Chemtrail Tanker Air Show For The Skeptics

reply to post by knowneedtoknow

attacking a avatar what a low move lol you definitely faild your mission on this one disinfo agent

No, I was attacking the author of the bill:

www.peaceinspace.com...

Carol Rosin

She allegedly had help from Diane Harvey, but Harvey has taken to denying this.

What ever guys but it has to be always your way does it

reply to post by knowneedtoknow

Not at all it doesn't look that way

Go back and read this post.

After all of this all I can say is... WOW...

Some of the comments being posted aren't surprising but I am amazed at how long it took before the disinfo agent shot was taken. I would suggest one thing though, if you are going to try and prove chemtrails exist you may want to do a bit of research on certain topics such as these...

HR 2977

What in the world are they spraying

Morgellons

Aluminum in the soil

Barium

And also do a bit of research on these people also...

Alex Jones

Rosalind Peterson

Cliff Carnicom

Will Thomas

This will help not only yourself but also the ability to understand the fact that chemtrails are not real and there is no credible evidence to prove their existence.

Originally posted by knowneedtoknow
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

lol you all refer to that Contrail Science web site that has a big zero of credibility i can make a nicer web site then that in just 5 minutes and feed you with my Bull SH??

edit on 17-7-2012 by knowneedtoknow because: (no reason given)

Why all the hostility from such an educated person as yourself.

How about in 5 days (even though a super person like you could do it in 5min) you come back with a link cause your stuff smells real good and I'd like to see you back your educated claims.

Cheers

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


I feel like even a tiny search about contrails and cloud formations would eliminate 90% of the chemtrail claims.
If these people would just try to understand clouds a little, they would see how foolish it is to point to a picture of a contrail and say, "yep, that's definitely a chemtrail!" yet we continue to see thread after thread of that exact same comment.

reply to post by network dude

If these people would just try to understand clouds a little, they would see how foolish it is to point to a picture of a contrail and say, "yep, that's definitely a chemtrail!" yet we continue to see thread after thread of that exact same comment.

The funny thing that I see in thread after thread about chemtrails is the use of HR 2977. No matter what you provide about this bill and how it didn't even get past committee They still want to actually say it is proof of chemtrails.

Go figure..

Originally posted by tsurfer2000h
reply to post by network dude

 

If these people would just try to understand clouds a little, they would see how foolish it is to point to a picture of a contrail and say, "yep, that's definitely a chemtrail!" yet we continue to see thread after thread of that exact same comment.

The funny thing that I see in thread after thread about chemtrails is the use of HR 2977. No matter what you provide about this bill and how it didn't even get past committee They still want to actually say it is proof of chemtrails.

Go figure..

But didnt you know that grids and Evergreen are also conclusive proof of chemtrails? Oh yeah, almost forgot the patents! Woops, air traffic decreasing, too!

Originally posted by jude11
Always been a believer. Thank you.

When I see my clear blue sky become filled with 'trails' within an hour and then have a haze that covers the sun for hours, I have to wonder how it looks in the city, near airports...

Since I am NO WHERE NEAR A CITY OR AIRPORT...how does it happen in my sky this summer and not once in the last 50 years?

Peace

Yeah, I have to say I agree something is not right. I lived in a particular town in a northern county in Maryland where you would rarely see aircraft. Certainly not near as much as where I worked which was closer to BWI airport. However there would be mornings where the sky - in this particular area, was LITTERED with trails. Just criss-crossing the sky. Were they from planes on static routes I should expect to see them at given intervals (not to mention I should actually see a plane or two). Whatever made them did so around 4-6 am, easily visible trails until about 8 am, then dispersed through the air. I live farther south now, MUCH closer to BWI, see and hear planes, yet no trails. Nothing like what I was seeing farther north.

Something doesn't add up - I think whoever is doing this realizes it's an imperfect science but nonetheless sprays certain contained areas anyway, and then gathers the data on rats (us) in some form or fashion. It started to make sense that they would target specific areas - easier to break out the demographic and study the control group rather than "simply spray anyone" and attempt to record the results.

What I saw was not made from commercial traffic, would only happen on certain days - and when they were visible there were LOTS of them - like Tic Tac Toe.

reply to post by flashtrum


But do you not think that they only appear on certain days because on the other days the weather was wrong? Or that on days where the weather is right for trails you will see a lot of them?

Whether you live near an airport or not doesn't really matter, except to say that if you are a long way away from an airport most or all of the traffic above you is likely to leave a trail, whereas if there is an airport nearby a much smaller percentage of the planes in the sky are likely to leave a trail. Do you understand why this is?

What I saw was not made from commercial traffic, would only happen on certain days - and when they were visible there were LOTS of them - like Tic Tac Toe.

How do you know it was not commercial traffic? There are thousands of commercial flights in the air at any given time. Any air raft you see flying overhead is far more likely o be commercial than not. You can check this with sites like Flightradar 24.

In six months of observing and photographing high flying aircraft leaving trails (on and off, I do have a life, lol) I saw only two military trails, made by C-17's, and another one was, i suspect, a Sentry AEW.1 though I didn't get a clear shot. All the others were identifiable commercial flights and they all looked like the "chemtrails" people post on here.

Originally posted by flashtrum
I lived in a particular town in a northern county in Maryland where you would rarely see aircraft.

Probably because more often than not conditions weren't conducive for persistant contrails to form. So you never noticed them. Except on the odd occasion when they were. And having read about chemtrails on ATS, you looked up properly for the first time and saw them.

After all, why wouldn't there be frequent commerical air traffic over Maryland? Why a massive exclusion zone? It makes no sense.

reply to post by wmd_2008

Can you link to the 1000's of jets flying in WW II the reason I ask is I am not aware of any air force around the world having a 1000 jets then nevermind flying at once.

Yeah, you're right with your gotcha. I misspoke. There weren't enough jets to mass together to make outrageously persistent contrails in WWII. The jets would occasionally leave an immediately disappearing contrail - the way our modern day jets used to do. It was the thousand(s) bombers flying in tight formation that created the grids.

Over 70,000 flights per day world wide, in the UK where I live we have a vast increase in internal flights over the last 10-15 years.

Care to supply some statistics? From what I read Ireland is in the dumps and so is the whole European sector. Is there something special that sets the UK apart as far as an increase in aircraft movements? All I've seen so far is a graph from Boeing to show that accidents with their craft are within normal parameters. As far as the 'internal' UK flights increasing - could you supply some statistics and altitudes with these flights? You may be onto something.

Just as an aside: since the UK has a lot of fronts and is known for weather, it would be a shame to alter that pattern creating, initially, floods, and then drought through chemtrailing. But that's not happening there, is it?

Originally posted by luxordelphi
Care to supply some statistics? From what I read Ireland is in the dumps and so is the whole European sector. Is there something special that sets the UK apart as far as an increase in aircraft movements?

Try the UK CAA Aviation statistics page - there's probably something on there you can use!

All I've seen so far is a graph from Boeing to show that accidents with their craft are within normal parameters.

What graph is that?

As far as the 'internal' UK flights increasing - could you supply some statistics and altitudes with these flights? You may be onto something.

I dont' know where you're going to get "statistics" on "altitude" from, but the link above probably has info on "internal" flight numbers

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by flashtrum

 

But do you not think that they only appear on certain days because on the other days the weather was wrong? Or that on days where the weather is right for trails you will see a lot of them?

Whether you live near an airport or not doesn't really matter, except to say that if you are a long way away from an airport most or all of the traffic above you is likely to leave a trail, whereas if there is an airport nearby a much smaller percentage of the planes in the sky are likely to leave a trail. Do you understand why this is?

What I saw was not made from commercial traffic, would only happen on certain days - and when they were visible there were LOTS of them - like Tic Tac Toe.

How do you know it was not commercial traffic? There are thousands of commercial flights in the air at any given time. Any air raft you see flying overhead is far more likely o be commercial than not. You can check this with sites like Flightradar 24.

In six months of observing and photographing high flying aircraft leaving trails (on and off, I do have a life, lol) I saw only two military trails, made by C-17's, and another one was, i suspect, a Sentry AEW.1 though I didn't get a clear shot. All the others were identifiable commercial flights and they all looked like the "chemtrails" people post on here.

edit on 17-7-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)

I was forced to move in with a relative for a time back in 2008 when the economy tanked. I had to work a night job to make ends meet. I spent a few hours after work just hanging in the car, listening to talk radio, reading the paper. I lived in that area before. I already said I rarely saw planes. Even if they were commercial why only certain days and only during limited periods. Yes, I've considered the weather. Yes, I get airlines have routes. I told my story because it really was abnormal what I witnessed. I won't say I am 100 percent "we're being drugged!" but I've given enough logical thought to this to realize what I witnessed was very suspicious.

The trails aren't from an altitude that would be a high-flying commercial airliner. I know what I contrail is. What I experienced was something different and there were too many of them made in a short time-frame to be simply commercial traffic. Weather - other days of exact type of weather (rather cloudless, 65 degrees, low humidity.) I would expect to see the same sort of contrail "traffic" (if it WERE simply commercial) but I didn't. I don't have a dog in this race, just posting my experience, and think that dismissing every "sighting" like mine (tic tac toe times 20) as simply commercial traffic is wrong.

You know how if you are in a public place you can feel someone staring at you? I feel like what I saw just looked - wrong.

Also I would like to thank you for engaging me without being disrespectful or completely dismissive. That seems to be an internet epidemic of late.

reply to post by flashtrum


Well, I always think civility is the best way to communicate, and I regret when I sometimes forget that

While I am aware that I have satisfied myself what what I have seen aren't chemtrails, I am also aware that your own traffic patterns may well be very different and can't assume you simply saw the same as me.

If someone posts pictures and says it is clearly a Chemtrail because of how it looks, I can come back because I have an identical photo that isn't. That doesn't say they are 100% wrong, only that their certainty is misplaced, and a little more thought/investigation may be warranted, if you get my drift.

I wish I could see for myself the differences you refer to and we could debate that, but I can't and so must respect your observations.

One thing I will refer to though, is regarding temperature and altitude. The temperature varies a great deal with height and the temperature you experience on the ground bears no relation to that at cruise altitude or aircraft where it is always at least -25 degrees or colder. The trails are formed, or not, due to the relative humidity of the air at that height.

Also altitude, I don't know how you determined what height the planes you saw were at, but I found that it is impossible to guess with the naked eye. I have, on other threads, posted visually identical photographs of aircraft where one is at14,000ft and not leaving a trail and another was more than twice as high at 34,000ft and a huge trail is pluming behind. I only knew their altitudes because of the flight tracker site I mentioned before.

It was coming on here that made me want to check it out for myself.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Amanda5

 

Here is the Evergreen 747 at work. Doesn't look much like "chemtrails". Doesn't come from the engines. Doesn't persist. Doesn't stretch from horizon to horizon.

US Patent #7413145

A method and apparatus for aerial fire suppression utilizing a potable fire retardant chemical dispensing system, readily adaptable, without extensive aircraft modification, to various makes of aircraft, for dispensing current types of forest and range fire fighting chemicals. The aerial delivery system is self contained and reusable. It enables cargo/utility aircraft to carry and dump a load, under control. The aerial delivery system is capable of attachment at the wing box, pressurized delivery from the nozzles, and nozzles directed straight downward.

www.google.com...

edit on 7/13/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Without a retrofit which is done daily on almost all mechanical things.........I am not saying it has been done but I am saying it can easily be done and all the backyard mechanics in the world know this for a fact.

Regards, Iwinder

Originally posted by Xtrozero
Phage brought up a good point a while back that I never really thought about, but was always sitting in the back of my mind. He suggested that contrails can be viewed as a form of air pollution since they tend to fill up are clear skies at times, and there are many days where I want to view a clear sky and those pesky buggers are there.

They tend to fill up the clear skys at all times now, without exception thats all I can say about your post.
Regards, Iwinder

Originally posted by Iwinder
[Without a retrofit which is done daily on almost all mechanical things.........I am not saying it has been done but I am saying it can easily be done and all the backyard mechanics in the world know this for a fact.

Yes it has never been a secret that it is more-or-less trivially easy to spray stuff from aircraft, and has been since at least the 1920's - which is when some of hte patents sometimes posted as "proof" of chemtrails date to for spraying equipment.

However it is NOT trivially easy to modify aircraft - especially when weight and balance and performance characteristics change. There is a mountain of paper work required - apporvals to be gotten, drawings to be produced, work packages to be accomplished and signed for my licenced engineers, etc.

Adn if you're changing the weight and balance or aerodynamics you have to make those changes available to the flight crew by way of performance documents, changes to flight manuals, loading sheets, etc.

These are some of the expected types of evidence that are completely absent from the chemtrail theory.

Originally posted by Iwinder

Originally posted by Xtrozero
Phage brought up a good point a while back that I never really thought about, but was always sitting in the back of my mind. He suggested that contrails can be viewed as a form of air pollution since they tend to fill up are clear skies at times, and there are many days where I want to view a clear sky and those pesky buggers are there.

They tend to fill up the clear skys at all times now, without exception thats all I can say about your post.
Regards, Iwinder

Patently untrue - ther is still plenty of clear sky all around the world as a quick view at any global satellite photography site will show you - eg MODIS

However for the original poster - contrails are indeed visual polution - but it is important to remember that chemical pollution is occuring from engine exhaust whether there are contrails or not! And jet engines at cruise aer buring a lot less fuel than when the aircraft is taking off!!

It is trivially easy to stop contrailing - just fly at a different altitude where contrails do not form.

However since jets always fly as high as they can or are allowed to by ATC as it burns less fuel (and so costs less), the only option to avoid contrails in practice will be to fly lower.

And flying lower uses more fuel, which means more "chemical" exhaust - so you can do away with contrails causing visual polution by burning more fuel and creating more "chemical" pollution.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by Iwinder
[Without a retrofit which is done daily on almost all mechanical things.........I am not saying it has been done but I am saying it can easily be done and all the backyard mechanics in the world know this for a fact.

Yes it has never been a secret that it is more-or-less trivially easy to spray stuff from aircraft, and has been since at least the 1920's - which is when some of hte patents sometimes posted as "proof" of chemtrails date to for spraying equipment.

However it is NOT trivially easy to modify aircraft - especially when weight and balance and performance characteristics change. There is a mountain of paper work required - apporvals to be gotten, drawings to be produced, work packages to be accomplished and signed for my licenced engineers, etc.

Adn if you're changing the weight and balance or aerodynamics you have to make those changes available to the flight crew by way of performance documents, changes to flight manuals, loading sheets, etc.

These are some of the expected types of evidence that are completely absent from the chemtrail theory.

Black budget is all I can answer with, to date the US budget is 54% military and the rest is for everything else.
Let us not forget the Pentagons missing trillion or so when their budget did not even account for such money.
I guess it was fitting that a supposed air liner took out the accounting department at the Pentagon.

No smoke here and I suppose that means no fire either?

What I am trying to say here is that if there is enough money which there is for sure anything is possible.
Anyone can Google The missing Pentagon money and 911, strange it was never mentioned again on the MSM and never investigated where all this money went to.

which they did not have in the first place according to the books.....
So was Don Rumsky just making things up for a slow news day when he said "we are missing major money here"?

Regards, Iwinder