Yea, I felt he had a lot of holes in his info too. Nevertheless, there were a lot of interesting points that could lead one on to investigate on their own. I'll have to say, I'm curious about the Oak Ridge National Lab now. Where he lost me was when he was tying in the religious stuff. Not to say that that may not be a part of it, but it was like you said, stuck in there with chewing gum.
I'm wondering about his motive for doing this. Anybody got an idea?
]]>This Jim Phelps is the guy I mentioned on the Dan Winter thread as being a grandiose-delusional man trying very hard to sound sane. At least that was my impression upon reading that link you just posted (someone sent it to me a couple weeks ago).
As far as I can tell, he's not a government scientist and never was, but he's done lots of mainstream book reading on various science subjects, enough to throw around impressive terms and dress them down in sincere-sounding explanations. I call it the "scientist on Coast 2 Coast" technique. Nevertheless, the whole thing seems held together by chewing gum and is full of holes. I don't buy it.
I got suspicious enough to track down his original website because one thing that didn't make sense to me was, how could this guy come off as schizo and yet have a nicely formatted page for his article? Turns out the gargoylemechanic page was a repost on another site, reformatted. Here's one of Jim's original articles:
]]>So here is the information. See what you think. Please don't jump to conclusions after reading the first 10 pages. I've talked briefly to Jim via email. I'm still processing.
]]>Here is a related experiment to try, since "ed" mentioned homeopathy: use a radionics box to get the vibrational rate of distilled glasses of water. Then set some out on a clear day and test their rate again...then set the others out on a chemtrail day and get the rate. If there is a difference, then that says something. One could mark them to identify which glass is which, but cover the mark with tape and switch the glasses around so that one doesn't know which glass is which until after the rates are taken, then check the marks and see if the difference still remains. Also, if done properly, the rates of a chemtrails (even a photo of them) can be compared to known rates of chemical and biological substances to analyze what's in them.
I'm not too familiar with spectrum analysis of light but using such laboratory devices one could analyze sunlight on a normal day vs sunlight on a chemtrail day and see if if any particular colors/frequencies are accentuated or diminished.
]]>One way or another, it's not something I want to expose my skin or my eyes to.
then why on earth would he want to ingest it ?
]]>A buddy of mine uses the cloudbusters and they work. Thinking of getting one of my own.
Interesting article.
]]>Personally, I just want to learn to do what Stuart does, and look at the chemtrails, think "No!" and poof! watch it pop like a soap bubble and disappear. 
Would be cool, then we wouldn't have to worry about the aluminum, eh?
On a more serious note, that's very disturbing to realize that we could be breating the aluminum from the chemtrail fallout. It's something I try not to think about, because it's one of thoes helpless feeling situations.....
]]>I know this hypothesis seems impossible by modern physics (current science doesn't explain a lot come to think of it) but science must be based on repeatable observations rather than assuming we know everything. Thus, I implore you to offer this experiment to the community so that we can come to understand or disprove what may be an unexpected effect of chemtrails.
But what brings up my question? Being winter, I occasionally put a pot of soup or bowl of food outside in the cold when there is no room in the fridge. One day I was disappointed to find the vegetable soup, that had been so delicious only the previous night, had acquired a disturbing metallic taste to it. I would describe the taste as aluminium, so naturally I resolved to not leave food in metal pots.
The next time the taste of aluminium appeared it wasn't so easy to explain away. The food had not been made or kept in metal at all, but in a ceramic bowl. Comparing the circumstances with that of the prior incident, the similarities lept into my mind as the dinner conversation turned to the day's alarming level of chemtrails. Both dishes had been outside in the sun with transparent covers.
My experiences thereafter have been watchfully measured and suggest to me that chemtrails alter our light, posing risk to us and out environment. This is not something I want to believe and I think thats why I've put off this message. But the recent articles about a mysterious skin disease provoke me to action.
http://www.rense.com/general62/eend.htm
http://www.rense.com/general20/mys.htm
So, I invite people to test this themselves and report back.
Here's the experiment:
Try this on a bad chemtrail day, and also on a clear day, say, after a good rain.
Cook, say, a sweet potato, mash it and divide it into different bowls.
Cover some with a plasticwrap or glass.
Cover some with something opaque, like aluminium foil, metal or wood.
Maybe leave some uncovered too.
Leave them out all day in the sunlight and then do a taste test. (note: smokers and drinkers may have duller tastebuds)
If you get an aluminium taste on chemtrail days but not on clean days that incriminates the chemtrails.
If you don't get the taste in the shaded ones but do in the lighted ones then there is something wrong with our sunlight.
The uncovered ones can test for ordinary plummet of aluminium oxide molecules.
Yes, I would think that it is impossible for molecules to decend from the atmosphere and pass through solid glass. But my tongue tells me otherwise.
Perhaps we are seeing some sort of quantum tunneling over the sun's rays. Or, perhaps the aluminum oxide molecules in the chemtrails aren't passing through themselves but are simply "imprinting" their frequency on the food via sunlight, bringing out metallic characteristics. (The imprinting of sub-atomic energetic resonances is a serious matter to consider. Ask anyone familiar with homeopathy. -ed)
One way or another, it's not something I want to expose my skin or my eyes to.
I hope I'm proved wrong,
James