In this conversation, Ariana Masters, an anthropologist and environmental journalist, discusses the controversial topics of chemtrails and cloud seeding. She explains the differences between the two, delves into the scientific evidence surrounding chemtrails, and highlights the potential health risks associated with aerosolized chemicals. The discussion also touches on the implications of government transparency, public perception of conspiracy theories, and the future of weather modification practices. Wellness Unmasked is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Tuesday & Friday.
Learn more about Arianna, Chemtrails, & Cloud Seeding HERE
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome to Wellness on Masks, where we peel back the
layers on health science and the world around us. I'm
your host, doctor Nicole Sapphire, and today we are diving
into a topic that stirs up some concern, confusion, and
a huge amount of controversy. And it recently stormed its
way into the mainstream news cycle following the tragic Texas floods.
When reports surface that cloud seating had taken place just
(00:25):
days before the deadly weather event. People across the country
started asking what is really going on in our skies?
From reportedly harmless jet contrails versus the harmful chem trails
to the real world science of cloud seating and weather modification.
We're going to unpack the facts and talk about the
fears with someone who has deeply researched this. And then
(00:50):
there's just a whole nother layer here, this growing concern
of what some people call the secret large Scale Atmospheric
Program or SLAP. This is a alleging that the government
and elites are conducting covert aerosolt spraying operations on a
global scale. Now, while these claims have been widely dismissed
(01:11):
by the scientific community and the government, they continue to persist,
and they're fueled by an era of increasing public distrust
in institutions, tech, and government. Joining me today is Ariana Masters.
She's an anthropologist, environmental journalist, speaker, and an advocate for
scientific transparency. So, whether you're a skeptic, a scientist, or
(01:34):
simply just someone trying to make sense of these headlines
like me, this is a conversation.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
You don't want to miss.
Speaker 1 (01:43):
And joining me today is Areana Masters, an anthropologists, environmental journalists, speaker,
and an advocast for scientific transparency. So now, whether you're
a skeptic, a scientist, or just simply someone trying to
make sense of these headlines, this is a conversation you
do not want to miss.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
Areana.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
I'm so excited to have you here today. Thanks so
much for being on Wellness on Mass.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
Thank you for having me. This is so much fun.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
So I just want to do the you know, the
bird's eye view right now? Can you just break it down?
What exactly are chem trails? And how did you know?
Speaker 3 (02:16):
What?
Speaker 2 (02:16):
People consider?
Speaker 1 (02:17):
It? Still a theory gain so much traction online.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
So the thing is there's this, there's cloud seating, and
then there's chem trailing and Honestly, in many ways they
are very similar because kem trail just means a chemical trail,
which cloud seating essentially, that's what that is. You know,
let's focus on Let's focus on kem trails first, because
cloud seating is real, but there is still some question
(02:41):
from people about the whole chem trails.
Speaker 2 (02:44):
So I consider cloud seating kem trails as well.
Speaker 3 (02:47):
But yes, when you talk about kem trails, people are
typically referring to very high altitude trails, you know, like
over over twenty thousand feet up. Cloud seating usually occurs
below two feet between ten and twenty thousand.
Speaker 2 (03:01):
Feet up.
Speaker 3 (03:04):
Trails that comes from I mean, I'm sure you've heard
about patents. You know, we can talk about patents all
day long. There are so many patents. But cloud seating
they talk about that is, you know, just dispersing silver iodide,
which is which encourages rainfall right and and snow as well.
(03:26):
You can also use it to mitigate hail and disperse fog.
But when it comes to kem trails, you know, they
do a very good job.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
At trying to differentiate between the two.
Speaker 3 (03:39):
You know, kem trails has this so like super crazy
negative connotation and anything online when it refers to kemtrails.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
When you google can trails.
Speaker 3 (03:48):
It's all negative and it will and it will say,
you know, it's a it's government controlled conspiracy and all that,
and to some degree it might be totally true. But
the primary differentiation between cloud seating and chemtrails are the
materials being used and how disclosed the project is and
(04:09):
what the reason is behind the program.
Speaker 1 (04:10):
Right, well, you just touched on something which, now that
you know, I'm trying to educate myself a little bit
on chemtrails is what people call slap for the whole
secret large scale atmospheric program.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
Have you heard of slap before?
Speaker 3 (04:27):
You know, I haven't looked into it much, but I've
definitely heard people use the phrase a lot.
Speaker 1 (04:31):
So, you know, the knee jerk response from the quote
unquote experts, whoever they may be, when you're talking about
chemtrails are they just point to contrails, which are essentially
just the condensation that comes out of these big jetliners
and so they're kind of coopooing the whole concept that,
by the way, you're releasing these chemicals, whether intentionally or unintentionally,
(04:56):
but they're essentially just saying it's condensation. But every time
someone talks about that and they're saying chemtrails versus contrails,
I keep seeing them point to this. I think it
was like twenty sixteen widely cited peer review survey of
like seventy seven atmospheric experts. And what I found really
(05:16):
interesting is because I'm an academic person, I work in
a very large academic institution, I'm a researcher. What they
kept you always see the headline is seventy six out
of seventy seven of these experts said that there was
no concrete evidence of this secret large scale atmospheric spreeing
program or SLAP. But you actually dig deeper into that data,
(05:39):
it wasn't just one of the experts who noticed unusually
high aluminum in the snow samples. In fact, several others
did too, but they just kind of chalked it up to, oh,
it's contamination or its industrial But in fact, forty percent
of the experts in that survey said that they weren't
sure really how to interpret the data in the airport
(06:00):
or snow particulate because they wanted more contact context for it.
And so for me, I was like whoa wait a minute.
They didn't say that there's no evidence of it. They're like,
we just don't really know. So they keep they keep
misrepresenting that data, and it feels like we're just too
quick to dismiss the public concern as conspiracy when the
(06:20):
science it still still holds all these unanswered questions.
Speaker 2 (06:23):
Well, you know, the word conspiracy, it's used so often.
I think people kind of forget what it means, right, I.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
Mean, a conspiracy is this it's like a secret plan, right,
and for nefarious purposes. So regardless of the purpose of contrailing,
I mean, there's so much evidence that it is occurring.
For instance, you know, I won't go through I mean, gosh, guys,
whoever's listening, there are there's like over one thousand patents
(06:51):
that have been filed. Why not random inventors. These are
government patents. For instance, You've got what is the Sperns material,
So okay, you've got like US thirty six thirty nine
fifty it's from nineteen seventy one. It's from a company
APTI Inc. And I'll get back to APTI Inc. But
(07:12):
that was that was one of the original ones. I mean,
there were original ones from the eighteen hundreds. But these
are like burning various kinds of materials to create aerosol
clouds for purposes of weather modification. So this one is
all about using electromagnetic radiation to alter regional atmospheric conditions.
You've got another one from nineteen ninety one where the
(07:34):
same company is generating a plasma mirror in the iono
sphere for.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Advanced radar and communications supposedly. But these companies, by the way,
Apti Inc.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
That was one of the foundational those were they were
the main contractor for Heart and they were bought out
and they became Raytheon Raytheon has most these really concerning contracts,
like another nineteen ninety nine to one where they use
aluminum oxide and barium they throw it into the stratosphere.
Speaker 1 (08:10):
Interesting, those are two of the chemicals that they continue
to find in the aerosol samples, the water samples, the
snow samples that they kind of are shocking up to
just environmental pollutants.
Speaker 3 (08:22):
And this one is one of the patents that they
talk about quite often, and you know, people will say, well,
they're patented, it doesn't mean they're being utilized. However, we
keep seeing these patents be used. And not only that,
but so many studies.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
I mean countless studies.
Speaker 3 (08:37):
Guys are finding aluminum and barium, I mean also strontium,
you're finding, titanium, you're finding.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
You're finding a lot, a lot of polymers. Crazy things.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
Are chemicals are associated with dementia, cancer, autoimmune disease, chronicle
inflammation and fertility over us inaciality or monal dysregulation.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
Here we are continuing to wondering and.
Speaker 1 (09:06):
Scratch our heads like, oh why do we have such
a rise in chronic illness? And I continue to point
out it is in the environment, and so it begs
the question is it being and is it being put there?
Speaker 2 (09:17):
I mean, I get it.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
You know, the industrial revolution and we have evolved as
a society and we have created pollution, and we've had
some negative consequences, like all of the plastic that we
are consuming. But if we're if we know that some
of this is unhealthy for us, there needs to be
a recogoning of we need to maybe you know, claw.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
Us back well, absolutely, and you know, and there's an
of course, again, I won't go into too many more.
I'll mention literally two more patents and I'm done. But
two thousand and one patent talks about using pulsed laser
beams to create localized atmospheric effects. You've got another patent
in two thousand and what was this two thousand and
nine where they're altering the temp sure of the ocean,
(10:02):
And I mean, that's insane today.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
I mean, to see how powerful we could possibly be
where we can even do that. Excuse me do that?
Speaker 3 (10:09):
I mean, the ocean makes up what seventy percent of
the Earth, and we've only we've only actually explored point
one percent of it. Yet we have somehow the power
to manipulate its surface temperature in certain areas, like back
to the stratosphere.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
You know a lot of.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
These programs inject these aerosols into the stratosphere. It's over
about forty thousand feet depending on where you are on
the planet. It's thicker at the equator, thinner at the poles.
But the thing about the thing that people don't realize
is when you put these aerosols and we'll get to
silver iodide, because that is not non toxic and harmless
(10:50):
as these cloud seaters suggest. But when you're putting these
aerosols into the stratosphere, you're you're essentially creating like a
bank of aerosols that could be there for years. For instance,
we see this with volcanic eruptions.
Speaker 2 (11:08):
When a volcano.
Speaker 3 (11:09):
Erupts, that stuff goes straight up into the stratosphere. It
goes up above the trumposphere, which is all that where
all the storms are. And I mean we've seen this
before where a volcanic eruption happens.
Speaker 2 (11:19):
It's a major one.
Speaker 3 (11:20):
You got ash going around the whole world, lowers the
world's temperature for like point, you know, point five degrees for.
Speaker 2 (11:26):
A couple of years.
Speaker 3 (11:28):
So when you put things up in the stratosphere, because
the stratosphere is very stable, there's not much going on
up there.
Speaker 2 (11:35):
The trump isphere.
Speaker 3 (11:36):
Yeah, anything you put up there, everything's going to fall
down with the rain, the wind, you know, storms.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
Things like that.
Speaker 3 (11:43):
But in the stratosphere, depending on the size of the particulate,
it's it's.
Speaker 2 (11:47):
Going to remain there a while and it accumulates over time.
Speaker 3 (11:52):
And a lot of studies suggest that when you do
this it's actually it's actually it might not cool the Earth.
It might actually cause the opposite result, which is it
completely defeats the purpose of everything that they're saying right,
the whole purpose of this is to supposedly.
Speaker 2 (12:11):
Reflect the sun you've got. They call it solar.
Speaker 3 (12:13):
Radiation management, cloud brightening, dimming. Nicole Shanahan released a good
report where they talk about how it within government.
Speaker 2 (12:22):
Over the last six months, they've altered.
Speaker 3 (12:24):
The names of every program, So solar Radiation Management, I
think is now called solar radiation modification. They switched it
up so that when you try to get Freedom of
Information Information Act requests you can't because it'll.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
Come up empty. What happens is, this is the strangest
thing it can create.
Speaker 3 (12:43):
It creates There is a study that proved this recent study.
I'll publish it again on a link website. Aaronashis dot God.
I really wish I could show you, but I know
a lot of you are just listening. It proved that
it increases the humidity in the trumpet sphere, and it's
because these aerosols prevent rainfall. It prevents the cloud from
(13:06):
dropping the moisture, so instead the moisture disperses and spreads
into the surrounding air, which creates higher humidity. And the
higher humidity actually creates higher storm clouds, stronger storms.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
It creates.
Speaker 3 (13:24):
More pat well creates more lightning, it creates It's funny
because when you create bigger storms, you're actually releasing more heat.
Every time you have a storm, it releases heat. It's
called latent heat, and so the bigger the storm, the
more latent heat there is. And by doing this aerosol
injection into the stratosphere, like I said, you're creating higher
(13:46):
humidity levels and the troposphere down on the ground level,
and that is the fuel for powerful storms. And powerful
storms are heat generators. So it was basically suggesting that
this whole stre spheric aerosol injection program may reflect sunlight,
but it will increase heat down where it actually matters.
Speaker 1 (14:08):
Well, you know, you know, cloud seating is obviously very real.
There's companies that are well known for doing it, and
it recently made the mainstream news cycle because its presence
in Texas was now widely known just before these floods,
and it reignited the entire debate. A company called Brainmaker
(14:30):
Technology has come forth and said that they conducted a
brief cloud seating mission on July second, targeting two small
clouds about one hundred and twenty miles from the flood zone. Obviously,
then we had the catastrophic flooding and over one hundred people,
many children of which died. Now, so when people found
(14:50):
out about this, they were bringing into question, well did
this cloud seating have an effect on these floods?
Speaker 2 (14:57):
Could it have been prevented?
Speaker 1 (14:59):
Brain Makerechnology says that they again, we're one hundred and
twenty miles away, and they said that their operation was
suspended the same day because they had detected already high
moisture levels. But obviously the timing of it all triggered
a wave of suspicion and accusations online.
Speaker 2 (15:14):
What are your thoughts. I love this rain maker kid.
I think he's ambitious.
Speaker 3 (15:22):
I think he's got he's got bright eyes. You know,
he's he's hilarious to me, because number one, you know, Okay,
to set the stage think about it. I'm just gonna
let you know a couple of things. You've got North
American weather consultants. They've been around since the nineteen fifties.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
They have.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
And by the way I've looked through now, I've downloaded
every disclosed Noah contract with private companies. There's over twelve
hundred of them rainmakers on there. Just a handful of times.
So you've got North American Weather Consultants, they're on there a.
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Ton of that. I mean they have I again, I'm
going to actually publish this.
Speaker 3 (16:07):
I'm going to I'm I'm creating a platform where you
can actually organize it by state, by company.
Speaker 2 (16:12):
The Noah Library doesn't allow you to even view by company.
Speaker 3 (16:16):
It makes it very hard to see what's going on.
So I downloaded them all and I'm creating a new organizing,
a new database to organize information so people can actually
really see what's going on in their state, by what company.
But anyway, North American Weather Consultants have a ton of contracts,
ridiculous amount of contracts. Weather Modification, Inc. They've been around
(16:38):
since the nineteen sixties. You've got Western Weather Consultants, My gosh,
do they have a ton of contracts in the US
from the nineteen seventies. You've got SORE, which is seating
operations in atmospheric research.
Speaker 2 (16:51):
They've been around since the Night nineteen ninety two.
Speaker 3 (16:54):
It's just consulting since two thousand and seven, Atmospheric sink
since the nineteen eighties. Rain Maker twenty twenty three, they're
brand new. This kid is marketing himself he's not staying
quiet all these other companies who have the vast majority
of contracts in this country right now, active contracts. I mean,
(17:14):
ski resorts hire them, farmers hire them, but mostly utilities
hire them. In fact, utilities operate on their own. They
don't even hire out they'll.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
Why would utilities hire them?
Speaker 3 (17:27):
So utilities hire them because they want to produce more
water for the region. Sometimes it's to bring more water
to their dam so they can make more electricity, so
they can pull moisture out of the air, you know,
And there's also something to say about stealing moisture from
the air when it may have dropped somewhere else that
(17:48):
actually would have normally gotten it. But anyway, yeah, there's
a bunch of reasons utility companies would hire them to
usually for their electricity, which is something a lot of
people don't know. But Idaho elect has a whole page
about their cloud seating program. They've been doing it since
twenty twelve, where they produce more water for their dams.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
But anyway, the rainmaker guy, so he's this.
Speaker 3 (18:10):
You've got these big time, big dog companies been around decades,
making lots of money. Staying quiet, staying at the limelight.
They're like, no, we don't exist, don't talk about us.
And then you got this rainmaker kid who's like, we exist.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
Help these big, big.
Speaker 3 (18:29):
Dog companies who've been very happy staying on the limelight.
They're like, shut up, kid, what are you doing? Because
he's bringing attention.
Speaker 2 (18:39):
So here's a question I have for you.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
Because I'm from Arizona and obviously very much of a drought,
we would have it all the time. You hear drought
issues in California, wildfires in California and Arizona and Texas,
massive amount of crops and cattle when they are having
a dry season. I guess I could see the argument
for some of these seating programs. I mean, obviously not
(19:02):
if they have consequences like all the chronic illness that
they potentially could, But I guess I can see where
there may be a benefit to the cloud seating. And
so how do you have that conversation to make sure
you're doing something that, if something has a positive and
is very needed for our society, balancing that with some
of the potential consequences.
Speaker 3 (19:22):
I definitely understand the argument for for cloud seating. Obviously,
there are farmers who want all the rain on their crops.
Speaker 2 (19:31):
We obviously want utility companies to be.
Speaker 3 (19:33):
Able to you know, power their cities by increasing rain
supply for their dams. You've got towns that are in
just major droughts, and cloud seating can be an argument,
you know, you can make an argument for why should
why you should cloud seat in this area spring more
water to you know, droughtstricken regions.
Speaker 2 (19:51):
Sorry for repeating myself multiple times.
Speaker 3 (19:53):
But essentially, when you're pulling moisture out of the air
in one area where that must would have would have
normally not dropped, you're creating drought somewhere else.
Speaker 2 (20:05):
And we're seeing this.
Speaker 3 (20:07):
And also when when it comes to the frequency generation,
which is not really a conspiracy theory. It's not really
a theory. We have the patents to back it up.
There's a lot of theories that these frequencies, there's a
microwave radiation that these next rad towers put out that
they could they could they could be dehydrating certain areas
and that's a that's a well.
Speaker 1 (20:28):
You just you just touched on next rad which I
want to expand on because I just learned about this
with this topic after those July fourth floods. An individual
actually broke into a next rad whether radar site in
Oklahoma and next rad next rad is what is it's like?
Speaker 2 (20:45):
Next generation whether? Next generation radar? Hold on, wait, I
didn't even I didn't hear about this? Do you know who?
How did I not get?
Speaker 1 (20:53):
So? They broke into a next rad whether radar site
in Oklahoma. They damaged the power equipment and surveilla camera
and then.
Speaker 2 (21:01):
I know the guy who did it and briefly knocked
the radar offline.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
And the action was tied to threats by some groups
who believe whether manipulation like cloud seating and geoengineering is
to blame for the floods. And I think it was
kind of as a response to the Texas flooding?
Speaker 2 (21:17):
Was it Michael Lewis Arthur Meyer? I don't know. I
don't know the name. And they mentioned a couple of
groups that are on patrol, but they.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
Said the last I read was they had a clear
shot on video of surveillance of the person's face.
Speaker 2 (21:30):
But I don't remember reading a name. Yeah, I interviewed
that guy.
Speaker 3 (21:34):
I believe it was that guy because he and I
announced it, and you know, people knew that is.
Speaker 1 (21:40):
A little bit dangerous though, because I understand he's upset
if he truly believes that this cloud seating caused those
floods and killed all those children, I could understand where
that emotion comes from.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
But you know, it's kind of come out that probably
didn't cause that.
Speaker 1 (21:56):
And if he's knocking out this surveillance fat I mean
we do rely on that or weather.
Speaker 2 (22:00):
Alerts, don't we? For sure?
Speaker 3 (22:02):
Yeah, And I want to make sure that I answer
your original question with regard to cloud seating, and because there's.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
A whole lot to talk about next rade the cloud.
Speaker 3 (22:11):
The cloud seating, So yes, yes, I do to answer
your original question. I do think there are good, good
excuses for using it. I don't, however, think that the
consequences are worth the benefit. Because silver iodide being the
only disclosed ingredient in these aerosolized particulates that these cloud
seed companies are using, I'm sure it's not the only one.
(22:34):
We have patents to prove it, we have the studies
to prove it, but the amount of silver iodide that
is being spread is far beyond levels that.
Speaker 2 (22:47):
That are that are considered safe.
Speaker 3 (22:48):
As a doctor, I'm sure you're aware the stuff bio
accumulates and tissue in organs, and it causes nervous.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
System issues, cary issues, and.
Speaker 3 (22:59):
Yeah, heal, your calcium chain gets blocked, which causes a
whole lot of other a whole whole other.
Speaker 2 (23:05):
Set of issues.
Speaker 3 (23:06):
And I mean there's from a toxicity standpoint, I don't
think it's worth it.
Speaker 2 (23:11):
I mean, the EPA declared that I think it was.
Speaker 3 (23:13):
Point one micrograms a leader. Gosh, I can't remember the
exact unit, but I'll publish. I'll put the study up,
but that one's not in my notes. But it's toxic
for marine life. And they found through a government it
was a government report, and I'll publish that too. But
(23:35):
there was a government report that found that they're releasing
ten kilograms gosh, again, I forgot the exact amount, but
it was it was a pretty decent amount of silver
eydid per region, per season. And you multiply that across multiple,
multiple regions and multiple states, you know, that's that's a
lot of silver iodide that's being added into the soil
(23:57):
and added into the water supply on a very regular basis.
There are thousands of contracts. Those are just the disclosed contracts.
Those are just the private company contracts, not never mind,
you know, possible government involvement. And I mean, we have
most of these most of the patents, most of these
patents are government patents. These are defense defense contractors.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
So and then when you're.
Speaker 3 (24:24):
Finding these materials in the soil, which there was that
twenty twenty one peer reviewed study.
Speaker 2 (24:30):
It was an MIT study.
Speaker 3 (24:32):
It was titled Aerosol Invigoration of Atmosphere convection through Increases
in Humidity, And that's the one I was talking about
where they talked about finding these certain kind of particulates
in the stratosphere and how it was causing increased humidity
down below. And then there's like studies where you find
the aluminum and barium, and there's there's a lot of
(24:55):
universities doing conducting studies on their soil and they're finding aluminum.
Speaker 2 (24:59):
And bear So I don't know.
Speaker 3 (25:01):
I mean, I just think from a toxicity standpoint, the
consequences outweigh the benefits.
Speaker 1 (25:06):
You're listening to wellness and mass. We'll be right back
with more. There has to be some sort of oversight.
I mean, the fact that you know we saw through
COVID conspiracy theories proved true sometimes and when it comes
to the notion of chemtrails, you know, with enough data
showing these contaminants in the soil, it will take people
(25:30):
at the EPA, at the FAA to kind of listen
to people and you'd either prove or disprove it, right, Like,
all they really need to do is redoce some of
the studies. We have to kind of get away from
calling people conspiracy theorists because we already have this growing
this way to bridge the gap with science, trust and transparency.
(25:53):
I mean, it's it's dangerous to just dismiss people when
their whole goal is to maintain the health of the nation.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
Well, that's the thing I think.
Speaker 3 (26:03):
I think conspiracy theorist being used as an insult makes
no sense because someone who is who is thinking openly
about their government and about how things work around them,
and are speaking out when they see something strange, if anything,
that the guardians of the country, that the guardians of
the civilization, that the guardians of the safety and the
(26:25):
protection of the people. Because you have to you have
to think, you have to theorize, you have to consider,
because I mean, that's the.
Speaker 2 (26:34):
Foundation of science.
Speaker 3 (26:35):
The theorists, you hear the theorize, yeah, and the word
conspiracy is that and then they're simply because you know,
sometimes follow the.
Speaker 2 (26:43):
Mainstream reading it.
Speaker 1 (26:45):
So what do you think that I'd say scientists, but
it's really the government at this point. The government needs
to do something. But so what do you think that
these agencies?
Speaker 2 (26:54):
One, do you think.
Speaker 1 (26:55):
They've done enough to explain atmospheric science and whether or
modifiation to the public. And my guess is going to
be no, what do you think they could do for
greater transparency and to really investigate that, would you know,
suffice the people who have concerns about countries.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
I think there is an obvious.
Speaker 3 (27:18):
Effort to keep this information away from the public as
best and as long as possible. I think these programs
have been going on for decades. I mean I don't
think I know it's obvious, and I mean you could
just look at the cloud seating contracts that are available
on the NOA Library and pretty soon on my website
(27:38):
because I'm reorganizing all of them because I think their
organization sucks on purpose, and I think that all cloud
seating can and and aerosola and putting aerosols into the
stratosphere as we talked about, by the way, that wasn't
that was the I. It was Mi t that found
that that doing that can actually increase surface level.
Speaker 1 (28:00):
So the bottom of the barrel scientists.
Speaker 3 (28:04):
But I mean, I think that it's very possible that
all of this aerosolized activity is actually.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
Quite possibly creating the exacerbation.
Speaker 3 (28:16):
Of these weather events that we've been seeing, the very
weather events that they use as an excuse for geo
engineering today. And it's interesting because if that were the case,
that would be brilliant to experiment for decades creating widespread
weather issues of anomalies all over the place. Then say, oh,
(28:40):
you know what, it looks like global warming is really
playing a role here. We have the exacerbation of these
hurricanes and these thunderstorms and these tornadoes and these winds. Wow,
we've never seen this before. Maybe what we need to
do is start cloud seating. Maybe we need to start
geo engineering that we can help to defend against these
these global warming symptoms. But meanwhild it's very possible that
(29:02):
all these crazy, crazy floods and storms are actually not
a result of global warming. Maybe the result of all
this experimentation that's been going on for decades and we
have the evidence to back it up. And yeah, we
haven't talked about next Red yet. But I don't know
if there's a nefarious reason for these programs. I don't
know if there's something astronomical happening to the planet where
(29:27):
maybe maybe there's something far beyond our understanding that's happening
to the planet that the higher ups know about. They
don't want to spread panics, so they're keeping it secret.
Maybe geoengineering is being used to actually help us survive
and whatever is going on.
Speaker 2 (29:41):
I don't know. Maybe there is some kind of.
Speaker 3 (29:44):
An altruistic motive to them doing this, and maybe maybe
the benefits of this program outweigh the consequences, but we
just don't know what those consequences are. Or maybe there
is actual and actual movement to depopulate the planet, and
you know, there's a lot of evidence to suggest that
(30:04):
might be the case, just simply from the whole entire
pandemic in the vaccine that's been spread around that. I mean,
I don't know how anyone can argue that vaccine was
designed to help people.
Speaker 2 (30:16):
So I don't know.
Speaker 3 (30:17):
I don't know what the reason is, but I do
think there is an obvious movement to keep the information quiet,
and now that it's not quiet, I think they're trying
their best to market it as.
Speaker 2 (30:32):
As friendly as.
Speaker 3 (30:33):
They possibly can, in a way that people will actually
accept it as being beneficial.
Speaker 1 (30:38):
Cloud break the quote vaccine certainly is worthy of its
own conversation.
Speaker 2 (30:42):
Maybe I'll have to have you back on for that.
Well we are.
Speaker 1 (30:45):
You're starting to see politicians taking action. You have Governor
DeSantis in Florida. They passed the Senate Bill fifty six.
He signed it and makes weather modification a third degree
fell at me punishable by one hundred thousand dollars fine.
So that's happening in Flora. We already saw Marjorie Taylor
Green announcing her efforts on a federal level.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
I really look to.
Speaker 1 (31:07):
The EPA, maybe the AHS under RFK Junior. I mean,
he's taking broad brushstrokes trying to look at the chronic
illness epidemic here in our country. You know, he's looking
at vaccines, the foods and some other things.
Speaker 2 (31:19):
But it's more than that.
Speaker 1 (31:21):
It's it has to be looking at the air, what's
in our soil.
Speaker 2 (31:24):
So he might help that too. He knows that, and
I would like to know. I don't know.
Speaker 3 (31:30):
Part of me thinks maybe he's remaining quiet because he
really is doing some digging.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
I hope, I hope.
Speaker 3 (31:35):
So, but I got to tell you, these state bans,
all these people know that those don't work because the.
Speaker 1 (31:42):
Federal because it's a federal level.
Speaker 3 (31:44):
Is that what you're saying, I'm saying that the state
doesn't even exist technically above four hundred to a thousand
feet in the air.
Speaker 2 (31:51):
Is that becomes the United States of America.
Speaker 3 (31:54):
So the state, the state only has jurisdiction up to
four hundred feet in rural air and you know, more
vacant areas.
Speaker 2 (32:01):
It can go up to a thousand feet above that,
state laws play no role.
Speaker 3 (32:05):
That is one hundred percent of federal cloud seating occurs
ten to ten to twenty thousand feet in the air,
and chemtrails occur over forty thousand feet in the air
up in the stratosphere.
Speaker 2 (32:17):
So no state can ban it. No state has the
power to ban it. That's why no one's.
Speaker 3 (32:20):
Seeing it stop and they know that they know this,
But it's important to ban it because we need to
bring attention to it, and we need to put it
in the news.
Speaker 2 (32:30):
We need to acknowledge on a state level that this exists.
Speaker 3 (32:33):
And we're not okay with it, and then it lays
the way for a federal ban, which which is occurring.
Speaker 2 (32:38):
The problem is these federal bands they incorporate.
Speaker 3 (32:42):
Aerostolized injections, but and ground based aerosolized and injections because
there's a ton of ground programs, I mean, like so
many ground generators.
Speaker 2 (32:52):
Putting aerosols into the air. Airlines are not the only
way to do it. That's question.
Speaker 1 (32:58):
So I have so you guys, are you believe that
the chemtrails that these companies are working with, like the
commercial airlines to get that high and create them by
the big jets, So they're dispersing something from these companies
when they're flying passengers.
Speaker 3 (33:13):
Okay, wait, I'm confused when you say these companies, are
you what are you like, you know, like Southwest, like
main airliners?
Speaker 1 (33:22):
Yeah, Like are these commercial jetliners Are they the ones
who are creating these chemtrails in the skies or so?
Speaker 3 (33:30):
RFK said this, and so many people in the movement
dismissed him, But I no, I agree with him. So
he said that he believes that the commercial airliners are
putting something in the jet fuel and not them, but
the fuel. The fuel source is part of the program
(33:51):
and it's just.
Speaker 1 (33:52):
Like normal pollution from jet fuel. Or is there something
intentional in the jet fuel?
Speaker 3 (33:59):
On a personal level, On a personal level, I know
what he's saying is true.
Speaker 2 (34:04):
I can't prove it to you yet.
Speaker 3 (34:06):
But because I watch the radar every single day and
I record it and I put it out so that
there's a record, because you can't actually go back in
time on these platforms, I know that these trails exist
and they're coming from commercial airliners in addition to military
(34:27):
because I saw black lines, black lines, black lines, black
lines caking. By the way, I don't know if you
know this when I say I look at radar, I
look at radar for the entire planet every single day.
I know where they trail and I know where they
don't trail on a consistent basis. Canada, United States, just
(34:50):
off the coast of America on both sides, by far
trail more than anywhere on Earth. Anywhere on Earth. Europe
gets them all the time, but they're lo were altitude.
They get haze NonStop, and the people in the comments
say that too. China's got the biggest geo engineering program
in the world. But I don't see many of their
(35:10):
trails there. I think mostly that money is going towards
ground based generators. But you never see them in Africa.
You barely see them in South America or Mexico. You
barely see them in Australia. I know they get them sometime,
are just.
Speaker 1 (35:25):
Based on normal air traffic control patterns, like they just
don't have as much traffic.
Speaker 2 (35:29):
Oh yeah, I mean, I.
Speaker 3 (35:31):
Know you're saying this for your audience, but you know,
I mean China, Come on, Asia, they have a ridiculous
amount of air traffic, and.
Speaker 2 (35:38):
So does South America, you know, and and Europe.
Speaker 3 (35:41):
Europe does too. Their their trails are a different brand.
They've always looked slightly different. And and Australia has a
ton of air traffic. But really, if you want to
compare air traffic, look at Asia. I mean, my gosh,
they have problem any any country on Earth. And no,
you do not see the kind of trails that you see.
But I'll tell you this, This is how I know
(36:02):
that there really are real because I was trying to
prove to myself that they were real, because I'm like,
maybe because I'm never convinced that the information I have
is right. I'm always trying to make sure that I'm
not digging miners. Well, yeah, I mean I want I
don't want to dig myself into a hole where I'm
filled with the wrong information. Like I don't want to
(36:23):
be in a cult. I want to be I want
the right information. I don't care what that information is.
But here's the interesting thing. USA was cut and the
two days following were the only two days ever until
recently that I didn't see a single trail on radar
on any part of the continental US. I had seen
(36:45):
it every single day taking Continental US, and USA gets
cut and all of a sudden, no trails for forty
eight hours.
Speaker 2 (36:55):
I don't know what that means, but clearly there was
a funding issue.
Speaker 1 (36:59):
Well, you know, is interesting if we had such decrease
air traffic during the two years following COVID, and if
they weren't able to do the chemtrails as much because
they weren't having that liner, so we saw the pollution
was down.
Speaker 2 (37:15):
I mean, there were massive changes.
Speaker 1 (37:17):
I mean, it'd be interesting to see if there was
anything any sort of change in the environment at that time.
Obviously it's too late at this point to do that research.
That would have been prime time, you know for me
looking at this from a policy standpoint, I think RFK
Junior at the AJHS, Pete Hegseth DoD and Sean Duffy
at FAA and also NASA now would be very interesting
(37:40):
trio to kind of come together and see if they
could put something together for the American people.
Speaker 2 (37:47):
Well for sure, And.
Speaker 3 (37:48):
Like I said, I hadn't seen them stop trailing except
for that USAID cut, but three weeks ago or when
the Iranian missile strike happened.
Speaker 2 (37:58):
I think it's been about three weeks, maybe it's.
Speaker 3 (38:00):
In a month now when that happened. Ever since then,
I haven't seen a normal trail over the United States.
It's it's been weeks, and all my viewers are like
waiting to start seeing them again. We're seeing them blatantly
obvious in the Atlantic and the Pacific and in Canada
(38:21):
they're still going crazy over their stinks because you know,
they've got wildfires and stuff, and there's you know, these
metals that are in these aerosols can actually exacerbate wildfires
because metal heats up like crazy.
Speaker 2 (38:32):
You're basically blanketing.
Speaker 3 (38:34):
An area and metal and then lighting it on fire
and it becomes very hot from all these metal particulates.
Speaker 2 (38:40):
Anyway, that's aside the point.
Speaker 3 (38:42):
But I don't know what the United States is doing,
and anyone anyone listening, I hope if you know what's
going on, please message me, because I have a theory
that they're either decreasing their program or I was right
and three months ago they changed their formula because it
looks completely different.
Speaker 2 (39:01):
It looks completely different.
Speaker 3 (39:02):
It's it's hazing out rapidly and everyone is just seeing
this white haze now. So I think they figured out
a way too to haze it out rapidly and maybe
even save money doing it. I don't know, but I
also think you probably want to talk about next Red
for a minute before we before we get off, because
that's it. That's probably the most important part of geo engineering,
(39:24):
is the frequency manipulation, more so than the aerosol dispersal itself.
Speaker 1 (39:28):
Well, I'm a radiologist, so all sorts of frequencies in
the atmosphere have concerned me.
Speaker 2 (39:33):
Oh man, then you're going to be fun to talk to.
Speaker 3 (39:37):
So Next Red, you know, next Ride, it's next generation radar,
it's it's pulsed microwave energy, and it's in the S band,
so that's strong enough to penetrate heavy rain.
Speaker 2 (39:48):
That's why it's used for What kind is it?
Speaker 3 (39:51):
It's a microwave, yeah, and it's in the S band,
so it's used for weather radar.
Speaker 2 (39:59):
So they're peak.
Speaker 3 (40:00):
Their peak pulse that they disclose is about seven hundred
and fifty thousand watts.
Speaker 2 (40:08):
Just pretty impressive.
Speaker 3 (40:11):
So officials say though that it's safe because like you
only get exposed to it microseconds at a time, so
average average exposure is low.
Speaker 2 (40:20):
But here's here's the thing. People like me.
Speaker 3 (40:23):
Who actually watch are very consistently noticing these concentric rings,
these radial blooms, these spiraling pulsing ratear like usually over
the more intense storms, and you can actually see them
happening before the storm even becomes intense. And meteorologists will
(40:43):
say they when they see the stuff I share, they're like, oh,
that's a glitch. That's a reflection off of like birds
or insects. I tell you, I look at this every
day and it shows up consistently, and before four months ago,
I very rarely saw it. Ever now I'm seeing it
(41:04):
all day every day, usually in Texas usually in the
middle of the country, all of these storms that have
been producing tornadoes, I see it and sometimes I'll see
the pulse go for go NonStop for days, NonStop. Big
spiral in the Carolinas went for like forty eight hours once.
(41:28):
And yeah, like I said, I mostly see that kind
of activity in the Carolinas, in Texas and lately California.
Speaker 2 (41:34):
So you know, the question becomes, are these towers.
Speaker 3 (41:37):
Really just a passive radar or are they doing more
than what we're told So, and if you combine that
with aerosols like aluminumberbarium, which are already up in the atmosphere,
and then put you're pulsing high energy microwave beams through
those particles, that could really affect things.
Speaker 2 (41:57):
It could influence cloud.
Speaker 3 (41:58):
It definitely could influence cloud for me in disrupt storm
structure and increase lighting.
Speaker 2 (42:04):
You can do some wild stuff with next RED. And
it's not it's not speculation.
Speaker 3 (42:08):
I mean, we've got the patents, we've got the technology,
we can see what's going on on radar.
Speaker 2 (42:14):
What we don't have is transparency, and and.
Speaker 3 (42:18):
Yeah, it's it's it's definitely concerning, and there are definitely
health outcomes to consider. In fact, the health outcomes for
this radiation exposure is more concerning to me than the
aerosols being sprayed.
Speaker 1 (42:33):
I mean, you're a radiologist, so I honestly I think
they would be pretty equal. But I mean I get
what you're saying. I mean, the aerosolized chemicals, radiation. I mean,
it's all it's all things that terrify me. I think,
you know, unfortunately there say it really goes back to
RFP juniors make.
Speaker 2 (42:52):
America healthy again.
Speaker 1 (42:54):
I think chemicals were put in, ultra process, foons were
put in.
Speaker 2 (42:57):
There is a positive impetus behind it.
Speaker 1 (43:00):
Stand why people were doing these things, make it low cost,
more efficient.
Speaker 2 (43:05):
But at the end of the day, they're proving to
be very harmful. So it's so much harder to roll
it back.
Speaker 1 (43:10):
And maybe some of these weather programs decades ago, forty
fifty years ago, when you started seeing these patents coming out,
there was a positive notion behind them. But as we
can see how sick our environment is, how sick we are,
when are we going to be transparent about it and
when are we going to start rolling back? Well?
Speaker 3 (43:28):
Yeah, absolutely, And you know, just from a radiation perspective,
I mean, gosh, if people are actually being affected by this,
if the theories are true, than anyone listening. And this is,
by the way, these are the if and I put
this in a chat GPT, I was like, if someone
were to be exposed to this seven hundred and fifty
watts for hours straight, what would the symptoms be? And
(43:53):
it said it says the stuff that my comment everyone
you commented at a well, it's like hut pressure, buzzing, dizziness, vertigo,
light sound sensitivity, waking up at three am every morning,
short term memory loss, brain fall, car palpitations, chest tightness,
poor circulation, temperature dysregulation, blood pressure, swings, sweating, fever, skin burning, fatigue, weakness.
Speaker 2 (44:15):
I mean, the list their sources of radiation everywhere.
Speaker 1 (44:18):
I mean, we just there's a huge paper that was
just published showing medical radiation is causing a significant amount
of cancer. So you know, I mean, we could just
talk about this forever. But I think, as you're saying forever,
I think that, honestly, transparency is what I'm going to
ask for from this Trump administration. And I'm so happy
(44:40):
Arianna that you came on. You brought an evidence based
approach to this I am someone who really appreciates objective
findings and evidence based medicine and science, and so it's
great to hear your perspective. And you came bringing receipts
and that's all I can ask for. So thanks so
much for joining me.
Speaker 2 (44:57):
Well, thank you, and I'll give.
Speaker 3 (44:59):
You that you l for the sources for everything, but
but yeah, thank you for where.
Speaker 2 (45:05):
People find you. I'm I'm Ariana Masters.
Speaker 3 (45:09):
You can take me in on every any social media,
but you go to my website Arianamasters dot com because
I do want I want you, guys, anyone listening to
really have links to good studies, to source to people
who are naysayers for.
Speaker 2 (45:25):
Studies that prove what's in the soil.
Speaker 3 (45:27):
I mean, it's out, it's there on the internet that
they make it hard for you to find. But I
spent a really long time trying to find this stuff.
So I'm gonna put it on because there's so much
more that I didn't even talk about. But yeah, go
to my website airindimasters dot com. I'm probably gonna create
I'm gonna put a thing in there called facts. I'll
probably do it before this airs, so it should be
available tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (45:48):
All right, perfect, well, thanks so much, appreciate you coming on.
Speaker 1 (45:50):
Thanks Arianna, thank you so much for bringing such a thoughtful,
evidence based voice to a conversation that's too often hijacked
by extremes. Whether it's just a healthy dose of skepticism
or making sure we have healthy skies, this episode reminds
us that real wellness means staying informed. I have concerns
(46:10):
about the environment. I've talked about chronic illness and what
we are consuming, whether it's our food, our beverage, what
we're putting on our bodies in terms of lotion, cosmetics,
what we're breathing in.
Speaker 2 (46:20):
In our air.
Speaker 1 (46:21):
We certainly are seeing more chemicals in our soil samples,
our air samples. Where is it all coming from? Is
it just simply, I guess we can say, simply from
chemical pollutants, whether they're the cars, whether there are airplanes,
or whether there's something more intentional going on.
Speaker 2 (46:40):
And it seems like.
Speaker 1 (46:41):
There are a lot of patents, there are companies that
are all focusing on these weather engineering, whether it's cloud seating.
Is this having consequences on our health? Is the benefit
does the outweigh the risk? Does the risk out weigh
the benefit. All I ask for is transparency, so I
would really like to know a little bit more about it.
(47:02):
There seems like there's evidence suggesting that there may be
some consequences to these actions. Again, I ask for transparency.
That's all I ask for from the government, from these institutions.
I'm doctor Nicole Sapphire. I hope that we all stay curious,
do our best to stay healthy. Thanks for listening to
Wellness unmass on America's number one podcast network, iHeart Follow
(47:23):
Wellness Unmasked with doctor Nicole Saffhire and start listening on
the free iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts,
and we will catch you next time.
Welcome to Wellness on Masks, where we peel back the
layers on health science and the world around us. I'm
your host, doctor Nicole Sapphire, and today we are diving
into a topic that stirs up some concern, confusion, and
a huge amount of controversy. And it recently stormed its
way into the mainstream news cycle following the tragic Texas floods.
When reports surface that cloud seating had taken place just
(00:25):
days before the deadly weather event. People across the country
started asking what is really going on in our skies?
From reportedly harmless jet contrails versus the harmful chem trails
to the real world science of cloud seating and weather modification.
We're going to unpack the facts and talk about the
fears with someone who has deeply researched this. And then
(00:50):
there's just a whole nother layer here, this growing concern
of what some people call the secret large Scale Atmospheric
Program or SLAP. This is a alleging that the government
and elites are conducting covert aerosolt spraying operations on a
global scale. Now, while these claims have been widely dismissed
(01:11):
by the scientific community and the government, they continue to persist,
and they're fueled by an era of increasing public distrust
in institutions, tech, and government. Joining me today is Ariana Masters.
She's an anthropologist, environmental journalist, speaker, and an advocate for
scientific transparency. So, whether you're a skeptic, a scientist, or
(01:34):
simply just someone trying to make sense of these headlines
like me, this is a conversation.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
You don't want to miss.
Speaker 1 (01:43):
And joining me today is Areana Masters, an anthropologists, environmental journalists, speaker,
and an advocast for scientific transparency. So now, whether you're
a skeptic, a scientist, or just simply someone trying to
make sense of these headlines, this is a conversation you
do not want to miss.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
Areana.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
I'm so excited to have you here today. Thanks so
much for being on Wellness on Mass.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
Thank you for having me. This is so much fun.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
So I just want to do the you know, the
bird's eye view right now? Can you just break it down?
What exactly are chem trails? And how did you know?
Speaker 3 (02:16):
What?
Speaker 2 (02:16):
People consider?
Speaker 1 (02:17):
It? Still a theory gain so much traction online.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
So the thing is there's this, there's cloud seating, and
then there's chem trailing and Honestly, in many ways they
are very similar because kem trail just means a chemical trail,
which cloud seating essentially, that's what that is. You know,
let's focus on Let's focus on kem trails first, because
cloud seating is real, but there is still some question
(02:41):
from people about the whole chem trails.
Speaker 2 (02:44):
So I consider cloud seating kem trails as well.
Speaker 3 (02:47):
But yes, when you talk about kem trails, people are
typically referring to very high altitude trails, you know, like
over over twenty thousand feet up. Cloud seating usually occurs
below two feet between ten and twenty thousand.
Speaker 2 (03:01):
Feet up.
Speaker 3 (03:04):
Trails that comes from I mean, I'm sure you've heard
about patents. You know, we can talk about patents all
day long. There are so many patents. But cloud seating
they talk about that is, you know, just dispersing silver iodide,
which is which encourages rainfall right and and snow as well.
(03:26):
You can also use it to mitigate hail and disperse fog.
But when it comes to kem trails, you know, they
do a very good job.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
At trying to differentiate between the two.
Speaker 3 (03:39):
You know, kem trails has this so like super crazy
negative connotation and anything online when it refers to kemtrails.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
When you google can trails.
Speaker 3 (03:48):
It's all negative and it will and it will say,
you know, it's a it's government controlled conspiracy and all that,
and to some degree it might be totally true. But
the primary differentiation between cloud seating and chemtrails are the
materials being used and how disclosed the project is and
(04:09):
what the reason is behind the program.
Speaker 1 (04:10):
Right, well, you just touched on something which, now that
you know, I'm trying to educate myself a little bit
on chemtrails is what people call slap for the whole
secret large scale atmospheric program.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
Have you heard of slap before?
Speaker 3 (04:27):
You know, I haven't looked into it much, but I've
definitely heard people use the phrase a lot.
Speaker 1 (04:31):
So, you know, the knee jerk response from the quote
unquote experts, whoever they may be, when you're talking about
chemtrails are they just point to contrails, which are essentially
just the condensation that comes out of these big jetliners
and so they're kind of coopooing the whole concept that,
by the way, you're releasing these chemicals, whether intentionally or unintentionally,
(04:56):
but they're essentially just saying it's condensation. But every time
someone talks about that and they're saying chemtrails versus contrails,
I keep seeing them point to this. I think it
was like twenty sixteen widely cited peer review survey of
like seventy seven atmospheric experts. And what I found really
(05:16):
interesting is because I'm an academic person, I work in
a very large academic institution, I'm a researcher. What they
kept you always see the headline is seventy six out
of seventy seven of these experts said that there was
no concrete evidence of this secret large scale atmospheric spreeing
program or SLAP. But you actually dig deeper into that data,
(05:39):
it wasn't just one of the experts who noticed unusually
high aluminum in the snow samples. In fact, several others
did too, but they just kind of chalked it up to, oh,
it's contamination or its industrial But in fact, forty percent
of the experts in that survey said that they weren't
sure really how to interpret the data in the airport
(06:00):
or snow particulate because they wanted more contact context for it.
And so for me, I was like whoa wait a minute.
They didn't say that there's no evidence of it. They're like,
we just don't really know. So they keep they keep
misrepresenting that data, and it feels like we're just too
quick to dismiss the public concern as conspiracy when the
(06:20):
science it still still holds all these unanswered questions.
Speaker 2 (06:23):
Well, you know, the word conspiracy, it's used so often.
I think people kind of forget what it means, right, I.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
Mean, a conspiracy is this it's like a secret plan, right,
and for nefarious purposes. So regardless of the purpose of contrailing,
I mean, there's so much evidence that it is occurring.
For instance, you know, I won't go through I mean, gosh, guys,
whoever's listening, there are there's like over one thousand patents
(06:51):
that have been filed. Why not random inventors. These are
government patents. For instance, You've got what is the Sperns material,
So okay, you've got like US thirty six thirty nine
fifty it's from nineteen seventy one. It's from a company
APTI Inc. And I'll get back to APTI Inc. But
(07:12):
that was that was one of the original ones. I mean,
there were original ones from the eighteen hundreds. But these
are like burning various kinds of materials to create aerosol
clouds for purposes of weather modification. So this one is
all about using electromagnetic radiation to alter regional atmospheric conditions.
You've got another one from nineteen ninety one where the
(07:34):
same company is generating a plasma mirror in the iono
sphere for.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Advanced radar and communications supposedly. But these companies, by the way,
Apti Inc.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
That was one of the foundational those were they were
the main contractor for Heart and they were bought out
and they became Raytheon Raytheon has most these really concerning contracts,
like another nineteen ninety nine to one where they use
aluminum oxide and barium they throw it into the stratosphere.
Speaker 1 (08:10):
Interesting, those are two of the chemicals that they continue
to find in the aerosol samples, the water samples, the
snow samples that they kind of are shocking up to
just environmental pollutants.
Speaker 3 (08:22):
And this one is one of the patents that they
talk about quite often, and you know, people will say, well,
they're patented, it doesn't mean they're being utilized. However, we
keep seeing these patents be used. And not only that,
but so many studies.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
I mean countless studies.
Speaker 3 (08:37):
Guys are finding aluminum and barium, I mean also strontium,
you're finding, titanium, you're finding.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
You're finding a lot, a lot of polymers. Crazy things.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
Are chemicals are associated with dementia, cancer, autoimmune disease, chronicle
inflammation and fertility over us inaciality or monal dysregulation.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
Here we are continuing to wondering and.
Speaker 1 (09:06):
Scratch our heads like, oh why do we have such
a rise in chronic illness? And I continue to point
out it is in the environment, and so it begs
the question is it being and is it being put there?
Speaker 2 (09:17):
I mean, I get it.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
You know, the industrial revolution and we have evolved as
a society and we have created pollution, and we've had
some negative consequences, like all of the plastic that we
are consuming. But if we're if we know that some
of this is unhealthy for us, there needs to be
a recogoning of we need to maybe you know, claw.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
Us back well, absolutely, and you know, and there's an
of course, again, I won't go into too many more.
I'll mention literally two more patents and I'm done. But
two thousand and one patent talks about using pulsed laser
beams to create localized atmospheric effects. You've got another patent
in two thousand and what was this two thousand and
nine where they're altering the temp sure of the ocean,
(10:02):
And I mean, that's insane today.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
I mean, to see how powerful we could possibly be
where we can even do that. Excuse me do that?
Speaker 3 (10:09):
I mean, the ocean makes up what seventy percent of
the Earth, and we've only we've only actually explored point
one percent of it. Yet we have somehow the power
to manipulate its surface temperature in certain areas, like back
to the stratosphere.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
You know a lot of.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
These programs inject these aerosols into the stratosphere. It's over
about forty thousand feet depending on where you are on
the planet. It's thicker at the equator, thinner at the poles.
But the thing about the thing that people don't realize
is when you put these aerosols and we'll get to
silver iodide, because that is not non toxic and harmless
(10:50):
as these cloud seaters suggest. But when you're putting these
aerosols into the stratosphere, you're you're essentially creating like a
bank of aerosols that could be there for years. For instance,
we see this with volcanic eruptions.
Speaker 2 (11:08):
When a volcano.
Speaker 3 (11:09):
Erupts, that stuff goes straight up into the stratosphere. It
goes up above the trumposphere, which is all that where
all the storms are. And I mean we've seen this
before where a volcanic eruption happens.
Speaker 2 (11:19):
It's a major one.
Speaker 3 (11:20):
You got ash going around the whole world, lowers the
world's temperature for like point, you know, point five degrees for.
Speaker 2 (11:26):
A couple of years.
Speaker 3 (11:28):
So when you put things up in the stratosphere, because
the stratosphere is very stable, there's not much going on
up there.
Speaker 2 (11:35):
The trump isphere.
Speaker 3 (11:36):
Yeah, anything you put up there, everything's going to fall
down with the rain, the wind, you know, storms.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
Things like that.
Speaker 3 (11:43):
But in the stratosphere, depending on the size of the particulate,
it's it's.
Speaker 2 (11:47):
Going to remain there a while and it accumulates over time.
Speaker 3 (11:52):
And a lot of studies suggest that when you do
this it's actually it's actually it might not cool the Earth.
It might actually cause the opposite result, which is it
completely defeats the purpose of everything that they're saying right,
the whole purpose of this is to supposedly.
Speaker 2 (12:11):
Reflect the sun you've got. They call it solar.
Speaker 3 (12:13):
Radiation management, cloud brightening, dimming. Nicole Shanahan released a good
report where they talk about how it within government.
Speaker 2 (12:22):
Over the last six months, they've altered.
Speaker 3 (12:24):
The names of every program, So solar Radiation Management, I
think is now called solar radiation modification. They switched it
up so that when you try to get Freedom of
Information Information Act requests you can't because it'll.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
Come up empty. What happens is, this is the strangest
thing it can create.
Speaker 3 (12:43):
It creates There is a study that proved this recent study.
I'll publish it again on a link website. Aaronashis dot God.
I really wish I could show you, but I know
a lot of you are just listening. It proved that
it increases the humidity in the trumpet sphere, and it's
because these aerosols prevent rainfall. It prevents the cloud from
(13:06):
dropping the moisture, so instead the moisture disperses and spreads
into the surrounding air, which creates higher humidity. And the
higher humidity actually creates higher storm clouds, stronger storms.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
It creates.
Speaker 3 (13:24):
More pat well creates more lightning, it creates It's funny
because when you create bigger storms, you're actually releasing more heat.
Every time you have a storm, it releases heat. It's
called latent heat, and so the bigger the storm, the
more latent heat there is. And by doing this aerosol
injection into the stratosphere, like I said, you're creating higher
(13:46):
humidity levels and the troposphere down on the ground level,
and that is the fuel for powerful storms. And powerful
storms are heat generators. So it was basically suggesting that
this whole stre spheric aerosol injection program may reflect sunlight,
but it will increase heat down where it actually matters.
Speaker 1 (14:08):
Well, you know, you know, cloud seating is obviously very real.
There's companies that are well known for doing it, and
it recently made the mainstream news cycle because its presence
in Texas was now widely known just before these floods,
and it reignited the entire debate. A company called Brainmaker
(14:30):
Technology has come forth and said that they conducted a
brief cloud seating mission on July second, targeting two small
clouds about one hundred and twenty miles from the flood zone. Obviously,
then we had the catastrophic flooding and over one hundred people,
many children of which died. Now, so when people found
(14:50):
out about this, they were bringing into question, well did
this cloud seating have an effect on these floods?
Speaker 2 (14:57):
Could it have been prevented?
Speaker 1 (14:59):
Brain Makerechnology says that they again, we're one hundred and
twenty miles away, and they said that their operation was
suspended the same day because they had detected already high
moisture levels. But obviously the timing of it all triggered
a wave of suspicion and accusations online.
Speaker 2 (15:14):
What are your thoughts. I love this rain maker kid.
I think he's ambitious.
Speaker 3 (15:22):
I think he's got he's got bright eyes. You know,
he's he's hilarious to me, because number one, you know, Okay,
to set the stage think about it. I'm just gonna
let you know a couple of things. You've got North
American weather consultants. They've been around since the nineteen fifties.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
They have.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
And by the way I've looked through now, I've downloaded
every disclosed Noah contract with private companies. There's over twelve
hundred of them rainmakers on there. Just a handful of times.
So you've got North American Weather Consultants, they're on there a.
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Ton of that. I mean they have I again, I'm
going to actually publish this.
Speaker 3 (16:07):
I'm going to I'm I'm creating a platform where you
can actually organize it by state, by company.
Speaker 2 (16:12):
The Noah Library doesn't allow you to even view by company.
Speaker 3 (16:16):
It makes it very hard to see what's going on.
So I downloaded them all and I'm creating a new organizing,
a new database to organize information so people can actually
really see what's going on in their state, by what company.
But anyway, North American Weather Consultants have a ton of contracts,
ridiculous amount of contracts. Weather Modification, Inc. They've been around
(16:38):
since the nineteen sixties. You've got Western Weather Consultants, My gosh,
do they have a ton of contracts in the US
from the nineteen seventies. You've got SORE, which is seating
operations in atmospheric research.
Speaker 2 (16:51):
They've been around since the Night nineteen ninety two.
Speaker 3 (16:54):
It's just consulting since two thousand and seven, Atmospheric sink
since the nineteen eighties. Rain Maker twenty twenty three, they're
brand new. This kid is marketing himself he's not staying
quiet all these other companies who have the vast majority
of contracts in this country right now, active contracts. I mean,
(17:14):
ski resorts hire them, farmers hire them, but mostly utilities
hire them. In fact, utilities operate on their own. They
don't even hire out they'll.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
Why would utilities hire them?
Speaker 3 (17:27):
So utilities hire them because they want to produce more
water for the region. Sometimes it's to bring more water
to their dam so they can make more electricity, so
they can pull moisture out of the air, you know,
And there's also something to say about stealing moisture from
the air when it may have dropped somewhere else that
(17:48):
actually would have normally gotten it. But anyway, yeah, there's
a bunch of reasons utility companies would hire them to
usually for their electricity, which is something a lot of
people don't know. But Idaho elect has a whole page
about their cloud seating program. They've been doing it since
twenty twelve, where they produce more water for their dams.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
But anyway, the rainmaker guy, so he's this.
Speaker 3 (18:10):
You've got these big time, big dog companies been around decades,
making lots of money. Staying quiet, staying at the limelight.
They're like, no, we don't exist, don't talk about us.
And then you got this rainmaker kid who's like, we exist.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
Help these big, big.
Speaker 3 (18:29):
Dog companies who've been very happy staying on the limelight.
They're like, shut up, kid, what are you doing? Because
he's bringing attention.
Speaker 2 (18:39):
So here's a question I have for you.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
Because I'm from Arizona and obviously very much of a drought,
we would have it all the time. You hear drought
issues in California, wildfires in California and Arizona and Texas,
massive amount of crops and cattle when they are having
a dry season. I guess I could see the argument
for some of these seating programs. I mean, obviously not
(19:02):
if they have consequences like all the chronic illness that
they potentially could, But I guess I can see where
there may be a benefit to the cloud seating. And
so how do you have that conversation to make sure
you're doing something that, if something has a positive and
is very needed for our society, balancing that with some
of the potential consequences.
Speaker 3 (19:22):
I definitely understand the argument for for cloud seating. Obviously,
there are farmers who want all the rain on their crops.
Speaker 2 (19:31):
We obviously want utility companies to be.
Speaker 3 (19:33):
Able to you know, power their cities by increasing rain
supply for their dams. You've got towns that are in
just major droughts, and cloud seating can be an argument,
you know, you can make an argument for why should
why you should cloud seat in this area spring more
water to you know, droughtstricken regions.
Speaker 2 (19:51):
Sorry for repeating myself multiple times.
Speaker 3 (19:53):
But essentially, when you're pulling moisture out of the air
in one area where that must would have would have
normally not dropped, you're creating drought somewhere else.
Speaker 2 (20:05):
And we're seeing this.
Speaker 3 (20:07):
And also when when it comes to the frequency generation,
which is not really a conspiracy theory. It's not really
a theory. We have the patents to back it up.
There's a lot of theories that these frequencies, there's a
microwave radiation that these next rad towers put out that
they could they could they could be dehydrating certain areas
and that's a that's a well.
Speaker 1 (20:28):
You just you just touched on next rad which I
want to expand on because I just learned about this
with this topic after those July fourth floods. An individual
actually broke into a next rad whether radar site in
Oklahoma and next rad next rad is what is it's like?
Speaker 2 (20:45):
Next generation whether? Next generation radar? Hold on, wait, I
didn't even I didn't hear about this? Do you know who?
How did I not get?
Speaker 1 (20:53):
So? They broke into a next rad whether radar site
in Oklahoma. They damaged the power equipment and surveilla camera
and then.
Speaker 2 (21:01):
I know the guy who did it and briefly knocked
the radar offline.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
And the action was tied to threats by some groups
who believe whether manipulation like cloud seating and geoengineering is
to blame for the floods. And I think it was
kind of as a response to the Texas flooding?
Speaker 2 (21:17):
Was it Michael Lewis Arthur Meyer? I don't know. I
don't know the name. And they mentioned a couple of
groups that are on patrol, but they.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
Said the last I read was they had a clear
shot on video of surveillance of the person's face.
Speaker 2 (21:30):
But I don't remember reading a name. Yeah, I interviewed
that guy.
Speaker 3 (21:34):
I believe it was that guy because he and I
announced it, and you know, people knew that is.
Speaker 1 (21:40):
A little bit dangerous though, because I understand he's upset
if he truly believes that this cloud seating caused those
floods and killed all those children, I could understand where
that emotion comes from.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
But you know, it's kind of come out that probably
didn't cause that.
Speaker 1 (21:56):
And if he's knocking out this surveillance fat I mean
we do rely on that or weather.
Speaker 2 (22:00):
Alerts, don't we? For sure?
Speaker 3 (22:02):
Yeah, And I want to make sure that I answer
your original question with regard to cloud seating, and because there's.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
A whole lot to talk about next rade the cloud.
Speaker 3 (22:11):
The cloud seating, So yes, yes, I do to answer
your original question. I do think there are good, good
excuses for using it. I don't, however, think that the
consequences are worth the benefit. Because silver iodide being the
only disclosed ingredient in these aerosolized particulates that these cloud
seed companies are using, I'm sure it's not the only one.
(22:34):
We have patents to prove it, we have the studies
to prove it, but the amount of silver iodide that
is being spread is far beyond levels that.
Speaker 2 (22:47):
That are that are considered safe.
Speaker 3 (22:48):
As a doctor, I'm sure you're aware the stuff bio
accumulates and tissue in organs, and it causes nervous.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
System issues, cary issues, and.
Speaker 3 (22:59):
Yeah, heal, your calcium chain gets blocked, which causes a
whole lot of other a whole whole other.
Speaker 2 (23:05):
Set of issues.
Speaker 3 (23:06):
And I mean there's from a toxicity standpoint, I don't
think it's worth it.
Speaker 2 (23:11):
I mean, the EPA declared that I think it was.
Speaker 3 (23:13):
Point one micrograms a leader. Gosh, I can't remember the
exact unit, but I'll publish. I'll put the study up,
but that one's not in my notes. But it's toxic
for marine life. And they found through a government it
was a government report, and I'll publish that too. But
(23:35):
there was a government report that found that they're releasing
ten kilograms gosh, again, I forgot the exact amount, but
it was it was a pretty decent amount of silver
eydid per region, per season. And you multiply that across multiple,
multiple regions and multiple states, you know, that's that's a
lot of silver iodide that's being added into the soil
(23:57):
and added into the water supply on a very regular basis.
There are thousands of contracts. Those are just the disclosed contracts.
Those are just the private company contracts, not never mind,
you know, possible government involvement. And I mean, we have
most of these most of the patents, most of these
patents are government patents. These are defense defense contractors.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
So and then when you're.
Speaker 3 (24:24):
Finding these materials in the soil, which there was that
twenty twenty one peer reviewed study.
Speaker 2 (24:30):
It was an MIT study.
Speaker 3 (24:32):
It was titled Aerosol Invigoration of Atmosphere convection through Increases
in Humidity, And that's the one I was talking about
where they talked about finding these certain kind of particulates
in the stratosphere and how it was causing increased humidity
down below. And then there's like studies where you find
the aluminum and barium, and there's there's a lot of
(24:55):
universities doing conducting studies on their soil and they're finding aluminum.
Speaker 2 (24:59):
And bear So I don't know.
Speaker 3 (25:01):
I mean, I just think from a toxicity standpoint, the
consequences outweigh the benefits.
Speaker 1 (25:06):
You're listening to wellness and mass. We'll be right back
with more. There has to be some sort of oversight.
I mean, the fact that you know we saw through
COVID conspiracy theories proved true sometimes and when it comes
to the notion of chemtrails, you know, with enough data
showing these contaminants in the soil, it will take people
(25:30):
at the EPA, at the FAA to kind of listen
to people and you'd either prove or disprove it, right, Like,
all they really need to do is redoce some of
the studies. We have to kind of get away from
calling people conspiracy theorists because we already have this growing
this way to bridge the gap with science, trust and transparency.
(25:53):
I mean, it's it's dangerous to just dismiss people when
their whole goal is to maintain the health of the nation.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
Well, that's the thing I think.
Speaker 3 (26:03):
I think conspiracy theorist being used as an insult makes
no sense because someone who is who is thinking openly
about their government and about how things work around them,
and are speaking out when they see something strange, if anything,
that the guardians of the country, that the guardians of
the civilization, that the guardians of the safety and the
(26:25):
protection of the people. Because you have to you have
to think, you have to theorize, you have to consider,
because I mean, that's the.
Speaker 2 (26:34):
Foundation of science.
Speaker 3 (26:35):
The theorists, you hear the theorize, yeah, and the word
conspiracy is that and then they're simply because you know,
sometimes follow the.
Speaker 2 (26:43):
Mainstream reading it.
Speaker 1 (26:45):
So what do you think that I'd say scientists, but
it's really the government at this point. The government needs
to do something. But so what do you think that
these agencies?
Speaker 2 (26:54):
One, do you think.
Speaker 1 (26:55):
They've done enough to explain atmospheric science and whether or
modifiation to the public. And my guess is going to
be no, what do you think they could do for
greater transparency and to really investigate that, would you know,
suffice the people who have concerns about countries.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
I think there is an obvious.
Speaker 3 (27:18):
Effort to keep this information away from the public as
best and as long as possible. I think these programs
have been going on for decades. I mean I don't
think I know it's obvious, and I mean you could
just look at the cloud seating contracts that are available
on the NOA Library and pretty soon on my website
(27:38):
because I'm reorganizing all of them because I think their
organization sucks on purpose, and I think that all cloud
seating can and and aerosola and putting aerosols into the
stratosphere as we talked about, by the way, that wasn't
that was the I. It was Mi t that found
that that doing that can actually increase surface level.
Speaker 1 (28:00):
So the bottom of the barrel scientists.
Speaker 3 (28:04):
But I mean, I think that it's very possible that
all of this aerosolized activity is actually.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
Quite possibly creating the exacerbation.
Speaker 3 (28:16):
Of these weather events that we've been seeing, the very
weather events that they use as an excuse for geo
engineering today. And it's interesting because if that were the case,
that would be brilliant to experiment for decades creating widespread
weather issues of anomalies all over the place. Then say, oh,
(28:40):
you know what, it looks like global warming is really
playing a role here. We have the exacerbation of these
hurricanes and these thunderstorms and these tornadoes and these winds. Wow,
we've never seen this before. Maybe what we need to
do is start cloud seating. Maybe we need to start
geo engineering that we can help to defend against these
these global warming symptoms. But meanwhild it's very possible that
(29:02):
all these crazy, crazy floods and storms are actually not
a result of global warming. Maybe the result of all
this experimentation that's been going on for decades and we
have the evidence to back it up. And yeah, we
haven't talked about next Red yet. But I don't know
if there's a nefarious reason for these programs. I don't
know if there's something astronomical happening to the planet where
(29:27):
maybe maybe there's something far beyond our understanding that's happening
to the planet that the higher ups know about. They
don't want to spread panics, so they're keeping it secret.
Maybe geoengineering is being used to actually help us survive
and whatever is going on.
Speaker 2 (29:41):
I don't know. Maybe there is some kind of.
Speaker 3 (29:44):
An altruistic motive to them doing this, and maybe maybe
the benefits of this program outweigh the consequences, but we
just don't know what those consequences are. Or maybe there
is actual and actual movement to depopulate the planet, and
you know, there's a lot of evidence to suggest that
(30:04):
might be the case, just simply from the whole entire
pandemic in the vaccine that's been spread around that. I mean,
I don't know how anyone can argue that vaccine was
designed to help people.
Speaker 2 (30:16):
So I don't know.
Speaker 3 (30:17):
I don't know what the reason is, but I do
think there is an obvious movement to keep the information quiet,
and now that it's not quiet, I think they're trying
their best to market it as.
Speaker 2 (30:32):
As friendly as.
Speaker 3 (30:33):
They possibly can, in a way that people will actually
accept it as being beneficial.
Speaker 1 (30:38):
Cloud break the quote vaccine certainly is worthy of its
own conversation.
Speaker 2 (30:42):
Maybe I'll have to have you back on for that.
Well we are.
Speaker 1 (30:45):
You're starting to see politicians taking action. You have Governor
DeSantis in Florida. They passed the Senate Bill fifty six.
He signed it and makes weather modification a third degree
fell at me punishable by one hundred thousand dollars fine.
So that's happening in Flora. We already saw Marjorie Taylor
Green announcing her efforts on a federal level.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
I really look to.
Speaker 1 (31:07):
The EPA, maybe the AHS under RFK Junior. I mean,
he's taking broad brushstrokes trying to look at the chronic
illness epidemic here in our country. You know, he's looking
at vaccines, the foods and some other things.
Speaker 2 (31:19):
But it's more than that.
Speaker 1 (31:21):
It's it has to be looking at the air, what's
in our soil.
Speaker 2 (31:24):
So he might help that too. He knows that, and
I would like to know. I don't know.
Speaker 3 (31:30):
Part of me thinks maybe he's remaining quiet because he
really is doing some digging.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
I hope, I hope.
Speaker 3 (31:35):
So, but I got to tell you, these state bans,
all these people know that those don't work because the.
Speaker 1 (31:42):
Federal because it's a federal level.
Speaker 3 (31:44):
Is that what you're saying, I'm saying that the state
doesn't even exist technically above four hundred to a thousand
feet in the air.
Speaker 2 (31:51):
Is that becomes the United States of America.
Speaker 3 (31:54):
So the state, the state only has jurisdiction up to
four hundred feet in rural air and you know, more
vacant areas.
Speaker 2 (32:01):
It can go up to a thousand feet above that,
state laws play no role.
Speaker 3 (32:05):
That is one hundred percent of federal cloud seating occurs
ten to ten to twenty thousand feet in the air,
and chemtrails occur over forty thousand feet in the air
up in the stratosphere.
Speaker 2 (32:17):
So no state can ban it. No state has the
power to ban it. That's why no one's.
Speaker 3 (32:20):
Seeing it stop and they know that they know this,
But it's important to ban it because we need to
bring attention to it, and we need to put it
in the news.
Speaker 2 (32:30):
We need to acknowledge on a state level that this exists.
Speaker 3 (32:33):
And we're not okay with it, and then it lays
the way for a federal ban, which which is occurring.
Speaker 2 (32:38):
The problem is these federal bands they incorporate.
Speaker 3 (32:42):
Aerostolized injections, but and ground based aerosolized and injections because
there's a ton of ground programs, I mean, like so
many ground generators.
Speaker 2 (32:52):
Putting aerosols into the air. Airlines are not the only
way to do it. That's question.
Speaker 1 (32:58):
So I have so you guys, are you believe that
the chemtrails that these companies are working with, like the
commercial airlines to get that high and create them by
the big jets, So they're dispersing something from these companies
when they're flying passengers.
Speaker 3 (33:13):
Okay, wait, I'm confused when you say these companies, are
you what are you like, you know, like Southwest, like
main airliners?
Speaker 1 (33:22):
Yeah, Like are these commercial jetliners Are they the ones
who are creating these chemtrails in the skies or so?
Speaker 3 (33:30):
RFK said this, and so many people in the movement
dismissed him, But I no, I agree with him. So
he said that he believes that the commercial airliners are
putting something in the jet fuel and not them, but
the fuel. The fuel source is part of the program
(33:51):
and it's just.
Speaker 1 (33:52):
Like normal pollution from jet fuel. Or is there something
intentional in the jet fuel?
Speaker 3 (33:59):
On a personal level, On a personal level, I know
what he's saying is true.
Speaker 2 (34:04):
I can't prove it to you yet.
Speaker 3 (34:06):
But because I watch the radar every single day and
I record it and I put it out so that
there's a record, because you can't actually go back in
time on these platforms, I know that these trails exist
and they're coming from commercial airliners in addition to military
(34:27):
because I saw black lines, black lines, black lines, black
lines caking. By the way, I don't know if you
know this when I say I look at radar, I
look at radar for the entire planet every single day.
I know where they trail and I know where they
don't trail on a consistent basis. Canada, United States, just
(34:50):
off the coast of America on both sides, by far
trail more than anywhere on Earth. Anywhere on Earth. Europe
gets them all the time, but they're lo were altitude.
They get haze NonStop, and the people in the comments
say that too. China's got the biggest geo engineering program
in the world. But I don't see many of their
(35:10):
trails there. I think mostly that money is going towards
ground based generators. But you never see them in Africa.
You barely see them in South America or Mexico. You
barely see them in Australia. I know they get them sometime,
are just.
Speaker 1 (35:25):
Based on normal air traffic control patterns, like they just
don't have as much traffic.
Speaker 2 (35:29):
Oh yeah, I mean, I.
Speaker 3 (35:31):
Know you're saying this for your audience, but you know,
I mean China, Come on, Asia, they have a ridiculous
amount of air traffic, and.
Speaker 2 (35:38):
So does South America, you know, and and Europe.
Speaker 3 (35:41):
Europe does too. Their their trails are a different brand.
They've always looked slightly different. And and Australia has a
ton of air traffic. But really, if you want to
compare air traffic, look at Asia. I mean, my gosh,
they have problem any any country on Earth. And no,
you do not see the kind of trails that you see.
But I'll tell you this, This is how I know
(36:02):
that there really are real because I was trying to
prove to myself that they were real, because I'm like,
maybe because I'm never convinced that the information I have
is right. I'm always trying to make sure that I'm
not digging miners. Well, yeah, I mean I want I
don't want to dig myself into a hole where I'm
filled with the wrong information. Like I don't want to
(36:23):
be in a cult. I want to be I want
the right information. I don't care what that information is.
But here's the interesting thing. USA was cut and the
two days following were the only two days ever until
recently that I didn't see a single trail on radar
on any part of the continental US. I had seen
(36:45):
it every single day taking Continental US, and USA gets
cut and all of a sudden, no trails for forty
eight hours.
Speaker 2 (36:55):
I don't know what that means, but clearly there was
a funding issue.
Speaker 1 (36:59):
Well, you know, is interesting if we had such decrease
air traffic during the two years following COVID, and if
they weren't able to do the chemtrails as much because
they weren't having that liner, so we saw the pollution
was down.
Speaker 2 (37:15):
I mean, there were massive changes.
Speaker 1 (37:17):
I mean, it'd be interesting to see if there was
anything any sort of change in the environment at that time.
Obviously it's too late at this point to do that research.
That would have been prime time, you know for me
looking at this from a policy standpoint, I think RFK
Junior at the AJHS, Pete Hegseth DoD and Sean Duffy
at FAA and also NASA now would be very interesting
(37:40):
trio to kind of come together and see if they
could put something together for the American people.
Speaker 2 (37:47):
Well for sure, And.
Speaker 3 (37:48):
Like I said, I hadn't seen them stop trailing except
for that USAID cut, but three weeks ago or when
the Iranian missile strike happened.
Speaker 2 (37:58):
I think it's been about three weeks, maybe it's.
Speaker 3 (38:00):
In a month now when that happened. Ever since then,
I haven't seen a normal trail over the United States.
It's it's been weeks, and all my viewers are like
waiting to start seeing them again. We're seeing them blatantly
obvious in the Atlantic and the Pacific and in Canada
(38:21):
they're still going crazy over their stinks because you know,
they've got wildfires and stuff, and there's you know, these
metals that are in these aerosols can actually exacerbate wildfires
because metal heats up like crazy.
Speaker 2 (38:32):
You're basically blanketing.
Speaker 3 (38:34):
An area and metal and then lighting it on fire
and it becomes very hot from all these metal particulates.
Speaker 2 (38:40):
Anyway, that's aside the point.
Speaker 3 (38:42):
But I don't know what the United States is doing,
and anyone anyone listening, I hope if you know what's
going on, please message me, because I have a theory
that they're either decreasing their program or I was right
and three months ago they changed their formula because it
looks completely different.
Speaker 2 (39:01):
It looks completely different.
Speaker 3 (39:02):
It's it's hazing out rapidly and everyone is just seeing
this white haze now. So I think they figured out
a way too to haze it out rapidly and maybe
even save money doing it. I don't know, but I
also think you probably want to talk about next Red
for a minute before we before we get off, because
that's it. That's probably the most important part of geo engineering,
(39:24):
is the frequency manipulation, more so than the aerosol dispersal itself.
Speaker 1 (39:28):
Well, I'm a radiologist, so all sorts of frequencies in
the atmosphere have concerned me.
Speaker 2 (39:33):
Oh man, then you're going to be fun to talk to.
Speaker 3 (39:37):
So Next Red, you know, next Ride, it's next generation radar,
it's it's pulsed microwave energy, and it's in the S band,
so that's strong enough to penetrate heavy rain.
Speaker 2 (39:48):
That's why it's used for What kind is it?
Speaker 3 (39:51):
It's a microwave, yeah, and it's in the S band,
so it's used for weather radar.
Speaker 2 (39:59):
So they're peak.
Speaker 3 (40:00):
Their peak pulse that they disclose is about seven hundred
and fifty thousand watts.
Speaker 2 (40:08):
Just pretty impressive.
Speaker 3 (40:11):
So officials say though that it's safe because like you
only get exposed to it microseconds at a time, so
average average exposure is low.
Speaker 2 (40:20):
But here's here's the thing. People like me.
Speaker 3 (40:23):
Who actually watch are very consistently noticing these concentric rings,
these radial blooms, these spiraling pulsing ratear like usually over
the more intense storms, and you can actually see them
happening before the storm even becomes intense. And meteorologists will
(40:43):
say they when they see the stuff I share, they're like, oh,
that's a glitch. That's a reflection off of like birds
or insects. I tell you, I look at this every
day and it shows up consistently, and before four months ago,
I very rarely saw it. Ever now I'm seeing it
(41:04):
all day every day, usually in Texas usually in the
middle of the country, all of these storms that have
been producing tornadoes, I see it and sometimes I'll see
the pulse go for go NonStop for days, NonStop. Big
spiral in the Carolinas went for like forty eight hours once.
(41:28):
And yeah, like I said, I mostly see that kind
of activity in the Carolinas, in Texas and lately California.
Speaker 2 (41:34):
So you know, the question becomes, are these towers.
Speaker 3 (41:37):
Really just a passive radar or are they doing more
than what we're told So, and if you combine that
with aerosols like aluminumberbarium, which are already up in the atmosphere,
and then put you're pulsing high energy microwave beams through
those particles, that could really affect things.
Speaker 2 (41:57):
It could influence cloud.
Speaker 3 (41:58):
It definitely could influence cloud for me in disrupt storm
structure and increase lighting.
Speaker 2 (42:04):
You can do some wild stuff with next RED. And
it's not it's not speculation.
Speaker 3 (42:08):
I mean, we've got the patents, we've got the technology,
we can see what's going on on radar.
Speaker 2 (42:14):
What we don't have is transparency, and and.
Speaker 3 (42:18):
Yeah, it's it's it's definitely concerning, and there are definitely
health outcomes to consider. In fact, the health outcomes for
this radiation exposure is more concerning to me than the
aerosols being sprayed.
Speaker 1 (42:33):
I mean, you're a radiologist, so I honestly I think
they would be pretty equal. But I mean I get
what you're saying. I mean, the aerosolized chemicals, radiation. I mean,
it's all it's all things that terrify me. I think,
you know, unfortunately there say it really goes back to
RFP juniors make.
Speaker 2 (42:52):
America healthy again.
Speaker 1 (42:54):
I think chemicals were put in, ultra process, foons were
put in.
Speaker 2 (42:57):
There is a positive impetus behind it.
Speaker 1 (43:00):
Stand why people were doing these things, make it low cost,
more efficient.
Speaker 2 (43:05):
But at the end of the day, they're proving to
be very harmful. So it's so much harder to roll
it back.
Speaker 1 (43:10):
And maybe some of these weather programs decades ago, forty
fifty years ago, when you started seeing these patents coming out,
there was a positive notion behind them. But as we
can see how sick our environment is, how sick we are,
when are we going to be transparent about it and
when are we going to start rolling back? Well?
Speaker 3 (43:28):
Yeah, absolutely, And you know, just from a radiation perspective,
I mean, gosh, if people are actually being affected by this,
if the theories are true, than anyone listening. And this is,
by the way, these are the if and I put
this in a chat GPT, I was like, if someone
were to be exposed to this seven hundred and fifty
watts for hours straight, what would the symptoms be? And
(43:53):
it said it says the stuff that my comment everyone
you commented at a well, it's like hut pressure, buzzing, dizziness, vertigo,
light sound sensitivity, waking up at three am every morning,
short term memory loss, brain fall, car palpitations, chest tightness,
poor circulation, temperature dysregulation, blood pressure, swings, sweating, fever, skin burning, fatigue, weakness.
Speaker 2 (44:15):
I mean, the list their sources of radiation everywhere.
Speaker 1 (44:18):
I mean, we just there's a huge paper that was
just published showing medical radiation is causing a significant amount
of cancer. So you know, I mean, we could just
talk about this forever. But I think, as you're saying forever,
I think that, honestly, transparency is what I'm going to
ask for from this Trump administration. And I'm so happy
(44:40):
Arianna that you came on. You brought an evidence based
approach to this I am someone who really appreciates objective
findings and evidence based medicine and science, and so it's
great to hear your perspective. And you came bringing receipts
and that's all I can ask for. So thanks so
much for joining me.
Speaker 2 (44:57):
Well, thank you, and I'll give.
Speaker 3 (44:59):
You that you l for the sources for everything, but
but yeah, thank you for where.
Speaker 2 (45:05):
People find you. I'm I'm Ariana Masters.
Speaker 3 (45:09):
You can take me in on every any social media,
but you go to my website Arianamasters dot com because
I do want I want you, guys, anyone listening to
really have links to good studies, to source to people
who are naysayers for.
Speaker 2 (45:25):
Studies that prove what's in the soil.
Speaker 3 (45:27):
I mean, it's out, it's there on the internet that
they make it hard for you to find. But I
spent a really long time trying to find this stuff.
So I'm gonna put it on because there's so much
more that I didn't even talk about. But yeah, go
to my website airindimasters dot com. I'm probably gonna create
I'm gonna put a thing in there called facts. I'll
probably do it before this airs, so it should be
available tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (45:48):
All right, perfect, well, thanks so much, appreciate you coming on.
Speaker 1 (45:50):
Thanks Arianna, thank you so much for bringing such a thoughtful,
evidence based voice to a conversation that's too often hijacked
by extremes. Whether it's just a healthy dose of skepticism
or making sure we have healthy skies, this episode reminds
us that real wellness means staying informed. I have concerns
(46:10):
about the environment. I've talked about chronic illness and what
we are consuming, whether it's our food, our beverage, what
we're putting on our bodies in terms of lotion, cosmetics,
what we're breathing in.
Speaker 2 (46:20):
In our air.
Speaker 1 (46:21):
We certainly are seeing more chemicals in our soil samples,
our air samples. Where is it all coming from? Is
it just simply, I guess we can say, simply from
chemical pollutants, whether they're the cars, whether there are airplanes,
or whether there's something more intentional going on.
Speaker 2 (46:40):
And it seems like.
Speaker 1 (46:41):
There are a lot of patents, there are companies that
are all focusing on these weather engineering, whether it's cloud seating.
Is this having consequences on our health? Is the benefit
does the outweigh the risk? Does the risk out weigh
the benefit. All I ask for is transparency, so I
would really like to know a little bit more about it.
(47:02):
There seems like there's evidence suggesting that there may be
some consequences to these actions. Again, I ask for transparency.
That's all I ask for from the government, from these institutions.
I'm doctor Nicole Sapphire. I hope that we all stay curious,
do our best to stay healthy. Thanks for listening to
Wellness unmass on America's number one podcast network, iHeart Follow
(47:23):
Wellness Unmasked with doctor Nicole Saffhire and start listening on
the free iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts,
and we will catch you next time.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.