New Report Challenges Basic Assumptions About Climate Change
A new report has been published which challenges certain basic assumptions about climate change. The report has been written by an independent lay researcher, and is backed by over 20 signatories from diverse backgrounds. The report presents significant ground-based and space-based data which indicates that ongoing illegal and unacknowledged aerosol spraying from aircraft could be affecting our climate. Copies of the report have been sent to Greenpeace, the Civil Aviation Authority, The Royal Air Force and DEFRA, challenging them to investigate the data themselves.
Derbyshire, UK (PRWEB) May 19, 2007 -- An independent lay researcher, with a background in Software Engineering, from Derbyshire, UK, has published a new report which documents ongoing illegal aerosol spraying activities which could be affecting our climate, our health or both. This activity can be seen in multiple, repeated instances of persistent aircraft trails across our skies.
Andrew Johnson said that, like most other people, he assumed, for many years, that the trails were just ordinary vapour trails (called 'contrails').
"In 2004, I began to notice that these trails did not behave like contrails at all. Then, on 10th June 2005, I witnessed a grid of aircraft trails right outside my window, just before sunset," Andrew has included copies of 2 photographs of this 'grid' in the report. "I sent the picture to the local paper and they published it. I also had it published on a popular website in the USA and I received quite a number of e-mail responses to the picture. Most of the responses described my picture as being of a grid of 'chemtrails' and quite a few people sent me similar pictures they had taken." Andrew then decided to write an article about this 'grid' picture and what the background to it seemed to be. The article was published, online, in September 2005 on the website of Phenomena Magazine.
"Since then, I have continued to photograph and study the chemtrails. I made some "time-lapse" videos using a webcam and this clearly showed the trails did not behave like ordinary 'contrails' or even clouds. I found that several other people have done this, including a former TV weatherman from Idaho, called Scott Stevens. I became more and more convinced that something was wrong - the time lapse footage clearly shows the difference between contrails and chemtrails. On 4th February this year, in a period of two and a half hours, I filmed 42 aircraft leaving long-lasting trails over the centre of Derby. I edited the film clips together (which were all time-stamped) and posted the results on the Internet. I reference this video in my report, and have included a copy on DVD."
Later, David Griffin, a Virtual Learning Environment Materials author based in Nottingham, contacted Andrew to share a weather satellite photo he had found, taken on the same day, which clearly showed the chemtrails.
David, who is a signatory to the report, said, "For me, the fact many of us around the country notice particularly heavy days of this phenomena and have recently managed to link the activity via satellite imaging systems, is some sort of concrete evidence that something is going on here. This evidence alone should be sufficient to at least initiate an enquiry of some sort."
Andrew explains, in the report, that the Physics of the formation of aircraft vapour trails are fairly straightforward. "On every cold winter's day, when we breathe out, we can see our breath. The reason is that our breath is warm and the winter air is cold. Tiny droplets of water vapour condense out of the warm air to form 'clouds of visible breath', before the warm air quickly cools and the 'clouds' disappear again. This is very similar to the process that is happening about 30,000 feet in the air, when hot exhaust gases from jet engines heat the air. Water droplets condense out of the exhaust fumes and from the cooler surrounding air and form a contrail - an abbreviation of condensation trail. Even in ideal conditions, these trails should become invisible after 1 or 2 minutes. This would therefore make the formation of a persistent grid of trails (like the one shown in my photograph) impossible without additional substances being sprayed or emitted from the aircraft".
Over the last few months, Andrew said that he has found a number of other people share his concerns and they have therefore agreed to be signatories to the report. For example, David Sherlock of Swanley, Kent said "I have been researching the phenomenon of aircraft releasing chemtrails into our skies. I noticed that these exhaust trails were not dispersing. After much research I discovered some startling facts as to the composition of the trails. I fully encourage more investigation into this matter."
In the report, Andrew outlines some of the work of former US Department of Defence Research Scientist Clifford Carnicom. Carnicom has tested samples of material which appear to be present in chemtrails and he has discovered Barium compounds. Samples of air from Los Angeles, for example, contained increased levels of Potassium and Calcium.
Brian Dovey, of East Tilbury said, "Over the last couple of months I have taken pictures with an old compact camera of these long trails, disturbingly most do not dissipate as contrails do, these linger and fan out over wide areas of sky usually resulting in a grey 'smogging' effect, later in the day. I really would like some answers to this phenomenon from someone in government circles."
Albert Shine, a former Aircraft Technician from Morecambe, Lancashire, said "My background is in aviation, thus I am very familiar with many current helicopters, civil airliners and some military types. As regards this phenomenon, which I have dubbed designer pollution, I was at first sceptical, until I began to observe chemtrails over Morecambe." He added "Many more people now suffer a wide spectrum of breathing related complaints (asthma is now quite common), frequent flu-like symptoms and lingering colds etc and this 'designer pollution' may be a contributory cause. It is vital that this matter is brought to as wide a section of the public as possible and it should merit headlines in the media".
As regards the report which Andrew has produced, Shine said, "The challenge to the authorities ought to be a thunderous roar demanding exposure of just what is going on. What Andrew Johnson is seeking to do, and the calm and meticulous submission that he has prepared is an excellent start."
Gil Williamson of Masham, North Yorkshire, a former member of the Armed Forces said "If the information from the US is correct, this spraying is very harmful to our health and should be stopped immediately. I certainly have not given my permission to be sprayed on, and judging by previous secret experiments unearthed by the Guardian Newspaper, this is a total breach of our democratic rights and should be stopped immediately."
Andrew points out that "Gil is quite correct in that declassified documents show that we have been sprayed before - in the 1950's and 1960's - with biological agents and I mention this matter in the report."
Nick Buchanan, a Lecturer in North West England, stated "I would like to know if the phenomena of chemtrails is what has led to the otherwise inexplicable rise in asthma of the last two decades. Proportions are now epidemic."
Another signatory to the report, Belinda McKenzie - a London-based language specialist - said "In the 1960's and 1970's, I was an avid sun-bather and, in warm weather, was almost always outside whenever the sun was. I never noticed anything like these trails then and I am therefore convinced the ones we are seeing now, so regularly, have some other cause than ordinary air traffic."
Andrew responds, "Many people are concerned about this issue, but are faced with a wall of denial by all Official Bodies - including non-partisan environmental organizations. People will undoubtedly criticize the report I have published because it has no 'Official Backing', but the report contains some very basic, easily verifiable data which proves things are not as the should be. I would argue that the report is truly independent - as it has been produced without any funding and it has been reviewed and agreed on by a 'lay jury' of over 20 people. We hear a great deal in the news about 'climate change' and 'global warming', yet all official bodies who discuss these issues ignore the sort of data presented in this report. This leads me to believe that these bodies must have drawn incorrect conclusions, which should now be subject to immediate and urgent review. Legislation has now been passed which assumes certain causes for climate change and we are increasingly subject to 'scare stories' about this. The data in the report adds a new dimension to this equation and is therefore very important in that regard alone. I encourage anyone and everyone to review the report for themselves and collect their own data too. Unless the illegal spraying suddenly stops, people will easily be able to verify the reality of this activity for themselves."
Andrew explains, in the report, that the Physics of the formation of aircraft vapour trails are fairly straightforward. "On every cold winter's day, when we breathe out, we can see our breath. The reason is that our breath is warm and the winter air is cold. Tiny droplets of water vapour condense out of the warm air to form 'clouds of visible breath', before the warm air quickly cools and the 'clouds' disappear again. This is very similar to the process that is happening about 30,000 feet in the air, when hot exhaust gases from jet engines heat the air. Water droplets condense out of the exhaust fumes and from the cooler surrounding air and form a contrail - an abbreviation of condensation trail. Even in ideal conditions, these trails should become invisible after 1 or 2 minutes. This would therefore make the formation of a persistent grid of trails (like the one shown in my photograph) impossible without additional substances being sprayed or emitted from the aircraft".
Why should the droplets disappear after a few minutes? Where is is scientific proof of this? What is the difference between water droplets from an exhaust at that altitude and those of cirrus clouds? Assumptions like this make for very bad science. Where are the tough questions on this topic?
Andrew Johnson wrote:
In the report, Andrew outlines some of the work of former US Department of Defence Research Scientist Clifford Carnicom. Carnicom has tested samples of material which appear to be present in chemtrails and he has discovered Barium compounds. Samples of air from Los Angeles, for example, contained increased levels of Potassium and Calcium.
Barium is released to the air by literally hundreds of manufacturing processes including glass, brick and paint manufacture. It is also the 14th most abundant element in the earth and concentrations in the air vary naturally across the globe. If you burn oil, coal and kerosine you will also release barium. As for potassium and calcium in the air, the dangers are zero!
Half of all radiation absorbed by humans in the UK comes from radon gas which occurs naturally in the ground in this country. It causes lung cancer. New homes in high radon areas have to be built with radon protection. Wouldn't it be better to promote radon awareness rather than use psuedoscience to satisfy silly conspiracy theories about climate change and chemtrails?
Why should the droplets disappear after a few minutes?
In the chemistry of the fuel. Mentioned in the report and in the press release in brief.
Quote:
Where is is scientific proof of this?
It's to do with the constituent of the exhaust gases - as it says in my report. CO2, CO, SO2 and H2O, like. At the petrol pumps it says "low sulphur" - get it? CO2, CO and SO2 do not "condense out" of the atmosphere (even at 30K feet - hence the "stuff" you see is water vapour (or, that's what should be seen, but it cannot persist).
Quote:
What is the difference between water droplets from an exhaust at that altitude and those of cirrus clouds? Assumptions like this make for very bad science. Where are the tough questions on this topic?
See above. It's not bad science and it isn't an assumption.
Additionally, look at the variabiltity of the appearance of trails etc etc - plenty of other aspects of evidence to consider.
Check the report and you'll see SOME of this other evidence. If you don't believe it, that's fine - but your belief that the Chemtrail phenomenon is just caused ordinary air traffic is incorrect and does not align with other physical laws, however many times you repeat such statements. _________________ Andrew
It's to do with the constituent of the exhaust gases - as it says in my report. CO2, CO, SO2 and H2O, like. At the petrol pumps it says "low sulphur" - get it? CO2, CO and SO2 do not "condense out" of the atmosphere (even at 30K feet - hence the "stuff" you see is water vapour (or, that's what should be seen, but it cannot persist).
This doesn't answer my question. Clouds are made of water droplets. Under the right conditions at high altitude they freeze and remain in the air. They are called cirrus clouds. Are you saying that under the same condtions, water from exhaust fumes will not do the same thing? Where is the science? It isn't in the report you refer to.
Just saying that I am wrong and you are right is not good enough. My dad's bigger than your dad and all that. Yawn, yawn.
Didn't we have this argument before and you just cried off because you had no proof? Just answer this tough question - why will water droplets from exhaust fumes not freeze in the air at 30,000 feet?
Have you considered the link between the amount of particulate pollution already in the atmosphere (especially above towns and cities) and the persistence of con-trails? Water vapour tends to cling to particles of pollution.
Couple this with the rapid rise in air-traffic in the last two decades and you might just have a reasonable sounded hypothesis that explains this phenomenon without requiring conjecture about government conspiracies to poison us. _________________ "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
This doesn't answer my question. Clouds are made of water droplets. Under the right conditions at high altitude they freeze and remain in the air. They are called cirrus clouds. Are you saying that under the same condtions, water from exhaust fumes will not do the same thing? Where is the science? It isn't in the report you refer to.
Just saying that I am wrong and you are right is not good enough. My dad's bigger than your dad and all that. Yawn, yawn.
Ridicule and insults. Hmmm oh well.
Yes, as I point out in the report, time-lapse photography shows the chemtrails do not billow and re-form as clouds do. They are emitted, last AT LEAST 18 minutes without changing shape and then dissipate/fade out.
Also, the variabiltiy of the phenomenon under conditions where cirrus clouds appear the same mean chemtrails are NOT cirrus clouds.
Check the evidence ALL of it, not just one aspect which you choose to insult and ridicule.
Or are you quite happy that someone is polluting our atmosphere (people likely connected at some level with the 9/11 Perps)?. But oh no, it's just another "fantasy conspiracy like 9/11" ay James? _________________ Andrew
Or are you quite happy that someone is polluting our atmosphere
I was just wondering - if this is indeed happening, it seems inevitable the perps would be getting big lungfuls of nasty too, not to mention their gran in Cleethorpes. Wouldn't spraying stuff over a populated area affect 'friend and foe' alike? So what would be the rationale for defecating on your own doorstep? _________________ It's a man's life in MOSSAD
And so JamesC, you have been mildly rude (not the first time) but I have tried to answer your question. Perhaps you can answer one for me:
Are you willing to reveal any details about yourself? Will you reveal as many details about yourself as I have about myself?
If you will not, why? If my science is bad/wrong and I am lying, then you have nothing to fear have you? You must be right about this, so you can easily say who you are with no fear. Isn't that right?
While your thinking about your answer, have a look at another comparison here:
If you were in charge of chemtrails you would ensure your habitat was not sprayed, same asd with Rockefeller he did not have conventional cancer treatment cos he no it does not work
I was just wondering - if this is indeed happening, it seems inevitable the perps would be getting big lungfuls of nasty too, not to mention their gran in Cleethorpes. Wouldn't spraying stuff over a populated area affect 'friend and foe' alike? So what would be the rationale for defecating on your own doorstep?
That is indeed a very good question, to which I don't know the answer. It is one of the questions which weighs the chemtrail phenomena towards the "weather modification" reason. One possible answer is that the perps know what the "antidote" is and therefore take it on a regular basis - a la CIPRO/anthrax?
Some people have suggested that at the moment, they are "inert" - they're just getting us used to them and using subliminal messages to make us ignore them. For example:
Andrew if you're really serious about this stuff I presume you've already been in touch with actual scientists who might be able to tell you whether your concerns have any validity.
Dr. David Travis of the University of Wisconsin is an expert on contrails and their effect on our climate, perhaps you should contact him? _________________ "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
Insults! What insults. I have asked a perfectly reasonable question. One you choose to ignore and have ignored time and time again. One which I'd still like to have answered by the way.
Andrew Johnson wrote:
Yes, as I point out in the report, time-lapse photography shows the chemtrails do not billow and re-form as clouds do. They are emitted, last AT LEAST 18 minutes without changing shape and then dissipate/fade out.
You see, this is why I have a problem with your argument and in fact it is typical of all your arguments on this site, i.e, it is based upon your assumption of how you believe things should behave. The word cloud sums up a picture of a white, billowing, cotton wool looking object passing across the sky under the influence of the wind. But being more specific (something you fail to be), there are many types of clouds and cirrus (high altitude) clouds are not billowing and usually move extremely slowly, remaining in the air for hours without much change. They are thin and wispy and can often look like spreading contrails. They are formed from frozen water vapour which is strange because you are suggesting the very same water vapour from plane exhausts won't freeze. Hmmmm!
Now I don't know about you but if I was wanting to pollute the atmosphere I'd want something which dissipates in the air within seconds rather than hanging for minutes or hours on end.
Andrew Johnson wrote:
Also, the variabiltiy of the phenomenon under conditions where cirrus clouds appear the same mean chemtrails are NOT cirrus clouds.
Proof please. Again, just saying something cannot be something else is not good enough. Providing absolutely no proof is something Jones and Tarpley do.
Andrew Johnson wrote:
Or are you quite happy that someone is polluting our atmosphere (people likely connected at some level with the 9/11 Perps)?. But oh no, it's just another "fantasy conspiracy like 9/11" ay James?
Can I remind you that I am not a debunker of the 9/11 conspiracy or have you failed to notice that. I have absolute conviction that 9/11 was an inside job even if I don't conform to NPT or laser beam weaponry. But just because such an event took place doesn't mean it formed part of a wider plan by the PTB to control us. There is no proof for this. I believe 9/11 happened as a justification for entering into war with the middle east as well as improving homeland security at a time of global energy crisis. It was a massive media stunt designed to be watched by and influence millions of people, (have you not read the "Re-building Americas Defences" report). But, if it was just one of many weapons in the arsenal of the PTB to control us then it failed because it has raised in the psyche of the common man the concept that there is a war and we must be ready to fight. Surely, if the PTB/Illuminati really wants to make prisoners of us all then their aim would be to passify and nullify us quietly and secretly before killing us off. After all, they'd rather not have dissenters talking on a forum like this would they? "Go back to bed America, you're government is in control" (Bill Hicks).
Andrew Johnson wrote:
One possible answer is that the perps know what the "antidote" is and therefore take it on a regular basis - a la CIPRO/anthrax?
Oh give me strength. This is just pure conjecture on your part. I get the impression you live in fantasy land.
Andrew Johnson wrote:
Are you willing to reveal any details about yourself? Will you reveal as many details about yourself as I have about myself?
If you will not, why? If my science is bad/wrong and I am lying, then you have nothing to fear have you? You must be right about this, so you can easily say who you are with no fear. Isn't that right?
What difference does it make as to who I am or who you are. We are members of a forum not public figures. Just because you promote your name and address to all and sundry and I do not doesn't mean you are correct and I am wrong.
However, if I were to live in fanatsy land, which I don't, I could take issue with your constant self-promotion and desire to attach your name and address to any piece of writing you post on here or elsewhere. From what I have read about the role of a patsy and the way they operate, they have two main aims. One is to make noise and disturbance. The other is to make themselves known as best as possible to as many people as they can so as to link themselves firmly to the crime. Are you a patsy Andrew? Your constant promotion of chemtrails and NPT coupled with your desire to support the most weird and vile members of this forum despite your position does makes me wonder. But as I said, I don't live in a fantasy bubble so I'm just thinking aloud you understand.
So, can you give me the science concerning what happens to water vapour from aircraft exhausts at high altitude? If you can categorically prove that it will not freeze and won't sit in the air like the same water vapour which creates cirrus clouds then I will believe you. But just to show lots of pictures and film clips of contrails and state they cannot be contrails is just plain daft. It also begs the question, which I have also asked before and you haven't answered, why use a few thousand planes to pollute the skies when contaminating the water supply or petrol/diesel of land based motor vehicles would be far more effective?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
