Unbelievably blatant conflation of unsupported pseudo-scientific claims - Chemtrails, Wireless And You http://www.pakalertpress.com/2013/03/02/chemtrails-wireless-and-you/
Some claims (some have been already debunked) - The original authors site. http://willthomasonline.net/william thomas ebook downloads.htm
Because then those pesky debunkers won't be able to persuade you it is all nonsense, and you will by stuff from me and/or visit my advertisers- did you not notice the "Advertise here" spots, and the "Power companies hate this" scam adds??
How does wireless communication compare to the radio frequencies of the universe which bombard us all the time? There's a lot of that isn't there? It's legitimate to question the effects of wireless communication as we are making use of it more and more, but is it true we are saturated with more radio waves than we would have been in a pre-technological age? Aren't we just making use of something that was always there? Aren't the frequencies known to cause harm way above the scale we make use of anyway?
This is why we use a tinfoil hat - actually Aluminium foil - like a Faraday cage around our head to protect is from the mind altering rays. Just kidding (in case someone thinks I'm serious about this).
It seems that barium increases the action of EM signals "WIRELESS HEADACHES Headaches from stem from microwave-induced leakage of harmful molecules through the blood-brain barrier. [Electronics Australia Magazine Feb/00] At one-ten-thousands of a watt, the blood-brain barrier opens, allowing blood proteins inside to disrupt brain signals and start killing brain cells. A cell phone typically transmits at 2 watts. Just two minutes on a cell phone, or sitting near a wireless computer router or portable phone cradle, shorts-circuits the electrical ion activity powering the blood-brain barrier. This allows proteins and other blood toxins to enter the brain and resume damaging neurons in thinking and memory centers. Dr. Leif Salford is finding “astonishing number of dead neuron cells, actually suffering holes in their brains from the damage” caused by a single cell phone call. No wonder wireless-altered brains lead to lack of concentration, memory loss, aggressive behavior, accelerated aging, impaired learning ability and dementia. Fibrils of proteins clumping in electromagnetically-altered brains are an identifying characteristic of Alzheimer’s, Early Onset Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, Fibromyalgia, Multiple Sclerosis and cancer patients. “There is strong evidence that… microwaves are associated with accelerated aging (enhanced cell death and cancer) and moods, depression, suicide, anger, rage and violence, primarily through alteration of cellular calcium ions and the melatonin/serotonin balance,” writes veteran EMF researcher Dr. Neil Cherry in New Zealand."
No, I'm pretty sure that is the actual reason. It definitely works, 100%. Common sense insurance really.
So it's electro-magnetic, not radio? Anyone want to tell me the difference? It's still the same spectrum that the universe bombards us with all the time isn't it? I get mobile internet, and sit a meter away from my phone all day (I lead a very fulfilled life). Is a mobile signal EM? I tether with a USB cable usually, sometimes I use the wireless signal to connect the Xbox. I also use a wireless keyboard and mouse. But I don't usually get headaches. I'm getting a headache from this cheap wine, but I choose to tolerate that. I must have alcohol induced leakage of harmful molecules through the blood-brain barrier.
There are some studies done with mice. My first thought is that mice are MUCH smaller and they have thin skulls. They would seem to be a convenient but poor study subject.
It's ionising v. non-ionising EM radiation. Basically whether or not the part of the EM spectrum in question (radio/microwave/visible light/infrared/gamma/etc) has enough energy to cause chemical bonds to break. Good page describing it here... http://www.arpansa.gov.au/radiationprotection/basics/ion_nonion.cfm
The godfather of chemtrails is at it again, or would it be more accurate to say that he's never really stopped?
He should have stopped. I had a good chat with him at the Chemtrails Conference, and pointed out some mistakes in his reasoning, specifically that he's be saying -70F for a decade when he actually meant -40F. We also discussed the ice budget argument (the weight of a trail of a specific optical density) which he seemed to understand quite well. I even gave him a copy of the paper.
I propose that if Mr. Thomas arrives for a discussion, the -70F baseline temperature he set for contrail formation could be a first item for discussion, then move on to persistence, since these are the basic premises for ordinary contrails, and supposedly the means by which a "chemtrail" can be distinguished from a contrail.
Ah! Of course the Faraday Cage thing is correct. My "Just kidding" refers to the implication that I (or we) actually wear a TFH for that purpose. Sorry to be unclear.
