Chemtrails. Why is the movie Toxic Sky BANNED in the USA ?

reply to post by Phage


If we don't stop it, we won't have to worry about our kids flying.

If jets are leaving trails that turn into dingy looking clouds, affecting weather and sunshine and health, then we should all agree that we can do better.

But you can't do that, can you.

reply to post by kingswillquiver

The effects of contrails on weather and climate is being actively studied but the biggest concern about air travel is in connection with climate are the levels of CO2 produced. Proponents of human induced global warming point to this as the biggest problem of air transport.

The other exhaust products are of concern (though that 2004 report you cited says there are no heavy metals) but so is all other air pollution. Jet turbines produce far less of these materials than internal combustion engines, their contribution to the surface level pollution which can affect health is much less than ground transport and factory emissions. But there are some concerns about what effect the exhaust release at high altitudes may have on the ozone layer.

Are there direct effects on health which can be attributed only to aircraft? No. Should aircraft be banned? That would be problematic. It would also increase the amount of pollution produced by the subsequent increase in the amount of ground transportation, which already contributes far more pollution than air transport.

Maybe the best thing would be to go back to the way it was before the industrial revolution.

[edit on 9/25/2009 by Phage]

reply to post by kingswillquiver


Aviation fuel contains lead?????

THIS is what you resort to?

(Sorry...I AM trying to stay polite, but really.....)

If you think that kerosene contains lead.....

Jet A

Jet A is the standard jet fuel type in the U.S. since the 1950s and is only available there. Jet A is similar to Jet-A1, except for its higher freezing point of −40 °C (vs −47 °C for Jet A-1). Like Jet A-1, Jet A has a fairly high flash point of 38 °C (100 °F), with an autoignition temperature of 210 °C (410 °F).

Jet A can be identified in trucks and storage facilities by the UN number 1863 Hazardous Material placards. Jet A trucks, storage tanks, and pipes that carry Jet A are marked with a black sticker with a white "Jet A" written over it, next to another black stripe.

Jet A will have a clear to straw color if it is clean and free of contamination. Water is denser than Jet A, and will collect on the bottom of a tank.

Jet A storage tanks must be sumped on a regular basis to check for water contamination. It is possible for water particles to become suspended in Jet A, which can be found by performing a "Clear and Bright" test. A hazy appearance can indicate water contamination beyond the acceptable limit of 30ppm (parts per million). The US commercial fuels are not required by law to contain antistatic additives, and generally do not. The annual U.S. usage of jet fuel was 21 billion gallons (80 billion litres) in 2006.


Jet A-1
Flash point: 38 °C (100.4 °F)
Autoignition temperature: 210 °C (410 °F)
Freezing point: −47 °C (−52.6 °F). (−40 °C (−40 °F) for JET A)
Open air burning temperatures: 287.5 °C (549.5 °F)
Density at 15 °C (59 °F): 0.8075 kg/L
Specific energy 43.15 MJ/kg

Note that we don't use "Jet B"...that is reserved for specific purposes.

Jet B
Jet B is a fuel in the naphtha-kerosene region that is used for its enhanced cold-weather performance. However, Jet B's lighter composition makes it more dangerous to handle.

AdditivesBoth standard jet fuels (Jet A and Jet B) may contain a number of additives:

Antioxidants to prevent gumming, usually based on alkylated phenols, eg. AO-30, AO-31, or AO-37;

Antistatic agents, to dissipate static electricity and prevent sparking; Stadis 450, with dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid (DINNSA) as the active ingredient, is an example

Corrosion inhibitors, e.g. DCI-4A used for civilian and military fuels, and DCI-6A used for military fuels;

Fuel System Icing Inhibitor (FSII) agents, e.g. Di-EGME; FSII is often mixed at the point-of-sale so that users with heated fuel lines do not have to pay the extra expense.

Biocide can be added if evidence of bacterial colonies inside the fuel system exists.

Before anyone gets excited....those additives are for the STORAGE of the fuel....they do not survive the combustion temperatures....

Here's some more.....

Military jet fuels

Military organisations around the world use a different classification system of JP numbers. Some are almost identical to their civilian counterparts and differ only by the amounts of a few additives; Jet A-1 is similar to JP-8, Jet B is similar to JP-4. Other military fuels are highly specialized products and are developed for very specific applications. JP-5 fuel is fairly common, and was introduced to reduce the risk of fire on aircraft carriers (has a higher flash point - a minimum of 60 °C). Other fuels were specific to one type of aircraft. JP-6 was developed specifically for the XB-70 Valkyrie and JP-7 for the SR-71 Blackbird. Both these fuels were engineered to have a high flash point to better cope with the heat and stresses of high speed supersonic flight. One aircraft-specific jet fuel still in use by the United States Air Force is JPTS, which was developed in 1956 for the Lockheed U-2 spy plane.

Jet fuels are sometimes classified as kerosene or naphtha-type. Kerosene-type fuels include Jet A, Jet A1, JP-5 and JP-8. Naphtha-type jet fuels, sometimes referred to as "wide-cut" jet fuel, include Jet B and JP-4

Piston engine use
Jet fuel is very similar to diesel fuel, and in some cases may be burned in diesel engines. The possibility of environmental legislation banning the use of leaded avgas, and the lack of a replacement fuel with similar performance has left aircraft designers and pilot's organizations searching for alternative engines for use in small aircraft. As a result, a few aircraft engine manufacturers, most notably Thielert, have begun offering diesel aircraft engines which run on jet fuel. This technology has potential to simplify airport logistics by reducing the number of fuel types required. Jet fuel is available in most places in the world, whereas avgas is only widely available in the few countries which have a large number of general aviation aircraft. A diesel engine may also potentially be more environmentally-friendly and fuel-efficient than an avgas engine. However, very few diesel aircraft engines have been certified by aviation authorities, and widespread use of diesel aircraft engines is still years in the future.

Jet fuel is often used in ground support vehicles at airports, instead of diesel. The United States military makes heavy use of JP-8, for instance. However, jet fuel tends to have poor lubricating ability in comparison to diesel, thereby increasing wear on fuel pumps and other related engine parts.[citation needed] Civilian vehicles tend to disallow its use, or require that an additive be mixed with the jet fuel in order to restore its lubricity. Jet fuel is also significantly more expensive than diesel, so using it in ground vehicles is considered by some to be wasteful.

en.wikipedia.org...

Please provide conclusive evidence of "lead" components in kerosene and diesel fuels.

reply to post by kingswillquiver


Ever looked into the amount of heavy metals, toxins and poisons factories, mines and other manufacturing plants introduce into the environment each year?

If you believe jets are bad, then you aint seen nothing yet.


Try this site out:

EPA Chemical Report

You can input the year, location, chemicals released and even the industry and it will tell you just how much is released.

reply to post by ChemBreather


The movie wasnt banned at all there was no US distributors willing to back the movie.Or to put plainly didnt think it would make ny money.If you want to finance this the producers are still looking for distributors in USA. (though after reading reviews id say your going to loose alot of money)If you can help him, here are the details for the company:

"Johnson Timothy O."

An LA - BC Production Contractor
for the North American Cable Networks

JOHNSON PRODUCTION GROUP, INC
www.johnsonproducti ongroup.com

LOS ANGELES - DEVELOPMENT OFFICE
417 Mesa Road
Santa Monica, CA 90402
(310) 573-3700 cell (310) 748-4052
FACSIMILE (310) 564-7727

VANCOUVER - BRITISH COLUMBIA
1917 W. 4TH AVENUE
SUITE 585
VANCOUVER, BC V6J 1M7
CANADA
(604) 218-0580 FACSIMILE (604) 731-6023
Yeah it was banned all right!

[edit on 9/25/09 by dragonridr]

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by kingswillquiver

 

Ever looked into the amount of heavy metals, toxins and poisons factories, mines and other manufacturing plants introduce into the environment each year?

If you believe jets are bad, then you aint seen nothing yet.


Try this site out:

EPA Chemical Report

You can input the year, location, chemicals released and even the industry and it will tell you just how much is released.

Interesting site.

I did a search under transportation (they didn't have aviation)

15 ALUMINUM (FUME OR DUST) 173,562 132,752 306,314
16 ALUMINUM OXIDE (FIBROUS FORMS) 47,042 79,366 126,408
17 AMMONIA 574,619 371 574,990
18 ANILINE 21 7,000 7,021
19 ANTIMONY 256 11,594 11,850
20 ANTIMONY COMPOUNDS 973 183,966 184,940
21 ARSENIC 112 1 113
22 ARSENIC COMPOUNDS 0 15,835 15,835
23 ASBESTOS (FRIABLE) 0 128,048 128,048
24 BARIUM 1,480 7,741 9,221
25 BARIUM COMPOUNDS 84,725 1,741,614 1,826,339
26 BENZENE 40,886 39,683 80,569
27 BENZO(G,H,I)PERYLENE 2 1 2
28 BERYLLIUM 112 0 112
29 BORON TRICHLORIDE 0 0 0
30 BROMINE 10 250 260
31 BROMOTRIFLUOROMETHANE 7,489 0 7,489
32 CADMIUM 112 0 112
33 CARBON DISULFIDE 0 0 0
34 CERTAIN GLYCOL ETHERS 3,080,919 70,853 3,151,772
35 CHLORINE 218 15 233
36 CHLORINE DIOXIDE 0 0 0
37 CHLORODIFLUOROMETHANE 591,134 3,825 594,959
38 CHLOROFORM 635 0 635
39 CHROMIUM 41,457 222,908 264,366
40 CHROMIUM COMPOUNDS(EXCEPT CHROMITE ORE MINED IN THE TRANSVAAL REGION) 71,152 873,563 944,715
41 COBALT 2,566 17,565 20,131
42 COBALT COMPOUNDS 81 3,808 3,889
43 COPPER 135,330 682,805 818,135
44 COPPER COMPOUNDS 22,446 764,954 787,400
45 CRESOL (MIXED ISOMERS) 0 0 0
46 CUMENE 33,246 19 33,265
47 CUMENE HYDROPEROXIDE . . 0
48 CYANIDE COMPOUNDS 711 196 907
49 CYCLOHEXANE 155,260 30 155,290
50 DI(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE 101,321 9,638 110,959
51 DIBUTYL PHTHALATE 0 0 0
52 DICHLORODIFLUOROMETHANE 12,000 0 12,000
53 DICHLOROMETHANE 57,816 52,215 110,031
54 DICYCLOPENTADIENE 2,462 0 2,462
55 DIETHANOLAMINE 21,990 8 21,998
56 DIISOCYANATES 89,435 77,559 166,993
57 DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 84,717 0 84,717
58 DIOXIN AND DIOXIN-LIKE COMPOUNDS ** 0 **
59 ETHYLBENZENE 978,675 7,625 986,300
60 ETHYLENE 1,938 0 1,938
61 ETHYLENE GLYCOL 26,586 27,290 53,876
62 FORMALDEHYDE 8,482 0 8,482
63 FORMIC ACID 0 . 0
64 FREON 113 14,400 . 14,400
65 HYDROCHLORIC ACID (1995 AND AFTER "ACID AEROSOLS" ONLY) 2,104,074 0 2,104,074
66 HYDROGEN CYANIDE 228 0 228
67 HYDROGEN FLUORIDE 14,460 3,294 17,754
68 LEAD 40,843 637,050 677,893
69 LEAD COMPOUNDS 4,521 74,127 78,648
70 M-XYLENE 75 2,285 2,359
71 MANGANESE 52,744 441,587 494,331
72 MANGANESE COMPOUNDS 22,493 746,255 768,748
73 MERCURY 17 124 140
74 MERCURY COMPOUNDS 0 3 3
75 METHANOL 730,473 4,127 734,600
76 METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE 1,194,533 2,547 1,197,080
77 METHYL METHACRYLATE 1,016,765 5,255 1,022,020
78 METHYL TERT-BUTYL ETHER 4,604 0 4,604
79 MIXTURE 167 82 249
80 MOLYBDENUM TRIOXIDE 0 0 0
81 N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE 331 0 331
82 N-BUTYL ALCOHOL 4,588,181 27,934 4,616,115
83 N-HEXANE 253,501 7 253,508
84 N-METHYL-2-PYRROLIDONE 342,900 6,858 349,758
85 NAPHTHALENE 102,878 161 103,039
86 NICKEL 66,117 217,688 283,805
87 NICKEL COMPOUNDS 4,848 284,119 288,967
88 NITRATE COMPOUNDS 376,463 165,637 542,100
89 NITRIC ACID 73,484 312,784 386,268
90 NITROGLYCERIN 26 29 55

[url=http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/broker?view=USCH&trilib=TRIQ1&sort=_VIEW_&sort_fmt=1&state=All+states&county=All+counties&chemical=All+chemicals&indus try=336&year=2007&tab_rpt=1&fld=RELLBY&fld

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Sundancer

 

Let me guess. You live in a place with a fairly warm climate, right? So do I. And you're right there is a reason why contrails are rare here. (Hint, the word "warm").

But you don't want to hear that do you?

I live in alaska, next to a HUGE airforce base (we also have the highest number of air ports percapita in the US) never see any persistant "con trails" ever... in ALASKA, where its quite often 20 below at ground level..

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by kingswillquiver

 

The effects of contrails on weather and climate is being actively studied but the biggest concern about air travel is in connection with climate are the levels of CO2 produced. Proponents of human induced global warming point to this as the biggest problem of air transport.

The other exhaust products are of concern (though that 2004 report you cited says there are no heavy metals) but so is all other air pollution. Jet turbines produce far less of these materials than internal combustion engines, their contribution to the surface level pollution which can affect health is much less than ground transport and factory emissions. But there are some concerns about what effect the exhaust release at high altitudes may have on the ozone layer.

Are there direct effects on health which can be attributed only to aircraft? No. Should aircraft be banned? That would be problematic. It would also increase the amount of pollution produced by the subsequent increase in the amount of ground transportation, which already contributes far more pollution than air transport.

Maybe the best thing would be to go back to the way it was before the industrial revolution.

[edit on 9/25/2009 by Phage]

Do you seriously believe in the man mad global warming hoax, i mean its completely fake.

Don't believe me look into these videos.
www.youtube.com...
(i think this has 8 parts to it)

And this is another one.
www.youtube.com...

Hope you find these intresting

reply to post by zTargeTz

Interesting. A quick search for "alaska chemtrails" turns up quite a few examples of persistent contrails in Alaska. Maybe there aren't many high altitude flights over your location. If you are near a base, the flights would tend to be lower (taking off and landing).

reply to post by Ominousbeing


I didn't say I believe in man made warming. I said:

Proponents of human induced global warming point to this as the biggest problem of air transport.