In response to accusations that most have already noted as being terribly desperate attempts to create distrust in the small guys helping our selves and trying to help others understand the chaos.
Hi Karl, A spectrophotometer eh? While those are still on the market, they're almost an outdated tech, depending on what your intentions are to use it. They range from about $250 to multi thousands, again what is your intended use? The basic ones I'm very familiar with ,having used a Bausch and Lomb unit decades ago. You will need some quality cuvettes (optically flat), or results get skewed. When leaning towards needing a high end unit, it might be worthwhile to take a leap into a low end flame photometer - which come digital now of course. Next up is atomic absorption which also works off of flame emissions, but for determining elemental composition these might be preferred. They are far more accurate than a spectrophotometer which will require titrations etc. to determine concentrations. However, unless you plan to open a commercial lab with continual use, this type of equipment is hard to make pay off. To run a few occasional samples, it might be easier to contact someone who already has a lab. I have no affiliation, but Mike Adams comes to mind, who runs a commercial accredited lab with all the latest bells and whistles. Just a thought.
great info tom, i did respond to an earlier message. Imagine how you could help with the right tools ? i bet you would be great on this game. the more, the merrier. The world needs all hands on deck sir !
While that may be the case...silica/silicon was pointed out early on as a component the nanotech uses to build it's network out. So it's good for something but not at all what we want to utilise in our nano-riddled bodies. Look into those claims though before proceeding. It's another catch-22.
Yes Danyele, I know this body of work. Gregs post was beautiful. Were you pointing out the 2 parts to water? in the human body?...it's all brillliant understanding isn't it...yep see you soon!
No, I was pointing at outer cells being gel. Free ready-to-eat lunch for QDs?
We’re having a huge snow storm starting tonight; 20-40 cm of snow expected tomorrow and evening with 100 km/hour winds. Actually, the whole sky is white, the landscape has totally disappeared. Snowflakes punch one’s face as sharp needles.
On the highways, which are usually closed on Québec’s South Shores during snow storms, many people get stuck in their cars because they are forced to stop driving. Too dangerous and they can’t see the road at all. There is at least one death/year.
Not sure if I’ll be able to attend the meeting for electrical failures often occur. In these times, no Internet, no heating… just survival.
Feel free to contact me as I have a possible lead for you in your search for labs. I have used the company myself. They are in the U.S. Give me a heads up in your response here so I’ll know to expect a communication: felicemifa@yahoo.com
Only a week ago Apple pectin was noted as being another material that the synthetic nanos are utilising to further their network in us. I am crushed about it too. It was brilliant to use. Coincidentally I had just run out of it.
Would you mind sharing your source for where it says apple pectin is a no-no? It, along with kaolin clay, was going to be my last resort.
That said, fellow excellent SubStacker, Brandon Iglesias, did an incredible experiment using activated coconut shell charcoal/zeolite while working on the computer. He is able to detect on a special computer when or if there is nano interference with the outside world. He saw the outside interference almost completely zero out. So, it would seem that charcoal and/or zeolite are caging off/removing vs feeding the nano.
“Now” put out a brand, but I don’t think it says organic - even so, it’s very, very effective. It was used to help the children in Chernobyl after the nuclear explosion and was also studied on the victims with the Fukushima nuclear meltdown. Great results in those 2 incidents. You can look up the studies online.
Karl, evil or possessed by evil people atrack, BY DEFINITION. The concept or entity which haa been referred to as s atan is also called the Accuser, the Antagonist, the Divider. It has the power to seduce, divert, entetain, confuse, possess and enslave. The challenge we all face is manage to look away and keep looking away.
I completely agree, i just do not want my space here which has had people feeling free to converse cluttered by quite obviously ill intended people. I made the post to make clear my position as an honest person. I blocked the guy because i did not wish to fight with him either and that is what he wanted since he had no actual point about anything else going by details or lack of in his knock article. I do not like censorship, fair and polite debate is always welcome, government shrills or fake fact checker level types are not welcome.
I don't think in this instance that's all that needs to be done - look away.
The knowledge and information Karl and others are trying to show to the world is being disparaged in an attempt to invalidate their findings. It isn't only in Karl's comment section, but also elsewhere.
We all need to keep an eye on those who are lying and call them out in their lies.
Jesus did this when it was appropriate to do so. He called a hypocrite a hypocrite and some he called beautiful coffins filled with dead bones and betrayers of those who trust them and the children of Satan.
To my understanding, Jesus never advocated letting evil pass in silence.
While some may say that is also accusatory, antagonistic and divisive, this is where we use discernment. A much needed skill. Though I do agree if one doesn't possess discernment it's better left to those who do. Practice and hone this skill. We need it more than ever.
In our culture, lay people are not supposed to take control of our own health. I am being forced to do the same thing because I have no access to doctors even remotely interested in covid related diseases and the diseases downstream of what I am calling "frankenbug" assaults. My position is that our immune systems and our natural medicines are not designed to deal with these man made things that assault our health. We have to experiment with each new frankenbug (morgellons, spike protein, Lyme etc) to find its weakness. I am doing that currently with the anti-parasitics as I think my current issue is most likely to be the spike protein. You are doing it currently with the sodium citrate to get rid of plastics and metals which are most likely from the jabs or from chem trails. When I have finished doing what I am doing, I will likely have to follow up with what you are doing. In fact we all will, for the rest of our lives, while these frankenbugs exist in the environment. I have only just started this stack and have much more to draw into it, including your work, but it is a start.
Please consider reading Geneva‘s Substack from Geneva Thatcher (not the other acct.) She has a pinned article which talks about her Vaxxed elderly mother (3 to 4 shots) who was showing serious life-threatening symptoms. She treated her mother primarily with Cat’s Claw tincture, and IVM. And after three months, all of her mother’s symptoms were completely resolved. She and her husband continue to use this remedy when they feel they’ve been shedded upon by other people. She has a lot of homeopathic knowledge so I urge you to peruse her articles.
Karl, you should know Ray has attacked other people as well who attempted to offer viable solutions/treatments. Jealousy, bitterness, the want of recognition (all symptoms of Ego) may be motivating him.
I commented on Ray's post that I think you are both good guys. He is up his own arse a bit and let's his anger, skepticism and cynicism pollute his often spot on work. Karl. Keep going. Unblock him, engage.
Definitely not going to unblock him. I am being told that in his comments he is now inferring i have gotten more donations and money then i really have, 14k i think it was and that i earn even more from pledges which i do not have switched on and do not currently use.
He has tried many other angles on attacking me and others. His article is terrible, with misleading info on it. Not to say mine are amazing, and grammar isn't my strong point, but he is implying things with an angle on it that is not accurate and rather curious.
Would you unblock someone who seems a lot like a psyops cyclops? Many do not want him here or on their stacks either. We have no problem with fair debate, or genuinely curious inquiry. I will never engage with anyone who shows interest in a psychological pattern which assumes to strategically defile another person using all the obvious techniques.
Others have unsubscribed from Ray because of his attacks on people which are often done using terribly biased articles he writes. I don't need Ray, he has nothing to teach me or anyone else, he just wastes our time because he likes to disrupt people with dribble unfortunately. I am sorry this does not earn him pocket money.
I was looking for money for equipment. I take very little out for my own survival, i do this full time and i do nothing else. I do not want attention like Ray, which is why people had to encourage me on to the substack in the first place.
Ray lost subscribers over many articles for good reason.
Thanks Paul, I've now been informed he is calling me names and finding any way he can to make me look like a demon in his comments over on his post. I am finding it quite amusing since he is just digging himself a hole by showing what his intentions were. I don't think he is frustrated in any other way then that he set out to get attention or attack me and it his gone pear shaped for him. I hope he is enjoying himself as much as others have watching him get so desperate. I would hate to be him right now from what others have said. My mum and others read his ranting for a laugh and tell me what he's been saying. Absolutely hilarious, I have been ammused by his ranting shameful to say.
Yes, I happened to check out his article of biased criticism, only to see what an arrogant protagonist at work. In another of his articles he teams up with amateur provocateur, Richard S,..and saw the two of them together - bait and attack and ridicule a newcomer to his site....like two emaciated vultures licking their chops at what fun they were having torturing this unknowing person! I couldn't understand why the lady stayed reply-commenting in that thread (quite unknowing she was being ridiculed) with the two of them tearing into her. It was literally witnessing a battery/assault.
Beware ppl....of the "Source" of much condescention, ridicule and lies !
Indeed, i am finding it highly odd that there is even a few people defending his character and i am considering these few few people to be part of a circle with "the source". It is effectively a largely forcing of opinion based strategy he is pushing. Other substackers are offering theirs. It is extremely suspect. x
Fluoride has nothing to do with q-dots. Q-dots are nano technology, fluoride treatment in water supply is a water soluble chemical. * * * I suggest you treat your kidneys with respect. Overdosing SC can cause permanent damage. * * * I don't advise drinking rain water. There are so many toxins in the air which wind up in rain water, especially if it comes off your roof. Same goes for snow; don't eat it or drink meltwater. Those days are gone.
The rain water is contaminated as most are showing, the rain in OZ looked horrible, their is a reason for them spraying constantly with plane routes circling constantly before landing again. I cannot believe how many people have shared these flight paths, it is rather worrying.
Thank you for sharing your personal experimentations as well as other testimonies! You and the other researchers are on significatives and helpful tracks.
I definitely missed something here… Some comments are so weird or harsh that even Deepl can’t translate them adequately. :):):) So sorry that you have to go through the hundreds of comments/replies and it’s your right to ban contra-productive people.
I hope that you will not hold me against for having expressed that I was part of the 1% of the population that reacts unlikely to drugs in a systematic way. I am very happy that the CS works for the majority of users and I would have liked to get all the benefits from it too. This said, in any case, I’m willing to be a guinea pig. I will do other dosage tests and, as soon as I feel better, the next one will be the administration of a minimum dose in an enteric capsule instead of a dilution in water. I will keep the Micronauts informed of the results.
Above all, thank you and your collaborators for devoting so much efforts and time to the good of humanity.
Warm regards.
P.S. De-fogging!!! Now I understand David’s thanks for contributing to the discussions. I didn’t know what he meant or that there were parallel experts groups who were reviewing and discussing the comments we laymen made following your publications and Zoom meetings…
Hey Danyele, i could never hold anything against you, i feel very bad for those who have a real issue trying something that might help because of another condition. Hopefully we can find something else soon. The nattokinase does seem to disrupt some of the processes in the swab samples too. so thats a good one with charcoal maybe? Alway love to hear from you.
Greetings Karl. I'm kind of dating myself in terms of lab techniques as my hands-on lab days go back to when I shot the last T-rex on a safari. I didn't know they were endangered, but oh well, too late now. * * * I'm glad you decided upon something better than spectroscopy. In terms of liquid chromatography, of course we all are familiar with the original way to do this, with filter paper hanging in a vat with solvent. Of course, doing this "manually" served its purpose well to demonstrate the process of separation. There's a neat way to take this simple method to a next level. After the sample is well separated along its vertical path, take the paper out and let it dry. Next, cut the paper to size that works for you and hang it back into the solvent at a 90 degree angle to the first run. This will tease apart the patches of concentrate even further, or if its all the same molecule, it will stay as a patch and move in unison. Lastly, after drying, the patches can be snipped apart, re-dissolved in solvent and analyzed further with gas chromatography etc. With todays equipment, LC works almost like a cracking tower at a refinery in that a continuous stream of various compounds can be supplied, separated out from the original mix. I have only seen such equipment but have not run it myself, so cant help you with ticks of the trade in that department. * * * There are ways to keep labs honest. First, like you said, don't reveal sample origin. Tell them your samples are duplicates that were run at a different lab, and that some samples are actually known standards. You can easily make standards yourself from dist water and reagent, then diluting. If their results are too far out of the ballpark, then obviously they will have taken themselves out of your market, proving to be unreliable. That puts them on the hot seat to be as accurate as possible. If you have an analytical scale, you can also test your standards by evaporation and weighing remainder. While that might not give you ppm accuracy, it certainly puts you in the ballpark. * * * In terms of how to start out getting experience with new equipment, I would work with your own standards to see if the equipment results come close to what you know them to be. That builds confidence to tackle unknowns. Doing this with a wide array of known samples then expands your experience and confidence. Determining complete unknowns would be a tough challenge for me as results that tell us molecular weight, rough composition, and similarity to some knowns still leaves one in a sea of endless possibilities. I'm not enough of a chemist to be able to get to an end result with confidence. That takes more background than I have. * * * I have worked with labs that are less than "perfect", in case of a fuel spill. In one case, sampling soil samples with a visible oily sheen of fuel, which came back non-detect - yes, those were a bit suspect. But when weighing out what decisions to make, we realize we cannot ever get to zero and stay within a reasonable budget. We have to consider what natural processes help neutralize spill contamination. Here in town, I loosely watched the progress of "rehab" of an old truck stop. They pulled the tanks, then excavated and replaced the top 4 feet of soil. Mind you, the bottom of the tanks were deeper than that! But, as the city's water source isnt nearby, all we can do is look the other way, dont buy the property, and dont put a potable water well there either. You mentioned results from effluent testing covering endless pages. Yes, very familiar with that; its one hot potato to deal with. Trying to come to conclusions regarding what we are dealing with here with the cv19 nano-tech, etc., to be frank, this is bordering on out of reach of DIY methods. Not that its impossible, but it takes a budget we dont have, and knowledge/ skills/ experience we dont have either. I dont wish to be negative, but I'm thinking of the huge staff of specialists it took to create this garbage: chemical engineers, medical staff, electrical engineers, microbiologists, plus the endless resources of our dark intel, etc. Such a staffing represents a huge amount of specialty knowledge that is hard to catch up with using DIY methods. Personally, my hopes are that larger entities like Carnicom Institute and the group working in Germany can pick up where we have to leave off. My view of our role here is to turn on the red flashing lights, ring the alarm bells, get publicity - far and wide, and present irrefutable evidence of what we are faced with. I would venture to say that we already have been an effective "starter motor", but - realistically - we will never be the real horsepower that brings this to conclusion.
Very interesting comment as usual. Thank you. The kind of liquid chromatograph we were looking at is a HPLC. If we can only infer what several other components are it might really help stop the processess even unfolding in the slightest. That would be an achievement and likely come soon than a full understanding of the whole technology as you say. The time we need to keep us all going long enough is likely in some of these simar solutions. If they cannot utilise their technology then that is one win, if they cannot stop us doing it then that is a 2nd win, if we can detox large amounts of it that is a 3rd, and if we can understand it enough to damage or render it inert in the envirement that will be the 4th win. The biggest win will come from being able to clean up all the mess afterwards that is just laying everywhere and blowing around, or stuck in our drinking water and food. But who knows how we shall fair in this war against evil. I hope for the best and keep doing what I can. Your separation technique is interesting too. I look forward to being able to use a HPLC in the future. I am just trying to get enough donations and get situated again so I have room to do it all. Huge pain being technically homeless for now. Need to find somewhere to rest my feet and keep working. Our new study database is growing nicely with recent ventures. It has added me greater clarity to what I have to understand and keep record of. Best wishes Tom Karl. C
Karl .. well done on your amazing scientific documentation & discovery’s
You are (100% a scientist ) and a especially good one ..as you were not trained /brainwashed/ indoctrinated by the matrix establishment of lies with deliberate created parameters to suppress free thinking ..
you are more free to explore unscripted ways of searching for information than the so called (certificated parrots)..
Remember you only get hit with flack when you are right over the target 🎯.
the awake ones are many !
we are all watching you
we are more than you know & connections to international movements with your name mentioned in corridors of specialised researchers
Ok - yes I see where you're going, and I've had similar thoughts for testing rain as well as snow (NW corner of ND). With a string like that to test for, I would definitely advise against a spectrophotometer. The only way to derive concentration is to do old-school titrations, which for that many elements take a very long time. Accuracy might be in ppm range if you're really good at it, but most likely a bit less. The modern equipment can get you in ppb range with repeatability, in fraction of time. I unfortunately don't have Adams' contact info, but he runs the website: Natural News, calls himself the health ranger, runs a health food on-line store, and also runs the Brighteon video platform. In truth, I think he would be quite interested in working your samples up. My impression is he has quite the lab equipment - no idea where he gets his funding for top of the line equipment.
In terms of what to look for in testing, we already know most contamination is from flyash / chemtrails, so testing for those tracers might be good evidence of chemtrails, but... we already know that. This might be waste of $. Taking dust samples can quantify chemtrails, especially with notes re: seeing few/ common/ many trials across sky on sampling day. Results just might show high correlation between dust quantity and seeing trails?? Hint: takes about 8 hrs for 90% to settle out of air column. Sampling can be easy: cardboard box with lids cut off or folded in forms a "stilling well" where air currents are reduced to allow better settling. I would use clean microscope slides, numbered to track their weights, and weigh before/after with decent scale down to milligrams. Can do various sampling durations: 24 hrs, week, etc. FYI: the "geoengineering" program that the feds are doing has NO EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) as they knew trying to get an EIS approved would be impossible. So they didn't, which is against law as this "federal action" affects the US public. For this reason the program isn't directly admitted to. When a program "doesn't exist" then you don't need to provide info via FOIA etc. as its "doesn't exist". However, leaks have confirmed the program. Care to estimate the "carbon footprint" of all those tankers in the air 24/7? An appropriate lawsuit would stop this cold in a heart beat, while saving billions. Those planes belch out more CO2 than all of US traffic combined. (Not that CO2 is a problem - its truly NOT) What about the legality of dumping flyash into our air after its required collected by EPA?
One of my own interests is finding out what type of ice nucleation chemicals are being used to instigate precip. On occasion we get snowfalls that don't feel right for the given temp outside. It feels different, not crunchy, not sticky, but it packs down when - by temp - it should be fluffy. Next time this happens, I'll take a sample of a cooking pot full, evap it down to see whats left. Something isn't right, thats all I know. As for as your parameters go, should be straight forward with most elements. "Coal ash" can vary a lot depending on where coal was mined. Most fly ash (baghouse ash) is actually lime from inclusions of limestone in the coal. It does contain occasional radioactive elements; which ones I don't know offhand. Sulfur is common in coal, fools gold often found. I recall doing sulfur testing in pine needle fascicles in Montana, influenced by industries now long gone. Acid rain induced fascicle death and resulting browning of needles, eventually killing the tree.
I'm at a loss suggesting other possible labs to work with. One would think it not real hard to find one but I appreciate your experiences in this. Also the tip re: using glass - makes sense and hadn't thought of that. I guess all that leaves is stainless steel containers with rubber or cork gaskets. However, using glass might be ok IF you do a thorough acid wash of the glass container both before and after sampling. The "after" acid wash would re-add back in all the adsorbed metals.
I've had similar thoughts of testing atmospheric dust samples using polarizing microscope. What I'm looking for is the source of mass quantities of Q-dots. I suspect this source is aeolian and should be traceable fairly easily in dust. Some days are so bad here that a spotless clean windshield has thick coating of dust by morning. Most of Chemtrails is flyash / lime, but the rest of the "additives" is "proprietary" - which gives us something to do trying to sleuth it out -lol. The way Dr. Ana is finding Q-dots by the million in blood of everyone, I cant quite fathom where it comes from thus suspecting air quality. Food quality is another one, but the sheer quantity of Q-dots has to have a different source other than food. I don't discount their actual manufacture in our bodies.
HIGHLY recommend this reference, very technical but excellent:
This is all very interesting tom. We actually are diverting our purchase to liquid chromatography for now. Some good machines going at reasonable prices and the results are more useful or more accurate than spectroscopy. far more tangible with the separating process. Many of us have avoided using labs since we know they are mostly told to either refuse certain samples, or skew results if the ingredients flag up known. I saw a documentary where they showed this happening simply over lake water from a well known lake suspected to be dangerously contaminated. No lab would touch it when the guy explained where the sample came from. So it is best to lie and say its something else, and even then you may get dishonest results if they get an idea of what you are after. Pressure has been put on many in the industry to keep quite i do believe. The titre testing has me at interest. Would you have useful info on these processes as a bite size introduction, with suggestions as to most useful test types ?
Only new here but is F treated town supply water higher in Q-dots compared untreated town water- has anyone tested? Could the dots come with the F toxin?
FYI - been on SC for over a week at 1/2 teaspoon (about 2g
) taken at night with 500ml rain water. Have found that I have extremely dry mouth early morning such that I have to get up and have a drink. Has anyone else noticed this?
Also, I decided to have a 4g dose SC just before noon today and within half an hour noticed what I have to assume is kidney pain. Not something I have consciously observed before so I will now be a bit more careful with the dose.
You're hurting their bottom line if you aren't pushing the same thing they are or not pushing something that they want to push. It's a zero sum game to them.
That 22.2g dose bothers me. Why is there such an odd dosing schedule? 7.2g followed by three 5g doses seems a bit odd to me, almost as if it were intentional to administer such strange doses.
You can make your own, and then you’ll know the purity of the contents. There are websites out there that demonstrate how to make it. So long as you get baking soda and citric acid, you can do it.
Baking soda isn't the same as sodium. Here's the chemical compound difference :
Sodium carbonate is often referred to as soda ash or washing soda. Sodium bicarbonate is popularly called as baking soda. Sodium carbonate is made up of sodium and acid. Sodium bicarbonate comes with sodium, acid and hydrogen.
Also, if you purchase citric acid, you are still buying from a commercial source that manufactures it. Citric acid is used in so many things it's generally produced in very large industrial factories. You can't really make it yourself. So contamination is still possible.
IDK if baking soda and citric acid will have the same results as sodium and citric acid. My guess is they are different enough the functions will be different.
I buy a brand of SC called Pure that comes in a sealed bag and is inexpensive.
Your comment prompted me to look at my box of Arm & Hammer and it says it's only active ingredient is Sodium Bicarbonate. I have no idea what the third ingredient referred to above may be. Moon dust? Maybe? Again...Ah, who knows.
Though as you said, it may be changing day by day or even moment by moment!
You have made me feel less lonely as well. And now I'm chuckling...
Hi Karl, A spectrophotometer eh? While those are still on the market, they're almost an outdated tech, depending on what your intentions are to use it. They range from about $250 to multi thousands, again what is your intended use? The basic ones I'm very familiar with ,having used a Bausch and Lomb unit decades ago. You will need some quality cuvettes (optically flat), or results get skewed. When leaning towards needing a high end unit, it might be worthwhile to take a leap into a low end flame photometer - which come digital now of course. Next up is atomic absorption which also works off of flame emissions, but for determining elemental composition these might be preferred. They are far more accurate than a spectrophotometer which will require titrations etc. to determine concentrations. However, unless you plan to open a commercial lab with continual use, this type of equipment is hard to make pay off. To run a few occasional samples, it might be easier to contact someone who already has a lab. I have no affiliation, but Mike Adams comes to mind, who runs a commercial accredited lab with all the latest bells and whistles. Just a thought.
great info tom, i did respond to an earlier message. Imagine how you could help with the right tools ? i bet you would be great on this game. the more, the merrier. The world needs all hands on deck sir !
Well said great idea Mike Adams would be the go
So it looks like it’s true that silica can remove metals from the body. Good affirmation.
While that may be the case...silica/silicon was pointed out early on as a component the nanotech uses to build it's network out. So it's good for something but not at all what we want to utilise in our nano-riddled bodies. Look into those claims though before proceeding. It's another catch-22.
Hello Koppykat!
Please read the 7th par.:
The Miraculous Nature of Water
The structure of water is transformed by human thought
GREG REESE
22 DÉC. 2023
HTTPS://GREGREESE.SUBSTACK.COM/P/THE-MIRACULOUS-NATURE-OF-WATER
See you on next meeting!
Yes Danyele, I know this body of work. Gregs post was beautiful. Were you pointing out the 2 parts to water? in the human body?...it's all brillliant understanding isn't it...yep see you soon!
Yes, great post from Greg.
No, I was pointing at outer cells being gel. Free ready-to-eat lunch for QDs?
We’re having a huge snow storm starting tonight; 20-40 cm of snow expected tomorrow and evening with 100 km/hour winds. Actually, the whole sky is white, the landscape has totally disappeared. Snowflakes punch one’s face as sharp needles.
On the highways, which are usually closed on Québec’s South Shores during snow storms, many people get stuck in their cars because they are forced to stop driving. Too dangerous and they can’t see the road at all. There is at least one death/year.
Not sure if I’ll be able to attend the meeting for electrical failures often occur. In these times, no Internet, no heating… just survival.
Have a good evening.
Feel free to contact me as I have a possible lead for you in your search for labs. I have used the company myself. They are in the U.S. Give me a heads up in your response here so I’ll know to expect a communication: felicemifa@yahoo.com
Cheers.
And other binders, have they not worked for you - modified citrus pectin, bentonite clay, activated charcoal, fulvic/humic acids, and apple pectin?
Only a week ago Apple pectin was noted as being another material that the synthetic nanos are utilising to further their network in us. I am crushed about it too. It was brilliant to use. Coincidentally I had just run out of it.
Hello!
Would you mind sharing your source for where it says apple pectin is a no-no? It, along with kaolin clay, was going to be my last resort.
That said, fellow excellent SubStacker, Brandon Iglesias, did an incredible experiment using activated coconut shell charcoal/zeolite while working on the computer. He is able to detect on a special computer when or if there is nano interference with the outside world. He saw the outside interference almost completely zero out. So, it would seem that charcoal and/or zeolite are caging off/removing vs feeding the nano.
I highly recommend his SS!
https://electrostasis.substack.com/p/experiment-105-activated-charcoal?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
“Now” put out a brand, but I don’t think it says organic - even so, it’s very, very effective. It was used to help the children in Chernobyl after the nuclear explosion and was also studied on the victims with the Fukushima nuclear meltdown. Great results in those 2 incidents. You can look up the studies online.
Arsenic, Antimony, Bismuth?
As the poisoning also comes from above, check what the latest lab results were for chemtrails analysis at GeoengineeringWatch.org
Can you explain further about Dane Wigington & the producer Mike Murphy. Any links you can refer me to? Thanks. 🙏
Go to Internet Archives or research with Yandex.com
What about volcanoes? Our local one in NZ puts sulphur out (White Island).
Please consider the implications of this article from The Exposé, UK:
https://expose-news.com/2024/01/06/nasas-project-blue-beam-as-told-by-serge-monast/
Posted everywhere I could…
Sorry! Thanks for the feedback!
I thought that le bad link had been replaced everywhere. (:
Post edited.
Hi!
Sorry! I thought that I had corrected the link everywhere.
Here it is: https://expose-news.com/2024/01/06/nasas-project-blue-beam-as-told-by-serge-monast/
Karl, evil or possessed by evil people atrack, BY DEFINITION. The concept or entity which haa been referred to as s atan is also called the Accuser, the Antagonist, the Divider. It has the power to seduce, divert, entetain, confuse, possess and enslave. The challenge we all face is manage to look away and keep looking away.
I completely agree, i just do not want my space here which has had people feeling free to converse cluttered by quite obviously ill intended people. I made the post to make clear my position as an honest person. I blocked the guy because i did not wish to fight with him either and that is what he wanted since he had no actual point about anything else going by details or lack of in his knock article. I do not like censorship, fair and polite debate is always welcome, government shrills or fake fact checker level types are not welcome.
Yes! Absolutely! Block and delete! Block and delete! Thank you so much for all you do.
Block and delete, and block and delete. Then rinse and repeat! Lol 😂
lol, yes. It wasn't free speech, it was a rant of the de-constructive kind
I don't think in this instance that's all that needs to be done - look away.
The knowledge and information Karl and others are trying to show to the world is being disparaged in an attempt to invalidate their findings. It isn't only in Karl's comment section, but also elsewhere.
We all need to keep an eye on those who are lying and call them out in their lies.
Jesus did this when it was appropriate to do so. He called a hypocrite a hypocrite and some he called beautiful coffins filled with dead bones and betrayers of those who trust them and the children of Satan.
To my understanding, Jesus never advocated letting evil pass in silence.
While some may say that is also accusatory, antagonistic and divisive, this is where we use discernment. A much needed skill. Though I do agree if one doesn't possess discernment it's better left to those who do. Practice and hone this skill. We need it more than ever.
In our culture, lay people are not supposed to take control of our own health. I am being forced to do the same thing because I have no access to doctors even remotely interested in covid related diseases and the diseases downstream of what I am calling "frankenbug" assaults. My position is that our immune systems and our natural medicines are not designed to deal with these man made things that assault our health. We have to experiment with each new frankenbug (morgellons, spike protein, Lyme etc) to find its weakness. I am doing that currently with the anti-parasitics as I think my current issue is most likely to be the spike protein. You are doing it currently with the sodium citrate to get rid of plastics and metals which are most likely from the jabs or from chem trails. When I have finished doing what I am doing, I will likely have to follow up with what you are doing. In fact we all will, for the rest of our lives, while these frankenbugs exist in the environment. I have only just started this stack and have much more to draw into it, including your work, but it is a start.
https://curingcoviddiseases.substack.com/p/the-era-of-the-frankenbugs
Please consider reading Geneva‘s Substack from Geneva Thatcher (not the other acct.) She has a pinned article which talks about her Vaxxed elderly mother (3 to 4 shots) who was showing serious life-threatening symptoms. She treated her mother primarily with Cat’s Claw tincture, and IVM. And after three months, all of her mother’s symptoms were completely resolved. She and her husband continue to use this remedy when they feel they’ve been shedded upon by other people. She has a lot of homeopathic knowledge so I urge you to peruse her articles.
Have a great day ☀️
Like you I have no trust in GP’s for decades. Use just for injuries & broken bones.
I really can’t stand time wasters…and really annoyed with what Ray has done. You handled it well !
Karl, you should know Ray has attacked other people as well who attempted to offer viable solutions/treatments. Jealousy, bitterness, the want of recognition (all symptoms of Ego) may be motivating him.
I commented on Ray's post that I think you are both good guys. He is up his own arse a bit and let's his anger, skepticism and cynicism pollute his often spot on work. Karl. Keep going. Unblock him, engage.
Definitely not going to unblock him. I am being told that in his comments he is now inferring i have gotten more donations and money then i really have, 14k i think it was and that i earn even more from pledges which i do not have switched on and do not currently use.
He has tried many other angles on attacking me and others. His article is terrible, with misleading info on it. Not to say mine are amazing, and grammar isn't my strong point, but he is implying things with an angle on it that is not accurate and rather curious.
Would you unblock someone who seems a lot like a psyops cyclops? Many do not want him here or on their stacks either. We have no problem with fair debate, or genuinely curious inquiry. I will never engage with anyone who shows interest in a psychological pattern which assumes to strategically defile another person using all the obvious techniques.
Others have unsubscribed from Ray because of his attacks on people which are often done using terribly biased articles he writes. I don't need Ray, he has nothing to teach me or anyone else, he just wastes our time because he likes to disrupt people with dribble unfortunately. I am sorry this does not earn him pocket money.
I was looking for money for equipment. I take very little out for my own survival, i do this full time and i do nothing else. I do not want attention like Ray, which is why people had to encourage me on to the substack in the first place.
Ray lost subscribers over many articles for good reason.
Hi Karl , understood. I did not realise it was this bad. I knew he was arrogant but thought it was a form of frustration. Keep up the good work.
Thanks Paul, I've now been informed he is calling me names and finding any way he can to make me look like a demon in his comments over on his post. I am finding it quite amusing since he is just digging himself a hole by showing what his intentions were. I don't think he is frustrated in any other way then that he set out to get attention or attack me and it his gone pear shaped for him. I hope he is enjoying himself as much as others have watching him get so desperate. I would hate to be him right now from what others have said. My mum and others read his ranting for a laugh and tell me what he's been saying. Absolutely hilarious, I have been ammused by his ranting shameful to say.
Such a shame. I know you are on to something and will not be deterred from your important work.
Yes, I happened to check out his article of biased criticism, only to see what an arrogant protagonist at work. In another of his articles he teams up with amateur provocateur, Richard S,..and saw the two of them together - bait and attack and ridicule a newcomer to his site....like two emaciated vultures licking their chops at what fun they were having torturing this unknowing person! I couldn't understand why the lady stayed reply-commenting in that thread (quite unknowing she was being ridiculed) with the two of them tearing into her. It was literally witnessing a battery/assault.
Beware ppl....of the "Source" of much condescention, ridicule and lies !
Indeed, i am finding it highly odd that there is even a few people defending his character and i am considering these few few people to be part of a circle with "the source". It is effectively a largely forcing of opinion based strategy he is pushing. Other substackers are offering theirs. It is extremely suspect. x
Fluoride has nothing to do with q-dots. Q-dots are nano technology, fluoride treatment in water supply is a water soluble chemical. * * * I suggest you treat your kidneys with respect. Overdosing SC can cause permanent damage. * * * I don't advise drinking rain water. There are so many toxins in the air which wind up in rain water, especially if it comes off your roof. Same goes for snow; don't eat it or drink meltwater. Those days are gone.
The rain water is contaminated as most are showing, the rain in OZ looked horrible, their is a reason for them spraying constantly with plane routes circling constantly before landing again. I cannot believe how many people have shared these flight paths, it is rather worrying.
Frank Zappa long ago advised against eating the yellow snow !
hahaha, but they don't have snow cones here anymore, what else will i do :D
Hi Karl!
Thank you for sharing your personal experimentations as well as other testimonies! You and the other researchers are on significatives and helpful tracks.
I definitely missed something here… Some comments are so weird or harsh that even Deepl can’t translate them adequately. :):):) So sorry that you have to go through the hundreds of comments/replies and it’s your right to ban contra-productive people.
I hope that you will not hold me against for having expressed that I was part of the 1% of the population that reacts unlikely to drugs in a systematic way. I am very happy that the CS works for the majority of users and I would have liked to get all the benefits from it too. This said, in any case, I’m willing to be a guinea pig. I will do other dosage tests and, as soon as I feel better, the next one will be the administration of a minimum dose in an enteric capsule instead of a dilution in water. I will keep the Micronauts informed of the results.
Above all, thank you and your collaborators for devoting so much efforts and time to the good of humanity.
Warm regards.
P.S. De-fogging!!! Now I understand David’s thanks for contributing to the discussions. I didn’t know what he meant or that there were parallel experts groups who were reviewing and discussing the comments we laymen made following your publications and Zoom meetings…
Hey Danyele, i could never hold anything against you, i feel very bad for those who have a real issue trying something that might help because of another condition. Hopefully we can find something else soon. The nattokinase does seem to disrupt some of the processes in the swab samples too. so thats a good one with charcoal maybe? Alway love to hear from you.
I haven’t coined the expression! All credits must be rewarded to Will THE Micronaut, artist and poet:
https://substack.com/@micronaut
👍🏽👍👍🏿
Greetings Karl. I'm kind of dating myself in terms of lab techniques as my hands-on lab days go back to when I shot the last T-rex on a safari. I didn't know they were endangered, but oh well, too late now. * * * I'm glad you decided upon something better than spectroscopy. In terms of liquid chromatography, of course we all are familiar with the original way to do this, with filter paper hanging in a vat with solvent. Of course, doing this "manually" served its purpose well to demonstrate the process of separation. There's a neat way to take this simple method to a next level. After the sample is well separated along its vertical path, take the paper out and let it dry. Next, cut the paper to size that works for you and hang it back into the solvent at a 90 degree angle to the first run. This will tease apart the patches of concentrate even further, or if its all the same molecule, it will stay as a patch and move in unison. Lastly, after drying, the patches can be snipped apart, re-dissolved in solvent and analyzed further with gas chromatography etc. With todays equipment, LC works almost like a cracking tower at a refinery in that a continuous stream of various compounds can be supplied, separated out from the original mix. I have only seen such equipment but have not run it myself, so cant help you with ticks of the trade in that department. * * * There are ways to keep labs honest. First, like you said, don't reveal sample origin. Tell them your samples are duplicates that were run at a different lab, and that some samples are actually known standards. You can easily make standards yourself from dist water and reagent, then diluting. If their results are too far out of the ballpark, then obviously they will have taken themselves out of your market, proving to be unreliable. That puts them on the hot seat to be as accurate as possible. If you have an analytical scale, you can also test your standards by evaporation and weighing remainder. While that might not give you ppm accuracy, it certainly puts you in the ballpark. * * * In terms of how to start out getting experience with new equipment, I would work with your own standards to see if the equipment results come close to what you know them to be. That builds confidence to tackle unknowns. Doing this with a wide array of known samples then expands your experience and confidence. Determining complete unknowns would be a tough challenge for me as results that tell us molecular weight, rough composition, and similarity to some knowns still leaves one in a sea of endless possibilities. I'm not enough of a chemist to be able to get to an end result with confidence. That takes more background than I have. * * * I have worked with labs that are less than "perfect", in case of a fuel spill. In one case, sampling soil samples with a visible oily sheen of fuel, which came back non-detect - yes, those were a bit suspect. But when weighing out what decisions to make, we realize we cannot ever get to zero and stay within a reasonable budget. We have to consider what natural processes help neutralize spill contamination. Here in town, I loosely watched the progress of "rehab" of an old truck stop. They pulled the tanks, then excavated and replaced the top 4 feet of soil. Mind you, the bottom of the tanks were deeper than that! But, as the city's water source isnt nearby, all we can do is look the other way, dont buy the property, and dont put a potable water well there either. You mentioned results from effluent testing covering endless pages. Yes, very familiar with that; its one hot potato to deal with. Trying to come to conclusions regarding what we are dealing with here with the cv19 nano-tech, etc., to be frank, this is bordering on out of reach of DIY methods. Not that its impossible, but it takes a budget we dont have, and knowledge/ skills/ experience we dont have either. I dont wish to be negative, but I'm thinking of the huge staff of specialists it took to create this garbage: chemical engineers, medical staff, electrical engineers, microbiologists, plus the endless resources of our dark intel, etc. Such a staffing represents a huge amount of specialty knowledge that is hard to catch up with using DIY methods. Personally, my hopes are that larger entities like Carnicom Institute and the group working in Germany can pick up where we have to leave off. My view of our role here is to turn on the red flashing lights, ring the alarm bells, get publicity - far and wide, and present irrefutable evidence of what we are faced with. I would venture to say that we already have been an effective "starter motor", but - realistically - we will never be the real horsepower that brings this to conclusion.
Very interesting comment as usual. Thank you. The kind of liquid chromatograph we were looking at is a HPLC. If we can only infer what several other components are it might really help stop the processess even unfolding in the slightest. That would be an achievement and likely come soon than a full understanding of the whole technology as you say. The time we need to keep us all going long enough is likely in some of these simar solutions. If they cannot utilise their technology then that is one win, if they cannot stop us doing it then that is a 2nd win, if we can detox large amounts of it that is a 3rd, and if we can understand it enough to damage or render it inert in the envirement that will be the 4th win. The biggest win will come from being able to clean up all the mess afterwards that is just laying everywhere and blowing around, or stuck in our drinking water and food. But who knows how we shall fair in this war against evil. I hope for the best and keep doing what I can. Your separation technique is interesting too. I look forward to being able to use a HPLC in the future. I am just trying to get enough donations and get situated again so I have room to do it all. Huge pain being technically homeless for now. Need to find somewhere to rest my feet and keep working. Our new study database is growing nicely with recent ventures. It has added me greater clarity to what I have to understand and keep record of. Best wishes Tom Karl. C
Karl .. well done on your amazing scientific documentation & discovery’s
You are (100% a scientist ) and a especially good one ..as you were not trained /brainwashed/ indoctrinated by the matrix establishment of lies with deliberate created parameters to suppress free thinking ..
you are more free to explore unscripted ways of searching for information than the so called (certificated parrots)..
Remember you only get hit with flack when you are right over the target 🎯.
the awake ones are many !
we are all watching you
we are more than you know & connections to international movements with your name mentioned in corridors of specialised researchers
Is taking place .. be sure of that
You are a child of god stand firm
And keep up the good work
The future will record you .
I'll second that !
Ok - yes I see where you're going, and I've had similar thoughts for testing rain as well as snow (NW corner of ND). With a string like that to test for, I would definitely advise against a spectrophotometer. The only way to derive concentration is to do old-school titrations, which for that many elements take a very long time. Accuracy might be in ppm range if you're really good at it, but most likely a bit less. The modern equipment can get you in ppb range with repeatability, in fraction of time. I unfortunately don't have Adams' contact info, but he runs the website: Natural News, calls himself the health ranger, runs a health food on-line store, and also runs the Brighteon video platform. In truth, I think he would be quite interested in working your samples up. My impression is he has quite the lab equipment - no idea where he gets his funding for top of the line equipment.
In terms of what to look for in testing, we already know most contamination is from flyash / chemtrails, so testing for those tracers might be good evidence of chemtrails, but... we already know that. This might be waste of $. Taking dust samples can quantify chemtrails, especially with notes re: seeing few/ common/ many trials across sky on sampling day. Results just might show high correlation between dust quantity and seeing trails?? Hint: takes about 8 hrs for 90% to settle out of air column. Sampling can be easy: cardboard box with lids cut off or folded in forms a "stilling well" where air currents are reduced to allow better settling. I would use clean microscope slides, numbered to track their weights, and weigh before/after with decent scale down to milligrams. Can do various sampling durations: 24 hrs, week, etc. FYI: the "geoengineering" program that the feds are doing has NO EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) as they knew trying to get an EIS approved would be impossible. So they didn't, which is against law as this "federal action" affects the US public. For this reason the program isn't directly admitted to. When a program "doesn't exist" then you don't need to provide info via FOIA etc. as its "doesn't exist". However, leaks have confirmed the program. Care to estimate the "carbon footprint" of all those tankers in the air 24/7? An appropriate lawsuit would stop this cold in a heart beat, while saving billions. Those planes belch out more CO2 than all of US traffic combined. (Not that CO2 is a problem - its truly NOT) What about the legality of dumping flyash into our air after its required collected by EPA?
One of my own interests is finding out what type of ice nucleation chemicals are being used to instigate precip. On occasion we get snowfalls that don't feel right for the given temp outside. It feels different, not crunchy, not sticky, but it packs down when - by temp - it should be fluffy. Next time this happens, I'll take a sample of a cooking pot full, evap it down to see whats left. Something isn't right, thats all I know. As for as your parameters go, should be straight forward with most elements. "Coal ash" can vary a lot depending on where coal was mined. Most fly ash (baghouse ash) is actually lime from inclusions of limestone in the coal. It does contain occasional radioactive elements; which ones I don't know offhand. Sulfur is common in coal, fools gold often found. I recall doing sulfur testing in pine needle fascicles in Montana, influenced by industries now long gone. Acid rain induced fascicle death and resulting browning of needles, eventually killing the tree.
I'm at a loss suggesting other possible labs to work with. One would think it not real hard to find one but I appreciate your experiences in this. Also the tip re: using glass - makes sense and hadn't thought of that. I guess all that leaves is stainless steel containers with rubber or cork gaskets. However, using glass might be ok IF you do a thorough acid wash of the glass container both before and after sampling. The "after" acid wash would re-add back in all the adsorbed metals.
I've had similar thoughts of testing atmospheric dust samples using polarizing microscope. What I'm looking for is the source of mass quantities of Q-dots. I suspect this source is aeolian and should be traceable fairly easily in dust. Some days are so bad here that a spotless clean windshield has thick coating of dust by morning. Most of Chemtrails is flyash / lime, but the rest of the "additives" is "proprietary" - which gives us something to do trying to sleuth it out -lol. The way Dr. Ana is finding Q-dots by the million in blood of everyone, I cant quite fathom where it comes from thus suspecting air quality. Food quality is another one, but the sheer quantity of Q-dots has to have a different source other than food. I don't discount their actual manufacture in our bodies.
HIGHLY recommend this reference, very technical but excellent:
https://carnicominstitute.org/blood-alterations-iv-protein-analysis/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
This is all very interesting tom. We actually are diverting our purchase to liquid chromatography for now. Some good machines going at reasonable prices and the results are more useful or more accurate than spectroscopy. far more tangible with the separating process. Many of us have avoided using labs since we know they are mostly told to either refuse certain samples, or skew results if the ingredients flag up known. I saw a documentary where they showed this happening simply over lake water from a well known lake suspected to be dangerously contaminated. No lab would touch it when the guy explained where the sample came from. So it is best to lie and say its something else, and even then you may get dishonest results if they get an idea of what you are after. Pressure has been put on many in the industry to keep quite i do believe. The titre testing has me at interest. Would you have useful info on these processes as a bite size introduction, with suggestions as to most useful test types ?
Only new here but is F treated town supply water higher in Q-dots compared untreated town water- has anyone tested? Could the dots come with the F toxin?
FYI - been on SC for over a week at 1/2 teaspoon (about 2g
) taken at night with 500ml rain water. Have found that I have extremely dry mouth early morning such that I have to get up and have a drink. Has anyone else noticed this?
Also, I decided to have a 4g dose SC just before noon today and within half an hour noticed what I have to assume is kidney pain. Not something I have consciously observed before so I will now be a bit more careful with the dose.
You're hurting their bottom line if you aren't pushing the same thing they are or not pushing something that they want to push. It's a zero sum game to them.
That 22.2g dose bothers me. Why is there such an odd dosing schedule? 7.2g followed by three 5g doses seems a bit odd to me, almost as if it were intentional to administer such strange doses.
I have no idea why that person chose very specific doses. i doubt it was for any particular reason.
All good. Keep doing what you’re doing. Everything is an experiment.
Does anyone have a source for clean SC ?
You can make your own, and then you’ll know the purity of the contents. There are websites out there that demonstrate how to make it. So long as you get baking soda and citric acid, you can do it.
Baking soda isn't the same as sodium. Here's the chemical compound difference :
Sodium carbonate is often referred to as soda ash or washing soda. Sodium bicarbonate is popularly called as baking soda. Sodium carbonate is made up of sodium and acid. Sodium bicarbonate comes with sodium, acid and hydrogen.
Also, if you purchase citric acid, you are still buying from a commercial source that manufactures it. Citric acid is used in so many things it's generally produced in very large industrial factories. You can't really make it yourself. So contamination is still possible.
IDK if baking soda and citric acid will have the same results as sodium and citric acid. My guess is they are different enough the functions will be different.
I buy a brand of SC called Pure that comes in a sealed bag and is inexpensive.
Hi Pirate, I noted on a box of baking soda it has potassium listed as one of 3 ingredients.
So there goes the definition I posted....sigh. Ah, who knows?
I'm always delighted to meet someone able to question their own stuff. Makes me feel less lonely !
When the creatures change the formula from day to day being caught flat-footed is a problem.
Your comment prompted me to look at my box of Arm & Hammer and it says it's only active ingredient is Sodium Bicarbonate. I have no idea what the third ingredient referred to above may be. Moon dust? Maybe? Again...Ah, who knows.
Though as you said, it may be changing day by day or even moment by moment!
You have made me feel less lonely as well. And now I'm chuckling...
https://youtu.be/UTGzLor4k4M?si=aMBNH-T9jLQD9rzv
Same question...
Actually answered my own question ! Make it yourself !
https://youtu.be/UTGzLor4k4M?si=aMBNH-T9jLQD9rzv
Awesome great stuff!
So grateful for u karl keep up the great work. May God continue to bless you