The New Age Of Bio-Warfare
Research Compilation By Dr. Robin Loxley
Weather modification is also commonly known as cloud seeding, cloud
modification, atmospheric resource management, and precipitation management.
Weather Modification, Inc. specializes and excels in all aspects of this water
Specifically, we offer a complete range of services from turn-key operational programs for rainfall increase (rain enhancement), snow pack augmentation, hail damage mitigation (hail suppression), and fog clearing (fog dissipation), to technical assistance and/or technology transfer for all of these.
In addition, we can provide complete weather radar services, including interfaces with TITAN full-sky radar data archival software, a complete line of proven and FAA-approved seeding equipment, seeding aircraft, atmospheric research instrumentation, and aircraft modification for these purposes.
We have been conducting weather operations and research since 1961, and constantly strive to improve all aspects of these atmospheric water management tools. We invite visitors to our Fargo, North Dakota facilities. Just e-mail us at email@example.com, and we will be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
Patrick H. Sweeney - President
Patrick H. Sweeney is the current president of Weather Modification Inc., a worldwide atmospheric research and cloud seeding company conducting business in Europe, Africa, Middle East, Asia, South America and North America. He also serves as chief executive officer of Fargo Jet Center Inc., a full service aviation service company based at Hector International Airport, Fargo, ND.
Upon high school graduation, Mr. Sweeney enlisted in the United States Navy in 1970 and received an honorable discharge in 1973. Mr. Sweeney received his Bachelor of Science degree from the University of North Dakota (UND), Grand Forks, ND, in 1978 with a major in Industrial Technology. He also received his Commercial Pilot instrument and multi-engine training while at UND. He began his career with Weather Modification Inc. in 1975 as a summer electronics technician in Bowman, ND. In 1979 he was named vice president and became a stockholder of the company. Upon gaining controlling interest of the business in 1992, he moved the operation to Fargo and was named president. In 1995 he established its sister company, Fargo Jet Center Inc. As president of these organizations, Mr. Sweeney oversees all company operations and is responsible for all technical and aircraft operations.
Mr. Sweeney is a certified operator and past president of the Weather Modification Association and is a member of the North Dakota Water Users Association, the North Dakota Pilots Association as well as the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association.
Since the early 1960s, Weather Modification Inc. has been a worldwide leader in the field of cloud modification, atmospheric research and technology transfer for private and public insurance companies, water resource management organizations and federal and state research organizations. Weather Modification, Inc. is committed to staying ahead of developments in weather modification, aviation, meteorology, cloud physics and atmospheric research to achieve the maximum benefits of weather modification technology and its effects on water supplies around the world. Weather Modification Inc. works extensively with Fargo Jet Center Inc. to maintain and modify all 33 owned aircraft including its flagship, a Model 35 Learjet.
After realizing the need for improved designs in pyrotechnic flares and chemicals for the cloud seeding industry, Mr. Sweeney formed Ice Crystal Engineering LLC in March 1999 to design, manufacture and market new cloud seeding pyrotechnics. Today, Ice Crystal Engineering LLC is the largest producer of cloud seeding pyrotechnics in the world.
Under the direction and influence of Mr. Sweeney, Weather Modification Inc. has always taken an entrepreneurial approach with employees. Employees are given a job with minimal supervision in a secure, stable environment. The organization has grown from 12 employees in 1992 to over 130 to date. A 20% annual employment growth during the next three years is expected. Weather Modification, Inc. annually budgets for training – both internally and externally – encouraging employees to enhance current skills as well as develop new ones.
Patrick Sweeney and Weather Modification, Inc. have been featured in articles in Canadian Geographic and The Furrow magazines, the Export-Import Bank of the United States Annual Report FY 2001 and a segment of the Discovery Channel’s Future Sciences television series.
While attending the Governor’s International Trade Conference event in Fargo in September 2002, Mr. Sweeney was presented the 2002 North Dakota Exporter of the Year award by North Dakota Governor John Hoeven and sponsored by the North Dakota District Export Council, the Department of Commerce and the North Dakota Manufacturing Extension Partnership. During the conference Mr. Sweeney participated on a panel discussion with other state leaders and business people who have a large interest in cultivating North Dakota’s presence in the domestic and international marketplace.
In spring 2001, Mr. Sweeney was a recipient of the “2001 Business Innovator of the Year” award. This award, given by the University of North Dakota’s Center for Innovation, recognizes the new generation of entrepreneurial leaders who are changing the way business is being done, discovering new approaches, exploring new frontiers and building new operations through innovation. In addition, Weather Modification Inc. was nominated to receive the “2000 Small Business of the Year” award from the Fargo-Moorhead business community and the Chamber of Commerce of Fargo-Moorhead. In 1997 he was awarded the “Small Business Exporter of the Year” by North Dakota’s U.S. Small Business Administration.
Weather Modification, Inc., (WMI) offers a variety of fully functional aircraft to meet all cloud seeding project and cloud physics research needs.
The type of aircraft best-suited for any particular project is determined by the:
a. size of the intended target area
b. terrain near and within the target area
c. temperature regimes during which the program is to operate (warm season or cold season)
d. expected frequency and duration of seeding operations
e. the extent of the cloud physics and atmospheric aerosol-measurement instrumentation to be flown.
Though proficient at adapting most any aircraft type for cloud seeding and/or cloud physics applications, WMI has found by experience that there are five aircraft types especially well-suited to these needs. These aircraft types have proven themselves repeatedly, based on performance, endurance, dependability, economy, availability of parts, payload, dual-engine redundancy, and the ability to operate in aircraft icing environments.
Primarily because we conduct operations whenever suitable clouds are present, day or night, we require that our aircraft be multi-engine. In the event of an engine failure, the aircraft can then return safely to an airport.
WMI is very experienced in aircraft modifications. We have routinely completed FAA-approved installations of seeding equipment and cloud physics instrumentation, as well as sampling equipment for atmospheric chemistry on aerosols.
Our extensive experience includes small, twin-engine, piston aircraft through King Airs and Lear Jets.
Whatever your instrumentation or aircraft needs, WMI can do the job in compliance with all FAA rules and regulations.
Weather Modification, Inc. offers a wide variety of aircraft modifications for special purposes. WMI manufactures and installs cloud seeding equipment for all purposes. Equipment types for airborne operations include pyrotechnic flare racks, dry ice dispensers, and seeding generators.
We have extensive experience installing cloud physics instrumentation and aircraft data systems. Additional instrumentation for atmospheric chemistry and to quantify atmospheric aerosols is also available. We also do special-purpose aircraft modifications for lidar, special purpose radars, and photogrammetry.
If you need an aircraft for any special purpose, contact us. We would be pleased to assist you in whatever custom modifications and/or installations you require.
For additional information, see the links to the right.
Weather Modification, Inc. excels in providing airborne atmospheric research platforms, and also offers diverse remote-sensing instrumentation. We have many years' experience installing cloud physics instrumentation and aircraft data systems. Additional instrumentation for atmospheric chemistry and to quantify atmospheric aerosols is available. We also do special-purpose aircraft modifications.
WMI's Learjet 35A is shown here, rigged for cloud microphysical measurements. The Lear is also used as a high performance on-top seeder for hail mitigation damage control, and most recently as the dropsonde aircraft for BAMEX, the Bow Echo and Mesoscale Vortex Experiment.
We configure and install all our instrumentation and the aircraft data acquisition systems. Each system is specifically designed to make the measurements needed by the client, and includes those instruments best-suited to the client’s needs. The most commonly used instruments are described briefly below.
1. Cloud Liquid Water Measurement System
The WMI-LWC100 cloud liquid water measurement system consists of the control unit, the power supply, and a sensor head (shown here). The sensor head holds the wire-wound element between two prongs that position it three inches away from the outside aircraft skin. The sensing element, in conjunction with a remotely mounted power supply, is interfaced with the display module. The display is mounted within the WMI-DAS-300 data acquisition system and is interfaced with the computer for recording and displaying liquid water content measurements.
2. Total Temperature Sensor
The WMI-RT105 is a de-iced platinum resistance-type total temperature sensor for high performance aircraft applications where accurate total temperature measurements are required. The sensing element is protected from small foreign particles such as sand, ice and insects. The sensor features a de-icing heater that dissipates 270 watts under in-flight conditions with 28 volts DC applied. The WMI-RT105 is interfaced with the WMI-DAS-300 and will accurately measure and display temperatures from -50°C to +50°C.
3. Dew Point Temperature Sensor
The WMI-137 Dew Point Sensor is a complete optical dew point system for monitoring in-flight atmospheric dew and frost points. It is the only aircraft instrument that provides two stages of thermoelectric cooling. It can reach frost points between –60°C and -70°C, depending on mounting configuration and operating conditions. No auxiliary coolants are required. Included in the WMI-137 system are a water-excluding inlet probe and a pressure tap for monitoring static pressure. A digital display with resolution to 0.1°C is provided as well as an analog D.C. voltage output that is interfaced with the WMI-DAS-300 for display and recording purposes.
4. Cloud Particle Probe
Study of complete microphysics requires knowledge of the sizes, number, and shapes of the hydrometeors (water and ice particles) within the cloud. This probe does exactly that. A laser shines from one “arm” of the probe onto a row of photodetectors in the other (see photo to the right). When any particle passes between the arms, it shadows the detectors, and high-speed processing records which of the 32-element detector array were shadowed, and in which order. The image shape can then be accurately reconstructed, and the maximum dimension determined.
The WMI-2D2-C two-dimensional optical array probe (OAP) stores complete two-dimensional images of encountered particles for shape analysis in addition to one-dimensional sizing.
5. Precipitation Probe
This probe complements the Cloud Particle Probe, and is recommended for cloud microphysics studies requires knowledge of the sizes, number, and shapes of larger hydrometeors within and beneath the cloud. A laser shines from one “arm” of the probe onto a row of photodetectors in the other (see photo to the right). Physical measurement principles are the same. The arms are spread to increase the depth of field, and allow a larger sampling volume to ensure representative measurement of the larger, but fewer, precipitation-sized particles. The image shapes are reconstructed, and the maximum dimensions determined. The number of particles of each size and shape are also tabulated.
The 2D2-P Precipitation Probe is an aircraft-borne instrument that utilizes photo diode array and photo detection electronics.
6. Cloud Droplet Spectrometer Probe
The Foreward-Scattering Spectrometer Probe or FSSP, is used to measure the sizes and numbers of cloud droplets. This instrument focuses specifically on these very small droplets, and does not measure larger (precipitation-sized) drops, or ice particles. The primary purpose of this instrument is to determine in real-time the character of the sampled clouds, that is, whether they be maritime or continental.
The WMI-FSSP-100 is a one-dimensional laser probe that provides sizing of particles up to 45 microns diameter. The probe outputs a parallel digital size code along with a strobe pulse for each acceptable particle encountered. The output is interfaced with the WMI-DAS-300 for collecting, displaying and recording the data provided. The available ranges of the WMI-FSSP-100 are controlled by the WMI-DAS-300 and can easily be selected by the user.
7. Instantaneous Vertical Speed Indicator or Linear Acceleration
An aircraft configured for level flight will climb or descend only as the air through which it is flying rises or falls. In studying clouds, we take advantage of this fact by flying cloud penetrations with the aircraft at constant attitude. The pilot does not worry about maintaining constant altitude, but rather allows the aircraft’s motion to be sensed and recorded, thus providing a measure of cloud up- and downdrafts. Updrafts are particularly important, for they mark the location of the developing cloud volume, produce additional cloud condensate, and are often used to transport seeding agent upward into cloud when treatment is done from cloud base. The WMI-BV4.0 is an electric instantaneous rate of climb indicator that features smooth action, rapid response rate and very high accuracy.
Passive Cavity Aerosol Spectrometer Probe
The Passive Cavity Aerosol Spectrometer Probe (PCASP) is an airborne probe, similar in size to the Cloud Particle Probe, Precipitation Probe, and FSSP (see Cloud Physics instrumentation). A sampling cone extends out from the forward end cap, oriented in the direction of flight. A hollow rake at the rear of the cone creates a venturi that draws a large volume of air flow into the small opening at the tip of the cone during flight. The expanding cone decelerates the input ram air to become iso-kinetic, with the small volume of actual sample air flow drawn straight into the inlet jet. The WMI-PCASP has 15 size channels, and measures particles from 0.10 to 3.00 microns in diameter.
Cloud Condensation Nuclei Counter
The Cloud Condensation Nucleus Counter (CCNC) used by WMI is designed for the measurement of the activity spectra of condensation nuclei over the range of supersaturation from approximately 0.2 to 2%. This range is not hardware limited and to a large degree depends on the calibration techniques and the relative concentrations and activity of the nuclei in the same.
The WMI-CCNC employes a static diffusion chamber in which a controlled supersaturation is created by means of a temperature gradient between two plates having moist surfaces. The instrument incorporates an automatic light scattering detection system, which is calibrated by photographic means and includes aerosol-handling capabilities.
Instrument control is provided by an internal microprocessor, which provides temperature control and state sequencing necessary to acquire and process successive samples. A standard (RS-232) serial port is provided to allow system parameter modification as well as system diagnostic capabilities.
Our most basic data recording package allows very affordable recording of aircraft position (latitude, longitude, and altitude), as well as the status (off or on) of cloud seeding equipment. Outside air temperature and cloud liquid water content can also be recorded. If needed, all these data can be telemetered to a ground site in real-time via radio modem.
The M-300 data acquisition system is the latest in high-speed, high-volume data collection platforms, handling input from all kinds of sensors. The power of the M-300 ensures high-frequency recording of data from a full instrumentation suite, including position, aircraft motion (heading, true air speed, pitch, roll), temperature, dew point, pressure, cloud liquid water content, derived and observed winds, and data streams from cloud physics, aerosol, and chemistry instrumentation, including FSSP, PCASP, 2D-C, 2D-P, IN, CN and CCN counters, and NOx, O3, and CO detectors, among others.
Atmospheric chemistry is of interest to many, especially those studying cloud development and air pollution. Certain gases are usually of greatest interest in this regard, among them ozone (O3), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and nitrous oxides (NOx).
· Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) Analyzer
· Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Analyzer
· Ozone (O3) Analyzer
WMI offers a wide array of cloud seeding equipment for all purposes, both ground-based and airborne. WMI has either developed or completely re-designed a full suite of cloud seeding equipment for all your needs. Our equipment emphasizes functionality, safety, reliability, and ease of use.
Racks for Burn-in-Place Flares
WMI manufactures racks and firing-control systems adaptable to most aircraft types. Racks are designed for strength and safety, bolting directly to structural members of the wing.
This rack, affixed to a WMI Cheyenne II turboprop, is sporting 150 gram glaciogenic pyrotechnics produced by Ice Crystal Engineering, LLC (ICE), of Davenport, ND. WMI uses exclusively ICE products. Click to enlarge image.
This rack has the ability to hold a dozen flares. As you can see from the photo above, the rack is able to hold both hygroscopic and glaciogenic flares. The rack is easy to convert with minimal ground time.Click to enlarge image.
Racks for Ejectable Flares
WMI racks for ejectable flares are mounted on the belly of the aircraft fuselage. Each rack holds 102 cartridges. When fired, the pyrotechnic is ignited and ejected from the aircraft. In this configuration, the WMI Lear 35A is equipped with four 102-count racks for ejectable glaciogenic pyrotechnics, a total of 408 flares. Click to enlarge image.
WMI has designed state of the art ground based silver iodide generators for seeding orographic clouds. The generators burn a mixture of acetone and silver iodide that produce a silver iodide plume which is ingested by the cloud.
There are two types of Ground-Based Generators, the Remote Ground-Based Generator and the Manual Ground-Based Generator.
The design of the Remote Ground-Based Generator System include the use of satellite technology integrated with the micro-processor for full automated control of the system. The user has, via modem, real-time control of the system, including access to the status of the system and the surrounding environment. Present surrounding weather information includes temperature, humidity, wind speed and direction, and ambient temperature. System Status information includes power source status and availability, flow condition and level of availability of seeding agents, and the temperature of the flame. System Control includes changing from a weak power source to a revitalized source, switching of individual valves, and ignition. Data collection of various types is available at the customer's request. These units are designed to take the heavy abuse of storm systems that may pass over any region. They are constructed to take on large amounts of rime icing and operate under the most demanding of weather conditions.
The Manual Ground-Based Generator System is similar to a Remote System except there is no need for a satellite phone, microprocessor, constant power source, or weather data collection. This system is operated manually by a person "on-site" with switches and valves. Items can be added at the customer's request.
WMI offers the latest in ground-based
pyrotechnic applications, specifically, the ground-based flare tree, or GBFT.
Our GBFT incorporates a “tripod base”, which provides exceptional stability in
even the most extreme weather conditions, and easy leveling.
Shown here, the WMI GBFT supports nine racks, each holding up to 12 glaciogenic or hygroscopic flares. The GBFT can be configured for either manual or remote-controlled operation. The remotely-controlled GBFTs are controllable by either cellular or satellite telephone, depending upon availability of reliable service at the site. Local power is provided by deep-cycle batteries, recharged by solar panel. In applications characterized by extended periods of cloud weather, thermoelectric generators can be used in lieu of the solar panels. Flares can be ignited as rapidly as the operator wishes, so multiple flares can be burned at one time if the situation warrants. WMI custom builds GBFTs, so we can provide the capacity you need.
Contact us for pricing and detailed specifications.
The cloud seeding agents used by WMI are exclusively those manufactured by Ice Crystal Engineering, LLC, (ICE) of Davenport, North Dakota. All pyrotechnic formulations are thoroughly laboratory tested. The available formulations have been extensively field tested, and have demonstrated their reliability.
ICE manufactures the finest cloud seeding pyrotechnics in the world. For more information about Ice Crystal Engineering,
WMI has integrated weather radar with today’s computer technology to produce the industry standard real-time full-sky weather observation and data archival system. This sophisticated system can be controlled from the console at the radar, or remotely via Internet connection, and is available in either Doppler or non-Doppler versions. For advanced applications, WMI can provide dual-polarization and multi-parameter radar systems.
The WMI C-Band Radars
Each WMI radar systems comes complete with computerized color radar displays, and optional GPS aircraft tracking via RF (radio frequency) modems. Doppler capability is available. A typical WMI C-band weather radar installation is shown to the right.
The C-band (5.4 cm wavelength) weather radars offered by WMI are sensitive instruments capable of detecting rainfall rates of 1 millimeter per hour at a range of 100 nautical miles (185 km, 115 statute miles). When coupled with the TITAN radar processing software, full four-dimensional (x, y, z, and t) manipulation of the acquired full-sky data set is straightforward.
The WMI weather radar system consists of the following components:
a. Operating console
b. Antenna pedestal, dish, and radome
e. Radar data acquisition system (RDAS)
f. The TITAN data processing and display software
TITAN is an acronym that stands for Thunderstorm Identification. Tracking, Analysis, and Nowcasting. While the software was developed with thunderstorms in mind, it turns out that it is flexible enough to handle any meteorological situation. Before TITAN is used to process the radar data, the radar data acquisition system (RDAS) first ingests the raw radar data, does preliminary (calibration) processing, and passes it on to the TITAN processing and display software. The RDAS is typically programmed to control the radar antenna such that a complete volume scan consists of 18 elevation steps, up to 45 degrees elevation. This software ingests a complete “full-sky” volume every five minutes, and processes the data to provide horizontal and vertical storm cross-sections, storm motion, history, estimated total precipitation, and a variety of other useful radar products. In addition, the aircraft AirLink data are ingested and displayed directly on the TITAN display, eliminating the need to request position information from the pilot or to mentally translate positions shown on one display to another. The TITAN data are regularly archived, and the complete data set will be provided to the client.
If Internet access can be arranged at the selected radar site, a current radar image will be automatically sent at regular intervals to an Internet web site to provide the client access to recently recorded data. The web site can be accessed using any PC with Internet access and contains current radar maps (at least every 15 minutes) displaying reflectivity data, as well as project GPS aircraft position when the aircraft is operating. Should the client desire, the web site can be made accessible to the public as well.
The software has the following functions:
The image below is of the TITAN radar display with constant altitude PPI, vertical storm cross section, storm history, storm time-height profile and reflectivity distribution. The history of storm motions (yellow circles), and forecast storm motions (red circles) are also shown.
Aircraft flight tracks are superimposed upon the TITAN CAPPI to aid the meteorologist in directing the cloud seeding aircraft to the most suitable seeding candidates. An electronic overlay generated by a computer file displays the project target area as well as county boundaries and prominent cities and geographical features.
Radar and flight track data are saved automatically in approximately 6-minute increments. The time period required to complete a volume scan varies dependant upon the speed of rotation of the radar. For 3 rpm, a volume scan requires about 6 min. The large volume of graphical data being recorded and stored requires the higher performance computer and low-overhead Linux operating system.
Weather Modification Services
---NAWC FAST FACTS---
---Cloud Seeding Frequently Asked Questions---
Cloud seeding (also known as weather modification) is the deliberate treatment of certain clouds or cloud systems with the intent of affecting the precipitation process(es) within those clouds. Application of this technology is increasing world-wide. This page addresses some key questions relating to cloud seeding and its practical uses. References are provided at the end of this document keyed to numbers at the end of the highlighted topics.
When did application of modern cloud seeding technology begin?
Attempts to modify the weather have been conducted for centuries. However, modern cloud seeding dates from the late 1940's, springing from a discovery at the General Electric labs in Schenectady, New York in 1946. The ability of dry ice shavings to convert supercooled water droplets (those existing as water at temperatures colder than freezing) to ice crystals was observed during the conduct of an unrelated experiment. Later consideration of those observations led to a series of laboratory trials which demonstrated the nucleating properties of various materials in certain cold cloud conditions. Trials in the atmosphere soon followed, and operational cloud seeding programs began in about 1950.
Reference: 1, 2.
What are the most common applications of cloud seeding technology?
The most common intended effects of cloud seeding include precipitation increase (rain and/or snow), fog dispersal (visibility improvement) and hail suppression. Of these, the majority of operational projects focus on precipitation increase.
Reference: 1, 2.
Is cloud seeding effective?
Trials conducted by various researchers under laboratory conditions have documented the effects of cloud seeding materials. Numerous scientific experiments have been conducted to investigate/demonstrate the effects produced by cloud seeding in the atmosphere on various cloud types in a variety of climatic regions. Evaluations (usually statistical) have been made of many operational programs. The results of many of these efforts have been published in the scientific literature and in industry journals.
Summarizing the collective evidence from the various studies and operational projects, Capability Statements have been published by the Weather Modification Association, the American Meteorological Society and the World Meteorological Organization. For precipitation augmentation, the accepted magnitude of increase to be expected from well-designed and properly conducted projects ranges from 5% to 20% for winter precipitation in continental regions and from 5% to 30% for coastal areas. For warm season precipitation increase, single-cloud experiments have indicated increases as large as 100%. Area wide increases over a project area vary with the frequency of occurrence and spatial coverage of suitable cloud systems, plus the ability to treat all favorable clouds. Hail suppression effectiveness, based upon surface hail data, is estimated to be in the range of a 20-50% reduction.
Who conducts cloud seeding activities?
The large majority of cloud seeding projects are conducted by a handful of highly specialized commercial firms, working under contract to a variety of sponsors. Some water agencies and hydroelectric power generation companies conduct their own programs. Researchers continue to conduct occasional trials within carefully designed and controlled experimental projects, striving to better understand the various in-cloud effects of cloud seeding, and to refine quantitative estimates of cloud seeding effectiveness.
Who are the most common sponsors of cloud seeding projects?
The most common sponsors of cloud seeding projects include water agencies, municipalities, operators of hydroelectric power facilities, agricultural or ranching interests, airports and recreational interests such as ski areas. An increasing number of sponsors are incorporating cloud seeding as an integral part of their ongoing water resource management strategies.
Why is cloud seeding so attractive to the increasing number of sponsors?
Cloud seeding is a highly portable and flexible technology. It does not require construction of large, permanent and costly structures, such as dams or water conveyance systems. Projects can be mobilized quickly and operations can be regulated as water needs dictate or suspended very quickly if hazardous weather conditions develop. Comprehensive laboratory and field studies have indicated no significant environmental impacts. Further, the benefit/cost ratios associated with most cloud seeding projects are typically very favorable, ranging as high as 25-30:1, depending, in the case of precipitation increase applications, on the value of water.
Reference: 5, 6, 7.
How widely used/accepted is cloud seeding technology?
Over its history of 50 years, modern cloud seeding has involved projects of various types in nearly 50 countries around the world. Some individual projects have been in operation nearly continuously for decades, with a few operating for nearly fifty years. As water needs increase world-wide, the demand for weather modification services will also increase. Similar increase in demand will occur in hail-prone regions.
Reference: 5, 8.
How is the cloud seeding accomplished?
Cloud seeding materials are released via ground-based and/or airborne systems (see pictures). Determination of the best suited method or combination of methods for a given project is based upon an assessment of a variety of factors. The seeding materials are applied to the clouds (sometimes targeted very carefully into very specific portions of clouds) so that the material has adequate time to affect the precipitation process, so the effect will be focused over the intended geographic area.
Reference: 1, 4, 5.
What are the most commonly used seeding materials?
The materials used in cloud seeding include two primary categories, tied to the type of precipitation process involved. One category includes those which act as glaciogenic (ice-forming) agents, such as silver iodide, dry ice and compressed liquid propane or carbon dioxide, which are appropriate in cloud systems where the precipitation process is primarily cold (colder than freezing). Of the ice-forming materials, the most commonly used is silver iodide. The second major category is focused on cloud systems where the warm (coalescence) process predominates. In those environments, hygroscopic (water attracting) materials such as salt, urea and ammonium nitrate can be utilized. Of the hygroscopic materials, the most commonly used are salts.
How does cold cloud seeding work?
In cold cloud seeding. the introduction of an ice-forming nucleating agent, e.g., silver iodide, into the appropriate cloud regions causes supercooled liquid water droplets to freeze. Once these droplets freeze, the initial ice embryos grow at the expense of the water droplets around them (sublimation) and through contact with these neighboring water droplets (riming). These embryos, if they remain in favorable cloud conditions, will grow into snowflakes, falling to the surface as snow if surface temperatures are below or near freezing, or as raindrops at warmer surface temperatures. This process mimics nature where certain airborne substances, e.g., soil particles have the ability to act as ice-forming nuclei and initiate the freezing process. A secondary effect of this process can occur, wherein the freezing of water droplets releases latent heat of fusion into the cloud. This addition of heat, under the right circumstances, can cause the treated clouds to grow larger and last longer than would have naturally occurred.
The first freezing process is often referred to as a static seeding effect, increasing the efficiency of the precipitation process within the seeded cloud volume. The second freezing process, resulting from release of additional heat into the cloud, is often called the dynamic effect, whereby the treated clouds are invigorated, thus processing more moisture.
Although one might initially develop the impression that cold cloud seeding is strictly appropriate to winter clouds, it can work equally well during the summer when the precipitation forming process is active in the upper (colder) portions of cumulus clouds and adequate amounts of supercooled water droplets are available.
Reference: 1, 2, 5.
How does warm cloud seeding work?
Nature can produce rainfall from clouds that are warmer than freezing. Tiny water droplets that form during condensation and define the cloud can grow as they collide with one another within the cloud. This process is known as collision/coalescence. Cloud seeding of this type of cloud involves introduction of additional condensation nuclei (e.g., salt particles) which can cause additional water droplets to condense within the cloud. Various modeling and research studies have indicated that this type of seeding is effective in continental clouds, but ineffective in maritime clouds.
Reference: 1, 2, 5.
Do the commonly used seeding materials pose any direct health or environmental risks?
Many detailed studies have been conducted to address these questions. These efforts have ranged from chemistry-focused work to broad ranging environmental investigations. The bottom line is that no significant environmental effects have been observed. Seeding materials are applied in very small amounts relative to the size of the geographic areas being affected, so the concentrations of the seeding materials in rainwater or snow are very low. Using silver iodide (the most common seeding material) as an example, the typical concentration of silver in rainwater or snow from seeded cloud systems is less than 0.1 micrograms per liter. This is much below the U.S. Public Health Service=s stated acceptable concentration of 50 micrograms per liter. As another example, the concentration of iodine in rainwater from seeded clouds is far below the concentration found in common iodized table salt.
Reference: 1, 2, 5, 9.
Does cloud seeding rob Peter to pay Paul?
The answer to this commonly-posed question is no. Of the total atmospheric moisture passing over any point, the proportion falling as natural precipitation is quite small, typically less than 10-15%. Cloud seeding-induced increases in precipitation of the order of 5-30% still results in a small overall proportion (<20%) of the total available moisture reaching the ground. Further, especially when cumuliform clouds are present, and over mountainous terrain where air is forced to rise, the cloud-bearing layer of the atmosphere undergoes nearly continuous moisture replenishment. Analyses of precipitation data from areas downwind of several cloud seeding projects have indicated small percentage precipitation increases extending as far as 100 miles downwind of the intended areas of effect on projects that had indications of increases in the intended target area.
Reference: 1, 10, 11, 12, 13.
Are cloud seeding activities subject to regulation or control?
In many jurisdictions, government agencies are responsible for regulation of cloud seeding in the public interest. These agencies commonly require licenses and/or permits for cloud seeding, to help assure that the projects are properly designed and that those conducting such operations are properly qualified. In the U.S., for example, nearly two-thirds of the fifty states have developed rules and regulations specific to cloud seeding activities. These regulatory groups generally also maintain records of cloud seeding activities.
What does cloud seeding cost?
The cost of cloud seeding varies greatly, depending on a large number of factors, such as which seeding methods and materials are appropriate to a specific application, the frequency of seedable conditions, the size of the intended area of effect and the duration of the project. Most cloud seeding projects carry favorable benefit/cost ratios, ranging over 20:1 in some cases. Cost questions are best addressed via direct discussion with a well qualified cloud seeding company/consultant.
What does the future hold for the cloud seeding field and its sponsors?
As water needs steadily increase worldwide, the demand for weather modification services will also increase. Focused research efforts will continue to yield incremental refinements to the technology. Sponsors will increasingly enjoy the benefits of cloud seeding at very attractive benefit/cost ratios, and a growing number of those sponsors will incorporate cloud seeding as an integral part of their ongoing water resource management strategies.
1. Dennis, A.S. , 1980: Weather Modification by Cloud Seeding. Academic Press, New York.
2. Hess, W.N. , 1974: Weather and Climate Modification. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
3. Weather Modification Association, 1992: Weather Modification Capability Statement. Journal of Weather Modification, Vol. 24, No. 1.
4. Weather Modification Association, 1997: Some Facts About Seeding Clouds. Fresno, California.
5. American Society of Civil Engineers, 1995: Guidelines for Cloud Seeding to Augment Precipitation. ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice No. 81..
6. Griffith, D.A. and M.E. Solak, 1999: A Cloud Seeding Program to Enhance Hydroelectric Power Production from the El Cajon Drainage, Honduras. Seventh Conference on Weather Modification, Chiang Mai, Thailand, February 17-22, 1999.
7. Stauffer, N.E. and K. Williams, 2000: Utah Cloud Seeding Program, Increased Runoff/Cost Analysis. Technical Report, Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources.
8. Weather Modification Advisory Board, 1978: The Management of Weather Resources. Report to the Secretary of Commerce, 2 volumes.
9. Klien, D.A. , 1978: Environmental Impacts of Artificial Ice Nucleating Agents. Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc. , Stronsburg, Pennsylvania.
10. Brown, K.J., R.D. Elliot and M.W. Edelstein, 1978: Transactions of Total-Area Effects of Weather Modification. Report to the National Science Foundation on a workshop held August 8-12, 1977, Fort Collins, Colorado.
11. Brown, K. J., R.D. Elliott and J.R. Thompson, 1974: The Seeding of Convection Bands. AMS Fourth Conference on Weather Modification, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, November 18-21, 1974.
12. Long, A. B., 2001: Review of Persistence Effects of Silver Iodide Cloud Seeding. Journal of Weather Modification, Vol. 33, No. 1.
13. Solak, M. E., D. P. Yorty, and D. A. Griffith, 2003: Estimations of Downwind Cloud Seeding Effects in Utah. Journal of Weather Modification, Vol. 35, No. 1.
How can I obtain more specific information?
The Weather Modification Association (WMA) has produced a basic informational booklet, Weather Modification: Some Facts About Seeding Clouds. The WMA can be contacted at 559-434-3486 or via e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.
The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) has published a comprehensive manual, Guidelines for Cloud Seeding to Augment Precipitation, which contains much useful information. The ASCE telephone number is 800-548-2723, and their web site is http://www.asce.org.
For those wishing to investigate the possibility of developing and implementing a specific project, we recommend that you contact us, North American Weather Consultants, an industry pioneer and leader since 1950, to discuss your cloud seeding needs and interests. As the longest-standing, continuously-operating cloud seeding company in the U.S., and probably the world, we have amassed a track record of many hundreds of successful research and operational project seasons in a wide variety of climatic regions world-wide. We would be happy to discuss your specific needs and interests, and help with all aspects of cloud seeding issues, from basic questions to feasibility studies to full service cloud seeding projects. Our projects are never of the cookie cutter variety. We will work closely with you to design and implement a project which is tailored specifically to your circumstances. Contact information is provided below.
WEATHER MODIFICATION FEASIBILITY STUDIES
cost-effective way to determine site-specific cloud seeding
possibilities, without obligation to conduct a project.
The design of every cloud seeding project should be based upon careful consideration of the various important factors which a) characterize the project area and its weather and b) reflect the sponsor's specific needs and circumstances. The potential for beneficial cloud seeding can vary significantly from region to region, so caution must be used in "transferring" apparent results from one project area to a prospective project area. Further, the ability to manage the water resources, e.g., reservoir distribution and capacity, can vary greatly from one area to another.
NAWC's philosophy is to carefully assess all the relevant factors and then tailor each project, thus providing the best-suited, practical solutions to our clients.
To limit the prospective client's cost exposure when seriously considering a cloud seeding project, but without client obligation to conduct a project, we offer "Phase 1" feasibility studies. These studies are focused and site-specific. The intent is to provide decision makers objective information regarding cloud seeding potential for their area of interest, the likely benefits and the estimated costs. The value of the project can be compared to the cost, to produce useful benefit/cost estimates. The decision makers can then assess whether the prospective project constitutes a viable and attractive solution to their needs and fits their circumstances.
The key steps in the Phase 1 study process include:
The bottom line is that a) we listen carefully, b) we do our homework, c) we address your specific needs, d) we identify practical solutions and e) we produce a tailored package for your consideration. With this information, you can assess the utility of the cloud seeding possibilities for your area and needs and make a well-informed decision. If the Phase 1 indications are not favorable or if for any reason the client chooses not to proceed, the process simply stops, with no additional obligation. However, if the Phase 1 indications are attractive to the client, the process can then move toward implementation.
For more information regarding our Phase 1 feasibility services or any other of our full-range of weather modification services, please contact either Don Griffith or Mark Solak. We would be happy to discuss your cloud seeding interests and provide cost estimates if you elect to work with us. We are here to help!
North American Weather Consultants, Inc.
Highland Dr., Suite B-2
Sandy, Utah 84093
Cloud Seeding Equipment, etc.
(Click on image for more details)
A few of our Air Quality Services are listed below. If you don't see the service you desire, please submit a request on our Information Request Page or contact us to discuss your needs in further detail.
Few companies in the country can offer their clients such a long history of performing ambient monitoring work. North American Weather Consultants has offered ambient monitoring services since 1970 and continues today as a leader in this field. Our philosophy is to make quality assurance/quality control the controlling factors of any ambient monitoring program. Ambient monitoring is a time-consuming, resource-intensive effort and every detail must be triple-checked in order to achieve the highest data recovery and data quality possible. We can provide any or all of the following services/equipment: ambient monitoring shelters, data acquisition systems, specialized air intake manifolds, a variety of instrumentation for measurement of criteria pollutants (oxides of nitrogen (NO, NO2, NOX), SO2, O3, CO, PM10, PM2.5, TSP/Pb). We also offer ambient monitoring for air toxics, including canister sampling, TO methods 1-14, puff samplers, cartridge sampling, and a variety of other sampling techniques. We also offer a full line of auditing and calibration services. If your sampling needs are not listed or you wish to discuss your particular needs in more detail, please drop us a note on our Information Request page - we are sure we can provide you with the sampling program you require.
As with ambient monitoring, North American Weather Consultants has a long history of performing meteorological monitoring. We have been collecting meteorological data since the 1950's. Our company is comprised primarily of meteorologists who are very familiar with the subtleties of obtaining and interpreting meteorological data. This factor has allowed North American Weather Consultants to consistently offer their clients the highest data collection percentage and the most representative data available. As with ambient monitoring data, we place quality assurance foremost. All monitoring data are routinely interrogated and scrutinized by a Certified Consulting Meteorologist for reasonableness. We offer the following services: meteorological tower installations, siting, data acquisition systems, a full line of meteorological sensors such as wind speed, wind direction, ambient temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, solar radiation, and atmospheric stability. We also offer independent performance and system audits or instrument calibrations. Drop us a note if you need further information by visiting our Information Request page.
North American Weather Consultants is the world leader in providing atmospheric dispersion studies using tracer technologies. We have conducted tracer studies domestically and overseas since the early 1970's and continue today, serving clients' special needs in the U.S.A., South America, the Far East and Europe. Tracer studies are typically performed to "finger-print" a specific source to determine the transport and dispersion of a pollutant from a specific source and the subsequent ambient impact due solely to the source. This technique can be very helpful when there are multiple sources in the area which all emit a similar pollutant. Other uses of tracer studies include ambient monitoring station site selection, model validation efforts (comparing predicted model concentration to actual measured concentrations), and pure transport and dispersion to better understand movement away from a source (especially useful in complex terrain). We have the capabilities of running ground-based tracer experiments using automated portable samplers to collect whole-air samples which are later analyzed for a man-made tracer gas. We own nearly 100 of these instruments. We can also provide real-time (400 milliseconds) tracer measurements using our real-time continuous analyzers from moving platforms such as mobile vans or one of our research aircraft (outfitted with data acquisition systems, supplemental probes and GPS receivers). Tracers can be tracked anywhere from property fenceline to more than 100 kilometers downwind, depending on atmospheric conditions and the tracer release rate. If you have a potential tracer application drop us a note on our Information Request page.
Links to Weather Information on the Web
Please note: These web links are provided as a courtesy of North American Weather Consultants. They do not constitute an endorsement of websites or products. Please report outdated links, or suggest new ones, by using our Information Request Form.
This page is best viewed with a screen resolution of 1024x768 pixels. Click here for information on how to change the screen resolution.
National Weather Service
NWS Graphical Forecast Map (Click on map to zoom in on various regions)
MesoWest Data (Current weather at automated stations around the US)
24-hour Summaries (Clickable map with links to daily climate summaries)
Weatherunderground.com (Useful site with maps, forecasts, historical station data, etc)
Wxnation.com (Weather conditions and cameras around the US)
WxUSA.com (Weather conditions and forecasts around the US)
WeatherUSA.net (Weather conditions, forecasts, and cameras in the US)
Weather.com (The Weather Channel online)
EPA Air Quality (Current air quality information around the US)
Interactive Weather Information Network (NWS links to weather information, warnings, etc)
Hydrometeorological Prediction Center (Precipitation forecasts, weather maps, etc)
Long-Range Forecasts (Long-range, including seasonal forecasts)
of Transportation - Clickable U.S. Map and Canada Map
Roadweather.com (Current road/highway weather conditions around the US)
Index of DOT Traffic/Highway Cameras in the US
<>Another Index of Highway/Traffic Cameras in the US
(Large collection of weather images and maps around the world)
Weather.cod.edu (Surface and Upper-Air Maps, Satellite and Radar Images, etc)
Wxportal.com (This interactive site allows you to customize and overlay different types of graphics)
Weathergraphics.com (Weather imaging software, books, videos, archived data, etc.)
Unisys Satellite Images (Satellite images of various types, with loops also available)
High-Resolution Visible Satellite Images
US Satellite Image and World Satellite Image from Intellicast
Wxportal.com (This interactive site allows you to customize and overlay different types of graphics)
GOES Satellite Images (Satellite images and loops)
United States satellite images (Includes U.S. infrared image with color scale)
GOES Sector Satellite Imagery (Satellite images of various global sectors)
Global Infrared Satellite Image
Global Satellite and Temperature (Global IR images with surface temperatures)
Western US Images (Visible and IR satellite images in the western US)
Indian Ocean and Other Satellite Images
Accuweather.com Satellite and Satellite/Radar Overlay
Radar and Rainfall
National Radar and US Radar Locations (National Weather Service clickable US radar maps)
High-Resolution Radar Images
Weather Channel Radar Composite (National radar map showing precipitation types)
Weathertap.com (Wide variety of radar images and other weather graphics; requires a paid subscription)
US Radar-Estimated Precipitation Maps: (Hourly and storm totals can also be obtained for individual sites through NWS radar map above)
Weather Channel 24-hr Radar-Estimated Precipitation Map
Weather Channel One-Week Radar-Estimated Precipitation Map
Radar-Estimated Precipitation from the National Weather Service River Forecast Centers:
Lower Mississippi Region
Texas and New Mexico
Arkansas/Red River Region
Ohio River Valley
National Weather Service Surface Maps
Weather.cod.edu (U.S. surface observations, etc)
Weather Channel Current Surface Map
Intellicast US Surface Map
Unisys Satellite Surface Map and Close-up version
Surface maps of current temperature, dewpoint, pressure, etc.
Other Surface Maps (RAP/UCAR)
Difax Maps (Detailed surface plots)
Upper-Air and Skew-T Plots
RAP/UCAR Upper Air Data (Upper-air maps and skew-t plots from around North America)
Radiosonde Data (Radiosonde data on U of Wyoming server)
Weather.cod.edu (Upper-air maps and soundings, etc)
Radiosonde Data (Another clickable map of skew-t plots in the US/Canada)
MAPS Sounding Plots (Data collected from aircraft and other sources, as well as model data)
US Surface and Upper-Air Maps (Surface and upper-air maps as a user-defined level)
Surface and Upper-Air Maps (University of Utah map page)
Storm Prediction Center (Current
watches and warnings, storm reports, forecasts, discussions, etc)
NWS Current Watches, Warnings, and Advisories (Clickable US map)
National Severe Storms Laboratory (Lots of research and general information about severe weather)
Lightningstorm.com (Lightning information and current US lightning maps)
More US lightning maps
Climate Prediction Center Hazards Assessment
Onthesnow.com (Ski reports and
Snow-forecast.com (Weather forecasts and more, for ski resorts worldwide)
Avalance Center (Links to avalanche reports and conditions)
Skiutah.com (Utah ski conditions and weather)
Utah Avalanche Conditions
Coloradoski.com (Colorado ski conditions)
Colorado Avalanche Conditions
Guide to coastal water
temperatures for the U.S. Planning a trip to the beach? See this
National Data Buoy Center (Weather and ocean surface observations from buoys)
National Weather Service Clickable Map (Includes coastal conditions/warnings)
National Weather Service Marine Radiofax Charts
Weatherunderground.com Marine Weather
Oceanic Satellite and Other Images
Current Global Sea-Surface Temperature and Global Sea-Surface Temperature Animation
National Hurricane Center (Hurricanes and Tropical Weather)
Weather Cameras in the U.S.
Weatherimages.org (Camera images around the US)
US Weather Cams (Scroll down to bottom for clickable map)
Wxnation.com (Weather conditions and cameras around the US)
Utah Weather Cameras (Utah cameras on the SLC NWS page)
Index of DOT Highway/Traffic Cameras in the US
Links to Highway/Traffic Cameras in Major US and International Cities
Colorado Highway Cameras (Not found on index sites)
RAP/UCAR Model Page
(Allows you to select variables to plot from various forecast models)
Forecast Model Loops Page (Allows you to view loops of forecast model plots)
NCEP Model Forecasts (Model forecast maps from NCEP)
Ensemble Forecasts (Ensemble forecasts from NCEP)
University of Utah
Forecast Soundings (Atmospheric sounding profiles forecast by various models)
Climate Diagnostics Center and their links to
climate data and U.S.
past climate maps
State Climatology Sites (Clickable US map of state climatology offices)
USU Climate Data Server (Zoom in, draw a box to see list of stations, then go to 'export data' tab)
Climate "hardiness" zones
Lawn and garden climate zones
National Climatic Data Center (All types of climate data available; find a station on this page.)
Weatherbase.com (Temperature and precipitation climatology for locations around the world)
Annual precipitation maps for the U.S. (Maps for individual states and regions)
US Climate at a Glance (US temperature and precipitation data and normals)
MesoWest Data (Current weather and historical data from automated stations around the US)
Guide to coastal water temperatures for the U.S. Planning a trip to the beach? See this chart.
Snow Depth and Analysis for the U.S.
El Nino Information Page (Current El Nino / La Nina status, including a technical discussion)
Climate Change (National Climatic Data Center info on climate change and extremes)
Astronomical Data (Sunrise, Sunset, etc)
Regional (station means, histories, etc)
Western Regional Climate Center and historical climate data
High Plains Climate Center
Midwest Regional Climate Center
Northeast Regional Climate Center
Southern Regional Climate Center
Southeast Regional Climate Center
Natural Water and Climate
Center Main Page
Color-Coded Snow Water Percentage Map (At the bottom of this page are links to the actual snow water percent of normal and water year precipitation percent of normal for the western US).
SNOTEL Maps and Graphs (Select a site from the map, or usethis page.)
Current and Past SNOTEL Basin Reports
Links to Individual State Snow Surveys (SNOTEL and snowcourse data for each western state)
National Weather Service River Forecast Centers
Satellite Archive (Archive of hourly satellite images, can display
GOES Satellite Archive (Archive of satellite images from 1992-present)
NCDC Radar Archive (Archive of US radar images from 1995-present)
NCAR/RAP Radar Archive (Archive of recent images, can display loops, etc)
High-Resolution Radar Images (Get the required software here)
SPC Upper Air Maps (Archive of upper air maps from 1998-present)
Plymouth State Sounding Archive (Radiosonde data from 1957-1998)
U of Wyoming Sounding Archive (Radiosonde data from 1989-present)
FSL Sounding Archive (Radiosonde data from 1998-present)
Map-Based Access to Archived METAR Data
SNOTEL Basin Reports (Daily snowpack reports from 1997-present)
Historical Climate Data in the Western US (Data from observation stations in the western US)
Current and Historical Streamflow Data
USU Climate Data Server (Zoom in, draw a box to see list of stations, then go to 'export data' tab)
Eastern Pacific Sea-Surface Temperature Archive
Weather Instruments and Equipment: (Note: Numerous vendors of weather instruments can be found using an online search. Here are just a few examples. This is not an endorsement of these vendors or products).
space "weather", images of auroras, etc)
National Aeronautics and Space Admininstration NOAA Space Weather (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration space weather page)
Space Science and Weather
(Sunrise, Sunset, etc.)
Time Zones of the World
Temperature/Dewpoint/Relative Humidity Calculator
Agricultural Weather (How weather is affecting crops in the US)
Drought Monitor (Current drought conditions in the US)
Fire Weather Maps
Current and Historical Streamflow Data
National Weather Service Main Page
National Hurricane Center (Hurricanes and Tropical Weather)
National Water and Climate Center
National Centers for Environmental Prediction
RAP/UCAR Weather Page
Hydrometeorological Prediction Center (Precipitation forecasts, weather maps, etc)
Weathermatrix.net (Website for weather enthusiasts, contains various weather resources)
Weatherbug.com (Displays local weather conditions on your desktop)
Chemtrails - Frequently
By Toni Thayer - <email@example.com>
Executive Director, Blue Skies International
What's the difference between a jet contrail and a chemtrail? According to the U.S. Air Force, jet contrails form above 33,000 feet when hot engine exhaust momentarily condenses ice crystals into pencil-thin vapor trails that quickly vanish like the wake behind a boat.
Chemtrails (CTs) look like contrails initially, but are much thicker, extend across the sky and are often laid down in varying patterns of Xs, tick-tack-toe grids, cross-hatched and parallel lines. Instead of quickly dissipating, chemtrails expand and drip feathers and mare s tails. In 30 minutes or less, they open into wispy formations which join together, forming a thin white veil or a "fake cirrus-type cloud" that persists for hours.
In August 2000, chemtrail watchers began to report "more normal" appearing or nearly invisible jet sprays. However, these reports go on to include cloud formations dripping the feathers and mare s tails just as the chemtrails do. It s our belief that the operation has adjusted the chemtrail mix as word about the phenomenon is spreading and as more and more people are looking up. Observant chemtrail watchers continue to see the "fake cirrus-type clouds" on top of and surrounding real cumulus clouds.
Who is doing the spraying? Witnesses have documented and photographed military KC-135s and KC-10s and white, unmarked jets. Airport personnel and pilots have also confirmed specific commercial airliners to be leaving the long lasting chemtrails.
What's in the chemtrails, and why are they spraying us? We wish we knew. There are only a few planes in the world that have the equipment to analyze the spray mix and can get to the CT altitudes, clearance must be obtained to fly into the trails and money must be raised for the $22,000 per day plane rental fee.
There may be several programs working at the same time. Possibilities include atmospheric and weather modification and biowarfare. Many theorize that it s part of a clandestine operation to implement the New World Order (NWO) by eliminating society s "useless eaters" and the infirm and/or to reduce the population to a support level for the "elite". Originally, it was thought to be mass inoculation for possible biowarfare attack; this theory has been ruled out with the increase of sicknesses and illnesses in the CT paths.
Edward Teller's (inventor of the hydrogen bomb) proposal to reduce global warming to the U.S. involves spraying minute aluminum particles to deflect the sun s harmful ultraviolet rays but still allow the Earth s heat to rise through them. This seems to be supported by rainwater tests after heavy spraying in Espanola, Canada which contained 7 times the allowable limit of aluminum. In this instance, the areas with the least ultraviolet protection, as in the Southwest, would be the heaviest sprayed. Most often, this does not seem to be the case.
Generally, spraying increases as clouds build. Chemtrails may be the reason that over half the world and over half the U.S. have been experiencing drought for the past 2 years. Witnesses have reported watching chemtrails fall through cumulus clouds, leaving the real clouds "skinny" and within a few minutes totally gone. Typically, storm clouds build and mix with the chem ingredients, resulting in a grey, uniform "mucky" sky which doesn t rain. The real clouds disappear, leaving behind the chem formations which were on top of the storm system.
Another possibility is barium salt mixtures. The Variable Terrain Radio Parabolic Equation (VTRPE) shows pilots what nearby radar systems can and cannot see under different terrain and atmospheric conditions. It was tested and perfected after aerosol barium titanate salt mixture was released from military aircraft, forming chemical trails in the atmosphere across America. Barium salts were also used in Libya, Panama and Desert Storm where they were sprayed and exploded overhead to make the people extremely sick and weak. It s a radioactive material that accelerates and magnifies the effects of other mix ingredients by altering the chemical structure of the other agents. A spectrum analysis reveals only the barium compounds and hides the "bad stuff" by placing a shell around it. After time, it releases the other agent. Think of it as a time release death pill.
What do the governments say about Chemtrails? No governmental agency of any country will confirm that spraying activity is occurring. Most often requests are ignored. The U.S. Air Force has explained that they routinely dump fuel over populated areas to reduce weight prior to landings. More recently, the Environmental Protection Agency states that it may be pesticide spraying. Generally, officials explain it away as increased commercial jet traffic. However, this does not explain why areas with no commercial flight paths overhead are also seeing these long lasting plumes. Some citizens have been told by government "to keep it quiet".
Why would our government authorize such a program when they live here too? Money talks and corporate dollars influence our legislators and officials. In 1997, the year of disasters, insurance companies paid $92 billion in weather disaster-related claims. Teller stated that his weather modification program would cost only $1 billion per year. Research into a NWO takeover reveals a heavily funded and incredibly powerful elite group of individuals that most are afraid or unwillingly to go up against. We also know that informed citizens can take precautions to offset the effects of CT spraying by limiting time outdoors on spray days and by building their immune systems with vitamins, herbs, Colloidal Silver and other therapies.
Why do you think the cirrus clouds in the sky aren't real? Cirrus clouds are high altitude clouds, formed above 20,000 feet and consist of ice crystals. They precede a storm or are in the jet stream. Cumulus clouds are formed in lower altitudes, 6,500 to 20,000 feet. These 2 cloud formations are seen together at the lower altitudes of 9,000 to 15,000 feet in extreme drought conditions. This goes against the laws of nature. Also significant is the "white ground haze" that can be seen from horizon to horizon with clear blue sky overhead.
How long has this spraying been occurring? Cloud books confirm that tests have been conducted since the 1960s. Old photographs show sporadic CTs dating to the early 1970s with the activity steadily increasing throughout the 1980s. Since 1998, citizens throughout the world have documented spray patterns on a nearly daily basis, with an average of 1 "clear" day per week. We have all become accustomed to these changes as they ve been introduced bit by bit and have presumed them to be normal. Younger generations have never seen normal weather and clouds.
Do they spray us here? They have been spraying most areas intensely in the U.S., Canada, Europe and England since 1998, including areas with no commercial flight paths overhead. Recently, Australia, Mexico, South Africa, Bahamas, Puerto Rico and Croatia have reported chemtrail spraying.
Why should we be so concerned about Chemtrails? A "flu-like" epidemic is on the rise which the Centers for Disease Control says may be due to some "unknown pathogen". From their May 6, 2000 Influenza Summary Update, 11 out of every 100 newly dead people have died from this "Influenza-Like Illness", but 99% of sick patients have tested negative for the flu. The most prevalent symptoms reported by witnesses in the wake of these white plumes are: Persistent hacking coughs, upper respiratory and intestinal distress, pneumonia, extreme fatigue, lethargy, dizziness, disorientation, splitting headaches, aching joints and muscles, nosebleeds, diarrhea, bloody stools, depression, anxiety, loss of bladder control and nervous tics. The elderly, young and those weakened by disease or in poor physical condition are the first to feel the CT effects.
Why should I join Blue Skies International? Chemtrails is a program that affects the world, its climate, its citizens, and our children s heritage. The spray program is blatantly right before our eyes. Blue Skies, a newly-formed, concerted citizens effort, is seeking Answers, Action and Accountability from our governmental leaders. The more members we have, the more clout we have.
All donations and membership fees go towards informing the world s residents and continuing research. As a "public" charity, Blue Skies depends upon public funding to provide our services: Educational packets, web page, speakers, news articles, research and governmental communications. Our contact information is at our temporary website: http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/bsi/
Toni T. Thayer Executive Director Blue Skies International
This very unusual rainbow colored trail was seen stretching high into the sky from several states. Research shows that this was not a Chemtrail, but a vapor trail from a missle lauched from White Sands in March 1997 as part of a missle defense test. According to the DOD this particular intercept attempt failed.
Is this start-and-stop trail evidence of a spraying operation?
I'm Not Even Guessing
Releasing effluent? Probably, this has the expected irregular form of a waste dump and there is a strong correlation between the release point and the forward drainmast.
There is some correlation of the release point of this substance with the forward drainmast, although other experts say that it is most likely a post-processing artifact since it doesn't have the expected globulized form of an effluent dump. Comments from the photographer: "So, I had this particular plane in view, along with the engine contrails, but as I was waiting to take the photo the normal trails ended (were shut off?!) and revealed the single bottom sprayer you see in the picture. As frustrating as only getting one shot was, I still felt happy that the one did get proved what I witnessed in real life: the mysterious bottom spray."
Technology exists for using synthetic weblike fibers to disperse sustances from altitide. Is this what is being seen? "Starting October 15 and continuing clear into late November. The photo shows bare unplanted soil covered with webstrands that fell in just an hour. The soil was free of strands from tractor work, then the strands rained down. You are looking at about two square feet of soil. No spiders were seen. The nearest upwind land mass is China~ 5000 miles to the west. Spray planes were about 10~20 miles offshore when this happened."
On Rense website so-called experts claimed that this plane is a NAVY TACAMO E-6 which has inward fuel dump valves and that this is exactly what is shown in the picture, a fuel dump. However the logo is USAF.
A Curious Contrail 3
"What's odd about this is that there were just two bits of the trail as in the first picture for at least 4 minutes before the trail started again and continued up and over. I checked, there were no scheduled launches from Vandenburg. This was a little south from Vandenburg anyway." - Mount Wilson astophysics assistant
Glorious Sunrise with Bizarre Contrail
I doubt this is Chemtrail related because the picture was taken over 2 decades ago, but what the heck is up with that?
Trail Pointing 2
Crusing at 20,000 ft. Captain Alcon points out Chemtrails above from the cockpit of one of the major airline carriers. Alcon has been a pilot for decades in both military and commercial aircraft and says he knows the difference between a contrail and a Chemtrail.
Strips in the Sunset
Start and stops can be natural, but this looks like connect the dots. How many strips can you count? Even the trail at the top left had abrupt ends.
3 Trail Wagon Wheel
Three trails intersecting perfectly at a common point, lit up in blazing pink by the setting sun. Have never seen an asterix configuration in person before or since observing this. Is this the intersection of flight paths, or some pilots having fun as they spray?
All pictures © by their author.
I laughed and snickered when I first heard about “CHEMICAL TRAILS IN THE SKY” until I began looking up at the sky and seeing evidence that we were being sprayed with a light marine layer of cloudy trails, that when dissipated, leave a blanket of mist & clouds, which factually cooled the temperatures of our atmosphere. I also noticed evidence, of NOT POLLEN DUST on my car, but a strange kind of dust, not dirt, settling on everything. In addition to this, WHAT IS GOING ON WITH WATER? WHAT IS GOING ON WITH FINDING JET FUEL IN PREGNANT WOMEN? WHY ARE PEOPLE INTERNATIONALLY GETTING SICK WITH THE SAME SYMPTOMS? COULD FLUES AND VIRUSES BE AIRBORNE? WHO IS MONITORING THE U.N. MEGASPRAYERS?
I also noticed the evidence of our vegetation, north, south, east and west, 200 miles each way, withering, perhaps due to the intensity of the hot sunlight whenever chemical trails weren’t being sprayed. Since 1998, the sun has grown intensely hotter and whenever there is no cloud cover and the weather is clear, the sun is hot because our UV protection is mostly gone.
I believe that the Government of the United States wants to avoid a Global panic, that our O-ZONE LAYER has rapidly deteriorated, Global Warming has gotten out of control, and the profiteers from these corporate gurus who continue to make money off of oil, petroleum, and earth’s resources are paying people in the Global Government to keep this stuff TOP SECRET and pull a smoke screen over our eyes.
The above websites are just the tip of the iceberg.
I believe, after surveying the evidence, that we are being sprayed with bio-warfare. Ever wonder why people all over the world are experiencing similar symptoms simultaneously, as people quietly walk into local hospitals with fevers, chest pains, liver pains, stomach pains, dizziness, flues, no matter what age? Why do people contract flues and colds at offices? Could it be the FREE-ON from Air-Conditioning filtering outside air being generated through our ventilations, but these particles of chemical trails are getting through the ventilation systems and into our lungs?
Are we being sprayed with sleeping agents that burn our eyes and make us more tired? Are we being sprayed with tiny traces of bio-warfare, to prepare us for a biological attack? Are these particles from the Chemical Trails causing us flu-like symptoms and have our symptoms been air-borne this whole time? What about the cancer epidemic? There has to be a common source triggering cancer and I think that Chemical Trails are the source of a lot of deaths.
When we study the Rockefeller Pyramid through our hospitals (KAISER PERMANENTE) and his takeover of our pharmaceutical companies, perhaps he is the main architect for Global Genocide? We have to consider alternatives to counter-attack the attack being made on us, our families, our children, our parents. How do we stop them?
We need a massive worldwide protest to stop the production of oil and petroleum and diesel fuel and go to Electric Cars and Hybrids for starters. We also need to find alternatives for our factories to manufacture products and we also need to quit setting off nuclear bombs worldwide.
Our oil tankers are destroying our seas and our oceans and all the wild life. These chemical trails are a serious epidemic and the only way to stop them is to keep petitioning for alternative solutions.
Then again, it may be too late. Our O-ZONE layer is gone. Our UV protection is gone. How else will we cool the temperatures and absorb the bombardment of pollution in the air? Is there any other way? Do we have to keep visiting our local drug store for flu medicine every month now?
This is something to be taken seriously and we need some action.
God help us all.
THIRD 'MEGASPRAYER' CAPTURED
SEPTEMBER 9, 1999 SANTA FE, NM
SOUTHERN SKY 1115
THE EVIDENCE CONTINUES TO ACCUMULATE:
This plane, to the best of my ability, is currently being identified as a Boeing 757. If someone has information to the contrary, please advise me along with the rationale as soon as possible with email to firstname.lastname@example.org Assuming this is the case, the altitude of this aircraft during spray conditions has been calculated photogrammetrically at approximately 40,000 ft. above mean sea level. This is the third altitude computation which has been completed, and the results range from 39,000ft to 45,000 ft above MSL.. The first calculation of 45,000ft. is considered by myself to be slightly high due to an overstatement of the focal length. The average thus far appears to be fairly consistent at approximately 40,000ft. - 43,000ft. above MSL. This is apparently above most commercial flight traffic, which is stated to occur normally between 33000ft. to 37000ft. above MSL. The majority of aircraft identified with telephotos under spray conditions (Santa Fe NM) thus far appear to be of the Boeing 757 class, but this assessment is subject to revision if additional information is provided or becomes available. The sun was in near alignment with the plane when the photographs were taken. There is a distinct coloration which appears in these trails, which by all appearances is due to the chemical composition of the spray material. This is the third telephoto set captured which depicts a full length wing spray system.
Clifford E Carnicom
'MEGASPRAYER' NUMBER 4 CAPTURED
Santa Fe NM Nov 30 1999 Approx 1030
Photo by Santa Fe Resident
These photos show once again emissions which extend across the entire wingspan, and consequently they can not emanate solely from the engines of the aircraft, which in this case are rear mounted (tentatively identified as a MD80, a derivative of the originally identified McDonnell Douglas DC9; further identification assistance has been provided by a pilot of 10000 hrs military, civilian, and commercial time). The reader will also note again a distinct pinkish coloration in the emissions, which is even more visible in the original photos. These photographs are the fourth case presented of wingtip to wingtip aerial spraying in the United States, and as captured on film by three independent photographers in separate locations. These photographs were taken with a lens with an effective focal length of 1200mm (4 feet), as described on the web page "How to Photograph a Chemplane" on www.carnicom.com. Upon additional questioning with the photographer, the trails shown in these photographs were designated as persistent, they extended from horizon to horizon (east to west), and they resulted in additional cloud cover in combination with the heavy activity over Santa Fe on Nov 30 1999. Insufficient data was collected by the photographer to allow a photogrammetric estimate of the altitude of the aircraft.
Unenlarged Photographs Are Shown Below:
SANTA FE NM NOV 30 1999
SOUTHERN SKY 0945
Photographed by Clifford E Carnicom
NEW CHEMTRAIL SPRAY SYSTEM CONFIRMED
AUGUST 24, 1999 PAONIA, COLORADO
THE EVIDENCE CONTINUES TO ACCUMULATE:
An independent photographer has recently submitted the telephotos presented on this page, which further confirm the existence of a new chemical spray system. It will be observed that this system is identical in all respects to that first presented on this web page on Aug 14, 1999. These photographs were taken over Paonia, Colorado on August 24, 1999. These photographs are especially incriminating in that they show the chemical trail turned abruptly off and then on again; the trail below originates from the same plane which is shown above.
GROUND SAMPLES :
MICROSCOPIC FIBERS REVEALED
Ground Sample Photo : 1
Ground Sample Photo : 2
Ground SamplePhoto: 3
Ground Sample Photo : 4
Ground Sample Photo : 5
Ground Sample Photo : 6
All Photographs : Magnification is 100x
WIDTH OF INDIVIDUAL FIBERS : LESS THAN ONE MICRON
Click on Photographs Above For Enlarged View
COMPARISON MICROPHOTOS : CANDIDATE FIBERS
Human Hair (50-65microns)
Nylon 1 (12microns)
Nylon 2 (15microns)
Spider Web (7microns)
All Photographs : Magnification is 100x
Click on Photographs Above For Enlarged View
This work extends previous research and presents a series of microscopic views of suspected chemtrail ground samples received in November and December of 1999. A set of known fibers, both synthetic and natural, is presented for comparison purposes. The two samples received were deposited on the ground several hundred miles apart from one another, and yet they have identical characteristics in all respects. The first sample was directly correlated with aerial activity; the second sample was found by a motorist on an open and paved highway in the Sacramento CA area (airbone fibers were observed prior to photography). All photographs were taken at the same magnification, 100x. Study reveals that these samples are comprised of microscopic fibers which measure less than 1 micron in width; the nearest analogy to this situation would be comparable to the issues raised with asbestos fibers. It is known, however, that the materials collected and shown herein are NOT asbestos. There are potentially serious health issues that arise with the presentation of this data.
OF THE SAMPLES RECEIVED ARE:
1. The size of the fibers; microscopic and not normally visible to the human eye.
2. Extreme adhesiveness
3. Extreme elasticity
4. Wave nature of the fibers
The analysis on the sample fibers
now includes the following methods:
1. Visual Analysis
2. Metric (measurement)
4. Infra-red Spectrometry
5. Environmental conditions of sampling
6. Health Considerations
Ground samples have been received from two separate locations, eastern Oregon and Sacramento area CA. The material from each location is identical in all respects to the microscopic level. The amount of material available for analysis is quite limited. The material is white, and appears as in the following photographs taken at the Sacramento location (photographs originally appeared on Art Bell web site):
The material is extremely adhesive and elastic. It is essentially impossible to separate individual fibers from one another once they have made contact with each other. Reports commonly indicate the material dissipates in the atmosphere upon exposure to the elements, however, the samples received do not appear to be especially volatile. Upon being sealed in a plastic bag in a frozen environment for the majority of time, the material has maintained form since at least Nov 2 1999. Eyewitness accounts of material similiar to that being described herein have accumulated over the past year and earlier in direct connection with unusual aircraft activity. There is at least one video available that substantiates these reports, showing aircraft activity and web like material reaching the ground shortly afterwards. The material appears to be synthetic in nature, although the chemical composition remains to be determined. Certain individuals have suggested identification of the material as either a natural fiber, a common synthetic fiber or as spider webs, but further analysis does not support those claims. The adhesiveness of the shown material is especially significant; it commonly takes three or more passes to separate the material once it has attached itself to a needle or scalpel. Small groups of fibers are easily and more naturally prone to becoming airborne; it requires some finesse to allow the surface tension of a microscope glass side to permit adhesion to the surface. Some chemical tests have been performed upon the material, and they will be described in greater detail in a later section of this report.
A microscope is the tool of choice for more detailed visual analysis. Six microphotographs have been presented above to reveal the finer characteristics of this material; full size and thumbnail photographs are available above. The photographs taken are with a microscope stage illuminated from below, and therefore much of the imagery is a result of shadow. A set will be taken in the future with the stage illuminated from above; these will show the white and somewhat translucent characteristics more readily.
Comparisons have been made at the microscopic level with all suggested fiber candidates, including wool, silk, spider webs, cotton, polyester, nylon, and acrylic. A human hair has been photographed also for size comparison. Visually it becomes quite clear that the ground sample material is not a match against any of the candidate comparisons. The microscopic wave feature of the ground sample is unique in itself, and is not to be seen in any of the alternative fibers presented. The microscope also reveals that what may appear to be a single fiber under normal vision is actually composed of scores to hundreds of actual fibers. The size of the ground sample fibers is another of the remarkable qualities found, and also will be discussed in greater detail under the metric section of this report.
The adhesive nature of these fibers may be explained partially or completely by the unusual microscopic wave like nature of the fibers. In contrast, the following information excerpted from "Adventures with A Microscope", by Richard Headstrom (Dover 1941) may be of interest in analzying any adhesive nature of a spider web:
In addition to being substantially
smaller in size than the spider webs that were measured at 7 microns, the
fibers of the ground sample shown are uniformly adhesive, and show no such separation
of function or form. No fluid substance is visible on the exterior of any of
the ground sample fibers. Spider webs do not possess microscopic wave forms,
and are not formed at the sub-micron level. Wave forms are fairly common in
synthetic fibers such as nylon and polyester.
Readers, parties, or agencies that advocate that the presented ground sample data is explained by spider webs will need to substantiate their claims with all of the following information:
1. Microphotographs at a comparable
magnification that show sufficient similarity of form.
2. Measured spider web fibers at the sub-micron level.
3. Microscopic wave forms within the spider web fibers.
4. Uniform adhesiveness along the length of all spider web fibers.
5. Amount of spider web material commensurate
with ground samples photographed (e.g., 50ft. length, 1/2 inch. diam.)
6. Seasonal and locale compability with the collected ground samples.
In addition, any spider webs presented will be required to be submitted to a series of chemical tests which are presented later in this report. Identification of species will also be required. The substantiating data with respect to spider web claims has not been presented at this time.
Steps were taken to determine the width of the ground sample fibers, as well as of the candidate comparison fibers. This was accomplished using a relatively simple technique with a consumer grade projection screen microscope. A proportional relationship was established between the screen dimension(17.05cm) of the microscopic and the measured field of view with a ruler (9.00mm) at a particular level of magnification (20x). This relationship was then applied at a higher magnification level to the measurement of the fibers mentioned. Candidate comparison fibers range from 7 microns (spider web) to 65 microns(human hair) as shown in the table above. A micron is 1/1000 of a centimeter, or 1 / 25,400 inch. At this point, closer examination of the ground sample fibers revealed the extremely unusual and small size of these fibers. An initial calculation of approximately 1 micron was arrived at for the ground sample. This measurement exceeded the limits of accuracy of the method of measurement being used, and consequently a lab grade microscope was sought for the final measurement. Under a lab grade microscope, the fibers in question from the ground sample were measured as being LESS than one micron. No measured natural or synthetic fibers suggested as possible explanations for the ground sample are even remotely close to this size. The nearest candidate for a known fiber of this size is asbestos. For a variety of reasons, it is known that the material under evaluation is not asbestos, which will also be explained in more detail later.
Asbestos is a material that is under comprehensive management by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. It is managed as such because of the health risks and hazards associated with microscopic fibers of this size range. A wide variety of information on the hazards and illnesses associated with asbestos is easily accessible on the internet, and readers are encouraged to become familiar with it. The analysis above demonstrates that the material in question should likely be subject to the same level of scrutiny and investigation on behalf of the welfare of the general public. This is especially the case if it is later demonstrated that these fibers are a direct result of aircraft activity in the open environment, which is now commonly reported and documented with reports and photography. There are obvious health risks associated with the ingestion of microscopic fibers of unknown origin and composition. It is also important to note that a individual fiber of this size would not normally be visible to the human eye. It is not known at this time whether the fibers under examination will dissolve or remain in the human body over time.
It is also reasonable to expect that the United States Environmental Protection Agency, administered by Carol M. Browner, is dutifully obligated to accurately and completely identify the material in question, and to disclose those results to the American public. Consequently, a small portion of one of the ground samples has been delivered by certified mail to Carol M. Browner of the EPA, and the citizens of this country are encouraged to inquire as to the results. The collecting of additional samples by observers will be of benefit in providing further material for examination and analysis.
Below follows a chart (a direct link to the reference source is provided) of particles of various sizes, including the microscopic levels now associated with the ground samples that have been received. It will be observed that particles on the order of a single micron include some bacteria, asbestos fibers, tobacco smoke, combustion particles and insecticide dust.
Chart of Particle Sizes in Microns from GelmanSingapore:
The following chemical tests further distinguish the ground sample from spider web fibers. These tests are provided in addition to the unique visual properties of the fibers which have been described earlier. Three identical chemical tests were applied to both the spider web fibers and the ground sample fibers, and microphotographs of the resulting reactions were taken after approximately 5 minutes. The size of the other candidate fibers (wool, silk, polyester, etc.) eliminates the need for additional chemical comparisons at this time. The top two photographs of this table depict the original source material used (as described in the photographs at the beginning of this page). The remaining photographs show the results of the chemical testing under similiar conditions after an equivalent lapse of time. The three chemical tests are:
1. Application of Hair Perm Solution to both spider web and ground sample fibers:
The chemical solution for the first test consists of the following: Water, Ammonium Thyoglycolate, Butylene Glycol, Sodium Hydroxide, Ammonium Hydroxide, PPG-12-PEG-50 Lanolin, Sodium Lauroamphoacetate, Diammonium Dithiodiglycolate, Laureth-23, Pentasodium Pentetate, Choline Bicarbonate, Teacocoyl, Hydrolyzed Collagen, Styrene/PVP Colpolymer, Fragrance, Annato. This chemical solution has little to no effect upon the spider web fibers, as can be seen in the photographs. In contrast, the solution applied to the ground sample causes a marked congealing reaction to the fibers. Since the same chemical test was applied to both fibers in an equal manner, this demonstrates that the two fibers types are unique from one another in addition to the visual criteria defined earlier, and that therefore the ground sample is not composed of spider web fibers.
2. Application of Sulphuric Acid to both spider web and ground sample fibers:
Sulphuric acid causes an immediate contraction of the ground sample fibers. The microscopic wave forms within the ground sample fibers become smaller and even more pronounced than in the orginal fibers. The ground sample fibers will eventually dissolve in the sulphuric acid solution, after approximately 15-20 minutes. In contrast, sulphuric acid causes no change in the smooth form of the spider web fibers, and actually results initially in an enlargement of the fiber size. Spider webs will also eventually dissolve in the solution of sulphuric acid, although the process takes longer than with the ground sample, i.e., approximately 35-45 minutes.
3. Application of Methyl Ethyl Ketone and Acetone to both spider web and ground sample fibers:
Equal amounts (1 drop) of both methyl ethyl ketone and acetone were added to each fiber type. There is a reaction of effervescence in both cases. In the case of the spider web fibers, effervescence is mild in nature, with fewer and larger gas bubbles produced, as can be seen in the photographs shown. In the case of the ground sample, effervescence is extremely active, with generally smaller and many more gaseous pockets produced.
SPIDER WEB SOURCE MATERIAL
GROUND SAMPLE SOURCE MATERIAL
Spider Web : Hair Perm Chemicals
Ground Sample : Hair Perm Chemicals
Spider Web : Sulphuric Acid
Ground Sample : Sulphuric Acid
Spider Web : Methy Ethyl Ketone & Acetone
Ground Sample:Methyl Ethyl Ketone & Acetone
Magnification of all Photos : 100x
In addition to the six defining physical and visual criteria of distinction between spider webs and the ground sample which have been presented earlier, these three chemical tests further distinguish the fiber types from one another. At this point it has been demonstrated that the ground sample fibers cannot currently be identified as any known or common natural or synthetic fiber. A minimum of nine different criteria also clearly demonstrate that they are not of spider origin. They are sub-micron in size, and they can be considered a potential health risk until they are positively identified. Further analysis and interpretation by those within the chemistry profession of the results which have been presented is both welcome and desirable.
It is also significant that unusual aircraft activity was observed in conjunction with the presence of the ground samples currently being analyzed. It is appropriate that the Environmental Protection Agency, administered by Carol M. Browner, positively and completely identify the ground sample that is being provided to her, and that this agency promptly release the results of those tests to the public.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS OF SAMPLING:
The primary behavioral characteristics of this material have been previously described. These include high adhesiveness and elasticity. The sub-micron width and the microscopic wave forms within the fibers has also been discussed in detail. It may be of value to surmise the expected behavior of such filaments if they are determined to originate from flight altitudes.
There are repeated, frequent, and widespread accounts of illness being reported in association with chemtrail spraying activity. These reports are in need of a higher level of documentation than currently exists. These reports often center on respiratory distress and allergic reactions. [Unfinished segment]
summary of preliminary findings is presented; adequate time for full presentation and documentation of efforts does not exist at this time. The focus of current research is upon the geophysical and energy implications of the aerosol operations.
Analysis of time deviations over a five month period continues to indicate the very real possibility of a decrease in the rotational rate of the earth. An analysis of historical data from the U.S. Naval Observatory and the International Earth Rotation Service justifies the pursuit of this topic. The variations within the historical data are statistically significant to an extremely high level. More recent research indicates not only the possiblity of a measurable deceleration component, but of a non-linear component as well. The prospect of a increasing deceleration component is therefore under serious consideration, and it remains supported by all independently available data from this researcher. Small changes in time will translate to large changes in the kinetic energy of the earth, and geophysical events of greater magnitude and disturbance are expected as a result. The data indicates the possibility of increasing differences of time (rotational vs. atomic standards) with projected geophysical effects.
Initial investigations have been conducted on historical Schumann frequency data. The data indicates an increase in this frequency over the recent period of several years that has been examined. Popularly circulated stated changes of the Schumann frequency on the order of several hertz appear to be completely unsubtantiated. Changes on the order of a a fraction of a hertz from a reference value of approximately 7.8Hz are realistically under consideration. The literature shows a measured relationship between changes in Schumann frequency and the electron density of the ionosphere. A reasonable interpretation of the increase in the Schumann frequency results from an increase in electron density of both the atmosphere and the lower atmosphere as a primary objective of the aerosol operations. A conservative first estimate of the increase in electron density is on the order of 8% over the last five years; small changes in electron density dramatically alter the electromagnetic characteristics of a plasma. The remarkable electromagnetic properties of the ionosphere are evidence of that fact.
Energy levels of the HAARP facility act a level commensurate with solar storms. It is expected that the HAARP facility can therefore effect a global geophysical impact, including both electron density and energy state changes of the ionosphere and atmosphere.
Increased solar energy, e.g., from solar storms, and increased moisture are expected to enhance the intended effects of energy accumulation of the aerosol operations. The onset of operations in a particular region appear often to be predictable from the consideration of these and other factors, including aerosol concentration levels.
Changes in mass and kinetic energy are related through the equations of special relativity. Changes in mass will have an effect upon the gravitational field. Expected changes in the gravitational field from historical kinetic energy changes alone appear to be too low for detection with customary instrumentation by a factor of approximately 1 in 100,000. At a conceptual level, a decrease in the rotational rate of the earth is expected to produce a decrease in the gravitational field. Dimensional changes in the earth and mass displacements may act at a measurable level; GRACE satellite data may be a useful source of information for continued analysis.
Atmospheric pressure is expected to decrease, although the level of detection by instrumentation remains in question.
The expected increase in the radius of the earth as a result of decreasing angular momentum of the earth has previously been discussed.
There appears to be a strong relationship between the mass of a body, the angular velocity and the magnetic field strength at a macroscopic level. The foundation of this study indicates that the magnetic field strength is (commonly to one order of magnitude) proportional to the product of the mass and the square of the angular velocity of that body. The study is based upon data available from solar system measurements. This initial examination opens many prospects for the consideration of relationships between mass, gravity, magnetism, electromagnetics, velocity, momentum and kinetic energy, relativity dilations and quantum physics. The origin of ferromagnetism as a direct result of electron spin can not be ignored in conjunction with this finding. The general principle of magnetism as a result of mass in motion is also a derivative of this result. The magnetic field of the earth is expected, therefore, to continue to decrease with any decrease in the rotational rate of the earth.
Magnetic field variation in correspondence with solar flux variation appears to be easily measurable with fairly simple equipment. The variation with respect to aerosol operations, ELF-VLF propagation and astronomic events such as eclipses remains difficult to quantify.
Unusually high levels of ferromagnetism appear to be evident. The simulation of the conditions that best appear to reproduce this result include the removal of the ferromagnetism through heat, and the subsequent exposure of the material, e.g., steel, to high level magnetic fields. Artificial magnetic fields are a consideration in that result.
An estimate of the decline in the earth's magnetic field strength as a function of a decrease in the earth's rotational rate has been developed. Computations from the relationship indicate that this decline in magnetic field strength is a measureable amount, even by historical rates of changes in the earth's rotational rate. If the rotational rate declines beyond historical standards, the magnitude only makes this decline in magnetic field strength easier to detect. An estimate as to when the magnetic field strength declines to zero is also available from the relationship that has been developed.
A relationship between the decline in magnetic field strength with respect to a decline in the gravity field has also been developed at a first level of approximation. The magnitude of this change does not appear to be measurable.
A hypothesis of a fundamental geophysical motive of the aerosol operations does remain under serious consideration. The fundamental question exists as to whether or not it is feasible that the aerosol operations could affect the kinetic energy state of the earth. A mechanism of energy interaction is under review at this time. An examination of the energy density of a plasma, applied to the earth's atmosphere and ionosphere in particular, underlies the physics of this study. Analysis does indicate that is feasible to consider the prospect of an energized atmospheric plasma that exceeds the energy quota from kinetic energy changes in the earth. One method for increasing the energy state of the plasma involves the slow modulation of a high-frequency wave within the plasma, with the fundamental factor of influence being the ratio of the square of the plasma frequency to the square of the modulated frequency. Continued measurements support the existence of omnipresent ELF propagation at multiples of 4Hz. The fundamental objectives and methods of the HAARP facility can not be ignored in this analysis. A central question which remains is that of energy conversion efficiency; current analysis indicates that a conversion efficiency on the order of 10-6 (first estimate) is required between any kinetic energy changes of the earth and kinetic energy accumulated within the plasma of the atmosphere/ionosphere with an approximate plasma frequency of 3MHz modulated with ELF at 100Hz.. For interest sake, the conversion efficiency of the HAARP facility for ELF propagation is stated to be on the order of 10-8. An analysis of the time data indicates that a failure of affecting the kinetic energy state of the earth remains in effect, if indeed this exists as one viable motive of the aerosol operations,
All previously discussed applications of the aerosol operations, including environmental control, biological operations, electromagnetic operations, military operations and geophysical considerations remain substantiated with the research that has been conducted.
The consideration of directed biological operations upon the populace remains paramount. All factors discussed on this and previous pages act in a cumulative sense. There is no implied or stated act or motive of benevolence to the general human population within this research presentation.
photo by NorrinRadd
AGAIN, AND AGAIN - AND AGAIN
Clifford E Carnicom
Nov 30 2005
The following is a report submitted by a citizen in northern California. This report adds to the chain of evidence that has been brought forth for nearly seven years now on the subjecting of the populace to unidentified airbone contaminants. This report demonstrates that there are very likely significant health consequences that accompany these atmospheric operations. The report also demonstrates that the United States Environmental Protection Agency has completely failed in its mission to serve the public and to protect the health and welfare of our environment. The fibers reported here appear to be, in all respects, identical to those that the EPA has refused to identify when originally requested to do so more than six years ago. The 'policy' of the EPA on public record is that they will not test, identify or examine any 'unsolicited material'. The minority argument of claiming an ordinary origin to these fibers, such as spider webs, has long ago been shown to be unreasonable; these materials are evaporative and transformational in nature, and they display unusual dimension, mass and character. It is long past the point where the EPA must be challenged in a legal sense on their position. The sooner that this is recognized by U.S. and international citizens and acted upon, the sooner that we can restore the health and welfare of our atmosphere. This reparation will not occur without confrontation, and we will continue to pay the price for apathy and submission to these violations of natural law and divine right. I would recommend that pressure in the strongest form be brought to bear on the representatives of government of this nation if we wish to be able to breath and live in health. The submission of the citizens of this nation to the EPA 'policy' has brought no resolution to the wanton failure to protect life and environnment. There is an appropriate time for confrontation and rejection of the untenable EPA 'policy', and this point in time has already passed. An organized challenge by the public to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is necessary to halt the EPA's condoned contamination and degradation of our planet and atmosphere.
Extensive observations, records, analysis on similar airborne fibrous materials and the EPA historical correspondence on this subject are available on this site. Much appreciation is extended to Mr. Challender for his substantial effort in making this report available to the public.
Report On The Event of
Sunday 13 November 2005
By Jeff Challender – 17 November 2005
This is a report on the event of Sunday, 13 November 2005. It began at approximately 12:50 PM PST over my home in North Highlands California. At the time, my son was playing in our back yard. Since I have been following chem–spraying over our home for more than two years, he is accustomed to alerting me when he sees such activity.
At the time mentioned above, my son called me to look at the sky. Indeed, the sky was full of the “sheets” of material we usually see as chem-trails spread out after spraying operations. In particular there was a plane leaving a long, non-dissipating, emission to our east. I had my wife bring me our Vivitar 3300 digital camera as fast as possible. I photographed the aircraft and its trail as best I could from my position. I also took one shot of a recent trail, which was spreading fast.
Had I known what was to come in about two hours time, I would have taken more than four shots of the skies that afternoon… Instead, I returned to my office to resume working on my website.
Post Aircraft Operation "Haze" Conditions
At around 3 PM PST my son, in a very excited state, called me to come look at the sky again. I made my way to the back yard, and stood transfixed. Before my very eyes, strands and clumps of a white fibrous material were falling from on high. This material was snagging in the trees, alighting on houses, the grass, and parked cars. I was so stunned, I’m afraid I forgot to get photos of this phenomenon. I’m regretting that failure now!
I did think to ask my 18 year old son go about with small sticks and twigs he could find, and collect samples of the material. He was quite willing to help. I am permanently disabled due to spinal injury some 6 years ago. My mobility is limited, because my legs no longer function normally. For this reason, I rely on my son to be my “legs” when necessary.
I cautioned him NOT to touch the stuff, nor to get it in his eyes, hair, or on his clothing. He was careful, and suffered no apparent ill effects. Unfortunately, my wife did mash some of the substance between her fingers, expressing that it felt “waxy”. She visited our family Doctor four days later, with an itching rash problem… The rash has since cleared up with the application of an ointment prescribed by the Doctor. He was not able to diagnose the exact cause.
Within minutes, the “fallout” had all disappeared! Outside, it had all melted, evaporated, or just dissipated. Very curious. I have never seen anything like this event before, but had heard of it on the Internet.
We put the collected samples into a small jar with a snap-on cap and left it in my office over night. The thought was to get the sample to Mr. Clifford Carnicom, as I believed he could have it analyzed in a laboratory.
Original airborne fibrous material collected in jar
When we examined the jar of material on Monday 14 November, two-thirds to three-quarters of the sample was gone. I photographed the jar, and what was left of the sample. We then tried to hermetically seal it using packing tape around the cap and rim. It was hoped that perhaps a partial pressure of the “evaporating” material developing in the jar would cause the air inside to become saturated; impeding or halting erosion of the sample. This simple procedure appears to have had limited success, as the sample did “survive” into the week.
On Tuesday, 15 November, we took photos of the jar once again. Some of the material was definitely missing, but the loss was far less than during the first 24 hours. I also made a phone call to Ms. Fels, an associate of Clifford Carnicom, that evening. She gave me contact information for Mr. Carnicom.
On Wednesday, 16 November, Mr. Carnicom and I had a very pleasant and productive conversation regarding the events of Sunday 13 November.
It was most disappointing to learn that there was no chance of having a chemical analysis done on the material. Imagine my surprise to find out that the Federal Environmental Protection Agency has no interest in dealing with samples like my son had collected. This is the US government agency chartered to protect citizens from hazardous chemicals in the air, water, and land! One has to wonder why this tax-supported “agency representing the interests of the people” refuses to investigate allegations, from tax-paying citizens, that SOMEONE is spraying the skies with chemicals DETRIMENTAL to the environment we all live in. Adding insult to injury, they flatly refuse to even examine physical samples of the alleged chemicals! WHO DO THESE PEOPLE THINK THEY WORK FOR??
Mr. Carnicom therefore suggested that I do what I could with the sample on my own. Naturally, he urged the utmost care in dealing with the unknown material.
So, per Mr. Carnicom’s suggestions, I worked with the sample myself on Thursday 17 November. I connected my Intel QX3 USB microscope to my main work PC. My wife set up a “safe as possible” work area for me, with good ventilation and plenty of light. I took one last set of pictures of the jar, and removed the sealing tape.
I was not prepared for what happened when I popped the cap off the jar, though… It seems that when we sealed the jar with the packing tape, it did build up a concentration of whatever this material becomes when it breaks down. I was hit in the face with some sort of extremely noxious gas! My eyes burned fiercely, and I began coughing desperately. There was a very strong metallic taste on my tongue as well. It took several minutes to recover from this terrible bout. I worry what the long-term effects might be, but in the short term I did not get sick or feel any incapacitation.
I was determined to continue, however. So, the sample was removed from the jar, and placed on a glass plate. Using plastic tweezers, and a stainless steel penknife, I stripped what material was left from the twigs and sticks. I place one-third into a sample container for storage in the freezer, and another third into another container for storage in the refrigerator. The last third went into a capped examination chamber for the microscope. All of the containers used were supplied with the Intel QX3 microscope. In all, the remaining sample amounted to about one tablespoon. Not much at all considering the volume in the jar that first day. In the beginning, there was an estimated four tablespoons worth.
I spent over an hour examining the material, and capturing images with the microscope software. The examination included use of the 10x, 60x, and 200x magnification settings. It also saw the use of top, and bottom lighting at low, medium, and high intensities.
After capturing the images, they were processed in my PC for the web. It is only a gross examination, as I have no facilities for a proper scientific analysis of the sample. The images are included with this report for study by anyone who might be interested.
I hope that my efforts have been of some service to the greater goal of exposing what some corrupt authorities are doing to our skies, and to the inhabitants of the world.
Jeff Challender – 17 November 2005
This report, and accompanying images, may be freely reproduced and distributed. None of it may be used for monetary profit in any form.
BRAZEN PROPAGANDA FROM NASA
Clifford E Carnicom
Oct 22 2004
Edited Feb 11 2005
The highest levels of the United States government have been used to lie to the American public and the world. These lies have culminated in the conduct of a criminal war, and the harm to civilized society from these actions continues to this day.
History will eventually reveal, if it is truthfully written, that the United States Air Force is party to another set of falsehoods that attempt to conceal the nature of the aerosol operations that are being conducted upon the public without their informed consent. These aerosols have now dramatically altered the very nature of the atmosphere in ways that threaten our existence upon this planet. Examination of the issue strongly indicates a dominating military objective as only one of many aspects of the aerosol campaign. The first tactic of choice by the United States Air Force was an attempt to ridicule the issue by authoritatively declaring it as a "hoax."
This complicity has forayed into the arena of brazen propaganda, and is being conducted by another arm of United States "authority", the National Atmospheric and Space Administration (NASA). NASA has recently adopted a public strategy of abusing its position of national and public service by attempting to indoctrinate the citizens, including children, that the aerosol operations are a "normal" and expected consequence of daily life and aircraft. Nothing can be further from the truth, as is also apparent from an honest and thorough examination of the issue.
The latest strategy, apparently in partial reaction to the failures of the "hoax" declaration, would earn a rank of commendation from George Orwell himself. The doublespeak from NASA now characterizes the onslaught of aerosol operations, i.e., the deliberate and systematic injection of massive amounts of particulates into our atmosphere by aircraft, as "CONTRAIL CLUTTER" and as "SPECIAL CLOUDS".
The "clutter" and "special clouds" are now to be counted by our children in staged "educational" events. These events serve the purpose of indoctrination for an Orwellian world that declares the operations to be "normal". It is a world in which there is no need to question this authority.
The following excerpts exist from recent public web sites that are administered by NASA:
(A Proclamation by NASA)
From the NASA Student Features Program:
"We're looking for special clouds called contrails.
We want students, teachers and parents all over the world to report the number of contrails in the sky....
Contrails look like white lines in the sky"
"Unusual", "Persistent", and "Persistent Spreading"
For those that wish to examine the question of "normalcy", I encourage them to view a documentary that is available through the public domain on this site. Images from a documentary are sometimes helpful to clarify an issue. The recent presentations by NASA, coupled with the historical stance of the US Air Force, and the actions of the United States government are at the very core of propaganda. The effects of this deceit are now apparent in the world situation.
The citizens and nations of the world have not yet confronted the aerosol issue in an organized and public fashion. There is no guarantee or assurance that they will ever do so. The methods of deception are now being extended to the minds of youth with a longer term goal of indoctrination. These methods purposefully separate us from truth with an agenda of manipulation and control.
If the children are not given the opportunity to seek out the truth, you have lost your cause.
Clifford E Carnicom
October 22, 2004
Note: My thanks to the citizen that has brought this "public information" to my attention.
AIR FORCE SPOKESMAN
"MASTER INTELLIGENCE OFFICER"
Clifford E Carnicom
Santa Fe, New Mexico
Jun 29 2005
Lt. Michael K. Gibson
United States Air Force
Master Intelligence Officer
It is now established that the spokesperson for the United States Air Force chosen to issue an edict on the aerosol issue is a Master Intelligence Officer. Lt. Col. Michael Gibson assumed command of the 451st Information Operations Squadron at RAF Menwith Hill July 9, 2001. Upon this change of duty, The Air Intelligence Agency in Lackland Air Force Base, Texas, states in October 20011:
commander, Gibson, is a master intelligence officer, who has served primarily
abroad at installations such as: Iraklion AS, Crete; Templehof Central Airport,
Berlin; and Ramstein AB, Germany. He has been an executive officer for the
commander and vice commander, of Air Force Intelligence Command. He has
previous command experience as 68th Intelligence Squadron commander at Brooks
He comes to the squadron from the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., where he was the deputy chief, Congressional Inquiry Division, Directorate of Legislative Liaison, Office for the Secretary of the Air Force at headquarters U.S. Air Force.
Readers may judge for themselves the veracity of the proclamation by Lt. Gibson by reviewing the historical record of evidence and documentation on the aerosol issue. This record now exceeds a period of six and one-half years.
AIR FORCE LIES TO AMERICA
This letter authored by Michael K. Gibson, Lt. Col., USAF
This document received by email on September 11 2000
Posted by Clifford E Carnicom
September 11 2000
"hoax (n.)- An act intended to deceive or trick."
"lie (n) - 1. A false statement deliberately presented as true.
(v) 2. To convey a false image or impression."
The American Heritage Dictionary, 3rd Edition, 1994.
AIR FORCE INCREASES
RANK OF LIE
This letter authored by Walter M. Washabaugh, Colonel, USAF
This document received by email on May 22 2001
Posted by Clifford E Carnicom
May 22 2001
"hoax (n.)- An act intended to deceive or trick."
"lie (n) - 1. A false statement deliberately presented as true.
(v) 2. To convey a false image or impression."
The American Heritage Dictionary, 3rd Edition, 1994.
Below is Sen. Feinstein's cover letter and the attached letter to her
from Col. Walter M. Washabaugh.
May 16, 2001
Dear Mr. Moors
With reference to your inquiry concerning "chemtrails", I have received
a response from the Department of the Air Force which I am enclosing.
I hope that the response is helpful, and that the information it
contains will clarify the situation for you. If you have further
questions, or if my office can assist you with any other federal
matters, please do not hesitate to call on me again.
Once again, thank you for contacting me.
With warmest personal regards.
The attached letter is on DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE letterhead with
the seal of "Office of the Secretary" in the left margin.
Dear Senator Feinstein,
This responds to your inquiry for Mr. Rick Moors concerning
The term "chemtrail" is a hoax that began circulating approximately
three years ago which asserts the government is involved in a joint
federal program of covert spraying of the public. The "chemtrails" are
most often described as "unusual contrail or contrail patterns" seen
coming from military and civilian aircraft. The "chemtrail" hoax has
been investigated and refuted by many established and accredited
universities, scientific organizations and major media publications
There has been an increase in the number of contrails observed due to
the significant civil aviation growth in the past decade, and the
patterns observed are directly correlated to the grid pattern formed by
aircraft flying north/south and east/west routes designated by the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA manages the National
Airspace System (NAS) and controls both civilian and military aircraft
using the NAS. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are the
agencies charged with conducting atmospheric and climate experiments and
are investigating the effects of contrail formation and dissipation on
Aircraft and their engines can produce a variety of condensation
patterns ("contrails"), exhaust plumes, and vapor trails. Furthermore,
the Air Force performs missions during which, exhaust is released into
the atmosphere. The exhaust emissions produced by aircraft and space
launch vehicles can produce contrails that look very similar to clouds
whcih can last for only a few seconds or as long as several hours.
Vapor trails are formed only under certain atmospheric conditions and
create a visible atmospheric wake similar to a boat propeller in water
and usually dissipate very rapidly.
Contrails consist ofice particles that form or nucleate around the small
soot or aerosol particles in the exhaust hases. The contrails are
formed when the relative humidity increases because of the mixing of
warm and moist exhaust gas with colder and less humid ambient air of the
atmosphere. Contrails become visible roughly about a wingspan distance
behind the aircraft. Contrails can be formed by propeller or jet
turbine powered aircraft.
The contrails formed by the exhaust at high altitude are typically
whicte and very similar to cirrus clouds. As the exhaust gases expand
and mix with the atmosphere, the contrails diffuses and spreads. At
sunsets, these contrails can be visibly eye-catching and striking as
they reflect the blue, yellow and red spectrum of the reflected
sunlight. Due to horizontal wind shear and a (comment - sentence ends
here, and does not continue on the second page).
A different type of contrail or condensation trail is caused when a wing
surface or winglet causes a cavitation of iar in very humid conditions.
This results in a unique vapor trail that is not formed due to exhaust
Aerial spraying for pest or weed control and fire suppression is the
only Air Force activities that involve aircraft intentionally spraying
chemical compounds (insecticides, herbicides, fire retardants, oil
dispersants). The only unit in the Air Force capable of aerial spray
operations to control disease-carrying pests and insects is the Air
Force Reserve Command's (AFRC) 910th Airlift Wing, Youngstown - Warren
Air Reserve Station, Ohio. The aerial spray mission uses four specially
configured C-130 Hercules turboprop iarcraft. Aerial spraying enables
large parcels of land or water to be treated safely, quickly,
accurately, and cheaply. This is the only fixed wing aerial-spray
capability in the Department of Defense. Although the Department of
Defense initiates most of the unit's missions, its services are also
requested by local, state, and other federal agencies and coordinated
with the Center for Disease Control. The most common missions flown are
for mosquito, sand flea and weed control. Several states have also
requested support to combat grasshoppers and locusts.
For a number of years commercial companies have been involved in cloud
seeding and fire supression measures. Cloud seeding requires the
release of chemicals in the atmosphere in an effort to have water
crystals attach themselves and become heavy enough to produce rain. The
Air Force does not have a cloud seeding capability. The Air Force's
policy is to observe and forecast the weather to suport military
operations. The Air Force is not conducting any weather modification
experiments or programs and has no plans to do so in the future.
In short, there is no such thing as a "chemtrail" -the actual contrails
are safe and are a natural phenomenon. They pose no health hazard of any
kind. We thank you for this opportunity to address your concerns and
trust you find this information helpful.
WALTER M. WASHABAUGH, Colonel, USAF
Chief, Congressional Inquiry Division
Office of Legislative Liason
OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS
Clifford E Carnicom
Aug 20 2003
The United States Air Force Office of Special Investigations, Andrews Air Force base, has recently demonstrated an increased level of interest in the research that is available on www.carnicom.com that examines the aerosol operations. Particular interest has been repeatedly indicated in the page entitled Air Force Increases Rank of Lie, which was posted on May 22 2001. This post involves a statement issued by the United States Air Force from Walter M. Washabaugh, Colonel, USAF Chief, Congressional Inquiry Division Office of Legislative Liason, to Senator Barbara Feinstein on behalf of a constituent.
In this statement, the United States Air Force has established itself on record as stating that the aerosol operations are a "hoax", and that these same aerosol operations have been adequately investigated and refuted by both the media and academia of this country. The definition of the words "lie" and "hoax" have made available to the public at the top of the relayed letter. Citizens may also wish to become familiar with an earlier letter issued by the United States Air Force contained on the web page entitled Air Force Lies to America., posted on Sep 11 2000. The definitions of the words lie and hoax are also available to the public on that page as well.
The description of AFOSI is stated as follows:
"The Air Force Office of Special Investigations is a field operating agency with headquarters at Andrews Air Force Base, Md. It has been the Air Force's felony-level investigative service since August 1, 1948. The agency reports to the Inspector General, Office of the Secretary of the Air Force."
The interest of Bolling Air Force base, advertised as "The Chief's Own", has also recently been demonstrated in the information available to the public on www.carnicom.com.
Clifford E Carnicom
Aug 20 2003
A RESPONSE TO
LT. COL. MICHAEL GIBSON
Authored by Diane Harvey
This document received by email on September 13 2000
Posted by Clifford E Carnicom
September 13 2000
To: Michael K. Gibson, Lt.Col, USAF
Deputy Chief, Congressional Inquiry Division
Office of Legislative Liaison
Dear Col. Gibson:
This responds to your "response" to Representative Mark Green concerning chemtrails. I have of course removed your quotation marks from the word “chemtrails” and put them where they belong: around the word "response". Your ludicrous reply to sincere citizens’ demands for an explanation is receiving precisely the quality and quantity of outrage it so richly deserves. There are tens of thousands of us who have perforce been obliged to educate ourselves, in depth and at tedious length, in regard to this relatively new phenomenon overhead. We've done our homework, collected our research, and published our increasing encyclopedias of evidence. We are not amused with your infantile "ice crystals" taradiddle.
My father, like you, was a colonel in the USAF. He was physically courageous, deeply honorable and intellectually scrupulous. He never told lies, and neither do his children, who were patriotic little career Air Force brats. He thought of his service career, strange to say, as keeping the world safe for...well, what exactly was it he kept the world safe for, Col. Gibson? Oh yes: Democracy. Does this word ring any bells? I’m sure you’ve heard of it- the old “of the people, by the people, and for the people” kind of thing? Are you quite comfortable, morally speaking then, with your present function in our threadbare but still supposedly democratic society? Are you proud of yourself, sitting around churning out insultingly childish, barefaced lies to the American public? Who do you imagine is soothed by your serving up such an abysmally unintelligent piece of droning fluff? We are concerned, Colonel, and we are correct: your patronizingly meaningless letter is just one bit of proof that something is terribly wrong. And we can only be disgusted that the USAF, having done it’s duty to help destroy Communism, seems now to be doing its part to destroy democracy as well.
Furthermore, Colonel Gibson, if you are “only following orders”, and feel you absolutely must tell outrageous lies to the public, then at least let them be reasonably scientifically sophisticated and intellectually edible. Since you lack the courage and honor required of honesty and a decent response, at least give us worthier puffs of smoke and a bit of razzle-dazzle mirror-work. Don’t bother your pretty little head trying to palm off pathetic imitations of Contrails 101 on a segment of the population which is highly informed. The purple dinosaur level of your letter to Mr. Green entirely fails to entertain us. You will need to command a far higher order of drivel altogether for that.
You may choose to treat us as imbeciles, but this merely degrades you personally, and your department, and the USAF, and this government. I am not a liar, Colonel Gibson, and neither am I subject to inane delusional states. The countless other perfectly sane citizens of this country who are observing and reporting the factual proliferation
of chemtrails are also not going to be content to be spoken to in such a shamefully dismissive manner. We know precisely who is hoaxing who, and we are hardly going to be quelled by such a fatuous and pathetic attempt at a reply. You have not heard the last from us, Colonel Gibson. If I were you, I’d give the matter of chemtrails some serious thought. As long as they are present in our daily lives, we are going to be present in yours, and in the offices of our elected officials.
cc: The Honorable Mark Green
United States House of Representatives
Washington DC 20515
by Mike Blair
The strange-looking streaks in the sky aren't your imagination. They are anti-bacteriological warfare chemicals being tested by the federal government. And the public has been kept in the dark.
The Pentagon [and possibly other federal government entities] is testing anti-biological warfare agents, which produce the mysterious "chemtrails" that are appearing on an irregular basis in the skies over many American cities, towns and rural areas.
An Air Force veteran, who while on active duty was attached to the nation's top secret National Security Agency (NSA), presents compelling evidence that the Pentagon is using regular Air Force and Air Force National Guard aircraft to release anti-bacteriological warfare chemicals into the skies.
Unlike True Contrails
The former researcher said he believes he has tracked the chemical spraying to the "unconventional pathogen countermeasures program" of the top secret Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The agency has funded laboratory studies and tests conducted by scientists at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor.
DARPA Director Lawrence H. Dubois claims the agency is "not doing any large-scale or outdoor testing" and he knows of "no evidence that [the chemical substance] is being sprayed from aircraft by any agency of the federal government."
"After talking to friends in Congress, government and medicine, I have been referred to the University of Michigan and Dr. James Baker Jr., his nanotechnology oil-water liquid-the same liquid developed by Dr. Craig Wright, a scientist at Novavax Inc. in Columbia, Md.," the researcher said. "I speak for thousands of American citizens who are being sprayed by military aircraft and haven't a clue why the government is spraying and lying to them. They are very concerned in light of the present administration."
The researcher said the government is planning for a biological attack against the United States. Government officials have referred to such an attack as "not if, but when."
A number of Third World countries hostile to the United States as well as Russia and Red China are involved in massive chemical and biological warfare development programs.
The government and its scientists claim that the chemicals being tested are harmless to humans. This researcher disagrees.
including pneumonia tracked the spraying effort across America but the
American people have not been told about the project," the
"These aircraft trails appear below 10,000 feet and do not act like ice crystals. Spray from aircraft are observed cutting on and off as you would throw a switch on the aircraft control panel. Grid patterns are painted in the sky with 'X' and circles are also painted."
According to one investigator, the oil in the substance being sprayed is responsible for "rainbow-like" colorations that appear frequently during the formation of the chemtrails. The "X" found in an area being sprayed probably marks the areas for satellite study of the dispersal patterns.
Government officials are concerned about a biological attack against the United States involving the use of the deadly disease anthrax, which several countries, including Iraq and North Korea, are developing as a biological weapon.
Government officials also are concerned about the development of a pandemic outbreak of a deadly flu, similar to the so-called Spanish flu that killed tens of millions worldwide in 1918.
Recent outbreaks of a new
flu strain in Hong Kong, which appears to be transmitted by chickens, has
given rise to fears about a pandemic outbreak
As it turns out, the chemical substance is being tested at the University of Michigan under Baker's direction. Baker, a professor of internal medicine, serves as director of the Center for Biologic Nanotechnology at the university's medical school, which is effective at countering flu viruses and anthrax spores.
The substance, called BCTP, is a milky-white emulsion of tiny lipid drop lets suspended in solvent developed by Wright, chief research scientist at Novavax. Wright is also president of Novavax Biologics Division. Novavax is a bio pharmaceuticals company.
BCTP is made of water,
soybean oil, Triton X 100 detergent and the solvent tri-n-butyl phosphate.
BCTP envelops the viruses and spores, causing them to explode and thus
destroying them upon contact.
Many critics are
convinced the military is using an unsafe vaccine. "I believe the
government is undertaking experiments with BCTP, a means of countering an
anthrax or other biological attack without anyone being at
"But the point is, you don't experiment on the public without their knowledge and consent, or at least that is the way it's supposed to be,... in a democracy" he added.
The chemtrail theory is a group of theories regarding what are claimed to be unnatural contrails from aircraft. Contrails are formed by condensation of water vapor in the aircrafts' exhausts. Proponents of the theories maintain that some trails have an appearance and quality different from those of normal water-based contrails; i.e. that chemtrails are not consistent with the known properties of contrails. The general unifying factor is the belief that some kind of chemical or biological agent is being secretly released.
The term "chemtrail" should not be confused with other forms of aerial dumping (e.g. crop dusting, cloud seeding or aerial firefighting). It specifically refers to alleged covert, systematic, high-altitude dumping of unknown substances generally for some illicit or undisclosed purpose, be it that of governments, terrorists, private corporations, or all of the above.
Among the theories proposed for the purpose of the alleged "chemtrails" are: atmospheric and weather modification, biological warfare, mind control, occult purposes. They are also theorized to be part of a system to counter the effects of global warming, to create a cheap wireless communications network for the military, or to create a more sophisticated radar system (for both defensive and scientific application).
The chemtrail theory apparently first achieved prominence in mid-to-late 1990s.  Chemtrails have been discussed on radio programs hosted by Art Bell and Jeff Rense, who frequently deal with paranormal and conspiratorial topics, as well as in more mainstream news sources. According to a FAQ posted at Jeff Rense's website, "chemtrails (CTs) look like contrails initially, but are much thicker, extend across the sky and are often laid down in varying patterns of Xs, tick-tack-toe grids, cross-hatched and parallel lines. Instead of quickly dissipating, chemtrails expand and drip feathers and mares' tails. In 30 minutes or less, they open into wispy formations which join together, forming a thin white veil or a 'fake cirrus-type cloud' that persists for hours."
Lacking proper scientific equipment, most chemtrail theorists can only speculate about the composition of the alleged cemtrail. However, one chemtrail theorist, Clifford E. Carnicom, operator of a website entitled Aerosol Crimes and Cover-ups, claims to have analyzed ground-level air samples following chemtrail events. It is not clear what his experience or expertise in chemical analysis is, but he carefully detailed the methods and procedures he used. He claims to have found airborne aluminum, barium, calcium, magnesium and titanium, and "microscopic fibers" in areas supposedly exposed to chemtrails.
"Chemtrails" are mentioned in House Bill HR 2977, the Space Preservation Act of 2001, introduced by Congressman Dennis Kucinich, where it appears as one of a list of "exotic weapons system[s]" to be banned under the bill. Proponents of the reality of chemtrails point to this as official acknowledgment of the possibility, at least, of such weapons systems. The reference to Chemtrails was omitted from the version of the bill re-introduced by Kucinich in 2002 as HR 3616 or in 2003 as HR 3657.
An article entitled The Chemtrail Smoking Gun by Bruce Conway, suggested that chemtrails represent the implementation of technologies suggested in a 1992 National Academy of Science study, Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming; specifically, that chemtrails are part of a secret project intended to mitigate global warming.
The Las Vegas Tribune, a free weekly broadsheet, ran an article on September 9, 2005, entitled Chemtrails - Coming Out Of The Closet?, Marcus K. Dalton stated that United States Air Force scientists working at Wright-Patterson Air Force base in Dayton, told Columbus Alive - a weekly entertainment magazine from Columbus, Ohio - ("Stormy Weather", Dec. 22, 2001), that they had been conducting two aerial spraying experiements: "one involved aluminum oxide spraying related to global warming and the other involved barium stearate and had to do with high-tech military communications." Dalton basically rehashes William Thomas's article in Convergence Weekly, though some new information is presented. Dalton has had a colorful past; he plead guilty in 1998 to violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) in connection with selling or promoting at least $80 million in fraudulent securities. In October of 2005 he was removed from his position as Managing Editor of the Las Vegas Tribune, and in November of 2005 the Las Vegas Tribune publicly stated that "[Dalton] is not authorized to represent the Las Vegas Tribune".
Skeptical groups, including the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal, assert that contrails normally exhibit a wide variation in appearance and that the descriptions and photographs of "chemtrails" are perfectly consistent with those of ordinary contrails (, ). They also voice various objections to the idea of chemtrails:
An important part of the chemtrail theories is that they are laid down in grids or crossing patterns. However, as successive aircraft follow the same established airways, and winds blow the resulting contrails aside, these contrail patterns occur without the aircraft actually following such patterns.
Nearly seven years after extensive “lay downs” of lingering and spreading white plumes were first reported smearing skies over across North America, Europe is in an uproar and Washington could be close to coming clean about chemtrails.
At least the Bush White house will soon have a legitimate weather control agency to finally “launder” one of the biggest cons ever perpetrated.
Introduced in the US Senate on March 1, 2005, Bill S517 calls for a US “Weather Modification Advisory and Research Board” to officially commence operations in October 2005. When passed as expected, this law will make large-scale chemical alteration of the atmosphere legal across a formerly free and beautiful land called America.
It’s already happening.
Less than two weeks before the bill was introduced, Linda wrote from “up here in the mountains of northeast Georgia” of the worst spray day she had ever seen. But when she pointed out the science fiction sky to another member of her yoga class, the woman promptly moved her mat to the other side of the room!
Over in Blairsville, Georgia, Eric watched broad white plumes deliberately spread by white unmarked plane completely snuff the deep blue vault overhead. “The entire sky cross-stitched with the "white lace" trails he reported on February 12, 2005
“Not one day in the past two months have we had a blue sky with normal clouds,” Linda wrote. Even normal clouds “are ‘laced’ with whatever the hell is coming out of those white planes that have no engine sounds, even when they fly low enough to see there is no printing anywhere on the planes.”
Several years ago the US Air Force stated that it was repainting its silver aircraft white, and retrofitting its jet tanker fleet with “hush kits” to silence their engines. [Chemtrails Confirmed by William Thomas]
ABOUT THE WEATHER
Whatever fresh environmental disaster Bill S517 accomplishes, this bill will ease the way for admission of a project suspected by many and confirmed by air traffic controllers at America’s biggest airports. When and if the US public demands that their government “do something” about the extreme weather pummeling their neighborhoods, Washington will be able to officially reply, “We are.”
Intended to “develop and implement a comprehensive and coordinated national weather modification policy,” the board is tasked with coordinating state and federal weather modification efforts. It’s direct mandate is stepped-up research and development aimed at developing experimental “models, devices, equipment, materials, and processes” to change or control, “by artificial methods” the development of clouds and/or precipitation in the troposphere. This weather-forming region of the atmosphere lies between Earth’s surface and the stratosphere, starting around 35,000 feet.
A previous study on “Owning The Weather: 2025” described how US Air Force tankers crewed by Weather Force Specialists can spread chemicals to produce “artificial overcasts.” More recently, a veteran air force insider told willthomas.net how C-130s are being used to attack violent storms and ricochet radar beams through glass, steel and flesh across the USA.
WEATHER MOD USA
The newly established 11 member Weather Modification Board of the US government will include representatives of the American Meteorological Society, American Society of Civil Engineers, National Academy of Sciences, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Center for Atmospheric Research of the National Science Foundation of the Department of Commerce.
The federal weather modifiers will now directly oversee the cloud-seeding operations currently being carried out over dozens of states to increase rain and snowfall for irrigation, electrical power and winter recreation purposes. As droughts intensify under an onslaught of moisture-absorbing chemicals dispensed behind ozone-destroying jet tankers, and future towns wash away in sudden flash floods triggered by rain-inducing atmospheric tinkering, these unnatural disasters and other “inadvertent” effects of weather modification will be closely “studied” by the newly created board.
But no studies have been released on the implications of wide-scale alteration of regional atmospheric heat balances.
Large-scale weather modification is banned under the United Nations Environmental Modification Convention signed by Washington in 1970.
Breaking yet another
treaty, the US Weather Modification Act will be officially funded at $10
million a year through 2014. “Black budget” or off-books funding for classified
weather modification projects has not been revealed. Actively engaged in
weather modification at home and abroad since the 1950s, the air force is
currently developing weather modification as a weapon of war under its “Vision
2020” program, which seeks “full spectrum” dominance over the Earth and near
space by that date.
But dominating a shipwrecked space colony may prove an elusive victory. As global warming continues to melt the polar ice caps, changing the oceanic circulations that currently warm northern Europe, the UK and the US eastern seaboard, the oceans of this mostly saltwater planet are warming rapidly. High surface temperatures supply extra energy to hurricanes. With ocean warming already amplifying a cyclical upsurge in violent Caribbean hurricanes, atmospheric experts warn of extended hurricane seasons packed with Superstorms in the decades ahead.
Meanwhile, recent heavy “chemtrail” spraying over Portland, Oregon and Canada’s west coast has eased off once again. Another long-time chemtrail “hot zone”, Santa Cruz, California continues reporting clear blue skies unmarked by the chemplanes’ ugly scrawl.
As recently as May 2005, a Swiss resident sent photographs to Meria Heller’s website, reporting: “Today was one of the heaviest Spraying in Switzerland ever.”
Earlier that same month, Steve Davis reported on the Jeff Rense website that “the special spectrums of colors” seen in prismatic chemtrails when viewed against the sun are best described as fourth order birefrigent colors.
This is important, said Davis and reporter Scott Stevens, because the pinks and greens seen in this special “fourth order” spectrum are characteristic of chemtrails—and chemicals seen in polarizing microscopes.
Davis points out that high-altitude ice crystals commonly associated with “sundogs” and similar atmospheric halos around the sun and moon have “a very low birefringence” and are “therefore unlikely to generate the higher birefringent fourth order spectrum greens and pinks seen in chemtrails.”
What is important, Davis emphasizes, “is that ice or water cannot make those chemtrail colors. We usually see water and ice as rainbows or gray-white moon ice halos, not pink and green glowing chemtrails.”
Davis speculates that these “higher order colors are most likely coming from added minerals or perhaps oily fuels/exhausts.” Since laboratory tests of chemtrail fallout in Ontario and Alberta showed highly-reflectant aluminum oxide and barium, these minerals and salts “may be the ones involved in this chemtrail color phenomenon.
Some Canadians have their eyes wide open. in June 2005, large graffiti spray-painted on a major overpass in West Vancouver advised motorists: WAKE UP, LOOK UP, CHEMTRAILS ARE EVERYWHERE.
On Thursday morning, May
26, 2005, a Canadian named Garry and a passenger were astonished while driving
to work near the Vancouver International Airport to see a four-engine
commercial airliner on final approach to Runway 26R “still spraying the
chemtrails. Somebody forgot to turn off the spray!”
Garry estimated the plane’s altitude at 2,000 feet or lower, speed perhaps 200 knots as it slowed on approach with its landing gear down.
The visual aspect through the car’s windshield was head-on. Garry and his companion agreed they were seeing “two large white streams of white material coming from underneath the outer two engines.” Appearing to emanate from beneath the plane’s outer engines, the dual white streams “drooped and trailed the aircraft for approximately one mile before being dispersed.”
Both inner engines were leaving no visible trails.
Garry said the bright white streams “looked like two fire-hose streams.” While he and his fellow eye-witness could not see exactly where the spray started, “it was definitely below and in-line with the outer engines.” The ‘trails “were definitely not coming from the engine exhaust.”
Around the same time as this close encounter, stunning high-resolution photos made by a FED-EX pilot Ziyad Haik shooting through the cockpit windows showed tankers spraying in nearby two-plane elements.
As passengers and federal air regulators can attest, commercial jetliners do not often fly in close formation. [http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/haik.html]
AND A HOUSE CALL DOWN UNDER
On March 31, 2005, Matt Farmer wrote to this reporter from northern New South Wales, Australia—about a nine hour drive north and inland from Sydney. Since moving from to NSW from Melbourne, “they have sprayed us both constantly, and at other times periodically,” Farmer reported, “escalating to the heaviest spraying I have ever seen in Australia in the last few months.”
Farmer says his skin
complaints and hacking cough, “I know are from CT's.”
Like William Wallace and other outspoken Americans who complained to the media about chemtrails, Farmer says his family was visited in a “silencing attempt” four years ago, “when an RAAF F-18 jet flew meters over the roof of my house, full throttle with both engines open, scaring the bejesus out of me and my partner and our two small children, while we were outside enjoying the mountain air one second the next diving for cover and seeing our lives flash before us as what we thought was a bomb about to land on us.”
The jet fighter “screamed overhead
and disappearing over the next rise in less than a
second,” Farmer added. Describing himself and his partner as “political activists”, Farmer noted that the day before they had been talking about chemtrails and the Pine Gap US military base in Australia to her father in New Zealand.
PLEASE DON’T CALL
This reporter enjoyed similar confirmation after phoning NORAD headquarters in Colorado to inquire why all the interceptors launched on the morning of September 1, 2001 flew in “pursuit” at officially announced speeds of 500 mph—when they were capable of flying more than three-times as fast? Soon after Colorado Springs said they’d “get back to me”, an American jet fighter buzzed my place, annoying the locals.
With international communications being continuously monitored, the London Telegraph has described ECHELON as “a global spy network that can eavesdrop on every telephone, email and telex communication around the world.”
Also decrying the microwave and scalar weapons being tested in Australia, Matt Farmer says he “can't sit back and watch any more.” Determined to “help humanity and mother Earth,” the Aussie declared that he’s had enough and “will not accept injustice and tyranny or biological warfare on any scale.”
Many others would do likewise, he felt, “if only they knew it was happening. That’s the biggest problem we face: people’s ignorance and apathy.”
AIR FORCE INSIDER DESCRIBES
WEATHER MOD MISSIONS
The continuing corporate media blackout of all real news is feeding ignorance, apathy and denial across America. But an active duty air force insider has described environmental combat missions already being flown by specially-outfitted C-130 Hercules transports, which can be reloaded, refueled and relaunched in just 10 minutes to continue their assault on violent storms afflicting US communities.
Flown by regular air force pilots—not reservists—these “science flights” include onboard meteorologists, who painstakingly log the results of each mission. Attempts at storm attenuation involve spraying moisture-absorbing chemicals from each aircraft to take some of the “steam” out of storms. In an early experiment in Florida, an approaching storm cell was completely wiped from the sky—and nearby radar screens—after being sprayed by a single aircraft.
Big storm fronts and hurricanes require a vast amount of absorbent chemicals to reduce their destructive power. To achieve the fast turn-around times needed to complete their missions, flights of returning C-130s taxi to a stop and immediately commence refueling as the empty onboard spray canister is removed.
According to the air force insider, whose identity has been verified, as soon as the empty canister is clear of the aircraft, a waiting truck wheels a semi-trailer-size container of sky-seeding chemicals to the plane’s lowered rear ramp, where it is slid inside on rails like a gigantic “soda dispenser”.
The air force insider added that other spray missions spread (barium) chemtrails to facilitate 3D radar mapping of the entire continental United States. He also said that the air force has been spraying storm fronts “for a long time”. The military’s main interest, he added, is experimentation aimed at gaining control of the weather for military use.
Did the air force spray this year’s first Caribbean hurricane, in which the western quadrant disintegrated just before making its Texas landfall? “There’s no reason they wouldn’t,” the air force insider replied.
But C-130 turboprops would not necessarily be used to try to influence hurricanes that typically release more energy than all atomic arsenals combined.
Instead, air force insiders dub the special all-white Boeing 757s recently converted to aerial spray missions, “the Roll’s Royce spray can.” Acquired through a costly and controversial lease program that sparked congressional suspicion, these new tankers are now replacing the aging Boeing 707 tankers known as KC-135s in US military parlance.
Referring to the 757s modified for aerial spraying, the air force insider told willthomas.net, “We’ve got them, but I can’t talk about them.”
He added that many people
in the air force “are aware of William Thomas” and his reporting on chemtrails.
They confirmed that this reporter “has it mostly right” concerning the
application and purposes behind chemtrails. But he would not elaborate on my
EUROPEAN CHEMTRAIL UPROAR
Meanwhile, the chemtrails controversy has taken Europe by storm following a series of articles by Swiss freelance journalist Gabriel Stetter in the German popular science magazine Raum+Zeit (Space and Time).
Brian Holmes says that his copy of the magazine was “an impressive, high quality publication with a circulation of some 50,000, much on the lines of a traditional scientific journal but as a theme it is apparently devoted to popular scientific issues that are otherwise ignored by the controlled mainstream media.”
Stetter’s first article, “White Skies” created a public relations nightmare for Greenpeace when it informed readers in January 2004 how “Thousands of people were thoroughly shocked when they realised, and were informed by Greenpeace in Germany, Switzerland and Austria that—for some reason or other—Greenpeace has no interest in the chemtrail question whatsoever.”
The Swiss government also
came under public pressure to explain the checkerboards being painted in its
skies. On March 5, 2004 the Environment Department in Berne, Switzerland
responded to an inquiry by Rudolf Rechsteiner, a Social Democratic member of
parliament, admitting that “A number of ideas exist that show how it would be
possible to reduce global warming by technical means, at least in the short
But these ideas, the government office hastened to add, “are no more than theoretical. We are not aware of any practical application of these methods, either at home or abroad.”
Ten days later, Greenpeace Switzerland climate and transport expert Cyrill Studer wrote an internal memo assuring colleagues that while he had “heard of the chemtrails phenomenon,” for the present, Greenpeace “will not be following up the theme of chemtrails.”
BOULDER—Weather modification is big business, both in the United States and abroad. Commercial companies are hired to enhance rainfall by "seeding" clouds and farmers fire "hail cannons" that generate a shock wave in summertime storms in the hopes of reducing hail damage. But how reliable are these techniques?
Researchers at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) have experimented with weather modification methods for decades. Now several NCAR scientists have contributed to a special report issued yesterday by the National Research Council of The National Academies. The report, “Critical Issues in Weather Modification Research,” reviews the history and techniques of weather modification and makes recommendations for future research.
At NCAR, current weather modification work includes guiding research on the feasibility of rain enhancement in the United Arab Emirates. The experiment expands on a similar NCAR project that took place in Mexico in the late 1990s to investigate the effectiveness of a method of cloud seeding that uses water-absorbing hygroscopic flares to stimulate rain production in convective summertime clouds. The results of the Mexico experiment and the findings from the UAE should shed additional light on the potential that hygroscopic flare seeding has for increasing rainfall.
Below is a list of NCAR scientists who have participated in recent or historic weather modification experiments or who have played a key role in preparing the new NAS report. Their specialties and contact information are included.
Weather Modification Experts
Daniel Breed 303-497-8933 email@example.com
NCAR Research Applications Program
Specialties: Cloud physics, rain enhancement, atmospheric electricity, radar meteorology, airborne instrumentation. Breed has served as project manager for NCAR's rainfall enhancement studies in Mexico and the United Arab Emirates. He also participated in the National Hail Research Experiment in the 1970s and subsequent cloud physics projects relevant to weather modification.
Roelof Bruintjes 303-497-8909 firstname.lastname@example.org
NCAR Research Applications Program
Specialties: Weather modification of all sorts, including various types of cloud seeding and the study of the effects of smoke and pollution on clouds and rainfall. Bruintjes was a primary author of the NAS weather modification report. He headed NCAR's cloud seeding experiment in Mexico in the 1990s and is leading a similar research project in the United Arab Emirates. He first studied hygroscopic cloud seeding in his native South Africa.
Brant Foote 303-497-8458 email@example.com
NCAR Research Applications Program
Specialties: Severe storms; cloud physics; history and current state of weather modification, including silver iodide cloud seeding, hygroscopic cloud seeding, experiments in hail suppression and rainfall enhancement; and the effects of smoke and pollution on clouds and rain. Foote was a project leader with the National Hail Research Experiment. He was an invited speaker for the NAS panel that compiled the report on weather modification, and recently cochaired a World Meteorological Society meeting of experts on hail suppression.
Robert Serafin 303-497-8127 firstname.lastname@example.org
NCAR Environmental and Societal Impacts Group
Specialties: Past and current uses of radar in a wide range of meteorological applications, including weather modification. Serafin is an expert on the role of radar in monitoring storms, detecting and forecasting new storm development, and studying the behavior of precipitation from growth to dissipation. Radar observations can improve our understanding of basic processes relevant to weather modification and may lead to new seeding ideas and hypotheses that can be tested. A former director of NCAR, Serafin offers a general knowledge of meteorology, forecasting, cloud physics, and satellite instrumentation. He served on the NAS weather modification committee that produced the report.
Charles Knight 303-497-8940 email@example.com
NCAR Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Division
Specialties: Hail, ice, and snow, including the natural formation of snow and other precipitation in clouds, artificial snowmaking, the structure of snowflakes, and hail suppression. Knight is an expert on nucleation, a process that is important for both artificial snow production at ski resorts and natural snow formation in the atmosphere. He played a prominent role in the National Hail Research Experiment.
Al Cooper 703-292-8524 firstname.lastname@example.org
NCAR Advanced Study Program
Specialties: Clouds and cloud physics, especially the processes involved in the formation of precipitation in clouds; studies of cloud hydrometeors (droplets, raindrops, and ice particles); and the influences of aerosol particles on cloud microstructure and precipitation. Cooper also is an expert on research aircraft and their instrumentation. Currently on a term appointment at the National Science Foundation, Cooper has been the director of NCAR's Advanced Study Program for seven years. Throughout his career, he has sought to understand how precipitation forms and the degree to which both natural and human-produced particles can influence precipitation amounts.
ALLEGATIONS SURFACE THAT U.S. & RUSSIA HAVE TECHNOLOGY TO MANAGE HURRICANES
By Mike Blair
Author Sydney Sheldon said, “The old adage that everyone
talks about the weather but no one does anything about it is no longer valid,”
in an afterword to his fascinating novel Are You Afraid of the Dark?
“Today,” Sheldon continued, “two superpowers have the ability to control weather around the world: the United States and Russia. Other countries, probably China and North Korea, are working feverishly to catch up.”
As this article was being written the aftereffects of Hurricane Katrina were still being felt in the southeastern United States, after it caused billions of dollars in damage along the Gulf of Mexico coast, and the death toll from the killer storm was still being tabulated.
Could this devastation have been avoided? Could Katrina itself have been avoided as a death-dealing hurricane?
The answers to both questions are probably “Yes.” The ability of Russia and the United States to create storms of this magnitude definitely exists.
The big question that remains is, why, then, wasn’t Katrina stopped before it devastated three states—Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi—along the Gulf Coast?
There could be any number of reasons, but all would be mere speculation, as the fact is nothing was done to stop Katrina.
Those who doubt that Katrina, or any other hurricane, could be stopped—or created—can find substantiation in a long-forgotten article by Chen May Yee in the Nov. 13, 1997, issue of The Wall Street Journal.
The article recounts an offer by the Russians to aid Malaysia to create a typhoon to dissipate a pall of smoke that hung over the country—and still does—caused by the burning of large sections of the rain forests in Indonesia and Sumatra.
To quote from the article: Datuk Law Hieng Ding, Malaysia’s minister for science, technology and the environment at the time, said his country “would use special technology to create an artificial cyclone to clean the air.”
The article went on to say that a Malaysian company, BicCure Sdn. Bhd., would sign a memorandum of understanding with a government-owned Russian company to create a cyclone that would cause torrential rains and thus cleanse the air over Malaysia of the smoke and ash.
What Russian company was the Malaysian official talking about?
On Oct. 2, 1992, The Wall Street Journal reported that a Russian company, Elate Intelligent Technologies, Inc., has weather control equipment for sale and uses the advertising slogan of “weather made to order.”
Igor Pirogoff, director of the company, said “Elate is capable of fine-tuning weather patterns over a 200-squaremile area for as little as $200 U.S. per day,” the newspaper reported.
A year before the article was written, Hurricane Andrew caused $30 billion in damages as it plowed through the South. Pirogoff said Andrew could have been turned into “a wimpy little squall.”
According to a UN pamphlet, titled Basic Facts about the United Nations, which was published in 1994, the world body negotiated the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques in 1977. This “prohibits the use of techniques that would have widespread, long-lasting or severe effects through deliberate manipulation of natural processes and cause such phenomena as earthquakes, tidal waves, and changes in climate and in weather patterns.”
Getting back to Malaysia, where the potential for creating or dissipating cyclones seems to have made its first appearance, there was never any follow-up to the stories about Elate and whether in fact the cyclone was created, although it was approved by the Malaysian government.
A call by American Free Press to the Malaysian Embassy in
Washington found no one there with any knowledge of the
However, there was more success when the Malaysian delegation to the UN was contacted in New York. There, a spokesman claimed to have no knowledge of the creation of a cyclone, but was willing to discuss weather control in his country.
The official said that, by using weather control technology, rain could be created and was being created over the nation’s capital of Kuala Lumpur.
He said that often rain was created over the city to cleanse the air of the smoke emanating from Indonesia, and particularly Sumatra.
He indicated he did not know if the technology being used had been obtained from Russia, but it would appear that such technology to create rain on demand would not have been developed in a Third World country like Malaysia.
There have been numerous reports in recent years about strange changes in the jet stream, which have created alterations in the weather.
In 1982 a report by a Pentagon researcher, identified as L. Ponte, noted that “the Soviets have made advances in bending the all-important jet stream that sweeps across Siberia to set global wind patterns. By using explosive devices in the jet stream, scientists are trying to make it dip and rise in a wave that could replace the frigid Siberian winters with milder air from the South.”
How this would affect weather in other parts of the world was not reported by Ponte, but there have been dozens of reports since his 1982 report about changes in the jet stream’s normal behavior.
In 1996, a group of seven U.S. Air Force officers, who had prepared a research paper about weather warfare, issued a report, which concluded that there was technology under development that would provide “warriors of the future” with the means to control the course of military conflicts, including through the use of weather modification.
The study also states that manipulation of precipitation, storms and fog could improve America’s own weather but could also involve controlling the ionosphere to guarantee U.S. dominance of worldwide communications.
Is major weather control really possible? Is weather manipulation a means of conducting war? If not, why in 1977 did the United States, the then-Soviet Union and dozens of other countries believe it was a good idea to enact a UN treaty banning weather manipulation as a means of conducting war?
In the afterword of his book, Sheldon concludes:
“Weather is the most powerful force we know. Whoever controls it can disrupt world economies with perpetual rainstorms or tornadoes; wipe out crops in a drought; cause earthquakes, hurricanes and tsunamis; close world airports and cause devastation on enemy battlefields. “We could all sleep better if a world leader said, ‘Everyone talks about the weather, but no one does anything about it, and it was true.”
(Issue #37, September 12, 2005)