Documents Reveal “Chemtrails” Originated at Department of Defense

reply to post by AndyMayhew

Which is why the whoe chemtrai myth is a farce (but a very clever hoax nonetheless)

Did you read the the pdf file ? if not you should look at page 15 the main ingredients of chemtrails.
Then read this:

Frances Mangels has a Bachelor of Science in Forestry from the International School of Forestry at Missoula, spent 35 years with the U.S. Forest Service as a wildlife biologist and worked several years with the USDA Soil Conservation Service as a soil conservationist. Today he lives in Mt. Shasta, CA and works as a master gardener. He took a sample of water from his backyard rain gauge on Feb. 1, 2009 and submitted it to Basic Laboratory of Redding, CA on Feb. 2, 2009. This sample showed Aluminum at a level of 1010 micrograms per liter (ug/l). This same sample also showed Barium at a level of 8 ug/l. Using the same sample method and laboratory, he took a sample on Oct. 14, 2009 which showed Aluminum at a level of 611 ug/l. The Barium should not be there in any amount. Barium carbonate is used in rat poison. The normal level of Aluminum in rainwater is .5 ug/l. These samples show levels of Aluminum at 2020 times and 1222 times the normal levels. There is no heavy industry in the Mt. Shasta area. There is no reason, other than chemtrails, for this stuff to be showing up at these levels.

Geoengineeringwatch

Also look at this The guardian

Then overview this chemtrail conspiracy theory

Various versions of the chemtrail conspiracy theory have circulated through Internet websites and radio programs.[1] In some of the accounts, the chemicals are described as barium and aluminum salts, polymer fibers, thorium, or silicon carbide.[

And tell me what you think after reading it?

reply to post by 0bserver1


That's an interesting article. I wonder, does the guy who collected the sample have any ideas about ground pollution and how it may travel in the air?

The only way to pin any pollution on airplanes is to sample the trail itself. The movie What in the World are they Spraying did all sorts of studies on the snow at Mt. Shasta, and raised over $50,000 to make their video. All they needed to do is rent a plane to sample the trails and that could have been done for much less than $50,000.

reply to post by network dude

The only way to pin any pollution on airplanes is to sample the trail itself

"cough"Maybe this guy did it for him..

Guy dives through Chemtrail

0bserver1
reply to post by AndyMayhew

 

Which is why the whoe chemtrai myth is a farce (but a very clever hoax nonetheless)

Did you read the the pdf file ? if not you should look at page 15 the main ingredients of chemtrails.
Then read this:

Frances Mangels has a Bachelor of Science in Forestry from the International School of Forestry at Missoula, spent 35 years with the U.S. Forest Service as a wildlife biologist and worked several years with the USDA Soil Conservation Service as a soil conservationist. Today he lives in Mt. Shasta, CA and works as a master gardener. He took a sample of water from his backyard rain gauge on Feb. 1, 2009 and submitted it to Basic Laboratory of Redding, CA on Feb. 2, 2009. This sample showed Aluminum at a level of 1010 micrograms per liter (ug/l). This same sample also showed Barium at a level of 8 ug/l. Using the same sample method and laboratory, he took a sample on Oct. 14, 2009 which showed Aluminum at a level of 611 ug/l. The Barium should not be there in any amount. Barium carbonate is used in rat poison. The normal level of Aluminum in rainwater is .5 ug/l. These samples show levels of Aluminum at 2020 times and 1222 times the normal levels. There is no heavy industry in the Mt. Shasta area. There is no reason, other than chemtrails, for this stuff to be showing up at these levels.

Geoengineeringwatch

this claim is examined here - it was apparently not difficult to determine that Mangels had no idea what the "normal" composition of the soil near his residence was - eh aera is actually quiet rich in naturally ocuring strontium, aluminium and barium!

the factual basis of some of his pH claim is also examined here - they do not stack up and in at least some cases he appears to be deliberately misleading people.

Also look at this The guardian

Yes - again, tests back in the 50's through 70's.

Then overview this chemtrail conspiracy theory

Various versions of the chemtrail conspiracy theory have circulated through Internet websites and radio programs.[1] In some of the accounts, the chemicals are described as barium and aluminum salts, polymer fibers, thorium, or silicon carbide.

And tell me what you think after reading it?

I think that it shows that people are not doing proper research - barium, for example, is a common substance in vehicle brake pads - so before you start saying that your sample shows that aircraft are "spraying it" you need to show that it has not come from roads and highways! Even if the sample is not particularly near any of those the dust can and does blow in eth wind for many miles - dust from China reaches the USA after all, so how far might barium dust from a highway blow?

0bserver1
reply to post by network dude

 

The only way to pin any pollution on airplanes is to sample the trail itself

"cough"Maybe this guy did it for him..

Guy dives through Chemtrail

Perhaps you could have searched for it on here - www.abovetopsecret.com...

It looked like rubbish back then, and it still looks like rubbish now - where's the chemical analysis of his suit for example??

not to mention this gem from the page:

THE CHEMTRAIL PUZZLE COMES TOGETHER THANKS TO DRUNK GUY AT BAR …

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


hmmm good point I give you that , but what in your opinion does the chemtrail pdf file tells you?

0bserver1
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

hmmm good point I give you that

, but what in your opinion does the chemtrail pdf file tells you?

the Airforce "Chemtrail" PDF is a freshman (I think that's the correct term in the US?) text book on chemistry.

It is dealt with all over the 'net, for example here

the person who runs het site you linked to it from has some serious problems understanding basic facts and is a prolific producer of you tube videos that are essentially hoaxes.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


So it's actually old news , hmmm they presented this like it was released twelve days ago..
I do however think somethings going on and I can't proof that but taking the video from the german news source in mind I still have doubts on chemtrails or whatever they are..

Also because I began notice these nifty contrail patterns ten years ago and found them strange. Maybe I begun noticing because someone mentioned them , like when someone says there's a purple haze in the morning your going to see it.. This whole debate around chemtrails would always exist. just like al the other things that makes ATS interesting...

reply to post by 0bserver1


I just wonder how many times you will be deceived by these chemtrail pushers before you decide to look into the facts? Don't listen to anyone here, but look at the science, the real life things that explain why contrails are contrails, and why they can and do persist under the right conditions. Once you know that, it's real hard to make sense of the chemtrail theory as it stands. But I guess that all depends on if you were telling the truth when you said you were looking for TRUTH.

0bserver1
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

So it's actually old news , hmmm they presented this like it was released twelve days ago..
I do however think somethings going on and I can't proof that but taking the video from the german news source in mind I still have doubts on chemtrails or whatever they are..

somewhere on YT there's a video of an aussie guy who mail ordered the "Chemtrails 101" text and read through it & was perplexed it doesn't actually mention chemtrails!! although he couldn't understand why airforce officers would need to understand chemistry...I'll see if I can find it.

Edit: found it:

Also because I began notice these nifty contrail patterns ten years ago and found them strange. Maybe I begun noticing because someone mentioned them , like when someone says there's a purple haze in the morning your going to see it.. This whole debate around chemtrails would always exist. just like al the other things that makes ATS interesting...

There are international laws in place to prevent any geo-engineering from being done. If you can prove it is being done, then you have the law on your side to stop it and punish the guilty.

True, but how do you notify other countries with proof without being considered a terrorist? I mean, If I had proof that the US is violating those laws and I shared that info with the UN, I'd be just as "guilty" as Snowden.

I was skeptical about "chemtrails" when I first heard about them, because the only contrails I ever noticed were the long, lingering ones that are called chemtrails.

Then one day I saw a jet going above my house, leaving a long, lingering contrail. I kept watching it, and suddenly, it stopped leaving a large contrail and started leaving a "normal", short contrail. I then started noticing this more often. Sometimes planes would leave "chemtrails" as far as the eye could see, but every once in a while you'd catch the gem of another jet flying nearby with a short contrail, or more jets leaving partial "chemtrails" with occasional breaks where you could see them leave a normal contrail in-between.

Now, I'm not an air traffic controller in a tower so I have no idea if they had the same altitude or speed and I admittedly don't know about how any high-altitude conditions may alter the length and duration of contrails, but just from my on-the-ground observations, it appeared that they were heading at the same altitude through the duration of their flight and maintaining a constant speed, and generally I only notice the contrails at all when there's clear or mostly clear skies.

I did see a rare sight today; four or five jets flying in the same vicinity leaving short contrails with no sign of any "chemtrails" at all.

Anyway, my point is, seeing is believing. I have seen "chemtrails" with my own eyes. I have seen them start, stop, and start again. All I know is that doesn't seem "normal", and because I don't know what circumstances cause the contrails to differ, I can only assume it is because there is something different that they're leaving behind, i.e. "CHEMTRAILS".

On a little bit of a side note, to those saying take any evidence you have to court because geo-engineering or whatever is "illegal", the courts are always as crooked as the people working in them, and I have seen this first-hand many times recently. Innocent people go to jail and guilty people walk away all the time. Taking something controversial that a corrupt government is doing "illegally" to a court that is run by the same or an equally corrupt government is like asking a robber to give you back your money because what he did wasn't very nice.

Close the thread already, it's a hoax....Yet brought about again by some sucker..

Debunked: Snowden uncovers shocking truth behind Chemtrails

Simple search on the web (which the OP should of done in the first place), brings about the many times this was re-posted from a satire site.....
"Please stop sharing the Ed Snowden piece on Chemtrails. The original was picked up by various "alternative" news outlets. If you read their source for the article, it goes back to a SATIRE site. I have the link to the original source, which I will post below. Look at the "about" section. Please stop spreading disinfo!!"
"http://www.chronicle.su/news/snowden-uncovers-shocking-truth-behind-chemtrails/"

Aldakoopa
I was skeptical about "chemtrails" when I first heard about them, because the only contrails I ever noticed were the long, lingering ones that are called chemtrails.

Then one day I saw a jet going above my house, leaving a long, lingering contrail. I kept watching it, and suddenly, it stopped leaving a large contrail and started leaving a "normal", short contrail. I then started noticing this more often.
.
.
.

Now, I'm not an air traffic controller in a tower so I have no idea if they had the same altitude or speed and I admittedly don't know about how any high-altitude conditions may alter the length and duration of contrails,...

then how can you conclude these are chemtrails??

contrail persistence (or lack of) relies solely upon the conditions at het altitude - these can vary considerably over a short difference.

so if you do not know eth conditions how can you possibly say that these were not contrails??

Divine Strake

There are international laws in place to prevent any geo-engineering from being done. If you can prove it is being done, then you have the law on your side to stop it and punish the guilty.

True, but how do you notify other countries with proof without being considered a terrorist? I mean, If I had proof that the US is violating those laws and I shared that info with the UN, I'd be just as "guilty" as Snowden.

Why would you be guilty of anything? Would you have broken some employment secrecy agreement? If so then flee to Russia and THEN reveal all.

If not hen why not just go for it??

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Ask anyone who has attempted to show anything to official sources ??

The entire system is maintained and designed like the scientific system, to hamper, control, and delegate , total separation for whatever purposes deemed fit by a myriad of super powerful agencies.

It is just not designed to allow for anything truthful or real to just get "seen", never was, and never will be.

Even the proof you have, that contrails are what you think they are, is barely visible, since the agencies that SHOULD be studying it and know a heck of a lot more of how to STOP CREATING THEM, just do not exist, or are not allowed to do any real research , or implement anything to stop the incredible amount of climate variation that these things cause..

Oh wait we cannot have any evidence for that either, because our eyes are not truthful tellers of this story, those clouds would have EXISTED ANYWAYS, or they are just ENHANCED moisture sectors, which do nothing to the overall climate, Yada-Yada.

Scientific method! The father of all truth hiding, and you guys want someone to find proof and somehow get it submitted to some agency oversight which does not exist that will never do anything about it ???

And some of us wonder why the debunkers are so darn hard about this, they KNOW that perception has an important place...

Aloysius the Gaul

Aldakoopa
I was skeptical about "chemtrails" when I first heard about them, because the only contrails I ever noticed were the long, lingering ones that are called chemtrails.

Then one day I saw a jet going above my house, leaving a long, lingering contrail. I kept watching it, and suddenly, it stopped leaving a large contrail and started leaving a "normal", short contrail. I then started noticing this more often.
.
.
.

Now, I'm not an air traffic controller in a tower so I have no idea if they had the same altitude or speed and I admittedly don't know about how any high-altitude conditions may alter the length and duration of contrails,...

then how can you conclude these are chemtrails??

contrail persistence (or lack of) relies solely upon the conditions at het altitude - these can vary considerably over a short difference.

so if you do not know eth conditions how can you possibly say that these were not contrails??

edit on 11-11-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: tag

I admitted my flaws and use the word "chemtrails" lightly. I'm still learning about them and what causes the difference in contrails. Currently I'm still stuck on the "maybe they are sprayed" theory.

Don't shove anything down my throat, please (and that's not accusing you of doing so), I will continue researching on my own time and on my own accord for what I find to be the most acceptable truth.

Peace.

ParasuvO
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Ask anyone who has attempted to show anything to official sources ??

I've done so occasionally - seems I'm still alive.

Of course if you have information and are not revealing it then YOU are part of the problem - YOU are supporting the system and hiding chemtrails!!

But I think it is much more likely you don't actually have anything new or interesting or even relevant to reveal and are just mouthign off.

reply to post by 0bserver1



I think atmospheric pollution (from cars, factories, industry etc) is of concern. But unless they comprise of ice crystals, so-called chemtrails would not be visible from the ground Do you disagree?

Aldakoopa

Aloysius the Gaul

Aldakoopa
I was skeptical about "chemtrails" when I first heard about them, because the only contrails I ever noticed were the long, lingering ones that are called chemtrails.

Then one day I saw a jet going above my house, leaving a long, lingering contrail. I kept watching it, and suddenly, it stopped leaving a large contrail and started leaving a "normal", short contrail. I then started noticing this more often.
.
.
.

Now, I'm not an air traffic controller in a tower so I have no idea if they had the same altitude or speed and I admittedly don't know about how any high-altitude conditions may alter the length and duration of contrails,...

then how can you conclude these are chemtrails??

contrail persistence (or lack of) relies solely upon the conditions at het altitude - these can vary considerably over a short difference.

so if you do not know eth conditions how can you possibly say that these were not contrails??

edit on 11-11-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: tag

I admitted my flaws and use the word "chemtrails" lightly. I'm still learning about them and what causes the difference in contrails. Currently I'm still stuck on the "maybe they are sprayed" theory.

Don't shove anything down my throat, please (and that's not accusing you of doing so), I will continue researching on my own time and on my own accord for what I find to be the most acceptable truth.

Peace.

Remember that contrails are just another type of cloud, they're made of the same stuff after all. Look at the way that clouds behave and how you get them in some parts of the sky and not others and at different altitudes. Now ask yourself why you should expect contrails to be any different.