It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by StellarX
I am not sure that one can or that you have but whatever the case it most certainly did not make the trails in the sky go away so it's completely irrelevant if his lying or not.
Originally posted by StellarX
There is no such thing as a 'logical person' and by your apparent definition ( anyone who thinks differently are not thinking 'logically') we should be thankful.
Originally posted by StellarX
And as accurate as the rest of them in my opinion.
Originally posted by StellarX
Which is basically my point and certainly that does not lead to less chem trails...
Originally posted by StellarX
You have shown what is contained in commercial Av-gas as per standards that are normally used and once again i am not sure what you think you have proved. Telling us what the standards are hardly changes what we observe and your contributing nothing in that regard.
Originally posted by StellarX
It may not have changed in those flights that leaves regular contrails but how can you suggest that it's the same for the flights that leaves these massively persistent trails?
Originally posted by StellarX
You think the organization involved in this scam will sell me whatever is used to create these chem trails or that it is now sold as regular fuel everywhere in the world? Why do you think they are simply distributing whatever causes these trails as regular fuel?
Originally posted by StellarX
while those aviation folks who don't know what is going on might arrogantly assume that they 'know it all' they clearly do not and have simply not explained what they have been asked to explain.
Originally posted by StellarX
Some are but as i have repeatedly said in the past i think chem trails are being laid for the good of Europeans and Americans
Originally posted by StellarX
Clearly the fuels used in the chem trails laying planes are differently and if you can not address that your not telling me specifically anything new.
Chem trails are still there and if regular fuel can not do that ( as you seem happily attempt proving; and i am not disagreeing) then you must address why we see what we do.
The engines have not changed significantly in the last ten years and certainly can not explain the appearance of chem trails. Increased traffic is certainly not important either as there were no great and sudden increases in the last decade as i have proven by source material. Three percent per decade is hardly 'significant' in that it can give rise to totally new atmospheric 'conditions'.
Originally posted by StellarX
Once again until we see 500 or 1000 commercial airliners flying in formation i simply do not see the relevance.
Originally posted by StellarX
That being said on not one of the photos posted earlier is it made so 'clearly' evident that the contrails are persisting for 'hours' after the planes past and in almost all the photo's the planes creating the contrails are still visible? Considering the speed of those bombers that is not a very long 'contrail' at all and well within what is expected on rare occasions.
Originally posted by -0mega-
I don't know about you but in my country you can't buy vaccines.
Our government funds the vaccinating process if a new disease is found and requires vaccination.
And to claim that buying fuel at commercial airports won't work because they probably won't sell the stuff that causes the chemtrails anyway is like those conspiracies in which the government is the suspect.
There won't be a truth because you claim that the people that are supposed to supply the truth are lying.
I have a better idea:
1.: Buy a hot air balloon
2.: Go fly up to the skies
3.: Grab some Chemtrail from the sky.
4.: Analyze it.
If the trails are too high, search for someone else with a primitive airplane that can reach the altitude, and still go grab it.
Rather than speculating and making claims about stuff that's in the sky, why don't you actually GO UP THERE and GRAB your evidence.
Problem solved.
Last year, 32.8 million travelers passed through SFO, a 12 percent increase from the year before
In 2005, UK airport passengers were predominantly bound for, or arriving from, destinations in Europe. The number of passengers on flights to or from Europe totalled 129 million, an increase of 8 million (6 per cent) on 2004. The largest growth was on routes to Italy, up by 1.0 million passengers (an increase of 11 per cent), Ireland, up by 0.9 million (9 per cent) and Poland, up by 0.8 million (85 per cent).
The next most popular destinations were either other UK airports or North America; each of these destinations accounted for over 20 million passengers. There were 26 million passengers on UK domestic flights, up by 4 per cent (0.9 million) on 2004; and 22 million North America passengers, up by 3 per cent (0.6 million). Despite this increase, passenger numbers between the UK and North America have not quite returned to their year 2000 levels of 23 million.
The total number of passengers from UK airports to all other destinations in the world was 25 million, an increase of 10 per cent (2 million) on 2004. The largest passenger growth was seen on routes to North Africa, up by 0.8 million (38 per cent), the Indian subcontinent, up by 0.6 million (27 per cent), and Australasia, up by 0.3 million (33 per cent).