1. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    The purpose of this thread is to examine the claims, in no particular order, made by Michael J. Murphy about 'chemtrails'. I encourage anyone to check out what he says and research the when, what, where, how and why he is saying it, then examine the statement and evaluate it based on fact and logic. Source and document his statements and references you use. What he is saying may eventually end up as evidence that will be of some value in the future, and I hope others will help. He is invited to respond to this, and if proven incorrect, we should acknowledge any mistakes made on our part, just as we expect him to acknowldge his own.

    I must mention that on May 18th, 2011, I did email Michael J. Murphy a number of questions regarding some of his statements which will be addressed below, and 3 weeks later he continues to make the same statements with no corrections and no response.
  2. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Claim #1-
    In the area of Mohave County, Arizona, due to chemtrails spraying, 25 people had blood tests which showed barium at over 1000 times the toxic level.

    In a youtube video of a radio show from June 1, 2011, Michael J. Murphy was interviewed by Dr Stan Monteith available here:

    Murphy's claim refers to a website by Gianluca Zanna which displays 12 lab reports showing blood barium levels between 70 and 250 mcg/L :

    At the website, Mr. Zanna states:
    Mr. Gianluca's report is individually linked here:
    http://mohavecountyconstitution.com/pics/luca blood.jpg

    The Zanna lab report was created by NMS labs and shows the following:
    Analysis- Barium, Serum/Plasma
    Result - 130
    Units - mcg/L
    Reporting limit - 11
    Notes - elevated

    The report includes the following comments:
    reported normal: less than 10 mcg/L
    NMS lab derived data:
    Median, 21 mcg/L
    Range, 0-489 mcg/L
    10-90% of concentrations range from 1.8 to 165 mcg/L

    On June 8, 2011, I contacted NMS labs at 1-800-522-6671, and spoke to their Client Support Representative Mr. Marlow. Here were my questions and his responses:

    Q: What does a "reporting limit" mean?
    A: This is the minimum detectable amount for which we will make a report.

    Q: What does elevated mean?
    A: Any amount above the median(average) amount will be reported as elevated.

    Q: What does "N-1155" mean?
    A.: That is the number of people that NMS tested when we were researching average blood barium levels.

    Q: I am looking at a report of barium in blood, what does the comment "Median, 21 mcg/L" mean?
    A: 21 mcg/L lies in the center of the range of what 1155 people had in ther blood.

    Q: What does "Range, 0-489 mcg/L" mean?
    A: That is the spread of blood barium levels that NMS labs found when they tested 1155 average people. The lowest was 0, the highest was 489.

    Q: What does "10-90% of concentrations range from 1.8 to 165 mcg/L" mean?
    A: Most people's blood barium levels fall into the range of 1.8 to 165 mcg/L.

    Michael J. Murphy's claim that these lab tests show "1000 times above the toxic amount of barium" is false. These lab tests show that none of the people tested had toxic levels of barium in their blood, and certainly not 1000 times above a toxic level. Most had completely average levels, some had none at all.

    These tests in actuality are an indication that debunks the "barium is being sprayed" claim!

    Murphy's claim isn't even logical. If all those people had 1000 times a toxic level in their blood, they would have been buried already. Dr. Stanley Monteith should know better as well.

    For more on this case, see:
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 20, 2013
  3. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Claim #2- Fun With Math

    Claim #2-

    A predicted 3” rain in Siskiyou County, California, was dried up by jets spraying barium, which is a desiccant.

    This is not the only time Murphy has referenced this claim. In his Youtube video, “Hawaii Revisited”, he said:

    Is Murphy’s claim plausible, or not? He is obviously unfamiliar with chemistry and aviation, and his comments also show that he doesn’t actually know anything barium. This is odd, especially since he has been making claims about barium for years.

    The facts are that while barium metal does react with water, it is not a very good desiccant, while barium oxide is! I actually think that barium oxide is what Murphy refers to. So let’s just see what Murphy’s claim comes down to on paper.

    What would be required to use barium oxide as a desiccant sprayed from an airplane to “sequester” a 3” rain down to a ½” rain?

    First, we are trying to subtract a 3” rain minus ½”, so that equals 2 & ½ inches of rain. A 1” rain falling over one square mile yields 17.38 million gallons of water:

    17, 380,000 gallons x 2 & 1/2” of rain equals 43,450,000 gallons of water. Hmmm, these numbers are already starting to look pretty big, eh, and this is only the amount of water that would fall over one square mile!

    Now for the chemistry, remember high school, folks? Maybe Michael slept through this one…..

    Here is the chemical equation for barium oxide reacting with water:
    BaO (s) + 2 HOH (l) ---> Ba(OH)2
    So, one mole of barium oxide will react with one mole of water to produce one mole of barium hydroxide.
    The molecular weight of water is 18 grams/ mole.
    The molecular weight of barium oxide is 153 grams/mole.
    Water weighs 3780 grams/gallon, so 43,450,000 gallons of water weighs
    43,450,000 x 3780 gm/gal. = 164,241,000,000 grams

    164,241,000,000 grams / 18 gm./mole = 912,450,000 moles
    So, 912,450,000 moles of water will react with 912,450,000 moles of barium oxide.

    How much does 912,450,000 moles of barium oxide weigh?
    912,450,000 moles of barium oxide x 1/153 grams/mole = 5,9637,254 grams

    Converting grams to pounds:
    5,9637,254 grams/ 3780 = 131,649 pounds

    So, reacting 2 & 1/2 inches of rain over one square mile requires 131,649 pounds of barium oxide.

    Siskiyou County contains 6,347 square miles. To adsorb the water for Siskiyou County, where Murphy says the incident occurred.:
    131,649lbs./sq.mi. x 6,347 sq. mi. = 835,579,816 lbs.

    How many flights would Murphy’s claim require?
    A 747 cargo jet can carry 124 tons, 248,000 lbs.
    835,579,816 lbs./248,000 lbs/flight = 3369 flights

    Conclusion: Michael J. Murphy’s claim that jets spraying barium(oxide) could have reduced rainfall by 2 & ½ inches over Siskiyou County would require 3369 flights of 747 cargo class jets. The claim is quite simply preposterous. This example is just one of many in which people who believe in chemtrails appear to simply repeat what others say with no proof or rational examination whatsoever.

    Murphy's statement that, "Its hurting people, its killing people, and many people have died from this. What do you think people would do if they found out that there might be corporations behind their incredible losses?”, sounds like a provocation. He bears the responsibility for these statements, because besides being baseless, they are very reckless to make towards his target audience of known gullibles.
  4. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Correction to above post

    Today, I recognized that I was mistaken in using the square miles figure for Siskiyou County, California, in the posting above. Dane Wigington actually lives in the adjoining Shasta County, which has an area of 3,847.44 sq. mi..
    The correct figures are as follows:
    Shasta County contains 3847.44 square miles. To adsorb the water for Shasta County, where Murphy says the incident occurred.:
    131,649 lbs./sq.mi. x 3847.44 sq. mi. = 506,511,628 lbs.

    How many flights would Murphy’s claim require?
    A 747 cargo jet can carry 124 tons, 248,000 lbs.
    506,511,628 lbs./248,000 lbs/flight = 2042 flights

    I apologize for any concern that my inaccuracy may have caused the residents of Shasta County;)

    Jay Reynolds
  5. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    A Response from Michael Murphy?

    I passed along my posting above regarding Claim #1 to Mr. G. Edward Griffin, who forwarded it to his colleague Michael J. Murphy and stated that Mr. Murphy was working on a response. I have had no direct response from Murphy, but I did receive
    an email from someone who was "asked to comment", I assume by Mr. Murphy.

    The person made several claims, and I asked for references, evidence, and documentation. I received an insulting email back and referred the person to this thread for edification.

    This is what I told him:
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 20, 2013