Michael J. Murphy's most recent

[tryblinking]

Periodically, Mr Murphy sends out bulk emails with his latest pleas for continued action on behalf of the chemtrail... um... 'theory' (hoax). It's like saying "hey, please pay attention to us. Ignore the fact we have no verifiable scientific evidence and just tell all your friends and anyone important you can think of to be scared every time you see a persisting contrail."

Please consider taking time to e-mail Varney.I do not have a link for the info I saw on Varney & Co( Fox Business) this morning. The interview was with Patrick Moore who was pushing his new book, " Confessions of a Greenpeace Drop Out". What moved me to consider contacting the host of the show was his reaction (as well as the reaction of his panel) to what Patrick Moore was saying about the radical Green Movement. Varney said he wanted to know more about issues causing environmental distress that the general public is not aware of (I'm paraphrasing). So-o-o-o, to me that spells an opening for 100's of thousands of contacts to be received from concerned citizens in regard Stratospheric Aresol Geoengineering (Chem trails) , HAARP, and geoengineering in general.Varney’s e-mail: [email protected]Link to “What in the World are They Spraying?” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0khstYDLATo order go to: www.stopspraying.usMichael J. Murphyhttp://www.coalitionagainstgeoengineering.org/http://truthmediaproductions.blogspot.com/

[Mick]

What would be interesting with "calls to action" like this, and with other things like "chemtrail awareness" days, would be exactly how much response is generated.

I suspect that the number of people who actually write in to TV shows on issues like this is very, very low, probably well under a hundred. Certainly not "100's of thousands" - you don't get that many on a mainstream issue.

I think that the intense focus that Murphy has on this particular topic has distorted his perspective somewhat.

[tryblinking]

speaking of which, here's his latest appeal:

Many activists have been sending geo-engineering info and copies of "What in the World are They Spraying?" to local TV stations. CBS Atlanta was one of those stations that received a copy and covered the issue. Please continue your efforts in exposing this crime against nature and humanity. The masses are beginning to awaken!!!!
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/index.html Click on chemtrails conspiracy or hoax.

Although I would love to have the time to read every e-mail that is sent to me, I am having a challenge keeping up with the large numbers that are being sent to me daily. Please do not reply to this. Instead please foreword this e-mail to someone else. Perhaps it might encourage them to get active. Thanks again for all of your efforts in addressing this important issue.


---
The article below was posted on our local CBS Atlanta TV station website last night. I did not see the actual TV news clip, but a friend did and called to tell me.
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/index.html


We have prepared envelops and will be mailing out several DVD’s today. One to CBS Atlanta and one to 12 other GA TV stations. One to the Research Scientist St John at GA Tech mentioned in the article below and one to the Science Research Dept at UGA.

A few of us called the GA Gov’s ofc about this on Monday and did not get an intelligent response.


-----
Subject: This made the local TV News on CBS tonight - FINALLY - The DVD is making its rounds in Metro Atl as well
-----

ATLANTA -- Conspiracy theorists believe the U.S. government is spreading toxic chemicals from planes. They call them chemtrails and there believe the toxins are damaging the environment and our health.

"It definitely angers me," said Ali Valente of Buckhead. "Some days there's only four [chemtrails] some days there's eight. Some days the whole sky is enveloped in milky white substance."

When Valente began noticing a bunch of white lines in the sky blocking the sun she searched for an explanation online.

The Internet is full of allegations, photos and information about the conspiracy.

"These are literally crimes against humanity, nature," said Michael Murphy, a chemtrail researcher from Los Angeles. Murphy produced a documentary about the so-called chemtrail cover-up. He said he believes the chemicals in the chemtrails, aluminum, barium and others are making us sick.

"We've seen aluminum-related illnesses go through the roof over the past 15 years since these long trails have been noticed on a daily basis," said Murphy.

Murphy said tests show high levels of chemicals in rain and soil. When asked how he knows the major increase is due to planes spraying chemicals, Murphy said they looked at other possible sources and couldn't find one.

Some theorists speculated that the government is dropping chemicals in order to control the weather.

So how can you tell the difference between chemtrails and typical plane contrails?

"A contrail dissipates and evaporates pretty quickly. A chemtrail lingers," said Valente.

But meteorologist and research scientist Dr. Jim St. John of Georgia Tech said he doesn't believe the chemtrail conspiracy. He said normally occurring contrails can linger. He said he believes more lines in the sky is simply due to more air traffic.

The U.S. government has said it isn't spreading chemicals from planes.

CBS Atlanta wants your chemtrail pictures. Send them to [email protected].

Michael J. Murphy
http://www.coalitionagainstgeoengineering.org/
http://truthmediaproductions.blogspot.com/

I think it really speaks to the quality of CBS as a news source that they seem to have spoken to a qualified meteorologist merely as an afterthought.

[Mick]

Well, he's less interesting If you watch the video though, he does get a few more words in than the article suggest.

http://www.cbsatlanta.com/news/26718985/detail.html

I might talk to Jeff Chirico of CBS Atlanta later today, maybe put in a good word for science.

[tryblinking]

Here's the latest:

"What in the World are They Spraying?" T-Shirts have proven to be an incredible activism tool. People will actually come up to you and ask the question "What are they spraying?" giving you and opportunity to educate them on the chemtrail/geoengineereing issue.
We are encouraging everyone who orders a DVD of "What in the World are they Spraying?" to make copies and hand out for free in support of our vision of making this issue known to all. Please also contact me for bulk orders. Your continued support allows us to address this issue on a daily basis.
Thank you.
Sincerely,

Michael J. Murphy

Here's the offending article:
I haven't included the link to buy the items in question, as I don't want to help him generate any revenue, or further 'evangelistic' opportunities.
...Of course you could always wear one ironically, and use it to spread the word of reason when anyone asks.

[Mick]

That is pretty funny. There's nothing in that image to suggest spraying at all - the contrail is probably not even persistent.

What are they spraying? Water and CO2, just like your car.

[Jay Reynolds]

Did anyone watch Murphy's presentation at the Ghent meeting of the Belfort Group?
There is a point at which is speaking, and Murphy has the most disingenuous look
on his face. I think he knows exactly what he is doing, and doesn't 'believe' at all.
It might be hard to believe but some chemtrails promoters are really that evil.

[Mick]

For some people, like fear salesman Alex Jones, and the snake oil salesmen, the connection between their theories and their profits is pretty clear. But how is Murphy benefitting from this? I don't really imagine it's going to make him much money.

Can you actually make a living simply selling the story? Is it posible he actually believes what he's saying?

[Jay Reynolds]

For Murphy, it's just a career move, another story to 'cover'. He's got a mentor, Griffin. He sells the DVDs for $20, he gets flown around and speaks for a fee no doubt. Then there are the t-shirts, etc.

Here is what I said in 1999, when it was just getting started, was I pretty close?
http://goodsky.homestead.com/files/scarehow.html

[tryblinking]

I think you are right- there isn't much money in Murphy's claims for him (tho maybe some backhanders from his associates). It seems to be more about what he sees as his credibility.
I think that once you have (what you believe to be) a significant number of supporters, and that your 'cause' is publicly associated with your name, you can't go back. Past a certain point beyond reasonable openness and unbiased discussion, you can't retract your ideas as proven false, or at least severely undermined, without losing all the credibility you think you have gained. Of course, the only credibility Murphy has actually garnered is within the 'chemtrail' believing community.

And here's the next installment of his assertions:

Above Top Secret claims to be The Best in Uncensored News Information and Analysis on the internet today. While proven to be effective in the past, Saturday March 12 contradicted this claim when Michael J. Murphy was not only censored, but disconnected from the show due to him addressing truths about chemtrail/geoengineering programs. This was an obvious attempt by ATS to discredit him and his film “What in the World are they Spraying? Black Listed News’ host, Nef Argued with Murphy on almost every fact made about the science and data about the damaging chemtrail/geoengoneering programs that have recently been uncovered. While having difficulty debunking the science and facts of the film, Neff, resulted in accusing Murphy of many things including creating public panic over the questions raised about current chemtrail/geoengineering programs. He went on to claim that “people everywhere are now paranoid when they see airplanes flying above them”.
After the interview, Murphy stated that “due to the monetary and political interests associated with chemtrail/geoengineering programs, we expect resistance from those who are working tirelessly to protect such interests, however, we where shocked to learn that Above Top Secret was amongst one of those groups”. He went on to state that while we encourage healthy dialog , we will not tolerate the deceptive propaganda being used to protect the interests associated with programs that are designed to protect those who are harming nature and humanity. Please take a moment to write Above Top Secret News and let them know that we will not tolerate this deceptive propaganda that is not only compromising all of us, but all of humanity. Above Top Secret News can be contacted at the following link: (link removed)

Correction, the folks at Above Top Secret, not Black listed News attempted to debunk chemtrail/geoengineering programs. In my urgency to get this information out, I made the mistake of stating that Blackilisted News was responsible for the attempted debunking. Blacklisted news has been a great support in our efforts to expose this crime against nature and humanity and I stand in support of their continued efforts.

Please take a moment to address this serious issue.

So he's repeating the same fallacy that many 'believers' do; if you disagree, however unbiasedly, you MUST be 'one of them', in the pocket of 'The Man', unable to think for yourself or assess 'the evidence', and as such ignorable.

[Jay Reynolds]

rather revealing to see how he handles a skeptical viewpoint, and show his weaknesses.
I note that he doesn't link to the interview for his followers to judge for themselves.
here is a link to a message board thread that in turn links to the interview audio archive, the segment starts in the second hour of show #48:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread666473/pg51

Jay Reynolds

[Jay Reynolds]

MJM's fatal weakness is that he can't handle debate at all, he is essentially 'disarmed' because he is 'unarmed'.
He also fell apart totally when he was asked to identify the planes.

He had to admit that commercial planes were not involved, but how does he know if he's never identified ANY of the planes using a flight tracker or a telescope?

I've changed my mind about his motivation, he comes off as a fanatic, a true believer.

But his rapid descent into incoherency when challenged show he is very unstable.

It would be child's play to vaporize him in real debate.

[Jay Reynolds]

here is the audio archive.
http://www.illustrial.net/site/archive
Click on ATS live show 48.
the first hour is earthquake stuff.
I think the particpants use skype.
Jay

[Mick]

This appears the be the ATS thread that eventually led to that interview. It starts out as a forum for Dr. Lenny Thyme to answer questions about the WITWATS, which he really fails to do.

I can't find the link to the interview audio in that long thread though, can you post a direct link?

[tryblinking]

The interview is good as long as it lasts. He makes unsubstantiated claims about metallic concentrations and contrail science throughout, and when confronted deflects with the false dichotomy of closed-mind vs government agent.
The evidence provided by the 'scientist' was unfortunately slow and over-complex, to the point where I couldn't tell if he was trying to show supporting or contradictory evidence. The presenters were certainly straightforward though, defending on points of persistence times and the 'chemtrails bill / space weapons bill" authorship (by ufo enthusiasts,m as you may know) and lack of content foreknowledge by the associated congressman. All MJM could do was change the subject and insinuate that the government had killed the congressman's close relatives, with no proof.

I just wish it hadn't cut out before the end. If it's a 2-parter, please direct me to the bit I missed.
If anyone knows of footage where MJM engages in any level of serious debate, I'd love to see him be undermined. (not sure what kind of person that makes me- good I hope)

[Jay Reynolds]

I'm guessing MJM will go to ground and avoid any further chance of such a cross-examination in the future.
I once got the chance to ambush William Thomas on the James Whale MW talk show in England. He won't forget it.

I broke the story about ISIS/Rosin/Webre and HR 2977 back in 2002:
http://chem11.proboards.com/index.cg...int&thread=316

[tryblinking]

Well, that sounds like a separate conspiracy altogether, on the motives behind the bill, for which you're free to start another thread.

The reality is that [chemtrails] were simply given a passing mention in a bill written by new-age UFO conspiracy theorists and sponsored by an eccentric politician, all of who believe in things that are far more unusual than 'chemtrails'.

(Taken from kucinich-chemtrails-and-hr-2977 over at contrailscience)

Again, any further audio or video of MJM discussing his 'crime against nature and mankind' with questioning skeptics would be greatly appreciated.

[Mick]

Conspiracy theorists rarely want to engage skeptics after the first time it happens. Unless they can control the "debate" in a friendly setting, like a conspiracy radio show, or Jesse Ventura's show. MJM made the mistake of thinking that ATS Radio was going to be friendly, as ATS discusses a lot of far more kooky subjects. But it depends on the individual, and ATS contains quite a few skeptics on a number of topics.

The question would be if A) we could do anything about that, or B) could it somehow be turned to our advantage? Something like the open invitation various people put out there for someone to come and defend their ideas - John Stewart inviting Glenn Beck, or James Randi offering $!,000,000 for proof of the paranormal?

Is there an actual "chemtrail challenge" that you could face MJM with? Something that could not be easily dodged?

[tryblinking]

I think if there were a 'chemtrail challenge', it would have to be presented at their annual back-patting gathering, known as the 'chemtrail conference'. A more interesting question would be what exactly should serve as a sufficient reward or incentive? Is it as simple as a big pile of cash, or should there be some kind of media recognition and public attention involved? Moreover, if media recognition and public attention are what they crave, they don't need us to offer it; the evidence (if they had it) would speak for itself, and attract that anyway, so that incentive already exists. I suppose we'd be offering a guarantee to take their evidence seriously as a group of international independents, and not 'brush it under the government rug'.

However, not only would the criteria for discovered evidence have to be scientifically strict, but it would appear to be more strict than any conspiracy theorist would agree could be discovered, by definition.

This is not the case of course. We wouldn't be asking for stamped and sealed secret documents or filmed admissions from senior officials, but rather physical proof from the contrail science side of it; aviation, meteorology, physics and maths. As ever, we want evidence of the chemicals used, the nozzles on the planes (if that's the theory they're using this week), contrail samples over periods of time, or indeed anything which fits their theories but cannot be ruled out by any current peer-reviewed scientific understanding.

Of course this evidence doesn't exist so I doubt anyone would go for it, or they'd play Admiral Ackbar, with the predictable claim that we're government shills.

[Jay Reynolds]

In 2002, I examined a chemmie claim by creatin a web page and also issued a challenge. Here is a link to an archived version which is missing graphics:

http://replay.waybackmachine.org/200.../expressb.html

Here was the reaction:
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/thread1140.html

In hindsight, perhaps I was not diplomatic enough in my approach.....

The result was a campaign to threaten a lawsuit against the free server which was hosting the webpage, and subsequent deletion of my account.

[tryblinking]

I'm not sure I understand- does the 'chemtrail' myth hold that a commercial plane cannot 'spray'? Surely if they can, there's no harm in identifying a plane as commercial? I think I am missing something.

[Jay Reynolds]

The original myth started by saying military jets were the only ones, and that JP-8 fuel specifically was to blame.

Later iterations held that airlines were involved via "Operation Cloverleaf", etc...

In my opinin, for the majority of believers, if the planes could be identified as commercial, the hoax falls apart for the following reasons:
-security concerns
-impracticality of coordinating "spraying" with ordinary passenger schedules
-Where/when/how would the spray components be loaded

Esentially, however, once a believer is able to identify the owner and pilot of the plane, if they really wanted to accuse the owner and pilot, there is no more mystery.

It is FEAR that sustains the hoax.

If there is no mystery, there is no fear.......

[Jay Reynolds]

Clifford Carnicom, for example, in a recent interview with Alfred L. Webre, says he believes commercial are not involved.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTVpsmBNvL8

Carnicom's site has radically changed over the years, he has deleted many things he used to have displayed.
It is instructive to check out the archived versions from 1999 onwards.
Many chemmie lies are lies of 'omission' rather than just simple in your face lies.....

For instance, he deleted "How To Photograph a Chemplane"!
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/200...com/camera.htm

He was also taking some photos and using photogrammetry to estimate altitude:
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/200...m/newspray.htm

The reason why I bring this up is that Carnicom has a BSci. degree in Surveying and Photogrammetry from California State University.

Why would a guy who invested 4 years earning a degree in a subject be satisfied with grainy images like he did?

Why did he turn to looking into a microscope at crazy stuff way out of his field when he should have been getting telescopic shots like these for years, or even better??????
http://www.luchtzak.be/forums/viewto...p?f=25&t=44422

Why has he now removed all references to the subject from his site????

BTW, the Carnicom Institute offers a Webinar where you can call in......

This whole messageboard, called "All Aircraft Are Not Involved" by Socrates, is dedicated to the proposition that ONLY military jets make chemtrails.
http://allaircraftarenotinvolved.freeforums.org/
While this is an extreme example, I believe the sentiment is lurking inside most chemmies.
Jay

[Mick]

The Chemtrail theory has evolved over the years, but very quickly became many-headed. If you ever manage to convince someone of the inconsistency of one aspect, then they can quickly shift to another version. Eventually, presuming they are somewhat reasonable, they end up with "well, they must be doing SOMETHING, since they are not to be trusted", or perhaps they escape into semantics: "contrails contain carbon dioxide, a chemical, so chemtrails are real!!!!".

The many facets of the theory are interesting. I'd though of doing some kind of infographic that illustrates them all, and their relationships, with perhaps some scale indicating degree of kookiness (from slightly increased cloud cover, to sylphs). You could do a scatter plot, time on the horizontal, kookiness on the vertical, popularity by the size of a circle, color for type, and interconnections with arcs.

Anyone interested in collaborating on such a thing? Here's a shared drawing as a start:

https://docs.google.com/drawings/edi...thkey=CPqqo4gH

Anyone can edit it, via the above link.

[tryblinking]

Well, here's his next installment, a 90 second "interview" about "Death Dumps and Affect on Children", whatever that means.
It is, as expected, loaded with inflammatory language, and extraordinary claims without any extraordinary evidence. In fact, no evidence at all, just the same nonfacts about high levels of Aluminum/'Alumina', Barium, and whatever else would sound the worst.

enjoy
tb

[Jay Reynolds]

'Chemtrailkook' sent me an email earlier today, I told him how to identify the planes using telescopic photograpy, and he offered as his best proof WITWATS.
This is how I responded:

Yes, I've seen it.
1. First of all:
I wasn't impressed, the aluminum and barium claims, and the rest have already been debunked very well right here:
http://contrailscience.com/what-in-t...they-spraying/

So, if you were go to court and present this evidence, it would be easily seen as false, or even a HOAX.
If this is the best you can do, think again!
Now that you know how easily it can be debunked, how does it make you feel?

2. Secondly:
Why In The World Wouldn't the video describe how viewers can identify the planes by telescope and then actually inspect them to see the spraying equipment?
Could it be that Michael Murphy doesn't want you to know?

3. Lastly:
I notice that you didn't answer my question as to what you were going to do now that you have been told EXACTLY how to identify the planes.........
So, I would like to see if you are really serious about this issue, and am making you a DIRECT challenge.
I challenge you:
(a) to post on your website, or a message board, or elsewhere, the information I have directed you to, namely, how to identify the planes using telescopic photography.

(b)I also challenge you to write to Michael Murphy, Paul Whittenberger, and G. Edward Griffin, and tell them too.

I will wait until you write back with the URL's for (a) above, and expect you to 'cc me on the emails you send to the video makers in (b).

If you take my challenge, you will show yourself to be a real truth seeker.
If you do not, you show yourself to be a follower, not a leader, as well as someone who is willing to mislead others by allowing them to remain in ignorance.

I eagerly await your response and action.

Happy Trails,
Jay

[Jay Reynolds]

@ Kook....what about the Shasta test results ?
There were follow-up results. Have you seen them ?
http://www.mtshastanews.com/news/x11...-in-area-water

In fact, here is yet another challenge for 'Chemtrailkook'.

In my challenge (b) above, ask Michael Murphy why he didn't discuss in his video these tests made by the local government(2009), long before he made the video which premiered October 2010.

What was Michael Murphy trying to pull, a COVERUP...............?

[Stupid]

For instance, he deleted "How To Photograph a Chemplane"!
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/200...com/camera.htm

He was also taking some photos and using photogrammetry to estimate altitude:
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/200...m/newspray.htm

The reason why I bring this up is that Carnicom has a BSci. degree in Surveying and Photogrammetry from California State University.

Why would a guy who invested 4 years earning a degree in a subject be satisfied with grainy images like he did?

This is very interesting to me. Why would he remove "How To Photograph a Chemplane" ??

I suspect because the ability to photograph "suspicious" planes, removes the suspicion most of the time.....and reveals a normal licensed plane.

--gotta love TheWayBackMachine --

[Mick]

And while you are there, ask him why he never responded to my questions, which were forwarded to him by G. Edward Griffin:

From G. Edward Griffin
to mick
cc Michael Murphy
date Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 4:08 PM
subject RE: From Linda: Problems with "What in the World"

Hello Mick.

Thank you for your questions. They deserve serious answers. I will check with our production team for their response and get back to you.

Ed Griffin

From: Reality Zone [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 3:33 PM
To: 'G. Edward Griffin'
Subject: From Linda: Problems with "What in the World"

From: Mick
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 10:08 AM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Problems with "What in the World"

Dear Sir,
I watched your documentary, “What in the world are they spraying” with interest, but I have a few of issues I’d like to raise.

1) The film seems to suggest that water from the pond was tested at 375,000 ug/L aluminum. However the lab report says it was sediment. Since sludge is basically soil, then 375,000 ug/L is a perfectly normal level. Ordinary soil has an aluminum content averaging 7.1%, or 71,000,000 ug/L

2) The hair test on the little girl were used to suggest that aluminum must have been sprayed. Yet the levels on the report were only 33% higher than that listed for a healthy adult, and children are known to naturally excrete aluminum at a higher rate than adults. Hence the use of that test result seems rather misleading.

3) Aluminum toxicity in soil has been a known problem for a hundred years. Breeding crops to be aluminum resistent has always been a goal, and hence a normal application of genetic modification. How then can this be evidence of aerial spraying?

4) The tests used for aluminum were EPA 6010B, Plasma-atomic emission spectrometry. This does not distinguish the form in which the aluminum is in. Hence any contamination with aluminum oxide, which is present in very large amounts in soil and dust, would throw off your tests. Basically, if the water had just a tiny bit of dirt in it, from dust or otherwise, then the results wold be immediately off. This was not addressed in the movie.

I hope that you can post a clarification on these issues.

I have no specific education in these subjects, but the facts speak for themselves. I refer you to the references below for confirmation.

Regards,

Mick

References:
Original test results from the pond, as shown in your film
http://ihost.nu/lucifer741/public/ch...lab_report.pdf
“Description: Pond Sediment”
“Matrix: Sludge”
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry – Summary Report Hair Analysis Panel Discussion Exploring The State Of The Science
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/hac/hair_analysis/4.2.html
“Aluminum in hair is not a useful biological indicator of exposure”
” Studies suggest, for example, that alkaline earths and zinc are not excreted as much in early years of life. The opposite is true with aluminum, of which children excrete higher levels than adults (Paschal 1989). ”
Botanical Gazette of the University of Chicago, Volume 71, page 159, from 1921.
“Aluminum as a factor in soil fertility”

[tryblinking]

Last week MJM sent out his standard inflammatories begging for public support and the pointless bombardment of your/any/every Senator with Chemtrail inquisitions.

But this came through today and I thought it was at least interesting.

5-2-11. We just did a pH test of rain after a heavy spray day on Maui. The pH of the rain was 7.5. According to Biologist Francis Mangels, this is shocking and is 100 times the normal alkalinity.

Obviously no references given, or methods of measurement, but that's the Chemtrail Science for you...

[Jay Reynolds]

Last week MJM sent out his standard inflammatories begging for public support and the pointless bombardment of your/any/every Senator with Chemtrail inquisitions.

But this came through today and I thought it was at least interesting.


Obviously no references given, or methods of measurement, but that's the Chemtrail Science for you...

So, they claim ph of rainfall is 7.5, eh?
One of the hallmarks of the scientific method is repeatability, right?

If someone wanted to check this out, there is a REAL lab that has been doing this in Hawaii for 30 years:
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/obop/ml...prec/prec.html

The email address for the office in on the right of that web page.

[Jay Reynolds]

Last week MJM sent out his standard inflammatories begging for public support and the pointless bombardment of your/any/every Senator with Chemtrail inquisitions.

But this came through today and I thought it was at least interesting.


Obviously no references given, or methods of measurement, but that's the Chemtrail Science for you...

tryblinking, could you please fwd the email from Murphy to me, I will write Mauna Loa and ask what they are seeing for PH of rain water.
[email protected]

[Mick]

The most likely cause of a high ph of rain water is contamination with dirt. Either it's ground water (like, from a puddle), which will have dirt in it, or the collector was contaminated with windblown dirt (things get dusty fast), or it's something approaching "rain dust" (rain with desert dust from Asia).

[Jay Reynolds]

and now for something completely different:

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks."- Bill Shakespeare, Hamlet

"You know you are closing on the target when you begin receiving return fire"- unknown

[tryblinking]

and now for something completely different:

Please take action and spread this e-mail!!!!!!!!

ACTION ALERT, CALL DAVE: Dave Baker of KATC News did a hit peice on chemtrails in an obvious attempt to supress the truths that are now coming to light about this issue. Please take a moment to e-mail him: [email protected] and call at 337-236-6303 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 337-236-6303 end_of_the_skype_highlighting and let him know that we will not tolerate this deceptive propoganda: http://www.katc.com/news/contrails-and-chemtrails/

Also, due to the large number of e-mails that I receive, I am not able to respond to every correspondance. Thank you for your understanding and attention to this important issue.

[tryblinking]

Oh hell's teeth, my bad- I should have made it clear that my last post was the latest installment of the MJM show.

[tryblinking]

which he followed up with this:

See e-mail below!!!!

Looks like Dave might think twice before protecting the very programs that are destroying human health and eco-systems around the world. Lets continue to call him at 337-236-6303 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 337-236-6303 end_of_the_skype_highlighting Please remeber to be respectful and also remember to send love his way!!!! He might need it after today!!!!! Please take action and spread this e-mail!!!!!!!!

Michael J. Murphy
www.truthmediaproductions.us
www.facebook.com/WhatintheWorldAreTheySpraying
www.coalitionagainstgeoengineering.org/


From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Called the station and he was livid
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 09:03:53 -0700

This guy was not too happy when I called and he hung up on me. He said he did not appreciate conspircy theories and the fact that people were calling his station all the way from Canada was a CONSPIRACY. Lets keep calling in and make him listen. I told him I am a holistic practitioner with real live patients with morgellons disease and maybe he would like a dose of morgellons. lol---- I am soooo mad.
YOu guys need to go and hold a demonstration infront of their station??
Take a look at what some Canadian activist friends are doing on the streets.. www.canadianawareness.org

Check out this song. It says it all http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6-5g78Nr6Q This song may inspire you as it did me----"will you join in our crusade and lets all stand together"

cheers
Rose

[tryblinking]

OK, wasn't sure where to post this, but "Food Integrity Now" posted this on the KATC comments page for their "Contrails & Chemtrails" column here this morning:

I am the host of an internet radio show called Food Integrity Now. we have had several guests on our show, including former USDA scientist, Frances Mangels. Frances Mangels has mounds of evidence that chemtrails and geoengineering does exist. This is not just speculation or "conspiracy theory," this is fact. To date, no one has contacted Frances to dispute the evidence that he has compiled. I invite you to listen to this show and comment: http://foodintegritynow.org/2011/03/...hemtrails-e36/

On May 18, 2011 at 2:00pm (MT) we will be interviewing G. Edward Griffen and Michael Murphy, producer of the documentary What In The World Are They Spraying. Geoengineering is real, there is even a patent on it.

I welcome comments. You can email me at [email protected]

thank you.

It's that May 18th interview with GEG and MJM I'm interested in. Hopefully someone can get a recording of it for a perma-link or some such. If you have any questions, which could even make it onto the show, the host welcomes emails.
Meanwhile that other link to their recent show should be good for some interesting 'evidence' too...

[Mick]

I'd suggest my original questions, but might not be radio friendly:

1) The film seems to suggest that water from the pond was tested at 375,000 ug/L aluminum. However the lab report says it was sediment. Since sludge is basically soil, then 375,000 ug/L is a perfectly normal level. Ordinary soil has an aluminum content averaging 7.1%, or 71,000,000 ug/L

2) The hair test on the little girl were used to suggest that aluminum must have been sprayed. Yet the levels on the report were only 33% higher than that listed for a healthy adult, and children are known to naturally excrete aluminum at a higher rate than adults. Hence the use of that test result seems rather misleading.

3) Aluminum toxicity in soil has been a known problem for a hundred years. Breeding crops to be aluminum resistent has always been a goal, and hence a normal application of genetic modification. How then can this be evidence of aerial spraying?

4) The tests used for aluminum were EPA 6010B, Plasma-atomic emission spectrometry. This does not distinguish the form in which the aluminum is in. Hence any contamination with aluminum oxide, which is present in very large amounts in soil and dust, would throw off your tests. Basically, if the water had just a tiny bit of dirt in it, from dust or otherwise, then the results wold be immediately off. This was not addressed in the movie.

Maybe #3, as it's related to food.

[tryblinking]

If you don't mind Mick, can I send Carol those questions, ordered 3, 1, 2, 4?