Why do they block the sun?

reply to post by metalshredmetal


Ahem......

this is NOT a roll cloud, or a arcus cloud

Well....maybe "not" an arcus cloud....but, here are a slew of Google Images of Roll Clouds

Look remarkably identical, don't they?


So to compare, here are Arcus Clouds

Actually, a bit similar sometimes.


Now, am wondering....since were so emphatic that they were "NOT" roll clouds.....what would you have called them?

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker

Originally posted by network dude
I do not believe in chemtrails. I have looked at both sides and science and common sense will not allow me to believe it.

I feel the same but do you think you will change someones mind with ridicule?

Just to be clear, I think a person who refuses to listen to all the science that has been presented refuting the possibility that every line in the sky lasting over 2 minutes (or whatever the official time is) is a chemtrail, should be proactive. If they truly believe the bad man is doing bad things to them, typing lots of words will not help them. You watching out for their fragile feelings will not help them. The only thing that will help them is to see for themselves first hand. I don't need anything proven to me.

My suggestion to all of them is to form a group, fund a test flight, and prove or disprove once and for all.

I may try to provoke a response but a group hug isn't cutting it.

Originally posted by ArchPlayer

The Following is links to images of chemtrail sprayings. Big difference between exhaust and spray.

www.google.com... AQ&biw=1680&bih=904

As already pointed out your link contains the now infamous 'Hazmat' image.

This is a link to the original image that was doctored by the 'chemtrailers'

www.airliners.net...

The photographer William Appleton can be contacted via the following.

www.airliners.net...

jetphotos.net...

The following link contains a few images that probably have been ripped off by the 'chemtrailers'

www.wired.com...

The ignorance and manipulation of aviation continues!

reply to post by tommyjo


and sadly, that proof will be ignored, only to be shown again, and again, and again.

reply to post by metalshredmetal


Just wondering if you do any research or do you just wing it? It is very simple google roll cloud and see what you get.

Here are a few more pics, and even a night roll clouds.....





There are more here...

www.mnn.com...

I don't know if this will make any difference or will actually be taken any notice of by the chemtrail believers,but here goes anyway.

When I was an aircraft spotting young teenager back in the early to mid 1970s,I used to spend all my summer holidays watching the nice clear blue skies over southern England (and we had PROPER summers even in the UK back in those days) with my binoculars and manual tuning Sharp AM airband receiver,so I had a pretty good idea what every contrail I saw was.I lived right underneath UR37 (Upper Red 37) as it was called then which was quite a busy airway,so I got used to seeing how contrails reacted over time.I soon got to learn from nothing more than using my own eyes that as the trails started to linger for longer and longer and became more persistent,the weather was about to change for the worse.Every time the day started and there were already lingering trails there when I woke up I knew there was a weather front approaching,and by the end of that day the sky would have gone from deep blue to manky grey and it'd be raining by the next day.

If a 13 year old schoolboy of average intelligence could work out just by using his eyes and a bit of common sense back in the pre-internet era that the approaching weather front caused the trails to be a LOT more persistent,and not the other way round where the trails caused the weather to change,then why can't grown up and more mature/intelligent adults also believe in such a simple concept? At that age I had an open mind (I still do actually) and didn't have my judgement of what was happening around me clouded (pardon the pun) by what I read on the internet,which from my own observations I'd have to guess at about 75% bull# or science fiction and the rest is science fact.

My dad who served as a fitter armourer in our FAA (Fleet Air Arm) in the second world war told me on many many occasions about the same thing over south east England as the Battle of Britain took place over head with Spitfires,Hurricanes,Messerschmits etc etc and the whole sky would be blotted out with countless hundreds of contrails going in every possible direction.

So I have empirical evidence that what are now believed by some people to be chemtrails that started in the 1990s were there some 20 years or more before this,and I even have the eyewitness account of someone with no reason to lie to me (he was a librarian and not a CIA shill) that they showed the exact same characteristics as today but a whole 70 years ago.That's a hell of discrepancy isn't it when according to the chemtrail believers,they only started "spraying" about 20 years ago.How do they explain in that case if back then they were just water vapour,how did they linger all day long without the chemicals we have to mix with them nowadays?

Chris.

My suggestion to all of them is to form a group, fund a test flight, and prove or disprove once and for all.

I may try to provoke a response but a group hug isn't cutting it

I'll chip in a dollar or two. Imagine if just half a million people would do that, we would be up there taking samples in no time (and ending the endless chemtrail -real or hoax?- discussion). Because then we would have physical proof in our hands....if "they" let us is the big question.

reply to post by Anim8tr


It would need to be independently tested. With control samples etc

You can't just go up their, take samples and claim it proves whatever you want it to prove.

Proper scientific process needs to be observed.

And you would need to be willing to accept if there is no evidence of anything other than the expected particles from aircraft exhaust, that you are wrong

reply to post by Imagewerx


Great first-hand account. Excellent stuff!

I lived right underneath UR37 (Upper Red 37) as it was called then which was quite a busy airway....

You will probably be interested in this, then. I finally found a source for free online Upper level Aeronautical Charts for the UK:


Upper ATS Routes UK (North Sheet)


Upper ATS Routes UK (South Sheet)

From the NATS Home Page, Index "ENR 6.3.0".


You'll have to find your location on the recent Charts.....not sure if the old Airway you lived under is still designated "UR37" nowadays.

BTW, back then the Airspace system was less complex, and it was common to use "color" names (as in "Red" for the 'R') but today, the standard aviation alphabet is used. So 'R' is "Romeo".

Aviation Alphabet

Originally posted by crankyoldman

Sometime back a ATC in Italy posted a video of the spaying plane not showing up on his commercial radar - seems they know about the issue but I suspect the cover story is set in stone on the bridge.

Please tell me that you didn't fall for the video (ATC Italy) that Tanker Enemy (Rosario Marciano) and his team made? It is a complete insult to aviation.



Tanker Enemy is making his money based on complete fabrication. People get sucked in by this nonsense and discover the likes of Tanker Enemy and all his links to other Chemtrail scammers. It is a never ending cycle in which their 'evidence' is spread and they laugh all the way to the bank. Marciano now has a click to donate button on his website along with selling his merchandise.

What he claims as 'evidence' is simply fraudulent. He has nothing else to offer but this type of drivel. Take for example the following.

His video title.

'Unidentified airplane with identifying marks removed'



Take a look at the comments on that video. Someone asks "What model/type of plane is it???"

Tanker Enemy responds that it is an A-330.

'A-330' as in Airbus 330.

The rest of the comments are simply staggering and shows the ignorance that is out there. That ignorance is only compounded by the fact that he removes and blocks any comment that busts his version of the video.

He claims to be an expert in his field, yet he can't even identify that aircraft he or his team film.

The aircraft is actually a Boeing 767 and it is marked. Tanker enemy hasn't a clue on how US aircraft are registered or where they display markings. All this information is out there so why does he still continue to peddle this utter ignorance?

High resolution image of the aircraft in the video.



In its previous life the aircraft was operated by a foreign airline and thus carried underwing registration.



The regulations covering US civil registered aircraft.

Until December 31, 1960, the required location for display of nationality and identification marks for fixed- wing aircraft was the wing surfaces, and the vertical surface of either the tail or fuselage. Effective January 1, 1960, all fixed-wing aircraft were required to display indentification marks on the vertical surfaces or either the tail or fuselage. Wing surface markings were no longer required.

The Boeing 767 in the two videos carries the registration N606TW and was leased to the Italian Air Force to train up its air-refuelling pilots. He also has no clue as to where US civil aircraft carry their identification registrations.

This was widely known in the aviation enthusiast community and people could even get onto the flight deck to take photographs at the Italian airbase.

theaviationist.com...

jetphotos.net...

www.planepictures.net...

Here is N606TW captured in the US before being sent to Italy.

This is Tanker Enemy's YT Channel. It is an absolute insult to aviation. His recent uploads are simply mind-numbing. I feel genuinely sorry for people who get sucked in and buy any of his products.

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by ProudBird

Thanks for those PB,I've spent some time trying to find an online archive to replace my collection of Jeppesen charts and who ever else it was did them back then without any luck,I threw them all away when I lost interest in the 90s.
From memory UR37 went between the VORs at Ibsley and Dover which is roughly the same as UM140 now.

Interesting to see that the OP has no answer to my question about how contrails were as just as persistent 50 years before the alleged addition of chemicals? Maybe he doubts the authenticity of my claims? If so I can even remember the VHF radio frequencies they used and even some of the more common aircraft that used to fly that route?

Sabena 'golf alpha without the F16s was one of them......

reply to post by Imagewerx

If so I can even remember the VHF radio frequencies ....

There is a website that I know of to listen to ATC here in the States, so on a whim I checked, and they also have some live ATC feeds from Europe as well:

Live ATC.net Europe Feeds

But, looks like it's a bit limited in scope, and no High Altitude center control frequencies, just Local and App/Dep.

reply to post by ProudBird

Had a quick listen to a few of those,guessing the people who provide them don't know what a squelch control is for? Used to be 127.1 and 132.45 for UR37,oddly enough despite many many hours listening to them I never once heard them mocking us earthbound types as they carefully destroyed our sunlight.

reply to post by Imagewerx


I think the squelch being turned up is the fault of whatever system they are using to monitor, to feed to the web service.

I've noticed, too here in the States, that some of the feed seem to have multiple frequencies that are cycled sequentially, so you get a combination of confusing audio, as you are listening to multiple transmitting ATC facilities.

Also, some frequencies the ATC transmissions are blocked by line-of-sight, so only hear the airplanes....it's a bit hit-or-miss. But of course, if you buy your own aviation band frequency scanner, you get the much the same thing....and you can adjust the squelch on those, too.

("squelch" brings me back....modern jets all have auto squelch, it cannot be adjusted by the pilots).....

At first this might seem off-topic but has anyone seen the Animatrix (2003) yet, the animated prologue to the Matrix trilogy?

Since the machines' main source of energy was solar radiation, mankind then decided that their last, best chance to win the war was to darken the skies and block the light of the sun. Hoping this would give them the edge they needed in combat, they scrambled aircraft and "Operation Dark Storm" began. While the lack of solar power would eventually force the machines to pursue other energy sources, Operation Dark Storm failed to turn the tide in the human's favor. The war continued, horrifically, with excessive brutality on both sides, until, inevitably, the machines claimed victory. SOURCE

Here's the link to the video, its worth watching even when your not a Matrix fan:



The scene I'm talking about starts at 2:00 min and ends at 3:00 min.

"..and thus, human kind became the architect of its own demise"

reply to post by Anim8tr


See also: Highlander II: The Quickening, where attempts to shield the Earth from the sun result in unpleasant side effects.

Geoengineering is a common theme in science fiction.

reply to post by Anim8tr


Darkening the sky was mentioned in the first Matrix movie as well, I believe it was done with nuclear weapons.

So I don't really know what you're trying to suggest here?

I have been monitoring this activity for a while and I still have no answers. If you would like to see the videos I made check out on youtube. Channel is thalogic2012. I will put one of my vids here too.


youtu.be...

reply to post by ProudBird
I will send you the pdf from the ASDS as soon as I find it.