Home » Uncategorized » Contrail photos through history

Contrail photos through history

I’ve collected together a few photos of persistent spreading contrails from the past from 1991 back to 1940, just to show that this is nothing new, and that skies exactly like those shown on the “chemtrails” conspiracy web sites have been happening for the past 60 years. Mostly these are just photos I found on the internet, but several, like the first four, are scanned from books, so can be physically verified.

1991, From the book Peterson First guide to Clouds and Weather

Here are four photos of contrails, scanned from the book. You can see these photos on the Amazon page linked above. Click on the photos for larger versions. I suspect the actual date of these photos is pre-1991, but that’s certainly the latest possible date.

1991-day-p46-2.jpg1991-day-p46-1.jpg

1991-day-p47-1.jpg1991-day-p47-2.jpg

1984, Rustler Peak, Oregon
Old and new spreading contrails. Then, as now, Oregon has a lot of North/South flyover traffic going between California and Portland/Seattle/Vancouver.

The above photo is from a collection of photos of forest lookouts in Oregon. Most of which were taken in the last few years, but a few like the above, back to 1984. It’s interesting to see just how few of them contain contrails, and just how many contain clear blue skies, regardless of which year they were taken in.

Here’s some from 1990, taken by a tourist in Washington DC:

Capitol Dome, 1990


New York, 1994,

New York, July 1, 1992

Persisting and Spreading Contrail. Mt Hood, Oregon, October 1964, Ed’s JG Photos

Mt Hood, July 15th, 1985, Rob DeGraff

Mt Shasta, 1989, Taylor Sherman

1995, Mirror Lake, Oregon

1991, Oregon, Coos Bay, Jonathan Harel

1985. Tahoe

1986. Mt Whitney, California

Arizona, September 1988




Mount Adams, September 1987.

North Vancouver, 1989

Paris, March 31, 1983, OliBac

Oregon, 1990, mdintenfass

1986, March 8. London, England.

1989, May. Echo_29, Nigh time contrails cas shadows on the clouds.

1988, Prague

pre-1981 – Plates 173 and 174 from “A Field guide to the Atmosphere“, by Schaefer and Day

petersonpl173w.jpg

petersonpl174w.jpg

1977 Michigan – a single persistent contrail cuts the sky, through some rippled clouds. Found on a chemtrail forum.

1972, From the book Clouds of the World, by Richard Scorer

cotw-1141s.jpg

1970 – Photo of a stop sign with a persistent and spreading contrail. I found this photo on a forum somewhere. I’m not sure of the source or accuracy of the date.

1967 – Plate 113 from Cloud Studies in Colour, Richard Scorer and Harry Wexler.  Shows over 30 contrails, some criss-crossing:

cloud-studies-115-500.jpg

1963 – Photo by Bob Shomler

1958, San Francisco airport: Two persistent contrails cross in the sky.

1954, A photo by Ansel Adams entitled “Rails and Jet Trails

1945, Europe: Contrails from fighter escorts (P-51s). Both old and new. You see lots of these types of photos when people try to debunk chemtrails, the believers say that engines back then were less efficient, so produced more trails. Ironically, the more efficient an engine is, the more of the fuel is combusted, so more water is produced. So the more modern an engine is, the more likely it is to produce a persistent contrail.

1944, Contrails formed over Germany by the 91st Bomb Group on a mission to Zeitz, Germany on 30 November 1944

1940, Europe, Bomber with fighter escorts

The 1940s, From the 1950 book Air Force: A Pictorial History

1940sairforcepictorial.jpg

For more WWII contrails, see here:

WWII Contrails

 

 

441 thoughts on “Contrail photos through history

  1. bryan says:

    based upon the stated ability of HAARP to accelerate electrons to KeV or MeV levels it has to be to the left of the chart.
    I wish it stayed as radio waves but based upon the Naval / AF paper it has to be gamma, x-ray or UVL. Cool chart.

    If the HAARP array can produce an aurora effect, plasma discharge, and a light show it is creating an ionizing effect.

    That is in part why many physicists get spooked by HAARP, as HAARP has demonstrated ionizing effects already.

    In nearly everything I have read about attempts to get energy from the vacuum, (so called ‘free energy’) there is
    critical attention placed on a very high speed pulsing. HAARP mentions in their own data pulsing energy this way as well.

    The conspiratorial crowd takes the Begich info. and runs with it, there are stories of dead carribou in Alaska, and human deaths from an alleged ozone hole created by HAARP that eventually aligned itself over Siberia, other tinhatters claim airline crashes have occurred from these arrays as well as claiming HAARP has caused bizarre weather over Iraq. Also claims supposedly from radio operators that HAARP increased its signal during both Rita and Katrina. Also claims of a thunderstorm in Russia where black clouds appeared suddenly, large hail accompanied by thunder that sounded unlike any thunder the locals had ever heard before (1000 times louder)
    -All just wild web-mania speculation probably, …hopefully.

    Regards, -B

  2. I wish it stayed as radio waves but based upon the Naval / AF paper it has to be gamma, x-ray or UVL.

    Which Navel/ AF paper? If you mean this one:

    http://foia.abovetopsecret.com/ultimate_UFO/Advanced/HAARPResearchAndApplications.pdf

    then it says nothing about any radiation that has a higher frequency than visual light.

    Where has HAARP demonstrated ionizing effects? They say:

    http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/ion4.html

    Effects produced by HAARP are thermal in nature and do not result in new ionization. HAARP is not able to produce artificial ionization for the following two reasons.

    The frequencies used by the HAARP facility are in the High Frequency (HF) portion of the spectrum. Electromagnetic radiation in the HF frequency range is non-ionizing – as opposed to the sun’s ultraviolet and X-ray radiation whose photons have sufficient energy to be ionizing.

    The intensity of the radiation from the completed HAARP facility at ionospheric heights will be too weak to produce artificial ionization through particle interactions. The power density produced by the completed facility will not exceed 3 to 4 microwatts per cm2, about two orders of magnitude below the level required for that process.

  3. bryan says:

    Uncinus wrote;
    “But where does it say that altering the ionosphere will affect the weather?”

    The HAARP FAQ website states;
    “…If the ionospheric storms caused by the sun itself don’t affect the surface weather, there is no chance that HAARP can do so either.”

    So we are arguing semantically now.
    I actually think that your question is much more scientifically sound than the HAARP FAQ’s statement. The HAARP FAQ thing
    is rather trickily worded. It is not well stated at all. Hopefully they are reading along and will remove it entirely.

    I still suspect that lifting and / or tearing a hole in the ionosphere isn’t such a good idea and can ripple outwards or worse.
    Begich in his book claims that a never before seen pocket was created just above the ionosphere after one HAARP experiment.

    The clarification of High Frequency makes sense -high in the radio wave spectrum but I think there is a focusing effect that
    can cause the frequency to do things that normal radio waves don’t do.
    -Bryan

  4. I’m certainly not arguing semantically. It’s quite a simple question: Can HAARP affect the weather?

    I think the following two statements are true:

    A) HAARP only affects the ionosphere
    B) The ionosphere does not affect the weather.

    Now, if those are true, then HAARP cannot affect the weather.

    You disputed A by claiming HAARP used ionizing radiation, which I’ve shown you is not true, as was likely a confusion in naming.

    You disputed B by giving several links showing how cosmic rays affect the weather, but I explained how that is irrelevant, as the ionosphere is not the source of those rays.

    Can HAARP affect the weather? That is not a semantic question.

  5. bryan says:

    There is a semantics angle to the difference in your statement and HAARP’s statement.

    This paper discusses ionization by HAARP. It validates my claim that the HAARP website is garbage as
    do the books that I have linked.

    Taken from the Naval / AF paper and in direct contradiction to the HAARP website claim that they are not creating new ionization;
    http://www.viewzone.com/haarp.exec.html -this document is different than the one you sourced recently and much more intriguing
    with detailed discussion of ionization in direct contrast to the PR website;

    “For example, survivable HF propagation above nuclear disturbed ionospheric regions would be possible; or, the very long range detection of missiles breaking through the ionosphere on their way to targets, could be achieved. The use of an HF heater to produce field-aligned ionization in a controlled (reliable) way has been suggested as a means for developing such concepts, and will be tested in an up-coming satellite experiment to be conducted during FY92. The experiment calls for a heater in Alaska to generate field-aligned ionization that will scatter HF signals from a nearby transmitter into elevated ducts. A satellite receiver will record the signals to provide data on the efficiency of the field-aligned ionization as an RF scatterer, as well as the location, persistence, and HF propagation properties associated with the elevated ducts.”

    and this;

    The Soviets, operating at higher powers than the West, now have claimed significant stimulated ionization by electron-impact ionization. The claim is that HF energy, via wave-particle interaction, accelerates ionospheric electrons to energies well in excess of 20 electron volts (eV) so that they will ionize neutral atmospheric particles with which they collide. Given that the Soviet HF facilities are several times more powerful than the Western facilities at comparable mid-latitudes, and given that the latter appear to be on a threshold of a new “wave-particle” regime of phenomena, it is believed that the Soviets have crossed that threshold and are exploring a regime of phenomena still unavailable for study or application in the West.

    Currently most information available states that HAARP is now the most powerful transmitter array on the planet although there
    is chatter that there is another array in Alaska even more powerful than HAARP, I couldn’t substantiate that as there is no
    documentation.

    So, if HAARP is now more powerful than anything the Russians have, we are capable of stimulating ionization.

    HAARP can cause ionization, the action is EM more than thermal, ionization and weather, do they relate?
    If haarp can cause plasmas to appear in the air, there is ionization occuring.

    Uncinus your second chart, where is the ELF on that chart? It should be shown on the far left
    Regards,
    Bryan

  6. bryan says:

    Plasmas = new ionization, true power generating capability and changing the chemical composition of the upper atmosphere
    Here’s a bit about the power capability of HAARP Uncinus and Jazzrock;
    THE AMPLIFICATION EFFECT
    Another aspect of HAARP that is extremely important is a non-linear effect. Researchers at Stanford University discovered that if you put energy into the upper ionosphere and magnetosphere, in the ULF range (ultra low frequency range), you can create a catalyst which causes natural energy to be released. They found that the signal sent up was amplified by a thousand times when it arrived there. HAARP, when it is fully completed, will have ONE BILLION WATTS OF EFFECTIVE RADIATIVE POWER. If you can manipulate that energy to get the amplification effect, it is huge. They have also created some new signal amplifiers. According to patents, transferring energy through this transmitter into huge Mylar reflectors and bouncing the signal back to the earth to where it can be re-introduced to the energy grid, is supposed to be economically feasible in the next couple of years. The problem is that if the reflector moves only slightly, you may have a path of energy rolling through your neighbourhood. Research also suggests that by using this instrument, you could actually change the chemical composition of the upper atmosphere.

    WEATHER MODIFICATION
    The idea that HAARP can be used for affecting weather systems is pretty startling to us. HAARP researchers felt that manipulating weather systems would be advantageous in terms of drought control, and producing rainfall where it is needed. With HAARP, you can create a column-shaped hole with a diameter of 30 miles that rises a couple of hundred kilometers through the atmosphere. The lower atmosphere then moves up the column to fill in that space, and it changes pressure systems below. The fact is, that it can literally be used to divert or alter the course of jet streams.

    The April/May 00 issue of Scientific American is about weather, and there is a specific article on the effects of a slight bend in the jet stream. This slight change happened to occur right above the HAARP facility. That little movement caused a storm front 4,000 miles away in east Texas and Louisiana to move into central Florida where it deposited a couple of tornadoes. This is interesting but it is not conclusive that it was a cause and effect relationship. However, weather modification is certainly possible with only a slight change. In fact, the European Space Agency contracted Bernard Eastlund, and in 1998 he completed a paper on how to knock out tornadoes using HAARP instruments on the ground. That paper was peer-reviewed and presented in Italy and it was widely accepted, in fact, so much so, that NASA and FEMA contracted Bernard Eastlund to do further research on weather modification using satellite-based technology and this was published in late 1999, early 2000.

    The problem is we cannot model the entire global system. We don’t even understand fully how the weather operates. And yet, the experiments go on. The issue of weather modification is disturbing because we have treaties that forbid it. The last three secretaries of defense have all suggested reopening that treaty because there would be significant military advantage.

    3. Earth penetrating tomography is one of the primary uses of HAARP. HAARP can act like a broadcast antenna and sends a signal back to the earth in the ELF (extremely low frequency) range, that can pass through the earth and sea for several kilometers for communication with submarines or determining underground nuclear facilities, tunnels, and defining mineral strata.

    Problems with using HAARP for Earth Penetrating Tomography
    Brooks Agnew, a specialist in the area of earth penetrating tomography, did research back in the 1970s using 30 watts of electricity to send a signal into the earth to locate underground oil and gas deposits. Brooks used only 30 watts of power, but he said that if you increased this to a few thousand watts, you could possibly create problems that you don’t anticipate, in other words you might trigger geophysical events within the earth. This statement was echoed in a lecture given by the previous Secretary of Defense, Cohen, on April 27, 1997 at the University of Georgia. He was speaking on weapons of mass destruction and he asserted that “electromagnetic waves can be used to stimulate geophysical events such as earthquakes, climate change, volcanic eruptions and the like”. In fact, there is an international treaty going back to 1977 forbidding the use of weapon technologies which do these very same things. The fact that we might trigger a geophysical event using this system, has been and continues to be a major concern. Secretary of Defense Cohen also stated that this is being used in an ecotype of terrorism, whereby they can alter climate, set off earthquakes and volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves. You can bring it up on the DOD’s website and see it yourself.

    the above is excerpted from http://www.consumerhealth.org/articles/display.cfm?ID=20011005223152

  7. bryan says:

    The problem is that the HAARP FAQ statement does not work. It is a bogus statement really. The earth’s weather is affected during periods of ionospheric storms. It’s like they are saying the aurora borealis does not effect the earths weather, therefore HAARP can’t either. The sun’s variable solar wind activity which illuminates the aurora display, now THAT is what can effect the earth’s weather.

    HAARP does a great deal more than create an aurora, it can be used to make defense shields, tap into the earth grids vast EM energy field, communicate half way around the world, cause explosions, create lightning ( weather ) and cause ionization events.

    It’s not me saying it. It’s our Governments own document that I sourced above. I haven’t even gotten into what the Russians say their array and ours can do. It is evident that the HAARP website is not an honest source of data based solely on the Joint Naval and AF document, since I expect you may start to resort to character assassinations very soon (Nick Begich, that crazy Bernard Eastland etc.)

    -Bryan

  8. It’s not me saying it. It’s our Governments own document that I sourced above.

    That documents states explicitly that HAARP can NOT do those things:

    http://www.viewzone.com/haarp.exec.html

    The use of very high power RF heaters to accelerate electrons to 14-20 eV opens the way for the creation of substantial layers of ionization at altitudes where normally there are very few electrons. This concept already has been the subject of investigations by the Air Force (Geophysics Lab), the Navy (MU), and DARPA. The Air Force, in particular, has carried the concept, termed Artificial Ionospheric Mirror (AIM), to the point of demonstrating its technical viability and proposing a new initiative to conduct proof-of-concepts experiments. The RF heater(s) being considered for AIM are in the 400 MHz-3 GHz range, much higher than the HF frequencies (1.5 MHz-15 MHz) suitable for investigating the other topics discussed in this summary. As such, the DOD program (HAARP) will not be directly involved with AIM-related ionospheric enhancement efforts

    See, they are quite clear that it would require microwave radiation. HAARP only produces radiation in the HF band of the radio spectrum, so it can’t be doing the things you suggest.

  9. The problem is that the HAARP FAQ statement does not work. It is a bogus statement really. The earth’s weather is affected during periods of ionospheric storms. It’s like they are saying the aurora borealis does not effect the earths weather, therefore HAARP can’t either. The sun’s variable solar wind activity which illuminates the aurora display, now THAT is what can effect the earth’s weather.

    So, for the statement to be bogus, either:

    A) Disturbances in the ionosphere must affect surface weather
    and/or
    B) HAARP must affect something other than the ionosphere.

    I’ve discussed a lot of reasons why these are not true. Could you clarify which, or both, or those statements you still think are true, and why? I’m starting to think there is a logic disconnect somewhere.

  10. bryan says:

    Uncinus there is a logic disconnect you read and somehow it slides off you like teflon, drink some coffee, do some
    jumping jacks, something.

    The document specifically says that it will be able to do stimulate ions once power generation is increased (power generation has
    been upgraded since the publication of this document)
    Read again this;
    The Soviets, operating at higher powers than the West, now have claimed significant stimulated ionization by electron-impact ionization. The claim is that HF energy, via wave-particle interaction, accelerates ionospheric electrons to energies well in excess of 20 electron volts (eV) so that they will ionize neutral atmospheric particles with which they collide. Given that the Soviet HF facilities are several times more powerful than the Western facilities at comparable mid-latitudes, and given that the latter appear to be on a threshold of a new “wave-particle” regime of phenomena, it is believed that the Soviets have crossed that threshold and are exploring a regime of phenomena still unavailable for study or application in the West.
    Effective-Radiated-Power (ERP)

    The AIM project is a good one though and is an example of ability to modify weather as well. AIM can be used in conjunction with
    satellites and or earth based arrays as well.

    As for B, HAARP can effect weather,
    Read this;
    http://www.consumerhealth.org/articles/display.cfm?ID=20011005223152

    WEATHER MODIFICATION
    The idea that HAARP can be used for affecting weather systems is pretty startling to us. HAARP researchers felt that manipulating weather systems would be advantageous in terms of drought control, and producing rainfall where it is needed. With HAARP, you can create a column-shaped hole with a diameter of 30 miles that rises a couple of hundred kilometers through the atmosphere. The lower atmosphere then moves up the column to fill in that space, and it changes pressure systems below. The fact is, that it can literally be used to divert or alter the course of jet streams.

    The April/May 00 issue of Scientific American is about weather, and there is a specific article on the effects of a slight bend in the jet stream. This slight change happened to occur right above the HAARP facility. That little movement caused a storm front 4,000 miles away in east Texas and Louisiana to move into central Florida where it deposited a couple of tornadoes. This is interesting but it is not conclusive that it was a cause and effect relationship. However, weather modification is certainly possible with only a slight change. In fact, the European Space Agency contracted Bernard Eastlund, and in 1998 he completed a paper on how to knock out tornadoes using HAARP instruments on the ground. That paper was peer-reviewed and presented in Italy and it was widely accepted, in fact, so much so, that NASA and FEMA contracted Bernard Eastlund to do further research on weather modification using satellite-based technology and this was published in late 1999, early 2000.

    As for what happens when HAARP creates a bubble in the atmosphere, the air underneath is is moved into new position.
    That is weather modification. HAARP generates way more than enough power by accessing existing power in the earth’s grid
    to change weather on earth. HAARP can create lightning (certainly you agree with that by now) Lightning is weather friend
    there is no mystery to that nor that HAARP can create it.

    Don’t read the stuff with out listening and paying attention. It is ridiculous that you ignore so much and make me re-gurgitate
    it again and again and again.

    Begich and Eastland are legitimate sources for HAARP info. The HAARP website is not.
    That would be evident to you if you were not the teflon man.
    -Bryan

  11. bryan says:

    I must fly off for a while.
    Part of the problem Uncinus is that you obviously don’t believe what you read unless it is the HAARP PR website.
    Somehow all the other stuff you read you deny. Get over it, haarp can easily modify weather. This has been
    known for some time by many people. It really isn’t a big deal or that controversial. HAARP can’t discuss the
    real applications because it is DOD. If they slap China with an earthqauke as a warning they don’t want it widely discussed (it still
    is, many EU countries reported on their newscasts that HAARP did it – I don’t know but they certainly are
    capable of it. I already linked you the data lol. The data for HAARP’s true capabilities is extremely robust. I have
    pointed you to 2 of the finest books on the subject but there are many more documents that you can research.
    It’s interesting stuff, the new warfare, is so very different than combating armored tanks and guns.
    Later,
    Bryan

  12. Begich and Eastland are legitimate sources for HAARP info.

    I’d ecourage people to look at Begich’s web site, and judge for themselves:

    http://www.earthpulse.com/

    I’d also like to know how HAARP creates lightning.

  13. JazzRoc says:

    WEATHER MODIFICATION
    The idea that HAARP can be used for affecting weather systems is pretty startling to us. HAARP researchers felt that manipulating weather systems would be advantageous in terms of drought control, and producing rainfall where it is needed. With HAARP, you can create a column-shaped hole with a diameter of 30 miles that rises a couple of hundred kilometers through the atmosphere. The lower atmosphere then moves up the column to fill in that space, and it changes pressure systems below. The fact is, that it can literally be used to divert or alter the course of jet streams.

    If the molecules/ions/particles are accelerated by HAARP’s focussable beam, then a HOLE is not what will be produced.

    What will be produced will be an INCREASE IN PRESSURE (Boyle’s Law).

    NOTHING will “rush in to fill the hole”.

    If anything, the accelerated volume will EXPAND a little. The expansion of such a low-pressure phenomenon in the first place is NOT likely to “depress” the denser atmosphere beneath it.

    These statements have nothing to do with physics or truth.

  14. bryan says:

    Clear as a bell out today, I can see way over 50 miles in all directions. I guess the chemtrail sprayers have the day off
    (tongue firmly in cheek)

    Yes Begich’s website is non-traditional.

    I would encourage people when they review a paper by Patrick Mcginnis to look at the date of the paper and
    then consider that his ‘science’ has very possibly been politicized by the Bush Regime. It is well accepted that
    atmospheric and climatic science has been very much distorted due to political agendas during the last 8 years
    (that we know of.) The concern with the established scientific community is well known by those who pay
    attention to the evolution of scientific knowledge.

    I’ll get back to you when I can source the lightning info. to an adequate level.

    Peace,
    Bryan

  15. Ross says:

    HAARP has noting to do with contrails. Why is this even being discussed?

  16. Yeah, I got sucked in. Back on topic everyone!

  17. bryan says:

    Weather manipulation does have a relationship with chemtrails, not contrails Ross.
    I’m not even close to proving chemtrails but I’m not giving up.
    The reason I can’t let chemtrails drop entirely is in looking at Government papers which
    cause alarm bells to go off.

    An example is that the best evidence of NASA not being honest is in the NASA data itself.
    NASA information is the data that shows they are not being honest. Same thing with
    chemtrails. While I don’t believe that a chemtrail program is related to the majority of
    contrails in the skies, I still think there is testing and use of chemtrails for communications,
    defense applications etc.

    Here’s an article on artificial lightning. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080414082517.htm This is the publicly available stuff. Note in the article it discusses the next step CREATING lightning by using more sophisticated high speed pulsing of energy (laser in this case) The high speed pulsing is being used now by
    HAARP and if you look at Eastlund’s patents -in use today at HAARP, AIM etc.
    you quickly see that the pulsing is very advanced ala Tesla.

    I’m glad you brought up AIM Uncinus, as AIM is also Eastlund stuff and is a weather
    modifier as well.

    The power generation of HAARP becomes amplified exponentially by the high
    speed pulsing.

    Uncinus where is your link on Bernard Eastlund’s credentials? Or on Tesla’s? Seems most disingenuous to not
    include a link for people to look up his biography since his work is the basis for HAARP.
    It is not Begich’s science that is the basis for HAARP.
    Peace,
    Bryan

  18. bryan says:

    Jazzrock,
    You are essentially saying the Bernard Eastlund and Tesla have nothing to do with
    physics or truth. Good luck with that !
    -Bryan

  19. bryan says:

    Ross, RFMP>VTRPE>DUCTING>HAARP>ATMOSPHERIC RF DUCT>barium salts>CHEMTRAILS.
    All just pie in the sky, thought experiments, futuristic 22nd century research and hallucinations according to Uncinus and Jazzrock… except that they aren’t.

    There are known problems with ducting over land (see Naval documents) that need fixing and through the use of Vulcan like technology they have been solved. The solution is BARIUM.

    Why is barium special? It is amazingly conductive to energy input. There are so many papers, and so much research
    done on the subject that is would make your head spin (again, all just thought experiments per Uncinus, Jazzrock).

    The information is out there.
    Bernard Eastlund has done some work on how Barium can be employed. Several of his ‘patents’ are already
    in use (for 2 well documented examples see HAARP and AIM-also known weather modifiers)

    This is why we went wayyyyyy off subject into the made up world of HAARP capabilities… except that they aren’t made
    up.

    High speed pulsing (as many as 30,000 pulses per SECOND) and resonance are 2 keys to the mystery (Tesla did this with astonishingly powerful effects such as the creation of lightning)

    As a further note, I’ve linked documents to the above in the past and won’t do so again since a real discussion of DOD chemtrails
    appears to be outside of the interests of this website.

    The effects commonly referred to as ‘orbs’ appear to be closely related to barium and energy input, they are often seen
    in photos taken of chemtrails / contrails. Uncinus has pointed out that they are ‘birds, balloons etc. and sometimes they
    probably are. Many times those shooting persistent contrail videos and photos do not see the orbs until examining the
    pics or videos as they are quite small. U tube has many videos of these birds and balloons for your viewing.

    As Jazzrock and Uncinus will tell you, don’t take my word for it go out and research it. Read about Tesla and the
    close similiarity between his patent the Eastlund patent that aligns very closely with the HAARP facility.

    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_tesla.htm
    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/haarp/esp_HAARP_12.htm

    Remember, plate tectonics was ridiculed at first, the Wright brothers were scientifically shredded and currently there
    are strong political reasons to not believe HAARP, AIM and barium salts are being deployed. Naval employees are
    on record as saying that Eastlund is crazy etc.

    “Theories have four stages of acceptance:
    i) this is worthless nonsense;
    ii) this is an interesting, but perverse, point of view.
    iii) this is true but quite unimportant.
    iv) I always said so.”
    – J.B.S. Haldane, 1963

    “All great truths began as blasphemies” – George Bernard Shaw

    We now return you to your regularly scheduled program;
    http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/aviation/contrails.pdf
    Regards,
    Bryan

  20. bryan says:

    “The mind likes a strange idea as little as the body likes a strange protein and resists it with similar energy. It would not perhaps be too fanciful to say that a new idea is the most quickly acting antigen known to science. If we watch ourselves honestly we shall often find that we have begun to argue against a new idea even before it has been completely stated.” – Wilfred Trotter, 1941

    “The study of history is a powerful antidote to contemporary arrogance. It is humbling to discover how many of our glib assumptions, which seem to us novel and plausible, have been tested before, not once but many times and in innumerable guises; and discovered to be, at great human cost, wholly false.” -Paul Johnson

    “Reality is far stranger than conspiracy” – me and no doubt countless others.

    unaccepted science:
    * Ball lightning (lacking a theory, it was long dismissed as retinal afterimages)
    * Catastrophism (ridicule of rapid Earth changes, asteroid mass extinctions)
    * Child abuse (before 1950, doctors were mystified by “spontaneous” childhood bruising)
    * Cooperation or altruism between animals (versus Evolution’s required competition)
    * Instantaneous meteor noises (evidence rejected because sound should be delayed by distance)
    * Mind-body connection (psychoneuroimmunology, doctors ridiculed any emotional basis for disease)
    * Perceptrons (later vindicated as Neural Networks)
    * Permanent magnet levitation (“Levitron” shouldn’t have worked)

    If one researches the possibility that HAARP or similar technology created the China earthquake they should also
    look into the same lights being reported over the midwest U.S. during the flood of 1993.

    For further research into weather modification related to chemtrails;
    * International Committee of the Red Cross, Expert Meeting on Certain Weapons Systems and on Implementation Mechanisms in International Law ,July 1994;

    * Metz, Kievit, The Revolution In Military Affairs And Conflict Short Of War, Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College at 9 (July 1994);

    * Heating Up The Air Waves, Jane’s Defense Weekly, Vol. 23, No.13;

    * Hayeslip, Preszler, NIJ Initiative On Less-Than-Lethal Weapons, National Institute of Justice at 16-18 ,March 1993;

    * Edwardson, The Right To Prevent The Commission Of International Crimes, International Health And Alternative Medicine Conference (October 9-10, 1993);

    * Smith, Best, Electromagnetic Man, Chapter 10 (St. Martin’s Press, N.Y. 1989)

    When I say that we can and are manipulating weather, I am met with vehement derision here.
    yet really all I am saying is that we can scale this http://www.physorg.com/news68812957.html
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn9293-physicists-create-great-balls-of-fire.html
    up and the information for doing so exists, the lab that is creating it is HAARP.

    It is really so hard to believe we can scale this up??? Why? Think, reason, investigate, LEARN.
    Peace,
    Bryan

    Tesla is still being scoffed at here and elsewhere.
    -Bryan

  21. Tesla is not being scoffed at. Tesla was a good scientist – if perhaps a little prone to hyperbole and self-promotion.

    If anything is being scoffed at it is those who invoke the good name of Tesla in the pursuit of a particular brand of pseudoscience. Really – to suppose that technology created 80 years ago can create remote earthquakes and nobody would have written a thing about it in all that time. Don’t you find that a little odd?

    You talk about chemtrails – could you even define what you think a chemtrail is? What does it look like? What does it do? How many are there?

  22. bryan says:

    If anything is being scoffed at it is those who invoke the good name of Tesla in the pursuit of a particular brand of pseudoscience. Really – to suppose that technology created 80 years ago can create remote earthquakes and nobody would have written a thing about it in all that time. Don’t you find that a little odd?

    Uncinus, I’ve seen another physicist dismissing HAARP make the same claim about invoking the good name of Tesla, then that same person went into zero detail about Tesla’s work and how it aligns closely with Eastlund’s work and HAARP. What I find odd (reality being so much stranger than conspiracy) is that Tesla reputedly drove a car without using any oil, or that Tesla technology lost out to JP Morgan who destroyed much of his work. Tesla’s treatment by the established scientific community is definitely ‘odd.’ Those who claim Tesla’s good name is maligned become silent when it comes to Tesla saying he could harness energy from the earth itself. That is odd -definitely.

    I find it odd that you would write here that no one has written a thing about it in all that time. I referred you to Gerry Vassilatos
    book already. For a really interesting look at Tesla’s technology I would refer you to John Bedini or Edwin Gray or Dr. Eugene Mallove. 2 of the 3 are dead under bizarre circumstances and Bedini’s work is well outside of established science despite the fact that his work aligns closely to Tesla’s.

    Another stream of info. that is most bizarre is Steven E. Jones relationship to dispelling cold fusion and then his relationship to
    mis-direction in 911 investigations. Dis-information is his specialty.

    Your comment is a great example of my previous quotes about the scientific establishment and the difficulty in getting to truth
    due to politics, greed and control issues.

    Indeed Tesla IS being scoffed at by his science still actively being kept out of the mainstream. HAARP is a net energy creater
    just as Tesla claimed he could do with his Tower. Where is Tesla’s tower in todays world, Uncinus?

  23. bryan says:

    Uncinus wrote;

    You talk about chemtrails – could you even define what you think a chemtrail is? What does it look like? What does it do? How many are there?

    The subject of barium in chemtrails is well traversed. It is not up for discussion here because…
    “The mind likes a strange idea as little as the body likes a strange protein and resists it with similar energy. It would not perhaps be too fanciful to say that a new idea is the most quickly acting antigen known to science. If we watch ourselves honestly we shall often find that we have begun to argue against a new idea even before it has been completely stated.” – Wilfred Trotter, 1941

    To you barium is a strange subject. You resist it because it requires too much serious consideration and it doesn’t have a Government stamp of approval. It is most uncomfortable to you just as the orbs are. The orbs exist in photos, videos and
    much personal testimony yet you object before you have even listened or payed attention. Your current belief system is
    far too entrenched even when contrary evidence is available.
    -Bryan

  24. bryan says:

    Tesla was not a “good scientist.” He was likely the greatest genius ever. Einstein stated he was not the smartest man alive, he stated that Tesla was. Why did I not learn about Tesla like I did Einstein when being mis-educated? Why? Look into it, seriously.
    -Bryan

  25. bryan says:

    See how well Mallove got along with the established scientific community and where it landed him,
    http://www.boston.com/news/globe/health_science/articles/2004/07/27/scientists_violent_death_shocks_cold_fusion_research_network/

    Then look at Steven E. Jones involvement with dispelling it. Fascinating. The Tesla ‘death ray’ is in the hands of black projects.
    The chance of it seeing the light of day to benefit mankind is nearly zero (it is free energy)

    Then look at how building 7 came down and think about resonance and high speed pulsing as exists with in the framework
    of HAARP (Eastlund did the REAL Tesla science)

    Now, what am I doing? I am ‘pursuing tesla technology which is called pseudoscience by you and the other
    entrenched mainstream scientific community. Tesla technology was destroyed by those who were greedy. This is
    not made up. It is the ‘real’ history which is continually being re-worked by the elite and you are following the
    bread crumbs of the establishment which is the same as scoffing at Tesla.
    -B

  26. bryan says:

    How is Tesla science called pseudoscience? Tesla said that through resonance he could do amazing things (hyperbole according
    to the breadcrumb followers) such as make a ‘deathray’ Ahh wacky crazy, insane you say. How dare you slander the great Tesla you say. Well the dis-association of metals through resonance has been demonstrated repeatedly.

    Here’s the super crazy nutty bizarre bloke who has done it. His name is John Hutchinson. The U.S. Government studied his work in
    fact at Los Alamos (the official story of their investigation of the Hutchinson effect is ridiculous and worth a look)

    Hutchinson’s work is the REAL Tesla stuff although Hutchinson doesn’t have the mind that Tesla did and has serious control issues
    with the technology. The treatment of Hutchinson is that he / “it” is pseudoscience. …and so it goes.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeUgDJc6AWE

    Now imagine the Government working with this FOR MORE THAN 30 years, with the best minds in the world. Do you think that
    maybe they have advanced it a bit more than John? Come on now, think.

    pseudoscience lol. Ahhh the establishment that’s right. IMPOSSIBLE, how dare you slander Tesla again lol.
    -B

  27. bryan says:

    Brown’s Gas and the Hutchinson effect are both examples of Tesla technology and both of them are covered up and ridiculed.
    Modern examples of scoffing at Tesla.

    http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Thinktank/8863/HEffect1.html

    http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/

    http://www.svpvril.com/svpweb9.html

    Brown’s gas is basically what Stanley Meyers was doing. Stanley Meyers is dead.
    You will find him under ‘pseudoscience’ which is scoffing at Tesla.

    If you come away accepting the vast amount of data on the internet stating that Meyer’s was a fraud, that’s great, good
    for you for following the breadcrumbs of the establishment. Take more time though and study Brown’s gas. That’s great it
    exists, but is not a net creator. Good job, you’ve been bought and sold by the mainstream scientific community.

    How did you gloss over the effects and amazing properties of brown’s gas? Did you know that it can take radioactive Nuclear
    waste and render it inert? No? That’s because it is ‘pseudoscience’ and because Tesla is still being scoffed at today.
    -B

  28. bryan says:

    Why are so many ‘pseudo scientists’ who are forwarding radiant energy concepts (slandering the great Tesla-who’s true genius is not discussed or even accepted) dead under strange circumstances Uncinus. Why? Come on now REALLY think, I dare ya.
    -B

  29. bryan says:

    Wouldn’t any plane that spews out JP-8 be a ‘chem’ trail Uncinus? Are you well versed in the concerns with JP-8 and the EDB that is a component of JP-8? Have you looked at the Government reports detailing how Government pilots become ill more than other
    Government employees? The Government data implicates JP-8. I’m sure you’ve already taken a look at that data of course.

    No need for me to discuss Barium as the data on it’s deployment from aircraft is readily available and has been linked here before.

    That we only have a few random admissions of the deployment of barium from aircraft certainly does not mean that it hasn’t been deployed more than we have been told. We just really don’t know. As for how the chemtrails look I think it is safe to say that they look and behave much like contrails wouldn’t you agree? Or does this ‘cloud’ the issue a bit more than you would prefer.

    -Bryan

  30. bryan says:

    Uncinus,
    How about the Shuman Resonance, how does that relate to oil deposit searching capabilities, submarine communication and causing earthquakes. Yes, I am invoking the good name of Tesla AND HAARP capabilities all in the same sentence.

  31. Bryan, it’s getting hard to take your Tesla worship seriously, you seem quite worked up about it. perhaps you need to step back a little from statements like:

    slandering the great Tesla-who’s true genius is not discussed or even accepted

    Is it slandering someone to doubt their claims in the absence of evidence? Sure Tesla was genius, one of the most important scientists in history, making great strides forward in magnetic fields, AC power tansmission, induction motors, etc. There’s a good page on him at Wikipedia, that has a huge list of his contributions:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

    Now, if these other inventions that you describe were real and viable, then with the vast advances in science in the 70 years since then it would be a simple matter to duplicate them, and post evidence of them on the internet. The internet is not censored, so why is there no such evidence?

  32. bryansail says:

    Browns gas, Stanley Meyers water car, John Bedini’s magnetic motor, Edwin Gray, not censored, but when they get to the point
    of putting it in the hands of the public they are bought out or killed. It not really so simple to duplicate the high speed pulsing
    sequences by the way. This is seen in the difficulty of those attempting to replicate Tesla’s work today. There are some small
    sucesses often but difficulty in harnessing what was easy for Tesla.

    Wiki is an absolutely hilarious way to get to know Tesla. Very good of you to follow the breadcrumbs of the scientific establishment Uncinus.

    One theory of why we do not see these inventions powering our Airplanes and vehicles is that the same technology is a nightmare
    in the wrong hands. -You might even say a ‘deathray’ lol. There is probably an element of truth to that. Or perhaps factions of
    Governments and other elite don’t want you to know that we have the ability to (today-for some time actually) to travel amongst the stars and I am paraphrasing from the former head of skunkworks Ben Rich n a speech he gave at UCLA some time ago.

    So its about control really and there are many attempting replications of Tesla’s best work today. Join a discussion group, many of them exist. You are after all saying that they are all ‘pseudoscientists’. Why not take a look, really take a look.

    Except that you prefer the cozy confines of your accepted belief system which includes that if all this were real it would be available
    to you and I. See my quotes on the scientific process again. There is evidence of them look DEEPLY into brown’s gas, because
    the internet is full of mis-direction by the entrenched scientists as Gene Mallove discovered.
    -Peace,
    Bryan

  33. bryansail says:

    HAARP is Tesla, Eastlund is Tesla. Once again I am boxing a glacier because if wiki doesn’t talk about it – it can’t exist.
    numbers i) and ii) from J.B.S. Haldane, once in a while you like to toss in a number iii) as in yeah HAARP exists so what
    without looking at the relationship between Tesla patent and Eastlund patent and the HAARP microwave transmitter.
    -Bryan

  34. So, 70 years ago, Tesla claimed to have invented all these amazing things, but nobody today can demonstrate that they work.

    So why do you think they work?

  35. bryansail says:

    Shouldn’t we be discussing JP-8 and contrails?

  36. Sure, we are discussing that over here:

    http://contrailscience.com/barium-chemtrails/#comment-6477

    But I think there’s a related topic here. Where do you get your information? If you think the “the internet is full of mis-direction”, then how do you discern the thread of truth? How exactly are you picking out what is true, and discarding what is false?

    Have you considered at all that your own preconceptions might be playing a role in what you select as true? If you already believe that Tesla’s genius was suppressed, then will you automatically reject all evidence to the contrary?

    True science is not about pushing a position. It is about finding models that best represent observable facts. It does this with verifiable evidence. Since nobody has ever demonstrated any evidence of the toxic effects of contrails at ground level, then we can assign such claims the same weight as we assign Tesla’s claim of being able to beam energy to other planets.

    http://www.tesla-coil-builder.com/Articles/july_11_1937.htm

  37. bryansail says:

    Good point Uncinus. I am going to reflect more on that and try to remember to keep it close as I go forward.
    Discernment…

    http://www.infoniac.com/hi-tech/nasa-strike-moon-with-double-sledgehammer.html

    These are exciting times for new paradigms in science.
    http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2008/1126/2
    The red rains (seen in Kerala, India recently http://www.world-science.net/exclusives/080122_red-rain.htm ) are an amazing phenomenon as well and there is evidence that many meteors show signs of biological life as well.

    The primary researcher working on the Viking mission has never backed down from his claim that evidence
    of life on Mars was discovered more than 30 years ago.

    http://www.space.com/news/spacehistory/viking_life_010728-1.html

    http://www.spherix.com/PressRelease/pr072903.html

    In looking at these issues I also ask for the gift of discernment. …cue Jazzrock lol .

    -Bryan

  38. Life on Mars? Now we are really getting off topic 🙂

    Levin has the same data as everyone else does, he just comes to a different conclusion.

    The problem is that there is not enough data to come to ANY conclusion. Nobody knows why the LR experiments gave the results they did. Time will tell.

    But does this have anything to do with contrails? Perhaps you should start your own blog to more fully expound your theories. I’m afraid they are not doing much useful sitting in my comments.

  39. bryansail says:

    Except that they relate to scientific inquiry, the stubbornness of the entrenched (funded) scientific community and how long it often takes for controversial ideas to see the light of day.

  40. Bruce says:

    Hello again gentlemen, nice to see the discussion seems to be running at full tilt thanks to some input from Bryan, this makes for very interesting reading.

    Poor Bryan, we now have JazzRoc trying to beat him down, or is he holding him whilst Unc tries to give him a good kicking? Don’t worry Bryan, I will hold your coat for you.

    Here is proof that some people actually worship the humble “chemtrail”. The guys who sprayed this one were playing a practical joke on the people of Turkey. Must be a great job to have.

    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=uZeaftWQxFk&feature=related

    Regards to all – Bruce

    .

  41. Birger says:

    Ironically, the more efficient an engine is, the more of the fuel is combusted, so more water is produced?????? So the more modern an engine is, the more likely it is to produce a persistent contrail.

    Somthing wrong here? An engine can not produce water!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! only consume it. To much water= engine problem.

  42. Birger, when jet fuel burns, it makes mostly carbon dioxide and water. Exactly the same as with cars.

  43. JazzRoc says:

    Birger:

    “Ironically, the more efficient an engine is, the more of the fuel is combusted, so more water is produced? So the more modern an engine is, the more likely it is to produce a persistent contrail.” – Something wrong here? An engine can not produce water! only consume it. Too much water= engine problem.

    You know NO science, do you? Kerosine (chemical name DECANE) is a hydrocarbon which when ignited will burn to carbon dioxide and water.
    The combustion formula goes:

    2*C10H22 + 31*O2 -> 20*CO2 + 11*H2O, or
    DECANE + OXYGEN -> CARBON DIOXIDE + WATER

    Asterisks are used here to represent the numbers of the molecules, and the oxygen is a 21% constituent of air.

    The true combustion formula would actually a lot more complicated than that, as aviation kerosine (JP-8) is a fractionation of petroleum approximately of the same molecular weight as kerosine, with smaller molecules removed because of their dangerously low flashpoints, and larger molecules removed because of their tendency to freeze into waxes at low temperatures.

    There are actually 166 separate isomers approximating kerosine in JP-8, but the predominant part of the fuel IS kerosine. The differing isomers tend to assist combustion performance, damping resonances in flame propagation, and helping complete combustion.

    Contrary to Bryansail’s repeated (and baseless) assertions, there is NO ethylene dibromide in JP-8. Its only use was as a combustion chamber solvent for gasoline engines using leaded petrol before the start of the seventies – it combined with the lead oxide to form lead bromide vapor, and prevented “leading up” of the head space, piston crown, and exhaust valves.

    Claims of “poisoning” by JP-8 are basically true, but it is the decane isomers (many of them mutagens) which are the cause, and not (non-existent) EDB…

  44. Paul says:

    The JP-8 debate would hold a lot more creedence if all the fuel handlers, refiners, motorpool maintainers,grounds people, etc, who are in actual CONTACT with the fuel had a higher disease rate, rather than the pilot who never intentionally touches the fuel! Heck, there are even people running it in their diesel trucks!

    Regarding “chemtrails”, I am waiting for something a little more concrete. I have seen no concrete evidence that it is anything other than enhanced condensation due to the increased efficiency of modern turbofans. Seems that the mid to late ’90s were the watershed days for the beginnings of the “chemtrail” era. Coincidentally, this is the same time that the newer, very efficient turbofans from GE and Rolls Royce began replacing the older, less efficient models. As with anything of this scale, it took years for the conversions to happen.

    As far as older accounts, I read a B-17 pilots report that said that the contrails were sometimes so persistent that they could follow them many hours later back towards the bombing areas.

    The fact that the chemtrail proponents keep changing their story regarding what chemtrails are composed of, and what they are for, means they are on a fishing expidition. Sometimes it is arial spraying of biotoxins for experiments. Other times it is barium or aluminum for radar and radio wave propagation. And, now, it is for seeding climate changes. Once this latest is shown to be unlikely, what will be next? As proposed before, if all the proponents got together and put in $5 each, they could charter a plane, rent some good, reliable lab equipment (not some scrapings off a home air ionizer!!), and put this thing to rest once and for all. I’m not counting on it happening any time soon!

  45. Halo says:

    Just wanted to say that in 24 years i had never seen any of these contrails in the city where i live. The first time and only time i was one it was at an extremely low altitude, i thought it was a trail of some sort but i wasnt sure where it came from until i accidently found everything about chemtrails/contrails on youtube, i’ve only seen one over these skies in 24 years, i just thought that was a bit suspicious.

  46. Halo says:

    Oh and i also like to mention that after i saw this contrail/chemtrails weather has been very unusual on this city, never in 60 years my parents had ever seen sun dogs, cirrus clouds, giant rainbows, etc on these skies.

    The fact that some people believe that these chemtrails are related to weather modification makes me wonder if this changes in our weather are actually being caused by a weather modification program.

  47. That’s the thing about unusual weather – it does not happen very often.

    You live somewhere where contrails are rare because of the weather. On a rare day when the weather was forming sun-dogs, etc, you also saw a contrail.

    Sometimes you get unusual weather, it’s a fact of life.

  48. Halo says:

    Thats no exactly what happened Uncinus. Me and my brother saw a large contrail just on top of our house at a very low altitude – it was the first time we saw something like this so we were not sure what it was.

    I had seen jets leaving contrails which faded after a few seconds so seeing a persistent contrail caught my attention.

    It was after this event that the weather changed dramatically over the next few weeks, we could see sun dogs, cirrus clouds, rainbows, stuff which not even my parents who have lived here for more than 50 years have witnessed before. Not to mention that there was even a devastating earthquake which destroyed a whole town where I live.

    The fact that there exists a weather modification program is a bit suspicious and i think its irresponsible to ignore these facts.

    I think its important to keep an open mind about this issue.

    Regards.

  49. Halo says:

    I think this is a bit suspicious, what do you think?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRnT-NXGIPI

    Just watch the video, it doesnt matter what he is saying.

  50. You live in Peru? Are you talking about the unusual weather in 2007, and the Aug 16 2007 Earthquake, or something more recent? You know Peru is prone to earthquakes, so why do you think this is significant?

    Your video I do not think is unusual – it shows a broken contrail, as explained here:

    http://contrailscience.com/broken-contrails/

  51. Halo says:

    Yes i am in peru and i know we have earthquakes around here, but like i said the persistent contrail, the earthquake, the cirrus clouds, the sun dogs and the giant rainbows are things I have only seen after I saw this gigantic and persistent contrail above my house.

    Here are a few videos :

    This is the solar halo which appeared over the devastated city a few weeks after the earthquake, very rare to see around here, i’ve never seen one until now.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7T_A5gNHxU

    This is a contrail and a rainbow seen In Mocegua-Peru in January 2008, i dont know if you understand spanish but the people who recorded this are confused about the nature of the object, which probably means that we are not used to see persistent contrails on the skies of peru.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjb1RZJeuRg

    Here is a video of a rainbow on february 23rd 2008 in lima, its very hard to see but its there.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NprG7E6ssxk

    Here is another rainbow video from march 2008 in lima.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOWNNiY3WEo

    November 2008 in lima

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rg6j3hn_0os

    And the latest february 2009

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5oyWtI1DTk

    As you can see this type of sightnings are becoming more usual since the earthquake which happened after i saw the first most persistent and largest contrail in my whole life.

    Its inevitable to feel a bit suspicious about all this knowing the fact of the existence of a weather modification program involving the creation of artificial clouds.

    And what i have to say about the broken contrails is that the one shown in the video i posted is broken in a very suspicious way, too many times over too little time. Now i ask you this, if this were in fact some type of chemtrails forming artificial clouds dont you think the people behind it would know how to make them look like harmless contrails?

    Just a thought.

  52. Sorry Halo, but I think that what’s happening is that you are interested in the subject, so you start noticing things, whereas before you were not interested, so you did not notice them. Solar Halos are not that unusual – if you keep watching the sky then you’ll see several every year. Rainbows are even less unusual.

    Do you know what makes solar halos? Have a look at this:
    http://www.atoptics.co.uk/halo/circular.htm

    I really don’t see why you think the broken contrail is “suspicious”. If the air has uneven pockets of humidity, then a plane flying through it will leave a trail exactly like the one you see. This on-off behavior has been observed many many times for nearly a hundred years.

  53. Halo says:

    Well the interesting thing is that i am not the only one noticing this rainbows, the videos showing this unusual events (to me and to others i know) began in 2007, around the same time when i saw the contrail and the earthquake happened.

    I mean im pretty sure it would be very hard for me to not notice a rainbow or a sun dog in 25 years. My parents had never seen one over these skies until now.

  54. But you’ve not seen any more persistent contrails?

    So, if one persistent contrail in Peru can cause earthquakes and a lot of rainbows for several months, then what about those areas of the US where we see tens of persistent contrails EVERY DAY, but with no actual effects.

    Consider the possibility that you are simply seeing a period of odd weather. These periods happen. Some years it rains a lot. Some years there’s lots of sun. Some years are windy. Some years have lots of ice in the upper atmosphere. It’s the weather. Has there never been a year in the past that has odd weather?

  55. Halo says:

    The only persistent contrail i could see was the one i mentioned.

    I remember i saw a video on youtube where some airplanes left a few contrails on the sky and after a few minutes a parhelion was formed.

    but that could’ve been just a coincidence.

    Something else which i find suspicious is that most of these airplanes look like comercial airplanes although i’ve heard people saying that these planes dont have any logos. Do you know anything about that?

  56. Parhelions can form in contrails, because contrails are made of ice crystals. Here’s a good example:

    http://paraselene.de/upload/bilder/108188.jpg

    And another where the parhelion is more part of the general condition, but still intersects the contrail.

    http://flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/264140258/

    The planes without logos thing is fairly obvious nonsense. Mostly because you can’t see the logos on many planes when they are five miles up. Also, many armed forces planes don’t have many logos, and still have to fly around.

    http://flickr.com/photos/joekuby/2344853350/

    And of course, you’ll notice these people don’t have photos of these planes with no logos. Because when they take clear photos, it’s very easy to identify the plane.

  57. Halo says:

    Ok, thank you for the information Uncinus.

    It seems like contrails are rarely formed in Lima, because i’ve only seen the one i told you about.

    I’ll have to see if i ever get to see one again.

    I guess I’ll start to worry a little if contrails become more usual from one day to another, that would be very strange.

    regards.

  58. SR1419 says:

    Halo-

    here is another interesting photo with contrails and sundogs…from 1983:

    http://www.1000plus.com/Imagic/8301sund.htm

  59. billybob says:

    UNcinus, i find it interesting that most if not all the planes you show leaving “contrails” during the 40’s and beyond are military planes..ever hear of chaff?? And yes they do still use it, before you contadict yourself you yourself admitted this in an October 07 reply, these planes are spraying chaff which is NOT a contrail in the conventional sense. I have caught you in several contradictions so please, at least remember what you have posted in the past.

    Cheerio 😉

  60. Which planes exactly are spraying chaff?

    And for reference can you find a single photo on the internet that is actually admitted to be a plane spraying chaff? Because all the chaff I’ve heard of has been invisible.

  61. billybob says:

    It’s very interesting how someone who doesn’t believe in chemtrails would try so hard to convince everyone that they are not real, most people would say ” believe what you want to believe” i mean after all why would it concern you so much that you spend alot of your time and energy trying to convince people they are not real, most people wouldn’t care who beieved they are real or not if they thought they didn’t exist..

    A sign of a true disinformation site 😉

  62. I can’t argue with that.

  63. billybob says:

    It’s interseting that even in the 40’s the media and certain peoples thought it news worthy enough to report on these “contrails” even back then..why? Because they weren’t NORMAL! The Government was doing testing even back then on aerosol spraying and it’s very well documented that they did this testing throughout the 70’s.

    Now i know anything posted here is like pissing into the wind but come on people, WAKE THE HELL UP!! This isn’t mass hysteria coming from millions of people all around the earth, people see that this isn’t normal, yes it can be difficult to wade through all the dissemination of information that the government spreads but do your own home work. Your gut instinct is usually right on track.

  64. It think the reason they were reporting on them is that were highly unusual. There was very little high altitude flight back then in the US, so when people saw them, they had not seen anything like it before, and did not know what it was.

    Now, billybob, can you explain WHY you think they are unusual (especially if, as you say, they have been seen since the 1940s)?

  65. billybob says:

    Well Uncinus, because we know that when the gov is in testing mode it’s on a limited scale until they get it perfected which at that point they can proceed with the full blown program.

    Spit, rinse, repeat ;-(

  66. billybob says:

    Here is a very interesting read, it’s quite long but well worth it, scroll down to second article.
    http://www.themonsterguide.com/MAGAZINEFeaturesCrowdedSky2.html

  67. So you think that these persistent contrails are a secret program dating back to the 1940s? That’s quite a program.

  68. And your article on chaff. Again, you’ll note that chaff is visually invisible. So how would it be forming these long white trails that persist and spread?

  69. billybob says:

    It’s interesting how 3 of my respnses haven’t been posted on your board?? Oh well..I guess they just hit too close to home???

    #1 – You obviously didn’t read the whole article (no surprise) for if you had you would understand that it helps neither your opinion nor mine, it’s simply a nice read 😉

    #2 Indeed it is quite a program, and not the only one to date back even before then. Shall i support your uneducated mind with tons of links and documents that you will never read??? Why waste my time, other than to shut this disinformation site down???

    Spit, rinse, repeate..

    I doubt this will even get posted but oh well..oh and your ip address and domain..what are you trying to hide???

  70. poshrat says:

    There is an official online petition at Number 10 Downing Street right now for an explanation as to what these long lasting contrails/chemtrails are.

    http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Chemtrail-Sprays/

    Hope that helps.

  71. What if the explanation is simply that they are long lasting contrails? That’s certainly consistent with science.

  72. Marcus says:

    Uncinus, I’ve been reading to most of your debate and is very hard to get around your logic, I don’t claim to know if some of them are chemtrails but you seem to be 100% sure that NONE of these contrails could be a chemtrail, when the truth is you DON’T KNOW for sure, actually some of them could very well be chemtrails is not a ridiculous idea, you claim to be open-minded but you are exactly the opposite, like people that claim for SURE 100% there’s no life outside planet Earth, when the truth is YOU DON’T KNOW FOR SURE, accept it, even science has been proven to be wrong many times,we know science is controlled by the same people who control education, religion, the media your government and everything else so please have some common sense, I really don’t know how can u sit there and tell people this events are perfectly normal and they been going on, you are insulting people’s intelligence all over the world, off course is hard for us to come up with hard evidence cause no one is working on our behalf meanwhile you have all the government institutions and powers at be working to sell the idea that “EVERYTHING IS JUST FINE” just go back to work and don’t worry. To top it off we have to deal with people like you, you either have an agenda, are working for them or you are just an arrogant prick with a lot time on your hands that has the audacity to say YOU KNOW FOR SURE NONE OF THOSE CONTRAILS ARE CHEMTRAILS…the truth is YOU DON’T KNOW, you remind me of of some Christians that say their religion is the only “RIGHT ONE”
    Hilarious.

  73. but you seem to be 100% sure that NONE of these contrails could be a chemtrail, when the truth is you DON’T KNOW for sure, actually some of them could very well be chemtrails

    Very true, but the point is that the is NO EVIDENCE that they are not contrails. They look and act just like contrails, so what exactly is it that makes you think they are not?

  74. Marcus says:

    Do you know about the treaty signed at the U.N. on weather warfare? they acknowledge there that they can cause droughts and floods at will, to drive the people out of the rural areas and into the cities, they have already done it, and use the excuse of global warming to say is the people’s fault and there’s too many of us, don’t you know about several depopulation projects that have been plotted since before the 60’s and are now common knowledge, like global 2000, MKULTRA, project Naomi and the such? ELF and making the sky a superconductor, it all makes a lot more sense to me than your explanations for the unmistakable huge increase on “persistent and expanding Contrails” as you and NASA’s “Contrail Education” calls them. IT”S JUST TOO DAMN FISHY.
    Sometimes you gotta follow your GUT and not follow what your beloved scientists and scholars tell you like gospel, as far as I know they are compromised.
    anyways good luck with your endeavor, I sure hope you are right;)

  75. SR1419 says:

    Marcus….

    let me get this straight….

    …a global, clandestine spraying campaign involving…

    ” several depopulation projects that have been plotted since before the 60’s and are now common knowledge, like global 2000, MKULTRA, project Naomi and the such? ELF and making the sky a superconductor….makes a lot more sense to me than your explanations for the unmistakable huge increase on “persistent and expanding Contrails””

    all that makes more sense to you than simple science??

    …the microphysical properties of ice, water and soot…combined with the physics of ambient atmospheric conditions is less plausible than a global spraying campaign involving 1000s of planes, 1000s of people for – apparently- multiple purposes…??

    Can you explain that??

    Moreover, it is not Uncinus’ explanation…it is Science’s explanation…testable, repeatable, observable science that follow the laws of physics…this is what is known as a fact. That is the beauty of science you do not have to “follow what your beloved scientists and scholars tell you like gospel” – you can find out for yourself.

    Have you, in fact, researched contrail behavior enough to know that this explanation is not possible??

  76. neon says:

    lol some folks must be new to this planet..

    i love airplanes and the sky..i have looked up for 50 years…something has changed..
    the contrails are different now….they actually change the weather…

    i started noticing this in the late nineties….it’s*new*..

    the sky..used to be a beautiful deep blue…now it’s a silvery haze that isn’t exactly cloud-like..and isn’t like pollution… i have old photos…forget the contrails from the past…please notice the colour of the sky…

    these ‘chemtrails’ don’t happen every day either..sometimes there are breaks of up to a week… and then, like today….there was an airshow…

    we are being sprayed…..’terra-forming and geo-engineering ‘specialists’ have been calling for adding aerosols to the sky to reflect the light from the sun back into space for a while now….just google.

    when they DO announce chemtrails..and they will…it will be as a counter to global warming…..wait and see.

    So just go back to sleep..your gov and the elite loooooooove you!

    oh, get a flu shot for the *new* ‘summer flu season” lol geeez

  77. SR1419 says:

    Neon.

    …why the willful denial??

    You say “i have old photos…”

    …and yet there are old photos on this very page that contradict everything you assert.

    The old photos on this web page and website are just the tip of the iceberg. The historical record and evidence – both scientific and anecdotal- of contrails…and the sky…behaving EXACTLY as you decry is overwhelming and undeniable.

    How do you explain that?

  78. Luke says:

    This website makes me think. I never believed in the whole “chem trail” theory, until last year. The contrails ARE very different now. And, They ARE changing the weather. I see it every (rare) clear day. They come out around noon time, and by evening there is nothing but artificial clouds, and a white haze covering the whole sky. It looks very intentional, and very creepy if you ask me. It could explain the horrible weather that is happening here in New England.

    On the other hand, it could be due to global warming making the air more humid at certain altitudes. that could cause contrails to look different, and “bigger” because it’s happening at a lower altitude now.

    Either way, it’s ticking me off. I am missing clear days. I consider it “cloud pollution”.

  79. Suntour says:

    Luke, it sounds like you haven’t read one thing on this site. Look at the articles in the left hand column, read them and try to understand them. They explain everything you’re observing using science, logic, tests and photographic proof more than 50 years old.

    I agree that clear days are much better than overcast ones, but fortunately for us the overcast days apparently aren’t being created by chemicals in the air.

  80. JazzRoc says:

    Luke:

    On the other hand, it could be due to global warming making the air more humid at certain altitudes. that could cause contrails to look different, and “bigger” because it’s happening at a lower altitude now.

    Check out WIKI definitions of “troposphere” and “stratosphere”. They show that there a marked change in atmospheric behavior at the TROPOPAUSE.
    You can see with your eyes the evidence for this change: it is the altitude where cumulonimbus clouds flatten out to make their “anvil”. It varies from a maximum of 45,000 feet at the Equator to 18,000 feet at the Poles.
    Above the tropopause the atmosphere is laminar and stable, quite different from the turbulent unstable atmosphere we are familiar with, with its cumulus clouds.
    All the water in the stratosphere is in the form of either (completely invisible) water vapor – or in ice crystal clouds, known as cirrus.
    Present-day aviation puts three hundred million tons of water into the stratosphere each year. This can only escape downwards to the troposphere by gaseous diffusion – there is NO RAIN up there to bring the water down in great quantities.
    In 1994 a survey put the proportion of stratosphere which was SATURATED with respect to ice at 17% – meaning that at that time, aircraft flying in the stratosphere aircraft would produce PERSISTENT contrails for 17% of their flight time. Since then, passenger aviation has DOUBLED.
    This doesn’t mean that the trails have necessarily doubled, of course, but it does mean that from the point of view of local sky coverage with white diffusing trail ice – it’s worse than it was then.
    As for how long this has been happening: the first time would have been over Germany in 1943 with thousand-bomber raids.
    When did I first notice it? Trying to have a sunny picnic on the downs near Dunstable in 1972. But I knew what the phenomenon was… I knew it was damp already in the stratosphere – there were already cirrostratus and horsetail cirrus clouds up there as the contrails were forming and not dissipating.
    But then I didn’t know that horsetail cirrus was Cirrus Uncinus…

  81. Nice try . . . but, no cigar! Few people actually look at the sky anymore so they don’t know what’s what. So it’s like politics, when an observant individual notes something unusual and refers to the unaware, they are unaware that they are unaware. As A Registered Respiratory therapist, it’s my business to know what is harmful for my patients to breathe, this is why I keep a curious eye to the sky and pollen counts. Contrails from jet exhaust fade within a relatively short time, as the water particles cool to ambient temperature and pressure, reverting back to ambient conditions and evaporating. Chemical composites in chemtrails remain in gaseous suspension sometimes for hours. I’m not going to attempt to debunk the photos offered here however this site is relatively new, it hasn’t been here for long. I first started noticing Chemtrails over Central Texas in 1997 from observing a perfectly manufactured cross on a totally cloudless day.
    One day driving to Austin I noticed that A military plane that had been spray a fresh trail failed to terminate the spraying as they made approach and landed at Grey Army airbase in Killeen. What is more compelling evidence; other than my eye witness is that the employees of a major US defense contractor have obtained a patent on the spraying of particulates into the atmosphere, or in other words, chemtrails. This startling discovery is the lead story in our latest installment of ATS News with Johnny Anonymous. There are few conspiracy theory subjects as controversial as chemtrails, and this new discovery by a AboveTopSecret.com member adds some startlingly volatile fuel to the fire.

    http://media.abovetopsecret.com/media/4842/ATS_News_04_-_US_Defense_Contractor_Owns_Chemtrail_Patent/

    So I’ve seen enough evidence to know that there is a concerted effort in planning and implementing a program which sprays chemicals in our atmosphere.

  82. Shilltastic says:

    Hehe, nice try yourself. What you probably saw was a common fuel dump. Also “Contrails from jet exhaust fade within a relatively short time, as the water particles cool to ambient temperature and pressure, reverting back to ambient conditions and evaporating.” is completely wrong. Well, if it’s a short live trail, it’s right But, persistent contrails persist BECAUSE the temperature stays low and humidity high in that particular area of the sky. You haven’t “seen evidence” You’ve misunderstood fact. Also, show me that the “spraying of particulates into the atmosphere” apparatus results in trails that look ANYTHING like the trails we see over our houses. You assume SO MUCH!

  83. JazzRoc says:

    George:

    “Contrails from jet exhaust fade within a relatively short time, as the water particles cool to ambient temperature and pressure, reverting back to ambient conditions and evaporating”

    Well, NO. That’s only ONE of THREE things that may happen. And at the end of your sentence is a MISTAKE.

    They AREN’T “water particles”. They are STEAM MOLECULES at 1100 C. They will nucleate upon partially-unburnt kerosine (JP-8) fragments somewhere past ZERO on the way down their temperature drop to MINUS FORTY (Celsius or Fahrenheit), and end up as MICROSCOPIC ICE CRYSTALS.

    In VERY DRY AIR (and warmer than -40) these crystals will evaporate as soon, or soon after, they form. The AIR becomes MORE HUMID by the weight of the water added by the plane.

    In SATURATED AIR at -40 these crystals have NO PLACE TO EVAPORATE INTO, and so MUST REMAIN. They REMAIN relatively LIGHT IN WEIGHT and their fall rate is low. The AIR becomes POTENTIALLY MORE HUMID by the weight of the added trail. The air CANNOT SUPERSATURATE because the evaporated ice crystal would leave a SEED nucleation particle in saturated air.

    In SUPERSATURATED AIR (which by definition would have to be rigorously free of SEED particles, and occurs for at least 17% of the time) the trail ice crystals ACT IMMEDIATELY AS SEED PARTICLES, and rapidly put on weight as they TAKE OUT WATER VAPOR FROM THE AIR. The HEAVIER ICE CRYSTALS INCREASE THEIR FALL RATE and will fall out of the stratospheric layer from which they formed. They may have gained in weight by a factor of TEN THOUSAND. An hour later, in general, these enlarged ice crystals will be SUBLIMING back to water vapor in the UPPER TROPOSPHERE where the temperature is RISING as they are FALLING. Particulates used in the forming of the trail will be released here. The net result of this latter activity is that THE TRAIL BECOMES LESS SUPERSATURATED AFTERWARD. Continued flights through this sector of the stratospheric layer would bring it DOWN to SATURATED.

    It could NEVER be true that a passing plane (with its engines on) would leave the air in such stratospheric layers UNAFFECTED – “revert back to ambient conditions”. They MUST leave A HUNDRED POUNDS OF WATER PER MILE. There are already, additionally, MANY TONS of WATER just hanging there as water vapor along that same mile.

    The AIR TEMPERATURE up in those layers (where the pressure is just a fifth of what it is down here towards sea level) lowers the saturation pressure with respect to ice. This, on occasion, makes the STRATOSPHERE SPECTACULARLY INTOLERANT of added STEAM.

    You get MASSIVE FOUNTAINS of falling ice crystals. I REALLY MEAN MASSIVE. I’m talking EIGHTY THOUSAND TONS OF ICE released over a five-hour flight. Not regularly, just occasionally.

    Not regularly, just occasionally, lads and lasses.

    THAT was your “evidence” when you said you had “seen enough evidence to know that there is a concerted effort in planning and implementing a program which sprays chemicals in our atmosphere”.

    Uh-uh…

  84. JazzRoc says:

    Ah two things.

    I should have written “THE LAYER BECOMES LESS SUPERSATURATED AFTERWARD”. A typo… 🙂

    ALL of my account of the three possible outcomes of planes leaving contrails in stratospheric layers (and down to the tropopause) is in fact a simplification of the jargon-ridden details you can derive for yourself from the LINK “Contrails to Cirrus” which you will find on this site page on the left below ARTICLES.

  85. SR1419 says:

    George-

    Your knowledge of atmospheric physics is extremely lacking.

    Please research “contrail cirrus” and “supersaturated persistent contrail” to help clear up some of your misconceptions.

    Thanks!

    …oh! …and please do “debunk” the photos on this site. I am quite curious as to how you will explain away 60 years of photographic and scientific evidence that contrails can and do persist.

  86. ooppoddoo says:

    Thank you. I wasted two years of my life on this nonsense. The first stupid thing I did right off the bat was look up “chemtrail” online instead of studying jet contrails. Very interesting information about modern engines creating more of vapor, BTW.

    It’s not easy coming back from a conspiracy theory that you’ve invested so much time and energy into, but if I managed it I know it can be done. Thank you again.

    Janet

  87. Shilltastic says:

    Excellent job Janet. It’s good to hear about a success story every now and then. Please help the others who aren’t as fortunate. Thanks.

  88. ooppoddoo says:

    As I’m sure you’re aware, it ain’t easy. This is a subject that people see in very black and white terms. People think I’ve gone to “the other side!” Ha ha ha…oh well. Thanks again.

    Janet

  89. Albert A. says:

    Bruce, QuoTodt and all other concerned with CHEMTRAILS.
    Please understand this website was just created for the reason to debunk chemtrails and teach the public that these are normal. A Dis-Info project.

    If millions of people are questioning the same thing as you are, doesn’t that make you wonder?

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/apr/21/uk.medicalscience#history-byline
    The UK Ministry of Defense realeased a government report for the first time a comprehensive official history of Britain’s biological weapons trials between 1940 and 1979. Many of these tests involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told.
    While details of some secret trials have emerged in recent years, the 60-page report reveals new information about more than 100 covert experiments.

    Do you really think that our current government would tell you they are testing on you? Seriously. They would rather create dis info agents just like this website to educate the people on CHEMTRAILS they call contrails. LOL

  90. The basic problem with your theory is that “chemtrails” look and behave exactly like contrails. That’s really all I’m saying.

  91. SR1419 says:

    How is it “disinfo” to provide verifiable facts?

    How is it “disinfo” to point out that some of the claims made by Believers of “chemtrails” are in fact False?

    How do some tests the British gov did in the 50s and 60s prove that every persistent contrail today is really a “chemtrail” ?

    Torture the data until it confesses I guess.

  92. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    If millions of people are questioning the same thing as you are, doesn’t that make you wonder?

    Yes it does.

    It makes me wonder what happened to seeing something that you thought odd, asking loads of people about it, everyone saying they’ve seen it and then concluding that you were probably wrong to think it was odd. I’m pretty sure that’s how it used to normally work.

  93. Ross says:

    For what it’s worth, wouldn’t a conspiracy on this scale require vast expenditures, resources and an army of manpower sworn to absolute secrecy for what…more consumerism, better mind control, a docile labor force? Don’t we have better things to worry about? Here in Northern Israel when conditions are right there are dozens of contrail circles overhead but those are IDF F-15s and I’m living 9 miles from the Lebanese border where the Hizbullah are rearming with zillions of rockets right under the UN’s nose in flagrant violation of their security council resolution. Which conspiracy would you worry about?

  94. TimeForBed says:

    Yes, interesting, so

    “chemtrails” look and behave exactly like contrails.

    Hmmmm… Yes, thanks, I see now how that has been cleverly achieved to hide the current bout of secret testing in plain sight, as they say. Very clever these secret government types, I guess there may be some page on wikipedia that explains it all in a bit more detail in about 50 to 75 years or so. Maybe an article tucked innocuously into the middle pages of the Guardian. Can’t wait to read it. Until then, don’t talk about the weather!
    – oh yes, I wonder if secret government undercover agents look and behave exactly like ordinary citizens…

  95. Phil says:

    Like others on here I made the mistake of looking up chemtrails without researching contrails fully. I even started putting together a short film about the evil of chemtrails.

    Eventually I understood the science of what I was seeing. You too can have the same realisation that there is no big chemtrail conspiracy.

    Look for the following..

    You will often see what you are convinced is a chemtrail splitting into several sections, minutes after being produced, with gaps appearing in it as sections fade. You will be left with a “____________ _______ _______ “pattern in the sky. The solid sections may well become pendulous or persisting and/or spreading.

    Watch a second plane as it leaves a “chemtrail” across the same sky, note that sections that cross areas that faded for the 1st trail also fade minutes later, and the lengths that cross persistent trails persist/spread.

    What you are seeing is the effects of differing atmospheric conditions in various areas of the sky. The only alternative is that the mix of the chemtrail is being adjusted to match the pattern of the other trails, (ie fading and persistent sections) with no visible indication during production of the trail that the mix is being changed, which I think you will agree would be ridiculously complex and pointless.

    Therefore what you are seeing are contrails, being affected by atmospheric/weather conditions. If they were chemtrails why would they do the sectional fading thing, and why would other chemtrails sectionaly fail in the same locations. They wouldn’t. It’s the weather.

    Phil

  96. Faithinscience says:

    Phil, great post. It’s good to read a success story.
    Thanks

  97. JazzRoc says:

    Hiya, Faith. Yes, indeed it is a good thing. A rare thing. I would like to know how the “hard cases” rationalize that away. (They probably just give it a studious “miss”. 🙂

  98. JazzRoc says:

    TimeForBed:

    I see now how that has been cleverly achieved to hide the current bout of secret testing in plain sight, as they say. Very clever these secret government types, I guess there may be some page on wikipedia that explains it all in a bit more detail in about 50 to 75 years or so. Maybe an article tucked innocuously into the middle pages of the Guardian.
    Maybe hundreds of scientific research papers that have quantified it, explained it, and made predictions about it over half a century.

    Can’t wait to read it.
    That’s strange, for you have read and understood none of it so far. What’s new?

    Until then, don’t talk about the weather!
    No, please talk about it. How much do you know about it?

    – oh yes, I wonder if secret government undercover agents look and behave exactly like ordinary citizens…
    That’s exactly what I wonder about paranoid chemtrailers…

  99. Another respiratory victim says:

    The problem with blogs is that the public is unknowingly/unwillingly paying for public servants to sit around and “Troll” – essentially making blog comments to make false contradictions and put out disinformation as if they were regular citizens making personal comments.

    Wiki has an article about constant distortions and changes coming from various government office IP addresses. Hal Turner was charged with threatening to kill judges and lawmakers but turned out to be secretly paid and trained by the FBI as an “agent provocateur” and make the conservative majority look equally evil.

    If the FTC enforced mandatory disclosure for EVERYONE who was being paid to put out false information, things would be different. But for now, people just have to accept that most of what they read on line has been tampered with.

    Fortunately, while God provided warnings “MY PEOPLE ARE DESTROYED FOR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE” he also gave most people two eyes and a conscious mind to know what is happening to them.

    The white planes spreading the crap, fly lower and much faster than regular jets and fly in tandem with others. Occasionally a black line can be seen with two jets flying in opposing directions on either side of it to quickly cover it up with their manmade smoke screen. Some days are trail free with actually sunny blue skies and people start breathing better but then they go right back at it the next day. There have been too many people severely sickened by this for the truth to come out voluntarily. Check out the mortality rate increase over the last few years from respiratory distress.

  100. faithinscience says:

    “There have been too many people severely sickened by this for the truth to come out voluntarily.”

    PLEASE name a SINGLE person who has been “sickened” by “chemtrails”.

    A higher rate of respiratory distress, yeah…from “chemtrails”?!? No evidence of any such thing.

Comments are closed.