Werner Altnickel, Published April 4, 2013.
This 172-page document, titled Chemtrails, (1990) referred to in the video was obtained from the Department of Libraries in Oklahoma on microfiche. It appears to have been written to train pilots. As Geoengineeringwatch.org noted the course curriculum as described in the video appears compatible with weather modification using plasma ions and other chemicals.
 | Clare Swinney on Award-winning Documentary Make… |
 | MiffedTiffy on Award-winning Documentary Make… |
 | ConcernedPerson3900 on Award-winning Documentary Make… |
| ConcernedPerson3900 on Award-winning Documentary Make… |
| ConcernedPerson3900 on Award-winning Documentary Make… |
 | belinda pye on MORGELLONS NATURAL CURE REPORT… |
| belinda pye on MORGELLONS NATURAL CURE REPORT… |
| UK government’s nefa… on Geoengineering, HAARP, and the… | |
 | Millwakee on Award-winning Documentary Make… |
 | L. Oliver on Award-winning Documentary Make… |
NORTHLAND NEW ZEALAND CHEMTRAILS WATCH 
Perhaps no one has read this properly. It is merely a manual for chemistry students. There are occasional references to the environment, and the sentiment is that acidity in the air is a problem, NOT that pilots are encouraged to create some problem, which is what chemtrail conspiracists claim.
e.g. p97
“The increased acidity of lakes and natural waterways in recent years due to acid rain is a major concern in the US and Canada. Acid rain is generated when SO2 and NO2 are hydrolysed in water. The high acid content of clouds and waterways has damaged forests and the ability of lakes to sustain aquatic life”.
p108
“4. Explain why acid rain is primarily a problem in the Eastern US and Canada, as opposed to the Western US.(more population creating more sulphides and nitrides)
5. How do you think we can solve the acid rain problem for the long term?”
So twice they have said acid rain is a problem, not that they should be causing it.
The answer to question 5 comes on p98
“When a solution of carbonic acid (acid rain) is made more acidic, it decomposes to form carbon dioxide and water”.
Therefore the answer to question 5 must be to increase the acidity, which suggests that the dropping of more acid could theoretically neutralise the acid in aquatic and forest environments. But nowhere does it say the idea is to kill or sicken people. Rather the opposite!
You are referring to this: http://chemtrailsplanet.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/chemtrails-chemistry-manual-usaf-academy-1999.pdf ?
It appears to be a basic chemistry manual for students at the US Air Force Academy and interesting in that it is titled Chemtrails, particularly given the fact that the US Air Force/military has been involved in weather modification for decades. Here is an interesting old paper:
Case Study 2 Weather Modification: The Evolution of An R&D Program Into A military Operation.
Click to access weather.pdf
You refer to the acid rain section which teaches what happens when gases such as SO2 are hydrolised in water. It is teaching a concept of how the environment can be harmed when chemicals are in the air. Interestingly, top geoengineers talk in the public arena about spraying SO2 into the atmosphere, in order to supposedly “combat climate change.” For example, Can a Million Tons of Sulfur Dioxide Combat Climate Change? http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/magazine/16-07/ff_geoengineering .
Rainwater tests show they are spraying a range of metals of which aluminium, likely to be aluminium oxide, is one. This is mentioned on the Hughes Aircraft Patent #5,003,186. (In 1991 a U.S. patent was issued to Hughes Aircraft Company; the Stratospheric Welsbach Seeding For Reduction of Global Warming Patent (#5,003,186). It proposed injecting into the upper atmosphere, a “very fine, white talcum-like” powder of aluminum oxide, barium oxide and other oxides for the stated purpose of reducing Global Warming”.)
For example, Aluminium, Strontium & Barium In Brisbane Rainwater https://chemtrailsnorthnz.wordpress.com/2012/10/21/aluminium-strontium-barium-in-brisbane-rainwater/
Also, these hair analyses done locally showed high levels, in particular of Al: Hair Analyses Of Northland, NZ Resident Show Aluminium, Barium & Strontium Levels Increased Over Time https://chemtrailsnorthnz.wordpress.com/2013/01/20/hair-analyses-of-northland-nz-resident-show-aluminium-barium-strontium-levels-increased-over-time/
What they are spraying is effecting the pH of the soil. eg see the documentary What in the World Are they spraying?
From a testing company website:
Very little Al+++ in the soil solution is required to cause damage to most plants. Few, if any plants grown for commercial purposes in this country will tolerate more than 1.0 ppm of soluble Al+++, and most will have some problems at levels greater than 0.5 ppm.
Aluminum is a common metal in soils. It is a significant toxin in acid soils (or soils exposed to acid rain) causing stunted roots (no rootlets ergo poor plant health). Good picture on that site as well.
Here are that site’s general conclusions
– When the soil pH is below 5.0, soluble Al is almost certainly a problem.
– When the soil pH is between 5.0 and 5.5, soluble Al likely a small problem
– When the soil pH is between 5.5 and 6.0, soluble Al is not likely to be a significant problem
– When the soil pH is above 6.0, soluble Al is almost certainly not a problem.
– Lime is the solution to excess soluble Al in the topsoil
– Gypsum may be needed to correct excess soluble Al in the subsoil
There is, as usual in science, a contrary viewpoint. Water droplets collected from the base of clouds in the eastern US.during the summer have an average pH of 3.6, with some values as low as pH 2.6. The benchmark of ‘natural rain’ is 5.6. Acid precipitation in the range of 4.2-5.0 has been recorded in most of the eastern US and Canada. We can compare these values to familiar objects to show that these pH values may not be harmful. Examples: Carrots = 5.0, Bananas = 4.6, Tomatoes = 4.2, Apples and soft drinks = 3.0, Lemon juice = 2.0. Also, pH 5.6 may or may not be a valid reference point. It should not be considered the background or ‘natural’ acidity of precipitation.
Even without man-made influences, there are natural sources of sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and other species important to determining the precipitation acidity at any given time. Hence, trying to quantify man’s contribution to the natural condition will never be possible, since the ‘natural background’ condition cannot be known. In the forest areas of Brazil at the headlands of the Amazon River, an area remote from civilization, the monthly average of 100 rain events in the 1960s ranged from pH 4.3 to pH 5.2, with the median value of pH 4.6 and one reading as low as pH 3.6. On the island of Hawaii, remote from all industrial activity, the weighted average of precipitation over a 4 year period was pH 5.3, with a minimum value of pH 3.8. The mistake often made is that talk of pH values works well in a chemistry lab, but the weather cannot be put in a testtube and held over a bunsen burner. Without extensive collected readings from one location over many centuries to compare to present, all we can ever have is theories and stories.
Clare wrote “It appears to be a basic chemistry manual for students at the US Air Force Academy and interesting in that it is titled Chemtrails particularly given the fact that the US Air Force/military has been involved in weather modification for decades.”.
Yes a basic chemistry manual, that’s all, but the manual contains nothing suggesting weather modification, and yet the video posted here claims that this report teaches pilots how to poison people. Were you hoping no one would read it? Why have you been so misleading and incorrect. Weather modification has never been proven. It remains a scam.
Mr Ring says, “Weather modification has never been proven. It remains a scam”.
Couldn’t think of anything nicer than to wake up from this tragic nightmare of weather modification and find it’s just “a scam”. Sadly, I’ve already ‘woken up’.
Wonder what our Nelson flood victims think of all these ‘natural disasters’ hitting us – again.
Ngaire says “I’ve already woken up”. Then please, for the sake of science, give us the evidence rather than just description of unpleasant dreams. Evidence goes like this: someone who respects human life announces that they now have the science to prevent catastrophes. They then further proclaim what they are about to do in an area threatened with the beginnings of drought, for instance bringing rescuing rains to developing dryness that is beginning to kill millions in India or Pakistan, or they offer to alleviate imminent monsoons that could cause widespread flooding killing millions of families including innocent children and render them homeless. This they both announce very transparently beforehand then and then equally transparently carry out their procedures, not once, which could be dismissed as a fluke, but 10-12 times in succession. So far we have only had the Chinese do this in this fashion before the Bejing Olympics. For the 2008 international event it was imperative for national pride to prevent bad weather over just those 16 days. They did not want rain-soaked days to tarnish memories.
But China deployed 30 airplanes, 4,000 rocket launchers, and 7,000 anti-aircraft guns to stop rain. Each system shot chemicals into threatening clouds to shrink rain drops before they dropped. Sadly it rained often, although rain is rare in northern China. Marina Erakovic had to wait another day for her Olympics tennis debut after a storm. Rain delayed tennis matches and rowing events and made marshes out of fields for team sport events. The New Zealand field hockey team abandoned their white uniforms when rain created “see-through” and there were agonizing rain delays for the cycling and the marathon.
If anyone could modify the weather for their most talked-about event in centuries, the Chinese would have found a way. They failed.
When it comes to weather perhaps people do not want to accept the immense forces that are involved. First you need a playing field a few thousand miles long. One squall line can be 250 miles long. A single small fluffy cloud may hold 100 to 1000 tons of moisture. You’ll need a blow-torch 6000degC, to evaporate enough moisture from the sea to cause rain. The evaporation rate is only a mere 5 thousand million gallons per hour. This water, millions of tons, must be made to move or it will just remain over the sea. To bring rain over land requires a rotating gravitation which will also swerve the winds – necessary to keep them straight over the curved earth. Then you will need a cold mass of air as large as the Tasman Sea to create a boundary that forces itself up against a similar size air mass of different temperature to produce a front.
Cold air drops from the upper reaches of the atmosphere, enabling warmer air to rise. Amounts and rates are determined by a ‘tide’ that itself has a generating force. From that front comes rain and thunderstorms. Sending a few planes aloft loaded with pellet guns will only waste planes and pellets. BUT..before your private weather pattern can be swiveled into position and switched on you would need to find some way to halt all the weather patterns that are currently unleashing that have been a long time developing by natural forces such as perigees, equinoxes and solar ionisings and roiling from huge momentums of wave action interfacing with surface air currents.
These natural patterns are not easily stopped. A normal summer thunderstorm can have the energy of a dozen Hiroshima bombs. 45,000 of them are brewing around the earth every day. A hurricane releases as much energy as that every second. Lightning is happening somewhere every 2 seconds. Weather can blow down houses. One earthquake is an energy-release ripple that can start 300kms down in the bowels of the earth, then move at 20,000mph through solid granite with the force of 50 Hiroshima bombs and shift a city the size of Christchurch over by about a metre in a minute.
Can we duplicate that? Compare that it took many months and millions of dollars for human engineers to move a small hotel in Auckland called The Birdcage even a few yards. We should never lose sight of the size of the forces of nature. The earth intercepts only a tiny fraction of the vast amount of energy the sun radiates into space, about one two-thousand-millionth. This fraction pours onto the earth about 23 billion horsepower – more energy every minute than all mankind uses, in all forms, in one year. If the sun’s heat reduced by 13%, the earth would be encased in ice a mile thick. Then the moon brings its tidal force to bear on the land, the oceans and the interfacing air that sets and patterns the timing of weather events. That is where weather comes from and will always do so, no matter how many chemical pellets we fire into clouds and how much in carbon taxes we are forced to pay. It makes no difference whether or not we walk to work or drive, recycle or destroy aluminium cans, plant or burn trees, or whether man is even here at all. The weather affects us, not vice versa.
.
“To bring the water/rains over land requires a rotating gravitation… ‘No, it does not. Convection, thermal uplift, front activity, heating and cooling, are more than sufficient. Tell me, by what optical means can you prove the Earth rotates? And no, Foucault’ s fraudulent pendulum is NOT an “optical means. “
While I agree with Ken Ring that the “Chemtrails” document is something of a fizzler: http://chemtrailsplanet.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/chemtrails-chemistry-manual-usaf-academy-1999.pdf
I have to disagree about his comments regarding weather modification. It can be done and it’s something the US Defense secretary William Cohen certainly took seriously. I suggest that you, Mr. Ring, look up the US Navy document entitled ‘Weather as a Force Multiplier: owning the Weather by 2025″. Hell, I’ll get you a link shortly if you like?
http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch15.pdf Here’s the link to the ‘revised and updated’ version of Weather as a force Multiplier: See above.