N Y Times: Deflating Deflategate, the evidence & methodology of the Wells report is deeply flawed

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,334
4,176
113
"It is unlikely the Patriots illegally deflated their footballs"

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/14/opinion/deflating-deflategate.html?smid=tw-share&_r=3&referrer=



New York Times

BEFORE “Deflategate,” the National Football League’s most recent controversy, there was “Bountygate,” in which New Orleans Saints officials were accused of offering bonuses to Saints players who injured members of opposing teams — a policy alleged to have been in place from 2009 to 2011. Initially, several Saints officials and players were penalized by the N.F.L.

In 2012, however, we published an analysis of N.F.L. injury data that found that the Saints injured fewer opposing players than all but two teams did in 2009, and fewer than all but one team did from 2009 to 2011. Even if Saints officials offered “bounties,” there was no good evidence that Saints players were influenced by them.

We presented our findings at an N.F.L. hearing in November 2012. The next month, the N.F.L. vacated all the players’ suspensions.

Considering that our impartiality was at least implicitly recognized by the N.F.L. in the past, we believe that our analysis of the evidence in Deflategate, in a studyreleased Friday by the American Enterprise Institute, could help resolve this latest controversy.

Deflategate is a dispute about whether the New England Patriots used deliberately underinflated footballs in their playoff victory over the Indianapolis Colts in January. (Each N.F.L. team provides its own footballs when on offense, and an underinflated football may be easier to handle in cold or wet conditions.)

The N.F.L. commissioned a study, known as the Wells report, that concluded that it was “more probable than not” that Patriots personnel deliberately violated the rules and that Tom Brady, the Patriots quarterback, was aware of it. Following the release of the Wells report last month, the N.F.L. penalized the Patriots organization and suspended Mr. Brady for four games.

Our study, written with our colleague Joseph Sullivan, examines the evidence and methodology of the Wells report and concludes that it is deeply flawed. (We have no financial stake in the outcome of Deflategate.)

The Wells report’s main finding is that the Patriots balls declined in pressure more than the Colts balls did in the first half of their game, and that the decline is highly statistically significant. For the sake of argument, let’s grant this finding for now. Even still, it alone does not prove misconduct. There are, after all, two possibilities. The first is that the Patriots balls declined too much. The second — overlooked by the Wells report — is that the Colts balls declined too little.

The latter possibility appears to be more likely. The Wells report notes the expected pressure for the footballs at halftime in the Patriots-Colts game, factoring in the decline in pressure to be expected when a ball, inflated in a warm room, has been moved to a cold outdoor field. If the Patriots deflated their balls, their pressure levels at halftime should have fallen below the expected level, while the Colts balls at halftime should have hovered around that level.

But when we analyzed the data provided in the Wells report, we found that the Patriots balls declined by about the expected amount, while the Colts balls declined by less. In fact, the pressure of the Colts balls was statistically significantly higherthan expected. Contrary to the report, the significant difference between the changes in pressure of the two teams’ balls was not because the pressure of the Patriots balls was too low, but because that of the Colts balls was too high.

How could this be? The report’s own findings suggest an explanation: At halftime, N.F.L. officials measured the pressure of “only a sample” of the Colts balls (four out of 12) before they ran out of time; the second half of the game was about to begin. This implies that the Colts balls sat in the warm room where they were to be measured — and thus increased in pressure — for almost the entirety of halftime before being measured.
All of the 11 available Patriots balls, by contrast, were measured at halftime, which suggests that they were measured earlier, when they were colder — and thus lower in pressure. Although this explanation contradicts the Wells report’s conclusions, it fits all the evidence.

There are other factors discussed in our study that undermine support for the Wells report’s conclusions. For example, there is considerable uncertainty concerning the actual pressure of the footballs. The N.F.L. official who checked the pressure before the game used some combination of two pressure gauges to measure the Patriots and Colts balls, but it is not known which particular combination.
One of the gauges, as the report notes, records pressures that are higher than the other. If the official used that gauge to measure the Patriots balls (but not the Colts balls) pregame, then those balls may well have started out with too little air, which could explain a later appearance of intentional deflation. The report, however, does not consider that possibility.

Our recommendation? When the N.F.L. hears Mr. Brady’s appeal of his suspension later this month, it should proceed with the knowledge that the Wells report is unreliable.Kevin A. Hassett is the director of economic studies, and Stan A. Veuger is a resident scholar, at the American Enterprise Institute

Before joining AEI, Dr. Hassett was a senior economist at the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and an associate professor of economics and finance at Columbia (University) Business School. He served as a policy consultant to the US Department of the Treasury during the George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton administrations.

Before joining AEI, Dr. Veuger was a teaching fellow at Harvard University and Universitat Pompeu Fabra. He was a 2012-2013 National Review Institute Washington Fellow, and he is a board member of The Altius Society and of the Washington, D.C. chapter of the Netherland-American Foundation. He is a graduate of Utrecht University and Erasmus University Rotterdam, and holds an M.Sc. in Economics from Universitat Pompeu Fabra, as well as A.M. and Ph.D. degrees, also in Economics, from Harvard University.




Intelligent people are finally attempting to make the ignorant masses understand that they have been duped for months now
 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,334
4,176
113
American Enterprise Institute calls Ted Wells report “unreliable”
Posted by Mike Florio on June 13, 2015, 9:35 AM EDT
Getty Images
With the Tom Brady appeal hearing only 10 days away, it could be time for another Angry Ted Wells conference call.

The American Enterprise Institute, whose truly independent analysis helped several former Saints players ultimately avoid discipline in the bounty scandal, has examined the 243-page report from the NFL’s investigator in the #DeflateGate scandal. And AEI has determined the Wells report to be “unreliable.”

In an item written for the New York Times, AEI focuses on the conclusion that the Patriots tampered with air pressure in footballs prior to the AFC title game because the footballs used by the Patriots in the first half had a more significant drop in air pressure than the footballs used by the Colts in the first half. AEI rejects that finding based on two factors previously raised here: (1) NFL officials measured only four of the 12 Colts footballs at halftime due to supposed time constraints; and (2) the footballs used by the Colts experienced a likely increase in air pressure while in a warmer environment as the 11 footballs used by the Patriots were tested with two different gauges and then re-inflated.

The article in the Times also points out the different measurements from the two gauges used to set the air pressure in the footballs before the game and then to measure them at halftime, and concludes with a recommendation that the Brady appeal hearing “should proceed with the knowledge that the Wells report is unreliable.”

A separate and much longer report posted at AEI’s website reaches the same primary conclusion. AEI found that the footballs used by the Colts showed less of a reduction at halftime because they had a longer chance to experience an increase in air pressure in the warmer environment inside the locker room while the footballs used by the Patriots were being tested and re-inflated.

This report could give Commissioner Roger Goodell the “new information” needed to disregard the findings of the Wells report, concluding that the evidence did not point to tampering on the day of the AFC title game — and in turn that Brady deserves no punishment. To reach that conclusion, however, Goodell will have to admit that he hired an investigator who did a poor job. Which would mean that Goodell did a poor job in hiring Ted Wells.

Which could mean that Goodell will give no credence to the findings of AEI.

While the points made by AEI are hardly new, they now have a degree of credibility that makes the work hard to ignore. The real question moving forward is how hard will the Commissioner work to ignore them?


http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...-institute-calls-ted-wells-report-unreliable/
 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,334
4,176
113
http://

 

zeke4ahs

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 26, 2003
34,495
10,727
113
All I need to know is that there was no need for a cover up if they didn't do it. So obviously they did. That weight loss thing tho......ha!! So funny that you guys actually buy that. Thanks for starting another thread though.
 

T.M.P.

Hall of Famer
Jul 2, 2014
17,658
14,108
113
All I need to know is that there was no need for a cover up if they didn't do it. So obviously they did. That weight loss thing tho......ha!! So funny that you guys actually buy that. Thanks for starting another thread though.
 

ovaltine

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Sep 3, 2001
30,890
5,833
113
Indiana, our Indiana .....
"It is unlikely the Patriots illegally deflated their footballs"

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/14/opinion/deflating-deflategate.html?smid=tw-share&_r=3&referrer=



New York Times

BEFORE “Deflategate,” the National Football League’s most recent controversy, there was “Bountygate,” in which New Orleans Saints officials were accused of offering bonuses to Saints players who injured members of opposing teams — a policy alleged to have been in place from 2009 to 2011. Initially, several Saints officials and players were penalized by the N.F.L.

In 2012, however, we published an analysis of N.F.L. injury data that found that the Saints injured fewer opposing players than all but two teams did in 2009, and fewer than all but one team did from 2009 to 2011. Even if Saints officials offered “bounties,” there was no good evidence that Saints players were influenced by them.

We presented our findings at an N.F.L. hearing in November 2012. The next month, the N.F.L. vacated all the players’ suspensions.

Considering that our impartiality was at least implicitly recognized by the N.F.L. in the past, we believe that our analysis of the evidence in Deflategate, in a studyreleased Friday by the American Enterprise Institute, could help resolve this latest controversy.

Deflategate is a dispute about whether the New England Patriots used deliberately underinflated footballs in their playoff victory over the Indianapolis Colts in January. (Each N.F.L. team provides its own footballs when on offense, and an underinflated football may be easier to handle in cold or wet conditions.)

The N.F.L. commissioned a study, known as the Wells report, that concluded that it was “more probable than not” that Patriots personnel deliberately violated the rules and that Tom Brady, the Patriots quarterback, was aware of it. Following the release of the Wells report last month, the N.F.L. penalized the Patriots organization and suspended Mr. Brady for four games.

Our study, written with our colleague Joseph Sullivan, examines the evidence and methodology of the Wells report and concludes that it is deeply flawed. (We have no financial stake in the outcome of Deflategate.)

The Wells report’s main finding is that the Patriots balls declined in pressure more than the Colts balls did in the first half of their game, and that the decline is highly statistically significant. For the sake of argument, let’s grant this finding for now. Even still, it alone does not prove misconduct. There are, after all, two possibilities. The first is that the Patriots balls declined too much. The second — overlooked by the Wells report — is that the Colts balls declined too little.

The latter possibility appears to be more likely. The Wells report notes the expected pressure for the footballs at halftime in the Patriots-Colts game, factoring in the decline in pressure to be expected when a ball, inflated in a warm room, has been moved to a cold outdoor field. If the Patriots deflated their balls, their pressure levels at halftime should have fallen below the expected level, while the Colts balls at halftime should have hovered around that level.

But when we analyzed the data provided in the Wells report, we found that the Patriots balls declined by about the expected amount, while the Colts balls declined by less. In fact, the pressure of the Colts balls was statistically significantly higherthan expected. Contrary to the report, the significant difference between the changes in pressure of the two teams’ balls was not because the pressure of the Patriots balls was too low, but because that of the Colts balls was too high.

How could this be? The report’s own findings suggest an explanation: At halftime, N.F.L. officials measured the pressure of “only a sample” of the Colts balls (four out of 12) before they ran out of time; the second half of the game was about to begin. This implies that the Colts balls sat in the warm room where they were to be measured — and thus increased in pressure — for almost the entirety of halftime before being measured.
All of the 11 available Patriots balls, by contrast, were measured at halftime, which suggests that they were measured earlier, when they were colder — and thus lower in pressure. Although this explanation contradicts the Wells report’s conclusions, it fits all the evidence.

There are other factors discussed in our study that undermine support for the Wells report’s conclusions. For example, there is considerable uncertainty concerning the actual pressure of the footballs. The N.F.L. official who checked the pressure before the game used some combination of two pressure gauges to measure the Patriots and Colts balls, but it is not known which particular combination.
One of the gauges, as the report notes, records pressures that are higher than the other. If the official used that gauge to measure the Patriots balls (but not the Colts balls) pregame, then those balls may well have started out with too little air, which could explain a later appearance of intentional deflation. The report, however, does not consider that possibility.

Our recommendation? When the N.F.L. hears Mr. Brady’s appeal of his suspension later this month, it should proceed with the knowledge that the Wells report is unreliable.Kevin A. Hassett is the director of economic studies, and Stan A. Veuger is a resident scholar, at the American Enterprise Institute

Before joining AEI, Dr. Hassett was a senior economist at the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and an associate professor of economics and finance at Columbia (University) Business School. He served as a policy consultant to the US Department of the Treasury during the George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton administrations.

Before joining AEI, Dr. Veuger was a teaching fellow at Harvard University and Universitat Pompeu Fabra. He was a 2012-2013 National Review Institute Washington Fellow, and he is a board member of The Altius Society and of the Washington, D.C. chapter of the Netherland-American Foundation. He is a graduate of Utrecht University and Erasmus University Rotterdam, and holds an M.Sc. in Economics from Universitat Pompeu Fabra, as well as A.M. and Ph.D. degrees, also in Economics, from Harvard University.




Intelligent people are finally attempting to make the ignorant masses understand that they have been duped for months now
That would be all well and good, but doesn't address one simple fact: the NFL has been aware of the Pats and underinflated balls since at least 2003.

Don't ask for a link - there won't be one. But The League has been aware of this for more than a decade. There is no doubt that the Pats have been adjusting balls to Brady's "specs" for years.
 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,334
4,176
113
-made up trash-

Don't ask for a link - there won't be one. But The League has been aware of this...
The League should have been aware of weather-related drops in football pressure since it began, because it has always happened, NATURALLY, and did so here as well.

It happens, in this UNIVERSE
 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,334
4,176
113
And when the other team's balls conform to The League's spec's, but the Patriots' don't?
There are no examples where this was the case, where two teams footballs were tested at the same time and were different. it certainly did not happen here.

but of course you haven't read the synopsis of this report, or the report itself

A Right of Center Think Tank and a Left of Center Newspaper are saying that the Wells report is utter bullshit.
This is a "Holy Shit" moment for Goodell and the NFL.

study this infographic. you can do it!

 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,334
4,176
113
The truth seems to catch some people by surprise when it smacks them in the head.

It takes a good jolt to erase over 4 months of lies
 

crossfire74

All-American
Nov 28, 2014
9,561
13,116
113
"It is unlikely the Patriots illegally deflated their footballs"

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/14/opinion/deflating-deflategate.html?smid=tw-share&_r=3&referrer=



New York Times

BEFORE “Deflategate,” the National Football League’s most recent controversy, there was “Bountygate,” in which New Orleans Saints officials were accused of offering bonuses to Saints players who injured members of opposing teams — a policy alleged to have been in place from 2009 to 2011. Initially, several Saints officials and players were penalized by the N.F.L.

In 2012, however, we published an analysis of N.F.L. injury data that found that the Saints injured fewer opposing players than all but two teams did in 2009, and fewer than all but one team did from 2009 to 2011. Even if Saints officials offered “bounties,” there was no good evidence that Saints players were influenced by them.

We presented our findings at an N.F.L. hearing in November 2012. The next month, the N.F.L. vacated all the players’ suspensions.

Considering that our impartiality was at least implicitly recognized by the N.F.L. in the past, we believe that our analysis of the evidence in Deflategate, in a studyreleased Friday by the American Enterprise Institute, could help resolve this latest controversy.

Deflategate is a dispute about whether the New England Patriots used deliberately underinflated footballs in their playoff victory over the Indianapolis Colts in January. (Each N.F.L. team provides its own footballs when on offense, and an underinflated football may be easier to handle in cold or wet conditions.)

The N.F.L. commissioned a study, known as the Wells report, that concluded that it was “more probable than not” that Patriots personnel deliberately violated the rules and that Tom Brady, the Patriots quarterback, was aware of it. Following the release of the Wells report last month, the N.F.L. penalized the Patriots organization and suspended Mr. Brady for four games.

Our study, written with our colleague Joseph Sullivan, examines the evidence and methodology of the Wells report and concludes that it is deeply flawed. (We have no financial stake in the outcome of Deflategate.)

The Wells report’s main finding is that the Patriots balls declined in pressure more than the Colts balls did in the first half of their game, and that the decline is highly statistically significant. For the sake of argument, let’s grant this finding for now. Even still, it alone does not prove misconduct. There are, after all, two possibilities. The first is that the Patriots balls declined too much. The second — overlooked by the Wells report — is that the Colts balls declined too little.

The latter possibility appears to be more likely. The Wells report notes the expected pressure for the footballs at halftime in the Patriots-Colts game, factoring in the decline in pressure to be expected when a ball, inflated in a warm room, has been moved to a cold outdoor field. If the Patriots deflated their balls, their pressure levels at halftime should have fallen below the expected level, while the Colts balls at halftime should have hovered around that level.

But when we analyzed the data provided in the Wells report, we found that the Patriots balls declined by about the expected amount, while the Colts balls declined by less. In fact, the pressure of the Colts balls was statistically significantly higherthan expected. Contrary to the report, the significant difference between the changes in pressure of the two teams’ balls was not because the pressure of the Patriots balls was too low, but because that of the Colts balls was too high.

How could this be? The report’s own findings suggest an explanation: At halftime, N.F.L. officials measured the pressure of “only a sample” of the Colts balls (four out of 12) before they ran out of time; the second half of the game was about to begin. This implies that the Colts balls sat in the warm room where they were to be measured — and thus increased in pressure — for almost the entirety of halftime before being measured.
All of the 11 available Patriots balls, by contrast, were measured at halftime, which suggests that they were measured earlier, when they were colder — and thus lower in pressure. Although this explanation contradicts the Wells report’s conclusions, it fits all the evidence.

There are other factors discussed in our study that undermine support for the Wells report’s conclusions. For example, there is considerable uncertainty concerning the actual pressure of the footballs. The N.F.L. official who checked the pressure before the game used some combination of two pressure gauges to measure the Patriots and Colts balls, but it is not known which particular combination.
One of the gauges, as the report notes, records pressures that are higher than the other. If the official used that gauge to measure the Patriots balls (but not the Colts balls) pregame, then those balls may well have started out with too little air, which could explain a later appearance of intentional deflation. The report, however, does not consider that possibility.

Our recommendation? When the N.F.L. hears Mr. Brady’s appeal of his suspension later this month, it should proceed with the knowledge that the Wells report is unreliable.Kevin A. Hassett is the director of economic studies, and Stan A. Veuger is a resident scholar, at the American Enterprise Institute

Before joining AEI, Dr. Hassett was a senior economist at the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and an associate professor of economics and finance at Columbia (University) Business School. He served as a policy consultant to the US Department of the Treasury during the George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton administrations.

Before joining AEI, Dr. Veuger was a teaching fellow at Harvard University and Universitat Pompeu Fabra. He was a 2012-2013 National Review Institute Washington Fellow, and he is a board member of The Altius Society and of the Washington, D.C. chapter of the Netherland-American Foundation. He is a graduate of Utrecht University and Erasmus University Rotterdam, and holds an M.Sc. in Economics from Universitat Pompeu Fabra, as well as A.M. and Ph.D. degrees, also in Economics, from Harvard University.




Intelligent people are finally attempting to make the ignorant masses understand that they have been duped for months now
Please watch the movie Frozen and follow its theme song.

Thanks in advance,

The entire OTF and sane people
 

ovaltine

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Sep 3, 2001
30,890
5,833
113
Indiana, our Indiana .....
There are no examples where this was the case, where two teams footballs were tested at the same time and were different. it certainly did not happen here.

but of course you haven't read the synopsis of this report, or the report itself

A Right of Center Think Tank and a Left of Center Newspaper are saying that the Wells report is utter bullshit.
This is a "Holy Shit" moment for Goodell and the NFL.

study this infographic. you can do it!

"it certainly did not happen here."

But it has absolutely, certainly happened in the past, dating to 2003. That is irrefutable. You're just not in a position to have that information, and neither is the NYT nor the AEI.

But it is fact, and no amount of whining by you is going to change it.

Why did it come out know? You espouse using logic, so follow the information flow - where did that start? The Colts. Who owns the Colts? Jim Irsay. Is he enough of an, um, butthole to go public with something that's been known by The League for awhile?

What do you think?

But because he's a butthole doesn't change this fact: the Pats have been doing this for awhile. And there's nothing you or the NYT or the AEI or the FBI or the NSA can do to change that. And none of you can change the fact that other teams have done this, too. But the Pats and Brady got busted. If TB would've said, "Yeah, we fiddled with the pressure in the ball. Every team does," this would've gone away in a day.

But he didn't do that, so he and the Pats and their fans can continue to have this crap drag on forever. They can say that the guy that deflated the balls was actually talking about his own weight loss issues (in all of this garbage, that is the highest of high comedy). And they can continue to look like whiney little douches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hoosierdug

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,334
4,176
113
But it has absolutely, certainly happened in the past, dating to 2003. That is irrefutable.
flat-out, unsourced, unsupported, bald-faced LIE

You're just not in a position to have that information, and neither is the NYT nor the AEI.

But it is fact, and no amount of whining by you is going to change it.

flat-out, unsourced, unsupported, bald-faced LIE


The Pats have been doing this for awhile. And the Colts continue to look like whiney little douches.
flat-out, unsourced, unsupported, bald-faced LIE, with some truth inserted at the end
 

Rangeline Fan

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Mar 22, 2007
39,101
8,372
113
flat-out, unsourced, unsupported, bald-faced LIE

You're just not in a position to have that information, and neither is the NYT nor the AEI.



flat-out, unsourced, unsupported, bald-faced LIE




flat-out, unsourced, unsupported, bald-faced LIE, with some truth inserted at the end
Is that kinda of like "The NFL has nothing and New England will be found innocent and nothing will happen"?
 

Rangeline Fan

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Mar 22, 2007
39,101
8,372
113
Since we are posting everything that is true....

Late on Friday, the CIA's Office of the Inspector General finally released the findings of its internal investigation, concluded in 2005, into intelligence failures leading up to the attacks of September 11, 2001. The few sections left un-redacted in the 500-page report do not appear to offer any major revelations.

But they do touch on a question that has swirled around US inquiries into 9/11 since the first weeks after the attacks: was there any involvement by the government of Saudi Arabia?

The report claims no conclusive answer, but states it found no evidence that "the Saudi government knowingly and willingly supported the al-Qaeda terrorists." However, its sources speculated that rogue Saudi officials may have been involved — a long-running suspicion.

What the report says about Saudi Arabia
The very final section of the OIG report, titled "Issues related to Saudi Arabia," is entirely redacted, save for three brief paragraphs. They say the investigation found no evidence that the Saudi government had supported or played any role in the attacks. However, it says, some members of the CIA's Near East and Counterterrorism divisions speculated that rogue Saudi officials may have aided al-Qaeda's actions.

Here is the entirety of the un-redacted text from the much-anticipated Saudi section:







The findings, though frustratingly inconclusive, are in line with what many analysts and journalists have long suspected: that while the Saudi government was probably not involved, rogue Saudi officials sympathetic to al-Qaeda may have been.

Keep in mind that the CIA officials cited as "speculating" about such a possibility are considered among the agency's best analysts and have access to vast amounts of intelligence.

The little information contained in the un-redacted sections of this report do not fundamentally alter our understanding of the 9/11 attacks or the narrower question of Saudi involvement. But they are an interesting data point nonetheless in favor of the theory, prevalent among close observers of Saudi Arabia, that some number of rogue officials acting on their own may have been involved.
 

Rangeline Fan

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Mar 22, 2007
39,101
8,372
113
Swedish official admits toxic 'chemtrails' are real, not a wild conspiracy theory
Saturday, October 06, 2012 by: Jonathan Benson, staff writer
Tags: chemtrails, conspiracy theory, geoengineering


Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/037451_chemtrails_conspiracy_theory_geoengineering.html#ixzz3cyNBp3Nn

(NaturalNews) Those long, white streams of persistent, cloudy haze commonly blasted into blue skies by unmarked airplanes are not your typical contrails, says Swedish Green Party leader Pernilla Hagberg. As reported by the Swedish paper Katrineholms Kuriren, Hagberg, the first major political leader to come forward on the issue, has openly admitted that these unusual cloud trails, which fail to dissipate like normal contrails do, are actually a toxic mix of chemicals, viruses, and metals that she has collectively referred to as "chemtrails."

According to Hagberg, the sprayings are a joint endeavor by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), as well as the Swedish government in her own country, to modify atmospheric conditions via deliberate aerosol spraying efforts. And included in this "dangerous" mix of aerosols are various chemical components, viruses and viral fragments, and metals such as aluminum and barium, which have already been shown to be accumulating in water supplies and soils around the world. (http://chemtrails.cc/)

Normal contrails, which are composed of mere water vapor that quickly dissipates after emission from jet engines, are far different from chemtrails, which gradually blanket the entire sky in a sea of white. The following video, put together by the FreeTruth Show, a YouTube-based radio broadcast, contains some imagery of what these chemtrails typically look like in the sky:

"It is great to see a politician bringing public attention to this issue and helping add to the credibility of this cause in the mainstream," writes JG Vibes for The Intel Hub about Hagberg's unprecedented public admission. "Unfortunately, this is a political problem that requires many non-political solutions."

Spraying the skies to save the planet?
Interestingly, the United Nations (UN) and various Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation-backed groups have recently been forced to admit that such sprayings are taking place, and that the emitted particles are not normal contrails. But their excuse for why chemtrail sprayings are being done is that they will somehow save the planet from the devastating effects of so-called "global warming," that ever-present, pseudoscientific environmental theory that is often used as justification for all sorts of outlandish policy proposals. (http://www.globalresearch.ca)

In the case of chemtrails, everything from blocking the sun in order to lower the earth's average temperatures, to deliberately shifting weather patterns for the purpose of offsetting the allegedly melting polar ice caps, have been used as excuses for trying to legitimize the seeding of our skies with a cornucopia of poisons. And if re-elected to another term, Hagberg says she will continue to fight such chemtrailing efforts in her own country, which she says have been co-opted by the Swedish government.

Be sure to check out the documentary What in the World are They Spraying? (http://www.whatintheworldaretheyspraying.info/), as well as its sequel, Why in the World are They Spraying? (http://www.whyintheworldaretheyspraying.com/), to learn more about the global chemtrail phenomenon. Both full-length films can also be found for free viewing on YouTube.

Sources for this article include:

http://kkuriren.se/nyheter/vingaker/1.1554491

http://theintelhub.com






Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/037451_chemtrails_conspiracy_theory_geoengineering.html#ixzz3cyNSucDI
 

Rangeline Fan

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Mar 22, 2007
39,101
8,372
113
Lockheed Martin scientist on deathbed says aliens are real (VIDEO)
Published time: October 30, 2014 18:59
Edited time: October 31, 2014 16:44
Get short URL



Still from YouTube video

Media, SciTech, Space
Aliens, some as old as 200 years, are real and have visited Earth, a former Lockheed Martin senior scientist has claimed. In his final moments, he provided “photo evidence” while sharing his personal experiences of UFOs and extraterrestrials.

The controversial 33-minute video was made shortly before Boyd Bushman died on August 7, 2014. However, the footage has only recently emerged and is starting to garner widespread attention.

“I do have a top secret clearance,” he affirms at the beginning of the video. He goes on to state that incidents such as Roswell in 1947 – when a military Air Force surveillance balloon crashed – happened at the hands of aliens.

Bushman shared details about aliens, UFOs, and anti-gravity technology – which he says is being developed by US, Russian, and Chinese scientists at Area 51 (the US military facility).

In the video, Bushman is seen holding up second-hand “photo evidence” of aliens while describing them to viewers.

“They were approximately four and a half to five feet tall,” the former top aerospace scientist said. “They have three back bones. They’re actually cartilage,” he added, stating that they had fewer ribs than human beings. These aliens have fingers and toes like human beings.

He went on to state that their eyes and noses are different from humans, and that they are telepathic mind readers.

"They're able to use their own voice by telepathy to talk to you," he said. “You walk in the room with one of them, and all of a sudden you find yourself giving the answer to your question in your own voice.”





According to Bushman, there are two different groups of aliens.

“It’s like a cattle ranch,” he stated, adding that some can be up to 230 years old. “One group is wranglers, and the others are rustlers - the stealers of cattle.”

“Wranglers” are “much more friendly and have a better relationship with us.”

Bushman seemed to have known the details of where and how those aliens live.

He claimed the creatures are inhabitants of a planet called Quintumnia. It is located 68 light-years away from Earth, yet it takes them only 45 minutes to travel to our planet. At home, they commute through telepathy, Bushman insisted.

The deceased scientist went on to say that he actually saw their homes because he gave the aliens a camera to take pictures with. It is, however, hard to say what those pictures contain because the images turned out blurry.

In another revelation, Bushman said there is a special flight path from space to Area 51, a mysterious base in central Nevada where it is believed that aliens and their spacecrafts were stored.

He added that there are Americans working on UFOs from outer space 24 hours a day, reported the Metro.

“With respect to the alien craft, we have American citizens who are working on UFOs 24 hours a day,” he stated.

However, the alien seen in Bushman's photographs is actually available to buy at Walmart, according to an investigation by Quebec station TVQC.
 

IUExLAX

Newcomer
Jun 5, 2015
10
2
3
Link?
Support?
Source?
Evidence?
Facts?

/crickets chirp

a gaggle of geese,
a school of fish,
a douche of Colts fans
Most of your critics never competed or played anything other than World of Warcraft. They're stoners and pretend craft beer aficionados who have trouble getting their homework in on time. You're foolish to expect them to understand football or the folly of DeflateGate. You're foolish to expect them to know what the New York Times is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SequoiaHoosier

Rangeline Fan

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Mar 22, 2007
39,101
8,372
113
Real? Man claims to have first clear photo of Bigfoot, said spotted in Virginia
POSTED 8:00 AM, JULY 2, 2014, BY ASHTON EDWARDS, UPDATED AT 08:49AM, JULY 2, 2014


A Virginia man claims to have the first clear photos of Bigfoot.

Cryptozoology News reported Randy O’Neal said his father and a friend took the photographs late last month.

O’Neal posted the images to YouTube and said, “Finally, a photo that is not blurry nor hidden behind a tree. A clear photo of Bigfoot standing out in the wide open. You be the judge.”

So, do you think this is real?

See more on this story from WGHP