The Chemtrail Hoax

LOL... After a while you just gotta give up. This is how guys sitting in some house in Nigeria are able to scam millions out of people every year in this country... 'Well, I saw it on the internet, so it must be true'.

Watching this show on TV right now. It includes. Nice simple explanation of cloud seeding that people may benefit from.

www.bbc.co.uk...

The full segment will be on iplayer as soon as the broadcast is finished, dont let the buffoonery put you off completely

reply to post by waynos


It's quite likely though that it's going to get characterized as "brainwashing our children", like with this Thai video:

Please watch if you still don't believe Chemtrails are real.

The question is, to what extent are we being sprayed?

reply to post by pascalt


I am sorry that you have ben misled into believing this report was "scientific" - there is a thread on it in General conspiracies, and numerous critiques of it around the 'net - such as this one.

Basically it is almost all the same poor "evidence" "supporting" the exitence of vast geoengineering programmes and contrails as is usually presented.

it does manage some facts - geoengineering is being researched, the NATO AWACS fleet needs re-engining, et., - none of it contentious or denied by anyone at all AFAIK.

Some of its supposed evidence is missing - supposed order forms for barium - while "daily spraying shedules" are weather forecasts!!

And of course the conclusions simply do not match the data given.

Hello

This is a interesting post by you because I have seen so many documentaries about chemtrails that it does make you wonder. This is something I am still looking into and like you am presently going through forums to really understand the reasoning behind the chemtrail conspiracy.

However I wanted to know do you believe in a coming New World Order but simply just not the chemtrail conspiracy or do you actually not believe in anything to do with a global new world order conspiracy.

Thanks

Kev
www.theantichristidentity.com...
(shining the torch on the murky world of the new world order)

Kev, I'm not sure to whom your post is addressed; since I was the OP, though (even though it was seven years ago), I'll give you my inputs for what they're worth.

Originally posted by lmf21734
This is a interesting post by you because I have seen so many documentaries about chemtrails that it does make you wonder. This is something I am still looking into and like you am presently going through forums to really understand the reasoning behind the chemtrail conspiracy.

This is one of the reasons, why I believe the "chem-trail" hoax is just that -- a hoax: There is no reasoning behind it. Here's why.

If the reason for "chem-trails" were to make people sick, it has failed. People in most countries (except Russia) tend to live longer and healthier lives, except for those conditions dealing with lifestyle choices (cancers, heart diseases, and COPD from smoking; diabetes and morbid obesity from eating too much and lack of exercise).

If the reason for "chem-trails" were to act as a palliative or a cure for some hitherto-unknown disease, it seems to have failed, too, since there has not been a spike in any sort of disease, nor has there been a "cure" for any such non-existent disease, either.

As a matter of fact, spraying aerosols into the stratosphere for any sort of human-ingestion reason doesn't make any sense, since these contrails are so high and take so long to dissipate (which, as the "chem-trail" believers propound, is the hallmark of "chem-trails") that they never land anywhere near where they're emitted, but instead can fall to Earth days later and hundreds of miles downwind from where they started, which in many cases, puts them over the ocean or in isolated or uninhabited areas.

If the reason for the "chem-trails" is to, as some True Believers say, to block sunlight and thus ameliorate global warming, then this is an astounding rationale: most believers in "chem-trails" do not believe that the idea of a major climate crisis, whether global warming or anything else, is true; so why would they think that the purpose of "chem-trails" is to counteract something which most of the believe doesn't even exist?

In any event, if that were the reason for "chem-trails", it too, is a failure; the temperature of the oceans (which seems to be the most important and dangerous indicator of an upcoming climate crisis) actually is slowly increasing.

So no matter which argument the "chem-trail" devotees make for the existence of the myth, that fact that the argument isn't showing any sign of working tells me that there's no reason (or reasoning) behind any discussion of a rationale for "chem-trails".

Originally posted by lmf21734
However I wanted to know do you believe in a coming New World Order but simply just not the chemtrail conspiracy or do you actually not believe in anything to do with a global new world order conspiracy.

i believe there are quite a few national and international agendas, some of which are in the open, some of which are conspiratorial in nature, and some of which are neither, but involve collusion among government entities and special interest groups such as corporations, big labor unions, etc.

For example,
* I think the basic agenda of the United States is to maintain its position as the foremost military force in the world, and to re-establish itself as the arbiter and motivating force throughout the globe.
* I believe that the PRC has the same goal, but it wants to start with offsetting the United States' economic and military power and establishing a hegemony in the Pacific.
* I believe that India has the same goals, but they are limited (at least for the present) to neutralizing Pakistan and internal Muslim activities and making the Indian Ocean their maritime sphere of influence.
* I believe many Muslims, national and supranational, have the goal of a world-wide caliphate under shari'a.
* I believe that Indonesia and Australia are involved in an uneasy truce while attempting to maintain their respective spheres of influence in that corner of the Pacific Ocean.

But while there are certainly many secrets involved in those agendas (and others), that does not mean (INMHO) there is a single overarching world-wide conspiracy, call it the "New World Order" or the "International House of Pancakes". Humans being what they are, we are not wired to do anything but continue to live at cross-purposes with each other, regardless of our goals.

i read the OP and skimmed the rest but the whole chemtrail thing is a hoax. i grew up next to a small airport ( i can walk to the fence around the property from my parents back yard) its located somewhat i the middle of the island i grew up on and I grew up seeing contrails when i was little i found them fascinating so my mom would point them out to me. I never once saw it as spraying anything nor did i ever see evidence of such... when i first heard about the whole 'chemtrail' thing i knew it was total bunk contrails are basically clouds that form behind the aircraft i figured that out at a young age.... and was later confirmed by asking pilots and mechanics at the airport

reply to post by PsychoFaerie

i read the OP and skimmed the rest but the whole chemtrail thing is a hoax. i grew up next to a small airport ( i can walk to the fence around the property from my parents back yard) its located somewhat i the middle of the island i grew up on and I grew up seeing contrails when i was little i found them fascinating so my mom would point them out to me. I never once saw it as spraying anything nor did i ever see evidence of such

Can you remember how long those contrails hung around when you were a kid? Did they spread out and cover the whole sky hours later? No one argues the fact that there are and always (as long as the tech has existed) have been contrails. A real contrail will disappear as the jet goes and not stick around forever. I've personally seen too many side by side jets where one makes a contrail as it should be and the other leaves a "contrail" that stays around all day long. Of course there are legitimate contrails but that doesn't mean they all are.

reply to post by coyotepoet


Like this??

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


No, not like that.

Where one is emitting a short, real contrail that disappears from the sky as the jet goes and another is spitting out a "not real contrail" that doesn't go away over time.

reply to post by coyotepoet


So 2 different "types" of contrail - and the aircraft were at the same altitude?

Were they the same type of aircraft?

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

So 2 different "types" of contrail - and the aircraft were at the same altitude? Were they the same type of aircraft?

They appeared to be similar but I can't say they were the same type of aircraft. Also, the best I can say altitude wise is that they seemed to be appx the same. That can be tricky to judge though.

From OP:

Most chemtrail conspiracy theorists simply don't know much about things that would help them to disbelieve such hypotheses: stuff like engineering, meteorology, government procurement, military force structure, etc. But most importantly, the most of these individuals simply don't understand how scientific investigation and research works.

I only need my eyes. And my memory. Coyotepoet asked some good questions a couple of posts up. These things that we conspiracy theorists call chemtrails are a new phenomenon. 20 or 30 years ago, THEY DID NOT EXIST as we see them today. They were not there. Contrails were there, to be sure, but not these chemtrails that stay behind for hours upon hours. Further, they do not disperse themselves like the contrails we were accustomed to. The stay, they linger, they spread out from distinct lines to a haze covering large areas of the sky.

I am one of but many, many people that notice the change, the difference, and it takes no aerospace industry work or degrees to remember the past and understand that this is a phenomenon that is new. A change. What changed? Do the people that think this a hoax also assert that since there has been air travel or at least in comparison to, say 30 years ago, they have always existed in the form we see them today? That contrails hung in the sky for hours upon hours and then fan out? That they don't disappear but rather spread across the sky, resembling thin wide clouds?

Not according to my memory, nor many, many others who are asking questions and have noticed the very obvious and very real change.

These weren't there in the skies 30 years ago as they are now. So why are they there now? And what is there chemical composition? And why do they behave differently then the contrails we became accustomed to?

Originally posted by coyotepoet
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

So 2 different "types" of contrail - and the aircraft were at the same altitude? Were they the same type of aircraft?

They appeared to be similar but I can't say they were the same type of aircraft. Also, the best I can say altitude wise is that they seemed to be appx the same. That can be tricky to judge though.

I'd go so far as to say it is impossible to judge the height of an airliner by eye, with or without a contrail, that is at 30,000 feet more more less.

Our binocular vision simply cannot do it.

Ther are a number of highly magnified shots of 2 a/c in apparent close proximity on this page that show that aircraft can appear to be very similar sizes, despite being completely different types, depending on altitude - and that's using a 10" telescope to get the detail.

Originally posted by CatJockey

I only need my eyes. And my memory. Coyotepoet asked some good questions a couple of posts up. These things that we conspiracy theorists call chemtrails are a new phenomenon. 20 or 30 years ago, THEY DID NOT EXIST as we see them today. They were not there. Contrails were there, to be sure, but not these chemtrails that stay behind for hours upon hours. Further, they do not disperse themselves like the contrails we were accustomed to. The stay, they linger, they spread out from distinct lines to a haze covering large areas of the sky.

They were for me.

I was raised at a city that had a jet route directly overhead between 2 other cities each 200 miles or so away north/south.

As a kid I recall when jets first arrived here and we used to start seeing long contrails spanning the horizon that would still be there when the jet flew back the return leg an hour or so later.

Also in WW2 and the 1950's and 1960's the phenomena was occasionally mentioned in newspaper articles, and there was a 1980 broadcast mentioning it too:

1968 Gettysburg Times article

1955 Spokane Chronicle


1980 NBC news report:


Basically the fact that you and other people didn't notice it is not evidence that it wasn't happening - it is just evidence that you didn't notice it.

As a kid I recall when jets first arrived here and we used to start seeing long contrails spanning the horizon that would still be there when the jet flew back the return leg an hour or so later

That is a nice anecdote, but that is not what I am talking about. I am not talking about contrails that are there an hour or so later. I am talking about contrails that stay there all day. And multiple ones. Not one or two or three. Double digits.

Basically the fact that you and other people didn't notice it is not evidence that it wasn't happening - it is just evidence that you didn't notice it.

Let me turn that statement around for you:

Basically, the fact that you and other people don't notice the increasing amount of 'extremely persistent contrails' is not evidence that it is not happening - it is just evidence that you don't notice it.

See, I can thinly disguise insults too. Where you flatly state that some of us just woke up one day and discovered that there is a sky over our heads to look at, I can flatly state that people like you did precisely the same. And your determination from your new discovery is to assume that what you see today is how it has always been.

Like I said, the skies don't look the way they did 30 years ago concerning these 'extremely persistent contrails'. I notice it, and so do many others. The fact that you don't makes you, IMO, less observant is all.

The 1955 article isn't persuasive. It is too limited in scope. The TV clip doesn't show what I am talking about although it does mention a changing of the overall weather due to them. The 1968 article does nothing but fuel my concern, quite frankly. It notes the concern of atmospheric scientists for the ability of them to modify global weather patterns. That concerns me as we humans aren't quite sharp enough to toy around with such complicated systems to understand and predict future results. Too many variables considering the imprecise nature of weather forecasting.

I know what I know. And I know that 30 years ago, the skies were not filled with double digit numbers of chemtrails, of 'extremely persistent contrails', that stay in the sky all day. And on the Front Range of Colorado, there are many days when you will see precisely that - double digit numbers of chemtrails. As I asked, what has changed? I do not suspect aersol nozzles on jets, rather a change in the chemical composition of jet fuel. And, if intentional, my concerns lie along the lines of the geoengineering aspect, of people toying with the natural weather systems to produce either data or predefined results.

What your links do not address is the change many of us DO notice, despite your not noticing - the prevalence of these chemtrails. There increased numbers and increased frequency.

What has changed?

Originally posted by CatJockey

As a kid I recall when jets first arrived here and we used to start seeing long contrails spanning the horizon that would still be there when the jet flew back the return leg an hour or so later

That is a nice anecdote, but that is not what I am talking about. I am not talking about contrails that are there an hour or so later. I am talking about contrails that stay there all day. And multiple ones. Not one or two or three. Double digits.

So what is hte time limit for "normal" contrails to exist?

Basically the fact that you and other people didn't notice it is not evidence that it wasn't happening - it is just evidence that you didn't notice it.

Let me turn that statement around for you:

Basically, the fact that you and other people don't notice the increasing amount of 'extremely persistent contrails' is not evidence that it is not happening - it is just evidence that you don't notice it.

See, I can thinly disguise insults too.

It is not an insult, it is a fact because there is evidence to support it. Your statement is not a fact in the first place bvecause people like me DO notice the increasing number of persistent contrails.

Where you flatly state that some of us just woke up one day and discovered that there is a sky over our heads to look at, I can flatly state that people like you did precisely the same.

No you can't - if you had read the references I gave you would see that the increasing number of contrails has been seen by science for decades.

The 1955 article isn't persuasive. It is too limited in scope. The TV clip doesn't show what I am talking about although it does mention a changing of the overall weather due to them. The 1968 article does nothing but fuel my concern, quite frankly. It notes the concern of atmospheric scientists for the ability of them to modify global weather patterns. That concerns me as we humans aren't quite sharp enough to toy around with such complicated systems to understand and predict future results. Too many variables considering the imprecise nature of weather forecasting.

So htey hae too many variables....and yet you have a certainty that chemtrails exist based upon nothing except more contrails??

I know what I know. And I know that 30 years ago, the skies were not filled with double digit numbers of chemtrails, of 'extremely persistent contrails', that stay in the sky all day.

Had you kleft "chemtrails" out of that I would agree with you - and the answer is pretty basic - there are now many times the numbr of large jets flying than there were 30 or 40 years ago - here's a graph from Boeing that illustrate that quiet well -



and updated to 2008:



What's more those aircraft now fly higher, and have more efficient engines that are more likely to create contrails.

And on the Front Range of Colorado, there are many days when you will see precisely that - double digit numbers of chemtrails. As I asked, what has changed?

For contrails - as above.

For chemtrails - nothing - there is still no actual evidence of their existence

Originally posted by coyotepoet


Can you remember how long those contrails hung around when you were a kid? Did they spread out and cover the whole sky hours later?

they have been noted to do this since WW2, though with far less frequency than now. See the following link, in particular, though not exclusively, the account of Fl lt L V Longbottom, RAF ;

jazzroc.wordpress.com...

No one argues the fact that there are and always (as long as the tech has existed) have been contrails. A real contrail will disappear as the jet goes and not stick around forever.

a real contrail will disappear or linger exactly as the surrounding conditions dictate. This is the actor that people are missing. If the relative humidity is low it will disappear, if it is high then the ice crystals cannot sublimate into the air as it is already saturated, so it lingers.

I've personally seen too many side by side jets where one makes a contrail as it should be and the other leaves a "contrail" that stays around all day long. Of course there are legitimate contrails but that doesn't mean they all are.

But neither does it prove that they aren't all legitimate either. Of course you can see what you have described, I'm sure we all have. Aircraft do not fly side by side, there will also be a height separation and that easily accounts for the difference in the trails they leave. A persisting trail proves only that the jet flew through very cold and very high RH air. Any other conclusion drawn is purely conjecture.

reply to post by CatJockey

I was an avid aircraft spotter back in the 1970s during my school days,and back then we had proper summers with non stop deep clear blue skies for weeks on end without a break.One thing I have noticed though is that here in the UK we had a lot more in the way of stratus clouds in those days,all we seem to get now is nimbus and similar.
I would spend my whole summer holidays with my little Sharp Air band radio doing nothing other than watching the skies,and of course every type of contrail imaginable.There were days when the trail was only a few aircraft lengths and was gone after 30 seconds,and other days when it would spread out and was still there 5 or 6 hours later.There were also days when an a plane could be in level flight and could be making a short trail,would stop for a few minutes and then start making a trail again.There were also days (during the winter) when I saw civil airliners taking off from London Gatwick airport leaving contrails behind them when they had just become airborne.There were also days when even piston engined aircraft left trails behind them (although these were quite rare).
The important thing I remember from that era is that the average contrail was gone after about five minutes at the most,but when they gradually became more persistant over the period of a few days and eventually a clear blue sky full of contrails turned into a totally grey overcast sky,the weather was taking a turn towards being unsettled and rain was sure to follow.
My earliest memories of this go back to about 1973,and these were all legitimate civil airliners and even a lot of USAF transport planes (Galaxies and Starlifters) that were available for public scrutiny where they landed.All the USAF (or MAC) flights used their serial numbers as radio callsigns which was always a sign that they were on routine cargo flights and nothing else.If they used more cryptic callsigns (up to six letters and two numbers),this was a sign this was a flight of possible strategic or tactical significance,but these were VERY rare where I watched the skies from.