It is always fun to discover new information that broadens our perspective and adds to our data base of interesting and useful facts. However, it is quite another matter when the new information is troubling, and it requires a shift of existing belief systems. This is the case with aerial spraying in our skies and the consequences for our health and our environment.
We can, of course, be smug and confident and go to the various “fact checkers” for the truth. Yet, the question is, who is checking the fact checkers, and who is paying them, and where does the money lead? Or we can think for ourselves, and do our own research, and draw our own conclusions. And in my case, I prefer the latter approach, because I am the one who is taking responsibility for my beliefs, not someone else, or some organization of supposed experts.
In this regard, I was alerted to the existence of aerial spraying in our skies from an article written by William Thomas, published in the 2001, Nov.-Dec. edition of Nexus Magazine from Australia. He pointed out that a patent was awarded to Welsbach of Hughes Aerospace in 1994 for “the Reduction of Global Warming.” It envisioned placing a “sky shield” of reflective particles in the upper atmosphere, in order to reduce the incoming sunlight by 1-2% and, thus, reduce global surface temperatures.
To add credibility to the patent, Ken Caldeira at Lawrence-Livermore Labs did a computer model that determined the “sky shield” program could stop global warming over 85% of the planet. Furthermore, Lawrence-Livermore Labs estimated that the price for aerial spraying would be around $1 billion per year. In addition, a founder of Livermore and the father of the H-bomb, Edward Teller, advocated spraying reflective chemicals in our skies to create “mirror-shades” over our earth. He made these assertions in speech at the 1998 International Seminar on Planetary Emergencies.
Further investigations and planning studies resulted in a draft report in May 2000 to the IPCC of the UN, which was evaluated by approximately 3,000 atmospheric scientists. They looked at Teller’s plan and the computer simulations of Caldeira, and they agreed the plan might work. However, the IPCC warned against unintended consequences and the outrage of an angry populous. In addition, Caldeira went public and voiced his concern that the sky shield program could cool the stratosphere and further destroy the ozone layer.
However, despite these concerns, aerial spraying has been observed and photographed for approximately two decades by civilian populations all over the world. Primary constituents in the formula are apparently aluminum oxide, barium, and quartz, along with polymers of fine threads, used to keep the nano-particles airborne for longer periods of time. Multiple patents and extensive research-and-development are involved, as well as the willing involvement aircraft to complete the process.
Many health consequences have been reported, including flu symptoms; head aches; chronic joint-pain; dizziness; sudden, extreme fatigue; and acute asthma attacks. In addition, the computer scientist, Clif High of Predictive Linguistics, has noted that the relative humidity drops significantly after heavy aerial spraying in the Puget Sound area. He surmises that this is caused by the aluminum particles, which bind with water molecules, just like they do in an anti-perspiration formula. Furthermore, he has observed the death of native plants, due to the aluminum poisoning taking place in northwest Washington State.
In case you would like to know how to distinguish a chemtrail from a normal, water-vapor trail, the chemtrail widens after spraying and remains in the sky for a longer time; while the normal jet trails do not widen as much and they disperse more quickly. Also, the normal, jet vapor-trails do not occur unless humidity is above 70% and the temperatures are lower than about minus 76 degrees Fahrenheit, according to NOAA scientist, Thomas Schlatter. Plus, if you observe the tail-end of an airborne jet plane, the formation of a chemtrail plume begins at the tail, while the vapor trail of a normal jet begins a plane length, or so, behind the plane…
Now, the question is: how much longer will the spraying of our skies continue? Are they getting their intended results with their aero-engineering efforts? After all, they apparently started the aerial sprayings in the late 1990’s, and that coincides with the tapering off of the global warming trend that occurred between 1978 and 1998. (See the warming trend data in “An Inconvenient Fib,” listed in the Articles tab of this web site, www.environmentalsolutions.net)
And the other question is: will we finally get leadership in the USA, Canada, Australia, and Europe, who will demand answers and finally curtail these harmful activities? Only time will tell, but “we the people” of the world should keep pressuring our officials, to demand answers and to demand a cessation of the spraying, at least until the merits can be clearly demonstrated and the consequences for human health can be mitigated… We deserve to know and we deserve to be protected…Thank you and best wishes, Ron Pifer