LISTEN LIVE OR CALL IN » CLICK HERE!
Most Popular
Introducing Nicole Bijlsma: building biologist and expert in the health effects of radiation
Today it is my pleasure to welcome to the show Nicole Bijlsma, a best selling author with extensive knowledge on many health issues related to the toxic effects of ordinary things found in your home.
Nicole joins us in the 2nd hour of today's show.
Nicole's website provides information on the health effects of household chemicals, toxic gases, lead dust and electromagmetic energy, and on today's show she shares with us some of her research with an emphasis on the health effects of various forms of electromagnetic energy, including smart meters, wireless routers and mobile phones.
More backgound on Nicole can be found at buildingbiology.com.au:
Nicole Bijlsma is a woman of passion, and her passion lies in environmental medicine. She first became interested in building biology as a result of two events that occurred in her life: the first was when she began to notice the connection between many of her patient’s ill health and their homes. The second was her infertility.
The cause of her ten miscarriages was eventually identified as an immune disorder (which was diagnosed by a US reproductive immunologist) which she now suspects arose from long term exposure to a high electromagnetic field. Once these issues were addressed, she successfully gave birth to her three children. Nicole is an accomplished naturopath, acupuncturist and building biologist who has been in clinical practice since 1989.
She is also the founder of the Australian College of Environmental Studies which was established in 1999 to educate people about the health hazards in the built environment. The college provides nationally accredited training in Building Biology and Feng Shui. Nicole is the author of the book Healthy Home, Healthy Family and is a popular speaker who conducts lectures on sick building syndrome and healthy homes throughout Australia. Nicole has appeared on every major television network including the 7PM Project, Sunrise (five times), the Today show and The Circle and is regularly asked by the media to comment on health hazards associated with our homes. - source
In the first hour of the show we cover some recent news, with a critique of ABC Australia's coverage of the Climate Commission report titled "The Angry Summer"
Related Links
Obama’s crackdown and your rights
DISCLAIMER - 28 Jan 2010: It has been reported that the above image is not an actual scan image.
TNRA returns to the airwaves with our first show for 2010!
We lead with Obama's announcement yesterday of new stringent measures to heighten airline security and improve intelligence gathering in relation to terrorist threats. We present this speech in full and attempt to analyse the real agenda behind these moves, including the introduction on a massive scale of invasive technology such as full body scanners (see image above).
In the second half I am joined by Chris Tolland, host of the Radio Skid Row breakfast show in Sydney, to talk about various issues of the day.
Related Links
- Obama unveils tougher air safety measures
- Obama's Speech on new security measures (CSPAN Video)
- New compulsory body scanners "make curves and genitals eerily visible"
- Cowardly hit-piece in the Australian attacks the integrity of hunger striking farmer Peter Spencer
- Court Backs War Powers Over Rights of Detainees
- Important information about energy saver light bulbs (US Congress 2008)
Recent Comments
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/dane-wigington-on-infowars-4-4-13/#comment-33658
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:31:03
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:28:20
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
http://www.soldierhugs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Geoengineering.pdf
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:19:23
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
Leonard Clampett,
the video you linked is a really old conglomerate of all sorts of claims that have been debunked ad nauseam.
What do you think is the ultimate proof for the existence of chemtrails?
Why should we have to assume there is such a thing like chemtrails? How are they different from contrails?
By Josh on 2013 04 10 - 06:59:34
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
http://realnewsworldwide.com/2008/09/10/chemtrails-ultimate-proof/
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 09 - 16:31:36
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
If you open the link you will see the reference to chemtrail area forecasts. The other link I wish to post is refused by the “Truth news” which claims it may be SPAM and “will be moderated”, probably because it mentions chemtrails in the link. However, I will try again by separating the words. http://www.chemtrail forecast.com/main.html
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 13 - 09:02:16
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
Leonard Clampett,
about the link you posted - where is the relevance in the discussion about persistent contrails?
By Josh on 2013 03 13 - 08:50:08
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
http://www.haarpstatus.com/status.html
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 13 - 08:44:15
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
Leonard Clampett,
after you consistently refused to accept the fact that fuel combustion generates more water than the equivalent of fuel burnt - even when a Qantas pilot confirmed this - I am highly skeptical of your “aviation life experience”. I hope you understand that.
So there are more explanations needed before your claims can be taken seriously.
1. How did you determine that the ambient conditions at the upper troposphere were not conducive to the formation of contrails this summer?
2. How did you determine the causal connection between trails and lack of rain?
3. How did you determine the altitude of the low trail that you saw? How can you be sure it was below the cumulus? Why not above (remember: 3D viewing up to 160m max)? Any pictures maybe?
If you want to do REAL research on the Internet, I strongly suggest to repeat every search query that you issue with the word “debunked” appended. That is the way to do proper research because you see both sides and their arguments. Don’t just fall for sensational claims.
Unfortunately, the Internet is loaded with bunk.
By Josh on 2013 03 02 - 18:06:10
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
Josh Anonymous,
You apparently do not do much research. Notice how, over the Eastern Australian summer, there have been many chemtrails coincident with usual weather patterns where obvious rain should have been the outcome had the chemtrails not been laid, and it was not, and this during the season when ambient conditions are not conducive to the formation of contrails. Chemtrails are entirely different to what you term “persistent contrails” as you would know if you had sufficient aviation life experience. You may try to explain how there was recently, and I have observed the same many times before, a chemtrail below a layer of fair weather Cu at 8,000 ft and how this could possibly occur without the laws of physics and thermodynamics being turned on their head. I suggest that you do an Internet search for the activities of Bill Gates and geoengineering.
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 02 - 13:51:00
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.