The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Full ArchivesKevin Barrett Podcasts
Dane Wiggington on Geoengineered Climate Catastrophe
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks


I recently emailed Dane Wiggington of Geoengineering Watch to ask his take on weird weather patterns etc. Dane wrote back: “Hello, Kevin, hope you are well in spite of it all. Biosphere collapse continues to unfold and accelerate, the climate engineering assault is further fueling the process (and contaminating every breath we take).”

Dane claims the climate change alarmists are actually downplaying the real scale of the climate catastrophe, especially the part driven by geoengineering. He says the planet is in meltdown mode and recommends the film Chasing Ice. Dane also says the destruction of the ozone layer continues at a life-threatening pace.Bio:

Dane has a background in solar energy. He is a former employee of Bechtel Power Corp. and was a licensed contractor in California and Arizona.

His personal residence was feature in a cover article on the world’s largest renewable energy magazine, Home Power. He owns a wildlife preserve next to Lake Shasta in northern California.

Dane put all his focus, efforts and energy researching the climate engineering issue when he began to lose very significant amounts of solar uptake due to the ever-increasing “solar obscuration” caused from jet aircraft spraying in the skies above his mountain-top home. He also noted a significant decline in forest health was occurring and appeared to be accelerating. His extensive testing and research into the geoengineering issue has continued since 2002.

He has investigated all levels of geoengineering from stratospheric aerosol geoengineering (SAG) to solar radiation management (SRM), to ionosphere heater facilities like HAARP. Dane has appeared numerous films, and radio interviews in an effort to educate the public on the extremely dire environmental and health dangers we face from the ongoing global climate intervention programs.

(Republished from Truth Jihad by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Science • Tags: Environment, Global Warming 
Hide 44 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. anon[371] • Disclaimer says:

    Chemtrail cranks are highly amusing to every pilot who calculates a Weight & Balance, because he knows exactly how much mass of whatever chemtrail chemical is on his aircraft at Take Off Weight: zero.

    • Replies: @Kevin Barrett
  2. So, nothing to do with CO2 emission. Living in London I see how the contrails create clouds that frequently obscure the sun. Not sure about ‘climate collapse’ but the post-9/11 flight ban certainly brought home to people what a sky without contrails looks like – very very different!

    • Replies: @🙉RetroTrump2009
  3. But, but, but …. USA Today and other outlets for the common man person assure me the ozone hole is shrinking; are they BS’ing us to prevent widespread panic?

    https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/10/21/ozone-hole-above-antarctica-shrinks-smallest-size-record/4053468002/

    • Replies: @🙈RetroTrump2009
  4. Thanks for posting this. No MSM goes near this story and I’ve not seen Dane interviewed except on alternative internet sites.

    I’ve been listening to his weekly radio broadcast (which you can get on YouTube) and following his analysis of geoengineering for a long time.

    It seems that the majority of the population are lulled into a complacency that allows the immoral oligarchs/elites in creating a world where our children will have little opportunity for a safe and healthy life, free of the man-made poisons that are raining down on the Earth every day.

  5. AWM says:

    “Hole In The Ozone Layer Shrinks To Smallest Size On Record”
    October 22, 2019 12:18 PM ET

    The hole in the ozone layer shrank to its smallest size since scientists began recording it, NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said Monday.

    The ozone layer hole, which roughly sits above Antarctica, experienced massive retraction in September and October due to “abnormal” weather patters in the upper atmosphere, resulting in its smallest size since scientists began observing it in 1982, NASA and NOAA scientists announced.

    NASA and NOAA satellite measurements observed the ozone hole reached a peak size of 6.3 million square miles on Sept. 8, but then dwindled to less than 3.9 million square miles for the rest of September and October. However, scientists tracking the ozone hole cautioned the changes are mostly a reflection of atypical weather patterns and not because of a dramatic recovery.

    “It’s great news for ozone in the Southern Hemisphere,” Paul Newman, chief scientist for Earth Sciences at the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, said in a statement Monday. “But it’s important to recognize that what we’re seeing this year is due to warmer stratospheric temperatures. It’s not a sign that atmospheric ozone is suddenly on a fast track to recovery.”

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/10/22/hole-in-the-ozone-layer-shrinks-to-smallest-size-on-record/

  6. @Simon in London

    Just like science-denying left-wingers try to weasel out of the reality that IQ has everything to do with career success and wealth, science-denying right-wingers attempt to weasel out of the fact that global warming has everything to do with CO2 emission.

    The science of global warming is two centuries old now, starting with experiments in the 1820s with Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier. The history of this old white men’s climate science is covered here.

    The evidence that CO2 is a greenhouse gas is a third grade experiment that you can do on a few dollars at home with a couple 2L pop bottles, a few Alka-Seltzer, a couple thermometers, and a heat lamp, demonstrated on youtube here, or more a little more dramatically with CO2 gas placed between a candle and an infrared camera here.

    There will be consequences for humans evaporating earth’s vast coal beds and oil fields into our thin atmosphere. The consequences can be summarized briefly with just two simple numbers:

    4°C warming is forecast by the Trump Administration within a single human lifetime.
    6°C warming resulted in near-annihilation of planetary life in the P–Tr extinction.

    Life on earth is already in the Sixth Great Mass Extinction; humanity has little chance to dodge its own suicidal extinction. But like a patient who has been diagnosed with terminal cancer and seeks pseudoscience cures, many humans cannot look the reality of climate collapse in the face, and seek pseudoscience comforts.

    🙉RetroTrump2009
    https://tinyurl.com/RetroTrump

    • LOL: Wally
    • Replies: @John12755
  7. @anon

    In 2006 I spoke extensively and in person with a mainstream journalist who rejected all “conspiracy theories” except one: chemtrails. He had investigated them for an Indiana MSM outfit. He said he spoke to military pilots and others involved in two separate programs: One is an experimental program exploring the possibility of spraying “sunscreen” to slow global warming; the other involves spraying nano size metallic particles for use in a military imaging system.

    I don’t know whether he was telling the truth, but he sure sounded credible. If he was right, the military pilots spraying such stuff obviously know what they’re taking off with.

  8. Patricus says:

    The end is here. Really, any day now. They promised global freezing in the 1970s, then global cooking for some decades after. Before the 1970s I once rode into New York city with my parents. There were about 50 protesters claiming the imminent end of times. Some were religious with Old Testament garb, hair shirts and placards quoting biblical verses. Others were beatniks. “It’s all over Dadio”. I asked my parents if the world would end before I got to drive a car. They didn’t pretend to know but told me about the end of times demonstrations in their youth. Instead of beatniks there were hobos along with the usual religious folks. It seems the religious people have now been replaced by social scientists. Repent while you still have a chance.

  9. @Kevin Barrett

    Yes, there are a few experiments done as you mention, and cloud seeding for rain-making has been done for decades, but the materials in those experiments do not necessarily cause contrails. 100% of the contrails you see are condensation trails, the same observed since WWII. If the aircraft is spraying some experimental chemical or material, you wouldn’t know it.

    The whole “chemtrail” thing is 100% pure malarkey, and your last sentence lights the path about how you too can learn that to your own satisfaction. “The military pilots spraying such stuff obviously know what they’re taking off with.” Exactly! Such experimental material will be listed on a Weight & Balance calculation. The aircraft will be fitted inside with whatever containers are necessary to perform the experiments. It’ll be really heavy, and doesn’t fit magically in a normal jetliner.

    So keeping your last sentence in mind, go make friends with your friendly (or sometimes arrogant) neighborhood airline pilot, and ask him how many pounds (or kilos) of chemtrail chemical they’re loading onto his aircraft. He’s going to say “zero.” Then he’s going to laugh, because the airlines are getting so stingy on weight that they don’t even want him carrying extra fuel for emergencies than that legally required. The seats are getting thinner to save weight. They’re printing in flight magazines with thinner paper stock to save just one ounce of weight. Really! Airliners don’t have room for a single ounce of Trail Chem.

    Global warming is a result of our own CO2 emissions. The science is two centuries old and very simple to understand. It can be demonstrated on your kitchen table with junk you already have, a couple 2L soda bottles and thermometers, a heat lamp, and a few Alka Seltzer.

    🙈RetroTrump2009
    https://tinyurl.com/AlarmistTrump

    • Replies: @Greg Bacon
  10. @Patricus

    > They promised global freezing in the 1970s

    Scientists were overwhelmingly predicting global warming in the 1970s; from 1965 to 1979, only 7 predicted global cooling, while 42 predicted global warming. (Peterson, 2008) You’re trotting out a well-worn PRATT (Points Refuted A Thousand Times) that demonstrates you’re nothing but a goofball who watches too much sensationalist TV and reads crap like Time/Newsweek—and never read a scientific journal in your life.

    “….it was those sensational ‘Ice Age’ stories in the press that so many people tend to remember….The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet.

    What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?
    https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm

    > then global cooking

    Even the Trump Administration does that, forecasting 4°C warming by 2100. And don’t forget, 6°C warming resulted in near-annihilation of planetary life in the P–Tr extinction.

    🙉RetroTrump2009
    https://tinyurl.com/RetroTrump

  11. I like that hack on here whose whole reasoning is abuse.

    The ozone holes are the cause of global warming. There are more of them all the time. They are caused by atmospheric nuclear testing, not CFCs.

    And nobody is doing anything about it.

    • Replies: @🙈RetroTrump2009
  12. @obwandiyag

    My purpose is not abuse, but to disabuse, i.e., to free from error, misconception, or fallacy. Now let’s get on with it:

    Ozone is one of several greenhouse gases. Its loss in the “ozone hole” actually causes a little cooling.

    The ozone hole itself has a minor cooling effect (about 2 percent of the warming effect of greenhouses gases) because ozone in the stratosphere absorbs heat radiated to space by gases in a lower layer of Earth’s atmosphere (the upper troposphere). The loss of ozone means slightly more heat can escape into space from that region.

    Are the ozone hole and global warming related?
    NASA Earth Observatory
    https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/climateqa/are-the-ozone-hole-and-global-warming-related/

    Thermonuclear tests on the 1950s and early 1960s probably had an adverse effect on the ozone layer due to the nitrogen oxide lofted into the stratosphere; however, ozone levels were not being tracked closely at the time; so it has not been possible to prove this. Unlike CFCs, the nitrogen oxides do not have a long residence time in the stratosphere and so their effects faded away long ago. To be sure, the following Irish newspaper asked NOAA:

    In response to our queries, NOAA told FactCheck:

    Nuclear testing is not the cause of the ozone layer depletion we have experienced …. Human emissions of long-lived chlorine and bromine compounds, including CFCs and halons, have led to the observed ozone depletion.

    FactCheck: Was damage to the ozone layer caused by nuclear testing?
    https://www.thejournal.ie/ozone-layer-damage-depletion-nuclear-testing-danny-healy-rae-3057410-Nov2016/

    Global warming is caused primarily by the greenhouse gas CO2 from humans burning fossil fuels. The physics of it are simple enough to demonstrate on your kitchen table with inexpensive items you probably already have at home.

    🙉RetroTrump2009
    https://tinyurl.com/RetroTrump

  13. Greg Bacon says: • Website
    @🙈RetroTrump2009

    If there are no chemtrails, guess those trails I see emanating from the back of aircraft and spreading out, to cover the sky from horizon to horizon, are just hallucinations?

    Chemtrails are real, Bill Gates and others–like Harvard–have gotten approval to spread these damn things and no one is talking about the end game.

    If they’re in the sky to stop the Sun’s heat from hitting Earth, what in the Hell are they doing in the middle of Winter, when the extra heat would be welcome?

    Those sickly looking clouds that form, look like spilled milk on a pane of glass, obscuring the real sky with toxic chemicals in an ongoing planet-wide experiment using humans as guinea pigs.

    For what purpose? Afraid we’ll find out too late.

    • Replies: @🙈RetroTrump2009
  14. @Greg Bacon

    Condensation trails (contrails) have been made by airplanes in the sky since WWII. Do you really imagine a B-17 pictured below was spraying mysterious chemicals? Maybe the rear gunner got out of his seat every few minutes to move 55 gallon barrels of it to the pour spout?


    “Focke-Wulf 8 o’clock!”
    “Sorry, Cap’n, I’m giving the chem-barrel all I’ve got!”

    Yes, there are things deliberately dumped into the sky by airplanes. They seed clouds for rain. They are talking about experimenting with solar radiation management. Many large aircraft can dump fuel for an emergency. Those various chemicals aren’t going to leave a condensation trail.

    The real geoengineering is coming out your tailpipe. Humans are going to accomplish in 150 years what it took volcano flows from the Siberian Traps (which released CO2 from the permafrost soils of Siberia and caused the P–Tr (PETM) extinction) 20,000 years to effect, a mass extinction.

    Just the people within your own county, at 21.5 metric tons CO2 per capita, are dumping more tons of geoengineering chemical (CO2) into the atmosphere than Bill Gates could ever hope to dump from an aircraft to reflect sunlight.

    You are the chem-dumper. You’ll even leave a little condensation trail behind your vehicle this winter. Chemtrails!!! -🙉RetroTrump2009

    • Replies: @Greg Bacon
  15. John12755 says:
    @🙉RetroTrump2009

    Geoengineering is hubris and bollocks on stilts, as they say in UK.

    • Replies: @🙈RetroTrump2009
  16. @The Alarmist

    Thanks to the Montreal Protocol, which reduced ozone-depleting substances (ODSs), yes, we humans have started repairing the ozone hole we caused. Daily updates of data from several satellites and balloon sondes are available at NASA’s Ozone Watch. https://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/

    > they BS’ing us to prevent widespread panic

    Biologist Guy McPherson, Ph.D., says the same thing, often writing of lamestream “hopium,” e.g.:

    “Fully captured by corporations and the corporate states, the media continue to dance around the issue of climate change. Occasionally a forthright piece is published, but it generally points in the wrong direction…hopium…”

    Climate-Change Summary and Update
    https://guymcpherson.com/climate-chaos/climate-change-summary-and-update/

    I think you two might have more in common that you would imagine at first glance. Enjoy! -🙉RetroTrump2009

    • Replies: @Herald
  17. @John12755

    Regarding the common definition of bioengineering—interventionary greenhouse gas removal and solar radiation management—biologist Guy McPherson concurs with your analysis.

    “…geoengineering….The hubris underlying these attempts…”

    Geoengineering, Real and Imagined
    https://guymcpherson.com/2015/08/geoengineering-real-and-imagined/

    Of course, in the larger definition of the term, all we fossil fuel burners are bioengineers, each pumping over 20 metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere annually. The hubris of our happy motoring society is imagining that there will be no consequences for evaporating earth’s vast coal beds and oil fields into our thin atmosphere. Cthulu waits dreaming.
    -🙉RetroTrump2009

  18. Biosphere collapse continues to unfold and accelerate, the climate engineering assault is further fueling the process (and contaminating every breath we take).”’
    Total BS. Kevin these people are unhinged.
    May I remind you…This is GEOLOGICAL and GEOPHYSICAL FACT.
    65 million years ago there was a huge impactor struck the planet near what is now Yucatan, known as the Chixulub Impactor. Life survived, the planet went on, even though the dinosaurs didnt. We are still here. Also in geological history there have been many disasters for life MUCH WORSE than any of these so called conspiracy stuff. NO humans cant geoengineering the planet on a global scale. There are examples of small scale deforestation and desertification that can be attributed to agriculture. No atmospheric control is possible. An average hurricane, typhoon, cyclone etc has more energy (distributed) than the entire nuclear arsenal of the world. So do major volcanic eruptions. What human bomb including nuclear has been heard around the world like that of Krakatoa 1883!
    I didnt listen to the interview. Im trained in geophysics and engineering I dont get my science from interweb sites.

  19. The industrial revolution, and now the technological revolution, along with the advancements in medicine has made humanity almost 8 Billion strong. This is also putting an increasing strain on everything, and we’ve pushed past the threshold for sustainability (probably a few decades ago).

    I don’t see too many people worried about the population crisis. This will only end in a cataclysmic disaster, but first we will continue to watch many Western cities decline into 3rd world scenes; all over the USA many places, from small towns to large cities, have fallen or will soon fall. Sorry for the pessimism…

  20. If oceans are rising, why are the elite still allowed to build their domiciles within the proposed flood zone?
    Example: Barack Obama’s home on Martha’s Vinyard.
    Global warming/climate change/climate catastrophe/whatever the next buzzwords used is complete and utter bull$hit designed to move money from stupid people to smart people.

    • Replies: @🙉RetroTrump2009
  21. @BlackDragon

    You attempt to minimize human impact, yet humans are just as destructive to the planet as the huge Chixulub Impactor striking the earth, as this chart shows:

    Geophysical fact: In the PETM extinction, volcanic lava in the Siberian Traps managed to release 2×10^9 tons of carbon per year into the atmosphere, which lead to a 6°C warming over 20,000 years that resulted in near-annihilation of planetary life. Nowadays, we humans are releasing 30×10^9 tons of carbon per year into our atmosphere, and will do in decades what volcanoes took thousands of years to do.

    And if you’re trained in physics, do that simple kitchen table experiment I’ve mentioned thrice above that demonstrates the simple physics of global warming. You might learn something about how humans can drive mass extinction as fast as an asteroid smashing into the planet.

    Cthulu waits dreaming. What’s that smell? -🙉RetroTrump2009

    • Replies: @Mike P
    , @Bill Jones
  22. Greg Bacon says: • Website
    @🙈RetroTrump2009

    Sorry Trump Jr, but Chemtrails are for real.

    Harvard scientists will soon send chemicals into the atmosphere to test whether a last-ditch planet-hacking plan could keep Earth habitable

    https://www.businessinsider.com/harvard-scientists-to-release-chemicals-into-sky-in-2019-to-cool-earth-2018-12

    As for the WWII bomber contrails, show me a pic of that same sky 30 minutes after the bombers flew thru it and let me see the contrails spreading from horizon to horizon.

    As for the climate change which is real, the biggest cause is deforestation, Trees exchange CO2 for oxygen, so why do we keep cutting down huge swaths of forest each year to make paper when hemp would be a much better choice.

    Sorry, don’t have any snazzy looking gif’s to capture the proletariat imagination.

    • Replies: @🙉RetroTrump2009
  23. Just a thought: How do plans to dump chemicals in the sky tomorrow make “chemtrails” today?

    You are correct that deforestation disrupts the natural carbon cycle enough to cause slight human-caused global warming 8000 years ago; that has been studied and quantified in this very interesting study:

    Man has been changing climate for 8,000 years
    Agriculture may have released huge amounts of greenhouse gases into atmosphere.
    https://www.nature.com/news/2003/031208/full/news031208-7.html

    And you are correct that deforestation contributes today to global warming, but only 11%. The largest contributor by far (65%) to increased global temperatures remains the burning fossil fuels, as quantified below. -🙉RetroTrump2009


    screensave source: EPA Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data
    https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data

  24. @Handsome Philosopher

    An elevation map shows that Obama’s mansion is 120 inches (10 ft.) above sea level. Sea level is expected to rise 26 inches by 2100.

    “If the rate of ocean rise continues to change at this pace, sea level will rise 26 inches (65 centimeters) by 2100….”

    New study finds sea level rise accelerating
    https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2680/new-study-finds-sea-level-rise-accelerating/

    Do the math. Sea level rise is the least worry for loss of human habitat caused by global warming.

  25. @Patricus

    Rather more accurate than your Schiffty-like smears is that climate science is the realm of conservative old white men.

    Climate science is well-established over two centuries of discoveries by European males. That’s something that a fellow who calls himself Patricus should more carefully consider. -🙉RetroTrump2009

  26. @Greg Bacon

    > show me a pic | Wilco, Bacon Leader!

    How do you copy? -radio crackle- 🙉RetroTrump2009

    p.s. the standard for persistent contrails, i.e., Cirrus homogenitus, is 10 minutes, not 30, according to the World Meteorological Organization.
    https://cloudatlas.wmo.int/aircraft-condensation-trails.html

    • Replies: @Herald
  27. Herald says:
    @BlackDragon

    As you didn’t listen to the interview your comments are not worth reading.

  28. Herald says:
    @🙉RetroTrump2009

    Despite your interesting and conveniently to hand archive photograph, I only saw a persistent contrail for myself in the late nineties, when I was already in my early fifties, but now I see these menacing trails on most most days when the weather permits. I sometimes wonder why people can’t see the glaringly obvious mess above their heads. Of course, most are too dumb to ever notice anything, while perhaps others might just not want to see. There may also be those who are paid to tell the rest of us that, there is nothing up there and we should stop listening to crazies like Dane Wigington, no matter how convincing they might seem.

  29. @Herald

    They’ve been around since Jesus was a corporal.


    Source: Kuhn, P. (1970) Airborne Observations of Contrail Effects on the Thermal Radiation Budget. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. Vol. 27, Issue 6, pp. 937-942. DOI: 10.1175/1520-0469(1970)0272.0.CO;2

    Back in the summer of ’69! – 🙊RetroTrump2009

    p.s. it is a mess up there. I concur with Henry David Thoreau, who wrote in Walden, “But if we stay at home and mind our business, who will want railroads? We do not ride on the railroad; it rides upon us.”

  30. @Kevin Barrett

    The movie you recommended, Chasing Ice, is excellent. It was quite the feet to get that film! It’s a wonder he’s alive.

    And it’s available to watch for free on youtube:

    Again, thank you; I greatly enjoyed it. -🙉RetroTrump2009

  31. Herald says:

    Geoengineering has been around in one form or another since at least World War 2 and it has been wound up many times since then. Your handy photos from 1969, when presumably Christ was still with us, prove nothing. You are here, and no doubt elsewhere, on a mission it seems, but I’ll stick with Dane Wigington and what my own eyes tell me. Thanks all the same.

    • Replies: @🙉RetroTrump2009
  32. Herald says:
    @🙈RetroTrump2009

    I like Guy, he is always a fun listen, but he does get more than just a little touchy when the subject of geoengineering is brought up. His views seem to mirror those of your own quite closely.

  33. @Herald

    The first photograph of a contrail was 1940; however, the contrails weren’t explained until thirteen years later. (Appleman, 1953) But I suppose the Wright Brothers were spraying old-timey chemtrails. Hell, Odysseus left classical chemtrails behind his sailboat.

    Can’t dispute that! -🙉RetroTrump2009

  34. Evilc says:

    On the subject of contrails, clouds and commercial aircraft spraying chemicals (esp aluminium oxide) into the atmosphere a relative mailed me with some photos of strange cloud formation over his home in the Midwest. He asked me if it was caused by chemtrails as he had read a blog talking about how Aluminium oxide was added to jet fuel and someone had even registered a patent on it and asked what I thought of the subject and if it were possible. Below is my original mail to him:

    Thanks for sending the link, always interesting to see and read stuff. As you know I don’t buy it, mostly though im puzzled as to why people do and why they think a patent proves something works or is in use. The only thing a patent does is to register an idea/invention and give it some legal protection for 20 years or less. Patents certainly do not prove that the described invention will work or be viable. As far as aviation fuel (Jet A1 etc) goes it is so refined now that all metallic compounds are removed requiring the addition of (non metallic) static dissipater. The only other additives added are glycol compounds to bind with water and prevent the water from freezing. These additives are usually only added in extremely cold operations. The presence of metallic compounds in the fuel would seriously compromise the injectors and combustion blades of the engines leading to greatly reduced engine life and possible in flight failure. Since replacing these components requires an engine strip down it would be very expensive. Added to that the specification and approval of aviation fuel is governed by the aviation safety agencies and implemented by engine manufacturers, fuel system and engine component manufacturers, the main airframers and of course the companies that refine and supply the fuel. Everything on an aircraft is traceable and at each stage approvals are generated by independent authority. So everyone checks each others work and is responsible for the consequences. Its not a perfect system but for the most part it works well. I cant see anyone deliberately contaminating aviation fuel and getting away with it, there are simply too many people looking and checking and the first sign of contamination would be discovered quickly. To suggest that metallic compounds are routinely added to aviation fuel on a large scale is just not credible.

    ‘On the subject of clouds I think what has changed is that there are many more aircraft flying now than when we were young. It was the late 60’s and 70’s that kick started the boom in air travel and it hasn’t slowed down since. Plus as you say the atmospheric conditions constantly change and there is a big difference between the east and west coast and the mid states, so if you grew up in the east near the sea then the sky would look different, maybe not so much through a child’s eyes but we are both at an age where we have slowed down enough to look into the sky and take notice of stuff.

    [MORE]

    On the issue of scale and how much aluminium oxide or whatever chemical it is that people claim is dispersed into the aircraft contrails here’s an approximate example of how much liquefied chemical a modified aircraft could carry (I say liquefied as I cant think how you would store and effectively distribute a powder or tiny slivers of metal, plus the theorists seem to think its in the fuel):

    Considering a Boeing 777-200 (classed as a large transport aircraft) modified by removing all the passenger seats (say 300) and installing tanks and a system to disperse the chemical (liquid) whilst managing the aircraft C of G change as the chemical is depleted from the tanks. The idea being minimum structural modification to the aircraft (as the aircraft modified would need to be returned to commercial service afterwards) so tanks etc have to be installed through existing doors and existing structure used as best as possible. There are about 1500 Boeing 777s in-service today worldwide.

    First point, the weight saved by removal of seats would offset some or all of the additional weight of the structural modification to install and carry the chemical tanks. For simplicity at this point lets say that the removal of the seats offsets all the weight of the chemical tank system modification.

    Since the physical carrying capacity of the Aircraft for chemical dispersal will be weight limited and not volume limited the simplest way to calculate how much chemical we can safely carry is to take the average weight of passengers and their baggage we are going to be removing. Assuming an average weight per person of 200lb plus baggage at 75lb = 275lb x 300 pax = 82500lb or 37500kg (I will try to keep in metric units from now on!)

    So we have at least 37500Kg of liquid chemical. In terms of volume, using the same specific gravity as aviation fuel (0.80) 37500Kg by weight equates to 46,875 Litres (or 12,383 US gallons). I haven’t a clue what aluminium oxide suspended in a fluid would actually be but I think comparing it to aviation fuel rather than water is reasonable since the theorists state that its in the fuel.

    I’m going to assume that the theorists out there believe that aircraft are continuously dispersing the chemicals throughout the aircraft’s flight as I have heard this said time and again. Keeping things simple let’s say the aircraft is flying for 6 hours not including take off, climb and descent. At cruise altitude a Boeing 777-200 is flying at @ 900km/hour (airspeed) so in 6 hours the aircraft has covered @5400 km. But airspeed is not ground speed and ground speed changes depending upon the wind speed and direction in relation to the aircraft heading.

    Lets round things for simplicity and say the aircraft can carry 50,000 Litres of chemical to be dispersed and travels 5000 Kilometres in 6 hours. So every kilometre the aircraft disperses 10 Litres of chemical. Looking closer, for every 10 meters the aircraft travels it is dispersing 0.1 Litre of chemical and for every meter it is dispersing 0.0l Litre (or 10cc; that’s just two teaspoons!). Considering time the aircraft would cover 250 meters in one second requiring a chemical dispersal flow rate of 2.5 litres a second. That isn’t such a high flow rate and we are not limited to dispersing via one line we could use two or even several lines.

    So if we took out all the passengers and the seats and then modified the aircraft to take as many tanks as possible to hold the maximum (by weight) quantity of liquid chemical a Boeing 777-200 would be capable of delivering in a seven hour flight (6 hours at cruise altitude) about two teaspoons of chemical for each meter it travelled. I think you could replicate that with one of those small indoor plant sprayers that you squeeze the trigger and twist the nozzle to get a spray coming out of it. The motive force for this work could come from the pressure differential of the cabin in much the same way as toilets are evacuated (of air) via the sink drain. This way we wouldn’t need a pump, just plumb it all in and open a tap when we are airborne.

    On the structural modification side of things, it’s worth considering what the structure of a commercial aircraft can take. Since the maximum (limiting) design load is the crash case of 9g forwards the weight of the chemical tank system cannot exceed this design case unless a forward crash bulkhead is installed at the front of the cabin (as installed on cargo aircraft). The weight must then be distributed over the cabin floor at a similar density to the original passengers and seats that have been taken out (it also needs to be distributed carefully to maintain the Aircraft C of G within safe limits). Lets assume we will be using the same anchor points that the seats use, these are tracks set into the floor structure that are pitched at 1″.

    Looking at a typical layout for a large aircraft like the B777-200 a normal mixed density is 10 seats across with 40 odd rows including business class. Since passengers weigh more than seats lets assume a standard 10 across economy seating that would weigh in at about 1200kg per row (that’s 10 people and their carry on luggage plus about 15kg per seat place) so maxing out at about 48000kg over the whole cabin floor. That’s 10,000kg more than the 37500kg of chemical dispersant but we haven’t taken into account the weight of the tanks and structure to mount the tanks and reinforce the floor (if required) and all the other stuff that is needed.

    On tanker aircraft for fuel off loading to support military aircraft (think fighter jets etc) the fuel is carried in large ACTs (Additional Cargo Tanks) that are positioned in the aircraft in such a way to spread the load and weight to not adversely effect the aircrafts Centre of Gravity. In order to do this the fuel is sequenced from each tank into an offloading tank (normally the aircraft centre wing tank).

    So the chemical dispersal system will have to have some means of controlling the change in C of G as the chemical is dispersed and another central collector tank may be needed. Dividing it all up over the entire cabin floor for each row of passenger seats 1200Litres (938kg) of chemicals could be carried plus an allowance of about 200kg for the tank structure, if you multiply the weight of the chemical and its tank by 9G you get the crash case load that the tank and attachment must react which is about 10700kg. So 200kg allowance for the tank and structure doesn’t seem so high (bearing in mind that 10 seats across weigh in at about 150kg).

    It all seems to add up, it seems it can be done within the capability of the airframe without substantial structural modification but obviously would not be a simple or quick task to install it, The flow rates are easily achievable as well and the big advantage over carrying people is that as the chemical is dispersed and depleted from the aircraft the total aircraft weight goes down, this would yield a big saving on fuel, so it may be possible to carry even more chemical but then you would have to figure out where to put it. How about the cargo bay? That would work and our allowance of 275lb per passenger includes 50lb for baggage in the hold (ok we used this amount in the figure of 37,500kg). But we should have at least 15000lb or 6800kg of chemical we could put down in the hold. Actually the hold will take much more but our limit is governed by the maximum take off weight of the aircraft so it may not be a whole lot more, lets take a guess that we could carry 20% more, that’s 7500kg extra or an extra 2cc of chemical per meter travelled.

    It’s a very simplified way of looking at it but what does it mean?

    Simply put, if you take all the passengers and seats out of a Boeing 777-200 and fly it around void of fare paying passengers (though you wouldn’t need to pay for flight attendants) we would have enough chemical to disperse into the atmosphere at a rate of about two teaspoons for each meter the plane travels. So just how effective are these chemicals at modifying the weather? I have no idea, but at that volume concentration they must have some incredible magic multiplying properties to do what people claim they are doing.

    And that’s why it doesn’t add up, but try to explain this on forums and you get your head kicked in 🙂

  35. Herald says:

    The consensus among those who share the view of the reality of geoengineering, is that the great bulk of particulate spraying is actually done by military or military style tankers.

    From long experience, of observing these offending high flying aircraft, I would report that they invariably have a plain white or less often a silver underside and no identification markings are visible. The tanker aspect of spraying largely negates the great bulk of your post, as being a valid refutation of geoengineering being done by way of particulate spraying.

    My own view is that the use of civilian aircraft as the main delivery vehicles for spraying seems rather impracticable, as you suggest. Furthermore I generally see this civilian aircraft idea being floated by disinformants as a ‘straw man’ being put forward solely for the purposes of it being easy to refute.

    • Replies: @Evilc
  36. Evilc says:
    @Herald

    So I guess that ‘those who share the view of the reality of geoengineering’ is a sort of club? To be part of it you have to believe in it?

    My post was originally a reply to a question from a relative. I saw no reason to alter it for the purpose of this article as I am at heart lazy and I believe that it contributes enough on the subject. The recipient of the ‘post’ was a Nuclear power engineer, I say was as he is now retired, his position, education and training as an engineer allowed him to read into the variables that I stated, that is it was written with that in mind. I understand and appreciate that not everyone has this ability and as such may not be able to read between the lines.

    Firstly I will say that most all the voices I have heard or read on this subject believe that all aircraft are ‘spraying chemicals into the atmosphere with deliberate intent to cause harm to those below’. Predominately they believe or have been told that the offending chemicals are contained in the aircraft fuel. Hence my explanation why this cannot be the case. Clearly then these people are not members of the ‘reality of geoengineering’ club but are ‘Straw men’ being used by others for nefarious purpose.

    Secondly in the respect of payload, aircraft are weight limited not volume limited. It’s a common enough error but whether the aircraft is commercial civil transport category or military it’s the same, physics can be a bitch. The aircraft has a weight and distribution limit placed upon it, its maximum weight is prior to flight phase when it has its full fuel load. The greater ‘payload’ of an aircraft is often the fuel load, which can equal the structural weight of the aircraft plus its maximum cargo/passengers.

    Thirdly you state that from long experience of observation you note that these aircraft are high flying. A suitable aircraft flying at a high altitude has to be flying at a high airspeed to maintain flight in a very thin atmosphere. I gave the example of a Boeing 777-200 but most aircraft of this type have a similar performance. The point about this is the speed of the aircraft through the air, it is moving at @ 250 Metres a second (or @820 ft/sec). You could choose to deliver the chemical at a low rate (as I had shown) or plug in your own numbers and see how much you could off load in as short as time as possible, or at a rate to cover a specific distance. You can get a very small amount delivered over a large distance or a large amount in a much shorter distance. Offloading in a rapid manner will require a much higher motive force than that I suggested, it would probably take many minutes even with very powerful pumps (and don’t forget the energy to power those pumps has to come from somewhere). Every minute the aircraft would travel some 15 kilometres/10 miles. Even when offloading the maximum possible amount in as short a time as possible its volume concentrate in the atmosphere the aircraft has travelled through would be negligible. So what exactly are these chemicals they are using? How do they work and what are they called and what are their chemical formulae?

    Fourthly you state that these aircraft you are observing are invariably painted white or silver with no identification markings. Most commercial aircraft are painted white or have polished (aluminium) surfaces. So how do you know these are military aircraft? Not being able to see any markings on them is understandable as you say they are flying at high altitude. What are you using to observe them? Binoculars? A telescope? What are you actually observing? How do you know they are dispersing chemicals?

    Fifthly your statement that the ‘tanker aspect of spraying largely negates the great bulk of my post as being a valid refutation of geoengineering by particulate spraying’ is incorrect in its assumption that that was my goal. It was not; I had stated and described how it was possible to modify a civil transport aircraft to carry a fluid with the intention of offloading into the atmosphere, that is to do the work of a tanker aircraft. Indeed modified ex civil aircraft are in-service doing exactly that (both Boeing and Airbus tanker aircraft are derived from their respective civil aircraft programmes). There are aircraft modified to disperse oil slicks on water by spraying chemicals. Aircraft that spray crops with pesticides, aircraft water bombers that are today being used on the fires in California and specialised aircraft that conduct experiments in the atmosphere. Aircraft are amazingly adaptable for all sorts of work but that doesn’t make them good at everything, they have inherent limitations that have to be observed. Whether the aircraft is a dedicated Military cargo aircraft or a modified civil aircraft the limitations are the same, you can only carry so much weight and if you exceed that the aircraft won’t fly. If you fly high you fly fast and cover distance rapidly. Whether it’s a military tanker aircraft doing the work or a modified civilian aircraft the limitations are the same.

    What is missing from the discussion is as I have asked before; what exactly are these chemicals and how do they work? I have yet to read a valid description or explanation.

    • Replies: @Herald
  37. Mike P says:
    @🙉RetroTrump2009

    This has to be the dumbest plot I have ever seen – but then of course it comes from the dumbest poster on UR, and that implies some stiff competition. You are familiar with the concept of variable measurement resolution?

    You forgot to plot the absolutely catastrophic warming that occurred just this morning – you know, the thermometer in my backyard jumped by 10 degrees in just 2 hours! Clearly, the end is nigh.

    Here is a little perspective on the current terrible climate crisis. The recent catastrophic warming is shown on the far right. You can add a little bit for the last couple of years, we are almost approaching the level medieval warm period. Just like the latter, the “anthropocene” will come to an abrupt end all by itself.

    • Replies: @IT'S ME
  38. IT'S ME says:
    @Mike P

    Well done ! Finally
    someone for the truth 😉

  39. IT'S ME says:
    @Herald

    TAKE YOUR TIME AND READ CAREFULLY –
    Journal of Advances in Medicine and Medical Research

    25(10): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JAMMR.40072 ISSN: 2456-8899 (Past name: British Journal of Medicine and Medical Research, Past ISSN: 2231-0614, NLM ID: 101570965)

    Aerosolized Coal Fly Ash: Risk Factor for Neurodegenerative Disease

    Mark Whiteside1 and J. Marvin Herndon2*
    1Florida Department of Health in Monroe County, 1100 Simonton Street Key West, FL 33040, USA. 2Transdyne Corporation, 11044 Red Rock Drive, San Diego, CA 92131, USA.
    Authors’ contributions

    [MORE]

    This work was a joint effort between the authors that is part of an ongoing collaboration aimed at providing scientific, medical, public health implications and evidence related to aerosolized coal fly ash including its use in the near-daily, near-global covert geoengineering activity. Author MW was primarily responsible for medical and public health considerations. Author JMH was primary responsible for mineralogical and geophysical considerations. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.
    Article Information

    DOI: 10.9734/JAMMR/2018/40072 Editor(s): (1) Jera Kruja, Neurology, University of Medicine, Tirana, Albania. Reviewers: (1) Normah Awang, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia. (2) Eric S. Hall, U.S.A. (3) Sofia Borrego Alonso, Cuba. (4) Lourens J. C. Erasmus, University of Limpopo, South Africa. Complete Peer review History: http://www.sciencedomain.org/review-history/23779

    Received 7th January 2018 Accepted 19th March 2018 Published 22nd March 2018

    ABSTRACT
    Aims: Coal fly ash (CFA), the major waste product of coal-burning utilities, is trapped and contained in Western nations, but not generally in India and China, where it is a major component of air pollution. In Western nations, the CFA trapping is inefficient, exposing downwind populations to the toxic aerosols. Similarly, CFA industry workers and those living downwind of coal ash piles may be exposed to the wind-blown toxins. Aerosolized coal fly ash, especially as used for climate manipulation, is a particularly hazardous form of air pollution. Our objective is to review the multifold components of coal fly ash, linked to neurodegenerative disease, which is rapidly increasing world-wide. Methods: We review the interdisciplinary scientific and medical literature.
    Review Article

    Whiteside and Herndon; JAMMR, 25(10): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JAMMR.40072

    2

    Results: The recent finding of spherical exogenous magnetite (Fe3O4) nanoparticles in the brain tissue of persons with dementia suggests an origin in air pollution produced by coal fly ash. The primary components of coal fly ash, iron oxides and aluminosilicates, are all found in the abnormal proteins that characterize Alzheimer’s dementia. The presence of these substances in brain tissue leads to oxidative stress and chronic inflammation. Energy absorbed by magnetite from external electromagnetic fields may contribute to this neuropathology. Conclusions: Considering the well-known and manifold toxicities of CFA, the public should be made aware of the potential risks for neurodegenerative disease posed by aerosolized CFA, including its use in climate alteration activities. We have set forth the basis for understanding how this kind of pollution may damage cognitive abilities. It is a form of pollution that should be halted altogether.

    Keywords: Aerosols; coal fly ash; climate intervention; Alzheimer’s; Parkinson’s; dementia; brain disease.
    1. INTRODUCTION
    Burning coal accounts for one-third of global energy utilization and 40% of the electricity generated throughout the world [1]. Unlike burning natural gas, burning coal produces solid ash in amounts of approximately 10% of the initial coal weight. The heavy coal ash settles beneath the burner, while the light ash, called coal fly ash (CFA), condenses and accumulates in the vapors above the burner, and exits with the exhaust gases. Being a concentrate of the toxins originally present in the coal, in Western nations, CFA is electrostatically trapped and sequestered. India and China, however, frequently do not trap CFA, and it is a major contributor to air pollution in those nations [2].

    Even in Western nations, the public is exposed, in some locations, to aerosolized CFA pollution downwind of coal-burning utilities with inefficient trapping [3,4], downwind of CFA coal ash piles [5], and as workers in the coal fly ash industry [6]. On a larger scale, forensic evidence is consistent with coal fly ash as the primary material utilized in undisclosed and ongoing tropospheric aerosol climate manipulation operations in North America and Europe [7,8].

    Air pollution is one of the great killers of our age. It is increasing at an alarming rate and is currently the fourth leading cause of death worldwide [9]. Exposure to air pollution is known to be associated with respiratory, cardiovascular, and stroke-related morbidity and mortality [10,11].

    In this Review, we disclose potential risk factors and toxicological evidence of neurological degenerative diseases resulting from aerosolized CFA.
    The prevalence of dementia is higher in developed countries than in developing ones, but it is rapidly increasing throughout the world [12]. It has been projected that the number of people affected by dementia will double between 2020 and 2040 [13]. Data suggest that air pollution is a significant risk factor for neurodegenerative disease including Alzheimer’s dementia (AD) and Parkinson’s disease (PD). Long-term exposure to air pollution is associated with neuroinflammation, altered immune response, disruption of the blood-brain barrier, particulate deposition, and accumulation of amyloid plaques in the brain [14].

    A recent study documents significant adverse health effects from PM2.5 at concentrations below national standards [15]. Ultrafine particles (UFP), those particles less than 0.1 um in diameter, contribute negligibly to PM2.5, but dominate the particle number count (PNC). There is no regulation or effective monitoring of these ultrafine/nanoparticles [16]. UFP’s are among the most toxic particles based on their greater number, larger content of redox active compounds, greater surface-to-mass ratio, bioavailability of chemically active agents, and their ability to penetrate cell walls [17].

    Over recent decades, the central nervous system (CNS) has been a suspected target of the harmful effects of air pollution. In one of the first indications, indoor coal fumes were found to be an independent risk factor for stroke (cerebrovascular accident/CVA) [18]. Somewhat later, air pollution was found to be an important risk factor for ischemic stroke [19]. The first study to show that air pollution might be related to neurodegenerative disease used dogs from a highly polluted urban area. Brain damage in the exposed dogs (compared to controls) included

    Whiteside and Herndon; JAMMR, 25(10): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JAMMR.40072

    3

    disruption of the blood-brain barrier, degenerating cortical neurons, non-neuritic plaques, and neurofibrillary tangles. Tissue damage was greatest in the olfactory mucosa, olfactory bulb, and frontal cortex, implicating the nasal pathway as portal of entry [20]. It was later shown in rats that inhaled ultrafine particles can translocate to the brain [21].

    In recent years, emerging evidence from epidemiological, observational, clinical, and experimental studies strongly suggest AD, PD, certain other neurodegenerative diseases, and stroke in humans, are associated with ambient air pollution [22]. Children residing in a highly polluted urban environment were found to have cognitive deficits, and the majority of them demonstrated brain abnormalities on MRI [23]. A link between exposure to air pollution and AD was found by Jung and colleagues in a Taiwanese cohort of over 95,000 people age 65 or older [24]. Long-term exposure to PM2.5-10 levels typically experienced in the U.S. was found to be associated with cognitive decline in elderly women [25].
    2. METHODS
    There is much information in the scientific literature pertaining to the subject of this review, however, it is spread among different journals across several disciplines. We review relevant medical and scientific literature to collate diverse information and thus draw inferences on the adverse health risks for neurological degenerative diseases due to atmospheric aerosol climate alteration based upon the compositional nature of CFA and the commonalities disclosed by air pollution investigations. Principal search engines used are the Florida State Internet and Google Scholar.
    3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
    The primary mineral components of CFA are silicates, aluminum-containing compounds, and an iron-bearing component that includes magnetite (Fe3O4) [26]. Notably, all of these component-elements are found in AD plaque core material including iron, aluminum and silicon [27]. Iron and aluminum are both implicated in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative diseases. In both AD and PD, iron accumulates in the brain, indicating a loss of iron homeostasis and resultant iron-induced oxidative stress [28]. The recent finding of exogenous magnetite nanoparticles in brain tissue of persons with
    dementia lends strong support to the relationship between air pollution, iron compounds, and neurodegeneration [29]. As we discuss, the components of CFA, as utilized in atmospheric climate manipulation, pose similar, if not more severe, potential risk-factors for neurodegenerative diseases.

    The relative amount of ultrafine particulate matter and nanoparticles is higher in CFA than any other combustion-derived material. The average size range of CFA nanoparticles fall within the range of PM0.1 [30]. Ultrafine particles in CFA often escape filtering devices like electrostatic precipitators [4]. Coal fly ash that is not trapped by pollution control devices contributes to the fine particle (PM2.5) component of particulate matter. These particles stay in the atmosphere longer and can be transported greater distances [31]. Duration time and transport distances are much greater for aerosolized CFA used for climate manipulation. Aluminosilicate glass is a dominant material in fly ash particles. Atmospheric weathering of this aluminosilicate phase can mobilize iron (Fe), which is present in the inner core or surface of fly ash spheres [32]. Iron ions are among the most hazardous components of PM, as they produce the most reactive oxygen species [33].
    A large body of evidence suggests that neurodegenerative disorders are partially mediated by oxidative stress. The brain is highly susceptible to oxidative stress injury because of its high metabolic activity, its low antioxidant activity, its high cellular content of lipids and proteins, and its large amount of redox active metals such as iron, copper, molybdenum, and zinc, all components of CFA [22]. Biometals such as these are essential for neuronal function, but their deficiency, excess, or dysregulation can lead to neurogenerative disease. Homeostasis of transition metals in the brain is disturbed in AD, with extracellular pooling of zinc and copper in amyloid plaques, and intraneuronal accumulation of iron. Amyloid and tau protein pathology arise in the setting of high metal flux, and as these proteins are involved in both transition metal import and export, they may contribute to AD by developing defective metal transport roles [34]. Dysfunctional transition metal metabolism, transport, accumulation, and storage can result from either endogenous disorders or exogenous insults [35]. The recent findings of particulate matter, including magnetite pollution nanoparticles in the brains of persons with AD, generally and strongly implicates air

    Whiteside and Herndon; JAMMR, 25(10): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JAMMR.40072

    4

    pollution as the essential, primary external environmental causative factor leading to neurodegeneration [29].

    Maher et al. [29] distinguished exogenous magnetite nanoparticles in brain tissue of persons with dementia by their spherical particleshape, which is different from biogenic magnetite. Coal fly ash is principally composed of spherical particles, including magnetite spheres, which condensed from and agglomerated in, the hot gas above the burner. The spherical shape results from the surface tension of the melt (Fig. 1).

    Natural rocks and minerals tend to form slowly or form from matter which formed slowly, approaching thermochemical equilibrium.
    Consequently, some degree of stability generally may be expected, except over long periods of time or in corrosive environments. By contrast, CFA condensed and/or accumulated and cooled rapidly under circumstances quite unlike natural terrestrial environments. Consequently, water [36] as well as body fluids [37,38] are capable of extracting from CFA a large number of elements, many toxic and/or carcinogenic, and in the process produces chemically reactive surfaces.

    The morphology of CFA is diverse, but most of the particles are microspheres, porous microspheres, plerospheres containing sub- microspheres or mineral fragments, and magnetic ferrospheres [39]. The ultrafine particles (0.1-1 um), and nanometer-sized particles (< 100 nm) in CFA, characterized by

    Fig. 1. Polished cross section of coal fly ash (ASTM C 618 Class C) embedded in epoxy. The image was obtained from back-scattered electrons which show differences in atomic density represented by variation in gray scale. The overwhelming spherical morphologies are the consequence of the surface tensions of the melts during condensation from and agglomeration in the hot gas above the coal-burner (Courtesy of Wabeggs: CC BY-SA 3.0)

    Whiteside and Herndon; JAMMR, 25(10): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JAMMR.40072

    5

    energy-filtered transmission electron microscopy, are often spherules embedded in a silica matrix with metallic elements like aluminum, iron, and titanium [31].

    Coal fly ash contains significant amounts of magnetic iron oxides, especially magnetite (Fe3O4). Magnetic particles tend to be spheroidal, especially with decreasing particle size [40]. High-resolution transmission electron microscopy studies of nanometric-sized crystalline phases in CFA reveal iron-rich oxides, Fe-sulfate, and heterogeneous Fe-aluminum silicate particles with abundance peaks at 10 and 100 nm [41] (Table 1). This particle size is consistent with biogenic magnetite in human brain tissue (most 10-70 nm) [42] and exogenous pollution magnetite nanoparticles in human brain tissue (10-150 nm) [29]. Iron speciation by Mossbauer spectroscopy indicates that ferric iron in an aluminosilicate phase is a source of the bioavailable iron in CFA, and that this iron is associated with combustion particles and not crustal dust. Such bioavailable iron has been shown to produce reactive oxygen species in cell culture experiments [43].

    The primary elements in coal fly ash, i.e., iron, aluminum, and silicon, have all been found in core plaque material in AD. Aluminum and silicon were found co-localized in the central region of senile plaque cores in the 1980’s [45], with these findings confirmed by more recent studies [27]. The presence of aluminum and silicon as aluminosilicates was documented using solidstate 27Al nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Al and Si have also been reported in the neurofibrillary tangle-bearing neurons which characterize AD [46]. The presence of aluminosilicates (which have no known biologic function) in these abnormal sites suggests they may play a role in neuropathology. The potential
    pathogenic role of microglial cells in the neurodegenerative process is suggested by the finding that murine microglial cells, exposed in vitro to aluminosilicate particles, stimulate tissueinjurious free radical reactive oxygen metabolites [47]. This particle-induced activation of glial macrophage cells promotes chronic inflammation and deposition of the abnormal protein material that characterizes AD [48]. The presence of Al3+ in plaques also potentiates the redox cycle in favor of the more toxic ferrous (Fe2+) iron at these sites [49].

    Iron is essential for brain function, but its imbalance or excess is a potent source of reactive oxygen species. Iron accumulates with aging and excessive iron occurs in many neurodegenerative diseases including AD, PD, and Huntington’s disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and several genetic neurological diseases under the category NBIA: Neurodegeneration with Brain Iron Accumulation. Iron has two valence states, ferric iron (Fe3+), and ferrous iron (Fe2+) which in living systems allows its use in uptake, mobilization, storage, transport, etc. However, the ability of iron to exchange single electrons with multiple substrates can lead to generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). An excess of ferrous iron can be toxic, e.g., by reacting with hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) via the Fenton reaction, or with peroxynitrates, catalyzing oxidant-mediated damage. The result of abnormal iron chemistry can lead to oxidative stress, lipid peroxidation, and DNA damage that ultimately causes death of irreplaceable neurons by apoptosis (programmed cell death) [27,50]. Under normal conditions in the body, a highly complex and fine-tuned regulatory system controls Fe homeostasis on both an intra and extracellular basis, severely limiting the amount of free, available ionic iron. There is evidence that a build-up of iron and
    Table 1. Classifications of mineral-chemical compositions of ferrospheres in CFA, from measurements on 60 spheres [44], based upon the major elements iron (Fe), aluminum (Al), and silicon (Si), which are observed in neurologically degenerate tissue samples. Cations are normalized to 100 % by weight

    Ferrosphere Fe content (Al+Si) content Classification Wt. % Wt. % Ferrooxides Fe ≥ 75 (Al+Si) ≤ 25 Aluminosilicate-containing Ferrooxides 50 ≥ Fe < 75
    25 50
    50 > (Al+Si) ≤ 75 Ferroaluminosilicates Fe 75

    Whiteside and Herndon; JAMMR, 25(10): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JAMMR.40072

    6

    oxidative stress precedes the development of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles that characterize AD [28].

    Microglia are the resident immune surveillance cells in the brain, and they are activated in neurodegenerative diseases. Microglia are activated in response to disease proteins, cytokines, neuron death, and environmental toxins, including components of air pollution. Microglia were first shown to recognize and respond to PM in an in vitro study of diesel exhaust particles [51,52]. While most of the microglial activity is beneficial, an excess of activated microglia can become a source of chronic inflammation and oxidative stress. It has been found that activated iron-containing microglia are numerous in the hippocampus (a key portion of the brain relating to memory function) of persons with AD compared to controls [53]. Iron-containing monocytes from peripheral blood can migrate across the bloodbrain-barrier in neurodegenerative disease, where they transform into brain macrophages. These macrophages participate in the phagocytosis of dead and dying cells, and eventually die themselves, leading to the release of their iron into the central nervous system. This iron could transform from ferric iron present in the storage protein ferritin to the more available but more labile and toxic ferrous iron [54].

    Magnetite (Fe3O4) is a ferrimagnetic iron oxide crystal with alternating lattices of Fe (II) and Fe (III) which are antiferromagnetically coupled. This alternation of lattices and their corresponding differences in the number of unpaired electron spins give magnetite its strong magnetization [55]. Magnetite is formed biochemically by many living organisms including man. Biogenic magnetite was first discovered in human brain tissues in 1992. Biogenic magnetite nanoparticles occur as angular, crystalline particles, most in the 10-70 nm size range. Biogenic magnetite particles are often found in “clumps” or chains, usually within a “closed system” of lipid membranes called magnetosomes [42]. Since the discovery of biogenic magnetite, particles of this material have been extracted, imaged, and characterized by transmission electron microscopy and SQUID magnetometry. Recently magnetite pollution nanoparticles were found in abundance in the brain tissue of persons with advanced dementia [29]. These particles match the high-temperature magnetite nanospheres of CFA, which formed by
    condensation from hot combustion-gas. The pollution particles have diameters between 10 and 150 nanometers and can enter the brain directly through the olfactory nerve and especially through the injured olfactory apparatus, including the olfactory bulb [29].

    Neurofibrillary tangles and amyloid [senile] plaques are major sites for catalytic redox reactivity of transition metals, including iron. This lesion-associated iron is distinct from iron sequestered in ferritin and provides evidence of reactive ferrous (Fe+2) in AD tissue [55,56]. βamyloid (BA) is capable of accumulation and coaggregation of iron within plaque structures, resulting in the chemical reduction of redoxinactive ferric to redox-active ferrous iron. The presence of aluminum increases this reductive activity [57]. Both iron and aluminum can induce aggregation of hyperphosphorylated t (PHFt), the major constituent of neurofibrillary tangles [58]. The excess iron found in neurodegenerative disease may be in the form of magnetite [59]. Using an integrative set of advanced transmission electron microscopy techniques, it has been shown that Fe in amyloid plaque cores is present as iron oxide nanoparticles. These highly organized nanostructures are bound into fibrillar BA and demonstrate superparamagnetic properties [60]. In an in-vitro model, the combination of magnetite and β-amyloid disrupts the functional organization of cultured neuronal networks [61]. Malfunction of the light polypeptide of ferritins leads to the formation of superparamagnetic magnetite. The presence of this magnetite may reduce the bioavailability of iron, and potentiate free radical production by Fenton reaction and/or triplet state stabilization [62].
    Magnetite is the only ferromagnetic compound in the body, and it reacts over one million times more strongly to external electromagnetic fields than any other biological substance [42]. Electromagnetic frequencies absorbed by magnetite are transduced into acoustic vibrations at the microwave frequency within the crystal lattice via the magneto-acoustic effect. This energy is dissipated into cellular structures close to the magnetite particles. Magnetite best absorbs microwave frequencies in the 0.5 – 10 Gigahertz range, but it can also be affected by radio frequencies and extremely low frequencies (ELF). We are surrounded by sources of electromagnetic radiation in that absorption frequency range including Bluetooth, GPS, smart meters, microwave ovens, mobile phones,

    Whiteside and Herndon; JAMMR, 25(10): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JAMMR.40072

    7

    wireless LAN, and ZigBee – to name a few. Mechanically-sensitive ion channels can open or close from the movement of magnetite in response to external electromagnetic fields [63]. This transient opening of membrane pores allows calcium and other ions to enter cells. There is evidence that voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCC) may provide an alternative route for iron to enter neurons and produce oxidative toxicity [64].

    Electromagnetic Fields (EMF’s) are associated with oxidative stress in the human brain and contribute to neurodegeneration [65,66]. Microwave frequency EMF’s have also been shown to produce neuropsychiatric effects [67]. Microwave radiation is damaging to brain cells not by thermal effects, but rather by vibration effects on cellular structures and processes. The magnetite pollution nanoparticles in the brains of persons with advanced dementia greatly outnumber the biogenic magnetite particles [29]. Exogenous pollution particles may also absorb and transduce a wide variety of man-made electromagnetic frequencies [63].
    4. CONCLUSION

    Virtually everyone in the world is now exposed to air pollution, the leading environmental cause of disease and death. Air pollution is linked to neurodegenerative disease and dementia, which is reaching pandemic proportions. The recent finding of exogenous magnetite nanoparticles in brain tissue is like a “smoking gun,” indicating a strongly supported relationship between pollution formed by combustion and neurodegenerative disease. Among several sources of exogenous neurologically damaging magnetite pollution, we have shown that the size and morphology of these particles is most consistent with an origin in coal fly ash. The principal components of coal fly ash, i.e., aluminosilicates and magnetite, are all found in in the abnormal protein material that characterizes Alzheimer’s Dementia. Magnetite is extremely sensitive to external electromagnetic fields and this fact hints at a synergistic role of electromagnetic fields in producing neurodegeneration. Additional research is urgently needed to confirm and further investigate these findings.

    There is published evidence consistent with coal fly ash being the main component utilized in atmospheric aerosol climate manipulation. This
    activity, now conducted on a near-daily, nearglobal basis represents an unacknowledged, involuntary, and extremely toxic form of air pollution with potential global impacts. There is no effective regulation or monitoring of the principal elements (e.g., Al, Si, and Fe) in aerosolized coal fly ash. The ultrafine and nanoparticles present in coal fly ash often go unfiltered and undetected. We have set forth the basis for understanding how this kind of pollution may damage the cognitive abilities of human populations. It is a form of pollution that should be halted altogether.
    CONSENT

    It is not applicable.
    ETHICAL APPROVAL

    It is not applicable as no human or animal subjects were involved.
    ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

    The authors thank Environmental Voices and its donors for generously providing funds for publication fees.

    COMPETING INTERESTS

    Authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
    REFERENCES

    1. Available:http://wwwieaorg/topics/coal/ International Energy Agency. (Accessed March 10, 2018. 2. Carlson CL, Adriano DC. Environmental Impacts of Coal Combustion Residues. Journal of Environmental Quality. 1993; 22(2). 3. Mohr M, Ylätalo S, Klippel N, Kauppinen E, Riccius O, Burtscher H. Submicron fly ash penetration through electrostatic precipitators at two coal power plants. Aerosol Science and Technology. 1996; 24(3):191-204. 4. Zhuang Y, Kim YJ, Lee TG, Biswas P. Experimental and theoretical studies of ultra-fine particle behavior in electrostatic precipitators. Journal of Electrostatics. 2000;48(3):245-260.

    Whiteside and Herndon; JAMMR, 25(10): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JAMMR.40072

    8

    5. Baxter M. Environmental radioactivity: A perspective on industrial contributions. IAEA Bulletin. 1993;35(2):33-38. 6. Stierum R, Hageman G, Welle I, Albering H, Schreurs J, Kleinjans J. Evaluation of exposure reducing measures on parameters of genetic risk in a population occupationally exposed to coal fly ash. Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology. 1993;319(4):245-255. 7. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Further evidence of coal fly ash utilization in tropospheric geoengineering: Implications on human and environmental health. J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2017;9(1):18. 8. Herndon JM, Whiteside M. Contamination of the biosphere with mercury: Another potential consequence of on-going climate manipulation using aerosolized coal fly ash J Geog Environ Earth Sci Intn. 2017;13(1):1-11. 9. World Health Organization. Ambient air pollution: a global assessment of exposure and burden of disease. Ambient air pollution: A global assessment of exposure and burden of disease; 2016. 10. Brunekreef B, Holgate ST. Air pollution and health. The Lancet. 2002;360(9341):12331242. 11. Pope A, Burnett R, Thun M, Thurston G. Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution. JAMA. 2002;287(9):11321141. 12. Rizzi L, Rosset I, Roriz-Cruz M. Global epidemiology of dementia: Alzheimer’s and vascular types. BioMed Research International. 2014;2014. 13. Ferri CP, Prince M, Brayne C, Brodaty H, Fratiglioni L, Ganguli M, et al. Global prevalence of dementia: A Delphi consensus study. The lancet. 2006;366(9503):2112-2117. 14. Calderón-Garcidueñas L, Solt AC, Henríquez-Roldán C, Torres-Jardón R, Nuse B, Herritt L, et al. Long-term air pollution exposure is associated with neuroinflammation, an altered innate immune response, disruption of the bloodbrain barrier, ultrafine particulate deposition, and accumulation of amyloid β42 and α-synuclein in children and young adults. Toxicologic Pathology. 2008; 36(2):289-310. 15. Di Q, Wang Y, Zanobetti A, Wang Y, Koutrakis P, Choirat C, et al. Air Pollution and Mortality in the Medicare Population. New England Journal of Medicine. 2017;376(26):2513-2522. 16. Koehler KA, Peters T. New methods for personal exposure monitoring for airborne particles. Current Environmental Health Reports. 2015;2(4):399. 17. Araujo JA, Nel AE. Particulate matter and atherosclerosis: Role of particle size, composition and oxidative stress. Particle and Fibre Toxicology. 2009;6(1):24. 18. Zhang Z-F, Yu S-Z, Zhou G-D. Indoor air pollution of coal fumes as a risk factor of stroke, Shanghai. American Journal of Public Health. 1988;78(8):975-977. 19. Hong YC, Lee JT, Kim H, Kwon HJ. Air pollution: A new risk factor in ischemic stroke mortality. Stroke. 2002;33:21652169. 20. Calderón-Garcidueñas L, Azzarelli B, Acuna H, Garcia R, Gambling TM, Osnaya N, et al. Air pollution and brain damage. Toxicologic Pathology. 2002;30(3):373389. 21. Oberdörster G, Sharp Z, Atudorei V, Elder A, Gelein R, Kreyling W, et al. Translocation of inhaled ultrafine particles to the brain. Inhalation Toxicology. 2004;16(6-7):437-445. 22. Genc S, Zadeoglulari Z, Fuss SH, Genc K. The adverse effects of air pollution on the nervous system. Journal of Toxicology. 2012;2012. 23. Calderón-Garcidueñas L, Mora-Tiscareño A, Ontiveros E, Gómez-Garza G, Barragán-Mejía G, Broadway J, et al. Air pollution, cognitive deficits and brain abnormalities: A pilot study with children and dogs. Brain and cognition. 2008;68(2):117-127. 24. Jung CR, Lin YT, Hwang BF. Ozone, particulate matter, and newly diagnosed Alzheimer’s disease: A population-based cohort study in Taiwan. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease. 2015;44(2):573-584. 25. Weuve J, Puett RC, Schwartz J, Yanosky JD, Laden F, Grodstein F. Exposure to particulate air pollution and cognitive decline in older women. Archives of internal medicine. 2012;172(3):219-227. 26. Fisher GL. Biomedically relevant chemical and physical properties of coal combustion

    Whiteside and Herndon; JAMMR, 25(10): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JAMMR.40072

    9

    products. Environ Health Persp. 1983; 47:189-199. 27. Collingwood JF, Chong RK, Kasama T, Cervera-Gontard L, Dunin-Borkowski RE, Perry G, et al. Three-dimensional tomographic imaging and characterization of iron compounds within Alzheimer’s plaque core material. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease. 2008;14(2):235-245. 28. Castellani RJ, Moreira PI, Liu G, Dobson J, Perry G, Smith MA, et al. Iron: The Redoxactive center of oxidative stress in Alzheimer disease. Neurochemical research. 2007;32(10):1640-1645. 29. Maher BA, Ahmed IAM, Karloukovski V, MacLauren DA, Foulds PG, al. e. Magnetite pollution nanoparticles in the human brain. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2016;113(39):10797-10801. 30. Sambandam B, Palanisami E, Abbugounder R, Prakhya B, Thiyagarajan D. Characterizations of coal fly ash nanoparticles and induced in vitro toxicity in cell lines. Journal of Nanoparticle Research. 2014;16(2):2217. 31. Chen Y, Shah N, Huggins F, Huffman G, Dozier A. Characterization of ultrafine coal fly ash particles by energy filtered TEM. Journal of Microscopy. 2005;217(3):225234. 32. Chen H, Grassian VH, Saraf LV, Laskin A. Chemical imaging analysis of environmental particles using the focused ion beam/scanning electron microscopy technique: microanalysis insights into atmospheric chemistry of fly ash. Analyst. 2013;138(2):451-460. 33. Lakey PS, Berkemeier T, Tong H, Arangio AM, Lucas K, Pöschl U, et al. Chemical exposure-response relationship between air pollutants and reactive oxygen species in the human respiratory tract. Scientific Reports. 2016;6:32916. 34. Bush AI. The metal theory of Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease. 2013;33(s1):S277-S281. 35. Zheng W, Monnot AD. Regulation of brain iron and copper homeostasis by brain barrier systems: Implication in neurodegenerative diseases. Pharmacology & Therapeutics. 2012; 133(2):177-188. 36. Moreno N, Querol X, Andrés JM, Stanton K, Towler M, Nugteren H, et al. Physicochemical characteristics of European
    pulverized coal combustion fly ashes. Fuel. 2005;84:1351-1363. 37. Gilmour MI, O’Connor S, Dick CAJ, Miller CA, Linak WP. Differential pulmonary inflamation and in vitro cytotoxicity of sizefractionated fly ash particles from pulverized coal combustion. Air & Water Manage Assoc. 2004;54:286-295. 38. Twining J, McGlinn P, Lol E, Smith K, Giere R. Risk ranking of bioaccessible metals from fly ash dissolved in simulated lung and gut fluids. Environ Sci Technol. 2005;39(19):7749-7756. 39. Liu H, Sun Q, Wang B, Wang P, Zou J. Morphology and Composition of Microspheres in Fly Ash from the Luohuang Power Plant, Chongqing, Southwestern China. Minerals. 2016;6(2):30. 40. Bhattacharjee A, Mandal H, Roy M, Kusz J, Hofmeister W. Physical characteristics of fly ashes from three thermal power plants in West Bengal, India: A comparative study. International Journal of Chem Tech Research. 2013;5(2):836-843. 41. Silva L, Moreno T, Querol X. An introductory TEM study of Fenanominerals within coal fly ash. Science of the Total Environment. 2009; 407(17):4972-4974. 42. Kirschvink JL, Kobayashi-Kirschvink A, Woodford BJ. Magnetite biomineralization in the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 1992; 89(16):7683-7687. 43. Veranth JM, Smith KR, Huggins F, Hu AA, Lighty JS, Aust AE. Mössbauer spectroscopy indicates that iron in an aluminosilicate glass phase is the source of the bioavailable iron from coal fly ash. Chemical Research in Toxicology. 2000;13(3):161-164. 44. Zhao Y, Zhang J, Sun J, Bai X, Zheng C. Mineralogy, chemical composition, and microstructure of ferrospheres in fly ashes from coal combustion. Energy & Fuels. 2006;20(4):1490-1497. 45. Edwardson J, Klinowski J, Oakley A, Perry R, Candy J. Aluminosilicates and the ageing brain: Implications for the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease. Silicon Biochemistry. 1986:160-179. 46. Candy J, Klinowski J, Perry R, Perry E, Fairbairn A, Oakley A, et al. Aluminosilicates and senile plaque

    Whiteside and Herndon; JAMMR, 25(10): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JAMMR.40072

    10

    formation in Alzheimer’s disease. The lancet. 1986;327(8477):354-356. 47. Evans PH, Yano E, Klinowski J, Peterhans E. Oxidative damage in Alzheimer’s dementia, and the potential etiopathogenic role of aluminosilicates, microglia and micronutrient interactions. Free Radicals and Aging: Springer. 1992;178-189. 48. Evans P, Harrington C. Aluminosilicate Particulate and Beta‐Amyloid in Vitro Interactions: A Model of Alzheimer Plaque Formation. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1998;854(1):492. 49. Khan A, Dobson JP, Exley C. Redox cycling of iron by Aβ 42. Free Radical Biology and Medicine. 2006;40(4):557569. 50. Gozzelino R, Arosio P. Iron homeostasis in health and disease. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2016;17(1):130. 51. Block M, Wu X, Pei Z, Li G, Wang T, Qin L, et al. Nanometer size diesel exhaust particles are selectively toxic to dopaminergic neurons: The role of microglia, phagocytosis, and NADPH oxidase. The FASEB Journal. 2004;18(13):1618-1620. 52. Block ML, Calderón-Garcidueñas L. Air pollution: mechanisms of neuroinflammation and CNS disease. Trends in Neurosciences. 2009;32(9):506516. 53. Zeineh MM, Chen Y, Kitzler HH, Hammond R, Vogel H, Rutt BK. Activated iron-containing microglia in the human hippocampus identified by magnetic resonance imaging in Alzheimer disease. Neurobiology of Aging. 2015;36(9):24832500. 54. Andersen HH, Johnsen KB, Moos T. Iron deposits in the chronically inflamed central nervous system and contributes to neurodegeneration. Cellular and molecular life sciences. 2014;71(9):1607-1622. 55. Dobson J. Nanoscale biogenic iron oxides and neurodegenerative disease. FEBS letters. 2001;496(1):1-5. 56. Sayre LM, Perry G, Harris PL, Liu Y, Schubert KA, Smith MA. In situ oxidative catalysis by neurofibrillary tangles and senile plaques in Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Neurochemistry. 2000; 74(1):270-279. 57. Everett J, Céspedes E, Shelford LR, Exley C, Collingwood JF, Dobson J, et al.
    Ferrous iron formation following the coaggregation of ferric iron and the Alzheimer’s disease peptide β-amyloid (1– 42). Journal of The Royal Society Interface. 2014;11(95). 58. Yamamoto A, Shin RW, Hasegawa K, Naiki H, Sato H, Yoshimasu F, et al. Iron (III) induces aggregation of hyperphosphorylated τ and its reduction to iron (II) reverses the aggregation: implications in the formation of neurofibrillary tangles of Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Neurochemistry. 2002;82(5):1137-1147. 59. Hautot D, Pankhurst Q, Khan N, Dobson J. Preliminary evaluation of nanoscale biogenic magnetite in Alzheimer’s disease brain tissue. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences. 2003;270(Suppl 1):S62-S64. 60. Plascencia-Villa G, Ponce A, Collingwood JF, Arellano-Jiménez MJ, Zhu X, Rogers JT, et al. High-resolution analytical imaging and electron holography of magnetite particles in amyloid cores of Alzheimer’s disease. Scientific Reports. 2016;6:24873. 61. Teller S, Tahirbegi IB, Mir M, Samitier J, Soriano J. Magnetite-Amyloid-β deteriorates activity and functional organization in an in vitro model for Alzheimer’s disease. Scientific Reports. 2015;5:17261. 62. Hautot D, Pankhurst QA, Morris CM, Curtis A, Burn J, Dobson J. Preliminary observation of elevated levels of nanocrystalline iron oxide in the basal ganglia of neuroferritinopathy patients. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)Molecular Basis of Disease. 2007; 1772(1):21-25. 63. Kirschvink JL. Microwave absorption by magnetite: A possible mechanism for coupling non-thermal levels of radiation to biological systems. Bioelectromag. 1996;17:187-194. 64. Gaasch JA, Geldenhuys WJ, Lockman PR, Allen DD, Van der Schyf CJ. Voltage-gated calcium channels provide an alternate route for iron uptake in neuronal cell cultures. Neurochemical Research. 2007; 32(10):1686-1693. 65. Consales C, Merla C, Marino C, Benassi B. Electromagnetic fields, oxidative stress, and neurodegeneration. International Journal of Cell Biology. 2012;2012.

    Whiteside and Herndon; JAMMR, 25(10): 1-11, 2018; Article no.JAMMR.40072

    11

    66. Reale M, Kamal MA, Patruno A, Costantini E, D’Angelo C, Pesce M, et al. Neuronal cellular responses to extremely low frequency electromagnetic field exposure: Implications regarding oxidative stress and neurodegeneration. PLoS ONE. 2014; 9(8):e104973.
    67. Pall ML. Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects including depression. Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy. 2016;75:43-51.
    _________________________________________________________________________________ © 2018 Whiteside and Herndon; This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

  40. IT'S ME says:
    @Kevin Barrett

    FOR KEVIN and anybody else who is interested – Take your time and read carefully ! http://www.journaljgeesi.com/index.php/JGEESI/article/view/30157/56595

  41. @🙉RetroTrump2009

    Meanwhile, for those of us who live in the real world, here’s what the global warming scam is all about:

    http://www.investors.com/po&#8230;

    “At a news conference last week in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.

    “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said.

    Referring to a new international treaty environmentalists hope will be adopted at the Paris climate change conference later this year, she added: “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”

    and

    http://www.cfact.org/2017/0&#8230;

    “Ottmar Edenhofer, lead author of the IPCC’s fourth summary report released in 2007 candidly expressed the priority. Speaking in 2010, he advised, “One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth.””

  42. Herald says:
    @Evilc

    The work you have put into analysing and refuting my post makes me wonder why any normal respondent would be bothered. Thus I have to wonder whether certain interested people are very keen to shut down even the very idea that large scale geoengineering by way of dispersal of particulate matter may already be taking place. Despite these thoughts I will deal with at least some of the points you make.

    Firstly I will say that most all the voices I have heard or read on this subject believe that all aircraft are ‘spraying chemicals into the atmosphere with deliberate intent to cause harm to those below’. Predominately they believe or have been told that the offending chemicals are contained in the aircraft fuel. Hence my explanation why this cannot be the case. Clearly then these people are not members of the ‘reality of geoengineering’ club but are ‘Straw men’ being used by others for nefarious purpose.

    You are again continuing with straw man arguments. I made no mention of the intention of particulate spraying and any reference to deliberate harm is your own invention. I have already dealt with the “chemicals in the fuel” argument and won’t rehash it.

    Secondly in the respect of payload, aircraft are weight limited not volume limited. It’s a common enough error but whether the aircraft is commercial civil transport category or military it’s the same, physics can be a bitch. The aircraft has a weight and distribution limit placed upon it, its maximum weight is prior to flight phase when it has its full fuel load. The greater ‘payload’ of an aircraft is often the fuel load, which can equal the structural weight of the aircraft plus its maximum cargo/passengers.

    This is little more than a collection of well known generalties and there is nothing worth replying to.

    Thirdly you state that from long experience of observation you note that these aircraft are high flying. A suitable aircraft flying at a high altitude has to be flying at a high airspeed to maintain flight in a very thin atmosphere. I gave the example of a Boeing 777-200 but most aircraft of this type have a similar performance. The point about this is the speed of the aircraft through the air, it is moving at @ 250 Metres a second (or @820 ft/sec). You could choose to deliver the chemical at a low rate (as I had shown) or plug in your own numbers and see how much you could off load in as short as time as possible, or at a rate to cover a specific distance. You can get a very small amount delivered over a large distance or a large amount in a much shorter distance. Offloading in a rapid manner will require a much higher motive force than that I suggested, it would probably take many minutes even with very powerful pumps (and don’t forget the energy to power those pumps has to come from somewhere). Every minute the aircraft would travel some 15 kilometres/10 miles. Even when offloading the maximum possible amount in as short a time as possible its volume concentrate in the atmosphere the aircraft has travelled through would be negligible. So what exactly are these chemicals they are using? How do they work and what are they called and what are their chemical formulae?

    Most of what you say is again nothing more than a statement irrelevant technicalities. You ask about the nature of the chemicals being sprayed and I would ask how you expect myself, as simply a layman observer to answer that? However I would refer you and anyone else to geoengineeringwatch.org if you really want to delve into the possibilities.

    Fourthly you state that these aircraft you are observing are invariably painted white or silver with no identification markings. Most commercial aircraft are painted white or have polished (aluminium) surfaces. So how do you know these are military aircraft? Not being able to see any markings on them is understandable as you say they are flying at high altitude. What are you using to observe them? Binoculars? A telescope? What are you actually observing? How do you know they are dispersing chemicals?

    From the quasi-technical you have now reverted to a childlike simplicity, but no matter. They may be military aircraft or civilian, but again who knows, as no markings can be seen, even using my more than adequate Leica binoculars. Yes, they are clearly dispersing chemicals of some description as all substances, other than pure elements, are chemicals.

    Fifthly your statement that the ‘tanker aspect of spraying largely negates the great bulk of my post as being a valid refutation of geoengineering by particulate spraying’ is incorrect in its assumption that that was my goal. It was not; I had stated and described how it was possible to modify a civil transport aircraft to carry a fluid with the intention of offloading into the atmosphere, that is to do the work of a tanker aircraft. Indeed modified ex civil aircraft are in-service doing exactly that (both Boeing and Airbus tanker aircraft are derived from their respective civil aircraft programmes). There are aircraft modified to disperse oil slicks on water by spraying chemicals. Aircraft that spray crops with pesticides, aircraft water bombers that are today being used on the fires in California and specialised aircraft that conduct experiments in the atmosphere. Aircraft are amazingly adaptable for all sorts of work but that doesn’t make them good at everything, they have inherent limitations that have to be observed. Whether the aircraft is a dedicated Military cargo aircraft or a modified civil aircraft the limitations are the same, you can only carry so much weight and if you exceed that the aircraft won’t fly. If you fly high you fly fast and cover distance rapidly. Whether it’s a military tanker aircraft doing the work or a modified civilian aircraft the limitations are the same.

    What you say about tanker aircraft being in use for various purposes is not in dispute and has no value here and what you say about rates of dispersal at high altitudes does not interest me. What I would say is that geoengineering deniers will usually claim that the high altitude persistent contrails are simply water vapour from burned jet fuel and if we accept that argument as correct, then that in itself is a clear demonstration that chemicals can be dispersed over large areas by aircraft.

    Lastly you ask again about the chemical composition and how the chemicals may work. I have already touched on the subject but I don’t pretend to be able to answer those points. My only contention is that persistent contrails from high flying jets have only become a regular feature of our skies over the past twenty years or so. Before that they may have existed but were largely unknown, even to regular skywatchers, such as myself. Therefore it seems clear that some major change happened in the late nineties. The introduction of a concerted program at that time seems to me the most likely explanation. Others will not agree and that’s their privilege.

    • Replies: @IT'S ME
  43. Herald says:

    Thank you for the link to a very interesting paper. I am familiar with some of Herndon’s earlier work in connection with coal fly ash particulates and also with the frenzied attempts by the “scientific” climate establishment effort’s to rubbish his work. It is good to see that he and others haven’t been deterred and are still providing further objective insights into the thorny issue of aircraft particulate dispersal.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Kevin Barrett Comments via RSS