Microscopy stills are attached in this paper from fiber samples that had been previously evaluated in an earlier Carnicom paper named BIOLOGICAL COMPONENTS IDENTIFIED that was published on May 11, 2000. Though a portion of this same fiber sample was sent to EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner six months prior to this paper, to date, Ms. Browner refuses to identify the material in this sample.
A ground fiber sample received previously in November 1999 is observed and pictured in this paper under a microscope and black light, and is compared to other known and unknown synthetic fibers. A notable thing from this observation is that the ground fibers show a low level of fluorescence, whereas the synthetics compared to show a high level of fluorescence. The ground fiber samples also showed sub-micron diameter, and high levels of adhesiveness and elasticity. Additional data and feedback of the current investigations underway with UV light is most welcome.
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.
Pictures on this page show unusual samples from Sacramento, California that a witness sent in to the Carnicom Institute. These samples, which are white and of granular or powder form, are not at all similar to the fibrous microscopic samples sent in and discussed earlier. The significance of this ground sample, as well as the identification of it, remains unknown at this time.
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.