Contrail or Chemtrails, abruptly ending at Canada US border, HUH?

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Sorry, US does hold a seat, Canada currently does not.
Canada would not purposefully break US laws because US is a way bigger corporate entity who could legally wipe their buts with the Canadian corporation.
And yes the UN banned chemtrail spraying for all Countries who hold a seat at the UN council. I think it happened at the end of 2010, a few days before the new year.

a reply to: Fireflysky

And yet there is allegedly spraying going on in the US.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I have no idea about the US. All I know is that Canada has its weather modification act. The spraying here is not as intense as it use to be, but there are still bad days for the sky's in Canada.

a reply to: Fireflysky

Read ATS any day of the week. There are constantly new threads about alleged trails being sprayed over the US. Which kind of disproves the UN ban theory, if they're really spraying and not just persistent contrails. Which also persist in Canada.

originally posted by: Fireflysky
a reply to: Zaphod58

I have no idea about the US. All I know is that Canada has its weather modification act. The spraying here is not as intense as it use to be, but there are still bad days for the sky's in Canada.

Since I nevse rheard of the Weather Modification Act I decided to look it up...
laws-lois.justice.gc.ca...
www.canlii.org...

Seems it was current up until last week... I might add more soon.

:/


ETA: Regulations have some more detail
www.iijcan.com...

So is there an other explanation for these regulations on offer?

a reply to: Fireflysky

And yes the UN banned chemtrail spraying for all Countries who hold a seat at the UN council. I think it happened at the end of 2010, a few days before the new year.

So then you could provide a link where this was done...because I am not saying I don't believe you, but I don't believe you.

Why would they ban something that doesn't exist?

a reply to: ItVibrates

Here you go Weather Modification has their own website...

www.weathermodification.com...

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Thanks for that. Isnt that part of what the chemtralis crowd are complaining about? Weather modification by aircraft?

www.weathermodification.com...

If cloud seeding via aircraft is known to exist, then where does this become some chemtrails conspiracy?.

Sorry if these questions seem a bit ignorant on the topic, but chemtrails/contrails isnt really something I have paid much attention to.

a reply to: ItVibrates

If cloud seeding via aircraft is known to exist, then where does this become some chemtrails conspiracy?.

Because "chemtrails" are what those who are ignorant of atmospheric science call contrails (condensation trails) left by high flying aircraft.

Cloud seeding bears no resemblance to contrails. In appearance or theory. Equating the two is mostly an attempt at conflation in order to lend credibility to the reality of "chemtrails."

originally posted by: ItVibrates
If cloud seeding via aircraft is known to exist, then where does this become some chemtrails conspiracy?.

Ignorance. Because it can be done by a plane, it's lumped in with chemtrails.
The fact that you wouldn't even see it from the ground, or that it's done much lower than contrails can form seems to elude those who wish to associate it with chemtrails.

Go team chemtrail debunkers. Propaganda at its finest. Nano dispersion is the correct term and the only true way to debunk it is with airquality testing. Post something that actually debunks it vs stating what it could possibly be. You debunkers are no different then the believers. Hey at least believers can be swayed though right. But when you get someone who applys logic and reasoning,You still want proof. Are the debunkers afraid of posting air quality tests? Are you afraid to post the high levels of aluminum in our foods.my rights say i am innocent until proven guilty. You guys have yet to debunk nano dispersion otherwise this topic would be over. So to both sides i say have the air tested. Sort of reminds me of fukishima reactors.when all the radiation monitering went offline for awhile then came back on with a different tale. Sorry i went offtopic but data manipulation is a problem just look at the debt yet the dollar gains ground.

a reply to: 2giveup

Nano dispersion is the correct term and the only true way to debunk it is with airquality testing.

No. "Debunking" does not mean proving a negative.
On the other hand, some actual evidence that contrails are anything but contrails would provide some support for your position.

But when you get someone who applys logic and reasoning,

Haven't seen any of that from the "chemtrail" crowd. Just a bunch of arm waving.

Are the debunkers afraid of posting air quality tests?

No.
www.bouldercounty.org...

Are you afraid to post the high levels of aluminum in our foods.

You mean food that is grown in the ground. The ground which, on average is about 7% aluminum? That, of course varies depending upon location. For example some soil tests from prior to 1920 provide some perspective. According the chart in the book linked below, the percentage of aluminum oxide in California soils ranged from 1.63 to 32.42. That translates to between 16,300 and 324,200 mg/kg. Samples from various locations in North America ranged from 3.26% to 14.16% (32,600 to 141,600 mg/kg).
Soil Science

Here, read about those "chemtrail" claims:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: 2giveup
Go team chemtrail debunkers. Propaganda at its finest. Nano dispersion is the correct term and the only true way to debunk it is with airquality testing. Post something that actually debunks it vs stating what it could possibly be. You debunkers are no different then the believers. Hey at least believers can be swayed though right. But when you get someone who applys logic and reasoning,You still want proof. Are the debunkers afraid of posting air quality tests? Are you afraid to post the high levels of aluminum in our foods.my rights say i am innocent until proven guilty. You guys have yet to debunk nano dispersion otherwise this topic would be over. So to both sides i say have the air tested. Sort of reminds me of fukishima reactors.when all the radiation monitering went offline for awhile then came back on with a different tale. Sorry i went offtopic but data manipulation is a problem just look at the debt yet the dollar gains ground.

Nobody but you is talking about "nano dispersion". There is nothing to debunk, your bunk exposes itself by its very vacuousness. Hell, you are still connecting aluminium in foods with aerial spraying? When did we start growing carrots and spuds in the sky? Is food somehow immune from aluminium that is already a natural element in soil?

You wouldn't recognise logic and reasoning if it bit you on the arse. Go back to the start, why do you think something is being sprayed in the first place? What started you on this path? The odds are that it was something untrue.

a reply to: 2giveup

Post something that actually debunks it vs stating what it could possibly be

Many did in your thread about nano dispersion...you are just afraid to except your wrong.

. You debunkers are no different then the believers.

Except they are, and even provide links to sources...unlike chemtrail believers.

Are the debunkers afraid of posting air quality tests? Are you afraid to post the high levels of aluminum in our foods.

No and if your in the US, or Canada you can find air quality in your area.

www.airnow.gov...-0

As for aluminum in our food...why do you think they are trying aluminum resistant seeds to help with that?

You guys have yet to debunk nano dispersion otherwise this topic would be over.

Well first provide evidence that it is real and happening, then the debunking will follow.

So to both sides i say have the air tested.

Ah yes , but how does one know that what they find in the tests are from 7 miles above their head, and not from something closer to the ground?

Sorry i went offtopic but data manipulation is a problem just look at the debt yet the dollar gains ground.

And that is no more evident than when you see a chemtrail pusher put out so called test results that are misunderstood either on purpose, or by accident it doesn't matter as they push it as truth.

I give chemtrail thinkers one big point -
there is spraying - and yes it's not very healthy
it's very basic the exhaust from the engines
that mix with the local watervapor in the air..
Eventually this will rain down and soak into
the soil - it's a very important factor of
polution - check other post about MH17
if you check the online flight radar services
you can see how much traffic there is..
howmuch fuel there is burned and dumped
dumped before landing - although this is
cutdown more and more.. for budget reasons.

but look at the daily traffic density...
and mark every big ship with a minimum
amount of fuel - if you do this for every
identifiable ship one can calculate the
total amount per day pooped into the sky.

originally posted by: herauthon
I give chemtrail thinkers one big point -
there is spraying - and yes it's not very healthy
it's very basic the exhaust from the engines
that mix with the local watervapor in the air..
Eventually this will rain down and soak into
the soil - it's a very important factor of
polution - check other post about MH17
if you check the online flight radar services
you can see how much traffic there is..
howmuch fuel there is burned and dumped
dumped before landing - although this is
cutdown more and more.. for budget reasons.

but look at the daily traffic density...
and mark every big ship with a minimum
amount of fuel - if you do this for every
identifiable ship one can calculate the
total amount per day pooped into the sky.

And think how this pales beside the exhaust pollution from ground traffic (not to mention industry) which not only vastly outnumbers aircraft, but also cannot benefit from gaining between 50 and 90 per cent of its power (depending on type) from pure unsullied air by using a bypass fan, like planes do.

Scary thought, but why the obsession with only planes?

originally posted by: ecapsretuo
Incidentally, I have seen a plane turn around, 180 degrees and head the opposite direction. All the while it was leaving a huge trail.

I relate this to your report, as it happened absolutely at the Oregon/ California border. It came from and returned to Cali.
It was over deep, deep forest. Therefore, unlikely that people except for mountain men like myself could see this happening.

Out toward the coast, no airports to accommodate such a plane were remotely near.

Strange to see an airliner do a U turn; and it occurring right at the border, in middle of nowhere, seemed significant to me.

I've seen this several times here in Holland too.
Assuming contrails are left when planes are at or near cruising height, could someone explain why a plane would suddenly make a U-turn?
Maybe they forgot one of the passengers at the airport

a reply to: Tyrion79

They broke, it was a military flight like s tanker waiting for a receiver, they told it to turn around into an orbit to take separation from another aircraft... There are a lot of reasons.

a reply to: Tyrion79

Assuming contrails are left when planes are at or near cruising height, could someone explain why a plane would suddenly make a U-turn?

They noticed they were going the wrong way and turned around.

Or they could have had some type of problem they needed to address.

They forgot the passengers.

The pilot left hi ID at the bar before they left and needed to get it back.

There are many mundane answers for what you saw, but I will go out on a limb and say it was nothing nefarious.