Thank you for your contribution to this debate. You will find staunch advocates of both types in ATS. Makes for great reading!

Great info. I hadn't seen this before. I have a lot to say on this, but to keep it short, watch people come here and say that the *trails are "seasonal" and a bunch of people were ill because of the weather.

I've been watching the skies over L.A. for some time now - what I do know is that something unnatural is being done to our skies and it sickens me that we are so oblivious and helpless to what is going on.

These were my favorite parts of the article.

We have positively identified many of these aircraft as unmarked KC-135 and KC-10 Airforce tankers. In early March, hundreds of KC-135 aircraft were grounded for a part to be replaced in the tail-section of the airplane, and spray activity decreased from 24, to just two locations across the United States. Spray activity climbed right back to previous levels as the planes returned to service the following week.

I spent 25 years working around USAF aircraft, including KC-135s and KC-10s. There is no way that there is a large number of "unmarked" KC-135 and KC-10 aircraft. There are only 59 KC-10s in the entire inventory. I've seen almost all of them at one point or another, and have NEVER seen an unmarked one. There are 453 KC-135s in the inventory as of September 2008. You can knock that down some, as there are 28 that are unflyable, and at any given point 50-60 are in PDM at the depot, as well as a bunch that are undergoing phase inspections at their unit.

KC-135s and KC-10s are used to supplement airlift, which means that they fly cargo around like C-5s and C-17s. During the years that I was working on these aircraft we had multiple times when we had fighters forced to sit for two to three weeks waiting for an available tanker, because they were all tasked with airlift missions.

These contrails are sprayed by low flying C-130 Turboprop aircraft. I witnessed this myself in Pagosa Springs, Colorado, last summer. I was stunned to see a C-130 gliding low over this little resort town in the mountains, engines throttled back, dead quiet, spray coming out of the wings of the aircraft as it pulled away.

First of all, good luck finding ANY pilot that would try to "glide in with the throttles pulled back" in a C-130. Secondly, there is no such thing as a dead quiet C-130. The only way you're going to find one that quiet is if the engines are throttled back so low that the plane wouldn't keep flying. Even sitting on the ground at idle this is a very loud aircraft.

A reddish powder was also dropped on patios and a nearby lake from AC-130s flying at rooftop level.

The only AC-130s are gunships. They carry a 105mm canon, 40mm gun, and 20mm minigun. They wouldn't be flying at rooftop level, and they're not capable of carrying cargo because their cargo holds are filled with the guns and ammunition.

I'm sure the debunkers will swoop in, but for me, that was the sealant on my view that we are being systematically made ill (to the benefit of Big Med and Big Pharma) with toxic spray in chemtrails.

If one reads these data, one must at least leave open the idea that this is being done to us. If one does not...one is lying to oneself or to the rest of us.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
I spent 25 years working around USAF aircraft, including KC-135s and KC-10s. There is no way that there is a large number of "unmarked" KC-135 and KC-10 aircraft. There are only 59 KC-10s in the entire inventory.

First... I suspect that if they have these craft, unmarked and all, it is unlikely that they are telling everyone in the force. It is likely that this activity is partitioned off from normal operations, and just because you spent 25 years working "around" the USAF (not even IN the USAF) does not mean you had access to ALL information.

Secret operations tend to be...er...secret.

I've seen almost all of them at one point or another, and have NEVER seen an unmarked one. There are 453 KC-135s in the inventory as of September 2008. You can knock that down some, as there are 28 that are unflyable, and at any given point 50-60 are in PDM at the depot, as well as a bunch that are undergoing phase inspections at their unit.

You might presume you have seen "almost all of them," but I suspect that unless you were high enough in the USAF, and passed the tests for being trustworthy, you would not see those planes involved in secret operations.

These contrails are sprayed by low flying C-130 Turboprop aircraft. I witnessed this myself in Pagosa Springs, Colorado, last summer. I was stunned to see a C-130 gliding low over this little resort town in the mountains, engines throttled back, dead quiet, spray coming out of the wings of the aircraft as it pulled away.

First of all, good luck finding ANY pilot that would try to "glide in with the throttles pulled back" in a C-130. Secondly, there is no such thing as a dead quiet C-130. The only way you're going to find one that quiet is if the engines are throttled back so low that the plane wouldn't keep flying. Even sitting on the ground at idle this is a very loud aircraft.

Hmmmm.... Although I am not an expert on planes and their behavior, I have flown a prop plane, and the instructor told me to back off the throttle all the way. Then he asked me if I knew that it was as if the engine was not functioning. I said I would believe it and he confirmed that we were coasting as we would if we had no engine.

Now I might presume that most planes (if not all of them) have SOME coasting behavior with no thrust. I mean, planes don't just plummet out of the skies with no engines. They coast until they reach the ground.

So I might presume that throttling back for short periods of time would be feasible in the craft in question.

A reddish powder was also dropped on patios and a nearby lake from AC-130s flying at rooftop level.

The only AC-130s are gunships. They carry a 105mm canon, 40mm gun, and 20mm minigun. They wouldn't be flying at rooftop level, and they're not capable of carrying cargo because their cargo holds are filled with the guns and ammunition

So you're saying that guns and ammo on planes, kept secret and separate, could not be removed and replaced with equipment to spray us like roaches? Really?

I'm betting this could easily be done.

Originally posted by Amaterasu
First... I suspect that if they have these craft, unmarked and all, it is unlikely that they are telling everyone in the force. It is likely that this activity is partitioned off from normal operations, and just because you spent 25 years working "around" the USAF (not even IN the USAF) does not mean you had access to ALL information.

Just because I wasn't IN the USAF doesn't make my experiences or information wrong. A large amount of support is handled by civilians, who do the same work as the guys in uniform. I'm not saying that I have all information in the USAF. I know that there's a lot that I never had access to. But to hide a large fleet of these planes would be difficult. Sooner or later one of these aircraft is going to have to land somewhere other than their top secret hideout and someone will comment.

Secret operations tend to be...er...secret.

Yes they are. But it's kind of hard to hide a large number of unmarked planes on an air force base. Someone would notice them and comment.

You might presume you have seen "almost all of them," but I suspect that unless you were high enough in the USAF, and passed the tests for being trustworthy, you would not see those planes involved in secret operations.

KC-10s are too valuable to have them and not use them for their mission. The USAF has had a tanker shortage for YEARS, and desperately needs every aircraft they can get for the mission. One one day over Afghanistan this year, they offloaded 3.3 MILLION pounds of fuel into 305 aircraft. But you're argument is that they're going to have secret tankers that aren't doing anything but spraying us. That makes no sense to me.

Hmmmm.... Although I am not an expert on planes and their behavior, I have flown a prop plane, and the instructor told me to back off the throttle all the way. Then he asked me if I knew that it was as if the engine was not functioning. I said I would believe it and he confirmed that we were coasting as we would if we had no engine.

Now I might presume that most planes (if not all of them) have SOME coasting behavior with no thrust. I mean, planes don't just plummet out of the skies with no engines. They coast until they reach the ground.

So I might presume that throttling back for short periods of time would be feasible in the craft in question.

The heavier an aircraft the less time it has to glide. Not to mention that small planes are a lot more aerodynamic than a C-130 is. There is a ton of drag on a C-130 due to the large size of the fuselage. The empty weight of a C-130 is 83,000 pounds. That's before you put on crew, cargo, etc. The maximum take off weight of a C-130H is 155,000 pounds. It's higher for the J model. That means that if you throttle down to nothing, and try to glide, you're not going to get very far. I don't have the exact glide ratio, but it's horrid in a plane with that shape.

So you're saying that guns and ammo on planes, kept secret and separate, could not be removed and replaced with equipment to spray us like roaches? Really?

I'm betting this could easily be done.

No, it can't. Then you have a C-130 instead. Visibly, there is almost NO difference between a C-130 and AC-130 except the guns. The AC-130 has different fuel tanks on the wings, a FLIR on the nose, and a glass bubble under the tail for the observer. Unless you are very good at identifying planes, there is no way you could tell one from the other.

As for removing the guns, when they are converted to the AC standard, the guns are fixed in place. To remove them you have to take parts of the fuselage apart to get to the anchor points. What's the point of going to all the trouble of taking the guns out if you have a regular C-130 to do the same mission.

My biggest problem with the whole debats is peoples lack of understanding of what a contrail is.
I have seen photographic evidence of chemtrails and do not deny that they exist.
The main problem is when your average joe looks up for the first time and sees a regular contrail and screams from the rooftops, "they are spraying us"
Contrails exist and some can last over an hour, they generally do not flatten out and just look like a long cloud.
It is these types of people who give chemtrail witnesses a bad name.

does anyone remember the poster who asked if they changed the receipe because the trail only lasted 30 seconds and they where being sprayed?

I come from an aviation family and have been around aircraft and pilots my entire life and I have to say that this is hands down the most bogus and ridiculous conspiracy theory on the planet. It has been debunked over and over again by aviation professionals and related personnel, yet it persists. Other evidence regarding contaminated water or soil is spotty at best and limited in scope, and yet accepted as though it accounts for the whole perceived phenomena. Nobody is debating that spraying hasn't occurred in isolated locals or that weather manipulation hasn't been tried in various locations, but to take that and stretch it like a giant piece of silly putty and try to wrap it around the entire planet Earth and say it is a massive international effort to spray when what 99.999% of what you are seeing is regular condensed ice crystals formed from ordinary jet exhaust in a sky that has increasingly grown in terms of quantity of flights exponentially...well that's just not using your noggin! A theory doesn't remain a theory once it has been faulsified...this one is so shot full of holes you could read a novel through it in your neigbor's back yard!

I suspect (now here's your theory) it [chemtrail theory] has been perpetuated by ops in order to side step attention from other theories that actually hold some water...in other words, if the "regular Joe and Sue" were to gain an inclination to start sticking their nose in strange places, or start asking questions about major events and cover-ups, and happen across this one (red herring) then if even two thirds decide to never venture out into conspiracy land ever again, then it succeeded in it's endeavor.

"Deny Ignorance". More than just a slogan folks!

Originally posted by watchZEITGEISTnow

What makes you think everything involved in aircraft is up for your eyes?

I've never said that it was. But when people post the same pictures over and over again of aircraft that I know and types I have worked on then I would say that I know a thing or two.

What makes you think you can't be kept in the dark on such matters?

Never said I couldn't be. But again, the things that are being claimed about these aircraft are things that are public knowledge and easily verified.

What makes you think you know what other people are thinking or what they know?

When did I say that I did? I have only pointed out errors about the aircraft.

What makes you think ANY evidence such as this will make you believe?

It won't. Because when it comes to aviation I know what I'm talking about. If someone were to actually test an actual contrail and find something then I might listen more. But collecting water on the ground, when there are dozens of other sources of that material nearby won't do much to convince me.

Why are you on ATS for anyway? To "debunk"?

Yeah, you're right. This site is only for people that believe so you can all sit around patting each other on the back at how right you are and how everyone else is a sheeple.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Just because I wasn't IN the USAF doesn't make my experiences or information wrong. A large amount of support is handled by civilians, who do the same work as the guys in uniform.

Surely this is true... But secret stuff is seldom handled by civilians (and when it is, all kinds of tests and checks take place, with sworn statements to keep the secrets secret. So unless you were given such a position, you really don't know.

But to hide a large fleet of these planes would be difficult. Sooner or later one of these aircraft is going to have to land somewhere other than their top secret hideout and someone will comment.

Well... According to the OP in the post above yours, there are cases of unmarked craft landing. On top of that, "hiding" these craft would not be that difficult. A secret area on a base, for example. I can assure you, having held a civilian position with the USMC at 29 Palms, there are HUGE areas that could be used as landing strips and to hide craft.

Granted, that was USMC and not USAF, but the point is that there are many, many places they could be hidden. (And they may not be all together in one place. Two or three here, two or three there... Easy.)

I don't think you realize just how easy it would be to hide such a fleet.

Secret operations tend to be...er...secret.

Yes they are. But it's kind of hard to hide a large number of unmarked planes on an air force base. Someone would notice them and comment.

Depends on the base, and that assumes they are all in one place. Sure, some may notice - and some HAVE noticed and made comment. But unless the information is taken to the tipping point it will not spread. Some few will have the data, and the MSM will not inject it into the infosphere, so it peters out in overall awareness.

You might presume you have seen "almost all of them," but I suspect that unless you were high enough in the USAF, and passed the tests for being trustworthy, you would not see those planes involved in secret operations.

KC-10s are too valuable to have them and not use them for their mission.

Mhmmmm... And you can prove that we have not "thrown cost to the wind" for an Elite (Lizard Hearted) program to decimate the population? I know I cannot prove we have - but I can show evidence that we likely have. Like the linked article in the OP.

And if their "mission" is to spray us...?

The USAF has had a tanker shortage for YEARS, and desperately needs every aircraft they can get for the mission.

Maybe there is a shortage because many have been "redirected" in their assignment? Is that possible? If one arm needs something and another arm has it secretly... It will appear that there is an actual shortage.

But you're argument is that they're going to have secret tankers that aren't doing anything but spraying us. That makes no sense to me.

It makes sense to me if the priority is not Afghanistan, nor Iraq, nor other official war zone, but is actually the war on Humans by the Lizard Hearted.

The heavier an aircraft the less time it has to glide.

Agreed, but this does not make it impossible for a skilled pilot to glide the plane in question for short durations. It may offer a "horrid" glide ratio, but it is likely to offer enough glide time. A few seconds to pass over many populated areas. More than that if the activity is in a wide area of population. Still, I think it very easily could be done by a skilled pilot.

So you're saying that guns and ammo on planes, kept secret and separate, could not be removed and replaced with equipment to spray us like roaches? Really?

I'm betting this could easily be done.

No, it can't. Then you have a C-130 instead.

You say this and then you go on to tell me how you really wouldn't because of the differences. I'm not sure what your point is...

Visibly, there is almost NO difference between a C-130 and AC-130 except the guns. The AC-130 has different fuel tanks on the wings, a FLIR on the nose, and a glass bubble under the tail for the observer. Unless you are very good at identifying planes, there is no way you could tell one from the other.

Ok. Does it really matter whether they were perhaps misidentified? Or properly identified? If they look so similar, it may have been a case of misidentification, but the point is, that there are planes doing this.

As for removing the guns, when they are converted to the AC standard, the guns are fixed in place. To remove them you have to take parts of the fuselage apart to get to the anchor points. What's the point of going to all the trouble of taking the guns out if you have a regular C-130 to do the same mission.

You must believe that the Elite are not interested in eliminating most of us like roaches.

Best to you on that, but when I take all the many signs together I must give a very high probability to the idea that they are indeed killing us off slowly (for the moment) so as to sap our money from us at doctor's offices, hospitals, and at the pharmacy.

It will get much worse before too long.

Originally posted by QBSneak000
This could explain the red dust and the low, slow flying aircraft.

Does it explain the pathogens, too...?

Second line.

Originally posted by skyshow
I come from an aviation family and have been around aircraft and pilots my entire life and I have to say that this is hands down the most bogus and ridiculous conspiracy theory on the planet.

Originally posted by skyshow

If you want to triviallize this, fair comment but at least make an effort to back it up with something more credible than "I come from an aviation family and da da da da da da" ....It doesn't wash with me.

Originally posted by skyshow It has been debunked over and over again by aviation professionals and related personnel, yet it persists.

Originally posted by skyshow

I disagree, I have seen videos of mods to aircraft for spraying purposes and they are not going out dusting crops. I have yet to hear a convincing explanation for any of these mods.

Originally posted by skyshow Other evidence regarding contaminated water or soil is spotty at best and limited in scope, and yet accepted as though it accounts for the whole perceived phenomena.

Originally posted by skyshow

People are getting sick, what more evidence do you need?

Originally posted by skyshow Nobody is debating that spraying hasn't occurred in isolated locals or that weather manipulation hasn't been tried in various locations, but to take that and stretch it like a giant piece of silly putty and try to wrap it around the entire planet Earth and say it is a massive international effort to spray

Originally posted by skyshow

This is being reported from other countries outside of the USA.
U.K, Holland, Germany, Australia, Canada to name a few. Is everyone a hypochondriac?

Originally posted by skyshow when what 99.999% of what you are seeing is regular condensed ice crystals formed from ordinary jet exhaust in a sky that has increasingly grown in terms of quantity of flights exponentially...

Originally posted by skyshow

Please give people a bit more credit to know the difference between con and chem. I spoke to a guy in Spain today who is reporting finding chaff raining down from the clouds and a guy in Arizona who says most of the people he knows in his town just got sick after planes had been spraying.

"There's non so blind as them that can not see" old Yorkshire saying

PEACE,
RK