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

facts1
Share

Massive UV Levels Are Not So Easy To Hide. (Even if the disinfo agents lie about the facts)

Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org

Most have already noticed how incredibly hot the sun feels in recent years. Bark is literally being burned off of trees in countless locations. Plants are stunted, gardens don’t produce in many regions, etc. Would global geoengineering negatively affect the ozone layer?

Yes

 

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

Increasing UV radiation from ozone layer depletion

 

Do the “liars” lie about other things as well? What about nuclear fallout? Even after Fukushima blows and continues to spew radiation to this day, and is still getting worse? Do we believe government agencies, dis-information people and all their phony statements and impressive graphs of totally fictitious data telling us everything is “normal”? How about the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, lots of charts, graphs, and phony data there, more than anyone could even begin to digest. “Data”  saying everything is “safe” from too many sources to list, yet marine life and people continue to die in the gulf day in and day out in spite of everything being “fine”. What about the Exxon Valdez? How about the lead that used to be put in gasoline? That was fine till it wasn’t. DDT, that was completely safe we were told.  ”Agent Orange”? Vaccines? Cell Phones? Smart Meters? Safe, safe, safe, no need to worry. The cancers and diseases being caused “are not related” many dis-information people and agencies say.

How about geoengineering? Is it really going on? Well, “it can’t be because the government says it isn’t so”. They would never lie to us, would they? Even NASA says the chemical covered skies from global geoengineering are “safe and normal”. They have even set up special courses to teach our kids such despicable lies.

If UV radiation had gone “off the charts”, what might it do to our aquatic friends? Lets start with global plankton populations, the foundation for life on earth. Even NASA says high UV radiation would be really bad for these microscopic organisms.

 

So how are those plankton populations doing?

 

How about Krill populations? (Krill feed on phytoplankton)

(especially good article to review overall is below)

 

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

 

What about our larger ocean friends, wouldn’t excessive UV show up with them?

Excessive UV damage to marine life

Whales getting sunburnt

 

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

 

Are we seeing problems with trees?

 

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

 

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

 

HOW ABOUT OUR METERS AND THE MATH?

(A direct response to recent disinformation “hit piece” article”)

August 21, 2013

By Roger Foote, Owner Foote Control Systems

Our instruments are brand new instruments used for verifying medical sterilizers, UV curing ovens in semiconductor manufacturing, UV developing in offset printing.

UVAB_8_21_13_Small  UVA_8_21_13_Small

Both of our instruments are +/- 4% tolerance, both carry NIST traceability.(National Institute Standards and Technology)

The meters Mick West shows are mainly used for reptile enclosure UV lamps, a different class of instrument altogether.

IguanaKalangoGreenIguana3

Our scientific grade metering equipment is rated at +/-4% of full scale and the reptile lamp meters he referred to are +/-10% of full scale.

That breaks down to a possible error of 8% total on our instruments and a possible error of 20% on the SOLARMETER MODEL 6.2 UV METER. That is a 250% difference in accuracy!

Roger_02_Small

This is why we chose professional test equipment for the important task of verifying the UV levels, made even more important by the fact that all “OFFICIAL” readings from recognized agencies appear to be completely invalid.

Mick West Wrote:

“Now, in space, sunlight is a total 1366 w/m2, which is 136.6 mW/cm2. That’s for ALL the radiation, visible, infrared, and ultraviolet.

UV makes up around 10% of that. about 14 mw/cm2

Actual total UV that hits the ground is normally around 3.2 mW/cm2. Most of this is UVA. Hence his UVA readings also seem to be entirely wrong.

The fact that his total UV was higher than UV in space should be enough to prove it wrong, but if you look at just the UVB, its four times the amount of UVB in space. Physically impossible.”

Response by Roger Foote:

Actually, that number was 1353W/m2 Mick, not 1366Wm2.

And, if Mick had actually done his research, he would have seen that the 1,353 W/m2 figure was acknowledged to be a discrepancy in 1982 when they found out the instrument calibration was lower than the actual measurements acquired by rocketry and satellite instruments at that time….

From the documentation at: http://www.powerfromthesun.net/Book/chapter02/chapter02.html:

“Other values for the solar constant are found in historical literature with the value 1,353 W/m2 appearing in many publications. It is now generally believed that most of the historical discrepancies have been due to instrument calibration error (White, 1977). Recent satellite and rocket data (Duncan et al., 1982) and (Hickey et al., 1982) have confirmed that the 1,353 W/m2 value was low.”

Roger Foote Continues:

We are seeing up to 18mW/cm2 of combined UVA/UVB and at the same instant 7mW/cm2 of UVA.

And yes you can subtract the A from the A/B and get a good measurement of B.

How does Mick know how much is actually hitting the ground?

Does Mick have reliable instruments?

Does he take the measurements himself, or cut and paste from the web?

In the pictures he posted, the people holding the instruments are not holding them correctly to measure solar UV arriving at the surface. To do this correctly, one must point the instrument directly at the solar disc and adjust the position until the peak value is attained.

In the pictures on Mick West’s disinformation article, those instruments are simply measuring scatter and reflections being created by geological and architectural surfaces. It is also notable that if the SOLARMETER MODEL 6.2 UV METER was in fact pointed directly at the solar disc, it would go into over-range since the SOLARMETER MODEL 6.2 UV METER has a fixed range maximum of 1.99mW/cm2, nearly as low as a recent UVA only measurement we collected on a recent cloudy day (1.52mW/cm2).

This instrument, the SOLARMETER MODEL 6.2 UV METER seems to be woefully lacking as an environmental measuring tool.

“Stupid” wrote: (who quoted on Mick West’s disinformation article)

“UV meters can get expensive…..but modern units are out there, with NIST Cert. His old Omega unit was likely +10% or more off from NIST standards when brand new…..no telling how off it may be now.”

Response by Roger Foote:

Sorry “Stupid”, ours are brand new, 4%, NIST traceable…  You really assumed a lot considering you knew nothing about our instruments, or the ones you are referring to which ARE +/-10% tolerance when new!

They go on to say that they couldn’t find any UV meter made by Omega… A simple search would yield:

And this is our UV A/B meter:

Again, neither meter is old, both are brand new, and both are at 4% accuracy with NIST traceability.

And there are more of these UV513AB meters going on line as we speak around the globe.

Of the people already reporting their findings using the UV513AB, all of them are reporting readings of composite UVA/UVB that are in line with readings we have collected. Ours are somewhat higher than average since we are in an area where UV readings tend to be higher.

Mick West’s disinformation article stated:

“His column shows UVA, UV A/B, and UVC. They say they had two meters, so how are they are getting three numbers? Presumably something must measure UV C as well as something else.”

Response by Roger Foote:

We get those 3 numbers by having one of our meters supplied with 2 sensors.

Here is the meter Mick’s people are referring to:

Capturehttp://solarmeter.com/model62.htmlIt is mainly sold to reptile enthusiasts, not very professional looking either, and I bet Mick doesn’t even have one.

Now, about the UV Meter Owner’s Group:

http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/UVB_Meter_Owners/Mick deleted the first line in their mission statement:

The UVB_Meter_Owners group is a group formed to test common UVB sources for keeping reptiles.

And I guess this line was unimportant as well?

“Ownership of a UVB Meter is not required to join this group. The group is formed to encourage learning about one of the most important aspects of care for our reptiles.”

Lizard465

Roger Foote

Foote Control Systems

40 years in wireless environmental monitoring and measurement and industrial controls.

20 of those years in government agency work, 20 years private consulting including precision electronics design and manufacturing with customers world wide.

SO WHAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE?

There are articles out there to tell people anything they might want to hear, and agencies that exist to lie about obvious and glaring truths with official approval by their governments. There are “bottom of the barrel” paid disinformation “trolls” that live of their efforts to tarnish the truth with impressive looking charts and graphs. From the fictitious “recovering economy”, to Fukushima lies, environmental cover ups, etc etc. Lots of impressive looking data that ads up to total disinformation. Primary disinformation paid trolls have said for years there is no geoengineering, no increase in droughts, no increase in floods, no increase in wildfires, etc etc. The increase in UV radiation story hit a nerve as we thought it would. This issue is very dire and can not be hidden once widely known. Attempts to “debunk” our data on the extremely high UV levels were expected.

If you care about the truth, if you care about protecting the planets ability to continue sustaining life, if you care about our collective futures, do some research yourself. Look at the links above. Remember that you can always find conflicting data, but what does the reality on the ground, combined with available research studies, lead you to believe in regard to who has it right with the facts and who is lying their backsides off?

DW

 

 

 

 

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

  1. r. fleenor says:

    OK here’s an easy question to ask that is an undeniable fact. You can ask this question and then wait for the excuses. Question — Why over the past 30-years has the appearance of the mid-day sun changed from yellow to the now blinding platinum white that it is today. — Answer – Because the ozone layer is nearly gone and it isn’t scattering the incoming light rays. So now we see the unfiltered sun. The answer is 100% correct and is undeniable. No one seems to notice this huge change in the sun even though it’s in your face everyday, it’s mind-boggling. Now that answer will lead you to more questions and eventually you’ll find alot of the answers to some big questions. Hint: Research ozone thinning experiments carried out in the 70′s aboard Skylab. Different compounds were released to find one that effectively dissipates the ozone layer. Why you ask, you’ll find out just keep looking,it should take but a few hours to find out plenty.

  2. dave smitte says:

    Strange, because only last week i had the thought to myself that the sun is really intensely hot, meaning a different kind of heat. And thought nothing more about it, until i just literally stumbled across this article from facebook. Most interesting.

  3. Roger F says:

    Here’s an update:
    After we purchased a total irradiance, whole spectrum light meter we have been seeing around 1,300 W/m2 as have others around the US using this same meter.
    By the way, this whole spectrum meter was designed for solar contractors to assess the wattage needed in the PV panel array being specified for installations.

    It is interesting that we see around the same amount of solar power on the ground as the “Solar Constant” in space. That figure, 1,360 W/m2 is an averaged number that is pretty obviously useless in ground based solar research, and a source for much confusion for those unable to think outside the pre-programmed box that the “Authorities” such as Koch Industries, DuPont Chemical or other government agencies under them dictate as reality…

    But regardless, we and others are seeing around 1,300 W/m2 of raw solar power on the ground. At the same time we are seeing around 1/10 of that total power in the UV spectrum.

    Here is where it gets scary:
    Total irradiance: 1,304 W/m2
    Total UV: 134.5 Wm2
    UVA: 55.6 W/m2
    UVB: 78.9 W/m2

    That’s right, our instruments are showing that we are seeing 30% MORE UVB than UVA!!!

    This ratio keeps climbing as it has through the nearly 100 days of data logging we have performed.

    Do the math…

  4. Roger F says:

    We are taking “direct beam” measurements, not averaged across half the planet facing the sun, so of course our numbers are higher.

    Many people including disinfo agents that believe the numbers we post are outrageously high are not taking this into account.

    We never said that the total UVA/UVB numbers were out of range, what we see that IS out of the norm is the ratio of UVB in the total UV spectrum.

    Most sources state that we should see 1%-5% of total UV spectrum as UVB. We are seeing more than 1%-5%.

    This would point to ozone degradation as a possible cause for the higher amounts of UVB than expected.

  5. Marthur Farquois says:

    I asked my Homeopath but he hasn’t replied yet. I think he’s doing some tests to present the results with hard data so we all should look forwards to that.
    I went out in the mid-day sun for a few hours on a trip to visit relatives in Brisbane and noticed a slight pinking of skin on my arms. Perhaps we should think about using some sort of sunblock cream as protection?
    Does anyone know what levels of UVB cause sunburn on the unprotected skin and how many hours it would take to notice any effect?
    That would be very useful data to add to the article above so we can all best protect ourselves

  6. Roger F says:

    That number, 14 mW/cm2 is the averaged total UV in space, or approximately 1/10 of the whole solar irradiance “constant” of 1360 W/m2.

    These numbers are averaged across the hemisphere of our planet facing the sun, not the direct beam measurements we are taking with our meters.

  7. Ellin Callvis says:

    Just a minor point, but the “Mick readings” say 14mW/cm2 in space and the ground readings are 3.2mW/cm2 – so why do you say “the ground readings are higher than in space”? {3.2 being less than 14}

    • admin says:

      Hello Ellin,
      Not sure what you saw but the ground readings are going all the way up to almost 20 mw/cm2 at times. All “official” readings from gov sources appear to be completely fictitious. You will hear more about the collapsing ozone layer from other sources soon enough. We have a full blown crisis on this issue alone, not to mention the long list of other issues that we face.

    • RogerF says:

      It is also interesting to note that on August 29, 2013 our Maine USA observer saw 3.32mW/cm2 (33.2W/m2) on a day that the observer noted “as completely cloudy/no sun”

      On sunny days he is seeing between 11.78mW/cm2 to 13.99mW/cm2.

      As quoted from the response above:
      “The 1,353 W/m2 figure was acknowledged to be a discrepancy in 1982 when they found out the instrument calibration was lower than the actual measurements acquired by rocketry and satellite instruments at that time.”

      We have other reliable data from 2002 that shows UVA and UVB at 4.5mW/cm2 (45Wm2).

      Factor in 10+ years of stratospheric particulate injection and resultant ozone destruction on an ozone layer that was not even starting to recover and it is no mystery that we are now seeing around 4X the amount of UV that was hitting the ground on a sunny summer day in the UK in 2002…

      We likely had higher readings in Northern California than 4.5mW/cm2 (45Wm2)in 2002 since the UK is coastal with thicker atmosphere, lower elevation, more moisture content than we have here nearly 100 miles from the coast and at higher elevation of 3,000 feet.

      Scientists found very high UV readings in the Antarctic around 1976. This data was kept suppressed until around 1985. Some reports say the instruments must have been faulty, but if you remember the “UV Campaign” of the 1980s it became all too clear that something was dreadfully wrong already.

      In the 1990s, the Montreal Protocol had to be amended because the rebound of the damaged ozone layer was not happening as they had hoped.

      This gives more than ample reason to question numbers given to us by ALL government agencies since they are actively pressuring scientists to moderate their own data…

      We don’t believe that forecast models show the actual UV that is killing trees and wildlife around the world.

      Scientists are just now starting to research the whale population that is suddenly (over the last 3 or 4 years) starting to “tan” turning a darker color because of elevated UV.

      Scientists tell us that compared to healthy ozone levels, we would see seventy times the normal amounts of UV with zero ozone layer present.

      We expect to see UV levels continue to rise at an exponential rate.

  8. Marthur Farquois says:

    I showed this article to my homeopath who has been treating my gout and he had some wonderful insights. I told him of my idea that they reradiate other light colours and he said I was onto something because the glow in the dark lamps at his favourite nightclubs are called “black light”
    He said the trails are possibly absorbing and storing black light energy during the night and re-emitting it during the day.

    We often get those long periods when there are no trails and he thought this is when the trails are at their most powerful due to potentisation as the trails get diluted by the huge amounts of water in the sky they mix with. The more water they mix with the greater the potentisation. He said the planes do a lot of mixing flying through the trails and stirring them and this was just like something called “succussion”. I looked it up on wikipedia.
    He said it’s so clever how the trails get stronger the less visible they are and that the global dimming makes the sun stronger than if it’s in vacuum.
    I find hard to grasp myself but I don’t have his qualifications.

  9. Marthur Farquois says:

    Thankyou kindly Dane for making these earth shattering discoveries available to us.
    We need to find out how the chemtrails are making the UV rays stronger on earth than in space. Are the chemicals absorbing all the other colours and mutating them and reradiating them out as UVB?
    I know washing powder chemicals used to do something like that. Like those fluoride paints that glow in the dark in nightclubs.
    We will probably find the chemtrails are blocking and absorbing and converting all the blue light and other colours like black from space and only letting white light and extra UVB down to earth. The people doing this probably have shares in coconut plantations to profit from the tanning creams and things like sunglasses and sombreros everyone will need for protection
    That’s a lot of money or an instrument but we should all follow Dane’s example and buy one of these meters and get some good hard science facts to fight the debunkers. Do the instructions come in English?

    • Susan Hills says:

      I am a Gardener.A few weeks ago I noticed that a yellow Potentilla had orange flowers-a week later they were all yellow again.A yellow rose started having pink flowers and a pink rose was having white flowers.They were NOT sports.I thought then that something was happening with the wavelengths of light

    • admin says:

      That’s real interesting Susan. Please keep making note of what you’re seeing. I haven’t heard that particular observation before.

    • Peter says:

      I don’t understand how it could be stronger on earth than in space.

  10. John says:

    I live in Houston, TX. I’ve noticed these last few years that if I stay out in the sun for more than 30 minutes, a few hours later my skin develops a red, itchy rash. This never happened before about 2004. In fact when I was younger, I practically lived outside and always had a dark tan, especially in the summer. My sister has the same experience. Beyond the obvious chemtrails in the sky just about every day here, you can definitely see and feel your skin burning. Also our yard’s grass for the last two years is brown and dead; it’s mostly just weeds now – and two of the trees on our lot have suddenly died.

    • Susan Hills says:

      I too recently came out in itchy bumps when in the Sun.Its called PLE – Polymorphic Light Eruption and its caused by sensitivity to UV rays.Ive never had it in my Life before.

  11. Thanks Dane for a well written and well researched page. Its hard to refute evidence, but even 2+2 I hear can be debated by disinformation public relations experts. Seems they always put a stick in the wheel. The truth is and shall always come to surface.

  12. Excellent information and well documented. Thank you Dane.

  13. Gina says:

    All of these soul-less, anonymous disinfo agents, thousands upon thousands of them – we’ll never know their names. Yet I find it beyond ironic that there will come a day in the future when their lives, each and every one of them, will be gravely impacted by the very lies they each have sown.

    All of them will be impacted by chemtrails (among many other things), as well as the lives of their children and grandchildren.

    And since they have sold what’s real – their souls, our souls, and the souls of their children and grandchildren for what’s not real – some fake dollar bills, I’m sure when that day comes they will also lie to themselves and everyone else.

    I can hear the conversations now – “Mommy, daddy, did you know about this all those years ago? Did you know we would get horribly sick and terminally ill?” “No honey, we didn’t, we had no idea.” (as they lie through their teeth and avoid eye contact with their loved ones)

    They’ll have to be the ones to go to their death beds with that. Yes, that’s one thing they won’t be able to escape.

  14. anon says:

    We’ve noticed that our garden’s production has fallen off steadily over the last four years. My friend says hers (much larger than mine) too is off too.

  15. Barbara C says:

    The corporations are the new aliens destroying the planet, and inMcCloud, CA, the critical berry and feed vegetation has failed due to high UV, the water holes are drying up, and the frogs are GONE. A dozen refugee birds were near the holes, but the rest are GONE. Insect numbers are 10-20% of normal terrestial and aquatic, and fish numbers are down.

  16. Francis mangels says:

    Shades of other disinformation trolls! They said EPA labs I sent my rain samples to were unreliable and biased. I suggest they write the labs directly and see what the legal responses of 100 labs might be.

    As another scientist, obviously Foote’s data is correct, and Mick is just another paid military or disinformation stooge. Get a real meter, Mick.

  17. Robert M Stiles says:

    Like many others I have noticed the increased intensity of the sun. This morning I purchased a General Tools AB UV meter from Amazon. During the purchase I noticed the availability of detectors decreasing. This article is selling detectors. Perhaps enough concerned people will be able to provide a national picture of a vs b uv radiation. Perhaps a section of geoengineeringwatch.org could be provided for people to post readings from around the world. Maybe Mr. Foote could be persuaded to do a short video presentation on the proper way to take these measurements so we all do the same thing. If enough people join this effort this could be forced into the public awareness. There are several websites where radiation readings are posted following Fukishima. Hopefully we can persuade Alex Jones to have Dean on his program. Alex has millions of listeners

  18. Tim says:

    What will “Mick” say when all this stuff finally comes out to the public? He will go into hiding.

  19. karen devine says:

    Superb information. Well laid out and easy to answer all concerns. I would appreciate a map of the world to show where these new ozone holes are showing up.

    Please keep up the great job…don’t give up

  20. John & Debbie says:

    Hi Dane, we would both like to say with all our hearts THANKYOU for taking this fight to another level, we check this website daily to get the real news. We live in the NE of England and we have been creating awareness for four years now, this is all going to come to light and the snakes which have been orchestrating this madness will have to answer to we the people of Gaia. Keep fighting the good fight Dane, much respect and love to you and you family :)
    John and Debbie

  21. Fran says:

    The sun is hotter on the ground here on Earth. About 10-15 years ago my aunt noticed her house plants were getting sunburned. My aunt had put her house plants outside every summer for about 40 years,(she’s 83 now). Things have definitely changed. We have had more extremes in weather in the last 10-13 years than probably the last 80 years. I think part of it is natural earth changes and part human changes.

  22. admin says:

    With all due respect, you base your conclusions on what?
    We are metering UV on the west coast, east coast, Florida, New Mexico, and the UVB levels are at minimum 1200% higher than we are being told. If you don’t think thats a factor, science would not agree with you.
    How much is “climate change”? and how much is geoenigneering?
    Sincerely
    Dane

  23. Roger F says:

    We have been watching the UV damage to our trees in the Six Rivers National Forest for over a decade, and have been avid hiking enthusiasts since the mid 60s.
    A lot of valuable empirical observations were made through those years.

    Our recent observations include a group of tress that half are watered every day and half are not watered except by rain.

    They are all exhibiting the exact same damage, as in only half the yearly foliage and the crown leaves are curled and burned, a definite known UV damage scenario.
    http://uvb.nrel.colostate.edu/UVB/uvb_overview.jsf

    If you look at the top bar on the website I linked to, you can see examples of leaf damage from UV, exactly the same as we have seen here and elsewhere.

    Best
    Roger

Add Comment Register



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers