1. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Rainwater Samples From Alachua County Florida Test Positive for Aluminum and Barium:

    (The above was the original title of the video, which was deleted and re-uploaded titled "CHEMTRAILS:? Florida Rainwater Sample Tests Positive for Aluminum and Barium", and then later as "Aluminum and Barium Should Not Be Found in Rainwater Lab Tests")

    Well, yes they do. Harold Saive of Gainesville Florida has been testing his rain water and has been reporting the amount of Aluminum found in the water. This was the first test where he included barium in the specified tests.



    The first six times he tested, there was actually no barium listed as it was not tested for.


    So what are we to make of these results. Let's take the highest values, 196 ug/L of aluminum, and 28.5 ug/L of barium. The implication of Saive's video is that these are unusually high levels. However historical tests do not back this up. Take these tests from 1967:


    So his samples actually show perfectly normal levels of Aluminum, actually below the low value of 520 ug/L found in these test. As for the barium, most of the time he finds ZERO barium, and the one time there happens to be some, it's just 28.5 ug/L, vastly lower than the EPA's limit for drinking water of 2000 ug/L

    Where does this aluminum and barium come from? It's simply dust. Aluminum and barium compounds like alumina or barite are minerals naturally found in the ground, and hence get in the air. Random amounts of dust gets in the water because of his collection system, which is something like a dust magnet.


    The very small quantities of water collected in the tubs are concentrated into a bottle, and strained through a "drain filter, to eliminate twigs or leafs".



    The fact that twigs and leaves need eliminating suggests that there's quite a bit of potential for contamination of the water with things other than just rainfall. It's surprising that the levels of aluminum are not higher. I would not be at all surprised if much higher values are occasionally reported in the future, depending on what random objects happen to fall into the tubs.

    Of course, the rain itself will also collect dust on it's way from cloud to ground, as shown in the above study. But the collection method used here make it impossible to tell what is in the rain, and what is simply from dust and debris that ended up in the tubs.

    For more discussion on this topic, see:

    Last edited: Jun 1, 2015
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    I like the way google has picked up on this. Almost any search for Alachua aluminum and barium directs to your debunking.
    Very effective!
  3. Harold saive

    Harold saive Guest

    You have posted copyrighted material without permission. Remove this post immediately.
    Harold Saive - Owner of illegally posted materials
    • Disagree Disagree x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member


    I have simply embedded your video, which is explicitly allowed based on your embedding settings on YouTube, I also posted four low quality screen grabs from your video.

    These are used under the fair use provision of the US copyright law (title 17, section 107). Particularly that I use them in a non-commercial, non-profit, educational manner, for criticism and comment. The original work itself is not commercial. I use only a small segment of the work. I quote here the relevant section, emphasis mine.

    I would ask you to review applicable copyright law, and familiarize yourself with the fair-use doctrine and its interpretation by the courts before making further request. I refer you to:


    If you still feel that this does NOT constitute fair use, then please submit a DMCA Notice as per our DMCA policy:

    Note that in order to receive damages you will need to demonstrate that your work has commercial intent. Specifically that you intended to make money from this video.
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2013
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Harold Saive has this posted all over the net. He wants publicity for his work. He just doesn't want anyone to know that it is debunked.
    I wrote Harold Saive and told him exactly what was wrong back in mid-August. Harold Saive has been given ample information about this. If he wants to be angry about something, he should direct his ire towards Michael J. Murphy, G. Edward Griffin, Dane Wigington, Francis Mangels, Rose Taylor Casebeer, and Mauro Martins de Oliveira who set him up for a fall by giving him false information to start with.

    You need to also understand, Harold, that long before you became informed in August, Michael J. Murphy knew that he was promoting false material in his movie and interviews. He just doesn't care that he has been lying to you, Harold, or that he has been lying to each and every one of his interviewers and their audiences. He doesn't care how silly you look when you repeat what he has told you. He doesn't care about you or anyone else. He cares about Michael J Murphy, that is all.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. truth finder

    truth finder Guest

    I don't buy your bullshit mike. you and your masters are failing and when the time will come no one will give a shit about you
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  7. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    So, you couldn't find anything factual to say?
    You sound like another person angry because he was set up for a fail by Michael J. Murphy and the Mt. Shasta bunch.
    There's a lot of that going around, maybe you should hold his feet to the fire, since Michael J. Murphy is the one that caused you to believe in a hoax.....
    Pity, that.
  8. Unregistered

    Unregistered Guest

    You know what wasnt in any of the tests then and now-Silver Iodide- AGI Its because its not done anywhere in US not in any tests offered or available for soil, water, air, or human, and animal medicine! If they dont test for it is it shown to cause harm...hmmm dont scoff before you know all the facts about exactly what is in that pretty shiny silvery glare that glows in the dark with a myriad of rainbows...Go back to your periodic table and get out your notes and compare the problems an only negatively charged nanoparticle which is a neurotoxin and can cross the blood brain barrier carrying other toxins in with it. As all neurologic disorders, adhd, autism, als, dystonia, alzheimers, etc. skyrocket, and fungal, bacterial problems grow deadly-Just look to the domino effect of what comes of broadcasting something no one does really see-who looks up and is curious enough to know why things have changed so drastically in the last couple of years especially.... yet pay attention its choking out the atmosphere and everything around you, excessive in their daily barrage of flyovers christmas eve, christmas, easter, and fourth of july night behind the fireworks i could see them laying stripes to the south-who is paying for this anyway-jet fuel, jets, pilots, and silver iodide to make it 'rain' isnt cheap! Ouch the glare has grown out of control and is getting people killed, and the severe weather, and resulting fires as well....all a Direct result of using silver iodide in the spraying over our green city. Pray for the people involved in the Paynes Prarie crash, as my friend was one of the ones who came up on it. Please dont spew negative remarks about test results just realize you missed that part too and hating on people who have noticed the change and are only reporting what is a HUGE Problem and warn us of dangers from a Huge Blatant Secret-I just happened to not stop till I got to the complete and admitted to breakdown on their chemical composition in their weather modification program and compared it to the periodic table, available tests, meterology, history, and trending health, weather, and ag issues, and medical data...it leads to it All! Do your own research and itll be painfully obvious...Peace
  9. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

  10. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Interesting that hysteria about weather modification using silver iodide is a subject of the latest Michael J. Murphy movie.
    More interesting is that G. Edward Griffin hasn't followed Michael J. Murphy into this latest enterprise.

    The high pH colloidal silver generator and lung delivery system! Warranty - FAQ - Contact Us

    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

  12. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

  13. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

  14. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

  15. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    I actually doubt that there is any silver generated by that device. They certainly don't offer any testing results. But what if it did, how does the user know what he is getting? Could he get an overdose?
    Who really knows, and they are suggesting inhaling the vapor!

    Buyer beware.
  16. firepilot

    firepilot New Member

    Oh goody, lets hope sometime I can get a chance to argue MJM, since I actually have performed cloud seeding flights using silver iodide, and I know exactly how it is meant to work, the quantities used, and what kinds of aircraft are used in it.
  17. Steve Funk

    Steve Funk Active Member

    By the way, how did barium and strontium become known as geoengineering chemicals? I have never seen them referred to outside of the conspiracy sites. This 2009 paper by Caldeira, et al, has a short section on potential substances to use as geoengineering aerosols. It mentions aluminum, and sulfur (as h2so4), and mentions several other molecules in passing. But there is no reference to any barium or strontium compounds. http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0907/0907.5140.pdf

    I wonder if they just worked backward and assumed that if they find what the think are abnormal amounts, it must be the chemtrails.
  18. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    The Barium suggestion comes from a variety of places. David Keith's self-levitating nano-disks being one geoengineering connection (though relatively recent, 2009):


    But the Barium connection goes way back, to William Thomas and AC Griffith. The suggestion at the time seems more to do with HAARP type conspiracies - RF ducting, ionospheric modification. It just got folded into the geoengineering later. see Rense 2000:


    Strontium I think got a boost with the Fukushima fallout concerns, with all the easily worried people worrying about radioactive strontium. It was pretty obscure before that - sometimes mentioned but just as a generic heavy metal toxin.

    When they do their tests, they generally now ONLY test for those three things. Or course they end up finding some, which continues to reinforce their beliefs.
  19. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Barium and strontium got into chemtrails in 2000, as Mick says Barium by A.C. Griffith and strontium just by specuation f Clifford Carnicom. Here is the complete history:

    As you can see, barium in chemtrails predated the Keith paper by 9 years, and was part of an evident hoax by someone. Either Griffith made it up, or his anonymous source did. Griffith was an enlisted man and knew a bit about radio from his service, but actually, higher tech communications have made much of what he was claiming about radar and radio frequency propagation an obsolete anachronism.

    As of a few years afer Griffith pulled his stunt and I exposed it, all the members of his group disbanded and thus far he never came back with anything else. His legacy lives on, however, perpetuated by folks who find ordinary amounts of barium everywhere in the environment.
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 20, 2013
  20. Unregistered

    Unregistered Guest

    So it's been a year and no-one has touched this subject on your site. [...] the levels of aluminum, strontium and barium in the metro Phoenix area are over 6000% above normally safe levels as the EPA has suggested.

    The northern polar caps are melting at an astronomical rate, and the methane expulsion as a result threatens life as we know it on planet earth.[...] no matter the complete loss of visibility over vast vistas of land, the browning of EVERYTHING green, the sudden and clinically proven lurches in COPD, MS, asthma, ALS here and everywhere else that gets bombarded with this crap.

  21. Cairenn

    Cairenn Senior Member

    Can we see your proof of that claim, please?
  22. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    Or even evidence - "proof" is a somewhat loaded word ...:)
  23. jvnk08

    jvnk08 Active Member

    I'd love to see the statistics that back this up :D
  24. David Fraser

    David Fraser Senior Member

    6000 times does seem quite high. A number of years ago there was a water pollution incident in the UK involving aluminium sulphate and at its peak levels of 620,000 ug/l, that's over 3000 times the recommended limit by WHO for drinking water. There were reports of a fish kill of up to 60,000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camelford_water_pollution_incident

    Now a lot of people became very ill and animals died, so one would expect there to be a large number of animal deaths, especially birds and small mammals, if levels were at over 6000 times in rainwater.
    • Like Like x 1
  25. Belfrey

    Belfrey Senior Member

    Presumably this is referring to the Arizona Skywatch air samples, which are covered very well in this contrailscience page. Basically, they didn't understand how to do a proper air sample. They pumped air through a filter for some indeterminate length of time, and then had the dust that had collected in the filter tested. So, what their results showed was the proportion of those elements in dust, not the concentration of them in the air.
    • Like Like x 1
  26. David Fraser

    David Fraser Senior Member

    This is slightly off topic but I did not want to start a new thread.

    I have a great deal of time on my hands and I have been compiling as much information and data about aluminium and barium levels in the environment and food chain. This is more a personal interest thing for me but I hope to present as much information and historical data on a webpage as a sort of one-stop shop for anyone interested. I often use the apparent lack of elevated levels of the metals in my arguments and I have been contacted by a few chemtrailers who have asked for more information. However all the information I have at the moment is for the UK and I am looking at expanding it to cover as many countries as possible. I would be grateful if people could PM me any links they may feel are useful if they come across any, ideally any documents like these;



    cheers :)
  27. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    There's quite a bit of that sort of thing scattered around Metabunk:
    and several others.
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2013
  28. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Be sure to let us know when you get this webpage ready, it is valuable work.

    Here is another link with references:


    and you might find my videos of interest:


    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 20, 2013
  29. Wild Bill

    Wild Bill New Member

  30. Wild Bill

    Wild Bill New Member

    O.K... I have no sympathy for the original video here.
    I live in the Pacific Northwest where an increase of soil
    pH in the forests is well-documented.
    I am looking for a fairly knowledgeable explanation for this one.
    The best film I have seen "debunking" "What in the World Are They Spraying" points out that the period in which the soil pH in the Pacific Northwest forests increased corresponds to an increase in the burning of coal in China. It had not occurred to me that this pollution could cross the world's widest ocean and produce this effect.
    The problem is that the "debunking" film is describing this pollution as "acid rain." The locally observable phenomenon here is that the soil pH is increasing from 5.6 in the forests, which is acidic, to 6.6 which is nearly neutral. In other words, "acid rain" is making the soil if falls on less acidic. This does not make sense to me.
  31. Belfrey

    Belfrey Senior Member

  32. solrey

    solrey Senior Member

    I live in Corvallis Oregon, my gf is a botanist, we have a large garden ourselves and among our friends and other folks we socialize with are farmers, foresters, mycologists, master gardeners, beekeepers, permaculturists and other botanists. Not a single person we know, either personally or through social media, has mentioned anything about unusual changes in soil pH anywhere in the Pacific Northwest. On our forays into the forests we have not seen widespread problems with plants that would indicate a drastic change in soil pH. The Oregon State University extension service office is just a short walk from here, maybe I'll pop in this week and ask if anybody has reported anything relating to changes in soil pH. Are you aware of any documentation that does not come from Francis Mangels?
    • Like Like x 1
  33. jhodgski

    jhodgski New Member

    Mick, How did you find you raise water test result from 1967? And was it cherry-picked?

    If you are trying to claim it represents typical aluminium levels for 1967, then how do you explain what would be a massive reduction to today's levels?

    Also, how do you explain today's high levels of aluminium bearing in the fact the aluminium is rarely found in free form in nature?
  34. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    Your last 2 points are contradicting each other - it can't be a massive reduction to today's levels and also have todays levels as high!!

    However the last point about aluminium being rarely found in "free form" in nature is irrelevant - the tests do not measure "free form" aluminium - they measure total aluminium, regardless of what form it is in.

    So if you have any dust from, say, soil*, then you are likely to get some aluminium in that - and that will show up in the tests.

    *soil is of course a mix of all sorts of stuff, but commonly includes clay and feldspar - both of which have aluminium in their makeup.
    • Like Like x 5
    • Agree Agree x 2
  35. Belfrey

    Belfrey Senior Member

    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2
  36. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Unfortunately @jhodgski has been banned for one week for being excessively impolite.
  37. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Senior Member

    I believe it is true to say that in terms of "rainwater analysis" by amateurs?

    There is a serious lack of proper scientific control methods, to suggest any "result".

    I would encourage those who believe in some sort of "metal spraying" to conduct a proper scientific evaluation, that can
    be validated after repeated peer review.

    This is how science is conducted.
  38. JFDee

    JFDee Senior Member

    This is the fundamental misunderstanding with regards to the test results in question.

    The test method cracks up all compounds in the sample into their elements. So you get metal readings from minerals.

    That bit of information can't be stressed too often or too much.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  39. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Probably needs an infographic though.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  40. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    Precisely. If you were to do a similar test on a human body (which might require quite a bit of some sample preparation!) you would find about 1kg of calcium. That doesn't mean that there's a kilo of calcium metal in your body - that would be impossible, as calcium reacts violently with water. All the calcium is tied up in compounds, eg hydroxylapatite, Ca5(PO4)3(OH), in your bones.
    • Informative Informative x 1