|
Post by BigBunny on Sept 16, 2006 10:16:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by halva on Sept 16, 2006 10:55:31 GMT -5
breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=102Thanks for this link, Socrates. Jerry Fletcher is a low-keyed, subtle manipulator, employing many of the familiar Reynolds-type tricks, but more politely. I wonder how he would handle an aggressive opponent.
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Sept 16, 2006 11:11:41 GMT -5
Thanks for this link, Socrates. Jerry Fletcher is a low-keyed, subtle manipulator, employing many of the familiar Reynolds-type tricks, but more politely. I wonder how he would handle an aggressive opponent. Others have tried. I think most of them just left the forum. I tried to reason with him and find middle ground, but then he couldn't hold back from making a mockery out of anything to do with "chemtrails". No solid points from the pro side were ever addressed. I think if someone like yourself showed up, they would be in over their heads. As it is, they try to ignore the subject, but then whenever it gets bumped back to page one from page three, they are forced to see how many more thousands of people have viewed the thread compared to the other threads at the place.
|
|
|
Post by BigBunny on Sept 16, 2006 12:32:29 GMT -5
Socrates to assist you in some degree if I may.
I've read Fletcher as linked and this individual seems to be concentrating on the term 'spraying' amongst others in reference to CTs. I and others are guilty of using this term loosely to denote Chemtrail activity whereas in fact it is not spraying per se that is occurring but it is distribution of CTs via the exhaust of aircraft. The constituent materials complained of are in the fuel itself.
You have noted a debate over barium v. sulfate. Again it is not that simple. The barium referred to in CT articles needs to be defined. Are we talking about barium in its pure form? If so, then it didn't come from a CT. If we are talking about barium oxide or barium sulfate then it may be part of a limited military experiment. However if you are talking about global distribution then you are talking about the sulfate constituents of the current fuels in general aviation use. Of course there is another aspect to this debate as well which is that sulfates will create cirrus aviaticus far more readily than barium oxide ever will.
Of course you will also hear about alumiinium being one of the culprits. No doubt you have read about aluminium chaff being sprayed. The simple history behind the application of chaff lies in its use as an air defence to anti-aircraft missiles. The chaff is NOT of the appropriate particularate size for aerosol use. If any aluminium is present it is more likely to be the detritus from the engine as opposed to an active ingredient in the aerosol mix.
Further you will have noted a degree of bone-pointing at the USAF and lately NATO air forces as being the delivery mechanisms. Alas this is not so. The delivery mechanism lies with commercial aviation. It is true that the military does conduct atmospheric operations with a view to achieving better communications etc. However such operations are limited in scope when compared to the global CT activity.
As for the guilty parties it is unlikely to be any 1 government or alliance thereof. The most likely culprits are multinational corporations run on the principle of "greed is good" which traverse national boundaries with impunity.
Having written this short reply there are 3 very important points that must be made:
1. We should be very careful that we do not allow this process of discovery and education to be hijacked by amateur politicians intent on grandstanding. Ths is not the way to achieve a sustainable resistance to this activity. Also we have to remember we are up against a megalithic machine which is quite capable of anything. (Although you do know you are making an impression on an alphabet agency or two when you find your telephone is bugged apart from any other niceties.)
2. We must realise that as the atmosphere is changed so too is the environment in which we live. The changes occurring with the onset of new diseases and the recurrence of old ones (albeit packaged slightly differently) is but one example of the changes occurring. There are fundamental changes occurring now which will affect the future survivability of the human race. And the brutal truth is that even if we reverse emissions I believe that many of the environmental changes are irreversible in the long term.
3. We must accept that the CT phenomenon is part only of a wider phenomenon so that we shouldn't be dismissive of the other indicators as they arise. To suggest that we segregate and compartmentalize this phenomenon is to fall into a carefully laid trap. The CT phenomenon is part of a greater evil which you will have to confront in time.
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Sept 16, 2006 17:12:37 GMT -5
I'm pretty much done with that website. There doesn't seem to be a point in continuing. Even if I could improve on my posting, it wouldn't serve any purpose over there. Everything to them is fake this, fake that. I got a bit of satisfaction in taking them all on. I just didn't want them to keep letting the subject drop off the front pages.
I pointed out to someone that "chemtrails" have only been heavily reported since 1997 after that person said there was some turbo something change back in 1985 explaining the fake cloud cover. Then someone else said 1997 was when Carnicom and Will Thomas started the "hoax". You know how it is with debunkers, they twist the words, change the meanings of comments. At this surprisingly boring website, everyone seems to take turns taking swings at Rense, Alex Jones, 9/11 personalities. Sure those are easy targets. Maybe that website is all about ruining the credibility of the idea of internet fakery by seeming as fake as any of the others they attack.
"this individual seems to be concentrating on the term 'spraying' amongst others in reference to CTs. I and others are guilty of using this term loosely to denote Chemtrail activity whereas in fact it is not spraying per se that is occurring but it is distribution of CTs via the exhaust of aircraft. The constituent materials complained of are in the fuel itself."
They definitely love to play "gotcha". I agree with you that we need to sound unlike crazy conspiracy knuckleheads as much as possible. Rosalind Peterson or Thomas, I forget who, doesn't use the word "chemtrails" for example. I don't usually say there was "spraying", but that fake cloud cover was produced by aircraft. When you say the CT material is from the jet fuel, how do you know that? Are you saying there are different types of fuel, one for commercial aircraft and then this sulfur concoction used for the aerosol operations?
OK, I found your answer perhaps.
"...if you are talking about global distribution then you are talking about the sulfate constituents of the current fuels in general aviation use."
I thought that "chemtrails" have nothing to do as regards to the conditions needed for natural contrails to form. I logically do not understand how general aviation jet fuel is responsible for what we are seeing. Plus, when I see them "spraying", it looks like they are filling in spaces between clouds while seemingly not being on any normal flight path, and that it is being done towards where the sun is shining.
"We should be very careful that we do not allow this process of discovery and education to be hijacked by amateur politicians intent on grandstanding."
If this is an ad hominen attack on Halva, I don't want to address that. I'm not going to judge him based on a day or two of posts. Everyone is flawed, everyone is special. Even if someone is shown to be wrong on something, it doesn't mean they are necessarily a plant. Perhaps this is why Chem11 has that fight club, to keep heated disagreements out of threads designed for overall clarity.
"We must accept that the CT phenomenon is part only of a wider phenomenon so that we shouldn't be dismissive of the other indicators as they arise. To suggest that we segregate and compartmentalize this phenomenon is to fall into a carefully laid trap."
You lost me on this one. I think "chemtrails" are another example of hidden knowledge, and I think "chemtrails" is a separate issue from nearly everything. This might sound crazy, but I'm not really into conspiracy theories. Just the facts, and we don't need no stinking badges is good enough for me.
Maybe we need to compartmentalize "chemtrails" to separate the wheat from the military chaff. The first questions I had for your post do leave me a bit confused. I think aerosol operations hasn't anything to do with regular aircraft or their jet fuel. Yet I do agree that too much emphasis on barium and HAARP is off the mark.
I'm sticking with ozone hole and/or global warming mitigation as the rationale behind the program.
|
|
|
Post by Swamp Gas on Sept 16, 2006 17:43:33 GMT -5
Et in Arcadia Ego/Sickle found a government PDF awhile ago that called it "Aerosol Mitigation"
That's what i use.
|
|
|
Post by halva on Sept 17, 2006 2:08:10 GMT -5
Thanks for this link, Socrates. Jerry Fletcher is a low-keyed, subtle manipulator, employing many of the familiar Reynolds-type tricks, but more politely. I wonder how he would handle an aggressive opponent. Others have tried. I think most of them just left the forum. I tried to reason with him and find middle ground, but then he couldn't hold back from making a mockery out of anything to do with "chemtrails". No solid points from the pro side were ever addressed. I think if someone like yourself showed up, they would be in over their heads. As it is, they try to ignore the subject, but then whenever it gets bumped back to page one from page three, they are forced to see how many more thousands of people have viewed the thread compared to the other threads at the place. The only forum I have ever gone to that was infested with debunkers was CTC. That was at the beginning of my interest in this subject. I have never sought out debunkers for the sake of arguing with them, and when I was elected to the Council at CTC I tried to have them all thrown off, starting with Reynolds. I went to Arianna's as it was then because she had just written an article" "It's not nice to fool with Mother Nature" in reaction to the "Pentagon Report" on Climate Change. Her being Greek was also not irrelevant for me. As it turns out her successful opponent for the California governorship Schwarzenegger may have politics that are at any rate not worse than hers and possibly better. "Chemtrails" were at that time not being discussed at Arianna's, but Reynolds immediately showed up along with a bunch of hangers on and proceeded to try to drive away anyone wanting to talk about "chemtrails" from other than a debunking "point of view". On the subject of military vs civilian aircraft, it is only in photographs that I have seen civilian airliners giving off anything that looks like chemtrails/mitigating aerosols. Here on the island of Aigina there are basically two categories of aircraft flying over: civilian air traffic heading for Athens international airport, which I have never seen leaving any kind of visible trails, and other aircraft going up and down the Saronic Gulf (at a ninety degree angle to the other traffic) and leaving trails. It is claimed that these aircraft operate from the military airport at Eleusis.
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Sept 17, 2006 13:54:58 GMT -5
I don't understand how "chemtrails" could be the result of a change in jet fuel. What I mean is if the muck is a result of jet fuel, to me it isn't the same jet fuel being used by commercial flights. When I observe what looks to me to be aerosol mitigation, the planes in action do not appear to be following normal flight patterns. They appear to be criss crossing, going parallel, filling in gaps between the normal clouds. When I witness this happening, I don't see this occurring from horizon to horizon. I see the formation of fake clouds generated in the direction of the sun. I mentioned earlier that I do not believe in "conspiracy theories". I will clarify this. I do not believe in the stereotyping of the questioning of coincidence theories as being loony conspiracy chatter. I also resent the massive infiltration of the internet by paid hacks and their useful idiots. I came across two MSNBC articles yesterday which perhaps foreshadow how the debate is about to evolve. Warming expert: Only decade left to act in timeIn this article, the point seems to be that carbon dioxide emissions must drop immediately. There is no mention of the Dr. Frankenstein approaches that many believe are already in place. Can pollutant stave off warming crisis?In this article, the geo-engineering viewpoint is put forward that placing sulfate aerosols in the atmosphere along with the cutting of carbon dioxide emissions could be effective in mitigating global warming, that it would buy us time.
|
|
|
Post by halva on Sept 17, 2006 14:47:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by halva on Sept 17, 2006 14:59:57 GMT -5
A blue ribbon group of U.S. climate scientists have filed an action with the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has "mischaracterized" the evidence of climate change and is thereby avoiding its responsibility to pass appropriate regulation. www.desmogblog.com/climate-science-to-enjoy-its-day-in-court
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Sept 17, 2006 21:16:13 GMT -5
I think I have been on the internet too much lately. I find myself with more questions than answers. My gut is telling me I need to take a break after this post and then come back in the future and see if it makes sense then. What has me going in circles right now is the Chem11/Halva confrontation. Sure this is a fairly nifty thread. It's got lots of links and comments. It provides a legitimate theory as to why an aerosol mitigation program may already be in place. If recent comments made by Hansen (the NASA scientist), Lovelock, and so many others are true, we are looking at perhaps ten years to turn this Co2 emissions thing around. Seeing that our backs are up against the walls, and that global warming is not exactly a new concept, implies to me that we have been witnessing this proposed Crutzen mitigation all these years. I always wondered why the US didn't sign the Kyoto Treaty. I never thought it was because the fascists didn't believe that there was no man-made global warming. It now appears that the reason they bailed out of Kyoto was because they already had their aerosol mitigation program off the ground. Chem11 has made some strong charges against Halva. excerpts from: Wayne Hall and the Marketing of Air PollutionThe problem I am having is that Halva has not answered Chem11's claims. I have waited to see how he would respond but have yet seen answers to these serious charges of shillness. I am not sure what is going on. I do know that credibility is everything. I appreciate that Chem11 has the fight club. He has certainly given Halva a great opportunity to answer the charges. I even sense that Chem11 would take back what he said, if Halva could explain himself. That he doesn't specifically answer what has been said has had me thinking Chem11 may have made a strong case. I do think that Chem11 seems a bit ambiguous as regards to chemtrails versus contrails, but that might be because I haven't read enough of his thoughts on this. I completely agree with him that it is 100% wrong to diss the environmentalists while propping up the geo-engineers. If you're out there Chem11, I would appreciate if you joined up here. I wouldn't expect so many posts from you, but sometimes I wish I could ask some questions to someone who appears to know an incredible amount more than me on all this stuff. I doubt I am the only one frustrated by the turn of events here. It is so much easier to see the familiar writers who we believe are sincere. One test I have for seeing if someone is for real is how do they respond to direct, pointed questions, those that go to the heart of the conversation. I do not understand why Halva can't answer these charges. I've been reading these threads a lot the last year or so, made plenty of posts myself, and am just curious as to why he can't answer the charges. The more I think about this the more confusing it gets. Why is Halva supporting Crutzen at all? Why does he think scientists like Crutzen are perhaps telling the truth, while those environmentalists trying to regulate the pollution are into disinformation. As Halva said, Megasprayer It does appear Halva that you have been lumping contrails and chemtrails together too much. This I believe has caused a lot of confusion. Such types of confusion and misdirection caused me to leave the site I linked to before. I think you need to find a way to explain why you have been supporting the intentions of the geo-engineers over those fighting for clean sky legislation. Am I the only one whose head is spinning over this? You there Swampgas? Should I just drop out of this thing and stfu?
|
|
|
Post by altitudelou on Sept 17, 2006 22:38:59 GMT -5
Hi soc,
Not to defend Wayne, he has pissed me off to no end in the past but I think he just gets so entrenched in a particular issue that the CT subject gets a bit lost at times, like it has with him recently over the geo-engineering debate that he initiated if not outright picked a fight over.
I have been watching but walking around the whole thing going on with Chem11 as I could see this blow up coming for awhile now and I'm glad that I did not enter into it, if I wanted this kind of bickering I would be over at CTC.
It's a shame that two fine minds such as this are going at each other in this manner as both have a great deal to offer with regard to many issues involving our environment and what is being done to it, I think this rift between Wayne and Chem11 will find common ground as soon as they realize that they are not proving their case by all of the rhetoric and they both are better than that.
Wayne should recognize from his past mistakes that mixing apples and oranges to reach a selling point does not always work and trying that with Chem11 really isn't going to work, I believe that if Wayne could just make his point in as few words as necessary he would be far better off with regard to people properly understanding just what it is that he has to say, he goes on so much people do get confused as to his ideas and or theories.
I don't want to rag on ether Chem11 or Wayne and since I'm not really into this thread I'll bug out and mind my own business, that's my dimes worth for what it's worth, now I'll shut up.
PS.
Don't let your head spin, step back and watch the way it goes for awhile, I'm sure things will work out, they usually do.
|
|
|
Post by halva on Sept 17, 2006 23:45:49 GMT -5
I also am going to reduce my Internet presence for awhile. The only way of finding out whether Crutzen's intervention is useable for our purposes or not is to try to use it, in reality, not in arguments on forums.
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Sept 18, 2006 20:27:11 GMT -5
How's it going? The response you gave me took away the pain. I wouldn't say you're not into this thread. It just seems you could do without the CTC type bickering. Hopefully, we can get back to discussing messages, not messengers. They say all the ducks should be in a row. I think they are working out completely. I have formulated opinions on this, yet will keep them to myself. They cannot be proven. One would need to be in a fight club to talk this out in that way. What we can talk about here is what is going on in the skies? Why are the "contrails" so messed up? What is a "contrail" and what is a "chemtrail"? Are we seeing mostly weird looking "contrails" or are most of those we see that linger, are they "chemtrails"? I personally think the shit we see in the skies is deliberate. I don't believe what we see is a result of the change in all jet fuels. Anyone have a thought on this? It is now considered true that aircraft emissions are mucking up the sky. They are shown to have both cooling and warming effects depending on the time of the flights. Aircraft, however, are also emitting the carbon dioxide adding to the greenhouse effect. The confusion for us lies in the time delay between the emergence of the fake clouds to when the scientific confirmation of our observations has appeared the last few years. Why such a gap in receiving this acknowledgement if the skies have looked so drastically different since 1997ish? I hope Big Bunny can answer my question from earlier about the jet fuel. Hopefully he can get a bit of time to explain this sulfate theory better. Perhaps we witness the strange skies more than he does, yet perhaps he has more of the technical knowledge. From Chem11: Megasprayer(Here one can find the info on ACACIA.] Contrails And The Dark SideChem11 really got me thinking when he finished with this: Maybe even a third option remains. Perhaps "they" have been experimenting all these years. Perhaps "they" figured that increased global warming could help speed their crap up to legal status. Were they just stupid enough to think Crutzen's ideas would then be taken more seriously and accepted? I predict large reductions in carbon dioxide emissions arriving very soon. It will be presented as a new deal type situation. We have less than two months to the elections. Knock on wood we get back on track and clean up this Shrub mess. Our President is in favor of legalised war crimes.... I think I am about to not just mix apples and oranges but the whole fruit and vegetable section. End of post.
|
|
|
Post by altitudelou on Sept 19, 2006 18:14:12 GMT -5
Hi soc,
I think that we are on the same page with regard to our climate and what is happening overall to our environment as a whole, there is obviously little that we can do to prevent natural events from taking place such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, etc, ( I know, some will argue that point but that's for another thread.) that said, I have some reservations with regard to whether or not we can or will see reductions in CO2 levels in the near future.
What "We" can effect for certain is the way in which we pollute our environment and how we have strayed far, far away from being anything close to being good stewards of our precious planet, when government mouthpieces utter words that protect the polluters and chose economy / greed over our healthy and safety, then it becomes obvious that we have and are being sold out by those sworn to protect us. ( Corrections and adjustments need to be made in that regard.)
For years now I have been monitoring the changes wrought by both nature and we humans on the environment and more and more I have become aware that we humans have been steadily and systematically polluting our planet in spite of all of the fake "Save the environment" rhetoric postulated by our so called leaders while at the same time kissing the arses of industry and enabling them to continue to pollute at will the very things that all living things need in order to live, our air, water and land.
Given the past and present rampart pollution and what "They" have done and are still doing to our environment and the consequences growing more apparent with each passing year, week and day, there is no doubt what so ever in my mind that "They" have initiated secret aerosol mitigation projects dating back many years now up to the present / ongoing.
Since we do not have access to the research data generated by such projects we are left in the dark as to whether or not those projects are having a desired mitigating effect on reducing CO2 levels ( If indeed that is even there objective.) or whether "They" are just attempting to justify programs that have already failed with yet more mitigation, we may never know the answer to those questions so I think that incumbent upon "Us" to keep on monitoring our environment and keep on sticking the important issues of it's systematic destruction right in our politicians faces at every opportunity and demand pro-environment changes given that our environment is what is keeping "Us" all alive, "They" need to know that we will chose the health of our environment over their political lives, in that regard there is only one choice and it's not some bureaucrats poll numbers, our environment is to important an issue to entrust to politicians alone, we all must be pro-active in that regard or die rightly so due to our ignorance and apathy.
Hope you don't mind, I tried to pack a lot into this post as I have to go out tonight to a town meeting and will not be back for some time, I feel that I have not addressed your last post adequately but the clock on the wall says I got to go buddy, all for now.
|
|
|
Post by halva on Sept 20, 2006 0:37:08 GMT -5
American for "arse" (Lou) is "ass". American for "aluminium" (Socrates) is "aluminum". Why are you Americans adopting British spelling?
I hear that British spelling is used by some present-day supporters of Southern secession and supporters of the South in the American Civil War of the nineteenth century.
They reject American spelling because it was invented by the Jew Noah Webster.
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Sept 20, 2006 1:42:23 GMT -5
Hi soc, I think that we are on the same page with regard to our climate and what is happening overall to our environment as a whole, there is obviously little that we can do to prevent natural events from taking place such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, etc, ( I know, some will argue that point but that's for another thread.) that said, I have some reservations with regard to whether or not we can or will see reductions in CO2 levels in the near future... I wouldn't put it past them that they have some sci-fi tricks up their sleeves. I think it's very important, however, to present the things we can that are most likely to be taken seriously by masses of people. I'm starting to think Al Gore will be the next President. Even Shrub seems to be doing a turnaround on global warming. The game is over for climate-change debunking. Outrageous conspiracy theories and the paid debunking efforts have hurt us in the past. I think Chem11's political strategy makes sense. Those who are messing up our atmosphere are going to have to be the ones to pay for the repairs. There's no way any of us are gonna quietly accept some 20 year stall tactic through the geo-engineering. A teacher I had way back warned us about the evangelical, right-wing fascists. I know in my heart that they have stolen these past elections, because I never could see where they could gain any real power. I mean, Pat Robertson types are ridiculous. Dick Cheney is VP? This is definitely Bizarro times going on. I think Gore will be the next President for what it's worth. He has changed a lot, kind of a Forest Gump evolution. He has lost that John Kerry stiff neck affliction. Halva wrote, "American for "arse" (Lou) is "ass". American for "aluminium" (Socrates) is "aluminum". Why are you Americans adopting British spelling? I hear that British spelling is used by some present-day supporters of Southern secession and supporters of the South in the American Civil War of the nineteenth century. They reject American spelling because it was invented by the Jew Noah Webster. " I use the word arse because I lived in Ireland, and also because it's a classier way to say it. I also spell aluminum the way I just wrote it. If I wrote it differently, it was a most fortunate typo. Some of us actually respect and like Europeans, we like the accents, turns of phrase. Man, you can get real strange at times. Jew this, Jew that, you write on the thread at the other place with some skinhead who calls Mel Gibson his hero. You busted me and Lou. We are carpetbaggers or scalawags, I forget which is which. We present ourselves as being from the Northeast but we are really from Dixieville. I'm from Memphis, Tennessee and Lou is from Paris, Texas. We reject all nonsense from that zionist dictionary. OK, just being sarcastic, have you any explanation why you think Paul Crutzen could be a "goodie"? Can you explain how those fighting for carbon dioxide emissions reductions could be the bad guys? That's pretty wild stuff you're saying there. I appreciate Chem11 pointing it out. He nailed you pretty good. With all the writing you do, there's no way for you to explain his complete slam job on you? He wrote an essay called Wayne Hall and the Marketing of Pollution. Ouch.
|
|
|
Post by halva on Sept 20, 2006 4:29:23 GMT -5
Have you any explanation why you think Paul Crutzen could be a "goodie"? Can you explain how those fighting for carbon dioxide emissions reductions could be the bad guys? That's pretty wild stuff you're saying there. I appreciate Chem11 pointing it out. He nailed you pretty good. With all the writing you do, there's no way for you to explain his complete slam job on you? He wrote an essay called Wayne Hall and the Marketing of Pollution. Ouch. I'm trying to organize it so that we can find out whether Crutzen has anything to offer us or not. Chem's strategy just involves going along with what is happening in California anyway. I'm not interested in fighting him because I think it is good what is happening in California. Look at David Stewart's article on that (next posting). I was just trying to find out whether Chem wanted to be part of an initiative in relation to Crutzen, and he made it clear that he doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by halva on Sept 20, 2006 4:31:35 GMT -5
David Stewart wrote this: SCHWARZENEGGER FOR PRESIDENT of THE REPUBLIC OF CALIFORNIA FOR 2008! That is actually a bumper sticker and a local “joke”. However this holds a sentiment in it which is talked seriously about in growing numbers, basically California seceding from the USA. Some facts about California: It is the 5th largest economy of the world. www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2001/06/11/daily42.htmlWe hold 10% of the US population: at 33,871,648 www.southlandrealestate.com/CensusCaliforniaHistoricalfrm.htmWe produce 25% of the national harvest. Oil and Natural Gas: We are the 4th largest producer of the Nation’s oil and natural gas – we used to be 3rd, and that is based on those reserves that are tapped. Alaska and Texas are the big guys,the gulf Coast works into that too. While those areas have been tapped (harder and harder) California has quietly been capping wells, shutting down pumping stations and not “officially” prospecting (looking for) more reserves. I’m willing to bet that the official announcement of our capacity is well below what is actually there. A friend of mine works for one of the big oil companies, he retired from the field to a cozy office position, however in his youth he was one of those guys who worked the drills and then worked on pump maintenance. In his later years in the field he personally supervised the shut down and capping of oil wells that still had lots and lots of oil in them(1990’s). (In Kern Country mostly, but elsewhere too) How much oil do we actually sit on? Probably more than Alaska, maybe as much as Iraq which we are presently fighting for. Recently (about 6 months ago) oil “broke through” the ground here in the Valley in an “unexpected” place, well north of Kern County. At first it was thought to be a pipe line, but then it was reported that it was a natural break from an up to then unknown reserve – then suddenly the news story disappeared. We personally went to the spot of ground. I have seen the La Brea Tar Pits of Los Angeles – it looked something like that, except there was chain link fencing, a lot of heavy equipment and a “clean up” effort underway along with a capping of the bubbling crude. How much do you want to bet that that source will be capped and not tapped for a long while to come? Kern County California: “The valley, of course, is not all agriculture. The 'kicker', especially in the far south end, has long been petroleum. Kern is the nation's number one oil-producing county, accounting for more than half of the state's production even when the off-shore component is included. Kern alone produces more crude oil than Oklahoma!” geography.berkeley.edu/ProjectsResources/Publications/Parsons_SauerLect.htmlThen why on earth is California paying through the nose for oil/gasoline when we hold 21 refineries (most of the west coast production), we receive a large shipment of oil from overseas and Alaska andrefine and pump that to the rest of the USA? Not because oil companies are making a profit, but because state taxes on oil products has steadily increased – while at the same times tax breaks on solar, wind and now hybrid cars has been on the increase. Mind the Californian Government is not actually paying that out to people, instead it is offering tax incentives to companies and local governments to actually offer the breaks. That is cheaper for the State than actually handing out a check to each owner. Bank of America was recently brought into that fold (here in California). Solar power: www.partsonsale.com/nutshell1.html there are others out there. www.petitiononline.com/casec/petition.html lays out a lot of interesting points about California and the rest of the USA – consider those a moment when you think of Sen. James Inhofe, R-Oklahoma. SOSDD (Same old shit, different day) Ok, Schwarzenegger is Republican, supported by President Bush, er, I mean was supported by the President. Why was Schwarzenegger supported? Because Bush thought he had a nice puppet to “control” California and its wealth. Schwarzenegger is proving to be thinking, self motivated, self interested (and sincerely interested in the State of California’s well being. Something that Bush and company (and the rest of the USA) dislike. What isn’t national and international news is that we here in California are well aware that the USA does not have our best interests in mind. Bush made that clear in 2001 when we suffered from rolling black outs. Yeah, you all might hear that we are close to another energy crises, but we are now holding our “cards” close to our chests. The fact is that when the news tells us we are at Stage whatever of a power crunch business and home owners turn off lights to conserve. If you think the reason why we haven’t had a power black out since 2001 is due to “good management” by the power companies, you are wrong, Californians have taken it upon themselves to do something. Come to California during a Stage Three Alert, walk into any store and half of the lights are out – This is not mandated by any laws. We are all doing our part to conserve when we can. New Don Pedro Dam is under reconstruction – you can go to TID web site (http://www.tid.org/Default.aspx) and won’t see aword printed – go out to the dam and you see that things are being constructed, machines and construction are taking place – inside mostly, although some outside work is being done too. While you’re on that site note the new power plant: Walnut Energy Center. “Using natural gas for fuel, the Walnut Energy Center is among the cleanest power generating facilities of comparable size in the nation.” Natural Gas wells abound in the central valley, there is one about 1/3 to ½ mile down the road from us. In the 1960’s it supplied the local area, in the 1990’s it was capped – not because it is depleted, but because it was thought that we should bring in natural gas from else where. Another, unmentioned in the media, fact is that about another ½ mile further down the road is another smaller natural gas power station being built. The road (which actually is the same one servicing our property) was all dug up a few months ago from the capped gas well to the power plant – of course we could strike that up to the small fact that along that stretch of road new houses are being built – I suspect that gas pipe was laid from the capped well to the power plant. TID and MID are local suppliers of power around here, both of their sites are “helpful” if you are looking for old information, however both MID and TID are pretty quiet about the actual building of power stations around here. Things are changing – a lot more than what is being said. Now the problems with the Federal Government have been going on since the Bush administration, the one BEFORE Clinton. Reagan, former Governor of California had a soft spot for us – However since 1990 onward California has been treated like a red-headed step child. Gov Wilson (R) (1991 – 1999) is the cause of a lot of power problems for California, he devised and implemented the deregulation that lead to the energy crises, then, in 2001 he had a lot of stuff to say which amounted to “I got’s my money, screw you California” He also allowed the Feds to do us wrong on a lot of deals, if anything he helped to bring about some of those issues. The politics and at home feelings for Bush, his Administration, the Federal Government and recent historical facts have to be taken into consideration. Also note that California has always been the leader when it comes to environment, technology and all of that “stuff”. So maybe environmental concerns is not the real big push in Schwarzenegger’s Cleaner Emissions controls, maybe there are political motivations that go well beyond Global Warming and Climate Change. Those are not actually State issues, those are issues that are more or less left to the local city and county governments, the reality is that the State can not afford to take on more costs presently. Mind the Hybrid Rebates are incentives through companies, cities and counties – this is due to a lack of funds because of Pete Wilson (R) and the Federal Government – Both I stress have black-balled California when it comes to funding. “California is already the international leader in smog control technologies,” said Balmes. “Now we must become the leader in technologies that reduce global warming pollution, and slow the warming process of our planet.” www.californialung.org/press/040614GlobalWarming.html(June 14 2004) Most likely we already are, we have solar power on private homes tied into the grid, which is growing more each year, we are buying hybrid cars, we have the wind farms, we have a lot more natural gas power stations and dam power than you can shake a stick at (Interestingly enough around here they are also tapping the canal system for hydroelectric). The energy crises of 2001 has produced a society which is more aware about conservation and is willing to do anything – ANYTHING to keep the energy flowing. It also produced a state that is well aware of how our National Government feels about us. Think about that – we were doing that well before the rest of the world decided air quality was a real issue. We are being “forced” by the Federal Governments and out of state power companies to become self sufficient and to find local (clean I might add) methods of generating power. Most of us already switched toward conservation methods at home and at work.
|
|
|
Post by halva on Sept 20, 2006 4:32:53 GMT -5
If Schwarzenegger is aware of Geo-Engineering he ain’t saying anything – but I think his policies are telling on how he thinks the problem needs to be addressed. Mr. Senator Dumbass from Oklahoma doesn’t care about the environment, but he does have an axe to grind and hatred toward California.
Schwarzenegger also knows that California is broke – the state is in debt up to its eyebrows and will be for a long while to come. Thus instead of passing laws and trying to come up with more money to support those laws, Schwarzenegger is pushing the local city and counties toward greener, cleaner incentives. Something Mr. Dumbass from Okalahoma either doesn’t know or totally ignores.
The People of California are the ones pushing environmental standards higher and higher, we Vote those things upon ourselves. We agree to them and most importantly we believe it is not the duty ofour government to make us do it, instead “greening” is something we do for ourselves.
I suspect that California is getting ready to stick it to the man by seceding from the union. California has long been whipped for being California, and now, once again, although we have set the highest emissions standards of ANY other state, we are being whipped again.
WE don’t need the USA – They need us.
|
|
|
Post by greenman on Sept 20, 2006 6:26:46 GMT -5
sorry if this was posted already. mainstream news reporting Read Bulletin From: Chemtrails 911 .com Date: Sep 19, 2006 7:32 PM Subject Climate expert suggests adding sulfur dioxide via planes!! Body: MSNBC reports that a "climate scientist has proposed lobbing sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere", using "numerous planes" to do so, to "stall global warming"!! This has already been occuring for years and evidently the time has arrived for them to break the idea to the public... to ease us into the concept and into believing that this is for our own good. So far, the concept has been repeated in several government-sponsored studies but with little public exposure. But we have been exposing these insane operations for several years now. Has the public knowledge and pressure grown too much for them to keep it under wraps anymore? - Chemtrails911.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- msnbc.msn.com/id/14840178/Can pollutant stave off warming crisis? Climate expert suggests adding sulfur dioxide to create shade By Deborah Zabarenko Reuters Sept 14, 2006 WASHINGTON - To stall global warming for 20 years, one climate scientist has proposed lobbing sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, which would work in concert with cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. The sulfur dioxide, a pollutant on Earth, would form sulfate aerosol particles to shade the planet, much as the ash clouds from a major volcanic eruption do, said Tom Wigley of the National Center for Atmospheric Research. Wigley used computer models to determine that injecting sulfate particles at intervals from one to four years would have about the same cooling power as the 1991 eruption on Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines. His research, published Thursday on the journal Science's Web site, indicates this approach would work together with cutting emissions of greenhouse gases, which are produced by the burning of fossil fuels. The idea of injecting sulfates into the stratosphere, some 10 miles (16 kilometers) above the Earths surface, was first proposed and quickly rejected three decades ago as a dangerous tinkering with natural processes. But Wigley said he was prompted to pursue this angle when Paul Crutzen, a Nobel-winning atmospheric chemist, recently suggested a new look at the notion of geoengineering, as this notion is known. Plan would be no quick fix Im not suggesting we dont reduce our dependence on fossil fuels for energy, Wigley said in a telephone interview. I think that thats the only long-term solution to the problem of global warming, we definitely have to do that. But ... can we make it economically and technologically easier by doing something thats also technology, which may be cost-effective? It would not be cheap, according to Wigleys estimates. The most sensible way to get sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere would be to send numerous planes more than the worlds current commercial airline fleet to take it there. This might cost hundreds of millions of dollars, he said. The sulfur dioxide would form small sulfuric acid aerosol droplets. Another method to get these aerosols into the air is the possible addition of sulfur compounds to airplane fuel, which would then form sulfur dioxide, Wigley said. Health hazard on Earth On Earth, sulfur dioxide contributes to respiratory illness, aggravates heart and lung disease and contributes to acid rain. Power plants and other factories are the biggest producers. But Wigley said the amount of sulfur dioxide needed for the geoengineering project would probably cause negligible pollution down on Earths surface, because his model called for less than 10 percent additional sulfur dioxide than is emitted by the burning of fossil fuels. The technology exists now to put this plan into effect, but studies of economic feasibility are needed, he said. It has the potential to stall global warming for 20 years, to buy time for solutions to the problem, according to Wigley. Weve got to consider it very seriously because otherwise we might be in for much worse things just due to emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, he said. msnbc.msn.com/id/14840178/d.
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Sept 20, 2006 16:08:58 GMT -5
Have you any explanation why you think Paul Crutzen could be a "goodie"? Can you explain how those fighting for carbon dioxide emissions reductions could be the bad guys? That's pretty wild stuff you're saying there. I appreciate Chem11 pointing it out. He nailed you pretty good. With all the writing you do, there's no way for you to explain his complete slam job on you? He wrote an essay called Wayne Hall and the Marketing of Pollution. Ouch. I'm trying to organize it so that we can find out whether Crutzen has anything to offer us or not. Chem's strategy just involves going along with what is happening in California anyway. I'm not interested in fighting him because I think it is good what is happening in California. Look at David Stewart's article on that (next posting). I was just trying to find out whether Chem wanted to be part of an initiative in relation to Crutzen, and he made it clear that he doesn't. What could Crutzen possibly have to offer? What are you smoking over there to think Crutzen cares about people posting on the internet? You continue to dodge answering the question of what does this Teller clone have to do with solving our problems. Can you not see the writing on the wall that they are trying to legalise something which we saw through RealClimate doesn't work. You are opening up yourself to the same kind of conjecture that one often hears of Reynolds and other internet "personalities", that they are paid trolls. Right now all I see from you is mostly talk of "jews" and thinking that Crutzen might be a "good guy". It still stands out in my mind how you got published by Rense.Com. You continue to mention this Dave Stewart "deep shield" character who anyone who has read these forums knows resides within the tabloid conspiracy website folklore. I wasn't looking for a cut and paste of Dave Stewart. I thought you might be able to better explain yourself since the allegation against you is that you are a paid disinfo hack.
|
|
|
Post by altitudelou on Sept 20, 2006 18:31:07 GMT -5
Ha, Ha, Ha,....We might just have to start our very own fight club thread here at Gastro, I can not believe you Wayne, why are you even wasting your time and ours nit picking over the "Kings English" we use for time to time as harmless sarcasm and humor, obviously that's something that Greeks don't get, so why don't you just get over it, our culture is our business and not open to debate in this thread as far as I'm concerned ! Ok, can we get back to the real world now, have you all read Al Gore's article " Global Warming Is An Immediate Crisis" posted on 9/18/06 at www.algore.org/ , this article and the research that led up to it is pretty much the defining point, "The Debate Over Global Warming Is Over, All doubt has been removed". Quote: Al Gore. "A few days ago, scientists announced alarming new evidence of the rapid melting of the perennial ice of the north polar cap, continuing a trend of the past several years that now confronts us with the prospect that human activities, if unchecked in the next decade, could destroy one of the earth¹s principle mechanisms for cooling itself. Another group of scientists presented evidence that human activities are responsible for the dramatic warming of sea surface temperatures in the areas of the ocean where hurricanes form. A few weeks earlier, new information from yet another team showed dramatic increases in the burning of forests throughout the American West, a trend that has increased decade by decade, as warmer temperatures have dried out soils and vegetation. All these findings come at the end of a summer with record breaking temperatures and the hottest twelve month period ever measured in the U.S., with persistent drought in vast areas of our country. Scientific American introduces the lead article in its special issue this month with the following sentence: ³The debate on global warming is over." Given the number of world leading climate scientist and researchers that are now on board with the idea that global warming is real and now absolutely proven beyond doubt and human influence is a very real influence in driving global warming, the nay-sayers and paid debunkers and government scientiod yes men are becoming harder to find, as soc say's, Bush has softened his once "No such thing as Global Warming" stance, I would not say that he is coming around because he will never be a friend of the earth but always the yes man to industry and the oil cartels, Bush will forever be at best a waste of space and user of the precious air that we breath. He has two more years in the White House to screw things up even more than he has already and I only hope that he stay's preoccupied with war and the rest of his warmonger ilk and has his attention averted from the environment, as I see it, in this his last two years in office, keeping him away from environmental issues will be the best way of protecting it. Hmmmm, Gore being the next president, I thought he already was the "Real" president since we all know that Bush stole the 2000 election, Bush's has been a liar and a low life thief throughout his whole life, steeling the presidential office is just the height of his dark and seedy career. Gee, it's so easy to get sidetracked by that little chimp chump and his sorry ass actions, sorry about that. ( Note: Wayne, I spelled "ASS" as "ASS", happy now, is that the way I'm supposed to spell, it according to you ?) God, just what we need, the freaking politically correct spelling police, give me a break. I understand the science behind pollutants retarding greenhouse gases emissions in the short term but I do not see it as any kind of a solution to the overall effects of global warming, I would have to see more than just one report on the subject before I would even consider it having a positive effect, after all, pollution is pollution, I really don't see more pollution as being better or good in any way. Well, there is just to much to write about and I'm once again pressed for time and I've just run out of it for writing, looks like I'll be playing catch up later, so later it will have to be.
|
|
|
Post by Swamp Gas on Sept 20, 2006 21:19:01 GMT -5
No need for a fight club.
Please all just stop the bickering.
Halva, I respect the European culture, but all Americans are not Cowboys, Fundamentalists, or Suits. We detest Bush and his Imperialists as much as any Greek, perhaps even more.
Everybody on Gastro is basically on the same side, so let's stop, or we may have to make an "invisible to the world - visible to members area". I don't think it is that serious, but crap slinging can get out of hand.
|
|
|
Post by halva on Sept 20, 2006 23:06:21 GMT -5
I don't want to fight with non-contrarians, here or anywhere else.
Socrates is the one who most wants to impose political correctness on us. But I don't want to fight with him either. I like him.
|
|
|
Post by halva on Sept 20, 2006 23:41:53 GMT -5
Chem has picked me up on this so that I was forced to check back in the files. What happened was that Chem offered to send my article, which he liked, to a number of sites. I accepted his offer. Shortly afterwards Chem announced that the article had been published by Rense. I had not noticed this, because I do not very much read Rense and I had not sent the article to Rense. I see now that Rense had picked up the article from Holmestead, which in turn had taken it from Spectrezine.
My memory had compressed these two events: that Chem had offered to send my article to various sites and had then announced its publication by Rense, as Chem having sent the article to Rense. I remembered that I had never sent it myself. So I plead guilty to inaccuracy. My hope is that this will not lead to me being branded a liar at Megasprayer, as David Stewart has been, with similar or less justification.
I have put up relevant links in the Fight Club posting at Megasprayer.
|
|
|
Post by Swamp Gas on Sept 20, 2006 23:42:59 GMT -5
Oops Sorry halva. I started to edit your post instead of mine.... Anyway Socrates is a good guy, and so are you. So, no need for gut-punching, right? Cool!!!
|
|
|
Post by chickenlittle on Sept 21, 2006 2:30:49 GMT -5
Greenman, The answer that we all know to their question on will the poisons stall global warming?? We all know the answer is NO DUMBASSES!!! take it from us right?I mean it's not as though they haven't been trying already for what?some odd 10 yrs probably,man the media are such asswipes. I personally had not seeen this yet if it has been posted here already,quite interesting that it is getting let out of the bag now,perhaps the will do a woopsy on gee to bad it didn't work,but oh well, it cut the population down. Bastards!!!! chicky
|
|
|
Post by altitudelou on Sept 21, 2006 21:22:43 GMT -5
Chicky,
This is pure hypothetical
Perhaps the way "They" look at it is, what the hell, we might as well try to put up this screen around the earth to thwart this killer global warming and loose a percentage of the worlds population because if we can not stop it or mitigate most of the effects the outcome will be near total world population losses.
Maybe "They" figure that there is little to loose in plastering the atmosphere with chemicals, metals, polymers and who knows what else.
I'm not trying to find excuses for "Them", there is no excuse for what they are doing but there are far better ways of reducing the world population than slowly poisoning us by filling the atmosphere with toxins, that's why I believe that the side effects of the spraying are probably considered just executable collateral losses while there in a panic to avoid a total loss of civilization as we know it.
Either that or they are really trying to kill us all, but that doesn't make sense because they would be killing themselves in the process.
Round and round we go.
|
|
|
Post by altitudelou on Sept 21, 2006 21:26:23 GMT -5
Not a typo,
"executable collateral losses".
They expect that a good number are going to be killed by the spraying, thus we are " executable" !
|
|