Debunked: C-130 dropping 'raindrop shaped fibers', lab tests for metals [Spider Silk, Dirt]

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member


Earlier this month, Arizona's CBS 5 reported on the story of a local woman who had observed some planes fly overhead, and then noticed some fibers (as in the image above). First she saw them floating in the air, then later saw some clumped together on a fence. Reporter Greg Argos took some samples of these to a lab, where scientist Melissa Beddow suggested they might be biodegradable gauze used on cattle.

However the fibers are almost certainly spider silk. There are three reason why this is so.

1. They were floating in the air exactly like spider silk
2. They look exactly like clumps of spider silk
3. The chemical analysis matches spider silk

The local woman, Marie Snow, first described the fibers in the air as "what looked like 50 foot long spider webs [...] continuous and glistening in the sun". Long thin gossamer cobwebs in the air, glistening in the sunlight, is something most people are familiar with. The origin of the web might be unfamiliar to people though, it's actually from newborn spiders that spin a long strand of web into the wind, and use it fly away from their hatching place.

Since there can be millions of spiders in a field, the long strands of silk sometimes combine into something that looks rather unlike a spider web, but it's actually made of the silk from perhaps thousands of baby spiders, wrapped together by the wind, and caught on fences. Here's an image of the resultant bundle of silk, compared with the samples found by CBS5

source: http://museumvictoria.com.au/discoverycentre/discovery-centre-news/2011-archive/spider-ballooning/

So later when she says of the fibers she found on the fences "it's thicker than a spider web", she is quite correct, because it's actually thousands of spider webs.

These ballooning spiders are not uncommon in Arizona, and this is exactly the right time of year to be seeing them. Here's another local news story about the spiders, from Nov 12, about the same time as the CBS5 story.
http://azdailysun.com/news/local/ba...cle_c8128ac5-b59f-51fa-98b6-0f437f4a04d7.html
But what of the lab tests? Why wheat gluten flour and Bacitracin (or the similar gramicidin)?


Here's the FTIR scan for spider silk (the red line)

Source: http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2013/130910/ncomms3435/fig_tab/ncomms3435_F3.html

And here's what the lab found:


When you overlay them for scale, you get a very close match


The reason for the confusions here is simply that the mixture of these substances is very similar to spider silk in its chemical composition, basically being a blend of peptides and proteins. Spider silk is a complex and variable mix of these, and could very easily be misidentified as mixture of other similar things - especially if you don't have it in your database.

http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/spider/page3.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacitracin
http://chemistry.about.com/od/foodcookingchemistry/a/What-Is-Gluten.htm
Remember the tests being done here are not deterministic, all it does is provide a rough signature, and then the computer compares it to things in the database and tries to figure out what it could combine together to make a match. It's basically guessing. See the various guesses in the above screen capture. In #1 it guesses Bacitracin, in #2 gramicidin. In #1 we have "80% Nylon 20% Spandex", in #2 Naphazoline, in #3 it's 2-Phenethlybenzyl alchohol.

Beddow was then taking these computer guesses, and trying to come up with something that matched, so she theorized biodegradable antiseptic cattle bandages made of gluten. A good try, but of course would not explain the long fibers glistening in the air, or the fibers exactly resembling clumped spider silk. It also appears to be something of an imaginary product.

So it seems almost certain that this is spider silk. However some additional tests performed by Shepard Ambellas suggest there are "metals" in the fibers.


1020 mg/kg of aluminum is 0.1% aluminum. This does seem rather high at first glance. However you have to remember that dirt is around 8% aluminum (10% in western states). So all this means is that the sample is 1% dirt by weight. This is hardly unexpected from a sample of old spider web stuck to a fence. The other metals were found in much lower quantities, consistent with background levels found in dirt.

Marie Snow suggests that the test are high because they are higher than the MDL
However this is a misunderstanding of what the MDL is. It's the Method Detection Limit, the value below which the substance cannot be reliably detected. So rather than being high, the values here are barely detectable. The second number RL, the Reporting Limit, is sometimes misunderstood as a value above which "report" it to some authority. But it's actually the value below which the substance can be detected, but not accurately measured.

http://www.alphalab.com/support-services/faq-frequently-asked-questions#A8
And notice the test method used was EPA 6010B, a very common method for detecting metals. However it detects aluminum the metal, and aluminum oxide (the mineral) exactly the same. So really it's not finding metals, just oxides of metals. Regular old dirt.

So this mysterious fiber is just some dusty spider silk.
 
Last edited:

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
Nice analysis. I thought the "gauze bandage" explanation seemed a bit iffy.

As for the metals analysis on Intellihub, a more truthful headline would have been LAB TEST CONFIRMS MYSTERY FIBRES ARE 99.9% ALUMINIUM-FREE :)
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Isn't November a late time for spiderlings?
Not in Arizona. This story was at the same time.
http://azdailysun.com/news/local/ba...cle_c8128ac5-b59f-51fa-98b6-0f437f4a04d7.html
 

scombrid

Senior Member.
I'm kind of angry at the TV station reporter and his editors on this one. I don't see much excuse for the errors they propagated with this story.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I'm kind of angry at the TV station reporter and his editors on this one. I don't see much excuse for the errors they propagated with this story.

Well the "edible cow bandages" theory came from the lab director. But yeah. It reminds me of the classic KTLA Barium story where the reporter got the units wrong. Also the "insects in a field" UFO story, where they badly used an entomologist.
http://kdvr.com/2012/11/20/insect-expert-ufos-over-denver-not-bugs-images-on-video-remain-a-mystery/

Problem is, once one "expert" expresses an opinion, it kind of gets stuck. There's an endless stream of stories like this in local news, and even occasionally in national news - like the Mystery Missile, where they had a fomer four star general looking a photo of an airplane contrail and saying he knew for a fact is was a missile. So now there's still lots of people who think it WAS a missile.
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
This is all so confusing:

Why would "hygiene challenged maggots" be at odds with "unwashed masses" ?
Seems like we're all on the same team! :D

Only a Brit could genteelly refer to such truculent responses as "lively replies"
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
Dragging > > >....back to topic. When spider fibers are mis-represented as some sort of "aerial spraying" shenanigans? How best to respond?

Science and logic often do not work. So, what else to use?

It seems (sometimes) a Sisyphean task.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
When spider fibers are mis-represented as some sort of "aerial spraying" shenanigans? How best to respond?

Science and logic often do not work. So, what else to use?

I think here there's a very good chance of simply presenting the actual evidence. Now true believers and promoters like Ambellas will ignore you, but this is so clear cut that pretty much everyone not 100% down the rabbit hole should be able to see it's spider silk.

It would be good if CBS5 did a correction though. You'd think they could do an interesting story just about the spiders, like the Arizona Sun did.
http://azdailysun.com/news/local/ba...cle_c8128ac5-b59f-51fa-98b6-0f437f4a04d7.html
 
Last edited:

scombrid

Senior Member.
Graphic is concise and unambiguous. Thanks for putting in the effort. Would be nice if CBS-5 would step up and hit the redo button.
 

TEEJ

Senior Member.

Looks like they are not interested in debate over on intellihub? I've posted twice in the comments section. One of my posts appeared and has now been removed. Looks like they have turned on the old get out clause of "awaiting moderation". I bet if I posted "I am being sprayed like a bug today by unmarked windowless aircraft" my post would magically appear!
 
http://education.jlab.org/itselemental/ele013.html

"Although aluminum is the most abundant metal in the earth's crust, it is never found free in nature."

Let that one sink in for a second.


"All of the earth's aluminum has combined with other elements to form compounds. Two of the most common compounds are alum, such as potassium aluminum sulfate (KAl(SO4)2·12H2O), and aluminum oxide (Al2O3). About 8.2% of the earth's crust is composed of aluminum."

Aluminum is derived from the ore bauxite. First bauxite is mined from typically shallow deposits, and then it is refined into alumina (aluminum oxide – Al2O3) using the Bayer process at an aluminum refinery. The aluminum, a powdery white substance, is then sent to an aluminum smelter where it subjected to electrolysis (Hall/Héroult process) which separates out the aluminum metal.

Aluminum is not found free in nature...


I suppose I'll be banned for this as well ;)
 

Ross Marsden

Senior Member.
http://education.jlab.org/itselemental/ele013.html

"Although aluminum is the most abundant metal in the earth's crust, it is never found free in nature."

Let that one sink in for a second.


"All of the earth's aluminum has combined with other elements to form compounds. Two of the most common compounds are alum, such as potassium aluminum sulfate (KAl(SO4)2·12H2O), and aluminum oxide (Al2O3). About 8.2% of the earth's crust is composed of aluminum."

Aluminum is derived from the ore bauxite. First bauxite is mined from typically shallow deposits, and then it is refined into alumina (aluminum oxide – Al2O3) using the Bayer process at an aluminum refinery. The aluminum, a powdery white substance, is then sent to an aluminum smelter where it subjected to electrolysis (Hall/Héroult process) which separates out the aluminum metal.

Aluminum is not found free in nature...


I suppose I'll be banned for this as well ;)
Is sarcasm or irony being used here?
These are hard to do successfully in the written medium.
Could someone please explain that post for me? Is he inadvertently debunking himself, or not understanding some of the phrases he is quoting from somewhere? I don't get it.

I've given it as "thumbs down" in lieu of "wut?"

FWIW: I understand that Al is not found in elemental form in nature. It is bound up in oxides silicates and needs some pretty high energy extraction processes to get an ingot of Al (which will have a thin layer of Al2O3 after all that effort).
 

Analyst

Member
Is sarcasm or irony being used here?
These are hard to do successfully in the written medium.
Could someone please explain that post for me? Is he inadvertently debunking himself, or not understanding some of the phrases he is quoting from somewhere? I don't get it.
I must admit, I'm struggling to see what point hiilikeyourbird is trying to make. The focussing in on the phrase "Aluminum is not found free in nature" would lead me to assume that he thinks his previous description of how Aluminium is refined from bauxite in some way debunks the assertion that it does not occur naturally as 'free aluminium'.
I just think that there are some very serious comprehension shortfalls here, but that's generally apparent when people start going on about aluminium being a 'highly toxic, heavy metal'. You can usually assume that it will be followed up by a plethora of similar misunderstandings and misconceptions, all common in the chemtrail hive-mind.
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
I must admit, I'm struggling to see what point hiilikeyourbird is trying to make. The focussing in on the phrase "Aluminum is not found free in nature" would lead me to assume that he thinks his previous description of how Aluminium is refined from bauxite in some way debunks the assertion that it does not occur naturally as 'free aluminium'.
I just think that there are some very serious comprehension shortfalls here, but that's generally apparent when people start going on about aluminium being a 'highly toxic, heavy metal'.
Yes, a quick glance at the periodic table will show you that there are only four metals "lighter" than aluminium (five if you count boron as a metal), so I have no idea where the "heavy metal" thing comes from. Whether you use atomic mass, atomic number or physical density as your criterion, there is no way you can call aluminium "heavy"!

I think people just don't understand (or don't want to admit) that the chemical test breaks compounds down into their constituent elements, so ANY aluminium compound will test positive for aluminium.
 

Hevach

Senior Member.
There's no standard definition of heavy metal. Cadmium is generally considered one, but Gold is not despite higher atomic number and higher density.

Aluminum is not considered a heavy metal, at all, though.

Its toxicity is also negligible in soil - not zero by any means, but the amount needed to be toxic is just incredible. Because if you do contaminate soil with free aluminum, it won't stay contaminated, because free aluminum is not stale. It will oxidize. The smaller the pieces, the faster they will oxidize because oxidation is relative to surface area. Dust, like you'd get machining parts*, will oxidize within minutes to hours depending on the size of the pieces and environmental factors. Aerosolized aluminum at ground level would oxidize in seconds.

Aluminum oxidizes the same way copper does - the oxide produces a barrier on the surface, protecting the metal from further oxidation but also protecting the environment from the metal. It doesn't corrode like iron, which flakes off exposing new metal to oxidation and eventually rusting away to dust.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Could someone please explain that post for me? Is he inadvertently debunking himself, or not understanding some of the phrases he is quoting from somewhere? I don't get it.
I must admit, I'm struggling to see what point hiilikeyourbird is trying to make. The focussing in on the phrase "Aluminum is not found free in nature" would lead me to assume that he thinks his previous description of how Aluminium is refined from bauxite in some way debunks the assertion that it does not occur naturally as 'free aluminium'.

It's not that hard to understand. hiilikeyourbird thinks the test would only show aluminum if it was "free aluminum".

This is a very common misconception. I'm not sure even if Dane fully understands it. I should probably do a nice thread/infographic to explain it, as it comes up all the time.
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
It's not that hard to understand. hiilikeyourbird thinks the test would only show aluminum if it was "free aluminum".

This is a very common misconception. I'm not sure even if Dane fully understands it. I should probably do a nice thread/infographic to explain it, as it comes up all the time.

The test method uses ICP-AES. From Wikipedia's description of the method:

A peristaltic pump delivers an aqueous or organic sample into an analytical nebulizer where it is changed into mist and introduced directly inside the plasma flame. The sample immediately collides with the electrons and charged ions in the plasma and is itself broken down into charged ions. The various molecules break up into their respective atoms which then lose electrons and recombine repeatedly in the plasma, giving off radiation at the characteristic wavelengths of the elements involved.

Quite a lot of jargon there, but basically the sample is heated up to about 12,000 degrees Fahrenheit, which breaks all compounds down into their constituent atoms, each of which then emits a characteristic "fingerprint" that can be detected.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Quite a lot of jargon there, but basically the sample is heated up to about 12,000 degrees Fahrenheit, which breaks all compounds down into their constituent atoms, each of which then emits a characteristic "fingerprint" that can be detected.

Yes, it uses a plasma torch like this:

Strips it down to the atoms, then blasts off the electrons to make it sing.

Problem is, lots of people don't really understand plasma, electrons, atoms, molecules, and compounds. Now you might think this is really trivial stuff that everyone understands (at least the "atoms vs. molecules" part). But there's a very large number of people who have absolutely no idea how chemistry works. So it's quite hard to explain to people, and then it just becomes this issue of trust.

So you can say "that test will detect the aluminum in Bauxite exactly the same as it detects 'free' metallic aluminum", and you will get the response "but free aluminum does not exist in nature, so why is it being detected in this test".

People miss the point, because they A) don't really understand it, and B) They trust "authority" figures like Dane, who don't really understand it either.

A vital point to keep in mind here is that there is nothing wrong with not understanding this. Billions of people don't. Most people don't. Lots of "debunkers" don't. It's knowledge that seems basic to some, but is esoteric to others. Think how some people don't understand basic algebra, like how solving 2x+2=4x seem obvious to you, but it totally gobbledygook to some of your friends and family. Same thing with chemistry.

So it's important not just to throw your hands up in the air and dismiss people as stupid, but instead to understand their misunderstanding and try to communicate with this in mind.
 

ShowtimeGA

New Member
If it's just "water," what is the point in spraying water from military planes? They're spraying SOMETHING, because passenger planes do not do this. I've seen photos of the sky covered with chemtrails.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
If it's just "water," what is the point in spraying water from military planes? They're spraying SOMETHING, because passenger planes do not do this. I've seen photos of the sky covered with chemtrails.

The water is just in the engine exhaust. It's always there, just when the weather is humid (at cruising altitudes), it can form clouds (contrails)

This thread, however, is about the fibers that were found. There are many other threads discussing the formations of contrails. I'd appreciate it if you could review the posting guidelines before posting again.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/posting-guidelines.2064/

I'd also recommend having a quick read of the wikipedia article on contrails. At least the opening paragraphs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrail
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
So it's important [...] to understand their misunderstanding and try to communicate with this in mind.
I am convinced that in this case, it is unavoidable to clear up the misunderstanding because it is so central to the CT. The soil tests come up like on cue every time the contrail persistence issue is exhausted.

On the other hand, I'm confident that the principle of molecules can be explained in simple terms, with images and the help of analogies that most people can relate to - like the "H2O" molecule which behaves so much different than its components, or "rust" as an example of metal turning into dust, changing its properties completely.

Even if people may not understand at first, the point is to make them aware that there might be something which they did not take into account previously. I think it is useful to not hold back on using the terms "molecule" and "atom".

I tried to add the following comment to the CBS5 page but there seems to be a hard limit on the number of comments; anyway, mine did not show up.

"The metal traces found in the samples are likely from dust accumulated in the silk. Dust is mostly soil / minerals, and most mineral molecules are based on metal atoms. Clay contains aluminum, for instance. This is what shows up in the analysis results. There were no FREE metals around."
 

jaydeehess

Senior Member.
Isn't December kinda late, too? What about in Canada? I don't think Arizona holds the "market" for spider webs all over the world.
In my area of Canada, just north of Minnesota, it was minus 20 C a few weeks ago. On Remembrance Day ( Veterans Day down yonder) it was minus 10C. No spider was crawling about by Halloween. Others areas, notably Vancouver and Victoria see milder temps.
Now June, July, August and even September are quite amenable to many varieties of spiders in all non-Arctic provinces.

I can attest to walking on the beach and having a spiderling, blown by the wind, land on me and have his trailing strand of silk stick to me.

In addition we have Tent Catepillars here which also produce a silk. When they are in season , walking through a deciduous tree stand can be utterly disgusting as they drop to the ground on that silk, often hundreds of these strands hanging from the trees that glom onto your cloths and hands and face.
 
Last edited:

jaydeehess

Senior Member.
If it's just "water," what is the point in spraying water from military planes? They're spraying SOMETHING, because passenger planes do not do this. I've seen photos of the sky covered with chemtrails.
Wrong. Passenger jets are quite prolific in producing contrails. In fact that's why you see portions of the sky rife with contrails, because passenger jets follow specific routes.

As readily demonstrated in the links Mick supplied above.

Back to spider silk.
 
Last edited:

jaydeehess

Senior Member.
It's not that hard to understand. hiilikeyourbird thinks the test would only show aluminum if it was "free aluminum".

This is a very common misconception. I'm not sure even if Dane fully understands it. I should probably do a nice thread/infographic to explain it, as it comes up all the time.
The theme is self debunking. Aluminum exclusively exists in the air or soil as a compound ( other than in enviroments that strongly promote reduction processes) because it reacts so readily with, among other elements, oxygen. That is a point which chemtrailers promote quite vocally.

Spraying elemental aluminum in fine particles from thousands of feet above the surface will garuntee it is oxidized by the time it reaches the surface. One need only drive down a gravel road on a dry summer day ( around here gravel consists primarily of granite) and note that the dust, blown up to a grand height of a dozen feet or so, at best, (due to a passenger car, large trucks or busses send it higher) takes several minutes to settle out to the surface again. Much less dense, particulate elemental aluminum sprayed from a jet moving at several hundred MPH, ensuring mixing with the atmosphere, at several hundred or thousands of feet agl is going to take much longer, hours perhaps, to reach the surface. Ample time to oxidize even if collected asap.

Finding fine particulate elemental aluminum in a dust sample would be rare to impossible, unless it has been deposited in high concentration very recently and tested immediately. Simply collecting the dust and spending hours or days transporting it to a test lab makes the idea that any elemental aluminum exists in the sample quite ridiculous.

So the logical conclusion is that what is being found in these tests is aluminum as a component of compounds found in the samples.
 
Last edited:
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Robert Tankersley Debunked: Video of UFO behind a cloud, dropping flashing blue lights [Viral Marketing Hoax] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 43
Mick West Debunked: Aerosol Chemcloud dropping towards the ground Contrails and Chemtrails 0
Rory Debunked: UK undertaker's claim that Covid vaccine is responsible for spike in deaths Coronavirus COVID-19 0
Marc Powell Debunked: 9/11 truth experts are knowledgeable professionals and their judgments are to be trusted 9/11 195
Marc Powell Debunked: Explosions preparatory to demolition of the WTC North Tower are visible as Flight 175 crashes into the South Tower 9/11 7
Mick West Debunked: Pfizer Developing a Twice-Per-Day COVID Pill, Taken Alongside Vaccines Coronavirus COVID-19 0
Marc Powell Debunked: Demolition “squib” is visible at top of WTC North Tower before Flight 11 crash 9/11 19
Marc Powell Debunked: Construction worker Philip Morelli experienced an explosion in the sub-basement of the North Tower 9/11 0
Marc Powell Debunked: ABC News correspondent George Stephanopoulos reported an explosion in the subway 9/11 1
Marc Powell Debunked: Debris from twin towers was projected upward by explosives 9/11 13
Marc Powell Debunked: Government officials revealed having foreknowledge of Building 7’s collapse 9/11 58
Marc Powell Debunked: NIST computer simulation of Building 7 collapse is inaccurate 9/11 22
Marc Powell Debunked: FEMA reported finding evidence that steel had melted. 9/11 47
Marc Powell Debunked: VP Dick Cheney ordered a standdown of jet fighters on 9/11 9/11 16
Oystein Debunked: Claim that Bobby McIlvaine's injuries ("lacerations") are best explained as result of glass shards and debris from bombs 9/11 22
Marc Powell Debunked: World Trade Center should not have collapsed due to 9/11 fires 9/11 3
Marc Powell Debunked: Firefighter reports of secondary explosions 9/11 3
Marc Powell Debunked: Steel was hurled hundreds of feet by explosives 9/11 4
Marc Powell Debunked: Demolition Explosion Before Collapse of South Tower 9/11 8
Marc Powell Debunked: Explosion in South Tower Lobby 9/11 7
Marc Powell Debunked: Mysterious Explosion Before the Flight 11 Crash 9/11 48
J.d.K Debunked: Marx: "The classes and the races too weak to master the new conditions must give way... They must perish in the revolutionary Holocaust" Quotes Debunked 0
dimebag2 Poll : Which DOD Navy video do you consider debunked ? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 74
Mick West Debunked: Diving Triangle UFO Photos from Reddit [Fake] UFOs and Aliens 37
Theferäl [Debunked] Object Seen From Airplane Above Canberra: 04 Apr 2012 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 5
TEEJ Debunked: Claim that Joe Biden's hand passes through microphone during White House press gaggle, 16th March 2021 Election 2020 8
bird_up Debunked: "Interdimensional being" caught on CCTV in Neza, Mexico Ghosts, Monsters, and the Paranormal 6
M Debunked: Atmospheric pressure on Mars is 9 PSI, not 0.09 PSI as claimed by NASA Science and Pseudoscience 75
Patrick Gonzalez Debunked: missing cable on Perseverance landing footage proves it is fake. General Discussion 3
TEEJ Debunked: Biden's Oval Office "Coming Apart at the Seams" [It's a Door] Election 2020 19
derrick06 Debunked: UFO over California Highway (TMZ) UFOs and Aliens 1
P Debunked: 7 Alleged photos of aliens UFOs and Aliens 9
Mick West Debunked: Biden signing "Blank" Executive Orders Election 2020 5
Mick West Debunked: Biden in "Fake" Oval Office Election 2020 27
P Debunked: UN hidden camera: the first UFO contact happened [Deep Fake] UFOs and Aliens 3
Mick West Debunked: 94% of Fulton County Ballots Manually Adjudicated [It's a Process all Batches go Through] Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: "Missile Strike" caused Nashville Explosion General Discussion 3
Mick West Debunked: Nashville Explosion was "Across the Street" from the RV General Discussion 0
Mick West Debunked: "Error rate of 68.5% Allowable is .0008%" [Neither is True] Election 2020 4
Mick West Debunked: Claim that the Electoral College Count On Jan 6 will Change the Election Election 2020 136
Rory Debunked: Einstein wrote "blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth" Quotes Debunked 12
Mick West Debunked: Navid Keshavarz-Nia's Claims of "A Sudden Rise in Slope" as Election Fraud Evidence Election 2020 5
Mick West Debunked: Trump's Claim of "1,126,940 votes created out of thin air" in PA Election 2020 9
Mick West Debunked: Crowder's "Fraud Week" Title Graphic (and Why it Matters) Election 2020 1
JFDee Debunked: Democratic senators complained about 'vote switching' by Dominion voting machines in 2019 Election 2020 2
Mendel Debunked: The Democrats are trying to take away freedom of religion Election 2020 6
H Debunked: Dr. Shiva's Scatterplot Analysis of Michigan Precincts Election 2020 43
Mick West Debunked: Suspicious "Biden Only" Ballots in Georgia Election 2020 3
Mick West Debunked: "Nancy Pelosi's long time Chief of Staff is a key executive at Dominion Voting" Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: Wisconsin Turnout 89% Impossible High [Actually 72%] Election 2020 1
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top