Chemtrails, Seeing is believing.

by pedal power 482 Replies latest social current

  • still thinking
    still thinking

    This is one of the sprays that was used in was used here in Dec 1997 in a field trial of aprox 10,000 people in India.

    Don't they just love to use humans as guniea pigs?

    Here are the other two sprays that were used first....

    Lorsban 50 ...very toxic to aquatic organisms, may cause long term adverse effects in the aquatic environment....guess what? Auckland is surrounded by sea. Fabulous.

    Chlorpyrifos is an organophosphate, with potential for both acute toxicity at larger amounts and neurological effects in fetuses and children even at very small amounts. For acute effects, the EPA classifies chlorpyrifos as Class II: moderately toxic. Recent research indicates that children exposed to chlorpyrifos while in the womb have an increased risk of delays in mental and motor development at age 3 and an increased occurrence of pervasive developmental disorders such as ADHD. [15] An earlier study demonstrated a correlation between prenatal chlorpyrifos exposure and lower weight and smaller head circumference at birth. [16]

    A 2010 study found that each 10-fold increase in urinary concentration of organophosphate metabolites was associated with a 55% to 72% increase in the odds of ADHD in children. [17]

    Studies have shown evidence of "deficits in Working Memory Index and Full-Scale IQ as a function of prenatal CPF exposure [as measured when the children reach] 7 years of age." [18]

    The oral LD50 for chlorpyrifos in experimental animals is 32 to 1000 mg/kg. The dermal LD50 in rats is greater than 2000 mg/kg and 1000 to 2000 mg/kg in rabbits. The 4-hour inhalation LC50 for chlorpyrifos in rats is greater than 200 mg/m3. [19]

    Chlorpyrifos poisoning has been described by New Zealand scientists as the likely cause of death of several tourists in Thailand who developed myocarditis in 2011. [20] [21] [22] Thai investigators have come to no conclusion as to what caused the deaths, [23] but maintain that chlorpyrifos was not responsible, and that the deaths were not linked. [24]

    A 2011 study on the neurotoxic effects of chlorpyrifos showed that chlorpyrifos and its more toxic metabolite, chlorpyrifos oxon, altered firing rates in the locus coeruleus. These results indicate that the pesticide may be involved in Gulf War Syndrome and other neurodegenerative disorders. [25]

    This is what they sprayed us with in Auckland in 2002.

  • still thinking
    still thinking

    The Australian painted apple moth was first found in 1999 in Glendene, West Auckland, and began to spread through West Auckland from Avondale to Titirangi.

    The apple moth eats everything from pine to kowhai and fruit trees with the ability to cause tens of millions of dollars worth of damage.

    October 20 2001 West Aucklanders say they fear for their health if Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry officials push ahead with a bid for aerial spraying to get rid of the apple moth. MAF orders $5 million of pesticide for its eradication.

    October 23 MAF gets approval for the aerial spray programme.

    November 11 Biosecurity Minister Jim Sutton intervenes to allow aerial spraying after MAF's plans to start an aerial spraying programme were stalled by the local council's district plan which prevented low-flying aircraft.

    January 18 2002 Around 50 people hold a last-ditch protest rally against the spraying outside MAF's Operational Spray Headquarters in Henderson.

    February Moth spraying begins after being hampered on numerous occasions due to bad weather.

    April 23 MAF claims aerial spraying is reducing the painted apple moth in West Auckland.

    September 10 Some residents in Waitakere are up in arms over continued spraying aimed at controlling the painted apple moth. More than 160,000 Aucklanders will be in a new, expanded spray zone.

    September 15 The Painted Apple Moth Advisory Group monitoring the aerial spraying wants more talks with the MAF before a bigger programme gets underway. It says there has not been enough consultation on the possible health effects of spray drift and penetration.

    October 5 Up to 80 people protest outside the Prime Minister's Auckland home against the aerial spraying campaign.

    October 12Hundreds join a protest march in West Auckland over the painted apple moth spraying programme which is set to resume on 40,000 homes.

    MAF says the spray is safe and crucial if New Zealand is to protect its forestry and fruit industry from. However, it reveals its staff do not know what is in the spray. Four scientists and medical officers of health are nominated to hold this information due to confidentiality agreements with the chemical manufacturer.

    The Greens claim they have a list of ingredients from Canada showing for the first time what may be in Foray 48b, a component of the spray. They say chemicals include benzoic acid and butylated hydroxy toluene.

    November 7 Flight paths to eradicate the apple moth in Auckland have been changed following community concern. The change means planes spray over certain suburbs for a shorter period of time.

    March 11 2003 Waitakere City Council says it will not take legal action to stop the aerial spraying. The council gathered evidence from residents claiming the spraying is making them sick, but it says the symptoms are not sufficiently injurious to health under the Health Act to warrant legal action.

    March 14An Auckland University study finds that aerial spraying has coincided with a sharp rise in some medical problems. Researchers found that in the most intensively sprayed area there was a significant increase in sleep problems, stomach complaints and diarrhoea.

    March 22 2006A people's inquiry into the aerial spraying begins. Seventy people testify over the programme which lasted 29 months. Those testifying say they have suffered from nose bleeds, rashes and toxic poisoning from the spraying.

    November 2007 Opponents of the aerial spraying call for changes to the Biosecurity Act as findings of a people's inquiry are released. A number of people complained of health problems after the spraying.

    December 12 2007The ombudsman releases a report critical of the way the potential health risks from the spraying were communicated to residents and how the ingredients of the spray were kept secret from the public.

  • Chariklo

    Just wondering if the general cynicism displayed in this thread is the result of reacting against the WT and all its teachings.

    Pedal Power, you raised an interesting point, but it's a long way from observation to assuming we're all under attack.

    I'd never heard of chemtrails before your post. Interesting, but a quick Google has not brought up convincing sites so far...

  • pedal power
    pedal power

    Charlico, There is masses of evidence on the web from all over the globe, its one thing seeing it on a screen, however it takes on much greater significance, when you see it with your own eyes, many times. I have photographed and filmed it, its bizzare. The jets criss cross the sky,making a lattice, with the areosol cloud expanding to form straightish man made cloud formations, this is completely distinct from water condensation that creates a contrail, that quickly dissapates after a minute or so, that you see on very high flying jets.

  • still thinking
    still thinking

    My partners parents live in Australia...they have been concerned about the chemtrails for years. It is not a new phenomenon.

    Good grief, the government in England has even admitted to spraying chemicals in these chemtrails....and people still deny...

  • cantleave

    Another thing I would like to mention is that when these chem trails are being left there is usually little to no cloud cover in the sky.

    Could it be that contrails are created above the cloud line, so you don't see them when it is cloudy?

  • bohm

    PP ...this is completely distinct from water condensation that creates a contrail, that quickly dissapates after a minute or so, that you see on very high flying jets

    Yes thats why i know the great white motherships are not just natural cloud formations: If they were, they would dissapate in a matter of minutes, not slowly float around for hours or days.

    I wish people would take the motherships more serious, they are real! There is a huge one hanging just overhead of me right now, delivering its payload of toxic chemicals. Explain why it does not dissapate in a matter of minutes, haters!

    Cantleave: impossible!

  • pedal power
    pedal power

    Hi bohm, You dont happen to be the proud owner of a pair of dark glasses a white stick, and a friendly dog that leads you around ?

  • sizemik

    Somebody mentioned the scientific method . . . observe, theorise, experiment, hypothesise, test, etc.

    Why not try some basic analysis of cause and effect? The phenomenon has been reportedly observed by some since the mid-fifties . . . moreso latterly . . .

    Assuming these trails are deliberately chemically loaded . . .

    What effects are they having? . . . are there observable changes following these events? . . . birth defects?, sterility?, human / animal behavior?, an increase in specific diseases?, changes to vegetation?, . . . . anything?

    still thinking gave the example of chemical spraying over Auckland NZ . . .

    Did they have a cause? . . . yes . . . a pest problem. Did they have an effect? . . . yes . . . partial eradication of the pest, along with side-effects to human and animal health.

    It should also be noted that this took place with full public warning and disclosure, and was carried out at low-level.

    A scientific analysis would suggest these so-called chemtrails have no observable effect . . . much like water vapour has no tangible effect (apart from being observable)

    Until you positively identify an effect which can be tested and linked to the theorised cause . . . you have a theory, nothing more, based on very loose conjecture. Any conclusion must therefore be treated as such.

    Additionally, there is much evidence here and elsewhere regarding the varied behavior of high-altitude water vapour from a variety of sources (different aircraft), under an even more varied regime of atmospheric conditions. There are more aircraft in our skies than at any other time in history . . . thousands at any one time. Correct me if I'm wrong, but these trails are observed at high altitude . . . aircraft cruising altitude. Anything released at these altitudes can travel in any direction for over 1000 miles. Their concentration when making landfall would be totally uncontrollable and vary widely.

    None of this need reflect my personal opinion in any way . . . it's just the result of scientific analysis based on the evidence.

  • ProdigalSon

    Airplanes have been observed turning the chemtrails off and on at will, so it has nothiing to do with altitude or atmospheric conditions.

    As I said, this is a subject that isn't even debatable.. you bozos come in here and try to make us believe that we don't see what we see with our own eyes. The only thing that's debatable is whether they are trying to kill us, trick us, or just dumb us down. You desperately want us to be blind like you... you should all go back to the Kingdom Hall where you belong... as for me and those of us who choose to see what's being done to us, our intent is to take back our planet from these f**kers... and reap the fruitage of our own labor instead of them.

Share this