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.

 

Proof of chemtrails?

page: 8
6
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nextstep
Thanks for your post and comments. I have read this whole thread and am fully aware of the WWII bomber plane aspect, but I see a big difference in a fleet of bombers 60 years ago and a single plane being responsible for a trail today (or 30 years ago for that matter).


Well you've asked me a lot of questions, so....

Why would you think this?




posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 07:32 AM
link   
This is probably one of the best documents I have come across on chem/contrails:


Chemtrails
After the initial formation of ice, a contrail evolves in one of two ways. If the humidity is low, the contrail will be short-lived. Newly formed ice particles will quickly evaporate. The
resulting contrail will extend only a short distance behind the aircraft. If the humidity is high, the contrail will be persistent. Newly formed ice particles will continue to grow in size by taking water from the surrounding atmosphere. The resulting line shaped contrail extends for large distances behind an aircraft. Persistent contrails can last for hours while growing to several kilometers in width and 200 to 400 meters in height.


It highlights many of the same things that have been mentioned in this thread, touches on others, and further explains the chemtrail hoax.

This:

Is an aircraft used to test jet engine water ingestion at altitude, a simular test to this one:



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 07:31 AM
link   
Essan,

That looks like an interesting document you linked up there - will have a read when im not so tired, but it does appear to have chemtrail-like contrails.

EVen if that document does end up having a seeming explanation for chemtrails, does it REALLY write off the chances that chemtrails do exist? i know it gets down to a question fo what you want to believe almost, but one explanation doesnt completely write the whole concept off IMO.

Also, that is interesting that you say that in the UK all the contrails appear in the same place, but honestly, its not like that in Australia, or at least in Sydney anyway. i cant tell you direction of the spraying in the detail you can, but they are often in different places - almost at random and appear to follow no pattern what so ever here. I mean, yes sometimes they are in similar places, and sure, at these times they may be simply contrails - some of the kind describe in the link you provided, but it doesnt explain them all i dont think.



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Hi Neformore,

I have been thinking of a way to explain this simply, and hope that with this example one can find the resemblance.

Place a lighter under a closed conical flask filled about a third full of water and light it. The chance of steam forming is very small. Now get twenty lighters and repeat. The chance of steam appearing is considerably increased.

This has now scientific relevance to what occurs in the sky other than that the increased presence of a source/catalyst considerably increases the effect. As this also occured with the bombers (they were flying in large formations) they can not be compared.

My question regarding a photo dated 30 years back with contrails showing was also related more to private photos, not ones made by the air force or any other government agency. Does anyone have one where a chem/contrail is visible?

Some of the reasons why I am still suspicious:

1) I have never anything like chemtrail on old photos

2) I have never seen chemtrails other than close to shore or overland

3) I have seen two planes at similar altitudes flying close to each other in the same direction (as if one was being escorted by the other) where one was leaving a 'chem'trail and the other a quickly disappearing 'con'trail

Thanks for your postings, you rae a good debater.

Does anyone know



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Hi there. I spent many years working with the "Snow Birds" aerobatic team in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. One of the things that they do is smoke during their show. Having seen literally hundreds of their smoke shows and worked on the system myself, I can say that the majority of chemtrails/contrails in the you tube are either natural contrails or the result of a diesel smoke system. The first two shown definitely are smoke.
Jet pilots just love to play with their smoke systems,and there is no law against it. The spotty contrails left be jet passenger liners are usually the result of varying atmospheric conditions. The heavy contrails that you are seeing, that is heavier than would have been seen from past aircraft types, are a result of the ugraded power and increased temperature of the jet engines used in the newer type aircraft.
That is not to say that they aren't spraying something into the atmosphere, but that most of what you are seeing is not a chemtrail.



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nextstep
1) I have never anything like chemtrail on old photos


1947 Louisville:
1947 Newfoundland:
1947 Newfoundland:
1969 Colorado:


1977 Michigan:
1958, California:
1954, Rails and Trails:
1940, Europe:
1940 Europe:
B-17’s different angle:
1943, Europe:
1943 Europe:
1944, Germany:



From a book printed in 1991:
1991 or earlier:
1991 or earlier:
1991 or earlier:
1991 or earlier:

U2 with contrails below it (below left wing tip):
F-101 contrails above it:
F-106 intercepting a TU-95:

Interesting one from a fighter plane in Afghanistan, which is of course not spraying anything:


C-141 cargo plane over Antarctica, also not spraying anything:


Spraying Agent Orange in Vietnam.
Now these ones are spraying something:







This is skywriting, but still funny:



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 01:22 AM
link   
Hi Defcon5, thanks for your post and time taken to provide these pictures. I discount all the photos as usable, except the 1977 and 1958 photos (govt photos, unrelated issues, close ups where you can't see how long the trails last in the sky are not relevant to me).

I said that even one photo would be enough though, so I am glad to have seen two now, thank you.

This tells me that it is possible to have longer lasting contrails without them having to be chemtrails. Thanks for this. It does not disprove the theory of chemtrails being sprayed yet though, and perhaps we should try to focus on this moving forward.

If it is possible to have contrails and chemtrails, both lasting for extended periods of time in the sky, how can one tell the difference?

The reason I believe both are possible (it not just being ALL contrails or ALL chemtrails) is because of the various lab tests done with samples of what came down to the ground from the air.

I think all of us who have had some input in this thread know these results exist, the aluminium and barium spikes in water levels where there has been so-called spraying at the time, the Magellon cases, the headaches, dizzyness, lack of energy etc experienced by people in the path of these trails seems to debate whether these are just contrails made of ice particles. There is a growing number of studies done on this, and they all point in one direction....there is something in the air that can not have gotten their naturally.



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 02:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nextstep
The reason I believe both are possible (it not just being ALL contrails or ALL chemtrails) is because of the various lab tests done with samples of what came down to the ground from the air.


The problem I see with this is, that these supposed samples are collected by Chemtrail believers, and posted to Chemtrail sites. I have yet to see any independent research on these supposed chemicals which shows them to be 1) coming from contrails, and 2) not occurring from some other source in the area. When something is coming from a Chemtrail website, I find it highly suspect information from the word go.

Varying forms of Barium are used in brick making, glass making, rubber production, oil drilling, fireworks, rat poison, spark plugs, florescent lamps, and white paint to name a few. Its not surprising to myself that it can be found in water runoff.

Aluminum is everywhere, and when it oxidizes/rusts it turns into a powder. If you have ever run your hand over old aluminum siding and had it turn white, that is aluminum powder.

Now, I do have a theory as to the increase in the number and volume of contrails which we are currently seeing, and it relates to what Direwolf mentioned. I have brought this up in other threads in the past, but no one seemed to catch what I meant by it, so I’ll try and explain it better here.

First thing is that there is more air traffic now then there has ever been in all proceeding history. This is a proven fact, which accounts for the number of contrails we now see.

As to the volume, first I want you to look at these photos:






If you notice the engines, they are all roughly the same small diameter on these aircraft. I believe that several of them used the exact same engine type. Either way, the common factors on these aircraft are 1) Small fan to engine diameter, and 2) they were the most numerous aircraft in the sky before the late 80’s. In the 90’s, we started to see the 727’s being retired and replaced with much more efficient aircraft families. Watch what happens to the engines sizes when this change takes place:







So as the fan in these engines has increased in size, so has the amount of air exposed to the heat of the running engine:

www.boeing.com/companyoffices/aboutus/wonder_of_flight/engine.htm


Thus the volume of the contrails increases, and the conditions to form them increase with the increase in engine temperature.



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 04:13 AM
link   
defcon,

interesting data and certainly you make a strong case against the increased prevelance of chemtrails. Your data on plane engines certainly would explain why we see more and more lines in the sky in recent times and of course increased air traffic would also contribute to this.

Direwolf,

i hear what you are saying but dont think any of the chemtrails i've seen were pilots playing with their smoke trail. what purpose would leaving a trail along the horizon for miles and miles prove? it's a watse of time to do that IMO.


I think i am starting to agree that chemtrails are indeed much rarer than i thought before coming into this thread. I honestly suspected every persistent contrail was a chemtrail, perhaps this is not the case.

In saying that though i whole-heartedly agree with NextStep. THere is a high number of unusual symptons related to heavy bouts of spraying in certain areas.
I think all you guys in this thread have done a great job so far of showing how lines in the sky could really be as simple as persistent contrails, but should we now look at these bizzare illnesses which i mentioned in my link a while back and to which NextStep refers?

I also reccommend the chemtrail non-believers to google "Jim Phelps air pharmacology" and tell us what you think. THis guy claims to have invented air pharmacology aka chemtrails to combat a whole host of problems and he makes a solid case. I cant attach his 98 page report here but i would really love some opinions on this guy.



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nextstep

The reason I believe both are possible (it not just being ALL contrails or ALL chemtrails) is because of the various lab tests done with samples of what came down to the ground from the air.


But think about it: if you see a persistent contrail/chemtrail then it means that whatever you are seeing is not falling to Earth.

And at the altitude at which they form any particles deliberately released to spray the ground could land thousands of miles away - indeed in theory they could travel around the world before reaching the ground depending on prevailing high level winds.

What evidence is there that any substance found on the ground was sprayed by an aircraft some 20,000ft+ overhead?

If you see a chemtrail above you then the one thing you can be sure of is that whatever causes it will not land on you ....



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 05:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by srsen
I also reccommend the chemtrail non-believers to google "Jim Phelps air pharmacology" and tell us what you think. THis guy claims to have invented air pharmacology aka chemtrails to combat a whole host of problems and he makes a solid case. I cant attach his 98 page report here but i would really love some opinions on this guy.


But the thing is this....I log onto his website and one of the first things I see is photo's of contrails. And I see him saying things like "there are two jets and one is producing a short trail and one is producing a longer lasting chemtrail" - and we've already covered the fact that two planes at different altitudes can produce varying effects because of temperature layers, and we've discussed how its damn near impossible without the aid of radar to determine visually how high a plane is, so its possible he's seeing one aircraft at 24,000ft and one at 31,000ft, and then you need to factor in the temperatures, moisture content and prevailing wind conditions at those heights to see whether short lived or persistent trails will form and even after you've done all those things you would still need a qualitative air sample from immediately behind the aircraft in order to determine if it was spraying anything before wind dispersal became a factor and even THEN you need a pure control sample at that height to work with that is free of pollutants.

And as Defcon has pointed out, there could be any number of contributory factors to what is in the air at any given time, from factory chimneys to volcanic eruptions, nuclear explosions (most of what went up circles in the jet stream), accidental releases, vehicle emissions and even natural ground conditions and pollens, and even then you need to factor in local weather conditions to see what is likley to be in a particular area at a particular time and whether it will be dispersed, or fall to ground.



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 06:15 AM
link   
Here are some highlights of Jim Phelps Auto-Biography:


Jim Phelps Bio

I have degrees in Electrical Engineering from the University of Tennessee.

What I am best known in the secret side of the Govt. for "Global Systems Sciences." These are techniques to promote massive climate changes or changes in immune system functionality.

Global Systems Sciences make use of a class of information termed "extra-terrestrial," this meaning that it is of a higher knowledge base than most of the planets knowledge.

when the Rockefellers wanted to study teratogenic chemical effects on humans and did so in the South American jungles. Then the US wanted to do nuclear testing on live humans and they did so. All these experiments were classified due to their criminal nature that showed up after the German Nuremberg trials.

Jim Phelps a Global Systems Science person was his discovering the effect of the ozone hole or the rise in UV in killing the oceans plankton levels.

Phelps put together in the 1980s at ORNL that there were active volcanic fields in Western Saudi Arabia that interacted with oil deposits to make a natural refinery process.

Other examples of the extra-terrestrial knowledge base are the issues of chemtrails and how they pertain to religion's hidden knowledge.

Jim Phelps found the very simple association that the story of Moses in the area of Midian was about the formation of this compound and its benefit to human health.

When I was in high school I knew how the A-bombs worked, the machining characteristics of uranium, etc.

My lineage comes from the Phelps family, which traces its heritage back to Europe and the Welf and Guelph families that trace their heritage to the House of David.

Jim Phelps found the very simple association that the story of Moses in the area of Midian was about the formation of this compound and its benefit to human health.

I also found that anyone that understood the slightly deeper Jewish issues of the story of Moses and the Column of Fire well knew this was a natural event of refining oil.

I even knew that Oak Ridge conspired to murder JFK to support their jobs there. I knew the major players the day it happened--they were Jewish and pro-Israel. One, I knew personally.

In 1986, I had found the most epic discovery for the causation of cancers, which was that fluorine and radiation induced free oxygen have very similar effects on cell trace metals necessary for cellular immune resistance.

Today, I am a legend in the world of national security for going straight and recommending the criminal prosecution of the upper levels of the shadow Govt. I used to work for the "crooks" of the Oak Ridge national security system as their most prolific inventor. I was the inventor that defined God for them and explained the messages of the Revelations.

Perhaps my most valuable discovery at ORNL was finding the real issues pertaining to the Ark of the Covenant.

The discovery of the causation for AIDS epidemics.


Jim Phelps also likes to talk about himself in the third person.


So basically, to recap this, Jim Phelps is a direct descendant of the line of David, who believes he knows the true secrets of the bible, chemtrails, who shot Kennedy, aliens, area 51, and he has cured both cancer and aids. I am surprised he had the time to write that bio.

The first sentence of the above selected text is most likely the only true thing written in the whole rest of the text. He sounds a lot like the author of this thread here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The moral of this story is:
Don’t believe everything someone writes on the internet, unless you can back it up with some facts…



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Other examples of the extra-terrestrial knowledge base are the issues of chemtrails and how they pertain to religion's hidden knowledge.


So that's it - Chemtrails are actually a secret message from God telling us how to find the Ark of the Covenant ........


btw anyone else think Jim Phelps needs to brush up on his English? He writes like an 8 year old .....



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 07:29 AM
link   
ooookkkkaaayyy, so i have read a few reports from Jim Phelps and started on the 98 page report and NONE of that Ark of the Convenent/Moses junk is in there and he doesnt write like an 8 yr old in what ive read from him either.

All i can say is that he obviously had a journalist friend help him write the stuff i've read from him. I never thought to read his bio as silly as that sounds and had i read it then maybe i wouldnt be recommending his work so strongly!

The reports from him which i have read are still impressive and the data is still something i would stand by - but geez, i'm kindof glad that exert was posted - he sounds like a bit of a nutter - seriously, who writes in third person!?


If he is all that he says he is then he REALLY needs to work on his PR and learn how to not turn people off his work by mixing his beliefs systems with his knowledge base and experience.

But i'm glad you guys took the time to look him up - if he hasnt completely turned you off (which i wouldnt blame you if he did) then try to find his reports on his work with chemtrails, it really is INFINTELY more impressive than his bio! doesnt take much to beat that tho


[edit on 13-8-2007 by srsen]



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5

He sounds a lot like the author of this thread here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



hahaha
good call.

not one line post, but deserved a reponse!

[edit on 13-8-2007 by srsen]



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
So that's it - Chemtrails are actually a secret message from God telling us how to find the Ark of the Covenant ........


Maybe we are supposed to follow the:

until:

marks the spot…



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Defcon5, Thanks for your post, very strong in argumentation, and much appreciated. It still does not answer the possibility of both con and chemtrails existing though.

Essan, play with words like you do and you only do yourself injustice, and in my eyes you lose credibility as a result. I would therefore like to share something with you which may provide some insight:

If someone really believes in something that doesn't prove him/her right, it only shows passion and bias.

If someone really doesn't believe in something that doesn't prove him/her right, it only shows passion and bias

If someone is merely seeking the truth they are not concerned with the outcome, so long as it is truthful.

It is funny to see how far people in the first two groups will go to explain their side, yet want to spend little to no time or energy trying to be open to the other side's argument.

The last group of people are hard to find, I will leave it at that.

To get back to the thread, no matter how much evidence is provided to explain long lasting contrails, this thread is dedicated to the proof of chemtrails. Was it not in the 70's that a nobel prize was awarded to a scientist (will try to find his name and post) for proposing weather control via largescale placement of aluminium particles above the lower atmosphere.

If one understands the process of nobel laureates, and consequential prize money for further research and additional contracts from private and govt agencies, one can assume that a prize like this is not given if nothing is to be done with the knowledeg presented by this scientist.

Furthermore, somewhere in the late 70's or early 80's (if I recall correctly), the addition of aluminium to plane fuel was banned, because of noted health damage potential (yes the world was a bit more conscious then), so it has already been tried in the past. Why have so much trouble believing that it could happen again?

I find value in Neformore's and Defcon5's posts, and will add this info to the pile, but it does not sway the argument in the contrail direction. Then again the chemtrail argument is not strong enough to sway the argument in this direction.

For this reason I am trying to dissuade presumptive conclusions and biased judgements.



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nextstep
I find value in Neformore's and Defcon5's posts, and will add this info to the pile, but it does not sway the argument in the contrail direction. Then again the chemtrail argument is not strong enough to sway the argument in this direction.


Hmm.

What is strong enough evidence to put this "chemtrail" stuff to bed then?

Between us, Essan, Defcon and I have - in my opinion - more than dismantled this whole charade. We've done it with logic, we've done it with science and we've done it with a whole load of knowledge accumulated over the years, and yet you say thats still not enough?



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
[What is strong enough evidence to put this "chemtrail" stuff to bed then?

Between us, Essan, Defcon and I have - in my opinion - more than dismantled this whole charade. We've done it with logic, we've done it with science and we've done it with a whole load of knowledge accumulated over the years, and yet you say thats still not enough?


I had a feeling this would come up and i dont entirely blame you for thinking it either. You're right, you guys have done well, and everyone reading this thread would agree wholeheartedly, but in my opinion, what you guys have proved is not that chemtrails dont exist, but that:

a) a lot of the info out there on chemtrails is incorrect and false; and
b) that perhaps not every line we see in the sky is a chemtrail - contrails are more common than i, at least, ever realised.

But i still feel that there are some loose ends that simply dont add-up, and i'm mostly referring to the documented mass illness which relate to periods of heavy spraying. this does occur and is something which i'd need comprehensively expalined to me.

IF that could be done then it would be hard to argue against the theory that chemtrails might not be what we thought they were.

i mean, we KNOW that those in real power do some very evil and underhanded acts to people on this planet and really, spraying us with chemicals wouldn't be that far fecthed would it? I recall reading somewhere that Rumsfeld stated that the US had stores of "Aerosolized Prozac and Valium ready to go" - i mean doesn't this say something??

BTW: i have searched and searched for a link to this and all i can find is Alan Watt discussing it - but i SWEAR BLIND i had read it in a news article somewhere.



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 07:50 PM
link   
Found an interesting transcript…. Have a quick read



June 22 2007, Alan Watt on ‘The American Awakening’ with Tim Wingate (filling in for Michael Herzog).

Tim Wingate: “This issue of chemtrails, something is going on way up above the commercial airline route, that planes are doing something, they’re spraying something, and there’s been all kinds of reports here, and you told me that in Europe they are already admitting they are doing this?

Alan Watt: “Yeah just in the last week or so. It had to come to this because there have been too many people talking out about it that they had to eventually address it, so some of the governments have come out and admitted it. See, now that we’ve heard the Kyoto warnings and the global climate change stuff, [now its time] to use it as an excuse that they are actually trying to save us all from excessive global warming. However, they’re a bit late and a bit of a liar too because they were spraying back in the 90’s pretty consistently before we heard about global warming and all the terror that’s been drummed up since.

Now governments don’t move quickly as you know and beaurocracy’s certainly don’t, it takes many years of planning something on this scale to get it in to operation. It takes years of making the chemicals that they are spraying on a world basis, because I get graphs from all over the world and it’s going on everywhere. So this has been in the manufacture for probably 20 or 30 years beforehand to get us to this stage today, long before global warming became the con-game issue that it has.

What they are doing in fact, I think, is to do with drugging the populace as they take them through the greatest changes in history into a new system.

The day after 911 on national TV, Rumsfeld came on and he was asked what the government was going to do if there was another great catastrophe in a city, and this was probably to do with the panic situation in a city, and he said we have aerosolized Prozac and valium compounds ready to go and we can deluge whole cities with this stuff – and that’s when it hit, my god they have been doing it before this.”



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join