TOXIC SKIES PART II

[kola]

Paul Moyer on NBC4.TV Los Angles will broadcast Part II of Series on "Toxic Skies" at 11:00 P.M. on Thursday, November 16, 2006 on the Channel 4 News. For more information: www.nbc4.tv/station/1277631/detail.html Burbank, California

Kola

[altitudelou]

Way to go Kola, thanks for the heads up on the broadcast, it should be interesting for sure.

[kola]

I urge readers to drop him a short email just thanking him for what he is doing...and the fact the news directors let it air.

Let him know where you are from and that it is happening in your state as well..in fact you want to mention this is happening globally.

just click on the link to email him.

Kola

[socrates]

Maybe someone could e-mail him this Russ Feingold letter?

Sorry for the cross-posting of this letter, but it looks important and fairly recent.

It'd also be nice to get a transcript of the Moyer show. Thanks.

[halva]

Socrates thanks for this very useful link.

[kola]

youtube or video google will show the NBC moyer clip if you miss the live version.

Kola

[kola]

A nice piece written by Feingold..it would be even better to get a audio(or live) confession from him.

lets hope the ball keep rolling!! Kola

[lophofo]

kola, do you know if Toxic Skies Part I is also available on Google Video or youtube? I clicked on your link and sent him a thank you email. I appreciate this post. We need more people who are able to use their current positions and credibility to speak out like this.

[socrates]

Welcome to all the new members, and to all members. With the CTC slide from being a very intriguing presentation when Swamp and others were there, perhaps we can fill in for some of that. Hopefully, nice, sincere lurkers can join here also.

[lophofo]

Thanks for the welcome, socrates. I used to read all the time over at CTC. But, I could never post anything, since I wasn't registered. Someone mentioned in a post about this place, it could've even been you. Any way, I'm glad to be here and to be able to actually start posting instead of simply reading.

[altitudelou]

lophofo,

It's always nice to see someone move from being a spectator into active participation in discussing the issues that we do here at Gastro, welcome aboard, looking forward to your thoughts and perspective on things such as the spraying, etc....

[kola]

www.nbc4.tv/news/9155725/detail.html

Toxic Sky Part 1

..if the link doesnt work I will try and post up the transcript.

Hats off to Mr Moyer!!


AHO!

Kola

[Swamp Gas]

Welcome aboard lophofo ;D

We were wondering when you would post, but that has been answered....

Have fun, and this has evolved from the mess that CTC, Carnicom, and others have become to a gathering of like minds looking at the anomalies of our current times, and not just aerosol mitigation.

[kola]

Heres the May 2006 NBC transcript....last nights Toxic Sky Part 2 should be online by tomorrow..( video and transcript)..kepp yur eyes peeled for it!!


Toxic Sky?”

"It's a quiet mountain community, but some residents claim something's happening in the sky that's making them sick."

"Mystery clouds and unusual contrails ... Is it a weather experiment on a massive scale?"

"In a Channel 4 News investigation, Paul Moyer looks into why some say the government is manipulating the weather."

(The video runs 4.30 minutes. For a transcript of the video commentary, see below.)


May 23, 2006: Here is perhaps the first real mainstream media coverage in the U.S.A on the subject of U.S. Senate Bill 517, U.S. House Bill 2995, and experimental weather modification programs that are currently ongoing in the United States.

On 23 May 2006 the NBC station in Los Angeles, KNBC broadcast a news item, reported and hosted by Paul Moyer, called "Toxic Sky" on the Jet Contrails in Los Angeles. and many counties in Northern California.

”It is as fair and balanced a report as you're going to see on network TV. Mr. Moyer himself appears to be genuinely convinced that something unusual is happening. Rosalind Peterson is great in a formal interview setting with Moyer and, in too little time, covered barium, aluminum, and the upcoming U.S. Senate and U.S. House Bills on weather modification.” Brian Holmes, Canada (For more on Rosalind and Bill S-517 - Visit Website: californiaskywatch.com)

”Much of the basic research for this story must have come from this excellent piece in the Alpenhorn News newspaper based in Crestline, California, and from research conducted by Rosalind Peterson since 2002.” Quote: Brian Holmes, Canada

Up to this point in time the mainstream media has largely "ignored" the subject of the ongoing myriad of weather modification programs and experiments. Jets leaving persistent jet contrails that are modifying our weather, covering our skies in man-made clouds and white haze, exacerbating global warming, and polluting our environment with jet fuel emissions, have also been ignored by our elected officials and mainstream media. When atmospheric heating and testing programs are added to this mix of experiments, pollutants, and man-made clouds, the synergistic effects may be adversely impacting public health and having negative consequences on our natural resources.Note: Many of the sky pictures and video portions of this broadcast was filmed in Mendocino County, parts of Marin County and San Francisco. The video sky clips and pictures taken in Los Angeles look similar to the skies in Northern California, especially Mendocino County, CA.


Note: Many of the sky pictures and video portions of this broadcast was filmed in Lake & Mendocino Counties, parts of Marin County and San Francisco. The video sky clips and pictures taken in Los Angeles look similar to the skies in Northern California, especially Mendocino & Lake Counties, CA.


AGRICULTURE ALERT – June 2, 2006

EXPERIMENTAL WEATHER MODIFICATION BILL FAST TRACKING FOR PASSAGE IN U.S. SENATE & HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES By Rosalind Peterson

U.S. Senate Bill 517 and U.S. House Bill 2995, a bill that would allow experimental weather modification by artificial methods and implement a national weather modification policy, does not include agriculture or public oversight, is on the “fast track” to be passed in 2006.

This bill is designed to implement experimental weather modification. The appointed Board of Directors established by this bill does not include any agricultural, water, EPA, or public representatives, and has no provisions for Congressional, State, County, or public oversight of their actions or expenditures.

Weather Modification may adversely impact agricultural crops and water supplies. If the weather is changed in one state, region or county it may have severe consequences in another region, state or county. And who is going to decide the type of weather modification experimentation and who it will benefit or adversely impact?


Our compliments to Paul Moyer and his NBC4 team for a job well done!

Transcript of KNBC "Toxic Sky" - May 23, 2006
(Note: Items in parenthesis are added to the transcript for clarification purposes.)


Paul Moyer: “Tonight, a community in the San Bernardino mountains has a real mystery on its hands. The official explanation here is that jet contrails are causing strange lines in the sky and that it’s pollen making people sick on the ground. But others are convinced it is something else. And they ask: ‘Is the government experimenting with our weather?’”

Cedar Glenn, California, resident Gretchen Sherman: “There is a huge dust cloud.”

Paul Moyer: Long-time Cedar Glenn resident, Gretchen Sherman, says she has never seen anything like it.

Paul Moyer: “How big was it?”

Sherman: “Oh, it covered the entire Cedar Glen area.”

Paul Moyer: A cloud of dust leaving a sticky yellow slime all over her car. It happened again last February (2006). And calls began pouring in to the local Alpenhorn newspaper.

Alpenhorn News Publisher, Dennis Labadie: “And they had a tremendous upsurge of children that were not going to school at that point.”

Paul Moyer: Pharmacist Ed Burrows says it is the most mysterious illness he’s seen in twenty-two years on the mountain.

Ed Burrows: “A lot of eye infection problems, upper respiratory problems, nose bleeds.”

Paul Moyer: The nearby March Air force Base says it didn’t come from them. Others said it was a pollen cloud. The Department of Health found a yellowish tint on a tissue submitted for testing. But (quote): "There was no sign of any biological form such as cedar pollen.” And the test was ruled inconclusive. And it wasn’t long before things ballooned into a sky-high mystery.

Paul Moyer: The story is not just here in Crestline and the alleged yellow cloud. People say the government is up there in airplanes spraying all kinds of chemicals to change or manipulate the weather.
Paul Moyer: Leaving what you see there. And they call that a chemtrail? “So when I look up there and what I think are contrails, you’re telling me are chemtrails.”

Alpenhorn Newspaper Report, Laurie Kelly: “Yes. A contrail would be dissipated by now.” (The Alpenhorn Newspaper article is reprinted below-2006.)

Paul Moyer: “It would?”

Laurie Kelly: “Yes, It would.”

Paul Moyer: Chemtrails. On the Internet they are cited as proof of the government creating clouds to combat global warming. In response the Air Force says that

: “There is no such thing as a chemtrail. The actual contrails are a safe and natural phenomenon. And that people are seeing more contrails simply because there are more jets forming large clouds, depending on weather conditions, as in this video of alleged chemtrails shot near San Francisco.”

Professor Gregory Benford of UC Irvine works with the Department of Energy (DOE) on weather research.

Gregory Benford: After viewing a short film segment of the skies above San Francisco and Marin County Professor Benford stated: “I think these are contrails.” Another film segment brought the following statement: “That’s very odd. They could be very large contrails.”

Paul Moyer: He says the DOE doesn’t know of any jets spraying chemicals to affect the weather. However, he says, we will probably see it in the near future.

Gregory Benford: “You’ve got to, in a sense, engineer all these, so you get the right kind of clouds, with the effects we want.”

Paul Moyer: It is called geoengineering. Fighting global warming by putting a chemical dust in the atmosphere and reflecting harmful radiation back into space.

Gregory Benford: “You could use barium oxide, for example, which makes big fluffy clouds. You could use tiny little bits of aluminum, which is benign in the environment, and essentially manage the climate.”

But Rosalind Peterson of California Skywatch (former California U.S.D.A., Certified Crop Loss Adjustor-More Information Website: californiaskywatch.com) says Health Department records show a sharp increase in both chemicals in the water supply of Northern California, dating from the time the huge contrails first appeared over her home in Mendocino County (California).

Rosalind Peterson: “And what I found was unusual spiking (in California drinking water tests) since the early 1990s, and barium, aluminum…”

Paul Moyer: “What’s the significance of the barium and the aluminum?”

Rosalind Peterson: “I went and got all the tests (from the California State Department of Health, Drinking Water Division since 1984) and all these things in the same test would be up way over state and federal standards. This had to be airborne because how could it get into such diverse regions of our county (and State drinking water supplies)?

Rosalind Peterson: “We have jets going in every direction: Xs, east-west, north-south, circles. There is something going on in the air. I don’t know exactly what but I think there is some experimentation.”

(Note: More information on the unusual spiking of barium and aluminum in California drinking water supplies is located below this transcript.)

Paul Moyer: “Is it legal?”

Rosalind Peterson: “I don’t know because we haven’t had a public discussion.”

Paul Moyer: But what is unknown today may be actual fact tomorrow thanks to a bill soon to be voted on in the U.S. Senate, a weather modification act calling for research in

“...attempting to change or control by artificial methods the natural development of atmospheric cloud forms…”

Paul Moyer: “Doesn’t it seem to you that they’re going to be doing it in future, for sure?”

Rosalind Peterson: “Yes, and if they are, I want to know about it.

Paul Moyer: In the meantime a lot of people are wondering if they’ll ever get clear skies and a clear answer.

Paul Moyer: “The legislation is there. Therefore somebody is thinking about this. How does this make sense…?”

Laurie Kelly: “I don’t know. Maybe they’re practicing.”

Paul Moyer: “…over Cedar Glen, over Arrowhead?”

Laurie Kelly: “Ah, I guess you have to try it out before you use it. I’m not sure.”

Paul Moyer: “Well, you be the judge. We’ll keep you posted on anything further on this story. And there will be more, that’s for sure. More information on the weather modification proposals, check on our website: NBC4.tv.” END FOR NOW…

[kola]

interesting sidenote..Paul Moyer has a pilot license.

[kola]

IT AIRED!! and it is good...

I hope everyone can view it,,if not let me know.

write other news stations and ask why they are not reporting the ground breaking story about the controversy surrounding airplanes and air contamination.

see below

kola

[kola]

www.nbc4.tv/news/10329066/detail.html


try that one.

[socrates]

Hey Kola, and anyone else who has seen it, could you write a bit on it. I can't watch it on the computer I have now, but will definitely see it when I can. That's why I was wondering about transcripts. Like, how are the visuals, they show some good spray jobs going on? Four minutes is a good chunk of time. A whole hour or two by Frontline would be much better, but for now I am grateful to this Paul Moyer dude. And I think it is good that he is a pilot. While a lot of fake pilots have perused these forums over the years, you may know AA767 unfortunately like many of us do, but that is probably that Smell, Jason, whatever company making fake posts, trying to get us to spin our wheels.But yeah, any impressions on toxic skies Part 2 will be appreciated. Thanks.

[socrates]

I finally got to watch Toxic Skies Part2. I think it was fairly well done. Right at the start Moyer framed the spraying if true as being done to combat global warming. I am pleased that he has offered a logical theory as to why such activity would be going on.

NASA says that the technoclouds are a result of more jets. They are backing Reynolds types that what we see is safe and natural. Rosalind Peterson was on pointing to spikes of aluminum and barium in water supplies. Jeremy benford was on saying that it isn't going on but probably soon will be. He promoted the use of aluminum.

Chem11 probably won't be happy that they didn't mention sulfates. I would agree with such a sentiment. Moyer should have gone in-depth about the geoengineering proposals. He could have mentioned Crutzen and global dimming. He could have talked about the Dust Bowl and Mount Pinatubo. He could have reported about the change in temperatures when planes were grounded after 9/11. While it is nice to get any kind of coverage in the mainstream media, I am a bit disappointed there wasn't more depth to the story presented.

I also watched a few other chemtrail videos on youtube. One in particular was brief and to the point. Some anonymous bloke from England in 39 seconds gives more credibility to the chemtrail awareness movement than I think Moyer does.

I think that extended clips are needed to help masses of people really see what the problem is. Olbermann will put on uninterrupted minutes of Bush or Tony Snowjob before analysing with his guests. I think the same approach would work better with chemtrails.


Check out this video

This is precisely what I see as chemtrails.
Here is the transcript to go with the clip:

"Clear Morning 8:00 on the second of May.
The sky's absolutely turning white.
Not a cloud in the sky.
Every single thing is from planes."

If Moyer showed 39 straight seconds like this bloke did, I believe he would cause more of a stir. I believe that chemtrail videos such as this one give all of us credibility. No wonder the debunkers are a dying breed. They don't want any of us to even know this is a topic.

My problem with Moyer is if he doesn't go more deeply into this, he is just a bit more credible than a Charlie Sheen talking about 9/11, but without anywhere the amount of exposure that Charlie got. A good hour show by Moyer on this would be much more effective. This is not a story that can be explained in four minutes. That is why I think the 39 seconds from the Brit are better than the four minutes by Moyer. Yet, don't get me wrong. Thanks to Paul Moyer for keeping an eye on the skies.

[altitudelou]

I liked the time that Paul Moyer devoted to Rosalind Peterson in the interview, she comes across as someone who is very credible and knows what she is talking about and that lends an air of matter of factness to the issue.

The segment was way to short though, it barely gets going and then it's over just when it might be catching peoples attention, I have to agree with Socrates,......

Quote:

"My problem with Moyer is if he doesn't go more deeply into this, he is just a bit more credible than a Charlie Sheen talking about 9/11, but without anywhere the amount of exposure that Charlie got. A good hour show by Moyer on this would be much more effective. This is not a story that can be explained in four minutes. That is why I think the 39 seconds from the Brit are better than the four minutes by Moyer. Yet, don't get me wrong. Thanks to Paul Moyer for keeping an eye on the skies. "

Hopefully the E-mail that this "Toxic Sky's II" segment is going to generate on the spraying issue will force the producers to allow Paul Moyer to do a more in-depth segment, I think people should, in a nice way, be encouraged to e-mail their thoughts on them doing just that.

My thoughts are that at least the spraying is getting some main stream coverage without the usual ridicule attached to it, the fact that Paul Moyer is going to continue with more reports on the subject is not only encouraging but now other main stream new outlets may take the issue seriously for a change.

[kola]

I agree the clip was way too short. But it is a start and I am impressed they did a Part 2 and avoided the possiblility of someone putting a gag order on the program.
I have had email corresponsdence with Rosalind and Paul Moyer. I urge more people to write Paul and Mary Parks from LA 4NBC.
This could easily be a step headed for a one hour documentary, but people need to write in and ask questions and ask for more info. The LA Dept of Water needs to be pressured as well as they did not comment about the issue.

It appears as though Paul Moyer is committed and concerned while almost the entire US media has slammed the doors shut.
IMO, he has the ability to broadcast the biggest story in the history of mankind.

Write other news stations and ask why they are not reporting the "new and shocking" story regarding "Toxic Skies" that Paul Moyer and the LA NBC station has been broadcasting. <wink>
( make them feel like they are missing the "big story")..which they are!!

Kola

[altitudelou]

Well, I have been after the local media to start reporting on the subject for years now with little results, they spout off about the spraying issue not being confirmed by "Higher Authorities" thus it is considered just a conspiracy theory, news directors have told me that they will not report on "Chemtrail's" until a state or government source can confirm said spraying, Ha, we know that's really going to happen when HELL freezes ,don't we?

That doesn't mean that we should do nothing, throwing the Paul Moyer "Toxic Sky" reports in their faces may change some minds in the media but I don't know if it will change their policies?

[socrates]

There is a thread on this at CTC and I am the only one who has responded. That place is a joke. It no longer has the right to have chemtrail in its name.

CTC Thread

"This place shouldn't be called Chemtrail Central....

This is pitiful. KNBC with Paul Moyer puts on a news report on "chemtrails", yet there is no discussion about it. Is it because he opened up saying that many believe the spray program is being conducted to combat global warming, even though such plans would do nothing to cut greenhouse gas emissions? Is it because such a program markets pollution without having to address the core environmental factors screwing with the atmosphere?


Hey Starman, I don't see much posting by you on chemtrails. Is there a reason you have no comment on an event that should be getting tons of responses here?

This is Chemtrail Central? I don't think so. "

[kola]

Lou,

In the wild, small bites from small amimals take down one very large animal. It takes a bit of time and some vicious knawing away but we must keep going for the big kill.

Stay positive and keep pluggin' away!

Kola

[altitudelou]

Kola,

Your singing that tune to the choir, I've been with this Chemtrail crap from the start, I'm no stranger to dogging the media, I'm on a first name basis with a number of news directors and producers of local TV stations here in Maine and over in New Hampshire, Tiff knows many people in the main stream national news media so we are not exactly without contacts.

The problem lies in trying to get them to run material on the spraying, that's the trick, we ask them nicely when something like this Paul Moyer "Toxic Sky" report has aired but they are very reluctant and we keep getting the "It is not confirmed by a reliable source" excuse but we will keep on trying for sure.

We know- they know- we know that it's only a matter of time before they are forced to report on it because of the publics pressure on them to do so, I think that they would have done it before now but there is pressure from the other side to keep the spraying issue off the main stream air waves, the last thing they want to see is news at 6:00 and 11:00 about jets filling our skys with Chemtrail's made up of barium salts and Aluminum-oxide and God only knows what else, that would not be good for their image of secrecy.

[halva]

Kola your input has been helpful for securing a positive and alert attitude here at Gastronamus towards Rosalind Peterson and her initiatives.

[BigBunny]

I do not have any difficulty with Ms Peterson's attempts to raise public awareness on this issue. Indeed I applaud her for it.

However it is a little difficult to justify the argument regarding barium and aluminium pollution of the water supply when Ms Peterson quotes data from 1986 - 1994 to criticize a program which began in 1997 at the earliest. This is precisely my criticism of Ms Peterson's website. Further I find it hard to believe that the only published data is for the period mentioned. Unfortunately the Opposition will have a field day on this point alone.

[kola]

Sorry to be repetetive Lou. My apologies. ( Newbieville)

Yes even Gwen Scott (retired CNN reporter) commented she could not get anyone to take on the chem story and she had several connections.

Big Bunny, You raise some good points about Rosalind's data. I am interested in what The LA Dept of water has to report. In the short NBC Toxic Sky part 2 they had "no comment".

What do you folks think of Alex Jones? Is he acknowledging this issue?

Kola

[altitudelou]

Kola wrote,

"Sorry to be repetetive Lou. My apologies. ( Newbieville)"

""Yes even Gwen Scott (retired CNN reporter) commented she could not get anyone to take on the chem story and she had several connections.""
________________________________________________

No problem here Kola, I just thought I'd clarify how long I've been at this for you, I was a nubie on the web back in 2000 and I know how confusing all of this can be at times, so much to read, what to believe, who to believe, it gets crazy at times for sure.

With regard to Gwen Scott, my point exactly in getting producers and directors to persuade the network execs to Ok the reporting on the spraying, it's not a simple matter of reading material off a teleprompter and showing a bit of video with it, stories have to be run up through the top exec offices and by the attorneys and then past the exec producers that no doubt cut it to pieces if it's Ok'd for programming, there is a whole gauntlet that a special news report has to get through before we actually get to see it.

This subject of Chemtail's / spraying is a touchy subject, it seems that the higher up exec's have been warned not to pay any attention to it or to can any stories on it that come across their desk, obviously they want to keep their jobs so they comply, Paul Moyer must have some real pull with the exec's to get his "Toxic Sky's" material on the air because everyone that I have talked to won't touch it.

I just sent off another e-mail to our local TV stations, even the University TV station with a nice statement about the Paul Moyer "Toxic Sky" report and I asked them if they would consider running there own report or the moyer reports, I doubt that they will but I took a shot at getting them to do it.

Re: Alix Jones, Hmmmm, don't know, I only catch an Alex Jones article once in awhile at "rinse.com", I can't really offer an opinion about him or what he might think about the spraying.

Ros Peterson has done a few things that I question as with the old water supply data from 1986-1994 but then who is to say that there was no spraying in that time frame, there could very well have been some testing going on then in California but it is puzzling why she has not researched more current data which should show even higher spikes in Aluminum and Barium contamination due to the amount of heavy spraying in recent years.

I'm not going to criticize her efforts or her research as she is on our side and trying to find out why they are spraying and what they are spraying, even if her methods are somewhat unusual, I certainly can not get into her head so I trust she will keep us informed as to anything new in her research, Ros is one of the good guy's / Gal's looking for answers just like we are.

[altitudelou]

"but then who is to say that there was no spraying in that time frame, there could very well have been some testing going on then in California"

Let me clarify that statement.

We started to see the Chemtrail's / spraying here here in the north east back in 1996-97 but I'm not sure when it started in California and other western states but I'm fairly sure that it started there first and gradually spread across the country to the east.