The following is the complete first chapter from the author’s book Chemtrails Exposed: A New Manhattan Project. Feel free to copy and share generously!
According to all relevant United States federal government organizations, chemtrails do not exist and are a conspiracy theory. They say the white lines in the sky stretching from horizon to horizon are normal jet contrails. They add that these emissions are nothing but harmless water vapor. So, they are saying that this water vapor can first appear as white lines high in the sky then, over the course of hours, expand as it floats down to earth; first creating clouds and finally a haze. Folks, that’s not how water vapor behaves. That’s how particulate matter behaves.
Contrails (not to be confused with chemtrails) are visible jet airplane engine emissions resulting from the combustion of unadulterated fuel. Most of the time, jet airplane exhausts are invisible, but when unadulterated jet engine exhausts are introduced into an atmosphere of high humidity (over 70%) and low temperature (below -76 degrees F), a contrail forms. Contrails then quickly (under 10 seconds) disappear.
Chemtrails are a different animal. Chemtrails are jet airplane emissions which do not quickly dissipate and are not necessarily the product of engine exhausts. They are seen in the sky above our heads on a daily basis. They are the lines in the sky. Your subconscious knows them already. The word ‘chemtrail’ is an amalgamation of the words ‘chemical’ and ‘contrail.’ You could call chemtrails ‘chemical contrails’ or ‘chemical trails.’ The earliest mention of the word ‘chemtrail’ the author could find appears as the title of a 1990 U.S. Air Force Academy chemistry manual.
The word ‘chemtrail’ is recognized by the Oxford dictionary. It is defined as, “A visible trail left in the sky by an aircraft and believed by some to consist of chemical or biological agents released as part of a covert operation.”
The term ‘persistent contrail’ is often used to describe chemtrails, but this term is a politically correct oxymoron which the author uses only to condemn. The term creates confusion. Contrails do not persist. Chemtrails do. The earliest use of the term ‘persistent contrail’ known to the author appears in the 1970 proceedings of the Second National Conference on Weather Modification.
Lab tests of rainwater samples taken around the world have shown that chemtrails commonly consist of aluminum, barium and strontium. Further, as we will see in chapter 6, a world famous PhD scientist has come forward with rock-solid evidence that the substance commonly being sprayed is coal fly ash – a toxic waste.
Oh no they wouldn’t!
Oh yes they would. Dr. Leonard Cole’s 1988 book Clouds of Secrecy documents our military intentionally exposing unsuspecting United States citizens to chemicals and biologicals hundreds of times over the past 60 years. Andrew Goliszek’s illuminating book In the Name of Science provides another examination of our government’s indiscretions. Going back many decades, this book documents megatons of chemical and biological agents ranging from VX nerve gas to zinc cadmium sulfide to bacillus globigii to radioactive iodine to many other substances released onto unsuspecting American citizens in thousands of open air tests conducted all over the country. Many of these experiments involved the agents being released from airplanes.
Governments spray us with toxic chemicals openly. What about cloud seeding with silver iodide? What about the spraying of malathion in the 1980s to save California from the Mediterranean Fruit Fly, or the more recent Light Brown Apple Moth sprayings? Did everybody consent to these actions? In some areas of the Country, city works trucks will routinely drive down the street spraying herbicides all over the sidewalk and anyone who might be unfortunate enough to be walking down it. In Florida, large aircraft will drop mosquito spray over populations without prior consent.
A typical chemtrail first appears as a white line high in the sky emitted by a large jet airplane. These lines become diffuse as they float down to earth. Heavy spraying creates a thick haze over vast areas. Chemtrails often form Xs and sometimes grid patterns. Chemtrails are also sometimes sprayed in a circular fashion. Although seemingly endless amounts of photos and videos are posted online, you can observe these phenomena with your own eyes. One just needs to look up.
Although trolls online try to drag people into highly technical, obscure, and deceptive arguments about the formation of contrails, simple applications of deductive reasoning show that we are being sprayed. When two jet airplanes fly at a similar altitude, why is it that one will emit a persistent trail while the other does not? The fuels are not different. Jet fuel, like gasoline, is standardized. How does a trail appear behind one engine of an airplane, but not the other engine? How does a plane fly along emitting a trail that persists, then abruptly stop emitting a trail, then abruptly start again? It is safe to assume that the engine is not being turned off and on. Why is it that one day the sky will be full of lines in every direction and then the next day there will be none, even though the weather is identical? Why do the lines in the sky often not follow common flight paths? Your author has witnessed all these things, and you can too.
When they spray above natural clouds, we get a milky sky. Chemtrails sprayed above clouds descend and commingle with the clouds below to cause a loss of cloud definition.
Chemtrail spray can cause iridescence. Often when they spray, something called a ‘sun dog’ occurs. Also referred to as a 22 or 46 degree halo, a sun dog is a big, rainbow-like halo encircling the sun, although a sun dog’s colors are not as bright as a rainbow’s. You may also see little rainbow segments called ‘chembows.’ Lastly, you may see small, iridescent cumulus clouds. Spraying in general tends to make clouds iridescent; especially around the edges and when backlit by the sun. Chemtrails manifest themselves in many other ways not noted here. These are merely the most common and noticeable.
Coastal areas are seeing a depletion of marine layers. There is a district of San Francisco, CA (the author’s home town) called the Sunset District. Until about 2005, this district had literally 5-10 days of sunny weather per year. Before 2005 the adjacent Pacific Ocean provided the Sunset District with an almost ever-present blanket of clouds and fog. Now in the Sunset District it is sunny most days. Due to the hygroscopic (moisture-absorbing) properties of the spray, chemtrail spraying has destroyed the Sunset District’s marine layer. It is safe to assume that chemtrail spraying has caused similar effects along the rest of California’s Pacific Coast as well as desiccation of the state’s interior. What do you think that does to a native ecosystem?
San Francisco’s summer fog is gone. San Francisco used to be world famous for its thick fog which usually occurred in the summer. When was the last time you heard about it? Until about 2005, many summer days in San Francisco were so foggy that one could not see for more than one half of a city block. One never hears about it anymore because now, due to the spraying, San Francisco never has that really thick fog that it used to have.
Personally, I can smell and taste chemtrails. Chemtrail spray has an ashy, metallic smell and taste. Others report a burning rubber/metallic type of smell. Also, chemtrail spray irritates my eyes and makes them water. After so much exposure, many others are apparently not sensitive enough to observe these things, or maybe they think it’s just common industrial pollution.
At the time of this writing, chemtrails are appearing almost every day above San Francisco and San Rafael, CA; where the author currently lives. Judging by the first wave of reports, large-scale chemtrail spraying became nationally prevalent in the mid 1990’s. Although chemtrails have been mostly documented in North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries such as America, Japan, Australia, and those in Europe, this is a global operation. The number of chemtrail reports from all around the world has been steadily increasing and chemtrails can now be observed above all adequately industrialized regions of the planet. In fact, the more industrialized and populated a region is, the more chemtrails can be observed.
The only commonly known reason for jet airplanes to be emitting sprays at altitude is for weather modification. Geoengineers have been publicly proposing just that.
Many people calling themselves geoengineers have appeared on many television and Internet broadcasts. They often propose spraying megatons of chemicals into the atmosphere utilizing jet airplanes. They say it can save us from global warming. They don’t admit that it is currently happening, they just say it might be good and sometimes press for the adoption of such measures. Harvard University has a whole department dedicated to geoengineering.
Although geoengineering encompasses many schemes such as ‘fertilizing’ the ocean with iron filings or building giant terraforming machines to remove atmospheric carbon dioxide, the most famous and most promoted geoengineering scheme is something called Solar Radiation Management (SRM). Solar Radiation Management involves spraying fine particles into the lower stratosphere from jet airplanes. Amongst us common folk, the term ‘geoengineering’ has become synonymous with SRM. Proponents of all forms of geoengineering claim these activities will save us from the dreaded global warming and climate change.
Geoengineers say they want to alter the climate. Climate is synonymous with weather. Because geoengineers are publicly advocating for climate modification, they are advocating for weather modification. Just as climate is synonymous with weather, geoengineering is synonymous with weather modification.
The thesis of this book is that geoengineering, specifically the spraying of stratospheric aerosols, is a current, ongoing operation. It’s not being done to save us all from global warming, though. It is mostly done as part of a global weather modification project. Just as the prominent geoengineer David Keith has claimed that he doesn’t know what a chemtrail is, geoengineers are simply playing word games. This thesis will not and cannot be disproven. The New Manhattan Project exists. Chemtrails are real.
Although today’s geoengineers often claim that the field only began in the late 1970s, geoengineering is actually a newer name for an old global weather modification project with roots going back to the 1940s and earlier. In fact, the history of weather modification, or ‘weather control’ as the Library of Congress calls it, is the history of geoengineering.
‘Cloud seeding,’ which has been done openly for a long time, is a pre-cursor to today’s geoengineering programs. Government agencies officially oversee the cloud seeding industry and there are many companies involved. They have an industry association. They engage in conventional cloud seeding activities where permitted aircraft usually dump silver iodide on us to either make it rain or suppress hail. But that’s old technology. As this book will explain, today’s geoengineers spray us with completely different materials and, in addition, use electromagnetic energy to manipulate the particles once they are dispersed.
You see, what today’s scientific establishment calls ‘SRM geoengineering’ is actually code for the greatest scientific endeavor in Human history. This scientific project involves the dispersion of tiny particles from aircraft which are then manipulated en masse by electromagnetic energy generated by ground-based antennas as well as satellites. In this way, along with the electromagnetic manipulation of the ionosphere and other techniques, the weather can be comprehensively modified and/or controlled. It is chiefly this use of electromagnetic energy which distinguishes the New Manhattan Project from conventional weather modification activities.
Perhaps a former executive adviser for aerospace & defense at Booz Allen Hamilton by the name of Matt Andersson put it best when he said, “Few in the civil sector fully understand that geoengineering is primarily a military science and has nothing to do with either cooling the planet or lowering carbon emissions. While seemingly fantastical, weather has been weaponized. At least four countries – U.S., Russia, China, and Israel – possess the technology and organization to regularly alter weather and geologic events for various military and black operations, which are tied to secondary objectives, including demographic, energy and agricultural resource management.”
The term ‘geoengineering’ was introduced in a 1977 paper by Cesare Marchetti titled “On Geoengineering and the CO2 Problem.” It appeared in the premiere edition of a publication called Climatic Change.
Although many people unfamiliar with the literature and the science argue that weather modification and control are physical impossibilities, many of those ‘in-the-know’ contend otherwise. Rudimentary weather modification is a fact and a substantial body of credible evidence indicates that weather can be comprehensively controlled. Technical arguments regarding the physics of weather modification and control could be made here, but prima facie evidence as well as summaries posited by scientists and public policy experts are noted here instead because these are more easily understandable.
First, let’s take a look at rudimentary forms of weather modification. It is a scientific fact that if unsheathed wires are strung over an area in a relatively tight grid pattern and then electrified, ground fog will condense on the wires and the area will be cleared of fog. Is that not an example of weather modification?
Although many have questioned the efficacy of seeding clouds with materials such as silver iodide, as we will learn in chapter 8, study after study has shown otherwise. Do you think power companies would have been spending so much money on dispersing silver iodide all these years if it didn’t work? They have been doing it since the late 1940s and they are still doing it today. Our federal government is on record as having spent tens of billions of dollars on conventional weather modification as well. As the pioneering weather modifier Bernard Vonnegut wrote, “Cloud seeding works and works every time.”
The Western world’s most highly powered scientific organizations have been deeply involved in the atmospheric sciences and weather modification since early on. As we will see time and time again throughout the pages of this book, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Stanford Research International, the Rand Corporation, National laboratories, the National Science Foundation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Naval research, Air Force research, General Electric, Raytheon, the American Meteorological Society, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and many more have all contributed greatly.
There are at least hundreds of applicable patents and major government reports going back over 100 years. There are easily thousands of papers – many from some of the biggest names in science. Nobel Prize for chemistry winner Irving Langmuir devoted most of his later work to weather modification. Edward Teller is widely recognized for his work in the field. Former United States Science Czar John Holdren, University of Calgary professor David Keith, Stanford University professor and Carnegie Institution member Ken Caldeira, and Microsoft’s Bill Gates are currently very prominent proponents.
Now let’s take a look at the reality of more comprehensive weather control.
~ ~ ~
Before he died in 1957, the famous Manhattan Project scientist John von Neumann said that, “Intervention in atmospheric and climatic matters on any desired scale” was only decades away. Von Neumann was also quoted as saying, “Our knowledge of the dynamics and the controlling processes in the atmosphere is rapidly approaching a level that will make it possible, in a few decades, to intervene in atmospheric and climatic matters. It will probably unfold on a scale difficult to imagine at present. There is little doubt one could intervene on any desired scale and ultimately achieve rather fantastic effects.” We will have more about von Neumann in the next chapter.
~ ~ ~
Beginning in 1957 as a senator, then later as president, Lyndon B. Johnson (1908-1973) spoke in favor of global weather control many times. Johnson was also the political driving force behind the creation of NASA. In 1958 he stated:
“The testimony of the scientists is this: Control of space means control of the world, far more certainly, far more totally than any control that has ever or could ever be achieved by weapons, or by troops of occupation. From space, the masters of infinity would have the power to control the earth’s weather, to cause draught and flood, to change the tides and raise the levels of the sea, to divert the Gulf Stream and change temperate climates to frigid… If, out in space, there is the ultimate position – from which total control of the earth may be exercised – then our national goal and the goal of all free men must be to win and hold that position.”
~ ~ ~
Dr. Joseph Kaplan (1902-1991), chairman of the International Geophysical Year, said, “Control of earth’s weather and temperature is within the realm of practicability now.”
~ ~ ~
High-profile weather modifier Archie Kahan pointed towards future large-scale weather control by stating, “Changes in the atmospheric circulation produced by modifying the radiation balance of the atmosphere and control of major storms are possibilities held forth for the future.”
~ ~ ~
Distinguished Rear Admiral Luis de Florez (1889-1962) was best known for something called Project Whirlwind. He also chaired a special science advisory board of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). De Florez’s CIA committee met three or four times each year in Washington to talk about how new technologies could help CIA missions. De Florez wrote of comprehensive weather control many times.
It was as chairman of this CIA science committee, and after discussions with Thomas F. Malone of The Travelers insurance company, that de Florez sent a 1960 memo to General Charles Cabell (1903-1971) which spoke to new, comprehensive climate control capabilities. The paper itself was produced by the Research Division of the Travelers Insurance Company and it stated, “It has now become necessary for us to recognize the realities and potentialities of modern science for what they are and what they can mean for the possibilities of climate control.” As our story unfolds, we will see the pervasive role of the CIA in all of this.
In a 1961 article he wrote for Aerospace Engineering, de Florez stated, “By subjecting the problem of weather control to an attack equal in magnitude and quality to that which brought about our great discoveries in the fields of flight, nuclear power, chemistry, medicine, and other disciplines, we can expect results of equal, if not greater, value.” He explains that man, “can and will achieve control of weather if he but seek it with all his might.” De Florez then mentions the so-called ‘butterfly effect;’ a phenomenon central to the New Manhattan Project and explained in the next chapter. He writes, “There is reason to believe that we can find triggering mechanisms which could make or dissipate atmospheric disturbances.” Later in the piece, he advocates for further investigation of these atmospheric triggering mechanisms. De Florez finishes with, “Perhaps it is a matter for the United Nations to consider.” By the end of the same month of this article’s publication, as we will see next, President John F. Kennedy was speaking before the UN in favor of weather control. The aforementioned Thomas Malone of The Travelers insurance company advised Kennedy on his speech.
~ ~ ~
On September 25, 1961 President John F. Kennedy (1917-1963) addressed the United Nations proposing a global system of weather control. He said, “We shall propose further cooperative efforts between all the nations in weather prediction and eventually in weather control.”
~ ~ ~
In his paper “How to Wreck the Environment,” LBJ’s presidential science advisor Dr. Gordon J.F. MacDonald (1929-2002) wrote of man controlling weather. As a chapter in the 1968 book Unless Peace Comes, MacDonald writes:
“Operations producing such conditions might be carried out covertly, since nature’s great irregularity permits storms, floods, draughts, earthquakes and tidal waves to be viewed as unusual but not unexpected. Such a ‘secret war’ need never be declared or even known by the affected populations. It could go on for years with only the security forces involved being aware of it. The years of draught and storm would be attributed to unkindly nature, and only after a nation was thoroughly drained would an armed takeover be attempted.”
As this book unfolds, we will have much more about the infamous Dr. MacDonald.
~ ~ ~
During House weather modification hearings in 1977, the former U.S. ambassador to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Harlan Cleveland (1918-2008) advocated for more national and international weather modification efforts. He said:
“The review here is an informal general theory of what kind of changes can be wrought in the atmospheric environment by what the experts call brute force, by seeding of various kinds in different circumstances – at the moment with chemical agents, perhaps in the future with forms of electromagnetic energy – and by altering the lower layers of the atmosphere.”
Harlan Cleveland was the chairman of a government group called the Weather Modification Advisory Board. The Weather Modification Advisory Board submitted a paper to these proceedings titled “A U.S. Policy to Enhance the Atmospheric Environment.” In this paper, they reiterate Mr. Cleveland’s assertion, writing that Earth’s atmosphere may be manipulated by, “Introducing perturbation energies to redirect the atmosphere’s ‘natural’ energies. The seeding of different clouds in different ways, with chemical agents (and perhaps, in the future, with some form of electromagnetic energy),…”
Harlan Cleveland was chairman of the Weather Modification Advisory Board which was created in January of 1977 to fulfill the directives of the 1976 National Weather Modification Act. The Weather Modification Advisory Board consisted of 17 citizens ordered to study the then current state of weather modification technology and to produce a report recommending national weather modification policy and research programs. The Weather Modification Advisory Board finished their report titled “Weather Modification: Programs, Problems, Policy, and Potential” in the spring of 1978. Among many other findings, the 746-page report stated that, “It will soon be possible to influence the weather more reliably and in a much greater variety of ways.”
We will have much more about Dr. Cleveland in chapter 14.
~ ~ ~
On April 28, 1997 at the University of Georgia, U.S. Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen said:
“Others are engaging even in an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves… So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations. It’s real, and that’s the reason why we have to intensify our efforts, and that’s why this is so important.”
~ ~ ~
Throughout the pages of this book, we will see time and time again many people in-the-know telling us about the realities of a new generation of weather modification technologies capable of changing the weather in ways previously thought impossible.
A new Manhattan Project
Have you heard of the original Manhattan Project? It was the gigantic, super-secret government research and development project which produced the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945. It was a massive undertaking employing over 125,000 people. It was all kept secret largely through a bureaucratic process known as compartmentalization.
Over the years, many weather modifiers have compared weather control to the power of atomic bombs. Weather modification-pioneering General Electric scientist and Nobel Prize winner Irving Langmuir often mused about it. The ‘Father of the Hydrogen Bomb’ and Manhattan Project scientist, Edward Teller suggested using atomic bombs detonated in the sky as a means to modify the weather many times. In fact, Edward Teller advocated for weather control in all of his post-war years. In 1958, high-altitude atmospheric detonations of nuclear bombs were actually carried out in Operations Argus, Starfish, and Newsreel (as part of Operation Hardtack) as part of experiments designed to map Earth’s natural magnetic energy.
Ross Gunn, Donald Hornig, Vannevar Bush, Bill Nierenberg, Horace Byers, Bernard Vonnegut, Marvin Wilkening, and John von Neumann are some other famous scientists who worked on the original Manhattan Project and then later contributed to the atmospheric sciences and/or weather modification. It is this way because both atomic bombs and weather control are subjects for the physical sciences. They are physics problems. This is a new Manhattan Project in weather control brought to us by the producers of the original Manhattan Project.
Meteorology and atomic energy have another fundamental connection. Meteorology is necessary, for the health and safety of all those affected, to track the atmospheric movements of radioactive particles. Both in the use of radioactive materials for energy and for weapons, varying amounts of radioactive material are released into the atmosphere either on purpose or by mistake. In any case, it takes a knowledge of the movements of the atmosphere in order to keep track of these harmful particles.
The scientific era of weather modification began with General Electric in 1946 (ch 3), only one year after the detonation of the first atomic bombs. Five years later, in 1951, reputable scientists who brought us this initial foray into weather control were testifying before Congress – enumerating the similarities between weather modification and atomic bombs. During 1951 testimony before the United States Senate, Chauncey Guy Suits (1905-1991), the director of research at General Electric Laboratories said:
“It is a fact that has been repeatedly demonstrated that under suitable circumstances one may with 1 pound of dry ice cause a thundercloud to precipitate a heavy rainstorm. In a typical case the energy of condensation which has been released is equivalent in magnitude to the energy of several atomic bombs. There are so many points of similarity between the release of atomic energy and the release of weather energy that it is well to consider them in detail. The similarities are – and I quote from a letter I wrote to you, Senator Anderson, dated November 22, 1950: 1. Large amounts of energy are involved. The energy release (in the form of heat or condensation) in a small thunderstorm equals the energy of several atomic bombs. 2. A chain reaction is an important basic mechanism in many meteorological phenomena and in atomic reactions. This permits a small initiating force to generate large-scale effects. 3. The national defense and the economic possibilities are vital aspects of both problems. 4. Both problems transcend State and National boundaries in their influence and importance, and ultimately will involve international agreements. 5. Extensive research is required to fully develop the economic and military applications of both forms of energy.”
General Electric (GE), who we will soon recognize as the original developers of the New Manhattan Project, also developed the first peaceful application of atomic energy. In the mid 1950s, GE began using a prototype nuclear submarine reactor to generate electrical power at West Milton, New York.
~ ~ ~
In 1954, one of President Eisenhower’s science advisors, Howard T. Orville (1901-1960) wrote in an article titled “Weather Made to Order?,” “And before we can hope to control the weather, we must learn what causes weather. To gain this knowledge would probably require an effort as large as the Manhattan Project for the development of atomic energy.”
~ ~ ~
In 1961, the aforementioned Rear Admiral Luis de Florez advocated that the US government should, “Start now to make control of weather equal in scope to the Manhattan District Project which produced the first A-bomb. He also wrote, “We must realize that weather control or modification, like nuclear energy, solves world problems.” He continues, “Certainly the end results, weather control, justify the same consideration as that which was given to nuclear development and it should be treated as such. We have led the world in nuclear power, why not lead the world in meteorology and its application?” The last paragraph of the piece makes his point more explicitly. De Florez writes, “From the standpoint of importance to our present and future existence, we might well consider the control of [sic] modification of weather in the same category of importance as that we attached to the Manhattan Project which yielded the first atomic bomb.”
~ ~ ~
The executive summary of the seminal 1996 document “Owning the Weather in 2025,” reads, “A high-risk, high-reward endeavor, weather-modification offers a dilemma not unlike the splitting of the atom.” We will have much more about this Air Force document in chapter 3.
~ ~ ~
The House Committee on Government Reform held a hearing on September 21, 2006 titled Climate Change Technology: Do We Need a ‘Manhattan Project’ for the Environment?
~ ~ ~
Geoengineers themselves are calling this National effort in weather modification a new Manhattan Project. In late 2009 and early 2010, the U.S. Congress heard detailed testimony from top geoengineers. They called the hearings Geoengineering: Parts I, II, and III. These geoengineering hearings referenced the Manhattan Project three times. Geoengineer Philip Rasch, in written testimony, provided the best example:
“In my opinion before a nation (or the world) ever decided to deploy a full scale geoengineering project to try to compensate for warming by greenhouse gases it would require an enormous activity, equivalent to that presently occurring within the modeling and assessment activities associated with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) activity, or a Manhattan Project, or both. It would involve hundreds or thousands of scientists and engineers and require the involvement of politicians, ethicists, social scientists, and possibly the military. These issues are outside of my area of expertise. Early ‘back of the envelope’ calculations estimated costs of a few billion dollars per year for full deployment of a stratospheric aerosol strategy (see for example, Crutzen, (2006) or Robock et al (2009b)).”
Although the story deserves much more coverage, local professional news reporters around the nation have investigated and/or made objective mentions of the chemtrail phenomenon many times. A plethora of professional and objective newspaper, magazine, and Internet-based reports about chemtrails have been published. National news outlets almost exclusively ridicule those aware of the situation and say that nothing is going on.
Despite big media’s disinformation, there is a global grassroots political movement against chemtrails and geoengineering. There are hundreds of thousands (probably millions) of independent eyewitness accounts on the Internet. Many millions of people are already fully chemtrail aware. People from all walks of life around the world have come forward and spoken out against chemtrails. Airline pilots, police officers, U.S. Marines, air traffic controllers, a senior Air Traffic Control manager, Air Force tanker crews, career scientists and many others are speaking out.
The rest of this section is comprised of excerpts from the 2004 book Chemtrails Confirmed by William Thomas, who is an award winning Canadian journalist. Thomas’ writing and photography have appeared in more than 50 publications in eight countries, including translations into French, Dutch and Japanese. His editorial commentaries have appeared in The Globe and Mail, The Toronto Star, The Vancouver Sun and Times-Colonist newspapers. A frequent radio talk-show guest, Thomas has also appeared on the CBC and New Zealand’s national television. He currently lives and works among the Gulf Islands of British Columbia. Thomas first popularized the term ‘chemtrails.’ He writes:
“It was nearly noon when S.T. Brendt awoke and entered the kitchen of her country home in Parsonfield, Maine. As she poured her first cup of coffee, the late night reporter for WMWV radio could not guess that her life was minutes away from drastic change.
“Her partner Lou Aubuchont was already up, puzzling over what he had seen in the sky a half hour before. The fat puffy plumes arching up over the horizon were unlike any contrail he had ever seen, even during his hitch in the Navy.
“Lou got up and looked. What kind of clouds run exactly side-by-side in a straight line? He wondered. It’s just too perfect to happen naturally. When he said he wasn’t sure, S.T. stopped smiling and went outside.
“Looking up towards the southeast over West Pond, she spotted the first jet. A second jet was laying billowing white banners to the north. Both aircraft appeared to be over 30,000 ft. Turning her gaze due west, Brendt saw two more lines extending over the horizon. She called Lou. Within 45 minutes the couple counted 30 jets.
“This isn’t right, S.T. thought. We just don’t have that kind of air traffic here. While Lou kept counting, she went inside and started calling airports. One official she reached was guarded but friendly. He had relatives in West Pond.
“The Air Traffic Control manager told Brendt her sighting was ‘unusual.’ His radars showed nine commercial jets during the same 45-minuite span. From her location, he said, she should have been able to see one plane.
“And the other 29? The FAA official confided off the record that he had been ordered ‘by higher civil authority’ to re-route inbound European airliners away from a ‘military exercise’ in the area. ‘Of course they wouldn’t give me any of the particulars and I don’t ask,’ he explained. ‘I just do my job.’
“Excited and puzzled by this information, S.T. and Lou got into their car and headed down Route 160. Looking in any direction they could see 5 or 6 jets flying over 30,000 ft. Never in the dozen years they’d lived in rural Maine, had they seen so much aerial activity. As a former U.S. Navy intelligence courier, Aubuchont was used to large-scale military exercises. But he told S.T. he had never seen anything this big.
“’It looked like an invasion,’ he later recounted. Another driver almost went off the road as he leaned over his dashboard trying to look up. As they passed, he acknowledged them with a nod.
“As far as they could see stretched line after line. Two giant grids were especially blatant. In stead of dissipating like normal contrails, these sky trails grew wider and wider and began to merge. Looking towards the sun, Aubuchont saw what looked like ‘an oil and water mixture’ reflecting a prismatic band of colors.
“At approx. 3:55 they headed home to Parsonfield. They (the jets) were still up there. What’s worse is that these grids were now merging to the point of greying their beautiful skies… By 5:30 their beautiful day had turned dingy and hazy like air pollution and the sunset was dirty. Lou remembers seeing the last jets at about 5:15 pm leaving chemtrails. They were spaced further apart than the earlier jets.
“Richard Dean called back. After receiving S.T.’s message, the assistant WMWV news director had gone outside with other news staff and counted 370 lines in skies usually devoid of aerial activity. The most jets they could see at any one time was 17.”
~ ~ ~
“Dave Dickie’s World Landscapes company performs contract landscape work for the City of Edmonton. ‘Some contracts require us to utilize the services of environmental labs for soil tests,’ says Dickie. ‘Recent soils analysis have come back with a high EC [electrical conductivity] rating 4:l (toxic) and we’ve had some soil sources rejected of course they did not meet specifications.’
“In an interview with me on Nov. 23, 2002, Dickie explained that city landscape crews were finding widespread nutrient deficiency soils could cause severe problems for plant life – including trees.
“’Wait,’ I interrupted. ‘Aluminum sucks nutrients from the soil.’
“’No question’ answered this soil expert. Moreover, added Dickie when measuring the electrical conductivity in Edmonton soil samples, ‘city specifications call for a reading no higher than 1.’
“Dickie’s crews are now finding readings from 4.6 as high as 7.
“The ‘chlorosis’ condition resulting from this drastically high electrical conductivity in soil was impacting their landscaping business, Dickie explained. ‘We were not able to determine the cause of the EC, and many reasons are possible.’
“Presuming that unusual metal content in the soil could be causing the high readings, Dickie obtained samples of a fresh snowfall in sterile containers and took them to NorWest Labs in Edmonton. As explained, ‘Our most recent snowfall was tested for aluminum and barium and we were not surprised with the results. You’ve said it all and this just substantiates some of your claims.’
“In Nov. 2002, lab tests of snow samples collected by the city of Edmonton, Alberta between Nov. 8 – 12, confirmed elevated levels of aluminum and barium. NorWest Labs lab report #336566 dated Nov. 14, 2002 found: aluminum levels at 0.148F milligrams/litre and barium levels of 0.006 milligrams/litre.
“Because aluminum is ubiquitous in the environment, and its chemistry depends on soil pH and mineralogical composition, it is difficult to provide generalized estimates of natural background concentrations.
“But according to Dickie, the NorWest Lab techs told him, ‘That’s interesting. Elevated levels of aluminum and barium are not usually found in Alberta precipitation.’
“’It may not prove that the aluminum came from atmospheric programs,’ Dickie admits. ‘However we are going to sample precipitation from various areas within a 40 mile radius of the City of Edmonton to determine aluminum/barium within precipitation.’
“Dickie says it’s simple to test for aluminum and barium in soil samples. Labs typically charge about $15 for these tests. I suggested he add quartz to the list of chemtrail fallout components to check for. In Espanola, quartz predominated rainfall samples, which also showed hazardous levels of aluminum.
“Though it must be emphasized that neither Dickie nor NorWest Labs are making any claims regarding these early test results, the correlation of known chemtrail chemistry with Edmonton’s soil samples is compelling.
“This was hot. But imagine my shock when Dickie told me that he regularly visits Air Traffic Control at the Edmonton municipal airport and watches the chemplanes making repeated passes over the city!
“’I’ve been a plane spotter all my life,’ Dickie explained. Blessed with good friends at work in the tower, he has watched radar-identified KC-135s ‘on many occasions.’
“Last Father’s Day (2002), Dickie and an excited group of 12 year-olds watched two sorties by two KC-135s. Petro 011 and Petro 012 were tracked by radar as HA (High Altitude) targets flying at 34,000 and 36,000 feet – ‘one to the south, and one to the north of the city.’
“Both USAF tankers had flown south out of Alaska. As Dickie, the kids and the controllers watched, the big jets began making patterns over Edmonton – ‘circuits’ the controllers called it. The Stratotankers were working alone in ‘commanded airspace’ from which all other aircraft were excluded.
“And they were leaving chemtrails.
“’The signature is significant,’ commented one radar operator, referring to a trail clearly visible on the scope extending for miles behind the KC-135. In contrast, a JAL flight on the display left no contrail.
“Going outside, Dickie and several controllers scanned clear blue skies. They easily located the KC- 135 leaving its characteristic white-plume ‘signature.’ Visibility was outstanding. They also clearly saw the JAL airliner at a similar flight level. It left no contrail at all.
“On other occasions, Dickie has watched KC-135s on Edmonton radar leaving lingering trails as low as 18,000 feet.
“’We see these guys up here a lot,’ Dickie says radar techs told him. The tanker flights originate in Alaska, grid the Edmonton area, and continue on into the States.”
~ ~ ~
“The following unedited transcript is a recorded message from a Dec. 8, 2000 call by a Canadian aviation authority from the Victoria International Airport to a local resident.
“Stewart was responding to a call the previous day demanding to know why intense aerial activity had left lingering X’s, circles and grid-like plumes over the British Columbia capitol on Dec. 6 and 7.
“’Mark, it’s Terry Stewart, Victoria Airport Authority. Just calling you back from your comment. From what I gather, it’s a military exercise; U.S. and Canadian air force exercise that’s goin’ on. They wouldn’t give me any specifics on it. Hope that helps your interest. Very odd. Thanks a lot. Bye bye now.’”
Hard scientific evidence
Francis Mangels has a Bachelor of Science in Forestry from the International School of Forestry at Missoula, Montana. He spent 35 years with the U.S. Forest Service as a wildlife biologist and worked several years with the USDA Soil Conservation Service as a soil conservationist. Today he lives in Mt. Shasta, CA and works as a master gardener.
He took a sample of water from his backyard rain gauge on Feb. 1, 2009 and submitted it to Basic Laboratory of Redding, CA on Feb. 2, 2009. This sample showed aluminum at a level of 1010 micrograms per liter (µg/l). This same sample also showed barium at a level of 8 µg/l. Using the same sampling method and laboratory, he took a sample on Oct. 14, 2009 which showed aluminum at a level of 611 µg/l. The barium should not be there in any amount. He says that chemtrails have been known to consist of both barium carbonate and barium oxide. Barium carbonate is used in rat poison. The normal level of aluminum in rainwater is .5 µg/l. These samples show levels of aluminum at 2020 times and 1222 times the normal levels. There is no heavy industry in the Mt. Shasta area. There is no reason, other than chemtrails, for this stuff to be showing up at these levels. Similar test results from others have corroborated these findings hundreds, possibly thousands of times.
~ ~ ~
ChemtrailsProjectUK.com presents rainwater sample test results from Europe – mostly from the UK. There, one will find test after test showing elevated levels of all kinds of substances that are not supposed to be showing up in our rainwater.
GlobalSkyWatch.com is also another tremendous resource. There, one will find a plethora of scientific data supporting the chemtrail hypothesis not only in rainwater sample test results, but also other test results such as those of dust and soil.
Dane Wigington over at GeoengineeringWatch.org has compiled quite an impressive collection of supporting scientific data as well.
~ ~ ~
The mission statement of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) is, “To promote and protect public health, welfare and ecological resources through the effective and efficient reduction of air pollutants while recognizing and considering the effects on the economy of the state.” This organization is not serving its purpose.
Data produced by the CARB shows elevated levels of chemtrail toxins. Between 1990 and 2002, CARB ambient air statewide average data shows elevated and increasing levels of aluminum and barium. From 1990 to 2002, aluminum was detected in the range of 1500 to 2000 nanograms per cubic meter. Barium, which between 1990 and 2002 consistently trended upwards, reached a peak of 50.8 nanograms per cubic meter in 2002.
CARB historical aluminum graph
The CARB classifies aluminum and barium as toxic compounds. The CARB website says, “For toxics compounds, there is generally no threshold concentration below which the air is healthy. For toxics compounds, the greater the quantified health risk, the more unhealthy the air is.” In other words, any aluminum or barium is unhealthy. There are no safe levels except zero. Remember, these are statewide averages. God forbid you might be living in an area that increased the average.
You may ask why we are only referencing data up to 2002. This is 2020. Where is the missing data? The answer is that data from between 1990 and 2002 is the only data which the CARB has widely distributed. As far as statewide averages for ambient aluminum and barium are concerned, these years are the only years for which their website and their “California Ambient Air Quality Data” DVD showed results. Their Public Information Officer Dimitri Stanich curiously refused to answer questions about the missing data. He referred me to documents which did not address the issue.
After discussions with staff, Mike Miguel, the chief of the Quality Management Branch of the Monitoring and Laboratory Division, wrote me an email dated Aug. 22, 2011 stating, “It is my understanding that the toxics air monitoring network (samples collected in Summa canisters) stoped [sic] analyzing for these compounds due to the low concentrations. However, the PM2.5 network does analyze for these compounds and that data was provided in the analyses and CD.”
A statewide average of barium at 50.8 nanograms per cubic meter and aluminum at 2000 are low concentrations? Any levels of detectable aluminum or barium have been classified as unhealthy. The concentrations were trending upwards, yet they stopped analyzing for these compounds? This author has scoured their website, written letters and made many phone calls to the CARB and has not heard of or seen this missing data presented in any CD.
Thankfully, other people have been asking for this missing data as well. The organization known as Environmental Voices requested the missing data and on September 15, 2010, they got it.
Amazingly, after data showing many years of elevated and increasing levels of aluminum and barium, this newly produced data showed much lower levels. That’s good news, right? We want to believe that everything is as it has always been. The problem is that the newly released data contradicts the previously released data.
Let us look at data for the year 2002 both new and old. 2002 is a year for which the CARB widely distributed data and it is a year for which they have provided data to only a select few researchers such as your author due to the efforts of Environmental Voices. We will refer to the widely distributed data as the ‘old’ data and the thinly distributed data as the ‘new’ data. The old data says that in 2002 the statewide average for ambient aluminum was 1980 nanograms per cubic meter. The new data says that the statewide average in 2002 was 67.5 nanograms per cubic meter. The new data also says that statewide average aluminum concentrations generally remained at this level through 2009.
As far as barium goes, the old data says that the statewide ambient air average barium concentration for 2002 was 50.8 nanograms per cubic meter. The new data says it was 27.5 nanograms per cubic meter. The new data says that statewide average barium concentrations only trended lower from 2002 to 2009.
Are certain people at the CARB trying to hide something? Why does their Public Information Officer, whose job is to answer questions from the public, refuse to answer questions about missing data? Why does he obfuscate the truth by referring me to documents that don’t answer the question? Why does one of their division chiefs’ response not make sense? How is it that data released to only a select few magically reduces the problem? Why didn’t they post this new data on their website? All their answers so far only leave us with more questions.
Charles E. Jones III is a retired US Air Force brigadier general who served continuously in the Air Force and Air Force Reserve from 1954 to 1986. He has written a short piece acknowledging the reality of chemtrails. Jones writes:
“When people look up into the blue and see white trails paralleling and criss-crossing high in the sky little do they know that they are not seeing aircraft engine contrails, but instead they are witnessing a man made climate engineering crisis facing all air breathing humans and animals on planet Earth. These white aircraft spray trails consist of scientifically verifiable spraying of aluminum particles and other toxic heavy metals, polymers, and chemical components. Toxic atmospheric aerosols used to alter weather patterns, creating droughts in some regions, deluges and floods in other locations and even extreme cold under other conditions.”
~ ~ ~
On the 16th of August, 2018, Dane Wigington of GeoengineeringWatch.org released a YouTube video of an interview with a retired U.S. Air Force Major General named Richard H. Roellig. The video is titled “Geoengineering: An Interview With A US Air Force General.” Major General Roellig expressed that he is aware of and concerned about the current, ongoing large-scale uncontrolled climate geoengineering experiments.
~ ~ ~
On the 21st of August 2018, Dane posted a YouTube video of an interview with a former employee of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) named Michael Davis. The video is titled “Interview: EPA Scientist Sounds The Alarm On Geoengineering Contamination.” Mr. Davis is an expert who has firsthand knowledge of the hard scientific evidence proving that we are being sprayed with massively destructive substances that work synergistically with the other toxic waste they call ‘fluoride’ in our drinking water to make us die and ruin our environment.
In the video Davis expounds upon the abject cowardice and selfishness of the legions of ‘chair-warmers’ at the EPA who are willing to watch the world burn so that they may receive a big paycheck. He was an Environmental Engineer for nearly 16 years in the National Pollution Discharge Elimination Systems Programs Branch of the Water Division in Region 5, Chicago of the USEPA. He was fired for blowing the whistle.
Complementing Davis’ revelations, Wigington breaks protocol and names names of people in important positions of power who are fully aware of the geoengineering situation, but do nothing about it. In the interview the tension in their voices and how carefully they choose their words is palpable. They are both fully aware of just how crucial this information is.
Earlier, in February of 2017, Dane posted a statement by Davis as part of an article on Geoengineeringwatch.com titled “US EPA Scientist Fired For Trying To Tell The Truth About Climate Engineering And Fluoridated Water” in which Davis refers to the ‘criminality’ of the EPA and how the organization is ‘a complete sham’ that is ‘corrupt to the core’ and ‘completely hijacked by multinational corporations.’
In a video posted on Globalskywatch.com, an airline pilot calls chemtrails ‘a necessary evil.’
~ ~ ~
On July 8 of 2015, at a big climate conference in Paris, France, high-profile climate guru Tim Lenton admitted that geoengineering is an ongoing program TWICE. Audience member Dr. Colin Pritchard asked:
“My question is again for Tim. Colin Pritchard, Edinburgh University. Hi, Tim. Thank you very much for your very cogent explanation. I would basically agree with you on geoengineering – except, may I infer that you prefer an enormous global-scale uncontrolled experiment in geoengineering as opposed to a small-scale uncontrolled one? At the moment we are in the former. And it seems to be a little bizarre to prefer the former to the latter.”
“I’m certainly not preferring carrying on with our current uncontrolled experiment. And I’m not – what’s the right word – I’m not monolithically set against things that are being discussed under the banner of geoengineering. So it’s quite a nuance… I think that’s quite a nuance discussion to have, perhaps over lunch, because it really depends on the options you’re considering. So you’ve got some things which would be reflective roofs and road surfaces that are very practical, local adaptation options against urban heat islands that, if you did on a large enough scale, could have some measurable effect on regional climate and I think are very sensible. So we have to just be… I think we have to be nuanced on specific proposals, specific technologies. But I think we can perhaps all agree that certainly none of us want to continue the current uncontrolled experiment.“
This introductory chapter alone provides much convincing evidence for the existence of a new Manhattan Project in weather modification and for the assertion that the chemtrails we so often see are a part of it. For the researcher, the problem is not that of a lack of evidence, rather the problem is that of too much – with it all existing in a multitude of different disciplines. Fear not, though. Your intrepid author has been on the case for about ten years now and he has brought home the bacon. Can’t you hear it sizzling? The rest of this book pieces together the history and current state of the biggest scientific effort in history.
Catch your author, now on a weekly basis on Dark Outpost with David Zublick. I’ll be going over all the best, new information in my book Chemtrails Exposed: A New Manhattan Project: second edition. Please support independent media.
Top image: GGP concourse chemtrail landscape
“Chemtrails, Chemistry 131 Manual, Fall 1990” a study guide by the United States Air Force Academy, Department of Chemistry, 1990
“Pollution of the Upper Troposphere by Soot from Jet Aircraft and Its Relation to Cirrus Clouds” a paper by Freeman F. Hall, Jr., produced by the Douglas Advanced Research Laboratories, McDonnell Douglas Corporation as it appeared in the proceedings of the Second National Conference on Weather Modification of the American Meteorological Society, sponsored by the Atmospheric Sciences Section of the National Science Foundation, 1970
Clouds of Secrecy a book by Dr. Leonard A. Cole, published by Rowman & Littlefield, 1988
In the Name of Science a book by Andrew Goliszek, published by St. Martin’s Press, 2003
Under an Ionized Sky: From Chemtrails to Space Fence Lockdown a book by Elana Freeland, published by Feral House, 2018)
“On Geoengineering and the CO2 Problem” a paper by Cesare Marchetti, published in Climatic Change, v1 n1, 1977
“When Will We Change the Weather?” an article by Bernard Vonnegut, 1967
“The Pathological History of Weather and Climate Modification” a paper by James Roger Fleming, published by the University of California Press, 2006
“Don’t Like the Weather? Change it; The Weird Science of Weather Modification Makes a Comeback” an article by Bennett Drake, published by the Boston Globe, July 3, 2005
“Weather – Take It or Make It” an article by Luis de Florez, published in Aerospace Engineering, September, 1961
Memorandum for General Charles P. Cabell from Luis de Florez, November 22, 1960
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration a book by Richard Hirsch and Joseph Trento, published by Praeger Publishers, 1973
Fixing the Sky a book by James Roger Fleming, published by Columbia University Press, 2010
“Weather Modification: Panacea or Pipedream?” an article by Archie M. Kahan, published by the SRI Journal, second quarter, 1959
Jerome C. Hunsaker and the Rise of American Aeronautics a book by William F. Trimble, published by the Smithsonian Institution Press, 2002
“How to Wreck the Environment” a paper by Dr. Gordon J.F. MacDonald, as published in the book Unless Peace Comes edited by Nigel Calder, published by The Viking Press, 1968
Weather modification Hearing Before the Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere of the Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, Ninety-fifth Congress, Wednesday, October 26, 1977
“Weather Control” by Marc Leepson, published by Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1980
“Weather Modification: Programs, Problems, Policy, and Potential” a report by the Congressional Research Service, republished by the University Press of the Pacific, 1978
“United States Nuclear Tests: July 1945 through September 1992” a report by the U. S. Department of Energy, 2000
“Meteorology and Atomic Energy” a report prepared by the United States Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau for the United States Atomic Energy Commission, 1955
Hearing before the Subcommittees of the Committees on Interior and Insular Affairs, Interstate and Foreign Commerce and Agriculture and Forestry, United States Senate, Eighty-second Congress, first session, 1951 as it appeared in “Weather Modifications,” published by the General Electric Research Laboratory, 1951
The Travelers: 100 Years a book by The Travelers Insurance Companies, published by The Travelers, 1964
“Weather Made to Order?” an article by Howard T. Orville as it appeared in the May 28, 1954 edition of Collier’s Magazine
“Climate Change Technology Research: Do We Need a Manhattan Project for the Environment?” a hearing before the United States House Committee on Government Reform chaired by Tom Davis (R-VA), Sept. 21, 2006
Geoengineering: Parts I, II, and III hearings before the Committee on Science and Technology, House of Representatives, November 5, 2009, February 4, 2010, and March 18, 2010
Chemtrails Confirmed a book by William Thomas, Bridger House Publishers, 2004
What in the World Are They Spraying? a documentary film by Michael Murphy, Paul Wittenberger, and G. Edward Griffin, produced by Truth Media Productions, 2010
Geoengineering: Chronicles of Indictment: Exposing the Global Climate Engineering Cover-up a book by Dane Wigington, published by Geoengineering Watch Publishing and Media LLC, 2017
”Geoengineering: An Interview With A US Air Force General” an article by Dane Wigington, published by Geoengineeringwatch.org, August 16, 2018
“US EPA Scientist Fired For Trying To Tell The Truth About Climate Engineering And Fluoridated Water” an article by Dane Wigington, published on Geoengineeringwatch.org, Feb. 7, 2017
“Interview: EPA Scientist Sounds The Alarm On Geoengineering Contamination” an article by Dane Wigington, published by GeoengineeringWatch.org, August 21, 2018
“CRACKED! Top Climate Scientist Admits to Ongoing Geoengineering” an article by James Hodgskiss, published by ChemtrailsProjectUK.com, October 17, 2015
Peter A. Kirby is a San Rafael, CA researcher, author, and activist. Please buy the greatly revised and expanded second edition of his book Chemtrails Exposed: A New Manhattan Project available now exclusively at Amazon. Also please join his email list at his website PeterAKirby.com.