Speaker 1: Really now, really, really.
Speaker 2: Now, really hello and welcome to really no really, just
Speaker 2: Alexander and Peter Tilden, who remind you that subscribing to
Speaker 2: our show paves the trail to happiness. And speaking of trails,
Speaker 2: we've all seen them, white streaks up in the sky,
Speaker 2: trailing behind commercial airliners. Is it just water vapor or
Speaker 2: is there something more nefarious being released to thirty thousand
Speaker 2: feet Tennessee lawmakers were so alarmed by these white plumes
Speaker 2: they passed legislation banning so called chemtrails and any other
Speaker 2: forms of geoengineering. That's right, they actually banned them. Really no, really,
Speaker 2: chemtrails have been linked to conspiracies about secretive government forces
Speaker 2: who are using them to release chemicals, chemicals that could
Speaker 2: cause sterilization, reduction of life expectancy, alter the weather, and
Speaker 2: control people's minds, plus a whole host of other sinister outcomes.
Speaker 3: But are any of these conspiras He's real.
Speaker 4: No.
Speaker 2: But when we saw that six or more states are
Speaker 2: taking up similar anti chemtrail legislation, we turned for answers
Speaker 2: to doctor Joshua Horton, Senior program Fellow for Geoengineering at
Speaker 2: the Harvard Kennedy School so let's follow the trail that leads.
Speaker 4: To Jason and Peter.
Speaker 5: We're going to talk about a thing that is of
Speaker 5: great concern to many, many people, and yet by all
Speaker 5: anecdotal evidence doesn't exist. It's not a thing we've done.
Speaker 5: The guys with the ghost stores, we're not sure if
Speaker 5: they exist. We're not sure this one. We're relatively sure
Speaker 5: it doesn't exist. But it's got a lot of people
Speaker 5: very concerned.
Speaker 4: It's a conspiracy.
Speaker 5: It's well, I never know what actually conspiracy. Conspiracy is
Speaker 5: that something, something is nefarious and it is being done
Speaker 5: behind our backs. We're being swindled. We don't have all
Speaker 5: the information. If I may, yes please.
Speaker 6: You called me and said, hey, Pete, Tennessee lawmakers are
Speaker 6: banning chemtrail.
Speaker 5: That was the thing they banned. This is exactly what
Speaker 5: they banned. They had a bill to prevent geoengineering, which
Speaker 5: is the practice of intentionally modifying the atmosphere to counteract
Speaker 5: global warming. So they banned this thing because they see
Speaker 5: aeroplanes flying up in the sky and they see a
Speaker 5: trail of white mists or white cloud behind it, and
Speaker 5: they go, that is somebody in the deep dark underworld
Speaker 5: spraying things into our atmosphere to either affect the atmosphere,
Speaker 5: the weather, or.
Speaker 6: US reproduct or reproductive organs right, or its companies doing
Speaker 6: crop stuff.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 5: Something's going on, and the state of Tennessee said, no way,
Speaker 5: you're done. You're not doing it, not here, not over
Speaker 5: our sacred ground. Atmospheric scientists are saying, we have no
Speaker 5: evidence of any large scale programs suggesting that you know
Speaker 5: any of this is going on. A White House official
Speaker 5: said in an email, the federal government is not involved
Speaker 5: in any outdoor testing or deployment of solar radiation management
Speaker 5: or any of this stuff. Nobody that might be doing
Speaker 5: it is copping to it, not even to say, well,
Speaker 5: we're just seeing if maybe something, But I also want
Speaker 5: to go, oh really, Tennessee, you banned it. So now
Speaker 5: what it's supposedly is condensation. That's what we're seeing is condensation.
Speaker 5: So when a plane flies over Tennessee now and it
Speaker 5: has a trail behind it, what is Tennessee actually going
Speaker 5: to do? They scrambled jets, but are they shooting it
Speaker 5: out of the sky?
Speaker 4: What are they going to do?
Speaker 6: Sorry, So six more states are in the process of
Speaker 6: banning it, and we're not being cocky.
Speaker 4: We wanted to go some babies.
Speaker 5: And I don't mean to be political. People are very
Speaker 5: concerned about these things, and God knows, yes there has been.
Speaker 6: Let me give you that, okay, So let me give
Speaker 6: you the background. Apparently it's been around this chemtrails iudea
Speaker 6: since nineteen ninety six, when an Air Force paper research
Speaker 6: paper was least called weather as a Force Multiplier, so
Speaker 6: owning the weather. In twenty twenty five, it was a
Speaker 6: military paper about how they may weather modification systems in
Speaker 6: the future. Whatever Art Bell, the Late Night guy got
Speaker 6: on that, other people got on it. It was when
Speaker 6: the Internet exploded right all over, so that began the thing.
Speaker 6: But we have to know that also during the Cold War,
Speaker 6: the British government conducted more than seven hundred and fifty
Speaker 6: mock chemical warfare attacks on the public and thousands of
Speaker 6: people were exposed to zinc cadmium sulfide, a chemical chosen
Speaker 6: because it's small, similar to that of germs, and because
Speaker 6: it glows under unctraviolet light, making it easy to trace.
Speaker 6: It was thought to be non toxic at the time.
Speaker 6: The repeated exposure could be cancers. The US did the
Speaker 6: same in the fifties and sixties. So do having done
Speaker 6: that now being told there's nothing like this happening.
Speaker 4: Yeah, so that thing.
Speaker 6: Became a force multiplier and that is the origin of this.
Speaker 6: So what we do on this podcast is we try
Speaker 6: and get on the top guy, somebody non biased. And
Speaker 6: I'm sure people who are into it are still going
Speaker 6: to write us and go, guys, yeah, what are you stupid?
Speaker 5: What he's still stupid? What are you being stupid? Yeah,
Speaker 5: you're being stupid. Yeah.
Speaker 6: So I'm dying to ask if this is happening, if
Speaker 6: there's a possibility, by the way, with climate change, yeah,
Speaker 6: can we please alter alter the weather? Can you make
Speaker 6: it rain? On a micro level? I just want to
Speaker 6: know what they're working on, how they're working on it.
Speaker 5: And they sprang it over the state of Tennisee and
Speaker 5: if this guy can be trusted.
Speaker 4: So we've got an expert.
Speaker 5: So let's welcome Josh Horton. Oh I'm sorry, I'm very sorry.
Speaker 5: I didn't mean to denigrate. It's paraph spiritualist spent a
Speaker 5: lot of money to get that dr.
Speaker 4: Well he did, or what we're banking.
Speaker 5: Doctor Josh Horton is a research director of geoengineering and
Speaker 5: he conducts research on geoengineering, policy and governance issues, including
Speaker 5: the regulation of research, liability and compensation, and geopolitics. That
Speaker 5: previously worked as a clean energy consultant for a global
Speaker 5: energy consulting firm.
Speaker 4: We won't say which one.
Speaker 5: And he holds a PhD hence a doctor in political
Speaker 5: science from Johns Hopkins University. Let us welcome doctor josh Horton.
Speaker 5: He also might be the Horton of the Horton's restaurant chain.
Speaker 4: So doctor Joshua Horton has joined.
Speaker 5: Thank you for joining us. It's very nice we get
Speaker 5: actual smart and smart, intelligent, experienced people that want to
Speaker 5: waste time with us.
Speaker 6: It's a fabulous We had set up the premise of
Speaker 6: chemtrails and that states are starting to ban chemtrails or
Speaker 6: and I thought, and we don't want to be cavalier
Speaker 6: about it, but I thought the kemptrail thing I gave
Speaker 6: some of the origin was debunked, that that it was vapor,
Speaker 6: et cetera. But we want to have somebody on who
Speaker 6: knows what they're talking about. Tell us why this continues
Speaker 6: and why this legend you think this legislation is happening now.
Speaker 7: Well, it's a classic conspiracy here pem trails and exactly
Speaker 7: what kem trails are or to be. It depends you ask.
Speaker 7: There's a long history here. So you talked about the
Speaker 7: idea of contrails, which are a real thing which we
Speaker 7: can see when the airplanes fly. For many years now
Speaker 7: there were claims that those are actually chemtrails, not contrails,
Speaker 7: and what those chemicals were doing.
Speaker 1: It's a wide variety of.
Speaker 7: Claims, weather modification, which is pretty benign, try to enhance rainfall,
Speaker 7: to mind control, to mass sterilization. Since the time that
Speaker 7: the chemtraial conspiracy kind of got rolling, geoengineering sort that
Speaker 7: came into the mix separately, which is what I work on, which.
Speaker 1: Isn't happening, but also would.
Speaker 7: Entail I woever were to happen dispersing chemicals in the atmosphere,
Speaker 7: although upper atmosphere, not the chop sphere. So there's been
Speaker 7: this melding of PEM trails and weather modification claims with geoengineering,
Speaker 7: which is a very controversial field, and if you look
Speaker 7: at the claims or try to figure out what's being asserted,
Speaker 7: it's very messy. It's never clear cut. I think if
Speaker 7: you ask people that give you a bunch of different answers.
Speaker 7: Cam trails do not exist. They've been debumped in that sense,
Speaker 7: certainly scientifically, and yet people believe they exist, and they
Speaker 7: believe they do certain things, and they never can quite
Speaker 7: tell you who's doing it, why they're doing it, what
Speaker 7: if I's having But they believe this and it's persistent,
Speaker 7: and now it's sort of showing up legislation and things
Speaker 7: like what you're talking about, these statewide bands in Kinnessee
Speaker 7: maybe elsewhere.
Speaker 1: And if you look at sort of the bills that
Speaker 1: have been passed.
Speaker 7: You can see you can sort of do an archaeology
Speaker 7: and find that the origins of these proposals for classic
Speaker 7: chemtrail's ideas that sort of globbed on too conspiracy theories
Speaker 7: about geoengineering and sort of melted it all together. And
Speaker 7: now they just want to ban all this stuff even
Speaker 7: though never really exists. That's the best that I can
Speaker 7: to explain it. It's a very difficult thing to pin
Speaker 7: down because it's a conspiracy theory. It's ever shifting, ever changing,
Speaker 7: it's very flexible, it adapts to the latest news that
Speaker 7: comes across the wires, and it's so it's a difficult
Speaker 7: thing to fully debunk in a way that's perspective to
Speaker 7: those who really believe it. And that's the challenge.
Speaker 5: So can you just for I think I know the answer,
Speaker 5: but I would rather hear it from you. So when
Speaker 5: we look up and we do see a sort of
Speaker 5: a plume of a trail behind an airplane, what are
Speaker 5: we actually seeing?
Speaker 7: So I'm not a physical scientist, but I have a
Speaker 7: pretty good grasp of this. This is basically it's water
Speaker 7: vapor that's in the exhaust from engines on jet aircraft.
Speaker 7: When the water vapor exits the jets, it turns into
Speaker 7: ice crystal. It freezes, and you can see it. The
Speaker 7: white lines are frozen ice crystals that condensed from the
Speaker 7: water vapor that was contained in the exhaust from the
Speaker 7: jet engines. And within a few minutes usually it goes away.
Speaker 7: It can be longer or shorter depending on local atmosphere conditions.
Speaker 1: But that's all. It's just ice.
Speaker 7: And yet that's not enough for some people who won't
Speaker 7: accept that as the answer. But that is they asked me,
Speaker 7: and they ask I would say virtuale all scientists, but
Speaker 7: really all scientists, they will play you.
Speaker 4: That's what it is.
Speaker 5: Yeah, Jason had an interesting question about that though. So
Speaker 5: you're in Tennessee, shoot to shoot the plane out of
Speaker 5: this guy. So they made a band so that now
Speaker 5: only happened. How do you enforce it in practice? It
Speaker 5: seems a bit sir, because you're obviously not going to
Speaker 5: sort of prohibit all airplanes from flying over the airspace.
Speaker 6: See geo engineering the task of trying to release particles
Speaker 6: into the honesty wherever you're releasing them to do enough
Speaker 6: either help damage, et cetera. That would make a difference.
Speaker 6: And if I'm correct, there is no geo engineering that
Speaker 6: we I mean, China may be doing something North who
Speaker 6: knows who's doing what that you're not privy to, but you,
Speaker 6: you're into the scientific community, would know if there's something
Speaker 6: going on, if anyone's doing it, And as of today,
Speaker 6: no one is doing it successfully or unsuccessful.
Speaker 4: Is that correct?
Speaker 1: That's correct?
Speaker 7: Yeah, so's there's different kinds of geoengineering, and the labels
Speaker 7: get confusing. But when people think about geo engineer talk
Speaker 7: about it, what they tend to mean is this large
Speaker 7: scale aircraft flying into the stratosphere to release sulfur or
Speaker 7: other particles that creates this thin case. You really wouldn't
Speaker 7: able to see that would deflex in sunlight and cool
Speaker 7: the earth sort of like a giant.
Speaker 5: Solar shield or something that is not happening.
Speaker 7: Just there's no evidence for that. We can barely get
Speaker 7: experiments done that would be micro versions microscope versions of that.
Speaker 7: There's been a few attempts by Harvard. We tried to
Speaker 7: do that a couple of years ago to have an
Speaker 7: experiments that would have produced virtually no effects. There was
Speaker 7: an outcry about it in various simple society groups that
Speaker 7: that's not good. We don't have to be affected. This,
Speaker 7: don't do it.
Speaker 1: So that failed.
Speaker 7: The one exception in terms of anybody doing anything like
Speaker 7: this is that there's another kind of geo engineering that's
Speaker 7: called marine cloud brightening, which is this idea that you
Speaker 7: would basically loft sea spray into low lying marine clouds
Speaker 7: that would brighten the clouds, that would reflect more slide
Speaker 7: away from the Earth, and in those areas and regions
Speaker 7: where you had done this, you could cool the local areas.
Speaker 7: This could work, and it's actually is being trialed in
Speaker 7: a very limited way in Australia over the Great Arier
Speaker 7: Reef by legitimate scientists who are trying to see to
Speaker 7: what extent this could actually be engineered, how much brighter
Speaker 7: the clouds could be made to be, what the fact
Speaker 7: I would actually have in this case the reefs underneath
Speaker 7: the clouds or that are really sort of helped them
Speaker 7: to adapt to higher temperatures. But there's a hand, you know,
Speaker 7: it's three or four tests. It's very very minimal stuff.
Speaker 7: And in terms of the big geo engineering stuff that
Speaker 7: you might hear about in Hollywood movies or elsewhere that
Speaker 7: that's not happening, we're decades away from that happening. It
Speaker 7: could happen, and it probably could work. It'd be very risky,
Speaker 7: a lot of unknown consequences, but we're pretty sure it
Speaker 7: would work in a very basic way in terms of
Speaker 7: dialing down the sun and producing temperatures. Wow, but lots
Speaker 7: of controversies about that. It's most that there as much
Speaker 7: political and governments and ethical as they are sort of
Speaker 7: technical engineering. Right.
Speaker 5: Is there anything that you're aware of or that you
Speaker 5: specifically are working on yourself that you think does is
Speaker 5: promising and it could be viable to help counteract, you know,
Speaker 5: are the global crisis. It's that you think does is
Speaker 5: promising and it could be viable to help counteract, you know,
Speaker 5: are the global crisis.
Speaker 7: I think it's pretty clear. So this is a very
Speaker 7: narrow feels it's a full of a bunch of nerds
Speaker 7: who look at this stuff. But if one is honest
Speaker 7: looks at the growing amount of literature and studies is
Speaker 7: supposed to computer models that sort of see what would
Speaker 7: happen if you did this. There's increasingly, i'd even say
Speaker 7: overwhelming evidence using computer models that a moderate amount of
Speaker 7: geoengineering is putting a moderate amount of say sulfur or
Speaker 7: some other part of up in the atmosphere, in the
Speaker 7: stratosphere over the planet, it would certainly reduce global temperatures,
Speaker 7: and if you did a small amount, you could just slow,
Speaker 7: you know, just marginally reduce things. Looks like if you
Speaker 7: did it intelligently in terms of where you released it,
Speaker 7: how quickly, how much, et cetera, it looks as though
Speaker 7: most parts, if not all, parts of the world would
Speaker 7: be better off under some geoengineering scenarios then they would
Speaker 7: be without doing geo engineering. But with climate change happening.
Speaker 1: Right now, there's a lot of you know, one.
Speaker 7: Could say you're playing god, You're you're you know, who's
Speaker 7: controlling who's setting the third step for the planet, which
Speaker 7: country is doing it? How do you agree on where
Speaker 7: that's set. There are concerns about talk about this stuff.
Speaker 7: Is that provide an excuse not to cut see you
Speaker 7: two emissions?
Speaker 1: And does it sort of give a uh.
Speaker 7: You know, a green light toil and as companies to
Speaker 7: go full bore. These are all legitimate concerns and it's
Speaker 7: very messy. But in terms of the technical di mentions
Speaker 7: it of this, as I see it, it's pretty clear
Speaker 7: that that some sort of moderate version of what has
Speaker 7: been discussed, if it were done, would benefit most places
Speaker 7: and most people in most ecosystems.
Speaker 5: With any projected potential hazards.
Speaker 7: The more you do, the more hazardous it becomes. Any
Speaker 7: geo engineering, there's going to be perturbation, so there's going
Speaker 7: to be some some effects consequences for say, regional precipitation,
Speaker 7: for regional temperatures that compared to the way the world
Speaker 7: was one hundred and fifty years ago, would be problematic.
Speaker 7: But comparac to birthings are headed, which is really the
Speaker 7: proper comparison sort of risk risk scenario, things soon be headed.
Speaker 7: It generally looks again as you get a sort of
Speaker 7: a smart deployment, a moderate amount that on balance, no
Speaker 7: place would be much worse off than it would have
Speaker 7: been without doing the geoengineering, and most places would be
Speaker 7: better off in terms of lower temperatures, more more sort
Speaker 7: of stable precipitation patterns, fewer extreme weather events including the cyclones, floods, droughts,
Speaker 7: you know, the usual set of things. It's reparkeable. Actually
Speaker 7: it's almost too good to be true.
Speaker 5: Question, why don't we give it a shot? Where's the
Speaker 5: tipping point?
Speaker 6: Where's where I'm at? You don't have a lot of funding.
Speaker 6: I read that the funding is minimal. Isn't there somebody
Speaker 6: somewhere who's going to screw this? Like Jason just said,
Speaker 6: also two hundred billion dollars at this. Let's let's get
Speaker 6: approval and let's let's go for it.
Speaker 7: Well, a couple of things. So there are a handful
Speaker 7: of sort of cowboys. There's there's a couple of guys. Well,
Speaker 7: I think they're a renow now that these guys from
Speaker 7: Silicon Valley. They have a company called make Sunset makes sunsets,
Speaker 7: and the past year they've been filling balloons with sulfur,
Speaker 7: releasing them and then selling cooling credits to those who
Speaker 7: would buy these things. I mean, hell, one balloon delivered
Speaker 7: x amount of cooling. Now that's ridiculous physically.
Speaker 4: Is it working. Is the business working?
Speaker 1: Uh, it's not working. They don't think it's going to work.
Speaker 7: But they're they're in it for the shock value, and
Speaker 7: they've certainly made an impact. They've gone lots of attention,
Speaker 7: they've gotten a lot of pushback from those and in
Speaker 7: my community, some of them think it's people think it's
Speaker 7: great because they're just sort of sticking into the system
Speaker 7: and saying, hey, we're going to just try something. It's
Speaker 7: something not gonna work, They're going to get this intention
Speaker 7: for this generate enthusiasm. That's one case. There's also an
Speaker 7: Israeli company, well I think startups. It's a brand new
Speaker 7: company that I it's shrouded in secrecy, and of course
Speaker 7: one of the people who runs it is former was
Speaker 7: involved in the Israeli nuclear program, so it's got all.
Speaker 1: The sort and there.
Speaker 7: Apparently this is a company that's got a lot of
Speaker 7: funding that has has patented some sort of a delivery
Speaker 7: mechanism or a particle and it intends to do some open.
Speaker 1: Air trials of this four now.
Speaker 7: I don't know how it is, but they have a website,
Speaker 7: there's talk about it. These are really fringe sort of
Speaker 7: actors in the scheme of things by a large I
Speaker 7: think the views of the people who really work on
Speaker 7: this is that the scale of what's being contemplated in
Speaker 7: terms of really, in a sense, taking over some control
Speaker 7: of planetary climate and trying to manipulate it in a
Speaker 7: way that helps people in the planet. It's an issue
Speaker 7: of immense global public interest. It's a public policy issue.
Speaker 7: So this should not be left of the market to
Speaker 7: deliver to the sale.
Speaker 5: If you could sort of snap your fingers and get
Speaker 5: the green light for a kind of project or experiment
Speaker 5: that you think is viable, what would be the thing
Speaker 5: that you would like to put into some sort of
Speaker 5: practical experimentation of this.
Speaker 7: I like this, It's going to be very boring, but
Speaker 7: I think what's actually the most important right now is
Speaker 7: to do some very small scale experiments that wouldn't even
Speaker 7: affect the climate, but that would involve releasing a little
Speaker 7: bit of particles they could be sold for something else
Speaker 7: at the right altitude, and then driving vehicles through the
Speaker 7: plumes to sort of measure what's happening in those plumes,
Speaker 7: how there are particles of behaving. And the reason to
Speaker 7: do that is because, first of all, it's impossible to
Speaker 7: recreate those conditions in.
Speaker 1: An the laboratory.
Speaker 7: Everything we need to think we know about geoengineering, which I
Speaker 7: was giving you sort of a you know, a sort
Speaker 7: of optimistic depiction of it all that is based upon
Speaker 7: computer models, which obviously could be wrong. And the computer
Speaker 7: models are only as good as the data that we
Speaker 7: have from real world experiments, and so you need to
Speaker 7: sort of parameterize those models with real world evidence. So
Speaker 7: we need to go see if sort of the algorithms
Speaker 7: we have in these models is actually accurate. Is what's happening,
Speaker 7: what would happen in the real world.
Speaker 6: So as a review, just to recap Jay tem trails
Speaker 6: not not a thing.
Speaker 5: I'm not so sure we got the guy.
Speaker 4: We got the guy. You can unequivalently look at us
Speaker 4: and say, not a thing.
Speaker 5: I just want to be one of those guys who
Speaker 5: you know, I fascinated this where you know, like a
Speaker 5: flat Earth or apparently there's still some flat earther people
Speaker 5: out there, and you go, at, what, what do we
Speaker 5: need to do can break you go maybe. I mean,
Speaker 5: we we have satellites and people in space looking back
Speaker 5: and going it seems to be a ball and they go.
Speaker 6: No, but somebody who's comfortable with a conspiracy. We need
Speaker 6: things explained. People need things explained. And I know we'll
Speaker 6: probably get huge pushback on this episode, but doctor Horton,
Speaker 6: thank you so much for coming on and good luck.
Speaker 6: I hope you get funded.
Speaker 8: I would love your work to get a little more attention,
Speaker 8: rip it up a little more love, because it seems
Speaker 8: to me, I mean, the obvious statement is if if
Speaker 8: you and your colleagues.
Speaker 5: Are not allowed to push forward, it seems that the
Speaker 5: writing is on the wall that we're going to have
Speaker 5: a major crisis on our hands, that we're already seeing
Speaker 5: the signs of and right.
Speaker 7: And the really scary thing is what if we don't
Speaker 7: do any research and then we come to a point
Speaker 7: the world does in say, twenty years time, and we say, well,
Speaker 7: we got to do something extreme, right, we don't know
Speaker 7: if it works, let's just give it a shot.
Speaker 1: And it's a disaster. That's sort of the worst possible out.
Speaker 4: You've got it, doctor Horton, Tanky, it's a pleasure. Thank you.
Speaker 5: So very Rarely, very rarely do we ask a question
Speaker 5: and get an answer, even though, by the way, that
Speaker 5: was the format of the show initially. Yeah yeah, really
Speaker 5: no really, but that well, as you said, there will
Speaker 5: be people no matter what, who will hear this. If
Speaker 5: someone has information and they're telling the truth. If I
Speaker 5: know something I can say, I will tell you. Here's
Speaker 5: my source, here's my thing. These unnamed we are idiots.
Speaker 5: You and I are idiots. We are idiots. We should
Speaker 5: not yourself, young man.
Speaker 6: We should not have called this podcast really no real
Speaker 6: what should we have called unnamed sources?
Speaker 5: And we interview every week unnamed sources in every category?
Speaker 5: What's your name? I can but here's what I know. Yeah,
Speaker 5: here's what I know unnamed sources. Wow, maybe here's a
Speaker 5: name source that we can rely on.
Speaker 4: Googa nyme? Hello sir, Hello, hello, Hello, break through the cloud?
Speaker 5: See what I did there? Metaphor breakthrough?
Speaker 4: I heard what you said? What?
Speaker 5: Yeah?
Speaker 7: What?
Speaker 5: What in the miasthma of our.
Speaker 4: Attention to your brilliance? Yeah? Did you hear what? I
Speaker 4: did you hear that segment?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 5: It wasn't me.
Speaker 4: What's that? What? What?
Speaker 5: What did we miss or discover.
Speaker 9: Well, I've been researching Tim Harton's and it appears it
Speaker 9: appears that they are releasing toxic casses through their patrons
Speaker 9: through It's a nefarious Canadian going.
Speaker 5: To employed them into a balloon.
Speaker 6: The piece people that people don't know that Tim Moreton
Speaker 6: Tim Morton's is because we're in America. Tim Hortons is
Speaker 6: a huge chain hamburger, hamburger or lunch chain or whatever,
Speaker 6: what do you want to call it.
Speaker 9: I think I think a dunkin Donuts sort of.
Speaker 5: I thought it was more like the equivalent of a
Speaker 5: Denny's kind of thing, and I've actually eaten there. I
Speaker 5: don't remember. It's in the strange foreign land called Canada.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 9: Obviously it was very correct, except for the fact that
Speaker 9: our guest said the keem trails don't exist.
Speaker 4: But I did want.
Speaker 10: To say, I don't want to say people are actually
Speaker 10: worried about out toxic gases that are being released into
Speaker 10: our atmosphere that are actually causing problems like you know,
Speaker 10: climate change.
Speaker 9: We might and this is and I will source this
Speaker 9: because why not EPA is letting us.
Speaker 5: Know those liars right right right the.
Speaker 9: In cells or whatever they call the deep State the
Speaker 9: Deep State that the EPA a single cow produces between
Speaker 9: one hundred and fifty four and two hundred and sixty
Speaker 9: four pounds of methane.
Speaker 5: Gas a year.
Speaker 9: Yeah, okay, now map counting emissions from any other livestock,
Speaker 9: we're just talking about cattle here worldwide. That's one point
Speaker 9: five billion cattle raised for meat production worldwide, So that
Speaker 9: releases two hundred and thirty one billion pounds of methane
Speaker 9: into the atmosphere per year.
Speaker 4: So take it.
Speaker 5: Figure out my Atlanta or something from cows that would
Speaker 5: alleviate they just they did. I'll tell you what they
Speaker 5: tried to do. And I've actually seen this, and David,
Speaker 5: you can research this and we can verify it. There
Speaker 5: was a company that was trying to get charcoal filters
Speaker 5: that would hang over a cow's tail so that the
Speaker 5: farts would go through this charcoal.
Speaker 4: And film the fart the fart. I didn't quite Why does.
Speaker 5: That sound like something I would come up with rather
Speaker 5: than we're going to hang does I get a car,
Speaker 5: we're hanging this on your mirror.
Speaker 4: We're hanging this on the cow's tail.
Speaker 5: Charcoal undies for the cow, and the.
Speaker 4: Cow's going Is there charcoal covering my ass? What's going
Speaker 4: on back there? What's going back?
Speaker 5: Does my ass look fat in the side?
Speaker 6: You know, I can fart and not smell it anymore?
Speaker 6: What's happening here? I would think the thing is to
Speaker 6: get him not to fart, like to cut down on
Speaker 6: the sure, or to capture the fart and use it
Speaker 6: for energy. I didn't get to asking them about partment
Speaker 6: credits because I wonder how how that whole thing works.
Speaker 6: But he probably doesn't. That's not a business that he
Speaker 6: knows because it just always was.
Speaker 5: There anything else in your research that have to worry
Speaker 5: about other than cows?
Speaker 9: Well, I'm just saying I don't know if this is
Speaker 9: the exact thing that you're referred to, but Argentina's National
Speaker 9: Institute of Agriculture and Technology, it came up with a
Speaker 9: backpack for cows that would capture the cow emissions.
Speaker 4: It's not quite what I Yeah, where are we with that? Oh?
Speaker 5: It's right there with the flying car.
Speaker 4: Just is it neal?
Speaker 9: And it actually looks like a jet pack on the
Speaker 9: back of a cow?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean it's I think.
Speaker 5: Its the cows are going to get the jet packs.
Speaker 5: I'm still waiting the jet pack. And by the way,
Speaker 5: it's negating the cow's natural jet and you want.
Speaker 6: Me to produce mock really this thing on my ass, David, thank.
Speaker 5: You, thank you, and please don't blacktap for us. You
Speaker 5: know what, that's a very special episode. So keemp trails
Speaker 5: nothing but kept nothing. I don't think we've changed one
Speaker 5: person's believe you. So what's interesting The average parashooter, given
Speaker 5: the methane problem, is probably contributing more to the problem
Speaker 5: of global warming. Then you think they're farting the hallway down,
Speaker 5: I'd be cropping the hallway. So let's stop the passion.
Speaker 4: You know what. I The only vision I got when we're.
Speaker 6: Wrapping up here is chickens somehow watching this on YouTube
Speaker 6: going pooh, now, yeah, take care of everybody.
Speaker 4: Really no.
Speaker 3: As another episode of really no, really, he comes to
Speaker 3: a close.
Speaker 2: I know you're wondering, what are some other popular conspiracy
Speaker 2: theories that have been pretty much debunked. Well, I'll burst
Speaker 2: those bubbles in a moment, but first let's thank our guests,
Speaker 2: Doctor Joshua Horton. You can follow doctor Horton on LinkedIn,
Speaker 2: where he is simply Joshua Horton, or on x where
Speaker 2: he is at Joshua Horton five three three.
Speaker 3: Find all pertinent links in our show notes.
Speaker 2: Our little show hangs out on Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, and
Speaker 2: threads at really.
Speaker 3: No Really podcasts.
Speaker 2: And of course you can share your thoughts and feedback
Speaker 2: with us online.
Speaker 3: At reallynoreally dot com.
Speaker 2: If you have a really some amazing factor story that
Speaker 2: boggles your mind, share it with us, and if we
Speaker 2: use it, we will send you a little gift. Nothing
Speaker 2: life changing, obviously, but it's the thought that counts. Check
Speaker 2: out our full episodes on YouTube, hit that subscribe button
Speaker 2: and take that bell so you're updated when we release
Speaker 2: new videos and episodes.
Speaker 3: Which we do each Tuesday.
Speaker 2: So listen and follow us on the iHeartRadio app, Apple
Speaker 2: podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 3: And now, what are some other popular conspiracy theories that.
Speaker 5: Have been pretty much debunked.
Speaker 2: Well, you have a bunch of old favorites still hanging around,
Speaker 2: like the Earth is really flat, we never landed on
Speaker 2: the moon, Bigfoot and NeSSI the Lockness Monster still running
Speaker 2: and swimming around out there.
Speaker 3: And of course President John F.
Speaker 2: Kennedy was killed by Cubans, the CIA, the Mafia, the
Speaker 2: military industrial complex and pretty much anyone.
Speaker 3: Who wasn't Lee Harvey os.
Speaker 2: But there are some other beauties out there that you
Speaker 2: don't hear about as much, like the folks who believe
Speaker 2: the European Nuclear Research Agency that discovered the Higgs Boson
Speaker 2: particle in twenty twelve apparently created a black hole that
Speaker 2: sucked our entire planet in. The conspiracy claims that Earth
Speaker 2: was destroyed right then, but we just haven't realized it yet,
Speaker 2: which is kind of a big thing to miss.
Speaker 4: But you never know.
Speaker 2: I mean, maybe we're protected by the hollow Earth theory,
Speaker 2: which claims that what we believe is the surface of
Speaker 2: our planet is really.
Speaker 3: Just a hollow shell.
Speaker 2: Not only that, but the actual inhabited Earth is really
Speaker 2: inside that hollow shell. And all of that, of course,
Speaker 2: jobs very nicely with the theory that our entire reality
Speaker 2: is actually a manufactured computer matrix that we are living in.
Speaker 3: And I guess we are still waiting for Neo to
Speaker 3: get us the.
Speaker 2: Hell out, or at least make another movie about And
Speaker 2: while we're waiting, we can consider the conspiracy theories that
Speaker 2: claim that the Titanic never actually sank, which is going
Speaker 2: to be a big blow to James Cameron and that
Speaker 2: King Charles is actually a vampire because he is in
Speaker 2: fact related to Vladi Impaler, who was the role model
Speaker 2: for Bramstokers.
Speaker 3: Dract And yeah, I guess he is kind of pale.
Speaker 3: Maybe he is a vampire And if that's true, m
Speaker 3: trills are the least of our problems. Really, no, really
Speaker 3: is production of iHeartRadio and Blase Entertainment