What "Chemtrails" aren't.

page: 1
7

log in

join

posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 09:10 PM
link   
With all the crazy conspiracy theories out there, it can be difficult to keep track of who's conspiring against whom, but let's be honest, we just gotta know!

Conspiracy theories have been around since there were at least three people on the planet, and two of them could conspire against the other to get some of that sweet-ass fire, so we know it's nothing new, but something has changed, the INTERNETS!

Conspiracy theories to the internet are as venereal diseases were to Sodam & Gomora, but a least we don't have to buy antibiotics and make a dozen awkward phone calls to ex's for these outbreaks.

From time travelers to reptilian overlords, the internet has bred some of the craziest, out there theories, that some times you just gotta wonder, if the internet had a captain's wheel, who the hell is driving?


Probably this guy.

With so many choices of conspiracies to choose from, one of the least understood by it's subscribers are CHEMTRAILS.


Conspiracy theory or Zeus getting down on some tic-tac-toe?

The "chemtrail" conspiracy has about the same amount a variations as Lady Gaga's wardrobes, so it's no wonder it's difficult to find any corroborating evidence that's pro "chemtrail".

The theories go from geo-engineering to hiding a giant planet next to the sun, and everything in between is probably the brain child of Dr. Evil.


Would you like a suckle of my...CHEMTRAILS?

The general consensus on "chemtrails" by the chemtrail group, is that "chemtrails" are the white lines left behind planes, that stay around and linger, but...that's about it.

There is always new things, but mostly the same things that the pro chemtrail group use and reuse to try and prove chemtrails, but these are things that with a little google searching, are quickly understood to have nothing at all to do with chemtrails.

So I figured I would start this thread as a reference for what chemtrails aren't


Aerial firefighting

Often times in the chemtrail debate, this topic will sneak it's way in as proof of nefarious chemtrails, and unfortunately, sometimes nobody is around to point out that it's not. Thankfully this isn't the case too often since the internet is such a busy place, but it does happen, and when it does, more often than not, well-intentioned yet gullible people buy into to this without a second thought.

What Aerial firefighting is.



Aerial firefighting is the use of aircraft and other aerial resources to combat wildfires. The types of aircraft used include fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters. Smokejumpers and rappellers are also classified as aerial firefighters, delivered to the fire by parachute from a variety of fixed-wing aircraft, or rappelling from helicopters. Chemicals used to fight fires may include water, water enhancers such as foams and gels, and specially formulated fire retardants.


The two highlighted words in the quote above are the only thing's that even remotely tie in to the theory of "chemtrails", but often times, that's all the chemtrail camp needs as proof. The problem is though, this is not the white lines in the sky.

The chemicals and water held in these air craft are dropped at very low altitudes, so as to actually hit their target, not at 30,000+ feet, where contrails form.

Source


Cloud seeding

Cloud seeding is probably the largest misconception throughout the chemtrail community, with good reason too, it IS actual weather modification!


Cloud seeding, a form of weather modification, is the attempt to change the amount or type of precipitation that falls from clouds, by dispersing substances into the air that serve as cloud condensation or ice nuclei, which alter the microphysical processes within the cloud. The usual intent is to increase precipitation (rain or snow), but hail and fog suppression are also widely practiced in airports.


But it's not these...




For release by aircraft, silver iodide flares are ignited and dispersed as an aircraft flies through the inflow of a cloud. When released by devices on the ground, the fine particles are carried downwind and upwards by air currents after release.


Cloud seeding is done at much lower altitudes then where cirrus clouds occur, usually over large clouds, that are already bearing enough moisture for precipitation. Besides, most aircraft equipped for cloud seeding are not even CAPABLE of flying at altitudes where contrails can form.

Source


Chaff

Chaff is another one that almost always makes it's way into the "chemtrail" debate. It's usually brought up through a video of a weather man talking about it. And thats just the thing, that is EXACTLY what he's talking about, CHAFF.




Chaff, originally called Window[1] by the British, and Düppel by the Second World War era German Luftwaffe (from the Berlin suburb it was first found near), is a radar countermeasure in which aircraft or other targets spread a cloud of small, thin pieces of aluminium, metallised glass fibre or plastic, which either appears as a cluster of secondary targets on radar screens or swamps the screen with multiple returns





Although it looks very intimidating, and is certainly not good for our health, chaff is NOT the white lines in the sky that believers claim are "chemtrails".

Source

Thats all I have for right now folks, but this is a work in progress, and I encourage everybody to contribute to the list




posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Ofcourse this post is just asking for trouble, in a few minutes the pro-chemtrailers will be in here to insult your intelligence and tell you that you have too much time on your hands, or perhaps that you're a govt. agent hired to dismiss the claims.

The fact is, you're spot on with everything.. there's zero credible evidence for chemtrails and a basic understanding of science should be enough to understand how CONTRAILS work .. the very fact the chemtrail discussion continues on is frustrating..



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ZombieJesus
 


There is nothing crazy about the American Military admitting before Congress in 1977 that indead they have tested for spread and effects of biological agents on 249 populated areas . One of these areas was SanFrancisco . And not all came from spraying from airplanes . At least on came from the costal waters . We will never know just what has been tested on us , but we do know they could not be good . North East Florida is known to have the highest lung cancer rate in the United States and no reason can be found for the elevated risk . Our military is in the business of killing and none other .



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


Please cite sources when you make a claim like that, I'm not saying you're not telling the truth but it would be interesting to read and independently verify. That's how progress in a discussion happens.

And just because they went before congress in 1977 to admit testing does not mean you're seeing chemtrails or that it's in any way related at all.. that is jumping to conclusions in quite a heavy way.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by ZombieJesus
 


There is nothing crazy about the American Military admitting before Congress in 1977 that indead they have tested for spread and effects of biological agents on 249 populated areas .


Definitely present your source, I've been googling but find nothing on this happening so far, I'm continuing to search but you could make it easier by just linking to something..



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 10:50 PM
link   
This thread is absurd and I held back commenting, until now...

Read it and weep:

imageevent.com...



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by miniatus
 


I'm a pilot and have been for 18 years . I know what contrails are and what forms them . As for seeing some apparent Chemtrails I have seen a couple of suspected chemtrails . The Military before congress admitting spraying the populas with chemical and biological agents has been around for 30 years . Anyone that actually wants to know can find this information fast . This isn't something new . Our military marched troups into an atomic test site 2 hours after the explosion to see just how long it would take for them to become ill and die .
This reality that your government does not have your best welfare in mind is a hard pill for a young person to take . Along with the above is the shadow government of the NWO that is dismantling the United States as we talk . As for links I would have to go back and relocate them .



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by miniatus
 


I found one instantly . The site is < www.cbsnews.com/.../10/.../main524873.shtml > As far as giving a link that you can click on , I do not have that skill yet .



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mayura
This thread is absurd and I held back commenting, until now...

Read it and weep:

imageevent.com...



I wept at the atrocious coding of that site. I hate any website that has me scrolling a mile sideways to see all of the text. ALSO WRITING LIKE THIS without using ANY punctuation or ever executing a PARAGRAPH BREAK and randomly breaking out he CAPITAL LETTERS IF and WHEN the MOOD takes is very annoying. The site looks like it was written by a 7 year old, and even if it wasn't I imagine the creater's knowledge of atmospheric systems and chemistry is about on par with a 7 year old. Its a muck stirring website designed to get the reader angry for no apparent reason. The garish artwork of people wearing smog masks and the dodgy screen-rips from low-res video of contrails is pretty annoying and reminds me of those really early porno sites that were all scrolling and flashy graphics.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Mayura
 


Honestly, the site you've linked to (And even the two subsequent links contained within it - one dead and one linking to a site run by a conspiracy theorist who seems to run a veritable cornucopia of such blogs-sites-youtube channels) offers nothing remotely approaching evidence of any merit. Not even anything that is enough to provoke debate.

I do not say this to alienate or insult - I merely offer help so that you might, in the future, find links to better research and sources. This will go a very long way towards augmenting your enjoyment of ATS and its membership.


~Heff



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Of all the conspiracy theories on this site, Chemtrails is one where there is definitely enough evidence to suggest that they are real.

There are so many patents relating to the technology which have been filed by or purchased by US defence related companies that it would be ridiculous to conclude that they have not, at the very least, carried out testing.

The most telling patent is one filed by the Hughes Aircraft Company who is a defence contractor that manufactured the Hercules and the Galileo space probe. It specific relates to the dispersing of Welsbach materials (aluminium, barium etc) into the atmosphere by adding the fine particles to jet fuel so it can be dispersed into the atmosphere when jet airliners are at cruising altitude.

This particular intellectual property is now owned by Raytheon a US defence systems contractor and the worlds largest producer of guided missiles. The company was founded by Vannevar Bush of atomic bomb, majestic 12 and hypertext fame. If you don't know who he is the link is below as are links to the patent and related companies.

As to what the military is doing with the technology is the only point of conjecture. The fact it exists is no longer a conspiracy IMO.

Links -

US Patent 5003186
Hughes Aircraft Company
Raytheon
Vannevar Bush



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


Gee, don't you think the demographics of elderly smokers would have an impact? As a layman, I'd guess that is the real cause, not "chemtrails".
I enjoy epidemiology, John Snow is a hero of mine. I am posting this at 921a my time. I'll see what I can find out about the demographics.
TTFN



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZombieJesus



Although it looks very intimidating, and is certainly not good for our health, chaff is NOT the white lines in the sky that believers claim are "chemtrails".


As an aside, (I'm far from an expert on the matter) I believe that picture depicts the deployment of flares (which thwart heat-seeking missiles) and not chaff (which is used to confuse various radar systems).



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:23 AM
link   
I'm still on the fence with regards chemtrails. I have seen a few documentries on them, but they were all pro-chemtrails, so I realise they're slightly biased. However, one piece of evidence that stands out to me is the numerous toxicology reports of varying areas of water, which show extremely high levels of barium and aluminium. How can you explain a lake which has 350000 parts per billion of aluminium? This comparing to the dangerous high quoted by the government of 1000. The only source to this lake, which I believe was underground, was tested and this was found not to be polluted. There are several instances of this shown in the Edward Griffin backed documentry- I believe it's called "What in the world are they spraying?". Also, how can you explain severe changes in soil pH over the past 10 years in the same area?

I'm genuinely asking, because I'm no expert on this field. Yes, the evidence could be doctored, but then again so could any evidence- either government backed disproving chemtrails, or vice versa. So, assuming it's legimate, what other explanations are there? At the very least, it's a fact that geoengineering is very much on the governments current agenda, and aluminium is the main tool they are at least planning to use.
edit on 2-1-2011 by ScepticalBeliever because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by ScepticalBeliever
I'm still on the fence with regards chemtrails. I have seen a few documentries on them, but they were all pro-chemtrails, so I realise they're slightly biased. However, one piece of evidence that stands out to me is the numerous toxicology reports of varying areas of water, which show extremely high levels of barium and aluminium. How can you explain a lake which has 350000 parts per billion of aluminium? This comparing to the dangerous high quoted by the government of 1000. The only source to this lake, which I believe was underground, was tested and this was found not to be polluted. There are several instances of this shown in the Edward Griffin backed documentry- I believe it's called "What in the world are they spraying?". Also, how can you explain severe changes in soil pH over the past 10 years in the same area?


What direction did the soil pH move in? If it became more alkali and more aluminium was found in it I suggest the lake was dammed and the concrete was leaching into the water. Aluminium is a common air pollutant from industry and is a bio-accumulator that is not readily broken down in the environment (hence why its good to sample for it). I doubt the lake was studied under a big catch-all chemical analysis test, they probably tested specifically for Aluminium as part of a series of indicators. Where was this lake? Pitsburg? Somewhere else they roll a lot of metal I wager, or atleast thanks to topography a lot of air pollutants drift into this lake naturally. That is this lake ever existed and you are not falsly remembering something.


But once again, why dose from the sky? If you want a lot of Aluminium in a lake just drop it in there. Dispersion of materials from 37000feet would make such an unpredictable dispersion pattern that it is not a reasonable means of emitting any material. Dispersion modelling for a chimney stack on a power plant thats 100m high is impossible to accurately model and instead only a crude modelling pattern can be generated using one of a few modelling programs used.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
Okay, for the person that stated that Florida has a lung cancer rate for unknown reasons. I proposed that the lung cancer was so high in Florida was because there a lot of old smokers.
First, the NE side of Florida was mentioned. Not so. The NW of Florida has the highest incidence.

Source
Forgiving that error, the US incidence to see Florida is'nt really in the top state in lung cancer incidence.
Here's the US map:


Source

I looked up my contention. First how old is the population?


Source

Lots of brown. How would Florida rank?

Source
The oldest state in the entire country.
Do the people smoke? I tried to find a map for visual effect to no avail. I did find a pamphlet about the stats of smoking in the entire State. Overall, they are at or above the national mean.
Smoking in Florida, by the Health Department of the State of Florida

And as to what causes cancer? Lots of things, but the first two? Age and tobacco.


Source

In order to include "chemtrails", you would have to exclude all the other possible reasons for someone to get lung cancer. Then you would have to show conclusively that something carcinogenic is found in supposed "chemtrails". As there are no tests to show there is anything besides exhaust is found in any trail from a plane, it is quite a few giant leaps of logic and reason to even consider "chemtrails" are responsible for anything.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Manolete
 


The soil is becoming more alkaline, yes. Sorry, though- just to clarify, I didn't mean soil in the direct vicinity- the soil is in a USDA biologists garden- the general area being California.
You can see the video I reference here:
www.youtube.com...

Mount Shasta is cited as being another location where the water is tested as being high in aluminium- 65000 I believe the documentry shows. They also do state that these areas are not near any industry, though I know nothing of the area and acknowledge that these documentries may be slightly biased.

Anyway, I'm not saying if they are chemtrailing, that there is definitely anything nefarious in it. They have been looking into geoengineering for some time now, I believe last year the AAAS held several conferences regarding it.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by stars15k
 


The time of the report and data collected was about the 1970s . A doctor conducted an in depth study to find the reason for the high rate of lung cancer .He found no appreciable environmental or lifestyle differences that would explain the higher incidence rate . The high risk area could have migrated over the years .
The fact that our military has been testing deadly materials on our own people is old news . Most youngsters will not remember those events coming to light and have no interest in researching them out because they are quite distressing ! Of course the immediate response of most people is to laugh it off and deny any validity of the offending information. It's easier that way .



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by ScepticalBeliever
 


Just throwing this out there but isn't Aluminum the third most abundant element in the earth's crust?


Aluminium is the most abundant metal in the Earth's crust, and the third most abundant element, after oxygen and silicon. It makes up about 8% by weight of the Earth's solid surface



Also in keeping with the element's abundance, it is well tolerated by plants in soils (in which it is a major component), and to a lesser extent, by animals as a component of plant materials in the diet (which often contain traces of dust and soil). Soluble aluminium salts have some demonstrated toxicity to animals if delivered in quantity by unnatural routes, such as injection. Controversy still exists about aluminium's possible long-term toxicity to humans from larger ingested amounts.


en.wikipedia.org...

So could this be a reason why it was found in the soil of the USDA biologist,and Mount Shasta. I don't know but it could be a possibility.





new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join