Print Friendly, PDF & Email

NEW MEXICO 1996-1999
Clifford E Carnicom March 23 2000

Clifford E Carnicom March 23 2000

A study of the airborne microscopic particle count data from the State of New Mexico covering the years 1996-1999 has been conducted. Approximately 175,000 observations of hourly monitored data from five stations in the state have been analyzed; this represents a sizable statistical sample. The statistical test that has been designed questions the difference between the data of 1999 vs. the combined data of the three previous years: 1996, 1997 and 1998. The data which has been measured is the airborne particles which measure less than or equal to 10 microns in size (PM10) ( a human hair is approximately 60-100 microns in thickness). The design of this test results from the fact that aerial spraying over the United States has been repeatedly observed and documented with photographs and personal testimony through the course of 1999 and 2000. Records of such spray activity are not available on any widespread basis for the years 1996-1998, and that lack forms the basis for statistical investigation of the relevant data.

The results show that there is a significant statistical difference between the magnitudes, averages, and variances of the two data sets in the state of New Mexico. There is an increase of 16% in the magnitude of the average microscopic particle count data of 1999 vs. the average of the combined years of 1996-1998. The differences between the averages of these two data sets is significant at the 99.9% plus level. Lastly, the differences between the variances (indicative of data distribution) are also equally significant at the 99.9% plus level. Normal distributions are assumed in the analysis.

The conclusion to be reached from this study is that the microscopic air particle count in the state of New Mexico in 1999 is significantly different from that of the preceding three years, and that this difference is directly correlated with the observations of aerial spraying that have taken place during this same time period. The results of this study form a further basis for criminal investigation of the documented spray activity, and for congressional hearings on this subject. This initial study further substantiates those findings that have been presented which document the crimes of aerial spraying against the American people without their informed consent. These findings include numerous telephotos of offending aircraft with extensive spray methods easily visible, cloud progression photographic series, meteorological studies in an arid environment that defy any basis for cloud formation, a certified receipt ground sample which to this date has not been identified by Carol M. Browner, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, repeated letters of denial and discount by official agencies of the United States government, refusal of or inadequate response by William Jefferson Clinton, William Cohen (DoD), Janet Reno (Attorney General), Carol M. Browner (EPA) , and Jane Garvey (FAA), repeated refusal of response by the various state senators and governors, as well as hundreds of thousands of eye witness accounts and testimony recorded from the beginning of 1999 to the present day.

Clifford E Carnicom
March 23, 2000



Source of data : New Mexico Environment Department – Air Quality
No. of observations from five monitoring stations 1996-1998 : 129410
No. of observations from five monitoring stations 1999 : 43449
Measured quantity : PM10(<=10microns)
Mean of observations 1996-1998 : 39.42 micrograms/cubic meter
Mean of observations 1999 : 45.70 micrograms/cubic meter
Standard deviation of observations 1996-1998 : 111.69micrograms/cubic meter
Standard deviation of observations 1999 : 134.57micrograms/cubic meter
Zm Statistic : 11.65
F Statistic : 1.45

Readers from other states are encouraged to request similiar data for further analysis. Please feel free to contact me (Clifford Carnicom) for additional assistance in this matter.