Chemtrail Tanker Air Show For The Skeptics

reply to post by Human_Alien

This is not a debatable topic anymore. The only thing that's worth discussing here in the year 2012 is: what are they spraying not whether they're spraying.

Yes, you are right this isn't a debatable topic anymore and do you know why?

Well in part because of the video you are using as a source, Seriously now TankerEnemy...

Also when there is actual proof of chemtrails actually existing then it will be debatable again.So please keep up the entertaining threads.

reply to post by Human_Alien

I have a solution too. Go to Evergreen Facility.

You mean the company that runs this plane....





Are you really saying this is for chemtrailing?

Just wondering if you have read thru the Evergreen Aviation website at all?

If not you should....

Originally posted by luxordelphi
your pseudo-scientific dreams.

You've got some nerve talking about "pseudo-science". There isn't one shred of verifiable, repeatable scientific evidence to prove the made-up word "chemtrails" even exist.

You want some real science?

If "they" were spraying something, it would be all over everything outside. Your house, grass, bushes, trees, etc. Anything and everything that sits under the sky all day and all night would have this "chemical(s)" that is being sprayed. All you need to do is get swabs of the above items and have them tested in a lab for chemicals. If the same chemical shows up on all swabs, then you have a working theory with possible proof.'

Right now, you've got jack nothing.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
If I'm lying, I'm dying.

R.I.P.




I feel kinda sorry for the person who made the video. He continues to make himself a laughing stock to those of us who had a proper education and can see that we're looking at contrails and wingtip vortices.




reply to post by Human_Alien

And you.

You have "World Peace" in your signature while promoting a hoax that does nothing but fear mongers others. That could almost be considered an oxymoron.

World peace will never happen through fear mongering and ignorance.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


Why bother to reply to me when you have nothing to say? Your opionion doesn't matter to me. What you think doesn't make any difference to me. Your lack of education is irrelevant to me. Your threats (R.I.P.) are meaningless to me. I think that pretty much covers your post.

reply to post by Human_Alien


That link to Evergreen is completely bogus.

Do we have the technology to create a hurricane, or tornado, or earthquakes?

Yes.

Who has this technology?

The US and Russia. But Russia has been offering the technology for sale.

What specific technologies/techniques can be used to alter the weather and create storms?

Several.

High-energy lasers can be directed into the atmosphere which creates free oxygen (O2), this combined with hydrogen to create H2O – water. Space based lasers are even more effective, and can also create O3 (Ozone) in the process of creating water in the atmosphere. Water is the most essential element in weather. The amount of it at a given point in time at a given location can create wind shifts, rain, (obviously), snow, but a clever use of it can create a tornado, or, over water, a hurricane. Over warm ocean water, it creates a very powerful hurricane, and if created in the right position at the right time, prevailing winds will carry it where you want it to go.

There is no conceivable way to create a tornado or a hurricane. Yes, they can create rain when the conditions are already ripe for it, but there is just no way to create something the size of a tornado and it isn't even in the realm of science fiction to create a hurricane. Unbelievable even in sci fi!

Bogus claims.

Originally posted by ProtectedWitness
I support this spraying. Ever since they started spraying in my area, I have had more energy, a renewed sense of creativity, and overall better health. I hope they keep it up. The reason why the pilots agree to spraying is because they are aware of the benefits. I have a feeling this has remained a secret because we don't want our enemies to know of our super-spray.

I like the one that just kind of spits the crap out...kind of like a room freshener.

The really mystery is what do those planes use for fuel since they are full of chemicals instead?

Originally posted by Human_Alien
This is not a debatable topic anymore. The only thing that's worth discussing here in the year 2012 is: what are they spraying not whether they're spraying.


So without further ado

Well at least you've abandoned the silly idea that contrails from engines are chemtrails - I see that as a positive move.

those short, intermittent trails from the fuelage of a/c are clearly not from engines, and so I think you have asked a perfectly reasonable question in regard of them - what are they?

There are a number of things that get discharged from aircraft in flight - and although toilet waste is NOT one of them, washbasin water actually is. Also the airconditioning system will regulate the humidity of air in the cabin and will dump overboard any excess mosisture removed from it.

I do not know if the examples shown are either of these - it would take much better photography to establish that.

However as with the previous idea that engine contrails aer chemgtrails that you have abandoned, there are possible legitimate sources for such trails that need to be discounted before you can claim this sort of evidence as proof of any sort.

Published on Jul 7, 2012 by chemtrailsplanet
NEED 100% PROOF?
/6o58dv7
In 2010 Aerospace Engineers submitted conclusive evidence for Covert Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering, (aka "Chemtrails") in a 336 page report called "CASE ORANGE". The report was commissioned by THE BELFORT GROUP (UK), who held a "CHEMTRAILS SYMPOSIUM" where the conclusions were presented by Aerospace Engineer, Dr. Coen Vermeeren. -- ALSO: The term "chemtrails" is in the text of 2001 legislation (HR-2977) where it is defined as an "exotic weapon".

the Belfort group paper is a load of hot air - it contains nothing new, andhas been discussed and debunked before - eg here - basically they have no verifiable evidence, they do not say who they are, it is not peer reviewed, their criteria for "good evidence" is nothing more than they agree with it, etc - pretty much the usual non-evidence of chemtrails.

And some of it is just outright nonsense - such as it is illegal for the NATO AWACS fleet to have Luxembourg registrations - complete bovine excrement. Certainly the engines of that fleet are old & could do with replacing - they get that right - but it's also completely irrelevant to their supposed point.

HR-2977 - so what? you can have a draft bill that refernces pixie dust if you like - the bill is discussed at length here - including noting that Kucinich himself had the term "chemtrails" removed because he did not believe they existed.

And of course it is not "legislation" - it has never been passed - in fact the official status of this bill is "Died (referred to committee)"

Following the links from that page its replacement (which did not mention chemtrails) has the same status, as does ITS replacement.

reply to post by Human_Alien


This from your link...

Evergreen Aviation, one of the worlds largest private aviation companies admits to weather modification service. On their own website in the Markets section for their New Super Tanker they state Weather modification among other interesting service markets.

So again cloud seeding is chemtrailing and chemtrails are now weather modification, just want to make sure I get that right,and Evergreen Aviation is the main company spraying chemtrails and doing weather modification.

Okay then...

reply to post by Xtrozero

The really mystery is what do those planes use for fuel since they are full of chemicals instead?

Oh you didn't hear they are mixing it with the jet fuel..

I'm going to post this here, and then I'm going to start a thread on it. The long, white lines in the sky are impossible to "spray."

Cirrocumulus Clouds occur between 16,000 to 39,000 feet. Precisely where commercial aircraft also fly. They occur at frontal boundaries, and they rarely cast shadows, but they often precede rain, because the moisture level at those altitudes has to be sufficient to support the cloud formation.

Altocumulus look similarly but are typically more water and less ice. These occur at lower altitudes, up to about 20,000 feet, so they are often seen together with Cirrocumulus, and they also often precede rain. These clouds can cover thousands of square miles.

Now, let's consider the density of a very small, but average cloud.

Consider a hypothetical but typical small cloud at an altitude of 10,000 feet, comprising one cubic kilometer and having a liquid water content of 1.0 gram per cubic meter. The total mass of the cloud particles is about 1 million kilograms, which is roughly equivalent to the weight of 500 automobiles.

Source

But, to be more specific, lets look at the specific size of a typical white line in the sky.... a contrail.
Size of Contrails, if we know the size of an airplane, then we can estimate the size of the contrail, and the length of the contrail, and with a known density to clouds, we can determine exactly how much liquid would need to be there to form the contrail. So, lets work backwards from known airplanes.

Lets say we are talking about the planes in the link above. A KC-135 or 747-400, similar in size, wingspan of 131 feet. Lets say we see one of those planes flying over at 32,000 feet, and the contrail spreads out behind it at about double that width, so lets say 260 feet wide, and it is save to assume a cross-section of the contrail is tubular, so pi times radius squared times the length would give us the volume, and the volume times the density would give us the mass of that cloud.

SO, the KC-135 Stratotanker has a maximum weight of 322,500 lbs, with a useful payload of 200,000 lbs. So, 200,000 lbs of some liquid, lets just use water. Water has a weight of a little over 8lbs per gallon. So, 25,000 gallons of water.

Now, an average cloud has a density of about 0.5g per cubic meter, so to convert that to US measurements, that is 0.0011 lbs per cubic foot.

If we know we can carry 200,000 lbs of water, then we know the Stratotanker could create a cloud that is about 6 billion cubic feet in volume. So, pi is 3.14 times radius squared is 131*131 is 17161 equals 53885 square feet cross section, which means the contrail for the maximum load of the Stratotanker could stretch 260 feet wide by 118,771 feet long, which is about 22 miles.

If a plane is flying at 30,000 feet or above, you can see it for over 200 miles horizon to horizon.

So, if you see a single plane, spraying

a Contrail from horizon to horizon, it would have to have the capacity of at least 11 times that of a 747-400 or KC-135 Stratotanker. There is no such plane, so there is no such thing as "spraying" a contrail.

Now, that is the simple version, but in reality, we know the contrails are wider than 260 feet, we would also have to talk about the humidity and ambient conditions, and nozzling and delivery system that could actually create minute particles that would stay aloft, and then for the hardcore chemtrailers that believe heavy metals such as aluminum are added, we would have to account for all that extra density, and in reality, it would probably take a freight train of 20 or more super-cargo jets just to haul the materials up to the altitude to create a single trail!

They are, and always have been CONTRAILS! Caused by the quick compression and decompression of already humid air, where conditions are right, or at least intermittently right for them to form ice crystals and stay aloft and reflect light and become visible to us 7 miles below on the ground.

I'm going to put this into another thread, with a little more detail and pictures, but there you have it, physically impossible by any known aircraft that we have!

reply to post by getreadyalready


Indeed, that's an excellent point. If chemicals were being sprayed they would swiftly dissipate. Only contrails can persist and spread, precisely because they are made of water.

This simple science, and it is the EXACT OPPOSITE of the chemtrail myth.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
They are, and always have been CONTRAILS! Caused by the quick compression and decompression of already humid air, where conditions are right, or at least intermittently right for them to form ice crystals and stay aloft and reflect light and become visible to us 7 miles below on the ground.

A correction though, while contrails can form from compression and decompression of humid air, the long persistent trails you see are almost always not of this type. They are exhaust contrails, caused by the extra water in the exhaust gasses momentarily raising the relative humidity over 100%, allowing water to condense and freeze. If the relative humidity is over 60%, then the ice crystals will continue to grow, and the contrail will gain mass and spread.

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Published on Jul 7, 2012 by chemtrailsplanet
NEED 100% PROOF?
/6o58dv7
In 2010 Aerospace Engineers submitted conclusive evidence for Covert Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering, (aka "Chemtrails") in a 336 page report called "CASE ORANGE". The report was commissioned by THE BELFORT GROUP (UK), who held a "CHEMTRAILS SYMPOSIUM" where the conclusions were presented by Aerospace Engineer, Dr. Coen Vermeeren. -- ALSO: The term "chemtrails" is in the text of 2001 legislation (HR-2977) where it is defined as an "exotic weapon".

Oh god please tell me you're kidding with this paper? I'm 20 pages in and have found some serious factual errors in it. For example they claim that the KC-135 still uses the JT3D-3B (technically it was the TF33-P-5, but basically the same engine), but the last aircraft that used that engine retired in 2009. The vast majority of those aircraft were gone before then. They've been flying the CFM-56 engines starting in 1984.

The dates for the fuel use by the US military is off too. The USAF switched entirely to JP-8 in the 1990s. It's basically Jet A-1 with some additives. It used to drive us crazy because we could put JP-8 into a plane and everything was fine, but as soon as we put Jet A-1 in, it would leak like a sieve.

Those are just a couple of the problems found in the first twenty pages of this "report".

Oh wow, they changed the contrast and brightness and then reverted back to normal just as it started "spraying"...

Seriously? How is this even slightly believable?

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by OccamAssassin
reply to post by Human_Alien

 

I'm sure the chemtrail buzzers will be ringing our resident debunkers very soon so I implore everyone to skip over their posts

So what your saying is that your right and everyone else is wrong so we should only listen to you.

What I am saying is the footage speaks for itself.
To deny this is to derail reality.....so, you don't want to be a member of delusion do ya?

If anyone is a "member of delusion" it's you.

Interesting thread and a lot of good replies. Made for a fantastic read.

Like usual I don't have much insight to add to the conversation, but still I'm just not convinced of this whole chem-trail craze.

But OP, you're very one-sided on this and can't seem to approach someone who has a different opinion on the matter without being rude. As my mother once told me, "You attract more bees with honey, not vinegar."

Just my two-cents.

Watched the video, but have to catch up with the thread. Has anyone proposed yet that what you are seeing in this video is the aircraft's APU (auxiliary power unit) being turned on?

Great video. I haven't seen many that were this extensive. I think this is the best I've seen. I was kind of on the fence for a while when I was introduced to the idea of chemtrails, mainly because of the stigma associated with the people who believe in that kind of thing. At this point, from my own observations and some light research, I'm pretty much convinced. Not so much on an "I have all the evidence" basis, but more on a "it's just common sense" basis.

reply to post by Human_Alien


ok - lets hold you to your stated position :

what are they "spraying" ?

PS i use " spraying " in quotes - because i disagree with the alegation that spraying is occuring

for the purpose of this discussion - please limit the topic to the 1st plane shown in your OP vid [ the 4 engine jet with white fuselage and red engine pods

at this point - i will also throw in the question - who is "spraying " ?

the a/c in question - is neither military , nor a tanker - but most likley an aircraft from the virgin atlantic fleet - thier livery is red engine pods - white fuselage and red vert. stab. [ unseen in the clip ] - if you wish to challenge this id - please supply a counter identification what uses the livery observed

i will await your answer on this point

now back to the meet of the topic - what are they " spraying "

in the clip shown the trail is only visible from 1 fuselage length from the engines - agree ?

further - as this is a 4 engine jet - the fuseage lenth can be assumed to be in the order of 60m [ minimum ] - agree ?

As this is an aircraft in flight at altitude - can we assume a minimum cruise speed of 300kt ? - agree

this will mean that to creat a gap of 60m + between aircaft and trail - there is a delay / condenation period / reaction time of 0.4 seconds [ the time an airliner @ 300kt takes to travel 60m ]

now - as you claim they are " spraying " - and post this clip as evidence - the material seen in the trail cannot be composed in whole - or part of water vapour generated by the combustion of fuel in the engines - as you support the claim that the " spray " is " turned on " - agree ?

so it must be wholey " chemtrail " reagents - agree ?

so - chemistry 101 question - please idetify the chemical / mixture of chemicals or reagents that when combined produce a white vapour in the quataties oberved - with the caveats that :

the vapour only becomes visible 60m+ from the " sprayer " - thus its reaction time must be 0.4 seconds - agree ?

a normal chemical spray from a nozle is visible the instant it leaves the nozzle

also - if the " spray " is in the fuel - all reagents must be able to resist combustion chamber temperature

if the " spray " is not in the fuel - then the temperature of the exhaust cannot be relied upon as a catalyst to creat the trail

so - simple chemistry question - what is the spray ?

i await your - or any onelses coherent reply

Originally posted by ProtectedWitness
I support this spraying. Ever since they started spraying in my area, I have had more ...

I am just curious what color is it?
.....you know the spray in your area that makes you feel so good, what color is it?