August 24, 2016
By Suzanne Maher
Bye Bye Blue Sky Rebuts UCI’s Study the Chem-trails are a Conspiracy Theory
Bye Bye Blue Sky felt the need to challenge the veracity of this study because clearly our scientists are not doing their jobs.
Thank you to Greg Pallen for his valuable input and contributions to this blog post.
Surveyed Scientists Debunk Chemtrails
Bye Bye Blue Sky wishes to challenge the validity of the research study that University of California, Irvine News released August 12, 2016 stating that there are internet sites that are promulgating “a pseudo-science conspiracy theory that the government, the military, airlines and others are colluding in a widespread, nefarious program to poison the planet from the skies”.
There have been recent admissions of the aerosol spraying, one such admission by former KLM pilot Willem Felderhof who attests to these weather modification programs. With admissions of this type from the inside, calling the obvious lingering grid patterns that are being witnessed worldwide a “pseudo-science conspiracy theory” is ludicrous, wildly irresponsible and reeking of a Manhattan Project-style cover-up.
This “research study” does not discuss the following points:
- The specific thermodynamics of persistent contrails and how exactly they are formed;
- Who are the 77 leading atmospheric scientists that were in this study, how the study and facts were presented, and who funded this study. The study claims that one scientist was aware of a secret large scale atmospheric program (SLAP), what were his findings? Should this information not have been included?
- Fundamental scientific facts to corroborate their position, only conjecture;
Climate scientist Ken Caldeira of Carnegie Institution of Science, a pioneer of geoengineering research who was also a contributor to this study, does not mention any of his extensive research of aerosol spraying. As a paid researcher of these programs, Caldeira claims “solar radiation management” is just in the discussion phase. Caldeira has been videotaped when he worked at Lawrence Livermore Lab nonchalantly discussing biological warfare and “putting pathogens in a cloud to rain down on your enemies”. Carnegie is heavily funded to research bio warfare methods and has been involved in bio/scientific genocide for decades.
You tube link from Patrick Roddie challenging Caldeira on his “pathogen in a cloud” statement – May 9, 2015
Link to Carnegie’s history;
The study suggests that these long -lingering trails are a result of increased air traffic and climate change (which is a consistent naturally-occurring undulating cycle over the ages) and is causing contrails to persist for longer than they used to. Increased air traffic WOULD NOT create grids in the sky unless specific thermodynamic conditions were met. These conditions are very high altitude of 27,000-43,000 feet, very cold temperatures of -40 to -62 degrees Celsius and high relative humidity over 68%, a condition called “super saturation over ice”. If these conditions are not present, then persistent contrails are not scientifically possible. This argument is a classic bait and switch, blaming the trails on “climate change” the very conditions the perpetrators themselves are deliberately and methodically creating through their geoengineering practices.
The scientists were said to have studied the four pictures below and stated the long pluming trails and erratic flight patterns and reasons for such as; combustion efficiency, different air temperatures, high sulfur or particle content and high flight traffic. They do not expound on these statements or why these visibly strange phenomena are occurring. Their arguments are not valid without scientific explanation.
Program (SLAP Study) Photos – August 12, 2016
Photo A –The study reports different combustion efficiency – How could two planes leave such short contrails, while another lays a trail thousands of feet long? Water vapor should dissipate approximately 20 plane lengths behind the aircraft. Furthermore, modern high-bypass turbofan jet engines are virtually incapable of forming contrails except under very distinct conditions. We should not be seeing persistent “contrails” like the ones in the study, much less the uniform grid pattern being witnessed worldwide.
PICTURE OF HIGH-BYPASS TURBOFAN JET ENGINE WHICH SHOULD NOT PRODUCE PERSISTENT CONTRAILS
Photo B – Study reports different humidity/ dry air –
With prevailing wind currents in the atmosphere, there should not be drastic localized differences in humidity that would create this stutter pattern. Furthermore, if the conditions of “supersaturation over ice” are not present, persistent contrails cannot form, it is scientifically impossible.
Photo C – Study reports moist air that is supersaturated –
How could 30 out of 90 “experts” come to the conclusion that these massive, billowing trails are the result of supersaturated air? Where is the evidence for this claim? How could they be privy to the altitude, humidity and temperature conditions in this photo? Their observation would appear to be conjecture as opposed to fact-based scientific evidence.
Furthermore, if this picture depicts supersaturated air, then why do we have live video from Tanker Enemy of aerosols being turned on and off while airborne witnesses (pilots?) refer to the spray as “chemtrails”?
Links below to you tubes clearly demonstrating the pilots on/off pattern of the spraying in mid air
2:48 Video from Tanker Enemy
30 minute Bye Bye Blue Sky Documentary by Patrick Pasin
Photo D – Study reports high flight traffic – The fact that five “scientists” would have concurred that this photo reflects high flight traffic demonstrates the ludicrous nature of this study. Jets do not fly in erratic circular patterns as pictured. The air traffic corridor never looked like this 20 years ago. Moreover, there are some low altitude trails in this photo which could not have formed without the required thermodynamic conditions for persistent contrail formation (temperature/altitude/humidity).
The study goes on to suggest that all collected samples are contaminated because they were collected in mason jars. This is a very thin argument. How would these scientists come to this overreaching conclusion? I myself have collected my samples in sterilized bottles specifically sent to me by the labs themselves. My samples tested positive for barium, aluminum and strontium. Are the hair samples that tens of thousands of people have tested (which show elevated levels of metals) also contaminated by the labs?
When one googles University of California, Irvine you will see that they have a Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Department. Let’s look at the Graduate Concentration of Environmental Engineering; the statement on the website of the co-author of this study, Steven Davis UCI associate member; and also two of the faculty member’s CV’s.
Graduate Concentration of Environmental Engineering
Environmental Engineering includes environmental air and water chemistry, environmental microbiology, combustion technologies, aerosol science, transport phenomena, reactor theory, unit operations and systems design, physical, chemical, and biological processes in relation to water and wastewater treatment, water reuse, pollutant fate and transport, waste disposal, the ecology of natural waters, mathematical modeling, energy systems, soil physics, fluid mechanics, hydrology, and meteorology.
Steven J. Davis, co-author of this study University of California, Irvine, Dept. of Earth System Science
“Satisfying global demand for energy, food and goods without emitting C02 to the atmosphere is a central challenge of the 21st century. My research is aimed at understanding the scale of that challenge and finding ways to meet it”.
Clearly Steven J. Davis is a “global warming/anthropogenic” proponent who is positing the demonization of CO2, a trace life-giving greenhouse gas.
Let’s be clear, CO2 is not the tail that wags the dog. 95% of all greenhouse gases are water vapor. Activists in the geoengineering movement will recognize this rhetoric, and also know the “carbon capture” industry is a multi trillion-dollar industry with so called “do-gooders scrambling for the feed”.
The firm Near Zero who also participated in this study has the same mission; “to achieve near zero emissions to transform the energy system”. Do we see a theme here?
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Department
Donald Dubdub, Ph.D. Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering;
Mechanical Aerospace Engineering Research Interests: Mathematical modelling of urban and global air pollution, dynamics of atmospheric aerosols, secondary organic aerosols, impact of energy generation of air quality, chemical reactions and gas-liquid interfaces.
Jasper Vrugt, Associate Professor, Ph.D. University of Amsterdam
Ecology, aerosol-cloud interactions, hydrometeorology, parallel computing, uncertainty quantification, data assimilation, parameter estimation, Bayesian statistics.
Dynamics of atmospheric aerosols/aerosol cloud interactions implies the practice of geoengineering; whereas secondary organic aerosols refer to forest fires, monsoons, volcanic eruptions and dust storms. Two very different aerosols and causations.
Based on the University’s curriculum, atmospheric aerosols are certainly taught in their courses, it would be most informative to know what exactly the faculty is lecturing on and why the students are taught aerosol sciences.
This article provided no substantive argument that our climate is NOT being manipulated, only conjecture, and a biased one-sided study by those who are cleverly pushing “climate change/anthropogenic global warming and carbon reduction, which will ultimately lead society straight into World Governance, carbon taxation and Agenda 21.
Let us also point out that many sciences and large social movements are directed by the same foundations and money that financed the eugenics movement in the early 20th century. Carnegie, the Rockefeller foundations, Ford, Mellon, Harriman, and Morgan money flowed into eugenics which led directly to ‘scientific racism,’ and ultimately the Holocaust in World War II.
As such, scientist Stephen Davis, a scientist benefitting economically from pushing CO2 reduction (follow the money) and Ken Caldeira of Carnegie, a geoengineer researcher/denier/bio-warfare researcher are not uncompromised and unbiased sources of reliable, balanced scientific information about the decimation of our skies from toxic nano aerosol spraying. Moreover, the tainted historical background of Carnegie and heavy involvement in their ongoing bio warfare research demonstrates their real agenda; the deployment of silent weapons for quiet wars and their “hiding in plain sight” eugenics agenda.
Our scientific community has failed us; not only in denying the deployment of these toxic aerosol programs, but revealing in a truthful manner what is being sprayed on us. They serve their masters; the Military Industrial Complex.
Link to the aforementioned article: