It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by kwell
HR 2977 This bill clearly speaks of “Chemtrails” eventhough much of our government puts on an act of plausible denial.
PDF Copy of Section 7 of the HR2977 Bill H.R.2977 Section 7 PDF
www.rense.com...
www.dailymotion.com...
A method for producing a high yield explosion without radioactive fallout comprising filling an expendible structure with an explosive mixture of a combustible gas (e.g. methane) and an oxidizer gas (e.g. oxygen) and then detonating said mixture.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
If these persistent contrails were really just that, then it would have been debunked long ago and less and less people would tend to believe it. But the opposite is true.
Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
reply to post by Misterlondon
Did you even take a look at the video?
You always flame OP's without providing much substance, why is this?
Its pretty much impossible to prove a negative, so how do we go about proving something that does not exist?
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
First off we all know that what people call chemtrails do exist. For the sake of argument I will appease you and call them "persistent spreading contrails". Now you can admit that "persistent spreading contrails" do exist right?
Now if we agree that "persistent spreading contrails" aka "chemtrails" exist. Then we are no longer trying to prove a negative. So your theory that we're trying to prove a negative is bunk.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Hypothetically, let's create a testing scenario. Suppose we have a jet flying at a consistent fuel/air ratio during two test flights. During the first flight they fly to an area and altitude known to be conducive for normal contrails to form. During the second flight they fly to an area and altitude conducive to persistent contrails to form. In theory the exhaust should be the same during both test flights, yes?
Can you prove that the amount of jet exhaust from a normal contrail is the same as in the persistent spreading contrail?
Lets just look at this topic from pros and cons:
Cons:
1)There is no logistics structure for the transport of vast quantities of chemicals in secret.
2)There is no tankage for storage of these chemicals at any airports.
3)There are no secret storage tanks on aircraft.
4)There is no pumping equipment for these chemicals on the ramp.
5)The ramp crews do not sign any non-disclosure documentation.
6)The ramp crews would have to be aware of the pumping of any chemical into aircraft.
7)Ramp crew people say its not happening.
8)The pilots would have to aware of any chemicals being sprayed.
9)Pilots have stated its not happening.
10)ATC would have to be aware of any chemicals being sprayed.
11)ATC personnel have stated its not happening.
12)It would show up in the weight and balance of the aircraft if there were chemicals in the aircraft.
13)NOTAMS would have to be filed for aerial visibility hazards at spray points.
14)TFR's would have to be filed for spraying activity areas.
15)The US would have to have unrestricted access to other countries airspace.
16)JP is commonly available for testing to show there are no secret additives in it.
17)The additives that are in JP can be bought online, and tested.
18)The specific weight of JP has not changed any since forever.
19)VOR and Jet routes account for the patterns seen in the sky.
20)Aircraft fly in banks.
21)Thermal drafts cause the trails to sometimes stop for sections.
22)Contrails are the same thing as clouds and can persist just as log as clouds, in the same areas.
23) Wingtip vortexes cause fingertip contrails.
24) Ice causes rainbow colored contrails.
25) Chaff, cloud seeding, fire fighting water drops, crop dusting, etc are not chemtrails.
26)The engines have been updated causing them to create more contrails at a wider temperature range.
The plane in question is an Airbus A380. Easyjet do not own an A380.
The plane in question is an Airbus A380. Easyjet do not own an A380.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
False, there is a vast quantity of logistical structure for the transport of chemicals in secret. The amount of drugs that make it into this country by airplane is proof of that.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
False, chemical storage tankers that are stored at military bases or private airfields are under lock and key.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
False, they do not need "secret" storage tanks. All large jet aircraft have more than one fuel tank and are able to be switched on and off.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Again false, if the equipment is located on a private airfield or military base they would again be under lock and key. Also why would this be necessary? It isn't. There are many different storage tanks for different kinds of fuel.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
When a ramp crew is refueling an aircraft do they check the chemical make-up of the fuel? No, so the ramp crew has no idea what kind of fuel they are loading a plane with except for the fact that they trust what the label on the storage tanker says.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
False, what ramp crew tests the fuel they are pumping? None
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
I don't believe you have the authority to make this claim. Where are the signed statements made by all ramp crews?
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew]
False, how many pilots test the fuel in their tanks before flying? None
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew]
Some have said that it is happening.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
False, but perhaps they do know and are bound by disclosure agreements.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Some have stated that it is happening
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Not if it is mixed into the fuel
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Do they have to notify ATC when flying through airspace that is conducive to persistent contrails? No
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Do they have to notify ATC when their craft begins to make persistent contrails? No
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Not true, you're under the assumption that these planes are operating under the normal rules of commercial A/C
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
False, no one has said that the USA is the only one with chem-planes
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
JP8 + 100 and other fuel additives are military grade fuels and are not readily available to the public for testing
JP-8+100 (F-37) is a version of JP-8 with an additive that increases its thermal stability by 56°C (a difference of 100°F). The additive is a combination of a surfactant, metal deactivator, and an antioxidant, and was introduced in 1994 to reduce choking and fouling in engine fuel systems. Commercially, this additive is used in Boeing aircraft operated by KLM, and in police helicopters in Tampa, Florida.[citation needed] JP-8+100 is also used for Canadian Forces CP-140 Aurora & CC-130 Hercules aircraft.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Not all fuel additives are available for purchase by the public. They are also strictly regulated. Especially military grade fuel and fuel additives.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
So what ????
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Proof ???
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
False, contrails are not the same as clouds.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Never has a wingtip contrail persisted and spread
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
No its actually the sunlight that causes them
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Chaff is a type of chemtrail, they have developed new forms and methods of nano chaff fog
I guess you don't know what a fingertip contrail is.
Chaff is strips of aluminum dropped in very small quantities to confuse radar, it does not make a visible cloud.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Also please provide a picture of these so called fingertip contrails made by a wingtip that are persisting and spreading.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/578edd910a09.jpg[/atsimg]
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Every point you have tried to make has an easy solution to work around the problems you suggest.