Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

[Dixon]

Wikipedia is an extremely left leaning organization...If you google chemtrails, the number one site is wikipedia. Coincidence? I think not.

Ha! If you google just about anything, Wikipedia is gonna be #1 or near #1 on the list (as it's a great resource for comparatively reasonable, concise general knowledge). Seeing that as evidence of conspiracy speaks volumes about your thought processes. And if Wikipedia seems like "an extremely left leaning organization", you must be waaaaay over on the right-wing end of the spectrum. And, if you think the political left is the protector of the corrupt imperial status quo, I can't even imagine the fantasy world you're living in.

[Dixon]

Noooooooooo...the enemy is 'THEM'. Do you realize that every time a rocket (aka shuttle et al) is sent into space, there is a many miles wide hole blown through the ozone, where the ozone layer is destroyed?

I am aware that rockets are hugely polluting, though am not sure whether your quantification is quite accurate. It's certainly a point well taken, but if you think that that means the damage we cause with our zillions of cars, methane-producing livestock industry, etc. is negligible, your analysis is one-sided, to put it politely.

...they are hell bent on destroying our way of life.

I'm very curious to know what you mean by "our way of life". In your mind, what is "our way of life"?

You have to be a complete moron to have said what you did. Wake the fuck up.

I could certainly be wrong about anything at any time, but just being wrong about something doesn't mean one is a moron. iPragmatist, do you feel that your argument is strengthened by the addition of a bit of verbal abuse?

[Dixon]

Why don't you tell us what your educational level is? Then take an IQ test and let us know the results.

I'm disinclined to indulge in intellectual penis-measuring, preferring to leave that to the insecure. If you really, really want to engage in that sort of pissing contest with me, I suppose we could sit down together and take an IQ test, wagering a sizable amount of money on the outcome. I could sure use the dough. But more to the point, what does educational level or IQ have to do with the discussion at hand? Are you veering toward some logical fallacy such as the appeal to authority (you've already engaged in ad hominem attacks)?

I ask that because it's quite obvious you are a typical close minded guy who wouldn't know the difference.

And what connection does one's educational level or IQ have with closed-mindedness? And, given that I haven't even aligned myself with one side or the other in the chemtrails debate, why do you see me as closed-minded? Is it because I've admittedly written off the reptilian humanoid overlord conspiracy theory without researching it deeply? Have I offended your anti-reptilian sensitivities?

[CSummer]

You don't tell the public that you're dumping millions of tons of metal oxides and other pollutants into the atmosphere because you don't want to deal with a global uprising against an activity that could have (is having?) far-reaching and devastating impacts on the environment and human health. If they stay silent, it will be that much more difficult to know who's behind it, and so who do you rise up against?

It may be that the actual effects of geoengineering are not what they were intended to be. It wouldn't be the first time a plan of this sort backfired. It's also likely that many are involved at many levels, and the eventual execution of a plan may not reflect the spirit of the original intention. Take free and democratic elections, for example . . . There are those who, failing to stop a plan from moving forward, will attempt to pervert it to fit their own ends in the execution.

Not that Clifford Carnicom doesn't know vastly more about it than I do. Just letting you know how I make sense out of it.

CSummer

To C. Summer --
If this were a benevolent program to shield the earth from the ravages of global warming, why not tell the public? Clifford Carnicom has found that this program is actually working to trap heat, and it is causing the earth to warm. Therefore, this is not a program designed to offset global warming.

The reason that I hesitate to comment on the real motivation is that its true purposes are so deleterious that to even speak of it on this thread would be to invite further attack and ridicule. The truth is that those directing our "leadership" have depopulation, the biomodification of all life, as well as other military and geophysical purposes. Clifford Carnicom has laid it out well in the research to which I have already alluded, and which has been cast off as unworthy by some commenters on this thread.

Sincerely, K. Willens

[Kate Magdalena Willens]

Expand

I do care about the air I breathe, and that you breathe, and that our children breathe. I don't consider that caring to be "a white person's problem" or less important that political and economic problems of our time. This photo was taken yesterday near Lake Tahoe. I suppose it reflects very unusual atmospheric conditions indeed.

I'm sorry this discussion has morphed into the inanities of reptilian overlords. That emphasis must only be to denigrate the realities of legitimate concerns. Unless of course lizards have painted the above with their snouts. I'm also sorry for the level of personal attacks on this thread.

[Jude Iam]

Dear Kathy,

One easy place for the information you seek is Forbidden Knowledge TV - free subscription to daily videos which enlarge your understanding of what is not commonly known about the intersections of reality, politics, etc.
Requires time, fortitude, courage to learn, absorb, discern, integrate - all needed to be awake in 2014.
While Alexandra is smart, savvy, vets her material and publicly acknowledges mistakes, one always needs one's own discernment.
I just posted today's installment in Wacco Reader - or go directly to:

US Military Trains for Martial Law

https://www.ForbiddenKnowledgeTV.com/page/26407.html

And, of course, KPFA ( 94.1 FM ) is THE news source which is least corporate - a FAR cry from PBS and their public radio station. Listen and draw your own conclusions. You'll find a whole other world...

Blest, Jude

Kate,

It didn't seem possible to me that you had no idea what might be behind "aerosols", and the resulting theft of our winters, as you said a few days ago, quoted here:


Hi Kathy, Sorry, didn't see the question.
That is the million or billion or trillion dollar question. I honestly cannot answer it.

But you were just pretending not to know in hopes of avoiding further challenge?

The reason that I hesitate to comment on the real motivation is that its true purposes are so deleterious that to even speak of it on this thread would be to invite further attack and ridicule. The truth is that those directing our "leadership" have depopulation, the biomodification of all life, as well as other military and geophysical purposes.

This is where it seems to fall apart, Kate--your whole mission seems to be to wake us up to the horrible stuff happening...but you don't want to say what that really is? i mean...depopulation, for example. to whose benefit?

i would still really like to know.

kathy

[Gus diZerega]

Congratulations! You have written one of the most articulate and penetrating analyses from a right wing mentality I have read in a long time. This is particularly clear in your use of reason, examples, and demonstrated ability to address the central issues at hand. Any three year old in a tantrum would be left breathless with admiration.

Hey Gus....if you're so involved in the whole pharma thing, why didn't you mention the poisons that are in the pharma drugs? Huh? You act like you've researched so many aspects of the pharma situation, yet you don't mention the damage these pharma drugs are doing to the average person, especially kids. As far as chemtrails, contrails are NOT common, and any pictures you can site are probably showing chemtrails. They WERE around in WWII. Stop taking us all for fools....they used chemtrails to seed rain in the Viet Nam war. THAT is known. Why are you refuting the fact that today's plane engines don't produce chemtrails? You are another boring guy who wants those of us to think you are an authority. You aren't. You are a shill, you simply push lies to make others think you know what is reality. I'll debate you any time old man. That is what you are, an old, tired, lying, sack of shit old man. And people like you should be made fun of. Which I will graciously do. Take me on...I dare you. Old man. Sorry, tired, lazy, bought off, surface dweller, old man.

[jbox]

I do care about the air I breathe, and that you breathe, and that our children breathe. I don't consider that caring to be "a white person's problem" or less important that political and economic problems of our time. This photo was taken yesterday near Lake Tahoe. I suppose it reflects very unusual atmospheric conditions indeed.

I'm sorry this discussion has morphed into the inanities of reptilian overlords. That emphasis must only be to denigrate the realities of legitimate concerns. Unless of course lizards have painted the above with their snouts. I'm also sorry for the level of personal attacks on this thread.

Kate,

What you see here is a very common cloud formation going north to south along the crest of the Sierra Nevada that occurs when the prevailing winds descend over the crest into the desert. I see it all the time backpacking along with jet contrails. No need to get all alarmed.

[Scott McKeown]

Why are you refuting the fact that today's plane engines don't produce chemtrails? You are another boring guy who wants those of us to think you are an authority. You aren't. You are a shill, you simply push lies to make others think you know what is reality. I'll debate you any time old man. That is what you are, an old, tired, lying, sack of shit old man. And people like you should be made fun of. Which I will graciously do. Take me on...I dare you. Old man. Sorry, tired, lazy, bought off, surface dweller, old man.

What we have here is a classic example of what I described in my list of "new terms" (posted earlier) as a "vaportroll".

Vaportroll (noun)

Someone who creates a temporary anonymous account on Waccobb for the sole purpose of blasting away at people with personal insults while hiding their true identity. Typically, vaportrolls reveal their own idiocy without help from anyone through their own emotional angry rants. Usually a vaportroll is someone who has their worldview challenged in some way and can't seem to not take things hyper personally. Used as in, "We were having a fairly civil debate online when all of a sudden this vaportroll showed up and had a meltdown."

"iPragmatist" joined Waccobb only 12 days ago and has been spewing invective in this discussion since. I notice he/she claims in one of his/her posts that he/she lives in upstate New York. He/she hides behind the name of "The Pragmatist" and won't reveal his/her real identity.

I think my definition of a vaportroll speaks for itself.

Scott

[Scott McKeown]

Consider one episode from this chemtrails discussion. One person wrote that contrails are rare whereas chemtrails are common. I showed photographs from WWII demonstrating they were nothing unusual 70 years ago. Silence.

Another example: Scott showed reports from atmospheric books published over decades refuting the commonly described ways to distinguish between chemtrails and contrails. Again silence.

There is no discussion when evidence against conspiratorial claims is ignored.

Gus, I think we finally have our answer:

As far as chemtrails, contrails are NOT common, and any pictures you can site are probably showing chemtrails. They WERE around in WWII. Stop taking us all for fools....

That would explain why atmospheric scientists and authoritative books about cloud formation going back over 60 years (and confirmed by observation by just about everyone since the 1940's) describe and explain the phenomenon of jet trails spreading out and forming into lingering clouds. Apparently, all of it has been chemtrails all along going back to the very introduction of jet engine flight technology.

I'm wondering if any chemtrails proponents disagree with this.

Scott

[hummingbird]

I think you are right Scott about the vapor troll.... The only problem is that s/he was likely controlled by a reptilian overlord as well attempting to give the grounded folks who share his perspective (with out the personal insults) a bad rap. It looks like a technique to discredit a pretty clear truth about chemtrails. The message is actually totally reasonable and I buy it more than most of the other "facts" I've seen here, but the delivery quickly causes many to discredit the whole thing. "What a jerk, I would much rather believe the calm linkers."

LINKER (noun)

Some one who has a long standing account on Waccobb for many possible reasons. They often bring information and "proof" from links from throughout the internet with little regard for the intuitive aspects and alternate realities that help to shape our existence. While most "linkers" are well meaning, they often lack awareness to formulate an argument that encompasses the broader thinking necessary to fully understand the stated issue. Still through their sweet and bumbling ways they manage to find comfort in one another and through it all build some resemblance of a community.

Blessings

What we have here is a classic example of what I described in my list of "new terms" (posted earlier) as a "vaportroll".

Vaportroll (noun)

Someone who creates a temporary anonymous account on Waccobb for the sole purpose of blasting away at people with personal insults while hiding their true identity. Typically, vaportrolls reveal t...

[TyrannyNews]

Gus, I think we finally have our answer:

I'm wondering if any chemtrails proponents disagree with this.

Scott

Absolutely I do, Scott. My name is Peter Klein, btw. I choose the TyrannyNews username to be recognized. It's actually quite depressing when I consider how many other Peter Kleins their are. For some reason, they're all mega-accomplished geniuses. I get buried in the pile so I promote my blog and channel, which is what I'm aiming to do anyway. There was even a Peter Klein said to have died in the towers on 9/11.

Returning to your wondering if any proponents of "chemtrails" disagree with iPragmatist's assertions. Contrails, he says are not common and any pictures showing airborne trails are probably chemtrails, which he claims were around during the WWII period. I disagree with all of it.

I think of myself as a well-liked, highly intelligent guy with a very balanced constitution. I go out of my way to be respectful of others, to be helpful to others, to be consistent and dependable. I'm fortunate to have been raised in an environment that fostered creativity and didn't aim to box me into a traditional path. The down side of it is that I had few close relations that could encourage discipline, achievement or the importance of knowledge. Being curious helped to keep me going forward. Even still, I can't say which form of rearing would have been better.

Part of why I have a deep trust in my instincts and yet am still highly self-critical is because of what I was exposed to that most would view as bad. My sense of humor applies to that and to myself, meaning that I don't have a chip on my shoulder.

I found that being an adult wasn't what I had expected and began to look at things differently. It wasn't only that I was applying a different view. The things I observed were different and had been all along. I noticed that some of my ideas were being rejected by the majority as undesirable. I experienced the real impact this had in my life, in relationships, in my career, in my personality and in my attitude towards society and life in general. I determined it to be a very small price to pay in exchange for learning the truth. At no point was I willingly or lazily accepting fallacy, although I'm well aware of how stupid I am and that I can't know where exactly my understanding is really misunderstanding.

The result of these transgressions and the aftermath has empowered me to view things more as they are. I've also learned to view issues in a near-impartial way (sounds boastful, I know), allowing me to even argue against my own theories.

So where am I going with this? About a year ago, I started work on the outline and narration to a documentary I hope to produce soon. I've produced a couple videos that were received well, and so the research and work I've done has been pretty determined. My working title is, "My Position on Chemtrails" for lack of considering a real title. I'm good at titles though. Not, "Flow my tears, the Policeman said" good. I actually started work on this just prior to my reaching out to the Carnicom Institute in the hopes of becoming a volunteer. I did, and the experience has been everything I hoped it would be. Clifford, myself and the other people involved appear to be standing still, but I know to look at how the micro/macro interplay. Minor achievements are joined by huge shifts in understanding on a world scale.

My reason for choosing to go to work for Carnicom is that, over the years and during my research for this documentary Clifford has always seemed like someone marooned in some distant place. Although he's very much here observing and interacting, when it comes to his work he does it irrespective of everything and everyone really. He's not like me, as I am far from immune to social conditioning and typical pressures. People tend to want to be noticed by their peers for something admirable. Some think it’s too risky to reveal a belief that the majority finds undesirable. This process is irrespective of the truth.

So, with that as a back story here's my view and limited understanding of what people call "chemtrails." Having been privy to what is likely the most clear vision into the phenomenon, with the best prepared and best equipped minds to see it without so much static, I think my opinion is more than sufficiently valid. I can only offer my opinion, as even the best-established findings are far too controversial to be allowed their place in our collective understanding. Despite what some will claim, there are many organized groups and many programs working at present to dissuade, discourage, discount, deflate, you name it. This is basic economics. They told us the bank bailout was going to be $700 Billion all the while knowing it would actually be more like $29 Trillion because Economics is a "soft science."

The focus of research at the Carnicom Institute is bioengineering in essence. Yes, geoengineering remains a topic of research. But, not as much progress has been made in that area. But, many of us see a connection between the two. Fundamentally, spraying of aerosolized elements including biological elements falls in the category of geoengineering primarily because of the scale of the operations. Without knowing the purpose, one could classify it as either bio or geoengineering. I suspect that, where the danger lies is when the purpose is not environmental but biological. That’s just my opinion. Man’s sperm count has been halved in only 20 years, yet most shrug that off and reproduction continues.

Before I get into the meat of the biological bombshell discovered by Clifford and his colleagues, I should clarify the connection to chemtrails. Yes, I suspect very strongly that a global program of distributing various substances from aircraft is and has been underway since as far back as 1996. Previous to that, I have little knowledge except what I know of minor weather modification efforts and other small operations involving testing of bacteriological and chemical weapons.

Where I disagree with many proponents of “chemtrails” is on some of the more prominent theories. For instance, many people suspect that a jet fuel additive is the source, and therefore most planes will be involved with little or no modification of the aircraft and not require the knowledge of the pilots or crew. I see some evidence to support this capability. What can be done however is limited because of problems presented by the requirements in fuel composition and especially the combustion of the fuel. To my mind, this delivery method might work to some degree for distribution of minute metallic particles.

Speaking of metallic particles, there is plenty of evidence that at least some of what is being sprayed is metals and other suitable chemical compounds for various reasons. I’m less inclined to take a guess at the purpose when it comes to this aspect of the operations. Any conspiracy proponent or denouncer has heard of HAARP, which isn’t the only large radio array in use. From what I’ve learned and from some of the unverified claims, there’s a lot about the ionosphere and other magnetic (for lack of a better term) phenomenon that the public is not aware of, but that certain agencies are actively making use of. This is one issue that concerns me a great deal.

What I have not personally observed with my own eyes, but I have overwhelming evidence to support is the spraying of substances from aircraft-mounted apparatus. In fact, I have almost no interest in looking at the lines in the sky from day to day at this point. The reason being that, so many things are going on atmospherically I can’t say with a good enough degree of certainty which trails are jet contrails and which not. But, when presented with either photo or video evidence showing certain things that can’t be caused by jet engine operation or other plane effects, I become very interested.

One clear example of spraying taking place is in cases where there is an even sheet of white vapor-like emissions being emitted right at the wing’s trailing edge, across the entire span of the wing. This is not wingtip vortices or other known effects. The only reasonable explanation I have come to is it constitutes one method of spraying. Another very good example should be easier to understand for most people. When a commercial or cargo jet has only 2 engines, yet the plane is leaving behind a persistent trail of four distinct lines that are evenly spaced and evenly pronounced, it is almost certainly the result of spraying through some apparatus. To be more sure, if the trails form right at the wing itself, it is the result of spraying. Normal jet contrails will form at a short distance from the engines, usually no closer to the engine than the rear vertical stabilizer.

There are a few anonymous accounts of what these spraying apparatus are composed of and of how the operation generally takes place. I’m not sold on any one account, but some points are very compelling and sometimes chilling. Did you know that most passenger jets are equipped with dozens of explosive charges? These charges are also wired for remote detonation. I’m referring to the exit doors which contain explosive actuators that blast the door free from their footing. Now, consider that many planes are modernized with fully electronic controls that enable remote control from the cockpit or remote control from anywhere, really. In other words, those exit doors can be triggered to pop by anyone crafty enough to access the flight control systems.

Last on my list of unusually frightening realities of modern aircraft is what’s called Smacsonic. It’s made by a French company. It’s a thin material that comes in sheets and is used to line both the inside of the fuselage for sound suppression and to form part of the bulkhead that supports the large equipment below the passenger compartment for vibration dampening. But get this. The sheets are essentially two very thin aluminum layers compressed onto a core of chemicals and other elements, including a high percentage of iron and even red phosphorus! Are you familiar with Thermite? One envisions how a plane might be converted to liquid magma in an instant. But I digress. These points are totally unrelated to accounts of how some planes may be equipped for spraying.

Lastly on the point of “chemtrails,” there’s the highly unusual but frequently reported issue of spraying by drones. There are even accounts of UFOs spraying, but I don’t see enough evidence to support the theory. Although, there are plenty of video clips where a plane either involved in spraying or simply leaving a very persistent contrail is buzzed by or shadowed by strange objects. I have no theory as to what accounts for that. As for the drones, I am still looking into it. What is very well documented is nighttime spraying. Obviously, if an operation was underway and is meant to be kept under wraps night spraying virtually eliminates observation by most people. This aspect, coupled with what can be seen in flight path analysis as planes flying in loops or flying back and across their own paths seems to indicate a purpose other than destination travel.

This is getting very long, so I’ll end it here without detailing what actually concerns me most related to the chemtrail phenomenon, bioengineering. In short, most people, animals and plants are now carrying within them a bacteria-like form that, in humans first infects blood cells. Looking at your own blood under a high-powered microscope (about 4000x) will “likely” reveal bulbous mutations of many cells. This is the “Cross Domain Bacteria” that Clifford Carnicom has discovered develops into the filament structures that emerge from the skin of certain people with a particular genetic characteristic. Seemingly, only people with this chromosome trisomy will develop the “Delusional Parasitosis.” Ha ha. Very funny, CDC. Talk about commitment to a bit. They took 4 years and $8 million dollars before delivering that punch line. In truth, the NIH knew all about this and it was they who referred to the condition as “Morgellons” as far back as 2002, I believe.

On a less funny note, some rare cases are so bad that they are truly between a rock and hard place. On the one hand, they could really use some medical attention for an almost alien-like condition in which semi-organic material is forcing itself out through the skin or though gaping wounds. On the other hand, the medical community is either oblivious or is well aware that proper diagnosis and treatment is a quick way to lose their license to practice. Therefore, at best they are forced to play along as anti-parasitics are prescribed. At worst, they fend for themselves or risk explaining the reality of their situation and being referred to a psychiatrist. I’ve seen what these things look like and it’s not as simple as picking fibers growing through the skin. It’s not entirely biological, as often crystalline objects of geometric shape are present. Seahorses, spiders, crabs…I can’t write it all off as a hoax when these things emerge from a 16” laceration requiring hours of tending, sterilization and bandaging every day. And this person didn't appear to seek attention and was generally in good spirits. Go figure.

[Dixon]

...little regard for the intuitive aspects and alternate realities...

Okay, but the whole question is "Which of the 'alternate realities' are really realities, and which are just alternate illusions?"

And, re: intuition--I'm not sure how you see intuition connected with the topic of this thread, chemtrails (maybe you're just digressing, as I am now), but I'd caution anybody about citing "intuition" as support for any position about objective reality. Interested Waccites might wish to read my essay "The Role of Intuition" here. Okay, end of digression--now we're back to our regularly scheduled contentious philosophical train-wreck.

[Rustie]

I completely understand that the link you have provided to the article and graph discusses the effects of “chemtrails” and assumes that the reader is aligned with the theory posited by Clifford Carnicom, the author, that in fact there is an “Aerosol Operation” afoot. My objective in this missive is to demonstrate just a few points of the article, it's assumptions, and the writer that don't pass the smell test. I do not do this as a mere exercise to nay-say. I am genuinely interested in responses, particularity from you Kate, to the specific issues I present.

The first item I noticed was immediately apparent. Here was a 1200 plus word report discussing scientific research and observations citing only 6 information sources, three of which are the author's own institute. In effect Clifford Carnicom is corroborating his assertions about aerosol operations with his own previously reported assertions. I checked those three reports and they too had no outside corroboration. This is not, to say the least, good form. Credible scientific work relies on the research done by others. Citing self-referential sources, particularly in the name of science, is absurd, not to mention provides zero reference for cross checking facts and theories. Conclusion: his writings are nothing more than opinion pieces.

The remaining 3 sources cited in this report were references only to general statements of the existence of global warming &/or climate change. None, and I checked them, supported any of Carnicom's “findings” of aerosol operations. This left me with the impression that Mr. Carnicom intentionally stretched beyond reasonable measures in an attempt to give his report an air of authenticity.

And finally, I checked Clifford Carnicom's credentials. In short, he has no background in the areas of meteorology, chemistry or physics, any of which would be necessary to conduct, analyze or interpret legitimate research on the causes and effects of climate change. Nor does he have any background in bio or geo-engineering which would be significant to research and conclusions positing theories on chemtrails. He does have training in statistics and mathematics which is valuable in these particular areas of study but not likely to establish one as an expert. Certainly this is not enough background to conduct legitimate, plausible scientific research that is devoid of any outside corroboration.

When I receive information as evidence or in support of a hypothesis, theory or belief I first vet the sources provided. In this particular situation, for the simple three points I cited, Carnicom and his institute do not pass the credibility test. If you can refute my observations with reliable facts I would be delighted to reconsider my position. If you cannot provide any such evidence I propose that you reconsider your position on the issue of chemtrails.

This article and graph may help. Carnicom explains that the aerosols are not cooling the planet, but warming it. Given the charade that is occurring now among the geoengineers who doth protest too much that they are afraid geoengineering may have devastating consequences upon the environment, while knowing full well that aerosol operations have been underway for over a decade, we can assume that they know exactly what they are doing.

https://www.carnicominstitute.org/articles/gwmodel.htm

[TyrannyNews]

...And finally, I checked Clifford Carnicom's credentials. In short, he has no background in the areas of meteorology, chemistry or physics, any of which would be necessary to conduct, analyze or interpret legitimate research on the causes and effects of climate change. Nor does he have any background in bio or geo-engineering which would be significant to research and conclusions positing theories on chemtrails. He does have training in statistics and mathematics which is valuable in these particular areas of study but not likely to establish one as an expert. Certainly this is not enough background to conduct legitimate, plausible scientific research that is devoid of any outside corroboration....

Rustie, I appreciate the tone of your response and think some of your comments were valid and well thought out. However, I disagree with your critique of Clifford Carnicom and feel compelled to provide the members here an alternative assessment.

First, it should be known that I am a volunteer member and consultant at the Carnicom Institute. As you might expect, my involvement is a cost center and not a source of revenue or any other privilege. I like to think that I work harder for the Institute than I do in any other capacity. In any case, I'm aware that my total impartiality is not really possible so I won't make that claim.

There are really two distinct ways to view a person's abilities in a professional, scientific or academic sense. There is the approach of factoring in their academic or professional credentials within the discipline for which they are being assessed. Then, there is the approach of taking an in-depth look at their actual knowledge along with their typical lifestyle and the way in which they involve themselves in activities related to the discipline for which they are being assessed. In both cases experience can be a factor in the assessment.

I'll begin by explaining how I have assessed Clifford using factors outside of traditional academic credentials. With regard to knowledge of the disciplines required for any appreciable research into both the geoengineering and bioengineering subjects being studied at the Institute, Clifford is widely known as someone who can at minimum converse fluently with any highly-credentialed person on a full spectrum of topics, both commonplace and more obscure. I won't provide references to any individuals, as I assume they would prefer deciding for themselves whether to risk the consequence of associating themselves with controversial topics, even if only to acknowledge them.

Clifford is, from my personal observation something of a genius in a number of areas. Yet, I consider him to be very well-oriented to social interactions, a good communicator and appears to relate to people from different walks of life, unlike many geniuses who many seem to lack these traits. It should also be known that he has made a number of scientific breakthroughs which I think pale as compared to his development of practical methodologies. For instance, he's developed a red wine self-test for determining of a person is infected with the Cross Domain Bacteria, currently the focus of research at the institute.

In this very accessible test method, a person first brushes their teeth vigorously for at least 5 minutes followed by a thorough rinsing of the mouth. Next a solution of 1/3 3% non-food-grade hydrogen peroxide and 2/3 dark red wine (merlot) is prepared. Next, the person swishes a comfortable portion of the mixture in their mouth vigorously, for 5 minutes. Afterward, the mixture is spit into a clean container (a glass) and the process is repeated a few times. The resulting substance will, if infected to any degree contain up to 4 forms of the pathogenic form, encasing filaments, sub-micron filament networks, a chlamydia-like form and hybrid form. These are all signs of infection. If a person is so inclined and capable, they can allow the mixture to dry completely and prepare a slide for examination under a microscope. A high percentage of samples used in cultures for production of the pathogenic form are derived from this, or a similar method.

I just learned recently of his amazing trick that enables someone with an inexpensive trinocular microscope with a 1000x magnification power to increase that to between 4000x and 5000x by fabricating the attachment of a barlow diverging lens. I'm anxious myself to create one of these hybrid microscopes.

Now, as to your statement that Clifford has no training in advanced mathematics, here's something interesting to consider. Very recently, Clifford was encouraging me to take some courses at MIT. He was nearing the end of a course that just happens to have been in advanced mathematics. I believe he began another course just yesterday. A fellow volunteer at the institute just completed his Masters in advanced mathematics and I would hazard to guess that he would consider Clifford to have a superior understanding of the topic. In short, anything Clifford does he appears to require of himself that he become extremely well-versed and efficient in. I don't dare say he achieves "expertise," as I no longer value the concept.

Speaking of "experts," I find there to be a growing use of the concept to the detriment of science, learning and communication. This field of "expertology" does more to shield people from criticism and accountability than it serves as a measure of one's abilities. That is why I will almost never consider one's education when attempting to assess their capabilities in any particular area. At best, I see the modern education system as a blight on society and simply disgraceful.

I hope people will consider what I've testified to here as helpful when making any assessment of Clifford himself, his institute and the topics being researched.

[Scott McKeown]

In short, most people, animals and plants are now carrying within them a bacteria-like form that, in humans first infects blood cells. Looking at your own blood under a high-powered microscope (about 4000x) will “likely” reveal bulbous mutations of many cells.

I’m gathering you are another person who has joined Waccobb in the last couple of weeks to participate in this discussion (your only posts have been on this chemtrails thread) and specifically to comment about the work of Clifford Carnicom, who you clearly ardently support. I also gather you live far from West Sonoma County. You originally signed up under the name Derrick Smithers and now you say your name is Peter Klein.

While acknowledging the value of intuitive knowledge (which I believe has some place in many cases) I try to be open minded about objectively considering evidence that is presented to support extraordinary claims.

To that end, I took the time to watch all ten of a ten-part series of YouTube videos of a presentation by Clifford Carnicom — a total of one hour and thirty-eight minutes — of which Part 1 can be viewed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlCCEmNkd6A

I could pick apart a lot of his contentions I find lacking, but here are my conclusions in a quick nutshell:

• Carnicom seems like a quite likable and good person who is sincere in his efforts to try to help people.

• It seems that (by his own admission) he is an amateur researcher with no training or professional experience in pathology, forensics, material sciences, or any other relevant field to make him qualified to really understand what it is he is looking at under a microscope.

• While I concede that of course there is always some possibility he could be right, I found his presentation to be rambling and, in my opinion, he just doesn’t make a coherent, compelling case that there are strange, bio-engineered bacterial-like forms that are being purposefully sprayed on us from airplanes and that have now infected most people’s blood cells, and which can likely be viewed with a microscope (or through the "red wine test") and that only he and a few others have noticed them who are either not afraid to come forward or not intentionally suppressing the information.

I suppose my personal conclusions might be greatly offensive to some people on this forum who apparently are huge fans of Carnicom and who seem to take rather personally any critique that challenges his work. I hope I’m not personally insulted again for having my own views on this.

I understand there are people who suffer greatly from what is called Morgellons Syndrome and I don’t want to belittle what is happening to them. It must be horrible.

Scott

[hummingbird]

Dixon, to answer your the the as to how intuition applies to this topic....

While there are many "experts" posting here with all sorts of ideas about what is true and what is not, I am forced to read between the lines to find the truth. I use my intuition to guide me so I don't get bogged down in intellectual debate that seems to just go around and around and around and around in circles. My hope is to encourage others to try it out.... It's kinda fun. What is "objective reality", but just another belief system that is extremely difficult for most muggles to break through.

The left brained intellectual thought process has brought little to the deeper understanding of this and many other issues. Solutions are virtually non existent or are limited to "just let it go...there is nothing we can do anyway" opposing the "we must do something to stop them" even though we have no clue who "they" are, or what the the rules of the game are.

Similar to what Mr. Tyranny said about expertise, the overuse of the intellectual mind is a shield, protection for the ego which is deeply attached to the mental BELIEFS that most of us consider fact. The Chemtrails issue is a big issue that none of us really seem to understand fully. Unless we delve into the intuitive brain and allow information and truths to come through those parts of ourselves that we have historically shut down, the conversation never broadens. We remain polarized and with no deeper understanding from when we started out.

I look forward to seeing folks hoping off the merry-go-round of the intellect and exploring more possibilities. I apologize if this concept eliminate the hobby of debate for those who are deeply committed to keeping the argument going for sake of a good sport. If it resonates, I challenge anyone and everyone to explore what it would mean to look at this discussion through the lense of intuition... if only for a day.

Blessings

And, re: intuition--I'm not sure how you see intuition connected with the topic of this thread, chemtrails (maybe you're just digressing, as I am now), but I'd caution anybody about citing "intuition" as support for any position about objective reality. Interested Waccites might wish to read my essay "The Role of Intuition" here.

[Barry]

Dixon, to answer your the the as to how intuition applies to this topic....

Did you read Dixon's excellent article: "The Role of Intuition"? Please read it before replying.

As far I can tell, what you are saying boils down to your intuition saying that "they" are out to get us, and the contrails following planes looks suspicious, so that must be how they are doing it. And let's not overuse our intellectual mind to shield us from the various shortcomings of this argument.

[Gus diZerega]

Dixon's article is excellent in my opinion. I want to add one important point. As I continually told my students, when your intuition tells you some argument or finding must be false, without your being able to explain why, two possibilities arise. First, you do not understand what seems false to you. Not understanding it, you would change your view once you did.

Second, it is in fact wrong and your intuition is picking up information that you cannot make clear to others or even yourself. In that case, if you want to engage in public discussion your job is to SHOW THE WAY so that othjers can find the same conclusion you intuited. As you do you might even find your initial intuition needed revising even though it correctly told you something was wrong. In the case of this conspiracy stuff, it requires showing evidence where the explanation of conspiracy is at least as rational as any other explanation.

The discussion so far has convinced me even more strongly than when I entered it that those claiming chemtrails exist do not understand science and do not understand even the minimal requirements for making a scientific claim. They are not alone- much of this culture is in free fall as to their ability to make a rational argument or subject their own claims to rational evaluation.

I urge those attacking experts to use their intuition to fix their computer when it crashes, fix their transmission when it needs work, set their bone, or the bone of another, when it breaks, and grind the lens needed for their glasses. WITHOUT using a instructional source - because such sources were prepared by experts.

Being an expert does not mean you are always right (and many experts need frequent reminding of that), and experts sometimes disagree, but it does mean that they know much more about the subject concerned than non experts, and their views deserve being given MUCH more weight on the issue than those of a non-expert. While it is irritating to encounter an expert so full of himself as to think he or she is always right, it is even more irritating to encounter a non-expert who pretends to be as worth listening to on a subject as an expert in the field.

Did you read Dixon's excellent article: "The Role of Intuition"? Please read it before replying.

As far I can tell, what you are saying boils down to your intuition saying that "they" are out to get us, and the contrails following planes looks suspicious, so that must be how they are doing it. And let's not overuse our intellectual mind to shield us from the various shortcomings of this argument.

[podfish]

I urge those attacking experts to use their intuition to fix their computer when it crashes, fix their transmission when it needs work.

as one who fixes computers and transmissions, I can attest that many people strongly believe their intuition about the cause of the problem. And are happy to explain how to go about fixing it. They typically do stop short of fixing it themselves but are quite distrustful if the problem you find and correct is different than the one they diagnosed for you.

[spam1]

the fact that condensation can occur with anything that causes pressure differentials is what makes cloud formation so interesting. If you have ever been to the Midwest, you can go from clear, to thunderstorm clouds, in a matter of minutes, and the clouds form "out of thin air" (actually its out of heavy air when the humidity is high). Here is a couple of youtubes showing very cool condensation patterns:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWrbip5TwJs and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-d9A2oq1N38

Also, liquid fuel rockets use H2 and 0 to burn and produce only water, just like a fuel cell. I'm not sure what the exhaust is from the solid rocket boosters.

Kate,

What you see here is a very common cloud formation going north to south along the crest of the Sierra Nevada that occurs when the prevailing winds descend over the crest into the desert. I see it all the time backpacking along with jet contrails. No need to get all alarmed.

[podfish]

Now there's a man that I know, the only man that I have personally met on this earth that decided to take what he knew, what he had, and devote his entire life to the service of humanity and the world.

I don't mean this to belittle your obviously strong feelings. You know by now that most people won't be convinced, and I'm sure that's frustrating for you - though I bet you've figured a way to account for it.

but i gotta say, this all sounds like a Robert Heinlein story from the early 50s. Down to the heroic iconoclast... it's a story that probably was told by Homer in a different form -- obviously it resonates with the way we perceive our world and have for millennia. Of course, its familiarity; or rather, the re-occurrence of its form in epic tales, speaks against the likelihood of its truth.

[Jude Iam]

Well, now, all this talk bout experts and fixing stuff has reminded me of a story about Edgar Cayce, the Sunday school teacher who was known as the Sleeping Prophet.

Seems there was an ocean liner stuck out at sea because the engine wasn't working. The mechanics had been through the rooms of gears and cable and thingamajigs innumerable times. Experts had been brought in from afar. All was to no avail - the huge ship stayed floating helplessly in the ocean with passengers and crew waiting for the engine to be made to work.
As a last resort, someone thought of contacting Edgar Cayce. He knew nothing of engines but was ready to help where he could, so he went into his trance, got clear on where the problem was, then gave detailed though entirely un-mehanical directions to the mechanics, who finally located the small piece which had malfunctioned, fixed it and the ship engine turned on and took the ship et.al. on their way.


And Albert Einstein had much to say about intuition, including these 2 quotes:

"The only real valuable thing is intuition."
“The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.”
― Albert Einstein


I'll have what they're having - BOTH sides of the brain.
Blest, Jude

Dixon's article is excellent in my opinion. I want to add one important point. As I continually told my students, when your intuition tells you some argument or finding must be false, without your being able to explain why, two possibilities arise. First, you do not understand what seems false to you. Not understanding it, you would change your view once you did.

Second, it is in fact wrong and your intuition is picking up information that you cannot make clear to others or even yourself. In that case, if you want to engage in public discussion your job is to SHOW THE WAY so that othjers can find the same conclusion you intuited. As you do you might even find your initial intuition needed revising even though it correctly told you something was wrong. In the case of this conspiracy stuff, it requires showing evidence where the explanation of conspiracy is at least as rational as any other explanation.

The discussion so far has convinced me even more strongly than when I entered it that those claiming chemtrails exist do not understand science and do not understand even the minimal requirements for making a scientific claim. They are not alone- much of this culture is in free fall as to their ability to make a rational argument or subject their own claims to rational evaluation.

I urge those attacking experts to use their intuition to fix their computer when it crashes, fix their transmission when it needs work, set their bone, or the bone of another, when it breaks, and grind the lens needed for their glasses. WITHOUT using a instructional source - because such sources were prepared by experts.

Being an expert does not mean you are always right (and many experts need frequent reminding of that), and experts sometimes disagree, but it does mean that they know much more about the subject concerned than non experts, and their views deserve being given MUCH more weight on the issue than those of a non-expert. While it is irritating to encounter an expert so full of himself as to think he or she is always right, it is even more irritating to encounter a non-expert who pretends to be as worth listening to on a subject as an expert in the field.

[Rustie]

I understand now Kate – you joined this board, May 02, 2014, solely to pick up on an old thread, one that had not received any activity since Dec 2012, for the purpose of proselytizing for the Chemtrails Cult and one of it's guru's Clifford Carnicom. My question is are you a hired gun or a groupie? Beyond that I have nothing else to say to you. Your inability to respond intelligently with any form of evidence other than 'I believe what I believe because I believe it' says it all.

We will not settle this argument here. For what we seek to establish is airborne, clandestine, denied...

[Rustie]

Six hundred and sixteen words into your ramble you have said nothing in response to my observations. You seem to be of the impression that spouting your personal opinions and citing zero relevant facts to substantiate anything you offer somehow has credibility and we should now understand that Mr. Carnicom is a genius. I'm particularly entertained by your dissertation about Clifford's “scientific breakthrough” in his development of a self-test for Cross Domain Bacteria. Of course you neglected to mention that Mr. Carnicom also invented the disease, for which I was unable to find any outside corroborative evidence of its existence. Now that's a scam worth considering – I'm wondering when he will get around to inventing the cure?

Eventually you attempted to respond directly to one of my statements. Unfortunately you got that wrong. There were two things I attributed to Clifford's expertise and one of them was mathematics – so there we have no disagreement. Considering this is the only point you attempted to address I'm guessing that the results of my relatively cursory search vetting Mr. Carnicom are in fact spot on. He is simply not qualified to be an authority on any of the issues his institute represents. He has opinions and he began the Carnicom Institute to propagate those opinions and guise them as scientific research. Does he have a right to do this? Of course he does. Do you have the right to bite on his hook and get reeled in? Of course you do. Is it appropriate for Clifford, yourself or anyone else to misrepresent themselves? In my opinion, it is not.

Now you might want to consider mentioning to your cohorts, Paul Harris (who I realize might well be you under another name) and Kate Willens that you have all been sniffed out for what you are – Internet trolls, likely for hire but not necessarily so, but definitely pushing an agenda. In my opinion it's time for you all to move on and find another discussion board to infiltrate.

Rustie, I appreciate the tone of your response and think some of your comments were valid and well thought out. However, I disagree with your critique of Clifford Carnicom and feel compelled to provide the members here an alternative assessment.

First, it should be known that I am a volunteer member and consultant at the Carnicom Institute. ...

[kpage9]

Rustie,

I agree with nearly everything you say, and admire the way you say it. If you haven't published, you should. If you have, I'd be curious to read what you've written. The only thing that troubles me about your post is the imperiousness of it--you practically order this triad to flee the kingdom. I hope they don't. I'm quite happy to read what they say, as one of my fascinations is mass delusion. Arthunter and I have gone around a few times on the subject of Targeted Individuals; Morgellons are clearly in the same delusional category (though differing in the randomness of the victim).

While I appreciate your "tribal elder"-like efforts to keep our commons here free of rubbish, I also value the ability to interact with people I'm curious about. And to really get to know the logic. Mostly I hope to get some insight into how an apparently intact intellect allows itself to jump off into outer space like that, and ONLY about the one subject. Encapsulated delusions in minds that are otherwise perfectly good--one end of a spectrum, not so far away from the band that believe global warming is a hoax, or that tax cuts for the rich make sense for a poor person. Not all the way out at the end of the spectrum, where schizophrenia lives...but a little nuts just the same. And i think it behooves the rest of us to understand it all a little better.

To the three Clifford devotees: I know this seems really judgmental, off-putting, maybe painful, what I say here. (Although my suspicion is that you take some "us against them" satisfaction in fielding criticism.) There is nothing I can do about that, and if it does cause pain i am sorry. You may instead be feeling sorry for me, since I've obviously opted for the blue pill, in your collective book.

kathy

Six hundred and sixteen words into your ramble you have said nothing in response to my observations. You seem to be ...

[kpage9]

Jude, in all this talk...nothing about fixing it, as far as I can tell. That would be different.

kp

Well, now, all this talk bout experts and fixing stuff has reminded me of a story about Edgar Cayce, the Sunday school teacher who was known as the Sleeping Prophet. ...

[Gus diZerega]

Kate- I sadly think Rustie is correct. But I will make one last try.

I doubt you are aware of how smugly arrogant what you wrote was, but it was offensively so. You say you and those like you have superior values to the values of “this world” without getting any more specific as to what those values are than you did to the evidence behind chem. trails. For your information the writers with whom you have been dealing have widely divergent be;iefs, from strong atheism or agnosticism to very strong religious and spiritual beliefs. Many have made life choices expensive in terms of the dominant financial values of “this world.” What most of us share is a belief in reasoned discussion and the obligation to provide evidence when we make claims we expect others to accept.

That is an important kind of humility that involves respect for those we talk to and awareness of our own fallibility.

Perhaps your alternative value is pride and arrogance?

If the man you admire is as you describe, he is one of many such, including arguably people on this thread. Sorry you have met only one.

Many of us have devoted ourselves to seeking to serve those around us, each in different ways. And many of us disagree as to how best to do that. This is why having a common commitment to reason and evidence is so important. The world has been filled with misfortune not just from the actions of the bad and amoral, arguably even more suffering can be traced to those who in their sincerity hold themselves above others. The ease with which you denigrate any and all who have different views suggests you are at least prone to those errors.

When you want to engage in honest dialogue try and give concrete verifiable claims. If those claims are rebutted, address the rebuttals. And address others’ reasons for disagreeing. If you do not do that you are not engaging honestly with people who see the world differently than you.

We will not settle this argument here. For what we seek to establish is airborne, clandestine, denied. My initial post was never to establish proof. I have observed the sky every day since I first found out about chemtrails in 2011. There is no way that any of you can tell me what I know I have seen is not what I know it to be....

[kpage9]

Kate, you say:

"Now there's a man that I know, the only man that I have personally met on this earth that decided to take what he knew, what he had, and devote his entire life to the service of humanity and the world."

are you serious?

Clifford is the only person you've ever met who has devoted his or her (I'm assuming your use of "man" is just a figure of speech, albeit an archaic one) life to the service of humanity and the world???

kp

[Barry]

...
(btw, this thread is being marginalized as the last post still appears on the front page as 5/4.....is this intended?)

It's not being marginalized (unless there is a conspiracy I don't know about ). Here's what it looks like in the WaccoTalk category listing (at or near the very top of the category):

What are you seeing?