Are contrails pollution?

originally posted by: luciferslight
Chemtrails exist. They are dumbing down America with this white fluffy clouds of chemicals. Don't even fill up a jug or bucket of rain water. That # has chemicals in it

So these "chemtrails" that are getting spread everywhere.....how are the people spraying them, the ones who order it done etc not getting effected too?

originally posted by: luciferslight
Chemtrails exist. They are dumbing down America with this white fluffy clouds of chemicals. Don't even fill up a jug or bucket of rain water. That # has chemicals in it

Yes, as mentioned a few posts ago, they are loaded with dihydrogen monoxide. Very deadly.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: luciferslight
Chemtrails exist. They are dumbing down America with this white fluffy clouds of chemicals. Don't even fill up a jug or bucket of rain water. That # has chemicals in it

Yes, as mentioned a few posts ago, they are loaded with dihydrogen monoxide. Very deadly.

I heard some bad things about Dihydrogen monoxide such as:

Prolonged exposure to solid Dihydrogen monoxide causes skin damage.
Can cause death if accidentally inhaled.
When in gaseous form it can cause burns.
It is the main component in acid rain.

The list goes on. It's dangerous stuff.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: angryhulk
Those who worry about contrails need to put more focus into the vehicles on the ground, in my opinion.

Yes, that and industry.

That is exactly right. Crude oil contains sulphur (S) and jet fuel after refining is about 600 parts per million sulphur. The coal that is burned in power plants and steel mills and other industry is generally about 5% sulphur. That's 50,000 ppm. Car gas can contain 3,000 ppm of S. There is no question that sulphur is a pollutant. It combines with hydrogen in the fossil fuel and oxygen in the atmosphere and the moisture in the air to form H2SO4, which is sulphuric acid and makes "acid rain. We use, in the US, about 1500 barrels a day of jet fuel. Cars and trucks use about 18,000 bbl/day. The US uses just shy of a billion tons/year of coal. So sulphur emissions of jets is neligible compared to other sources. The 747-400 that I fly can carry 524 passengers in a 2 class configuration. Cruising along at 570 mph we burn aout 3,300 gallons/hour, so that gives us aout 90 passenger miles per gallon. When you drive alone in your car you might get one-fourth of that.Now, when they quick change my airplane to a freighter we get about 6 gallons per mile. Since the airplane holds 64,000 gallons and the fuel averages $4.00/gallon, I ca earn a lot of points on a credit card. Although a lot of places don't take credit cards in Africa and Asia.

a reply to: F4guy

the real [ IMHO ] sulphur issue = marine fuel , " heavy oil " for marine use has no suplhur limit

a reply to: TerryDon79

Yea, it's evil stuff. But I hear some folks get along swimmingly with it.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: TerryDon79

Yea, it's evil stuff. But I hear some folks get along swimmingly with it.

I've heard that too!

I've even heard that people put it in their tea and coffee.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: F4guy

the real [ IMHO ] sulphur issue = marine fuel , " heavy oil " for marine use has no suplhur limit

Actually, in some areas there are limits. For example the EU has established strict limits of a 1.5% limit for marine fuels used in SECAs and by passenger ships operating on regular services to or from EU ports in Member States’ territorial seas, exclusive economic zones and
pollution control zones. The International Maritime Organization has set a limit of .1% to the North Sea, English Channel and the Baltic as of 2015. The US and Canada have the same limit for all coastlines out to 200 miles. Without these limits, which are fairly recent, marine heavy oil has 2700 times the sulphur as road fuel. Sulphur is in all fossil fuels, since all life forms contain .2-.3% sulphur by mass, contained usually in various amino acids like Methionine, cysteine, homocysteine, and taurine.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: network dude

The fact that this is not common knowledge concerns me.

Whilst I never believed in chemtrails, I did used to think that contrails were partly pollutant. Not because I was a bit slow, but because I simply never gave it any further thought. After reading ATS for years and latching onto this sub forum, it realised how silly I was and of course it's just a cirrus cloud being formed.

But I can understand people not knowing that. My wife was surprised when I told her.

There is, however, no excuse for believing "they" are dumbing down America by spraying chemtrails. Just....no

And it seems so silly to worry about a bit of pollution from planes when factories ans cars are burping pollution CONSTANTLY into our air. Talk about picking the wrong fight

a reply to: 3danimator2014

While I tend to agree about the concern about jet-engine pollution, one must remember that there are currently over 11,000 commercial airplanes in the skies of the world right now, and that doesn't include the private planes all over.

It does add up.

Flight Radar 24

blinks - sighs

of course jet aircraft [ and for that matter turbo prop and ICE powered prop plane ] exhaust gasses are pollution

to suggest otherwise is simply bat crap crazy

the exhaust gas analysis shows this :

for every ton of petrol / kerosene etc burned there is :

several kilograms of various oxides of nitrogen and sulphur + other trace compounds

in addition to tonnage levels of water vapour and carbon dioxide

so aircraft emmissions = pollution

QED

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: 3danimator2014

While I tend to agree about the concern about jet-engine pollution, one must remember that there are currently over 11,000 commercial airplanes in the skies of the world right now, and that doesn't include the private planes all over.

It does add up.

Flight Radar 24

Sure, but it still amounts to peanuts compared to ground based pollution.

a reply to: 3danimator2014

Maybe, but the altitude of origination may play a different role, and may increase it's pollutive effect on the mid- to upper-atmosphere.

Please note that I do not know this at all to be fact, I'm just thinking aloud, but it seems to make sense without any real research into it...at least, the possibility makes sense.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Maybe, but the altitude of origination may play a different role, and may increase it's pollutive effect on the mid- to upper-atmosphere.

Please note that I do not know this at all to be fact, I'm just thinking aloud, but it seems to make sense without any real research into it...at least, the possibility makes sense.

It might. I don't know either. I've never heard of that. ...but you may be right, altitude of dispersion may alter how the pollution affects the earth. I'd look I to it now but om on a train and my phone battery is at 5%. I'll look later tonight.

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Maybe, but the altitude of origination may play a different role, and may increase it's pollutive effect on the mid- to upper-atmosphere.

Please note that I do not know this at all to be fact, I'm just thinking aloud, but it seems to make sense without any real research into it...at least, the possibility makes sense.

It might. I don't know either. I've never heard of that. ...but you may be right, altitude of dispersion may alter how the pollution affects the earth. I'd look I to it now but om on a train and my phone battery is at 5%. I'll look later tonight.

www.ipcc.ch...

2.1.1. Introduction
The chemical products of aircraft jet fuel combustion are emitted at the engine nozzle exit plane as part of a high-velocity plume. This gaseous and particulate stream is subject to chemical and dynamical processes that influence downstream composition. Eventually, plume constituents irreversibly mix with, and are diluted by, ambient air. Subsequently, some of the emitted species act in concert with other natural and anthropogenic chemicals to change ozone abundances in the Earth's atmosphere. The ultimate fates of these aircraft-derived species are determined by larger-scale chemical and transport processes.
Concerns about NO and NO2 (i.e., NOx) emissions from present-generation subsonic and supersonic aircraft operating in the upper troposphere (UT) and lower stratosphere (LS) were raised more than 20 years ago by Hidalgo and Crutzen (1977) because these emissions could change ozone levels locally by several percent or so. Despite extensive research and evaluation during the intervening years, WMO-UNEP (1995) concluded that assessments of ozone changes related to aviation remained uncertain and depended critically on NOx chemistry and its representation in complex models. Because of large uncertainties in present knowledge of the tropospheric NOx budget, little confidence has been placed in previous assessments of quantitative model results of subsonic aircraft effects on atmospheric ozone.

You all still lie to your kids, every Christmas and Easter. What the heck do you know about spreading "truth"?

And yes, contrails are made from pollution. But "chemtrails" are a form of geo-engineering. Geesh. Why is that sooooo secretive??? Maybe because they're doing more harm than good, like vaccines???

If those planes are traveling at 30,000 feet, where the heck are people going? No way there are that many scheduled long distance flights. Let's be real. Planes only fly at that altitude, when traveling long distances.

The first time i realized something was "wrong", was on Christmas day, about 4 years ago. I stopped counting at 22 planes. Now, who the heck travels on Christmas day?????

a reply to: JuJuBee

Apart from geo-engineering is actually a thing and chemtrails aren't that.

originally posted by: JuJuBee
You all still lie to your kids, every Christmas and Easter. What the heck do you know about spreading "truth"?

And yes, contrails are made from pollution. But "chemtrails" are a form of geo-engineering. Geesh. Why is that sooooo secretive??? Maybe because they're doing more harm than good, like vaccines???

If those planes are traveling at 30,000 feet, where the heck are people going? No way there are that many scheduled long distance flights. Let's be real. Planes only fly at that altitude, when traveling long distances.

The first time i realized something was "wrong", was on Christmas day, about 4 years ago. I stopped counting at 22 planes. Now, who the heck travels on Christmas day?????

I'm gonna go ahead and assume you are joking.

a reply to: JuJuBee

spreading truth is a whole lot smarter than "spittin truth". Wouldn't' you say?

a reply to: 3danimator2014Assume what you want. I'm not here to convince you. I'm here to spread information to those, with eyes to see.

Artificial Clouds and Geoengineering: Public Exposed to Toxic Chemicals

Normal contrails are only produced when the temperature and humidity in the air are just right. If the temperature is too high or the humidity too low, then normal contrails cannot be produced by jet engines. As a result, normal contrails are actually rare.

Normal contrails from jet engines are actually rare and primarily contain frozen water vapor. Normal contrails do not persist, but dissipate quickly. They are not considered toxic in comparison to persistent contrails.

Persistent contrails contain toxic particles of aluminum, barium, strontium and many other substances, which are hazardous to human and environmental health. These contrails persist in the sky for many hours. Persistent contrails that are sprayed in the morning will usually remain visible in the early evening. They will start out as thin white lines, and will slowly spread throughout the day to form broad bands and sheets of diffused milky white clouds.

Why are Persistent Contrails being Created?

Some people believe that the creation of persistent contrails is part of a secret strategy to reduce global warming. Others believe that the spraying has to do with preventing rain, causing rain, or modifying weather patterns. Some believe it is part of a military system for encapsulating and distributing biological and chemical agents over large population areas. Still other researchers believe that the spraying program is part of various military computer systems designed to hide aircraft, create 3D images of ground terrain, and for developing weapon systems that utilize charged particles and atmospheric plasma in connection with the military’s High-frequency Active Auroral Research Project (HAARP).

In addition to the release of heavy metals in aerial spraying, certain fibers are also released. The outer casing of some of these fibers is made up of high-density polyethylene fiber (HDPE). This material is used throughout the bio-nanotechnology world as a compound to encapsulate a viral protein envelope with DNA, RNA, etc. Sometimes these fibers mimic the filamentous ”parachutes” created by newly hatched spiders that allows them to float in the air and drift to new homes. These polymer tufts can lengthen the time and distance that nanoparticles of aluminum, barium, and strontium can float in the air. The polymer fibers can also be electroactive. Such fibers are identified and described in the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) documents 26

Three of the most widely used substances are aluminum, barium, and strontium, all of which have a long history of causing serious illness including Alzheimer’s, cancer, and respiratory failure just to name a few.

The nanoparticles and polymer fibers that are sprayed into the air at altitudes between 20-thousand and 42-thousand feet attract water vapor and create man-made cirrus clouds. Many of the tiny particles are smaller than one millionth of an inch in diameter. These nanoparticles are called condensation nuclei. These condensation nuclei attract water and keep the water suspended in the atmosphere for many hours. The tiny water droplets are so small that they float in cloud-like formations and do not immediately fall to earth. Eventually, over time, the clouds disperse and the tiny particles fall to the earth as hazardous air pollution.

Australian researchers found aluminum, arsenic, barium, boron, iron, strontium, cadmium, manganese, and zinc in rain water samples that fell in areas where persistent contrails had been created.

Stratospheric aerosol geoengineering in a nutshell: Bad news

4. Saturating the atmosphere with geoengineering particulates “diminishes and disperses rainfall.” Period. The excess of condensation nuclei causes moisture droplets to adhere to these nuclei and thus droplets do not combine and fall as precipitation, but continue to migrate in the form of artificial cloud cover. This is one of the reasons SAG and SRM cause devastating drought in many regions around the globe. Monsanto is engineering a long list of drought-resistant crops in response; welcome to disaster capitalism. (Devastating deluges are also connected to climate engineering as moisture that was migrated over one region comes down in a torrent somewhere else). Artificial chemically nucleated engineered snowstorms are also wreaking havoc around the globe, causing radical temperature fluctuations in short spans of time.

5. SAG and SRM are causing “global dimming” on a scale that can hardly be comprehended. Current figures are averaging in the 20% range globally, but in some areas, like Russia, the total amount of sun that now reaches the ground is some 30% less than only a few decades previous. This reduction of sunlight further amplifies the currently occurring global droughts. Sunlight is a major component of evaporation.

7. The SAG and SRM particles are “light-scattering” materials. These properties alter the light spectrum and will likely cause many, and as of yet unknown, negative effects on all life forms. Blocking out the sun alone is of extreme concern regarding photosynthesis, but when one considers the fact that the light which does get through the toxic particulates is in altered wave form, the concern is much greater still. Statistically 98 percent of the U.S. population is vitamin D deficient, yet another likely result of “global dimming” and the altered light form now reaching the surface of our planet.

Spin it how you want. Call it what you will. What they're doing "for us" is not "helping us". It's destroying us, and our planet. TPTB don't care. They don't see the dangers. They only see the $$$$$ to be made.

The scripture that everyone misquotes, needs to be said again, PROPERLY.
1 Timothy 6:10

10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.