Debunked: Shade, The Motion Picture - Chemtrails and Geoengineering

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
"Shade" is a new documentary film by Shepard Ambellas & Jason Bermas, the descript for which reads:
http://shadethemotionpicture.com/

For hundreds of years an elite group of oligarchs have ruled the land, fueled by a legacy of sex, money, power and greed….
….in the last 60 years their power has become more consolidated as they have become more organized.
Their own white papers and other documents show the diabolic plans they have in store for the population.
Content from External Source
The film has yet to be released, and yet there's enough in the trailer to know that the "chemtrails and geoengineering" segments contain a fair bit of bunk.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8EOXYG4elQ


For a more general debunking of chemtrails see ContrailScience.com, but here I'll specifically address the points mentioned in the trailer.

Michael J. Murphy: "We now have an issue called Global Dimming"

No, we don't. We actually have Global Brightening. The global dimming claims were based on sunlight studies that ended in the 1980s, and the dimming they recorded was due to particulate pollution. Since the introduction of clean air legislation in Western countries this pollution has been greatly reduced, and we now have MORE sunlight reaching the ground in North America than we did 20 years ago. See a full discussion of this here:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/gl...idence-for-geoengineering-or-chemtrails.2182/
With an overview of the academic literature confirming this here:
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00074.1

Rosalind Peterson: "This lack of vitamin-D from this man-made cloud cover and these reflective particles, leads to human health problems which are already being identified in the United States.

This is false because:
  1. As noted above, there has been no such reduction in sunlight, in fact it has increased.
  2. The amount of sunlight needed to make vitamin D is tiny, around ten minutes. Vitamin D deficiency is caused by people not going outside, not by low sun levels (which vary vastly by location and time of year)
Al DiCicco: "It was very high barium, 190.

DiCicco is talking about a blood test for barium. The normal levels of barium in blood are from zero to 400. So 190 is perfectly normal. See the references linked from:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/high-barium-levels-in-blood-mohave-az.128/

Anthony Gucciardi: "Barium is actually the most important as it goes in an not only causes heart disease, which is the number one killer of humans across the board, but it actually disables the immune system function.

So does sugar. It's all about the dose. The facts are:
  1. Barium is a naturally occurring substance found in small quantities in soil, food, water, and blood.
  2. Unusual levels of Barium have not been measured.

Al DiCicco: "The reporting limit is 11"

The "Reporting Limit" is the reliable limit of detection. If it's below 11 then they can't measure it accurately. On that same sheet that Al is reading from it describes the normal range as being 0 to 489, with 95% of people in the range 1.8 to 165. See:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-claims-of-michael-j-murphy-a-factual-examination.172/#post-784

It is unfortunate that many of these claims were debunked over two years ago, and are still being recycled. One would hope this does not reflect the quality fact checking behind the rest of the film.
 
Last edited:

Miss VocalCord

Senior Member.
I noticed this documentary quite a while ago, I think it was first to be released for more then a year ago. For unknown reasons they keep postponing the release. I thought only two weeks ago it still said to be released the first week of September. I think it won't be released either at the end of this month....
 

Strawman

Senior Member.
Somewhat OT: I wonder if they back up their claim about a group of oligarchs ruling the world for "hundreds of years".
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I noticed this documentary quite a while ago, I think it was first to be released for more then a year ago. For unknown reasons they keep postponing the release. I thought only two weeks ago it still said to be released the first week of September. I think it won't be released either at the end of this month....

Jason said he basically just needs to "encode a 720P document". Meaning it's all done, he just needs to export it to a file.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The man on the bench is Anthony Gucciardi. Here he is discussing "chemtrails" with a "detoxification" doctor. (Not part of the "Shade" film, as far as I know)

He repeats the nonsense that the government has "admitted" chemtrails.


Contains a bizarre theory that the flu shots six years ago contained genes for shingles, and that recently they sprayed the "trigger" for this via chemtrails at the same time as releasing a shingles vaccines.
 

David Fraser

Senior Member.
The man on the bench is Anthony Gucciardi. Here he is discussing "chemtrails" with a "detoxification" doctor. (Not part of the "Shade" film, as far as I know)

He repeats the nonsense that the government has "admitted" chemtrails.


Contains a bizarre theory that the flu shots six years ago contained genes for shingles, and that recently they sprayed the "trigger" for this via chemtrails at the same time as releasing a shingles vaccines.

It sounds like he does not know much about chicken pox or shingles. He will be talking about the vaccine Zostavax http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/shingles/vacc-need-know.htm

It is not that widely used in the UK except for more elderly folk as it is only about 50% effective although it can lead to lessend symptoms. That's a good thing. I had shingles in my '30's and it was agony and that is from someone that has quite a high pain threshold.
 

Miss VocalCord

Senior Member.
Jason said he basically just needs to "encode a 720P document". Meaning it's all done, he just needs to export it to a file.
I read some pre-screen review about it on intellihub, but it seems even the 30 september isn't that solid. This still can be read on the main page:

Updated Release: Ships September 30, Sorry For the Delay
Content from External Source
However when you look at the ordering page there is again a two week delay:

DVD Ships October 15, 2013.
Content from External Source
http://store.shadethemotionpicture.com/landing-1/?ap_id=unbound

The 'review' can be found here, but I wouldn't really call it that, doesn't say much:
http://intellihub.com/2013/09/19/film-review-shade-ushers-powerful-new-era-documentary-filmmaking/
 

Miss VocalCord

Senior Member.
I have only skipped through it briefly now, don't have time to watch it (or don't want to make time is more close to the truth :) ).

The first twenty minutes are mostly about Bilderberg and persons related to it. Then there is a big chunk about chemtrails. Rosalind Peterson seems to be speaking a lot, not much news I've come across while skipping. A nice one from Murphy is that he describes David Keith as a drugs addict in a way to explain why Keith does what he does....
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Starting off with an advert for MyPatriotSupply.com is classy.

Yes. Unfortunately it all comes across as just a bit commercial for survivalists supplies. i.e. "The world is ending, so buy this!"

I've just skipped around in it, but already I see that he's left in one of the errors I pointed out above, DiCicco saying "The Reporting limit is 11". At 54:33 he talks about rain water samples, and then there's a odd cut to him talking about his blood test results, to confuse the two things and make it look like there's been some increase. As I said above: The "Reporting Limit" is the reliable limit of detection. If it's below 11 then they can't measure it accurately. On that same sheet that Al is reading from it describes the normal range as being 0 to 489, with 95% of people in the range 1.8 to 165. See:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-claims-of-michael-j-murphy-a-factual-examination.172/#post-784
 
Last edited:

M Bornong

Senior Member.
You'd think that when they super impose an article to back up an assertion, it would at least agree with them.

@41:30, Michael Murphy, "We now have an issue called global dimming. The earth is now receiving 20% less sun than it did just a couple decades ago."

The observed "dimming" has strong regional differences across the globe. While the southern hemisphere saw modest dimming in the period 1961–90 (which has continued to date), the northern hemisphere saw much more significant declines (reductions of 4–8%). Since then some parts of the world, such as Europe and North America, have seen partial recovery (known as "brightening"), while other regions (most notably China and India) have seen further although regionally mixed declines.
Content from External Source
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/may/11/global-dimming-pollution

Mick already touched on this in his opening.

@44:25, Anthony Gucciardi, "Now what happens is when the chemtrails start to descend upon the earth, it oxidizes into what’s known as aluminum oxide. This acidifies the soil, devastating crops, water. It can go in and actually make so fish can’t take oxygen from the water anymore, this causes them, of course to die."

The environment ministry said Friday the water tests confirm that a naturally occurring temperature inversion brought an oxygen-depleted layer of water from the bottom of the lake close to the surface causing the widespread kill.

“Samples back from the lab do not show any evidence of a manure spills or anything unusual in terms of contamination. The information that we have suggests the fish may have been killed as the result of natural causes,” said ministry spokesperson Kate Jordan told the Star.
Content from External Source
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2012/09/07/lack_of_oxygen_killed_lake_erie_fish_tests_show.html

45 minutes is as far as I've gotten, and these were the only 2 articles I checked. Up to now it seems to be the same regurgitated stuff, I haven't heard anything new.
 

Miss VocalCord

Senior Member.
If you pause at 54:59 it can clearly been read from the paper:


Result: 35mcg/l
Reporting limit: 11
Generally: less than 50mcg/L

so he is still well below the general I would say.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The key confusion there is what "Reporting Limit" means for these tests. It's hard to communicate this to people, as the terminology can be confusing, and "Reporting Limit" means other things in other contexts.

http://dnr.wi.gov/regulations/labcert/documents/guidance/-LODguide.pdf

Method Detection Limit (MDL) is the minimum concentration of a substance that can be measured
and reported with 99% confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero, and is
determined from analysis of a sample in a given matrix containing the analyte. Appendix A contains
the necessary equations for calculating method detection limits. (40 CFR part 136, Appendix B, rev.
1.11)

Reporting Limit is an arbitrary number below which data is not reported. The reporting limit may
or may not be statistically determined, or may be an estimate that is based upon the experience and
judgement of the analyst. Analytical results below the reporting limit are expressed as "less than"
the reporting limit. Reporting limits are not acceptable substitutes for detection limits unless
specifically approved by the Department for a particular test
.
Content from External Source
http://www.epa.gov/fem/pdfs/Env_Measurement_Glossary_Final_Jan_2010.pdf

Method Detection Limit – (1) The method detection limit (MDL) is defined as the minimum concentration of a substance that can be measured and reported with 99% confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero and is determined from analysis of a sample in a given matrix containing the analyte. The MDL is determined using the procedure at 40 CFR 136, Appendix B. (OW/EAD) (OPP) (2) See definition for Limit of Detection/Detection Limit/Method Detection Limits. (ORD) (OPP)

Reporting Limit – (1) The minimum value below which data are documented as non-detects. (OW/TSC) (OECA) (ORCR) (2) The minimum value of the calibration range. Analyte detections between the detection limit and the reporting limit are reported as having estimated concentrations. (ORD) (ORCR)
Content from External Source
http://www.northcoastlabs.com/frequently-asked-questions/glossary-terms.php

Method Detection Limit (MDL)
The method detection limit, as outlined in 40 CFR Part 136, Appendix B, is the minimum concentration of a substance that can be measured and reported with 99% confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero. This limit is determined by analysis of a sample in a given matrix containing the analytes. Seven replicates fortified at one to five times the expected detection limit are analyzed. The standard deviation times the Student’s t value is calculated to determine the MDL.

Reporting Limit (RL)
The reporting limit is the lowest concentration routinely determined during laboratory operations.
Content from External Source
 

toasterhead

New Member
I actually sat through about 45 minutes of this drivel before giving up. Yes, it was painful.

The producers continue to harp on the point that excess aluminum/barium/strontium in the soil is making it more difficult for organic farmers to grow their crops and forcing farmers to only use Monsanto seed.

If that's true, why has the organic food industry continued to grow in sales and market share, according to the Organic Trade Association? http://www.organicnewsroom.com/2012/04/us_consumerdriven_organic_mark.html
 

Sausalito

Active Member
I just couldn't do it. I couldn't stomach more than a few minutes. I did, however, derive amusement from some kid saying, "...uncut, unedited..." before the editing cut him off.
 

toasterhead

New Member
Thinking about it, this was just a video Gish Gallop. It meandered from the Bilderberg Group to cloud seeding to trees dying to Evergreen Air to geoengineering to Monsanto to who knows what else (not me, anyway - this was the point when i bailed out.). Nowhere in the portion I saw did the video offer anything more than speculation on top of speculation.

And there seemed to be a lot of confusion about chemistry. The alleged chemtrail planes are allegedly spraying aluminum nanoparticles, which combine with oxygen somehow to create aluminum sulfate, which then rains down and somehow becomes aluminum ions acidifying the soil. I'm no chemist, but am pretty sure aluminum doesn't work that way.
 

Miss VocalCord

Senior Member.
The key confusion there is what "Reporting Limit" means for these tests. It's hard to communicate this to people, as the terminology can be confusing, and "Reporting Limit" means other things in other contexts.
I can understand the confusion about the "Reporting Limit" up till some (very little) extent, but you still have to completely ignore the "Generally: Less than" line. This simply means what it says doesn't it? ( This isn't some term which can be explained in too many ways can it?)

And it isn't something which can be overlooked, its right below there, its not deep down hidden somewhere, if you see the "Reporting Limit" you can't ignore the "Generally" bit.

Al (or Allen is his name?) has the report in his hands, somebody has been scanning this document, it has been edited into the movie, and all this time nobody ever wondered what the "Generally: Less than" line would mean? I think they are asking the wrong questions again :)
 

M Bornong

Senior Member.
Thinking about it, this was just a video Gish Gallop. It meandered from the Bilderberg Group to cloud seeding to trees dying to Evergreen Air to geoengineering to Monsanto to who knows what else (not me, anyway - this was the point when i bailed out.). Nowhere in the portion I saw did the video offer anything more than speculation on top of speculation.
The dead tree scenario is around @30:00. The only trees that Rosalind Peterson named are the Manzanita trees.
Natural periodic fires have burned separate portions of the chaparral throughout history. Since people started building houses in the chaparral, these fires have been suppressed. Manzanita cannot regenerate unless the seeds are scarified by fire and the thick endocarp is burned off. Many manzanita have now reached the end of their life cycles without newer generations replacing them, changing the character of the chaparral.
Content from External Source
http://www.blueplanetbiomes.org/manzanita.htm
 

blargo

Member
I actually sat through about 45 minutes of this drivel before giving up. Yes, it was painful.

The producers continue to harp on the point that excess aluminum/barium/strontium in the soil is making it more difficult for organic farmers to grow their crops and forcing farmers to only use Monsanto seed.

If that's true, why has the organic food industry continued to grow in sales and market share, according to the Organic Trade Association? http://www.organicnewsroom.com/2012/04/us_consumerdriven_organic_mark.html
Remember most of the GMO seeds are in commodity crops, like corn, rice, soy and cotton not many it the other traditional veggies. So comparing the raw amounts of food grown in dollars in a growing industry does not tell the entire story. You really have to look at yields per acre over time to see if there are any downward trends. I found this article but it is dates:
http://www.berea.edu/anr/files/2012/08/AJAA-Clark-et-al-1999.pdf
It has some awesome graphs that show the yield per HA over time. This is also during much of the global dimming period and it shows no reduction in yeilds, but it is pre 1996.

So I found this report:
http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/statistics/pdfs/2013/FieldCrops.pdf

This is fairly current and it shows a ton of California field crops of all types. Most of these do not have high percent of GMO seed so they would have the same trouble with excess aluminum/barium/strontium as organic crops. But as you can see there is no downward trend. In fact I see a general yield increase over most of the crops.

To me this is the type of data that just destroys this argument. If the spraying was happening and it is destroying our ability to create food why are these non-GMO yields increasing?
 

Blue

New Member
I only watched a few minutes. So fed up of these [people] spreading unnecessary fear. What I saw reminded me of 'What in the World are they Spraying' which is total scientific nonsense. Can anyone tell me - does one of the celebrity Hemingways get dragged in anywhere (like in 'What in the World) to demonstrate their lack of knowledge and complete gullibility?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Balance

Senior Member.
Top