reply to post by totallackey
Just how do you propose someone take air samples at 32000ft?
There are planes designed specifically for this task. I believe Gulfstream may make a model designed specifically for this purpose.
I recently watched 2 videos of the 2006 Fairnborough & Biggin Hill airshows in the UK. My idea was to look at chemtrails because high quality
cameras would be focussing on the sky, & its time of 2006.
Apart from the great shots (Mig 29 vertical stall & revrse loop incredible) the blue sky distance shots were perfect.
In them were yes, perfectly natural contrails dissapating about 10 lengths behind the plane. However, there were many lingering chemtrails in there as
well. These were jets in the far distance & at altitude , not the display aircraft.
Did you see anything substantially different regarding these types of trails you saw in your video and that of the OP video? If so, care to link that
I also noticed how quickly the "smoke" from the display aircraft dissapates into the air- it being oil injected into/onto the exhausts of the
This was from 2006 & you can clearly spot the difference between contrails & chemtrails!
So, the oil injected in the afterburn dissipated quickly? What chemical do you suppose was injected in the trails left behind in the lingering trails?
Please take a shot at answering this, and then go ask an expert aviator/mechanic for confirmation.
So I take it you are in the camp that water condensation cannot linger in the air at high altitude.
You cannot tell the difference between a contrail and chemtrail because the latter does not exist until such time as there is proof of existence.
THERE IS, WITHOUT A SHRED OF DOUBT, UNICORNS!!!
I can tell the difference between a unicorn and a horse because one has horn on its head and the other does not. Further, I have drawings of unicorns
and I have drawings of horses.
I (nor anyone else) cannot prove chemtrails do not exist. Let me repeat that once again, because I hope you can fathom the meaning...I (NOR ANYONE
ELSE) CANNOT PROVE CHEMTRAILS DO NOT EXIST!
Chemmies need to prove they exist. And it is not even a standard of proof required in a criminal trial. No one needs to prove chemtrails beyond a
reasonable doubt; rather, simply provide evidence to tilt the scales to a 51 percent level in favor of their existence. At that point, I will STFU. At
that point, one of the largest settlements in the history of jurisprudence will have been made.
Not one pro-chemtrailer has ever addressed this point I raise, let alone the numerous others raised by others, such as
edit on 19-2-2014 by totallackey because: grammar
edit on 19-2-2014 by totallackey
because: further content