Originally posted by StellarX
Who's facts are we talking about here; theirs or ours?

The facts of every single aviation person on this site that I have spoken with, either in a thread or in chat. There is not a single one of us that
believes there is the slightest validity to Chemtrails.
Originally posted by StellarX
So funding the Nazi war machine before and during the second world war by US government officials were unknown to the US government?

Um, I guess I must have missed that lesson in history class. Don’t know anything about what your talking about on this one.
Originally posted by StellarX
So what if high ranking officials in the aviation industry knows about this and also understand that they better not talk about it?

That is just the point, they could not contain it to only high ranking officials. High ranking officials are not the guys that would transport, store,
pump, weight and balance the supposed chemicals. ATC guys would have to be in the know to direct traffic around where the spraying was going on.
Originally posted by StellarX
What do you think their silence on the issue proves there is no conspiracy?

No, I know there is no conspiracy. One of many reasons is because I see those same persistent contrails over my house, and I know what flights made
those contrails, plus I know that there are no chemicals being pumped on those flights beyond what has been pumped on aircraft for the last 70 years:
Gas, Oil, Hydraulic fluid, toilet water, and potable water.
Originally posted by StellarX
contrails just did not persist the way they do these days

If you feel that contrails are more persistent then try looking into the changes in aircraft types being flown today as opposed to 10 years ago. Check
the difference in the diameters of the engines on those aircraft. You should also check into the changes in the atmospheric conditions over the last
decade or so.
Ill tell you what you’ll find about aircraft, that most airlines flew B727's as their mainstay aircraft for a long time, and now are going to more
fuel efficient types of aircraft. The main difference there is that the diameter on a 727 engine was about 4 feet, and those three engines where
tightly packed on the tail. Now its all 737’s, 757’s, airbuses and the like, they all have much larger diameter engines that run more fuel efficiently
and have larger intake fans. They are also almost all now lower-wing and separated by at least 30 or so feet, depending on the aircraft.
Originally posted by StellarX
impossible for lack of knowledge as to how many facilities they have somewhere other than what we do know about?

Well I’ll tell you, in my city there is one, Centcom (MacDill AFB), and that is in fact a tanker base (43rd Air Refueling Group). Those aircraft
though are certainly not the ones that are making the persistent contrails that I see heading into TPA.
Originally posted by StellarX
Why presume that the limits of your understanding and knowledge of the air force as a limit on their capabilities?

Because they are not hiding any bases in my town, fact not speculation…
Originally posted by StellarX
Why do they want all those new tankers if the old one's are as brand new as their official flight hours supposedly indicate they are?

Maybe its because those old ones are in fact old. KC-135’s are B707 based aircraft. Civilian aviation does not even fly those old dogs anymore, they
were one of the first commercial jet aircraft, they have been around since at least the 50’s.
I have a really good idea, why not learn something about aviation before you challenge me… In the process you’ll start to understand why no person
with aviation background believes in chemtrails.
Originally posted by StellarX
As to the ATC question their database can obviously easily be integrated and used to provide flight routes for these aircraft if they are in fact
operating at normal commercial altitudes.

Um, well lets see, if there not operating at commercial altitudes, then what are they using? Uncontrolled airspace? Then all your private pilots would
also have to know about it as this is where they fly IFR/VFR, they would have to issue advisories to those pilots. Obviously, if they are operating in
Controlled airspace then the controllers all would have to know of their existence.
Originally posted by StellarX
Why on earth presume that civilian ATC controllers would be in the know about this?

Because its how the system works…
In controlled airspace the controllers control it, thus its called controlled. In uncontrolled airspace they have to issue advisories to other pilots
so they don’t hit the guys spraying. In restricted or military airspace they can do as they wish, hence the fact that a private pilot cannot legally
fly near the space shuttle prior to launch or you cannot fly over area 51.
As long as we are discussing it, then why not tell me why they even have restricted airspace to begin with, according to you the military should be
able to perform any aerial mission they want, any place they wish, and just lie about it?
Originally posted by StellarX
Why presume their displays would even indicate that these planes are in the sky?

Oh, Duh…
Because they would not want to run a passenger jet into one of them…
You obviously know nothing about how airspace works. I am far from an expert myself, but at least have a general grasp of it, I am sure Snafu can
explain it better.
Originally posted by StellarX
The FAA is a federal branch and i can't imagine why it would be so hard to send a official to each ATC center to simply block certain flight profiles
from every being registered as being in the sky.

Delta 179 descend and maintain 10000, turn to heading 025, reduce speed to 240.
Rodger, Delta 179 descending… Wait, holy crap there is a plane heading right toward us…
Delta 179 we don’t show any traffic at that location…
Delta 179…
You guess as to why.
Originally posted by StellarX
People who don't know what has been hidden in the past always makes this vapid ignorant claim and i have little respect for anyone who pretends that
bigger and more complex 'secrets' than this one have been kept from public knowledge for longer.

Yeah, by folks that have signed away their rights to talk about such things, like military personnel. Civilian aviation folks don’t have to agree to
anything along those lines.
[edit on 12/16/2006 by defcon5]