Kristen Meghan, former US Air Force whistle-blower?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am late to the party but I did not feel like scrolling for ages to see if this was posted. It is Kristen Meghan telling everyone that Metabunk and ContrailScience is a bunch of government shills. She only names those sites. She picked them out specifically.

This is relevant to the part of her speech where she ask people in the audience to catch rain water or to scoop up snow and have it tested at her facility she deals with for 50 bucks. (cough, cough, lol). There have been studies about aerosols and particulants in the atmosphere that have been present in rain across the globe. Scientist are only now beginning to really understand this complex "ecosystem" which is our atmosphere. They've found quantites of fungi, mold, rust spores, bacteria, pathogens, mildew, smut, etc etc etc and have established that this is related to where the rain originates due to terrain and pollution. Interesting but long read. I snipped the abstract to give you a premise of what's discussed.
http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/13/6151/2013/acp-13-6151-2013.pdf
upload_2014-9-9_23-3-47.png
 
Last edited:
I'm a very late comer to this site and thread.

Mostly because I had the "pleasure" of Kristen trolling a facebook group we were both part of, she had very little activity in it until today.

But the long version short was a post blasting the military as being the biggest terrorist organization on the planet with a link to the bombings in Syria. This is a closed military/veteran group.

We challenge each other to be intellectually honest and when challenged, Kristen refused to provide any references, merely said things to the nature of, "Do your own research." among other things. I am assuming it was her boyfriend Nate who through out the baby killer comments. Needless to say we are not scared of a challenge and we challenged her to back up what she was saying. All dodging, deflections, and insults back. Unfortunately she deleted the thread and I didn't think about copying and pasting it.

I understand keeping to the meat of a topic and avoiding the personal issues, but behavior matters and it can be quite telling.

Other than the broad dictionary definition which would include every single military and every single act of violence committed in a conflict, there was no substance to any of the arguments. I had no idea she could post a reference until I came to this site.

Needless to say, I do believe character matters and should/does have an affect on any arguments you are trying to make. I'm not happy at all with someone throwing their military service like it substantiates everything they are saying. I have been enlisted for 14 years and am going out on medical. I find it unfortunately frustrating when service members do those types of things.
 
But the long version short was a post blasting the military as being the biggest terrorist organization on the planet with a link to the bombings in Syria. This is a closed military/veteran group.

We challenge each other to be intellectually honest and when challenged, Kristen refused to provide any references, merely said things to the nature of, "Do your own research." among other things.

First, thanks for your volunteer service. (I know, this is an over-done sentiment...)...

Second. thanks for your perspective, and contribution. RE: K. Meghan.
 
It is appreciated but the sentiment is better suited for opportunities to help veterans in need. We have a huge homeless problem that is very difficult to curb. But I do thank you. Once I complete my medical retire/discharge whatever I get I am hoping to use my land to help homeless vets homestead and rehabilitate to help them get some control of their lives again.

If I could copy and paste to provide direct reference I wish I had the ability to, though I am certain it is stored on a server some where I just don't have access to it.

I believe perspective is important and character matters. I'm not looking to smear the girl, but I also don't believe it is a smear to state the truth that she essentially trolled a group of veterans (most of us combat veterans) and refused to even try to "debate" or provide anything to support her claims when we pushed back.

No one is perfect and yes some service members have broken the laws, some have been punished and others haven't. But we really don't like being lumped in with evil men who defile men, women, and children.

I challenged her to be specific on what resources are being stolen but she told me to "do your own research" assuming I have never done any research.

If I make a claim, I will be prepared to provide the best amount of information as possible. I would also hope someone would challenge me if I did not provide references to force me to stay intellectually and personally honest.

She made a claim just to piss us off and when challenged with reason and logic, she eventually deleted the threat.

I have a very difficult time listening to anyone who conducts themselves the way she does and thinks selling a shirt endorsing service members to go AWOL is remotely okay.

I'm a brash stubborn Staff Sergeant (E-6 in the Army, Air Force Staff Sergeant is an E-5, funny story I reminded an Air Force medic that when we were in Afghanistan because she was trying to boss my E-5 Sergeants around, she didn't like me after that), but I'm also a dumb grunt (Combat Engineer) without an overly impressive job title.

terrorism
[ ˈterəˌrizəm ]
noun
  1. the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
And EVERY military fight, battle, war, conflict and/or EVERY heated negotiation on behalf of EVERY government and EVERY politically motivated group can be considered terrorism because the definition is that broad. An intellectually honest person can recognize text book definition and modern understanding/concepts.

Would religious people enjoy falling under one of the broad definitions of a cult being thrown in their face when the common understanding is not that loose of a definition? I think not.

I'm sure there are a great deal of things I can agree with her on, but unfortunately even on those items she is never someone I will support because conduct matters.


 

Attachments

  • Kristen Meghan Post.jpg
    Kristen Meghan Post.jpg
    146.9 KB · Views: 531
  • 10685351_10204408277303743_6727736992377492798_n.jpg
    10685351_10204408277303743_6727736992377492798_n.jpg
    297.1 KB · Views: 501
I'm sure there are a great deal of things I can agree with her on, but unfortunately even on those items she is never someone I will support because conduct matters.

This intrigues me. Can you expand on this? (As long as it stays within the boundaries of the Posting Guidelines of this topic. If not, then it will deserve its own thread topic).

I ask because it (A) goes to "conduct" (of Ms. Kristen Meghan, even if separated from the military) and (B) I wonder what you have to say, when you proclaim "agreement" with her, and in what regard?

(AND (C)....welcome to 'MetaBunk'!!!)


Would religious people enjoy falling under one of the broad definitions of a cult being thrown in their face when the common understanding is not that loose of a definition? I think not.

I happen to think that ALL so-called "religions" are cult-based. I mean, just take a moment to define them, and realize. Textbook examples, actually. (But, this is straying off-topic...mea culpa)...
 
Last edited:
Of course.

Primarily, I agree that many things the government has done are Unconstitutional. Corporate and government corruption, domestic spying, land grabs, the size and scope of government, etc. Many veterans tend to be more on the libertarian side, especially after going to combat and seeing the scope of the waste, fraud, and abuse. So there are common grounds... but the severity of those topics is where agreements will quickly end.

I will be more vocal in certain ways after I separate, but I will never attack my fellow veterans as terrorists. She claims on another site she never called the service members terrorists, just the DoD. I can find it if you want.

Many of us were very angry when we were included in a Missouri report stating war veterans were the most likely to join hate groups and become domestic terrorists. We fought and died primarily to keep each other safe in theater rather than the notion of fighting for freedom because we are not stupid, we know there is not a direct force engaging us in combat to take away our liberties, but stand more ready to defend those liberties. Hence another reason why her saying it also gets us going.

So to many of us, conduct matters. A lot of vets are getting yelled at for calling out anyone with "Stolen Valor" aka "fakers." Also we get frustrated when someone uses their military service to inflate their credentials primarily because most civilians don't know how to read between the BS. You tend to pick up on character types when you observe their conduct while in the military and out of the military. One of my friends at the American Legion sister was going on a "platonic date" with a guy who claimed he was super amazing in the Army. I gave her some questions to pass along because I have friends in Special Forces and worked with them in Afghanistan, so I know enough to help call BS. Needless to say, he didn't want to play the game when confronted with actual information.

I hope that helps in understanding there is some friction between modern veterans.

Conduct impacts credibility.

And thank you for the welcome! I'm not sure how active I will be, but who knows I may find a home here. I like skeptics, even if they are only being skeptical to ensure someone strengthens their case.
 
I think there is some common ground, based on your last post. But, only my "one" opinion. Still, this site is a "community" of sorts, and subject to standards. Something that is understood by most in any society.

(Of course, often it's much, much easier to "hash it out" verbally over a beer. Still, online is another "outlet" too.....).

Conduct impacts credibility.

<snip>

I like skeptics, even if they are only being skeptical to ensure someone strengthens their case.

Well stated.
 
i fully agree that conduct affects credibility. as a zen buddhist who engages in the occasional online discussion about said practice and countless other topics- conduct is a dead give-away to someone's understanding/knowledge of any given subject matter.

the type of behaviour displayed by kristen is typical of conspiracy theorists- when presented with challenges to which they have no valid reply, either "you are a government shill", the thread gets deleted- or something similar occurs.

someone who cannot behave in a rational manner when interacting with others is probably not very rational in their interaction with ideas. (such as any given conspiracy theory)
 
i fully agree that conduct affects credibility. as a zen buddhist who engages in the occasional online discussion about said practice and countless other topics- conduct is a dead give-away to someone's understanding/knowledge of any given subject matter.

the type of behaviour displayed by kristen is typical of conspiracy theorists- when presented with challenges to which they have no valid reply, either "you are a government shill", the thread gets deleted- or something similar occurs.

someone who cannot behave in a rational manner when interacting with others is probably not very rational in their interaction with ideas. (such as any given conspiracy theory)

"Do your own research" and "I don't have to prove anything to you" are standard and dead giveaways.
 
Ms Meghan now seems to be denying that the earlier comments on this thread under her name were actually made by her.

 
Last edited:
I know I'm late abut this, and I apologize if this was already posted, but she started resorting to calling us a dis-info site:



She claims Persistent Contrails are a lie, and Mick West has no first hand experience in this. Basically Genetic Fallacy at its finest.
 
given that she has no first hand experience I believe she is eminently qualified to judge everyone else who has no first hand experience :)
 
given that she has no first hand experience I believe she is eminently qualified to judge everyone else who has no first hand experience :)

Of course from what I've read from the thread (Up to page six), she claimed to have first hand experience, but refused to give any evidence when asked.
 
but of course!! :)

She handled dangerous goods for the USAF - she has less flying experience than Mick, who is at least a pilot!
 
but of course!! :)

She handled dangerous goods for the USAF - she has less flying experience than Mick, who is at least a pilot!

The fact that he's a pilot completely makes her point of him having no first hand experience moot. Even if this wasn't the case, it would be the Genetic fallacy for saying he has "no experience" and Poisoning the well for calling him a shill.
 
I know I'm late abut this

I've said this before. I think that Kristen Meghan has exhausted her "15-minutes-of-fame" at this point.

Although, others will no doubt stumble upon old videos, via YouTube.

(Which is sad. For those who don't bother to dig into deeper research, as to the reliability of the claims).
 
Well it looks like Kristen has shown her hand at last.

OMG this video would be funny if it didn't tick me off [...] But based on what comes out of her mouth she clearly does have some trust issues and a general fear of her government.

[politeness edits]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This was posted on an independent on-line magazine a few days ago.

One day, Meghan says, she came across canisters of chemicals that were supposed to be loaded onto planes to disperse their contents.
Content from External Source
https://lajicarita.wordpress.com/2014/12/10/contrails-or-chemtrails/

Why would Kristen, when she was posting here a year ago, neglect to mention the loading of mysterious canisters onto planes for dispersal? Kristen was asked many times by several people to present here evidence of chemtrails. She mentioned patents and debates at environmental symposiums but never anything about canisters.

In fact, she said her "whistleblowing" had nothing to do with chemtrails but rather with chemical overexposures related to industrial ground activities.

So, either Suzy Kane, the author of the blog article, is misinterpreting what Kristen is saying, or Kristen is changing her story.

Kristen still has an account on Metabunk. Perhaps she could come back to explain.
 
Are you referring to all those times she very candidly stated why she has trust issues with the government?

well yes her comments regarding her government and NWO and I have seen her make some very bizarre statements, both here and in the video.

the whole NWO thing is rather silly to me. I do not see anyday soon where any nation would give up their identity to merge with others. In fact in recent years (past 5 or so maybe?) most governments are looking at less merging and more self preservation.

Also when I see titles in google search like
"Geoengineering Whistleblower – Ex-Military – Kristen Meghan"

She has admitted here and on her YouTube videos that the whistle blowing incident had nothing to do with chemtrails. She talks about samples she has, but if you listen close its samples in regard to her so called whistle blower efforts, and not samples that prove chem trails. So best word I can use is deceitful.

She has made statements like contrails are formed because of different temperature ranges at different altitudes. Which most of us normal folk understand that contrails are formed when the temperature is low enough and the mosisture is high enough. There are many pilots I have seen here that have tried to wake her up but she is not having any of it. I would be interested to know how many pilots say she is right about chemtrails. Like many of these people she is obviously making a career of this chemtrail thing. It is clear that she is more than willing to misrepresent herself in order to gain attention and maybe money? I am sure these radio shows must pay something, if not her promoting video and books most likely would also be for capital gains. She may in her heart believe everything she reads on the internet, but she is still be misleading and in science that is the first no no. I have not seen any DATA from her so called samples. In fact it seems like from what I have seen in her comments that the samples she says she has at her home are most likely from the event where she claims she was a whistle blower. We had some of these kinds of people who had college degrees at NASA and NASA had to let them go because they were to filled up with bad science they got from the internet. Also I have some questions regarding the claimed whistle blower event. First is were the workers wearing protective equipment? How much higher than the PEL (permissible exposure limits) were the air samples she collected? hmm that brings up other question was it air samples or bulk samples? If it was bulk samples that would bring up a WHOLE lot more questions. What was the Haz Mat in question?

Also here is another question for Kristen.....
I have noticed a few places you have said that the materials being used a a secret.........however as you can see below there is no secret. The below para shows what materials we use for weather modification. Please review and let us know your expert opinion on how harmful these materials are when sprayed into clouds to seed them?


What are the most commonly used seeding materials?


The materials used in cloud seeding include two primary categories, tied to the type of precipitation process involved. One category includes those which act as glaciogenic (ice-forming) agents, such as silver iodide, dry ice and compressed liquid propane or carbon dioxide, which are appropriate in cloud systems where the precipitation process is primarily cold(colder than freezing). Of the ice-forming materials, the most commonly used is silver iodide. The second major category is focused on cloud systems where thewarm (coalescence) process predominates. In those environments, hygroscopic (water attracting) materials such as salt, urea and ammonium nitrate can be utilized. Of the hygroscopic materials, the most commonly used are salts.""

http://www.nawcinc.com/wmfaq.html
 
Last edited:
This was posted on an independent on-line magazine a few days ago.

One day, Meghan says, she came across canisters of chemicals that were supposed to be loaded onto planes to disperse their contents.
Content from External Source
https://lajicarita.wordpress.com/2014/12/10/contrails-or-chemtrails/

Why would Kristen, when she was posting here a year ago, neglect to mention the loading of mysterious canisters onto planes for dispersal? Kristen was asked many times by several people to present here evidence of chemtrails. She mentioned patents and debates at environmental symposiums but never anything about canisters.

In fact, she said her "whistleblowing" had nothing to do with chemtrails but rather with chemical overexposures related to industrial ground activities.

So, either Suzy Kane, the author of the blog article, is misinterpreting what Kristen is saying, or Kristen is changing her story.

Kristen still has an account on Metabunk. Perhaps she could come back to explain.

I have asked Kristen, specifically, about the "canister" claims, some time ago. No response. I can't remember where I first heard that, but I'm not sure SHE has ever actually said it. Others have SAID that she talked about "canisters", but I'm not sure she ever did. It's people quoting other people, but never confirming in with Kristen.
 


@7:20 she talks about using a high volume air sampling pump. as if this is some amazing piece of equipment. It is not. They cost about $100.00 compared to things like TEM microscopes which cost half a million. She states her air sampling pump collect a football field size amount of air in 10 minutes. most high volume pumps run at 10-20 liters per minute. We normally run this at 10 LPM. So 10 minutes at 10 LPM = 3.5315ft³. That is only 1/10,000th of a football field, which is 30,000 cubic feet (ft). She obviously has poor knowledge and understanding of the equipment and methods she is using.

EDIT
low just finished watching last part of the video. So Mike what proof did Kristen offer that shows you are a government stooge??? Mike how much money does the government pay you for your disinformation services? I m thinking of starting up my own disinformation site and want to know how much I should charge the government.....lol jk hehe... omg so Mike how much do you make from Government?
 
Last edited:
At 11:00 is the reference to "canisters". She said: "I've had people come forward that actually load the canisters on the planes".

Of course NONE of the references she makes to pilots, etc who have supposedly come forward are available for comment. Not a single, solitary one of them.

PS: The "canister" statement has since morphed into the idea that SHE saw canisters being loaded. In fact, NO ONE with a specific identity has come forward with that claim.
 
Last edited:
@7:20 she talks about using a high volume air sampling pump. as if this is some amazing piece of equipment. It is not. They cost about $100.00 compared to things like TEM microscopes which cost half a million. She states her air sampling pump collect a football field size amount of air in 10 minutes. most high volume pumps run at 10-20 liters per minute. We normally run this at 10 LPM. So 10 minutes at 10 LPM = 3.5315ft³. That is only 1/10,000th of a football field, which is 30,000 cubic feet (ft). She obviously has poor knowledge and understanding of the equipment and methods she is using.
How can a football field be measured as a VOLUME?


well she was the one using the football field analogy. I used the lowest possible volume using the unit of 1 foot, instead of 1 yard hehe. Well I guess someone could figure 1 inch instead of a foot. but she obviously does not have a firm understand the equipment she is using. the cubic feet was the easiest and lowest normal measurement for volume. but like I said she is WAY off base on how much air a high volume pump can intake in 10 minutes. To be only 1/10,000 of what she states the pump is capable of.

However the more important instrument is the method of microscopy or analysis. XRD and TEM is the best in my opinion for particulates and gas chromatography for gases. , but it is costly,. If she can come up with a sample of the so called fuel that has additives I am stating here and now I would be more than happy to pay for the analysis. But I would have one thing that I would require and that is that I would want to oversee and watch her collect the sample.
 
Last edited:
well she was the one using the football field analogy.

Which makes no sense at all, much like many of her claims. Following her lead on that claim just makes it look as if you didn't notice the basic fallacy. She hasn't offered ANY documentation for ANY of the tests she supposedly ran.
 
This is relevant to the part of her speech where she ask people in the audience to catch rain water or to scoop up snow and have it tested at her facility she deals with for 50 bucks. (cough, cough, lol). There have been studies about aerosols and particulates in the atmosphere that have been present in rain across the globe. Scientist are only now beginning to really understand this complex "ecosystem" which is our atmosphere. They've found quantites of fungi, mold, rust spores, bacteria, pathogens, mildew, smut, etc etc etc and have established that this is related to where the rain originates due to terrain and pollution. Interesting but long read. I snipped the abstract to give you a premise of what's discussed.
upload_2014-9-9_23-3-47.png


i do not understand how do bioaerosols relate to her Chemtrail claims?

The $50 dollar analysis I have not seen that. for $50 bucks you will not get anything that would be able to detect all things possible. If you did most reliable methods you can test for particulates using TEM approx 100-300 bucks and it can even trace levels. Also gas chromatography to check for gases. then you could also do microbile for about $50 bucks. PLM microscope is also approx $50 bucks actual prices I pay is about half that, prices for non indupeople would likely be 2x the prices I listed.

All the Labs I use are AIHA and EPA certified. does Meghan say what NIST method of anaylsis she is offering for $50 bucks?
 
All the Labs I use are AIHA and EPA certified. does Meghan say what NIST method of anaylsis she is offering for $50 bucks?

The most common test used by chemtrail believers is EPA6010B, generally just for Aluminum, Barium, and Strontium, and sometimes just for Aluminum. You can probably get that for $50, based on these prices for packages of similar tests.
http://www.onsite-env.com/pdf/Schedule-of-Fees.pdf
 
i do not understand how do bioaerosols relate to her Chemtrail claims?

The $50 dollar analysis I have not seen that. for $50 bucks you will not get anything that would be able to detect all things possible. If you did most reliable methods you can test for particulates using TEM approx 100-300 bucks and it can even trace levels. Also gas chromatography to check for gases. then you could also do microbile for about $50 bucks. PLM microscope is also approx $50 bucks actual prices I pay is about half that, prices for non indupeople would likely be 2x the prices I listed.

All the Labs I use are AIHA and EPA certified. does Meghan say what NIST method of anaylsis she is offering for $50 bucks?

At one point Kristen was offering to be the middleman for testing with certain "trusted" labs. I think she never followed through with that and lots of emails to her about it were not answered.
 
An American football field has an area of 57,600 sq ft. So a volume of 30,000 cubic feet would be the air above a football field to a height of just over half a foot, or six inches.

I thought a football field was 100 x 300 feet,...doh

oh well I guess that proves how little I know about team sports.

btw the measurement you give is including the end zones. I was not including that in my math.

But oh well so she said she collected 48.000-57,600 cubic feet in 10 minutes when a high volume air sampling pump would only collect approx 600 liters (3.5 ft3) of air in 10 minutes at the normal rate of 10 liters per minute. without end zones the web says it is 48,000 square feet... so my math was not so far off, but Kristen's math as I have explained here and above is waaay off.
 
The most common test used by chemtrail believers is EPA6010B, generally just for Aluminum, Barium, and Strontium, and sometimes just for Aluminum. You can probably get that for $50, based on these prices for packages of similar tests.

The sample analysis methods you linked there is for soils and water not for air.

Also the only analysis of those that samples for aluminum (symbol AL) which the price is $240 - $270 is the last of the metals analyses listed. You maybe able to ask the lab to check for only couple of specific metals, to lower the price. Also those prices are based on the lowest detection limit via that method. There is other methods and means to raise the limit of detection. If air sampling for aluminum I can tell you you would be hard pressed to see much more than what we call trace levels. This is when we can see some but it is right at the limit of detection.

The fact she was saying she could be the middleman for only $50.00 bucks also shows her lack of knowledge in the Haz Mat / industrial hygiene field. If you can find a lab that can detect trace levels of aluminum for $50 bucks let me know, I am always looking for good prices. I think she may have decided to not be the middleman after she found out the real prices and limits of detection for the method.
 
If you can find a lab that can detect trace levels of aluminum for $50 bucks let me know, I am always looking for good prices. I think she may have decided to not be the middleman after she found out the real prices and limits of detection for the method.

If I'm not mistaken, those tests do not differentiate whether the Al was found in a molecular form or elemental/ionic form.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top