Dangerous Gas may be cause of super-charged weather, mass die-offs, quakes and more

reply to post by JrDavis


Do not buy the cheap china ones, they are dangerous. You can find a good one on ebay that will last.
I use one that uses two ozone plates. Better living makes a good one. Just make sure when you run it, run it on low . High is for sterilization, and is not meant to be breathed in. I run mine on low for 20 min a day. It has killed all the mold in the house, that was making me ill. Watched it turn from green to white in ten min. ....

When you sterilize, wait 20 min to enter the room, so it breaks back down to o2.

Alpine also makes a good one. My unit has lasted for 12 years now and still going.

You are trying to propel an unified theory of all things unexplained. It just doesn't add up.

Sorry. But as a writer myself. It is easy to fall in love with a draft of your work when it is realistically far from a finished product. I can see you have put a lot of work into it. But the more you have worked the harder it is for you to seem objective over the subject. It seems you do not have the ability to look over your work scientifically, which is objectively.

You need to stop trying to group everything in, it makes you looks a bit crazy.

AAC

Originally posted by AnAbsoluteCreation
You are trying to propel an unified theory of all things unexplained. It just doesn't add up.

Sorry. But as a writer myself. It is easy to fall in love with a draft of your work when it is realistically far from a finished product. I can see you have put a lot of work into it. But the more you have worked the harder it is for you to seem objective over the subject. It seems you do not have the ability to look over your work scientifically, which is objectively.

You need to stop trying to group everything in, it makes you looks a bit crazy.

AAC

It appears that you are using one of those disinfo 101 tactics again, and insulting me. Using all these ancient disinfo tactics might lead the suspicious mind to question your motivation in hanging around here. If you want to start a new thread, by all means do so.

On the off chance that you're an actual person, perhaps you have simply not considered the potential effects of atmospheric doom. Those effects might manifest anywhere the atmosphere itself is present, which means pretty much anywhere on Earth, from the bottoms of the oceans to the edge of space. You would thus expect atmospheric doom to change many things, and therefore to explain many otherwise unexplained changes around us where the atmosphere is present.

In any case, your disagreement with my hypothesis is duly noted. If you continue to hang around and harangue anyway, I'm afraid it's going to be you that starts to seem a little crazy.

I think people can judge for themselves, and if they decide I'm incorrect, that's fine with me. I do think an honest perusal of the information, the science, the events that are happening, the inadequacy of the explanations for those events, are worth a look and the investment of a modest amount of time.

jumpingjackflashhypothesis.blogspot.com...

Originally posted by JonnyMnemonic

I don't really know about chemtrails, but I do see the giant checkerboards in the sky, and I did mention a proposed reason for that. You ever look at the screen in your microwave? Grid pattern, to slow/stop radiation leakage. So yeah, I do think 'they' are trying some stuff, to buy us a bit of time if nothing else. Doesn't matter to the hypothesis though. If they're not trying any protective measures then we'll just die a little faster. And I don't think they can SPRAY ozone. But I didn't know about any classified ozone-generating planes before either, so who knows. I hope they ARE trying stuff to protect us, being one of those don't-wanna-die-sooner-than-necessary type of people. Heh.

I can't believe I overlooked this post! Brilliant!

I have, at least a dozen times over, mentioned this same reasoning in chemtrail threads for years now. Not tying in ozone...never made that connection before, but just material which will reflect the solar radiance back into space. I've intuited for a long time that AGW is much worse than it seems to be. It's well known among climatologists that the models are rather conservative. I've intuited that they don't properly understand the feedback mechanisms, and how they all interact, to properly assess the rate at which changes will occur.

We're actually much closer in our reasoning than you may think. I simply think we have at least a decade before civilization is challenged. That's all. I think these releases seem ginormous, but am thinking it's not much in comparison to what is actually down there. It won't all bubble up at once. Just as the arctic breaks off in chunks over many years, so too will these methane plumes be released over the years and decades.

I think the fastest we'll have to worry about civilization collapsing is maybe 2025, and the latest maybe 2045. Until then, I'm staying in a keto-adapted state, already stocked up on minerals, vitamins, and lard, and have a private lake house in a gated community ready to inhabit.

Originally posted by AnAbsoluteCreation
You are trying to propel an unified theory of all things unexplained. It just doesn't add up.

Sorry. But as a writer myself. It is easy to fall in love with a draft of your work when it is realistically far from a finished product. I can see you have put a lot of work into it. But the more you have worked the harder it is for you to seem objective over the subject. It seems you do not have the ability to look over your work scientifically, which is objectively.

You need to stop trying to group everything in, it makes you looks a bit crazy.

AAC

Then offer up an explanation and if you're going to say it's all normal, save your breath, heard that one already. Here's one small example. Johnny said on here earlier that USGS stopped tracking smaller quakes to balance out the amount of activity so it would appear to be normal. I have yet to see anyone here at ATS come in and offer a different perspective so that tells me one thing. He's right and earthquakes have been on the rise!

reply to post by Rezlooper


He already said that it was an oversimplification, yet you're asking him to prove what he denies? How does that make any sense?

Fallacy of the single cause (causal oversimplification[26]) – it is assumed that there is one, simple cause of an outcome when in reality it may have been caused by a number of only jointly sufficient causes.

Informal Fallacies

Interesting one here. Classic Chevelle, fully restored, bursts into flame in storage facility:

www.whiotv.com...

reply to post by unityemissions


Yep, you're right, I'll leave it at that

Hey Johnny, I just posted a thread about an animal visciously attacking goats and ripping their faces off. This is a news story in Waddy, KY. It made me think of that post you put up earlier about the guy walking across the causeway who attacked another person and started eating him. Wanted you to check out this story and let me know what you think here. It's a pretty unbelievable story.

Here's the news link

Viscious attacks on livestock

Here's my thread

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Rezlooper
Hey Johnny, I just posted a thread about an animal visciously attacking goats and ripping their faces off. This is a news story in Waddy, KY. It made me think of that post you put up earlier about the guy walking across the causeway who attacked another person and started eating him. Wanted you to check out this story and let me know what you think here. It's a pretty unbelievable story.

Here's the news link

Viscious attacks on livestock

Here's my thread

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Jeez, that's some freaky stuff there! I'd guess it's something new, a genetic chimera, Mother Nature going berserk and creating new life, blending two species together as genetic damage from rising UV levels spreads across the world. Wolf-bear chimera? Wolf-human? Definitely a very smart predator of some kind. I'd like to see them catch one. And we should hope that there's not a breeding population of them out there in the wild reproducing and making more, but there could be.

Here's another similar story, something unknown attacking people on the island of Borneo:

news.discovery.com...

I think we'll be seeing a lot of this, new stuff popping up. Looks like we already are. There's some new fungus/bacteria wiping out coral around Hawaii too. We didn't evolve with this stuff either, so it's not likely to be too good for human civilization, as if we didn't have enough problems.

Another interesting one, guy finds a little, well, looks kind of like a small dragon:

www.s.o.t.t.net...

Bird-snake chimera? Kinda too bad he killed it. But what if it reproduces with eggs and there's a clutch out there? How big might they get? Big enough to knock in a door and eat a family? Feed on livestock?

Take the extra dots out of the link. Heh.

reply to post by Rezlooper


So you are saying that one thing has nothing to do with the other? By definition as our ozone becomes depleted UV rays becomes more radiant on the earth. If it was posted somewhere else and not part of this discussion then it must not be accurate I suppose. You are talking about unexplained levels of gases being put into the atmo i.e. causing fires. Now to say the same elements you discussed do not exist in volcano gases is semi well lets just say funny. That being said global warming and issues related to it exist, and as the planet warms more of the gases you are speaking of will be released into the atmosphere, most of these gases are currently trapped under frost and ice (for the moment) but will cause more incidence like the one you described as time moves along.

Sorry for the late rebuttal, I didn't realize I would need to defend a simple point.

Originally posted by thekaliyuga
reply to post by Rezlooper

 

So you are saying that one thing has nothing to do with the other? By definition as our ozone becomes depleted UV rays becomes more radiant on the earth. If it was posted somewhere else and not part of this discussion then it must not be accurate I suppose. You are talking about unexplained levels of gases being put into the atmo i.e. causing fires. Now to say the same elements you discussed do not exist in volcano gases is semi well lets just say funny. That being said global warming and issues related to it exist, and as the planet warms more of the gases you are speaking of will be released into the atmosphere, most of these gases are currently trapped under frost and ice (for the moment) but will cause more incidence like the one you described as time moves along.

Sorry for the late rebuttal, I didn't realize I would need to defend a simple point.

Do volcanoes sometimes emit hydrogen sulfide? Yep. It's a geochemical gas. But the oceans themselves - ancient anaerobic bacteria in the oceans, seas and lakes - can emit VASTLY more hydrogen sulfide, via biochemical activity. I provided the link which explains this in some depth. Here it is again (PDF format):

www.chicagocleanpower.org...

THAT is what we face. The volcanoes and their contributions will be, relatively speaking, minor compared to the biochemical releases. Also, those bacteria feed on biomatter, e.g. dead stuff and crap and trash. Where does most of North America's crap go? Into the Gulf of Mexico. And as the bacteria ramp up their activity, as the waters grow warmer, they will kill stuff, then feed on the corpses, creating more bacteria, which kills more stuff, and they'll eat that, and so on until a massive exchange of biomass has taken place - most of what is alive now, most of that biomass, will be converted into bacterial biomass. Once they have devoured all that is available then they will die off hard, and oxygen-using life will make a return. When this happened in the Permian-Triassic the full recovery of the Earth was not complete for around 30 million years.

This is a very interesting thread and I am definitely going to follow up with the research, just wanted to toss something out there to make sure it may not be throwing off your calculations.

Car fires keep coming up. My own car, a Ford Explorer, just mysteriously burst into flames back in May. My husband drove it to work, came back after a 10 hour shift just as a little smoke was starting to come out from under the hood. Very quickly it erupted into a hot enough flame to warp several sections of rather sturdy framework. It seemed a total mystery until I was going through the paperwork a few weeks later, clearing it out, and found a recall notice I had put off to bring the car in for a new cruise control. There had been instances of them spontaneously bursting into flames, usually in cars that were not running at the time.

I'm not saying that is what is causing all of these fires, however, I'm quite sure it was the cause of mine when you factor in the starting point of the fire.

I wonder how many of these other cars may have been Explorers? Or have there been other similar recall issues? My sister's first car also suddenly caught fire in a parking lot, but I think that was an issue with an old battery, it's been about 20 years so my memory could be off. A little research into that may help make sure you have a solid set to plug into your equations.

There was no news coverage of either of these car fires. I know I didn't have to report to the DMV why my car was totaled. I'm not sure where a good comprehensive list may be. I had just reduced my insurance coverage from full to liability when my son got his license, so I didn't even report it to insurance, but that may be a place to start. You'd at least get numbers on the covered vehicles...

Again, not trying to detract, looking forward to a lot of reading in my near future, just trying to help get a clear picture for better estimates.

I'm sure some vehicles have been Explorers. Obviously that'd include some fraction of the SUVs, but none of the jet skis, fishing boats, cargo ships, yachts and generic boats, school buses and other buses, tanker trucks, pickup trucks, motorcycles, forklifts, golf carts, RVs, tractor trailers, cars, or vans. No way to know if the Explorers that have burned had been taken in and fixed. But think about it: they issue recalls to fix problems. So if there's a fire problem and they issue a recall to fix it, you'd expect to see the number of fires decrease, not increase. Many of these fires are in vehicles that are not running, just sitting in a parking lot or car dealership lot, or auto shop, or car park, etc. Many burst into flame inside garages or outside homes and burn down the home too. One dealership had surveillance video, and it showed the car just bursting into flame in the lot, beneath the hood. What's under the hood? Thick copper cables. Hydrogen sulfide is reactive with copper. (Which also explains the power poles bursting into flame, especially the pile that went up in Texas in the same general geographic area.)

With news stories showing an increasing number of people being found burned to death inside vehicles, it seems like it's worth paying attention to. I think THAT is because while hydrogen sulfide is flammable and is causing and exacerbating fires, it's also a knockdown agent and renders people unconscious or dead. If you're in a vehicle, both can happen: the vehicle bursts into flame AND the driver is knocked unconscious, and so the driver is incinerated (if the gas hadn't already killed him or her).

And no, there's no news story for many vehicular fires. I can't do much about that; I can only see what I can see. The same is true of the people dropping dead; no news, just the sirens of ambulances carting away the bodies from homes, one by one. Three of my friends dropped dead fairly recently, all in their 40s, no health issues. One dropped dead outside, in his back yard. One lost consciousness and slammed his scooter into a truck then dropped dead in the shower a week later. One dropped dead in her sleep. No news stories for any of them. Their only commonality was that they lived in reasonable proximity to a low-lying area, a river. Another friend, trying to lose weight, was taking walks, outside, also in reasonable proximity to the river. She's now having neurological seizures.

Originally posted by thekaliyuga
reply to post by Rezlooper

 

So you are saying that one thing has nothing to do with the other? By definition as our ozone becomes depleted UV rays becomes more radiant on the earth. If it was posted somewhere else and not part of this discussion then it must not be accurate I suppose. You are talking about unexplained levels of gases being put into the atmo i.e. causing fires. Now to say the same elements you discussed do not exist in volcano gases is semi well lets just say funny. That being said global warming and issues related to it exist, and as the planet warms more of the gases you are speaking of will be released into the atmosphere, most of these gases are currently trapped under frost and ice (for the moment) but will cause more incidence like the one you described as time moves along.

Sorry for the late rebuttal, I didn't realize I would need to defend a simple point.

I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, what I meant was that these additional leaks are causing the more rapid depletion of the ozone. Of course they all play their part.

Originally posted by JonnyMnemonic

Originally posted by Rezlooper
Hey Johnny, I just posted a thread about an animal visciously attacking goats and ripping their faces off. This is a news story in Waddy, KY. It made me think of that post you put up earlier about the guy walking across the causeway who attacked another person and started eating him. Wanted you to check out this story and let me know what you think here. It's a pretty unbelievable story.

Here's the news link

Viscious attacks on livestock

Here's my thread

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Jeez, that's some freaky stuff there! I'd guess it's something new, a genetic chimera, Mother Nature going berserk and creating new life, blending two species together as genetic damage from rising UV levels spreads across the world. Wolf-bear chimera? Wolf-human? Definitely a very smart predator of some kind. I'd like to see them catch one. And we should hope that there's not a breeding population of them out there in the wild reproducing and making more, but there could be.

Thanks for the reply, I quoted your reply on the other thread.

reply to post by Rezlooper


I gave my 1987 Bronco II to my brother a few
years ago; hasn't burst into flame but rather
burst a brake line a while back.

Does that count? I mean, it hasn't exploded, yet.

Originally posted by fever
reply to post by Rezlooper

 

I gave my 1987 Bronco II to my brother a few
years ago; hasn't burst into flame but rather
burst a brake line a while back.

Does that count? I mean, it hasn't exploded, yet.

Just give it some time. If there's copper in it and a battery with a charge then it's just a matter of time until it burns. Unless you have it stored inside your facility with your backup atmosphere, obviously. Oh, don't have one of those? Then it doesn't matter what happens to it, since you'll be dead from poison gas. Always look at the bright side of life, right? You might be dead BEFORE it burns. Your brother too!

jumpingjackflashhypothesis.blogspot.com...