Patrick Roddie - San Francisco, California, Rainwater sample

And I haven't used FB in... 8 years? 9? I don't have any reason to be blocked - I started using my current username after that.
 
I used to work for this lab. We were never happy to see these people using our results.
I advised my State Government body (Queensland Australia) that had analysed some rain water for a farmer that the report was being used to spread lies on the internet. The report had been doctored to add deceiving red and green printed amounts which only made sense if the amounts were measured in mg not micro and other additions that made no sense at all. They contacted the farmer and were going to notifiy the police to see if they could have the reports on the internet removed. Sometimes it is worth speaking up.
 
Patrick is at it again and still asking for funding.

My latest rain water test came out positive for barium and aluminum. I missed the beginning of the rain, so most of the metals had been washed out, explaining why the levels are lower than usual. Mind you, neither of these metals should be detectable in our rain, especially right on the Pacific coast.
Content from External Source
I wouldn't mind if the leaders of the chemtrail hoax were truthful and said we have absolutely no proof but are concerned large scale SRM may be happening and it most probably wouldn't be contrails, so you can all stop freaking out now! If they are concerned about contrails changing the local weather then they could also investigate that. I wonder if they are either wildly believing a delusion, doing it on purpose or some may have personality disorders. I have lately heard a bit about psychopathic personalities and wonder if this has anything to do with how such a hoax can continue in the face of no evidence. I heard recently on the radio a psychologist advising young women to choose their partners very carefully if they are going to have children because studies have shown a hereditary tendency. I am not meaning this in a derogative way but trying to understand what drives people. As this lady mentioned some psychopaths can end up billionaires.
 

Attachments

  • P Roddie water analysis.jpg
    P Roddie water analysis.jpg
    164.2 KB · Views: 351
I wonder if they are either wildly believing a delusion, doing it on purpose or some may have personality disorders.

Considering the diversity within the population, I see it as likely that all the characteristics you mention are represented among the people who profess a belief in so-called 'chemtrails'. Taken together, they represent an extremely small part of the populations, but even at that rate thousands are negatively impacted. Hopefully none of this gets to the point where the mental anguish caused moves into some sort of physical damage to person or property.
 
I don't even know what the results are saying here, can you interpret? I don't think Patrick knows either.
On there own these results are meaningless as there is no context. The only context the chemmies use to interpret the results is that Francis Mangels tells them that rain water should not contain anything.
 
I'm sure it's already interpreted in previous posts (far better than I could). Or you could see here http://contrailscience.com/barium-chemtrails/
...A liter of water weighs 1 kilogram, which is 1000 grams...A microgram is 1/1000000 (a millionth) of a gram...
Content from External Source
In other words, there are nine millionths of a gram of barium in 1000 grams of water.

Put another way, to ingest 1 gram of barium you would need to drink 111 tonnes of that water, or just over 29,000 US gallons :)
 
What does the "RL 50" mean for Aluminium - I can't seem to find a definition - it is probably on het whole form somewhere??
 
Haven't looked this up for quite a while, but it seems to me that the reporting limit is the amount below which you can't reliably determine the quantity of a substance, but can determine its presence. So RL would be higher than detection limit.
 
Haven't looked this up for quite a while, but it seems to me that the reporting limit is the amount below which you can't reliably determine the quantity of a substance, but can determine its presence. So RL would be higher than detection limit.

Yeah. There I go being imprecise with my language again...
 
Yes, in analytical chemistry, the detection limit is the lowest level that you can say "it's there", while the reporting limit is the lowest level you can quantify at.
 
so basically he is saying positive for Barium and Titanium because it found some,
The safe limits for Barium in DRINKING WATER according to the EPA: is 2mg/L or 2000µg/L His sample has 9µg/L.
It has shown NO Aluminium or Strontium. So this is a REALLY BIG NEGATIVE for what are considered to be chemtrail materials.
I don't even know why he was even testing for Titanium which is considered non toxic and the body does not absorb it generally anyway. either way, 2.1µg/L is 0.0021µg/g of water or 0.002ppm. Food plants contain typically 2ppm of Titanium so there is 1000 times more Titanium in his lettuce or cabbage than there is in his water.
 
so basically he is saying positive for Barium and Titanium because it found some,
The safe limits for Barium in DRINKING WATER according to the EPA: is 2mg/L or 2000µg/L His sample has 9µg/L.
It has shown NO Aluminium or Strontium. So this is a REALLY BIG NEGATIVE for what are considered to be chemtrail materials.
I don't even know why he was even testing for Titanium which is considered non toxic and the body does not absorb it generally anyway. either way, 2.1µg/L is 0.0021µg/g of water or 0.002ppm. Food plants contain typically 2ppm of Titanium so there is 1000 times more Titanium in his lettuce or cabbage than there is in his water.

Titanium dioxide is an approved food additive (as a white colouring) and is also present in substantial quantities in toothpaste, as an abrasive. It's pretty well totally inert.
 
It has shown NO Aluminium or Strontium. So this is a REALLY BIG NEGATIVE for what are considered to be chemtrail materials.

Anyone else notice that the lack of Aluminum is causing them to be suspicious of the testing lab:


Pariah Stormy JaneI'm seeing companies using 3 hexagrams, all over the place now. Just a side thought.
9 · November 16 at 12:12pm

Edward TanToo many to count. Remember the letter V and the letter W are substitutes for the number 6, the same as one 6 serves as a substitute for three.
November 16 at 12:41pm · Edited

Pariah Stormy JaneYep.
November 16 at 12:40pm

Edward TanObviously, that company like all the rest is controlled. Your results are fake.
November 16 at 12:41pm

Patrick RoddieEdward Tan - probably. After I presented McCampbell results at the EPA (190 aluminum, 160 barium) they have been coming back suspiciously low. Need a new lab.
9 · November 16 at 12:44pm

Jochem Rokus SmithAluminum not detected?? yeah right
7 · November 16 at 1:31pm · Edited
Content from External Source
 
So the same old, same old then. No aluminium doesn't mean you are wrong, it means the lab is in on the conspiracy.

and the whole numerology symbology thing. you can tie anythign into anything with that rubbish.
 
I tried to find a scientific study on metals in rainwater, but couldn't find any. The closest I got was a study done in Australia on elements in rain collection systems. That study found an average of ~72 ug/L strontium and ~17ug/L barium in "mains water" (which I presume is the same as tap water), which was significantly less than what was found in water from roof rainwater holding tanks (~24ug/L strontium and ~ 6ug/L barium).

Wonder if Roddie has bothered to have his own tap water tested.
 
Back
Top