Home » contrails » Debunked: What In The World Are They Spraying?

Debunked: What In The World Are They Spraying?

Update: If you are looking for a debunking of Why In The World Are They Spraying, first check out this post, as the second film really depends on the first being true, then have a look at the various errors in Why In The World Are They Spraying, detailed here:

http://metabunk.org/threads/712-Factual-Errors-in-quot-Why-In-The-World-Are-They-Spraying-quot

——————————————————————————

The documentary film “What in the World are They Spraying“, by Michael J. Murphy, attempts to promote the Chemtrail Conspiracy Theory (which states that long lasting contrails are actually the result of secret government spray operations), and proposes a possible explanation: that the trails are part of a geoengineering project involving injecting large amounts of aluminum into the atmosphere to block the suns rays.

Multiple parallel trails over Mt Shasta, California. Taken in 1989, ten years before the chemtrail operations were supposed to have begun.

The basic premise of the film is:

  • Normal Contrails fade away quickly
  • Scientists have talked about geoengineering using aluminum sprayed from planes
  • Since 1999, trails have been observed to persist for a long time
  • Tests in various locations at ground level have found different levels of aluminum
  • Monsanto has genetically engineered aluminum resistant crops
  • The government denies any spraying or geoengineering is going on
  • THEREFORE:  The trails are aluminum being sprayed as part of a secret government geoengineering project.

Normal contrails can persist and spread

That reasoning is somewhat suspect even if you accept all the points. But where it really falls down is that it’s based on a false assumption – that “normal” contrails quickly fade away.   In reality, normal contrails can persist for hours and spread out to cover the sky.  Whether they do this or not is entirely dependent on the atmospheric conditions that the plane is flying through, so it depends on the weather, and on the altitude of the plane. This is something that has been observed since 1921. Just look at any book on the weather, like this one from 1981:

They tested sludge, not water

So the film is based on a  false premise and builds upon it to an inevitable false conclusion.  But what about the aluminum tests? You can find the tests referenced in the film here:

http://contrailscience.com/files/chemtrails_basic_lab_report.pdf

And this is the one shown in the film, which they claim should be pure water:

Pond with low aluminum in the sediment. The film mistakenly claims the level are high by comparing them to water levels.  Note the rocks (8% aluminum) that line the edges, and the bottom.

The bottom line here is that they are testing sludge rather than water. Sludge is water mixed with dirt. Dirt is naturally 7% aluminum. That’s all they are finding.

The first aluminum result is from the pond, discussed at the start of part 3, and it’s 375,000 ug/l.  What they don’t mention is that it’s from pond sediment, sludge.  So essentially it’s not testing water, but is instead testing the amount of aluminum in soil. So that’s  375 mg/kg for sediment that has settled in a pond over several years. That’s actually quite low. Aluminum concentration in soil ranges from 0.07% to 10%, but is typically 7.1%, or 71,000 mg/kg.  The amount of aluminum found in the sludge is quite easily explained by windblown dust. It’s low, probably because it’s a new pond, so a lot of the sediment is vegetable matter.

Then there are the rain readings.  33, 262, 650, 188, 525, 881, 84, 815, 3450, 2190 ug/L. Wildly different values, some high sounding, some low.  But no details are provided that correlate these different numbers of contrail activity.  If this variation were due to aerial spraying, then surely a match would be found.  These numbers simply tell us that different tests produced different results.  It does not tell us why.   No details of the sampling procedure are given, or the weather conditions preceding the test.   Nor are we told what are the expected levels of aluminum to be found under these conditions.

Rain gauge used for the aluminum test. Note the mounting bracket appears to be made from aluminum.

Rain water contains particulates from airborne dust.  The amount of particulates will vary greatly based on the weather.  A sample from a brief intense storm after a dry period would give you more particulates than a sample taken in the middle of several days of rain. The amount of particulates in the sample would also vary with how long the container is left out in the open.  Dust will settle on the container if it’s left out for a while, increasing the amount of aluminum found.  All these tests are really telling us is how much dust the sample was contaminated with.

How much aluminum is there in the dust? Let’s say it’s about the same as the amount of aluminum in soil (although it’s probably higher). How much dust is there in rain? According to Edward Elway Free of the the United State Bureau of Soils, in his book “The Movement of Soil Material by the Wind“, in tests performed by Tissandier, rain water contained 25,000 to 172,000 ug/L of particulates.  But he notes “As the amounts of rain and snow which fell in the various cases are not given, the figures are of little value.  The first drops of a rain storm will of course contain the largest percentage of dust, and as the storm continues the air is gradually wasted clean.”.  Still if only 1% of the lowest figures there were aluminum, then that’s still 250 ug/L.  And at a quite plausible 10% of the upper range, that’s 17,200 ug/L.  A range that easily covers the observed test results.

See also the Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, VOl 4, 1967, which shows Aluminum found in rain in the range 520 ug/L to 1,120 ug/L, over 13 different tests. This shows that the results in 1967 (when presumably there were no chemtrails) are pretty much the same as the results the WITWATS is getting. Nothing unusual.

Tens of thousands of time the “maximum limit” for water. Sure. But you were not testing water, you were testing dirt

The soil tests are where a typical mistake is made – conflating the percentage of the metal in one substance (soil) with the typical percentages in others.  As noted, soil aluminum naturally ranges from 0.07% to 10%, and is typically around 7.1%, which is 71,000 mg/kg.  The tests from Oregon (see sheet 16 in the pdf) list quite ordinary results for soil of 18,600 to 38,000.  But then they note the results are “Tens of thousands of times the maximun limit for water“, which is true, but they are not testing water, they are testing soil, and it less than half the normal value for soil.

They continue this on the next page, with a low soil aluminum value of 10,500 mg/kg (just 1% aluminum), and yet note: “Near playground Sisson Elementary 300‘ away”.  As if this is somehow dangerous to children.   It’s just normal soil, as found in any playground, anywhere, ever.

Aluminum is everywhere, in various quantities

  • Aluminum is the most abundant metallic element in the earth’s crust, about 8% of the ground is aluminum. In some places, like the Hawaiian islands, it’s 30-60%!
  • Aluminum is everywhere, in the food we eat, and the air we breath (as dust)
  • Aluminum is in daily contact with us, in soda cans, cookware, aluminum cooking foil, construction, transportation, baseball bats, etc.
  • The amount of aluminum in any location varies naturally. In some places there is a lot, in others there is very little.
  • Contamination of samples with aluminum is very common due to it’s abundance and common usage.  Unless careful control samples are taken, then the results are often wildly inaccurate.
  • One of the tests in the film was water collected by a schoolgirl in a mason jar.  Mason jars occasionally have aluminum lids
  • Another was taken from a ski area snow pack in early summer.  Skis, ski grooming equipment, and ski towers use aluminum. (Update: it is not an active ski area, so more likely it’s just dirt contamination, as the sample was taken in July)
  • Aluminum is a common ingredient in antiperspirants and antacids such as Mylanta.

Aluminum resistent crops have been a goal for 100 years

And knowing that aluminum is very common will also answer why Monsanto would want to develop  aluminum resistent crops.  It will increase yields in areas with acidic soil.   Given the ubiquitous presence of aluminum in the ground, and the fact that aluminum ion levels (Al3+) due to soil acidity have been a known problem for a hundred years , it’s hardly surprising that someone would try to make crops have a higher resistance to it.  Here’s the Botanical Gazette of the University of Chicago, Volume 71, page 159, from 1921.

Note the reference at the bottom: “Aluminum as a factor in soil fertility”.  Note also they are discussing how to “reduce the toxicity of aluminum salts” in the ground.  So if scientists were doing it 90 years ago, then why exactly is it somehow suspicious that they are doing it now? For more discussion, see:

http://metabunk.org/threads/341-Debunked-Monsanto-s-Aluminum-Resistant-GMOs-and-Chemtrails

Discussing ≠ Doing

Finally, what of the government discussions of geoengineering, and their denials that anything is going on? Exactly.  What of it? They discuss geoengineering because it’s something that people might actually want to do in the future, so we’d better talk about it now, so we can figure out what problems might occur.  The concerns about health effects and effects on the environment are perfectly valid concerns, but they are not evidence that a spraying program is currently underway.

Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif), chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, has no idea what you are talking about, because there is no government geoengineering project, just a few scientists talking about it.

And the most reasonable explanation for why they deny they are doing it because they are not actually doing it.  The congressmen interviewed in the film claim they they are not familiar with it because they are not familiar with it.  They don’t want to talk about it because they don’t know anything about it.  There’s nothing sinister going on there.  The congressmen are simply not familiar with this one particular theoretical geoengineering method (or probably any theoretical geoengineering method), so when they are buttonholed by someone who rather intensely asks them if they approve of it, then it’s quite understandable they don’t want to talk to him.

The film presents the conferences on geoengineering as if they are somehow secret and clandestine operations that need to be revealed to the public.  In reality, geoengineering of this type has been discussed for at least sixty years. It’s hardly covered up, as the discussion has been constantly in the news, often front page news, since 2006, and has been making occasional mainstream news stories since the 1980s, with thousands of publicly accessible research papers over the last sixty years.   There’s no evidence anyone was doing it sixty years ago, there’s no evidence anyone was doing it in 2006, and as far as anyone can tell, nobody is doing it now. Denials are not admissions, and discussing something is not the same as doing it.

I don’t want to make this article too long, but I’ve noticed a few more problems with the documentary, see the comment section for more info.

1,142 thoughts on “Debunked: What In The World Are They Spraying?

  1. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    unimaginable amounts of power

    And, if you can control the weather, which is clearly a huge issue here, you can control food production, you can control pretty much anything. The world, its people.

    I like how they go from all powerful to not so powerful depending on the argument.

  2. SR1419 says:

    Friends of the Earth said:

    “WHAT IF you see 10 lines across the sky in different directions, what is the point of this, please, tell me!”

    The point is travel.

    Over 40,000 flights EVERY day in the US. 5000 planes in the sky at any moment.

    …and you think it odd to see evidence of 10 of them?

  3. Steve says:

    SR1419,
    I’m a little suspect of anyone who just “happens” to have a supply of pics handy from the 60’s and 70’s of chemtrails. ( Or in your case suspended contrails) How about giving me a movie I can rent that I can see for myself? Anyone can photo shop a chemtrail/contrail into the sky.

  4. MikeC says:

    Get some WW2 movies of aerial battles using real footage – 8th AF bombing Germany for example. However I believe there’s a screenshot rom 1969 “Patton” here somewhere that shows a contras so you might get that, and I have seen reference to a contrail towards the end of “The Battle of Britain” and I mentioned that on a post here too.

    contrails were NOT common in the 1950’s and 60’s – they were new to almost everyone, due to new-fangled jet transports flying around.

    And given that debunking of the chemtrial myth has been happening for 15 years it should be little surprise that debunkers have pretty much “seen it all before” – being surprised that debunking information is easy to hand merely shows you are new to the whole thing.

  5. SR1419 says:

    Steven…

    So, go rent “Patton” or “Diamonds are forever”….or Daniel Boone….they are only “handy” because people have come across them and collected them on this site….I have seen plenty more- on Little house on the prairie….even old football follies from the 70s with shots from the stadium floor looking up with persistent contrails right across the sky….they are there if you look for them….there were not nearly the same number of aircraft in the sky…but the physics hasn’t changed.

    Do you truly believe that all the photos collected here of persistent contrail spanning decades are all fake?

  6. Noble says:

    Steve, There are persistent trails in the wallyworld scene in Vacation….

  7. Noble says:

    Too much censorship. Even where it’s so unnecessary. One tries to make a simple point and it’s deleted. Oh well.

    Bye all. I wish you all the best of luck in the quest to help the chemmies.

    The nice weather is here and these people don’t deserve my time any longer.

  8. I deleted an off-topic exchange about religion, that’s all.

  9. JC says:

    Great article in Discover Magazine, April 2012, “Life at the Edge of Space”. As water vapor will not condense and form ice crystals, even at -30F, regardless of the “high levels of Aluminum, Iron, Silicon, and Titanium”. Snow, it appears is caused by biological activities in the clouds. Clouds are only a high concentration of vapor. Some clouds, during the winter, may be very cold (-30F) and very wet (100%+ RH), however will not form ice and fall as snow.

    Also, water vapor will not condense unless cooled to the point it forms droplets (visibly as a cloud), has something to condense around (microscopic dust), and must be in a high enough concentration to become visible. A cloudless day may have a relative humidity at 30,000 feet low enough to not condense on its own. However, the sudden introduction of more humidity (e.g. the exhaust from the engine), along with the sudden drop in pressure (from the aircraft passing through the air), may cause the vapor to condense to the point to become visible. That disturbance may also be the catalyst for ice formation. I would say that contrails are caused by the sudden disturbance of water vapor in an extreme manner, with the added water vapor caused by the exhaust from the engines, resulting in the mechanical creation of droplets and ice crystals (visible as contrails).

    Why some contrails may last longer than others? Some contrails will contain more ice via the process described above. It will take longer for the ice to evaporate when sitting in a very cold condition (15-60 degrees below the freezing point of water) than the water droplets. Also, the contrail may be the catalyst in the formation of a new cloud as the conditions were just slightly imbalanced for the formation of the droplets. The newly formed droplets and ice crystals become the “seeds” for the new cloud.

  10. Really now says:

    weathermodification.com

  11. Really now says:

    When most people look up they see clouds.
    WE SEE POTENTIAL.
    ABOUT US
    Now, more than ever, the worldwide need for solutions to atmospheric necessities such as water resource management and environmental quality monitoring, is critical. With nearly a half-century of successful programs, our experience speaks for itself.
    Let us help you better manage your atmospheric and water resources.
    Learn More
    SERVICES & OFFERINGS
    Program Services
    Meteorological Services
    Atmospheric Assessment
    & Evaluation
    Cloud Seeding
    Weather Radar Systems
    Environmental Monitoring
    Aircraft

    Program Services

    HomeProgram Services
    PROGRAM SERVICES
    METEOROLOGICAL SERVICES
    ATMOSPHERIC ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION
    CLOUD SEEDING
    WEATHER RADAR SYSTEMS
    ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
    AIRCRAFT
    The Sky’s The Limit

    Weather Modification, Inc., has a wide range of services to provide knowledge, data, equipment and capability at any phase in your project. We can also tailor a program to meet your specific objectives and manage it from beginning to end.
    Our talented scientists, researchers, project managers, technicians, and pilots have the expertise you need to carry out an efficient, effective weather program.
    Program ServicesSelect a service on the graphic to learn more.

    Feasibility Studies
    Weather Modification, Inc., has been involved in multiple programs with the goal of identifying the potential benefits derived from the application of cloud seeding techniques. Our feasibility studies focus on the cloud structures and patterns in the project area. Gathered information assists in identifying the cloud seeding technology that’s best suited for the project.

  12. JFDee says:

    Really now,

    how is cloud seeding related to contrails?

  13. MikeC says:

    Better still, how is cloud seeding – which is not secret, done in clouds (not clear skies) and at low altitude, usually by small aircraft – related to chemtrails – which are secret, done in clear skies and by airliners (or so we are told)???

  14. Anonymous says:

    Uncinus

    Where are you getting your information?

  15. Anonymous says:

    Uncinus

    What particular agenda, in your opinion, might the purported conspiracy theorists have for the creation of such a large amount of hype over a subject that is so mundane, well understood and that has quite frankly, been visible to the naked eye for more years than many have lived? Have they simply not looked up at the sky in years and are just now noticing so-called “persistent contrails” and “freaking out”?

    Or would you conclude, as it is most tempting to do, that the types of people spread this particular brand of conspiracy mongering are mentally unstable, incompetent, drug addicts or people unable to cope with the stress of life and look to put the blame for their failures on the harmful machinations of an ethereal global elite with a diabolical lust for power.

    You are looking for empirical evidence. I understand this. There are, however, several road blocks to obtaining such evidence if it indeed exists.

    First and foremost is the status of personal bias. Are you truly prepared to believe in the veracity of such evidence if it were presented to you in the proper manner? If not then….(you fill this in yourself). But if so, what would that evidence look like? How would it be presented? In a government, military, corporate or alleged independent scientific study with all the trappings thereof, with precise “scientific” terminology, the relevant charts, graphs, data sets, valid experiments with correct measurements and a notable correlation of the resulting data? You would prefer this to the unprovable assertions, apparently bungled and amateurish experiments and video of those “conspiracy nuts” who are not trained scientists, do not have access to state of the art labs nor large amounts of funding provided by a benevolent benefactor with pure “philanthropic” reasons for doing so? Yes?

    You are free to suggest any specific experiments, how they should be conducted, video clips, or studies you would constitute as a program that if conducted could hypothetically provide the empirical evidence You are challenging others to provide for you to “debunk”. If these are already listed elsewhere on this site, perhaps you could point them out. After all this is your site is it not? Hopefully, you would do this in the name of science and reason if you believe in no higher authority than these.

  16. I think most of them are simply mistaken, for a variety of reasons. Some are highly predisposed to believing in conspiracies, and this one seems quite reasonable to them. Most people don’t pay attention to the sky.

    I’m quite willing to look at any evidence. Debunking is about identifying and exposing bunk, not about taking sides.

    What should be studied depends on what is being claimed. If people claim that contrails do not normally dissipate, then they should gather scientific literature and examine the photographic record to confirm this. If they think they can smell contrails, then they should do some blind tests.

  17. Jay Reynolds says:

    Anonymous, in your list of possible agendas for promoting the chemtrails hoax, it began by Richard Finke and Larry Wayne Harris as a publicity stunt to promote a book, so add commercial interests as a possible reason. Michael J. Murphy, for instance, has no other visible means of support in his life other than money he is making off of his sales, etc. He is living off of chemtrails, though it seems to be a dwindling source of revenue as few ‘angels’ have flown down to fund his latest film.

    Then there are egotistical reasons. Everyone would like to be a hero and expose some major wrongdoing. I can understand that. However, the big guns in investigative reporting haven’t found anything to it, only those at the fringe and bottom of the barrel come out with loads of bunk, so what does that tell you?

  18. Anonymous says:

    Uncinus

    Alright.

    Is it indeed possible to account for all the variables present in an enviornmental experiment to achieve valid data?

  19. Anonymous says:

    Uncinus

    Alright.

    Is it indeed possible to account for the variables in an enviornmental experiment and produce truly valid data result accepted by all?

  20. Depends on what the experiment is.

  21. Anonymous says:

    Mr Jay Reynolds

    While I appreciate your contributions to my agenda list, I must respectfully point out that chemtrails have not been definitively proven a hoax. Entrepreneurship, commercial and egotistical interests do not constitute empirical evidence against the existence of chemtrails. Internet data, pictures, and films would also fail to be considered automatic definitive empirical evidence against the existence of chemtrails for the simple reason that they can be tampered with or falsified for the benefit of a particular viewpoint. Likewise, as this site points out, the aforementioned do not constitute valid empirical evidence for the existence of chemtrails. Investigative reporters would not be able to prove or deny the existence chemtrails on their own,but would be relying on others, namely “the experts” to confirm of deny the existence of chemtrails. This is fallible human trust, not empirical evidence.

  22. Anonymous says:

    Uncinus

    So, what are these experiments?

  23. Anonymous says:

    Mr Jay Reynolds

    The trails are byproducts of a chemical/combustion reaction are they not?

    So what would stand in the way of calling them chemtrails instead of “persistent contrails”

  24. The fact that “chemtrails” is use to refer to things that are specifically not contrails.

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

    [chemtrails] does not refer to other forms of aerial spraying such as crop dusting, cloud seeding, skywriting, or aerial firefighting.[7] The term specifically refers to aerial trails allegedly caused by the systematic high-altitude release of chemical substances not found in ordinary contrails, resulting in the appearance of characteristic sky tracks.

  25. tryblinking says:

    Classic. How many times have we seen someone, when confronted with the fact that only contrails exist, try to redefine all contrails as chemtrails in a last vain attempt to win the argument. That kind of ‘goal post shifting’ is obvious in every case, and simply advertises a belief that the argument is all but lost.

  26. Jay Reynolds says:

    Anon, The reason I call them a hoax is because I followed the idea back to its origin by Richard Finke and Larry Wayne Harris in 1997. They invented the concept, and of course they claimed the first lab sample 15 years ago, which no one has ever seen, wonder why?
    Here is how it went down:
    http://goodsky.homestead.com/files/evolution.html

    Tryblinking, indeed a Classic. I was also around when Val Valerian coined the word Chemtrail, he did so expressly to distinguish the claim from the word contrails which everyone used before then. Interesting that after so much trouble to call them one thing, this anon wants to turn back the clock!

    Here is Valerian coining the word April 17,199:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20000815234743/http://www.trufax.org/research3/contrails.html#chem

  27. Chemtrail Assassin says:

    Are you all this stupid …. Chemtrails are real What you have failed to mention is the 9 year old girl who tested water .. and here water sample were tested. And four to contain hi levels of all these chemicals
    Let me just post this . U feeble Minds .. You belive what the CDC tells you. Weather modification is real and the bill to fund it was passed in 2007 …
    I will now post so you sheep will wake up

    005 U.S. Senate Bill 517 and U.S. House Bill 2995 U.S. Senate Bill 517 [23] and U.S. House Bill 2995 [24] were two bills proposed in 2005 that would have expanded experimental weather modification, to establish a Weather Modification Operations and Research Board, and implemented a national weather modification policy. Neither were made into law. Former Texas StateSenator John N. Leedom was the key lobbyist on behalf of the weather modification bills.

    2007 U.S. Senate Bill 1807 & U.S. House Bill 3445 Senate Bill 1807 and House Bill 3445, identical bills introduced July 17, 2007, proposed to establish a Weather Mitigation Advisory and Research Board to fund weather modification research
    If you wish I will post more … Oh this site has been Debunked

    Also why am I being harrassed by DHS for my research on weather modifications

  28. SR!1419 says:

    Indeed….weather modification IS real…its is simply cloud seeding and has been done for decades…

    Its not secret, doesn’t involve persistent trails in the sky…its simply is an attempt in enhance precipitation in already existing rain clouds…they burn flares of silver iodide…often shooting them from the ground via rocket.

    It has nothing to do with supposed “chemtrails”….don’t confuse the two

    Here is but one of several private companies that seed clouds:

    http://www.weathermodification.com/

  29. hugh eile says:

    @Uncinus
    Hi I was just wondering whether your email to G. Edward Griffin was ever returned?

  30. hugh eile says:

    And if anyone could tell me how to correctly do the thing with the name, the @ sign didn’t quite do the job. Pardon my vagueness.

  31. Noble says:

    Chemtrail Assassin, how exactly is it determined that what the 9 year old found cam from the trails we all see in the sky?!

    Seems like many are jumping to conclusions based on some VERY sketchy “evidence”.

    I see no reason to assume that what she found came from the trails in the sky and not windblown contaminates and other ground based sources. To accept that the source was the trails and not the millions of natural/man made sources of elements all around us…everywhere…brings a word you have used against us to mind….”stupid”.

  32. Hugh, no – I never got an answer from Griffin on those questions.

  33. Jay Reynolds says:

    ‘Chemtrail assassin’ wrote: “What you have failed to mention is the 9 year old girl who tested water .. and here water sample were tested. And four to contain hi levels of all these chemicals”

    I’d like to see that water test and I’ll examine it carefully.
    I encourage you to seek out those tests and lets discuss them.

    However, when I politely asked Mauro Martins de Oliviera, Dane Wigington, Francis Mangels, G. Edward Griffin and Michael J. Murphy to publicly show all of the tests they claim to have, they refused to publicly display anything more, despite their previous claims of having them. You can see this all documented here:

    http://metabunk.org/threads/267-Proposal-for-a-quot-Chemtrails-Information-Freedom-Aagreement-quot

    Regarding the tests that have been shown, here is what has been found:

    http://metabunk.org/threads/137-Shasta-Snow-and-Water-Aluminum-Tests

    http://metabunk.org/threads/135-Chemical-Composition-of-rain-and-snow

    You all need to understand that all of the people I have mentioned personally above are aware that their claims have no basis in fact. They are aware and have been aware for nearly a year that their claimed levels of aluminum, barium, and strontium in rain and snow are ordinary, have been seen for decades, and that both the elements and the amounts found are not toxic.

    Michael J. Murphy, G. Edward Griffin, Dane Wigington, Francis Mangels and all of their cohorts have FAILED and are currently hanging on to their past claims strictly by ignoring the evidence arrayed against them, and they hope to keep their followers from finding out what they know. If you read this, you have also been made aware and unless you do somethig to correct the situation you are part of the problem.

    There is probably nothing worse than knowingly spreading misinformation. Michael J. Murphy, G. Edward Griffin, Dane Wigington, Francis Mangels and their cohorts know better, but they have gone ahead and stayed with it.. They are engaged in systematically covering up evidence I quote above, fabricating horror stories which they know are not true, and knowingly portraying ordinary lab test results as abnormal and toxic.

    I can tell you that over the past year I have had frequent communications by email and telephone with these people. They KNOW that their claims are false.

    What they hope is that you WILL NOT become aware.

    If you are reading this, it been yet another FAIL on their part.
    Congratulations!

  34. tryblinking says:

    Well getting a documented admission is best. Hos do the fuzz deal with a group of conspirators? It’s in their questions but also in the way they portray each member to the next, until one ‘breaks’.

  35. Jay Reynolds says:

    Another thing that the followers of Michael J. Murphy need to know is that he considers them and the public in general like children, who will not understand if he told them all of his claims in full. What he does is to withhold most of it until he has begun a process of propagandizing them. He even speaks of how he intends to use a ploy to advance his agenda among public officials, a ploy of subterfuge in which he doesn’t disclose his real intent.

    However, perhaps there is a truly deeper motivation that Michael J. Murphy is demonstrating when he uses his ploys. Isn’t it also true that Michael J. Murphy is AFRAID of exposure, that HE IS AWARE that if a newcomer is made aware of the totality of the situation that they will turn off and WILL NOT ACCEPT what he is saying?

    I’ll let him speak for himself, in a somewhat candid moment on an obscure broadcast when he let his guard down.

    Here:
    http://metabunk.org/threads/71-Michael-J-Murphy-s-most-recent/page4

  36. Anonymous says:

    You people should be ashamed of you’re selfs for trying to mislead people. The data is out there and pitiful people in the media and in government cannot hide you’re lies any longer.

  37. MikeC says:

    No-one here is trying to mislead anyone – the data, information and analysis are there for everyone to see and check.

    Which part of the any of it actually shows that chemtrails exist??

  38. Jay Reynolds says:

    What data are you speaking of, “anonymous”? Cite the data, unless it is the data that has already been debunked in the links I cite above. If you dispute the debunking, do it there on the forum threads and we can debate the issue using fact and logic.

    Don’t respond to real research and the application of fact with a simple contradiction. Above, you spoke of empirical evidence, but so far you have failed to cite any empirical evidence at all. Why is that?

    You call me names and say I lie, but where have I lied? If you wish t find lies, why not ask the people wh have claimed to have lab reports but refuse to show them, as referenced above? Either they have the data or they don’t, or the data doesn’t show what they claim it does. Why not join with me and cry out to the Coalition Against Geoengineering to end this withholding of data? For what eason do they hide their data away from us, aren’t you willing to look at the data? If not, why not?

  39. Din says:

    Contrails or Chemtrails?? -whatever you like to call them…
    they make me sick – truth; esp. the ones everywhere covering sky, haze. One bad experience I thought was a crop sprayer small plane kept going back and forth, the smell & taste chemicals in mouth and nose burning and could hardly move or breath for 4 days after this exposure, thought was going to die, police did nothing, or even look to see the plane just outside their office, joked as if I was crazy as if all the planes were spraying, yet couldn’t look me in the eye when I mentioned chemical smell/taste (I thought was something fishy) & then he referred me to EPA, EPA refer me to police?? Collected gold/yellow coloured dust on car due to this, I look up internet for explanation and it may be a conspiracy theory?? – this may have even been a wake-up call that I needed at the time.

    Sometimes can see with own eyes when it’s sunny out, many shiny tiny particles in air, or perhaps I see all this shiny energy around me – that just a description at what I am observing, so not sure exactly, as I sure as hell don’t know the whole truth. Everyone’s perception of reality is different.

    When it’s the white, grey, black thick haze covering sky, alot time dirty sticky dust on car & I question when it’s not windy or raining, like ice (meth) in a crack pipe (though on car windscreen) – yes, I been around a mix of ppl & old friends etc; wouldn’t surprise me that whatever it’s made out of, the goo stuff see on the windscreen or windows of house, make ppl crazy if breathing it all in, and on skin, eyes: allergies, breathing difficulties, affect memory, flu, heart attacks, deaths etc, who knows how it affects the brain & body our senses, our perceptions, our moods (everyone’s included), who really knows if pharma/other industries that may already have money making solutions, does seem moreso in built up areas, city, I really don’t think cars could do all that, what gases visible to the eye – that is just my intuition telling me anyways.

    Sometimes the thick blanketed sky from planes, I don’t feel any adverse reactions (that would be rare though, or maybe I could be bias) and sometimes I don’t see any trails from any planes or no planes like it appears from perhaps all those satellites (I wouldn’t know) and I have adverse reactions, but I usually listen to my body moreso, am one of those kind who is quite sensitive to all things around me & quite possibly what I can’t always see to the eye too, again I wouldn’t know the whole truth. I’m grateful to be alive and experiencing all life at present, nature is de bomb & I love a blue sky with a few fluffy clouds – those small planes flying going nowhere (don’t seem to be a purpose for em) but leaving smog/forming clouds light haze everywhere so annoying, they allowed to be so loud zooming around just above home quite disturbing even just the noise, sometimes as soon as blue sky above houses in neighbourhood, they seem to come back few times like it too cover the sky again or they double cover it before flying around further homes…I also love rain & wind with alot of clouds floating past & I love the sun, and I love fresh water & organic food, what are you grateful for :)?

  40. MikeC says:

    Crop spraying is neither chemtrails nor contrails – it is crop spraying, and the pesticides or herbicides or whatever it was probably WILL make you sick! They are certainly chemicals, and some people think that chemtrails are any chemicals “sprayed” by aircraft.

    But chemtrails are the specifically high altitude trails in clear skies that do not dissipate in a few minutes and usually come from airliners. The wiki article on them has a good overview – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail_conspiracy_theory

    Some people like to argue that any chemical trails are “chemtrails”. Apparently getting someone to admit that chemtrails exist by broadening the definition to include non-secret, low altitude spraying for known purposes is more important than actually getting any evidence that the original version actually exists.

    IMO this is probably because they know it does not, but are unable to give up on the myth.

  41. Din says:

    Forgot to say too: There were no crops in a residential area (houses only, hence why I reported to police, though was funny how he joked to another police guy all the planes were doing it, yet I had to tell him again it was one, & again could not look me in the eye like a human) – EPA or Police did nothing, no answers?? Nor was it mosquito spraying as none are done in the state I’m in.

    On other side of city opposite direction, in the evening before I went to bed getting dizzy, ill. Was told from a mate on ph that 3 planes were making clouds, he never seen that before, I couldn’t believe what he was saying either (what the…?) and I thought that’s probably what this plane was doing above the houses on the west side where I was, I saw one trail higher spread too. Hence why I looked up the net, no one else had any answers for it, and at the time I would think the police are there for our protection, but how little did I know back then.

    Not all the time do I smell the chemicals, mostly get the allergies moreso & sometimes sore throat the following day, but then maybe my immune system has been jeopardised since the chemical spray when thought was going to die (that obviously not a serious issue chemicals on houses for our police to do anything or investigate). Only a couple of times, I’ve noticed a slight ammonia type of smell, could be just a co-incidence. Mostly, lots dust/goo stuff on car, what’s with that?. What the “chemtrail conspiracists” said about barium rang true for me, when I looked up on the net to find out what the hell is going on with these planes esp. when it’s the yellow/gold dust as described by them.

    Also a couple of times, I’ve seen when clouds part slightly or not as thick (happens alot above the house I’m staying in), probably why the smaller planes that fly lower smog/fog/cloud seeding/whatever they doing and go double or 3 times around this neighbourhood moreso & most times it appears to be thicker (who the beep knows what doing), 3/4 times (not in the same day) I’ve seen jets much higher with a trail (chemtrail/contrail) -two of the seperate times, looked like no jet ahead with about 4 trails together at the same time, each.

    Of one instance, one jet was following the other (only one had the trail) it quite strange to me when I’m in Australia. There aint that many passenger planes or bigger type planes around and if they do usually are going where I can see em & more parallel to the ground can see them good, lucky to spot these doesn’t happen alot.

    Curious as why the jets above, doing these trails after all the lower crap, who knows how many more above that this is just what I’ve seen when there are slight gaps.

    They can get so thick at times not even moving/floating away, which I thought that’s what clouds do / at least rain. I remember when in country you could tell it was going to rain because the clouds were coming, or the birds would fly in certain direction? -like we get no warning now if it does rain, has anyone else noticed this? Yet, when clear blue sky only seen 2 jets (seperate instances) doing their 1 chemtrail/contrail no other clouds in sight, &/ obviously no smaller planes around, unless they just doing laps, think training to fly, no clouds/smog left from those dudes.

    Nice talking with ya MikeC, ta for reading 🙂

  42. Din says:

    “Intuition knows reality, by the time it is knowledge it is already too late”

  43. MikeC says:

    Low level spraying of something that isn’t known about would definitely concern me too – although you refer to the EPA and living in Australia when the EPA is an American institute – in Australia it would be the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (see http://www.environment.gov.au/about/index.html)

    There are plenty of flights in Australia – have a look at http://www.flightradar24.com/ – and think that the a/c shown are only those equipped with ADSB systems – which are not compulsory yet – many older aircraft still in service do not carry it.

  44. Din says:

    EPA was what the police referred me to (EP Australia think is the better term), depending what state (I’m just guessing), the state I’m currently residing in (I have no idea who does what-too many organisations, and use different names/websites to what I’ve previously known or thought was common sense, very confusing and sometimes you get an agent in some customer service (like that police guy) you call, or for you want to do the right thing, on an unknown toll road (also thought is American, like in the movies, someone had told me that if you see the blue sign for tollway you can’t get back out, so I avoided so many roads and places due these things for about 3 years -in fear :), those in their offices don’t even know, then they straight out lie or can’t ask or don’t want to admit they may not know, so you don’t know any procedures or how to do payment or given wrong account numbers, way too many rules, confusion, chaos & I think some ppl actually then forget the actual laws), then you get in trouble or fined or whatever, because their customer service, have got it all wrong in their job or don’t know how -big joke on me, then you get a demand notice to pay etc refused any assistance or clarification lots of fines, can’t even fart anymore without one-jokes. “think, while it’s still legal”

    I notice when weather is clear (blue sky &/ sun) ppl seem to be in happier moods where I am otherwise control not happy chappies, crazy -good cos I fit in ;), but not with any the bad vibes or where want to control another or disrespect someone I’ve never met before. Anyways loves spreads quicker than fear/hate, so I keep up my vibes and it does eventually catch on, noticing more and more each day now, or it is like they say, like attracts like, so possibly a combination of both.
    They even have sheriffs here -America? One called me up, I couldn’t stop laughing, thought was a prank or he called Australia by mistake or something of the like, I couldn’t help but joke, it blew me away the attitude (bully -accepted?) & as to why these dudes think they can force/steal/trick stuff off you, or clamp ppls cars like they never even worked hard in their life for their belongings (could mostly be true too, I have not worked everywhere :).

    Commonwealth of Australia is registered in Washington DC trading for profit, have since been made aware of this Dunn & Bradstreet website (sorry, no linkage). Are you from there buddy your state, is boss of our country and others.

    Ta for that link you gave, I looked it up & not one fly above where I am residing, but I’ve seen like two (passenger planes) with no chemtrail/contrail though and flying parallel to ground, don’t know why the bigger one’s (the jets) above after the small annoying ones have done there job (they have markings and no smells from them, perhaps two times ammonia or unless coming from a factory somewhere) or jets??

    A little off topic story, I worked in Insurance company in reception section, the mail would get so lost and ppl in the department would send their mail around again, I had to sort, look up departments (sometimes even individuals) and then the individual would pass on to another, (was too many there that couldn’t be arsed, getting 3 times more than me, mind you, only doing 1 position, while I was doing about 3. I would give this correspondence to correct department, same floor too mostly, instead was put in mail again, even when it was for their department, alot mail would come back to do the rounds, at each department, upstairs, downstairs, in building next business/brokers/insurance too etc it would be forwarded on to next then end right back in mail room. This is just one of these type companies, can’t imagine how many others out there (esp. just ordinary good folk, who forked out, not necessarily by choice, as I would get alot of calls saying they sent correspondence in to so and so department etc, not heard anything, many livlihoods? & in a lucky country (Aus).

    Back to: What about what’s above after the smaller annoying planes have each done their deeds (the small ones have blue numbers on them, are marked, can never see all the numbers in bad position when viewing) the small planes usually start all together (4/5/6 of ’em) when it’s sunny & clear blue sky (like I thought meant to be), all was calm & silent, only when their are gaps of blue in sky, (1/2) come back (not all the time) sometimes about six fly over further away, I’ve only spotted them going and returning, but far from them where they flying from are thick clouds, blanketed, no blue sky as far as I can see, I don’t see trails from them either, just slight cloud marking/seeding (you could call them fumes even) then it gets thicker/bigger & spreads, though only 1/2/3 layers what I’ve seen it doesn’t float up to be higher like or like helium, sometimes spreads apart (I never sat/stood there and watched for too long, don’t want to freak my eyes out, plus sensitive, incase is bad I like my good eyesight).
    There could be jets above and more that I didn’t see and have heard twice (two seperate occasions) something big loud above the lower clouds, one could have been huge chopper (sounded like a “black hawk down”, as was not a jet sound) – love choppas, used to fly in them when was little, still remember these days. In relation to this, is there a site, would you know for the jets? Or is that all secret?

    Cheers MikeC where you from buddy?

    Oh also I’ve seen a couple of freaky things in sky, no vid footage (out of this world -just in last 2 years), 3 in daylight (seperate instances) & 3 (at night, also seperate times).

  45. Din says:

    Apparently “Australia – Australia is the first country with full, continental ADS-B coverage, though only above FL300. There are 57 ground stations operating at 28 sites.” (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_dependent_surveillance-broadcast)

  46. enraged xpat says:

    debunk this

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfhEtAH0sYA

    You paid government Aholes will pay in the end. What goes around comes around.

    Know this!

  47. JFDee says:

    enraged xpat,

    it’s not unusual for a contrail to show gaps. It just shows that the atmosphere is not homogenous at high altitudes. Clouds have gaps too, haven’t they? Humidity is not the same everywhere.

    See this discussion:
    http://contrailscience.com/broken-contrails/

  48. MikeC says:

    I am from New Zealand – Chch & Wellington mainly – I have worked for NAC, Air NZ and Ansett NZ and also the NZ CAA. Have also been in Fiji & Aus.

  49. Din says:

    Fiji – awesome! Think Washington DC boss of NZ too ;).

  50. Din says:

    have you had many earthquakes lately, do you still get them – I don’t watch the news, rather that I hear straight from horses’ mouth, as like everything there are many sides to a story.

  51. MikeC says:

    Not sure what your comments mean – NZ is on the Pacific Rime “Ring of fire” – this country was MADE by earthquakes (more or less) & we get them all the time – there’s been no more or less than usual, excepting Christchurch and it’s aftershocks.

    i think Washington DC has a difficult enough time being “Boss” of the USA, let alone anywhere else.

  52. Din says:

    Depends which way you look at it, I’m not the kind to judge -Anyways, ciao to ya then.

  53. Din says:

    OMG – you here when the land was formed?? -would of thought that impossible, wrong I must be.

    In sincerity
    Din (human & I proud to make mistakes..will admit, how I learn & be true)

  54. Lynn Chase says:

    This debunking leaves out so many already undisputed spraying of chemicals upon us for over 30 years. When you watch a plane spraying something above you, stop spraying, turn around start spraying again and continue to and fro until you have a giant grid then tell me, they are not spraying something, cause they sure aren’t flying to any destination. They sure aren’t crop dusters either I watch them from Las Vegas, no farms here.

  55. Well, get it on video, and you can expose the whole thing.

    Generally they don’t turn around. But it does happen. See Voodoo contrails.

  56. Jay Reynolds says:

    Lynn,
    You need to understand that almost all the contrails you see in the Vegas area come from commercial airliners. Ken over at Las Vegas Skywatch has done an excellent job documenting this fact in a 5 part video series here:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvXVvahXw4M

    These are ordinary jetliners carrying passengers to and fro, his videos and telescopic photos prove it.

    He could have gone one step further and actually photographed the planes in such a way to read the tail numbers like this:
    http://www.luchtzak.be/forums/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=47372&sid=a77572eee95abe2f2bbf5a2b2fd641b6

    Of course, none of these facts have found their way into movies by Michael J. Murphy, but his former co-producer G. Edward Griffin recently has come to admit that, “We now know that most persistent trails do come from commercial jets.”
    http://www.realityzone.com/20120504.html

    I think this is why Michael J. Murphy hasn’t got G. Edward Griffin on board for his latest film.
    Not seeing eye-to-eye, or at least not headed in the same direction.

    Murphy says he is struggling for money, flying to and fro from Hawaii and LA seeking funding for the film.

    I wonder if he is leaving some of the ‘Trails you are seeing? Likely he is making his own share.
    Strange how you can afford to fly back and forth to Maui and be so broke, huh?

  57. Noble says:

    I have to wonder if MJM has bothered to ask anyone in the flight crew their opinion on “chemtrails” during all of these flights.

  58. EFFNC says:

    Ever seen the hiccups these trails have sometimes? Means probably a blocked carburettor or a faulty spark plug.
    If you really want to find out what’s going on then go to http://www.flightradar24.com and match the trails you see overhead with the planes leaving it. The flighnumber and height etc is shown live on that site, click on the plane above where you live and it will show the line of flight as well.
    Another thing: Why is there aluminium and barium on top of snow? Did someone shovel it there?
    My vegie plants are showing signs of spraying, bees are dying on my driveway after these so called “contrails” that never happened in the 60-70ies did it?

  59. GregOrca says:

    EFFNC, have a read of http://metabunk.org/threads/137-Shasta-Snow-and-Water-Aluminum-Tests

    The levels of aluminium were perfectly normal and the documentary makers deliberately misrepresented what was tested and the conditions in which samples were taken.

    In reference to your hiccups comment, please read the article above called broken contrails.
    That is perfectly normal.
    Contrails sometimes have gaps in them for the same reason clouds sometimes have gaps between them. The distribution of moisture in the atmosphere is not uniform.

    Bees dying on your driveway have nothing to do with ice crystals 10km above you.
    Gardeners for hundreds of years have had problems growing things and had difficulty understanding plant diseases, plant growth and genetics and soil chemistry and instead blamed witches, stars and constellations, demons, not enough praying etc etc for their lack of gardening skill.
    On what scientific basis have you decided your gardening problems are attributable to ice crystals 10 kms above you?

    Contrails were very common in the 1960s and 1970s
    http://contrailscience.com/contrail-photos-through-history/

  60. opconquest says:

    I find it funny that both sides tell each other they are wrong, when they could both be wrong.

    There are 3 sides of this argument:
    1. Chemtrails don’t exist and it is do to Ice in the toposphere
    2. Chemtrails exist and they are spraying some form of chemical
    3. Both exist. While normally we see a majority as high altitude contrails, some applications of chemtrails exist though varied and easily disguised as contrails.
    (Technically 4. Neither exists)

    Personally, i can only logically believe #3 because i do not know enough about climate change or climate and toxic regulations. I don’t think anyone else should believe this, but i mention it as food for thought.

    If it were both, how would we know the difference?

    Either way it is probs pointless to pursue a definite opinion

  61. Alexey says:

    @opconquest

    There is no other known chemical apart water, spraying of which at the jet cruise altitude would imitate behavior of a persistent contrail.

  62. JFDee says:

    opconquest,

    your side 3 is not needed to explain trails. Side 1 is sufficient to explain everything we see.

    Why would you prefer a more complicate explanation?

  63. Semaj says:

    http://www.seektress.com/patlist.htm

    search any of the listed patents on the US Patent Office website and your debunking will be debunked, the technology you claim isnt real has been around for decades. do some real research and stop being a faux journalist

  64. There are also patents for anti-gravity flying saucers in the US Patent office.

    Where’s the evidence that it’s actually being used?

  65. Noble says:

    Not only that, where is the evidence that the trails we see have anything to do with any patent?!

    Seems like a bit of conclusion jumping with an unhealthy dose of pure assumption.

    I have yet to see anything that proves the trails aren’t persistent contrails.

  66. MikeC says:

    Who said any of “the technology” isn’t real??

    aircraft have been able to “spray stuff” since at least the 1920’s – the existence of the technology is trivial, in the sense that it is a given.

    but being able to do something and actually doing it are quite different things – fortunately ever since we have H-bombs enough to wipe us all out!!

  67. Tom says:

    It is quite funny that over extended Memorial Day weekend, there were ZERO ChemTrails overhead from my location in “Fly Over Territory” in North Central Iowa. The sky was natural and beautiful, with an occasional short normal contrail appearing overhead. We all know that there such holiday weekends are loaded with air traffic… but alas, it seemed that those involved in the mischief were on holiday.

  68. It depends on the weather. The air traffic is essentially constant, but the weather aloft can vary wildly from day to day.

  69. Noble says:

    There were plenty in my area…

    I remember because I thought about the chemmies and how they would be horrified that “they” didn’t stop “spraying” for the holiday.

  70. Taylor says:

    Hi – did you ask me for permission before using my photo of Mt. Shasta? You might have – it’s been two years so maybe I just forgot. But, if you didn’t, please ask me or anyone else in the future. I have chosen to share them online but using them without permission would be a violation.

    thanks,
    Taylor

  71. Taylor, I don’t remember, but I suspect I did not, as I’m just using a thumbnail linked to the Flickr page. May I have permission to continue using it? It’s an excellent example of multiple contrails along a flight path ten years before the “chemtrail” theory.

  72. Orange says:

    Hi,

    Very interesting site! I came here more as supporter of the chemtrail theory than not, but you’ve done a good job of persuading me that it’s mostly hype over nothing. I’ve seen footage of planes with extra trails intermittently coming from parts of the plane where there is no engine, is there a reasonable explanation for this phenomenon (perhaps something to do with plane’s aerodynamics?)?

    Closer analysis of many documents cited as evidence showed by chemtrail proponents make reference to the ionosphere not stratosphere, so not even in the same ballpark.

    One point you make here is that aluminium is safe because it’s in Mylanta – you should probably read what the scientific literature on what aluminium’s toxicological profile is like. Thankfully our gut is designed to reject the vast amount of aluminium so only about 0.3% is absorbed orally (that figure could be a little off I’m going from memory, but it’s a low percentage nonetheless), but it is quite a potent neurotoxin if it makes its way to the brain (where it persists for quite a while and causes a fair bit of oxidative stress among other things) which happens at high enough plasma concentrations. There are other antacid chemicals like calcium carbonate which are much safer, not sure why Mylanta (alone?) opts for the more toxic option. I’d personally never take it.

    Also, seeing as you seem pretty well versed in clouds, what clouds would one expect to see co-existing with contrails? I know cirrus clouds exist at that altitude but is that the only type?

    And more of a theoretical question, if there were non-water particles in the exhaust, like a fine smoke/dust, how would this likely effect contrail formation, if at all?

  73. Taylor says:

    Hi Uncinus,

    Yes, you may keep using it. Keep up the good work 🙂

    Taylor

  74. GregOrca says:

    Hi Orange.
    ” I’ve seen footage of planes with extra trails intermittently coming from parts of the plane where there is no engine, is there a reasonable explanation for this phenomenon (perhaps something to do with plane’s aerodynamics?)?”

    Yes, have a read about aerodynamic contrails:

    ‪http://www.pa.op.dlr.de/~pa1c/JAS66_227-243_2009.pdf‬
    ‪http://insciences.org/article.php?article_id=3992‬
    ‪http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27Cs6RjkBSE‬
    ‪http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwaA1e3FlWk‬
    ‪http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-A0fN7PijgY‬

    and read about “heated drain masts”

  75. Steve Funk says:

    LightupBong. Sounds like a really smart guy.

  76. someone says:

    ok first let me point out. halliburton and its subsidiaries owns 2 of the 3 major areofuel comanies in the us for all airport fuel. also look into what else halliburton owns and who ows halliburton this should answer alot.

  77. Strawman says:

    Firstly, where’s second?

    Secondly, suspicion and allegation prove exactly nothing. In the real world, that is. In CT world, on the other hand, they are common – often sole – currency.

  78. Jay Reynolds says:

    Exactly, Strawman. Jet fuel is available for sale at many airports. If someone suspected that the fuel was adulterated, all they have to do is go buy some and have it analyzed.

    G. Edward Griffin, co-producer of WITWATS, conducted research which found, to his surprise but exactly as I told him he would, that the planes his researchers observed making “chemtrails” were ordinary commercial airliners.
    see:
    http://metabunk.org/threads/71-Michael-J-Murphy-s-most-recent?p=9447&viewfull=1#post9447

    I haven’t seen Griffin showing a fuel analysis lab test yet, even though its been months since he did this research, but I do note that he is no longer participating in Michael J. Murphy’s movies.
    That should answer alot, ‘someone’, correct?

    But it is much easier, actually. The jet planes which burn fuel suspected to be adulterated, in the case of WITWATS with alleged poisonous substances, should show significant effects in those who are exposed to the fuel exhaust. In this case, the ground crews, who are DIRECTLY and CONTINUOUSLY exposed to the jet engine exhaust are not keeling over dead.

    This should answer alot, ‘someone’, correct?

    Think about it…..

  79. captfitch says:

    Jet fuel is tested at every fuel farm. Every day I would imagine. Large airports employ their own independent in-house labs to test fuel. To top all that off modern engines test fuel as it’s burned. It’s IMPOSSIBLE for jet fuel to be the medium for any dispersion product. Especially any metallic substance. What is the melting point of aluminum? 660C. My engine has transient limits around 800C. Barium? 725C. Every start I make the temp rises to around 900C. There would be melted metal all over the engine.

  80. JL says:

    Hi,

    I’m not 100% convinced either way, but the fact that in the UK, the Ministry of Defense admitted spraying the public in germ warfare tests for almost 40 years, shows that this kind of thing doe happen: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/apr/21/uk.medicalscience

    I need more evidence, but at the moment, knowing about other horrendous deeds by Monsanto and government agencies and knowing the long history of involvement of several of the world’s most wealthy families with eugenics and more recently simply population reduction, I am swaying on the side of chem – rather than con – trails.

    I encourage those who share my suspicion to do more real world research and then publish it and don’t waste time in endless circular debates.

  81. Noble says:

    WHAT “horrendous deeds” is Monsanto responsible for?!

  82. Strawman says:

    So, instead of looking into the evidence, you’re going with assumptions.

    Not exactly a critical attitude.

  83. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    I encourage those who share my suspicion to do more real world research and then publish it and don’t waste time in endless circular debates.

    I’d encourage people to learn the subject matter.

  84. PW says:

    My first thought was exactly as Keepitsimple posted November 9,2010. Hello…is anyone listening? Flying up, capturing the vapors, and analyzing them will end this nonsense.

  85. GregOrca says:

    ” Flying up, capturing the vapors, and analyzing them will end this nonsense”

    That’s exactly what about 80,000 passenger jets do every single day.
    They fly up, their engine compressors pump the trail filled air outside the plane to inside the plane and all the passengers and crew breathe it for hours.
    The air on the way in does not get filtered but it gets mixed with air from inside the cabin that does get filtered. So there’s actually nothing to stop any chemicals from “chemtrails” entering the cabins of 80,000 passenger jets every single day.

    Your proposed experiment gets conducted by 80,000 test vehicles every single day all over the earth.
    The result is the same . The trails are ice crystals.
    They are not poisons.
    Understanding aviation is the only thing that ends this nonsense.

  86. Anonymous says:

    What a load of crap!

  87. Jay Reynolds says:

    It appears that GregOrca knows what he is talking about.
    http://go-aviation.blogspot.com/2009/09/do-you-know-why-aircraft-need-to-be.html

    Why In The World doesn’t Michael J. Murphy die when he flies back and forth to Hawaii through all those chemtrails? Inquiring minds want to know……

  88. captfitch says:

    Yeah- I’ve mentioned that several times but it flies in the face of what most people believe about “recycled air” onboard jets. I think the air turnover rate is something like getting a new cabin every eight minutes. My previous point was to emphasize that the flight crews should be the ones showing any signs of chemtrail exposure but we are typically healthier than the rest of the population. How could someone who receives direct exposure to the trails have no symptoms?

  89. Noble says:

    They have the antidote!

    Duh!

  90. Frankly says:

    WHAT “horrendous deeds” is Monsanto responsible for?! Hahahahahahaha seriously? Perhaps some reading is required., as not enough space here to even start that one and it is off topic. In regards to chemtrails I believe that inbetween the extreme theorists and the poo poo ers lies the truth. The American government still denies any involvement in the ‘spray’ tests carried out on the British public at the height of the cold war, when paranoia over germ warfare peaked…Now I wonder, is it over stating to say at the moment the US government are yet again hitting the paranoia highs with ‘incase of terrorist attacks’ when more americans are probably killed in road accidents than by random terrorists. It is public knowledge now in UK that secret tests were carried out on the public in the 60’s with the aid of the American government..without the public knowing, you are naive to think that governments would not do something similar again.

  91. tash says:

    It’s as simple as this.. it comes down to psychology.. why even fight something that is obviously a hoax?
    Counter measures to assure us how wrong the movie is only proves that there is some substance to it.
    .. I agree that this site is trying to un-educate people back to the old ways .. but the world is waking up
    Namaste

  92. MikeC says:

    Why fight somethign that is obviously a hoax?

    Because lots of peole believe it anyway, and because it slanders me an people I work with, and because it is harmful to the people who do honestly beleive it.

    Debunking is a social service.

  93. Strawman says:

    Why fight a hoax?

    I suggest you look in to this thread: http://metabunk.org/threads/251-Advocating-violence-against-quot-Chemtrail-quot-planes

    Reason enough?

  94. Noble says:

    Frankly, just name ONE thing that shows that Monsanto has participated in any horrendous deeds..

    I’m only asking for one instance.

    please

  95. Noble says:

    Also, Frankly, what makes you think that anyone on this site is so naive that we don’t think that if “the government” has participated in something in the past, that they won’t be involved in the future…or now?!

    I don’t see a single statement on this site which reflects such belief…do you?!

    How did you come up with that?

    This site is all about a LACK OF EVIDENCE that the trails said to be part of some “spray program” are anything more than contrails in varying atmospheric conditions.

    Nobody is making any claims about what “the government” is, or isn’t, capable of.

    We KNOW that there has been testing of aerosols in the atmosphere….no one is denying that here!

    This site is all about the claims made by people who see/photograph trails in the sky, or find chemicals/elements in the water, air and soil…who make assumptions and jump to conclusions based on a LACK of knowledge in these subjects!

    No one here denies that there is a possibility that there ARE “chemtrails”…just that there is a large group of people who are misunderstanding what they see in the sky….and the people in this group are spreading ignorance as truth.

Comments are closed.