Facts of contrails

Fact
They want to ridicule anyone that does not accept their word as gospel on what they call facts as they research something as crazy as chemtrails.
They need to explain why they have Google alerts for the word,
and respond when ever it appears on the internet,
and they post their rehearsed responses.

Truth never has to be defended,
but this group feels the need to defend what they call contrails,
24 hours a day.
Fact

In the past people were allowed to look up at the sky and describe what they seen in the clouds and no one ridiculed them.
One kid would see a bunny, another kid saw poison gas being sprayed.
but people did not ridicule or try to silence what people saw in the sky.
But this group feels that cloud description, now needs to be silenced.
Fact

Any child that does not conform to the cloud police,
in the future will have to be educated.
Fact
if we listen to contrail/chemtrail believers.

Hope you enjoy your new role in society,
as cloud police.

Originally posted by flyswatter

Originally posted by Rudy2shoes
Here is a fact for you
Chemtrail debunkers with their theory's of what a chemtrail is.


I am more interested in how they know more about chemtrails then the public,
and dictate what they are?

They need me to believe that they are what they create in their minds,
so they can ridicule my believe.

Any argument that does not meet their believe,
has to be discounted and then ridiculed because they claim,
I do not understand what a chemtrail is in their minds.

They they try to dictate what a chemtrail is,
thus they can tell you or me your wrong.

Fact they will never discuss chemtrails that do not meet their criteria.

Those that argue against chemtrails on here are not arguing what chemtrails are, they are arguing about what they are NOT. There is a big difference. Example - you say that you saw a chemtrail. Someone says show me. You point up and they see a plane flying high (we'll say 30k+ feet) and leaving a white trail behind it, and from the length you can tell that it has been lingering for quite a while. That person says it looks like a contrail. You say its a chemtrail. He says looks like contrails, as documented over the last few decades. You say its a chemtrail. You go back and forth, back and forth. Neither of you can prove what the white fluffy trail is above. Difference here is that he has scientifically documented proof of what a contrail is, what they can look like, what they are made of. You have nothing.

Do you understand the point I am trying to make here?

I see man made machines,
using combustion in its must primitive form of travel.
Pollution is a side effect of our primitive air travel.

Do you understand the point I am trying to make here?

Your altitudes arent true in all conditions. I have seen jets leave contrails on the ground in fact

reply to post by flyswatter


I understand how you were trained to believe that we do not have a cheap way to make hydrogen fuel,
a harmless form of travel, but humans spend trillions on,
splitting atoms for war

Any idiot knows a harmless contrail that is created from a hydrogen fuel is harmless.
Any petroleum product used for air travel has chemicals in it.
Fact!

So show me a hydrogen fuel, harmless contrail,
a water vapor, created from combustion.
Something we would accept as clouds that may benefit us.
Fact
Your primitive form of air travel has not advanced as far as the claims you have made.

I want to believe in chemtrails,
and the only 3 chemicals released are H2O.
Airlines are too primitive,
and will never meet that standard,
of chemtrail emissions.

Fact:

If you were able to post coherently in one post with links to proof you would be able to get more people to get behind your argument. If you're trying to say that contrails are chemtrails because they contain jet exhaust, you're just way out of your element IMHO

Another fact is,
no one has explained to me how natural cirrus clouds at 35,000 feet,
get petroleum by-products in them like contrail cirrus clouds?

The only way it could be natural,
was if airplanes are releasing pollution into the natural clouds.

So tell me again how are natures clouds, the same as man made clouds?

Originally posted by Rudy2shoes
Another fact is,
no one has explained to me how natural cirrus clouds at 35,000 feet,
get petroleum by-products in them like contrail cirrus clouds?

I wouldn't be surprised if they do...see below - but do you ahve any actual evidence of this, such as the quantities?

The only way it could be natural,
was if airplanes are releasing pollution into the natural clouds.

I wouldn't be surprised that pollution gets into all clouds...why wouldn't it??

So tell me again how are natures clouds, the same as man made clouds?

They are both water ice - no problem.

Originally posted by minkmouse
Fact:

If you were able to post coherently in one post with links to proof you would be able to get more people to get behind your argument. If you're trying to say that contrails are chemtrails because they contain jet exhaust, you're just way out of your element IMHO

Show me a link proving,
you asking me for link is out of my element?

Originally posted by Rudy2shoes
I want to believe in chemtrails,
and the only 3 chemicals released are H2O.

lol - 3 chemicals??

Airlines are too primitive,
and will never meet that standard,
of chemtrail emissions.

Unless they use hydrogen as fuel

Just like the cars and trucks and trains and ships that generate many more times the pollution that aviation does.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Hi I know you,
how are you doing?
This thread was about facts,
you ask me about facts,
while I have not been able to confirm some of what you call facts.
So while I still try to confirm what you call facts,
how about you disprove mine?

reply to post by Rudy2shoes


I'm worried about mixing those 3 chemicals into the atmosphere. If H, 2, and O were ever allowed to dance in the same space, the results give me the fear!

Originally posted by flyswatter

Originally posted by eXia7
So we're just going to pretend geo-engineering doesn't exist?

I don't really see how chemtrails don't exist if geo-engineering is going on, Those particulates don't fly themselves up there now do they?


I mean they do admit to "thinking" about the idea, but these are scientists, they will do w/e they need to. And I continue to remain 50/50 on this conspiracy. I mean, unless people are flying planes through these trails, and testing the air.. I don't really see how it couldn't be done, all the while people refer back to contrails. People act like it's hard to hide a form of chemical in a contrail. absurd.

edit on 11/29/2012 by eXia7 because: (no reason given)

I dont know that anyone here is saying that geo-engineering does not exist. What people are trying to point out is that what many people see as their "chemtrails" are in fact contrails. This does not mean that chemtrails dont exist. But when you have individuals that insist a contrail cannot persist, or that they dont spread, things of that sort ... they are going to be corrected in their errors.

So tell us, if it would not be difficult to introduce chemicals into a contrail (beyond the carbon and normal emissions from the engine), how would they go about it?

if I was in this field of study, then I'd have concrete answers for you. but I'm sure any type of micro emitters would work..

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by Rudy2shoes
I want to believe in chemtrails,
and the only 3 chemicals released are H2O.

lol - 3 chemicals??

Airlines are too primitive,
and will never meet that standard,
of chemtrail emissions.

Unless they use hydrogen as fuel

Just like the cars and trucks and trains and ships that generate many more times the pollution that aviation does.

edit on 29-11-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)

Can you show us the facts of per vehicle,
how many gallons consumed.
I have been unable to find any train or car that consumes as much fuel as one airplane.