By Peter A. Kirby
“Living things are adapted to the weather that actually prevails, and any change in that weather will be generally deleterious to them.” – from “Weather and Climate Modification” by the National Science Foundation, 1965
When airplanes routinely dump megatons of toxic garbage into our atmosphere as they have been doing for twenty years now, the most obvious question is: What are the biological impacts? What are the environmental implications of very small aluminum, barium, and strontium particles entering our bodies and fouling our biosphere? As one might guess, the implications are grave. Although the geoengineers will undoubtedly tell us that everything is fine, the best available evidence shows that the general population’s health is being negatively impacted, at least hundreds of thousands of people are dying, and that our environment is being summarily wrecked as well. These are the biological impacts of the New Manhattan Project.
If you do not know what the New Manhattan Project is, please see the author’s previous article “Chemtrails Exposed: A History of the New Manhattan Project.”
Aluminum oxide
As evidenced by voluminous rainwater sample lab reports, the most common chemtrails have been shown to consist mostly of aluminum oxide (Al2O3) nanoparticles. Aluminum oxide, because it is by far the most prevalent form of aluminum. In fact, when one refers to “aluminum” they almost invariably mean aluminum oxide because free aluminum basically does not exist in nature. For more about this topic, please refer to the author’s previous article “Aluminum, Barium, and Strontium: The New Manhattan Project Chemtrail Sprays.”
Aluminum oxide nanoparticles are nasty stuff. A material safety data sheet (MSDS) produced by US Research Nanomaterials, Inc. says that they can cause: respiratory problems, skin irritation, eye irritation, tumors, Alzheimer’s, pulmonary disease, neoplasms, and gastric or intestinal disorders. This MSDS also states that people coming in contact with Al2O3 nanoparticles should wear a respirator and a fully protective impervious suit.
It appears coincidental that Wright-Patterson Air Force Base has studied the biological impacts of aerosolized aluminum. In March 2001, the Air Force Research Laboratory published a study titled “In Vitro Toxicity of Aluminum Nanoparticles in Rat Alveolar Macrophages.” Scientists exposed rats to airborne, nano-sized aluminum oxide particles. The authors concluded:
Aluminum oxide nanoparticles displayed significant toxicity after 96 and 144 hours post exposure at high doses (100 and 250 µg/ml). Aluminum nanoparticles also showed slight toxicity after 24 hours at high doses (100 and 250 µg/ml). When these cells were dosed at lower non toxic levels (25 µg/ml) Al 50, 80,120 nm caused a significant reduction in phagocytosis. Even at a dose as low as 5 µg/ml Al 50 nm still caused a significant reduction. None of these nanoparticles caused the induction of nitric oxide, TNF-alpha, or MIP-2, important components in inflammatory responses. In summary, based on viability, aluminum nanoparticles appear to be slightly toxic to rat alveolar macrophages. However, there was a significant reduction in phagocytic function of macrophages.
Yeah, they found that even at low doses, forcing rats to breathe in tiny aluminum oxide particles screwed up their lungs. In other news, the geniuses at the World Health Organization found that bullets fired from guns can kill people. The induced lack of phagocytes means that the rats’ immune systems (especially in the lungs) became unable to fight off invading organisms.
“In Vitro Toxicity of Aluminum Nanoparticles in Rat Alveolar Macrophages” was but one of a series of studies produced by Wright-Patterson pertaining to aluminum nanoparticle exposure. Wright-Patterson also produced a 2010 study titled “Nanosized Aluminum Altered Immune Function” in which they found that inhaled aluminum nanoparticles impair human immune systems. The authors continued to note that nanoparticles have more deleterious health effects than do larger sized particles.
Curiously, “Nanosized Aluminum Altered Immune Function” also states that we are prone to inhale aluminum nanoparticles because they are used in jet fuels. This information, combined with the allusion to alumina-spiked jet fuels in Raytheon’s 1990 “Stratospheric Welsbach Seeding for Reduction of Global Warming” patent makes a case for aluminum-spiked jet fuels.
All this is extremely interesting when one considers Wright-Patterson’s involvement in the New Manhattan Project such as that which is documented in the author’s previous article “Death from Above: The New Manhattan Project Chemtrail Fleet.”
A 2009 paper titled “Manufactured Aluminum Oxide Nanoparticles Decrease Expression of Tight Junction Proteins in Brain Vasculature” found that, due to brain cell death, aluminum exposure can cause: Alzheimer’s, stroke, reperfusion, hypoxia, mitochondrial disease, and general vascular dysfunction.
In a 2012 paper written by one of the world’s top neurosurgeons (now retired), many neurological diseases are linked to aluminum exposure. Russell Blaylock’s “Aluminum Induced Immunoexcitotoxicity in Neurodevelopmental and Neurodegenerative Disorders” found a link between aluminum exposure and: Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, Huntington’s, Pick’s, HIV dementia, multiple sclerosis, viral encephalopathies, chronic traumatic encephalopathy, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS / Lou Gehrig’s disease). In this paper, Dr. Blaylock also found that aluminum exposure is linked to: impaired cognition, poor memory, impaired learning, poor attention, social withdrawal, irritability, reduced food and water intake and depression. Not only that, but Dr. Blaylock cites another paper here showing how extremely small aluminum particles like the ones used in today’s New Manhattan Project can intensify adverse health reactions.
Dr. Russell Blaylock, MD.
Image source: unknown
Dr. Blaylock has provided us with some impressive evidence for a causal relationship between chemtrails and Alzheimer’s. He tells us that the aluminum oxide nanoparticles we constantly inhale are carried directly to the part of the brain that is first affected in Alzheimer’s disease AND most severely affected in Alzheimer’s disease. On March 28, 2013 Dr. Blaylock went on the Linderman Unleashed radio program. The host asked him how he became chemtrail aware and Dr. Blaylock said this:
Well, you know, the connection has been the aluminum in the vaccines. I wrote several articles about the effects of the adjuvants in vaccines including the mercury and the aluminum effect.
Then I found some articles about the chemtrails and there was a lot being said about it and I wasn’t too sure whether it was true or not because in my State we rarely saw them. But as I started looking on the Internet and I would see these States in which there were these criss-cross patterns and they were very tight patterns and geometrical shapes where it was obvious that it was a purposeful covering of the atmosphere with these patterns and the trails were so long. Well now, you know, we’re starting to see them in my State and as I look at them, they go from to horizon to horizon. Well, you know, I’ve been alive long enough to know that jets never did that in the past and I see the same patterning effect now where they’re criss-crossing; it’s an obvious pattern.
And so I look into the literature and some of the reports and YouTube videos and they were saying that they were dropping as one of the ingredients, aluminum. Well, I had done a fair amount of writing and research on the effect of aerosolized chemicals in the nose when you breathe them. And what we knew was that these particles tend to travel along the olfactory nerves which are the smell nerves in the nose. And it travels directly to the part of the brain that has to do with memory and emotions; the hippocampus, the interlinal area, and the prefrontal cortex. And that you can trace these chemicals traveling along that nerve and depositing in this area of the brain.
The other thing that was known is that if you aerosolize aluminum, it’s one of the metals that passes very easily along this track and directly into the brain. So it bypasses the blood-brain barrier and goes directly into the brain and accumulates. Well, if you do it in animals, it produces lesions, or damage in that area of the brain and the animal will begin to show changes of memory and learning and emotional changes.
When we look at people who have Alzheimer’s disease, ironically, the highest concentration of aluminum in the brain is that same entry point; what’s called the interlinal cortex. And the levels continue to accumulate. So we have compelling evidence that aerosolized aluminum alone will enter the brain and produce damage to that critical area of the brain.
The worst of all is the nano-sized. Nano-size means you make it such a small particle that it easily penetrates skin. It penetrates barriers in the body that normally metals cannot pass through. When you nano-size and produce these incredibly small particulate matter, it passes very easily. So when you nano-size aluminum and you use it in these aerosols through the nasal passages, it enters the brain in very high concentration and they find that the nano-sized aluminum in the brain is infinitely more toxic.
Now one of the toxic reactions to aluminum is intense inflammation and activation of cells in the brain that are the immune cells called microglia. Aluminum is a very potent activator of these immune cells and that triggers the release of a powerful substance called glutamate which is an excitotoxin that causes cells to die from an excitatory mechanism. Kinda complex mechanism, but it is a combination of inflammation and excitotoxicity. And I coined the term in the medical literature called immunoexcitotoxicity to describe that process. So, we know that occurs. We know it occurs very easily.
Now, the reports are coming out now that what they’re spraying is nano-sized aluminum and the idea is the old concept of preventing global warming. And they nano-size the aluminum so it will stay in the upper atmosphere longer; supposedly as a reflective compound metal. The problem with that, even from a climatological description is that if you make it into cirrus-like clouds rather than reflecting it upward and out of the atmosphere, it reflects the heat downward and actually causes global warming. So, you know, you could envision that they’re doing this on purpose to make the atmosphere heat up so they can say, ‘See, the atmosphere is warming up.’
But what I’m concerned about mainly is the medical effect and that’s because of these very strong connections between aluminum passing through this pathway into the brain [which] is so strongly connected with Alzheimer’s disease and other diseases of memory.
If you’re aerosolizing this and spraying literally tons of it over the world, people are constantly breathing that aerosolized, nano-sized aluminum which will easily penetrate filters in your air-conditioning system [and] enter your home. So you’re breathing it 24 hours a day; producing high levels of aluminum in this part of the brain. And the consequences could be absolutely devastating. It could cause a huge increase in Alzheimer’s disease and inflammatory neurological disorders.
I watched a YouTube which was a geoengineering conference that the government had put on. And in the conference, one of the questions somebody in the audience asked was: What is the medical effect of spraying aluminum in the atmosphere? And the speaker said, ‘Well, uh, we don’t really know. But we’re in the process of researching that.’ Well, of course that was an absolute lie. We do know what it does. But the fact that they were admitting that in fact they were going to spray, they gave it in the future tense that they were going to spray aluminum, the evidence now from the examination by biologists and scientists around the world is that the aluminum level in the lakes and streams and trees is increasing enormously. Some areas have incredible elevations of aluminum in the groundwater and in the vegetation. So if this indeed is happening, we’re looking at a medical catastrophe that’s worldwide.
There is lots of other highly credible evidence available linking aluminum exposure to the diseases mentioned here. If you want more information, please search the term “aluminum toxicity.” Expediency demands that we move on.
Barium oxide
Rainwater sample test results from around the world consistently show barium, but not what type of barium. It has to be bonded to another element. Free barium, like aluminum, basically does not exist in nature. Although there are many forms of bonded barium, today’s New Manhattan Project probably sprays us with barium oxide (BaO). Barium oxide because a famous Inorganic Chemistry Ph.D. scientist by the name of Dr. Lenny Thyme has identified it.
For a lesson on the chemistry of chemtrails, watch Dr. Thyme’s presentation here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxCrtsranP8
Dr. Lenny Thyme
Image source: Truth Media Productions
Barium oxide is highly toxic. A popular barium oxide material safety data sheet produced by ScienceLab.com says:
Extremely hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant), of eye contact (irritant), of ingestion. Very hazardous in case of skin contact (corrosive), of inhalation. The amount of tissue damage depends on length of contact. Eye contact can result in corneal damage or blindness. Skin contact can produce inflammation and blistering. Inhalation of dust will produce irritation to gastro-intestinal or respiratory tract, characterized by burning, sneezing and coughing. Severe over-exposure can produce lung damage, choking, unconsciousness or death. Inflammation of the eye is characterized by redness, watering, and itching. Skin inflammation is characterized by itching, scaling, reddening, or, occasionally, blistering.
Many other barium oxide MSDSs go on and on in a similar fashion. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says that barium oxide reacts violently with water.
Strontium oxide/hydroxide
Being that the strontium we concern ourselves with is atmospheric, we are probably looking at strontium oxide, possibly strontium hydroxide as well. Strontium oxide because small strontium particles floating around in the atmosphere will tend to bond with the available oxygen. Dr. Lenny Thyme has also identified the strontium from chemtrails to be strontium oxide.
A strontium oxide MSDS from Sigma-Aldrich states that it is corrosive. It causes burns when it comes in contact with the skin and can be absorbed through the skin. If one inhales it, the MSDS states that it is, “…extremely destructive to the tissue of the mucous membranes and upper respiratory tract.” The MSDS continues:
Inhalation may result in spasm, inflammation and edema of the larynx and bronchi, chemical pneumonitis, and pulmonary edema. Material is extremely destructive to tissue of the mucous membranes and upper respiratory tract, eyes, and skin.
The Sigma-Aldrich MSDS finishes up by noting that the chemical, physical, and toxicological properties of strontium oxide have not been thoroughly investigated.
Strontium hydroxide is even worse. Being that there is lots of water in the atmosphere, the atmospheric strontium oxide produced as part of the New Manhattan Project may react with it and form the extremely caustic strontium hydroxide. Not only that, but don’t forget that our bodies are comprised of mostly H2O. Strontium oxide in the atmosphere and inside of us has lots of opportunities to become strontium hydroxide.
The Sigma-Aldrich MSDS cautions potential users to never expose strontium oxide to water because it reacts violently.
Another famous Ph.D. scientist, J. Marvin Herndon, has declared chemtrails to be reconstituted coal fly ash. It is interesting to note that a form of strontium is a component of coal fly ash and studies have been done concerning exposure to the strontium found in fly ash. The CDC writes:
Rats were exposed to aerosols of 85Sr [strontium] carbonate, phosphate, fluoride, oxide, or titanate (particle sizes and doses not specified) (Willard and Snyder 1966). Greater than 99% of the initial lung burden of 85Sr was cleared from the lung 5 days after inhalation of the carbonate, phosphate, fluoride, or oxide, whereas 60% of the 85Sr remained in the lung after inhalation of the more insoluble strontium titanate.
In rats exposed to airborne fly ash (sieved to have a particle diameter of distribution of 90% less than 20 μm) for 6 hours, strontium was eliminated from the lung with a half-time of 23 days (observations were made for 30 days) (Srivastava et al. 1984b). One day after the exposure, the tissue:plasma strontium concentration ratios were 0.3–0.5 in the liver, kidney, small intestine, and heart. The report of this study does not indicate whether whole-body or nose-only exposures were utilized in the study; therefore, it is not possible to know for certain how much of the absorption may have resulted from ingestion of fly ash deposited on the animals. Furthermore, given the relatively large particle size of the fly ash, it is likely that deposition in the respiratory tract was largely in the tracheobronchial and nasopharyngeal region, from which the strontium may have been cleared mechanically to the esophagus and swallowed. Nevertheless, studies in which 89Sr-enriched fly ash was instilled into the trachea of rats indicate that strontium in this form was partly absorbed and appeared in plasma and other tissues within days of the exposure (Srivastava et al. 1984a).
The CDC goes on to note that the fly ash strontium administered to the lab rats ended up mostly in the bones. After that, it appeared in (in order of prevalence): muscle, skin, liver, and kidneys.
Those heady days of just dumping dry ice into the troposphere are long gone.
Respiratory Diseases
The inhalation of any aerosolized particulate matter tends to have harmful human health impacts. This is not a matter of debate. Common sense and many studies show this. In fact, those great progenitors of the New Manhattan Project, the Atomic Energy Commission, helped produce a 1964 book titled Pulmonary Deposition and Retention of Inhaled Aerosols.
Diseases associated with particulate matter inhalation include: asthma, chronic sinusitis, chronic bronchitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema, and lung cancer.
Rates of associated diseases
As this article has explained, chemtrails are associated with a great many diseases. As we have been assaulted by this New Manhattan Project for about twenty years now, it is no surprise that the best available data shows rates of many associated diseases going up significantly.
Historical rates of every disease associated with chemtrail spray are not presented here due to a lack of CDC data. Every associated disease with available CDC data is presented.
Let’s start with the most strongly correlated disease: Alzheimer’s. According to the CDC, from 2000 to 2010, while deaths from other diseases such as cancer, heart disease, and stroke decreased significantly, Alzheimer’s deaths increased 39%. They write, “In 2010, Alzheimer’s disease was the underlying cause for a total of 83,494 deaths and was classified as a contributing cause for an additional 26,488 deaths. Mortality from Alzheimer’s disease has steadily increased during the last 30 years.” Knowing what we now know, it is reasonable to assume that chemtrails have contributed greatly to this.
Image source: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Not only have the rates of adult Alzheimer’s disease been increasing, but a disease that used to be relegated to old people is now showing up in children. Reports have been pouring in from around the world documenting research into Niemann Pick Type C disease, also known as “childhood Alzheimer’s.”
Dr. Blaylock says that there is also a correlation between aluminum exposure and Parkinson’s. The CDC says that the rate of Parkinson’s disease went from about 4.5 per 100,000 people in 1995 to a little over 6 per 100,000 people in 2003. If you will recall, the large-scale spraying started in about 1995.
This Book Could Save Your Life (Ad)
The CDC found that the rate of chronic pulmonary disease (COPD) including: asthma, chronic bronchitis, and emphysema was stable between 1998 and 2009. This is probably attributable to drastically falling rates of smoking counterbalanced by chemtrail exposure. The CDC reports that between 1995 and 2011, smoking went from 35% among students and 25% among adults to 18% and 19% respectively. Concurrently, the CDC reports significant drops in the rate of lung cancer between 2002 and 2011. With these big drops in the rate of smoking, one might assume that the rate of COPD would go down as well instead of remaining stable. Chemtrails probably kept the rates of COPD stable. Lung cancer probably decreased because chemtrail exposure has not been as bad for your lungs as smoking.
Image source: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Image source: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Early exposures
Although it appears that our bodies have been finding ways to cope with this daily onslaught of aerosolized metals, around the times when people were first exposed, emergency rooms filled up. William Thomas’ groundbreaking 2004 book Chemtrails Confirmed chronicles many of these examples.
Thomas recounts the words of a registered nurse:
Approximately December 16th or the 17th, while traveling north, I could see ‘stripes’ in the sky. It appeared as if someone took white paint on their fingers and from north to south ran their fingers through the sky. These contrails were evenly spaced and covered the whole sky! They covered it completely! When I was finished with the next visit, approximately 45 minutes, I came out of the house and found the whole sky was white. There was no definition in cloud pattern.
Within the 24 hours I became very weak, feverish, and my asthma began to act up. I didn’t think too much about it, until my boyfriend told me that many in his family started coming down with the same complaints. I also started noticing a lot of my patients and their family members were coming down with these symptoms at the same time. In our area we have one main hospital which I was the Supervisor of for four years. I worked there a total of six years. I stay in close contact with the nurses and physicians and am planning on investigating into this more. At that time, they complained of being extremely busy with respiratory diagnoses.
Another passage from Chemtrails Confirmed recounts the experiences of a restaurant owner from Oklahoma. The passage reads:
On January 24, 1999 [Pat] Edgar reported that on ‘Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday and Thursday of last week, we were really hit hard with the contrails. I mean real bad. Everybody in this town is sick right now; sicker than a damn dog. It’s all in their head and their sinuses, and it hangs in the throat, (sore necks), ears ringing.’
Edgar added: ‘Some customers that frequent our business have stated that they have been to the doctor and the offices have been full of sick people. Same thing at the Indian clinic.’
‘People have to wait for hours because the waiting room is full. Some people have reported being on their third and fourth round of antibiotics and they are still ill. We noticed excessive contrails Thursday, Feb. 11th.’
Edgar became ill the following day, and visited a doctor. From a friend he learned that Sparks regional hospital had over 500 people seeking medical attention at the emergency room for flu, or flu-like symptoms.
Others appearing in Thomas’ book tell similar stories.
Bodily contamination testing
When we ingest aluminum, some of it eventually comes out in our hair and fingernails. There are many reports online of people finding high levels of chemtrail toxins in their hair and fingernails. Certain laboratories can analyze hair and fingernail samples for aluminum and other substances.
If you are curious about your bodily contamination, one may get their hair tested here.
Biospheric implications
There is evidence that chemtrails are changing soil pH. This could be very bad for our biosphere.
Anti-geoengineering activist Francis Mangels has a Bachelor of Science in Forestry from the International School of Forestry at Missoula, 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. In order to document the effect of chemtrail spray upon soil pH, Mr. Mangels wrote on Oct. 30, 2009:
The soil scientists from the USDA Soil Conservation Department visited private property east of Shasta Lake, California, on Oct. 27, 2009. Mr. Bailey, Komar, and Owens tested the pH with standard federal meters. All agreed the pH should be 5.5.
Under Douglas fir, the pH was 7.4, astoundingly basic for that habitat.
Under Poderosa pine, at the precise soil-needle interface, I would expect a pH of 5. At that point, Bailey’s meter showed 6.5. This is high for a microhabitat that should be very acid. Old soil surveys indicate this soil should be very acid, around pH of 5.5.
I bought a house in Mt. Shasta old black oak/pine pasture in 2002, tested the pH at below 6, good for vegetable gardening. It was a major reason for purchase, and proceeded with highly acid composting of leaves and grass to drive the pH down or at least keep it low, as every master gardener knows. I added a touch of sulphur and avoided wood ash to insure acidity, and proceeded to teach organic gardening courses out of my yard through COS. The pH tests were an embarrassment because now my garden is pH 7, sometimes higher. This is the opposite of what should happen.
The pH meter of Jon McClellan proceeded to show pH in McCloud gardens also running close to 7 or 8, which is too high for heavy organic mulch with no ashes. General lawns were also running over pH 7 under oaks and pines and fir trees. This is contrary to everything I learned in college and the Soil Conservation Service for 35 years. The old data sheets say these soils should be running at a pH of 5-6.
In the movie What In the World Are They Spraying?, Mr. Mangels says that when soil pH changes, soil arthropods (a vital link in our ecosystem) start to go away.
Francis Mangels
Image source: ChemtrailsPlanet.net
***
Spraying vast regions of the Earth with megatons of toxic metals is probably contributing to the alarming rate of animal species extinction. The Center for Biological Diversity reports that, “Scientists estimate we’re now losing species at 1,000 to 10,000 times the background rate, with literally dozens going extinct every day. It could be a scary future indeed, with as many as 30 to 50 percent of all species possibly heading toward extinction by mid-century.”
***
Reports of massive plant and animal die-offs potentially due to chemtrails are widespread.
***
Although, to the author’s knowledge, not a lot firm data has arisen yet, we should be very concerned about the effects of chemtrail spray upon the Earth’s flora and fauna. This will be a large area of study going forward.
Electromagnetic fields
Besides being forced to inhale aluminum, barium, and strontium, we are also currently subjected to another, potentially harmful component of the New Manhattan Project; electromagnetic energy.
Electromagnetic fields, which are produced by electromagnetic energy, are known to be capable of damaging our DNA. DNA provides instructions for how new cells are to grow. When our DNA is damaged, growing cells lose their instructions and instead of growing the way they should, they may grow incorrectly and cancerously. Although it has not been firmly established in mainstream science that relatively weak, sustained exposures to electromagnetic fields cause cancer, there is a growing body of evidence suggesting that they do.
Some famous career scientists like Barrie Trower are already asserting a causal relationship and declaring a cover-up. Here is a link to a good Barrie Trower interview in which he addresses this alleged cover-up:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMMEQNnSZIo
It’s not only the New Manhattan Project generating environmental electromagnetic energy waves, though. Electromagnetic energy is described by my scientific advisor Ginny Silcox (a senior-level R&D electromagnetics technician) as, “…the very fabric of space and time.” In other words, electromagnetic energy waves and electromagnetic fields are absolutely everywhere. All electronic devices and the power grid itself generate them; not to mention all the cellular and WiFi signals flying all over the place. The Earth, the Sun, our solar system, and the universe are constantly generating incredibly massive quantities. Sometimes these fields are of frequencies and types that are beneficial to Humans, sometimes they are not. In our environment, different electromagnetic fields are constantly overlapping and thus either helping to amplify each other or helping to cancel each other out.
Being that the people running the New Manhattan Project have not informed us of the specific frequencies, types, and intensities of electromagnetic energy they are employing, it is impossible to tell whether or not we are being negatively impacted. Coupled with the fact that, regardless of the New Manhattan Project, we are constantly exposed to a mishmash of hundreds, sometimes thousands of electromagnetic signals and fields every day, it is a fool’s errand, at this point, to speculate.
Silver iodide
The conventional weather modification industry has been openly spraying vast areas of the United States with silver iodide since 1947. The super-secret New Manhattan Project only started spraying us with aluminum, barium and strontium around 1995. Hence, the vast majority of the weather modification and atmospheric sciences literature is geared towards the dispersion of silver iodide. Although silver iodide is not what is used in today’s New Manhattan Project, as a side issue, let’s take a look at the scientific evidence (or lack thereof) concerning the biological impacts of silver iodide. Past is prelude.
Considering that this issue is the most obvious question and of grave importance, the lack of publicly available research pertaining to the biological impacts of silver iodide dispersion is quite shocking. You may read the 746-page, 1978 Congressional Research Service report on weather modification. You may read all 21 of the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences reports or all of the National Science Foundation annual weather modification reports. You may read scores of weather modification reports, book after book, and myriad of reports and papers about weather modification and the atmospheric sciences. But nowhere in any of these documents will you find an adequate examination of biological impacts and specifically human health effects caused by atmospheric silver iodide. Only after reading a stack of documents about a yard high, did your author finally find a report containing an adequate discussion of the human health effects of exposure to silver iodide.
This Chess Champ Memory Hack May Prevent Dementia (Ad)
A popular silver iodide material safety data sheet describes silver iodide as, “Hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant), of eye contact (irritant), of ingestion, [and] of inhalation.” Unbelievably, much of the toxicology information is NOT AVAILABLE. They’ve been spraying us with this stuff since 1947 and the toxicology information is not available?!
Equally as unbelievable, to date, no publicly available long-term studies have been done.
It is widely suggested that exposure to silver iodide causes argyria; characterized by a blue-grey discoloration of the eyes, skin, mucous membranes, and internal organs. Another MSDS produced by Fisher Scientific reads, “Chronic ingestion of iodides during pregnancy has resulted in fetal death, severe goiter, and cretinoid appearance of the newborn. Prolonged exposure to iodides may produce iodism in sensitive individuals. Symptoms could include skin rash, running nose and headache.”
A 1966 National Science Foundation report stated, “The present state of knowledge places uncomfortable limits on the prediction of the biological consequences of modifying the weather.”
A 1969 Bureau of Reclamation report noted, “There has so far not been a single biological field study completed and reported in the literature specifically designed to identify any aspect of the ecological effects of weather modification.”
A 1972 study conducted by the Council on Environmental Quality stated, “Projects may have significant adverse environmental effects, ranging from immediate hazards to life and property to long-term alterations in land use patterns and threats to ecological systems.”
The vast majority of research done in this area does not even concern itself with Human health impacts or biospheric contamination. Rather, it focuses on the ancillary issue of how plants and animals may be affected by either more or less rainfall.
The work that is publicly available is mostly cursory. In the vast majority of cases where the subject is even so much as broached, the literature quickly follows with assurances that there are probably no adverse effects and that further study is not necessary.
Thankfully, some research indicating silver iodide’s negative biological impacts has surfaced. It is not good news, but we need to hear it. Evidence suggests that it is exceptionally bad for organisms further down the food chain. The aforementioned 1969 Bureau of Reclamation report also noted:
Silver compounds are much more toxic to fish than to terrestrial vertebrates. Some of the higher concentrations of Ag recorded in precipitation from seeded storms are comparable to the lowest concentrations lethal to fish in the short run. In one set of experiments, sticklebacks were able to withstand no more than 0.003 ppm Ag in water at 15-18° C. The fish survived one week at 0.004 ppm, four days at 0.01 ppm, and but one day at 0.1 ppm.
This 1969 report also found silver to be, “…highly toxic to microorganisms….” The report continues:
Many investigators have placed Ag at or near the top of the list among heavy metals in toxicity to fungi, slime molds, and bacteria. Water containing 0.015 ppm Ag from contact with specially prepared metal has exhibited bacteriocidal activity. 0.006 ppm Ag has killed E. coli in 2 to 24 hours, depending on numbers of bacteria. Bacteriocidal activity in this context usually implies death of 9.99% or so of the cells present.
Killing fungi, E. coli, and slime molds may sound like a good thing. But in the context of our complex and interdependent biosphere, it is not. Our overall ecosystem needs slime molds and the like. These things are vital links in the food chain.
Why does the conventional weather modification and atmospheric sciences literature not sufficiently address the issue of silver iodide’s biological impacts? They wouldn’t have anything to hide, would they? That which is not disclosed is often more incriminating than that which is. Although today’s Weather Modification Association claims it is completely safe, they have a conflict of interest and they do not have data to sufficiently answer the most obvious question.
The bottom line is that there is evidence showing that silver iodide has negative biological impacts. We cannot know for sure that spraying this stuff is safe if no public long term studies have been done.
Conclusions
Although it is currently not feasible to completely assess the damage to Earth’s biosphere caused by this New Manhattan Project, the available evidence does not paint a pretty picture. This is an area of study which should be fleshed out over the coming years. This body of work is bound to be vastly expanded and updated in the coming years and decades.
We have seen already that the main ingredient, aluminum oxide, is very toxic to Humans. The rates of specific diseases linked to aluminum oxide exposure are on the rise.
Barium oxide, strontium oxide, and strontium hydroxide are absolute nightmares.
Many people have become very sick when first exposed.
There are very troubling things happening in our biosphere.
The historical precedent set by the conventional weather modification industry mandates irresponsibility.
When geoengineers say that their activities are harmless, we have plenty of good reasons to not believe them.
Peter A. Kirby is a San Rafael, CA researcher, writer, and activist. Check out his ebook Chemtrails Exposed: A New Manhattan Project. Follow him on Twitter @PeterAKirby
Notes:
“Weather and Climate Modification: Report of the Special Commission on Weather Modification” by the National Science Foundation, 1965
Aluminum oxide material safety data sheet by US Research Nanomaterials, Inc., 2013
“In Vitro Toxicity of Aluminum Nanoparticles in Rat Alveolar Macrophages” a report by Andrew Wagner, Charles Bleckmann, and E. England of the Air Force Institute of Technology, Krista Hess of Geo-Centers, Inc., Dayton, Ohio, and Saber Hussain and John J. Schlager of the Air Force Research Laboratory, Human Effectiveness Directorate, Applied Biotechnology Branch, Wright-Patterson AFB, published by the Air Force Research Laboratory, Human Effectiveness Directorate, Applied Biotechnology Branch, Wright-Patterson AFB, 2001
“Nanosized Aluminum Altered Immune Function” a paper by Laura K. Braydich-Stolle, Janice L. Speshock, Alicia Castle, Marcus Smith, Richard C. Murdock, and Saber M. Hussain, published by the American Chemical Society, 2010
“Manufactured Aluminum Oxide Nanoparticles Decrease Expression of Tight Junction Proteins in Brain Vasculature” a paper by Lei Chen, Robert A. Yokel, Bernhard Henning, and Michal Toborek, published by the Journal of Neuroimmune Pharmacology, December, 2008
“Aluminum Induced Immunoexcitotoxicity in Neurodevelopmental and Neurodegenerative Disorders” a paper by Dr. Russell L. Blaylock, as published in Current Inorganic Chemistry, 2012
“Gila Activation Induced by Peripheral Administration of Aluminum Oxide Nanoparticles in Rat Brains” a paper by X. Li, H. Zheng, Z. Zhang, M. Li, Z. Huang, H.J. Schluesener, Y. Li, and S. Xu, published in Nanomed, 2009, 5, (4), 473-479
Barium oxide material safety data sheet, produced by ScienceLab.com, 2013
Strontium oxide material safety data sheet by Sigma-Aldrich, 2007
“Aluminum Poisoning of Humanity and Earth’s Biota by Clandestine Geoengineering Activity: Implications for India” a paper by J. Marvin Herndon, PhD, published by Current Science, 2015
“Strontium” a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Inhaled Particles and Vapours a book edited by C.N. Davies, published by Pergamon Press, 1961
“Fine Particulate Air Pollution and Mortality in 20 U.S. Cities, 1987-1994” a report by Jonathan M. Samet, M.D., Francesca Dominici, Ph.D., Frank C. Curriero, Ph.D., Ivan Coursac, M.S., and Scott L. Zeger, Ph.D., published by the New England Journal of Medicine, volume 343, number 24, 2000
“Pulmonary Deposition and Retention of Inhaled Aerosols” a book by Theodore F. Hatch, Paul Gross, the American Industrial Hygiene Association, and the United States Atomic Energy Commission, published by Academic Press, 1964
“Mortality from Alzheimer’s Disease in the United States: Data for 2000 and 2010” a report by Betzaida Tejada-Vera, M.S., published by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2013
“Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Among Adults Aged 18 and Over in the United States, 1998–2009” a report by Lara J. Akinbami, M.D.; and Xiang Liu, M.Sc., published by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2011
Chemtrails Confirmed a book by William Thomas, published by Bridger House Publishers, 2004
What In the World Are They Spraying? a documentary film by Michael Murphy, Paul Wittenberger, and Edward G. Griffin, produced by Truth Media Productions, 2010
Overpowered: What Science Tells Us About the Dangers of Cell Phones and Other WiFi-Age Devices a book by Martin Blank, PhD, published by Seven Stories Press, 2014
Silver iodide material safety data sheet produced by ScienceLab.com, 2010
Silver iodide material safety data sheet produced by Fisher Scientific, 2009
National Science Foundation Report No. 66-3 as it appeared in a hearing before the Subcommittee on Oceans and Atmosphere of the Committee on Commerce, United States Senate, Ninety-fourth Congress, second session, Feb. 17, 1976
“Ecological Effects of Weather Modification: A Problem Analysis” a report by Charles F. Cooper and William C. Jolly, produced by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Office of Atmospheric Water Resources, published by the University of Michigan, 1969
“Federal Regulation of Weather Modification” a report by the Council on Environmental Quality, Washington, D.C., 1972 as it appeared in a hearing before the Subcommittee on Oceans and Atmosphere of the Committee on Commerce, United States Senate, Ninety-fourth Congress, second session, Feb. 17, 1976
Environmental Impacts of Artificial Ice Nucleating Agents a book edited and co-written by Donald A. Klein, published by Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, 1978
“Weather Modification Association Position Statement on the Environmental Impact of Using Silver Iodide as a Cloud Seeding Agent” by the Weather Modification Association, 2009
Websites:
nsf.gov
us-nano.com
wpafb.af.mil
raytheon.com
russellblaylockmd.com
lindermanunleashed.com
howdt.blogspot.com
sciencelab.com
cdc.gov
sigmaaldrich.com
nuclearplanet.com
energy.gov
willthomasonline.net
cfc.umt.edu
fs.fed.us
nrcs.usda.gov
biologicaldiversity.org
loc.gov/crsinfo
fishersci.com
usbr.gov
whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ceq
weathermodification.org
Image Credit