George Knapp and Channel 8 in Las Vegas look at Chemtrails (ATS included)...

originally posted by: Iwinder

Jet engine exhaust is cleaner than automobile exhaust (per pound of fuel burned, PLUS there is more automobile fuel being burned in the world than jet fuel). While there are toxic material associated with jet exhaust, they are generally cleaner than automobiles

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

I can drive a long way on say 20 pounds of fuel, how far does mister jet get with that amount?
Could you post a link that shows jet exhaust is cleaner than automobiles? I would love to read what is says.
I appreciate you offering the information that Jet exhaust is toxic to humans its nice to know, I I mean that in a non snippy way.
Regards, Iwinder

How many cars are on the road at any given time versus how many passenger jets are in the air?

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

you failed to answer the question posed.

Did a little reading between power outages we are suffering and this is interesting.

Jet engines require some complex fuel chemistry for maximum safety and efficiency. Kerosene is sometimes used synonymously with jet fuel in some conversations. However, jet fuel chemistry does some serious "tweaking" of the basic kerosene it is made from, by adding chemical ingredients. U.S. Oil & Refining uses Cyclohexane, 1,2,4 Trimethylbenzene, Benzene and Toluene. Jet fuel producers use different formulas and ingredients in their refinement and production. Tesoro Corporation uses Napthalene, Ethyl Benzene and Diethylene Glycol Monomethyl Ether. These additives and ingredients are intended to help minimize fuel gumming, static charges, corrosion and icing. Most jet fuels are considered to be hazardous products. Read more : www.ehow.com...

I might say that we produce the above in town on a world scale and let me tell you from first hand knowledge you do not want to fool with Benzene at all......

www.ehow.com...

Lots of goodies on his sleigh LOL yep he is up there dropping the above.

Regards, Iwinder

Why does everyone over-think this subject, and NEVER bring up the REAL issue: GASOLINE is burned above all our heads, a toxic brew of ugly. That's the real deal, no conspiracy required. GASOLINE PEOPLE! You breathe it, you eat it after it blankets your garden ... it's real, and all above you.

The reason why 'trails' follow a pattern, is because Air-routes follow a pattern.
I've never understood the chemtrail craziness, when there's so much real world evidence any conspiracy slant is pretty much absurd. Any military project is a none issue when you've hundreds of planes blasting Gasoline all over your scalp.

a reply to: Flesh699

What?

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

you failed to answer the question posed.

The answer isn't in how much cleaner or dirtier one plane is compared to one car. The answer lies in the fact that there are so many more cars on the road.

The pollution from one car is obviously less than the pollution from one plane, but put together all of the exhaust from the Hundreds of Millions of cars driven each day in the world, and they would make more pollution than the 90,000 flights in one day worldwide.

a reply to: Springer

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge

Which were?

Dont you just hate it when people post something like this and not tell us what was said?
You should tell us or better still provide a link to it.

Dont presume we all know what he said because we dont

a reply to: mekhanics

WASHINGTON, May 14— The spraying of a potentially toxic chemical in several cities in Army tests in the 1950's and 60's apparently had no adverse health effects, a National Research Council committee said today.

The 15-member committee said in a report that the compound, zinc cadmium sulfide, which was secretly sprayed from airplanes, rooftops and moving vehicles in 33 urban and rural areas of the United States and Canada, did not expose residents to chemical levels considered harmful.

www.nytimes.com...

And yet they didn't kill anyone or cause them any adverse effects.

Fantastic. Best chemtrail video I've ever seen. This should be pinned. The trail in part one is Interesting though, I have my thoughts on that but I'm off to read the rest of the thread first.

originally posted by: Glassbender777
I have never bought into the whole Chemtrail issue. At least not the issue that its a world wide phenom. I personally believe that this issue has more to do with a change in the jet fuel, maybe a new fuel, or mixture. And the increase in air travel. The arguement is very weak

You're almost on it. It's not the fuel as such, but it is a combination of increased air traffic, plus older prop and turbojet powered aircraft being replaced by turbofans, which are far less costly to operate and leave cooler, wetter exhaust, which can lead to more trails in the right conditions.

originally posted by: Strawberry88

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: JacKatMtn
Is it just harmless water vapor?

Is the term Chemtrail used in such a bad light to deflect?

Plane Exhaust Kills More People Than Plane Crashes

Sunlight May Turn Jet Exhaust Into Toxic Particles

Planes' exhaust could be harming communities up to 10 miles from LAX


Is it a plan to kill off the folks? perhaps not, is it an effort to hide the real dangers of increasing air traffic exhaust?


Who knows... but I ain't buying the message that we shouldn't worry about the growing exhaust plumes in our skies...

What you see is just ice crystals. Just like cirrus clouds. The exhaust that you cannot see (much like automobiles, buses, and trucks) is another issue entirely. It's an internal combustion engine that burns petrol based fuel. So you will have the evils of that process involved.

Is aircraft exhaust any more or less dangerous than ground transportation?

You do see how your reply is completely off the point, right?


Ohh so engine exhaust and chemtrails are two different things, I can sleep on both ears tonight!

No, it's completely on the point but you seem to have missed it. That being that pointing at contrails or photographing them and fear mongering that we are being poisoned/controlled/whatever is as stupid as thinking that a clear blue sky is pure, uncontaminated air because there are no visible trails in it.

The stuff you can see is water. That's the point.

originally posted by: AmenStop
I am not going to spend a lot of time explaining this too people who are trying not to see it, trying not to find the research and info i=on it, and purposefully using false arguments to kill the conversation.

Keep It Simple Stupid.. Clouds are formed when oppositely charged water molecules all condense and adhere to small specs of dirt or debris. The water molecules weigh it down, and it falls down as rain. Now in a chemically induced cloud, Nano particles are used, often nano aluminum or chromium, the nano particle is MUCH smaller than the dust particle and can hold MUCH more water molecules 20X or more, so clouds that would have rained on CA 9if they were normal clouds) instead dont rain because they can suspend much more vapor in the air.

So what do they do?

well they monitor the weather.
Then create the correct mixture of nano materials in order to keep the water suspended until the area they want it to be released.
load into jets spray tanks.
spray.
monitor weather.
Then create the correct mixture of nano materials in order to keep the water suspended until the area they want it to be released.
Spray.............


But you guys already knew all of this...

Cirrus clouds, and contrails are cirrus aviaticus, NEVER rain. But you knew that before you started, didn't you?

originally posted by: Iwinder

originally posted by: JacKatMtn
Is it just harmless water vapor?

Is the term Chemtrail used in such a bad light to deflect?

Plane Exhaust Kills More People Than Plane Crashes

Sunlight May Turn Jet Exhaust Into Toxic Particles

Planes' exhaust could be harming communities up to 10 miles from LAX


Is it a plan to kill off the folks? perhaps not, is it an effort to hide the real dangers of increasing air traffic exhaust?


Who knows... but I ain't buying the message that we shouldn't worry about the growing exhaust plumes in our skies...

Bingo you said what I was thinking, I really would like some blue sky's some day soon like years ago.
Regards, Iwinder

And why would a blue sky be any cleaner than a contrail covered one? Think about it.

a reply to: Flesh699

But the gasoline that is burned by millions of cars and the diesel burned by hundreds of thousands of lorries, buses and trains at ground level isn't a problem? Why do we only hear about planes?

The answer is that, as much as people may protest, the plane obsessed chemtrail crazies got to you after all. However much people really try to make it look like they are being rational, the focus on planes and the failure to be concerned at other sources is a dead giveaway.

Yes, carbon fuel exhaust is poisonous. All of it. Plane exhaust dissipates and circles in the upper atmosphere before eventually coming down massively diluted. That ground level exhaust is sucked straight into your lungs. Damn planes indeed

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

you failed to answer the question posed.

The answer isn't in how much cleaner or dirtier one plane is compared to one car. The answer lies in the fact that there are so many more cars on the road.

The pollution from one car is obviously less than the pollution from one plane, but put together all of the exhaust from the Hundreds of Millions of cars driven each day in the world, and they would make more pollution than the 90,000 flights in one day worldwide.

Not to mention that one car may have one occupant, where a plane could be transporting 100-500 people, depending on type. If you take all the people out of all the planes in the sky and put them in cars, what then?

To be honest, I'm not buying the "chemtrail" conspiracy nor will I in the near future.

George Knapp, my friend. I was a trained observer and US.Navy Radar operator as well as an electronic technician 2nd class who specialized in tuning and repairing AN-SPS40 air-search radar. This began back in the late 70's. What we see today and call chemtrails never existed before 1992. Contrails are impossible to confuse with chemtrails to anyone with half a brain.

After viewing your reports in the two videos in the OP I have lost all respect for you. I see no possible way you arrived at your conclusions without selling a part of your soul. These two things are quite separate.

a reply to: ArJunaBug

Fantastic! We have our first "trained observer of chemtrails!" Sir, or Madame, This is something everyone has been needing to know for a long time.

Could you please share how to discern the difference between a contrail and a chemtrail. (And as a bonus, could you end the debate about what chemicals are in them too?)

originally posted by: ArJunaBug
George Knapp, my friend. I was a trained observer and US.Navy Radar operator as well as an electronic technician 2nd class who specialized in tuning and repairing AN-SPS40 air-search radar. This began back in the late 70's. What we see today and call chemtrails never existed before 1992. Contrails are impossible to confuse with chemtrails to anyone with half a brain.

Then why did my science teacher (who was really interested in the weather) in the late 1970s tell us all about the why contrails can turn big and puffy, and spread out into clouds?


Or what about this scientific paper publish in 1972 that mentions long lasting trails, and how spreading contrails create cirrus clouds:

Measurements of the Growth of the Ice Budget in a Persisting Contrail
(This links directly to a PDF file)

Measurements of the Growth of the Ice Budget in a Persisting Contrail
R.G. Knollenberg
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
Volume 29, Issue 7 (October 1972)

Excerpt:

“It is often observed that contrails spread considerably…Under favorable conditions, a lateral spread of kilometers is observed…If sufficient air traffic exists, and entire overcast of contrail cirrus may develop and persist for hours with rapid growth in the ice budget of individual contrails.”

Or this book that was published in 1963 that discusses long-lasting contrails:



Or this book published in 1972:



Or this video from the "NBC NIghtly News" from 1980 of a story they did on how contrails can spread out and create cloud cover, resulting in more cloudy days that before the proliferation of air travel:



Or this video from WWII that shows persistent contrails from bombers: