So, just a (feeble) attempt at getting to topic? Shasta is still a "thing"??? Seems.....it was a "Town-Hall" type of meeting....about a year ago?
I see Mick's post just up-thread (apologies as I get "up-to-speed").
Perhaps once again, a description of just how many Upper-level Jet Routes exist in that vicinity? To explain the preponderance of (sometimes) persistent contrails, when upper-level conditions are conducive for their formation?
Public comments on chemtrails are at:
23:45-30:00
33:45-42:25
48:25-49:20
Board response at 49:44, stating that the 3 promises of the board, 1) to record the meeting and send to all representatives, 2) Gather info from Lassen National Park on size of particles tested 3) contact air quality boards find out what is tested and costs if more tests are thought to be needed. All 3 actions were carried out.
Well, there were about 4 people talking 3 minutes each about the chemtrail issue. But the picture freezes at the beginning of the video, and the audio also cuts off during the talk of the 4th speaker, so I don't know what happened next. Probably nothing. I guess next year they can repeat the whole thing.
Well, there were about 4 people talking 3 minutes each about the chemtrail issue. But the picture freezes at the beginning of the video, and the audio also cuts off during the talk of the 4th speaker, so I don't know what happened next. Probably nothing. I guess next year they can repeat the whole thing.
The video worked fine for me, nothing new was said, same old look up, and Mt. Shasta snow testing 60 thousand times higher than normal for aluminum. The board responded stating they carried out all actions as they promised.
Thanks, I downloaded the video file and I could watch the relevant parts. The board said they had sent the results of the actions to Kimberly Steele (sp?) in a letter last year. But it looks like nobody knows what's in that letter
Thanks, I downloaded the video file and I could watch the relevant parts. The board said they had sent the results of the actions to Kimberly Steele (sp?) in a letter last year. But it looks like nobody knows what's in that letter
Looking at Kimberley Steele's Facebook page, most of her timeline is promoting herbal remedies, essential oils etc, which she sells (or at least gets commission for) via her site here: http://www.mydoterra.com/kimberlysteele/#/ Cui bono?
Thanks, I downloaded the video file and I could watch the relevant parts. The board said they had sent the results of the actions to Kimberly Steele (sp?) in a letter last year. But it looks like nobody knows what's in that letter
I "stalked" Kimberly's FB page looking for it but it's so plastered with meme's I gave up. I did see a copy of the letter the BOS apparently sent out to "all concerned officials" as requested but other than that, found nothing about the other two promises. The actual FB event page drumming up support seemed to have stopped posting around August last year.
so. testing tests elements.
an element is an atom.
a molecule is 2 or more atoms stuck together.
the wiki nanoparticle article says:
Although the size of most molecules would fit into the above outline, individual molecules are usually not referred to as nanoparticles.
so... how is a nanoparticle smaller than an element? or are they saying the Lessen equiptment..um, the nanoparticles fly through the equiptment catching filters? so even though the chemtrailists rain and soil tests "find" this nanoparticle aluminium, strontium etc.. the Lessen equiptment can't?
and...if chemtrailist approved testing can be done for 45,000 the first year and 32,000 each year after, can the chemtrailists just raise money for that instead of movies nobody watches? is that the right testing they want?
It also looks like he is wielding the threat of legal liability to move the county supervisors.
There is currently a team of 6 US attorneys and 2 Canadian attorneys (and other qualified professionals) that are focused on this contamination issue. The legal consensus of this group of legal professionals is this, that county public health and safety agencies have a mandated, legal, and moral responsibility to disclose any and all public safety threats. Again, for over 7 years, no investigation and no public disclosure has taken place from Shasta County officials. As the verifiable heavy metal contamination continues to take it's toll, and the reality of this contamination can no longer be hidden, the question of legal liability will certainly be the primary focus of a justifiably outraged population.
I hope they do it. Then the "mountain" of evidence can be examined on its merit in a public forum.
PM10 and PM2.5 (particles smaller than 10 or 2.5 micrometers) are routinely measured. That would include nanoparticles, although I'm not sure how the test methods catch them. Anyway, recently there has been some research about particles smaller than 0.1 micrometers (100 nanometers) potentially being of concern regarding health effects. It's not enough to measure the mass of these particles as their surface is what counts. But the research about possible adverse health effects of nanoparticles is still not clear and not settled, so even though they could be measured, we have nothing to compare the values to. There are no reference values or limits.
Nanoparticles are everywhere, we are all breathing them in right now. They are part of nature. In fact, the majority of nanoparticles in the environment come from nature. Human activity only adds a little. So when measuring nanoparticles, separating those from natural sources from those that were added by human activity is quite hard, and would require additional analysis. Laser printers are known to produce a lot of nanoparticles, but even if you just light a candle, it will release lots of nanoparticles into the air while it burns.
So yes, they could be measured, and something would be found. But we wouldn't know where it's coming from and what its effects are. Anyway, Wigington et al. would complain as they also complain about normal amounts of aluminum in rainwater. It would not prove anything.
Anyway, recently there has been some research about particles smaller than 0.1 micrometers (100 nanometers) potentially being of concern regarding health effects
Yes, a lot smaller. pm is for picometer, PM is for Particulate Matter.
118 pm = 118*10-12 m = 1.18*10-10 m.
PM10 is 10 micrometers = 10*10-6 m = 10-5 m.
So PM10 is 100,000 times as big as an atom in diameter.
Yes, a lot smaller. pm is for picometer, PM is for Particulate Matter.
118 pm = 118*10-12 m = 1.18*10-10 m.
PM10 is 10 micrometers = 10*10-6 m = 10-5 m.
So PM10 is 100,000 times as big as an atom in diameter.
Wigington plans a Hootenany around the middle of August to be held at an auditorium in Redding. He will have details on his next propaganda show.
It is just very sad to see him ignore that the elements his followers find in rain water are commonly found in the soil under their very feet. Every time one of them works in The Good Earth they get exposed to the elements of their Mother.
They have also carried on a myth that nonoparticles "pass right through" HEPA air filtration, which is definitely a FALSE claim.
Ever wonder why most state air quality monitors haven't detected chemtrails with their fancy air monitoring equipment?
These expensive machines pass a metered amount of air through a mesh filter. The particulates captured by the filter are then counted. Finally, some math is done taking into account the amount of metered air along with the number of captured particulates to determine the particulate count per unit of air.
The problem of environmental control of nanoparticles has been studied because people regularly work with them and need to be assured of protection:
Recent publications (Golanski et al. 2010, 2008, 2009; Rengasamy et al. 2008) have documented that high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters have close to 100 % collection efficiency in the nanoparticle size range. However, due to their relatively high cost and lack of clean ability, researchers and companies may be tempted to use less sophisticated filters; this research investigates the performance of several fabrics commonly used in environmental air cleaning filters. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3569546/
Thanks, I downloaded the video file and I could watch the relevant parts. The board said they had sent the results of the actions to Kimberly Steele (sp?) in a letter last year. But it looks like nobody knows what's in that letter
It also looks like he is wielding the threat of legal liability to move the county supervisors.
There is currently a team of 6 US attorneys and 2 Canadian attorneys (and other qualified professionals) that are focused on this contamination issue. The legal consensus of this group of legal professionals is this, that county public health and safety agencies have a mandated, legal, and moral responsibility to disclose any and all public safety threats. Again, for over 7 years, no investigation and no public disclosure has taken place from Shasta County officials. As the verifiable heavy metal contamination continues to take it's toll, and the reality of this contamination can no longer be hidden, the question of legal liability will certainly be the primary focus of a justifiably outraged population.
I hope they do it. Then the "mountain" of evidence can be examined on its merit in a public forum.
I agree, it can only result in a disaster for them. Then they move the goalposts or blame it on the "Power Structure" being too powerful. Now the conspiracy extends to the former Redding Chief of Police, a female cattle rancher with a Masters degree in Agriculture, former Mayor of Redding, and the Pastor of a small town community church. According to Dane Wigington, all of these people who make up the Board of Supervisors deserve to be sued for not taking him seriously.
If past is prologue, the show won't get on the road:
First off they have to show "contamination", which they will not be able to do.
The whole thing is a lose-lose for them. Two outcomes, which is worse?
1. the suit goes nowhere, they suck up money and time only to fail like they always did before.
2. The suit ensues and is heard in court, only to find that their "evidence" is faulty, they can't show any evidence of anything out of the ordinary. Worse yet for them, they get to see that the "Mountain of Evidence" is bunk.
This one is a new angle I had not previously heard of, but he is claiming that he has 'scientific proof' that chemtrails are actually coal ash, and that it is being transported by train and loaded into aircraft worldwide...