Contrail Monuments

reply to post by Argyll

Kinda like living under a overpass on the highway, just move.
So where can I move to escape airplane pollution?
I do have 3 emission licenses in 3 states so
I hope you have the same documentation to talk auto emissions with me.

I think the OP believes members who use the word contrails support air pollution...I believe this is the point he is trying to make...

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket
reply to post by adeclerk

 

You need to back up that claim right now!
I have never claimed chemtrails.
Go back through all my posts.
I claim pollution, airplane exhaust is pollution.
You debunkers have been ridiculing me for that the whole time,
making a fool out of yourselves.

de·bunk/diˈbəNGk/
Verb:
Expose the falseness or hollowness of (a myth, idea, or belief).
Reduce the inflated reputation of (someone), esp. by ridicule: "comedy takes delight in debunking heroes".

So you debunkers want to ridicule me for pointing out airplane pollution, have at it.
It works both ways.
Airplanes pollute, I am here to debunk your claims of Contrails are harmless water vapor!
Or are you Contrail Worshiper?

All irrelevant, you are complaining about contrails, which are formed at altitudes where fuel burn is more efficient. If you cared at all about pollution, you should be jumping f or joy over contrails. Plus, automobiles cause much more pollution than aircraft, so why you would choose to demonize aircraft over automobiles, I'll never know.

Originally posted by jeichelberg
I think the OP believes members who use the word contrails support air pollution...I believe this is the point he is trying to make...

It's false to begin with, since aircraft are more efficient at altitudes where conditions are favorable to contrail formation.

Originally posted by Uncinus
reply to post by XLR8R

 

It's already been looked into. Evergreen listed "weather modification" as a possible future use for their ONE supertanker. That's all.

Would you please be so kind to link me up to a thread or a site other than contrailscience so I can digest this information you speak of?

It would be appreciated, I'm genuinely interested in looking into this.

Thanks.

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed

Originally posted by Uncinus
reply to post by XLR8R

 

It's already been looked into. Evergreen listed "weather modification" as a possible future use for their ONE supertanker. That's all.

Would you please be so kind to link me up to a thread or a site other than contrailscience so I can digest this information you speak of?

It would be appreciated, I'm genuinely interested in looking into this.

Thanks.

Sure:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And "weather modification" is still listed as a potential market on Evergreen's site:

www.evergreenaviation.com...

Are there any other markets for the Evergreen Supertanker? Can it operate globally?
Evergreen is studying other applications for the Supertanker. Oil spill containment, chemical decontamination and weather modification are all potential markets for this aircraft. Because the aircraft is pressurized, the Evergreen Supertanker has the capability of any long-range Boeing 747 passenger aircraft. This allows the aircraft to deploy to any international location.

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket
reply to post by adeclerk

 

You need to back up that claim right now!
I have never claimed chemtrails.
Go back through all my posts.
I claim pollution, airplane exhaust is pollution.
You debunkers have been ridiculing me for that the whole time,
making a fool out of yourselves.

de·bunk/diˈbəNGk/
Verb:
Expose the falseness or hollowness of (a myth, idea, or belief).
Reduce the inflated reputation of (someone), esp. by ridicule: "comedy takes delight in debunking heroes".

So you debunkers want to ridicule me for pointing out airplane pollution, have at it.
It works both ways.
Airplanes pollute, I am here to debunk your claims of Contrails are harmless water vapor!
Or are you Contrail Worshiper?

All irrelevant, you are complaining about contrails, which are formed at altitudes where fuel burn is more efficient. If you cared at all about pollution, you should be jumping f or joy over contrails. Plus, automobiles cause much more pollution than aircraft, so why you would choose to demonize aircraft over automobiles, I'll never know.

So who are you to tell me what I can complain about?
Or was my comment, they think they are superior apply to the way you talk to me?
You again confirm, I should worship contrails by jumping for joy.

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by jeichelberg
I think the OP believes members who use the word contrails support air pollution...I believe this is the point he is trying to make...

It's false to begin with, since aircraft are more efficient at altitudes where conditions are favorable to contrail formation.

The statement airplanes are more efficient at contrail formation altitude is most certainly correct; however, it does not indicate they are not polluting the air....they certainly are...

Having said that, they are a safe and effective means of transportation in the current world.

Originally posted by jeichelberg

The statement airplanes are more efficient at contrail formation altitude is most certainly correct; however, it does not indicate they are not polluting the air....they certainly are...

Oh yes, they are certainly still polluting. But claiming that using the word contrail supports pollution is patently false. The first issue, of course, is that no one is claiming to support pollution. While I would love if airplanes could not pollute, I would much prefer them to be making contrails rather than flying at lower altitudes where they would be burning more fuel and polluting more!

All I'm saying, if one is speaking of contrails they are supporting less pollution.

...Or does anyone who speaks of transportation support pollution?

Originally posted by jeichelberg
Having said that, they are a safe and effective means of transportation in the current world.

Yes, yes they are.

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed

Originally posted by Uncinus
reply to post by XLR8R

 

It's already been looked into. Evergreen listed "weather modification" as a possible future use for their ONE supertanker. That's all.

Would you please be so kind to link me up to a thread or a site other than contrailscience so I can digest this information you speak of?

It would be appreciated, I'm genuinely interested in looking into this.

Thanks.

You can also look up Evergreen's fleet on the FAA registry - eg All aircraft owned by anyone with "Evergreen" in their name - I forget the exact name(s) of Evergreen & it's subsidiaries - but you can probably find them easy enough & use theFAA name search function to get a more targeted list than the example above - which runs to many pages and includes a few Me-109G's...

I think the OP has discovered that Tucson International Airport's historical aviation industry was a messy polluter & is looking to use that information to attack "chemtrails" via the indirect route - blithely ignoring that almost all industries in the 1940's & 50's were gross polluters - he has a fixation with the TIAA superfund site as "evidence" and is determined to use it to prove his case....even if that means altering the case away from what seems to be the generally accepted idea of what chemtrails actually are supposed to be.