From: Andrew Johnson
Date: 2007-07-05 15:34:28
UK Agencies Deny Evidence of Widespread Illegal Aerosol Operations Derbyshire, UK Following the submission of a report, backed by over 20 signatories from diverse backgrounds, detailing widespread illegal and unacknowledged aerosol spraying from aircraft, UK agencies have ignored or denied the significant data it presented. Copies of the report were sent to UK Greenpeace, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), The Royal Air Force, DEFRA and, sometime after, to the UK World-Wide Fund for Nature, challenging them to investigate the data themselves. Four responses were received and all of them have denied the basic science presented in the report, which was backed up by the clear evidence. (PR Web) 5th July 2007 An independent lay researcher, with a background in Software Engineering, from Derbyshire, UK, has continued to try and draw attention to the report he compiled which documents ongoing illegal aerosol spraying activities which could be affecting our climate, our health or both. In May 2007, a previous Press Release (www.prweb.com//relea…) described how he had sent copies of this report to several UK Agencies. Andrew Johnson said that, It has been an interesting exercise. Though the responses from official bodies have been largely as expected, I have been gratified and surprised by the response of a number of people from all around the world. Since submitting the report in May 2007, Johnson said that he has received responses from DEFRA, The Department of Transport, the UK World-Wide Fund for Nature and the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). He said The response from DEFRA was a 1-page flat denial, stating that what I was describing was ordinary contrails. They did not refer to any sections of the report, nor did they attempt to explain any of the data it presented. I had already included in the report that I would not accept such a flat denial and suggested that, if that was the sort of response they were intending to make, then they would be better sending nothing. This is another strong indication they did not even read the report. The response came from the Customer Contact Unit and Johnson said I wrote back to them explaining again that a simple denial type of response was not acceptable. I also wrote that I did not consider myself a customer of DEFRA after all, I hadnt bought anything from them. Johnson said that he was surprised to receive a response from The Department of Transport, I did not send a copy to the Department of Transport (DoT), but in their response they said that the report had been forwarded to them for comment by DEFRA Ministers. The DoT response was by far the most comprehensive, and referenced one specific section of my report, so it seemed they had actually read it. They included reference to a Scientific Paper about Persistent Aircraft Trails, written in 2005 by Professor Ulrich Schumann of the Institute of Atmospheric Physics. I studied this report in some detail and could not really find anything that was specifically relevant to the data in my own report such as how grids and parallel lines are formed. The Schumann Paper talks about contrail formation being possibly linked to cirrus cloud formation, but states there is no proven link between them. It does indeed discuss persistent “contrails” but does not explain why they form and the duration of their persistence is not discussed in detail or with any empirical data. In particular, my attention was drawn to 2 figures in the report: the standard contrail duration of maximum 2 minutes (with which I have no argument) and also the discussion of regions of ice supersaturation. It states that ice supersaturation in the atmosphere may be the cause of persistent contrail formation, but no firm link is documented or established. Indeed, a figure of 150 km is quoted for the maximum size of a region of ice supersaturation. However, I have measured chemtrails that are over 300 km long. Johnson explained that, after reviewing Prof Schumanns Paper, I e-mailed a copy of my report, along with these and other comments to Professor Schumann, but so far, I have received no response. Johnson responded to the DoT and CAA asking that, if their assertions were correct and the chemtrails were just contrails, it must mean that the picture of the grid he took in 2005 and the 42 aircraft he recorded leaving persistent trails over a period of 2½ hours on Feb 4th 2007 must be ordinary air traffic. He therefore asked if they could please supply flight data for these days? As I have videoed the actual aircraft from 4th of Feb and have the files time-stamped on a disk, I can prove they flew over the place where I was. I have received no response to this request so far. There has been interest and support expressed from around the world, Johnson has found. “During the week after I first posted the report, I received a number of complimentary messages from around the world, which was a pleasant surprise. It seems that more people are aware of and concerned about this issue than I thought”. Brian from Ontario, Canada also contacted Andrew with information regarding chemtrail identification, I have put together this webpage www.holmestead.ca/ch… for people in the USA which helps them to identify Chemtrails. One important consideration, for example is that most commercial aircraft are tracked by the FAA within the U.S. Other countries may have similar tracking programs and in turn make that tracking data available to the public via tracking programs such as ‘FlightAware’ and ‘Flight Explorer’ in near real time. If the aircraft that you have observed do not show up on these tracking programs then you must assume that they are exempt from being tracked. Only military type aircraft, and some Government aircraft are exempt from tracking. That should cause many questions to be asked as it is against FAA regulations as well as military flight regulations for any large body jet aircraft to conduct operations, manoeuvres, or training exercises over populated civilian areas without notification by the Secretary of Defence ninety days prior to any such operation – and only then with the express permission of the Governor(s) of the affected state(s), unless National Security is at issue. Johnson said I was grateful that Brian has contacted me with this information – I have come across a similar tracking system which is available in the UK called the SBS-1 but this is quite expensive to buy. John from Australia said I have been following this issue for some time and have been videoing our local skies for 3 months I think the Greens really need to look at this but so far here it has fallen on deaf ears and the other parties deny it. Susan from Arizona also contacted Johnson to say I have tracked [chemtrails] here in northern Arizona for the past two years, where skies are normally a bright, clear blue (or at least they used to be) for most days of the year. The chemtrails have increased and become far worse over the past several years, along with extreme changes in local climate and environment. Respiratory problems are virtually epidemic and long-lasting. James from Exeter said I agree 100% with your views and conclusions. I have taken digital camera pictures of these unmarked aircraft spraying overhead, sometimes as many as thirty or more aircraft in a very short time, spraying in a grid pattern it seems, and have looked up some mornings to find an X marks the spot in the sky overhead – looks like a St. Andrews cross. I have a large pair of binoculars 80 x 20’s , but even with these there are no markings on these aircraft. I have seen a couple of aircraft with what look like extra tanks under the fuselage. So, yes we are being sprayed. I’m so pleased to see someone that is voicing the concerns I’ve had for a while now. John from Kelso (Scotland) also wrote to say Chemtrails first caught my attention after reading an article in about 1998/99, and to be honest at that time in the UK I was not seeing any, so I just dismissed the idea as something that was happening in the US. In 2002, I was leaving my nephews house in North Shields Tyne & Wear to come home and from the main road near the Tyne Tunnel and I could see in the distance a huge X in the sky. I have since taken many photos and videos of this phenomenon. Rosalind from California wrote We believe, that the program here in Northern California and Arizona dates back to 1988 or 1989. We believe that there may have been experiments prior to this date… however, technology and funding became available on a massive scale in the late 1980s. Andrew Johnson added Rosalind also kindly sent quite a few related documents that she has obtained, though I simply have not had chance to study them yet. Caroline, a Financial Consultant, from Surrey, UK also described her own thoughts and experiences, I do not believe that any government-sponsored scientist has or will be sanctioned to look into all the evidence relating to chemtrails with the depth that you, I and many other private individuals have. Any scientists who may feel that chemtrails should be investigated would, I think, have to consider the 80 untimely and unexplained deaths of some of the worlds top scientists that have taken place since 1994. DEFRA has not and will not act impartially and has, I consider, erroneously decided to accept scientific discussion as fact rather than theory. One must wonder why there was not one time lapse experiment undertaken (or reported on if undertaken) when this economical way of confirming facts could quickly turn a theory into a proven point. I do feel that time is of the utmost importance with regards to halting these chemtrails, at least until a full and open public enquiry has taken place. Mark, a Rail Worker in the West Midlands, has recently written an article regarding his observations about the Chemtrailing activity in which he says, During the summer of 2006, my attention was directed to unusual cloud formations that were becoming a frequent and alarming feature of the daytime skies over the Wolverhampton area of the West Midlands, UK where I live. On a sunny Saturday afternoon in July 2006, I actually witnessed the entire vista was filled with criss-crossed and checkerboard patterns constructed of thick, milky white lines of cloud. I have been an aviation enthusiast for as long as I can remember, and maintain what I consider to be a good working familiarity with most types of civilian and military aircraft. The aircraft I saw appeared to be of three types, two larger types of the KC-135 (a derivative of the Boeing 707) and Boeing KC 767 (the military tanker version of the Boeing 767) varieties, and a smaller and faster type which recalled the configuration of a McDonnell Douglas MD-80. These aircraft were all flying at high speed, and initially deposited thin, white trails in their wakes. It was also patently obvious that the patterns visible above were being constructed to some kind of design. It is therefore clear that a wide range of people are aware that the spraying is going on, and basic science proves it is really happening. The question has to be asked, then, how do we proceed and obtain answers to has authorised this spraying and what is its purpose? In summary, Johnson comments, I see this as a stage in the process of getting both Governmental Organisations and Non-Governmental Organisations to look at this issue realistically and responsibly. The research of many people and the report I compiled proves the issue is real, even though we don’t know who is responsible for the spraying. Anyone who has an interest in protecting our environment should be looking at this issue and asking questions. The official responses I have received so far have done nothing, realistically, to refute or correct any of the data or overall conclusions I included, disturbing though they are. Perhaps the main problem is that it is difficult for us all to accept, in the face of everything else we are told (about things like global warming, for example), that something like this is really going on. I think we must therefore continually apply pressure in various places so that we can get more answers. I strongly encourage everyone to try and do something to increase awareness of this. Write to government and environmental agencies (especially if you are a member) and send them copies of the report, or any other data on Chemtrailing which you feel is important.” Most of the responses that Andrew Johnson has received, both official and unofficial, can be viewed online here: www.checktheevidence… or using this shorter link: tinyurl.com/yugavz The original report submitted can be viewed, online at www.checktheevidence… or using this shorter link: tinyurl.com/2w8ytk/ Johnson actively encourages all interested parties to contact him for any required clarification or further information required.