Proof that Geoengineeringwatch had been lying all along.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: network dude

Let me get this straight…

jet exhaust and fuel are not toxic?

Jet exhaust and fuel do create pollution, but I'm not sure why you want to connect them to the "contrail vs. chemtrail" debate.

The pollution you speak of has nothing to do with contrails. Jet exhaust would create that pollution whether or not a visible trail is being produced.

originally posted by: intrptr

I thought we need proof that jet exhaust isn't harmful, just water.

Yes -- jet exhaust can be harmful. However, the VAST majority of what chemtrail believers point to when they say "that is a chemtrail" is just water. The visible part of a contrail is mostly water. The soot and gasses produced by jet exhaust are mostly invisible. Therefore, using your definition of chemtrail, than THIS is a picture of a chemtrail being produced by a plane:



You are correct in saying that the plane in the above image is making as much sooty pollution and CO2 from the combustion of jet fuel as a plane that is producing a visible contrail, but that visible part is mostly water -- like a cloud. If you are only worried about the soot and exhaust made by a plane, then why do you keep bringing them up on threads about the visible white trails?

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
a reply to: intrptr

I think we all know what jet exhaust is. What's your point?

I don't, I don't think anybody knows for certain, or even what the unknown concoctions can create in a novel manner.
But you carry on with your blasé manner, it's good for all those one liners.

a reply to: smurfy

the princilpe of the jet engine is pretty simple really - as is the chemical composition of jet fuel and lastly we know what comprises the atmosphere

thus - we do actually know what should come out of a jet exhaust

now if jet exhausts are somehow different to the theoretical model :



then either :

a ] jet engnes dont work the way we have been taught

b ] jet fuel is somehow different

c ] the atmosphere contains different gases and or a different ratio of gasses

now my opinion is that keeping any of the above prositions [ a , b , c ] were true - then it would be imposible to " keep it a secret given the number of peopl that have the ability to falsifie any one of them

a reply to: smurfy

Blaze'. Nice word.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: network dude

make your own thread about air pollution. if you want to bring all your fears into this forum, to be on topic and not have your posts flagged, you will need to explain why your pollution has anything to do with contrails. (or chemtrails)

Yah, I get that pollution isn't allowed in the debate. But the 'debate' is about the chemicals (or not) in jet exhaust… isn't it?

no - it is abut something OTHER THAN "normal" jet exhaust being in "the trails".

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: smurfy

the princilpe of the jet engine is pretty simple really - as is the chemical composition of jet fuel and lastly we know what comprises the atmosphere

thus - we do actually know what should come out of a jet exhaust

now if jet exhausts are somehow different to the theoretical model :

then either :

a ] jet engnes dont work the way we have been taught

b ] jet fuel is somehow different

c ] the atmosphere contains different gases and or a different ratio of gasses

now my opinion is that keeping any of the above prositions [ a , b , c ] were true - then it would be imposible to " keep it a secret given the number of peopl that have the ability to falsifie any one of them

That's okay by me if you are happy with that, you stick to that pretty picture as if the holy Grail, and never enquire if there could be anything else at all at al!, But at least you did stick up that pretty picture, and a bit of guesswork, compared to that other boyo I was replying to.
So, I'll give a little something, and it's actually a good pointer to exactly what I am talking about, and is to do with toxic cabin air in an aircraft, of which there are many incidents...and it is only talking about lubricants for jet engines, and even before a jet completes the cycle to it's final exhaust, 'plume'

"It is important to note that when these synthetic oils are pryrolised
(heated) and contaminate the breathing air supply (bleed air), you will be
exposed to a complex cocktail of chemicals.
The toxicological impact of inhaling this mixture is different to any
exposures you may have to the cold oil in a can."

So do you want to tell me again exactly what comes out of a jet exhaust? but don't forget all the scavenging of an aircraft's engine that takes place as well..you'll know what I mean, they wear out don't they, just like everything else, bits of this and bits of that noble metal so fine, but enough to start yet another chemical trail/reaction process inside and out of the engine, blah blah. So tell me, tell the world, exactly what comes out of a jet exhaust... you might make a fortune out of it, or even a posthumous medal.

originally posted by: smurfy
So do you want to tell me again exactly what comes out of a jet exhaust? but don't forget all the scavenging of an aircraft's engine that takes place as well..you'll know what I mean, they wear out don't they, just like everything else, bits of this and bits of that noble metal so fine, but enough to start yet another chemical trail/reaction process inside and out of the engine, blah blah. So tell me, tell the world, exactly what comes out of a jet exhaust... you might make a fortune out of it, or even a posthumous medal.

Already done



Electron microscope analysis of residual particles from aircraft contrails

a reply to: smurfy

Um...so, the academic reason that is taught to students who design, build, engineer, and maintain these things is a make believe, and your theory, that you seem to be a bit vague on, is the more likely option. Is that about right?

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: smurfy

Um...so, the academic reason that is taught to students who design, build, engineer, and maintain these things is a make believe, and your theory, that you seem to be a bit vague on, is the more likely option. Is that about right?

So what's in a working contrail then, exactly?..you tell me, your metabunk mate/s didn't know, didn't even mention metals, proprietary additives and those are the basics, proprietary additives, you will not know about unless you are doing formal research, even so those proprietary additives are still protected and secret, so rat bags are not going to know about them, nor then can they know what novel chemistry might occur. So, what is the ensuing chemistry then, feck all to do with building, feck all to do with anyone's 'theory' whatever that is, and feck all to do with your post, so and again tell me what the working chemistry of a contrail is, better still tell NASA who are working on jet exhaust components in the air as of now for all sorts of reasons, including new fuels. Pff!

a reply to: smurfy

What proprietary additives are those that are also in a contrail?

I posted a link above that gives a microscopic analysis of the contents of a contrail - did that not already answer your question?

Nobody is disputing that aviation contributes to pollution. About 2% of the total picture, in fact. The rest is caused by all the other industries and whatnot. I don't see the point of discussing that in a chemtrails topic though.

According to wikipedia:

According to the chemtrail conspiracy theory, long-lasting trails left in the sky by high-flying aircraft are chemical or biological agents deliberately sprayed for sinister purposes undisclosed to the general public.[1] Believers in the theory argue that normal contrails dissipate relatively quickly, and contrails that do not dissipate must contain additional substances.[2][3] These arguments have been dismissed by the scientific community: such trails are normal water-based contrails (condensation trails) that are routinely left by high-flying aircraft under certain atmospheric conditions.[4] Although proponents have attempted to prove that the claimed chemical spraying does take place, their analyses have been flawed or based on misconceptions

That's what we're discussing here.

This particular topic is about the demonstrable lies and intentional witholding of truth as perpetrated by geoengineeringwatch.

In this case, the demonstrable lie was the claim that the video of the Thai Airlines boeing 747 was chemtrailing. It has been sufficiently demonstrated that it was dumping fuel in an emergency procedure.

avherald.com...

Several forum members (myself included) have tried to post comments to that effect on the geoengineeringwatch page featuring the video, as well as onthe facebook page. On the geoengineeringwatch page the comments haven't been passed through the moderation process, and they've been deleted on the facebook page.

That's deliberate lying and obfuscation of the truth. So we can say with certainty that geoengineeringwatch is perpetrating a hoax. Videos by Tankerenemy are already automatically being relegated to the hoax forum, and I suggest we do the same with anything coming from geoengineeringwatch.

For the full story on this, go here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: payt69


I posted the information about the fuel dump incident on the Geoengineeringwatch FB page and now I'm blocked from posting and my post has been deleted.

originally posted by: smurfy

So what's in a working contrail then, exactly?..you tell me,

A whole # load of water ice, and a tiny, tiny little bit of particulates for the ice to form around. A bit less than 1%.
Exactly. You have been told. Now, if you want to discuss the invisible exhaust of the engine, I am sure there are all sorts of nasty things there. C02, Carbon, Dihidrogen Monoxide! Good Lord, a whole lot of Dihidrogen monoxide!

originally posted by: mrthumpy
a reply to: payt69


I posted the information about the fuel dump incident on the Geoengineeringwatch FB page and now I'm blocked from posting and my post has been deleted.

Yup that's how things go in chemtrail land. It's a bit of cult, really, carefully shielded from anything that might make the parishioners doubt the 'truth' of chemtrails. It's just like scientology, in which scientologists aren't supposed to see/read anything that's considered 'entheta' (information that's not in accordance with the scientology teachings). Critics are made out to tbe the equivalent of the devil (they call them Suppresive Persons (SP), see here).

On geoengineeringwatch we see the same principle being applied. The followers (I mean the 'awakened ones') aren't allowed to read critical information, and anyone critical of the chemtrail theory is made out to be a paid government shill/agent/troll. It's the exact same mechanism being applied to stop the followers from actually having to think about things, so they won't veer away from the herd.

originally posted by: payt69

originally posted by: mrthumpy
a reply to: payt69


I posted the information about the fuel dump incident on the Geoengineeringwatch FB page and now I'm blocked from posting and my post has been deleted.

In chemtrail lore, anyone critical of the chemtrail theory is made out to be a paid government shill/agent/troll. It's the exact same mechanism being applied to stop the followers from actually having to think about things, so they won't veer away from the herd.

Agreed. How often do we see that on this forum?

originally posted by: mrthumpy

originally posted by: payt69

originally posted by: mrthumpy
a reply to: payt69


I posted the information about the fuel dump incident on the Geoengineeringwatch FB page and now I'm blocked from posting and my post has been deleted.

In chemtrail lore, anyone critical of the chemtrail theory is made out to be a paid government shill/agent/troll. It's the exact same mechanism being applied to stop the followers from actually having to think about things, so they won't veer away from the herd.

Agreed. How often do we see that on this forum?

More often than I care to remember. Not just on this forum though, but just about anywhere where the chemtrail theory is being contested (youtube comments, facebook, metabunk, other forums, etc).

originally posted by: mrthumpy
a reply to: payt69


I posted the information about the fuel dump incident on the Geoengineeringwatch FB page and now I'm blocked from posting and my post has been deleted.

That's because if people knew the truth about that photo (and other "chemtrail" issues), fewer of them would click on Dane Wigington's "donate" button.

a reply to: network dude

Could you link me to some of the threads you have started on this subject? It's obvious that you feel very strongly about it.

Theres enough chem con trail miasma. Why should I start more threads on it??

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

no - it is abut something OTHER THAN "normal" jet exhaust being in "the trails".

Thats silly.

And jet exhaust isn't… "normal".

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

no - it is abut something OTHER THAN "normal" jet exhaust being in "the trails".

Thats silly.

And jet exhaust isn't… "normal".

Why not? How is it different from any other kind of pollution?