Welcome
Welcome to All Aircraft Are Not Involved.

Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, make your voice heard!

{UPDATED} Patrick Minnis of NASA Further Exposed as Disinfo

dialogue and research on chemical trails

{UPDATED} Patrick Minnis of NASA Further Exposed as Disinfo

Unread postby socrates » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:25 am

IMPORTANT UPDATE

There can be no doubt about it. Patrick Minnis and Mark Steadham, the owner of Chemtrail Central, have known each other for many years. Minnis denied this last year in an email. Yet, we now have clear cut proof that Patrick Minnis is a liar and a troll.

Steadham Post As It Now Appears

[quote="Mark Steadham"]For whatever it's worth, canex is a member of the Chemtrail Central forums, and probably knows more about contrails than anyone, and they check in on us occasionally.

[Edited 1 times, lastly by Thermit on 03-20-2002]
screenshot



The original post was made on January 22nd, 2002.

Via the wayback machine, here is how the post was originally written.

[quote="Mark Steadham"]For whatever it's worth, Dr. Minnis is a member of the Chemtrail Central forums. He goes by "canex" here, and checks in on us occasionally.
screenshot




From Conspiracy theories find menace in contrails

[quote="Traci Watson in USA Today"]Some, such as Minnis, are outraged enough by the claims of chemtrail believers that they have trolled Internet chat rooms to correct misinformation or have gotten into arguments with callers.


_____________________________________________________________________________________________

I asked this dude back in September if he was Canex at Chemtrail Central. This was his response.

I did post as Canex, but I have no clue whether Mark Steadham worked for NASA or not. I do not know the name and do not remember any relationship with him. Why do you ask?


screenshot proof


Here's a tidbit the owner of Chemtrail Central posted at an obscure forum. He has never admitted once at CTC that he has worked for NASA.

Image
link


Today we got absolutely blasted with chemtrails. There was nowhere near the necessary amount of relative humidity to account for what was witnessed.

Atmospheric Soundings

Image
Image
Image

According to Minnis from October 2000, there is also a relationship between dewpoint and temperature that can explain why persistent contrails or "contrail outbreaks" as he puts it form.

...You will notice that between 8,000 and 12,000 meters, the temperature and dewpoint temperatures differ by 3 to 7 deg C. The layers where the difference is less than 5 deg is definitely supersaturated with respect to ice and will form persistent contrails while the layers with the 5 to 7 deg differences may form persistent contrails but more likely will produce short-lived contrails.


Hmmm. So according to the data, there is no reasonable explanation for today's activities in the Southeastern Massachusetts area.


This is where it should get very interesting for you the good reader. You know how if someone lies in the courtroom, everything else one says will fall under greater scrutiny? I have always wondered whether Minnis was Canex. It's not like he makes it clear in his posts or profile. Until he admitted to it in the email, I had little faith that they were one and the same. I was shocked to find out Patrick Minnis of NASA made 164 posts at a chemtrail forum run by a co-worker from 2000-2003.

You're gonna love this. I have caught this individual in outrageous lies, in which he denied in his posts to being Minnis or even working at NASA. There is absolutely no way Minnis can be unaware of the deliberate creation of white-outs. I wrote to him again recently, and he sounded interested in the low humidity readings for the "contrail outbreak" I observed. He asked me where I was located. I wrote back with answers for him along with my uv-b ray and severe weather mitigation theories, and I never heard back from him again. The following will prove once and for all that this guy is a bold-faced liar. I did not forge that email above. He admitted to being Canex.

I'm gonna copy and paste comments from a specific CTC thread. It's not adding up. Is the reason Minnis has stopped answering my questions because he now realises he has been outed by a prolific trollbuster? I am gonna save these pages, just in case they get deleted. They clearly show that he was portraying himself as anyone but Patrick Minnis.

link

{excerpts}
Sore Throat: Ah... CANEX finally makes an appearance. Kinda like tag team wrestling. NASA to the rescue. His NOAA buddy FK was pretty hard on the mat, whining about being twisted when the fact was he was being quoted directly. We of course notice CANEX's reference to "Frisco".

So here's what I did CANEX. I returned to the Contrail Forecast site....

I suppose it's just a matter of what you consider a wazoo... but then again you did say "Frisco". Maybe "The Esteemed" Dr. Patrick Minnis can help YOU use his modeling program.


Why did Sore Throat refer to Canex as not being Patrick Minnis????

From the wording it appears that Canex works for NASA but is not Minnis. Why all the confusion. Then in between the give and take, kind of interesting, the alleged NOAA dude links to an article on hidden clouds and moisture. One thing debunkers are always good for is the creation of wiggle room. The article is available through the wayback machine. A quick google search isn't turning up anything on hidden clouds. Got disinfo?

Onto page five where Chem11 shows up. Talk about a concern troll. He runs a forum called Megasprayer in which one can peruse copy and pastes from debunkers in chemmie clothes. They believe every aircraft is a defacto "spray" plane, thus that chemtrails are contrails.

The first post by Canex, one can see him refer to himself in the third person, though he was listing publications. Ok, some wiggle room there. But check out the end of his post. He quotes Sore Throat then refers to his interest in contrails as being a hobby. WTF??????

Canex:
The more I think about it the more I realize what could very well be at work here. I know that I haven't benefitted a dime for the position I've taken on this issue. I wonder if they could say the same?

I haven't even benefitted a penny pursuing this fruitless hobby. I take that back. Some fruit has been borne and some people have actually gained some understanding of the atmosphere. There have been some believers who could actually put 2 and 2 together and get 4 instead of 3. They have actually come to understand that persistent contrails are just that and no longer fall for the convoluted and baseless arguments of chemtrail proponents....


That is actually an interesting thread. And one can see how anyone could have believed there were some good chemmies, that the whole thing wasn't scripted.

But why did Minnis make it seem he wasn't Canex, yet clearly in the email he sent to me he admits to being that username?


Farther down the page, Minnis talks about the SUCCESS study in the third person. This is all very strange, if you check it out. I have seen before, where other posters say Canex is Minnis. I don't think I've ever seen Canex himself admit to it.

I'm onto page six.

He clearly speaks of himself in the third person in the top post on that page. First he rips into Bill Clinton, exposing his right wing ideological stance. Then this:

Sorethroat, you can get water vapor imagery anytime you want back to some date in 2001 on the Minnis site.


So he says this is his hobby, that he makes no money off of contrail studies. Then he went sadistic debunker style.

Every day, propped up by a black budget of approximately 20 billion greenbacks, they are spraying something on the order of 20 megatons of a new barium-titanium oxide impregnated long-chain polymer (you haven't read about this anywhere yet) that produces single molecules that are 4-6 µm in length. This new wonder molecule is produced catalytically from the exhaust of aircraft using a special fuel mixture that is systematically and covertly provided to different airports. This distribution method arouses no suspicion and spreads the effect over the country in a somewhat random manner....



Then Chem11:

If you had a problem providing the reference, Canex, you shouldn't have offered to provide it in the first place. I won't trouble you with any more of these 'tiresome' questions, though.

Respectfully,

Chem11

PS - Perhaps I will drop the esteemed Dr. Minnis a line and inform him of your troubles deciphering his oh-so-complicated Contrail Forecast. Perhaps he can come up with a 'Contrail Forecast for Dummies' that won't be quite so goshdarn confusing for some folks. Until then, maybe you should consider a hobby that isn't such an obvious intellectual and emotional challenge for you.



Patrick Minnis is a disinformation troll. Instead of admitting to being Minnis, he wrote the following:

BTW. An intellectual challenge requires that there is some logic involved on both sides of the argument. So far, chemtrail arguments lack that basic feature. The best quotes so far to support the case come from the likes of Will Thomas and Carnyclown.and yes William Teller is irrelevant in this debate. It happens to all of us eventually. I guess it got me already. An emotional challenge? Does that mean whichever idiot recognizes a stupid argument first, wins? Notice, I didn't say ignorant in this case. That contrail forecast for dummies sounds good. Why don't you email Minnis and get him to provide the taxpayer with something useful?


However, Chem11 does refer to Canex as Minnis. This was scripted. Chemtrails on the internet has been one big inside joke. It's just that these insidious creators of smoke and mirrors never expected any independent voices to show up and call their bluff. That is why this forum has been so brutally attacked.

I've already told you, Minnis. I have no more questions for you, nor any further desire to serve as some sort psychological punching bag for an incompetant (notice I didn't say moronic) researcher that can't read a simple graphical user interface.

It's this patented NASA combination of arrogance and idiocy that winds up getting people killed. Your agency routinely ignores every warning, every piece of evidence and every red flag until you have to gather your best and your brightest up with a shovel.

And then you ignore it some more.

I'm not naive enough to believe that troubles you anymore than the condition of our environment our the concerns of the people that pay your salary. Keep pushing buttons, keep playing games. It's obviously what you do best.

If I seek clarifcation on anything further, it wil be from someone employed by an organiztion that isn't neck-deep in Pentagon cash and classified payloads.


More from Chem11:

Of course, NASA isn't 'interested' in aerosols. The only thing they are interested in is sending some used car salesman into the public forum to loudly proclaim that there are "no health hazards" associated with these aerosol trails that they are not intertested in. And that we're all cRaZy to be concerned with these aerosol trails that we shouldn't be surprised to see at least 57% of the time. In fact, if it's not 'bone dry' up there, we shouldn't be surprised at all to watch these aerososl trails blanketing the sky at least 57% of the time under a high pressure system.



Canex:
And just when I thought chemii was my friend, he gets ornery. They have plenty of people studying aerosols in NASA. My agency? I wish! Anyway, all you gotta do is contact them.


Then on the last page, #8:

[quote="Canex"]....BTW, why do you keep calling me “Minnis?” He’s not the only person out there who knows something about contrails.



Aaaah, now it's adding up.

[quote="Chem11"]As for your last question; this forum's adminstrator publically stated that Dr. Minnis psoted on this forum. Having had access to user IP data during my time moderating on this site, I couldn't help but notice that 'Canex' logged in frequently using NASA resources. At the time, it seemed to be common knowledge. If you are not Dr. Minnis, now is the time to state so unequivocally and for the record (or forever hold your peace).

This is not a request for you to answer another question with a question, BTW.

Other than that, I think I've learned all I need to know with regards to NASA, public dislosure and the effects of aerosols on our climate and on our skies. Sadly, it seems we won't be forced into these awkward social situations in the future, Dr. Minnis.

Good luck on your selfless quest to secure the future of mankind.

Chem11



[quote="Canex"]Nice try, Chemii. No one ever said aerosols were not important in their own right. Only that they make little difference in the formation of contrails. Sure aerosols have effects in many atmospheric processes, but there are other people researching them. "So far" is an honest assessment of the situation that you brought up.

I assume that your insinuations about my character, backed up by no evidence, mean that your preconceived notions about the chemtrails were not supported by the facts in this discussion. If you look hard enough, perhaps, you can find a pig that's turned into horse....

The notion that those cloud trails are chemtrails is a fantasy that actually causes needless worry to some people on this and other boards. It also stirs up some small number of readers against the government for no good reason. If you want to rail against the government, find a legitimate reason. Chemtrails are not bonafide.

It is a shame that you have such hostility to your government and NASA. There is a lot of uncertainty in the effects of contrails on climate. But despite the uncertainty, efforts are underway to find new propulsion systems and other means for mitgating their possible impact on climate and perhaps some day diminish the number of contrails in the sky and return blue skies where they are now so often obliterated with white lines.

William Teller is the guy who had an apple blown off his head with an H bomb.

It's a good thing you are not moderating any more. You can't be trusted with people's privacy.




So basically, Patrick Minnis made his first post at Chemtrail Central on October 27th, 2000, just three months after CTC started. For two and a half years he acted as if he doesn't work for NASA and that studying contrails is just a hobby. Then he is outed as Patrick Minnis on March 11th, 2003. He made his last post two days later. The Patrick Minnis as Canex era had ended.

My Conclusions:

Mark Steadham and Patrick Minnis knew each other the whole time. Chem11 was part of the scam. He and Deborah/FootSoldier along with et in Arcadia Ego became the debunkers in chemmie clothes. Chem11 was gift-wrapped this find in order to enhance his concern troll status. I used to post at Megasprayer and Gastronamus Cafe. That is where the "normal" chemmies went. But it turns out that they were nothing but concern trolls. I figured out the scam, thus I became the focus of an elaborate cybersmear script. Minnis' acting all dumb and blind in the email about a relationship to Mark Steadham was a sign that I hit a grand slam. Minnis knows all about the chemtrails. He's known about them from day one and has been running interference for almost a decade.

The fake outing of Minnis as Canex served two purposes. It gave Chem11 gravitas. It also gave the illusion that Steadham and Minnis had no connection. But that's where this whole enchilada doesn't add up. How did Mark Steadham know that Minnis was Canex? Why if Minnis was trying to hide that did Steadham let it slip out? The answer, imho, is that this whole episode was scripted. Chemtrail Central appears to have been a NASA controlled gig from the get-go. For more information, folks can check out NASA's Big Bluff Called: They're Chemtrails Not Contrails.


n.b. I did recently write to Minnis again, with not much luck. Here is some more of the exchange we had back in September.


[quote="socrates"]Thanks for the reply, sir. Mark Steadham posts as Thermit. He's the one who did the trail report, if that rings your memory. He claims to have worked for NASA. Oddly, he never mentioned this once at Chemtrail Central. Hmmm.

I asked, because a lot about how chemtrails has been portrayed on the internet doesn't add up. This goes beyond whether one is a believer, debunker, fence-sitter, or newbie. Chemtrail Central has been part and parcel of the convolution.

Despite where one stands on this topic, it wouldn't be a stretch of the imagination to think that CTC has been all about controlled opposition.

I know you are very busy, and I don't want to bog you down with rabbit holes. I do, however, find it very curious why the most logical theories for chemtrails have never been addressed.

1) Climate Change: This is now considered a national security issue. This would give any project the secrecy needed to continue without any disclosure or accountability. Also, with severe weather increasing and with movement towards converting our economy to clean, renewable energy stalling, this theory argues that chemtrails are being used to tame wild weather. There is a new weather bill being pushed by Hutchison {senate version} and Udall{house version} which speaks of climate change and weather mitigation.

2) UV_B Radiation: We are told how dangerous it is to be outside for over fifteen minutes without protection. A study by Paul Crutzen has argued that ozone in the troposphere is more effective in attenuating the effects of the harmful rays than that to be found in the stratosphere.

Both of the theories above would explain why many are observing trails much lower than the 35,000 feet you have used as the generic altitude for where most persistent contrails form. Albeit, you have argued that altitude can be deceiving and not easily pinned.

But I have shared with you these more realistic theories not with the intention of initiating yet another "debunker versus believer" discussion. I have shared these thoughts to set the table to explain why I asked you about Mark Steadham {Thermit} of Chemtrail Central.

There is this idea of the strawman, and Steadham, Will Thomas, and many others fit the bill. Thomas has been shown to be involved beyond knee-deep in false claims and what appear to be outright hoaxes. {e.g. The Terry Stewart Hoax concerned an airport manager stating that he had been informed by a military source that a bombardment of trails had been the result of a joint US/Canadian military exercise. Reporter Jeff Ferrell of KSLA News12 Louisiana has spoken to Mr. Stewart who said he recieved no such information.}

I could write you a book showing how chemtrails as portrayed on the internet has been more likely than not a rigged operation.

The global warming theory can be shot down pretty quickly, as the geoengineering plans have been put forth to be done much higher up in the stratosphere. So why did Will Thomas and many others keep pushing ideas with no credibility?

While the 9/11 clear air showed that aviation can have a cooling effect, the atmosphere is complex and trails as high as 35,000 to 40,000 feet, unless I'm mistaken, will ultimately have a net warming effect.

I am not a newbie. I know about Mt. Pinatubo, the 9/11 airplane/atmospheric connection, the global dimming, etc..

My main point for writing to you was because I do not trust that the discussion on the internet pertaining to chemtrails has been legit. In fact, it has slanted so far towards being about kookiness, that as a social scientist, I cannot help but feel this has been done to obfuscate and hide the real truths about chemtrails. There are plenty of facts that can show that weather manipulation is not science fiction. China recently guaranteed good weather for the olympics. There is EnMod. There is a company named Dyn-O-Gel, now Gel Tech Solutions, which claims the ability to temper the severity of hurricanes. The idea of chemtrails is anything but kooky. The predominance of the meme that chemtrails are kooky, to me, represents a deliberate disinformation campaign to repel as many citizens as possible from considering the true nature of the trails we witness.

Newbies and fence-sitters are being guided towards convolution. Real people have been squeezed out. What we are left with is apparently a psychological operation including closed-minded debunkers, crazy believers, and believers who eventually agree with your all aircraft can produce persistent contrails explanation, that chemtrails are anything but deliberate, that chemtrails and contrails refer to the same thing.


This is turning into too long a letter. I apologize. I am grateful that you took the time to respond to my questions. Have an excellent weekend.

socrates at
http://allaircraftarenotinvolved.freeforums.org



[quote="socrates"]Dear Dr. Minnis,

I write this third letter to you, because I am concerned that your reputation has taken a fatal beatdown. You were quick to answer my first letter confirming that you posted at Mark Steadham's disinformation website, Chemtrail Central. But then when I sent you a second letter asking for your response to plausible explanations for the why's of chemtrails, all I got were crickets chirping.

Today in Massachusetts we got a brutal contrail outbreak. The planes all had the same similar look and were not flying in regular air traffic formation. You can go on all the Mickey Mouse interviews you want with people who don't even know your name, but the truth is that you posted at Chemtrail Central with a coworker named Mark Steadham! Mark has admitted to being an employee of NASA!

Now why can't you answer to the ideas that chemtrails are for mitigating severe weather and for possibly shielding photosynthesis and whatnot from harmful uv-b rays? Do you really think anyone is buying your chemtrails are a kooky idea ********?

I checked the soundings for Chatham, MA., the closest one, and there simply was not enough relative humidity to account for your cockamamie idea of commercial airliner contrail outbreaks.

Make no mistake about it, Dr. Minnis. You have been tied in directly with a co-worker named Mark Steadham who created and runs Chemtrail Central. You made 164 posts! But you couldn't send me a reply when real theories were presented to you?

A few of us figured out everything, to why you're doing the chemtrailing to who exactly you are. I believe that you are part of the military industrial complex, that you are a front man for the status quo of pollution, wars, and inequality. This is in your face, socratic, speaking truth to power.

Basically, your power is now gone. The humidity simply wasn't there today for what was witnessed. Thanks for never answering my second email. I posted it on my humble forum. And it is there for everyone to read. You don't look like the one who has won the debate. You might have won over rigged opposition at CTC, but not this time. You have lost the war.

Hey, time for one more question? Do you have apparatuses off the t-tails, or do you run the jets dirty? Please also spell out the various connections with chemtrails as regards to NASA, all the military branches- especially office of naval research and the usaf, the NOAA, Dr. Evil atmospheric scientists found at various universities, UCAR, NCAR, who'd I forget? NATO?

So how are chemtrails such a crazy idea when your military police-state has declared that climate change is an issue of national security? Thinning ozone? Ever hear of that? Or the idea of dyn-o-gel?

If I were you, I'd check to see if Steadham even works or worked at NASA like he claims. You two work for the same company? You made 164 posts at his disinformation palace? This does not look good.

{laughing}

Your silence speaks volumes, Minnis!

sincerely,

socrates
http://allaircraftarenotinvolved.freeforums.org

I'll let "Canex" have the last word. I'm telling you, these guys are all about wiggle room, moving goal posts, and plausible deniability. I tried to make reason out of his suggestion below, but all it appears to be is the evoking of authority, i.e. simply his way of continuing to say nothing to see here, move along.

[quote="Minnis"]Who do you think you are? Start sending me your real name instead of your fantasy name of socrates and perhaps we can have conversation. I do not care to keep up an email conversation with phantoms. I left the forum because my anonymity was compromised and I realized I was wasting my time sharing my knowledge with people who were uninterested in the truth. If you want to be treated as an adult then let's operate on a open playing field instead of one where you know who I am, but I do not know you. But, thanks anyway for your concern about my reputation.

A wise person would get his facts straight before he goes off and commits calumny. First, do you have a clue how big NASA is and how many centers there are? There are two Steadhams in the online NASA directory and neither one is named Mark. Sounds like you have a problem with Mark, not me. Second, the 12 Z sounding for Chatham, MA has a maximum relative humidity of 42% at 10,741 m (a common flight altitude) where the temperature was -52.7C. THat is the relative humidity (RH) with respect to liquid water, not ice. But you can gain some appreciation for the relative humidity with respect to ice (RHI) in the attached figures. At the bottom of the page, the figure on the left shows the RH measurements made with an instrument designed to measure the relative humidity at temperatures below freezing as opposed to standard Vaisala radiosondes(right panel) that are used for operational soundings and are designed to measure relative humidity at temperatures above freezing. If you look closely, you will see that very few of the Vaisala measurements exceed RHI = 100% (dashed curve in each plot) while the cryogenic hygrometer gives many values well above RHI = 100%. In fact, at -53°C, the maximum Vaisal RH is around 40% while the corresponding max for the hygrometer is about 90%, well above the ice saturation line. This bias in the operational soundings is not corrected. You can see from the upper panel that one would never get cirrus clouds to form if you required the sounding to give RHI = 100%. The bottom line is that the 12 Z sounding shows quite clearly that ice crystals would be very happy to have been forming over Chatham this morning.

An ode to Patrick Minnis:

Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Top

Re: Patrick Minnis Debunks Himself

Unread postby socrates » Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:48 pm

http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/thread1048-165.html

Patrick Minnis wrote:The standard used to determine that the relative humidity sensors measure too low is a frost-point hygrometer, a research-grade, cryogenically cooled instrument designed specifically to measure humidity at low temperatures.

I have already provided measures of how low the sonde values are for two temperatures, but to address your specific request, they are low by a factor of 1.1 at -30C up to 2.5 at -70C.


So looking at the data above for yesterday's white-out created by aircraft emissions, the radiosonde measurements had relative humidity from 10-16%. Even taking the highest number of 16%, and despite that being approximately 8 degrees higher than -70C, multiply 16 by 2.5 and the result is 40% relative humidity. That is simply not a high enough number to facilitate Minnis' so-called contrail outbreaks.
Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts


Return to Frankensteinian Atmospheric Shenanigans

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron
suspicion-preferred