Kristen Meghan, former US Air Force whistle-blower?
- Thread starter jvnk08
- Start date
- Status
deirdre
Senior Member.
(speculation) or mayhaps she is trying to get some actual evidence to present to Metabunk et al who keep asking for evidence.
Ross Marsden
Senior Member.
It's speculation. I'll stop now.
Trigger Hippie
Senior Member.
They are fond of listing their credentials, as if it grants them immunity from substantiating their claims.
Well I never heard of Simon Atkins so I Googled him...
Simon Atkins has, at different times, called himself a planetary risk economist, a planetary threat adviser and an energy medicine doctor. He's the CEO of Advanced Forecasting Corporation, a climate change hazard and planetary risk consulting think-tank.
In early 2013, presumably with the help of his think-tank, he used solar cycles to calculate there was a 75% chance some "sort of cosmic/solar/earth planetary event" would occur. A huge surge of electromagnetic energy, originating from a multidimensional source beyond the sun, would create a high electromagnetic event somewhere between Iceland, St. Louis and the Canary Islands. In turn, this would result in a 35 ft wall of water crossing the Atlantic at 200mph heading towards the eastern United States.
Another account of the same prediction describes him using genetic algorithms, neural network black box's, clairvoyance and remote sensing, to predict that electromagnetic ionic interference would pull a 'light wave' into the north Atlantic, causing some kind of ocean event, possibly related to an earthquake or volcano.
He's on record as saying that after March 2014, the Fukushima disaster will make "life in the USA change a lot". He's also made the bold assertion that "We are now in a 'Post-Radiation' world, and Fukushima is easily the biggest environmental disaster that has ever happened."
He has a diverse education, B.Sc. in Atmospheric Sciences from Cornell University and an iMBA from the Helsinki School of Economics.
He received his "PhD" from the Clayton College of Natural Health in biometeoelectromagnetics™. Biometeoelectromagnetics™ is the study of how planetary magnetics causes shifts in climate and our health. Apparently he first received the degree, then invented the field of study, and then trademarked the name. The details are confusing.
The non-accredited Clayton College of Natural Health has a long write up in Quackwatch. Most interesting is that soon after the state of Alabama decided to clean up its act by forcing schools to be accredited through agencies endorsed by U.S. Office of Education, the Clayton College of Natural Health closed its doors. No longer could $1,735 get you a doctorate of naturopathy. All that remained was a class action suit as some 5000 enrolled students attempted to recoup their prepaid tuition fees.
In 2010, Simon Atkins completed a second degree through a correspondence course. He was awarded a Doctor of Science in Alternative Medicine from the Indian Board of Alternative Medicines, Calcutta. Considered a torchlight for leading a healthy and happy life, the Doctor of Science in Alternative Medicines Course costs $900... paid in advance... no refunds.
Is this 'atmospheric scientist' Kristen Meghan's new science adviser?
http://skyaia.com/connecting/meet-simon/
http://www.glgresearch.com/Council-Member/Simon-Atkins-30189.html
http://about.me/drsimonatkins
http://www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/Nonrecorg/clayton.html
http://www.altmeduniversity.com/
http://www.altmedworld.net/alternative-medicine-doctorate-course.htm
http://www.transients.info/2013/05/earth-change-event-predicted-in.html
http://www.transients.info/2013/12/radiation-cloud-to-hit-us-west-coast.html
http://freeman.theanomalieschannel.com/G2-Files-Advance-Forecasting.mp3
Last edited:
deirdre
Senior Member.
well he got this part right. http://www.transients.info/2014/02/transcending-negative.htmlThe world has gone insane, clearly. People simply react to whatever is put before them. But this is only apparent if you’re watching. The degree of insanity we’re witnessing has broken all previous boundaries yet it continues to be portrayed as “normal”.
The interesting phenomenon to watch is when personal worlds collide with this manipulated mainstream narrative. That’s where the synthesis takes place that creates the next levels of so-called normality as people subconsciously integrate the swill being introduced into their own lives and hence project it into the society at large.
It’s carefully steered and controlled beyond the comprehension of those they’re puppeteering.
These phenomena are quite something to behold and it’s clearly more disturbing by the day. We have to take it in small doses or it will take us down with it, which is no doubt their intention. Infect, weaken and control – at every possible level is their mantra.
TEEJ
Senior Member.
David Fraser
Senior Member.
Interesting. But surely she knows that the samples for rainwater and drinking water are prepared in different ways so you are not measuring like for like.
Still its a hefty claim that labs will half ass rainwater samples. Obviously labs are not concerned about losing their accreditation or reputation.
Hama Neggs
Senior Member.
Where are the test results from people she has previously encouraged to do testing?
Belfrey
Senior Member.
She probably means (as mentioned elsewhere) that they might use a test with a higher minimum detectible level. Which would make sense, because the natural range of these elements is expected to be higher in rainfall than in drinking water.
cloudspotter
Senior Member.
Surely it can be anything from zero up?
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Excellent vetting . . . just goes to show everyone needs to investigate the education and experience of any expert in the public domain . . .
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I am not familiar with EPA drinking water standards but the constituents to monitor are very extensive . . . http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/index.cfm#List
To do definitive testing for all potential contaminates in one sample would be very complex and possibly expensive . . . there must be screening procedures which streamline the process . . .
To do definitive testing for all potential contaminates in one sample would be very complex and possibly expensive . . . there must be screening procedures which streamline the process . . .
TEEJ
Senior Member.
Attachments
Belfrey
Senior Member.
Sure, but for example in drinking water the EPA recommendation is to not exceed 50-200 ug/L aluminum (for aesthetic reasons, not a health requirement). That whole range is below what could be considered a normal average amount for rainwater. So if a lab is testing rainwater they might use a less-stringent method that can't reliably measure the lower concentrations.
cloudspotter
Senior Member.
Critical Thinker
Senior Member.
It is interesting whenever I see people shill for geoengineeringwatch or globalskywatch (Same company), since they used to have a public 'business model' page (it is no longer visable to the public now) which said that "We would like to offer a business model to all chemtrail activists that would enable them to profit or even build a business while dedicated a portion of all profits to the geoengineering-awareness movement" and their 'how to' page tells people to refer people to their websites.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/conspiracy-web-sites-have-paid-shills.1081/#post-84907
Hama Neggs
Senior Member.
https://www.facebook.com/Sugarfrees...comment_id=6928863&offset=0&total_comments=20
Chaff contains silica?Kristen MeghanI deleted Jeff, I don't care if someone is a pilot, it doesn't make them an SME in my field. I like how he admit military chaff but said it has a mission...well newsflash chaff is the spraying of alluminum and silica. Silica causes silacosis and cancer, while alluminum causes cns and respiratory issues. So how completely ignorant does it sound to say it's ok that we spray chaff but climate engineering is just a BS lie. Smh lol
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
There appears to be trace amounts of silica . . . This is what is known about the environmental effects of Chaff . . . http://www.env.gov.nl.ca/env/env_as...onmental_effects_of_radio_frequency_chaff.pdf
This paper indicated that Chaff may have a crystalline silica core . . . http://www.ellsworth.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-121022-061.pdf
Last edited:
Hama Neggs
Senior Member.
Kristen sure seems to be shilling for geoengineeringwatch.
She puts Metabunk down because Mick has no "credentials". What credentials can she cite supporting Dane's site?Kristen Meghan
February 1
So as you know people are saying the snow is fake or plastic. It's not fake in that sense, rather that it's not due to natural occurance. Storms are engineered and weather is modified. Here is an article from this past spring. Remember the most accurate data about geoengineering can be found atwww.geoengineeringwatch.org
Hama Neggs
Senior Member.
Seems it does contain silica, but how much chaff is actually used in peace time? I'm guessing very little.
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Past testimony in congress indicates military use in some areas is significant historically and Chaff has been used experimentally by the Forrest Service for example . . . I will cite my sources later . . . http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/gao/ns98219.pdf
Last edited:
Trigger Hippie
Senior Member.
This issue of credentials is a recurring theme. In the following conversation Kristen is asked to provide evidence. She doesn't, but instead claims her profession is 'pure science'. She seems to be using credentials as a cloak of legitimacy not realizing that true legitimacy is in the evidence.
Where's the beef!
Hama Neggs
Senior Member.
No need to cite sources, but what would the forest service use it for?
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
See page #11. . . . lightning suppression . . . http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/gao/ns98219.pdf
blargo
Member
Yes, but people can screen capture prior to your delete.
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
People within the conspiracy movements often fall prey to marginal authority because they either do not take the time to research experts' credentials or simply take people's word as if all individuals who think the way they do are honest . . . another issue is: experts who they agree with, who are shown to have issues with their credentials or experience, are often criticized by traditional authority and thus hailed as rebels or at the least have been targeted because they are whistleblowers and dangerous to those in power . . . Unfortunately, for many though some of their experts have been debunked it is not persuasive and sometimes makes true believers even more confident they were right all along . . .
Last edited:
solrey
Senior Member.
She's knocking the credentials of the Executive Director of the Genetic Literacy Project which is actually comprised of a large team of writers and advisors representing a wide range of expertise? A writer with an interest in genetic research is not credentialed to head an organization whose stated goal is "to promote public awareness of genetics and science literacy"? And her claim to fame is taking some samples and making noise over improperly cleaned parts that were previously discovered by OSHA which had already launched an investigation in the shop of origin? Wow.
http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/our-team/
http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/our-team/
David Fraser
Senior Member.
Yeah as Belfrey says there are a whole array of types of analysis and they have their own detection limits e.g. ICP-MS has a theoretical limit of 0.001 ug/l for Al but for ICP-OES it is 20 ug/l. While detection of elements will be made at levels lower than the detection limit, down to zero, no confidence can be placed on the result except to say there is some.
My concern is asking the sample to be treated as drinking water. A rainwater sample is usually filtered down to 0.45 um. This separates the soluble and insoluble fractions. Essentially you should be left with the stuff dissolved in the rain, nit held in suspension. This is important when one talks of toxicity, which is a function of solubility in metals. Generally an insoluble metal compound has extremely low toxicity, if any.
However drinking water samples are not filtered and are acidified prior to analysis, as are all water samples. This dissolves all the suspended compounds. Now this is what you want as you are going to drink the stuff so you want to know everything in it.
Now fair enough treating a rainwater sample in this way will show you the totals amounts if elements but it is wrong to then relate those levels to toxicity, even if you drink rainwater. The toxic fraction the the soluble part and when collected for drinking water the solids will settle. Again when toxicity is mentioned to plants mainly we are looking at the soluble parts. Kristen Meghan should understand this.
JRBids
Senior Member.
They also frequently exaggerate their own credentials, as I find it hard to believe I personally have run into 3 conspiracy theorists who are mensa members.
David Fraser
Senior Member.
If the British military I would guess none at all, they are tight like. Off topic but when I joined up I was assigned a Sterling SMG as my personal weapon http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sterling_submachine_gun However the MOD were so tight they rarely bought blank 9mm rounds, so when on exercise one had the embarrassing task of shouting "Bang Bang" or if on full auto "Nananananana" or "Brrrrrr"
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Sounds rather confusing to me but you seem to be saying rain water if tested like drinking water may contain more contaminates because it will not be filtered to remove un-dissolved solids which would happen if it were tested as rainwater . . . is that correct? And can this be why Meghan has recommended one should request tests for drinking water as opposed to rain water? So the un-dissolved solids will get tested?
David Fraser
Senior Member.
Yes that's correct. However my issue is that they then claim toxic levels which is incorrect. It is mainly the soluble part of rainwater that exhibits toxicity. To be frank given that Aluminium Oxide is insoluble one would think they would be more interested in isolating that.
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
But if you test the sample as "drinking water" would or would you not get the Aluminum from the Aluminum Oxide tested because they acid treat the water sample ?? Seems one (as you say) would have a greater chance of getting toxic levels of metals . . . because of the acid treatment . . .
David Fraser
Senior Member.
If it is filtered the Aluminium Oxide would be in the filtrate so you could test for its presence there. But without wanting to go off topic you have highlighted why rainwater testing is pointless. The tests show the amount of elemental Al in the water but not in what form i.e. it is not broken down into its species. Is it an oxide, hydroxide, silicate or sulphate? That is the important question.
Steve Funk
Senior Member.
David, would you know of any way to get the molecular composition of water samples? Geologists seem to be able to do this fairly confidently for rock samples.
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I understand . . . I think Meghan is basically implying all elemental (in this case) Aluminum, no matter its compound constituents, needs to be accounted for . . . you feel because many compounds are insoluble and considered non-toxic they need not be included in the testing . . . Interesting? So are un-dissolved solids contaminates or not? Does the EPA recognize solids as a problem to be mitigated?
Meghan seems to be just repeating Wigington's misunderstanding of the tests. Wigington likes to repeat that metallic aluminium is not found naturally in nature. But he does not seem to understand that his tests are not measuring metallic aluminum - the measure it regardless of if it's metal or a compound. Meghan is simply repeating this.
- Status
Similar threads
