Chemtrail Debunkers....

Originally posted by McKey
www.youtube.com...

No clue if this is legit, but interesting nonetheless lol

The existence and usage of chaff for radar-blocking purposes is well-known, not really a secret, and is NOT a chemtrail.

The concept of using chaff has been around for decades, and military planes could use it as a defensive measure to confuse enemy radar, such as the radar an enemy fighter jet might use to "lock" its weapons systems onto another aircraft.

Sounds to me, after reading this thread, that those who 'believe' in chemtrails think anything emitted from a plane is a 'chemtrail'.

Sounds like the chemers know less about the subject than the debunkers.

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


Sounds to me like you need a lesson in CHEMTRAIL 101



Have you done your homework?

Aerosol crimes / chemtrail crimes Clifford Carnicom
www.youtube.com...

Rosalind Peterson: The Chemtrail Cover-Up
www.youtube.com...

What in the World Are They Spraying? (Full Length)
www.youtube.com...

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


Are you REALLY telling me you think a youtube video with no scientific explanation or reference to obvious factors like altitude or climate (but with music!) is supposed to be 'informed'???

a video being online does not count as scientific evidence.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by incrediblelousminds

a video being online does not count as scientific evidence.

This thread and others are full of evidence, scientific, political, first hand sightings, pictures, etc. and still this resistence to even consider something is wrong here? I shared in an earlier post my views of why some may feel so strongly "chemtrails" don't exist.

The last video posted by Mathias is powerful because you have 2 planes in the same air space showing drastically different kinds of trails, the typical argument that altitude, humidity, weather conditions are the reason trails vary doesn't seem logical in this case. I have seen with my own eyes examples of this same thing, planes in the same airspace making vastly different trails, some that persist and some that do not.

The lighthearted music just takes a very serious subject and puts in perspective how obvious it is to anyone looking that these "chemtrails aren't normal.

reply to post by MountainLaurel



NO!!

...video posted by Mathias is powerful because you have 2 planes in the same air space showing drastically different kinds of trails...

It is bloody obvious that those two flights are NOT in the same "air space"!!

One is very clearly at a higher altitude...several thousand feet difference. It is clear as day.....the perspective is unmistakable, to experienced viewers. Those of us who have spent careers seeing all sorts of contrails, in all sorts of conditions...for decades.....

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


You have been schooled, over and over and over again, that:

Have you done your homework?

Aerosol crimes / chemtrail crimes Clifford Carnicom

"Cliff Carnicorn" is a con artist, scam artist huckster and fraud.

Rosalind Peterson: The Chemtrail Cover-Up

"Rosalind Peterson" has no idea what she is talking about when it comes to matters of aviation. Incredible that an apparently well-educated and credentialed person can b so ignorant.....

But, the BIGGEST scam and hoax???:

What in the World Are They Spraying?

That one is utter rubbish....belongs in the dustbin of Face/Palm. Anyone who cannot see the myriad flaws and circular "arguments" and lack of scientific method and accuracy is seriously deluded......

reply to post by weedwhacker


I really don't understand why you are involved in every single chemtrail vs contrail thread and keep posting over and over and over. It seems you are beating a long dead horse. Any other person would stop knowing that they aren't doing any real good to change others' minds...and would be satisfied knowing in their heart and mind they are "right" on the issue.

Are you afraid that when you were a pilot you unknowingly dumped chemicals mixed into the fuel? (Because I know you didn't personally refuel the aircraft nor buy the fuel.) Or do you get jollies from lampooning this subject? (Really verging on obsessive here.) Perhaps you're a shill? I don't get it.

Again, I have no real opinion on this subject because I cannot verify nor negate any hard evidence. Just an observation perhaps worth exploring...

reply to post by weedwhacker

You have been schooled, over and over and over again, that: "Cliff Carnicorn" is a con artist, scam artist huckster and fraud.

You saying someone is a fraud doesn't make it true or count as proof. What proof do you have that the man is a fraud or scam artist? I trust Clifford Carnicom's opinions a lot more than I trust yours.

theworldtruthconference.com...

Clifford Carnicom is a self-employed professional computer consultant in Santa Fe, New Mexico. He originated, developed, and maintains a high traffic environmental and socially conscious web site and public discussion forum – www.carnicom.com....

Clifford also worked as a technical research scientist acting in a professional capacity supporting analysis and development of major Department of Defense physical and weapons modeling systems, with extensive computer programming and system application development experience. He has held a Top Secret/SCI clearance. He was appointed for and completed two years of intensive graduate level studies in mathematics, statistics, computer science, and geodesy under the auspices of the Department of Defense.
Clifford has been an federal employee of the United States government for 15 years within 3 agencies, including the Department of Defense, The Bureau of Land Management, and the United States Forest Service.

Clifford was the Defense Mapping Agency Aerospace Center Employee of the Year, Supervisor of the Year, and he received the Geodetic Sciences Departmental Award for outstanding technical, managerial, and cost effective performance. He provided the US Defense research industry with original solutions to system development and modeling problems, including application of higher mathematics, statistics, computer programming, information management, task scheduling, product development, and computer graphics. Clifford has extensive technical briefing and written communication experience. He has received the Department of Defense Best Presentation Award representative of his excellent communication skills.

I've been schooled? By who? The way I remember it I schooled you on few things. You were the one saying that aluminum in jet fuel is impossible and can not exist. That's obviously been proven to be wrong.

"Rosalind Peterson" has no idea what she is talking about when it comes to matters of aviation. Incredible that an apparently well-educated and credentialed person can b so ignorant.....

How ironic your statement is because you seem like an intelligent person yourself.

What Ms. Peterson lacks in aviation knowledge, she more than makes up for with her knowledge of being a crop loss adjuster. Who's job it is to find the source and cause of crop damage. She had expert soil sample tests done and they found unusually high amounts of aluminum and barium. The soil PH levels were changing and there was no explanation for this except for that it must be coming from aircraft. She even had air and water samples taken and determined that it could not have come from normal air pollution.

But, the BIGGEST scam and hoax???:

What in the World Are They Spraying?

That one is utter rubbish....belongs in the dustbin of Face/Palm. Anyone who cannot see the myriad flaws and circular "arguments" and lack of scientific method and accuracy is seriously deluded......

That video has expert testimony and legitimate scientific tests to back it up. Not one of you debunkers has validly discredited any of the evidence presented in that documentary. You're just spouting off more of your same old opinions and using your favorite catch phrases. I have the same opinions about most of your posts. Anyone who can't see through your myriad of circular arguments is seriously delusional.

Originally posted by MountainLaurel
reply to post by incrediblelousminds

 

a video being online does not count as scientific evidence.

This thread and others are full of evidence, scientific, political, first hand sightings, pictures, etc.

Anecdotal evidence perhaps.

The last video posted by Mathias is powerful because you have 2 planes in the same air space showing drastically different kinds of trails, the typical argument that altitude, humidity, weather conditions are the reason trails vary doesn't seem logical in this case. I have seen with my own eyes examples of this same thing, planes in the same airspace making vastly different trails, some that persist and some that do not.

The video you are describing shows two different 'trails'. It offers nary a lick of evidence of what made those trails, and yet was offered up as 'proof'. Thats like taking a picture of dog crap and saying it's an alien, and then belittling anyone who asks why it looks like dog poop.

What you accept as 'proof' appears to be nothing more than opinion.

Please, show me 'proof'.

HINT: pointing at a trail in the sky and claiming it is a 'con-trail' is not evidence. There is no evidence that those are 'chemtrails'. only speculation.

Personally, i wouldn't be surprised chemtrails exist but what you fanatics true-believers unquestioningly accept as evidence is laughable.

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by incrediblelousminds

 

Sounds to me like you need a lesson in CHEMTRAIL 101

Have you done your homework?

Aerosol crimes / chemtrail crimes Clifford Carnicom
www.youtube.com...

Rosalind Peterson: The Chemtrail Cover-Up
www.youtube.com...

What in the World Are They Spraying? (Full Length)
www.youtube.com...

Yes Mathias, there is a night and day difference easily shown in your posted video, the bunktoids can type their mantra 'that's not proof', no 'That's not proof', over and over until there fingers fall off and claim it's just a huge difference in the atmosphere of planes flying a few 'thousand feet' apart (as if air currents are 100% stationary) rather than the actual exhaust of the planes being radically different and people will still easily see through their smoke and mirror lack of thinking.

Manipulating weather and clouds through all sorts of 'seeding' operations for rain and snow and hail supression etc. appears to not be a problem for them because they have been spoon fed by someone in 'authority' to tell them it's ok to think (and perhaps say) that, but taking the next logical step to admit admit more complex cloud creation operations and seeding for actually creating the clouds to seed into seems to be impossible for them to grasp. I understand why someone would feel these types are part of the military's sockpuppet force now KNOWN to be out on the net downplaying such efforts, and maybe they are or not, but maybe they are just extremely closed minds that reject any idea their so called 'leaders' would ever withhold info and lie to them.

Leonard Cole wrote a nice little book called 'Clouds of Secrecy' about the military's open air testing of all sorts of biological and chemical testing (actual PROOF of a type of *chem-trails*) upon unsuspecting populations for decades over millions of people, and how those in the know felt it was none of the public's right to know, and how those who were a part of it kept if from the public for a long long time. It shows this kind of blatant disregard for any health consequences or treating the public like human guinea pigs and some involved in the projects said they would still have no ethical problems with these programs and would do it again and lie as needed to cover it up.

What we are really witnessing IMO (just one area) is moving way past the simpler decades old methods of manipulating weather by the 'old school' seeding methods into much more high tech areas of weather manipulation and seeding and some it seems have been left in the dust of realizing this science has moved very far forward. The bunktoids perhaps serve a function of keeping people energized to post more and more videos and white papers so that folks can see and weigh the evidence on their own, I don't think they are going to keep anyone from seeing the obvious, weather manipulation has evolved, if they wish to stay back in the dark ages and shout 'proof' until hades freezes over more power to them, but I think they are wasting their time. We'll just keep right on posting and posting on as many sites as possible, bringing thhe issue up on as many boards as possible and soon I think the knowledge of this science will reach critical mass.

reply to post by weedwhacker

One is very clearly at a higher altitude...several thousand feet difference. It is clear as day.....the perspective is unmistakable, to experienced viewers. Those of us who have spent careers seeing all sorts of contrails, in all sorts of conditions...for decades.....

Aren't planes at higher altitudes more likely to leave a persistent contrail, why in this case is the "persistent/spreading contrail in that video at a lower altitude?

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


I would not say the video in and of itself constitutes proof, however I would say that combined with the mountains of proof provided just in this thread alone, along with hours of reading up on the subject and my own personal observations, it certainly gives a powerful visual of what is not a "normal" contrail......I trust my eyes and my instincts.......

Originally posted by MountainLaurel
reply to post by weedwhacker

 

One is very clearly at a higher altitude...several thousand feet difference. It is clear as day.....the perspective is unmistakable, to experienced viewers. Those of us who have spent careers seeing all sorts of contrails, in all sorts of conditions...for decades.....

Aren't planes at higher altitudes more likely to leave a persistent contrail, why in this case is the "persistent/spreading contrail in that video at a lower altitude?

It's dependent on temperature, humidity and pressure -- all of which can vary by altitude, but that doesn't always mean that relatively higher altitudes would be more conducive to trail persistence than a relatively lower altitude.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. The humidity easily could be at the saturation point at the lower altitude and not at the higher altitude.

Therefore, a single video showing a persistent contrail at a lower altitude than a non-persistent one is utterly meaningless.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


This study supposedly shows a "contrail" that was made by an aircraft operating in conditions favorable to persistent contrails. It lasted for about 18 hours. Yet very few other planes in the area are seen making any persistent contrails. Kinda odd don't you think? It's also odd that the altitude, temp., air pressure and humidity that this plane flew through seems to have made no difference or effect in the physical appearance of this "contrail".

A case study of the radiative forcing of persistent contrails
evolving into contrail-induced cirrus
www.met.reading.ac.uk...

A single aircraft operating in conditions favorable for persistent contrail formation appears to exert a contrail-induced radiative forcing some 5000 times greater (in W m 2 km 1 ) than recent estimates of the average persistent contrail radiative forcing from the entire civil aviation fleet

The radiative forcing due to a distinct pattern of persistent contrails that form into contrail-induced cirrus near and over the UK is investigated in detail for a single case study during March 2009. The development of the contrail-induced cirrus is tracked using a number of high-resolution polar orbiting and lower-resolution geostationary satellite instruments and is found to persist for a period of around 18 h, and at its peak, it covers over 50,000 k

nm. Responded to the wrong post.

reply to post by MountainLaurel

Aren't planes at higher altitudes more likely to leave a persistent contrail...

No.

Temperature and relative humidity. Simply being at a "higher" altitude isn't the entire difference, depends on the existing conditions.

Appleman Chart

reply to post by donatellanator


Hell no!! LOL!:

Are you afraid that when you were a pilot you unknowingly dumped chemicals mixed into the fuel?

THAT "chem"-trail idea (won't even validate it by calling it a theory) is one of the easiest to refute.

The whole topic is such nonsense, it boggles the mind that otherwise rational people fall for this.

Oh, and it is important to "beat" that horse when there is so much crap being spewed......crap in these threads, by one or two very prolific individuals....who just never seem to "get it".....

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by MountainLaurel
reply to post by weedwhacker

 

One is very clearly at a higher altitude...several thousand feet difference. It is clear as day.....the perspective is unmistakable, to experienced viewers. Those of us who have spent careers seeing all sorts of contrails, in all sorts of conditions...for decades.....

Aren't planes at higher altitudes more likely to leave a persistent contrail, why in this case is the "persistent/spreading contrail in that video at a lower altitude?

It's dependent on temperature, humidity and pressure -- all of which can vary by altitude, but that doesn't always mean that relatively higher altitudes would be more conducive to trail persistence than a relatively lower altitude.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. The humidity easily could be at the saturation point at the lower altitude and not at the higher altitude.

Therefore, a single video showing a persistent contrail at a lower altitude than a non-persistent one is utterly meaningless.

Yea, LOL, and you could eventually win the lottery too, just keep playin.

There really is a much simpler explanation, for the not just one but hundreds if not thousands of similar pictures,

And that is that all of the white papers written by the various authors and scientific leaning univerities as well as the military and varous think tanks and patents really are explaining the more sophisticated methods being used to seed for clouds and the manipulation of them.

But just keep typing that mantra over and over and over. Maybe you really will get one or two people give up and stop looking and researching. But I doubt many.