Search This Blog

Sunday, 8 September 2013

"Geoengineering - UV Radiation A, B, & C"

Don’t Believe UV Radiation Levels are “Off the Charts”?



Massive UV Levels Are Not So Easy To Hide. (Even if the disinfo agents lie about the facts)
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org
Most have already noticed how incredibly hot the sun feels in recent years. Bark is literally being burned off of trees in countless locations. Plants are stunted, gardens don’t produce in many regions, etc. Would global geoengineering negatively affect the ozone layer?
Yes

How many lies have we been told by the government, its agencies, main stream media, and paid dis-information trolls. Who do we believe? Do we believe them when they tell us all their readings on UV radiation show everything is fine? Even when we can feel with our own skin and senses the sun is too hot? 
Increasing UV radiation from ozone layer depletion

Do the “liars” lie about other things as well? What about nuclear fallout? Even after Fukushima blows and continues to spew radiation to this day, and is still getting worse? Do we believe government agencies, dis-information people and all their phony statements and impressive graphs of totally fictitious data telling us everything is “normal”? How about the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, lots of charts, graphs, and phony data there, more than anyone could even begin to digest. “Data”  saying everything is “safe” from too many sources to list, yet marine life and people continue to die in the gulf day in and day out in spite of everything being “fine”. What about the Exxon Valdez? How about the lead that used to be put in gasoline? That was fine till it wasn’t. DDT, that was completely safe we were told.  ”Agent Orange”? Vaccines? Cell Phones? Smart Meters? Safe, safe, safe, no need to worry. The cancers and diseases being caused “are not related” many dis-information people and agencies say.
How about geoengineering? Is it really going on? Well, “it can’t be because the government says it isn’t so”. They would never lie to us, would they? Even NASA says the chemical covered skies from global geoengineering are “safe and normal”. They have even set up special courses to teach our kids such despicable lies.
If UV radiation had gone “off the charts”, what might it do to our aquatic friends? Lets start with global plankton populations, the foundation for life on earth. Even NASA says high UV radiation would be really bad for these microscopic organisms.

So how are those plankton populations doing?

How about Krill populations? (Krill feed on phytoplankton)
(especially good article to review overall is below)

Wouldn’t this effect the food chain if plankton decline?

What about our larger ocean friends, wouldn’t excessive UV show up with them?
Excessive UV damage to marine life
Whales getting sunburnt

What about trees, would anything negative happen from excessive UVB?

Are we seeing problems with trees?

What would excessive ozone depletion and increase UV radiation do to us?

Is there northern hemisphere ozone depletion that we are not being told about by main stream media? 

HOW ABOUT OUR METERS AND THE MATH?
(A direct response to recent disinformation “hit piece” article”)
August 21, 2013
By Roger Foote, Owner Foote Control Systems
Our instruments are brand new instruments used for verifying medical sterilizers, UV curing ovens in semiconductor manufacturing, UV developing in offset printing.
Both of our instruments are +/- 4% tolerance, both carry NIST traceability.(National Institute Standards and Technology)
The meters Mick West shows are mainly used for reptile enclosure UV lamps, a different class of instrument altogether.
IguanaKalangoGreenIguana3
Our scientific grade metering equipment is rated at +/-4% of full scale and the reptile lamp meters he referred to are +/-10% of full scale.
That breaks down to a possible error of 8% total on our instruments and a possible error of 20% on the SOLARMETER MODEL 6.2 UV METER. That is a 250% difference in accuracy!
Roger_02_Small
This is why we chose professional test equipment for the important task of verifying the UV levels, made even more important by the fact that all “OFFICIAL” readings from recognized agencies appear to be completely invalid.
Mick West Wrote:
“Now, in space, sunlight is a total 1366 w/m2, which is 136.6 mW/cm2. That’s for ALL the radiation, visible, infrared, and ultraviolet.
UV makes up around 10% of that. about 14 mw/cm2
Actual total UV that hits the ground is normally around 3.2 mW/cm2. Most of this is UVA. Hence his UVA readings also seem to be entirely wrong.
The fact that his total UV was higher than UV in space should be enough to prove it wrong, but if you look at just the UVB, its four times the amount of UVB in space. Physically impossible.”
Response by Roger Foote:
Actually, that number was 1353W/m2 Mick, not 1366Wm2.
And, if Mick had actually done his research, he would have seen that the 1,353 W/m2 figure was acknowledged to be a discrepancy in 1982 when they found out the instrument calibration was lower than the actual measurements acquired by rocketry and satellite instruments at that time….
“Other values for the solar constant are found in historical literature with the value 1,353 W/m2 appearing in many publications. It is now generally believed that most of the historical discrepancies have been due to instrument calibration error (White, 1977). Recent satellite and rocket data (Duncan et al., 1982) and (Hickey et al., 1982) have confirmed that the 1,353 W/m2 value was low.”
Roger Foote Continues:
We are seeing up to 18mW/cm2 of combined UVA/UVB and at the same instant 7mW/cm2 of UVA.
And yes you can subtract the A from the A/B and get a good measurement of B.
How does Mick know how much is actually hitting the ground?
Does Mick have reliable instruments?
Does he take the measurements himself, or cut and paste from the web?
In the pictures he posted, the people holding the instruments are not holding them correctly to measure solar UV arriving at the surface. To do this correctly, one must point the instrument directly at the solar disc and adjust the position until the peak value is attained.
In the pictures on Mick West’s disinformation article, those instruments are simply measuring scatter and reflections being created by geological and architectural surfaces. It is also notable that if the SOLARMETER MODEL 6.2 UV METER was in fact pointed directly at the solar disc, it would go into over-range since the SOLARMETER MODEL 6.2 UV METER has a fixed range maximum of 1.99mW/cm2, nearly as low as a recent UVA only measurement we collected on a recent cloudy day (1.52mW/cm2).
This instrument, the SOLARMETER MODEL 6.2 UV METER seems to be woefully lacking as an environmental measuring tool.
“Stupid” wrote: (who quoted on Mick West’s disinformation article)
“UV meters can get expensive…..but modern units are out there, with NIST Cert. His old Omega unit was likely +10% or more off from NIST standards when brand new…..no telling how off it may be now.”
Response by Roger Foote:
Sorry “Stupid”, ours are brand new, 4%, NIST traceable…  You really assumed a lot considering you knew nothing about our instruments, or the ones you are referring to which ARE +/-10% tolerance when new!
They go on to say that they couldn’t find any UV meter made by Omega… A simple search would yield:
And this is our UV A/B meter:
Again, neither meter is old, both are brand new, and both are at 4% accuracy with NIST traceability.
And there are more of these UV513AB meters going on line as we speak around the globe.
Of the people already reporting their findings using the UV513AB, all of them are reporting readings of composite UVA/UVB that are in line with readings we have collected. Ours are somewhat higher than average since we are in an area where UV readings tend to be higher.
Mick West’s disinformation article stated:
“His column shows UVA, UV A/B, and UVC. They say they had two meters, so how are they are getting three numbers? Presumably something must measure UV C as well as something else.”
Response by Roger Foote:
We get those 3 numbers by having one of our meters supplied with 2 sensors.
Here is the meter Mick’s people are referring to:
Capturehttp://solarmeter.com/model62.htmlIt is mainly sold to reptile enthusiasts, not very professional looking either, and I bet Mick doesn’t even have one.
Now, about the UV Meter Owner’s Group:
http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/UVB_Meter_Owners/Mick deleted the first line in their mission statement:
The UVB_Meter_Owners group is a group formed to test common UVB sources for keeping reptiles.

And I guess this line was unimportant as well?
“Ownership of a UVB Meter is not required to join this group. The group is formed to encourage learning about one of the most important aspects of care for our reptiles.”
Lizard465
Roger Foote
Foote Control Systems
40 years in wireless environmental monitoring and measurement and industrial controls.
20 of those years in government agency work, 20 years private consulting including precision electronics design and manufacturing with customers world wide.
SO WHAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE?
There are articles out there to tell people anything they might want to hear, and agencies that exist to lie about obvious and glaring truths with official approval by their governments. There are “bottom of the barrel” paid disinformation “trolls” that live of their efforts to tarnish the truth with impressive looking charts and graphs. From the fictitious “recovering economy”, to Fukushima lies, environmental cover ups, etc etc. Lots of impressive looking data that ads up to total disinformation. Primary disinformation paid trolls have said for years there is no geoengineering, no increase in droughts, no increase in floods, no increase in wildfires, etc etc. The increase in UV radiation story hit a nerve as we thought it would. This issue is very dire and can not be hidden once widely known. Attempts to “debunk” our data on the extremely high UV levels were expected.
If you care about the truth, if you care about protecting the planets ability to continue sustaining life, if you care about our collective futures, do some research yourself. Look at the links above. Remember that you can always find conflicting data, but what does the reality on the ground, combined with available research studies, lead you to believe in regard to who has it right with the facts and who is lying their backsides off?
DW

2 comments:

  1. http://rhondagessner.wordpress.com/2013/09/02/a-killer-in-your-fridge-sweet-poison-a-must-read/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the link anon, interesting read.

      Delete