Senator Kelli Ward (Arizona) calls public meeting to address chemtrails concerns

deirdre

Senior Member.
Sorry, but:
They are going about it so wrong! (aside from the fact chemtrails are a delusion). I might have to become a chemtrailist just to show people how its done. I mean IF this was something happening, what they are doing is so detrimental to their cause. ; (
 

hemi

Senior Member.
Guy now talking about some "killing people for body parts" conspiracy - it's a very varied crowd.

Yeah, that was a bit random.

I'm enjoying this lady who can identify whether or not planes are commercial flights (at normal cruising altitudes, I assume) without any sort of magnification. Keen eyesight. Useful.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
o_O did the hippy chick just say the global warming scientists are hijacking the chemtrails 'geoengineering" term! ?
 

CeruleanBlu

Senior Member.
Now I have to start at the beginning to see what I missed, and to see if there is anything in there that is yet to be debunked--because I honestly heard nothing new from the crowd that hasn't already been addressed before at some point.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
Now I have to start at the beginning to see what I missed, and to see if there is anything in there that is yet to be debunked--because I honestly heard nothing new from the crowd that hasn't already been addressed before at some point.
I've heard it all before. (well except the hijacked geoengineering term, but maybe i misheard). I don't think you missed anything.
 

CeruleanBlu

Senior Member.
Well, I tuned in after the beginning presentation from the state representatives had ended and the Q & A had already begun. I'm wanting to see what the original "official story" was. :)
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
Here's the thing about these sorts of "Public Hearings".

Seems it's a bit like Speaker's Corner in London.

The "rules" are that just about "anyone" can have a say....but, after their rant....there is no follow-up!!!! To correct the mistakes. I know that it's ("Speaker's Corner") is open-air, but a situation such as this recent Kingman, AZ public forum is "moderated", but not properly.
 

Balance

Senior Member.
I'm confused - who's responsible for air quality? Were they all barking up the wrong tree or were ADEQ passing the buck?
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
I'm confused - who's responsible for air quality? Were they all barking up the wrong tree or were ADEQ passing the buck?
I think BECAUSE the chemtrailists are claiming the pollutant is coming from planes, that makes it federal jurisdiction/FAA/EPA. But like the Senator said if they want to talk ground pollution or even air pollution in general (not plane related) that's the way to go. If they can prove there is ground or air pollution then I think the ADEQ would be responsible for investigating to look for the source.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
It was rather sad to heard them endless bring up the same old points - many of which were very well debunked over ten years ago. It was a missed opportunity to actually get them to actually focus on the core misconceptions they hold: the persistence and frequency of contrails and the normal levels of various chemicals in blood, soil, air and water. There should have been a presentation explaining why these were wrong, and they should have asked for some test results ahead of time so they could explain them.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
There should have been a presentation explaining why these were wrong, and they should have asked for some test results ahead of time so they could explain them.

THIS is why, in retrospect, I wish there had been more time ahead of this, so that persons with some actual experience could have arranged their schedules, in order to attend and offer some SCIENCE to the discussion.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
It was rather sad to heard them endless bring up the same old points - many of which were very well debunked over ten years ago. It was a missed opportunity to actually get them to actually focus on the core misconceptions they hold: the persistence and frequency of contrails and the normal levels of various chemicals in blood, soil, air and water. There should have been a presentation explaining why these were wrong, and they should have asked for some test results ahead of time so they could explain them.
everything takes forever. maybe next time the Senator will have a Meteorologist, scientist or someone from the FAA there. maybe she tried and was told no, nobody wanted to bother. But she said she will continue discussion on her FB so maybe she can better explain to them gov. procedures.

I'm not sure (i'm lying, i'm sure) it's really up to the State gov to explain contrails or chemtrail myths. and worse, technically she isn't even supposed to say that. protocol and guidelines can be a real hindrance.

Bottom line, the state cant do anything without a formal complaint and evidence. 12 blood samples that don't even show elevated levels are not evidence. You cant just use tax payer money and test with no real reason. and where do you test?

Paranoia and conspiracy theories aren't really a state or government issue. They have real world issues to deal with.

add: maybe next time someone can go and hand out (outside!) a flyer with quick simple debunks.
 

Leifer

Senior Member.
Replay....


I saw it live. (on youtube)
Yes, the forum presenters never truly (hardly) addressed any audience questions on the specific AZ area regarding "trails in the sky".....they just stated the ADEQ's breadth of environmental duties.....or steered audience members to Federal environmental agencies. (FAA, EPA)
Unfortunately, because of the lack of the presenters' ability to cite actual ADEQ scientific data..........what was left was a free-for-all of audience rumor speculation, and mini soap-boxing.
I'll speculate that the net result was that more people at that meeting left with additional rumors, than answers or contrary evidence.

Here is a search-result on the ADEQ site, for "test results".....
http://www.azdeq.gov/search-results.html?cx=013539274693175974838:utv6y88fsi4&cof=FORID:10&ie=UTF-8&q="test results"&sa=Search&siteurl=www.azdeq.gov/function/programs/lab/index.html&ref=www.azdeq.gov/function/programs/index.html&ss=5767j2780179j16
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Might be useful to make a list of all the points that the audience raised, with very quick (well referenced and verifiable) debunkings of them. Inevitably they will be raised again, so it could be a handy list for someone to have to hand.
 

Leifer

Senior Member.
Might be useful to make a list of all the points that the audience raised, with very quick (well referenced and verifiable) debunkings of them. Inevitably they will be raised again, so it could be a handy list for someone to have to hand.
I understand this, so that we are not "out-rightly" claiming all suggestions to be false.....by a certain gathering of people.
I'll compile a list soon (asap). It may take a bit of time.....tonight though.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
THIS is why, in retrospect, I wish there had been more time ahead of this, so that persons with some actual experience could have arranged their schedules, in order to attend and offer some SCIENCE to the discussion.

This is what I was afraid of- that the "officials" wouldn't be prepared enough or have a clue what the believers would throw at them. I haven't watched it yet, but from what I read here- very disappointing and an opportunity missed.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
This is what I was afraid of- that the "officials" wouldn't be prepared enough or have a clue what the believers would throw at them. I haven't watched it yet, but from what I read here- very disappointing and an opportunity missed.
I thought it was good. it IS just a first step. AND the chemmies need to learn that you aren't going to get anywhere unless you can provide actual real data. That's how the world works. It's time they "woke up" to reality.

Plus if they review the tape they (hopefully) can see how their contradicting theories are hurting their cause.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
I thought it was good. it IS just a first step. AND the chemmies need to learn that you aren't going to get anywhere unless you can provide actual real data. That's how the world works. It's time they "woke up" to reality.

Plus if they review the tape they (hopefully) can see how their contradicting theories are hurting their cause.

They weren't asked to present anything. The ADEQ woman just said that the state doesn't have jurisdiction. The one question I haven't heard, up to 47:00 is whether or not the ADEQ found the suspect chemicals in the air tests.

PS: I can't listen to any more, past 52:00. It's just too disheartening.
 
Last edited:

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
The woman at 49:40 - Libby Schneider - was particularly upset and convinced that it all started 5 years ago and is "spraying". She seems convinced that the ADEQ woman is "smirking" through the whole thing. She is a chiropractor in Lake Havasu. Maybe someone wants to contact her on the basis of helping her out of the rabbit hole. She is apparently right here: http://www.healthgrades.com/provider/elisabeth-schneider-2hnsc
 

Miss VocalCord

Senior Member.
Too bad this was past my bedtime yesterday night. I might listen to the meeting later on, although from what I read here not much new or exciting has been presented.
 

Leifer

Senior Member.
I simply cannot reply to every audience comments here as there are about 40+ of them. Many comments agreed with one another. Not one comment disagreed with an other's one.

Let me specify several that were the most common, or repeated.

(name spellings guessed)
Al DiCicco >>> "Have you tested the rainwater, and if you haven't....have you seen the results of our rainwater tests ?"
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/more-analysis-of-rainwater-new-zealand.1407/page-2#post-54916
Here is Al's blood plasma test, Barium "above normal":
http://mohavecountyconstitution.com/pics/Image6.jpg
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-claims-of-michael-j-murphy-a-factual-examination.172/#post-784

Cory Gunnelson
>>> "In my family, I have had 5 people die from brain tumors, in the last 10 years"
Cerebral cancer is about 5-10% hereditary, depending on the site/study you visit.
I believe she is missing some very important data.....>> have others within a certain physical radius of her family.....also died of the same symptoms ?
One bit of info that I found.....that living in the Virgin Islands has indeed a lower cancer rate, but not by much......and supposedly has very few contrails.
http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/cancer-death-rate-per-100000/
The problem may be that she admits she has moved to AZ 5 years ago from Minnesota. Did her whole family move here 5 years ago ? Who died when....and where ?
Dr Russel Blaylock is mentioned by Cory. His researched is mentioned, and makes her "extremely worrisome", especially regarding "nano-sized" aluminium.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/de...ized-al-in-chemtrails-causes-alzheimers.2105/

Luca Zanna (@ 38:08) >>> health crisis about extremely high blood tests (some with +1000%) with high Al, Ba, strontium and lithium. His water well tests clean. I'm not sure that if well water tests fine, that these other chemicals are due to lines in the sky. He did not note the relation, but insinuated it.

Bill Ernchime >>> he home-checked his hair and urine.....found gold and zinc. He also found the same in his water.

Anonymous (@ 1:00:00) >>> she moved there in 1985, but in 1990's she remembered a difference between clear skies, and hazy skies. Also she had "a barium level blood test at 280, but should be less than 10 ".
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/high-barium-levels-in-blood-mohave-az.128/

Anonymous (@ 1:12:00) >>> "I moved here 6 years ago, it was beautiful and clear..." (that would have been 2008) "In 2009 it started to get sprayed all the time....it is a white blanket hazy muck, all the time. It doesn't matter if we are sprayed or not, it's always there....it's always there." "You can't analyze that ?" https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-the-sky-was-bluer.494/#post-85771
Then she went to into trees and plants are dying, and the rate that species are dying "each and every day" (not noting that this is mostly happening in the tropics or under the ocean, where chemtrails aren't normally found)
....."it's toxic nano-particles"...."just because you can't see it, doesn't mean it's not here"...."It's a toxic aluminium....is a toxic protoplasmic poison....". She had all the key words, and just jumbled them up.....maybe because she was passionate.

Anonymous (@1:15.00) >>> "...everything is dying....the birds, the bees, the bats, the fish, the trees". (in regards to: white lines in the sky / geoengineering / toxic spraying). I can't post to the hundreds of missing links of ornithology, apiology, mammalogy, ichthyology, and dendrology......that seem to coincide with her statement.
Where is the scare in these fields of study aka....the extreme concern by these biologists ? Is the alarm noted by this audience member, and not by the various species biologists ? Why ?

These are a few of the audience members' statements.
 
Last edited:

Leifer

Senior Member.
...but the above is a bit off-topic.....part of the fallout of the meeting in question.
Here is the link that Senator Ward sent me.......so we know she is somewhat aware of the situation:

http://www.azdeq.gov/environ/air/contrails_not_chemtrails.html

 

deirdre

Senior Member.
I simply cannot reply to every audience comments here as there are about 40+ of them
awesome, Stupid. is there a good debunk of the Chaff theory data that lady presented? I mean, they aren't chaffing the skies that often, are they?
 

Balance

Senior Member.
I considered Alexandra Hunter's "fact-based" presentations the highlight of the show. The best bit being;
Commercial jets cannot produce contrails (due to HBTF engine), unmarked military aircraft descending from higher altitude onto normal commercial routes to do all the spraying and vanishing from whence they came.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I listened to the rest. What a litany of bunk.

And very illustrative of the problem debunkers face with the true believers. You've got a bunch (30+) of what seem like perfectly ordinary people, mostly very polite, often quite eloquent, and yet they are repeating things that were debunked years ago.

This is why I think people like Dane Wigington and Michael Murphy are not deliberate liars. They truly believe in what they are saying. Dane in particular simply blocks out everything that is contrary to what he has already decided.

Notice there were no young people there. They were people who are set in their ways. Is it possible that they are all simply immune to reason? Maybe some of them, but not all. Having concerns about the air quality is not irrational - so if they can be shown the simple facts, then perhaps they can figure it out.

However, the important thing here is with the broader audience.
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
You should see the comments section of the local paper on the announcement of the meeting. All the typical wrong assumptions, even by some who are not believers.

Of course this same writer blames all the problems on...

I wasn't able to watch the whole thing live, but caught some of the woman from Phoenix (I think) reading for 10+ minutes from her prepared statement. That was enough to turn it off for the night. I'll probably watch it in bits later today after my wife leaves for work.
 

JDubyah

Member
And very illustrative of the problem debunkers face with the true believers. You've got a bunch (30+) of what seem like perfectly ordinary people, mostly very polite, often quite eloquent, and yet they are repeating things that were debunked years ago.

This is why I think people like Dane Wigington and Michael Murphy are not deliberate liars. They truly believe in what they are saying. Dane in particular simply blocks out everything that is contrary to what he has already decided.
.

That's something I've noticed. I lot of chemtrail believers say that those who cannot seem to accept the chemtrail truth are either experiencing or avoidin experiencing 'cognitive dissonance'. This is a psychological term that's been slightly hijacked by some in the community to mean, "The world as you knew it was revealed to be false, and the pain and anxiety you feel when facing this realization makes you deny it, avoid it, or respond with anger or even.. debunking.".

But if you're right, then guys like Dane could also themselves be experiencing dissonance when faced with facts that contradict their view of the world, which, while steeped in conspiracy and pseudo-science, seems like a perfectly normal reality. If it weren't true, then all that work, that research, the collecting of stories, videos, patents, and their staunch belief may be for naught. They wouldn't be onto something special, and that would be very hard to give up. More, I think, that a chemtrail skeptic would have to give up to accept the chemtrail theory.
 

Leifer

Senior Member.
Regarding the age of the people at the AZ meeting.....

I've seen a phenomena, and it is by no means exclusive, that older people (or any people) who are new to computers and the internet, can have a
tendency to put more belief in stories found on the web.......compared to the experienced savvy surfer who might normally question the legitimacy of stories found on the net.
It's can become a result of the typical story (son says to his aging parents), "Dad, you need a computer, I'll set it up for you....welcome to the 21st century".
Of the people I know who suddenly fall for "strange stories" on the net.......most of them are older, and have just recently started to visit the internet, "how to navigate" and "search", but they don't yet realize how (or why) to filter-out or critically bypass sites that may be on the edge of truth.
Of course this does not explain the younger computer generation that can also fall into the beliefs of say, Icke.
(let's not make this a subject here to ramble on. I'm making a small point from personal experience)
I also know many older people who are very internet savvy......so the above is by no means a rule.

Also, attending public meetings like city counsels, etc, is/was what the older generation traditionally used to do, to discuss ideas with local government. The younger computer generation has other ways.;)
 

Belfrey

Senior Member.
To be honest, I can somewhat sympathize with the approach that Sen. Ward and the ADEQ took in this case. Ward felt compelled to show her constituents that she was receptive and responsive to their concerns. But we all know that if scientists with a state agency had arrived at the meeting prepared to correct the misinformation and misunderstandings about contrails, environmental samples, and so forth, they would not have been likely to convince any of the believers about anything. Except perhaps that the Senator and ADEQ were complicit agents of the "conspiracy." And there's a good chance that they would have looked confrontational and not very sympathetic in the process, even if they were able to keep their cool in the face of those who disregard their explanations (which isn't easy). Thinking about it beforehand, it seemed likely to go badly for all involved.

So, they sidestepped the issue, and sent an administrative counsel to explain that although they know nothing about a "chemtrails" program, it would not fall under their jurisdiction if it did exist. Here's contact information for the appropriate federal agencies. Not very satisfying for anyone, but probably less damaging in terms of PR.
 

Leifer

Senior Member.
As I posted above, Sen. Ward claimed the science person from the ADEQ "couldn't accommodate my request" (to be at the meeting).
Heads-or-tails whether this was the case.
I'd like to ask her who this person would have been.....but since the meeting is past....it's rather a mute subject (pun intended).
 
Top