Former meteorologist explains how chembombs have replaced chemtrails

Hi Tap,

Here’s an interesting one. 

Man-made Climate Change in the Skies.

Interesting remarks and slides by former meteorologist.
(TAP – see next post)

Borders heavily chem-trailed of late with chem-bombs resulting in swirly clouds like Cirrus. Cirrus clouds are a sign of a storm front coming in but these man-made lookalikes feather out and eventually haze the sky. Got some good shots this morning.

Kind regards,
The Tap Blog is a collective of like-minded researchers and writers who’ve joined forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media.

2 Responses to “Former meteorologist explains how chembombs have replaced chemtrails”

  1. SECRET TPPartnership, CETAgreement & C-CITreaty & TRIBUNALS are INSIDER TRADING; corp. Canada fears China may Blow “Arrangements” between Can. Lobbyists’ Clients & Parties’ Executives (W.A.D. Accord*)? NON Shareholders HAVE TO PAY the arranged PENALTIES. Repatriating off-shore; profits, goods & services contracts, financing, etc. and co-manufacturing still not on the table? LINE UP to IPOs SHOrtens.
    What the TREATY of VERSAILLES was to the 20th century PALES in COMPARISON to the TPP, CETA, C-CIT, NAFTA, et al, in the 21st.

    (CAN) – Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s attempts to maintain the secrecy provisions in the Canada – China Investment Treaty (C-CIT; FIPPA) & the Canada – European Union CETA may be unraveling by way of the threatened Canadian Senate, et al.

    There are several reasons for the secrecy (“omerta”) of the dispute resolution tribunals.

    1) To Protect the parties to the treaty, &/or, agreement, ie. corporate sponsors, from having to reveal to the non shareholding tax payers the existing arrangements that it has with its own government. For instance, the Canadian W.A.D. Accord suggests that corporate Canada’s lobbyists pay considerations to the executives of the political parties for two main reasons:
    A) to promote corporate Canada’s agenda with governing party(ies) by:
    i) reducing its taxes & thus, the “net increase” in taxes for non shareholders
    ii) increase its funding for “economic development” which covers the cost of, among other things, the present & future advocacy, ie. lobbying & the cost of the considerations that corporate Canada pays out, etc. It may be regrettable that given the source of the accessed “economic development” funds, ie. those 95% – 99% of Canadians who are non shareholding tax payers there is a great deal of room for discretionary spending & its abuse
    to protect corporate Canada’s agenda by paying the other (non governing) political parties considerations in order to limit the scope of the “opposition” to manageable issues that can be compromised in order that “opposing” parties can claim victories (at least a limited victory) for their constituents. Under this arrangement both, the politicians & the lobbyists’ clients are protected from scrutiny by the role of the parties’ executives.

    2) To Protect the parties to the treaty, &/or, agreement, ie. corporate sponsor from having to reveal to the each others’ corporate sponsors their existing arrangements that it has with its own government & thus, each counties’ corporate sponsors are not obliged to share the benefits & considerations (& future considerations) that they receive from their respective governments ie. their non shareholding taxpayers. Often the benefits are shared as an inducement to conduct business together in the more convenient jurisdictions.

    3) To Protect the parties to one…
    …For the FULL ARTICLE;
    Google: “INSIDER TRADING; David E.H. Smith”,

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.