Jul 082010

The chemtrail conspiracy theory holds that some contrails are actually chemical or biological agents deliberately sprayed at high altitude in a non-disclosed to the public. Versions of the chemtrail conspiracy theory circulating on the Internet and talk radio shows theorize that the activity is directed by government officials. Consequently, federal agencies have received thousands of complaints from people who have asked for an explanation. The existence of chemtrails has been repeatedly denied by government agencies and scientists around the world.

The United States Air Force said that the theory is a hoax “was discussed and refuted by many established and accredited universities, scientific organizations, and major media publications. The UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said that chemtrails “are not scientifically accepted phenomena. The Canadian Government Leader in the House of Commons said that “The term chemtrails” is a term popularized, and there is no scientific evidence to support their existence. ”

Chemtrails term is derived from “chemical trail” in the same way that drag is an abbreviation of condensation trail. It does not refer to common forms of aerial spraying of crops such as dusting, cloud seeding or aerial control cons. The term specifically refers to aerial trails that have been caused by the systematic high altitude of chemicals does not appear in ordinary contrails, resulting in the emergence of so-called unusual sky tracks. Believers of this theory assumes that the purpose of the chemical release may be global dimming, population control, weather control, or biological warfare and calls for these tracks are the cause of respiratory diseases and other health problems.

The Chemtrail conspiracy theory began circulating in 1996 when the United States Air Force (USAF) has been accused of “projection of the population of the United States with mysterious substances” from the plane “models generate unusual drag” . The Air Force maintains that these accusations were a hoax fueled in part by quoting a strategy document prepared in the Air Force Air University entitled Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025. The document was submitted in response to a military directive to outline a strategic future weather modification system in order to maintain U.S. military dominance in the year 2025, and identified as “fictional representations of future situations and scenarios” . The Air Force said the paper does not reflect the current policy of military practice, the “ability or, and that it” is not required of all time modification experiments or programs and n ‘ has no intention of doing so in the future. “Additionally, the Air Force says the hoax” chemtrails “was discussed and refuted by many established and accredited universities, scientific organizations and major media publications “.

In Britain, where the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has asked “what research his Department has undertaken on the polluting effects of chemtrails for aircraft”, the answer was that “the department is not researching the chemtrail planes as they are not scientifically recognized phenomena, but that work was ongoing to understand how streaks can influence climate today and anticipate the future impacts that may result from the increased air traffic.

In response to a petition filed by concerned Canadian citizens regarding “the chemicals used in aerial spraying affect the health of Canadians, the Government House Leader responded by stating that” There is no substantiated evidence , scientific or otherwise, to support the allegation that it is high altitude spraying conducted in Canadian airspace. chemtrails The term “is a term popularized, and there is no scientific evidence to support their existence. “The House leader goes on to say that” it is our belief that the petitioners are to see the contrails of aircraft regular or streaks.

Different versions of the chemtrail conspiracy theory circulated through Internet sites and radio programs. In some accounts, the chemicals are described as barium and aluminum salts, polymer fibers, thorium or silicon carbide. In other accounts, it is alleged that the sky is stocked with materials that conduct electricity through an extensive program of electromagnetic super weapons around the High Frequency Active Aurora Research Program (HAARP). Those who believe in conspiracy chemtrails say are toxic, but the reasons cited by those who believe in the conspiracy are highly variable, ranging from the testing of military weapons, chemical population control, mitigation of global warming. Scientists and federal agencies have always denied that chemtrails exist, focusing on the slopes of heaven are simply persistent contrails. As the theory of propagation chemtrail conspiracy, federal officials have been inundated with calls and letters from angry. A multi-agency response to dispel rumors was published in 2000 as a sheet by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA believers), a step chemtrail many have interpreted as further evidence of the existence of a government cover-up.

Proponents of the theory that chemtrails chemtrail can be distinguished by their long trails of life, saying that chemtrails are those who persist skytrack provided a half day or transform into cirrus-like. However, some trails are visible for several hours after the event trails, a publication of the USAF. Air Force officials say that the long trails from certain weather conditions, and duration and rate of dissipation can be accurately predicted when the humidity level and temperature are known.

Chemtrails vs. Contrails
According to a piece United States Air Force is drag, drag or condensation trails are “streaks of condensed water vapor in the air created by an airplane or rocket at high altitude.” These tracks are the result of condensation of normal emissions of water vapor from piston engines and jet engines at high altitude where water vapor condenses into a visible cloud. Contrails form when hot humid air from the burn engines, and are cooled by air cooler. (The blend is the result of turbulence generated by the engine jet exhaust). The speed at which contrails dissipate is entirely dependent on weather and altitude. If the atmosphere is near saturation, the trail may exist for some time. Conversely, if the atmosphere is dry, the trail dissipates quickly.

Chemtrails, from “chemical trails” in the same way that contrails just “vapor trail” is a term coined to suggest that contrails are formed by something other than a natural process of exhaust knocking cold air in the atmosphere. conspiricists Chemtrail characterize the chemical trails that streams that persist for hours, and their interplay, grid-like models, or parallel bands which eventually merge to form large clouds. Supporters consider the presence of visible color spectra in streams, unusual concentrations of sky tracks in a single space, or trails left by aircraft or persistent unmarked military flight altitudes or atypical sites as markers of chemtrails .

Government agencies and experts on atmospheric phenomena to deny the existence of chemtrails, claiming that the characteristics attributed to them are simply characteristics of trails in different ways under different conditions in terms of sunlight, temperature, wind shear horizontal and vertical, and the moisture present in the aircraft altitude. The experts explain what appears like motifs such as grids formed by contrails resulting from increases in air traffic traveling through the grid as the U.S. national airspace system north-south and east-west flight paths oriented, and it is difficult for observers to judge the differences in altitudes between these streaks on the ground. The fact sheet issued jointly produced by NASA, EPA, FAA, and NOAA in 2000 in response to alarms about chemtrails details of the science of the formation of contrails, and describes both known and potential impacts have streaks on the temperature and climate. The USAF has produced an information sheet describes these phenomena as well as streaks observed and analyzed since at least 1953. He also refuted the theories more directly by identifying chemtrail theory as a hoax and denying the existence of chemtrails.

Patrick Minnis, an atmospheric scientist with the Center for NASA Langley Research in Hampton, Virginia, is quoted in USA Today saying that logic is not exactly a selling point for proponents of most chemtrails “If you try to pin these people down and refute things, it:” Well, you’re just a part of the conspiracy, “he said [2].

In 2001, the U.S. Congress Dennis Kucinich has introduced legislation that would permanently prohibited the basing of weapons in space, and cited as one of chemtrails a number of exotic weapons that would prohibited. [25 promoters] have claimed that because of explicit reference to Chemtrails was made by Congressman Kucinich in the Congressional Record, which is the government’s official recognition of their existence. The bill received a negative evaluation of the Department of Defense and died in committee, not to mention chemtrails appear in the text of one of the following three unsuccessful attempts by Kucinich to enact a law on the protection space.

X-Pattern Contrail

X-Pattern Contrail

Apr 292010

Project SHAD was a test run time of the Cold War by the U.S. Department of Defense biological and chemical weapons. The exposure of uninformed and unwilling during practice for the test substances, including exposure to U.S. and military personnel in service, has added controversy to recent revelations of the project.

Project SHAD was part of a broader effort by the Ministry of Defense called Project 112. The project began in 1962 during the administration of John F. Kennedy, and it is widely believed that neither Kennedy nor subsequent presidents knew or SHAD Project 112. However, Robert McNamara, Kennedy’s secretary of defense, knows and has approved those tests. There is also some evidence that shows local governments have participated in these tests, but we do not know exactly how they helped with Project SHAD.

The official statement on the purpose of the project SHAD was “… identify warships U.S. vulnerabilities to attacks with chemical or biological agents and develop procedures to respond to such attacks while maintaining an ability to fight. “134 tests were planned initially, but Only 46 trials were actually completed. In these tests, chemical and biological agents have been introduced for military personnel, who were ignoring the time they were involved in such an experience. Nerve agents and products chemicals include, without limitation, the nerve gas VX gas, tabun, sarin, soman, and chemical markers of zinc sulfide, cadmium sulfide, and QNB. Biologicals, Bacillus globigii note, Coxiella burnetii (which causes Q fever) and Francisella tularensis (which causes tularemia or “rabbit fever”).

Revelations on draft Shad were first exposed by independent producer and investigative journalist Eric Longabardi Telemedia News Productions, now based in Los Angeles, CA. survey of 6 years in the program Longabardi secrets begin in early 1994. It eventually led to a series of investigative reports produced by him, which were broadcast on the CBS Evening News in May 2000. Following the release of these exclusive reports, the Pentagon and the Veterans Administration have opened their own investigations in the program long classified. In 2002, the Congressional hearings on the project SHAD, in both the Senate and the House, also paid the media attention on the program still classified. In 2002, pursuing a class action was filed on behalf of the Federal Navy sailors exposed the United States during the tests. Additional measures, including a multi-year medical students was conducted by the National Academy of Sciences / Institute of Medicine to assess damages caused to the health of thousands of U.S. Navy sailors involuntary, civilians, and other who were exposed during secret trials. The results of this study were finally released in May 2007.

28 records have been released, focusing on the Deseret Test Center at Dugway, Utah, which was built entirely for Project Shad and was closed after the project was completed in 1973.

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has undergone great scrutiny, as those who participated in Project 112 and SHAD were not aware of all ongoing trials. Every effort has been made to ensure the informed consent of military personnel. Until 1998, the Department of Defense has officially stated that no project SHAD. Because the Defense Department has refused to recognize the program, the surviving test subjects were unable to obtain disability benefits for health problems related to the project. U.S. Representative Mike Thompson says the program and DoD’s efforts to hide it, “They said – they said, but do not worry about simulators, we only used. And my first thought was, well you lied these guys for 40 years, you lied to me for a couple of years. It would be a leap of faith for me to believe that you are now telling me the truth. “[1]

The Department of Veterans Affairs has undertaken a three-year study comparing experienced veterans affected by the SHAD veterans of similar age who have not participated in any manner or shad Project 112. The cost of approximately U.S. $ 3 million study, and results are being prepared for the next version.

Project SHAD Document 1

Project SHAD Document 1

Project SHAD Document 2

Project SHAD Document 2

Apr 242010

Human Plutonium Injection Experiments
The Manhattan Project plutonium and health hazards discovered in 1941 by Glenn Seaborg and others at Berkeley, supported plutonium nuclear fission, a process that atoms of Split and published lot of energy. The plutonium has become an urgent material for a variety of the atomic bomb, uranium-235, the fissile isotopes of natural uranium was used in the type bomb others.

The first significant quantities of plutonium became available by January 1944. At that time, Seaborg warned of its potential health risks and proposed studies to learn from its immediate biological behavior. He was a key issue: the more material remained in the body, the more damage it could do. Hundreds of workers would soon be exposed to plutonium and exposure standards are needed. Overexposure is not only injured workers, it could compromise the privacy and disrupt production schedules.

About 10 percent of the supply of plutonium has been allocated for animals studies in January 1944. In the summer of this year, these studies have provided sufficient information on the retention of plutonium justify removal of several employees of Los Alamos, with previous record
exposure to further work with the hardware. Los Alamos had have been several accidental exposure of humans to plutonium, and the imminent prospect of working with much larger quantities increased the desire for even more information on metabolism.

Animal studies have shown that different species excreted early known amounts of plutonium at different rates. This meant that there was no accurate way to correlate the excretion data of animals humans. Consequently, the feeling grew among the staff of medical project to administer known amounts of plutonium at the man to take excretion data accurate. However, it was not until the winter 1944, Los Alamos Health Group staff has developed methods detect concentrations of tracer at the level of plutonium in feces. In February 1945, the group led by Louis Hempelmann and supervised by Wright Langham, used the procedure Workers of accidental ingestion of plutonium.

With a proven method to detect small amounts of plutonium in feces, Los Alamos staff met March 23, 1945, with Robert Colonel Hymer Friedell Oppenheimer and the Manhattan Engineer District (MED) to discuss “medical problems of this project and their relationship with the medical research program of the Manhattan District. “In a memorandum written three days after the meeting, Louis Hempelmann said that the Manhattan Project was invited to examine “a patient hospitalized two or Rochester Chicago be chosen for the injection of 1 to 10 micrograms of material] plutonium [and that the waste will be sent to this laboratory for analysis. “The Manhattan district has also been asked to help make arrangements for this experience “a marker for the man.” These arrangements have been made, and a medical officer MED administered the injection of plutonium first man, April 10 1945 at Oak Ridge Hospital.

Experiments, Part 1

How all injections have been coordinated or even if they were coordinated is unclear. After the test of Oak Ridge, injections were given to Billings Hospital at the University of Chicago April 26, 1945, and the University of California hospital San Francisco May 14, 1945. At the end of June, Manhattan Project entrepreneurs at the University of Rochester Strong Memorial Hospital has developed a detailed plan for “fast (1 year) Completion follow-up studies of man. “These studies have been included plutonium, uranium, lead and radioactive polonium.

Over the coming months, this plan has been revised, and September 18, 1945, Wright Langham sent the latest version Colonel Stafford Warren, head of the Manhattan District Medical Division, noting that “you and the Colonel Friedell, will Of course, having the final say on whether or not the experiment will thanks in compliance with this plan. “Plutonium Rochester experimental protocol called for 10 subjects for admission to the
Strong Memorial Hospital Ward metabolism in groups of four month for two months and two for the third month.

After injection, samples of blood, urine and faeces should be Langham shipped to Los Alamos for analysis. Documents show that from October 1945 to July 1946, Rochester injected 11 patients. One patient later (designated as HP 11) died of pneumonia and other pre-existing conditions after six days Injection of 20 February. Samuel Bassett Rochester has described this experience as an “acute” that involve collection of feces, but this performance organs and other autopsy material which was sent to Los Alamos to study.

Upon notification of the HP 11, Langham said Bassett, “If you decide to make another terminal case, I suggest you use 50 micrograms [of] plutonium instead of 5. This would allow analysis of much smaller samples and do my job considerably easier. “Langham also said,” I just learned that Chicago is the scene of two experiments using 95 terminal micrograms each. I am reasonably certain that there would be no harm using larger amounts of material if you are sure that the case is one terminal. ”

Both experiments took place in Chicago’s Billings Hospital on December 27, 1945. Both patients died of preexisting disease shortly after injections of 94.91 micrograms of plutonium.

The experimental protocols exist for studies of Rochester. Langham and others who led the study also described in broad Terms how subjects were selected. In general, the choice fell on older people (13 of them were 45 years or more) limited life expectancy. (Ten of the 16 dead who were followed less than 10 years.) Four subjects did, however, live more than 20 years after the experiments.

Although several reports by other research appeared earlier, Langham and others at Los Alamos compiled the most full account of the plutonium injection experiments. They based its findings primarily on the Rochester study. Issued Los Alamos Report LA 1151 in September 1950, the distribution and The excretion of plutonium administered intravenously to humans describes the experiments, tabulated data on plutonium
metabolism, and derived an empirical formula for calculating plutonium retained from the analysis of urine. Although himself THE 1151
remained limited until 1980, information on plutonium Studies made its way into the scientific literature, shortly after injections took place.

Experiments, Part 2

During the 1970s, Patricia W. Durbin, a biophysicist at the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, revalued plutonium Langham excretion data. One reason could improve Durbin Langham results were unexpected given the availability of long-term survivors. During her research, she learned that they had submitted lived for 20 years after being injected. Thorough detective work revealed that four other subjects were also still alive in
early 1970s. With the approval of the ACS, the Centre’s support Radiobiology for the man to Argonne National Laboratory, and cooperation of the University of Rochester Strong Memorial The hospital, three of the four survivors were reviewed in 1973. Researchers collected and promptly published new data on the long-term modes of plutonium retention and excretion. Efforts to find and study these subjects survivors ultimately triggered controversy. In the time since the work had been done, the Government has therefore adopted requiring that the subjects give
informed consent as a condition of research. Questions have been raised if the subjects of plutonium consent for the original experiments or the 1973 follow-up examinations. Monitoring investigation resulted in two reports published in ACS internal August 1974. Both concluded that only one subject may have provided any kind of consent. The remaining 17 have participated little verifiable knowledge or experience of its risks.
In addition, reports in 1973 concluded that follow-up studies have been not done with the informed consent of subjects. Three subjects were not informed that they had been injected with plutonium experimental purposes, nor why they had been invited to return to hospital.

Although CEA has not publicly release these reports, the Agency successor, the Energy Research and Development Administration, has published a fact sheet on the issue in 1976. This the program has provided details on the experiments and briefly discussed results of the survey in 1974 ACS on informed consent.

The experiments on plutonium and the public

Publications based on studies of plutonium began to appear in medical literature since 1948. In several articles during the 1950s and early 1960s, Langham said the technique to measure plutonium excreted and returned to the validation Research on the metabolism of plutonium in humans. Some information However, remained secret for a number of years after.

The public has learned about the experiences in 1976, after ERDA issued to the sheet above. Several newspapers have carried stories focusing on the lack of informed consent and to raise questions about medical ethics, but the question seemed to arouse little public concern. Ten years later, a congressional committee issued a report criticizing the plutonium injections and approximately 30 other federal radiation experiments of man. Commonly known as the report of the subcommittee Chairman Edward Markey after J. Markey (D-Mass.), this document again stimulated Limited
media attention at the time.

What the scientific literature and other information on the experiments do not the names of substances their personal stories. This approach has been pursued by Eileen Welsome the Albuquerque Tribune, which in November 1993, published a series on the experiences and issues. The
the author had driven through government reports, scientific journals, and log files to reconstruct the facts on the experiences, including names and other personal details several subjects.

At a press conference in December 1993, Energy Secretary Hazel R. O’Leary has examined the experiences related to plutonium, in conjunction
with the release of more former classified information on a variety subjects. Under a new policy of openness, it also The Department is committed to reveal the full scope and details irradiation experiments of man by the Agency and its predecessors. The history of experiments have been widely national attention and led to public demands that the federal Government to provide full disclosure on the topics.

A year after hiring the secretary, the department located, declassified and made available many documents on injections of plutonium and other radiation of man experiences. Currently under consideration by the Advisory Committee radiation experiments on human and other, this information will provide the basis for a comprehensive analysis of these ethical studies.

Crossroads Able

Crossroads Able, a 23-kiloton air-deployed nuclear weapon detonated on July 1, 1946. This bomb used, and consumed, the infamous Demon core that took the lives of two scientists in two separate criticality accidents.