Personally, I flatly refuse to engage professionally with chemtraillers.
You'll get nowhere. I just block them.

You can direct people to a debunk website and say you'll block them if they
contact you again.

Personally, I get on with many of them fine. I'll happily chat to them
socially at conferences and stuff.

A

On 13 Nov 2017 13:16, "Douglas MacMartin" <[email protected]> wrote:

> I don’t know if this was a good idea or not to respond bluntly to Dane.
> The right answer is probably to just delete all of the garbage emails,
> since responding generally only brings more.  Though my inbox is kind of
> filled with crap from these folks anyway, so can’t get worse, right?  I
> guess some people thought that congress holding a hearing was proof that
> the US government was deploying geoengineering.
>
>
>
> (Last time I interacted with Dane, he edited my emails to remove my
> answers to his questions, then posted them on his website to show that I
> refused to answer his questions.  And he also edited out all the
> hate-spewing nonsense from his own emails to make it look like he was
> charming and I was a jerk.  Which is why my conclusion is that he knows
> full well that he’s making stuff up.)
>
>
>
> *From:* Douglas MacMartin [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Monday, November 13, 2017 8:08 AM
> *To:* Dane Wigington <[email protected]>; ShadowsFall1 <
> [email protected]>
> *Cc:* [email protected]; [email protected]
> *Subject:* RE: Geoengineering
>
>
>
> Ah, Dane.  You are an odd character.
>
>
>
> Anyway, you have precisely the same odds of exposing me for a climate
> engineering coverup as I do of exposing you for starting world war one, and
> for precisely the same reason.
>
>
>
> So, if you have any integrity left in you at all, you should actually post
> this on your website this time, unlike the last time where you deliberately
> removed any information from my emails that would expose you for what you
> are, and blocked me from commenting on your website to correct the
> information there.
>
>
>
> 1.      All aircraft exhaust contains water vapour (a byproduct of
> combusting hydrocarbons) and particulates.  In the right conditions these
> form contrails, as anyone with access to the internet can learn quickly (I
> think persistent ones are about 15% of the time, if I recall right).
> Anyone who thinks that high bypass ratio engines are somehow immune to this
> doesn’t understand contrail formation (it’s about the same as saying red
> cars don’t need gasoline).  So, hypothesis #1 is that clouds are made of
> water, and hypothesis #2 is that there is some vast conspiracy involving a
> few hundred thousand people; I’ll let you judge for yourself which is more
> likely.  Further, taking pictures of contrails doesn’t prove that they
> aren’t contrails any more than taking pictures of a tree proves it isn’t a
> tree.  So… zero evidence presented here, lets move on.
>
> 2.      People have found contaminants in soil.  Ok… and the connection
> is?  If you claim that anything found in soil could only have come from a
> deliberate coverup and no other cause, you should apply your own logic to
> acorns.  I don’t know where things like barium come from, my guess would be
> industrial pollution, but I don’t know.  So… zero evidence presented here
> (and I’m not sure what this has to do with anything else anyway), lets move
> on.
>
> 3.      There are patents and previous programs in weather modification,
> which Dane has successfully found (they are all public, after all, so it
> doesn’t take much research to find them).  Yup, we all agree.  I have no
> idea if any of it still goes on in the US or not, I know China still does.
> (Spraying things like silver iodide to seed clouds and make it rain, I’ve
> been told it doesn’t really work.)  So… nothing new here, and zero evidence
> presented that this has anything to do with climate engineering.  I’m not
> sure what the connection is supposed to be here, or what the point of
> finding these patents was supposed to be, since there’s never any
> connection made with climate engineering.  So lets move on…
>
> 4.      So finally, climate engineering.  The idea you appear to be
> trying to connect is the idea that you could put aerosols (most likely
> sulfate) into the stratosphere (say 60000 feet, where the lifetime of
> aerosols is years instead of weeks) to cool the global climate.  Yup, I do
> research in climate models to better understand that.  As do a number of
> other people.  It’s all publicly available on my website.  Some great
> papers came out last week, in fact, anyone can go read them and learn what
> I do.  Not obviously a good idea, but depending on what happens with
> climate change, maybe it might help.  And the connection with the
> aforementioned weather modification is… ?  Unfortunately, Dane presents
> zero information on this and hopes his readers never notice.  Doesn’t
> comment on the fact that the low-lying clouds in weather modification
> aren’t at the same altitude as contrails and sure aren’t at the altitude of
> the stratosphere.  Doesn’t comment on how we could get things to the
> stratosphere (technically I think it is feasible, but no aircraft today can
> get there and deliver a payload, so no-one needs to worry that this is even
> feasible.)  Doesn’t comment on the fact that contrails actually warm the
> planet, and don’t persist very long (nothing in the troposphere does), so
> that would be a stupid way to do climate engineering, so he must presume
> we’re both covering things up and insanely stupid.  I don’t know if Dane
> has ever read anything on the subject of climate engineering, because you
> sure wouldn’t know it from the website.  Doesn’t comment on the fact that
> sulfate aerosols, if some day someone ever chose to put them in the
> stratosphere and figured out how to get them there, would disperse, so
> wouldn’t look like a visible streak in the sky anyway, and you wouldn’t be
> finding things like barium as a result, since that would be a pretty stupid
> thing to use to reflect sunlight.  Bottom line: Dane has never ever
> produced even a logically coherent implication connecting stratospheric
> aerosol climate engineering to the previous three things or to any real
> program.  Nor will he ever do so, because there isn’t any evidence to
> produce.  So I’m not sure what there is to debunk here; this is about like
> asking Dane to debunk the claim that he started world war one.  Claiming
> that the existence of weather modification back to the 60s “proves” that
> people are currently putting aerosols into the stratosphere is about like
> pointing out that sneezing has been going on for thousands of years,
> therefore people are deliberately putting sulfate into the stratosphere.
> Huh?  How, exactly, does one make that leap of logic?  Other than both of
> them involving the atmosphere?  (As I pointed out to one person, sneezing
> might even be more closely related, because at least it involves
> aerosols…)  I can’t debunk anything here because there isn’t anything to
> debunk.
>
>
>
> Dane, you know you don’t need to keep the charade up with me, since I
> already caught you lying the last time we interacted.  The question I have
> for you is, what’s in it for you?  Is this about your ego?  Are you making
> money off of this somehow?  Do you think it’s just a giant colossal joke
> you’re having, like the people who made the crop circles in England?  The
> people who read your website think you’ve done research and haven’t noticed
> that you haven’t actually put together a logically coherent train of
> thought.  If I accuse you of starting world war one, everyone knows I’m
> being silly, but when you accuse me and my friends of crimes, there’s at
> least a handful of people who aren’t able to evaluate the evidence for
> themselves and actually trust that you are a reputable source of
> information.  Some fraction of the people who read your website are
> wonderful well-meaning people who care deeply about the planet.  But some
> of them are the most vile hate-spewing people I’ve ever encountered in my
> life, and I know people who have received credible death threats.  So you
> might think this is all fun and games, but eventually someone will get
> hurt; you need to start taking responsibility for your actions.
>
>
>
> doug
>
>
>
> *From:* Dane Wigington [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>]
> *Sent:* Sunday, November 12, 2017 9:28 PM
> *To:* ShadowsFall1 <[email protected]>
> *Cc:* [email protected]; [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: Geoengineering
>
>
>
> Yes, Brian, Mr. MacMartin (MacMynowski) will yet be exposed for his part
> in the criminal climate engineering coverup, wait and see.
>
> On Nov 12, 2017, at 3:43 PM, ShadowsFall1 <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Mr. McMartin,
>
>
>
> I recently witnessed your testimony during the November 8th, 2017,
> hearing of the US House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, with
> regard to geoengineering & solar radiation management programs.  For some
> strange reason, all participants seemed to be under the assumption that
> solar radiation management has not been underway for decades.  Yet
> government documents, lab tests from around the world, and video footage
> prove that jet aircraft have been spraying our skies with toxic heavy metal
> particulates for many years.
>
>
>
> During the hearing, you make the following statement:
>
>
>
> *"there is still considerable uncertainty as to the side effects and risks
> [of geoengineering] that will require focused, goal-oriented research that
> could take decades"*
>
>
>
> Yes Mr. McMartin, you are correct on this point, without question.
> Unfortunately, such research has already occurred in the sense that we have
> all been used as lab rats, as these programs have persisted for at least
> two generations already.  The results have been catastrophic, with
> neurodegenerative diseases (among many other illnesses) soaring off the
> charts.
>
>
>
> Significant peer-reviewed literature already exists proving that aluminum
> (the primary element named in geoengineering patents) causes demyelination
> of the central nervous system, resulting in neurodegenerative diseases such
> as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, ALS, multiple sclerosis, and others.  Your
> actions are allowing these diseases to be forced upon populations of the
> world.  Their blood is on your hands.  The blood of your own children,
> family, and loved ones will also be on your hands as you watch their health
> deteriorate along with your own.  Ask yourself if playing your part in this
> theatrical performance is worth such an outcome.
>
>
>
> The following documentary, in the first five minutes alone, contains
> enough evidence to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt these programs have
> already been deployed for some time:  https://www.youtube.com/
> watch?v=JZfEiiKTTbw
>
>
>
> When the masses fully awaken to the damage that has been done to their
> planet and health without their knowledge or consent, they will rout out
> those responsible.  You will be among them.  You will be tried as an
> accomplice to crimes against humanity.
>
>
>
> If you do not change course and choose to admit these programs are real
> and ongoing, you will either go down with the rest of us as Earth's life
> support systems fail, or you will be held accountable once this issue gets
> exposed.  Neither outcome suits you.  Choose wisely.
>
>
>
> Brian
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com/> Secure Email.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "geoengineering" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to