Erin Brokovich does not believe in chemtrails.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Leifer

Senior Member.
She has recently stood-up for cleaner air in Utah, but has never mentioned "chemtrails" as the cause.
https://www.facebook.com/7596080549...60805493/10153733806175494/?type=1&permPage=1
Another instance of her recent Utah air pollution criticism.... http://www.brockovich.com/projects/stericycle-utah/

Despite several Facebook pages dedicated to her activism...a new FB page seems to have arisen, implying she somehow is, or "should" believe in chemtrails. The page is called a "Plea for her action", but the followers seem to see her critisizm as truth.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Plea...gal-Action-against-Chemtrails/373781936107888
 
Here's a video from 2009 where she says a lot of people have emailed her, but she doesn't know much about it, and her focus has been on groundwater.



So I'm sure she's very familiar with the theory by this point, but being a sensible person with a good scientific network, she knows there's no real evidence behind it.
 
As someone who relies on real and physical evidence to prove her cases of activism in a courtroom.....she is never likely to join the "chemtrail" bandwagon.
In fact, she may a very good model for truth activists, in that she does not seem to take-on an activist cause, unless there IS real and hard evidence.
 
In fact, she may a very good model for truth activists, in that she does not seem to take-on an activist cause, unless there IS real and hard evidence.

You'd think that, but even the complete disinterest of conspiracy group "Pilot for 9/11 truth" in the chemtrail meme has not affected their zeal that much.
 
It looks like she may have just joined the bandwagon. https://www.facebook.com/7596080549...60805493/10154776687595494/?type=1&permPage=1
erinbrockovich.jpg

CPAP masks?

Just posted three hours ago, and already a deluge of excited comments.

Hopefully Erin was just positing what she though was a commentary on pollution, and has not actually been bamboozled into thinking there's something in the chemtrail claims. I would think she'd be pretty familiar with actual standards of evidence.
 
What's odd is that she appears to have posted the pic without comment.
and I am scrolling down and she has made NO comment so far.
Lots of people surprised and pointing out the chemtrail hoax has no evidence. Lots of people touting lookup.org, and WITWATS etc, Davoud Tohidy seems to have jumped on there, but so far i have not found any comment from her. maybe she got fraped and hasn't realised it yet
 
I don't understand...
What is the purpose of a chemtrail? (Conspiracy wise)
Who does it impact on?
Why do conspiracists believe they have a negative effect etc?
And most importantly.... is there any clear evidence to support their argument/claims?
 
There's many different interpretations as to purpose.
At the start of the theory it was as a means of either 'dumbing down' or mind-control through brain-effecting substances, or population control by introducing toxic substances into the general environment that would increase cancers and infertility, or introduce some newly created disease.
As that was 20 years ago and there's been no obvious mass-die-offs it's changed to geo-engineering the climate for the purpose of either mitigating global warming, or creating it in the first place.
Some people entertain notions of nano-bots being spread.
And the evidence is all circumstantial and interpretative. No direct evidence.
 
Or maybe, like lots of famous people, she has someone else handle her social media.
I agree......I don't think Erin ever posts on her "official" facebook page......and she may be well away from any content posted there. I see no list of administrators on her FB page. It's likely someone else manages that FB page.
Her official stand-alone website mentions nothing on the "chemtrail" issue. (she has no search-box)
Example google searches of her official site with two different words (chemtrails, and geoengineering)....leading to no results found:

https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&complete=0&site=webhp&q=chemtrails site:http://www.brockovich.com/&oq=chemtrails site:http://www.brockovich.com/&gs_l=serp.12...5340.8651.0.11019.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0.msedrc...0...1c.1.58.serp..0.0.0.eVnpnn43Wi4

https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&complete=0&site=webhp&q=geoengineering site:http://www.brockovich.com/&oq=geoengineering site:http://www.brockovich.com/&gs_l=serp.12...42037.46598.0.48980.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0.msedrc...0...1c.1.58.serp..0.0.0.VfYRrrEdhls

so, to double-check that my Google search format is valid (using search words).....here is a similar search, using the word "poison".....(it gets results)
https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&complete=0&site=webhp&q=poison site:http://www.brockovich.com/&oq=poison site:http://www.brockovich.com/&gs_l=serp.12...1366260.1367778.0.1370277.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0.msedrc...0...1c.1.58.serp..0.0.0.g8Cn4wtb0Do
 
Last edited:
This post was made by the Plea to Erin Brockovich...Facebook page a number of hours before. I hope it wasn't her science advisor that chose to post this, unless they are just fishing for reaction. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=385343778285037&id=373781936107888
pleaEB.jpg
BUT THE GOOD NEWS IS THIS: Erin and Robert are absolutely interested in taking on the CHEMTRAILS ISSUE!!! The interest and intention is definitely with them and in fact has been there for the past 6 or 7 years according to Robert.
Content from External Source
This hardly anything more than them saying..'we have been looking into this subject for years'.
 
Last edited:
I see that a few of you are members of this Facebook group and are contributing to the discussion about the postings on Erin B's own Facebook page. https://www.facebook.com/groups/HAARPCHEMScienceFacts/

Robert BowcockMick West I think there are extreme opinions on both sides of this ... I want the reasonable folks to dialogue. We probably won't come up with a remedy but hopefully a consensus.
Content from External Source
Robert BowcockMick West and Leslie Hayes... we will give this a fair evaluation. The picture was thought provoking... I stole it off the internet innocently. Erin made no comment... and the excrement hit the occulting unit. Sorry you can't unring that bell... but we will bring this to a head.
Content from External Source
I am not the sharpest tool in the science shed and being relatively new to the chemtrail hoax I know what it is like to be bombarded with information, however it only took me a couple of hours on Google University to understand the science and disregard the other nonsense. I find it very concerning that a person who has presumedly been verified as being Erin B's science advisor thinks that contrail science is an 'opinion' and refuses to replace an image with something that is more appropriate to their clean air agenda. I wonder if they realise what is going to happen when they inevitably come out and say "sorry guys, but you are wrong".

As an aside, I haven't seen DW et al jump on the chest beating bandwagon. Perhaps they are a little concerned about the eventual outcome of this s**tstorm.
 
I had a brief chat with Robert about this. He seems very sensible, it's just that the subject is very new to him. I have confidence his approach will be very level headed.
 
BUT THE GOOD NEWS IS THIS: Erin and Robert are absolutely interested in taking on the CHEMTRAILS ISSUE!!! The interest and intention is definitely with them and in fact has been there for the past 6 or 7 years according to Robert.
Content from External Source
This hardly anything more than them saying..'we have been looking into this subject for years'.
I have a hard time believing Brokovich, et al, will follow through once she gets a look at all the non-evidence available.
 
I would hope that Erin, Robert, and her entire team will be looking at all evidence and opinion, and come to a coherent and stable stance on the subject.
As Erin has been a 'pollution afflicted public' activist for a long time, I do find it hard to believe that this (chemtrails) subject has not crossed her plate over the years.
Perhaps her plate is full right now....and that is understandable too.
 
I guess it's possible that a "science advisor" apparently has never heard of this hoax, but I guess it's possible.

[edit: spelling]
 
I say we leave it alone, until we hear a stance from the Brockovich team. I'm sure they have heard earfuls by now.
 
Geoengineers talking about spraying aluminum into the atmosphere to stop global warming + NASA employees saying they're spraying chemtrails + Bill Gates funding these projects + A college in my state has a geoengineering course discussing the ethics of these programs = Yes Erin Brokovich believes in chemtrails, she's intelligent. ;)
 
Geoengineers talking about spraying aluminum into the atmosphere to stop global warming
Talking about proposals to do so in the future, yes. Not about doing so now.
hiilikeyourbird said:
+ NASA employees saying they're spraying chemtrails
Saying they're releasing tiny quantities of chemicals from a small number of rockets to study the upper atmosphere, yes. Not spraying large amounts of chemicals from planes.
hiilikeyourbird said:
+ Bill Gates funding these projects +
Funding theoretical research into those proposals, you mean. Not funding actual field implementation.
hiilikeyourbird said:
A college in my state has a geoengineering course discussing the ethics of these programs
Have you taken the course? You'd probably learn that these programs are being proposed and discussed, but have not been implemented.
hiilikeyourbird said:
= Yes Erin Brokovich believes in chemtrails, she's intelligent. ;)
Intelligent, yes, and hopefully also well-informed enough to see the bunk underlying the "chemtrails" claims.
 
A college in my state has a geoengineering course discussing the ethics of these programs

Discussing the ethics of these programs. Exactly. Don't you think that such a controversial subject should be discussed in great depth before anybody goes ahead and does it?

Oxford University here in England runs a geoengineering research programme, too. That doesn't mean that geonegineering is being carried out now, and it certainly doesn't mean that aircraft contrails are geoengineering!

Stratospheric aerosols are just one of a number of proposed geoengineering methods that is being discussed, yet they seem to be the only one we ever hear anybody complaining about! Or is anyone trying to claim that there are currently giant space mirrors in orbit?


There is wide range of proposed geoengineering techniques. Generally, these can be grouped into two categories:

Solar Radiation Management (SRM) or Solar Geoengineering
SRM techniques aim to reflect a small proportion of the Sun’s energy back into space, counteracting the temperature rise caused by increased levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which absorb energy and raise temperatures. Some proposed techniques include:

  • Albedo enhancement. Increasing the reflectiveness of clouds or the land surface so that more of the Sun’s heat is reflected back into space.
  • Space reflectors. Blocking a small proportion of sunlight before it reaches the Earth.
  • Stratospheric aerosols. Introducing small, reflective particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect some sunlight before it reaches the surface of the Earth.
Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) or Carbon Geoengineering
CDR techniques aim to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, directly countering the increased greenhouse effect and ocean acidification. These techniques would have to be implemented on a global scale to have a significant impact on carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. Some proposed techniques include:

  • Afforestation. Engaging in a global-scale tree planting effort.
  • Biochar. 'Charring' biomass and burying it so that its carbon is locked up in the soil.
  • Bio-energy with carbon capture and sequestration. Growing biomass, burning it to create energy and capturing and sequestering the carbon dioxide created in the process.
  • Ambient Air Capture. Building large machines that can remove carbon dioxide directly from ambient air and store it elsewhere.
  • Ocean Fertilisation. Adding nutrients to the ocean in selected locations to increase primary production which draws down carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
  • Enhanced Weathering. Exposing large quantities of minerals that will react with carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and storing the resulting compound in the ocean or soil.
  • Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement. Grinding up, dispersing, and dissolving rocks such as limestone, silicates, or calcium hydroxide in the ocean to increase its ability to store carbon and directly ameliorate ocean acidification.
Content from External Source
http://www.geoengineering.ox.ac.uk/what-is-geoengineering/what-is-geoengineering/
 
Geoengineers talking about spraying aluminum into the atmosphere to stop global warming + NASA employees saying they're spraying chemtrails + Bill Gates funding these projects + A college in my state has a geoengineering course discussing the ethics of these programs = Yes Erin Brokovich believes in chemtrails, she's intelligent. ;)
And here I'd chosen to believe that your 2.5 day absence after your ill-fated "Bill Gates" thread debacle
was because you'd reflected on the information and decided on less wild, unsupported positions... :oops:
 
Last edited:
Geoengineers talking about spraying aluminum into the atmosphere to stop global warming + NASA employees saying they're spraying chemtrails + Bill Gates funding these projects + A college in my state has a geoengineering course discussing the ethics of these programs = Yes Erin Brokovich believes in chemtrails, she's intelligent. ;)

Please show where Erin has made her thoughts known on those items.
 
Geoengineers talking about spraying aluminum into the atmosphere to stop global warming + NASA employees saying they're spraying chemtrails + Bill Gates funding these projects + A college in my state has a geoengineering course discussing the ethics of these programs = Yes Erin Brokovich believes in chemtrails, she's intelligent. ;)

State your sources for each of those claims please.. Id like to look them up for myself
 
Talking about proposals to do so in the future, yes. Not about doing so now.

Saying they're releasing tiny quantities of chemicals from a small number of rockets to study the upper atmosphere, yes. Not spraying large amounts of chemicals from planes.

Nice try, the NASA employee in a video in another thread clearly used the word "chemtrails" multiple times, unprovoked.

Funding theoretical research into those proposals, you mean. Not funding actual field implementation.

Well at least we agree this isn't a conspiracy theory, as you said. It is being researched. So now we just need more admittance of it. Wonderful!

Have you taken the course? You'd probably learn that these programs are being proposed and discussed, but have not been implemented.

No, I have not taken these courses. But I have contacted the scientists and teachers behind it. No one returns calls or emails...strange.

Intelligent, yes, and hopefully also well-informed enough to see the bunk underlying the "chemtrails" claims.

Lol

So the only argument that anyone here really has that this isn't happening is that is hasn't been fully disclosed...and well, most things aren't that our government does, aren't. The evidence is there.

http://fas.org/spp/military/docops/usaf/2025/v3c15/v3c15-1.htm

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2010/09/weather_as_a_weapon.html







Is this video a conspiracy? Are they lying?

No, a patent of a flighter engine is not proof against this. Engines in large military aircraft and commercial aircraft are designed specifically to have zero contrail. It would be too easy for any enemy to see. Trying to convince people that high bypass turbojet engines produce contrails like we're seeing is quite irresponsible. Those lines in the sky sure aren't some water vapor, but they sure look like aerosol spraying.

[....] PG
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, they are lying. There is no such design feature - it is impossible - if you burn hydrocarbons then you make water - that is basic chemistry. And if you make water then you can make a contrail - end of story.

High bypass engines generate most of their thrust from the air that does not go through the "core" - but they still have to burn a heap of fuel to generate that thrust.

they are certainly more efficient than older jets - but the margin is in the order of 30-50% more efficient - and they often generate 3-4 times as much thrust.

the maths is fairly easy - if you are 50% more efficient, but are making 3 times as much thrust, then you are still burning 50% more fuel, and thus are making 50% more water.

this has been covered here - https://www.metabunk.org/threads/de...-make-contrails-actually-they-make-more.3187/
 
Last edited:
Hiilikeyourbird, the "NASA scientist admits chemtrails" topic can be found here: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/de...s-for-decades-actually-sounding-rockets.2009/. Each side-topic you've brought up has been discussed here on other threads - I suggest that you do some looking around during your ban.

To relate this to the topic, Erin Brokovich is accustomed to dealing with evidence - and I would expect that she and her team would do at least a cursory check of these "chemtrails" claims before accepting them. You should do the same!
 
I wished to respond....or help to address....the misconceptions RE: the video that was posted in #34.

There is a potential here to help someone "learn", perhaps(?)

The video in (Post #34) is one that I replied to, directly. Is it possible to "tamp down" bunk when we see it? Or, is this a futile endeavour?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top