What does Greenpeace think about chemtrails?

Critical Thinker

Senior Member.
http://thenextbigblog.wordpress.com...-not-real-they-are-just-contrails-greenpeace/
 
Last edited by a moderator:

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Most interesting . . . like two people speaking different languages thinking they are communicating . . .
 

HappyMonday

Moderator
Clearly correspondence borne of frustration on both sides. Shame to see this CT wasting the time of that organisation too.
 

Ross Marsden

Senior Member.
The error for Graham Thompson was responding further than his first sentence in his initial reply. That's all he needed to say.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Max Bliss is a very aggressive individual . . . seems most disturbed by the rejection by Greenpeace . . . this is the first time I have actually felt sorry for Greenpeace !! :)
 

Belfrey

Senior Member.
I was taking a look at the letter he links (or tries to link, he messed up the URL), from Monika Griefhan, in which he says she is "admitting there is a program of chemtrailing." My German is rusty and was never very great, but if I'm reading it right, she's saying that she is aware of research and experimentation into geo-engineering, but she is firmly opposed to such strategies, which treat the symptoms rather than addressing the cause: greenhouse gas emissions. She says that while the release of aluminum and barium compounds could have some toxic effects, to her knowledge any amounts released up to then had been very small. Furthermore, she states that such a program would involve release of materials into the stratosphere, rather than the troposphere.

As far as I can see, she doesn't "admit" to an ongoing chemtrails program. If Freizeitgeist reads this, I'm sure this could be cleared up.

Edited to add: She starts out by saying something to the effect of, "I'm sorry that your previous attempts at communication were so frustrating, that you felt the need to fill your letter with so many unfriendly and hurtful remarks." Judging from Max Bliss above, this is a standard practice.
 

FreiZeitGeist

Senior Member.
I was taking a look at the letter he links (or tries to link, he messed up the URL), from Monika Griefhan, in which he says she is "admitting there is a program of chemtrailing." My German is rusty and was never very great, but if I'm reading it right, she's saying that she is aware of research and experimentation into geo-engineering, but she is firmly opposed to such strategies, which treat the symptoms rather than addressing the cause: greenhouse gas emissions. She says that while the release of aluminum and barium compounds could have some toxic effects, to her knowledge any amounts released up to then had been very small. Furthermore, she states that such a program would involve release of materials into the stratosphere, rather than the troposphere.

As far as I can see, she doesn't "admit" to an ongoing chemtrails program. If Freizeitgeist reads this, I'm sure this could be cleared up.

Monika Griefhahn is member of the german Parlament ("Bundestag") for the socialdemocratic Party and a member of GReenpeace.

As she wroted this letter 2004, the Chemtrail-hypothesis was very unknown in Germany, She answered very polite and just doesn´t know if these chemtrails are real or not. So she answered for the posibility if someone would do this.


Years later she was asked again, and this is the Answer the chemtrail-Belieers doesn´t like so much like her first Letter:

Zu Ihrer Frage nach sogenannten Chemtrails, also chemisch zugesetzten Kondensstreifen von Verkehrsflugzeugen, gab es verschiedene Untersuchungen öffentlicher Einrichtungen, die diese Sorgen ernst genommen haben.

Doch trotz eingehender Prüfungen gibt es bisher keine Erkenntnisse zu diesem Sachverhalt. Im Jahre 2007 sagte das Umweltbundesamt, dass es für derartige Vorgänge keine wissenschaftlichen Belege gibt. Daneben beschäftigt sich das Deutschen Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR) anhand zahlreicher Messungen der Emissionen von Verkehrsflugzeugen mit den Auswirkungen des Flugverkehrs auf die Atmosphäre. Dabei konnte das DLR solche Chemtrails in ihren Messungen nicht nachweisen. Neben diesen beiden Einrichtungen haben auch weitere Behörden, die sich mit dieser Thematik beschäftigen, keine Anhaltspunkte, die die Existenz von Chemtrails belegen.

Mit freundlichem Gruß

Monika Griefahn

Google-Translation:

To your question about the so-called chemtrails, so chemically added contrails of airliners, there have been several investigations of public institutions who have taken these concerns seriously.

However, despite thorough testing there have been no findings on this issue. In 2007, the Federal Environment Agency said that there is no scientific evidence for such operations. In addition, the German Aerospace Center (DLR) employed by numerous measurements of emissions from commercial aircraft with the impact of aviation on the atmosphere. It could not demonstrate such DLR chemtrails in their measurements. Besides these two institutions have also other authorities that deal with this issue, no evidence to prove the existence of chemtrails.

Sincerely,

Monika Griefahn

Source: http://www.abgeordnetenwatch.de/monika_griefahn-650-5584--f167323.html#q167323

But there is an official Statement about Chemtrails from Greenpeace-Germany. Our german "Carnicom", Mr. Werner Altnickel was a Greenpeace-Activist and was thrown out by them

Greenpeace Germany wroted in on of their magazins for members 2004

Google-Translation:

A sky full of conspirators

greenpeace magazin 5:04

For strange cloud phenomena can be only one reason, believes a growing number of people: Secret U.S. experiments with the climate.

The day on which Werner Altnickel rose the full extent of the conspiracy began, as the weather forecast for this 5 Had promised in March 2004: Following the dissolution of early morning fog fields clear and sunny, despite the overnight frost, the air would warm up to six degrees and at noon, the first time giving off a hint of spring this year, in Oldenburg.



Altnickel installed solar panels on a house roof in the Lower Saxon town when he saw a vapor trail in the sky. Later he noticed that the strip was surprisingly not disappeared, even new ones that constantly came the firmament finally "woven into a sloppy mass as the sky turned rührter milk foam" is.



For Werner Altnickel it was clear "that such a thing can not be normal." Finally, the independent solar technicians is 15 years on roofs between Frankfurt and Wilhelmshaven and has numerous contrails swell and disappear at will. However, he had some months previously read an article about clouds obscure phenomena: the U.S. government was in the January issue of the esoteric magazine "Space and Time", would be sprayed by aircraft chemicals in the air - and top secret world. Washington knew that the Earth is heading for a devastating environmental disaster, but still did not save energy or change the American way of life. Instead traktiere the superpower of the sky with deadly chemicals - with the concoction of metal oxides and plastic compounds not only affecting the weather. It also makes people sick, on all herunterregne sometime.



It is this horror scenario does the solar craftsmen on 5 March have discovered the domestic skies. He shot 1,500 photographs of the supernatural events, he had to "cry properly for the first time in years." Since then, dedicated Altnickel, two-time winner of the Oldenburg Environmental Prize and winner of the German Solar Prize 1997 with full force the battle against chemtrails.



He is not the only one. Under the search word "chemtrails" the Internet search engine Google found 79,100 hits in early August, a month earlier there were 28,500. The theme is becoming the mother of all conspiracy theories: whether UFOs or CIA experiments with consciousness altering drugs - nothing seems too far-fetched as it would not integrate into the dark world view of pervasive cult contrails.



"The thing with the chemtrails has spread incredibly quickly," says Thomas Hagbeck also firmly until recently spokesman for the Federal Environment Agency and now in the same capacity in the Ministry of Environment. Anyway, his ministry, politicians, federal intelligence service, research institutions, and not least Greenpeace have received hundreds of concerned calls and emails in recent weeks, the report unison of "criminal experiments in the atmosphere."



While most politicians and scientists throw the emails as "spam chemtrail" (the meteorologist Joerg tile man) in the trash, the SPD deputy Monika Griefahn has at least promised a parliamentary question on the subject. Federal Environment Agency Greenpeace or reply with the scientific facts: Yes, some contrails stay longer visible. This has always been so, and can be explained with different humidity and natural turbulence of the atmosphere. Yes, theoretically you can influence the climate by sprayed chemicals in the stratosphere. But there is no indication that this is really happening. Anyway always have to be sprayed to ever achieve a climate effect, which would require thousands of planes, tens of thousands confidant and billion-euro budget - hardly a mammoth operation to be kept secret.



Werner Altnickel contests this to yourself. "We must not forget who else is in the cover-up in the boat," he says, and makes a seemingly endless list: UN and WHO, secret CIA to BND, the IPCC climate scientists Panel, airlines, politicians and the media. Without their help, he argues, in a reversal of the burden of proof to chemtrails could not even keep it a secret - "and that they exist, I have seen with my own eyes."



The weather forecast announced for the 5th March incidentally also a zoom pulling deep, on the day of Oldenburg with increasing cloudiness veil manifested itself later. No wonder Altnickel believes: "The weather service also infected with it."

Source: http://www.greenpeace-magazin.de/?id=3121

Since this, there is a kind of love&hate relationship between Altnickel and his fans and Greenpeace. For Example they made a smal Greenpeace-like Action in front of the headquarter of Greenpeace Germany.

 

David Fraser

Senior Member.
Max Bliss. What a wonderful character. He is the one that told me rainwater should only contain 0.08 ug/l of Al and when asked how he had arrived at that figure he had "calculated" it.

I notice that Patrick Moore has been mentioned in the comments above. He is often cited by chemtrailers and their favourite quote of

http://chemtrailsplanet.net/2012/12...ipcc-revealed-as-basis-for-chemtrails-denial/

Strong words indeed, and totally misquoted, yet the chemtrailers conveniently ignore the fact that he is pro-nuclear, pro-GMO and worked for a logging company, essentially against all that Greenpeace stands for.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moore_(environmentalist)


However there is the unescapable fact that no environmental group accepts the premise of chemtrails, and many would wet themselves over an issue like this.
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
Max Bliss. What a wonderful character. He is the one that told me rainwater should only contain 0.08 ug/l of Al and when asked how he had arrived at that figure he had "calculated" it.

0.08 ug/L of aluminum? That is less than 1/10th of one microgram(ug) in one Liter. Consider that a grain of sand weighs about 100 micrograms (ug). What 'Max Bliss' is claiming is that natural rain water should only contain 1/10th of one percent of one grain of sand worth of the most common metal found in earth's crust? Bear in mind that almost all clay dusts contain large amounts of aluminum, between 2 and 3 percent! Max's claim simply boggles the mind.

What's worse though, perhaps, is that 'Max Bliss' seems blissfully unaware that the minimum detection limit for aluminum in these water tests is 750 ug/L.

People like 'Max Bliss' are both a boon and a liability for the hoax. On the one hand they target folks who don't bother to really understand the sometimes technical issues. The effect of that is to develop the belief system towards a membership with a 'low information' standard as well as proven gullibility. Effectively, this selects out from the group those who might otherwise question what they are told.

However, this process also prevents progress by excluding those with technical expertise such as scientists or environmental professionals like the Greenpeace guy. 'Max Bliss' doesn't even want Greenpeace to be involved, whether he knows it or not.
They threaten his dominance of the table and are actually the last sort of people he really wants to be involved. Unconsciously, perhaps, what he is doing is throwing up a wall between Greenpeace and his followers in order to maintain the status quo.

That is why we don't see Michael J. Murphy, Dane Wigington, or Max Bliss engaging in debate or conversation about these matters, they don't want to know, but perhaps more significantly they don't want others to know where they have made serious mistakes. Not very honorable behavior, in my opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

David Fraser

Senior Member.
Has anyone ever seen him do a debate on the subject?
Would he be willing to do a fair debate with me?

I have been blocked by all their FB pages and I really want to go to a "meet". Ask him Jay. I seem to have burned my bridges as obviously they read here so block me on FB. How could we organise a
 

TWCobra

Senior Member.
Max was the guy who told me I eat Borax to ward off the effects of flying in chemtrails. I comment a lot on his YT videos and got this reply from him after I questioned why chemtrail believers never appear to really believe the theory as none ever seem to wear face masks....which I would consider crucial if one were being poisoned. The response is interesting.

Hey Mike, do you ever question why you are doing your troll work? You seem intelligent, why not turn around and whistleblow...? You could be a hero to many more than your psychopathic bosses. Worth thinking about as more and more people get informed and the truth will come out, you know it, your bosses know it too... Have you ever checked out your own rain water analysis or had your own hair tested? Checked out the effects of the toxins from scientific journals? Look in the mirror and join us

So, apart from their standard definition of "troll" (someone who disagrees with your position????) he does appear to accept I am a pilot. I might see if he would contemplate a debate.
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
Because I haven't seen this done before, I propose a third party manage a Youtube video debatebetween two parties.

The third party could manage the video channel and commentary, and debaters would each create videos following the Lincoln-Douglas debate format as seen here:
http://facstaff.bloomu.edu/jtomlins/debate_formats.htm

There should be a time limit within which the videos must be completed, say within 2-3 days of the last exchange, and the complete debate should not be made public until it is completed.
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
Max Bliss. What a wonderful character. He is the one that told me rainwater should only contain 0.08 ug/l of Al and when asked how he had arrived at that figure he had "calculated" it.

I'm not sure what to think about Max, except that it would be fun to debate him.

This is what he is currently saying at his website:

Excessively high, the normal amount of alu in the air in a built up city is 0.08ug/l.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
I'm not sure what to think about Max, except that it would be fun to debate him.

This is what he is currently saying at his website:


Air, or rainwater?? Should you bother to take the time out to explain the difference to him?? ;)
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
I have commented on his videos in a fact-oriented fashion. At least he is not deleting sceptical comments or blocking commenters immediately.

His responses point to a somewhat 'evangelistic' approach. He just knows he is dealing with government agents and tries to encourage them to convert/repent/see the light.

Anyway, I think the comment areas of his videos are probably a good place to post factual information and reach lots of chemtrailers - if you manage to stay cool.
 
One CT guy was recently alarmed (Chemtrails Awareness FB page) that alumina levels were "off the leash" at 0.156ppm against a US EPA reportable level of 0.6ppm. Maths is my training, so I first noticed that this is about one-quarter of the reportable level - well and truly still "on the leash".

I'm no chemist but within 3 minutes looking at Wikipedia and the US EPA documentation on reportable substances it turned out that aluminium oxide (alumina) is not on the reportable substances register, and it is the nice and inert abrasive in toothpaste. I did point this out and ask why CTers were also afraid of toothpaste as well as coulds and water, and got blocked for questioning their personal hygiene. I'm very new to this chemtrail stuff but it seems the best argument they have is "Look up at the sky, maaaan!!!!!!!"
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Greenpeace UK
From: info UK
Sent: 08/03/12 05:39 PM
To: Max Bliss
Which job? Information officer at Greenpeace, or propaganda officer for MI6?
I will not be looking at any more ‘evidence’ for chemtrails, or discussing chemtrails, as I’ve already wasted far more time than necessary doing so, both with you and with all the other chemtrail conspiracy theorists who have emailed us, all of whom had no evidence whatsoever, apart from pictures of contrails which they insisted on showing me, despite my explaining to them, in advance, that pictures of contrails are not evidence of chemtrails.
I will not be redeeming myself, I’m afraid.
Regards,
Graham Thompson
Supporter Services


Reminds me of this:



Not comparing Max to Oswald of course, but there often comes a point when you have to recognize that future communication is not leading anywhere productive unless the fundamental disagreements can actually be addressed.
 
Last edited:

Belfrey

Senior Member.
One CT guy was recently alarmed (Chemtrails Awareness FB page) that alumina levels were "off the leash" at 0.156ppm against a US EPA reportable level of 0.6ppm. Maths is my training, so I first noticed that this is about one-quarter of the reportable level - well and truly still "on the leash".

Even aside from the glaring math error, that 0.6 ppm is not even an EPA reporting limit, at least as far as I can find. Aluminum falls under EPA's "Secondary Standards", voluntary recommended limits for contaminants in drinking water that may cause aesthetic or taste issues:
Contaminant Secondary MCLNoticeable Effects above the Secondary MCL
Aluminum0.05 to 0.2 mg/L*colored water

Edited to add: Sorry, I see now in your post that you already saw it wasn't on the reportable list.
 

David Fraser

Senior Member.
Even aside from the glaring math error, that 0.6 ppm is not even an EPA reporting limit, at least as far as I can find. Aluminum falls under EPA's "Secondary Standards", voluntary recommended limits for contaminants in drinking water that may cause aesthetic or taste issues:
Contaminant
Secondary MCL
Noticeable Effects above the Secondary MCL
Aluminum
0.05 to 0.2 mg/L*
colored water

This is something I find all the time, just a basic lack of understanding on limits etc. Even more frustrating is when I get in a debate and suddenly I am quoted levels that have no resembelence to anything I have seen. When asked for a link it us usually for a different country and a different medium.
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
Add in to that the folks that don't seem to understand 'that the dose makes the poison". A hard to measure amount is just as bad to them as a ton of it would be.
 

someGuy

New Member
I've seen a documentary on poisons where they stated that in toxicology, the time/duration of exposure is more important than the toxicity itself, tobacco for instance
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
If it builds up in the tissues, that is true, if it does not allow the body to heal itself that is also true.
 

David Fraser

Senior Member.
I've seen a documentary on poisons where they stated that in toxicology, the time/duration of exposure is more important than the toxicity itself, tobacco for instance
I have not got the figures to hand but in occupational health and safety they often have quantity over a fixed period. I know that air particulate Al is usually given as x ug/m3 for an 8 hour period. Anything over x is deemed hazardous.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
I have not got the figures to hand but in occupational health and safety they often have quantity over a fixed period. I know that air particulate Al is usually given as x ug/m3 for an 8 hour period. Anything over x is deemed hazardous.

I haven't seen any limits, but this CDC report (5mb pdf) notes some fatalitites and damage to lungs from 615– 685 mg Al/m3, and respirable dust was 51 mg Al/m3 (not sure what the difference between "total" and "respireable" is)
, and

Edit: Found some limits:

 

Critical Thinker

Senior Member.
On Greenpeace's website's blog section is an piece that addresses the chemmies claims:

 

Henk001

Senior Member.
Unfortunately that explanation is not entirely correct; they might inform themselves on Metabunk. But besides that I'm glad that they are on the ground with both feet.
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
First, apologies for being so late to the game... (I hadn't even heard of Metabunk in April 2013, never mind 2012)

And 30 minutes ago I had no idea who Graham Thompson was (evidently he's still with Greenpeace in 2015)
but I found his frankness and tone refreshing...he was willing to call a spade a spade, and a hoax a hoax,
long before many of us had heard of Max Bliss (is that a made-up name, btw?)

I understand why some wouldn't think Mr. Thompson quite polite enough...
but the highlighted portion--in the correspondence below--has started my Tuesday off with a big smile. :D

Screen Shot 2015-03-17 at 9.00.29 AM.png
 
Last edited:

Eric the Green

New Member
The use of the word "climate change hoax" in the original letter was unfortunate, and diverted attention from your claim about chemtrails. Climate change is not a hoax. If you had just asked them about chemtrails, you might have generated some interest.
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
Reminds me of this:



Not comparing Max to Oswald of course, but there often comes a point when you have to recognize that future communication is not leading anywhere productive unless the fundamental disagreements can actually be addressed.
Second, apologies for being so late to the game...again. I know it's wrong, but I've just got to type:

:p "Thank 'God' for Bertrand Russell!!" :p
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
The use of the word "climate change hoax" in the original letter was unfortunate, and diverted attention from your claim about chemtrails. Climate change is not a hoax. If you had just asked them about chemtrails, you might have generated some interest.
Not really "unfortunate". The idea that climate change is a hoax seems to be central to Max Bliss's views. But really, whether or not you believe that anthropogenic global warming is a genuine concern doesn't make any difference to the matter of "chemtrails".
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Edward Current Needs Debunking: That the GPS does not implement time corrections from Einstein's relativity Science and Pseudoscience 7
Mick West What does "Off-World" mean to the US Military? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 9
J Why Does the Sun Rise and Set In a Straight Line? Flat Earth 14
Joe Hill WTC7: Does This "Look Like" a Controlled Implosion? 9/11 45
J Does google earth pro simulate refraction [No] Flat Earth 7
brad fuller Does the inverse-square law apply to the flat-earth debunking tool chest? Flat Earth 4
creatonez Explained: Why the Earth does not look oblate in photos from space Flat Earth 0
Mick West Why Does the Atmosphere Not Fly off into the Vacuum of Space? Flat Earth 21
Mick West What does the Flat Earth Look Like From Space, with Perspective? Flat Earth 19
Tom Binney Does my FE Debunk in this case make sense to you guys? Practical Debunking 23
ConfusedHominid Need Debunking (Claim): Metabunk Curve Calculator Does Not Calculate for Angular Size Flat Earth 13
S Explained: Why does this Apollo11 photo act so weirdly? Conspiracy Theories 13
FolsomG10 Does Zooming in Change How Much of Something is Hidden by the Horizon [No] Flat Earth 54
Mick West Explained: Why a Spirit Level on a Plane Does Not Show Curvature "Corrections" Flat Earth 98
Trailblazer Why does Polaris appear stationary on a rotating Earth? Flat Earth 16
izz Does this photo show a too-small hole in the Pentagon? [No] 9/11 28
Supreme Logic Why does the equator stay warm all year? Conspiracy Theories 7
P Does Orlando victim switch legs when he switches languages [No] Conspiracy Theories 8
Rory Does the Earth's Curvature Vary with Latitude? [No, not significantly] Flat Earth 34
Z.W. Wolf Does Sundial Disprove Flat Earth? Flat Earth 17
Gamolon Does Mick West's WTC model meet the Heiwa Challenge? 9/11 25
aka How does this Domino Tower Collapse relate to 9/11 Collapses 9/11 75
mrfintoil Study: When Debunking Scientific Myths Fails (and When It Does Not) Practical Debunking 3
Tony Szamboti Does the exclusion of stiffness from Nordenson's falling girder calculations demonstrate anything? 9/11 288
william wiley Does Damage to MH17 indicate or exclude a Particular Buk Launch Location? Flight MH17 662
Hama Neggs Where does "Scientist" end and "debunker" begin? Practical Debunking 16
Steve Funk Does Guy McPherson believe in chemtrails? [No] Contrails and Chemtrails 21
Ogmion Does DNA emit light General Discussion 8
T How Does This Failed Demolition Relate to the Collapse of the WTC Towers? 9/11 14
Leifer Erin Brokovich does not believe in chemtrails. Contrails and Chemtrails 64
Trailblazer SkyderALERT: where does the money go? Contrails and Chemtrails 7
Leifer does Social Media + Ego help drive conspiracy theories ? General Discussion 63
David Fraser Super/subscript, how does one do it? Site Feedback & News 4
qed Why does the Lunar Lander leave not tracks Conspiracy Theories 44
Mick West The Johnson and Johnson Settlement, where does it fit in the conspiracy world Conspiracy Theories 13
qed Does concrete melt? 9/11 84
hiper Does Seismic Evidence Imply Controlled Demolition on 9/11 9/11 101
Mick West How Much Does Metabunk.org Cost to Run? Site Feedback & News 17
MikeC Video that does actually support hypothesis with evidence Contrails and Chemtrails 1
fonestar Why does JFK's Head go back after he's shot from the back? [warning: contains gore] Conspiracy Theories 178
Cairenn How much does a storm weigh? Contrails and Chemtrails 1
Mick West Does NIST not testing for explosives and not testing WTC7 steel invalidate everything 9/11 246
Mick West How Much Money Does Alex Jones Make? People Debunked 17
iKnowWhoYouAre why does this site even exist? General Discussion 134
Canadasix If its just contrails why does it start from the east and work it's way west? Contrails and Chemtrails 10
scombrid Does drug use cause paranoia or do paranoids seek out psychoactive drugs? General Discussion 7
Leifer Rabies does not exist. Conspiracy Theories 8
U Why does this site not debunk government and corporate wrongdoings? Site Feedback & News 4
Juror No. 8 Does the U.S. government manufacture terrorism? If so, why? General Discussion 99
firepilot Does Roxy Lopez have callers on her friday internet show? Contrails and Chemtrails 0
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top