G Edward Griffin Exposes Conspiracy - Monsanto's Aluminum Resistant Seeds and Geoengineering

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by burntheships

 

A higher pH represents lower acidity, not higher. Acid rain does not cause a higher pH, it causes a lower pH.

Aluminum oxide, the most common culprit cited by "chemtrailers" (and also happens to be one of the most common compounds found naturally) is insoluble in water . Aluminum sulfate is soluble in water but, as a sulfate, it would decrease pH levels, not raise them.

It does not seem reasonable to claim that aluminum is the cause of increasing pH levels.

edit on 3/1/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Phage, glad you came back, please read my comments on the last page of the thread and help me analyze this video. It is actually making me rethink this Chemtrail thing. I have been a skeptic, but now I'm looking at it closer and there might be some plausibility.

If Aluminum Oxide cannot raise pH to a base, either the PHD in chemestry is wrong, or they lie in the video. According to the video at 30:45 the US Forestry service emplyee checked with Dr Leonard Time??? (guess on spelling) PHD in Chemestry said that the oxides of Aluminum, Barium, and Strontium would drive the ph to a higher number from acid to neutral soil... as seen in the data.

The aluminum SULFATE in soil is an acidifier and makes the ph go down to around 4.4, but Aluminum OXIDE is availble as a powder in an alkaline 9.5pH:

In chemistry laboratories, alumina is a medium for chromatography, available in basic (pH 9.5)

source

reply to post by pianopraze

I could be wrong. The PHD would probably not be wrong. But I would not put it past the makers of the video to lie (or misinterpret the third hand information).

Yes, there is an alkaline form of Aluminum Oxide, but like the acidic form it is insoluble in water. For this reason it is used chromatography as an adsorbant for water, the opposite of an absorbant which is dissolved.

Aluminum sulfate is soluble. It can be used to change the pH of the soil. I don't think that an insoluble compound can affect the pH.

In chemistry, pH is a measure of the acidity or basicity of an aqueous solution.

en.wikipedia.org...

An aqueous solution is a solution in which the solvent is water.

en.wikipedia.org...

If there is alkaline aluminum oxide in the soil, it can't affect the pH because it is not absorbed.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by pianopraze

 

I could be wrong. The PHD would probably not be wrong. But I would not put it past the makers of the video to lie (or misinterpret the third hand information).

Yes, there is an alkaline form of Aluminum Oxide, but like the acidic form it is insoluble in water. For this reason it is used chromatography as an adsorbant for water, the opposite of an absorbant which is dissolved.

Aluminum sulfate is soluble. It can be used to change the pH of the soil. I don't think that an insoluble compound can affect the pH.

In chemistry, pH is a measure of the acidity or basicity of an aqueous solution.

en.wikipedia.org...

An aqueous solution is a solution in which the solvent is water.

en.wikipedia.org...

If there is alkaline aluminum oxide in the soil, it can't affect the pH because it is not absorbed.

I definitely do not put it past any production to lie or misrepresent, especially when they are espousing a view. All data outside the theorem presented would be downplayed or excluded. I notice they did NOT go get that professor to repeat this on camera which is telling but not absolutely conclusive of misrepresentation.

So, if this PHD is correct and it would cause the soil to go to a neutral, they have a point (if they are not lying). But again it is questionable for insolubility reasons... I really would like hear what that PHD said from the horses mouth. I don't find him after a quick internet search.

How about the rest of the video?

marking this for later, will contribute something once I've got an opinion on it...

reply to post by pianopraze

The fact that the video present persistent contrails as "evidence" says enough about it.

The "test" are unscientific; a guy sticking a piece of litmus paper in his garden plot, samples taken from a ski resort and stagnant pond.

The "witnesses", people who have been frightened by being told that contrails cannot persist, cannot spread.

It's crap. Slick crap. But crap.

Ok, I feel dumb. I looked at the credits at the end of the movie, found his name, searched on the internet and found him and noticed that I had seen him in the movie. The PHD Lenny Thyme is in the movie at minute 31. They do not have him restate the assertions of the Forester that it raise the pH to alkaline, but he does assert that he believes in chemtrails and that they are aluminum, barium, strontium and outlines the dangers of alumina. I better understand what he's stating after your post phage.

So is the MA Forester, and PHD scientist incorrect in stating alumina can raise the pH of soil? Are they strong believers and overlook the insolubility issue or do they know something that nullifies insolubility in pH of soil?

And how about the rest of the video?

reply to post by pianopraze

Well, you can see what I think about the rest of the video.
Interesting that they didn't mention the results of testing done after (and as a result of) the tests they were so worried about.

Aluminum:

Water samples were collected April 20 and testing was done by Basic Labs in Redding using method EPA60108 with containers provided by the lab to ensure no contamination. The results are as follows:
• Ream Ave. and W.A. Barr Road pond - Not Detected;
• Shasta Ranch Road pond - 0.097 milligrams per liter;
• Sisson Meadows pond - 0.085 milligrams per liter;
• City Park headwaters - Not detected;

The California Regional Water Quality Control Board also conducted tests on May 4 and 7 that were evaluated by Basic Labs. The results are as follows:
• Ash Creek near McCloud - 0.010 milligrams per liter;
• Mount Shasta area - 0.019 milligrams per liter;
• Castle Lake - 0.022 milligrams per liter.

Correct link:
www.mtshastanews.com...

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by pianopraze

 

The fact that the video present persistent contrails as "evidence" says enough about it.

The "test" are unscientific; a guy sticking a piece of litmus paper in his garden plot, samples taken from a ski resort and stagnant pond.

The "witnesses", people who have been frightened by being told that contrails cannot persist, cannot spread.

It's crap. Slick crap. But crap.

edit on 3/1/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Well, I looked up soil pH test and came up with everythign from thermometer looking gadgets, digital meters, to paper test kits:

How do scientists or even farmers know whether the soil in which they plant seeds or young plants is basic or acidic? They can use special test paper strips or a meter to measure what is called the “pH” of the soil.

source
So that is an invalid argument.

If it's a ski resort I didn't catch, but it is Mount Shasta which has a aluminum rating which is thousands of times over the limit for government intervention. The snow on that mountain is toxic with aluminum and they are asking the question how did it get so high? The soil tests have thousands of times LESS so it was not from the wind blowing the soil. The presume it is planes dumbing Aluminum, Barium, and Strontium... which match published plans for geo-engieering which can be accomplished in a budget of millions of dollars which would be easy to hide in our government which looses 2.3 trillion before 911 in the military alone.

If it is crap, let's debunk it. This is a major game changer in the debate as it presents arguments that seem valid. I've already pointed out several flaws in the video, but there are several more strong points. When I first heard about chemtrails i thought there was nothing to it, they were just contrails. But BTS has shown weathermen who say this is aluminum and they did it in the army. This video might be slick crap, but it presents a very intriguing case for geo-engineering. And better science in their case than the debunking.

I agree contrails persist and spread, let's ignore that. I agree.

How about the rest of the science presented in this video?
-Raise of PH
-Extreme levels of Aluminum on Mt. Shasta
-High levels in Arizona
-High levels in Hawaii
-High levels in child's hair who was raise on all organic food.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by pianopraze

 

Well, you can see what I think about the rest of the video.
Interesting that they didn't mention the results of testing done after (and as a result of) the tests they were so worried about.

Aluminum:

Water samples were collected April 20 and testing was done by Basic Labs in Redding using method EPA60108 with containers provided by the lab to ensure no contamination. The results are as follows:
• Ream Ave. and W.A. Barr Road pond - Not Detected;
• Shasta Ranch Road pond - 0.097 milligrams per liter;
• Sisson Meadows pond - 0.085 milligrams per liter;
• City Park headwaters - Not detected;

The California Regional Water Quality Control Board also conducted tests on May 4 and 7 that were evaluated by Basic Labs. The results are as follows:
• Ash Creek near McCloud - 0.010 milligrams per liter;
• Mount Shasta area - 0.019 milligrams per liter;
• Castle Lake - 0.022 milligrams per liter.

communities.earthportal.org...

edit on 3/1/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

This post totally confuses me. I checked your link and it did not have the information you posted, further it states:

As to the question of where the elements come from – aerial spraying is a distinct possibility. The thought that fall-out from coal burning in China might be seen on Mt. Shasta is ruled out by data that show no significant aluminum in the Chinese plume measured at Mt. Rainier.

your source

Aluminum is highly toxic to biological system in its form of trivalent (+3) cation. The most likely forms are as oxides, with formulas of BaO, SrO and Al2O3. These forms are more basic than hydroxides, which are unlikely to form under rainwater pH conditions.

And the managing editor is Dr. Lenny Thyme... the doctor who in that movie states the snow has many thousands of times the level that is considered toxic...
your source members page

reply to post by pianopraze

Yeah. Wrong link. I corrected it. I was reading about Dr. Lenny.

reply to post by pianopraze

Corrected the link in my previous post.

What I meant was the home testing of the pH of a garden plot is no indication of a global campaign.

I think you need to look at the actual test results. The aluminum found in the "snow melt" sample was at 368 μg/l. That is 0.368 mg/l. First of all, this isn't drinking water. Second the Federal government has no enforceable standards for aluminum and California sets a limit of 1.0 mg/l. California says you could drink the snow melt without worrying about it. Well, without worrying about the aluminum content, it depends on what color the snow is but that's another thing. You cannot really compare the soil samples to the water (or snow melt) samples so to say the snow sample was higher than the soil sample doesn't really make any sense.

So what about those "high" soil samples? The soil under Frances Mangel's house tested at 13,600 mg/kg (1.4%). Brookings, Oregon; 38,000 mg/kg. Sounds scary. That's 3.8%. Is that a lot? Apparently not. According to a chart from a 1920 publication (before "chemtrails", right?) aluminum oxide in California soils ranged from 1.63% to 32.42%. Samples from across North America ranged from 3.26% to 14.16%. It sounds like there may be a bit of fear mongering going on somewhere.
Soil Science

I've seen the geoengineering proposals for the use of aluminum oxide. I have seen none for the use of barium or strontium.

-Rise in pH in a single backyard garden. Who knows. Lots of things can cause that.
-If you're talking about the snow. No.
-Aluminum compounds are among the most commonly found. No way to correlate aluminum levels with "chemtrails".
-Aluminum compounds are among the most commonly found. No way to correlate aluminum levels with "chemtrails".
-Aluminum compounds are among the most commonly found. No way to correlate aluminum levels with "chemtrails".

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by pianopraze

 

Yeah. Wrong link. I corrected it. I was reading about Dr. Lenny.

Ok, analyzing this source raises immediate flags. One or the other are lying or misrepresenting as the results are so drastically different. Also I notice they do NOT analyze the snow from mount shasta. This is a huge red flag as this is what they are supposedly writing the article to debunk.

Also they do not say the results from the movie were wrong. They just flat out do not give the data for Mt. Shasta:

“It’s so common in our soil. I don’t see any red flags at all. That’s not to say earlier higher tests were wrong, but there may be other factors.”

This makes me think they are lying or misleading the reader. I have already shown the amounts of aluminum in the regional soil are thousands of times lower.

They state aluminum is safe in water and there is no guidelines against maximum levels.

The Environmental Protection Agency does not classify aluminum under its legally enforceable National Primary Drinking Water Regulations that sets amounts not to be exceeded for health reasons.

This is false here are the California and US maximum safe levels found under "Regulated Contaminants, Primary MCLs address health concerns: link

Chetelat pointed to a NASA study of sand storms in the Gobi and Sahara deserts that stated aluminum and other elements from the storms drift to the United States.

It would be from the Gobi in Asia, not the Sahara affecting the west coast but I could find no soil analysis stating how much aluminum would be in this soil:

Large dust plumes originating in the Sahara are transported across the Atlantic Ocean to the Carribean Islands and the southeastern coast of the U.S. Saharan dust is suspected to influence nutrient cycles in the Amazon Basin

Particles from dust storms in northern Asia influence biogeochemical cycles in Hawaii and have been detected as far away as North America. For example, dust originating in China's Gobi desert has been transported across the Pacific in sufficient quantities to cause brown skies in the Western U.S. (e.g., Seattle, Washington).

link

Among the health hazards cited by aluminum’s detractors are the risks of cancer from aluminum in water, antiperspirants, deodorants, cookware, antacids, cosmetics and foods. Claims have also been made that aluminum contributes to Alzheimer's disease.
The World Health Organization says scientific studies do not support these claims.
“There is little indication that aluminum is acutely toxic despite its widespread occurrence in foods, drinking water, and many antacid preparations,” WHO says.

This is an interesting fact not brought up in the video, they suggest the increase might be linked to the spraying, but I would wager there is more in the deodorant I am putting on than in any spraying done. But this is an aside. I do not trust the WHO they have been repeatedly caught lying and misrepresenting to protect and promote corporate agendas and profits. There has been a huge rise in the cases of Alzheimer's... but this was occurring even before any spraying was supposed to have begun. At worst it could only be another contributing factor, not a prime cause as insinuated in the video.

I accidentally stumbled on this as I was looking for data on the dust. There are insiders saying they are engaged in geo-engineering. Of course people lie so you cannot absolutely trust what is being said. But I have been wondering if this is going on where are the insiders telling it's going on?:


This is starting to look like a cover up. I do not trust this news report because they are clearly misleading. It is 4:30am and I'm going to bed, but if I can catch them in this many lies and misrepresentations it makes me think this is absolute disinformation. It raises a flag as to why are they trying to provide disinformation?

reply to post by Phage


This looks intriguing. I will examine it after I sleep

reply to post by pianopraze

They didn't test snow because people were worried about water quality. But...the snow melt levels were nothing to write home about.

They don't address the video at all. Maybe because the article was published more than a year before the movie was released.

You cannot compare soil levels with water levels. It's apples and oranges.

The statement about regulation is not false. Look at the footnote on the chart you linked. The Federal standard for aluminum is for Secondary Maximum Levels. For "aesthetic" purposes. So yeah, that snow might taste funny.

National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations are non-enforceable guidelines regarding contaminants that may cause cosmetic effects (such as skin or tooth discoloration) or aesthetic effects (such as taste, odor, or color) in drinking water. EPA recommends secondary standards to water systems but does not require systems to comply. However, some states may choose to adopt them as enforceable standards.

www.epa.gov...

"Ex government employee". On a youtube video. Really?

See my previous post. Who is distorting data? Who is fear mongering? I wonder why the makers of the video disregarded the follow up independent water tests.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by pianopraze

 

Corrected the link in my previous post.

What I meant was the home testing of the pH of a garden plot is no indication of a global campaign.

I think you need to look at the actual test results. The aluminum found in the "snow melt" sample was at 368 μg/l. That is 0.368 mg/l. First of all, this isn't drinking water. Second the Federal government has no enforceable standards for aluminum and California sets a limit of 1.0 mg/l. California says you could drink the snow melt without worrying about it. Well, without worrying about the aluminum content, it depends on what color the snow is but that's another thing. You cannot really compare the soil samples to the water (or snow melt) samples so to say the snow sample was higher than the soil sample doesn't really make any sense.

So what about those "high" soil samples? The soil under Frances Mangel's house tested at 13,600 mg/kg (1.4%). Brookings, Oregon; 38,000 mg/kg. Sounds scary. That's 3.8%. Is that a lot? Apparently not. According to a chart from a 1920 publication (before "chemtrails", right?) aluminum oxide in California soils ranged from 1.63% to 32.42%. Samples from across North America ranged from 3.26% to 14.16%. It sounds like there may be a bit of fear mongering going on somewhere.
Soil Science

I've seen the geoengineering proposals for the use of aluminum oxide. I have seen none for the use of barium or strontium.

-Rise in pH in a single backyard garden. Who knows. Lots of things can cause that.
-If you're talking about the snow. No.
-Aluminum compounds are among the most commonly found. No way to correlate aluminum levels with "chemtrails".
-Aluminum compounds are among the most commonly found. No way to correlate aluminum levels with "chemtrails".
-Aluminum compounds are among the most commonly found. No way to correlate aluminum levels with "chemtrails".

edit on 3/1/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by pianopraze

 

They didn't test snow because people were worried about water quality. But...the snow melt levels were nothing to write home about.

They don't address the video at all. Maybe because the article was published more than a year before the movie was released.

You cannot compare soil levels with water levels. It's apples and oranges.

The statement about regulation is not false. Look at the footnote on the chart you linked. The Federal standard for aluminum is for Secondary Maximum Levels. For "aesthetic" purposes. So yeah, that snow might taste funny.

National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations are non-enforceable guidelines regarding contaminants that may cause cosmetic effects (such as skin or tooth discoloration) or aesthetic effects (such as taste, odor, or color) in drinking water. EPA recommends secondary standards to water systems but does not require systems to comply. However, some states may choose to adopt them as enforceable standards.

www.epa.gov...

"Ex government employee". On a youtube video. Really?

See my previous post. Who is distorting data? Who is fear mongering? I wonder why the makers of the video disregarded the follow up independent water tests.

edit on 3/1/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Agreed gardens change, but the data is for the whole region, not just his garden. They should have never mentioned his garden as it confuses the subject. So what could cause ph for the region to go from an average of 5.x to close to 7 in the last 5 years? They maintain it is the elements in the chemtrials. They do not prove this claim, there could be other like vulcanism as suggested by WW but there has been none in the last 5 years. So what is causing the rise in pH? I have asked an expert to come join the discussion, hopefully he will come and be able to answer.

*grin* I grew up in Alaska and we knew which color snow to avoid... As to toxicity there are quite a few different scientific opinions coming out. Almost every source states different conclusions. I think there is a mass coverup to downplay the impact of mankind on the environment by the corporations who are trashing our planet. I tend to believe the studies that say there is a health risk. Most of those standards are CYA rules, not good guidelines for real safety. Rats are dieing from aluminum in laboratories with kidney failure and cancer. Just like GMO, there are lots of studies showing the danger but they are being overlooked.

Good data and good source for the soil information. This needs to be addressed by chemtrail supporters. I am more neutral and playing "devils advocate" here and am willing to examine all good data. This data is substantial. I have called in an expert, let's hope he comes and addresses this.

I have seen geo-engineering proposals with barium and strontium, let me go find links.

Hughes Aircraft Patent #5,003,186 - In 1991 a U.S. patent was issued to Hughes Aircraft Company; the Stratospheric Welsbach Seeding For Reduction of Global Warming Patent (#5,003,186). It proposed injecting into the upper atmosphere, a “very fine, white talcum-like” powder of aluminum oxide, barium oxide and other oxides for the stated purpose of reducing Global Warming”.

source

Good point, if this was published before the movie, the movie should have addressed it if they were aware of it. I thought the article was after and addressing the movie. I will write the movie people and see if they were aware of this data. Done, I wrote a letter to both the scientist and movie people.

There is a discrepancy because it is listed under controlled for health purposes. Seems like a backdoor admission that there is a health risk. It is clearly found under health risk chemicals on California's website and has been linked to health risks by science. You are clearly correct that it has a footnote saying it is secondary however.

I am at the end of what I can defend on this one.

Their point about the soil change is still valid, but you are showing clear questions with the publish figures which they need to address. The numbers and conversions are making my head spin. You have not addressed the Hawaii data, please do. It starts at 45:46. The girl has extremely high aluminum content in the test results.

....so would the aluminum still enter into the plant, just not be toxic to it? Hope that doesn't mean people would be eating high concentrations of aluminum from produce.

reply to post by pianopraze

I started a thread on this aspect of the move. If the expert shows up it may be a better place for the discussion.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Phage


I was enjoying the discussion going on in this thread. I question your motives for switching. There is a lot of good information in this thread to which you didn't answer. Both before my post and after.

I invited both the movie producers and the experts to this thread. Your switching threads could be viewed as an underhanded tactic and frankly I'm a little miffed. I respect you and your skepticism and logical arguments to frankly dissect this information. Switching venues negates the hours of research already presented and that other thread has already degenerated into a pundit match.

Why phage?

You leave me shaking my head sadly.

Please address the issues here in this thread, thank you. I have asked several questions which have not been answered. Please address the science here in this thread.

reply to post by pianopraze

The movie covers different topics. I created a separate thread because I felt that their presentation of the test results is a significant enough issue for separate discussion. I felt that it may be lost in the discussion about persistent, spreading contrails and geoengineering proposals.

I apologize if I missed what other topics you wish to discuss but that really illustrates my point. What other topics of the movie would you like to cover? I can do two things at more or less the same time.

reply to post by Phage


I will put my statements in "quotes"

What the forester is saying is that a forest that has been at 5.6 over 20 years of data should stay around that to stay healthy, when you see a huge raise from 5.6 to 6.8 in 5 years it is unhealthy for the plants. The wind has presumably been blowing all this time so let's abandon wind blown soil an a factor in the change of the ph. I just pointed out the flaw in both theories here. I think the foresters point is valid.. especially as these number are presumably still rising and will presumably go outside the healthy range if current escalations persist on the observed data trend. Again the videos premise theory is that aluminum from spraying is raising the levels of the PH, but this link is not proved but it is a better argument absent other data.

How do you repudiate the Foresters and Chemists assertion that Aluminum Barium and Strontium are causing a rise in the observed pH over the last 5 years. What would you suggest would produce these observed and recorded results in the country data log?

Originally posted by pianopraze
So is the MA Forester, and PHD scientist incorrect in stating alumina can raise the pH of soil? Are they strong believers and overlook the insolubility issue or do they know something that nullifies insolubility in pH of soil?

And how about the rest of the video?

They say aluminum can raise the soil pH and they have a few more letters behind their name when it comes to chemistry. How do you refute this?

Originally posted by pianopraze
BTS has shown weathermen who say this is aluminum and they did it in the army. This video might be slick crap, but it presents a very intriguing case for geo-engineering. And better science in their case than the debunking.

How about the rest of the science presented in this video?
-Raise of PH
-Extreme levels of Aluminum on Mt. Shasta
-High levels in Arizona
-High levels in Hawaii
-High levels in child's hair who was raise on all organic food.

There is evidence for high levels in Aluminum in both Arizona and Hawaii presented in the move. How do you account for these, especially for the amount in the little girls hair samples (the exact time is in a post above)? It would probably be hard for you to address Arizona as we don't have any data outside the move, but your refutation of that movie data would be appreciated. How do you account for the data of the trees?