Sorry its been a few days, I took some time off from here to go diving.
Originally posted by eaganthorn
I don’t think you actually understand the testing process and what it actually does or how the results are calculated
I never claimed to be a chemist, simply that there are chemists, who worked for my company, who test the fuel continuously, as contamination of any
type is a serious issue. Its easy enough to get a smaple of that exact same gas yourself, if you feel that you want to test it. It might be nice to
have a member here do that so we can put this “fuel” conspiracy to bed. Apparently there was already a discovery channel show where they did this,
and found nothing whatsoever in the fuel that did not belong there:
Chemtrails (funny stuff)
Pilotpip:
There's a show on Discovery right now called "Best Evidence". They're examining the whole "chemtrails" conspiracy theory. One lady from
California in particular is a riot. She has a wall of pictures showing differnet 'chemtrail' styles. The show paid a lab to perform analysis on
jet fuel samples from across the country. I'll let you guys guess what they found...
If you want to, send me a U2U, and I'll try to give you a hand getting some to test yourself.
Originally posted by eaganthorn
but you’ve now confirmed that there are more than one type of aviation fuel in use, which might not be an intentional conflict with your earlier
statement that there is only one fuel at the airport and all of the equipment uses that same fuel, but could be interpreted as such.
This is a misunderstanding of what I said and how fueling works. Maybe its my fault for not being clear enough, I am not a professional writer after
all. 90% of all aircraft, plus all ramp equipment is run off JP8, even the majority of military aircraft. JP5 is used only on fighter aircraft, mainly
for carrier ops, because it has additional fire retardant properties. The lines at an airport, which is using a hydrant system, are all charged with
the exact same fuel. As I stated above, when they have to switch lines its a huge deal, and it requires shutting down the system to discharge and
recharge it. This is only done in an emergency where a military base closes its runway, and fighters have to divert to the airport. The military
contracts with one of the hangers, the planes sit there, get fueled by the airport fueling agency, and they wait until their runway re-opens.
The other odd-ball case is some of the smaller prop-aircraft which run on Avgas, which is hand pumped from 55 gallon drums. Obviously neither types
of these aircraft match up with the supposed “Mega Sprayers” that we see on chemtrail sites. All of the pictures of those aircraft are the type
that run off of normal JP8. So for example, a TACAMO plane, or a KC-109 are both variants of the B707, and they run on the same JP8 that the B707
does.
Originally posted by eaganthorn
There are several different types of chromatographs, gas, liquid, electro, etc and their intended purpose is to identify various elements in a given
substance by burning that substance and comparing the various colors in the flame to the known colors of each element. This shows us which elements
are present but does not provide any accuracy as to how those elements are combined; otherwise the Colonel’s secret recipe would be in jeopardy of
discovery. A fuel may return spectrum analysis indicating hydrogen, carbon, oxygen, but will not show us exactly how those three elements are put
together and there are many combinations to those three elements.
You are better suited at telling what the equipment is called, all I know is that the fuel is placed in a tube, and exposed to a magnet and
centrifuge, then it produces a chart showing what elements are present in the fuel.
Originally posted by eaganthorn
As far as sparing no expense in testing, the industry would only want to test the fuel for relative standards to fuel efficiency, octane ratings, and
that which makes JP8 different from JP4 and so on.
Nope its tested for any type of contaminate. Could be something that is bleeding into the fuel in the lines, could be something growing on the walls
of the tank, could have been exposed to something on shipping, etc.
Originally posted by eaganthorn
It is not my intention to insult you by pointing out that you do not understand basic or intermediate level chemistry as it really isn’t required
for day to day activities, but some basic understanding is required for you to effectively argue this point with any intelligent leverage.
I have had basic chemistry, apparently the same as you, because if you were such the advanced chemist you would know that:
See below:
Originally posted by eaganthorn
Again the above statement further exemplifies that you do not understand conditions for chemical reactions, please review “ideal conditions for
chemical reactions” and it should provide you with an answer as to why the fumes on the flight line may be much different from the fumes at 10,000
ft.
While the chemical reactions may differ some at higher altitude (it would be harder to start something on fire as there is less oxygen, or it may not
burn as brilliantly), once it is burning it releases the same gas. If this were not the case then I could, for example, smoke a cigarette at 10,000
feet and not get any tar or nicotine from it...
Unfortunately, not the case. If there was some type of poison present in the fuel we would be
breathing it at an even more concentrated level here at sea level. The air here is at a higher BAR then it is at 10,000 feet, so it is denser and more
concentrated then it is up there. The same way that when I dive I have to blow off the extra levels of nitrogen I inhale, due to increased density of
the air at more then 1 BAR.
Originally posted by eaganthorn
And here my friend is where you couldn’t be more wrong as this type of conspiracy is one that is feasible because it is so potentially
compartmental. The only ones who need to know about it would be the ones who initiated it. The scientist who created such a compound wouldn’t need
to know it was to be introduced into aviation fuel, the boys at the refinery or the tank farm wouldn’t need to know anything other than that they
are instructed to add this additive and that additive to aviation fuel and they could be told that the additives are to stop bacteria from growing or
that it is a fuel detergent to prevent carbon build up. The fuel handlers wouldn’t need to know anything nor would the mechanics or flight line
crew, pilot, FAA, truckers, etc.
So I guess that there are no career airport personnel who would notice that there is something different then there was 20 years ago.
Besides
maybe you can then explain, through your theory, all the other chemtrail non-sense. How do the trails shut off and turn on if someone is not aware of
it, unless its from thermals as I stated above? Why will one aircraft be leaving a persistent trail while another is not, unless its from differing
atmospheric conditions, as I mention above. You cannot have it both ways, either it is happening as stated and someone must know about it, or its not
happening at all. Geez, don't you think that the pilot would notice if they were being sent out of their way to lay down a supposed grid, or the ATC
people would have to be in on it? Go get a part time job fueling aircraft, learn how airports work, and educate yourself, then come back here and tell
me this garbage.
Originally posted by eaganthorn
Any such compound could be called anything they wish, twinkie juice or dimethanolbromide-tetrasulfate.
Yep, its called Dihydrogen Monoxide....
Really evil stuff too:
DMHO Facts
Each year, Dihydrogen Monoxide is a known causative component in many thousands of deaths and is a major contributor to millions upon millions of
dollars in damage to property and the environment. Some of the known perils of Dihydrogen Monoxide are:
Death due to accidental inhalation of DHMO, even in small quantities.
Prolonged exposure to solid DHMO causes severe tissue damage.
Excessive ingestion produces a number of unpleasant though not typically life-threatening side-effects.
DHMO is a major component of acid rain.
Gaseous DHMO can cause severe burns.
Contributes to soil erosion.
Leads to corrosion and oxidation of many metals.
Contamination of electrical systems often causes short-circuits.
Exposure decreases effectiveness of automobile brakes.
Found in biopsies of pre-cancerous tumors and lesions.
Given to vicious dogs involved in recent deadly attacks.
Often associated with killer cyclones in the U.S. Midwest and elsewhere, and in hurricanes including deadly storms in Florida, New Orleans and other
areas of the southeastern U.S.
Thermal variations in DHMO are a suspected contributor to the El Nino weather effect.
Originally posted by eaganthorn
Do you really think Cletus at O’Hare or my pal “Sparky” over at Edwards AFB would know to question or even begin to know how to test for such a
compound’s high heat properties or subsequent chemical reactions? No they wouldn’t, nor would you or I, we simply either trust or don’t trust,
based on what we each have experienced.
I think when they asked them to put on a BNC Suit to fuel they would have an inkling that something was up. The ATC personnel and Pilots would know
that they were being asked to fly strange routes. The FAA, ATC, and Pilots would have to know that there was a visual obstruction hazard.
