The Chemtrail Cult has become as pervasive as the ‘chemtrails’ themselves and its proponents online are starting to inflict real psychological damage in my opinion.
In another time and place, I would have bothered to post links to set you on the road to knowing and misery. Now, I can't be bothered.
The first T-shirt I ever sold online was an anti geo-engineering t-shirt, to someone in Greece. I cried. I live on the west coast of Canada. Anyway, the sky is a very familiar place for me. It's a beautiful light show everyday, all day. The night sky is dazzling beyond measure.
One time, we were doing a protest walk against GMO foods and Monsanto (I hope you know about these crimes as well), it's got connections to geo-engineering.
Anyway, some guys starts walking beside me, points to my protest sign and says, you know were protesting chemtrails long, long time ago. I looked over at him. He seems to be about 60 or 70 years old. I asked him, when? He said, 1960's, 70's. I was not expecting that. I asked him, what did you call them? He said, chemtrails.
Yes, there were persistent contrails forming behind commercial aircraft even in the 1960s/70s; in fact contrails were quite prevalent during WW2 as military aircraft ascended to higher altitudes where the air is very cold (<-40C) and ice crystals can condense around the particulates emitted in the hot exhaust plume from the engines. Why are they so much more prevalent now? The huge increase in flights and the opening up of large numbers of new flight routes might just have something to do with it.
There's no debate. Don't take anyone's word for it. Probably best to make a habit of regularly surveying the skies, over a significant span of time. Your own common sense will guide you.
I think the expression is 'whatever floats your boat'. Facts float mine, plus observations. 'Chemtrails' are not being sprayed from military aircraft, as has been claimed time and time again by chemtrail theorists; they overwhelmingly form behind the jet exhausts of passenger aircraft. Furthermore, they tend to form (in the UK at least) when there is a moist Atlantic airflow. When dry air pushes in from the continent, they often do not form at all or are limited to very short trails which quickly evaporate.
In order to spray the atmosphere, there would have be to be international treaties and regulations in place, correct? There are...since the 60's I think.
Anyway, there is so much to it. military, commercial, stock market, agriculture, on and on.. as the say, follow the money.
We had all sorts of nutty doomsayers in Russia in early 90s. Social collapse, poverty, crime completed with now independent (=oligarch owned) media produced a decade of obsession with mysticism, conspiracy theories and worst crooks. I remember sessions by Anatoly Kashpirovsky who basically was pretending he is hypnotising people via TV broadcast. His friend and assistant Dmitriy Gordon became a prominent figure on Russian TV as well and now serves as major Ukrainian propagandist. Anyway, there were talks about climate weapons, chemtrails, toxic nano-insects, alien abductions, brain-damaging radio waves et cetera. It turns out that the products of Soviet education system were highly susceptible to stuff like this. Even tech guys, doctors. And since Western education is not feeling that good as well one can expect a growing audience of relatively sane people subscribed to very questionable theories.
It's not even close yet but the direction is pretty much the same. One can conceptualise Marxism as a disease. Russia had it in acute form and lost national state, 60% of educated class (dead or exiled) and quite a bit of land. Current events are simply late complications. I think that full recovery will take another century. The West has it in chronic form with slow dissolution of social and political order, slow loss of competence and industrial capability and so on. Chronic conditions may seem less threatening but they are actually even worse. I can only hope that somehow the worst scenario is not going to happen.
It just seems a really really inefficient way to go about it. Spraying a few thousand litres across the vastness of the sky? I don't know. I don't doubt they experimented with such a thing. What do we think about HAARP? Everyone lets follow that rabbit down the hole!
It began in earnest in my city four years ago. A couple of planes going back and forth laying down a grid of lines. The lines DO NOT dissipate like a contrail. They slowly spread until the sky is filled with a low level hazy cloud. My wife was explaining it to a skeptical neighbour walking with his nephew. The nephew was in the local University in sciences. The nephew said ‘I know. We have been
Studying this at school. We can actually cool the planet. That is why it is happening.’ He thought it was awesome. It might not be happening where you are. It is where I live.
How do you know they were the same two aircraft? Did you witness them turning round and coming back, again and again? How do you know that this 'grid of lines' was not simply the commercial air traffic routes going into/out of airports? Just because somebody's nephew studied the theory of stratospheric aerosol injection in order to artificially cool the planet does not mean that the persistent spreading aircraft trails you see overhead in your neighbourhood are automatically evidence of such an operation taking place.
As far as I can see, just one of those twelve 'new' cloud types - which have been catalogued and observed since 2008 owing to the efforts of amateur researchers - is attributed to man's activity: cirrus-like cloud formations created by persistent spreading contrails. I'm not an expert on clouds but it would seem a stretch to argue that all of the newly categorised cloud types are related to human activity/geoengineering. It's rather more likely that they are rare formations which have not been noted before, but even if they are becoming more frequent, it is not justifiable to conclude automatically that this is because of human activity, without some fairly hard evidence either way. In the case of homomutatus (spreading contrail cirrus), the evidence that they are man-made is irrefutable, but even here, the evidence that they are the result of deliberate geoengineering is not.
Spot on. This one and the virus no virus madness is totally irrelevant compared to the real biological war killing millions with jabs, lockdowns, midazolam, morphine, remdesivir and ventilators.
Jaime, with all the serious stuff going on, this makes me think of "Close Encounters of The Third Kind."
In the movie, there are *real* space aliens and serious shit going down. When the airforce is holding a press conference, people are asking serious questions, when this old dude stands up and says, "I saw Bigfoot once! There he was..."
That's what this chemtrail stuff makes me think of.
Sure there is cloud seeding, it's well documented. The Chinese did it for the Olympics. But they didn't do it with commercial passenger flights.
They used planes specifically configured to that purpose. They also fired shells loaded with silver iodide into clouds.
Exactly this, and I've noted that whereas previously, chemtrail conspiracy theorists were claiming that the trails were created exclusively by military aircraft, they are now starting to pivot to blaming commercial airline companies for being wittingly or unwittingly involved in a conspiracy to pollute our skies with heavy metals.
This is sad and infuriating. I have long believed that history is the most important subject. Not at the exclusion of all others, but the subject that needs the greatest attention while given the least in schools, and not by accident, I’d wager. But, as an amateur historian, I would say this, wouldn’t I.
At 15 my parents took me to a Civil war reenactment. I was hooked and once I got my drivers license, I joined the closet unit. This love of history, especially that era led me to read anything I could on it. A painting I saw in a book depicted a civil war camp scene in a narrow valley surrounded by short hills. The sky was a vibrant rainbow of color from the setting sun, as scene I had witness myself camping and later as a reenactor. The painting moved me; to think that I, a hundred and twenty years after this amature painter captured this beautiful sunset, I witness similar connected me, in my mind anyway, to those who were here before me.
To read people’s claims that such beauty can only be the result of chemtrails despite the same being capture in all manner of art for millennia or longer boggles the mind. It has other effects. When people I share concerns with on masking, lockdowns and others bring up chemtrails, it breeds doubt in the information they have shared with me on the issues we have in common and even upon my own beliefs. If my beliefs were in part formed by those who believe in chemtrails, how mushroom of what I think to be true is? This self reflection may not be bad, but is it good?
Bill NH HB1700 (The Clean Atmosphere Preservation Act) is an act in New Hampshire, USA which:
Prohibit[s]... the intentional release of polluting emissions, including cloud seeding, weather modification, excessive electromagnetic radio frequency, and microwave radiation and making penalties for violation of such prohibition.
To view the full bill, click here.
Summary of New Hampshire Bill HB1700
The Clean Atmosphere Preservation Act of New Hampshire speaks to weather modification, stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), solar radiation modification (SRM), and other forms of deliberate geoengineering which involves polluting emissions. As the Bill states, this is to prevent damages to “human health and safety, the environment, agriculture, wildlife, aviation, state security, and the economy of the state of New Hampshire.”
The Bill aims to heavily penalize “SAI geoengineering and other intentionally polluting activities” and protect New Hampshire from the Federal government of the US, under the authority of the tenth amendment “where federal programs and restrictions have become oppressive or destructive.”
The Bill aims to dedicate new resources for public reporting (especially lab research) of weather modifying activities, such as stratospheric aerosol injection, and judicial punishment for criminals who break the new laws. Should the perpetrator be found guilty by a court of law, they will incur charges of:
I - …a fine of not less than $500,000 or be imprisoned for not less than 2 years, or both;
II - Shall be guilty of a separate offense for each day during which violative activity has been conducted, repeated, or continued…
The Bill is sponsored by Reps Jason Gerhard and Kelley Potenza. Follow these links to verify that these reps are indeed sponsoring NH HB1700.
What is Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI)?
Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) is a geoengineering technique that involves the intentional release of aerosol particles into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight away from the Earth, with the aim of cooling the planet.
The most commonly discussed aerosol for SAI is sulfate aerosols, which can be dispersed at high altitudes by high-flying aircraft. Once released, these aerosols spread throughout the stratosphere and create a reflective layer, reducing the amount of solar radiation reaching the Earth's surface.
Proponents of SAI suggest that it could offset some of the effects of the long debunked theory of global warming. However, manipulating the Earth's climate in this way may have disastrous consequences, and the potential risks and uncertainties involved are not yet fully understood.
Added an update. 'Debs' thinks that beautiful cloud formations at sunset are "filthy chemicals". It's absurd, but it's really sad that somebody could be so mentally damaged that they cannot witness nature's beauty and appreciate it for what it is, instead attributing it to filthy man-made chemicals deliberately sprayed into the atmosphere in order to make us all sick and to kill plants and animals. THAT is serious mental illness. Well done chemtrail conspiracy theorists. You've fucked up peoples' heads for sure.
My dear it’s true! You just need to open your eyes to the skies. There are chemtrails and there are God clouds. I just with a total stranger from New Jersey, he sees them here, and there.
It’s not hysteria. If you chose to be blind you be my guest. Obtw the earth is flat
You can’t be serious. The earth is flat? Have you ever been at sea? Chemtrails are like global warming. Been around in one form or another since before you were born but we must wait 13 years before the damage is seen. That’s 13 years from the 80s when I was learning of this in elementary through high school, 13 years from the 90s, 13 years from 2000s, 13 years from the 2010s…. Yes, I know, they occasionally throw in different lengths of time, but I have lived past so many deadlines that I am a ghost many times over. Same with chemtrails. How many more decades must I live until I see the effects of them?
From an evolutionary POV, I don't think we're mentally equipped as a species to handle social media. I'm a techy, but I don't do Facebook or X or Instagram or TikTok etc. etc. They seem to feed off endorphins (or some form of addictive brain chemistry, I'm not a head specialist, goddammit) and corral vulnerable people into silos of insanity. I don't know how you can teach discernment, but without it we're all in danger of being traumatised by our own wild imaginations.
“ Indeed, when one is taking a contrary to the narrative position, one is at a disadvantage based on the inescapable reality that every other possible perspective is loaded into the skeptics position, thus your view, no matter how rational, is part of the everything else “denier” camp. You deny GHGs have any possible warming. You deny viruses are real. You are a Moon landing denier, and a “conspiracy theorist”. You are lumped with “them” and often effectively marginalized.
This is why I do not address things like chem-trails, or weather modifications, or the position that there is no greenhouse effect, or the possible US cause of 911, or the “viruses are not real” position. They may, or may not be supportable, but they are in a losing position, (a minority even within the skeptics camp) and often a distracting position from the main issues affecting policy and destroying nations and lives. So, as I have not committed the time and effort required to have a position on those rare views, I leave them be.”
Yet I support Jamie’s post here to directly address this, as I think these positions may well be advanced by those wishing to discredit the very rational skepticism of horrific government policies.
In the main, I agree with you. However, I might be induced to look deeper into these if proponents could offer something, anything, in the way of evidence. Picture of a cloudy sky doesn’t do it for me, sorry.
On no greenhouse effect, that I do engage in as I was taught that garbage in school in the eighties. I have not even sent nor heard that term in so many years I cannot count. I’ve been around quite a few green houses, they are the same all year round. The green house effect was even touted as “the end of weather” due to this fact. When that didn’t pan out, they switched to global warming and then to severe weather caused not be “Green House Gasses”, as this would invite ridicule as it did decades ago, but “GHGs”. This one, for me anyway, is an easy one to refute but only because I was taught in primary school and instructed in it for certification to use refrigerants in the navy. It is BS from the ground up.
That said, it is not worth anyone’s time to delve into this if your instinctive know it can’t be right. The global warming fanatics are as mad as maskers and cannot be convinced to even consider anything else.
GHGs redirect outgoing LWIR of disparate W/L. Some of that outgoing LWIR is redirected towards the surface. This is cause to an increase of energy residence time within the system, in this case earth's atmosphere.
There are only two ways to change the energy content of ANY system in a radiative balance. Either a change in the input, or a change of the energy residence time within the system. GHGs increase the residence time of energy in the system. CO2 is a minor GHG of modest affect, (only affects a very narrow band of LWIR that is not already absorbed by W/V,) and both the intial effect, and in particular the feedbacks are very wrong in the climate alarmism of today.
I deny nothing. However, words do have meaning. If GHGs cause the Green House Effect, then GHGs cannot cause severe Weather for that is not consistent with a green house. GHGs cannot cause cold snaps, unless they are inappropriately named, which would call into question just how much those who coined and choose to use the term really know.
The word "Greenhouse" , is a deep misnomer to take literally, except in the manner of increasing energy residence time, however through very different means. while helping planst grow through more CO2.
And yes, an increase in CO2 is likely to have most of its very limited warming happen at night, perhaps aiding in reducing frost damage, and also perhaps more warming poleward, reducing the intensity of weather systems caused by a clash of warm and cool air. And yes, it is a political term, not a scientific term.
Everything I have seen you post in reply of my comments has been known for at least 30 years. Yet, destructive polices to reduce GHGs continue to be implemented at increased speed and more universally. Governments are attempting to seize farmland and cull cattle to reduce them.
I think we have bigger problems than the definition of GHGs and what they actually may or may not do. Science has ceased being a party to this discussion decades ago.
Yes, percisely my point on why it is very unhelpful to the skeptic postion to deny GHGs as real. Yet you stated, "On no greenhouse effect, that I do engage in"
As an example, the oceans are, in effect, a GH liquid, and some of the solar energy entering the oceans, stays there for up to a thousand years. The oceans hold about one thousand times the energy of the the atmosphere, due to the fact that the energy residence time in the oceans is far longer then in the atmosphere. The energy residence time of SW insolation reflecting off of clouds is extremely short.
Understanding energy residence time is important, so I repeat, "The only way to change the energy content of ANY system in a radiative balance is to change the input, or change the residence time of the energy entering the system."
I don't take anything as "settled" anymore and will generally listen to anyone not profiting from their positions..... But yeah, the chemtrail folks kinda get under my skin. Still, I wouldn't doubt for a moment that there are or could be various experiments done with aerosol seeding in localized areas. I think they'd do it at night though.... :)
One of the problems I have with them is they use regular weather as evidence of irregular weather. Another is that depending on which believer of this. I have been breathing in this gunk since the day I was born or most of my life or hale of my life. At 53, I’d expect that some result of this would have manifested itself as some sort of health issue. How many more decade must I wait to see the adverse effects of this?
California does it all day long, occasionally one can see a rainbow colored burst in the clouds which is the sun's reflection off the metallic particles.
I am 53. Depending on the sources, I have been exposed to whatever is in chemtrails since I was in the womb or “just” most of my life. Som when are the effects of these chemtrails to be felt? How many more decades until the affect my health?
That might be so but the scale is a problem. Even relatively small (say 1000 sq miles) areas would require vast amounts of material and fleets of planes for days. To cover even 20% of Kali??? Possible? Maybe... But I still haven't seen anything yet that is particularly convincing.
According to CIA Director John Brennan in his address to the CFR, it’s very inexpensive to blanket the entire country, less than $10B a year annually in the United States. Coal fly ash, the SA (sulfur additive) discussed is a waste product, so like fluoride it’s practically free. Coal fly ash also contains extreme concentrations of Barium, Cadmium, Strontium, Aluminum and all trace crust elements.
Yep. I'm even willing to consider the moon landing being fake. Landing on the moon requires intelligence and courage and I don't see how our current generation could have decended from people with the intelligence and courage to land on the moon. Nothing is settled, except human stupidity.
Me too... Particularly the current "We lost all the notes" excuses for not getting back to the moon. Something is definitely off. Also if you watch interviews of the apollo 11 guys after they came back... These sure aren't acting like anything other Alpha-male type people I've ever known who just accomplished the impossible ..
I was fully on board with the 9/11 story and being military at the time, understood the call to go to war.
Then "covid" happened and I could see that they were all lying about it.
Then I heard RFK talk about Operation Northwoods.
And I read about Eisenhowers death camps and operation paperclip and the US policy pushing Japan into conflict and Roosevelt almost certainly having radio communication giving advance warning of Pearl harbour.
The NYT reporter covering up the genocide of the Holodomor and the gulags.
The "fortifying" of the 2020 election.
Etc, etc, etc.
Deception is their default setting.
I suspect that Buzz did go into space and that he just wasn't good at speaking, but "they've" lied too many times for me to give a shit about anything they now claim to be the truth.
They sound like flat Earthers and virus deniers. The result of years of deliberate dumbing down of the masses coupled with instinctive and well-deserved distrust of authority.
In another time and place, I would have bothered to post links to set you on the road to knowing and misery. Now, I can't be bothered.
The first T-shirt I ever sold online was an anti geo-engineering t-shirt, to someone in Greece. I cried. I live on the west coast of Canada. Anyway, the sky is a very familiar place for me. It's a beautiful light show everyday, all day. The night sky is dazzling beyond measure.
One time, we were doing a protest walk against GMO foods and Monsanto (I hope you know about these crimes as well), it's got connections to geo-engineering.
Anyway, some guys starts walking beside me, points to my protest sign and says, you know were protesting chemtrails long, long time ago. I looked over at him. He seems to be about 60 or 70 years old. I asked him, when? He said, 1960's, 70's. I was not expecting that. I asked him, what did you call them? He said, chemtrails.
Yes, there were persistent contrails forming behind commercial aircraft even in the 1960s/70s; in fact contrails were quite prevalent during WW2 as military aircraft ascended to higher altitudes where the air is very cold (<-40C) and ice crystals can condense around the particulates emitted in the hot exhaust plume from the engines. Why are they so much more prevalent now? The huge increase in flights and the opening up of large numbers of new flight routes might just have something to do with it.
Whatever (floats) your boat.
There's no debate. Don't take anyone's word for it. Probably best to make a habit of regularly surveying the skies, over a significant span of time. Your own common sense will guide you.
It might not be happening around her. It is around me, absolutely for sure.
sorry to hear that...
I think the expression is 'whatever floats your boat'. Facts float mine, plus observations. 'Chemtrails' are not being sprayed from military aircraft, as has been claimed time and time again by chemtrail theorists; they overwhelmingly form behind the jet exhausts of passenger aircraft. Furthermore, they tend to form (in the UK at least) when there is a moist Atlantic airflow. When dry air pushes in from the continent, they often do not form at all or are limited to very short trails which quickly evaporate.
Thank you for not deleting this conversation. : )
Floats your boat. : ) Thanks.
In order to spray the atmosphere, there would have be to be international treaties and regulations in place, correct? There are...since the 60's I think.
Anyway, there is so much to it. military, commercial, stock market, agriculture, on and on.. as the say, follow the money.
Bye for now. All the best.
We had all sorts of nutty doomsayers in Russia in early 90s. Social collapse, poverty, crime completed with now independent (=oligarch owned) media produced a decade of obsession with mysticism, conspiracy theories and worst crooks. I remember sessions by Anatoly Kashpirovsky who basically was pretending he is hypnotising people via TV broadcast. His friend and assistant Dmitriy Gordon became a prominent figure on Russian TV as well and now serves as major Ukrainian propagandist. Anyway, there were talks about climate weapons, chemtrails, toxic nano-insects, alien abductions, brain-damaging radio waves et cetera. It turns out that the products of Soviet education system were highly susceptible to stuff like this. Even tech guys, doctors. And since Western education is not feeling that good as well one can expect a growing audience of relatively sane people subscribed to very questionable theories.
That's interesting. It does seem that the West in the 2020s is going through something very similar to what happened in Russia in the 1990s.
It's not even close yet but the direction is pretty much the same. One can conceptualise Marxism as a disease. Russia had it in acute form and lost national state, 60% of educated class (dead or exiled) and quite a bit of land. Current events are simply late complications. I think that full recovery will take another century. The West has it in chronic form with slow dissolution of social and political order, slow loss of competence and industrial capability and so on. Chronic conditions may seem less threatening but they are actually even worse. I can only hope that somehow the worst scenario is not going to happen.
Even chronic diseases have acute flare ups. It certainly feels like that is what's happening now.
Very true.
It just seems a really really inefficient way to go about it. Spraying a few thousand litres across the vastness of the sky? I don't know. I don't doubt they experimented with such a thing. What do we think about HAARP? Everyone lets follow that rabbit down the hole!
It began in earnest in my city four years ago. A couple of planes going back and forth laying down a grid of lines. The lines DO NOT dissipate like a contrail. They slowly spread until the sky is filled with a low level hazy cloud. My wife was explaining it to a skeptical neighbour walking with his nephew. The nephew was in the local University in sciences. The nephew said ‘I know. We have been
Studying this at school. We can actually cool the planet. That is why it is happening.’ He thought it was awesome. It might not be happening where you are. It is where I live.
How do you know they were the same two aircraft? Did you witness them turning round and coming back, again and again? How do you know that this 'grid of lines' was not simply the commercial air traffic routes going into/out of airports? Just because somebody's nephew studied the theory of stratospheric aerosol injection in order to artificially cool the planet does not mean that the persistent spreading aircraft trails you see overhead in your neighbourhood are automatically evidence of such an operation taking place.
As far as I can see, just one of those twelve 'new' cloud types - which have been catalogued and observed since 2008 owing to the efforts of amateur researchers - is attributed to man's activity: cirrus-like cloud formations created by persistent spreading contrails. I'm not an expert on clouds but it would seem a stretch to argue that all of the newly categorised cloud types are related to human activity/geoengineering. It's rather more likely that they are rare formations which have not been noted before, but even if they are becoming more frequent, it is not justifiable to conclude automatically that this is because of human activity, without some fairly hard evidence either way. In the case of homomutatus (spreading contrail cirrus), the evidence that they are man-made is irrefutable, but even here, the evidence that they are the result of deliberate geoengineering is not.
Just because it isn’t happening in the skies near you doesn’t mean it isn’t happening in various other places.
Spot on. This one and the virus no virus madness is totally irrelevant compared to the real biological war killing millions with jabs, lockdowns, midazolam, morphine, remdesivir and ventilators.
Jaime, with all the serious stuff going on, this makes me think of "Close Encounters of The Third Kind."
In the movie, there are *real* space aliens and serious shit going down. When the airforce is holding a press conference, people are asking serious questions, when this old dude stands up and says, "I saw Bigfoot once! There he was..."
That's what this chemtrail stuff makes me think of.
Sure there is cloud seeding, it's well documented. The Chinese did it for the Olympics. But they didn't do it with commercial passenger flights.
They used planes specifically configured to that purpose. They also fired shells loaded with silver iodide into clouds.
Exactly this, and I've noted that whereas previously, chemtrail conspiracy theorists were claiming that the trails were created exclusively by military aircraft, they are now starting to pivot to blaming commercial airline companies for being wittingly or unwittingly involved in a conspiracy to pollute our skies with heavy metals.
This is sad and infuriating. I have long believed that history is the most important subject. Not at the exclusion of all others, but the subject that needs the greatest attention while given the least in schools, and not by accident, I’d wager. But, as an amateur historian, I would say this, wouldn’t I.
At 15 my parents took me to a Civil war reenactment. I was hooked and once I got my drivers license, I joined the closet unit. This love of history, especially that era led me to read anything I could on it. A painting I saw in a book depicted a civil war camp scene in a narrow valley surrounded by short hills. The sky was a vibrant rainbow of color from the setting sun, as scene I had witness myself camping and later as a reenactor. The painting moved me; to think that I, a hundred and twenty years after this amature painter captured this beautiful sunset, I witness similar connected me, in my mind anyway, to those who were here before me.
To read people’s claims that such beauty can only be the result of chemtrails despite the same being capture in all manner of art for millennia or longer boggles the mind. It has other effects. When people I share concerns with on masking, lockdowns and others bring up chemtrails, it breeds doubt in the information they have shared with me on the issues we have in common and even upon my own beliefs. If my beliefs were in part formed by those who believe in chemtrails, how mushroom of what I think to be true is? This self reflection may not be bad, but is it good?
Overview
Bill NH HB1700 (The Clean Atmosphere Preservation Act) is an act in New Hampshire, USA which:
Prohibit[s]... the intentional release of polluting emissions, including cloud seeding, weather modification, excessive electromagnetic radio frequency, and microwave radiation and making penalties for violation of such prohibition.
To view the full bill, click here.
Summary of New Hampshire Bill HB1700
The Clean Atmosphere Preservation Act of New Hampshire speaks to weather modification, stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), solar radiation modification (SRM), and other forms of deliberate geoengineering which involves polluting emissions. As the Bill states, this is to prevent damages to “human health and safety, the environment, agriculture, wildlife, aviation, state security, and the economy of the state of New Hampshire.”
The Bill aims to heavily penalize “SAI geoengineering and other intentionally polluting activities” and protect New Hampshire from the Federal government of the US, under the authority of the tenth amendment “where federal programs and restrictions have become oppressive or destructive.”
The Bill aims to dedicate new resources for public reporting (especially lab research) of weather modifying activities, such as stratospheric aerosol injection, and judicial punishment for criminals who break the new laws. Should the perpetrator be found guilty by a court of law, they will incur charges of:
I - …a fine of not less than $500,000 or be imprisoned for not less than 2 years, or both;
II - Shall be guilty of a separate offense for each day during which violative activity has been conducted, repeated, or continued…
The Bill is sponsored by Reps Jason Gerhard and Kelley Potenza. Follow these links to verify that these reps are indeed sponsoring NH HB1700.
What is Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI)?
Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) is a geoengineering technique that involves the intentional release of aerosol particles into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight away from the Earth, with the aim of cooling the planet.
The most commonly discussed aerosol for SAI is sulfate aerosols, which can be dispersed at high altitudes by high-flying aircraft. Once released, these aerosols spread throughout the stratosphere and create a reflective layer, reducing the amount of solar radiation reaching the Earth's surface.
Proponents of SAI suggest that it could offset some of the effects of the long debunked theory of global warming. However, manipulating the Earth's climate in this way may have disastrous consequences, and the potential risks and uncertainties involved are not yet fully understood.
If one has to legislate against it... Well...
Added an update. 'Debs' thinks that beautiful cloud formations at sunset are "filthy chemicals". It's absurd, but it's really sad that somebody could be so mentally damaged that they cannot witness nature's beauty and appreciate it for what it is, instead attributing it to filthy man-made chemicals deliberately sprayed into the atmosphere in order to make us all sick and to kill plants and animals. THAT is serious mental illness. Well done chemtrail conspiracy theorists. You've fucked up peoples' heads for sure.
Arrg!. I meant to post my comment above here.
Goodbye!
Yeah, bye.
My dear it’s true! You just need to open your eyes to the skies. There are chemtrails and there are God clouds. I just with a total stranger from New Jersey, he sees them here, and there.
It’s not hysteria. If you chose to be blind you be my guest. Obtw the earth is flat
You can’t be serious. The earth is flat? Have you ever been at sea? Chemtrails are like global warming. Been around in one form or another since before you were born but we must wait 13 years before the damage is seen. That’s 13 years from the 80s when I was learning of this in elementary through high school, 13 years from the 90s, 13 years from 2000s, 13 years from the 2010s…. Yes, I know, they occasionally throw in different lengths of time, but I have lived past so many deadlines that I am a ghost many times over. Same with chemtrails. How many more decades must I live until I see the effects of them?
There are no God's clouds anymore, just "filthy chemicals".
Scientifically illiterate nutters will believe any old gobbledygook.
It was ever thus...
From an evolutionary POV, I don't think we're mentally equipped as a species to handle social media. I'm a techy, but I don't do Facebook or X or Instagram or TikTok etc. etc. They seem to feed off endorphins (or some form of addictive brain chemistry, I'm not a head specialist, goddammit) and corral vulnerable people into silos of insanity. I don't know how you can teach discernment, but without it we're all in danger of being traumatised by our own wild imaginations.
ZeroGeoengineering.com
Geoengineeringwatch.org
In my “about” post on my substack I wrote,
“ Indeed, when one is taking a contrary to the narrative position, one is at a disadvantage based on the inescapable reality that every other possible perspective is loaded into the skeptics position, thus your view, no matter how rational, is part of the everything else “denier” camp. You deny GHGs have any possible warming. You deny viruses are real. You are a Moon landing denier, and a “conspiracy theorist”. You are lumped with “them” and often effectively marginalized.
This is why I do not address things like chem-trails, or weather modifications, or the position that there is no greenhouse effect, or the possible US cause of 911, or the “viruses are not real” position. They may, or may not be supportable, but they are in a losing position, (a minority even within the skeptics camp) and often a distracting position from the main issues affecting policy and destroying nations and lives. So, as I have not committed the time and effort required to have a position on those rare views, I leave them be.”
Yet I support Jamie’s post here to directly address this, as I think these positions may well be advanced by those wishing to discredit the very rational skepticism of horrific government policies.
In the main, I agree with you. However, I might be induced to look deeper into these if proponents could offer something, anything, in the way of evidence. Picture of a cloudy sky doesn’t do it for me, sorry.
On no greenhouse effect, that I do engage in as I was taught that garbage in school in the eighties. I have not even sent nor heard that term in so many years I cannot count. I’ve been around quite a few green houses, they are the same all year round. The green house effect was even touted as “the end of weather” due to this fact. When that didn’t pan out, they switched to global warming and then to severe weather caused not be “Green House Gasses”, as this would invite ridicule as it did decades ago, but “GHGs”. This one, for me anyway, is an easy one to refute but only because I was taught in primary school and instructed in it for certification to use refrigerants in the navy. It is BS from the ground up.
That said, it is not worth anyone’s time to delve into this if your instinctive know it can’t be right. The global warming fanatics are as mad as maskers and cannot be convinced to even consider anything else.
GHGs redirect outgoing LWIR of disparate W/L. Some of that outgoing LWIR is redirected towards the surface. This is cause to an increase of energy residence time within the system, in this case earth's atmosphere.
There are only two ways to change the energy content of ANY system in a radiative balance. Either a change in the input, or a change of the energy residence time within the system. GHGs increase the residence time of energy in the system. CO2 is a minor GHG of modest affect, (only affects a very narrow band of LWIR that is not already absorbed by W/V,) and both the intial effect, and in particular the feedbacks are very wrong in the climate alarmism of today.
Some very very strong skeptics of Global Warming, all highly educated, and well published PHDs, accept what I state above. When you "deny" GHGs, you aid in marginalizing these PHD scientists. I list some of them here, and you may consider to read my paper on Global Warming here. https://open.substack.com/pub/anderdaa7/p/global-warming?r=slvym&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
I deny nothing. However, words do have meaning. If GHGs cause the Green House Effect, then GHGs cannot cause severe Weather for that is not consistent with a green house. GHGs cannot cause cold snaps, unless they are inappropriately named, which would call into question just how much those who coined and choose to use the term really know.
The word "Greenhouse" , is a deep misnomer to take literally, except in the manner of increasing energy residence time, however through very different means. while helping planst grow through more CO2.
And yes, an increase in CO2 is likely to have most of its very limited warming happen at night, perhaps aiding in reducing frost damage, and also perhaps more warming poleward, reducing the intensity of weather systems caused by a clash of warm and cool air. And yes, it is a political term, not a scientific term.
Everything I have seen you post in reply of my comments has been known for at least 30 years. Yet, destructive polices to reduce GHGs continue to be implemented at increased speed and more universally. Governments are attempting to seize farmland and cull cattle to reduce them.
I think we have bigger problems than the definition of GHGs and what they actually may or may not do. Science has ceased being a party to this discussion decades ago.
Yes, percisely my point on why it is very unhelpful to the skeptic postion to deny GHGs as real. Yet you stated, "On no greenhouse effect, that I do engage in"
As an example, the oceans are, in effect, a GH liquid, and some of the solar energy entering the oceans, stays there for up to a thousand years. The oceans hold about one thousand times the energy of the the atmosphere, due to the fact that the energy residence time in the oceans is far longer then in the atmosphere. The energy residence time of SW insolation reflecting off of clouds is extremely short.
Understanding energy residence time is important, so I repeat, "The only way to change the energy content of ANY system in a radiative balance is to change the input, or change the residence time of the energy entering the system."
I don't take anything as "settled" anymore and will generally listen to anyone not profiting from their positions..... But yeah, the chemtrail folks kinda get under my skin. Still, I wouldn't doubt for a moment that there are or could be various experiments done with aerosol seeding in localized areas. I think they'd do it at night though.... :)
One of the problems I have with them is they use regular weather as evidence of irregular weather. Another is that depending on which believer of this. I have been breathing in this gunk since the day I was born or most of my life or hale of my life. At 53, I’d expect that some result of this would have manifested itself as some sort of health issue. How many more decade must I wait to see the adverse effects of this?
California does it all day long, occasionally one can see a rainbow colored burst in the clouds which is the sun's reflection off the metallic particles.
We used to just call that “smog”, for which LA was infamous for.
Smog is much different looking than chemtrails.
I am 53. Depending on the sources, I have been exposed to whatever is in chemtrails since I was in the womb or “just” most of my life. Som when are the effects of these chemtrails to be felt? How many more decades until the affect my health?
...or refracted from water vapor.
That might be so but the scale is a problem. Even relatively small (say 1000 sq miles) areas would require vast amounts of material and fleets of planes for days. To cover even 20% of Kali??? Possible? Maybe... But I still haven't seen anything yet that is particularly convincing.
According to CIA Director John Brennan in his address to the CFR, it’s very inexpensive to blanket the entire country, less than $10B a year annually in the United States. Coal fly ash, the SA (sulfur additive) discussed is a waste product, so like fluoride it’s practically free. Coal fly ash also contains extreme concentrations of Barium, Cadmium, Strontium, Aluminum and all trace crust elements.
Edit: Link helps! Brennan discusses the program cost around the 12:00 minute mark. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIQDqxl9FtM&t=881s&pp=2AHxBpACAQ%3D%3D
Yes well, I see it where I live. It is done over days... several days, a week.
Yep. I'm even willing to consider the moon landing being fake. Landing on the moon requires intelligence and courage and I don't see how our current generation could have decended from people with the intelligence and courage to land on the moon. Nothing is settled, except human stupidity.
Me too... Particularly the current "We lost all the notes" excuses for not getting back to the moon. Something is definitely off. Also if you watch interviews of the apollo 11 guys after they came back... These sure aren't acting like anything other Alpha-male type people I've ever known who just accomplished the impossible ..
Ha, who said we did not go back to the moon because we lost all the notes? At least link to such an assertion.
Please people, "suffcient unto the day is the evil therof."
I think it was Buzz Aldrin who, on video, claimed NOT to have been to space.
The thing I can't wrap my head around would be the scale of such a deception... However after the past 3 years...
I was fully on board with the 9/11 story and being military at the time, understood the call to go to war.
Then "covid" happened and I could see that they were all lying about it.
Then I heard RFK talk about Operation Northwoods.
And I read about Eisenhowers death camps and operation paperclip and the US policy pushing Japan into conflict and Roosevelt almost certainly having radio communication giving advance warning of Pearl harbour.
The NYT reporter covering up the genocide of the Holodomor and the gulags.
The "fortifying" of the 2020 election.
Etc, etc, etc.
Deception is their default setting.
I suspect that Buzz did go into space and that he just wasn't good at speaking, but "they've" lied too many times for me to give a shit about anything they now claim to be the truth.
Rant over.
Awomen brother! Preach it ...
Nope
I'll see if I can find the one I'm thinking of, rather than the one where he mangles his words.
Oh yeah, I didn't even think about why we haven't gone back. I always attributed that to a lack of funding or no monetary gain from going to the moon.
They sound like flat Earthers and virus deniers. The result of years of deliberate dumbing down of the masses coupled with instinctive and well-deserved distrust of authority.
I get mind pictures of old men shouting at the sky. I’ve got enough to worry about. Let’s say I’m agnostic about all this. Neither here nor there.
Flat earthers are not questioning, they assert the earth is flat and reject all evidence to the contrary. They are prime examples of scientism.