Massive Chemtrail Attack: Midwest

reply to post by dw31243




?? What?

.....but if we seek the truth we should not look for the term Chemtrials. They use other scientific terms such as

Upper Tropospheric and Stratospheric (UTS) Water Vapour

Well....OK, you got me there. Water IS a "chemical" in one sense, since it is a molecule composed of elements.

LOL...but, why would anyone be afraid of water?? Especially in vapor form? (Oh, there can be reasons to fear water, that's for sure.....if you're in the middle of the ocean, miles from any land, on a raft....well, then.....).

But, look how easy it is to fool people with scientific terms, that merely are another way to describe 'H2O':

Originally posted by dw31243
We know they are spraying Chemticals into the air making Chemtrails, but if we seek the truth we should not look for the term Chemtrials. They use other scientific terms such as

Upper Tropospheric and Stratospheric (UTS) Water Vapour

UTS Water Vapor

www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcrp/documents/3.3c_SPARC_savigny.ppt

www.wmo.int...

That Evil Water Vapor! Now they have stumbled upon the secret ingredient of those trails, its Water!!

reply to post by dw31243


Wait...you mean....there's water....in the atmosphere!?

Kidding aside, did you read through the presentation? It had nothing to do with contrails, or even air travel. It's about water vapor, in the atmosphere. But I guess that "chemtrail" "dog-whistle" word, "aerosol" probably had you,

Aerosol, noun:

1. A substance enclosed under pressure and able to be released as a fine spray, typically by means of a propellant gas
   
2. A container holding such a substance
   
3. A colloidal suspension of particles dispersed in air or gas
   

Contrary to what you might think, aerosol - when spoken of in the context of contrails "aerosol" refers to the third definition.

I often see studies of atmospheric aerosols being deliberately misrepresented by the "chemtrail" community as fitting the 1st definition, when in reality the studies are reflecting the 3rd definition.

The level of intellectual dishonesty that exists in the "chemtrail" community is appalling.

Originally posted by Clisen33
I guess we were spraying chemtrails all over everyone during WW2!

The time to Occupy the sky against those filthy chemtrails is NOW!!!

Nice pictures.

Chemtrails during World War II without Jet propulsion? A lot of plane activity obviously.

Those pictures put it in perspective (because they are obviously contrails).

Very hard to prove chemtrails exist without myself owning a plane and I don't know where these "Chemtrail" planes land, at the airport? And how am I supposed to get access to the runways to look at the planes for the spray nozzles. After 9/11 airport security is on complete lockdown. Therefore I would have to trust the testimony of a runway controller or airport employee staff who has access to the planes. But I haven't heard a testimony yet like that. I wish that I grew up in the 1800's sometimes, things were so much easier to understand.

reply to post by MarkScheppy

And how am I supposed to get access to the runways to look at the planes for the spray nozzles.

Book your next flight. Get to the airport very early. Go into the terminal, go to the windows.

Might try bringing high-powered binoculars. Use them to peer at the airplanes. Spend a few hours watching all of the activities on the ramp, at the gate. Watch what everyone does.

Join an avid "Plane Spotters" online blog or community. There are plenty of aviation enthusiasts of all types, many wannabe pilots who for whatever reason are unable to get a license (medical issues, et cetera). These people are "armchair experts" of sorts. They will also refute the notions of "nozzles" and "spraying equipment".

It is their hobby to know everything they can about airplanes, and they ca be quite passionate about it.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by MarkScheppy

 

And how am I supposed to get access to the runways to look at the planes for the spray nozzles.

Book your next flight. Get to the airport very early. Go into the terminal, go to the windows.

Might try bringing high-powered binoculars. Use them to peer at the airplanes. Spend a few hours watching all of the activities on the ramp, at the gate. Watch what everyone does.

Join an avid "Plane Spotters" online blog or community. There are plenty of aviation enthusiasts of all types, many wannabe pilots who for whatever reason are unable to get a license (medical issues, et cetera). These people are "armchair experts" of sorts. They will also refute the notions of "nozzles" and "spraying equipment".

Thank you for the help. Sounds like some work involved, but it takes work to distance yourself from the armchair conspiracy theorist, with some real testimony.

That sounds really intriguing. Perhaps I wouldn't even have to book a flight, just show up to the terminal and look out the windows with binoculars until someone asks me what I am doing. I would probably like doing that I generally trust my own eyes over others.

I'm a layperson but if I get started with this it could be something. I believe thoroughly that we are in a police state, so naturally authorities won't be automatically welcoming to someone at an airport looking suspicious. They would probably say "Go mind your business!" Worth a shot however.

Plenty of people sit at airports and watch planes and operations, see:

blogging.la...

Pretty much every airport is full visible from outside the fence though. I think you'd be hard pressed to find an area you can'd directly observe, one way or another. And there's lots of plane spotters, so the airport authorities are used to it - although obviously they can get a bit cautious if you look suspicious.

Many airports have designated viewing areas too, that are great for doing photography too. I have seen all too many chemtrailers look for every excuse to not go look at aircraft on the ground at airports, or watching them take/off land.

I know there are some on here from Alberta, and Calgary International Airport has a great viewing location, complete with picnic tables too.

reply to post by MarkScheppy


A wing, passing through the air, can create a contrail if the conditions are right. This is called an aerodynamic contrail and is caused by the sudden pressure change created by the aerofoil section. A propeller on a piston engined aircraft is also an aerofoil and so can create the same effect, as seen in the pictures. There are many accounts from WW2 of this, written by the pilots themselves. I know some think they are only a result of jet propulsion, but as you clearly recognise, this is not so.

Originally posted by MarkScheppy

Originally posted by Clisen33
I guess we were spraying chemtrails all over everyone during WW2!

The time to Occupy the sky against those filthy chemtrails is NOW!!!

Nice pictures.

Chemtrails during World War II without Jet propulsion? A lot of plane activity obviously.

Those pictures put it in perspective (because they are obviously contrails).

Very hard to prove chemtrails exist without myself owning a plane and I don't know where these "Chemtrails" planes land, at the airport? And how am I supposed to get access to the runways to look at the planes for the spray nozzles. After 9/11 airport security is on complete lockdown. Therefore I would have to trust the testimony of a runway controller or airport employee staff who has access to the planes. But I haven't heard a testimony yet like that. I wish that I grew up in the 1800's sometimes, things were so much easier to understand.

WW-2 plane "chemtrails" as pictured are exhaust gasses from internal combustion reciprocating engines. All combustion, including from jet engines when you mix the fuel with air and ignite it produce vapor trails. Depending on the altitude of the various aircraft in particular those in the stratosphere are going to get "mixed up" by winds, and aircraft passing through trails, etc. What we really need is to do a deep spectroscopic scan of these trails, and determine just what chemicals were dealing with if other then exhaust gasses, and that includes water vapor.

While there will be some moisture from the exhaust, for sure, I think they are mainly aerodynamic in nature, though I am no expert on this and have not really checked yet.

These pictures show the effect I was referring to in my previous post, does anyone think prop types have spray nozzles in the tip of the airscrew?

I think the majority of the WWII contrails are engine exhaust. Although you will see prop contrails, they generally form as water clouds at lower altitudes, and don't last very long. The longer persistent trails are generally ice clouds formed by the engine exhaust. You can see on most of the photos that they form some distance behind the engines, whereas prop contrails form right at the engines.

Here's my collection:

picasaweb.google.com...

My thoughts were that the exhaust from a piston engine produced too little vapour, but my mistake becomes apparent when I simply think of a car exhaust on a cold day.

I'm not sure the photos in themselves can be conclusive simply because in a bomber stream I've not yet been able to determine where the stream began while, at the same time, the swirling slipstream from the prop will cause any trail being left to swirl around too, so that pattern is not proof of prop trails either. That's probably why the pics I posted influenced me.

Originally posted by waynos
While there will be some moisture from the exhaust, for sure, I think they are mainly aerodynamic in nature, though I am no expert on this and have not really checked yet.

These pictures show the effect I was referring to in my previous post, does anyone think prop types have spray nozzles in the tip of the airscrew?

edit on 13-11-2011 by waynos because: (no reason given)

Thanks for the wonderful and technical (semi-technical) responses everyone. And amazing great pictures.

Careful, that is a propellor C-130 that Will Thomas made the accusation was creating the low-altitude chemtrails.

Apparently, you are a believer in chemtrails because I see you mention Spray nozzles. I know that I distinctly remember, about five or six years ago, being stuck in traffic in a busy freeway, my car was stopped. I was located about fifteen miles from the nearest airport and there was a large passenger plane flying low over going towards the airport. I can't say how low, but low enough that I could see the colors and markers underneath the plane. Can't say what designation of plane it was, I'm just a layperson. And I know I saw it spraying something out of the back of both of its wings. That was before I was a hardcore sold chemtrail believer, but I had heard about "Chemtrails." I just believed that Chemtrails were high altitude (and perhaps higher speed) operations for planes, so I was baffled what I was seeing (liquid) coming from the back (or perhaps slightly underneath) the wings of this aircraft. I know what I saw though, I did not see spray nozzles, but really wasn't sure where to look and didn't have a lot of time. I thought that the Chemtrails were mostly up higher in the sky and that they would "turn them off" after doing their business. And certainly wouldn't just accidently leave them spraying as the aircraft was descending altitude and approaching the airport. Unless this is water or something that commonly happens, do planes have water nozzles that clean off the undercarriage or something as they land??

Originally posted by MarkScheppy
And I know I saw it spraying something out of the back of both of its wings. That was before I was a hardcore sold chemtrail believer, but I had heard about "Chemtrails." I just believed that Chemtrails were high altitude (and perhaps higher speed) operations for planes, so I was baffled what I was seeing (liquid) coming from the back (or perhaps slightly underneath) the wings of this aircraft. I know what I saw though, I did not see spray nozzles, but really wasn't sure where to look and didn't have a lot of time. I thought that the Chemtrails were mostly up higher in the sky and that they would "turn them off" after doing their business. And certainly wouldn't just accidently leave them spraying as the aircraft was descending altitude and approaching the airport. Unless this is water or something that commonly happens, do planes have water nozzles that clean off the undercarriage or something as they land??

A couple of possibiities - most likely, IMO, is aerodynamic contrails off teh ends of hte flaps or winfs (usually flaps) on a humid day.

these are essentially the same as the prop ones in the photos - pressure differences cause the moisture to condense out - here's a video of one:



Also possible is fuel dumping like this -

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Also possible is fuel dumping like this -

Ah that solves it. That is definitely it, because it was coming out from both wings.

reply to post by MarkScheppy


From the questions in your post up a few:

And certainly wouldn't just accidently leave them spraying as the aircraft was descending altitude and approaching the airport. Unless this is water or something that commonly happens, do planes have water nozzles that clean off the undercarriage or something as they land??

No, nothing of that nature. There are drain masts that are located in the centerline of the fuselage that are connected to galley sinks and lavatory sinks....but, anything poured down those will be very brief in appearance.

So, seems what you saw was possibly a fuel dump. Where and when, do you recall?

As to the CAL 777 in that video in New Jersey.....the dumping was in process as the video was shot because the crew was getting the airplane;s gross weight down as much as possible, because of the emergency situation. This incident was a large hydraulic leak that occurred right after take-off....the flight was departing Newark for Tokyo, so had a LOT of fuel on-board.

The hydraulics blew when they went to retract the landing gear. You can see the gear doors are still open....when the fluid was lost overboard, then there was no way to get those doors closed again.

Losing one (of three main systems) you are left with the two main, and couple of stand-by systems. Some components receive hydraulic power from all three (critical flight controls, for instance). Other things won't work at all, or have diminished capacity.... (including the brakes). The weight has to be reduced for the landing, since take-off weight for most large jets is higher than maximum landing weight.

Although, some smaller passenger jets do not have fuel dump capability....in those cases when overweight, it is still within the capabilities (usually)...or else, they would have been mandated.

Point is, dumping fuel in that manner, and location, is a very rare occurrence and only done as part of an emergency situation.

Originally posted by MarkScheppy


When I do research on my own about chemtrails, I run into things like "Holographic Planes" and "UFO Connection with Chemtrails,"

What you are running into is people who haven't a clue what they are filming. Anyone can do it! Create a You Tube Channel, edit replies to suit and away you go. Possibly you have stumbled onto Rod Hilderman and his claims of 'Fake/Holographic Chemtrail aircraft in Canada' ?

Take a look at this video and read the comments.



A classic example of how people can mislead and distort facts. Poor quality optics and atmospheric distortion all add to the distortion of the aircraft. At the time he could actually go to his local airport in Alberta and film the aircraft landing, yet he chooses to stand under an upper air route and film at extreme range.

www.youtube.com...

The airliner was an Air Canada Airbus A320. The only one of its kind painted in the livery at the time Rod Hilderman filmed it.

It is distinctive as it is the only Airbus in Canada with this livery. The registration is C-FFWN. It was painted to celebrate the 65th Anniversary.

www.airliners.net...

www.airliners.net...

www.airliners.net...

Hilderman also likes to pass off anything that flies through his field of view when filming the aircraft as UFOs. Insects, birds etc all much closer to the lens are passed off as 'UFOs' interacting with the aircraft.

reply to post by tommyjo


Is this your embedded video?? (One extra letter in the YT code):