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

El Duderino

New Member
Hello, I just now joined this forum after some searching online. Yesterday I heard about a "chemtrail meeting" at a local county building (Kingman, AZ.) and decided to go on short notice, not knowing what to expect, maybe a few people with tin foil hats? Kelli Ward (R), state senator agreed to the meeting and had officials from the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality come and hopefully calm people down. Wow, I wasn't expecting such a turnout, there was a group of a few dozen who seemed to all know each other, ranting and raving and demanding something be done about the chemtrails. Every one of them claimed to have higher than normal amounts of barium, aluminum and strontium in their blood tests. Aluminum is the most abundant metal in earth's crust, I bet high levels of it in your blood must be the chemtrails. Luca Zanna handed the test results and some other papers to the ADEQ officials, throughout the meeting he was holding up pictures of chem- uhhh contrails rather. As a state senator and a doctor, why would she even agree to hold such a meeting? I asked one of the ADEQ officials if they thought addressing this crowd gave them too much credibility, she responded by saying that they have to address peoples concerns but weren't there to discuss chemtrails.

http://www.kingmandailyminer.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=797&ArticleID=61850


 

El Duderino

New 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.

Yes. I attended in person on short notice yesterday not really knowing what to expect. I see chemtrail conspiracy theorists all the time online but I've never witnessed them first hand, especially in a group. I was thinking of gathering a group of a dozen or so people to come next time (if there is a next time) this group manages to call for a public meeting.
 

El Duderino

New Member
Notice there were no young people there.
But me :) and my more vocal associate in the front row, who asked the crowd how they would attribute high levels of those metals in their blood to that one source out of the thousands of other possibilities. The crowd was silent for a moment, the ADEQ speaker asked who the question was for, he said, "to anyone that can answer it". The room got silent for a moment, with people looking at each other and murmuring, then Al Dicicco blurts out, "Investigate!", everyone is like Yeah! (claps galore).
 

Leifer

Senior Member.
But me :) and my more vocal associate in the front row, who asked the crowd how they would attribute high levels of those metals in their blood to that one source out of the thousands of other possibilities. The crowd was silent for a moment, the ADEQ speaker asked who the question was for, he said, "to anyone that can answer it". The room got silent for a moment, with people looking at each other and murmuring, then Al Dicicco blurts out, "Investigate!", everyone is like Yeah! (claps galore).
Thanks. At what point in the video did your friend speak ? I may have missed it.
EDIT....I found it. It was at around 0:30:47
 
Last edited:

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
I asked one of the ADEQ officials if they thought addressing this crowd gave them too much credibility, she responded by saying that they have to address peoples concerns but weren't there to discuss chemtrails.

And this is the mistake they made, IMO. Why bother to just give them an opportunity to speak without really addressing the facts surrounding what they were complaining about? I think Ward just wanted to give 'lip-service' to the whole thing so she could say she wasn't ignoring them, but in the end that's all she did anyway- ignore the meat of what they were complaining about. From Ward's POV something was accomplished. From the debunker POV, who are worried about the proliferation of the chemtrail hoax, nothing was accomplished at all.
 

Balance

Senior Member.
Ward stated she felt pressured by the chemtrail group to address their environment concerns (not debate chemtrails). As a starting point, I think she did her best and was maybe let down a bit by ADEQ. If ADEQ had presented their latest air, soil and water samples it might have helped but I wonder if they actually have any as the non-scientist rep didn't seem to know what, how or where samples are taken.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
Ward stated she felt pressured by the chemtrail group to address their environment concerns (not debate chemtrails). As a starting point, I think she did her best and was maybe let down a bit by ADEQ. If ADEQ had presented their latest air, soil and water samples it might have helped but I wonder if they actually have any as the non-scientist rep didn't seem to know what, how or where samples are taken.

Right. It was a big FAIL that they didn't present specific test results at least on AIR, if that is what they had. I mean, show a dang chart or something! Then let the believers respond to the total lack of what they claim is being "sprayed". On the other hand, believers seem to be inventing a 'work-around' for it not showing up on test results by claiming that "nano-particles" wouldn't register. In the end, I think there is no alternative to presenting technical data, since the believers keep pushing the debate toward more obscure details as to why they have to be right. How can you address the claim of nano-particles not showing up on tests without becoming technical?
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Right. It was a big FAIL that they didn't present specific test results at least on AIR, if that is what they had. I mean, show a dang chart or something! Then let the believers respond to the total lack of what they claim is being "sprayed". On the other hand, they seem to be inventing a 'work-around' for it not showing up on test results by claiming that "nano-particles" wouldn't register. In the end, I think there is no alternative to presenting technical data, since the believers keep pushing the debate toward more obscure details as to why they have to be right. How can you address the claim of nano-particles not showing up on tests without becoming technical?

You are just going to get bogged down in a public meeting though - and it will be over the heads of most of the people there.

They should have started out with the simplest of the misconceptions, as they apply to most of the people there. Contrails persist. Aluminum is in soil and air. Normal levels of barium are ... etc.
 

Balance

Senior Member.
How can you address the claim of nano-particles not showing up on tests without becoming technical?

Yes, it did require a scientific-minded rep from ADEQ. I believe this was what Ward requested but ADEQ failed to comply.
As for nano - it's just a wider defintion of a micron range isn't it? I'm sure one of the public stated specific micron size (something about hepa filters being "too large") and that someone from ADEQ could have given specifications showing if their tests do in fact capture and measure at these particle sizes?

They should have started out with the simplest of the misconceptions, as they apply to most of the people there. Contrails persist.

As Ward made it clear before and during the meeting, they were not going to address trails or aircraft emissions. Those enquiries had to go to EPA or FAA.

Aluminum is in soil and air. Normal levels of barium are ... etc.
Agree with this though.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
You are just going to get bogged down in a public meeting though - and it will be over the heads of most of the people there.

They should have started out with the simplest of the misconceptions, as they apply to most of the people there. Contrails persist. Aluminum is in soil and air. Normal levels of barium are ... etc.

Yes, but they didn't come prepared to present ANY technical info or science at all! It was just a political exercise.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
Yes, it did require a scientific-minded rep from ADEQ. I believe this was what Ward requested but ADEQ failed to comply.
As for nano - it's just a wider defintion of a micron range isn't it? I'm sure one of the public stated specific micron size (something about hepa filters being "too large") and that someone from ADEQ could have given specifications showing if their tests do in fact capture and measure at these particle sizes?



As Ward made it clear before and during the meeting, they were not going to address trails or aircraft emissions. Those enquiries had to go to EPA or FAA.

Agree with this though.

Which brings us to Madison Moon and her quest to find someone to take her complaint. Apparently there was found a specific avenue for complaints. I'd like to see Maddy get shown that specific avenue.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
What the believers were saying was that the "spraying" is not from normal FAA-governed activity- that it is an illegal activity, poisoning the people of AZ. Given that "reality", one can see how the local DEQ would/should get involved. I think ADEQ should address it on that basis, no matter how flawed and unfounded. Get to the MEAT of the complaint and deal with it directly!
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Which brings us to Madison Moon and her quest to find someone to take her complaint. Apparently there was found a specific avenue for complaints. I'd like to see Maddy get shown that specific avenue.

I believe she has called various government agencies.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
I believe she has called various government agencies.

She has. She has been around in circles with FAA and DEQ. Apparently one of those women speakers found a specific avenue for the complaint. She said it wasn't easy to find, but that she found it. I think she wrote the URL on the large pad.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
What the believers were saying was that the "spraying" is not from normal FAA-governed activity- that it is an illegal activity, poisoning the people of AZ. Given that "reality", one can see how the local DEQ would/should get involved. I think ADEQ should address it on that basis
this may not be the bet analogy but I'm going to try:

.001% of your constituents are writing you and demanding action in regards to the Bigfoot in the county.

-They know it is Bigfoot (NOT a raccoon or bear or opossum or wolf etc) because a TV show about Bigfoot did a filming in their area. And there are a bunch of debunked videos on Youtube. And someone started a weblog about it.
-On the tv show they found something that looked like it could maybe possibly be some sort of footprint. But this was not confirmed by any scientist.
-Shortly after the filming 10 people (out of a population of say 25,000) started having their garbage cans knocked over at night.
- 2 constituents had outdoor cats that 'vanished' in the last 6 months.
-no photographs, are presented. no evidence of a Bigfoot is presented.


The local government talks to the 'game warden' guys. They check it out because it could be a bear and they say there are no indications of bear or any big animal in the area. (ie soil and air tests come back within normal range).

But the 'theory' grows. People are calling and calling Gov. officials. Demanding them to do something about "The Bigfoot", they are afraid the Bigfoot will snatch up their children and kill their pets.

What does the government do?
 

Ross Marsden

Senior Member.
As Ward made it clear before and during the meeting, they were not going to address trails or aircraft emissions. Those enquiries had to go to EPA or FAA.
I wonder why Ward did not enforce that condition on the people who attended with their questions and statements from the floor about aircraft trails and emissions. It would have been a pretty short meeting I suppose.
 

El Duderino

New Member
Ward stated she felt pressured by the chemtrail group to address their environment concerns (not debate chemtrails). As a starting point, I think she did her best and was maybe let down a bit by ADEQ. If ADEQ had presented their latest air, soil and water samples it might have helped but I wonder if they actually have any as the non-scientist rep didn't seem to know what, how or where samples are taken.

I talked to the speaker after the meeting and she claimed to know more about the samples and the science despite saying she wasn't as informed. She said she just didn't want to go there with these people. Since she's the one who showed up, the crowd put her and the organization she works for under fire for not doing anything about this "issue". If it were another official from a different agency, state or federal, the crowd would be no different.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
this may not be the bet analogy but I'm going to try:

.001% of your constituents are writing you and demanding action in regards to the Bigfoot in the county.

-They know it is Bigfoot (NOT a raccoon or bear or opossum or wolf etc) because a TV show about Bigfoot did a filming in their area. And there are a bunch of debunked videos on Youtube. And someone started a weblog about it.
-On the tv show they found something that looked like it could maybe possibly be some sort of footprint. But this was not confirmed by any scientist.
-Shortly after the filming 10 people (out of a population of say 25,000) started having their garbage cans knocked over at night.
- 2 constituents had outdoor cats that 'vanished' in the last 6 months.
-no photographs, are presented. no evidence of a Bigfoot is presented.


The local government talks to the 'game warden' guys. They check it out because it could be a bear and they say there are no indications of bear or any big animal in the area. (ie soil and air tests come back within normal range).

But the 'theory' grows. People are calling and calling Gov. officials. Demanding them to do something about "The Bigfoot", they are afraid the Bigfoot will snatch up their children and kill their pets.

What does the government do?

They don't call a meeting and say, basically: "It's not our problem".
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
I talked to the speaker after the meeting and she claimed to know more about the samples and the science despite saying she wasn't as informed. She said she just didn't want to go there with these people. Since she's the one who showed up, the crowd put her and the organization she works for under fire for not doing anything about this "issue". If it were another official from a different agency, state or federal, the crowd would be no different.

That seems odd. Why not just give out the sampling data?
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
They don't call a meeting and say, basically: "It's not our problem".
they call a meeting to let the constituents speak. citizen's concerns about the environment ARE their problem. Chemtrails and contrails are not.

as the senator said, this is just the first step. baby steps. the adeq woman wrote down the 'specific' concerns. it was video taped and documented.
perhaps at the next meeting what she wrote down (these specific environmental concerns) will be addressed.
 

Belfrey

Senior Member.
They don't call a meeting and say, basically: "It's not our problem".
What do they do then? The best thing would probably have been to not have the meeting to begin with, but it seems like the state senator committed to that before the ADEQ reps agreed to it. The ADEQ scientists had already done what I would suggest, which is to post an explanation on their website and refer people to that. As you know from your own experience, confronting believers directly with facts and evidence is very rarely productive, and verbal debates are not generally the ideal format for science topics.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
concerns about the environment ARE their problem. Chemtrails and contrails are not.

Those are one and the same in the minds of those public. To ignore that is to avoid the "reality" of the situation.


at the next meeting what she wrote down (these specific environmental concerns) will be addressed.

Those specific concerns were already well known by the ADEQ, as shown by the web page they already created about them. Why should they suddenly play dumb a this meeting?
 
Last edited:

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
What do they do then? The best thing would probably have been to not have the meeting to begin with, but it seems like the state senator committed to that before the ADEQ reps agreed to it. The ADEQ scientists had already done what I would suggest, which is to post an explanation on their website and refer people to that. As you know from your own experience, confronting believers directly with facts and evidence is very rarely productive, and verbal debates are not generally the ideal format for science topics.

I have to agree. Why have this meeting and pretend to be listening as if they are hearing something new? It was just a political exercise. In the end, if they are going to interact with those people, they HAVE to supply hard facts regardless of how it might be received. They HAVE to debunk the nonsense claims and beliefs, directly. To the public, watching that event on Youtube, it might seem as if the ADEQ wasn't up to speed on any of this, when they actually know all about the claims and why they are false.

More than one person said that the ADEQ person was "smirking" throughout the meeting. Her hiding behind the "I'm not a scientist" statement is just her being disingenuous.
 

skephu

Senior Member.
Although Kelli Ward has not revealed whether she believes in chemtrails herself, on Facebook she called global warming a hoax.
Not a good sign.
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
Although Kelli Ward has not revealed whether she believes in chemtrails herself, on Facebook she called global warming a hoax.
Not a good sign.

Well, not really. Global warming and climate change are not really the same thing. I'm not sure of her opinion on either one, but she is trained in the sciences, so I'm sure with conflicting studies she is reserving her opinion. JMO but I absolutely believe there is climate change and that man is having an impact. Hard to believe otherwise when the population has increased so much over the last 200 yrs. Imagine what damage we can do over the next 100 yrs if things don't change.

I do agree with earlier comments that she was catering to her constituents...but isn't that what every politician does? My dentist is running for State Rep. She's an intelligent, professional person. Her views are similar to mine, or maybe she just reads me well because I pay her...lol.
 

skephu

Senior Member.
Well, not really. Global warming and climate change are not really the same thing. I'm not sure of her opinion on either one, but she is trained in the sciences, so I'm sure with conflicting studies she is reserving her opinion
She just referred to global warming as a hoax. You can find it on Facebook here.
A telltale sign of a science denier. I would not be very surprised if she turned out to be a chemtrail believer as well. Most chemtrail believers also believe that global warming is a hoax.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Or, IF they grudgingly concede the warming data, glacier retreat and ice shrinkage is correct, they will attribute it to the success of the chemtrail program which creates the problem so 'UN depopulation agenda 21' and carbon taxation can be the solution.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
I would not be very surprised if she turned out to be a chemtrail believer as well
wouldn't that be a good thing? if she can figure out a way to get a myth through the proper government channels for testing and investigations, it will prove chemtrails are false once and for all.
 

mrfintoil

Senior Member.
I think what these people would have needed was a lecture in contrail formation. The understanding of how contrails form under various conditions is like the key to realizing whether "chemtrails" is a redundant explanation or not.

I know from experience that most believers in "chemtrails" have poor knowledge about this fundamental concept, yet they make strong claims that what they have observe can not be just condensation.

Instead of talking about everything else, just talk about the key issue - how does contrails form and can today's observed trails be considered as such? If the answer is "yes", then most other questions about trail content, geoengineering and what not becomes unnecessary and redundant.

I know hardcore believers are hard to convince, but starting out with the core issue always works best for me.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I think what these people would have needed was a lecture in contrail formation. The understanding of how contrails form under various conditions is like the key to realizing whether "chemtrails" is a redundant explanation or not.

I know from experience that most believers in "chemtrails" have poor knowledge about this fundamental concept, yet they make strong claims that what they have observe can not be just condensation.

Instead of talking about everything else, just talk about the key issue - how does contrails form and can today's observed trails be considered as such? If the answer is "yes", then most other questions about trail content, geoengineering and what not becomes unnecessary and redundant.

I know hardcore believers are hard to convince, but starting out with the core issue always works best for me.
I have been trying very hard for many months to persuade believers just to consider a basic discussion regarding contrails. I think none of them come around quickly. The process takes years. But I think it is like the 2012 ELE prophecy and the Rapture Predictions. Once nothing happens that they are told will happen the foundations of the religion begin to crumble.
 

Belfrey

Senior Member.
But I think it is like the 2012 ELE prophecy and the Rapture Predictions. Once nothing happens that they are told will happen the foundations of the religion begin to crumble.
The difference is that those prophesies were specific enough to be falsified. The chemtrails idea can be applied as an explanation for pretty much anything, and so they think they are constantly having it confirmed. Check out the Global Skywatch FB page sometime. "I just noticed this [weather, cloud formation, illness, spot on a maple leaf, etc.]. Do you think it could be from chemtrails?" Response: "Definitely chemtrails! When will people wake up?"
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
I think what these people would have needed was a lecture in contrail formation.

Won't help without long term simple discussions one minor point at a time, if that. At least out here, these people believe that chemtrails exist like they believe that Obama was born in Kenya and that God (whichever one that may be) guides their every action in life. (Nothing against anyone's belief in any sort of God meant)
 

mrfintoil

Senior Member.
Won't help without long term simple discussions one minor point at a time, if that. At least out here, these people believe that chemtrails exist like they believe that Obama was born in Kenya and that God (whichever one that may be) guides their every action in life. (Nothing against anyone's belief in any sort of God meant)

These people are not very science oriented, everyone can see that. And of course, this limited understanding has made them susceptible to pseudo scientific claims that tells them to feel fear. I always maintain that a broad education is a good vaccine against bullshit. Of course it would have to be simple baby steps when it comes to people with pretty much no physics education or sometimes even thinking skills. But the concept of how condensation forms, how jet engines work through air, and the implication of such interaction isn't that hard to explain, or for normal people to understand. Laying down the basics isn't that complicated. It might be difficult to convince these people about it, but its the best point to explain because it touches the core of the issue.

In a world of perfect discussion climates, this should be the first thing to sort of before doing anything else in my opinion.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
The difference is that those prophesies were specific enough to be falsified. The chemtrails idea can be applied as an explanation for pretty much anything, and so they think they are constantly having it confirmed. Check out the Global Skywatch FB page sometime. "I just noticed this [weather, cloud formation, illness, spot on a maple leaf, etc.]. Do you think it could be from chemtrails?" Response: "Definitely chemtrails! When will people wake up?"
I am really referring to their concept of trans humanism transformation through nano bots and mass death caused by slow kill viruses, etc. When they finally realize they are the same species and still alive after decades of expected mass death and population culling they will slowly realize they have been played.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
These people are not very science oriented, everyone can see that. And of course, this limited understanding has made them susceptible to pseudo scientific claims that tells them to feel fear. I always maintain that a broad education is a good vaccine against bullshit. Of course it would have to be simple baby steps when it comes to people with pretty much no physics education or sometimes even thinking skills. But the concept of how condensation forms, how jet engines work through air, and the implication of such interaction isn't that hard to explain, or for normal people to understand. Laying down the basics isn't that complicated. It might be difficult to convince these people about it, but its the best point to explain because it touches the core of the issue.

In a world of perfect discussion climates, this should be the first thing to sort of before doing anything else in my opinion.

Agreed. How hard is it to spell out the simple fact that when you burn jet fuel in an engine you get thrust and lots of water vapor? If they start questioning the details, then explain further. The believers already THINK they are being scientific about it all. I don't see any alternative to blowing their minds by showing them just how shallow and flawed their "science" has been.

PS: Right now I'm listening to Dane Wigingtons's radio show and they are going on and on about the "real science" they are employing to reach their conclusions.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Top