There are lots of photos of contrails from World War II. I’ve collected a few of them here:
https://plus.google.com/photos/107393796095434664991/albums/5235534135256807809
The collection shows all types of contrail formation – from the very short ones, to long persistent trails that spread out like cloud cover.
Why so many photos of contrails in WWII, and not so many from the 50’s and 60’s? The simple reason is that contrails only form at very low temperatures, which are normally found at high altitude, and in peacetime there was NO REASON TO FLY THAT HIGH until the advent of commercial jet travel a few decades later.
The only reason these planes are flying that high is so they can avoid anti-aircraft fire. The bombers fly as high as they can, and then their fighter escorts fly even higher, so they can see incoming aircraft targeting the bombers, and swoop down to attack. This type of escorting is called “Top Cover”. The most classic example of this is the famous photo “Top cover over J-Group”:
This photo was taken over Emden, Germany, on September 27th, 1943, by Stanley M. Smith.
Contrails are NOT Chemtrails (as mentioned by name in the 2001 Space Preservation Act aka H.R. 2977.
CHEMTRAILS are the name given to chemical trails laden with barium, aluminum, and a host of other caustic and toxic products which are claimed to be used as part of ‘geomodification’, or weather control technology.
MULTIPLE independent news sources as well as government documents and documented history PROVE BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT that this is occurring.
By viewing this movie ‘CHEMA-KILL’, one can see for their self that CHEMTRAILS are real, distinguished from vapor trails, and are a public health risk.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQImJJTGmLA
DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH – START HERE!!!!!
Remain Vigilant! Stay Sovereign!!
SPUSA
Hi SPUSA, that’s rather a long set of videos, and most the the material in it seems to have already been covered here.
Perhaps you could point out the most irrefutable evidence there, so I can start with that. I don’t want to go over old ground again.
On point though – sure, contrails are no chemtrails, especially if you define “chemtrails” as “chemical trails laden with barium, aluminum, and a host of other caustic and toxic products which are claimed to be used as part of ‘geomodification’, or weather control technology.” However, it seems pretty clear that most, if not all, of the photos and videos of “chemtrails” are actually of contrails.
Nobody has produced any evidence of barium in trails. If you have some, then please share the lab report.
Sovereign,
If “MULTIPLE independent news sources as well as government documents and documented history PROVE BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT that this is occurring), perhaps you could supply us with the reports. I’ve seen statements similar to yours and haven’t received a reply.
Another statement you make, “distinguished from vapor trails”, has always puzzled me. Are you saying that you can tell a “chemtrail” from a contrail by observation from the ground? I fail to see how that is even remotely possible. Please enlighten, beyond the wrong “persistence” line. How do you tell the difference?
Sorry. I Just wanted to say thanks for this blog. Lots of interesting data
It seems you have not even watched the full documentary, which is why you are asking for ‘lab reports’.
If you HAD watched, you would have seen multiple news reports whereby air/water testing was done right after chemtrail spraying, and showed high levels of barium and aluminum present in samples.
It’s only 102 minutes, if you can’t pay attention long enough don’t blame anybody but yourself.
Also, just like your breath on a cold winter day, contrails dissipate quickly.
CHEMTRAILS are persistent, and spread out creating a haze (also many times they are in grid or ‘X’ patterns).
Water vapor contrails do not maintain their body for longer than half a minute at most.
Wake up dude!
Unless I missed one, the “testing” has already been discussed and shown to actually only contain normal levels of the chemicals tested:
Carnicoms test:
https://contrailscience.com/chemical-analysis-of-contrails/
The KSLA test:
https://contrailscience.com/barium-chemtrails/
The Arizona Skywatch test:
https://contrailscience.com/chemtrail-non-science/
Please let me know if there is another test I did not cover.
Contrails sometimes do dissipate rapidly, but sometimes they spread out to cover the sky – it depends on the weather, have a look in the Encyclopedia:
From:
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9074829
More info on the subject:
https://contrailscience.com/persisting-and-spreading-contrails/
I understand that the one reporter misunderstood those particular test results, and even if you take the whole ‘KSLA’ segment out of the picture, you STILL have to content with the whole range of other reports as well as the admissions by the U.S. and other western governments about their ‘geoengineering’ programs.
OR
Take the stance that there is nothing to see here. The government does not have any programs having anything to do with biological testing, or weather modification. Never has, and never will.
All the various reports are all hoax lies, and everybody involved is a wacko ‘conspiracist’ that needs immediate mandatory pharmacological intervention, and to be placed on the ‘terrorist watch list’ including RFID chip tracking (if that existed…but it doesn’t).
Your government loves you. You are free. Pay your taxes. Join the army. Trust the government. Worship the State. Be a good citizen, don’t think, don’t question authority.
Move along now.
Let’s go with option A there, since B was clearly in jest.
Which reports? Every single report I’ve seen has, if you examine it closely, shown just the amount of barium you would expect based on how they did the test.
If there were all these reports, then why is there no list of reports? Can you even point to one of these reports that firstly detects anything unusual, and secondly that you think actually links ANYTHING to contrails.
Just because you hate and distrust the government, it does not necessarily imply that contrails are somehow different now. Those are unrelated things. You need some actual evidence. Like a lab report.
Is there any particular reason why we can’t have a corrupt government and persistent contrails at the same time?
Not sure why they have to be mutually exclusive.
MMB:
I’m not sure they have been any other way.
Ever.
I say watch the documentary full length on google, if that’s easier for you.
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8604844090880701786
If there are any errors, they are mine. If I included a faulty report, then discount it and use the rest of the valid information to whatever benefit you can derive from it.
You claim I jest, yet you don’t make any acknowledgment admitting otherwise. You can’t have it both ways.
Remain Vigilant! Stay Sovereign!
SPUSA
Why don’t you take out the false reports? How is the viewer supposed to know what’s correct or not in your movie if you admit that there are false reports in it?
And half of it seems to be about Morgellons. What is the evidence of connection to contrails there?
SPUSA:
But they are all the same – as you say “All the various reports are all hoax lies, and everybody involved is a wacko ‘conspiracist’”. Or let’s suggest more kindly that the participants lacked sufficient scientific understanding to comprehend puzzling events…
SPUSA:
I see, Uncinus IS the “Powers That Be”. How did you deduce that?
UNCINUS
For which you’ll have to leave your “last refuge” and own up to not listening carefully to what others say, or ever being able to change your standpoint when confronted with better and more reasonable ideas.
Everything you mention has been originated either by people who do NOT understand science, or those that DO understand it, but are extremely malicious.
Are you the former, or the latter?
To answer one question, I cannot ‘take back’ in the sense of altering the documentary, but I can fairly amend my position as I should if the data has changed.
In the case of the single 3minute news clip, out of the rest of the movie that’s over an hour and a half long filled with true and compelling evidence, I refuse to get caught up any further with all you ‘denial zealots’ who keep using the ‘its really only just contrails’ argument ad-infinitum.
If you really have such a vested interest in believing ‘it’s really only just contrails’, then by all means use your 1st amendment and profess your blatant naivete and ignorance to any and all that would pay you any mind.
For the rest of us, ‘chemtrails’ are not the only piece of the global eugenics puzzle, set about by the world’s multi-trillion dollar security apparatus, and the ideological societies which govern it.
Maybe take a look at another piece of the puzzle it might help you gain perspective:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxRnkfvO_EU
That pertains to the electromagnetic warfare element.
And for UNCIUS:
Your glaring mistake of not understanding the chemtrails/morgellons connection lies in the apparent fact that you did not pay attention to the rense.com interview portion of the film, or maybe you didn’t even watch it through at all?
You all really need to visit http://www.infowars.dk/newvideo.html
and beef up on your hard-core documentary knowledge about a vast range of subjects.
also go to
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2488794/1966-Carroll-Quigley-Tragedy-and-Hope-A-History-of-the-World-in-Our-Time
and start reading on one of the MOST knowledgeable, genuine, and revealing looks at the workings of the New World Order.
Until you do…I repeat….Until you do….you are doing nothing more than wasting your time and mine.
Remain Vigilant! Stay Sovereign!
SPUSA
I think I can safely say you have strayed off topic when you ask me to read a 1090 page book on world history, written in 1966, in order to discuss if contrails are acting abnormally nowadays.
It seems the entire basis of you argument is just that you feel you have grounds to expect the government to do this kind of thing, and yet you have no evidence at all that they are actually doing it.
Really, I’d be happy to address any evidence about odd contrails. But I don’t see you offering any.
All it takes is a search and you can find hordes of video footage showing ‘on & off’ trails left behind planes in mid flight.
Some of the videos clearly show timed intervals between emissions.
You are also completely ignoring the German government’s admission of ‘Geoengineering’, using the same chemical elements that are being reported after ‘spray incidents’ in the USA.
Your denial of evidence does not constitute disproving of the facts.
SPUSA
The “on and off” trails have been explained countless times. It’s simply planes flying through regions of air with varying humidity or temperature.
https://contrailscience.com/broken-contrails/
I’m not familiar with “German government’s admission of ‘Geoengineering’”, perhaps you could provide a link? I hope you don’t mean this though:
https://contrailscience.com/germans-admit-they-used-duppel/
I’m not denying evidence, I’m simply providing very reasonable explanations for that evidence. I think you meant to to say “hypotheses”, rather than “facts” there – since the evidence IS the facts. A hypothesis is a suggested explanation of the facts, or a conclusion that can be reasonably inferred from the facts. One you have a hypothesis, then you’ll need to test it.
For all of those people who are advocates and destroyers of people trying to put out knowledge that Chemtrails are not harmful, You do not belong in America. Maybe you work for the Govt. as damage control on how to cover up or misconstrue the truth. Be an American and stand up for each other. This countrys going to sh.t because of the Greed in our Govt. Money over it’s people. WTF. Those Chemtrails stay in the air longer than clouds!!! I’ve seen and docmented it myself. How the F.ck is that possible?? Water Vapor my ass.. Theres your FACT. Airplanes never did that before. There were no Chemtrails back in the 70’s, 80’s, early 90’s. Why all of sudden they do that now? Why are there some planes that do and some that don’t? Be An American and be proud of where you live. Protect its people. You honestly think disproving people on here is a worthy cause?? Try to prove that they’re wrong and you will find that they were right the whole time. Be on the right side here. We created this country for it’s people and for freedom. I know I’m not that last TRUE American here. A local News Station tested the air after a whole day of Chemtrails filling the sky and low and behold the tests came back with a high number of toxic chemicals in it. There’s your Fact!! After exposure to those chemicals over a long period of time, Extremely Poisonous and Lethal!!! How dare they do that to it’s people!!! For those Spreading the knowledge to others of the Truth, Let Freedom Ring!!! Don’t let people with their slick words and argumentative tones discourge you. They’re good at what they do, which is spin the Truth. That’s their job. Just keep going and Stand together. ” Together We stand, Together We Will Not Fall!!!! ” You can’t Fool me nor will you fool people that know better.
It’s very possible. Contrails are dense clouds (meaning they have more water, in them), hence they often last longer than regular clouds.
No they didn’t, they left a bowl out in the yard for a month, and then found normal levels of environmental chemicals, as you would expect in rain water. See:
https://contrailscience.com/barium-chemtrails/
Your other question have been answered elsewhere on this site. If you want to continue making such bold claims, than I would appreciate it if you could link to the evidence for these claims.
How is believing and trusting in science related to patriotism? I’ve never understood the link. If a majority of the people decided the earth was flat tomorrow, and I knew differently, isn’t it my right as an American to say it’s round? Or does the concept of free speech only apply to YOUR perceived truth?
No, I remember seeing them when I was in elementary school, and I’m almost 50. My father traveled by air twice a week for most of my childhood, so I noticed them.
Yes, trying to teach people some really basic science principles when they so clearly lack them is not just worthy, it’s noble. I admire teachers, especially science teachers. Trying to prove “they’re” wrong is very easy, because they are wrong.
The right side is the one you believe in? I think it is freedom to have differing points of view. It’s how we expand our knowledge. Knowledge is power. And again, patriotism doesn’t affect science knowledge or facts.
And speaking of facts, the report you claim shows toxic levels of chemicals is WRONG. The reporter knows it is wrong, and a correction was made. The mistakes are very easy to spot. The mistakes are quite large. I know this because I spotted them the first time I saw the clip, then researched it just a bit farther than you and communicated with the reporter himself. If he knows it’s wrong, how can anyone use it as fact? I’ve researched it further still. Googling “barium in chemtrails”, I found 46 of the first 100 references use that same WRONG report as a basis of their “facts”. That’s beyond sad and moves well into shameful.
The truth isn’t something that you manufacture, it’s what is supported by the facts. The facts show that contrails are exhaust, comprised of water vapor, CO2, and hydrocarbons as soot. That’s been tested, many times over decades. Facts do not change. Facts are not linked to patriotism or freedom. Facts support each other.
I would rather know the truth based on facts than believe in something without them.
Uncinus & others,
Here is something you guys should read:
Extracted from http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/research/pdf/geo-engineering-0409.pdf
This paper has been prepared by the Climate and Energy: Science and Analysis
Division of the Department of Energy and Climate Change, as a preliminary
assessment of geo-engineering options to mitigate the effects of anthropogenic
greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions on climate.”
A few extracts:
This is just ONE more piece in putting together the aerosol operation puzzle. It fits perfectly with the Obama administration’s proposal of ‘geo-engineering’ (no doubt, the tentative first public admissions of aerosol operations).
Put this in your debunker pipe and smoke it!
I have more for you, but later. I have no time at present.
Remain Vigilant! Stay Sovereign!
SPUSA
Well, yes, we know all this. People have been talking about geoengineering with stratospheric aerosols for decades, and they have been talking about it quite openly, as you see from your quotes.
You don’t need to supply evidence that people are talking about geoengineering, you need to supply some evidence that people are actually doing it.
And if they were, would it look like a persistent contrail? Would it become visible some distance behind the engine?
Uncinus,
I am willing to admit when I encounter someone who displays the initiative of a skilled psy-operator, with the time on their hands to go to the lengths that you do, to attempt to deny any and all atmospheric operations, eugenics experiments, military programs, corporate schemes, or any such activity.
We all acknowledge your stance that all claims of government, supra-government, or corporate shenanigans to the effect of weather management, population control, environmental manipulation are ‘patently false’, to borrow from your messiah Osama bin Laden…er…Obama Joe Biden.
However, still you have yet to tackle the entirety of the picture, as you sit here seemingly stuck in your microscopic view, all things granted for the devil being in the details.
Meaning, take away the few items which may be in contention regarding proving the subject of the existence of ‘Chemtrails’, and you still have well beyond enough substance to hold the hypothesis of aerosol operations to and beyond a statistical significance.
Still need clarification?
Discarding the 1. KSLA report, 2. the German news piece (which you and your buddy claim to be mistranslated), and ….was there anything else that doesn’t meet par with our rigorous standards of testimony?….we are still left with an hour and a half of information that you STILL can not address, lest your strawman ploys fail to continue working.
Let’s break it down and see again, exactly how you feel so completely assured in your level of knowledge as to absolutely mollify any cause for suspicion or reason for investigation.
(Perhaps you have total spectrum awareness and access to data and resources that are the equivalent to a 4 or 5 star general of the armed forces, or one of the NSA’s undisclosed and unofficial positions behind the scenes with your finger on the pulses of all activities currently underway in all theater’s of operations?
Is that how you can say with such absolute clarity that there is ‘nothing to see here folks’? You must be either a super genius, or a total oxygen deprived brain-dead ignoramus. )
AHEM – as I was saying…you have yet to address any of the following, and to put them in perspective for us. As it seems you scoff at the film CHEMA-KILL with something akin to intellectual disdain, it really presents the picture that you really haven’t even seen the thing. That’s why you’re missing all these points:
1. NBC ‘Toxic Sky’ segment.
2. ‘Chemblob’ segment
3. ‘Operation Big City’ A&E segment (Germ warfare by US on New Yorkers)
4. ‘History of US experimentation on armed services’ History Channel segment
5. ‘1st video recorded aerosol operation 1958 in UK’ segment
6. Sr. Rosalie Bertell PhD. Author of ‘Planet Earth: The latest weapons of War’ discussion aerosol ops. segment
7. ‘Clouds of Death’ excerpt segments (BY ALL MEANS WATCH THAT FULL LENGTH DOCUMENTARY ALSO)
8. Dr. Hildegarde Staninger/ Rense radio segment (conclusive laboratory report linking morgellons fiber to aerosol particles)
9. All the half-dozen morgellons full news reports by nearly all the MSM networks.
10. Toxic Sky 2 segment (further admissions the government is ‘preparing’ for aerosol ops.)
11. ‘Toxic Sky’ Hollywood movie, cleverly being used to accomplish desensitization to novelty, and to smokescreen the real operations.
12. The admission that “Cruise missiles were used to disperse sedatives” in the ‘Revolution in Military Affairs and Conflict short of War’ 1994 document AND the video capture of that very thing in the ‘strange spraying cylinder’ segment.
13. All the other segments that show a proclivity of the gigantic and nearly unfathomable military/security apparatus that has co-opted this country to indiscriminately experiment on its own population (and even has laws to provide for it).
NOW –
Go ahead, take it all piece by piece, but also SEE THE BIG PICTURE.
THAT is also why ‘the devil is in the details’, because sometimes focusing too narrowly prevents you from conceptualizing the entirety of the situation.
Same as if you only looked at some colors and lines on a single puzzle piece….you can easily deny there’s a car or flower there, but once you put that piece in with the rest of the puzzle, THEN the picture comes into view and is made complete.
Believe me, unraveling the complexities of the global security / eugenics apparatus is much harder than any Milton Bradley puzzle you’ve ever tried. But, with persistence, the people will eventually figure out what is being done to them, and hopefully put a stop to it.
Enough said?
YOUR TURN
sovereignpatriotusa, while I appreciate the work you did in putting that list together, I’m afraid that it kind of misses the point.
The chemtrail theory says tht contrails now are different to how they were before. None of the 13 points you list above provide any evidence at all to back that up. I have provided a lot of evidence to demonstrate that contrails have not actually changed.
So, with no evidence that contrails have changed, the fact that more people are getting morgellons, or whatever, is entirely irrelevant. If contrails have not changed, then why blame contrails?
Sovereignpatriotusa, you are totally missing the point. You have in your laundry list several rather biased perspectives, i.e. Rense, a Hollywood movie (actually I think it was produced in Austrailia, at least has been shown there), a video documentary which was produced to further the chemtrail theory, and a bunch of rather far-reaching but undocumented claims made by others. You say the KSLA report can be discarded, but you don’t seem to realize that many of the items on your list claim barium are in chemtrails based on that very report. I’ve researched that even further: on any given day Googling “barium in chemtrails”, 46 of the first 100 references used that very same report directly from the opening page. Any theory that clings with such a high percentage of people willing to believe anything and not researching their sources to an easily debunked report just can’t be viable. You might believe all this is happening, and that is your right. But you own “Big Picture” is seen with rather narrow views.
This site is about contrails and the science behind them. The science I have yet to see debunked, although some have tried (for example, Carnicom insists that humidity and vapor point play no part in the formation of a contrail). The interpretation is up to the posters. When someone who claims that the visible trails of a jet plane over their head is chemicals making them sick, is being used to sicken it’s citizens, is used for weather control, eugenics, is used to cloak the invading alien motherships (and yes, there are many people who believe this is the actual truth), is used as a weapon of any type, they are required to provide some PROOF, not just a list of suppositions, suspicions, and bias. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. That is why it’s Chemtrail Theory: There are no chemtrail provable FACTS.
Contrails are visible when the conditions of the atmosphere are right, they have been researched for decades, they have been tested in situ (the only way any testing can be valid) and shown to be water vapor, CO2, and hydrocarbon soot. They mark only a plane’s path. They are a part of the atmosphere and some of the price we pay for living in a industrialized, well-traveled society. These are the proven facts of the case. When you can “debunk” those, have at it.
Sovereign, I’ve just spent a rather enlightening 20 minutes rereading this entire thread beginning to end. Perhaps you should review it yourself. You start with the HR 2977. Easily corrected. Next, the barium report and the “persistence factor” of differenciating. Also both easily corrected. Then talk of “reports”, for which you were asked a copy; nothing apparently was given. Then an admission there is “faulty reports” on the documentary you promote. Corrected that one yourself, more or less. A bit later, you claim the old “switch them on and off” line of malarky. That is also easily corrected with atmospheric sciences and knowing a bit of fluid dynamics. Then your lengthy laundry list of what you hold to be facts/truths/real.
All over a rather short period of time. It doesn’t look well for the theory when so much declared by you to be true is so easily corrected.
It’s ‘interesting”.
stars15k-
Ah, here come Uncinus’ wingman to attempt to bolster the voices of denial against the awareness that anything ‘funny’ is going on with jets, jetfuel, additives, abnormal ‘contrails’, chemical trails, aerosol dispersants and particulates, military operations, biological, toxicological, or other dangerous and undisclosed activities by this here UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT and other private entities.
As we attempt to narrow down the truth, you can’t use it against me when I concede a contested point for the sake of allowing the benefit of the doubt, because there are so many other points which I have brought to the table which continue, continue, continue to be ignored or blown off without good cause.
For one, don’t even bring in your fantastic stories of UFO’s into the conversation, because nobody here has gone there and you are not going to succeed in discrediting me by association.
Second, I don’t care what a google search brings back. A search for ‘hairy beaver’ will get you all kinds of things, but what if I really wanted to find an example of a very furry Castor canadensis?
My ‘laundry list’ as you disparagingly refer to it, contained 13 items, out of which both of you were able to only even meekly address two of them. Sorry boys, you have failed the bonus round.
What I’m really waiting to see either of you do is address these things which you didn’t at all under the false pretense that they were irrelevant.
Not a single one of those items is irrelevant, and I’d like to see you directly rebuke the information contained in them….let’s randomly take #6. ‘Sr. Rosalie Bertell PhD. Author of ‘Planet Earth: The latest weapons of War’ discussion aerosol ops. segment’.
Can we put your own educational level on the record, as you will be debating against Ms. Bertell PhD, who is an accomplished author and researcher? She gets called to the U.N. and other places to answer the really hard questions that you boys just don’t seem to get yet. That’s ok, just zip skip to that part in the documentary to make it easier for your hardworkin’ brains and listen to what the fair gal has to say. Oh, then read her book if you want to make sure you are still right before sayin’ she’s wrong.
And here’s the list of stuff you guys still haven’t addressed as we are looking at the WHOLE PICTURE, and how aerosolized toxicological, chemical, biological, synthetic/nano, or other agents are being deployed within the borders of THESE UNITED STATES as well as the U.K., and how ‘Chemtrails’ fits into that.
Can ya dig?
1. NBC ‘Toxic Sky’ segment.
2. ‘Chemblob’ segment
3. ‘Operation Big City’ A&E segment (Germ warfare by US on New Yorkers)
4. ‘History of US experimentation on armed services’ History Channel segment
5. ‘1st video recorded aerosol operation 1958 in UK’ segment
6. Sr. Rosalie Bertell PhD. Author of ‘Planet Earth: The latest weapons of War’ discussion aerosol ops. segment
7. ‘Clouds of Death’ excerpt segments (BY ALL MEANS WATCH THAT FULL LENGTH DOCUMENTARY ALSO)
8. Dr. Hildegarde Staninger/ Rense radio segment (conclusive laboratory report linking morgellons fiber to aerosol particles from modern aircraft)
10. Toxic Sky 2 segment (further admissions the government is ‘preparing’ for aerosol ops.)
12. The admission that “Cruise missiles were used to disperse sedatives” in the ‘Revolution in Military Affairs and Conflict short of War’ 1994 document AND the video capture of that very thing in the ’strange spraying cylinder’ segment.
13. All the other segments that show a proclivity of the gigantic and nearly unfathomable military/security apparatus that has co-opted this country to indiscriminately experiment on its own population (and even has laws to provide for it).
This site is about contrails, and the the “chemtrail” theory.
The chemtrail theory state that some trails behind planes are different than they used to be.
None of your 13 items offers any evidence that shows that the trails are different.
Now, all the other “evidence” in your 13 items might suggest that sometimes something is sprayed somewhere. But that’s hardly surprising. Crops are dusted every day, mosquito are sprayed every day, clouds are seeded every day. But all that is done without making anything that looks like a spreading contrail.
Where is the evidence that shows these different looking trails? Are these the trails that people think of as “chemtrails”, or are you talking about something completely different?
Take #5, the video looks like mosquito spraying, not at all like “chemtrails”. #3, #4 – nothing that looks like “chemtrails”.
Other segments seems barely relevant. Like #10 – how exactly is (rather specious) admissions that some is preparing for something evidence that they have been doing it on a huge scale for 20 years? Seems a little backward.
Now the one you pick, #6, Rosalie Bertell, were you referring to this video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8NmzfjIkI0#t=1m6s
She says “Jet discharge only lasts for 15 or 16 seconds, whereas chemtrails last for hours”. Which I assume even you would strongly disagree with – as normal contrails can last for hours. So what is the evidence you want me to address there? The whole video just seems to be her parroting chemtail theory claims, then saying she thinks it’s terrible. She start out with an incorrect fact, and then repeats a theory based on that fact. Or are you simply saying that because she got a Phd 43 years ago, then there must be something to the theory? This is your strongest evidence?
Uncinus-
I didn’t realize that the longer somebody has been a doctor, researcher, scientist, the LESS their opinions were worth!
THAT seems backwards to me!
Would you prefer an intern, or maybe it’s the 1st year students who really know it all?
She is not ‘parroting’ anything. She is explaining the science as her ’43’ years of being in the field allows her to.
How many years did you have in the field of those sciences?
And you don’t get to get away with making strawman arguments anymore…we’re not talking about low flying crop dusters, or bug sprayers, so don’t lead us down that road any more than aliens. It’s obvious that #5 has nothing to do with either of those.
You have to ask yourself, does the government have a history of acting first, and disclosing later, or do they always give the American public a full over-view of every program before they enact it?
Common sense and historical perspective should answer this.
‘Chemtrails’ are mere the latest evolution of a long-standing policy of experimentation by the U.S. gov’t, and every day we get closer to revealing exactly what is going on with it.
You two denial trolls won’t stop that.
Quite right, ad hominem argument are fallacious. But what you were doing there is an “argument from authority”, where you are saying that because someone has some credentials, then what they say must be true. Ignore her credentials then, and simply focus on the undeniable fact that she thinks contrails only last 15 seconds, which is obviously false, and even you yourself would agree it is false, would you not?
There are many people with PhDs that hold very unusual opinions. Unfortunately that’s all they are, opinions. There was no evidence at all in that video, just someone saying what they think about chemtrails. If I were to show you a video of Patrick Minnis (PhD in Meterology) saying how he thinks that chemtrails are just a silly conspiracy theory, without presenting any evidence, then that would also be an argument from authority. But Minnis does not simply state that chemtrails are fallacious – he actually explains why, and presents evidence that you can verify yourself, and that is consistent with known science.
And what the goverment is doing or not doing in secret is not the issue here. The question is: “have contrails changed?”, or if you like “are there unusual trails in the sky on a regular basis?”. That’s what this site is about. Now, if one is linked to the other, then fine. But if you agree that trails have NOT changed, then that’s not chemtrails – that’s something else.
So, stick to the theory. What does a chemtrail look like, and how does it differ from a contrail?
Well, in what discipline did she receive her PhD, and what did she research? Both deciding factors in whether or not I would use her information. I’ve seen videos of her, and she is using hearsay…..retelling what she has been told without actual knowledge of the event herself. Her website uses and trusts ground-level air and water testing and makes the leap of “faith” or rather, ignorance that the chemicals found must have assuredly come from the visible plumes of exhaust she has seen over her head. Plus, she should most certainly know that any aerosol will remain suspended for long periods and drift with the wind, like clouds, so nothing “sprayed” over her head will actually have anything to do with what is on her ground or water source. Not very scientific or non-biased.
So here, so you don’t go away without answering your questions:
1&2) They also run similar reports on UFOs, Chupacabras, Bigfoot, etc. Should we give these stories the same weight? All are reported, you seem to choose to believe some, and not others. I chose to believe those with proof.
3, 4, & 5) Not concerned with the visible exhaust plumes today. Another attempt by CT believers to muddy the water by throwing in past programs as evidence the same thing is happening. There is no proof that any of these programs are tied in anyway to chemtrail claims made today.
6, 7, & 8) All self-serving therefore not reliable for hard facts. I would expect any video, speaker, book, DVD, etc by someone who makes their living promoting chemtrails to be biased, unless they are able to back up those claims with hard evidence from valid testing. They don’t.
All the rest: I’m guessing “Toxic Skies 2” is an addition to the previously mentioned NBC news piece in your number one? Same answer applies.
When any of these sources can perform valid testing under exacting additions by qualified, neutral labs, and are able to prove who, how, and why any of the findings came from a visible trail of exhaust and/or pressure-created contrails, then we can talk. Until then, I stick with what is proven: No chemicals but those expected in exhaust have been found and contrails are produced based on atmospheric conditions meeting exhaust.
Oh, and I’m a woman. Why do people keep thinking I’m a man? Nor am I a troll or a shill. I freely answer in public forums, like yourself. If I am designated as a troll, than so are you. Uncinus runs this board, therefore is most definitely not a troll. And the “shill” thing? The only people making money from chemtrails are the people who write books, make documentaries, and give personal appearances, in other words, the chemtrail promoters.
1. Uncinus –
“If I were to show you a video of Patrick Minnis (PhD in Meterology) saying how he thinks that chemtrails are just a silly conspiracy theory,…”
Yeah, as if showing me a video of the head government spook in command of the NASA operations likely involved in what has been termed ‘chemtrails’ will prove anything except that he’s just one more high-paid either sold-out or compartmentalized and ignorant agent.
A few points on Patrick Minnis.
Note: ISI Assigned Category: Geosciences???( Changing the weather / Climate?)
Note: CSU at Fort Carson, Colorado, studied Atmospheric Science, major ties to the U.S.A.F. Academy in Colorado, Springs a few miles away that taught “Chemtrail” courses dating back to the early1990’s ???
( http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/spring-05.html )
Note: LTV-Vought Corp, ties to every major manufacture with government contracts for weapons and aircraft in the U.S.???
Note: 1978 to 1981, only three years to become the senior research scientist at NASA Langley Research Center. ??? ( Caught the fast track big time or he is one hell of a ‘yes’ man. )
Note: Research interest, Satellite Remote Sensing of the Atmosphere, Clouds, and the Surface
Atmospheric Radiation, Climate ??? ( Atmospheric Radiation / Forced Radiation a component of the CT issue? )
Patrick Minnis, what does this company man / Atmospheric Scientist really do for the government?
Is he just one of NASA’s top Atmospheric scientist or is he one of the Government’s chief scientific advisors involved in this Chemtrail Spraying operation?
One thing that Mr. Minnis does for sure is DEBUNK anything relating to Chemtrail Spraying, it is obvious that if he did not, he would not be the chief Atmospheric scientist at NASA’s Langley Research Center for very long.
There is much to question and should be questioned about Mr. Minnis, what he says regarding Chemtrails and his career that has been so close to classified military projects over the years.
About Patrick Minnis:
http://www-pm.larc.nasa.gov/pages/minnis_home.html
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/news/researchernews/rn_minnis.html
{{Minnis is a member of the Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES), Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM), Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation (CALIPSO) and CloudSat science teams, and also leads the Langley Cloud and Radiation Group. Minnis’ group is developing methods for detecting contrails from space and determining their impact on climate. Minnis is also developing near-real time cloud products, the first assimilation in numerical forecast models, and will be using the data for icing predictions.}}
So basically Mr. Minnis is TIED IN EXPLICITLY with the programs designed to scatter barium and other elements which ‘duct’ high-powered EMF and scalar waves, AAAAANNNNNNDDDDD his ties to the H.A.A.R.P program are exactly what would be expected as they are completely interconnected.
It’s no wonder that he’s also also playing part in the PR propaganda of denial, disinformation, and misinformation.
How appropriate that his medium is USA TODAY, owned by Gannett Company which just so happens to also print all the major military magazines such as Army Times, Navy Times, etc… through it’s client subsidiary Army Times Publishing Comany.
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/resources/basics/2001-03-07-contrails.htm
Thank you so very much for supplying that information.
I think we can rule out Patrick Minnis as any sort of ‘unbiased’ viewpoint, especially in comparison with Sr. Rosalie Bertrell who last I knew was called before the United Nations assembly to lend her expertise and credible authority on the subject of depleted uranium (DU) poisoning. That’s a whole other subject in itself. The point is, she’s working to protect people, while your guy is the very picture of an insider with conflict of interest.
stars15k-
I have absolutely no care as for what genitalia you have or don’t have between your legs, nor for what hormones course your veins, nor for what polluted ideas you have about what constitutes scientific proof, because it seems you just won’t be happy unless a jet comes down and squirts some juice in your personal piss cup for you to sample.
You seem to satisfy only yourself, when you come up with these blanket justifications for why there’s just nothing worth paying attention to.
You once again do the muddying of waters when you try to discredit by association, first flying saucers, now bigfoot. If that isn’t the definition of a ‘troll’, somebody who repeatedly does that as well as your other superficial and transparent attempts to stifle the questioning and deciphering of the government’s activities, then we are going to have to notify Webster’s to make the correction and issue a reprint.
I think you had better pay attention to what is happening worldwide, outside your own narrow and blind view.
For example:
http://www.willthomas.net/chemtrails/Articles/ITALIANS_CONCERNED_OVER_CHEMTRAILS.htm
Ten dollars for a donut that you don’t even read the article through to the end, with any real intention to figure out what’s worth figuring out.
Take that to the bank and spank it thank you!
Okay, so let’s assume that Minnis, like me, is an agent of evil.
Can you point to anything he has said that you can demonstrate to be wrong?
Anything?
Wouldn’t it be nice if it were that easy, much more accurate than sampling water that’s been sitting in a bowl on the hood of a car for a month eh? I know the government has sampled contrails (yes even persisiting contrails), but chemtrailers aren’t willing to accept any results from them. The strange thing is, considering the dire threat “chemtrails” supposedly represent, I’m surprised that chemtrailers gone up and sampled the trails themselves. Sure it might cost quite a bit of money, but there has to be some chemtrailer that actually believes strongly enough to fork out the $$$ to make it happen. If it ever does happen, I do hope they take James Randi or with them to make sure the sampling and testing is done without bias.
You say this and then link an article by William Thomas? Someone who (on that very website you linked) is selling a book titled “Chemtrails Confirmed 2004” and a video/cdrom titled “Chemtrails: Mystery Lines In The Sky”.
This is from the end of the “Counting Contrails” article on his website-
I think we can also rule William Thomas out as any sort of ‘unbiased’ viewpoint.
So now that we’ve determined that argument from authority is a draw, why not get down to the real question.
Will no chemtrailer ever step up to the plate and answer this question?
SPUSA:
Patrick Minnis:
Co-I, EOS Clouds and the Earths Radiant Energy System (CERES) international Science Team (1992 to present):
Dr. Minnis leads Cloud Working Group responsible for deriving cloud properties globally from TRMM, Terra, and Aqua satellite imagery coincident with CERES radiation flux measurements.
PI, Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Program (1993 – Present):
Dr. Minnis has two PI leadership roles on different aspects of ARM. Directs a research team implementing algorithms to operation ally derive cloud and radiation properties from satellite data over ARM sites. He also leads a group that develops and validates new methods for deriving clear radiance fields, surface temperature, emissivity, and albedo, and cloud properties from GOES and AVHRR data.
PI, ASAP Icing Detection Project (2002 – Present):
Leads a team developing a robust real-time satellite icing detection system for the USA. Currently implementing the system in an operational mode as part of the NCAR/FAA Current Icing Potential product.
PI, ESE Contrail Study (2004 – Present):
Dr. Minnis serves as PI for two separate proposals. Leads an international analysis group to relate contrail formation, optical properties, growth, and lifetimes to air traffic and meteorology using various model, FAA, and satellite datasets. Leads a research team to model contrails to more accurately assess their climate impact and predictability.
PI, Meteosat Second Generation (MSG) Science Team:
Dr. Minnis leads an international research group to develop and apply a new group of state-of-the-art methods for deriving cloud properties and surface emissivity and reflectance.
PI, NASA Decision Support through Earth Science Results Project (2005 – Present):
With a NOAA Co-PI leads research effort to improve short-term weather forecasts by assimilating his real-time satellite-derived cloud properties into state-of-the-art (RUC) mesoscale numerical weather prediction models.
Co-I, NASA Energy- and Water-Cycle Supported (NEWS) Research (2005 – Present):
Leads a cloud retrieval working group to derive accurate 3-D cloud fields by combining and analyzing MODIS, CALIPSO, CloudSat data.
He has also written 153 scientific papers on the atmosphere…
These are his deeds, SPUSA, as opposed to your weasel words.
Who’s the SPOOK?
(I’m sorry, Uncinus, but this guy’s beyond the pale!)
SPUSA:
This “gent” declined to debate with me past the first exchange of views, as soon as I mentioned some of the scientific results of sampling trails, which are easily available on the web.
I don’t reckon it’s worth putting up a donut for your ten bucks…
You’d best spend it getting a science education.
Suntour-
Where do you keep getting this ‘sitting in a bowl on the hood of a car for a month’ nonsense???
He says “I had it sit out in my yard, on my dad’s pick-up truck”.
Quite obviously, for the bowl to have sat out for a month, it would be non-sequitur to the context of him having taken the pictures of persistent lingering contrails that very day.
Hence, your attempt to frame the situation disingenuously has come to the surface.
Uncinus –
On what point would you like me to debate Mr. Minnis?
I understand you like to make the claim that contrails may on occasion in the right weather conditions ( ie perfect temperature, humidity, barometric readings etc…) “sometimes persist and spread outwards to form a layer of cirrus cloud” as you say.
Are you saying that occasional phenomena is responsible for the other 99% of times that the atmospheric factors are NOT in the favor of persistent contrails, and yet THERE THEY ARE in the sky in unnatural patterns.
Also, you can’t have it both ways. If it’s windy enough to ‘blow contrails together into grids and X’s’, how exactly does the contrail maintain it’s perfect shape in such gusty conditions? As far as any sort of smoke, or vapor I’ve ever seen, when the wind is strong the substance gets scattered every which way and quickly dissipates from view.
And you too need to correct your KSLA ‘executive summary’. NO WHERE is it said that the man leaves a bowl out for a month, and (again) it would be non-sequitur to the context of him having taken the pictures on the say day he says he put out the containers. That’s DIRTY JOURNALISM.
Jazzroc-
Mr. Minnis’ resume does not impress me, even though me may be a smart guy. There are lots of smart guys in the government and military / security apparatus. That doesn’t mean that they are all out there telling you the truth, exposing what operations are going on behind-the-scenes.
Most of the ones in those positions actually seem required to do the opposite, signing non-disclosure agreements and the like. Uncle Sam doesn’t like giving the full picture to Mr. John Q. Public very often, if at all.
I think there are enough red flags to warrant a much closer investigation into the matter. It is not a closed book, especially as further light is shed upon the HAARP program and other activities by NASA, Air Force, and Navy.
Or you would be much more comfortable if people didn’t ask questions or pay attention to anything more than American Idol?
Remain vigilant! Stay sovereign!
It’s from Bill Nichols own comments on the YouTube video:
“it was rainwater. i collected it in two separate bowls on the hood of a pickup truck in my backyard. … i don’t recall exactly when i put the bowls there, but they were there for about a month before i contacted ksla.”
And where did you get that 99% figure? Can you back that up with some statistics?
That’s where I got that “nonsense” and it is indeed nonsense.
Thanks for posting that Uncinus.
Uncinus,
As of yet, it is not possible to confirm ‘grandmacaesar’ as the genuine ‘Bill Nichols’ of Stamps, AR.
I have looked for some time at ‘grandmacaesar’s youtube page, and find no indication that this is the real Mr. Nichols. I have contacted ‘grandmacaesar’ and not received any reply.
Despite the few SPAMMING POSTS that ‘this is the guy and I left out the bowls for months’ on one youtube video, I would not bet my life that they are the same person.
Therefore, at first blush your screenshot may appear conclusive, but in fact it is far from so. What you actually hear the man in the video say, does not match up with your portrayal and version of events.
I am going to attempt to get in contact with Mr. Nichols personally, and attempt to video tape my conversation with him (on speakerphone) so that we can get some better answers to these questions.
Regardless, as previously stated, even without the 2 minute news clip from KSLA, the case for aerosol saturation of the environment with toxic heavy metals for use with cutting-edge communications and weapons projects involving HAARP and similar programs are just too much to ignore. For instance, the Eastland patent of which I know you are aware, which yet again outlines plans for barium dispersal.
Some threads we could pull on if we had more clearance are here:
http://www.dtic.mil/srch/doc?collection=t3&id=AD0739194 {{Studies of Barium Excitation by Molecular Beam Magnetic Resonance Techniques.}}
http://www.dtic.mil/srch/doc?collection=t3&id=ADA121087 {{Numerical Simulation of a Possible Freezing and Sheet Formation Mechanism for Barium Cloud Striations.}}
Additionally, other military programs outline the use of barium oxide and aluminum oxide for propagating EMF waves. If you read the Eastland patent (found here or at another website of your choice http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/4686605.html ) then you would be aware of this being ‘proposed’ over 20 years ago.
Are we to assume the military has just been sitting on its hands in regards to this type of technology?
There are just too many official sources outlining the use of such materials. Some I have posted above, others like this patent from Bernard Eastland (which I am aware has been presented to you before…) can be directly backed up with videos such as this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxRnkfvO_EU
I am taking the temporary position that con/chemtrails need not necessarily be part of any plan for global depopulation per se, and that will allow us to focus on their application as part of a possible undisclosed program aimed at command and control of the global airspace, both atmospheric and electromagnetic.
Again, that video is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxRnkfvO_EU
If in fact the military security apparatus is using a top-level program to modify the conditions of the battlespace (which they have always done as far as they could reach), and either military or commercial aircraft (or a combination) are being employed to meet their objectives, then we should more closely examine the issue.
Is there any reason we should not? Especially when the consequences for detrimental effects on lifeforms exist, completely unintentional or otherwise.
Would you argue against?
So, again…
just for the sake of a new tact, let’s remind ourselves to leave behind any notion or suspicion regarding biological experimentation using contrails as a vehicle for delivery.
We are now completely focusing on the much firmer ground that support the existence of a top-level command/control operation involving atmospheric and electromagnetic programs, which are potentially using aerosols as part of said programs.
I think I am going to use part of this post to include myself in another conversation on your board in which there seems to be another salient individual who made lots of sense to me.
as always…
Remain Vigilant! Stay Sovereign!!
SPUSA
For what it is worth, I am a Boeing engineer with 20 years of experience in the aerospace industry.
* There are no special tanks anywhere on our airplanes to hold chemicals to be sprayed out.
* There are no spray nozzles on the airplanes either, unless you count the emergency fuel dump nozzles on the widebody jets.
* This can be readily ascertained by simply looking through an airplane before the interior wall panels are installed. Here is a list of all the tanks which are on a jetliner:
** Fuel, potable water, waste water, engine fire suppressant (Halon + other stuff), cargo fire suppressant (just Halon), hydraulic reservoirs. On the new airplanes you will also see tank-like devices which generate nitrogen to inert the fuel tanks.
* Further, there is no room for such stuff to get installed. You would have to carry TONS of liquid to make spray trails independent of the exhaust condensation, and the only liquid we carry tons of is Jet-A fuel.
* In Everett Washington, the Seattle flight museum has a restoration center where you can go see dismantled airplanes being readied for display in the museum. The work is done almost entirely by volunteers. I assume other flight museums have similar workshops. If you can find one where you live, go to the restoration center and see the planes up close. There’s no where to hide a sprayer system where it wouldn’t be seen by maintenance crews.
* The Boeing final assembly plant is open for tours by the public, and VIPs from all over the world can get close-up tours. The airplanes are built in a staggered sequence, so that two airplanes side-by-side are usually being made for two different airlines.
* The majority of Boeing’s production is sold overseas. In fact, the company is the nation’s largest exporter.
* Thus, if a domestic airplane was modified for “chemtrail production” in the factory, it would be as easy as pie for a foreign VIP to walk over and say, “What are these fancy tanks and sprayers on the American plane which aren’t on my airplane?”
* If any airplane WAS modified for chemtrail to add chemtrail sprayers, the thousands of Boeing employees would have to know. I don’t work in Fuels, and I can identify every tank and tube in the wing area.
* If thousands of Boeing employees knew, then so would thousands of supplier employees who go through our factories, thousands of airlines employees who go through our factories, and all the FAA and NTSB and DOT people as well. Also, our airplanes and factories are inspected by the Aviation Authorities of foreign countries (like EASA from Europe) and they would also need to be in on the conspiracy.
* There would simply be too many people involved to prevent this from leaking out. If the chem trail sprayers were being added in the factory, the secret would be out.
* So what if the chemtrail sprayers were being added by an aftermarket shop?
* You’re back to the same problem. It takes hundreds of people to design, build, and install a major modification on a jetliner, and the mod shops are just as open as Boeing is. You wouldn’t be able to keep the secret.
* Further, most airlines have their planes maintained by outside suppliers, who would have to be in on the conspiracy. Those who do their own maintenance do the work in open bays that again would make it easy to view the modification.
* And you have the same problem that you need to get thousands of maintenance people, suppliers, and certification authorities in on the conspiracy. It would have leaked by now. All it takes is one guy with a cell phone camera, and the world would know.
* So what if they somehow managed to do all this stuff anyway? Now you have to realize that somebody, somewhere, has to be pumping TONS of chemtrail chemicals into these mysterious hidden tanks on the airplanes. You would need a fill valve, and a distribution system, and special trucks carrying the chemicals disguised as fuel trucks. That would take thousands more people to be in on the conspiracy.
* One giveaway would be two fuel trucks pulling up to the same jetliner – one with the fuel and one with the chemicals. Remember, we’re talking about tons of liquid here.
* It just doesn’t work – you would need independent chemical fill ports, and somebody, somewhere, would notice.
* And while we’re talking about it, remember that every jetliner pilot has to check the weight of the plane and calculate a talk off runway length and other factors. The charts are the same for every jetliner of a given type, but if there really were chemtrail sprayers, then the charts for those airplanes would have to be different to account for the tons of chemicals that might be on the airplane.
* So, I really don’t think there is any way to hide the sprayers on jetliners. Too many people would have to know, and it would be too easy to detect by passerby.
* So, what if the chemtrail chemicals are in the jet fuel? This wouldn’t require ANY visible modifications to the airplanes, and far fewer people would have to know about the conspiracy.
* This would be harder to refute, BUT, you would have to discard the “on and off” contrails as being caused by pilots turning sprayers on and off. All the fuel on the plane came from the same fuel trucks and the same fuel tanks, so the supposed chemtrail would have to be continuous from takeoff until landing. I think that would have been noticed by now.
* So to my mind, that pretty much eliminates the possibility of using jetliners to create chemtrails.
* Which means you have to be using military jets, and thousands of them, flying unnoticed back and forth on normal commercial routes. So now you have to have all the air traffic controllers in on the conspiracy as well.
* And the planes will again need special tanks for the chemicals, and special fill ports, and special sprayers, and special tanker trucks filling the chemical tanks on the planes, special non-military suppliers delivering the stuff, and you’re right back to the same issue of needing to keep thousands of people from talking.
Bottom line:
You would need a special delivery system on the airplanes.
You would need a special fill system.
You would need independent tanker trucks.
You would need a separate supply chain.
You would need thousands and thousands of people to hold their tongues, and never have even ONE person leave any incriminating evidence in a safe deposit box to be discovered after their deaths.
It ain’t happening.
boenoid,
Unfortunately the chemtrailers stopped listening to you at your first statement. The “I am a Boeing engineer with 20 years of experience in the aerospace industry.” instantly put them into “you’re a paid government shill” mode. So to them, anything you said after that is going to be misinformation and debunking.
Even though everything you said makes perfect sense, but they will dismiss it because they’re paranoid conspiracy freaks who can’t understand atmospheric science.
Mr. Suntour
“Unfortunately the chemtrailers stopped listening to you at your first statement. The “I am a Boeing engineer with 20 years of experience in the aerospace industry.” instantly put them into “you’re a paid government shill” mode. So to them, anything you said after that is going to be misinformation and debunking.”
Quoted for it’s sad truth.
I’ve made this comment by boenoid into its own post. Please add related comments there:
https://contrailscience.com/chemtrail-plausibility-study/
I re-posted beonoid’s ‘plausibility’ argument many times throughout the forum.prisonplanet.tv website, the premier forum of the ‘Alex Jones’ crowd, next to my own contributions which includes the ‘CHEMA-KILL 2.0’ assemblage.
http://unhypnotize.com/chemtrails-project-cloverleaf/6264-chema-kill-movie-extended-version-2-0-1-15-a.html
From this, I hope many visitors will be brought into the conversation, able to look at some of the most convincing points from both sides.
I summed it up by saying “I propose, that even if 99% of ‘persistent contrails’ are completely normal, & there are only 1% that corresponds to a ‘conspiratorial’ agenda then it needs to be flushed out all the same.
It’s too powerful to ignore, considering the other types of evidence present, empirical and circumstantial.”
Now with many more individuals interested in the HAARP program and related activities, perhaps more answers will be forthcoming.
Stay Sovereign America!
interesting.
You say: “considering the other types of evidence present”
Could you elaborate? Summarize what you think the most critical/damning evidence is?
I propose, that even if 99% of flatulence completely normal, & there are only 1% that corresponds to a ‘conspiratorial’ agenda then it needs to be flushed out all the same.
I propose, that even if 99% of human beings are completely normal, & there are only 1% that corresponds to a ‘conspiratorial’ agenda then it needs to be flushed out all the same.
Where does this paranoid game END?!
Sorry, there are too many things happening down here at ground level to worry about. Why focus on the absurd?!
The number of trails that are “completely normal” is 100% until there is the SLIGHTEST bit of evidence to suggest otherwise. I have yet to see ANY credible evidence that suggests any such thing. Even if there are thousands of weather mod projects going on around the world, there is ZERO evidence that a single one of these programs results in the long lasting white trails that we all see, and have seen for decades. The whole “chemtrail” “debate” is nonsense based on assumption, speculation and ignorance. It’s perpetuated by paranoia. Please, someone prove me wrong! The science is VERY basic stuff!
Chemtrailers should be ashamed for spreading such trash.
Your sub-intellectual taunts and lashings-out are ‘thought-terminators’ that attempt to stigmatize the act of questioning and following up on the lines of information present, about activities which deserve a valid and thorough investigation; at least one must possess an open mind sufficient for inductive and deductive reasoning, for the probable, improbable, possible, and seemingly impossible phenomena that can and often do occur as a result of the actions of the Military Industrial Complex.
I certainly do not feel ashamed at doing my best to understand the ‘operational plan’ as if seeing it from the eyes of the globalist architects; doing so from their own works & words which are widely available in the public forum should one commit any sufficient effort. The rounded whole of my understanding is that these powers-that-be are progressively working on the gradual and inevitable attempt to domineer the fate of humanity including measures that weaken, harm, and manipulate the ‘lower hanging fruits’ of world social hierarchy.
In this, I find that the whole concept of the potential for mass-scientific and military programs aimed at the populace to fit exceedingly well within the former hypothesis.
Of course, you are welcome to disagree or disavow any personal knowledge you may have regarding the plausibility of aerial operations as you see fit. Or if there are more pressing concerns than the potential contamination of our air and bodies, then I happily defer to your personal choice to invest your time and energy in another area.
That begs the question why you make a regular habit of attempting to spear every person not touting your agenda, but I’ll leave that to a better qualified participant.
Stay Sovereign America!
SP, your arguments seem to focus on saying that the PTB have the ability, the inclination and the track record to be performing such an operation.
If we take that as read, then what’s the evidence that they are actually doing it?
I mean there are thousands of things they could be potentially be doing. What’s the actual evidence they are doing something with persisting contrails?
“agenda” ?!?
“sub-intellectual” Coming from you? Too funny!
When did combating the spreading of ignorance by demanding evidence become an “agenda”?!
And your contention that I must not have an open mind is nothing but more assumption. How do YOU know I haven’t taken in info from both sides and logically came to a conclusion based on the information from both sides of the issue? It seems like you are saying that you are right about me simply because you believe it. At least I have verifiable science to back me up. You wish you did!
YOU are spreading fear and paranoia based on speculation and assumption. No matter how you slice your carp, it still stinks. Go ahead, paint a rosy picture of your intentions. I see through it.
Oh, by the way, if “doing your best” doesn’t include actual education in the subjects that prove you wrong or even a trip to an atmospheric scientist to ask some questions, I have to wonder what YOUR agenda is. So far it seems like you people are only interested in spreading lies based on complete ignorance and paranoia.
It’s like this. Here’s an allegory to help the point across.
Say you and I are in the jungle. “Watch out for tigers…”, I say, pointing down at several large impressions in the dirt around your feet. “I have heard reports of men being eaten alive near here, from some village men.”
You glance quickly around the trees, then look squarely at me and say, “Phooey, I don’t see any tigers here. You have no evidence, and I accuse you of alarmism!”
“Well..”, I respond, “…for starters I have already told you of the accounts coming from some individuals who were nearby when the previous tiger attacks happened. One man was a fisherman, the other was a prisoner, and yet another was the village witch-doctor.”
You fire back, ” Ah ha! The fisherman is obviously not a qualified witness, as he is used to dealing with fish and is out of his element when dealing with tigers. He probably could not make a valid appraisal and we must discount his testimony.”
“This prisoner…”, you continue, “is again a perfect example of somebody who cannot be trusted, about tigers or anything else as they are a compromised source of information.”
“And lastly, how can we trust the word of a witch-doctor, somebody who claims to be privy to special knowledge based on unpredictable and subjective rituals? Surely his association with that tom-foolery discredits any contribution he makes about tigers.”, you confidently state.
“Ok”, I reply. “What about these large impressions in the dirt at our feet? In my opinion, the shape and pattern that they are in bears an extremely striking resemblance to what would be created if a tiger had recently walked by here – a center depression with three smaller satellite depressions, repeated many times in a row leading up and down this path we are on.”
“Those?”, you sharply retort. “That could be anything. Take this one here….it’s shaped differently than the others.
“That’s because I accidentally stepped on that one.”, I return.
You then thoughtfully say, “And this other one is smaller than some of the others.”
“Looks like it was from a smaller tiger”, is my observation.
Now you are getting frustrated with my explanations. “Bah! Big tigers, small tigers, I don’t see any evidence for tigers. Just a bunch of untrustworthy reports and these dirt impressions that could have just as easily been made by a precocious child using different sets of smooth round stones to badly imitate the tracks of a tiger.”
“Have it your way.”, I say, as I continue on my path, watching my back and warning other travelers to watch out for tigers.
Ok, it’s late, and my story-telling abilities wane past 2am, but I hope I gave an honest and entertaining perspective of how I see your quest for evidence. You won’t see what you don’t want to see.
I DON’T want to see indicators that our PTB are conducting wacky operations, but if I catch even a whiff of it on the wind I am going to ask if anybody else is smelling it too.
I WISH I could let the whole subject go down the memory hole, but my conscience and intelligence won’t let me.
There’s nothing wrong with that, is there?
That’s an interesting analogy, but the problem with analogies is that you can craft one that makes you argument look good.
It’s not really you warning about tigers and pointing at footprints. Tigers are well known to science, and are expected in jungles.
It’s more like you are saying “Watch out for dragons”, and pointing to stones and saying “those are dragon droppings”. Then someone points out they are just stones, explains that nobody has ever produced a photo of dragon, or provided any other evidence that they exists, and you still go “watch out fro dragons”.
Nobody is ignoring evidence except you. The “evidence” you raise has been explained. All you have on your side is that you don’t trust the government. You can’t actually produce any evidence that they are actually doing anything unusual to the sky. You might as well say the government is evil and clever, hence they must be bioengineering invisible dragons.
“It’s more like you are saying “Watch out for dragons”, and pointing to stones and saying “those are dragon droppings”. Then someone points out they are just stones, explains that nobody has ever produced a photo of dragon, or provided any other evidence that they exists, and you still go “watch out fro dragons”.”
Well written Uncinus. These people actually believe that we are too stupid to see the trails in the sky and that they are actually educating as as to what they/we see. THAT is the spread of ignorance I was referring to. Some folks, like us, will RESIST their wacky notions based on an education in the subjects and the fact that there is a COMPLETE lack of evidence to support their claim. The trails are NOT an indication of a problem represented buy the tiger print, the trails are a misconception/misunderstanding represented by the “dragon droppings”.
Anonymous, I thought about this for a while and was almost able to hold my tongue, so to speak. But, I just can’t help commenting on something you wrote. You wrote: “I WISH I could let the whole subject go down the memory hole, but my conscience and intelligence won’t let me. ” And from where I sit, it’s your LACK of both that keep you fighting for the wrong side! If you had ANY conscience, you would make sure you researched this from the science end…thoroughly! And there is NO WAY that you have. You find ANY atmospheric scientist on the planet and ask him/her about this subject and they will be GLAD to educate you (after they are done giggling). I know, if they don’t see things from YOUR perspective, they must be “in on it”, right?! Isn’t that how it all works?! If someone disagrees with a chemtrail believer (affectionately know by me as “chemtards…easier to type) they are “paid shills”…right? And now onto your “intelligence”. How can you sit there and say that your supposed intelligence prevents you from dropping your belief in “chemtrails”?! It’s the other way around! Your belief in “chemtrails” prevents intelligence, at least in this one specific area of study. You OBVIOUSLY haven’t taken this matter to anyone who understands this subject or you wouldn’t accept them as “true”.
ANY atmospheric scientist on the planet would be able to explain the reason we see every type of trail we all see in the sky. Short/long, skinny/fat, long lasting/quickly dissipating…you name it, they all have an easy and simple verifiable scientific explanation that does NOT include any extra “chemicals” added. You have simply accepted the BS you find online from other uneducated fools as fact just because of what these trails LOOK LIKE from the ground. I’ll admit, if I hadn’t studied this subject years ago, I would probably be a chemtard myself. Visually, they do look sinister and scary…scientifically, they are beautiful. Also, A COMPLETE lack of evidence that there are any “extra” chemicals in the atmosphere should be enough…but paranoia easily defeats intelligence without proper guidance. I hope everyone has a Happy New Year and the chemtards seek out reliable sources of information other than EACH OTHER for their “education”.
WOOOO!! How do you do it Shilltastic?? Your so good!! I mean i have no choice but to believe your wittiness!! Anonymous is just a chemtard!! CHEMTARD!!! CHEM- TARD!! It is easier to type too!
Very witty of you Ian. When you have nothing to prove your side with, it’s no wonder you resort to sarcasm. *yawn*…impressive.
I had neglected to enter my name before posting, so for the record I claim the last ‘anonymous’ post.
Now, Shilltastic, you are setting up many ‘strawman’ arguments, with your assertion (assumption?) that I am claiming every persistent contrail to be a ‘chemtrail’, and other things.
Since I never made that claim, when you tear down that ‘strawman’ and act as if you have triumphed over my position (even though you’ve avoided that directly), it really appears disingenuous and ludicrous, especially the cheerleading.
Basically, you buried the bar then claimed to have jumped over it. Nice trick.
However, my position remains the same as before you tried to manipulate it. I am suggesting, that the potential and possibility of large-scale military and scientific programs needs to be more closely monitored and regulated than it is today, considering the irrevocable historical patterns and tendencies of the ruling classes to support such schemes.
Based on widespread reports, published information, eyewitness testimony, and expert opinion, a line of questioning has opened up which deals with the possibility of chemical or biological agents being dispersed via aerial vehicle.
Key documents provide information bridges that reveal a motive, a means, and an opportunity to fulfill a high-level command & control agenda – as defined by the government agencies themselves, with aerial dissemination of reactive substances being an important part.
Why shouldn’t people investigate it?
You seem to want to destroy any legitimate questioning with a vengeance, merely because the lynch-pin smoking-gun pieces of evidence have not been produced yet. Similar to when the Manhattan Project was underway, I suppose. It was only definitive when the newspapers reported it right? Up until then it was only a paranoid conspiracy.
Sort of like Uncinus with his ‘dragon droppings’ perversion of my story. He seemed to miss the translation which goes like this:
The impressions in the dirt, ‘tiger tracks’, are the historical records about governments, and the U.S. in particular, conducting massive and wide-scale scientific and military programs on people, including its own. Get the full report on PDF.
“103d Congress, 2d Session -COMMITTEE PRINT -S. Prt. 103-97
IS MILITARY RESEARCH HAZARDOUS TO VETERANS’ HEALTH?
LESSONS SPANNING HALF A CENTURY
A STAFF REPORT PREPARED FOR THE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE DECEMBER 8, 1994
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman”
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_rockefeller08.htm
Various operations of different scales, with the same long-term agenda: engineering society.
The reports from the ‘village men’ are the eyewitness reports from individuals who have experienced abnormal and suspicious phenomena, many of them officials such as police officers, bureaucrats, administrators, and other professionals. Are they scientists? No, but they are well within their rights to make observations about things in their environment which have directly affected them.
And the reality is that there have been actual casualties to these programs, innocent civilians. Or dispensable serfs?
So, in trying to be derisive, all you have done is shown an inordinate amount of animosity, which belittles both you and your case. That’s not the way civilized people debate, and it puts you at a disadvantage in the eyes of the jury.
Stay Sovereign America! Happy 2010!
You might want to ask why you have so little success in converting well educated people to your point of view. Are they actually brainwashed, or could there be another explanation?
Change MY word from “every” to “ANY” then! MY same arguments apply. There isn’t ANY proof that ANY of these trails contain “chemicals” so they persist. There also isn’t ANY proof that ANY of these trails have ANYthing to do with ANY “weather mod” or “special ops program” or ANY other program for that matter! How do YOU know that the experiments that are being done in the sky have ANY telltale signs at all! You people could be focusing on normal contrails while the ACTUAL tests are being conducted by the planes going by that have NOTHING (visible) coming out of any part of them! YOU people jump to conclusions! I don’t agree with the nonsense because it hasn’t been proven to me! You accept assumption and speculation AS “proof” “evidence” and “truth”. Sorry, I’m far too intelligent to do ANY such thing.
And look at the videos on youtube..theses people claim that EVERY trail they record IS a “chemtrail”. That is why I use that word! It’s ridiculous nonsense and you have fallen for the hoax. I have not…and won’t until I see a GOOD reason to believe it’s NOT a hoax! (not gonna happen). The assumptions, speculation and conclusion jumping I see are NOT good reasons to believe these trails have ANYTHING to do with any program mentioned on any website…anywhere. Talk about a “nice trick”…claiming something is something else simply because you believe it to be goes against EVERYTHING to do with science. Again, you have NO link for these lines to ANY project other than assumption…and then you DISMISS the actual science that proves they could EASILY be explained, and harmless, simply because you WANT THERE TO BE A PROBLEM! There is no evidence to support the chemtard contention that these lines are ANYTHING other than water vapor in varying atmospheric conditions…NOTHING!
This is my last post on this site. I have been asked not to insult those that insult me. Sorry, I just can’t do that. I call a spade a spade and a chemtard a chemtard. Unfortunately Uncinus would rather protect the feelings of those who work so hard to drag the names of aviation and science through the mud. I just can’t comply with that. These people are NOT going to learn the facts or treat US with respect no matter HOW MUCH you kiss their ignorant asses Uncinus. No matter how much you try to help these people, they will continue to crap all over you, and anyone that disagrees with them. You ARE the enemy to these people Uncinus…and always will be.
Bye all.
It’s not about protecting people’s feelings. It’s about having a constructive conversation. Angry name calling simply serves to polarise people’s opinions.
A fundamental piece of advice given to aspiring novellists is “show, don’t tell“. In fiction it is much more effective to allow the reader to discover a situation rather than flatly describing it. The same applies when debating. Simply telling someone they are stupid is not going to change anything, but if you show them the nature of their errors, allow them to figure it out for themselves, then you are much more likely to get a constructive result.
Yes, I know I’m not going to change sovereignpatriotusa’s mind. That not my intent. He raises points, and I (or others) answer them. Not for him, but for the casual reader, the person who maybe just heard about this odd theory, and wants to find out what the facts are. Someone who has perhaps heard his friends make the same argument as sovereignpatriotusa has been making here.
It creates something of a Socratic dialog. By discussing the points in a rational manner then the fallacies they contain may be exposed, and the actual grist of the debate can be discovered and then subjected to scientific examination.
Antagonizing people (which I realize this post might also do) does not help this process.
Great ploy. I’ll have to still side with SPUSA
Why?
Uncinus:
Yes indeed. Season’s greetings, everyone. 🙂
Uncinus,
Maybe, just maybe because you and ‘shilltastic’ are completely intractable in admitting that your government has done, is doing, or will seemingly always do unethical, inappropriate, and undisclosed operations on its population- being under the inordinate control of aforementioned sociopolitical factions.
Maybe its because you seem to keep creating false arguments with claims that ‘people like me believe that every contrail is government death cloud’ type of statements, which of course is NOT something that I believe.
‘You people’ as shilltastic rants again and again setting up fake ‘strawman’ arguments with preposterous zany claims for arguments that he ‘wins’ basically playing with himself.
I have learned a lot, like many, about atmospheric sciences in pursuit of this question, and it has not swayed my opinion one WHIT, in belief that the p-t-b would fully utilize the highest scale of technology, encompassing operations not limited to ground-based programs.
Some of my earlier posts may have drawn some wrong conclusions of persistent contrails. If you have a sense of progression of this thread, you can see that I have narrowed down drastically the focus of my observations, even allowing that 99% of all ‘contrails’, ‘cloud formations’, and ‘atmospheric activity’ could be completely normal.
And, as shilltastic correctly conjects, operations could possibly not provide anything with a visible after-effect from aircraft. Something like U.S. Army ‘Operation Big City’, or a much farther advanced version of MK Ultra – a nefarious program run by the CIA. It is clearly not beyond the DoD to maintain a private fleet of modified tankers, nor to run a highly compartmentalized water-tight program. Situations like it happen all day, every day.
Really, would you believe the government has not been developing this type of technology just considering their potential for application?
I have even provided concessions when it has been suggested that some of the news reports about ‘chemtrails’ have been ‘debunked’. Let them go, I replied. There is still a pile of other things which support the notion that something untoward may be happening in our midst, concerning manipulation of our airspace.
Maybe the whole notion of contrails being chemtrails needs to be refined, redefined, and readdressed.
But it can’t be ignored that strange respiratory and skin diseases like Morgellons popping up around the country do leave few vectors to be investigated, except the aerial vector. (Unless you suppose that there is simultaneous infection from ground-water sources or Lay-Z-Boy recliners in multiple locations separated hundreds or thousands of miles from each other?) Airborne dissemination makes more sense, does it not?
Add in the RFID factor of ‘Smart Dust’, with Raytheon in collaboration with IBM for creating a global monitoring system that tracks all things natural and synthetic through a space-based cybertronic & psychotronic satellite network that feeds information to a ‘Global Brain’ (their words), which can be used to relay real-time census data to global police services & their drone armies and …….it becomes quickly apparent that M*tha F*cka we are not in Kansas any more!
SO do all contrails = chemtrails? Of course not!
But is the aerial vector an important one to watch considering all we know? Of course it is!
Because while nobody has yet been able to precisely trace any one illness or host of community illnesses to a specific airplane, when whole communities are doused in mists, hazes, gels, goos, inorganic particles, and other general unpleasantries from above out of ‘nowhere’, then people need to start asking questions about it!
PERIOD!
SPUSA, sure, ask questions about that. But this site is really just about contrails, and the chemtrail theory. General conspiracy theory is rather beyond the scope of what I want to discuss, there are lots of other sites for that.
So, I take it from the above that you feel there is no evidence that indicates persistent contrails are anything nefarious, however you think it’s possible that they might be?
Sure, you’ve got to cover your bases, given your unusual set of beliefs, but you’ve also got to ground those bases on evidence. I think you maybe took up the chemtrail theory by assuming the evidence other presented (like barium test, and contrails not persisting in the past) and assuming their evidence was correct. Now you know it’s not, you are just left with a vague theory that the government might be poisoning people somehow via the air. Do you actually have any figures to support the “strange respiratory and skin diseases like Morgellons popping up around the country”?
==> Uncinus
Here is the data straight from the CDC website about Morgellons. There are no graphs or data charts, but this is provided:
http://www.cdc.gov/unexplaineddermopathy/
Now, that by ITSELF is nearly meaningless.
However, when combined with the research of Dr. Hildegard Staninger and others, I start to ‘connect the dots’ so to speak.
http://www.staningerreport.com/#DrHildy2.html
And the reports of respiratory diseases in combination with ‘mystery clouds’ that cause illness and death are archived in the news video and documentary segments that have been referred to throughout the thread.
When you combine the sum total of amalgamated knowledge of the history of the DoD, the scientific and military industries, and the sociopolitical ruling class mindset of the controlling entities and individuals, then you have a recipe that spells disaster for an unsuspecting populace.
But no, I do not have any incontrovertible evidence at present, that specifically links a particular individual ‘persistent contrail’ to an individual ‘special plane’ that is releasing ‘special chemicals’ in relation or correspondence to a fully declassified operation admitting proof of guilt.
If I did, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
Does that mean everything on the Ponderosa is all and well, Hoss?
It’s sort of like a game of Clue…you know from the start somebody’s dead because of foul play, sometimes it just takes a while to narrow down the answers, and so far the clues have kept the possible answer well within the ‘mansion house’ of unsolicited, unsanctioned, and unethical experimentation of new technologies & weapons on their own population (as indeed they must according to international treaties).
I just got enmeshed in thread and like Shilltastic I’m not sure what else more I can add that is productive without repetition.
You are going to stay the course over whether ‘persistent contrails’ are ever at all anything except normal water vapor exhaust, and if not, what direct evidence linking A to B is there that shows otherwise.
And I am going to persist on my own, in a belief that the ‘smoking gun’ may come much later than the impact of the bullet – meaning somebody ‘catching’ a ‘spray plane’ in action may NEVER come, but that doesn’t mean we should stop looking as long as the unexplained symptoms and diseases keep coming.
It isn’t foolish to predict future actions on past performance, especially when dealing with the DoD.
The problem is that you go on about increases in respiratory diseases when there is zero evidence of any growth, and lots of evidence that the rate is steady or declining. A TV story from ten years ago where some people say that lots of their neighbors have sore throats is not good evidence. Can you even be specific and quote anything to support this? Provide a single link?
==> SPUSA
Stop right there. You don’t.
You haven’t proved “somebody’s dead” neither have you proved “because of foul play“.
Nor CAN you prove “sprays occur through engines and are in contrails” (the physics FLAME TEST proves otherwise, and ALL biological material of any sort will combust at 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit).
Do you really know what you’re doing here?
Just shoot him on down. Along with anyone else who has any concern or slightly disagrees.
Can you be more specific? What was claimed, what was the evidence, and how was it shot down? Then given that, what would have been a proper response in your opinion?
Over 50 years of archived information, declassified documents, news segments, documentary videos, inside whistleblowing, and independent investigative research & collaboration….and for Uncinus it all boils down to “A TV story from ten years ago where people said their neighbors got sore throats…”.
Damn man. Damn it all. How belittling can you get?
Jazzroc=> You can’t quote me with that ‘spray out of engines’ tripe, so don’t try. You will have better luck with that smear on a Ritz cracker. That can never be attributable to anything ‘out of my mouth’.
I have grown in my understanding of contrails, which is great. I even can stand to correct myself with the ‘on off’ trails, after understanding the huge ‘waves’ that create the various temperature/humidity variation.
But yeah, in the 40’s people were irradiated next to farm animals, in the 60’s MK Ultra claimed civilian lives, the 70’s brought Agent Orange and painful death for vets, 90’s you have Gulf War Syndrome, and beyond & in between that you have innumerable examples of outright blatant experimentation on the U.S. population chronicled in a variety of fashions. It’s a sure bet that not all victims of government experiments have been accounted for. Do the words Tuskegee & syphilis mean anything?
So THOSE are the dead and dying, and I don’t want it to be a footnote 40 years from now about how the very air was contaminated by the government enacting applications beneficial to their high-level command & control operations. Because you JUST KNOW that ‘national security’ is an over-ride to any sort of concern for citizens. It has been proven that way time and again.
*************
Uncinus I will be digging out the 2009 data on respiratory disease from sources like the CDC, WHO, and other after they have been updated for last year. Many are due to be updated by month’s end.
As I think I’ve said several time, I’m quite willing to accept for the sake of argument that all the conspiracy stuff you suggest is true. That the PTB are evil, that they have no qualms about experimenting on the public, that they have done so in the past, etc.
So given all that, what I’m actually interested in is the evidence about contrails. Are they different? Is there something in them?
Where’s the evidence about those questions?
And, if you find an increase in respiratory illness (which I don’t think you will), then surely that’s just indicative of a general decrease in air quality. Why does that in any way point the finger at contrails?
Ian Bryant:
He is still very much alive. That’s what makes “Talk, talk” such a good idea.
It’s merely a false premise which is on fire and falling.
Do you think I haven’t had false premises of my own?
Fortunately for me, some gunmen shot mine down.
But there are probably more of them I haven’t noticed yet… 🙂
Nobody’s perfect, and I think we’re ALL concerned.
SPUSA:
You could go back to the “plague blankets” incident. Where’s the cut-off?
I suggest that things are really very different from even thirty years ago. Communication is instant, worldwide, and available to tribesmen and peasant farmers everywhere. There is no concealment possible in the way it was possible then.
Air is sampled and filtered privately in every major township and city. Again, this knowledge is open to everyone, and certainly not known only by some private clique.
Lastly, “applications beneficial to their high-level command & control operations” by which I think you mean the deployment of metal powders to boost tactical communications, which may have happened with a HAARP trial and also over Iraq, but requires mere pounds of material in burst events – like chaff. It has NOTHING to do with “trails” over the USA or Europe. What’s to “command and control”? Are you inferring “mind control”? If not, what?
I just want to quote you guys something from the report:
So a congressional report concludes that the DoD and Pentagon TO THE DAY still deny activities relating to these basic experiments. How do you think they are treating current high-level programs?
You guys keep talking about ‘somebody would say something’, but clearly and realistically, people on the ‘inside’ of any of these programs are highly compartmentalized, and sworn or threatened to secrecy upon very stiff penalties.
It may take a very long time to definitively prove the source of some of the strange, abnormal, unnatural cases that affect whole communities. But in the case of something like Morgellons where you have collaborating evidence from the very impressive Dr. Hildegard about aerial pathology, it is only a matter of time before history bears out the warnings of the ‘chicken littles’ like me.
SOURCE:
“103d Congress, 2d Session -COMMITTEE PRINT -S. Prt. 103-97
IS MILITARY RESEARCH HAZARDOUS TO VETERANS’ HEALTH?
LESSONS SPANNING HALF A CENTURY
A STAFF REPORT PREPARED FOR THE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE DECEMBER 8, 1994
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman”
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_rockefeller08.htm
That is a very interesting point you bring up Jazzroc. Does this video contain any information you find valid and useful?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxRnkfvO_EU
SPUSA – again, let’s take it as agreed (for the sake of argument) that the government is testing and poisoning people.
Now, GIVEN THAT, what’s the evidence that they are using contrails to do it?
As for Staninger – it seems she exaggerates her credentials. Why exactly do you trust her over the millions of scientists who say otherwise? Is is perhaps because she says what you want to hear? How exactly do you know that SHE is correct and EVERYONE ELSE is wrong?
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message453097/pg1
SPUSA:
It’s a rehash of old material, which I’ve seen before. Let’s keep this simple. No.
At present, I can’t say that anybody has definitively been able to pin-point a specific contrail to be a ‘chemtrail’, then gone up, tested it, & gotten firm answers about it on-the-spot.
No doubt there are TONS of mis-reportings of daily contrails.
Does that exonerate the p-t-b? Hardly.
For a long time, nobody could pin-point the source of the Anthrax attack on our Capitol either. Then after a couple years of analysis, it was concluded it came from one of the most notorious bioweapons labs the U.S. has – Fort Detrick – then it was quietly swept under the rug of ‘Dancing with the Stars’.
So we should remain vigilant.
And on Staninger, you attack her credentials, but it also says about her…
“She received the prestigious 7th U.S. Army and Greater Stuttgart Community Award for her work during Operation Desert Shield in preventing increased chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) from the Kuwaiti burning oil fields during Desert Storm. ”
I guess they hand those out to every quack that comes along?
Jazzroc >
‘Old rehash’ ? So a multitude of independent news sources providing a detailed picture of HAARP’s abilities isn’t up to snuff huh? You didn’t find anything pertinent to your query? I thought it provided quite a bit for you to mull over.
Well no, in fact she’s the only person in the world ever to receive it. It must be very prestigious indeed!
I don’t like to attack people, but if you are arguing from authority, they you need to be able to show that the authority you are using is actually a real authority. And again, you might ask for such an astonishing discovery, why has nobody else discovered it?
You know how she makes money? She sells diets and saunas, as a magic cure-all.
http://www.staningerreport.com/#NewConsult.html
She has a huge conflict of interest. Find a scientist who is not actually selling things.
“At present, I can’t say that anybody has definitively been able to pin-point a specific contrail to be a ‘chemtrail’, then gone up, tested it, & gotten firm answers about it on-the-spot.”
It would be VERY easy to just a hire an atmospheric testing plane to go up and sample a contrail or 10 of your choice. Why hasn’t anyone done that?
These guys have several for hire:
http://www.weathermod.com
There have been many, many in situ samples of contrails taken over the last 10 yrs and none of them have reported finding anything other than would be expected in combusted jet fuel.
..and how would any nefarious contents survive being combusted thru a jet engine?
well, then the question remains- what makes you think the contrails are part of the evil doing? If they behave the same as they always have, if the really can persist and spread and induce further cirrus formation…then what about them makes you think that they are potentially part of some global ‘spray” campaign?
Never mind the the entire premise of “chemtrails” is based on the myth that “contrails dissipate- chemtrails don’t”
That single lie makes almost every single Youtube “chemtrail” video completely null.
So she promotes colloidal silver. It really is good for you, sort of like Himalayan salt or ionic liquid minerals.
We could go to Dr. Randy Wymore if we wanted an unbiased opinion on Morgellons perhaps if you wanted to open a seperate thread for it, but lets stick to your original point of whether:
1. Have any contrails ever been anything except water vapor? Well obviously, a textbook definition of a contrail, is a contrail of water vapor, so the obvious answer is no.
Now, some people claim that biological and chemical stuff is coming out of jet engines. I personally have not flaunted such a claim, so stop using that like you have something on me.
Because hmm. I’m not sure how biological things could survive being combusted, but ‘could’ things be added to the jet fuel, as some reports have claimed? How about Alex Jones? He brings up some information about it.
He’s not 100% reliable, but he’s way ahead of most when it comes to providing cutting edge news about geopolitics, military activities, science and experiments, and other stuff that is often under-reported or blacked out of main stream news media sources.
This link is one of his broadcasts where he covers a whole range of the ‘geoengineering’ and other aerial science experiments being widely done etc…
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7198198514629240141#
Now many people see some persistent contrails, and mistake them for whatever they imagine these ‘geoengineering’ experiments to be (or eugenics, biological, etc…), and a flood of false alarms come in from every corner of the world where people have internet and free time.
Does that make a textbook contrail anything other than itself? Still not, because a ‘contrail’ is by definition a trail of water vapor.
Doubtless a majority of people making reports are flat wrong about seeing anything other than a perfectly normal acceptable occurrence of a phenomenon that is a by-product of a service that exists to make our lives better and happier (aviation).
But now, unless Alex Jones is completely flat wrong and off-target himself, picking crap out of the wind and tossing it in every corner just to make himself a buck, it would be fair to heed some of the things that he and others like him are warning about. In fact, he’s quite on-target about a good many things.
Here is a huge library of his documentaries available free. I recommend a thorough watching of each and every one, then you can have full confidence like I do that he is not a loose-canon fear-monger as some types would like to label him. http://www.infowars.dk/content/alex-jones-documentaries.
Now you say it is easy to just go up and measure contrails, which if you are measuring contrails, is indeed easy.
If however you are trying to ‘catch’ government programs ‘in the act’ so to speak, it is quite a different thing.
To account for the thousands of variables when it comes into taking an accurate sample of the air / atmosphere and trying to pin down any one source is quite a task and obviously takes more than ‘just hiring some guys to go up and follow an American Airlines redeye’ type of thing.
Because, since there are nearly 87,000 total flights per day in the U.S.,
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_Flights_daily_in_US
with that amount breaking down into three categories: commercial, general aviation, & air-taxi,
http://www.chacha.com/question/how-many-commercial-flights-are-there-per-day-in-the-united-states
and again with nearly 30,000 commercial aviation flights:
http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/1711790
No doubt your sample size would have to be significant, much more than a few random contrails.
and that still wouldn’t cover ANY military or ‘special access’ flights (which are the ones you would want to sample most no doubt). Or high-altitude blimps, and other vehicles that are restricted information like Aurora.
Plus, not even counting the ‘Freedoms of the Air’ which permits overflights from other countries. So, theoretically you could have a CIA proprietary front company in Mexico making overflights into a CIA proprietary front in Canada, and no record would exist in the U.S. of flight logs, etc…and who knows what could be released on the way through. (For an example of declassified government planning to cause terror using CIA proprietary aviation companies aka front companies see: Operation Northwoods http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf)
Since a normal every day commercial air traffic contrail is just a contrail of water vapor, any mis-perceptions that every day normal commercial air traffic contrails are laden with ‘special extras’ are wrong, OK.
But even taking into account some people’s wrong assumptions, you can’t altogether dump the idea that special programs ARE ongoing, and could EASILY be interspersed and kept very low-profile in the mass of airspace data, rules, regulations, clearances, etc….
Who is to say that these programs couldn’t occasionally look like contrails? It would be perfect plausible deniablity, would it not?
Or perhaps if ‘contrails = chemtrails’ is a COMPLETE red-herring at any and all levels, at least people can start from there and learn for themselves the real undeniable picture of unsolicited experimentation on the public many times throughout history, find the true answers for why such strange afflictions as Morgellons exist, and hopefully prevent any future experiements by being aware. .
On a side note, I have always been interested in the sky, clouds, airplanes, etc… and my unique living situation has brought me between California and Michigan on a nearly annual basis since I was very young. I have never noticed before recently, a phenomenon called ‘chembows’ or as some would like to say ‘sundogs’, though they are clearly different.
I personally have video I captured of a quickly appearing/disappearing massive ‘chembow'(more like a huge rainbow colored splotch in the sky) nowhere near the sunrise or sunset, that lasted about 5 minutes during a Michigan winter. Nobody that witnessed it here EVER remembered seeing that type of thing before, and it has happened more than once that I have personally been able to witness in recent years. Many others have reported or video captured similar instances across the country in variant temps.
Explain away, please.
SPUSA:
When confronted with a massed array of dipole antennae (with tweaks) and a gas-powered power station (and a reference physics book or two) I can work out for myself the ways in which it can be made to work, thanks.
Because each antenna is under individual control the array as a whole can be “phased” so in effect it may be “focussed” upward, downward, and from side-to-side.
No-one seems to talk about three important and relevant aspects, so I shall do so now. They are DIRECTIONALITY, POWER, and EFFICIENCY.
DIRECTIONALITY: the best way it works is straight up, and straight down, and at the natural frequencies (or octaves) of the antenna length. As soon as you wander from the strait and narrow, or off the fundamental or some octave of it, you will get a corresponding drop in transmitted power (which, NOT being transmitted through a vacuum, will be doing its best to be absorbed by everything).
The POWER, until recently, was sufficient to irradiate my cup of tea from cold to drinkable in about a week, if my tea were thirty miles above it. Now it might take an hour.
The EFFICIENCY isn’t too good. If it were several acres of (and millions of) MOBILE PHONE ANTENNAE working in the UHF region then you’d be talking. But it hasn’t that sort of efficiency potential, nor will it ever have. It’s best suited for the work it was originally designed for: heating up portions of the thermosphere at night.
It CANNOT ever be pin-point accurate. It CANNOT ever “reach over the horizon” except by bouncing off the thermosphere, and when it does this it can be hilariously inaccurate.
About the biggest thing it might be able to do is “bridge” the thermosphere to earth. That’ll pass an amp or two, and remove it from the map. I wouldn’t be bothered…
ALL the mad things I read attributed it seem to have been composed by people who believe they are expert “scientists” and “futurologists” because they’ve read about Tesla and seen every episode of Star Trek…
In other words go away and study enough to understand something (or anything) about it before you undertake to write about it.
No- can’t altogether dump the idea….its just that I see no evidence of it in a persistent contrail…that- in and of itself- is not evidence of something abnormal…and yet that is the Myth of the “chemtrail” theory.
…so, there could be some secret testing, research etc going on but that is a very long way from global, clandestine, “spray” campaign of unknown origin and intent supposedly perpetrated over the last decade…
…and as such, seeing a persistent trail, filming it and claiming it is a “chemtrail” is not a scientifically valid exercise.
I do not doubt that the government, NWO, Illuminati or whoever would LOVE to “own the weather” – but a persistent contrail is not evidence of their success.
As for halos, sun dogs and other optical events….
I cannot speak to your experience- although would love to see the video- but such phenomena ARE associated with ice crystals in the atmosphere…and it is typically assumed that only ice and water can refract light into “bows” …and not metal…or…??
They are more common in the winter and to be found with an atmosphere loaded with ice such as this picture from 1983:
http://www.1000plus.com/Imagic/8301sund.htm
Here is an interesting and informative site on atmospheric optics:
http://www.atoptics.co.uk/rainbows/notabow.htm
I’ve enjoyed reading the comments here, particularly from Boenoid. I agree with Uncinus that his (or her) posting was well worth it’s own blog entry.
I have seen a number of people with Asperger’s Syndrome who present much like SPUSA. That means nothing, but if SPUSA has Asperger’s, and would say so, it would tend to explain a lot.
I find Alex Jones to have zero credibility. His worldview seems to be mostly informed from many years of perusing comic books.
I’m a politically conservative atheist, and I deeply distrust our government, regardless of which party is in power. I distrust it in a different sense from that described by SPUSA. It was formed by and is currently operated by humans, who tend to seek advantage where possible. Therefore, I don’t think they (the government) will ever do a very good job of spending the money I send to them.
Still, to make that leap to chemtrails… It seems absurd, but I guess when a person is in the middle of it, and has invested sweet-baby-Jesus-no-telling-how-many hours in thinking/reading about a particular conspiracy theory, it’s bound to be hard to let go the stinking thing and rejoin reality.
Good luck to all, including you, SPUSA, even though I heartily disagree with just about every word you said. Uncinus, thank you for the site, and, Boenoid, your comment was simply outstanding.
SPUSA, I’d be interested to know whether you subscribe to other conspiracy notions, such as the 9/11 truther movement. I’ll check back later to see if you answer.
It took me a very long time to find and upload this video that I promised, and I apologize for the delay.
In any case, I personally filmed this in Grand Rapids, Michigan in December 2007 when there were a string of these amorphous rainbows that hung in the air looking like oil on water….dirty and polluted. I had brought my camera to work hoping to actually document one of these sightings of which there had been several over a few months period of time. I did film it, as I said .
http://www.livevideo.com/video/2367017664EA4EFFA4ADDE4DDA09C5E1/chembow.aspx
There were also a lot of ‘persistent contrails’ that persisted for many many hours, that fogged up the sky, and created X and grid patterns on a regular basis. This has not happened with the same consistency during the year 2009, though in 2008 these trails still seemed very prevalent in my area. So far into 2010, I have seen relatively few heavy persistent contrails, though they are not absent.
I have also sat back and watched as more news articles of geoengineering conferences and discussions have emerged.
And I pretty much hold still where I’m at. The puzzle will be revealed in time.
As for the Aspergers guy, it’s hardly worth responding to other than to brush it off like so much sand.
Stay Sovereign!
SPUSA
Yes, I can see the that it must be chemicals causing the -bow, what with water having the ability to refract light and clouds being made of water, therefore it must be chemicals causing the -bow.
Sarcasm, btw.
Well, perhaps the term ‘chembow’ is a misnomer, because it’s more like an iridescent splotch. There is no ‘bow’ about it at all.
So, when light refracts & reflects through water creating a prism effect which we perceive as a full-color ‘rainbow’, it is indeed the phenomenon which creates the ‘bow’.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow
I have never seen another type of rainbow in my life, with the exceptions of the things I started witnessing alongside the prominence of the heavy persistent contrails.
As I said, it was only due to multiple previous sightings that prompted me to carry my video camera around in the first place. I had subsequent sightings of these as well, some quite larger, when alas I did not have my camera with me. It was on the charger at the house, and I was across town. Believe me, I was mad.
At times both during these sightings and with just the heavy trails by themselves, there were unpleasant odors such as burned plastic, or metallic. However, not always.
So, while I do wish it were ‘just water’, I don’t see any evidence to confirm this. That alone leads to a bunch of other questions.
Stay Sovereign!
SPUSA
Interesting footage-
Technically- it is not a “bow” as bows require actual water droplets usually in the form of falling rain. It is a halo of some sort as halos rely on ice crystals to form.
It might just be a sundog…but it might it might actually be an arc of some sort- either a Circumhorizon arc or a Circumzenithal arc –
At any rate- the sky is clearly filled with high level cirrus clouds- and thus loaded with ice- perfect for refracting light.
See here from more info on Arcs:
http://www.atoptics.co.uk/halo/cha2.htm
can metal refract light?
🙂
It is not a ‘sundog’, since it is not anywhere near the sun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_dog
Neither is it a Circumhorizon Arc (CHA), based on the chart provide by your atmospheric optics site, taking into account both the latitude of Michigan, and the season (it was December, after all).
http://www.atoptics.co.uk/halo/chafreq.htm (CHA probability chart)
http://www.bcca.org/misc/qiblih/latlong_us.html#MICHIGAN (latitude and longitude of Grand Rapids, Michigan USA).
Nor do I believe it was Circumzenithal Arc (CZA), based on the chart provide again, by your website.
http://www.atoptics.co.uk/halo/cza.htm
The time of video capture was shortly after 12pm, when the sun was at its highest. Neither are there any sundogs around.
Not to mention, what I shot was not at all beautiful, or circular. And the others I witnessed, some quite larger, did not have any arc shape whatsoever. They were just giant iridescent splotches in the sky that persisted for a time.
So, I think we will have to keep trying to identify what this is, because as of yet, we have not.
Stay Sovereign!
SPUSA
There are quite a few arcs on that site
http://www.atoptics.co.uk/halo/mdisp5.htm
You often only get part of an arc, which can look like a “splotch”
You can’t rule it out based on the probability chart- it is a probability not an absolute-
It does, however, look almost identical to the pictures of the CHA and the fact that the time of day and that it is a “splotch” is consistent with the description:
” Look for the brightly coloured circumhorizon arc…when the sun is very high in the sky….Often only fragments are visible where there happen to be cirrus clouds – the individual patches of cirrus are then lit with colour that can be mistaken for iridescence.”
…and beauty is in the eye of the beholder- I thought it was pretty cool looking.
I am confident it was a CHA.
So, SR1419 you are trying to tell me that even though based on the probability chart that tells me my location and time of year basically have a 0% chance of these phenomena, there just happened to be several that year??
Again, this was not the only one, but the only one I was able to capture on video. Many of the others were larger, and splotchier.
There was NO SUN around the arc AT ALL! There were NO HALOS.
And it was not a part of some larger cirrus cloud that appeared iridescent, but the whole thing. And though you may not be able to tell from the video, it was not that high up. In fact it seemed damn near overhead at the time, and the people around me that I was pointing it out to were just as surprised as I was because nobody could remember every seeing anything like it.
I’ve lived in MI now for 9 years, and I have yet to see repeated the string of these sightings like there was that December. Believe me, I was keen to observe them this year, didn’t see a one.
So, if you can be so confident, that’s good for you. I have been up and down the ‘atmospheric optics’ site and I still don’t concur that it’s CHA or CZA, based on location, conditions, and personal observation.
Stay Sovereign!
SPUSA
Nor are there chemicals.
Although technically water is a chemical, so you call could a rainbow a chembow if you really wanted to.
Priceless.
What’s overhead got to do with it? Pretty sure the sun can pass overhead but it’s still a very long way away.
Your video, to me, shows cirrus clouds. That makes them high up. Can you explain how you determined how high they were?
SP-
the probability suggests it is unlikely at that time of year…but not impossible. Unless the sun cannot reach 58 degrees in the sky- Can it in MI in Dec (i don’t know)? If not then it is Not a CHA.
So, you have move from probability to empirical data. The empirical data suggests that is an Arc. It is identical to an Arcs description- this description – to me- depicts exactly what you filmed:
” Look for the brightly coloured circumhorizon arc…when the sun is very high in the sky….Often only fragments are visible where there happen to be cirrus clouds – the individual patches of cirrus are then lit with colour that can be mistaken for iridescence.”
the event was at noon when the sun was highest , the splotch of iridescence was lit on a patch of thicker cirrus clouds. The arc IS a halo. If you look closely- you can almost see a curve to the splotch- could just be me. You said there was “NO SUN around the arc AT ALL”- This fits the description which says a CHA is twice as far from the sun as 22 degree halo; “about 2 hand spans”
The film you took looks identical to pictures of CHA’s-
You said you saw others throughout the year…when the probability only increases the likelihood of occurring as they are “common in the USA”…
Perhaps it was only iridescence.
Be that as it may- they sky you filmed was filled with ice clouds and thus the possibility of some atmospheric optical event involving the refraction of light with prismatic effect is to be expected. Can you elaborate as to why you find this alarming?
Can you think of anything other than ice or water that would refract light with such effect?
I hope everyone is taking note of how the sky in UK is looking now planes have been grounded for the third day in a row because of the volcanic ash in Iceland. I’ve seen cirrus, cumulus… but no contrails obviously and no contrail cirrus. There’s no cloud at all in the sky over South London this morning and I must admit it’s nice to see a contrail free sky, especially yesterday evening at sunset.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8626686.stm
I personally like contrails, anonymous. But then again I live in Seattle so I guess I’m really used to clouds, seeing contrails means that the sky isn’t overcast. But I just really like the way they look along with cirrus clouds.
I’ve put up a post on the Volcano shutdown, for further discussion:
https://contrailscience.com/volcano-clears-the-skies-of-contrails/