I'll review your material and comment, but let's be clear, a thread on the environment regarding GHG's is NOT the same as how 5G affects humans on a physiological level.
OIC!
<Std Disclaimer> I am a Petroleum Engineer. While the industry I work in tends to be sceptics regarding Climate Change, I am not. I believe that the science is over and what we are left arguing is the what level of impact is due to anthropogenic sources.
<Std Diclaimer 2> I am part of a startup company in the USA studying ways in which we can use GHG's for Enhanced Oil Recovery and/or Enhanced Coal Seam Gas Recovery with the view to sequester and store the GHG's permanently to reduce the impact of climate change.
Last edited by OICURMT; 22-09-2018 at 07:15 AM.
Reason: 2nd disclaimer
#17 netwolf, security is yet another matter. And mentioning Amazon's devices like Echo is necessary, yes. When their Alexa with camera and display was first reviewed on wallstreetjournal they reported that if you covered the camera with a Postit the device turned itself off and there was no setting to disable turn-off.
Meaning: Amazon's developers didn't even remotely think of the privacy concerns they need to be aware of and build their hard- and software accordingly. That's typical for the bunch of irresponsible people who are already occupying our lives with devices and software.
And that device was launched in 2017.. After the privacy scandals around NSA, Snowden, Facebook and Android (and more, if your professional horizon reaches further than mainstream news).
And regarding health concerns, as I already said, mobile devices have not been scrutinized deeply enough. Because of the same disinformation tactics we already know from BigTobacco and BigOil.
I'll review your material and comment, but let's be clear, a thread on the environment regarding GHG's is NOT the same as how 5G affects humans on a physiological level.
Just got back from vacation. Have not forgotten about this thread…. Where to start…
Reviewed the supplied information and I then authored a four-page diatribe and concluded that my response fell squarely in the TL;DR category. Sooo… better a do a pithy post into a single page.
Since this post is going to be critical of a particular narrative, I feel compelled to give reference to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail_conspiracy_theory as background for anyone interested in the overall point of view for most, if not close to all, people in the world.
Geo-engineering has been a subject for decades. I know someone (a researcher from Australia) who worked at JPL last year studying the potential for space mining (Geophysics). He spent a year trying to design how to shoot seismic on asteroids. Oddly enough, there is now an actual degree (https://space.mines.edu/) at the Colorado School of Mines (my alma mater). So, the concept of geoengineering has obviously progressed. I believe that soon, we will start to talk about terraforming as the next logical step to geoengineering.
Regarding the video… A couple of comments here.
1) You ask, “You believe Harvard, right?” Actually, no… an institution does not make comments, representatives of institutions do. Dr. Cottrell is not a representative of Harvard, he is a student and
2) I think we all need to have full disclosure here and recognize that Dr. Paul Cottrell is a Financial Analyst. He is currently getting a post-doctorate degree in Biology and pre-Med (https://www.linkedin.com/in/paulcottrell156/). The video you provided is from 2017, just as he entered Harvard. I suspect that he is only now being trained in the scientific method, so I suggest that you might want to reach out to him to see if he’s gathered any hard evidence since posting video or possibly changed his view on the subject.
It was difficult for me to follow Dr Cottrell’s narrative, as it was disjointed in some areas. He wanders from point to point while trying to sell a story that has clear gaps in his conclusions while trying to support his hypothesis. Overall, he is articulate, but lacks the direct Hypothesis, Experiment, Analyze, Conclude style debate required to convince people that his ideas are supportable.
That said, my response will be just as problematic, as I’m reviewing his video and therefore will be just as disjointed as I comment…
00:50 – Research focuses on reflective nature (i.e. albedo) of SoX, and an “Al particulate” and the third “I don’t remember the 3rd one, OH!, it’s a carbonate, it’s sodium carbonate, maybe”. This is very interesting to me in that 1) Jet-A does not contain any Aluminum compounds; 2) flue gases are classic SoX and NoX along with minor unburnt hydrocarbons (kerosene), CO2 and CO. The same thing that is produced by cars and 3) Sodium Carbonate is benign (I use it to regulate acidity and increase the pH of my spa).
02:10 – States, “I’ve been seeing a trend…” This is opinion unless he has data, which he states he does not.
02:40 – Claims to have seen a “shift in the planting seasons” earlier. He clearly states it’s “anecdotal evidence”. That said, believe it or not, his statement has a basis in fact, though his perception does NOT align with reality. (https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-length-growing-season). Note that he contradicts himself here stating “earlier” and then flips to “farther and farther” into the year. Once again, makes is difficult to ascertain what he is talking about.
03:46 – states that his observations are for North America and anecdotal. IMO, if you don’t take the time to do the research, then you have no hope in convincing me. Sticking to NA rather than viewing the climate as global is the same measuring urine in a bath tub versus a swimming pool… (I use this analogy a lot when it comes to explaining why understanding GHG in the context of climate change is important).
04:35 – He states that he is “not a climatologist”. This should have been enough for me to stop, but hey!, I’ve got time to waste!
05:16 – states this is a “multi-dimensional problem”, but let’s only look at the “terrestrial side” of this (he was discussing the ocean as a sink). Sorry, not good with respect to the scientific method if you ignore one of the most important items with respect to climate change and the environment.
06:45 – His statement indicates that he does not understand how much oxygen is really in the atmosphere. For the record, there is about 21% or 210000ppm, which overwhelms the current 400ppm of CO2, so that while his statement that there is “less oxygen” is factual (on a normalized basis), it’s irrelevant from a material point of view. His view that the “ratio” is important then a change from 340/210000 to 400/210000 is small. (i.e. bath tub vs swimming pool).
08:55 – His narrative changes to a potential for natural “ebb and flow” of ice ages as a cause for the surface changes along with solar activity and “magma moving closer to the crust” (considering my geology background, this one cracked me up).
10:38 – Talks about cloud seeding in Vietnam as the start of Geo-engineering for military purposes, CLEARLY states “chemtrails”. This is where I want to explain what a Phase diagram is, but I suspect that people will fall asleep.
12:00 – he clearly “remembers” what water vapor trails look like when he was a child vs what he sees now, which are “chemtrails” today. There is ample evidence that contrails (the correct term btw) have not changed much over decades (i.e. WWII photo’s as evidence when the first jets were flying around through the Korean and Vietnam wars).
13:20 – SKYNET?????
For the record, Jet-A fuel is a simple hydrocarbon, better known as Kerosene (with additives to prevent icing). I could explain what a phase diagram and steam tables are and give you an exact explanation as to why you see condensed water vapor trails in the sky and not toxic, exotic chemicals, but I think I’d lose a lot of people here and not make many friends. Note that chemicals are released a lot from airplane for use in agriculture, specifically “crop-dusters”.
Don’t mean to be so harsh, but my BIGGEST problem with society today is that for some reason, unknown to me, people have outsourced critical thinking.
Apologies to anyone I may have offended, but if you are going to come to any forum filled with sophisticated and intelligent people, you better be armed to the teeth. I for one am willing to be proved wrong. As an engineer (I also consider myself a scientist), I must concede this.
In closing, As Neil deGrasse Tyson once tweeted,
“To be scientifically literate is to empower yourself to know when someone else is full of ****.”
I'm really glad somebody took the time to debunk the video point-by-point. Sadly, it won't stop bunkum like this from spreading, but it's great that the evidence is laid out for those who care to read it.
On the subject of "chem-trails" - they have been around a lot longer than most people realise. The sky above London was full of them in 1940. The official explanation given by the British government was that these were just vapour trails left by the RAF and Luftwaffe aircraft in combat, but of course this was just an excuse to avoid panicking the already traumatised people of Britain with the much scarier news that the Nazis were using alien technology to spread all sorts of experimental chemicals over Britain.
[/conspiracy mode]
