Chemtrailers: Your time is NOW!

Originally posted by GobbledokTChipeater

Originally posted by Phage

Yes.
Yes, it does.

No.
No, it doesn't.
Because this bloke wrote an article in '99 does not mean the internet has kept this discussion going on longer than it should.
That's quite a jump there lad.

GobbledokTChipeater.....

You'll have to do some reading.....

Art Bell was a serial hoaxer.

Some of his stuff was appalling.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not

GobbledokTChipeater.....

You'll have to do some reading.....

Art Bell was a serial hoaxer.

Some of his stuff was appalling.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Yes but the article was written by a Canadian journalist, who has been writing for nearly 50 years, and has received four Canadian awards for his investigative features. From Phage's link.

reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater

Yes. It shows that the brouhaha did not start until the internet started hitting its stride.

People hear Art Bell talking about "chemtrails". People see something on the internet about "chemtrails". They look up one day and think "Hmm. I've never seen that before. Must be those chemtrails everyone is talking about."

No. That can't be it. Never mind the fact that "chemtrails", which are nothing more than persistent contrails, have been noticed by more observant people for a good sight longer than the late 1990's.

From 1919:

The second German sighting occurred on May 9, 1919, when a pilot flying over Berlin at about 26,000 feet noticed the generation of a cloud stream that extended for about forty miles behind his plane. This stream eventually spread out to form a cloud layer that was about 3,000 feet thick. The pilot saw a similar phenomenon two days later.

www.accessmylibrary.com...

From 1940:

A few months later I witnessed the Battle of Britain taking place over my head in the July, August and September 1940. Being in SE London we had a grandstand view of the titanic struggle going on day aftr day with the intricate patterns of the contrails the most evident witness to the dog fights taking place.

www.bbc.co.uk... Short contrails do not produce intricate patterns.

1944:

So an airplane at great heights leaves behind it, stretching for endless miles, a visible "wake" composed of ice particles so tiny that they do not fall as snow but remain suspended in the air.

Source

From 1947:

Photo taken by Jerry Cole, combat aerialphotographer in the 390th Bomb Group at Framlingham Air Base in England. He is looking for a print from the original negative he shot around January 1944 or before. It shows contrails of P-47's crossing each other in the background and a B-17 in the foreground.

scoutbird.tripod.com...


From 1970:

The spreading out of jet contrails into extensive cirrus sheets is a familiar sight. Often, when persistent conditions exist from 25,000 to 40,000ft, several long contrails increase in number and gradually merge into an almost solid interlaced sheet.

journals.ametsoc.org...

Henry Wadsworth Hinkle, hired man down on the farm with Uncle Clarence and Aunt Martha, looked skyward a few days ago and was awed by the multiplicity of "vapor trails," as he called them. That's the old name. Now they are called contrails-short for condensation trails-resulting from the condensation of heat flowing from high-flying jet engines.

Source

A 43-year-old novice sailor said today that he followed jet contrails over the Atlantic to help him navigate after his sextant was smashed six days out of Pymouth, England.

Source He didn't follow jets, he followed contrails. You can't follow a short contrail.

1972:

Then there is the matter of cloudiness. The familiar contrails often left by high-flying planes might persist for a long time under some conditions.

Source


From 1973:

Often, after several clear days, high flying jets begin leaving condensation trails in the sky. These "contrails" are the result of the condensation of water vapor that accompanies engine combustion at high altitudes.

Source

He occasionally looked out the window at the earth and noted geographical locations. "We're coming over Europe and I've never seen so many jet plane contrails in my life," he reported

Source

Shore was no naïf; he recognized the irony of many of his images. One of the cleverest is "U.S. 97, South of Klamath Falls, Oregon, July 21, 1973," which depicts a desolate spot of road where a billboard displays a snowcapped-mountain scene — against actual mountains in the distance. The billboard image seems to emerge from the land itself. Along with a cattle gate and a sky with blown-out contrails, the billboard is a tired and shabby advertisement for America itself.

www.pitch.com... Contrails have to be around for a while to be "blown-out".

Originally posted by Phage

Yes. It shows that the brouhaha did not start until the internet started hitting its stride.

It could also show that a chemtrail operation first came about the same time as the internet started getting popular.

reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater


GobbledokTChipeater.....

Look.....I don't want to "hustle in" on the discussion you are enjoying with Phage

Suffice to say, Thomas has lost the plot, in his drive to make money & get attention.

I'll now butt out & leave it with you 2 fine gentlemen!

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater

And tell me again what distinguishes "chemtrails" from the persistent contrails which have been seen for 90 years. Or has the "spraying" been going on for that long?

Oh no. It hasn't. It's only been going on as long as the internet has been in common use.

Wait. Now I'm confused.

[edit on 5/29/2010 by Phage]

Originally posted by Phage

And tell me again what distinguishes "chemtrails" from the persistent contrails which have been seen for 90 years? Or has the "spraying" been going on for that long.

No idea. Just because somebody doesn't know the ins-and-outs of a theory, doesn't mean that they aren't spraying something into the sky for some purpose. I will always urge people to keep an open mind.

Edit to add: Of course the spraying hasn't been going on for 90 years. I'm not arguing contrails don't exist naturally.

[edit on 29/5/10 by GobbledokTChipeater]

reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater

Right.

And just because somebody can't prove that reptilians are behind the NWO doesn't mean they aren't.

And just because somebody can't prove that HAARP can cause earthquakes, hurricanes, and control our minds, doesn't mean it isn't.

But education, logic, and reason tell us otherwise.


Per your edit: So what's the big deal? Why are the contrails we see now any different than the contrails that were seen 90 years ago? The claim is that contrails do not persist, therefore there is something "funny" about those that do. That's it. That is the basis of the whole thing.

[edit on 5/29/2010 by Phage]

Originally posted by Phage

Right.

And just because somebody can't prove that reptilians are behind the NWO doesn't mean they aren't.

And just because somebody can't prove that HAARP can cause earthquakes, hurricanes, and control our minds, doesn't mean it isn't.

But education, logic, and reason tell us otherwise.

People are allowed to believe what they want to believe, right? I don't understand why people care so much what other people believe, as long a they aren't hurting anyone.

Originally posted by Phage
Per your edit: So what's the big deal? Why are the contrails we see now any different than the contrails that were seen 90 years ago?

I don't know, I am under 90 years of age

reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater

I have a natural aversion to those who, for whatever reason ($), make use of ignorance, speculation, and fear. It is not harmless.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater

 

I have a natural aversion to those who, for whatever reason ($), make use of ignorance, speculation, and fear. It is not harmless.

I have not made use of ignorance, speculation or fear. If you have seen someone who has, please take it up with them because talking to me about it is hardly helping.

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned
Replacing an engine every 500 hrs is laughable. But if you can show
me proof, I would have to eat my words.

Heck, I might even apologize.

Anyone who has worked around aircraft knows that 500hour maintenance in prop planes is essential. Commercial aircraft are serviced according to a schedule on a nightly basis then rotated out of service every so many hours for a complete hanger breakdown:

Some engines are more susceptible to fouling than others. You may want to invest in a set of fine-wire or "iridium" spark plugs. These last almost indefinitely and are virtually immune to fouling. The massive electrode spark plugs that are in most engines do foul and need to be replaced after 500 hours. Why don't airplanes come with fine-wire plugs to begin with? They cost about $55 each, compared to $18 for massive electrode plugs (iridium plugs for cars are about $7 each, compared to $1 or $2 for old-style spark plugs).

Magneto Maintenance - 500 Hour Inspections Are Critical
Magnetos are the heart and soul of your ignition system and they absolutely must be maintained to avoid serious problems.
Every magneto should be removed from the engine, disassembled and inspected at 500 hour intervals.
Failure to do so can lead to engine failure caused by broken gears, failed points, failed coils, cracked distributor housings or sheared drive shafts.
One of our most common findings on aircraft pre-purchase inspections is failure to do 500 hour magneto inspections. We’ve found mags that had close to engine TBO on them without ever being opened up. When we do open these mags, we often find cracked gears, severely pitted points, cam followers worn well beyond manufacturers specs and a host of other potential engine failure causing defects.
We cannot stress enough, the importance of following a 500 hour inspection schedule on magnetos.

reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater

I am talking about the perpetrators of the "chemtrail" myth.
Those with books, DVDs, web hits, and speaking engagements to sell.


[edit on 5/29/2010 by Phage]

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater

 

I am talking about the perpetrators of the "chemtrail" myth.
Those with books, DVDs, web hits, and speaking engagements to sell.


[edit on 5/29/2010 by Phage]

Well have you taken it up with them? Perhaps write an email.

reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater

Nah.
I don't think it would do much good.

Originally posted by Phage

Nah.
I don't think it would do much good.

It would do more good than talking with me about them would, surely?

reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater


There are guys out there making a living off this hoax, the only way to make them stop would involve getting a judge to order them to. However, I believe that it falls under freedom of speech, even though its complete fiction.

reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater

But we are talking to each other, not them.

They are selling a pack of ignorance, speculation, and fear that some here are buying. If not literally buying, they are accepting as truth.

It isn't.

Originally posted by defcon5

There are guys out there making a living off this hoax, the only way to make them stop would involve getting a judge to order them to. However, I believe that it falls under freedom of speech, even though its complete fiction.

Surely if their work is harmful, as Phagie was saying, then a judge would have no problems getting these people to stop.

Harmful behavior does not fall under freedom of speech.

Originally posted by Phage

But we are talking to each other, not them.

They are selling a pack of ignorance, speculation, and fear that some here are buying. If not literally buying, they are accepting as truth.

It isn't.

I understand what you are saying. What I'm saying is, if people are selling ignorance, speculation and fear, then talking to me is doing no good.

If you feel so strongly about it, then you need to stop them at their source.