial airliners; an unsubstantiated two million-person cull; missing Russian chemtrails; and the impracticalities of spreading inoculants and/or biowarfare from high altitudes.

In short, every aspect of published chemtrails research and speculation is regurgitated indiscriminately in this unsigned report.

With apologies to true believers excited by these recent "revelations", whether false or genuine in its insider origins, journalists requiring documented, first-hand sources will be unable to make use of this report without independent verification of its "Deep Shield" source and citations.

While it would be deeply gratifying to claim vindication for findings first published and broadcast in Chemtrails Confirmed and "Chemtrails: Mystery Lines In The Sky", there are enough bloopers to render this report, "inconclusive". Moreover, in the absence of corroboration for some of its wilder statements, the possibly persists that this is yet another chemtrails hoax drawn from already published texts and Internet reports.

Which is too bad. The shortest route to national media exposure remains for a credible chemtrails insider to come forward with documentation and at least verify their identity confidentially with accredited reporters. If the air traffic controllers observing chemtrail-dispensing USAF tanker on their scopes would come forward as individuals or a group simply to express their concerns over particulate emissions some controllers say could be hazardous to the environment human health – this story could no longer escape exposure on the 6 o'clock news.

Until then, the work of many chemtrails investigators – and anonymous email tipsters – continues.

posted 05-25-2003 02:31 AM               

That said, he remains a scientist, and would not feel it was his task to inject emotional affect. Particularly since he is worried about the mass hysteria factor.

I agree that the dominant political system would not deal rationally with this information if for some reason they decided to change the secrecy policy.

posted 05-26-2003 05:30 AM               

In any case, on this thread, where we are really getting to the point, and where debunkers are free to come, note that they are segregating themselves. They are not getting involved in this discussion.