Chemtrails Versus Contrails
You’ve seen them since you were a kid: contrails are the lines in the sky made from a plane’s exhaust system as it flies by. The only thing is, if you’re past the age of 25, when you were a child you probably didn’t see contrails last as long in the sky as they do now. What’s changed?
It was only 5 or 6 years ago that chemtrails were seen as a complete conspiracy theory. This was mainly due to a lack of data and limited public knowledge. Most whistleblowers on this topic had yet to emerge, and the subject of geoengineering was neither common discussion matter nor well understood.
What is Geoengineering?
Geoengineering is the deliberate and large-scale intervention into the Earth’s climatic system. This is done through various means, one of which is the spraying of chemicals into the atmosphere via planes. Weather modification dates back to the 1940s, when General Electric Company demonstrated that a cloud of super-cooled water droplets could be transformed into ice crystals when seeded with dry ice.
Shortly after this it was discovered that fine particles of pure silver iodide, with a crystal structure similar to that of ice, could be effectively used for global weather modification.
The Hughes Aircraft Company even has a patent dating back more than twenty years ago, to 1990, which contains 18 claims to reduce global warming through stratospheric seeding with aluminum oxide, thorium oxide, and refractory Welsbach material.
Fast forward to today, and we’re seeing even more chemicals added to the mix. For this reason you can understand why so many people are concerned.
In recent years there has been a decline in the support for weather modification research, and a tendency to move directly into operational projects.”
World Meteorological Association
What’s The Difference Between Contrails and Chemtrails?
Strictly from a visual perspective it can be a bit misleading, although there are certainly things to look for.
Regular contrails are the result of exhaust being released from engine turbines as a plane flies. Typically they are white in color and can be seen a short distance behind the plane as it passes, dissipating after about 10 seconds or so.
Chemtrails, on the other hand, come from specific planes designed to spray a particular mix of chemicals into the air in an attempt to modify the earth’s upper climate. Typically these types of trails can appear white, smoky, or even brown. They last in the sky for hours and spread wider and wider as time goes on.
As we will discuss below, the chemical compositions of these two types of trails are vastly different, with one being quite dangerous to human health and the environment.
According to M. Granger Morgan, the University and Lord Chair Professor of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University, in Developing an International Framework for Geoengineering:
I want to reiterate what John said, which is I think that any research in this area needs to be open. I think it would be truly disastrous if, you know, we discovered a few years from now that there was a “black program” that some government had stood-up to sort of learn on-the-quiet how to do this. . . .We do stuff in the stratosphere all the time, of course, and so it’s not as though the stratosphere is absolutely pristine. But you don’t want to have people going off and doing things that involve large radiative forcings; or go on for extended periods; or, for that matter, provide lots of reactive surfaces that could result in significant ozone destruction.”
If we look at SPICE, a United Kingdom government funded geoengineering research project that collaborates with the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh Bristol, some of the proposed particles to spray in the air include:
- Sulphate/Sulphuric Acid/Sulphur Dioxide
- Titania
- Silicon Carbide
- Calcium Carbonate
- Alumina
- Silica
- Zinc Oxide
They refer to it as Solar Radiation Management, and the idea is to spray these chemicals into the atmosphere in order to combat the effects of global warming by deflecting them away from the Earth’s surface.
Geoengineering has also been used for more mundane purposes, such as to modify the weather in China for the 2008 Olympics. This seems like a grossly irresponsible use of technology.
It’s also noteworthy to mention that these programs seem to be under the control of federal agencies. This means that if they are actually spraying things into the atmosphere, we would never hear about it, because it would fall under the category of ‘national security’ — a term used to justify the classification of millions of pages of documents every single year.
Government Agencies and Geoengineering
The CIA and NASA are certainly supporting the National Academy of Sciences with regards to geoengineering projects. This is quite clear in a United States government document printed at the request of the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation in November of 1978 titled Weather Modification: Programs, Problems, Policy and Potential:
In addition to specific research programs sponsored by Federal agencies, there are other functions related to weather modification which are performed in several places in the executive branch. Various federal advisory panels and committees and their staffs -established to conduct in-depth studies and prepare comprehensive reports, to provide advice or recommendations, or to coordinate Federal weather modification programs — have been housed and supported within executive departments, agencies, or offices.
Yet various individuals from all over the world have been raising concerns over this issue for years. For example, Rosalind Peterson, President and Co-Founder of the Agriculture Defense Coalition (ADC) and an ex-United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) employee, made this statement at a 2007 United Nations hearing on global warming:
One of the things that is affected by climate change is agriculture, but some of what we are seeing is manmade, but manmade in a different way than you may guess. Weather modification programs, experimental ones done by private companies, done by the US government, done by states across the United States, are underway; there’s more than 50 of them in operation across the United States. All of these impact agriculture because they change the micro-climates needed for agriculture to survive. None of these programs that I know of today, and this all public record, are available at anytime with oversight. . . . International corporations are modifying our weather all the time, and they’re modifying it in ways that cover thousands and thousands of square miles. Most of it is chemically altered, so that what happens is that we are putting chemicals, ground based chemicals that are shot into the air, or chemicals coming from airplanes, that change and modify our weather.
A 1996 report conducted by top military personnel in the U.S., titled Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025, reveals the supposed urgency to implement these programs:
Current demographic, economic environmental trends will create global stresses that provide the impetus necessary for many countries or groups to turn this weather-modification ability into a capability.
In the United States, weather-modification will likely become a part of national security policy with both domestic and international applications. Our government will pursue such a policy, depending on its interests, at various levels.
Dr. Marvin Herndon, a nuclear chemist, geochemist cosmochemist — most noted for deducing the composition of the inner core of Earth (it being nickel silicide rather than partially crystallized nickel-iron metal) — has published a groundbreaking paper in the peer-reviewed journal Current Science (Indian Academy of Sciences) titled Aluminum poisoning of humanity and Earth’s biota by clandestine geoengineering activity: implications for India which demonstrates how dangerous geoengineering is to the health of both humans and the environment. The abstract reads as follows:
In response to an urgent call through an article in Current Science for assistance to understand the geological association of high aluminum mobility with human health in the Ganga Alluvial Plain, I describe evidence of clandestine geoengineering activity that has occurred for at least 15 years, and which has escalated sharply in the last two years. The geoengineering activity via tanker-jet aircraft emplaces a non-natural, toxic substance in the Earth’s atmosphere which with rainwater liberates highly mobile aluminum. Further, I present evidence that the toxic substance is coal combustion fly ash. Clandestine dispersal of coal fly ash and the resulting liberation of highly mobile aluminum, I posit, is an underlying cause of the widespread and pronounced increase in neurological diseases and as well as the currently widespread and increasing debilitation of Earth’s biota. Recommendations are made for verifying whether the evidence presented here is applicable to the Ganga Alluvial Plain. (source)(source)
The paper goes on to discuss and cite publications which have detected heavy metals like aluminum, barium, and strontium in rainwater, fly ash, and more. During the period between July 2011 and November 2012, for example, 73 rainwater samples were collected and analysed for aluminum and barium; 71 were collected from 60 different locations in Germany, 1 from France, and 1 from Austria. Aluminum was detected in 77% of the rainwater samples, and concentrations of barium and Strontium were also very high.
Dr. Rose Cairns, PhD., who belongs to the University of Leeds School of Earth and Environment, published a paper in the peer-reviewed journal Geophysical Journal titled “Climates of suspicion: ‘chemtrail’ conspiracy narratives and the international politics of geoengineering.” She is also currently undertaking research into the Governance of Geoengineering as part of a multidisciplinary collaborative project between Sussex University, UCL, and Oxford University. The project examines the social, ethical political implications of climate geoengineering proposals.
In her paper, titled Climates of suspicion: ‘chemtrail’ conspiracy narratives and the international politics of geoengineering, she describes developments in mainstream academic and political discourse regarding geoengineering, and how climate modification, also being discussed by the citizens of the world (who use the term “chemtrails”), is having devastating ecological and health effects worldwide. According to her paper:
Understanding the emerging politics of geoengineering, and taking seriously claims regarding the importance of public participation, requires an understanding of the whole discursive landscape around ideas of global climate control — including marginal ideas such as those held by chemtrail activists. Ignoring or dismissing these discourses out of hand as pathological or paranoid is to ignore potentially revealing insights about the emerging politics of geoengineering.
She goes on to write that her “analysis suggests a number of ways in which the chemtrails narrative may contain important insights and implications for the emerging politics of geoengineering that cannot be dismissed out of hand as ‘paranoid’ or ‘pathological.’ ”
As you can see, this topic is far from a conspiracy theory. Geoengineering has the concerned attention of many important and informed people worldwide.
Additional Resources
- A Recommended National Program in Weather Modification
- Contrail Science, Its Impact on Climate and Weather Manipulation Programs Conducted by the United States and Its Allies
- “Modification of Cirrus clouds to reduce global warming,” Environmental Research Letters Vol. 4 No. 4, 30 Oct 2009. Available by subscription
- World Meteorological Organization Documents On Weather Modification. Approved By the Commission For Atmospheric Sciences Management Group, Second Session, Oslo, Norway, 24-26 September 2007
About the Author
Professor Finds $21 Trillion Missing from Government Budget
A Michigan State University economics professor discovered $21 trillion unaccounted for in the federal budget starting in 1998 until the end of fiscal year 2015. Professor Mark Skidmore enlisted the help of his graduate students to examine government documents from the Department of Defense and Housing and Urban Development to uncover an unfathomable amount of unauthorized spending.
According to the Constitution, all federal spending must be voted on and authorized by Congress each fiscal year. Any discrepancies found in the way of unauthorized spending would normally elicit a congressional hearing and investigation.
Skidmore and his students’ analysis used publicly available government documents from the two agencies’ websites to expose this inconsistency. Shortly after Skidmore published his findings, both agencies removed those documents from public access.
While no congressional committee tied to the budget had signaled the would open an inquiry prior to Skidmore’s findings, the Department of Defense allowed a first ever department-wide audit by independent firm Ernst & Young.
Skidmore says that sometimes there can be discrepancies meant to account for inadequate transactions, but those adjustments are usually no more than 1 percent of the total budget.
The Army’s annual budget for FY 2015 was $122 billion, meaning that an adjustment for inadequate transactions might be around $1.2 billion. The Army’s actual adjustments for FY 2015 were $6.5 trillion – 54 times what it was authorized to spend.
Out of thousands of documents spanning that period, Skidmore was able to find Army budget documentation for 13 of those years, saying its budget represented roughly $11.5 trillion of the missing $21 trillion. He also called these accounting documents “opaque,” saying it was not clear what the unauthorized adjustments were for.
That amount of unauthorized, “missing” money is equivalent to about $65,000 for every person in America. The government estimated that the federal deficit sits at around $20 trillion, an entire $1 trillion less than what Skidmore found missing in these adjustments.
So, what exactly is this money going towards? The revelation of a $56 billion Pentagon black budget for secret military, space, and surveillance programs has led some to speculate that it could be merely a fraction of what’s actually being spent.
Skidmore said he reached out to the Office of Inspector General, the Government Accountability Office, and Congressional Budget Office, asking if maybe the $6.5 trillion figure was a mistake and was instead supposed to be $6.5 billion. It was confirmed that $6.5 trillion was the correct adjustment. Though, when he asked if any of these agencies were alarmed or considering this a red flag, his questions were met with slight confusion and little concern.
Though Skidmore has reserved his speculation as to what he thinks the money might be going toward, it’s clear that either someone knows that a large amount of taxpayer dollars is being spent without authorized permission, or the accounting practices of those in charge of massive amounts of public money are that flawed.
