Chem-trail Plane Photographed on the ground?

here's a new spin, ufo trails
read the link its on ats

ats link


dont know if it helps

reply to post by Jezza


I would hope that Internos takes a look at that one...looks good. Maybe both sides of this chemtrail/contrail debate are wrong. Damn ET's and their pollution!!

reply to post by waynos


No. I think you guys have done a terrific job in providing alternative explanations and debunking this. I still think there is more to the issue of this phenomenon, but you guys did a great job at picking this one apart!

Great job guys!

reply to post by DimensionalDetective


I have to admit, its been a tough one on both sides of the fence. This has to be one of the most interesting debates that I have ever taken part in so far.

A star for you and your chivalry. keep up the good fight all.

reply to post by DimensionalDetective


I second what the previous poster said, thanks for your honest opinion

I agree with the way others have complimented DD on being open-minded, as this discussion wove through the thread.

There were a lot of mis-conceptions, apparently initiated by this Ted Twitmeir (I don't know who he is).

I noticed, as someone pointed out, Ted updated his initial report with a retraction....of sorts....but in what seems typical ill-informed fashion, still continued to question the part of the engine exhaust nozzle labeled 'B' in the photo.

UM....I have been up close and personal with commercial passenger airplanes for 22 years. That is a normal piece of the engine, as designed.

I'm supposing Ted, by implication, wishes to keep it a 'mystery'....because he's counting on the layman's lack of knowledge. This is a common tactic; propose a 'question', even if you already know the answer....it is called being provacative in order to promote an agenda. Later, if called out on it, he can say he didn't lie. BUT, willingly planting the seed of the eventual hysteria and paranoia that may ensue, is disengenuous.

Example: It is unlawful to falsely shout "Fire!" in a darkened movie theater.

But, say you whisper to a person behind you, a stranger, and say "Is that a fire?" And, this stranger thinks he sees something...gets agitated....and repeats to someone else, and so on....eventually someone will panic, and shout "Fire!"

See the analogy? I'll go one step further...you, the first 'whisperer', have written a book about human behavior...so, you conduct this experiment in the dark theater in order to get free publicity to help sell that book....AND, you skate away scot-free, and just reap the profits.

Instigation = profits.

reply to post by DimensionalDetective


Well, for you on having the decency to admit to the possibility of being wrong. I've got to give credit when people do that, since I know it's hard to admit it. Harder face to face than on a forum, but hard nonetheless.



Edit to try and choose nicer words.

[edit on 13-5-2008 by apex]

Thats just insanse.. Does the government have a stance on this offically?

How can they claim they do not use this technology, or that noone does to effect the weather, yet there are obvious sites selling equipment and claiming

"Since its beginning, Company personnel have logged over 30,000 hours of actual cloud seeding time. During its 40 years of weather modification experience, WMI has pioneered safe and effective techniques for cloud seeding, both day and night. These advances in cloud seeding have made it possible to conduct operations 24 hours per day, seven days a week. These techniques have been employed with continued success for over 40 seasons throughout the world."

Is that not factual evidence that is happens ALOT, I dont understand why weather mod is considered so conspirical? I would say if they are spraying flouride to make us more passive, yes -- but why weather modding topics?

reply to post by mindping


mindping....

'cloud seeding' has been around, for decades.....it is intended to induce rain. Is THAT weather modification??? Well, in a sense.

Why do some clouds produce rain, and some don't? Because the water vapor, even the visible vapor, needs particulate matter to further condense around, in order to form a droplet of rain. Sometimes this occurs naturally...but in drought stricken areas, it would be useful to know how to induce a cloud to start to rain its moisture.

It's only a nefarious scheme if you think saving a farmer's crops is a secret plan of some sort....

reply to post by waynos


Yet, Ted T. never gave up trying to convince people this was a chemtrail aircraft even though there was no solid evidence to begin with? How could he not have known it was a refueling aircraft? I worked in the Air Force for 6 years but I worked in munitions. I'm a stupid ammo troop and I found this exact model of refueling pod after 2 minutes of doing a google image search. I honestly think he was reaching for anything he could point to as supposed "tangible" photo evidence.

If this type of thing is really going on, these photos would have never been taken. Noone would be able to get close enough to do so. We continue to experiment with weather modification as well as the rest of the world. I think what people for a long time have believed to be the government dropping mind control chemicals on the populace has actually been cloud seeding and other weather modification research. It makes sense. The problem I see is that if the military is experimenting with weather modification with money from the black budget then they could honestly use any chemicals they want with no oversight whatsoever. They would have free reign to do what they want (In the past, as I stated before, this has gotten people killed).

-ChriS

i figured it out! case closed

chemtrails are just fuel leaking out of the extra tanks for refueling other planes! those pesky things always leak!

but seriously I cant confirm or deny the existence of chemtrails, although it has been proven that people/corporations/governments in the past have sprayed chemicals over populations.

but we all know the gov stops doing those things once we find out about it... right?

Originally posted by QBSneak000
reply to post by pikypiky

 

This is in no way a personal attack. Your posts are just as valued to me as they are to everyone else. Im just playing devils advocate.

Nothing personal should be taken by you or any member here at ATS as long as the name-calling is stopped.

Anyway, after viewing some photos and the arguments supporting why these photos should not raise the pitchforks of chemtrail advocates, these are indeed refueling planes used to 'tank' fuel for other planes. I’ve seen videos on one of those documentary channels.

Ah, shoot! However, an aircraft outfitted with nozzles could spray anything via the refueling boom/pod, thereby the spraying ‘chemtrails’ are formed as a plausible explanation to the appearances of grid-like patterns in the skies and other biological stuff into our atmosphere and onto the ground below.

Originally posted by mindping
Thats just insanse.. Does the government have a stance on this offically?

How can they claim they do not use this technology, or that noone does to effect the weather, yet there are obvious sites selling equipment and claiming

"Since its beginning, Company personnel have logged over 30,000 hours of actual cloud seeding time. During its 40 years of weather modification experience, WMI has pioneered safe and effective techniques for cloud seeding, both day and night. These advances in cloud seeding have made it possible to conduct operations 24 hours per day, seven days a week. These techniques have been employed with continued success for over 40 seasons throughout the world."

Is that not factual evidence that is happens ALOT, I dont understand why weather mod is considered so conspirical? I would say if they are spraying flouride to make us more passive, yes -- but why weather modding topics?

So now, cloud seeding projects are just there to spray flouride on people? How many different chemtrail beliefs have there been in this thread alone?

No, there is not flouride in cloud seeding flares. Here is a hint, those flares are often used in UPDRAFTS under and in storm cells, to take it higher into regions of supercooler water, to enhance precipitation. And its often over rural areas, where there is more agriculture. Some of those are for more water, or hail supression.

If someone was going to try and spray people, wouldnt you just go right over there heads?

as per the RAAF photo if it was full of NASTY chemicals wouln't the
guys in the said photos would be wearing PPEs or at least
gloves???????????

Well exactly. The pod itself is more or less simply a valved pumping mechanism for the fuel. But if this really was something toxic these guys would not exactly be so cavalier about grabbing that hose.

-ChriS

[edit on 13-5-2008 by BlasteR]

Originally posted by Witness2008
I found an interesting video of a Tampa Bay weatherman explaining the alluminum that is in our skies placed there by the military in order to jam radar. www.youtube.com...

It is called chaff and it is a countermeasure for enemy anti-radar missiles. For heat-seeking missiles, some aircraft use flares. Aircraft like C-130's are usually fitted with mods of chaff as well as flare to counter both types of missiles (heat-seeking and anti-radar) because it doesn't make sense to have countermeasures against one and not the other. I remember working with chaff alot when I was younger and sometimes when we would pack the mods with sticks of chaff the caps would fall off. If the stuff gets on you it's absolutely impossible to get all of it off. The strips are miniscule.

Some farmers in Arkansas were complaining to the base when I was stationed at Little Rock AFB because the C-130's would dispense their chaff mods in a certain area and it was landing in some guy's feild. I never actually saw this, however, from what I heard the stuff was everywhere. It happens and it has nothing to do with weather manipulation.

I was in the 2w0x1 career field in the USAF for 6 years.

-ChriS

[edit on 13-5-2008 by BlasteR]

[edit on 13-5-2008 by BlasteR]

DBL POST

[edit on 13-5-2008 by BlasteR]

reply to post by MrPenny
Brain-up!! Lemmie' see truely hmmm t r u e and ly, damn...
spell-hell!!!

reply to post by BlasteR


Just a real quick nitnoy correction, the missiles are radar guided missiles, not anti-radar missiles. Anti-radar missile generally use passive guidance, so chaff won't be effective against them. Radar missiles come in two variants, semi-active and active. Semi-active missile rely entirely on the shooting aircraft's radar to get tracking information. So do active missiles for a period of their flight time, before the on-board radar on the missile kicks in and the shooting aircraft can leave. In both cases, chaff is used to to confuse the host aircraft or missile radar, by creating a target with a larger radar cross section than the aircraft being targeted. Modern radars have ways of dealing with this (doppler gates which cut out non-moving targets), and there are other countermeasures available these days as well(towed decoys, expendable radar jammers, on-board jammers etc), though chaff still has utility.

Edit - because I'm pretty sure untility isn't a word...


[edit on 13-5-2008 by Willard856]

reply to post by Willard856


Radar-guided is correct yes.

And even those some chemtrail believers will state this, chaff is not something sprayed, it is not an aerosol. There are also some advanced chaff systems that can actually cut the length of the chaff on the fly to suit the wavelength of the particular radar frequency too.

If you want a good chuckle sometime, unfortunately at the expense of someones mental decline, you can go to Carnicoms site and see his pages where he does dentistry on himself looking for fibers on his teeth, and where he thinks chemtrails have changed the earths rotational speed.




[edit on 14-5-2008 by firepilot]