Navigation Menu

Documentation

Introduction

It is important to realise that not all documents will support the theories and evidence on this website. In fact many have been produced by what we refer to as complicit organisations such as certain universities involved in the program and so-called scientific bodies such as the IPCC The Royal Society and the MET Office. A few people have accused us of hypocrisy or inaccuracy because a document in this section contradicts something we claim. We have not written most of them and simply provide you with a simple and easy place to access all relevant information, both for and against.

One of the most important claims of this website is that a vast array of disinformation is available online, from both official and unofficial sources, so the fact that some of these documents contradicts what we say is to be expected. We are not scared to show you some of  those items because we feel it is important for you to realise that they exists and why, and also because none of them stand up to scrutiny and so, if the reader takes the time to investigate fully, they actually bolster our case. There is only one reason why a faked document is produced – to try to mislead people or hide something.

The reason they are produced by complicit organisations, and in turn are harmful to our campaign, is because it is human nature for the average person to accept what they are told from official sources without question. Sadly this will always be an obstacle we face, and though not insurmountable in the long run, it makes life very difficult for us, even when we manage to undermine those efforts conclusively. In the mean time please use your intuition rather than simply discounting things because some government scientist told you so.

We will hopefully, in due course, analyse all the documents individually in the evidence section and clarify what we think about the information they contain. If we regards it as disinformation we will explain why and present any evidence to prove it if available.

Please do scrutinise them and feed back to us if you discover anything significant. It may be the case that flaws in our theories and evidence may be discovered, or on the other had, valuable evidence in our favour may come to light, as has been the case in some examples.

 

There is only limited content here so far, but lots more in the way as and when we can.

Feel free to download anything though please be aware that some content is from 3rd parties and may be subject to copyright restrictions.

You will need to have Adobe Reader installed to open these documents

 

 

Laboratory results

Human Tissue and Rain – Lab Tests 1

Biomed results ICP-OES

 

General

Contrail paper

BBC charter

CAA direction

Clean Air Act 1993

ENMOD

hamilton_final_15.04.2013

2006_chemtrails_vaccines

 

Scientific

Barium Toxicity

BARIUM AND BARIUM COMPOUNDS

 

The following are waiting to be categorised

EM_GeoE_Meeting_Report_final

No._13_-_Upper_Air_Measurements

Night Flights GovRep

North Sea Oil

Nightflights11

night.flight.final.report

nano food

ATC Guide

US3556444

strategy-response1

European ADS-B regulation

2013-ads-b-wam-leaflet

info – Copy

Talk notes

ATC Guide

Chapter9

DfT-CAA-Directions

LASER ENG print

Marine Aerosols

SN01252

MET FoI response 1

MET Con/Chem answer

MET Weather Data FoI Answer

Design and Management of Sustainable Built Environments

Making space for water

hairinfo

David Lim – Forest Row article – for press. upload

RegisterDT230792

RS-09 GE-the-climate

Royal Society Agenda 3.10.13

RENSE chemweb lab tests Venice

2006_chemtrails_vaccines

Clean Air Act 1993

MET Office comms April 2013

EU Directive Environmental access to information

Environmental Information Regulations 2004

 

 

 

 

A21

BHT

 

Intelligence and counter intelligence

full-spectrum-cyber-effects-final

Organized and Professional Disinformation Operations (Autosaved)

 

 

 

 

 

SRMGI

Wednesday-Plenary-Thought-Experiment-2

Wednesday-Morning-Plenary

Wednesday-Introduction-Thought-Experiment-1

Wednesday-Breakout-4-Thought-Experiment-2

Wednesday-Breakout-4-Thought-Experiment-1

Wednesday-Breakout-3-Thought-Experiment-2

Wednesday-Breakout-3-Thought-Experiment-1

Wednesday-Breakout-2-Thought-Experiment-2

Wednesday-Breakout-2-Thought-Experiment-1

Wednesday-Breakout-1-Thought-Experiment-2

Wednesday-Breakout-1-Thought-Experiment-1

Tuesday-Plenary-Goals-Concerns-and-Principles

Tuesday-Plenary-Discussion-Thresholds-and-Categories

Tuesday-Plenary-Discussion-Mechanics

Tuesday-Breakout-5-Goals-Concerns-and-Principles

Tuesday-Breakout-4-Thresholds-and-Categories

Tuesday-Breakout-4-Goals-Concerns-and-Principles

Tuesday-Breakout-3-Thresholds-and-Categories

Tuesday-Breakout-3-Goals-Concerns-and-Principles

Tuesday-Breakout-2-Thresholds-and-Categories

Tuesday-Breakout-2-Goals-Concerns-and-Principles

Tuesday-Breakout-1-Thresholds-and-Categories

Tuesday-Breakout-1-Goals-Concerns-and-Principles

Thursday-Discussion-Thought-Experiment-3

Thursday-Breakout-4-Thought-Experiment-3

Thursday-Breakout-3-Thought-Experiment-3

Thursday-Breakout-2-Thought-Experiment-3

Thursday-Breakout-1-Thought-Experiment-3

SRMGI-Mechanics-background-paper

SRMGI-March-22-24-Agenda-Final

SRMGI-International-background-paper

SRMGI-background-paper-Thresholds

Instructions-Thought-Experiment-3

Instructions-Thought-Experiment-1-Individual-Country-Focus

Instructions-Addendum-Thought-Experiment-1-Individual-Country-Focus