Another bit of “Chemtrail” mythology was born with this YouTube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiUMfsR28SM

german_duppel_mistranslation.jpg

This video has been seized upon by the Chemtrail community as evidence that “chemtrails” are real, and that the German government has admitted they are spraying “chemtrails”.

Unfortunately the entire video is a very bad translation of a story about one Meterologist, Karsten Brand, who is was concerned that the military was using too much chaff (material used to disrupt radar). The military admitted that they do use chaff, but not too much, and it’s not harmful. Brandt contended they use so much it can affect the weather, and might be harmful to people. He’s also annoyed because it interferes with his weather radar.

There are numerous deliberate mistranslations, as pointed out in other places:

The German sentence which appears on screen is :

“Die Aufzeichnungen belegen, dass dabei sehr geringe Mengen von Düppeln ausgebracht werden”

The english sentence thats blended out at the same time reads :

“The registers report emissions of chemtrails at low altitudes”

(Note that you never see the full version of both sentences at the same time. One is wiped out as the other is filled in)

The actual translation should be more like :

“The reports show that very small quantities of chaff were used”.

 

The Meterologist behind all this, Karsen Brandt (show above, supposedly blaming it on “chemtrails”), actually goes out of his way to distinguish these odd cloud images from “chemtrails”, in this article, translated,

http://www.worldweather.net/news/specials.mv?action=show&id=5947

Following the publication of pictures of non-existent clouds on the radar we have been asked many questions. Here are the answers to the most frequently asked questions:

Are they “Chem Trails?
On various Internet sites there passionate arguments about aircraft spraying chemicals to either change the ozone hole or, acting for the United States (who else also ..), to change the weather – for world domination.  This is – according to the supporters of this conspiracy theory – not just an occasional trial, but regular, worldwide and especially in Germany. The sprayed chemicals leave greyish-white trails in the sky that are not like normal contrail, “Chem Trails” look quite different and also behave differently.

The beauty of this conspiracy theory is this: Everyone can see the trails, everyone may feel threatened, but no (normal) citizens can touch or examine them. The web pages show photos of various trails, and the “strange” pattern they leave behind in the sky.
For the layman, it is, at first glance, odd that one day contrails stay in the sky for hours, but the next day they dissolve within minutes .  However,  this “phenomenon” varies with the humidity and the change is very easy and simple to explain.
Of course, we also can not be absolutely excluded the possibility that a plane sprayed chemicals in the atmosphere.  But as regularly and as extensively as has been claimed by the conspiracy theorists, you can just use common sense to exclude.  For such a comprehensive worldwide conspiracy, there would have to be not only thousands of US pilots involved, but also scientists, German authorities, etc., etc. . How probably is it that with such a number of people, there is no leak?

The big problem with the video is the translation. In the shot above, the german word “duppel” is translated as “chemical trails (chemtrails)”, when the actual translation is “chaff”. The German word for “chemtrail” is “chemtrail“.

Another rather obvious distinction is that Brandt is talking about invisible clouds, whereas “chemtrails” are very visible (since they are aircraft contrails).

So what’s the real story here? Well, here’s the background of the story in German:

http://www.donnerwetter.de/news/specials.mv?action=show&id=6718

It’s a letter written to the local government in April 2006, describing false images of clouds that show up on weather radar, and asking if there have been Military tests that explain these tests. Here’s a rough (Google) translation:

Small request with response
Question wording of the Small

Small request with response

Question wording of the Small
Mr Ralf Briese (Greens), received on 04.04.2006
Mysteriöse weather phenomena on North German country – threat hazards for humans and the environment through military might experiments?

Several reputable media reported recently on mysterious phenomena in the sky over north German countryside. Thus, already in the last year in July at various radar screens of different weather stations to an apparent cloud over a distance of up to 400 km have been registered, although it neither rained nor the sky was cloudy. The radar is not explainable phenomenon has been repeated at the end of March 2006. The German meteorologists are faced with a mystery. Thus, for example, says Karsten Brandt, meteorologist and director at the weather service “gosh” in Bonn: “This is not right with things.” Together with weather experts from Germany and the Netherlands is Brandt agreed that it is “the appearance” no natural Statement as bird flight or kerosene from airplanes. Similarly, a Fehlmessung of radar equipment be excluded, since different recordings independently, the same pictures in the Netherlands, Emden and Hanover have made. “Golly” against unknown because large environmental pollution and misleading the public.

Meteorologists from the whole federal territory suspect behind the appearances military experiments. This is Joerg Asmus, a meteorologist at the German Weather Service in Offenbach, assuming that the military either to induce changes in weather or simulating terrorist attacks (see DER SPIEGEL 13/2006 – 27 March). Even physicists from the German Center for Air and Space in Oberpfaffenhofen, and geoscientists Bundeswehr come to the conclusion that particles in the atmosphere have been issued to the precipitation radar to disturb. In the expert authority of the Federal Environment Agency take the phenomenon seriously. Apart from the legal issues, which authority allowed these experiments and by what standards relevant here has been traded or whether a legal approval, are environmental and health issues.

I therefore ask the provincial government:

1st What she has knowledge about the phenomena reported on North German country?

2nd How are they evaluated and explained?

3rd Does the provincial government, the assessment of meteorologists, geologists and physicists, that the unerklärbaren weather phenomena or radar records to military experiments must act, otherwise no serious explanation to be found?

4th Has the state government knowledge of such military trials on the north German country with the goal of terrorism or the weather influence?

5th Is to be feared that these tests or other health hazards to humans and nature out?

6th Which country or authority would be notified of such military trials?

7th After the relevant standards such experiments are allowed?

(To the State Chancellery sent on 10.04.2006 – II/721 – 506)

Here is the response (the “admission”):

Reply from the state government
Lower Saxony Ministry Hannover, 24.05.2006
For Home Affairs and Sports
– 53.01-30309-02 –

The Small answer, I request on behalf of the State Government, as follows:
According to the available information, neither the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Sports nor in the other participating departments (MS, C, MU) to answer the knowledge of the issues facing state government. For this reason, to clarify the issue a request for information on the questions to the Ministry of Defence (BMVg). The parliamentary and Cabinet Department of the BMVg stated in a letter dated 28.04.2006 the questions answered as follows:

At 1:

The Ministry of Defence (BMVg) has no knowledge of the reported phenomena. The BMVg are from the first phenomenon in question in July 2005 due to the specified retention periods, and the sensors used no records available. Back to the question time in the affected area were no national air force exercises, tactical checks or similar aviation activities. According to a study of radar records of the Air Force, we found that at the end of March 2006, in the night of 22 On 23.03.2006 about 1 hour before the occurrence of the phenomenon in Dutch airspace an aerial combat exercise took place. The records show that very small amounts of chaff were issued, but which demonstrably after about 1 hour and 10 minutes had disbanded.

2:

The possibility of causing such a phenomenon in the magnitude described by active electromagnetic radiation can, because of the physical connections, in principle be excluded. Only the spreading very specific Chaff in significant quantity (in the range of several tons) could generate such a phenomenon. The self-protection equipment of aircraft of the German Armed Forces and allied forces in the context of air combat exercises but only a fraction of that amount expelled. The Air Force has no electronic interference or Täuschverfahren, a phenomenon of this dimension at the same time closely limited impact on a specific sensor could cause. Based on the present information systems come flying the Bundeswehr as a possible cause of clouds phenomena in question.

At 3:

The Bundeswehr is not conducting experiments, such a phenomenon could cause.

At 4:

The Bundeswehr is not conducting military trials with the goal of terrorism or the influence of weather.

At 5 to 7:

See answer to 3 and 4

 

Here’s a story on the subject in Spiegel Online:

http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/mensch/0,1518,445727,00.html

 

 

 

Summary:

  • A meteorologist sees cloud images on radar that he thinks are not actual clouds, he estimates they are 350 km long.
  • He asks the government (via his local Green Party member) if they made these clouds with chaff.
  • The government denies this, but says maybe the Dutch, but probably not for clouds that big.

It’s a bit of a stretch from this to “German government admits to clandestine chemtrail activity”.
(Note: if any German speakers would like to supply additional information here, I’d be very grateful – particularly with any follow-up story that might have been done).

  30 Responses to “Germans Admit They Used Düppel!”

  • Hi Uncius, I speak German and I noted numerous misleading subtitles is this video.

    1) at 0:22, Fighter pilots influence the weathercharts – not manipulating the climate
    2) chemical trails are not mentioned by Brandt, and also not in the quote.
    3) at 2:00, There is no mention of suspicious aircraft, but of a military exercise.
    The correct translation of the last line is: “The German army warns the meteo station for misleading weathercharts due to the exercises.”
    4) The translation at 2:10 is a complete mismatch. The person is talking how the clouds will move over Germany with the south-west wind.

  • Thanks Virga, that’s very useful.

  • If you like, I could make a correct translation of the entire video.

  • Thanks, I don’t think it’s really necessary though. Now it’s been shown to be a deliberate mistranslation to promote the chemtrail theory.

  • Uncinus and Virga,
    I see evidence of you deflecting a lot, sort of a hurry along, nothing to see here folks attitude with regards to chaff.
    As you are aware, there is a great deal of truth to chaff being used by the military. There is a patent for dispensing these
    aerosols that has been used, these things are public record. Your website does a great job illustrating true contrail characteristics, but you fall down when trying to determine how much use there is of these metals. Please do not gloss over how these metals
    are dispensed from aircraft, we know these aerosols (aluminum for example) are nasty to life forms. I propose stage II is determining not if metals are being dispensed from aircraft (they are as you know). Metals such as barium, zinc, aluminum are not harmless as the German Military contends, there is one inaccuracy from the German military, so what else are they hiding / misrepresenting? Would you agree that aluminum has nasty effects on living organisms? It is public record that chaff and other aerosols are being used / have very recently been used. The next step is determining how widespread the operations are. You do have it right that you can’t tell
    by looking visually at contrails. Hooray for that. Metals dispensed from planes is very real, lets instead determine how robust these programs are and seek transparency for programs that are bad for life forms.

    To say ‘oh that chaff is no big deal’ is probably as incorrect as saying you can tell by looking (or shooting movies for youtube) the difference between chem and contrails.

    -Bryansail

  • Uncinus wrote;

    Thanks, I don’t think it’s really necessary though. Now it’s been shown to be a deliberate mistranslation to promote the chemtrail theory.

    Uncinus,
    Chaff is aluminum, aluminum behaves in nasty ways (at high levels) inside humans, right? Aluminum could roughly be called a chemical and is currently in use by militaries, so how does that inaccurately promote chemtrails? Makes me wonder if you are able to think critically with regards to what concerns citizens have. It is one thing to point out how we don’t know by looking how robust
    these programs are, and it is an entirely different set of problems knowing that aluminum is coming out of airplanes.

    Just a question for you Uncinus, Do you see how Haarp and metals might go together? Just wondering if you see potential for them
    to work in unison, or is that just ‘wacky’ ?

    Very Truly,

    Bryansail
    -p.s. Chaff use is not a question, it is public record with detailed analysis of it’s use and (heh heh) benign effects on the environment, I for one do not agree with its use, nor do I agree that it is harmless to ecosystems, humans, plants and animals, I also have serious concerns with how much of this is being used. It is not ‘crazy’ nor ‘wacky’ to question whether aluminum should be dispensed from airplanes or to want transparency with regards to its use.

  • Would you agree that aluminum has nasty effects on living organisms?

    As opposed to what? In what quantity? All things are toxic to a relative degree, even water.

    It’s curious that you feel Aluminum is so toxic when it is frequently used in the cooking and storing of foods (aluminum foil) and in the storage and distribution of soft drinks (aluminum cans). It’s also the most abundant metallic element on the planet, and is found pretty much everywhere.

    Since the average person would ingest vastly more aluminum from the usage of Reynolds wrap than from the occasional military deployment of chaff, the perhaps you should focus on Reynolds wrap?

    And, trying to keep on-topic, are you saying that what people call “chemtrails” are actually chaff? Or are you not talking about chemtrails? Or is this about your own personal definition of “chemtrails”, or simply a separate subject?

    I ask because this blog is about contrails, and how they are sometimes mis-identified as “chemtrails”. Could you perhaps say exactly what you are talking about – what you are claiming?

  • The story behind the “Germans Admit They Used Düppel!” story is this:

    Radar echoes were noticed in the meteorological radar images over Netherlands and western Germany that did not correspond with observed precipitation or cloud in satellite images at the time. Based on the radar images at face value, rain was forecast for northwest Germany. No rain, or corresponding cloud was observed.

    The very reasonable objection to the “phantom cloud” is that forecasters were misled into forecasting rain when none was actually going to occur. Further, automated forecasting systems might also have forecast rain. A damage results to the public from wrong decisions due to wrong weather forecasts. In the forecast room, radar data then becomes less trusted. However, this phenomenon is not unknown and weather forecasters should be alert to these occurrences from time to time.

    The video is nothing more than the media beating up the issue into something it is not. Chaff in the “chemtrail” issue is a Red Herring.

  • Hi Uncinus,

    With regard to aluminum, it is not meant to be inhaled, when it is, it can cross the blood barrier and stay in the
    brain. Those with Alzheimers are found to have high levels of aluminum (higher than the general populace) in their brains during autopsies, for this reason I would suggest limiting cooking with aluminum also. It is not clear that aluminum causes alzheimers
    but there appears to be a connection. So it is not curious Uncinus to not want to inhale aluminum wouldn’t you agree? Comparing
    drinking out of an aluminum can to breathing in nano particles of aluminum is definitely curious however. With regards to chaff, the
    strips of aluminum and fiberglass particles are relatively large but will eventually break down into very, very small particles.

    You asked in what quantity? The answer is obviously in high quantities which is why I wrote, “high quantities”. We both know water can be toxic in high quantities and that the science of monitoring levels of metals in our air and water is difficult and prone to mis-representation but there is reason to be concerned with ‘chaff’ because it is an unnatural introduction of aluminum into the
    environment.

    Chaff as a red herring? Actually you may be correct Ross as chaff is the common explanation for false precipitation readings by radar. Radar may actually be picking up artificial ducting over land by militaries utilizing barium salts, aluminum or other metals
    dispensed from airplanes.
    The video is especially interesting for it shows an immense area effected by this harmless chaff. I am skeptical of the chaff explanation though. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qc0TWVtozio

    Can’t find the link on communications via airplane dispersal during Desert Storm (although I found a couple of links indirectly discussing its use) but I haven’t given up. There are numerous reports of its use on chemtrail websites, but I am going to
    find a link that is more reputable.

    -Bryansail

  • Bryansail, I’m not sure what your point is here. Do you actually have any evidence that you ARE inhaling large quantities of aluminum?

    Surely it would show up in drinking water tests? All tests I’ve seen show normal levels of barium and aluminum.

  • Briansail,

    Why use a dubious technology like “artificial ducting over land by militaries utilizing barium salts, aluminum or other metals” (which is an invention of the chemtrail theory proponents anyway) when ordinary radio communications, possibly digital and encrypted, are perfectly adequate?

    Why are you skeptical of the chaff explanation?
    See http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/mensch/0,1518,445727,00.html about the Admit They Used Düppel case (but you will need to translate from the German).

  • BryanSail.

    Chaff are not “nano” particles…Chaff is typically in the size range of .5 inch to 2 inches in length.

    Moreover, the delivery method is nothing like the supposed spraying method of chemtrails…and the visible result of chaff are also nothing like the persistent contrails that get confused for “chemtrails”….

    To ingest enough chaff to cause harm, one would literally have to ingest right from the source- which, being shot mechanically out of a plane, is not likely.

    So, I guess the question is…what is your point?

    Are you saying that “chemtrails” are really chaff?? Or that “chemtrails” do not really exist but we should all be concerned about indiscriminate use of chaff?

    Do you have any information regarding how much chaff is being deployed? It certainly isn’t daily, globally and causing a haze in the skies.

  • I left a long reply with tons of evidence supporting how chaff is a great deal more involved than the descriptions that I have seen
    talked about here and again dispersal methods from jet exhaust has already been allegedly utilized …

    If my long post doesn’t show up here than this will make no sense.
    Regards,
    Bryansail

  • Your post is there, under “Chemtrail Myths”. Large posts with lots of links sometimes get marked as spam. If it happens again, just email me.

    http://contrailscience.com/chemtrail-myths/#comment-3032

  • Bryansail33, we had chaff in our classroom. When you have it in your hand you will realize it is just as possible to inhale as it is to inhale long hair.

  • Hello,

    -sorry for my English… in advance, but i hope we can understand each other-

    i viewed this video and i realized 2 things

    1) Karsten Brand uses not the word “chemtrails”, but he is speaking about the “plastic stuff” that is be used together with metallic “Dampf” (in german)

    this substances are involved by the chemtrail-theory also

    2) He also says that there must be needed tones of this substance to make this enormous cloud-apparition on the radar screens

    3)He also made an instance against unknown… because of this

    Generally I would say: there are so many theories about what chemtrails can be or not, and the only one who wins through this are the governments, who don’t make clear what really is going on.. (i suppose they still will not say anything about, because of military exercises and “tests” that are involved)

    Mrs. Rosalie Bertel (NOBEL) says : “One must acknowledge that part of society, mainly the military sector, is highly secretive. It does not require a conspiratorialist approach to make one wonder what they are experimenting with in today’s world.” ……
    “We cannot blame everything we find of civilian activities and turn our heads away from the many toxic and destructive acitivities of the military. I commend those who are investigating this very real and admitted military atmospheric anomaly and trying to understand its deleterious effects.” R. Bertell.

    The whole text is available in http://www.enouranois.gr/english/epistolesenglish/indexrisogelos.htm

  • I am Airforce pilot! Sorry to say, this is a military operation that will kill more people then all the wars put together!! chemtrails are real God help us!!!!

  • Dave – can you elaborate a bit more on those two lines please? Those are very worrying words IF they are true and a statement like that with nothing to back it up WILL NOT CONVINCE ANYONE. Have you been involved in spraying?

  • I believe he was being sarcastic.

  • Hilarious!

  • I received a very interesting message from CowboyBebop2012. This is who is credited with translating the video from german to english. According to him, Tankerenemy sent him a transcript that was in italian. He translated it from italian to english. He never saw a transcript in german and had not seen the video. He states the transcript he received to translate had the phrase “scie chimiche” which is italian for chemical trails.

    As things are now people are beginning to drop the chemical trails part of this and focusing on the lawsuit that is mentioned at the end. I am now questioning if a lawsuit was really filed and if so, what for? I can find nothing other than chemtrail sites that just quote the video about the lawsuit and nothing else.

    I think it would be nice to have a true and accurate translation of this video into english.

  • I’ve translated it previously, by using Babelfish and turning that into proper English. You could do the same.
    Brandt states that “chemtrails” have nothing to do with it.
    He’s simply annoyed that his weather radar display was disrupted by the chaff, and complains to the German authorities.
    Their reply was that it was a pair of Dutch fighters that scattered the chaff in the first place – not German – so why complain to them?
    I’d provide this text, but it is on the hard drive of a now-expired computer which I haven’t yet got round to downloading. Tsk.

  • Highthawk,

    Have a look at this:
    http://www.mysteriousnewzealand.co.nz/forums/viewtopic.php?t=967
    It is a discussion of that video from not too long ago.
    The story is more about confused weather forecasters than any thing else.
    The precise translation of the media-hype is not really important here.

    As always, the issue of chaff is a red herring in the discussion about contrails; a distraction.

  • Just stumbled upon this video and this forum so forgive me if I am stating things already discussed. I listened to the German without reading the English subtitles. It was mostly about the fact that the meteorologists not having seen the origin of the clouds. However, the representative of the Green Party made it clear that it was clandestine pollution. Karsten Brandt is filing charges. The military says it’s harmless!!!! Hang on – we are told that using unproven complementary therapies could be harmful – like someone laying their hands on you maybe – yet on someone’s (whose?) say-so they can spray us with anything they like and tell us it’s safe. We have a right not to be sprayed without our consent. End of story.

  • Moi: “We have a right not to be sprayed without our consent.” – And you weren’t.

    End of story.” – Tall story.

    The end? It’s unlikely. The dark waters of ignorance are ever-rising in this dumbed-down world.

  • “I am Airforce pilot! Sorry to say, this is a military operation that will kill more people then all the wars put together!! chemtrails are real God help us!!!!”

    I would think an Air Force pilot would be intelligent enough to know that there is a space between “Air” and “Force” and to use “than” and not “then.” Then is time oriented. So in conclusion, he probably is a pilot for the Braindead Airforce.

  • If he were really an Air Force pilot who knew something about this, yet does not provide testimony of everything he knows about a criminal act, he is in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice:
    http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm

    However, just ask yourself who benefits when such an officer comes here and makes a claim, yet doesn’t substantiate it with anything?

    Yes, doing so benefits no one, and so why would a real pilot do such a thing?

    He wouldn’t.

    This one is just another hoaxer like we’ve seen before posing as a mechanic, an airline manager, an air traffic controller, a scientist, etc. They all make a scant comment of no use and remain anonymous. Remaining anonymous is the WORST thing a real whistleblower would do. A REAL whistleblower would remain anonymous only long enough to release some incontrovertible unimpeachable information of some real value wich would serve to protect him from harm.

    He would not not run around making risky nonsense comments on a message board.

    Think about it…….

  • “Note: if any German speakers would like to supply additional information here, I’d be very grateful – particularly with any follow-up story that might have been done”

    From gouvernmental side, this story had no more consequences. Chaff is often used by training-maneuvers in the North-Sea beyond the official borders of the countries… Normaly TV-Meteorlogist are able to recognize these wrong radar patterns as Chaff and call it so in their forecasts. There are plenty Videos about chaff in Weather-forecasts in the german Chemtrail-Scene. In these, the meteorologist says something like “These are no real clouds, this is Chaff used by military”

    But the meteorologist of this video – Karsten Brandt – had a lawsuit with another very popular Meteorologist Jörg Kachelmann, who was angry about the behavior to make politics reasonable just for a wrong weather-forecast and that Brandt was thinking about a lawsuite against german gouvernment. Kachelmann used some strong language to Brandt about this. Kachelmann lost this lawsuit.

  • Chemtrails do exist, energy is the top goal and you are the willing blind target. The target that is used bij scientists to develope new medication for deseases in direct connection with this experiments.
    You see the aircrafts spraying, you know that the clouds are not normal. You see the huge change in the sky, you are not blind. You also are aware of with how many they are, every day people notice something is wrong with that enormes trails this aircrafts make. If this does not convince you nothing els wil; read this, and all of it :

    http://books.google.nl/books?id=jmEqBPvLs8sC&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=Life+Cycle+Assessment+according+to+ISO+14040+series+DUPONT&source=bl&ots=LifvaRXe8b&sig=DjQZEqonsG5mGjwl0HWspQQ70yY&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=QqpqUfnvMsfT0QXvuoHIDA&sqi=2&ved=0CHEQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Life%20Cycle%20Assessment%20according%20to%20ISO%2014040%20series%20DUPONT&f=false

  • Still no evidence for chemtrails? Too bad.

We are no longer taking comments on Contrail Science
If you would like to comment, or ask questions about Contrails or The Chemtrail Theory,
then please head over to the contrail forum at our sister site:

METABUNK.ORG

   
© 2014 Contrail Science Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha