Chemtrails promote 'monster' wild fires?
Posting this to 'ignite' some discussion ... start an 'online think tank.'
America has seen massive, history-making wild fires over the last number of years. This year there is a massive fire burning in and around Ft. McMurray Alberta in Canada. Trees are burning like torches and the fire is growing at an "apocalyptic" rate ... 90,000 people being evacuated and the possibility that the entire city could be razed by this monster fire.
I have a theory to throw out for discussion here.
1) I checked and Ft McMurray has been getting chemtrailed since at least 2002
2) Nano aluminum is a chief component in chemtrails
3) Aluminum is one of the incendiary ingredients in Thermite (remember the twin towers?)
Is it possible that the fine coating of nano aluminum on trees and plants, not to mention structures, is acting as an accelerant to what would otherwise be more 'natural' and controllable fires?
Please add your comments and any knowledge you may have regarding the plausibility of my theory.
Thanks for your feedback, and especially for pointing out (indirectly) that I should phrase my question more specifically.
I am, of course, aware that natural fires occur ... good for the soil etc ... and do so periodically.
My more specific question is/was ... could the presence of nano aluminum exacerbate the fire problem. Between California and Alberta the severity of fires seems to be much worse over the last few years.
Thanks Dan ... good to know that open-minded inquiries and thoughts are so graciously received here on 12160 by folks like yourself!
I am, of course, entirely chagrined by your scientific rebuke of my comments and thoughts. I should have realized, from your message, that you are an expert on all things, and that I should have just meekly submitted to your proclamation of the facts (as you see them) ... since apparently you know everything about every possible contingency. Unfortunately my 140 IQ makes me think beyond the boxes some people exist in, such as yourself.
It may interest you to know, for your future academic discussions here on 12160, that vulgar and hysterical replies and comments are not generally indicative of someone who is confident , informed and rational. Therefore it is entirely impossible for me to actually take you seriously, given your demonstrable proclivity for hostile language versus intelligent debate.
Google can provide you with any definitions you need for words I have used herein that exceed a single syllable. You may find that tool helpful.
I had really hoped that Dan (of his "tribe") would reply ... after that 'awkward' exchange between us ... and offer some science of some sort. His original reply suggested that he had some empirical knowledge regarding my theory and could offer something helpful to all of us. Sadly he chose to be more hostile than knowledgeable, as you can see.
Therefore I am unfortunately left to believe (given the silence from him thereafter) that Dan may be one of those people called "trolls" ... people who are paid a little money to assault any opinion contrary to his employer's interests. Knowing how tough the employment situation is these days, it's understandable that he might be one of those ... but unforgivable that he would, for a minor pay check, sell out his country and countrymen for a few bucks by obfuscating open and honest discussion about subjects that affect us all.
My thread here on 12160 is just one subject of possible concern ... a small component of the 'larger problems' Dan very rightly spoke of ... however, unless we can all have open and unfettered dialogue, we will end up arguing details more than solving the real problems facing us all.
12160 is among many sites that offer this opportunity to use the internet to share and discuss the challenges we struggle with. IF we really care about truth, we must always care about keeping the conversation between us alive and moving. Short of that we just have to accept our fate ... and not complain further.
Case in point ... thanks for illustrating my point so clearly Dan! You are a real sport to do so!
Aluminum certainly gives more energy to fire, but there is another aspect that may not be obvious. Forests when "protected" and left in their natural state continue to grow denser. Bigger trees shade the smaller ones that die off and dry up. Those dying trees would normally be cut down and used as fire wood or some other purpose. When forest is left to grow freely without taking out the dead wood it will catch fire sooner or later with devastating results. Controlled burns are a technique used to keep the forests free of dead wood too, but are they applied in the protected natural reserves?
That issue you point out was huge some years back when there were fires around Kelowna BC where many homes were burned out ... major fire. My son was donating his old toys to burned-out kids there. The criticism then was that the undergrowth was not cleaned out over 'environmental' objections and smoke from controlled burns was prohibited. Made things worse by far!
Thanks for your input here!!