Fact Check - Hillary Acid Washed Her Emails

Photo credit: POLITICO

Initial concerns over the usage of a private server and emails by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton goes back to 2009. The scandal began to grow in 2012 and has become a major issue during the 2016 presidential campaign. Not a day goes by where the major networks don't at least mention it.

As the story unfolded, we learned that Hillary deleted tens of thousands of emails and the release of thousands of others have been slow-walked. Multiple congressional hearings have taken place, she was investigated by the FBI, and today only 35% of Americans see her as trustworthy. Many questions remain unanswered and it is highly likely that new controversies will arise related to the email scandal before the November election. But this post isn't about rehashing what everyone knows. A fairly recent and new attack line has been showing up in conversations and in the media - the idea that not only did Hillary (and her aides) destroy 'evidence' but that she "acid washed" her email servers in an attempt to get away with breaking the law.

From what I can tell, the first use of the term "acid wash" (in relation to this topic) came in Sept. 2016. Both Donald Trump and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani have used the phrase repeatedly, and even Trump's vice presidential pick Gov. Mike Pence has employed it to attack Hillary.

The idea of acid washing servers, to me at least, conjures up images of "Walt" from the TV series Breaking Bad using acid to dissolve a body. And while destroying electronics is no where near as gruesome, the impression is unmistakable: Hillary will do anything to avoid being held accountable. 

Trump told ABC on Sept. 6, "she had her emails -- 33,000 emails -- acid washed. The most sophisticated person never heard about acid washing. Acid washing is a very expensive process and that’s to really get rid of them."

The catch is, there is no such thing as acid washing emails. That's why his "sophisticated person" never heard of the practice. The reality is that Hillary used a free, widely available computer application called BleachBit to clean her devices. BleachBit is so proud of their product's ability to "stifle" officials investigating, that they boast about it on their website.

Now, Donald Trump is known for exaggerating things. So much so that Art of the Deal ghostwriter Tony Schwartz coined the term "truthful hyperbole" to describe many of the things Trump says. The problem is, there's no such thing. You're either telling the truth or you're not. And as I have said many times before, there's no reason to invent lies and spread misinformation about people with whom you disagree. If the truth of their ill deeds isn't enough to sway people and your ideas (and the strength of those ideas) aren't enough to persuade people to support you, then resorting to 3rd grade tactics only serves to denigrate you and your supporters.

I am staunchly anti-Hillary, but Trump's penchant for twisting the facts while refusing to directly acknowledge any wrong doing, while claiming to be the best and greatest (with zero evidence), really turns me off. Hillary may be a liar, but so is Trump. The fact Trump clearly had no clue what he was talking about, but kept forging on ahead should be deeply disturbing. Simply attacking someone because you fear or hate them, or lashing out wildly, should be beneath any self-respecting American.

--Jacob Bogle, 9/9/2016
www.JacobBogle.com
Facebook.com/JacobBogle
Twitter.com/JacobBogle

America Funds 73% of NATO: Fact or Fiction?

The claim that the United States funds 70% (or more) of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has been around for years, however, 2016 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has been using that figure in defense of his foreign policy ideas - specifically that we get nothing from NATO while paying the "lion's share" of funding. In short: we're subsidizing Europe's defense and thus it's a "bad deal" for America.

NATO was formed out of the chaos of World War II and not only helped to keep western Europe stable after so much disaster, more importantly, it served as a bulwark against a highly aggressive Soviet Union. And, the organization has always been dominated by America, after all we were the only democratic superpower in the world during the post-war era. Today, NATO still serves as a military deterrent to Russia and is involved in fighting terrorism, but it also enables an overarching sense of security that the trillion-dollar European marketplace needs.

Not only does NATO provide military security, but military security and a peaceful and stable region contributes to economic well being. As I discussed in another article, trade between the US and European Union amounts to $700 billion a year. I think that's a pretty good bang for the buck.

So, let's take a look at the reality of American funding.

NATO is funded based on a cost sharing arrangement that allows each of its 28 members to pay a percentage based on their respective GDPs and other factors.

For 2011, NATO's entire common budget - both military and civilian - amounted to $3.5 billion (3.1 billion euro). Meaning the US paid approx. $775 million. That's less than 40% of the current city budget of Nashville, TN.

Then where does the 73% figure come from?

NATO is a joint-security & coordinating organization that is based on the NATO treaty agreement. It has no standing army of its own. The military of NATO is similar to the military of the European Union, or even NAFTA (though the latter two aren't military organizations). In other words, the military capacity is whatever the combined domestic militaries and military spending of all of 28 member states equal.

The combined forces of NATO amounts to 7.3 million active and reserve personnel and costs $920 billion. Now, Spain spends $12.7 billion a year on their military. Does that somehow mean Spain funds 1.38% of "NATO"? No. In fact, Spain funds 5.78% of NATO's "common budget", which is the budget of NATO. Likewise, of the $920 billion in combined, domestic military spending, the US spends around $610 billion. That equals 66% of the combined expenditures of those 28 countries.

Thus, the 73% figure is actually an older number based on what the US spent as a percentage of the combined military spending of all NATO states. Another way to look at it would be: annual global military spending equals $1.2 trillion. Since America's spending is $610 billion, is it fair to say America "funds" 50.8% of the world's military? Not at all. The "world" doesn't have a military, it has ~190 different militaries, all of which are funded by the respective ~190 sovereign countries.

So if Trump really wants things to be fair and logically consistent, since America's military spending represents 66% of the combined spending of those 28 states, we should be paying for 66% of NATO's common budget, not the 22.1% we actually pay. But even that 66% would only equal $2.3 billion - or 18% of the cost of a single new Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier.


In the end, Donald Trump either really doesn't understand the distinctions between NATO's actual budget and the domestic budgets of its members combined or he is willfully spreading misinformation to achieve his goals. Either way, it's a bad thing.


--Jacob Bogle, 5/18/16
www.JacobBogle.com
Facebook.com/JacobBogle
Twitter.com/JacobBogle

Nuclear Explosion over Donetsk Ukraine?

On Feb 8, 2015, several reports came out of the city of Donetsk, Ukraine about a large explosion. Video of the bombing showed what appeared to be a small mushroom cloud. This was quickly conjoined with an alleged image from space showing a massive "fireball", which then fueled reports about a tactical nuclear device being detonated by Ukrainian forces against the separatists.

Sites Inforwars, ZeroHedge, Russia Today, and even the UK's Daily Mail all posted about the explosion and related worries about a potential nuclear disaster.

The video, which has been viewed over 2.6 million times can be seen here:

From Youtube user Самооборона Горловки

ZeroHedge reported that the explosion could be seen from space and posted this picture as "proof".

The truth is somewhat less cataclysmic.  

The video is of a real explosion, a normal non-nuclear bomb fell on a chemical factory. The image promoted by ZeroHedge author Tyler Durden was actually taken by astronaut Terry Virts from the International Space Station, and is nothing more than a sunrise. You can see Terry Virts' Twitter posting of the image here.

While the Daily Mail mentions that some were concerned about it being a nuclear explosion, the article clearly states, "A giant explosion which rocked the Ukrainian city of Donetsk sparked fears of a 'tactical nuke' after pro-government forces shelled a rebel-held chemical plant."

Not to mention that if it was a legitimate nuclear detonation, radiation detectors all over eastern Europe would have picked up on the very telltale signature of a nuclear explosion and news organizations the world over would have been reporting on it. Let's not forget that this is Ukraine, home of Chernobyl.

Neither the size, nor brightness of the explosion were indicative of it being a nuclear detonation - tactical or not. This was just another example of pro-Russian propaganda. Conspiracy theorists tried to spin it as 'the poor ethnic minorities seeking freedom have been nuked by the evil pro-Western Ukrainians'. In reality, they've successfully shown they have succumbed to "nuclear foot-in-mouth disease".

A bit of advice: sites like InfoWars have absolutely no credibility so ignore them and use some common sense.

For the record, mushroom cloud explosions are not the sole domain of nuclear annihilation. In fact, any adequately large explosion will result in a mushroom could.

Here's a video of a fertilizer plant explosion in Waco, Texas. You can see the main explosion from time index 1:22.

Jacob Bogle, 2/10/15
Facebook.com/JacobBogle
Twitter.com/jacobbogle



H/T to Laura Bohling and Tom Puschak for bringing this Internet rumor to my attention.

Is the Yellowstone Volcano Overdue?

For a while people have been saying that the Yellowstone volcano is overdue for an eruption. The figures thrown around have been between 40,000 and 60,000 years overdue.

Wait, Yellowstone is a volcano? Yup.

In fact, Yellowstone National Park is primarily a part of the Yellowstone Caldera, a massive volcano which measures 34 by 45 miles (1,530 sq. mi.) in size. Because it is so large, it lacks the commonly recognizable features of a volcano and it took geologists a long time to really figure out the scope of what Yellowstone was. Yellowstone is of course famous for its geysers, hot springs, and mud pots. All of those incredible sights, which have amazed onlookers for centuries and attracts well over 3 million visitors a year, belies the fact that this natural wonder is a very special type of volcano (a super volcano) with the potential for a very special and destructive type of eruption: a super eruption.

The visible features of the caldera, like geysers, boiling springs, and the countless small earthquakes are all evidence to the reality that Yellowstone sits atop a magma chamber 6,600 cubic miles in volume! For some perspective, that's enough to stuff to build a wall 1 mile high and a mile wide that stretches from New York to Afghanistan.

As we all know, the Earth's crust moves over an ocean of liquid rock thousands of miles deep. Because the crust is relatively thin, it can break and fracture which creates the various tectonic plates and fault lines, and causes earthquakes, and volcanoes. There are certain places where magma (the molten rock making up the mantle) concentrates in the upper reaches of the mantle and remains for millions of years, like a giant boiling pillar of fiery death. As the crust moves over these "hotspots", long chains of volcanoes form. The best known hotspot lies under Hawai'i and it's why there are a series of volcanic islands. Yellowstone is another such hotspot, and over the past 16 million years there have been seven major calderas which formed as the crust moved (right to left) over the relatively stagnant hotspot. This has actually left the region with an arch of extinct volcanoes and the current active caldera which formed 2.1 million years ago.

(Location of the Yellowstone hotspot over time. Number indicates millions of years before present.)

As I said, the current active Yellowstone caldera formed 2.1 million years ago as the product of the last three super eruptions which were, 2.1 million, 1.3 million, and 640,000 years ago respectively. The last super eruption which occurred created the Lava Creek Tuff formation, a layer of volcanic debris and ash which covered an area some 1,500 miles wide at its greatest extent. Such super eruptions can cause total chaos, alter global climate, and if one were to happen today, millions could die in the US within a few months and many more across world as "the world's breadbasket" (America's plains) became inhospitable to plant life. 

  

Doing some quick figuring - 3 eruptions over 2.1 million years - one see that these eruptions happen about once every 700,000 years, and since the last one was 640,000 years ago, we find that Yellowstone is not "overdue". In fact, the differences between the first and second eruptions and the second and third eruptions are 800,000 and 660,000 years respectively. This makes the average interval more like 730,000 years. The "40,000 years overdue" myth comes from a common misconception that the eruptions occur every 600,000 years. 

Humans love stability and predictability, but the world in which we live is neither stable nor precisely predictable. While there have only been 3 super eruptions in the last 2.1 million years, Yellowstone has had smaller eruptions as early as 2,270 years ago and others as far back as 16.1 million years ago. Although hotspots may last for millions of years, they do dissipate, and just like volcanoes, none last forever. There is no guarantee that any volcano will erupt again, and certainly there is nothing saying it "must" erupt. Indeed there is no such thing as an overdue eruption, earthquake, or asteroid hit. We assign odds and averages just to help us contextualize things which are far out of our control and that rarely have any real predictability.

In Yellowstone, things like earthquake swarms and ground swells could signal an impending eruption, but more often than not, when these events happen they tend not to be connected to one another. 

Only time will tell if Yellowstone will blow its top and send us all to our doom. The reality is, it could happen tomorrow, or 90,000 years from now, or never. The odds of it happening in any given year are 1 in 730,000 and the odds that we could actually do something about it are something like 1 in 2,948,321,110,479.5

So no, it is not overdue. Sit back and relax, or better yet, take a vacation to Yellowstone and see the awesome natural beauty that 6,600 cubic miles of magma can produce. 

Further Reading

Future Activity at Yellowstone, U.S. Geological Survey

United States Inc.

Is the United States of America a Corporation?

One of the more understandable misunderstandings on the Internet is the notion that the United States' federal government (and by extension the country as a whole) is in reality a corporation with its own set of rules, CEO's etc. This theory is held by many and is parroted across hundreds of websites and online forums, some with seemingly strong arguments. To complicate matters they point to a series of  laws which, on the surface, may appear to validate their claims. I hope to be able to explain where the misunderstandings come from and to clear up the whole issue.

These are the two laws which are the most quoted:

28 USC § 3002 - Definitions
(15) “United States” means—
        (A) a Federal corporation;
        (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
        (C) an instrumentality of the United States.

And the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 which creates a city government for the District of Columbia. You can find the full text of the Act here.

An example of the most common claims and arguments can be found here. Aside from claiming the US government is a for-profit corporation, it naturally asserts that we are and have been under the control of the evil Rothschild international bankers and that since some people think our "current" government is unlawful, that their minority opinion holds with the full force of law and is actionable i.e they do not have to follow any laws set forth after 1871 (a fantasy of the highest order).

The "Definitions" controversy rests in the meaning of "a Federal corporation." The rest of the issues arising from 28 USC § 3002 are really rather basic. This section is saying that for the purpose of identifying what is or is not a part of the United States federal government, the "United States" may refer to EITHER; a Federal corporation; an agency, department, commission, board of other entity of the United States; or an instrumentality of the United States.

As of 2011 there are 17 federal corporations. According to a report on federal corporations by the Congressional Research Service "The federal government does not possess a general incorporation statute as states do. Each government corporation is chartered through an act of Congress." Federal government corporations include the Postal Service, the Federal Reserve and the TVA. The definition does NOT say that the federal government *is* a corporation but rather, federal corporations (like the TVA) are part of the federal government of the United States.

English is a tricky language and words take on new popular meanings and tones, especially words that have a modern negative connotation, like "corporation." A person with only a cursory understanding of the law or only focusing on the "definitions" section could easily come to the wrong conclusion. This section has been used to great effect and unfortunately most people never step outside of themselves and their distrust of all things government to actually research the issue themselves. A meme showing evil bankers with "the United States is a corporation" will be passed along the Internet simply because people do not trust government and the meme reinforces pre-held biases; it reinforces a negative image and people are all too eager to indulge themselves.

The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 was an act to formally give a government to the District of Columbia which, up to that point, had been governed as a mixture of municipalities and counties within District boundaries. Let me give you some more background.

Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress (with the approval of the affected States) the power to create a district in which to hold the seat of government. This district, 10 miles squared (not 10 square miles, but 10 miles on each side), was formally placed under the direct control of the Congress.

The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801 allowed Congress to retain control over the city itself, known as the City of Washington, however the remaining territories were divided into Washington County and the County of Alexandria. The cities of Georgetown and Alexandria, which had existed prior to 1801 and which existed within the 100 square mile federal territory, were allowed to keep their city charters. In 1802, the City of Washington was granted its own charter. The mayor of the City of Washington was to be appointed by the President.

The citizens within the District were no longer citizens of Maryland or Virginia and were thus disenfranchised. This disenfranchisement is what led Virginia, in 1846, to ultimately reclaim the territory it had ceded to the District.

Next, comes the Act of 1871. This act repealed the individual charters of Georgetown and Alexandria, brought them in with Washington County (since the County of Alexandria now belonged to Virginia), and brought the whole area under one single government, the District of Columbia. Nowhere in the law's text does it say anything about the government of the United States being a corporation. Additionally, Congress repealed the Act in 1874 and replaced the system of direct Congressional governance for the local government of the District in favor of a more direct rule system. The District of Columbia would then be ruled by a three-member Board of Commissioners until 1967 when it was replaced with a mayor and city council who would be appointed by the President. This was changed once again by the 1973 Home Rule Act. 

What is a corporation?

The word "corporation" has several meanings, however it is generally understood as a legal entity that has been incorporated (in one way or another) by a legislative act. A fair amount of confusion arises because the modern American understanding of the term is somewhat different than the original English definitions. In the US, the term tends to mean a business, but the term really means that it is now an entity which can be sued, do business (activity), etc. without respect to the individuals who made it or control it. Basically, an incorporated entity can act and be brought to court. 

The notion that the term "corporation" is solely an entity with its own separate laws and whose only purpose is to make money is an utter misconception. Cities, states, colonies, nations, and yes, businesses have been incorporating themselves for centuries. 

In the American system of government, States hold the power to grant or refuse the incorporation (or home rule) of a city, county or other body. However, since the federal district was explicitly authorized by the Constitution and Congress was given direct control over the district, it took an Act (or Acts) of Congress to set it up. 

Final words

Under federal law, for an entity to become a federal corporation there must be an Act of Congress creating that corporation. And as we have seen, Congress has created multiple federal corporations. There are no acts incorporating the United States, only the District of Columbia; which is not the same thing as the government of the United States, no more so than the City of Nashville is the government of the State of Tennessee.

In the Supreme Court case, United States v. Cooper Corporation (1941), the Court said: "We may say in passing that the argument that the United States may be treated as a corporation organized under its own laws, that is, under the Constitution as the fundamental law, seems so strained as not to merit serious consideration."

This view is additionally supported by the doctrine of "sovereign immunity," which states that the government of the United States, or of the individual States, or of certain tribal entities, may not be sued unless the government first allows it. A business/company/corporation can be sued.

The government of the United States and the entity of the District of Columbia are not one and the same. The District of Columbia is no different than the incorporated cities of Nashville, Sacramento or Atlanta when compared to the Constitutional governing bodies (the governments of the States) that reside within their limits. 


Sources & additional reading:

Federal Corporations - by the Congressional Research Service (PDF)

District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801 - text of the Act

District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 - text of the Act

Morgellons

(Alleged fibers "growing" in dish)

Morgellons (Morgellons Disease) is a syndrome characterized by crawling and stinging skin sensations, persistent skin rashes/lesions, and the appearance of "unknown" fibers on and beneath the skin. The cause(s) of Morgellons are unknown but many believe it to be caused by a conspiracy involving chemtrails, population control efforts, HAARP, nano-bioweapons etc.

Modern Morgellons first came to light in 2001 when a woman, Mary Leitao, claimed her two-year old son developed sores on his lips and complained of "bugs". Leitao has a Bachelor of Science degree in biology and had worked in a local hospital. She said she examined the sores with her son's toy microscope and found fibers of different colors.[1]  She took her son to 8 different doctors who were unable to find any cause or known illness. Dr. Fred Heldrich, from John Hopkins, examined her son and found nothing. He further stated that Mrs. Leitao should seek psychological help.[1] In 2002 Leitao founded the "Morgellons Research Foundation" (MRF) and since that time the Foundation claims that it has received 12,000 case reports from people around the world.

Fast forward a few years and Leitao's story makes national news. This mysterious condition was discussed on several TV shows, including ABC's Medical Mysteries. But, despite the coverage and outpouring of purported sufferers, numerous medical studies have repeatedly failed to find any cause. This has led to a vast number of theories ranging from the targeted infection of the population by governments to aliens.[2] Some have even suggested that these fibers act as tiny antennas connecting us to mind-control programs.

Now, let us look at the facts:

The CDC began actively investigating Morgellons in 2007 after an extensive letter-writing campaign. In 2012 the CDC released their findings after studying 115 patients. They found no infective agents or environmental causes. In conclusion, they noted that this syndrome closely resembles delusional infestation (also known as delusional parasitosis) more than a new condition.[3][4]

There was also a study done by the Mayo Clinic which looked at 108 patients. The study was conducted from 2001-2007 and the results released in 2011. The study included examining skin biopsies and they found no evidence of a skin infection. The Mayo Clinic likewise raised the point that the sufferers are exhibiting the same signs and symptoms of delusional infestation.[5]

After studying the fibers they concluded they were bits of clothing and other everyday fibers (cotton, nylon etc) as well as things like gravel and oil that the sufferers had scratched into themselves.[5]

What about the wine test?

There is a Morgellons "test" that you can find online.[6] Basically, by washing your mouth with red wine for 5 minutes and then spitting into a cup you can determine if you have been infected. If you see stringy bits in the cup you are a victim. Aside from the odd issue of only using red wine (and not beer, vodka, etc) it is somewhat curious that this would be such an easy test and yet so many doctors have failed to detect these "nano-pathogens" in skin and blood samples.

Perhaps there is something more mundane at work? Wine tasters have always noticed "stuff" in the wine they spit out. They have known about this since before airplanes even existed. The mechanism at work is referred to as astringency. Astringency is the drying, roughing and sometimes puckering sensation that is experienced after tasting most red wines. Red wines also contain tannin's which can interact with your saliva (and the proteins therein) and cause a gritty sensation as well as bind together and form "super structures" which you can see.[7][8] So, fairly obviously, if you swish wine or other tannin containing substances in your mouth for an extended period of time you are likely to find bits of stuff in it once you spit it out. 

What about the people/groups involved in scientifically proving Morgellons?

Raphael Stricker is the author of "Morgellons disease: Analysis of a population with clinically confirmed microscopic subcutaneous fibers of unknown etiology" published by Dove Medical Press. However, he is also a disgraced doctor who was found guilty of falsifying data and excluding information which did not support his hypothesis.[9] And while the fact that he lied in the past is not 100% evidence that his data is currently untrustworthy it is nonetheless an important factor to keep in mind. Stricker is also associated with the Morgellons Research Foundation. The misconduct findings list him as an M.D however; I'm not sure what kind of doctor he actually is. I've found veterinary microbiologist, intern, scientist and others associated with his name. 

Dove Medical Press is an open access (free) journal. Further investigation reveals that DMP has a number of somewhat disturbing problems which, in my mind, makes them a non-credible source.[10][11][12]  

Randy Wymore is an associate professor of Pharmacology at the University of Oklahoma. He has been very active in studying Morgellons, in particular the fibers. Supporters often cite his work as evidence of Morgellons, specifically Wymore's first test in which he concluded "There's something real going on here. Something we don't understand at all." The problem is that science needs more than one test, more than one study and results MUST be repeatable or else it's just a theory. After additional studying, Wymore's fibers have been identified as: cotton, nylon, human hair, down from a pillow and other known substances. Wymore further admits "We have not yet exactly replicated the exact results of the forensics people in Tulsa."[13]

Clifford Carnicom is a computer consultant and former researcher & manager with various government agencies. According to his site he holds a Bachelors of Science. He founded the Carnicom Institute which claims to do "scientific research" on environmental and health issues.[14] Carnicom claims to have done a large amount of research into chemtrails and Morgellons and his "work" has been widely cited online in support of Morgellons being caused by some government chemtrail conspiracy. Interestingly, on his site there is a disclaimer which reads in part "The Institute does not perform any medical diagnosis. Any presentation, opinion or expression [by an Institute representative] in no way implies or denotes endorsement by the Institute." The Institute has two board members, Carnicom and a former music teacher.  

A man named Jay Reynolds has taken considerable pain to research the claims made by Mr. Carnicom. Reynolds concludes:

"No medical reports, material analysis, or documentable and confirmable evidence has been presented which supports the hypothesis that chemical or 

biological agents are currently being delivered or can be associated with 

jet contrails."

The relevant pages and information can be found here:[15][16][17]

The Institute's Morgellons research page also discusses the red wine test and lists a number of symptoms including: eye "floaters", joint pain and stomach problems.[18] The symptom list is not intended to be inclusive implying that there are many more symptoms. When just about anything can be associated with Morgellons (just do a Google search) it makes it very difficult to actually determine what is or is not a direct symptom and opens the door for anyone to claim they're sufferers and no one would dare doubt them. 

Carnicom claims to have a new "improved" method for researching "webs" that fall out of the sky. They look suspiciously like a cotton or nylon net which has been cut up and wrapped over a stick.

(Image from Carnicom)

Others claim that heavy metals like gold and silver are being dumped into the air along with the pathogens that cause Morgellons. Gold especially is practically harmless to humans. They also claim that 12,000 families in the US have been infected with Morgellons (which differs greatly from the MRF's claim of 12,000 *individual* cases - the world over). So after the countless chemtrails, the millions exposed, only 12,000 are infected?[19] Sounds more like a failure than any well-oiled conspiracy to doom us all.  

Morgellons from the 1600s? 

An interesting note of history is a letter by Sir Thomas Browne which was first published in 1690.[20] In it he writes:

"Hairs which have most amused me have not been in the Face or Head, but on the Back, and not in Men but Children, as I long ago observed in that Endemial Distemper of little Children in Languedock, called the Morgellons, wherein they critically break out with harsh Hairs on their Backs, which takes off the Unquiet Symptomes of the Disease, and delivers them from Coughs and Convulsions." 

And there are a number of other similar descriptions throughout the last 500 years. Could it be that a small minority suffer from this long forgotten rare illness while others suffer from delusion? Only further research will give us the end truth but there is little doubt that the modern and common claim of Morgellons is more legend than reality.

Bottom Line:
There is no credible evidence for this syndrome of being anything but a psychological illness and mass hysteria which has fed off lies, misinformation, ignorance and simple fear. Morgellons has no clear diagnosis criteria, no clear set of symptoms and is nearly identical to delusional parasitosis.[21][22] No one likes to admit they've either been the victim of a hoax/myth or that they have a psychological disorder.


Doubt, ignorance and fear can cause otherwise reasonable people to see, feel or think just about anything. Does this alone mean that people aren't experiencing itching or crawling sensations? No. Get a group of friends together and start talking about lice. Before you know it there will be people scratching and running off to a mirror to see if they have bugs in their hair. Just because you "feel" something doesn't mean your body is responding to an external physical stimuli.

We are surrounded by fibers from our clothes, blankets, napkins, paper, home and car upholstery, from each other, pets and even spider webs. The hairs on our body have wildly varying thicknesses, colors and shapes. Contrails (the trail of "smoke" behind a plane) have been observed since at least the 1940's, just because people confuse them or misidentify them doesn't mean much.


Instead of admitting the possibility that people like Mr. Carnicom have been taking advantage of the fear and ignorance surrounding this issue for their own benefit proponents will resort to the last stand of all conspiracy theorists: That the government and the millions of independent, private scientists the world over are all part of some vast plan. That "they" have been so blinded by formal education (even though the theorists claim to use the very same information and methods as academia) that they simply cannot discover what is clearly before their eyes. A perfect trump card, you either "see the light" or you're a part of it.

So tell me, which is more realistic?

Sources:
1. Mom fights for answers on what's wrong with son, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
2. Radiation & Chemtrail Assault, Food Freedom (blog)
3. CDC Study
4. Delusional Infestation, Clinical Microbiology Reviews (an introduction to the illness)
5. Morgellons, Medpage Today
6. Red Wine Spit Test, Beforeitsnews.com
7. Red wine astringency, Wine Aroma Dictionary
8. Food Chemistry 3rd Edition, pg 657. By Owen Fennema (hosted on Scribd)
9. Final findings of scientific misconduct, National Institutes of Health
10. Richard Poynder interviews Dove Press publisher, Open Access News
11. Predatory Open-Access Publishers, Jeffery Beall, University of Colorado-Denver (PDF)
12. DMP and academic fraud, DailyKos
13. Morgellons: A hidden epidemic or mass hysteria? The Guardian
14. The Carnicom Institute: Mission
15. Reynolds 1, his FOIA requests
16. Reynolds 2, chemtrail "web" info
17. Reynolds 3, an example of a claim by Carnicom being found false
18. Carnicom's Morgellons page
19. GeoEngineering Exposed, a blog roll with posts tagged "Cliff Carnicom"
20. A Letter to a Friend, Sir Thomas Browne (University of Chicago)
21. Morgellons Disease? A study published in Dermatologic Therapy (Wiley)
22. Morgellons: contested illness, a study published in Sociology of Health & Illness (Wiley) (PDF)


Additional Reading:
Morgellons' Wikipedia article
Morgellons Watch, a skeptic site
Morgellons related thread (supporters and opponents) 
Hair, Wikipedia
Contrail, Wikipedia 

Moregellons-like descriptions:
Sir Thomas Browne and the Disease Called the Morgellons, by C.E. Kellett MD 1935

Chemtrails Part 1: Barium & Alunimum

Chemtrails: chemical or biological agents deliberately sprayed at high altitudes for covert purposes by a government entity. 

The idea of chemtrails has been around for about 2 decades and it is one of those issues that can deeply polarize people. It has taken on a whole new life online and many people genuinely believe that there is a vast conspiracy aimed at global depopulation, the dumbing down of the people and weather modification which uses chemtrails (chemical trails) as a means to bring about this new world order.

What makes the issue so divisive is all the information that is out there, usually promoted by people with only a cursory understanding of the sciences involved and a confusion of history. Supporters usually point to an ever growing number of websites whose purpose is to "expose" the conspiracy and provide supporting science; however anyone trying to have an open conversation about it will tend to find supporters veering off the science and going into further conspiracies and pointing to ill-deeds done by the government decades ago as proof that the events of today are likewise caused by the global cabal.

I have heard people on both sides of the issue for years. Some become very animated at even the simplest questions while others are more respectful and earnestly try to help you see their point of view. I have tried very hard to listen to both sides and even today I still don't have a firm opinion on the subject matter, but I must admit I am not very fond of those who support it. 

So I will now attempt to take a number of claims made about chemtrails and give you my assessment of them with supporting evidence as usual. This is not necessarily intended to be absolute proof chemtrails are completely false but rather to provide evidence against certain specific claims made about chemtrails. 

News report found dangerously high levels of barium in ground water after spraying:

One of the sources for this comes from KLSA News 12 (Louisiana) when a reporter tested some water after seeing what he claimed were chemtrails. According to KLSA they found barium levels at 6.8 parts per million, which is 3 times the EPA's safety level. However, further investigations found that KLSA had misread the report and that the real level was 68 parts per billion, which is well within limits. There was no evidence submitted at all that directly linked the barium with the trails in the sky.[1] Spurred on by this allegation CBS-5 (Arizona) did an interview with the founder of the site "TheTruthDenied", the interview concluded that chemtrails didn't exist at all and that there was no support for high levels of barium.[2]


Chemtrails give off aluminum oxide which can cause cancer and other illnesses:

Aluminum oxide is a very common form of aluminum, in fact it is the most common oxide of aluminum found in nature. For those of you who don't know, an oxide is simply an element (like aluminum) that is bound to oxygen. Rust is technically iron oxide.

Aluminum is used in many dangerous sounding applications such as abrasives, paints, certain electrical insulators and then of course as pure aluminum metal in everything from bicycles to beer cans. Aluminum itself is the most common metal in the Earth's crust [3] and is actually the primary component of rubies and sapphires.

People claim that the government is using aluminum oxide to modify the weather and as a result people are getting sick from it. The problem is, aluminum is not used by the body and since it is not radioactive, it actually does nothing to the body at a cellular level. Like anything in particulate (dust) form, aluminum oxide can cause respiratory irritation but it is easily cleared from the body and there has never been an example of aluminum being purposely released into the atmosphere at a concentration that would cause harm.

Now, chronic (long-term) exposure of nearly anything can cause negative health effects but again, it is nearly impossible for the average person to have chronic exposure to high levels (1.5mg/m3 hour after hour, day after day) of aluminum oxide.

It is not a carcinogen, does not exhibit mutagenic effects, does not harm human fetuses and has no known lethal dosage within the limits of regular exposure (i.e. unless you swallow massive amounts it won't hurt you ).[4] Furthermore, should you be exposed to it less than 1% of it (>0.015mg of a 1.5mg dose) would be absorbed by the gastrointestinal tract and only a very small amount would be absorbed as a result of inhalation. [5] The amount that would have to be sprayed from the air (over large areas and multiple times as claimed) to cause negative health effects on a large segment of the population would be of such high quantity that no single plane could carry it and any sample of soil would be saturated with it. To my knowledge, there is no example of that being found in non-industrial soil samples.

Patent 7,645,326

This patent, dated 2010, deals with releasing aluminum oxide into a warehouse environment in order to reduce the ambient radio noise (clutter) associated with all electronic items, like lightbulbs, and to reduce problems associated with ionosphere disruption during sunset to allow better communication between items which use an RFID system.[6]  It has nothing to do with chemtrails. The process seeks to reduce noise and boost the signals of the intended radio sources. These radio sources work at very specific frequencies, which raises an issue relating to open environment use of aluminum.

If aluminum can be used to reduce the amount specific radio frequencies, could it not also interfere with the enormous number of different frequencies we use everyday? Cell phones, TV, wireless Internet, medical devices, ad nauseam all rely on radio communications. The private sector controls literally billions of frequencies along the electromagnetic spectrum and there is a lot of engineering involved to keep, say your television, from disrupting your iPhone. Placing any electrically conductive material in the atmosphere can have a positive effect on one group of technologies while unintentionally harming another. 

Basic logistics:

Many so-called chemtrails are at an altitude of thousands of feet. At this height the average wind speed can be anywhere between 50 and 100 miles per hour and then there is the potential for turbulence, cross-direction winds and so forth. This means that even if they were spraying something the people directly below wouldn't be exposed to it. Unless they sprayed at a low height (like crop-dusters) or on days with very little wind it would be difficult to gauge where the trail would go or what dilution it would reach - it may become so diluted that it would have no effect at all. Of course the argument is that it's all about weather modification and any negative heath risks associated are just a "bonus" to the NWO elite but as we've seen, at least with aluminum, there really aren't any health issues. 

Logical fallacies:

Many conspiracy supporters are either unaware of committing logical fallacies or intentionally use them in hopes that they will confuse or convert others to their cause. Usually they are: 

• False-cause - presuming that there is a connection between two events (e.g Obama was inaugurated as president, a month later a meteor hit the Earth)   
• Appeal to authority/Bandwagon - "So-and-so group/person/nation/website has investigated chemtrails thus they must be real. Plus, just look at all the websites about it!"
• Burden of proof - Basically claim that because you don't believe them it us up to you to prove their assertions wrong while they won't offer substantive evidence that they are right. 
• Anecdotal - using a personal or limited number of examples as full evidence
• And what I call the "synthesis" fallacy - pulling small bits of information from different sources and then meshing them together to support a claim that is not included in any of the original sources.  

Although committing a logical fallacy doesn't mean the conclusion is wrong, when much of your evidence is built around fallacies, incorrect assumptions or flawed science it makes it very hard to defend the position with any credibility.  


I'll tackle additional claims (like weather modification) in future posts. 
 

Sources:
1. Curious Contrails, Skeptical Inquirer
2. Do toxic chemtrails really exist?, CBS-5, Arizona
3. Aluminum, JLab.org 
4. MSDS-Aluminum oxide
5. Aluminum oxide: Health effects, EU-REACH/WHO(pdf)
6. Patent 7,645,326, US Patent Office

Additional:
Aluminum Heath Risk Assesment, National Institutes of Health (pdf) 
Aircraft Contrails Fact-sheet, FAA (pdf)
FCC Spectrum Search

Obama's Law License Revoked

The hoax that Barack and Michelle Obama had their law license revoked has been around for several years. It usually entails a claim that it was revoked due to disciplinary proceedings and gives a link to some obscure blog as proof, and for good measure a link to the front page of the Illinois Attorney Registration And Disciplinary Committee.

This has been making the rounds again all over Facebook, Twitter and E-mail.
The truth of the matter is this:

Neither Obama's have an active license, they were voluntarily retired. Despite the claim that Michelle was forced to surrender her license due to "insurance fraud", neither Michelle nor Barack were ever suspected of any wrongdoing and have not undergone any disciplinary action.

Obama placed his license on "inactive" status when he decided to run for president and after he won he had it retired. According the ARDC, it is a fairly common practice to retire your licence if you no longer intend to practice law. A 2011 ARDC report shows that 12% of the states registered attorneys were placed on "inactive" status.

So please, stop spreading this lie. Even if you don't like Obama it is still no reason to propagate such a blatant falsehood.

Sources:

1. http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/the-obamas-law-licenses/
2. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/lawlicenses.asp
3. http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/Obama-Law-License.htm
4. ARDC Report http://www.iardc.org/AnnualReport2011.pdf
5. IARDC Barack Obama Page https://www.iardc.org/ldetail.asp?id=368256064
6. IARDC Michelle Obama Page https://www.iardc.org/ldetail.asp?id=498531424