Part II of
the 'Deep Shield' letters
source:
Brian Holmes (Part I of letters: http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/shieldproject.html)
http://www.holmestead.ca
...15. Could you, "Deep
Shield" - be described as a scientist or...?
Scientist is a good generic term. I do study and research in a
scientific manner. I carry papers and degrees. My official capacity
is in direct research of atmospheric issues in relation to pollutants.
I also create models of potential long-term effects of green house
gasses on the climate. Predict wind patterns, weather patterns,
etc.
I have spent a good many years working on the project calculating
the amount of material needed and creating models for dispersion
patterns. I work other members who know the chemicals used and
their interactions with the atmosphere, pollution and water vapor.
I am part of a team which itself is part of a larger team, which
is part of still a larger team. Government work with many chiefs
and levels above the workers.
16. Are you prepared to comment upon your personal motives
for sharing this information?
Not at this time, no.
17. Have you signed a non-disclosure or Secrets Act document
that specifically relates to this project?
Yes.
18. To your knowledge what categories of individuals officially
know of the Project and are expected to remain silent? For example,
my list of suspects includes government down to the county level,
military especially air force, meteorologists, health specialists,
mainstream media etc.
All those who know are expected to remain silent. All of those
who suspect are either faced with trying to prove the virtually
unprovable or are faced with good enough reasons to remain silent.
I would assume that this situation is worldwide and could be considered
one of the dangers of this project.
It was presented to me as a matter of national security. I can
see the reasons why there is a desire to repress the information
not that spraying is taking place but the hard little fact that
we are facing a period of human history which might be the end
of civilization.
19. Is the mainstream controlled media specifically ordered
to avoid any mention of chemtrails? If so, have you anything further
to add such as how was this done?
I would assume that the Media is controlled by its own desire
to make money from what it reports. Since there is enough debunking
out there, which says that contrails are part of the normal use
of jet engines in the atmosphere, this would leave a reporter
with very little to report unless there was solid evidence or
pictures or something that could not be explained away.
You must know by now all the debunking methods that have been
employed. The 'official' announcements are the media's main dish.
The rest they regulate to the realm of the National Enquirer.
20. What government agency or agencies control this program?
Is it under international control?
It is an international program. Many nations contribute in different
ways. Measures have been taken to insure that what is sprayed
over all countries is the same through triple blind deliveries;
which include not knowing where a certain canister will end up,
not knowing which aircraft a certain canister will be flown, and
not even knowing who (in military craft) will be piloting a craft
which has the purpose of spraying (Note: in today's world there
is usually a mixed crew of different nationalities flying any
one military aircraft on a Shield mission). I believe the Media
caught Canadians in Iraq recently when Canada's official say on
the matter was that Canada was not giving any support to the military
might.
The fact remains that there were Canadian military with the USA
forces. Some on aircraft carriers most being pilots. I think you
can connect the dots.
21. How is the project funded - who pays for it? Have you any
idea of the total direct operating cost? Also, does Canada make
a funding contribution for the activities in our skies?
Most governments tend to over charge themselves to cover for their
black operations (unofficial operations). That money comes out
of the collection of taxes. So in effect the taxpayers of the
world are paying for this project.
I would assume Canada does contribute funding to the Project.
Canada is one of the top nations contributing time, material and
funding to this project. Most of the Free World, the Western World,
has taken on most of the burden of the costs.
22. Is the Shield Project the only such aerial spraying program?
Is it the only project designed to avert ecological disaster?
Then yes. There are countless other projects that could be taking
place which include spraying of some sort or another. Pesticides
are usually sprayed. There has been great interest in weather
control such as bringing rain to arid regions and taking the punch
out of hurricanes and typhoons.
Weather control may be one of the final options left to us. Considering
the amount of global warming that has taken place. There is a
strong need to deflect a storm's fury, or to bring rain back to
those regions which have been suffering drought.
What Mother Nature has done for millions of years automatically
may now require mankind's hand to keep the schedule.
23. There are reports of four different chemtrail programs
and other "code" names. For example, see: Holmestead:
Chemtrails - what are they? Any comments?
It is possible that the Military does have a use for similar sprays.
I cannot speak for the Military. However, my own personal research
has come across these things as well. Are they possible? Yes.
Are they practical? Only in the small scale say over the battlefield,
or in the case of say the Iraq War, over Baghdad. Global application
would be far too expensive and would require an obvious flight
pattern of grids, circles and other heavy spray patterns.
24. Is all the spraying done using the "tank kits"
described earlier or are the KC-135R and KC-10 types filled to
the brim? Such aircraft have a load capacity of 200,000 pounds
or more for refueling missions.
No. Several types of craft are used. Commercial jet airliners
are used and they are not diverted from their flight paths to
do so. How the canisters and the spraying is done on this kind
of craft is unknown to me exactly. I do have my suspicions. I
know best that which is my field; this is not to say that we do
not talk around the water tank. So I know more than just my area
and am able to think the matter through to its logical end.
I do know that even all the commercial jetliners in use are not
enough to insure complete coverage all of the time. My computer
models require knowing how much material needs to be sprayed.
Certain conditions cause wide areas to suddenly (over hours) open
up in the Shield. Then and only then is mass spraying done - and
would be done with the most logical craft, a tanker.
Why not spray more from individual jetliners? That is one of the
problems. Jetliners do not carry much material (100 to 500 gallons)
because the material has to be spread out thinly.
Look at the kinds of material being used, aluminum, barium, titanium,
etc. Most are highly reflective; in some instances the material
is an absorber of gasses. In the case of reflection the desire
is to reflect X amount of heat and X amount of UV while still
maintaining acceptable (nominal) levels of UV and heat reaching
the planet's surface.
Life requires a certain amount of both UV and Heat too much will
kill - so will too little. The apparent amount looks like a lot
more than what is actually being sprayed per volume of air it
is covering. Most of the whitening of the sky is not the material
per se, but the collection of water vapor, which forms into suspended
ice crystals. The introduction of the material causes the water
vapor to collect like rain collects on individual particles of
dust.
Too much material would cause a "mud fall" of sorts
where the naturally occurring water vapor would precipitate carrying
the material with it.
Spraying is done in such away as to "layer" the material
through a volume that will allow an acceptable level of UV and
heat through along with all the other wavelengths of light. Photosynthesis
is the foundation of life on our planet.
Only when all the material is removed in a local area does it
require a massive spray, this is usually in the front of a weather
system, or after a heavy period of precipitation. Then a tanker
is flown, fully loaded.
25. Is there any truth in the story that some of the spraying
is done by jetliners with modifications in the "honey"
or waste compartment? For example, see mechanic story: Mechanic.
The technology used for spraying is rather simple. It requires
at least two tanks under pressure, each carries half of the mixture
which is sprayed at the same time forming a complete compound
which is designed to be lightweight (so as to be suspended for
longer periods of time).
There have been attempts to incorporate the materials in jet fuel,
however the material binds with unburned jet fuel, water vapor,
etc and does not have the added buoyancy of the polymer threads.
The end result is a spray that is less than half as effective
and is more dangerous since it can lead to sulfates, acids and
other mixtures, which are more lethal than the spray.
It is very possible that the "honey" compartment is
used. The amount of material needed is small compared to the payload
of any given commercial airliner.
However, there is a good deal of fuel tank that is not used. Airliners
only fuel their craft for the journey ahead of them; they rarely
top off the tank. This has become public knowledge in light of
9-11. It was this small fact that caused the terrorists to pick
pan-continental flights so they would have a plane fully loaded.
The majority of flights are short range and do not require the
full capacity of an airliners fuel tanks. Any adaptations needed
could easily be done during routine maintenance, and could be
easily explained away as being a modification for safety and-or
pollution controls.
This last is my own theory.
We can assume that any means possible to deliver the material
is tried. Independent nations may favor one way of doing so over
another.
26. Where are the official sources that state that a certain
number of people (worldwide?) will sicken and possibly die as
a result of the spraying? In other words, what *internal* studies
have been done on the health issues and who carried them out?
WHO (World Health Organization) carried out most of the studies.
Other nations have carried their own research on the matter. Some
have said the ill effects will be minimal - along the lines of
a million or so, while others have found the numbers to be far
higher - 3 to 4 billion.
Some of the organizations include the CDC and independent labs.
We are dealing with a situation where the amount of contamination
is estimated to be far higher than what would normally take place
but is far lower than historical instances of industrial contamination.
This is important to note, the only real history we have with
barium/aluminum/titanium etc. contamination is through factory
workers, miners, etc, who receive a far greater dosage of the
material than what is to be experienced by the populace under
the Shield.
The amount of spray is very small compared to the volume of the
space that is covered. Most of the harmful chemicals that are
used are being dissipated over vast areas. Near coastal regions
the fall out is not reaching land at all, but is being carried
out to the oceans. The addition of polymers to make the material
remain suspended in the air longer means that less material is
being used.
Today the material used and its application is nothing like in
the early days when it was sprayed in greater quantities and settling
far faster to be inhaled by all.
The accepted Estimated Casualties (from WHO) is 2 billion over
the course of 6 decades. The majority will be either the elderly,
or those who are prone to respiratory problems. These numbers
are based on the current estimates of the general health of the
population, the average age and the occurrence of respiratory
problems as a health issue. All are estimates since there are
no solid numbers to work with.
27. Could you summarize the root causes of the initial destruction
of the atmosphere that requires this "repair" work?
Did it perhaps result in part from fluorides released/produced
by the nuclear weapons programs?
In a word - Industry. Most fail to understand that the products
we use, wear and live with are made in a manner that dumps CFC's
and green houses gasses into the atmosphere. There is no one single
causative in this issue. It goes way back to the Industrial Revolution
and the use of coal to power steam engines. Since that time we
have consumed greater and greater energy resources, dumping the
waste where ever we wanted.
Up until very recently refrigeration was a big contributor, imagine
all those hundreds of millions of households that owned and operated
freon cooled refrigerators from 1940 to 1970. Not just one refrigerator
per household, but over the course of time often multiple freon
units. This doesn't include the various air conditioner systems
or industrial refrigeration systems.
For a long period when the refrigerator or air conditioner unit
was replaced, the old one was taken to the dump and thrown into
the heap - the freon was free to escape and make its way up into
the stratosphere to eat away at the ozone layer.
You can add to that list. Think of all the cars that had air conditioners,
think of all those hair spray cans with their propellant gasses
- the amount of those alone were enough to do great damage.
Styrofoam is another industry and product that has contributed
to the problem. In the scheme of things atomic energy has contributed
little compared to the consumer goods that have been manufactured
during the past century.
Think of all the cars on the road today. In the late 1970's smog
controls started getting stronger. Think of all the pre-1978 cars
on the road - they are still producing a good many chemicals that
leech into every corner of the globe.
28. Have you any comment on the use of so-called "CloudBusters"
based upon the theories of Wilhelm Reich? For an example of this
see: CloudBuster.
I could go on for hours about the particular errors of this site.
Let us just cut to the chase: I seriously doubt that this machine
does as it is reported to do. I could be wrong, but then I do
not work with alternative energy sources such as Orgone energy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Points to Ponder: Conroy Penner, British Columbia.
Here is the second item mentioned above:
Conroy Penner, of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada contacted
me directly with his story. He told me that some years ago
he used to work for a certain company in Western Canada and along
with another person who was a qualified aerospace welder/fabricator
he was assigned to work on construction of some special spray
equipment for the United States Air Force.
The workers were told that the USAF contract involved equipment
to be used to spray insects at airforce bases in the States.
The spray systems incorporated exotic alloys and specially machined
parts with large holding, pressure and surge tanks along with
pumps. Penner became suspicious of the actual purpose of
the whole project as, in his opinion, things simply did not "add
up". He resigned after there were confrontations with
the US military people and the management over the true purpose
of the equipment.
Penner provided this photograph, that was taken in 1988 of some
finished spray equipment on a flat bed trailer. There are
parts carts in the foreground.
The description states that the green tank sections are coated
aluminum and the others are stainless steel for certain other
chemicals. The smaller tanks are for the solution for purging
the system. The large tanks are some 15 feet long and approximately
3 feet in diameter. The box seen at the right side of the
photograph is the control panel, and the plumbing and pumps are
underneath the tanks. It is said that these units were designed
for use with Hercules C-130 aircraft and it is understood that
in total eleven systems were to be made, this being the first.
I have on hand many other specifics from Penner but that is the
general outline. All of this took place in 1988/89.
Comments: There are obviously some problems with this -
it would be great to have the exact dates along with the names
of the company management involved. Also the names and rank
of the US military personnel involved is lacking.
As for the equipment itself - it looks much as if it could be
ordinary aerial spraying systems - that is because indeed it may
be just that with suitable modifications for the specialized USAF
requirements. At this time the aerial spraying programme
(chemtrails) was in the early stages of experimental development.
Certainly at first it was reported that the C-130 was seen being
used for aerial spraying (of unknown substances) and only later
were the large refuelling tankers seen spraying "chemtrails".
Further comments: Added 26 March 2003 - is an addition from
(and confirmed by) the source of the main item above.
The canisters that are shown above are similar to what is known
to be incorporated into this programme.
Two large ones are carried, one carrying one part of the chemical
mix, the other carrying the other part, when combined they form
long polymer chains - threads if you will. Even the green
tint finish is typical.
However, the way it is understood here, is that the small tank
provides the propellant (compressed gas) which is released into
the larger tank. Much like a large aerosol can, except the
compressed gas is stored in a separate tank which is much stronger,
and able to sustain a far greater pressure than a larger tank.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are ongoing efforts to confirm and clarify certain aspects
of all of the above information. Updates will be made when
any new material is available.
Holmestead.ca does not necessarily endorse the views expressed
in this web page. We present this in the interests of research
and for the relevant information we believe it contains relating
to the aerial spraying of unknown substances commonly referred
to as chemtrails.
At 26 March 2003 some updates have been made and again 4 April
2003.
You are invited to contact us at the "Holmestead".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return to: Holmestead
chemtrail page
------------------------------------------------------------------------