If You Think These Are Just “Contrails” Think Again – Here’s What They Really Are

So whats this all about?, sounds pretty dodgy.

Stratospheric sulfate aerosols (geoengineering)

a reply to: Dabrazzo

It is exactly about what the article says - there's a wealth of factual information there & IMO you're better off reading all that & understanding it than asking for opinions on here.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Yeah I read this.

Deliberating stratospheric aerosols for climate geoengineering and the SPICE project

And it sounds dodgy as hell.

Can kinda see why some people might suspect mad nutters for whatever reason are spraying stuff in the skies they maybe probably shouldnt.

originally posted by: Dabrazzo
So whats this all about?, sounds pretty dodgy.

Stratospheric sulfate aerosols (geoengineering)

From your link:

The ability of stratospheric sulfate aerosols to create a global dimming effect has made them a possible candidate for use in climate engineering project

I am not sure if you see the key word here but "possible" is it. If you work on context and understanding, you learn that so far, all the SRM projects are still in the planning/discussion phase.

And yes, it sounds dodgy.

originally posted by: Dabrazzo
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Yeah I read this.

Deliberating stratospheric aerosols for climate geoengineering and the SPICE project

And it sounds dodgy as hell.

Can kinda see why some people might suspect mad nutters for whatever reason are spraying stuff in the skies they maybe probably shouldnt.

Good thing it was cancelled.

originally posted by: Dabrazzo
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Yeah I read this.

Deliberating stratospheric aerosols for climate geoengineering and the SPICE project

And it sounds dodgy as hell.

In what way dodgy??

It was public knowledge, the science behind it was open to all to examine, no secrets involved......

Can kinda see why some people might suspect mad nutters for whatever reason are spraying stuff in the skies they maybe probably shouldnt.

Perhaps - but since it was a publicly known even there are plenty of ways to make that opposition known, and no need to go all stupid over it!

a reply to: network dude

Hi Dude,

I agree with you on most of your thinking, but even though we are impotent about changing things, talking and questioning is never useless. And, never underestimate the power of mass criticism...even if it's all we have NOW, better than stay silent and wave at the nice trails up there, right?

a reply to: ChaosComplex

Chaos,

I totally agree with you. I wish we could back up some people's FEELING that something up there may be going on beyong the nice and pretty "white water crystals".
Phenomena like web-like material has also been witnessed in connection with UFOs sightings...I think they called it "Angel Hair" or something? And who could analyze it found silicium in it and other substances.
Even so, no radical conclusion has been reached.

My point is, we need to keep searching for evidence on anything that we cannot fully understand. I like to think that if something is out there that we can see, then some sort of evidence must also be out there to back it up.

a reply to: Imagewerx

Image,

your technical explanation...about the CONTRAILS is more than enough to me, thanks!!!

a reply to: waynos

Hi Waynos,

Yes of course, I was following up with the trails WHICH ARE VISIBLE...if we want to go into what gets out of the planes and IT IS NOT VISIBLE, is a different story. However if we cannot see it, wouldn't it be an even wilder speculation?
Guys here are saying that even what you see is not what we think it is, so what about what we can't see?
Sorry to get so twisty

a reply to: LaCommissioneTXP

Indeed - that twistiness is one of the things about chemtrails that is weird - eg aircraft are putting exactly the same stuff into the atmosphere whether you can see contrails or not....so why only complain when you can see part of it??!!

originally posted by: LaCommissioneTXP
a reply to: Imagewerx

Image,

your technical explanation...about the CONTRAILS is more than enough to me, thanks!!!

You're welcome.

originally posted by: LaCommissioneTXP
a reply to: waynos

Hi Waynos,

Yes of course, I was following up with the trails WHICH ARE VISIBLE...if we want to go into what gets out of the planes and IT IS NOT VISIBLE, is a different story. However if we cannot see it, wouldn't it be an even wilder speculation?
Guys here are saying that even what you see is not what we think it is, so what about what we can't see?
Sorry to get so twisty

That is the trouble though. The whole of chemtrail theory is based entirely on highly visible persisting contrails, and an attempt to gain traction by exploiting people's lack of understanding. If someone doesn't know that it is freezing cold at cruise altitude or that aircraft exhaust has a huge amount of water in it which freezes up there, or that if the air is sufficiently humid that trail has nowhere to go so it hangs around for hours, then someone telling them that it is a spraying operation can seem quite plausible.

All the videos, all the pictures and all the hoo-ha are always about visible trails. A false premise right from the start. If you start from a false premise, everything that follows is false too. That's why later attempts to widen the definition to include weather modification don't work. Its the same with speculation that invisible sprays might be used. Yes, theoretically they might be, but if the original premise for chemtrails was a lie in the first place, there is still no reason to think it mightbe happening at all.

People often pretend to be more concerned about about (real) environmental concerns or curbing geoengineering, but this too tends to be a mask because, sooner or later, the same old chemtrail pictures and videos will be reintroduced to the discussion showing that they have learned nothing.

This is not directed at you by the way, you'll see on my profile that I've been on this site ten years and this is my experience generally on this particular topic.

a reply to: waynos

Hi Waynos,

Nothing taken personal on this side of the forum, we are here to discuss and the more knowledge we share the better for the all topic I think.
You are making interesting points here: so in your experience you don't believe spraying substances from the sky would the the easiest and most cost-efficient way to produce mass modifications in the climate-, social- or health-related areas?

Personally I think TV is already doing the trick (read waves frequencies) but after Internet went global its impact upon people has diminished substantially. Out there, however, we still walk and breathe in the open air (Except Asian people who wear masks all the time).

Just a thought-provoking question
Regards

a reply to: swanne

Definition of a scenario:

Def. of fiction...

fic·tion (fkshn)
n.
1.
a. An imaginative creation or a pretense that does not represent actuality but has been invented.
b. The act of inventing such a creation or pretense.
2. A lie.
3.
a. A literary work whose content is produced by the imagination and is not necessarily based on fact.
b. The category of literature comprising works of this kind, including novels and short stories.

www.thefreedictionary.com...

You bash the whole thing based solely on the fact that it contains illustrative scenarios.

No they are fictional scenarios...

This report contains fictional representations of future situations/scenarios. Any similarities to real people or
events, other than those specifically cited, are unintentional and are for purposes of illustration only.

csat.au.af.mil...

So those scenarios are just something out of the minds of the one's who wrote it, and doesn't represent that the Air Force has, or is in the mindset of trying to own the weather.

So I would not be surprised if some sources includes "water condensation" trails under the definition of "chemtrails", especially if these trails also contain aluminium, barium, etc as most contrails do.

SO most contrails have barium and aluminum in them, but this is what comes from a jet exhaust and low and behold no barium or aluminum in the exhaust where contrails are formed from...so where does that aluminum and barium come from?

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

You COULD see aluminum in a contrail if the aircraft has an engine problem developing. One of the things we routinely had to do after flights was take an oil sample that would check for aluminum shavings or other signs of engine problems starting.

a reply to: Zaphod58

You COULD see aluminum in a contrail if the aircraft has an engine problem developing.

Yes, but not in most contrails as has been suggested. Also wouldn't that be a fairly minute amount that it wouldn't register the high numbers that certain people want you to believe?

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Oh no, it wouldn't be in the amounts claimed. Not even close. Just saying it COULD show up.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Oh no, it wouldn't be in the amounts claimed. Not even close. Just saying it COULD show up.

I wouldn't expect it to be very high.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

No. Mostly just playing devils advocate.