by November at 7:00 PM
(13,545 Views / 0 Likes)
Hello All.

I am new to this board. I stumbled on it from Twitter.

I was wondering if anyone could tell me what might explain this photo.
It was taken in 1992, in the desert, during a time of increased earthquake activity.
We had had a 7.4 approximately a week earlier, and I was trying to get a photograph of the "glow" that was over the hills at nights.

The camera is facing west toward hills, they are dark, there are no houses or roads there. This was intentional. I don't know what time it was, sometime between 8 p.m and midnight.

What would explain this?
I have other photos that do show squiggled lights, due to time exposure I assume (I'm not a photographer), but nothing like this.

In the foreground on the right, I think that is a street sign.

I appreciate any information you could give me.

Thank You.
by Mick West at 11:12 AM
(20,012 Views / 20 Likes)
I'm a debunker. I like finding and exposing bunk. I do it because I enjoy doing it, and because I think it can do some good in terms of helping people not being scared of things that don't exist, and in terms of helping people focus on real issues.

As a debunker, quite often I debunk claims that some "official story" is wrong. For example, the "official story" of the long lasting white lines in the sky is that they are "just contrails". There's a conspiracy theory that they are actually "chemtrails". I've extensively debunked most of the claims of evidence behind this theory.

As a result, I often get the accusation that I'm a "supporter" of the official story, and that I "trust the government", and that I think "everything is fine", and "there's nothing to see here".

This could not be further from the truth.

I don't trust "the government" (and here we are talking about the US government). I most certainly do not trust career politicians....
by TWCobra at 7:23 PM
(10,379 Views / 8 Likes)
Chemtrail believers frequently question why contrails are becoming more prevalent today compared to previous decades. The answer of course is the almost exponential growth in world air traffic since 1970, a period just before deregulation began in the USA and elsewhere.

Here is an ICAO news release from 1970 regarding traffic figures.

While the figure of 386 million passengers is significant, the real measure is the RPK's or Revenue passenger kilometres carried out which takes into account both aircraft capacity and the distances flown, to give the true indication, or volume of air traffic in a certain year.

In 1970 the RPK figure was 465,000 million RPK's. In 2011 that had increased to 5000,000 million, including a 53% since 2000. This graphic was drawn from ICAO's forecast document.


The RPK figure is forecast to more than double in the next 20 years.

market.JPG ...
by Mick West at 11:09 AM
(12,014 Views / 0 Likes)
In World Trade Center 7, beam K3004 is thought to have expanded, and pushed Girder A2001 to the west. There is some dispute as to how much it could have expanded.

NIST NCSTAR 1-3E was focused on the WTC1/2 steel, however the findings regarding thermal expansion were carried over to the WTC7 investigation.

20C to 600C is 293K to 873K

Integrating the above polynomial over that range. (0.0000073633 +0.000000018723*x-0.0000000000098382*x^2+1.6718E-16*x^3) where x from 293 to 873

Gives 0.00852626, which...
by Mick West at 9:48 AM
(17,873 Views / 0 Likes)
This is a fake story. It's from the satirical (joke) site Internet Chronicle, which posts "almost believable" stories in the same vein as The Onion, but with a focus on conspiracy theories.

Here's the original joke story: (

And their about page: (
by Mick West at 8:23 AM
(98,944 Views / 1 Likes)
The iron microspheres (as evidence for thermite) were debunked years ago, but they keep coming up. The bottom line is:

  • Iron Microspheres form from condensed vaporized iron or from molten iron
  • You can melt iron by igniting it with a Bic lighter, if the pieces of iron are thin enough.
  • There are several other sources of iron microspheres
  • Iron microspheres were expected in the WTC dust
Here's an iron-rich microsphere found by the USGS, who did not consider it at all suspicious: (it's about 30µm, 0.03mm, in diameter)

If you ignite some steel wool with a hydrocarbon flame, then you get lots of iron spheres, some of the same size as these microspheres. Note this is not from the flame melting the steel, but from the steel itself burning, and melting itself. This is only possible with a sufficiently large surface...
by Mick West at 10:11 AM
(8,018 Views / 6 Likes)
The growth of photography has been a mixed blessing for debunking. On the one hand the vast number of photographs of events like the Boston Bombing helps to quickly disprove (but not prevent) the spread of conspiracy theories. Also the sheer number of cameras around makes it highly improbable that things such as Bigfoot and Alien UFOs could be appearing to people, and yet avoiding having good photographic evidence.

But on the other hand the vast number of cameras and photos means that there are far more photos of everything now than there were 10 or 20 years ago. And this leads to a special problem, the illusion of frequency.

The illusion of frequency is the impression that something is more frequent now because you can find more photos of it now. It's an illusion because the increase in the number of photos of a thing (say, persistent contrails) is due to a combination of several things:...
by Mick West at 10:11 AM
(5,063 Views / 7 Likes)

  • The UN IPCC Report did not say "the world won't cool without chemtrails"
  • It said: the world won't cool "except if net anthropogenic CO2 emissions were strongly negative over a sustained period."
  • That means we would have to remove CO2 from the air.
  • Some people consider that a form of geoengineering but it's nothing like Solar Radiation Management (SRM), which is what people are referring to when they talk about "chemtrails" for geoenginering.
  • All the mentions of SRM in the IPCC report are about possible future use.

In Depth:

The claim that the UN says "the world won't cool without chemtrails" comes from this Daily Sheeple article by Melissa Melton, repeated in Before It's News
by Mick West at 11:08 AM
(11,837 Views / 0 Likes)
"Shade" is a new documentary film by Shepard Ambellas & Jason Bermas, the descript for which reads:
The film has yet to be released, and yet there's enough in the trailer to know that the "chemtrails and geoengineering" segments contain a fair bit of bunk.

(Chemtrails segments starts at 1:42)

For a more general debunking of chemtrails see, but here I'll specifically address the points mentioned in the trailer.

Michael J. Murphy: "We now have an issue called Global...
by Mick West at 4:11 PM
(17,379 Views / 1 Likes)
A common claim regarding 9/11 was that the fires were not very serious because there was some black smoke and some of the flames looked "dark orange". The claim is that this indicates an oxygen starved fire.

However, this was no basis in reality. Here's an example of a fire in open air, with thick black smoke and dark orange flames creating temperatures of nearly 2000F


The "black smoke = cool" myth is just based on wood-burning stoves. The buildings contained a large amount of plastics, which burns with black smoke at all temperatures. And they had a ready supply of oxygen though the impact hole, and many broken windows.

This fire of plastic containers in an open field is clearly not lacking oxygen.

And while certainly not white, the fires on 9/11 were nowhere near even the open air black seen above:...