A copy of the Certified Receipt showing EPA Administrator received Clifford Carnicom’s sample.
Here is a copy of the Certified Receipt showing EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner received Clifford Carnicom’s sample, but had yet to reply.
A lengthy letter from the EPA, sent to a concerned citizen and copied on this page, is a complete denial of the possibility of aerosols and aerosol operations. The letter speaks a common theme of denial that the spray lines, witnessed by an increasing number of people and spreading out across the sky, are simply normal contrail exhaust from aircraft engines.
The process of submitting protest letters via www.carnicom.com began on Nov 20 1999, and thus far includes over 1700 letters sent to federal and state officials. This statement affects letters that have been sent to state officials only.
Postscript note by Clifford E Carnicom:
One would logically conclude that the EPA, having viewed the evidence submitted on www.carnicom.com, IS now quite aware of "such applications" by "such aircraft."
OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY DECLARES THAT IT IS 'UNABLE' TO COMPLETE AN INVESTIGATION
This letter was recently received by a Ohio citizen:
Eyewitness accounts of finding unusual fiber materials on the ground have been accumulated over the past year and more in direct connection with unusual aircraft activity. As might be expected, there are repeated, frequent and widespread accounts of respiratory distress and allergic reactions reported in association with such aircraft activity. This paper continues previous research on and presents microscopic views of suspected chemtrail ground samples collected in November and December 1999. Two identical ground fiber samples (one from Sacramento, CA, and one from eastern Oregon) were received, analyzed and compared to synthetic and natural fibers, such as human hair, wool, silk, spider webs, cotton and more. Though found in locations hundreds of miles apart, these two ground fibers exhibited identical characteristics in all respects down to the microscopic level. Based on tests outlined in this paper, it has been demonstrated that the ground sample fibers cannot be identified as any known or common natural or synthetic fiber.