What MONCKTON is DOING WRONG (since he asks)

“If it isn’t showing up in my atmospheric monitoring, what am I doing wrong?” appeals Lord Monckton in a 2013 interview with Jonathan Eisen.

In fact there are many competent professionals and citizen researchers into the ‘chemtrails’ phenomenon who could give him a lead in how to conduct a methodical investigation, and enlighten him as to what he is doing wrong in throwing such a cursory eye over test data before concluding, ‘nothing to see here.’

agk DSC_0413

The late Rosalind Peterson, a professional Agricultural Loss Adjustor in California, becoming aware of the strange and persistent trails appearing in the sky over Mendocino County, set about methodically investigating the phenomenon, starting by examining flight paths and establishing that the planes seen laying down trails were not scheduled commercial flights. She then turned to publicly available results of tests conducted on all sources of drinking water, including water used in food and beverage production, which have to be tested frequently under Environmental Protection Agency regulations. What she found was a huge reservoir of raw data going all the way back to 1972. She made spreadsheets for every city, district and county in the state, and proceeded to trace known sources of pollution such as pesticides and industrial pollution and to eliminate them. Then she looked for unusual levels of any chemical which could not be attributed to known sources. She found spikes in barium, aluminum, manganese, magnesium, calcium, arsenic, lead, iron –- but only in results from the 1990s onwards. Pre-1990 these contaminants were either not present at all, or not spiking. Moreover, the spikes were occurring simultaneously state-wide.

Sponsoring the investment of 300 man-hours of programming time to create software to co-ordinate data from all water sources across the state, she next went to California Air Resources Board air-test records and found similar chemical spikes occurring simultaneously with the spiking in the water supply. The same body carried out tests to see if chemical pollution was being carried across from China, and was able to eliminate that as a significant source. All Peterson’s raw data as well as the graphed and co-ordinated data and detailed methodology are available for peer-review (including Peer-of-the-Realm -review) on her site. The correlation between airborne and waterborne pollution is important evidence – and it can only work one way. There is no other explanation for the data. The cover of experimentation thinly masks an operation in full swing: evidence from all over the world is consistent with Peterson’s findings.

Peterson also states that she has evidence of atmospheric testing using space Shuttle and rocket technology to release materials including sulphur hexafluoride, barium, aluminum, trimethyl aluminum, and lithium in the ionosphere at different levels.dsc_0019

A compelling selection of similar evidence presented by competent professionals and revealing high concentrations of aluminum, strontium, barium, manganese and other metals, was aired before the Shasta County Board of Supervisors in California in 2014, as highlighted in this video report.

These metals are coming from somewhere. Patents for climate engineering specify precisely the metals being found in the samples. The ‘conspiracy theory’ is based on the congruence of scientific proposals, patents, visual observations and chemical analysis, establishing a hard prima facie case, not a theory.

Numerous accounts tell us that aluminum in soil has doubled in the last ten years, sending pH values off the charts. Normal pH of rainwater used to be measured at 5.6; typically it is now twenty times more alkaline. This is killing microbial life in the soil.

The decimation of stream organisms and aquatic insects is symptomatic of ecosystem collapse. Bee colony death syndrome is particularly ominous – and since colonies hundreds of miles into the wilderness have proved as vulnerable as those near cultivated land, it would seem that pesticides, while significant, are not sufficient to explain the phenomenon.

Kristen Meghan and others reveal that the metal oxides and salts being used are micronized to less than 10 microns, not detectable by normal atmospheric monitoring. This might explain why Monckton’s atmospheric testing in his estate in Rannock, like the monitoring carried out in cities across the world, fails to pick up these particles.

The nano form means more prolonged suspension in air; and rapid absorption by all life forms. In the case of humans, the aluminum passes straight through membranes and rapidly accumulates in the frontal lobe of the brain, which might explain why we are seeing huge rises in Alzheimer’s disease. Aluminum triggers early apoctosis (braincell death) leading to Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s as well as other neurological conditions. Nano-particles of aluminum are now in the circulatory systems of plants and humans. In an eight year study of rat alviolar macrofages (white blood cells), a dramatic suppression of the immune systems of the animals was recorded as nano-particulate aluminum penetrated the cells and attacked the mitochondria.

The disingenuous avoidance of any such objective, methodical approaches in Christopher Monckton’s response to questions about atmospheric aerosol injection, or ‘chemtrails’, makes his views on the question not just irrelevant but suspect, and helps us to understand the dialectic behind the global warming psy-op, to tie up the best minds in endless and absurd debates about carbon dioxide — it’s all angels dancing on pinheads, but that’s what Lord Monckton, Keeper of the Gate, is good at, and trained to do.

Photos by Paul Dunbar, Hadia Bouhana


3 thoughts on “What MONCKTON is DOING WRONG (since he asks)

  1. Back around the fall/winter of 2014, after becoming aware of a disturbing weather pattern, I decided to do my own home study on SRM/chemtrails. Being in the american west & located within “fire country”, rain/snow is always welcome. The pattern was simple enough– forecasted rain/snow storms never seemed to make it. They’d show up on the weather app, typically 2 – 3 days of wet weather 7 – 10 days away & then they’d dry up before they got here. Maybe some clouds would arrive, an hour or two of light drizzle perhaps and that would be it. This happened over and over again. It is still happening.

    Looking upward for chemtrails is easy. No instruments required. I decided to watch for them whenever a rainstorm was forecasted. Whenever weather stations forecasted rain on the way, I’d check the sky. Every time, there they were, thick white streaks criss-crossing over the mountains. No commercial flights fly over this area but we do have two military bases nearby that house aircraft, one is Navy & the other Air Force.

    I looked into how the aerosols were supposed to work and found information about how they reflect heat away from the earth back into space. This increases heat in the upper ionosphere where clouds form in what is naturally colder air. Moisture that normally should be condensing into precipitation instead remains airborne as humidity?

    Sometimes I’d notice that there were no chemtrails before a forecasted storm. The storm then arrived as forecasters predicted. I observed this for a couple of years and then gave up because it was 90{7afbbc0afb0c7a66aa968a61965a5f55aa54e1a53c5ce8d1dec42cbaeedea50c} total correlation. Chemtrails are apparently drying up forecasted wet weather in my locale every winter. Manufactured drought in the american west? Looks that way to me. No idea why.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *