Hugh,
In the 2 "cloudbusters" that I have built, one is with copper tubes and the other is wilth metal conduit. There may be an optimal metal (copper) but I believe that most any metal will work. One fellow in Africa made one with rebar and it worked.
I have read that the strongest effect is with groups of 3 or 5 cloudbusters. I have one more to build. The more crystals in each tube, certain magnets in the base, all thede things effect more power. Intent is a large part of the accomplisment also. Since they attract moisture if it is in the area it is useful to water the tubes on a daily basis.
I have a copy of Don Croft's instructions for building a cloudbuster and could fax to you if you like, give� me a number.
Dwayne
Do you Yahoo!?
<http://rd.yahoo.com/webhosting/mail_tagline/evt=7748/*http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/wh3/prod/>Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
Dear Dwayne,
My Fax number is 706 745 6056.
I'm hoping we can agree on some name other than cloudbusters for these disorganizational energy remediation devices. Chembusters I like, and it has a closeness with the use of the term cloudbuster, as a tool to break up chem trails. But toxbusters, reorganizers, or something more poetic etc. might do in some circles. It wouldn't hurt to have two or three names just as long as we don't muddy the waters by borrowing a term that has been in use for something else low this past half century, especially something rather similar but different. That has been a real tactical error so far, as it is guaranteed to lead to miscommunication, misunderstanding and misemotion.
Best wishes,
Hugh
Visit our website at: www.unionag.org
