Wigington/West Geoengineering Debate

ackdoc

New Member
if you have acidic soils and and you have aluminum oxide, it absolutely raises pH. The chemistry on that is very clear. It raises pH, if you have acidic soil. If you have normal alkaline soils, you're not going to see that change.
In the debate, Dane made the above statement regarding the effects of aluminum oxide on soil pH. And said it as if this is indisputable. But, I just found this page from an extension service that seems to state the opposite: http://www.extension.org/pages/63501/solutions-to-soil-problems:-soil-acidity#.U5EY9xYcXt0

It reads:

"Acidic soils tend to be high in iron and aluminum oxides, as they are the slowest minerals to weather in soil. Aluminum in these increasingly acidic soils is solubilized and will combine with water to release additional hydrogen ions (acidity)."

So, does anyone know more about the science here?

I ask, in part, because I have been spending some time on the sites, learning more about the chemtrail conspiracy theories, as more and more of my social media contacts are discussing it as it is the Gospel. And tomorrow night, the "What in the World..." film is airing at my local library, and afterwards, Dane Wigington and Lorraine Hurley are Skyping in to talk to the audience.

I am either going to go and set up a table outside the library and sell spray bottles of vinegar and tinfoil hats, or I am going to sit through it and ask Mr. Wigington a few questions.

The soil pH thing might be a new angle.

In fact, if I have a few minutes of time to ask Dane Wigington a question in front of a live audience, anyone want to offer suggestions as to what I should ask?

THANKS!

Addendum: I just found this thorough analysis that also seems to contradict Dane's idea that the rise in soil pH he has supposedly documented could be due to high levels of aluminum: https://c.ymcdn.com/sites/echocommunity.site-ym.com/resource/collection/E66CDFDB-0A0D-4DDE-8AB1-74D9D8C3EDD4/Acid_Soils_of_the_Tropics_[Web_Format].pdf
Doesn't it?
 
Last edited:

Hama Neggs

Senior Member
In the debate, Dane made the above statement regarding the effects of aluminum oxide on soil pH. And said it as if this is indisputable. But, I just found this page from an extension service that seems to state the opposite: http://www.extension.org/pages/63501/solutions-to-soil-problems:-soil-acidity#.U5EY9xYcXt0

It reads:

"Acidic soils tend to be high in iron and aluminum oxides, as they are the slowest minerals to weather in soil. Aluminum in these increasingly acidic soils is solubilized and will combine with water to release additional hydrogen ions (acidity)."

So, does anyone know more about the science here?

I ask, in part, because I have been spending some time on the sites, learning more about the chemtrail conspiracy theories, as more and more of my social media contacts are discussing it as it is the Gospel. And tomorrow night, the "What in the World..." film is airing at my local library, and afterwards, Dane Wigington and Lorraine Hurley are Skyping in to talk to the audience.

I am either going to go and set up a table outside the library and sell spray bottles of vinegar and tinfoil hats, or I am going to sit through it and ask Mr. Wigington a few questions.

The soil pH thing might be a new angle.

In fact, if I have a few minutes of time to ask Dane Wigington a question in front of a live audience, anyone want to offer suggestions as to what I should ask?

THANKS!

Addendum: I just found this thorough analysis that also seems to contradict Dane's idea that the rise in soil pH he has supposedly documented could be due to high levels of aluminum: https://c.ymcdn.com/sites/echocommunity.site-ym.com/resource/collection/E66CDFDB-0A0D-4DDE-8AB1-74D9D8C3EDD4/Acid_Soils_of_the_Tropics_[Web_Format].pdf
Doesn't it?
Ask him why he has never made the vid of his UV measurement experiments or updated those experiments.

Ask him why he shows pictures of a KC-10 and says that the flap track fairings on its wings are "spray nozzles".
 

Strawman

Active Member
I wonder if that's really a good idea. It might be too specific and too deep into the debates, so would not really be interesting to the audience there. It might just look like continuing a personal debate or a continuation of internet posts, which will lose most of the people there. I'd stick to the things he says at that meeting. Since he has his talking points, that shouldn't be too hard.
 

ackdoc

New Member
Especially, please, ask Mr. Wigington this question. Would be refreshing to see an answer.
Does the movie show the KC-10, or just Dane in his talks?

Since he is Skyping in to discuss the film, not sure if we will get to see his own supporting data.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member
Does the movie show the KC-10, or just Dane in his talks?

Since he is Skyping in to discuss the film, not sure if we will get to see his own supporting data.
Good point. Maybe it would be lost in the noise, since it's not Dane's presentation being shown there. The "sludge" question would be better, where you focus on the idea that there is naturally lots of aluminum in soil.
 
Last edited:

ackdoc

New Member
I think I might just start by asking the two experts at the Q&A, Dane Wigington and Dr Lorraine Hurley the following questions:

1) Do you both accept the notion of man-made global warming and it's potential for catastrophic planetary changes at some point in the future?

2) Do vaccines cause autism?

3) Do you guys think that the government has created some sort of directed energy "Death Ray" that they are, or can use for things like control of electromagnetic fields, weather modification, mind control or as a weapon?

4) Was 9-11 an inside job?

I'm curious how they would answer these questions. But then I could, I guess, focus in on the pond, that the source was documented as sediment/sludge and that the normal Al content of such material would be several times even what is reported. And question Mangal's expert and conclusion that Al from the sky would alter soil pH. And point out that summer snow is stale and dirty and no one in their right mind would drink it. And ask about Mylanta.

I know he has his talking points on this (yeah, right, "fish poop"). But my questions will be all designed to protect the gullible from my town that might show up at this thing, not convince him that he is wrong.
 

ackdoc

New Member
"Can you explain Bill Gates' role in International Geoengineering plans and discuss how it relates to his foundation's efforts to vaccinate children in the third world?"
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
"Can you explain Bill Gates' role in International Geoengineering plans and discuss how it relates to his foundation's efforts to vaccinate children in the third world?"
That is a brilliant observation. Really, though sometimes attempting to use such logic on a person's deeply held beliefs?

As Mick West has (often) noted, it requires a concerted effort of gentleness, and the results might not be immediately evident. In other words, sometimes there is no 'simple gratification' when attempting to help people to grasp these (sometimes) complex issues.

BUT, every now and then, when the proverbial "light bulb" clicks on, and that person mentions back to you, then THAT makes it all worth the effort!!
 

ackdoc

New Member
I know. If I even get to say anything, ask a question, I hold no hope of swaying the film's hosts and "experts" of anything. But I'm likely to have neighbors that show up out of curiosity. They need to see upfront how much of a farce this is, and not be convinced by the two hours of pseudoscience and sensationalism they will have just sat through.

"What do the Jews have to do with all of this?"
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
"Can you explain Bill Gates' role in International Geoengineering plans and discuss how it relates to his foundation's efforts to vaccinate children in the third world?"
I think you are perhaps overdoing things here by throwing out all these different things. NWO conspiracists generally think that Bill Gates is performing eugenics by killing people with vaccines. But really it's just going to confuse people who have never heard of the theory, and make those who have heard of it think you are a shill.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member
I know. If I even get to say anything, ask a question, I hold no hope of swaying the film's hosts and "experts" of anything. But I'm likely to have neighbors that show up out of curiosity. They need to see upfront how much of a farce this is, and not be convinced by the two hours of pseudoscience and sensationalism they will have just sat through.

"What do the Jews have to do with all of this?"
Is that film the one which has Mangles with his PH test strips? Somewhere there is a Youtube vid debunking that. It shows that Mangles was reading the color of the dirt and that the clean part of the stip showed normal PH. One doesn't even know where to begin in talking about sources like that film and Dane, himself.
 

ackdoc

New Member
OK. You're probably right. But. How do you think Dane would answer the question, or would he refuse to?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
OK. You're probably right. But. How do you think Dane would answer the question, or would he refuse to?
Based on what he says on his web site, he'd try to avoid the issue:
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/how-to-get-involved/
But then there's this post on his site linking chemtrails to Bill Gate vaccination program.
http://geoengineeringwatch.org/htm/
You might want to check if the library has any old books on clouds, and if they mention contrail persistence. The majority of chemtrail beleivers still think that contrails don't persist, and it's helpful to show them old books.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunking-contrails-dont-persist-with-a-study-of-70-years-of-books-on-clouds.3201/
 

ackdoc

New Member
I wouldn't ask about Jews. I was pushing it there. (I did look to see if his site made any such claims, and they're only in the comments section.)

I like the idea about looking for old cloud books in the library itself!
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I wouldn't ask about Jews. I was pushing it there. (I did look to see if his site made any such claims, and they're only in the comments section.)

I like the idea about looking for old cloud books in the library itself!
Look under 551.576 or thereabout :) Even modern books can be helpful to a lot of people.
 

ackdoc

New Member
So. I missed my opportunity. This showing of the film was well advertised. Several people shared it on Facebook. Several local heated debates ignited Facebook comments threads. The show was to be tonight at 7pm. With Q&A from Dane and Dr. Lorraine Hurley afterwards. (By the way, this happened at the Atheneum, the local library in Nantucket, MA.) I was prepared. Had my questions ready. Stood outside the doors from 6:45 on. Watched a total of 4 people go inside. And decided to just leave and go get dinner. I had watched the film earlier in the day on YouTube. Didn't see a reason to sit through it for 90 minutes just to make a point in front of 4 people!
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member
So. I missed my opportunity. This showing of the film was well advertised. Several people shared it on Facebook. Several local heated debates ignited Facebook comments threads. The show was to be tonight at 7pm. With Q&A from Dane and Dr. Lorraine Hurley afterwards. (By the way, this happened at the Atheneum, the local library in Nantucket, MA.) I was prepared. Had my questions ready. Stood outside the doors from 6:45 on. Watched a total of 4 people go inside. And decided to just leave and go get dinner. I had watched the film earlier in the day on YouTube. Didn't see a reason to sit through it for 90 minutes just to make a point in front of 4 people!
Yet I have seen chemtrail believers claim that "millions" of people are "awake" about chemtrails and fighting against them.
 
Hi Mick and Co
Your a very helpful group of people in my book and I have shared this debate with a few friends, most of them intelligent enough to see the truth behind real and credible facts and a couple of chemtrailers. One of them sent me back this link which has this other link in it that starts out saying it is having a go at both Mick and Dane for being un-scientific, but I do question that(when you read it you will see why), but it does bring up a couple of scientific points I think you will want to address. I know it is a blog and it has poor spelling and grammar, which also make me more skeptical of it, but I would like to hear your thoughts about the points made. I haven't gone into the links in it yet, but I thought I would post it here for you all to check out also. It was in a link I found on this one I was having a read of, http://irishweatheronline.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/contrails-v-chemtrails-the-science-that-debunks-the-conspiracy/

Here are a couple of short quote from the blog in question followed by a link to the whole thing...

"1st claim clearly wrong. The particulate exist because of jet plane and more particulate in fuel clearly change the behaviour of contrails.
CONTRAIL AND CIRRUS CLOUD AVOIDANCE , Frank Noppel, Riti Singh - Cranfield University, Bedfordshire, United Kingdom, - Mark Taylor - Rolls-Royce plc, Derby, United Kingdom.

2nd claim may be correct, but different sulfur / particle content can cause such difference too, this also deny the 1st claim:
Contrails: What’s Left Behind Is Bad News, By Nick Onkow, March 4, 2006 "

I did have a quick skim of the 6 pages here and I couldn't see anything that looked like it covered this, but sorry if I am wrong and please let me know where it is so I can check out the replies to this and the links used to back up the information written in the blog.

http://d-trail.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/correcting-contrails-science-in-debate.html

Thanks for your time.

Rusty
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Hi Mick and Co
Your a very helpful group of people in my book and I have shared this debate with a few friends, most of them intelligent enough to see the truth behind real and credible facts and a couple of chemtrailers. One of them sent me back this link which has this other link in it that starts out saying it is having a go at both Mick and Dane for being un-scientific, but I do question that(when you read it you will see why), but it does bring up a couple of scientific points I think you will want to address. I know it is a blog and it has poor spelling and grammar, which also make me more skeptical of it, but I would like to hear your thoughts about the points made. I haven't gone into the links in it yet, but I thought I would post it here for you all to check out also. It was in a link I found on this one I was having a read of, http://irishweatheronline.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/contrails-v-chemtrails-the-science-that-debunks-the-conspiracy/

Here are a couple of short quote from the blog in question followed by a link to the whole thing...

"1st claim clearly wrong. The particulate exist because of jet plane and more particulate in fuel clearly change the behaviour of contrails.
CONTRAIL AND CIRRUS CLOUD AVOIDANCE , Frank Noppel, Riti Singh - Cranfield University, Bedfordshire, United Kingdom, - Mark Taylor - Rolls-Royce plc, Derby, United Kingdom.

2nd claim may be correct, but different sulfur / particle content can cause such difference too, this also deny the 1st claim:
Contrails: What’s Left Behind Is Bad News, By Nick Onkow, March 4, 2006 "

I did have a quick skim of the 6 pages here and I couldn't see anything that looked like it covered this, but sorry if I am wrong and please let me know where it is so I can check out the replies to this and the links used to back up the information written in the blog.

http://d-trail.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/correcting-contrails-science-in-debate.html

Thanks for your time.

Rusty
His first quibble is a matter of degree, does it help "a lot" or "a little". This is actually a matter of some uncertainty and is under study - especially the role in forming "soot cirrus". See:
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/apl/research/science_integrated_modeling/accri/media/Contrail Microphysics.pdf

But my full point was:
The key point being that contrails would still form in the absence of exhaust particulates, because there are other water nuclei present in the atmosphere (there has to be, or we would not get clouds). The nature of the contrail, and the range of conditions under which the contrail might form may well vary, but the point was that the particulates in the exhaust are not necessary.

It was a pretty minor point though.

The second claim, as he notes, was correct.

He's just got a bit of a bee in his bonnet about there being particulates in contrails. I'm really not sure why. The FAA link above covers it all perfectly well, the science is not that controversial. The soot is there regardless of if a contrail forms or not.
 
Thanks Mick, I thought it may have been a bit of a red herring, but I did want to see what you thought of it and also learn more about this myself, as usual you have come up with more of the full picture to explain this all better for me. Thank you and keep up the great work you do with this web site and contrail science. Later
 

Balance

Senior Member
Due to being linked here from another thread/discussion I have to ask, has Dane, to date, published video of UV measurements in Norway, Maine, New Mexico and Florida, or anywhere, in any way shape or form?
 
Top