PDA

View Full Version : Chemtrails



Susan Grant
05-25-2010, 08:53 AM
http://mikephilbin.blogspot.com/2010/05/g-edward-griffin-michael-j-murphy-what.html

I am so useless at posting these links. Hope this has come out OK

This is about an in-depth chemtrail/geo engineeringing documentary called
"what in the world are they spraying/". This is basically just the trailer.

Many people see the trails in the sky. It is happening all over the world but most people just assume they are contrails and take little notice. The only time I didn't see them was when I was in Germany some short time ago and had my flight cancelled 3 times due to the ash cloud.

There was a complete beautiful blue sky for just a couple of days. No trails at all.

Susan Grant
05-25-2010, 08:54 AM
well it didn't come out blue. Sorrry

Magda Hassan
05-25-2010, 08:58 AM
I usually just copy and paste the links and not worry about the doolacky thing up top.

Susan Grant
05-25-2010, 09:00 AM
thanks Magda and the smiley was supposed to come out at the end of the last sentence with the clear blue skies. However just looked and it did work - or nearly. Hurrah!

Malcolm Pryce
05-25-2010, 09:43 PM
Mmm... I’m not sure. I’ve made a valiant attempt to buy the Chemtrail thesis but I must admit I struggle with it. I’ve spent the past year watching the skies over Oxfordshire and my experience has been that the oft-cited claim that contrails don’t linger isn’t borne out by the facts. Most days they don’t linger, but on some days they linger and spread in the manner described by the Chemtrail advocates. It’s the same planes making the same trails at the same time each day, just some days the contrails linger and after a while one gets a feel for the atmospheric conditions that make the difference. In addition to that, you really do have to wonder about the logistics of it all. Chemtrail advocates claim the offenders are in the skies day after day in white, unmarked planes. Where do they take off from and where do they land? How come no one notices? What do other people think?

Ed Jewett
05-25-2010, 09:59 PM
Like many other things, we watch and wonder. I have a tendency to try to find places (and, oh, I've hit the jackpot here) where bright, intelligent people can pick apart the stories, sources, facts, allegations, evidence, propaganda, "make-believe", etc. I am awaiting permission to copy a bunch of data from someone who collects this stuff, but it may be duplicative of the above and there may be no real evidence or proof. I got started down the 9/11 path doing the same thing: posting up a hunk of text, or a video, and then seeing who said what. That's not a question of seeing which way the herd travels; I retain the right, as we all do, to evaluate and decide on our own basis. But to the extent we can collectively verify or ascertain the junk status of __X__, we advance the cause. I've not yet convinced about chemtrails; the Gulf oil catastrophe is visible, palpable, available to our senses. The answer is scientific evidence verifiable and replicable.

Jack White
05-25-2010, 10:13 PM
Here is one I photographed last year making a big X in the sky
over my house.

Jack

Ed Jewett
05-26-2010, 12:53 AM
Chem Trails http://photos.imageevent.com/firesat/strangedaysstrangeskies/icons/8.jpg (http://imageevent.com/firesat/strangedaysstrangeskies?p=1&n=1&m=-1&c=4&l=0&w=4&s=0&z=3) Death in the Air - In the sky over America; toxic, heavy metals, biological agents
Daily, across the US, and around the world, planes fly over head, spraying toxic chemicals, heavy metals, viruses or organic materials, and possible Morgellons nanotech fibers that grow within your body. ChemTrails- Spain- Slide Show (http://www.abodia.com/1/1/Magic%20Moments/ChemTrails%20-%20Spain.pps)There are many purposes; to cause sickness & death, to layer the atmosphere for interaction with HAARP to control weather, effect mind control, search for deep or hidden things; underground resources, cities, bases, ...
World Wide Slide Show of equipped planes & cloud patterns
Unmarked white planes may be Russian, who have permission to fly over, thru the TOS, Treaty of the Skies.
They've been observed, photoed, noted, since 1990s. Contrails are the water vapor, condensate that jets sometimes causes. They disappear rapidly.
Chem Trails may linger in the sky for hours or days. In our area, I can observe clear skies to all horizons, then 6 to 10 planes will cross over, In less than an hour our skies are covered, a diffuse cloud that lasts for days.

http://www.abodia.com/t/photos/ChemTr1.jpg Nano-Chemical Poisoning of the World (http://imageevent.com/firesat/strangedaysstrangeskies?z=3&c=4&n=1&m=-1&w=4&x=0&p=14) Aerosol Crimes & Cover-up (http://www.carnicom.com/)
Local news station confirms barium in chemtrails (http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_flv/?VID=www.fourwinds10.com/photo_archive/video/071120954xakn.flv) Could a strange substance found by an Ark-La-Tex man be part of secret government testing program? That's the question at the heart of a phenomenon called "Chemtrails".
ChemTrails - the Smoking Gun (http://www.livefireproof.com/chemtrails) - extensive proof of government involvement, funding, sponsorship, multidisciplinary research, policy making and implementation of global atmospheric modification under the classification of 'Geoengineering.' Photos of interior of planes configured to disburse chemtrails.

Google Search terms: ChemTrails. Carnicorn, Morgellons, nanotech,
HAARP (government project in Alaska that works with Chem Trails),
MK Ultra, Mind Control, Weather Control, USAF to Control Weather by 2020

ChemTrails - (http://imageevent.com/firesat/strangedaysstrangeskies) Strange Days, Strange Skies (http://imageevent.com/firesat/strangedaysstrangeskies) - Chem Trails World Wide Phenomena

polluting skies in US & around the world - dropping chemical, heavy metal toxins & biological agents - to control us


Evergreen Air (http://www.evergreenaviation.com/) the CIA front



located at Pinal Airpark-Marana Arizona..a longtime CIA/NSA secret facility for more than 40 years.. is the prime modification center that modifies a wide range of aircraft types to conduct the "covert" Chemtrail spray operations that began over the entire united states in November of 1998 ... prior to this, selected areas of the U.S. had Chemtrail operations to test all the technology employed in these Chemtrail spray operations and to determine the operating parameters related to aircraft performance envelopes and optimum atmospheric conditions ... once this was accomplished ... . Tthe nationwide program began and is being conducted under more than one program code name ... the 2 program code names most often discussed are "Operation Clover Leaf" and "Operation Raindance" ... .within months of the operation over the united states beginning ... Chemtrail spray operations began over wide parts of dozens of countries with the most notable exception being China.

Air Traffic Controllers Concerned Over Chemtrails (http://www.willthomas.net/Chemtrails/Articles/Concerned_over_Chemtrails.htm) Chemtrail Contrail Solutions, International Chemtrail Awareness. How to stop chemtrails in your state / country. What are Chemtrails ? World renowned Chemtrail Contrail authority William Thomas explains chemtrails and how to stop them. best selling book Chemtrails Confirmed and in his documentary film Chemtrails Mystery Lines in The Sky
Chemtrails Aerosol Operations Chemtrail Phenomenon (http://www.bariumblues.com/chemtrails_phenomena_colin_bennett.htm) Chemtrails Secret Confirmed :: Environmental and Health Concerns :: Air Pollution (http://www.alive.com/691a2a2.php?subject_bread_cramb=161) by author William Thomas It started in the winter of 1998. Sky-obscuring "chemtrails" have been observed by thousands of eyewitnesses–including pilots, police officers and former military personnel–over Canada, the USA, Britain, Australia and allied European nations. Within Canada, Victoria, Vancouver, the BC Interior, Moose Jaw, Edmonton and much of Ontario have been hit particularly hard.
Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG) (http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/FIT203A.html) Chemtrails - Contrails (http://www.carnicom.com/af1.htm) Chemtrails Campaign Adds To Air Force Woes (http://www.rense.com/general27/qoes.htm) Chemtrails spraying in sky, September 2001 Star Beacon. UFO Page in Lithuania. (http://www.nso.lt/chemtrails/faq.htm) Chemtrails, Sept. 2001 Star Beacon. UFO and other phenomena - at night sky and during dreams or in another fields of life. Lithuanian
Crank Dot Net | Chemtrails (http://www.crank.net/chemtrails.html) Idaho Observer: Chemtrails Nationwide reports indicate "spraying" agenda stepped up in recent months (http://proliberty.com/observer/20060504.htm) Asheville Magazine: Chem-Trails (http://www.newfrontier.com/asheville/chemtrails.htm) Article in Asheville Magazine on anti-bacteriological agents Rep. Kucinich's HR 2977 Names Chemtrails as an 'Exotic Weapon' (http://www.lightwatcher.com/chemtrails/text/chemtrails_acknowl.html)
Chemtrails Over America (http://home1.gte.net/quakker/documents/chemtrails_over_america.htm#coa)

http://photos.imageevent.com/firesat/strangedaysstrangeskies/icons/43f539ac-cc7e-46d3-a645-196bb0e2fef5.jpeg (http://imageevent.com/firesat/strangedaysstrangeskies?p=2&n=1&m=-1&c=4&l=0&w=4&s=0&z=3)

Back to www.abodia.com/t (http://www.abodia.com/t) Truth Seekers
Chemtrail Sunscreen taught in US School Wed, 26 Nov 2008 Lisa Long

From: C Loverain <kisshoten12@hotmail.com>
Date: November 26, 2008 2:13:44 PM HST
To: 911Truth Australia <aus911truth@yahoogroups.com>
Health] Look up at the sky, and beware of chemtrails.
http://images.google.com.au/images?q=%E3%82%B1%E3%83%A0%E3%83%88%E3%83%AC%E3%8 2%A4%E3%83%AB (http://images.google.com.au/images?q=%E3%82%B1%E3%83%A0%E3%83%88%E3%83%AC%E3%8 2%A4%E3%83%AB)

Aerosol Emissions Australia Wide
http://youtube.com/watch?v=bsyHCbFxqPQ (http://youtube.com/watch?v=bsyHCbFxqPQ)

Danger In The Sky - The Chemtrail Phenomenon
http://youtube.com/watch?v=UdtLTyNOB0A (http://youtube.com/watch?v=UdtLTyNOB0A)
A Meeting
Clifford E Carnicom Jul 26 2003 Edited Aug 17 2003
A meeting has taken place recently between an investigative researcher and a well placed military source. The identity of both parties is to be protected. The source has intimate knowledge of at least one aspect of the aerosol operations, and asserts the following:
1. The operation is a joint project between the Pentagon and the pharmaceutical industry.
2. The Pentagon wishes to test biological diseases for war purposes on unsuspecting populations. It was stated that SARS is a failure as the expected rate of mortality was intended to be 80%.
3. The pharmaceutical industry is making trillions on medications designed to treat both fatal and non-fatal diseases given to populations.
4. The bacteria and viruses are freeze-dried and then placed on fine filaments for release.
5. The metals released along with the diseases heat up from the sun, creating a perfect environment for the bacteria and viruses to thrive in the air supply.
6. Most countries being sprayed are unaware of the activities and they have not consented to the activities. He states that commercial aircraft flying are one of the delivery systems.
7. Most of the "players" are old friends and business partners of the senior Bush.
8. The ultimate goal is the control of all populations through directed and accurate spraying of drugs, diseases, etc.
9. People who have tried to reveal the truth have been imprisoned and killed.
10. This is the most dangerous and dark time that I have experienced in all of my years of serving this country.
This information is relayed without qualification, as I am knowledgeable in the level of integrity of the researcher that has made this information available to the public. There is both risk and restraint that has been exercised in the preparation of this statement.

Clifford E Carnicom Jul 26 2003

Aerosol Crimes (http://www.carnicom.com/)

"AEROSOL CRIMES & COVER UP copyright 1999-2008 by Clifford E Carnicom. Observations, Extraordinary Biological Observations, Magnetic Field Measurement ..."
www.carnicom.com/

AND MORE on
http://www.carnicom.com/meeting.htm (http://www.carnicom.com/meeting.htm)
CHEMTRAIL sunscreen taught IN US Schools
by William Thomas
A is for Apple.
B is for Boy.
C is for Chemtrails.
http://www.willthomas.net/Chemtrails/Articles/Chemtrails_In_US_Schools.htm (http://www.willthomas.net/Chemtrails/Articles/Chemtrails_In_US_Schools.htm)
They're teaching children in the US that chemtrails are their sun screen !!
I believed that myth Johnny coWARd spreaded on TV, and now suffer
from lacking vitamin D, I believe on top of CFS that flu shots gave me.

In Japan, a very famous and popular kids program (like kindergarten, preschoolers)
had a song about chemtrails, saying they are planes drawing pictures in the sky.
Additional Notes Aug 17 2003 on the meeting & Carnicorn
The following personal and observations have been relayed to me by the investigative researcher referred to above:
I am the researcher that relayed information to Carnicom and I can tell you that the meeting occurred as stated. I see that my meeting opened up some dialogue. I have to ask: why are so many intelligent people debating the "tail of the dog"? Does it have fleas, long or short hair, or no tail at all. Look at the DOG. See the big picture here. Do you question that people are dying in record numbers from the aerosol operations? It is a fact that an increase in particulate matter increases mortality.

A top respiratory doctor has just written a book about the "breathing crisis." On the Today Show, not in some secret meeting place, he tells us that respiratory disease has gone from eighth to fourth place as a leading cause of death, soon to be third, in only FIVE years. The doctor says the increase in respiratory death is because of smoking. Now that seems a little off, since many people have stopped smoking, and yet in FIVE years dying from breathing is the major cause of death behind heart failure and cancer. It is also a fact that when oxygen is reduced, cardiac arrest goes up. He also advises "not to exercise outdoors". What does exercising outdoors have to do with smoking? Any chance that breathing heavy metals could be the cause of not only increasing death from respiratory disease, but also contributes to cardiac arrest and cancer? Go back to the DOG. Look at the bigger picture of what's going on with our health; stop debating the biological contents of an already deadly, efficient operation. Incidentally, "culling" was never mentioned in my report.

Give Carnicom some credit for his integrity in presenting this material. I risked my safety and the safety of others to get this information. I wanted the information for myself; I didn't get it for Carnicom or his site, but I did want to share it with others as a confirmation, not as a revelation, of what is going on. Many of you saw this and I appreciate your intelligence and wisdom. My thanks, also, to those of you who have followed up with some good research.
Posted Aug 17 2003
An interview that discusses the contents of this statement in greater detail is available at the following web address: 9th JEFF RENSE INTERVIEW JUL 27 03 (http://www.soundwaves2000.com/rense/)
America Sky Watch Network Feb. 5, 2009Geo-Engineering is the artificial modification of Earth's climate systems.
Geo-Engineering projects range from DECLASSIFIED experimentation (like iron particles being dumped into the oceans to attract algae, which sequesters carbon and slows global warming) to HIGHLY CLASSIFIED experimentation like AEROSOL SPRAYING.
http://americanskywatch.com/frontpagegrfx/Chemtrail4Sm.jpg http://americanskywatch.com/frontpagegrfx/photo+of+both+ct+and+contra.jpg The aerosol spraying projects have gained the nickname "chemtrails" for chemical trail. The word was DERIVED from the word "contrail", short for condensation trail, the term for the familiar exhaust trails from jet engines. As the picture above shows, a normal condensation trail is thin and disappears in roughly 90 seconds, depending on atmospheric conditions. Aerosol spraying trails spread out for hours, combining with other trails until cloud cover is achieved.
This website's function is to alert the public to the ILLEGAL HIGHLY CLASSIFIED AEROSOL SPRAYING projects that have gone beyond EXPERIMENTATION and are now ramped up into full global assaults on natural weather patterns. Either ignored or intended, these assaults are contaminating and damaging our forests, waterways, wildlife and HUMANITY
http://americanskywatch.com/frontpagegrfx/satduo.jpg.
Community watch groups, like SKYWATCH, have formed across the nation. Surface water tests, both by state governments and by Citizens, have alarming results. Aerosol Spraying evidence includes nation-wide surface water and air samples that are hundreds and thousands of times higher in aluminum, barium, sulpher hexaflouride, magnesium and a wide spectrum of other contaminents. Over a DOZEN US PATENTS have been exposed that describe EXACTLY those same contaminents being used via jet aircraft exhaust, to deflect sunlight back into space and thus reduce global warming. It should be noted here, however, that intelligent research by thousands of individuals world-wide has exposed further evidence that the aerosol spraying apparatus now above us, CAN be used for a host of other "experimentation".
This is ONE of the patents used to poison you: 5,003,186
Here is the Governments OWN patent office patent search by number url: http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm (http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm)
Put the patent number in the search engine and READ FOR YOURSELF!
NASA, under the guidance of the Bush / Cheney administration, has begun promoting a program to educate the public on "persistent SPREADING contrails" (NASA's own words). Meanwhile, international reports of large scale influenza, respitory distress, increased alzheimers and many unknown ailments are following intensive AEROSOL SPRAYING activities. The federal government is now scurrying to pass legislation that will make legal open ended weather modification projects that will legalize aerosol spraying, much in the same way the FISA BILL legalized the domestic spying activities THEY WERE ALREADY DOING.
This website is not a detailed research tool but will lead you directly towards EXPOSED EVIDENCE via several regional groups (LIKE "SKYWATCH"), to help you connect with this issue and to other concerned Citizens who have said "ENOUGH". Also, we hope you will investigate our other links and GET INVOLVED.
EACH OF YOU MUST DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH and focus your anger and frustration where it belongs...AT THOSE WHO ARE SPRAYING YOU!
The FIRST THREE STEPS are easy:
1- TEST YOUR OWN POND or RAINFALL.
2- Read as much information as you can from the sites listed here and the links off of their sites.
3- Join or create a Citizens Watch group in your area.
4- Do what your CONSCIENCE believes.
americanskywatch.com/ (http://americanskywatch.com/)


Ed's explanation: All material above proceeds from the computer files of a fellow who likes to collect such things whom I met two years ago in a library as I posted my blog and he invited me to a public meeting to discuss 9/11 and such ... this is the material I said I was waiting for permission to post, and it arrived.

Keith Millea
05-26-2010, 02:33 AM
Daily, across the US, and around the world, planes fly over head, spraying toxic chemicals, heavy metals, viruses or organic materials, and possible Morgellons nanotech fibers that grow within your body.

OMG,there's that creepy Morgellons again.I recently posted a quote from Joni Mitchell who claims to have this problem.Here it is again.


"I have this weird, incurable disease that seems like it's from outer space, but my health's the best it's been in a while, Two nights ago, I went out for the first time since Dec. 23: I don't look so bad under incandescent light, but I look scary under daylight. Garbo and Dietrich hid away just because people became so upset watching them age, but this is worse. Fibers in a variety of colors protrude out of my skin like mushrooms after a rainstorm: they cannot be forensically identified as animal, vegetable or mineral. Morgellons is a slow, unpredictable killer — a terrorist disease: it will blow up one of your organs, leaving you in bed for a year. But I have a tremendous will to live: I've been through another pandemic — I'm a polio survivor, so I know how conservative the medical body can be. In America, the Morgellons is always diagnosed as "delusion of parasites," and they send you to a psychiatrist. I'm actually trying to get out of the music business to battle for Morgellons sufferers to receive the credibility that's owed to them."

Malcolm Pryce
05-26-2010, 06:42 AM
I try to keep an open mind and have come to despise the knee-jerk scoffing of the herd when confronted with the sort of evidence discussed in this forum. So I don’t scoff or sneer. Normally the more I look into a subject - 9/11 or JFK for example - the more I become convinced. But not with this one . Yes, an awful lot of people worldwide seem convinced of the reality of this phenomenon. I’ve seen most of the web sites and most of the photos and I really don’t find them convincing. And I find some of the claims about deliberate mass poisoning naive. Chemtrails seems to inhabit the wilder fringe of the conspiracy theory spectrum where people seem to repeat uncritically things they’ve read somewhere else. Such as the claim that contrails don’t linger. It is simply untrue. You can prove it by watching your own skies and getting to recognise the regular scheduled flights. On some days the contrails linger, on others they don’t. Contrails are water vapour, just like clouds, so why shouldn’t they linger? Getting excited about an X in the sky, similarly, proves nothing since it is inevitable that planes cross the sky in criss-cross patterns. How else can it work unless they all fly in one direction? Showing me a fat one and a thin one doesn’t prove anything either, not unless you can tell me at what altitude each one is, and of course nobody can. The scale of the alleged phenomenon is staggering: unmarked white planes spraying all day long over most of the world, where are they? Who are the pilots? How come air traffic control don’t seem to notice?

Malcolm Pryce
05-26-2010, 01:12 PM
One good place for some expert input on the chemtrail issue is the Pilots for 9/11 Truth forum. The pilots there are clearly not close-minded because they reject the official narrative of 9/11 just like many of us. And at the same time they fly on a daily basis and know what they are talking about. It doesn’t get much better than that, in my humble opinion. They are pretty scathing about chemtrails. This is a typical comment:

‘Chemtrail advocates - P4T has enough pilots to start an airline. We have more pilots than most airlines have started with... obviously, we also have open minds...

You want to confirm "Chemtrails"? Get us aircraft with sampling equipment and we'll fly through any "checker-board" as you ride along... and bring you back home with the results.’

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=16919

Charles Drago
05-26-2010, 02:08 PM
"You want to confirm 'Chemtrails'? Get us aircraft with sampling equipment and we'll fly through any 'checker-board' as you ride along... and bring you back home with the results."

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=16919


Chemtrail debunkers are quick to note that long, lingering, widely spreading "contrails" occur due to various -- and presumably predictable and consistent -- combinations of altitude, temperature, relative humidity, other meteorological conditions, engine performance parameters, fuel mixtures, etc.

The familiar shorter, quickly dissipating, and therefore ostensibly benign phenomena too are dependent on similar factors.

It would stand to reason, then, that over the course of any 12-month span and absent contributing factors not present during the previous 12 months in which contrails of diverse appearance were observed and noted from a fixed location, we should see consistently diverse patterns in the skies.

Here's the problem: For the past year, daytime observations of classic "chemtrails" from my fixed observation point have all but ceased. In the previous year, the "chemtrails" were present on an almost daily basis.

To my knowledge, flight paths have not been altered (I'm under flights from Boston, Hartford, and Providence airports). I have no way of knowing if changes have been made in altitude, fuel composition, engine configuration and performance, etc.

There has been zero meaningful fluctuation in weather patterns over both years.

So if "chemtrails" are in fact "contrails" ... Where the hell are they now?

As for the offer to fly through the "chemtrails" and sample them: Easy to say.

Who provides the equipment? How are pilots and testing facilities vetted so as to blunt operations to infiltrate and influence the work? Who will pay for it all?

Jack White
05-26-2010, 02:33 PM
Exactly, Charles! In Fort Worth we used to have dozens of chemtrails
in the sky at one time on any given day. Then they suddenly ceased
for a period of six to nine months. Last week they started again. I saw
six or seven in the sky at the same time, being laid in a criss-cross
pattern on no airline routes.

Jack

Below...typical chemtrails







"You want to confirm 'Chemtrails'? Get us aircraft with sampling equipment and we'll fly through any 'checker-board' as you ride along... and bring you back home with the results."

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=16919


Chemtrail debunkers are quick to note that long, lingering, widely spreading "contrails" occur due to various -- and presumably predictable and consistent -- combinations of altitude, temperature, relative humidity, other meteorological conditions, engine performance parameters, fuel mixtures, etc.

The familiar shorter, quickly dissipating, and therefore ostensibly benign phenomena too are dependent on similar factors.

It would stand to reason, then, that over the course of any 12-month span and absent contributing factors not present during the previous 12 months in which contrails of diverse appearance were observed and noted from a fixed location, we should see consistently diverse patterns in the skies.

Here's the problem: For the past year, daytime observations of classic "chemtrails" from my fixed observation point have all but ceased. In the previous year, the "chemtrails" were present on an almost daily basis.

To my knowledge, flight paths have not been altered (I'm under flights from Boston, Hartford, and Providence airports). I have no way of knowing if changes have been made in altitude, fuel composition, engine configuration and performance, etc.

There has been zero meaningful fluctuation in weather patterns over both years.

So if "chemtrails" are in fact "contrails" ... Where the hell are they now?

As for the offer to fly through the "chemtrails" and sample them: Easy to say.

Who provides the equipment? How are pilots and testing facilities vetted so as to blunt operations to infiltrate and influence the work? Who will pay for it all?

Malcolm Pryce
05-27-2010, 05:35 PM
I’m not trying to debunk, just expressing scepticism, asking questions, seeking the truth. I really don’t know. I cannot account for the phenomenon you describe. But I think I can assert with a fair degree of confidence that the claim repeated at many Chemtrail sites that ordinary contrails do not linger is incorrect. It just depends on the atmospheric conditions. After all, if a contrail which is water vapour cannot last, how then can a cloud? Having said that, I have no difficulty believing the US military illicitly and covertly spray stuff into the sky from time to time, for various purposes such as 3D radar propagation. But this would only account for a small percentage of the phenomenon as reported.

Charles Drago
05-29-2010, 03:36 PM
Malcolm,

It surely was not my intention to assign "debunker" status to you. I have read nothing in your posts to warrant such an assignation.

Yes, water vapor in such volumes as required to form "clouds" as we commonly use the term can and does linger.

But "volume" seems to be the key here -- at least to this non-scientist. Should we expect the amount of water vapor sufficient to promote common contrail formation to expand to a size that -- again, a ballpark estimate -- is seemingly, in some cases, a hundred times wider than the initial trail?

I'd also be interested in reading available data on contrail dissipation rates.

My mind remains open -- AND informed by too many years of study of too many bad-ass assaults on our physical, psychological, and spiritual well-being by too many power structures.

Charlie

Malcolm Pryce
05-29-2010, 04:46 PM
Charlie, no worries! I was just anxious lest I had inadvertently given the impression that I was a ‘scoffer.’ Lord knows there are enough of them out there.

Susan Grant
05-29-2010, 06:16 PM
Charles, I believe Ed Jewett posted a lot on this with some relevant websites.
One of those websites is Carnicom.com.
My scientific knowledge is limited but scientifically-based date is on this web-site and may give you the knowledge and understanding of the technical possibilities which might influence such an atmospheric occurrence. In my humble non-scientific opinion this site may be of some help.
My partner is scientifically minded and suggested this so, please dont blame the messenger should you disagree.

Charles Drago
05-29-2010, 06:23 PM
Thanks, Susan.

FYI, any suggestions for ways to expand knowledge will be accepted gratefully and graciously.

Best,

Charlie

Susan Grant
05-29-2010, 06:37 PM
my pleasure Charles. I hope it helps.
I have been interested for years and would also love to get behind it. My
instinct (you know that female thing) has been nudging me in the direction of chemtrails instead of contrails - these expanding clouds I mean and spraying.
But if have seen 2 American newsmen in the last month mention it in their weather broadcast and BOTH of them said it is the military dropping chaff - something to help abate "'GLOBAL WARMING and BOTH said they were in the Air Force at some time in their pasts and THEY BOTH KNEW!!!!!
Make of it whatever you like. My sceptical side says - huh MSM saying this - must:p be true!

Keith Millea
06-25-2010, 12:16 AM
Holy crap,I've never paid much attention to the chemtrail thesis.I also don't see a lot of sky because I live in the woods.So today I drove into town,and on my way back home I noticed a couple of jet trails off to my left.Then I looked to my right,and their were about a dozen trails.Some narrow,and some wide.I was fascinated.I've never seen so many in my life.So when I get home they are still coming,and right over my house.I did see about three jets laying narrow trails that would spread out.I've just looked again,and their are still trails up there.This has been about three hours now.All trails are going basically North to South.There would have to been many planes involved to see this many trails.I'm not sure what to believe. :dontknow:

Jack White
06-25-2010, 05:51 AM
Yesterday's 6:30 a.m. chemtrail over Fort Worth was of the newer SAWTOOTH variety...see original and
detail photos below. The "sawtooth" feature seems to be a new feature to cause the chemtrails to have
a more natural cirrus-like appearance when they disperse.

Jack

Keith Millea
06-25-2010, 03:26 PM
Jack,
I did see that sawtooth pattern also,but I can't say all were that defined.The ones I saw yesterday(many)were coming North to South.They were basically flying down the I-5 corridor,where almost all the States population are located.I don't know about flight patterns,but there are only two major commercial airports that are North of here.Portland and Seattle,with Portland being 200 miles away.They were all heading South maybe going to California.

One question for you Jack.Have you ever heard of any electrical disruptions from these trails.I say this because I left my computer on when I went into town,in it's low power (sleep) mode.When I returned and logged on,it was weird.My AOL screen didn't show the usual number of emails that I have,and when I opened my email,it had a new email from my son.When I clicked it,it knocked me off the internet.I called my son,but he said he didn't send any email.We figured out that the email was in the "old email" box and was sent back on the 15th.This has never happened before.I hope you can figure out what I'm trying to explain.STRANGE.....:dontknow:

Jack White
06-25-2010, 04:29 PM
Jack,
I did see that sawtooth pattern also,but I can't say all were that defined.The ones I saw yesterday(many)were coming North to South.They were basically flying down the I-5 corridor,where almost all the States population are located.I don't know about flight patterns,but there are only two major commercial airports that are North of here.Portland and Seattle,with Portland being 200 miles away.They were all heading South maybe going to California.

One question for you Jack.Have you ever heard of any electrical disruptions from these trails.I say this because I left my computer on when I went into town,in it's low power (sleep) mode.When I returned and logged on,it was weird.My AOL screen didn't show the usual number of emails that I have,and when I opened my email,it had a new email from my son.When I clicked it,it knocked me off the internet.I called my son,but he said he didn't send any email.We figured out that the email was in the "old email" box and was sent back on the 15th.This has never happened before.I hope you can figure out what I'm trying to explain.STRANGE.....:dontknow:

Odd coincidence...my computer did have problems yesterday.
Cut itself off. When I rebooted, it has a humming noise.

The sawtooth chemtrails are a recent development. I think is
has to do with making them more "cloudlike".

Jack

Ed Jewett
07-26-2010, 04:31 PM
There's no such things as chemtrails, right?

People who believe in them are kooks, right?

No one's been up on the air night and day spraying thousands of square miles of air space around the world.

If they were, the government and the news media would have told us and explained it all to us, right?

Uh...maybe not. Look at this...

Video: http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/899.html

Matthew Lewis
07-26-2010, 10:18 PM
There's no such things as chemtrails, right?

People who believe in them are kooks, right?

No one's been up on the air night and day spraying thousands of square miles of air space around the world.

If they were, the government and the news media would have told us and explained it all to us, right?

Uh...maybe not. Look at this...

Video: http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/899.html

The people that made that video came out a few days later saying they made it to make fun of "chemtrail" believers.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059089620&postcount=71

What is pointed to as "nozzles" are the flap jack screw housings. The mechanism to lower and raise the flaps are inside. They are seen on every KC-10 and the civilian DC-10
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?search_active=1&search=&sheadline=&domains=Airliners.net&sitesearch=Airliners.net&client=pub-8297169501225184&forid=1&channel=1924797129&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&cof=GALT%3A%23E6E8FA%3BGL%3A1%3BDIV%3A%23000000%3B VLC%3AE6E8FA%3BAH%3Acenter%3BBGC%3A45678C%3BLBGC%3 A45678C%3BALC%3AE6E8FA%3BLC%3AE6E8FA%3BT%3AC4C8CC% 3BGFNT%3AC4C8CC%3BGIMP%3AC4C8CC%3BLH%3A36%3BLW%3A6 39%3BL%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fcdn-www.airliners.net%2Fgraphics%2Fopen_file_header_im age.jpg%3BS%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.airliners.net%3BFOR ID%3A1%3B&hl=en&search_field=datedesc&q=dc-10
Other large aircraft have similar structures.

What is seen is an aerodynamic contrail forming over the top of the wing and around the flap mechanism. Not as common as those from engines but it happens and was described nearly 70 years ago.
http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/1942/naca-wr-l-474.pdf
Seen on all types of aircraft
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?search_active=1&search=&sheadline=&domains=Airliners.net&sitesearch=Airliners.net&client=pub-8297169501225184&forid=1&channel=1924797129&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&cof=GALT%3A%23E6E8FA%3BGL%3A1%3BDIV%3A%23000000%3B VLC%3AE6E8FA%3BAH%3Acenter%3BBGC%3A45678C%3BLBGC%3 A45678C%3BALC%3AE6E8FA%3BLC%3AE6E8FA%3BT%3AC4C8CC% 3BGFNT%3AC4C8CC%3BGIMP%3AC4C8CC%3BLH%3A36%3BLW%3A6 39%3BL%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fcdn-www.airliners.net%2Fgraphics%2Fopen_file_header_im age.jpg%3BS%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.airliners.net%3BFOR ID%3A1%3B&hl=en&search_field=datedesc&q=aerodynamic+contrail

It "turns off and on" as the plane flys through nonuniform air.

This all says nothing about whether or not there is a worldwide spraying program but this isn't it.

Jack White
07-27-2010, 02:52 AM
Lewis' assignment is to monitor any internet mention
of chemtrails and show up to debunk it. He is a member
of the USAF. If he is here long, we will hear all chemtrails
called "persistent contrails". He will challenge EVERY posting
on Chemtrails.

Jack

Matthew Lewis
07-27-2010, 03:34 AM
Lewis' assignment is to monitor any internet mention
of chemtrails and show up to debunk it. He is a member
of the USAF. If he is here long, we will hear all chemtrails
called "persistent contrails". He will challenge EVERY posting
on Chemtrails.

Jack
Any evidence for your accusation? Yes, I am in the USAF. I don't believe I've ever hidden that fact. But as I have said MULTIPLE times on the other forum, I am NOT paid or in any way compensated to post here or anywhere else. My views come from my own research. Can you respect that people can have different opinions than you?

Any evidence I will "challenge EVERY posting on Chemtrails"? I've been a member here for more than a year now. I have seen previous postings on the subject and yet today was my first post. I just felt like commenting on this video because I saw it mentioned on a different forum and saw that it was an admitted hoax. So it seems you are WRONG that I will "challenge EVERY posting on Chemtrails".

Also, as I have said before, if the "chemtrail" supporters could take a sample directly from a trail and have it tested and actually find something that is not part of jet exhaust, I'll believe them. I'd become one of their biggest supporters. They have been promising to do this for more than 10 years now. Where are the results? Why instead are people content to assume a sample taken at ground level has anything to do with something 30,000 feet in the air?

While you're here, can you point to anything I said about the video that was wrong or are you just here to poison the well?

Myra Bronstein
07-27-2010, 04:13 AM
Lewis' assignment is to monitor any internet mention
of chemtrails and show up to debunk it. He is a member
of the USAF. If he is here long, we will hear all chemtrails
called "persistent contrails". He will challenge EVERY posting
on Chemtrails.

Jack

Jack,

Please review our forum rules here:
http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58

Specifically:

"14. Our fundamental objective is for DPF to be an arena where research can be seriously discussed, and thoroughly refuted if appropriate, without name-calling or member abuse. It is acceptable to be robust and even dismissive of the arguments of other members, if analysis and evidence are provided. It is acceptable to state that a particular argument serves the agenda of the powerful, again if analysis and evidence are provided. However, since DPF is primarily intended as an arena where serious informed research can be developed and debated, it is not acceptable to describe another member as, for instance, an agent provocateur."

It is not ok to call someone a troll or an agent provocateur, or to hint that's what they are. Please debate the subject and don't attack the person.

Jack White
07-27-2010, 04:21 AM
Lewis' assignment is to monitor any internet mention
of chemtrails and show up to debunk it. He is a member
of the USAF. If he is here long, we will hear all chemtrails
called "persistent contrails". He will challenge EVERY posting
on Chemtrails.

Jack

Jack,

Please review our forum rules here:
http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58

Specifically:

"14. Our fundamental objective is for DPF to be an arena where research can be seriously discussed, and thoroughly refuted if appropriate, without name-calling or member abuse. It is acceptable to be robust and even dismissive of the arguments of other members, if analysis and evidence are provided. It is acceptable to state that a particular argument serves the agenda of the powerful, again if analysis and evidence are provided. However, since DPF is primarily intended as an arena where serious informed research can be developed and debated, it is not acceptable to describe another member as, for instance, an agent provocateur."

It is not ok to call someone a troll or an agent provocateur, or to hint that's what they are. Please debate the subject and don't attack the person.

I have merely described what Lewis does. I have not called him anything.

He replies to EVERY posting on any forum regarding Chemtrails. He
is (was?) stationed at an AF base in Georgia.

I have not violated any forum rule.

Jack

Myra Bronstein
07-27-2010, 04:29 AM
Lewis' assignment is to monitor any internet mention
of chemtrails and show up to debunk it. He is a member
of the USAF. If he is here long, we will hear all chemtrails
called "persistent contrails". He will challenge EVERY posting
on Chemtrails.

Jack

Jack,

Please review our forum rules here:
http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58

Specifically:

"14. Our fundamental objective is for DPF to be an arena where research can be seriously discussed, and thoroughly refuted if appropriate, without name-calling or member abuse. It is acceptable to be robust and even dismissive of the arguments of other members, if analysis and evidence are provided. It is acceptable to state that a particular argument serves the agenda of the powerful, again if analysis and evidence are provided. However, since DPF is primarily intended as an arena where serious informed research can be developed and debated, it is not acceptable to describe another member as, for instance, an agent provocateur."

It is not ok to call someone a troll or an agent provocateur, or to hint that's what they are. Please debate the subject and don't attack the person.

I have merely described what Lewis does. I have not called him anything.

He replies to EVERY posting on any forum regarding Chemtrails. He
is (was?) stationed at an AF base in Georgia.

I have not violated any forum rule.

Jack

Hafta call bullshit here Jack. You have violated a forum rule. Specifically rule #14. Please don't play word games; whether it's a verb or a noun it's still a violation.

Magda Hassan
07-27-2010, 06:06 AM
Matthew has been a forum member for at least a year probably more if I recall and he has never posted anything before about chemtrails or anything else until today. So, while he has posted about chemtrails today he cannot be accused of doing it all the time. In actual fact it was to point out the hoax nature of the original video posting and not about chem-trails/contrails themselves. I would just ask everyone to quietly carry on and remain civil.

Jack White
07-27-2010, 06:10 AM
Matthew has been a forum member for at least a year probably more if I recall and he has never posted anything before about chemtrails or anything else until today. So, while he has posted about chemtrails today he cannot be accused of doing it all the time. In actual fact it was to point out the hoax nature of the original video posting and not about chem-trails/contrails themselves. I would just ask everyone to quietly carry on and remain civil.

He has been a member for a year and this is his FIRST posting?

Magda Hassan
07-27-2010, 06:14 AM
Yep.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2- today.

Malcolm Pryce
07-27-2010, 06:17 AM
I would like to thank Matthew for pointing out that this video was a hoax and for his fact-based input. This is precisely the sort of thing I come to this forum for.

Ed Jewett
07-27-2010, 06:20 PM
Being the fellow who posted the video, let me echo Malcolm and say that the give-and-take on issues like these is what I come here for, and let me add that, on the matter of chemtrails, I remain agnostic. I was curious but leaning away from lending it credibility, then I started to lean in the other direction. I am still uncertain. I don't think this issue, unlike others, have been "been brought home" and "nailed to the door".

Malcolm Pryce
07-27-2010, 07:35 PM
A very gracious response. Like you, I am agnostic on it, I wish I could find something to convince me one way or the other.

Ed Jewett
07-29-2010, 12:46 AM
Just for the record, I replied to the e-mail feed from Brasscheck TV with that video and sent a link to this forum, and this thread and invited someone there to join the conversation. There are lots of places like that which simply "echo" or pass along interesting stuff. One of the things going for this place is that there are names attached to the text.

Ed Jewett
07-31-2010, 01:45 AM
Not that members here aren't serious sources, but GlobalResearch.ca isn't a lightweight...:

Atmospheric Geoengineering: Weather Manipulation, Contrails and Chemtrails: A Review of the "Case Orange" report

by Rady Ananda
Global Research (http://www.globalresearch.ca/), July 30, 2010




At an international symposium held in Ghent, Belgium May 28-30, 2010, scientists asserted that “manipulation of climate through modification of Cirrus clouds is neither a hoax nor a conspiracy theory.” It is “fully operational” with a solid sixty-year history. Though “hostile” environmental modification was banned by UN Convention in 1978, its “friendly” use today is being hailed as the new savior to climate change and to water and food shortages. The military-industrial complex stands poised to capitalize on controlling the world’s weather.

“In recent years there has been a decline in the support for weather modification research, and a tendency to move directly into operational projects.” ~World Meteorological Organization, 2007

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/charles_hatfield-1915-san-diego%5B1%5D.JPG

Rainmaker Charles Hatfield, in 1915, destroyed much of San Diego.
The only conspiracy surrounding geoengineering is that most governments and industry refuse to publicly admit what anyone with eyes can see. Peer-reviewed research is available to anyone willing and able to maneuver the labyrinth of scientific journals. So, while there is some disclosure on the topic, full public explanation is lacking. A brief list of confirmed cloud seeding events is produced at bottom, starting in 1915.

Going under a variety of names – atmospheric geoengineering, weather modification, solar radiation management, chemical buffering, cloud seeding, weather force multiplication – toxic aerial spraying is popularly known as chemtrails. However, this is merely one technique employed to modify weather. The practice of environmental modification is vast and well funded.

Hosted by the Belfort Group, which has been working for the last seven years to raise public awareness of toxic aerial spraying, the Symposium included chemtrail awareness groups from Greece, Germany, Holland, France and the U.S. Belfort published five videos covering only May 29,[1] when filmmaker Michael Murphy (Environmental Deception and What in the world are they spraying)[2] and aerospace engineer Dr. Coen Vermeeren [3] gave the most dramatic presentations.

Dr Vermeeren, of the Delft University of Technology, presented [4] a 300-page scientific report entitled, “CASE ORANGE: Contrail Science, Its Impact on Climate and Weather Manipulation Programs Conducted by the United States and Its Allies.” [5]

Case Orange notes it was prepared for the Belfort Group by a team of scientists but presented anonymously. It was sent to embassies, news organizations and interested groups around the world “to force public debate.”

The report spends some time on HAARP, the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program, [6] which is a military endeavor focused on ionospheric, electromagnetic, and global electrostatic field manipulation, and on other exotic weapon systems that manipulate the environment. While related, they go beyond this discussion of chemtrails.

In the interest of brevity, the health and environmental implications of cloud seeding is not discussed in any depth herein. Case Orange does go into it, as did most of the speakers at the Belfort Symposium. Cursory research reveals a debate among researchers as to chemtrail toxicity, but whether that’s a 50-50 or 99-1 argument is unknown.

Contrails Are Chemtrails

Case Orange rejects use of the term ‘chemtrails’ because it is associated with amateur conspiracy theorists. The only credible document it could find that uses it is the Space Preservation Act of 2001 introduced by U.S. Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH). [7] H.R. 2977 sought to ban the use of exotic weapon systems that would damage climate, weather, tectonic and biological systems. “Chemtrails” are specifically listed. Though later removed, no version of the bill ever became law.

Instead, the writers prefer the term ‘persistent contrails’ to describe the phenomenon since all contrails are chemtrails. ‘Persistent contrails’ distinguishes those that contain weather-altering additives from those that represent normal aircraft exhaust that dissipates after a few seconds or minutes.

Case Orange also rejects misanthropic intentions behind persistent contrails. It shows that geoengineering is fully operational, but rejects it is used to sicken people on the assumptions that 1) public health agencies have the public interest at heart; and 2) the economy is consumer driven. The authors indicate no awareness of numerous reports of collusion between the pharmaceutical industry and government health agencies. This year, a significant conflict-of-interest report appeared in the prestigious British Medical Journal, which further heightened suspicions that the H1N1 flu and its vaccines were a scam.[8] Nor do the authors consider that sick people will spur economic growth in a capitalist (for profit) health system.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/chemt.JPG


Dr. Vermeeren gave his own introductory remarks and conclusions, but spent the bulk of the hour presenting information from Case Orange. He frankly admitted the existence of persistent contrails.
“We also know that chemtrails do exist because we do spraying; for crops, for example, and we know that they have been spraying for military purposes. So, chemtrails is nothing new. We know about it.”


CLICK LINK Dr Coen Vermeeren Symposium speech,
Afternoon Part 1 video, (starting at about 35 mins.) (29 May 2010) http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/7299427 (http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/7299427)

“Weather manipulation through contrail formation … is in place and fully operational.”

Case Orange cites publicly available material that shows geoengineering has been ongoing for “at least 60 years.” Used as a weapon of war in Hamburg by the UK during World War II, it was also used in the Vietnam Conflict by the US. Controversy over its use, revealed by investigative reporter Jack Anderson, spurred Senate hearings in 1972. During those hearings, military officials denied the use of cloud seeding technology. Later, a private letter from Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird admitting that his testimony was false surfaced. He, again unbelievably, claimed he didn’t know what was happening. [9]

Environmental modification (EnMod) weaponry was finally banned by treaty in 1978. The UN Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques forced the end of such programs, overtly anyway.[10] (Case Orange authors seem unaware of this international ban, as it is one of their recommendations.)

However, with widespread reporting of rising global temperatures, increasing population, and degradation of water supplies, renewed interest in EnMod is now becoming broadly supported. (See, e.g., Top economists recommend climate engineering, 4 Sep 2009 [11] and similarly, Top science body calls for geoengineering ‘plan B’, 1 Sep 2009.[12])


http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/stormfy.JPG


The crew in Operation Stormfury in 1963. Note the special belly on the Douglas DC6-B for cloud seeding purposes. (From Case Orange)
Building a case for old technology finding a new market, Case Orange discusses several U.S. patents. For example, authors describe a 1975 patent, “Powder Contrail Generation,” [13] for the invention of a:

“specific contrail generation apparatus for producing a powder contrail having maximum radiation scattering ability for a given weight [of] material. The seeding material … consists of 85% metallic particles and 15% colloidal Silica and Silica gel in order to produce a stable contrail that has a residence period of 1 up to 2 weeks.”
In 2009, researchers published “Modification of Cirrus clouds to reduce global warming,” which proposed two methods of delivery for this same proportion of metallics to silica and the same staying power of one to two weeks.[14]

Case Orange also reveals a 1991 patent held by Hughes Aircraft Company [15] that:

“contains 18 claims to reduce global warming through stratospheric seeding with aluminum oxide… thorium oxide … and refractory Welsbach material ….”
The report notes that “the proposed scenario by the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] in 2001 is identical to the claims” in Hughes Aircraft’s 1991 patent. Hughes was acquired by Raytheon, a private defense contractor, in 1997, “the same company that acquired E-systems and the HAARP contract.”

Case Orange presents evidence that Raytheon stands to control all weather, which the authors find repugnant given that it is a private corporation. The authors recommend suing private corporations instead of governments. But subcontracting is quite common for governments and agencies, especially the US military. The distinction between large, powerful corporations and governments is a fine line obscure to common folk. And, the effect is the same whether governments are spraying us with nano-sized metals, chemicals or biologicals, or whether corporations do. The authors’ protective posture toward governments is nonsensical.

Case Orange suggests that geoengineering found new life in the global warming scare. Old patents are being dusted off and private interests stand to make substantial sums now that Cap and Trade has been exposed as ineffective in reducing greenhouse gases. (Although, lawmakers are still considering it since substantial sums can be made from the scheme, to wit: Al Gore reportedly achieved billionaire status from it.)

Since 2007, billionaire Bill Gates has spent at least $4.5 million on geoengineering research. [16] Since reducing emissions is not popular with industry, ‘Plan B’ – geoengineering – is being touted as the answer to climate change and water shortage. A longer description of Plan B is: Add more pollution to the sky and water to offset industrial pollution, without reducing industrial pollution.

Human rights and environmental watchdog, ETC Group, describes the momentum [17]:

“The roll-out of geoengineering as Plan B is being skillfully executed: prominent high-level panels sponsored by prestigious groups, a spate of peer-reviewed articles this January in science journals, and a line-up of panicked politicians in northern countries, nodding nervously in agreement as scientists testify about the ‘need to research Plan B.’”
ETC reports that Gates’ top geoengineering advisor unveiled a plan to grow solar radiation management research “one-hundred-fold, from $10 million to $1 billion over ten years.”

Indeed, several watchdog groups recently ramped up calls to address clean water shortage. “At the end of July 2010, the United Nations General Assembly will vote on an important resolution, initiated by the Bolivian government, which would make clean water and sanitation a human right,” reports Food and Water Watch.[18]


Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/owning-the-weather-2025%5B1%5D.JPG


Case Orange ties a 1996 report by top military personnel in the U.S., “Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025” [19] to evidentiary details (like governmental spraying schedules, chemical orders, correct nomenclature used in airline operating manuals, and calls for geoengineering by economists) to support its notion of “heavy involvement of governments at top level in climate control projects.”
Owning the Weather in 2025 provides a specific timeline for the use of EnMod technologies in cooperation with the Weather Modification Association (WMA), a business-government group promoting the beneficial uses of environmental modification [20]:

2000 Introduce ionic mirrors, with a sharp increase from 2008;

2000-2025 Use chemicals for atmospheric seeding by civilian (as well as military) aviation;

2004 Create smart clouds thru nanotechnology, with exponential increase after 2010;

2005 Introduce ‘carbon black dust’.

Though Case Orange decries the paucity of research into EnMod, in 2009 WMA published its position statement on the safety of seeding clouds with silver-iodide, citing three dozen research papers from 1970 through 2006. [21] In 2007, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) published a statement that included “Guidelines for the Planning of Weather Modification Activities.” Acknowledging that the modern technology of weather modification began in the 1940s, it is still “an emerging technology” today. [22] WMO indicated disappointment that research is being abandoned for operations.

Case Orange contains no reference to the WMA position statement citing all that research, although it cites the group. Nor does it mention the World Meteorological Organization, an agency of the United Nations, which has a link to its Weather Modification portal on its Index page.

At the end of the section, The bare necessity of geoengineering through cloud generation for survival of the planet (5.2.7), Case Orange states:

“[O]ur investigation team comes to the conclusion that climate control programs, controlled by the military but approved by governments, are silently implemented in order to avoid the worst case scenarios they obviously do not want. The two basic instruments are temperature control through generation of artificial clouds and manipulation of the ionosphere through ionosphere heaters.

“Both remain basically military combat systems with the option to go into the offensive if deemed necessary. However since several ionosphere heaters are installed on various places around the globe one can assume that there is wide cooperation between governments in order to reach the climate targets by 2025: controlling the weather and thus the planet.”
The report published the following images provided by a former meteorologist at the Ontario Weather Service, showing spraying schemes for Europe. For December 6, 2008:


http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/euro-spraying-scheme-december-6-2008%5B1%5D.JPG


http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/6%20euro-spraying-scheme-january-3-2010.jpg

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/7%20euro-spraying-scheme-january-4-2010.jpg

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/8%20euro-spraying-scheme-january-5-2010.jpg

“The spraying schemes seem to be organized in a logical pattern so that the whole of Europe is covered in a 3-day period,” the authors write. The following images cover January 3-5, 2010:

Case Orange agrees that climate change needs to be addressed. Regarding Climate-Gate, the authors suggest that the University of East Anglia deliberately manipulated the climate data to gradually prepare the global population for its future on a hotter planet.
They also cite research that supports the notion that climate change is real. During the three-day grounding of most aircraft after 9/11, scientists noticed an increase in temperature of 1.1 °C (2 °F). [23] This is an astounding increase in such a short time frame. The incidence of cloud seeding reports by the public increases exponentially after this.

The 1996 military piece, Owning the Weather in 2025, gives climate change skeptics “an insight in what to expect in the 21st century:

‘Current demographic, economic and environmental trends will create global stresses that provide the impetus necessary for many countries or groups to turn weather modfication ability into capability. In the United States weather modification will likely become part of national security policy with both domestic and international applications. Our government will pursue such a policy, depending on its interests, at various levels.’”
Recommendations

“Persistent contrails,” however, “have a devastating impact on eco-systems on this planet and quality of life in general.” Case Orange joins the call of Bill Gates’ geoengineering advisor and the WMO for new research measuring the impact on human health and the environment from EnMod programs.

Case Orange also recommends an immediate and full disclosure of current EnMod activities to the public; and that all civil aviation laws be abided.

Of note, in response to policy interest in geoengineering as a means to control climate change and enhance water supplies, on May 14, 2010, the science subcommittee of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity proposed a geoengineering moratorium. [24] This proposed ban on “friendly” EnMod programs will be heard at the Tenth Conference of Parties to UN Convention on Biodiversity in Nagoya, Japan this October.

Case Orange reports that China and Russia openly admit to cloud-seeding, while the U.S. denies such activities. The U.S. does permit open air testing of chemical and biological weapons but not under the law the authors cited, which they paraphrased:

The secretary of defense may conduct tests and experiments involving the use of chemical and biological agents on civilian populations.

Public law of the United States, Law 95-79, Title VIII, Sec. 808, July 30, 1977.

Codified as 50 USC 1520, under Chapter 32 Chemical and Biological Warfare Program, Public Law 85-79 was repealed in 1997 by Public Law 105-85. In its place, 15 USC 1520a provides restrictions (such as informed consent). 50 USC 1512, however, allows open air testing of chemicals and biologicals and allows presidential override of notices and of public health considerations for national security reasons. [25] Case Orange authors are thus correct in asserting that such programs are legal in the U.S.

Epilogue

Having heard enough conspiracy theories to last me a lifetime, I hesitated researching the subject of chemtrails, and maintained skepticism. That all changed in March when I personally observed two jets seeding clouds, along with about 30 other people in the parking lot at lunchtime. Someone took a picture from her cell phone:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/9%20chemtrails-davie-fl-3-30-2010-x325.jpg


The trails lasted for hours, and looked distinctly different from other clouds. Since then, I’ve been watching the skies and can now tell when they’ve been seeded. We often have a white haze instead of a deep blue sky, even when persistent contrails aren’t visible.
A few days ago, someone sent me a link to the Belfort Symposium videos. Four hours into it, I became riveted when Dr. Vermeeren began his presentation of the Case Orange report. That’s when I decided to seriously look into the subject. As informative as Case Orange is for the newcomer, any serious research into the subject reveals that what all those “conspiracy theorists” suggest is true: they are spraying the skies, and they’re not telling us.

Discovering that the World Meteorological Organization has a tab on its website called Weather Modification shocked me. Reading their disappointment that governments are going ahead with operations instead of doing more research confirmed all of it for me. And that was published in 2007!

So, while we’re not being told, the information is publicly available to any armchair researcher.

Being so late to the game on all this accords me sympathy for others. Military leaders have for centuries recognized that it rains after a heavy battle, but harnessing that power in a way that doesn’t cause a deluge like in San Diego in 1915 has been a task. I came upon other stories like that in my research – misdirected hurricanes, farm wars, massive flooding and mudslides. It’s no wonder there are so many books on the subject. It’s no wonder this turned into a 3,000-word essay.

Chemtrails are no hoax; I spent time going to as many original sources as I could find. The record is replete with mainstream news accounts of the early days of the modern EnMod program. If its birth can be marked by Britain’s successful use of chaff in 1943 to jam enemy radar, the program is 67 years old. That’s quite a history to keep under the radar of most people. That reflects most poorly on mainstream news sources, who are supposed to expose government shenanigans.

~~~

A Brief History of Cloud Seeding

Cloud seeding, as a US military research project, began as early as the 1830s, according to Colby College professor, James R. Fleming. [26] Verifiably successful rainmaking attempts did not occur until 1915.

1915 To end a prolonged drought, San Diego hired reputed rainmaker Charles Hatfield, who claimed that the evaporation of his secret chemical brew atop wooden towers could attract clouds. San Diego was rewarded with a 17-day deluge that totaled 28 inches. The deadly downpour washed out more than 100 bridges, made roads impassable over a huge area, destroyed communications lines, and left thousands homeless. [27]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/10%20charle-hatfields-rain-washes-out-dam-1915.jpg


Charles Hatfield's rain washes out dam 1915, San Diego. Dozens died.
1943 “The first operational use of chaff (aluminium strips which are precisely cut to a quarter of the radar’s wavelength) took place in July 1943, when Hamburg was subjected to a devastating bombing raid. The radar screens were cluttered with reflections from the chaff and the air defence was, in effect, completely blinded.” [28]

1946 General Electric’s Vincent Schaefer dropped six pounds of dry ice into a cold cloud over Greylock Peak in the Berkshires, causing an “explosive” growth of three miles in the cloud. [29]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/11%20romy-ny-dry-ice-seeding-1946.jpg


New York dry ice seeding 1946 (Life Magazine)
1947 Australian meteorologists successfully repeated the process. [30]

1949 Project Cirrus: Nobel Laureate Irving Langmuir and General Electric researcher Vincent Schaefer fed ten ounces of silver iodide into a blowtorch apparatus and brought down 320 billion gallons of rain across half of New Mexico from a desert near Albuquerque. [31]

1950 Harvard meteorologist Wallace Howell seeded New York City skies with dry ice and silver iodide smoke, filling the city’s reservoirs to near capacity. [32]

1952 The UK’s Operation Cumulus resulted in 250 times the normal amount of rainfall, killing dozens and destroying landscapes. [33]

1962-1983 Operation Stormfury, a hurricane modification program, had some success in reducing winds by up to 30%. [34]

1966-1972 Project Intermediary Compatriot (later called Pop Eye) successfully seeded clouds in Laos. The technique became part of military actions in Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos from 1967 to 1972. Initially revealed by Jack Anderson in the Washington Post, 18 Mar 1971. [35]

1986 The Soviet air force diverted Chernobyl fallout from reaching Moscow by seeding clouds. Belarus, instead, was hit. [36]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/12%20china-weather-rocket-x-impactlab.jpg


China weather rocket (2008 by ImpactLab)
2008 Chinese government used 1,104 cloud seeding missiles to remove the threat of rain ahead of the Olympic opening ceremony in Beijing. [37]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/13%20Moscow%20halo%20cloud%207%20Oct%202009.jpg

2009 Moscow Halo. Case Orange cites this as evidence of cloud seeding, but others suspect it is electromagnetic in origin. Russian authorities said it was an optical illusion. [38]



This is by no means a comprehensive list; indeed, volumes are dedicated to the subject.

Notes:


[1] Belfort Group videos of International Symposium on Chemtrails, May 29, 2010 proceedings. http://www.ustream.tv/channel/belfort-test (http://www.ustream.tv/channel/belfort-test)

[2] Michael Murphy website: http://truthmediaproductions.blogspot.com/ (http://truthmediaproductions.blogspot.com/)

[3] Dr Coen Vermeeren, Delft University of Technology bio, n.d.

[4] Dr Coen Vermeeren Symposium speech, Afternoon Part 1 video, (starting at about 35 mins..) (29 May 2010) http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/7299427 (http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/7299427)

[5] Anonymous, “CASE ORANGE: Contrail Science, Its Impact on Climate and Weather Manipulation Programs Conducted by the United States and Its Allies,” 10 May 2010. PDF without appendices:
http://coto2.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/case_orange-5-10-2010-belfort-chemtrails.pdf (http://coto2.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/case_orange-5-10-2010-belfort-chemtrails.pdf)

[6] High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program, Fact Sheet, 15 Jun 2007. http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/factSheet.html (http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/factSheet.html)

[7] Space Preservation Act of 2001 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.2977.IH:), H.R.2977, 107th Congress, 1st Session. Introduced by U.S. Representative Dennis Kucinich.

[8] Deborah Cohen and Philip Carter, “Conflicts of Interest: WHO and the pandemic ‘flu conspiracies,’” British Medical Journal 2010;340:c2912, 3 Jun 2010. http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/340/jun03_4/c2912 (http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/340/jun03_4/c2912)

[9] The Sunshine Project, “The Limits of Inside Pressure: The US Congress Role in ENMOD,” n.d. Accessed July 2010. http://www.sunshine-project.org/enmod/US_Congr.html (http://www.sunshine-project.org/enmod/US_Congr.html)

[10] United Nations, “Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques,” Resolution 31/72, 10 Dec 1976, effective 1978. Geneva. http://www.un-documents.net/enmod.htm (http://www.un-documents.net/enmod.htm)

[11] Copenhagen Consensus Center, “Top economists recommend climate engineering,” 4 Sep 2009. Press release [pdf]
http://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/Admin/Public/DWSDownload.aspx?File=%2fFiles%2fFiler%2fPress+Rel eases+2010%2fCC_PRESS_STATEMENT__4september2010_.p df (http://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/Admin/Public/DWSDownload.aspx?File=%2fFiles%2fFiler%2fPress+Rel eases+2010%2fCC_PRESS_STATEMENT__4september2010_.p df)

[12] Catherine Brahic, “Top science body calls for geoengineering ‘plan B’, New Scientist 1 Sep 2009.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17716-top-science-body-calls-for-geoengineering-plan-b.html (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17716-top-science-body-calls-for-geoengineering-plan-b.html)

[13] Donald K. Werle, et al., “Powder contrail generation,” U.S. Patent 3,899,144, 12 Aug 1975. Assignee: U.S. Secretary of the Navy.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=3,899,144.PN.&OS=PN/3,899,144&RS=PN/3,899,144 (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=3,899,144.PN.&OS=PN/3,899,144&RS=PN/3,899,144)

[14] David L Mitchell and William Finnegan, “Modification of Cirrus clouds to reduce global warming,” Environmental Research Letters Vol. 4 No. 4, 30 Oct 2009. Available by subscription: http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/4/4/045102 (http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/4/4/045102)

[15] David B. Chang and I-Fu Shih, “Stratospheric Welsbach seeding for reduction of global warming,” U.S. Patent 5,003,186, 26 Mar 1991. Assignee: Hughes Aircraft Company.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,003,186.PN.&OS=PN/5,003,186&RS=PN/5,003,186 (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,003,186.PN.&OS=PN/5,003,186&RS=PN/5,003,186)

[16] Eli Kintisch, “Bill Gates Funding Geoengineering Research,” Science Insider, 26 Jan 2010. http://blogs.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2010/01/bill-gates-fund.html (http://blogs.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2010/01/bill-gates-fund.html).

[17] ETC Group, “Top-down Planet Hackers Call for Bottom-up Governance: Geoengineers’ Bid to Establish Voluntary Testing Regime Must Be Opposed,” 11 Feb 2010. http://www.etcgroup.org/en/node/5073 (http://www.etcgroup.org/en/node/5073)

[18] Food and Water Watch: http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/water/world-water/right/ (http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/water/world-water/right/)

[19] Col Tamzy J. House, et al. “Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025,” Department of Defense U.S. Air Force, 17 Jun 1996. Publicly released August 1996. Reproduced at Federation of American Scientists:
http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/usaf/2025/v3c15/v3c15-1.htm (http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/usaf/2025/v3c15/v3c15-1.htm)

[20] Weather Modicaton Association website: http://www.weathermodification.org/ (http://www.weathermodification.org/)

[21] Weather Modification Association, “Position Statement on the Environmental Impact of Using Silver Iodides as a Cloud Seeding Agent,” July 2009.
http://www.weathermodification.org/AGI_toxicity.pdf (http://www.weathermodification.org/AGI_toxicity.pdf)

[22] World Meteorological Organization, “WMO Statement on Weather Modification,” UN Commission for Atmospheric Sciences Management Group, 26 Sep 2007.
http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/arep/wwrp/new/documents/WM_statement_guidelines_approved.pdf (http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/arep/wwrp/new/documents/WM_statement_guidelines_approved.pdf)

[23] Donald J. Travis, et al. “Contrails reduce daily temperature range,” Nature 418, 601, 8 Aug 2002. Reproduced in full by University of Washington, Dept. of Atmospheric Sciences:
http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~rennert/etc/courses/pcc587/ref/Travis-etal2002_Nature.pdf (http://www.atmos.washington.edu/%7Erennert/etc/courses/pcc587/ref/Travis-etal2002_Nature.pdf)

[24] Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice, “In-depth Review of the Work on Biodiversity and Climate Change, Draft Recommendation,” Convention on Biological Diversity, United Nations Environmental Programme, UNEP/CBD/SBTTA/14/L.9, 15 May 2010. http://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-14/in-session/sbstta-14-L-09-en.pdf (http://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-14/in-session/sbstta-14-L-09-en.pdf)

[25] United States Code, Title 50, Chapter 32, “Chemical and Biological Warfare Program.” http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/50C32.txt (http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/50C32.txt)

[26] James Rodger Fleming, “The pathological history of weather and climate modification: Three cycles of promise and hype,” Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2006. Available at
http://www.colby.edu/sts/06_fleming_pathological.pdf (http://www.colby.edu/sts/06_fleming_pathological.pdf)

[27] Stephen Cole, “Weather on Demand,” American Heritage, 2005. http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/it/2005/2/2005_2_48.shtml (http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/it/2005/2/2005_2_48.shtml)

[28] Monsignore Pizzafunghi Bosselese, “The History of Radar,” BBC, 14 Jul 2003. http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A591545 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A591545)

[29] Fleming, citing New York Times, 15 Nov 1946, 24.

[30] Squires, P. & Smith, E. J., “The Artificial Stimulation of Precipitation by Means of Dry Ice,” Australian Journal of Scientific Research, Series A: Physical Sciences, vol. 2, p.232, 1949AuSRA…2..232S, 1949. Republished at Harvard University:
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1949AuSRA…2..232S/0000244.000.html (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1949AuSRA...2..232S/0000244.000.html)

Also see: Stephen Cole, “Weather on Demand,” American Heritage, 2005.
http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/it/2005/2/2005_2_48.shtml (http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/it/2005/2/2005_2_48.shtml)

[31] Life Magazine, “Solution to Water Shortage: Rain makers’ success shows how New York could fill its reservoirs,” p. 113, 20 Feb 1950.
http://books.google.com/books?id=FVMEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA113&dq=Irving+Langmuir&as_pt=MAGAZINES&cd=1#v=onepage&q=Irving%20Langmuir&f=false (http://books.google.com/books?id=FVMEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA113&dq=Irving+Langmuir&as_pt=MAGAZINES&cd=1#v=onepage&q=Irving%20Langmuir&f=false)

[32] Life Magazine, “U.S. Water: We can supplement our outgrown sources at a price,” 21 Aug 1950, p. 52.
http://books.google.com/books?id=wUoEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA52&lpg=PA52&dq=Irving+Langmuir+rainmaker&source=bl&ots=Ehqq8hZNsE&sig=
tkN51NoxqMsKVq6ClZU9Hvej8g0&hl=en&ei=9mhMTO3vG93llQfjpJHGDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CCIQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false (http://books.google.com/books?id=wUoEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA52&lpg=PA52&dq=Irving+Langmuir+rainmaker&source=bl&ots=Ehqq8hZNsE&sig=tkN51NoxqMsKVq6ClZU9Hvej8g0&hl=en&ei=9mhMTO3vG93llQfjpJHGDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CCIQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false)

[33] John Vidal and Helen Weinstein, “RAF rainmakers ’caused 1952 flood’: Unearthed documents suggest experiment triggered torrent that killed 35 in Devon disaster,” The Guardian, 30 Aug 2001.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/silly/story/0,10821,544259,00.html (http://www.guardian.co.uk/silly/story/0,10821,544259,00.html)

Also see: BBC News, “Rain-making link to killer floods,” 30 Aug 2001. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1516880.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1516880.stm)

[34] Jerry E. Smith, “Weather Warfare: The Military’s Plan to Draft Mother Nature,” Adventures Unlimited Press, 2006. pp. 47-54.
http://books.google.com/books?id=G7t260XD8AYC&pg=PA47&dq=stormfury&hl=en&ei=9wJ
OTOfVE4G88gbZ3IGaDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=stormfury&f=false (http://books.google.com/books?id=G7t260XD8AYC&pg=PA47&dq=stormfury&hl=en&ei=9wJOTOfVE4G88gbZ3IGaDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=stormfury&f=false)

[35] ibid. pp. 54-60.

[36] Richard Gray, “How we made the Chernobyl rain,” Daily Telegraph, 22 Apr 2007.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1549366/How-we-made-the-Chernobyl-rain.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1549366/How-we-made-the-Chernobyl-rain.html)

[37] Ian O’Neill, “The Chinese Weather Manipulation Missile Olympics,” Universe Today, 12 Aug 2008.
http://www.universetoday.com/2008/08/12/the-chinese-weather-manipulation-missile-olympics/ (http://www.universetoday.com/2008/08/12/the-chinese-weather-manipulation-missile-olympics/)

[38] Anonymous, “Moscow Halo,” cell phone video uploaded to YouTube, 7 Oct 2009. reposted at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXF9HSB627U (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXF9HSB627U)

Malcolm Pryce
07-31-2010, 06:25 AM
Thanks for posting this, Ed; it looks very meaty, I will read with interest. You are right, GlobalResearch is a great source.

Sam Kent
08-06-2010, 05:17 PM
I have a few problems with the chemtrails.

To Jack White:

Why is every trail in the sky you see a chemtrail?

Don’t you have any contrails from any airplanes in DFW?

I see videos of these supposed chemtrails where the spraying is on and off. But there isn’t any engine condensation trails in between the spraying. So are we to believe they shut down the engines for those few seconds where there is no spraying?

If the whole thing is supposed to be a secret, why do they spray during the daytime? Shouldn’t they do it at night? You did say the stuff hangs around for hours didn’t you?

Jack White
08-07-2010, 01:57 AM
I have a few problems with the chemtrails.

To Jack White:

Why is every trail in the sky you see a chemtrail?

Don’t you have any contrails from any airplanes in DFW?

I see videos of these supposed chemtrails where the spraying is on and off. But there isn’t any engine condensation trails in between the spraying. So are we to believe they shut down the engines for those few seconds where there is no spraying?

If the whole thing is supposed to be a secret, why do they spray during the daytime? Shouldn’t they do it at night? You did say the stuff hangs around for hours didn’t you?

The attached illustrates the difference. Up very high you
see a plane leaving a CONTRAIL, caused by heated air meeting
cold air, causing condensation. Contrails are caused by engine heat.

The two much large CHEMTRAILS illustrate the difference. Chemtrails
are not from the engines, but from spray vents in the wings, releasing
chemical and particulate matter into the air.

Contrails evaporate quickly as the hot air cools. Chemtrails do not
vanish, but morph into cirrus clouds.

I cannot answer your other questions.

Jack

Sam Kent
08-07-2010, 04:17 PM
Jack you are well published on the web. Couldn't you go to one of the many respected news departments in the DFW area and get a few minutes of video air time to alert the 1.3 million or so people to look up?
Why is it that no one else is seeing them?

Jan Klimkowski
08-07-2010, 05:33 PM
Jack you are well published on the web. Couldn't you go to one of the many respected news departments in the DFW area and get a few minutes of video air time to alert the 1.3 million or so people to look up?
Why is it that no one else is seeing them?

Sam Kent - you've been a member of DPF for a couple of days, and have posted 3 times.

Your first post asked Jack White some questions about chemtrails. Jack answered you civilly.

You have responded with sarcasm.

There is no place for such behaviour on DPF, particularly when you have so far failed to demonstrate any research credentials of your own, or any awareness of deep politics.

Please note and abide by the following DPF rules of engagement, which you have agreed to by becoming a member of this forum:


15. The deep politics forum is not an arena for the right and the left to bait each other. There are plenty of forums on the internet for keyboard warriors to call political opponents names, or to post crude propaganda.

DPF will close the membership of any poster whose rationale, as revealed through their posts, is to engage in crude political baiting, and who shows no understanding of, and no desire to learn, about deep politics.

This is, and will remain, the deep politics forum.

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58

Jack White
08-07-2010, 06:21 PM
Originally Posted by Sam Kent
Jack you are well published on the web. Couldn't you go to one of the many respected news departments in the DFW area and get a few minutes of video air time to alert the 1.3 million or so people to look up?
Why is it that no one else is seeing them?

Kent is poorly informed. Millions are seeing them, but
most are equally uninformed. Kent also exaggerates my
importance to local news departments. Television weather
people have been informed to refer to them as contrails.

Jack

Sam Kent
08-10-2010, 01:32 AM
I apologize to all for my transgression.

I still have a problem with the identification of actual chemtrails.
To make a positive ID on something you must already know what it should look like.
Example:
To identify an auto from 3-4 miles away we must look for the identifying characteristics of an auto. Like 2 round objects equal distant from opposite ends and a bulbous area slightly off set from the center line. We all would recognize it as an automobile since we see them every day.
But recognizing a chemtrail? Who has actually seen an actual chemtrail? This would have to be someone on the inside. This person would have had to watch the loading of some chemical onto a plane and then seen the spraying. A whistle blower. Where are these people with their pictures? Every news paper in the country would love to get a scoop of this magnitude. Remember Woodward and Bernstein? It defined their careers. If you want to secure your news job for life in these times of layoffs and company failures, get your name on the 'by line' of the century.

How do we know it's chemicals being sprayed? Just because some web blogger says so?
I'll do you one better. I know what it is. It's baby milk! Yes milk. Here's my proof.
These trails last longer and disperse slower that contrails right.
What's better than something that starts white and stays white? Even though it spreads out, the particulate matter stays white and creates a hazy milky sky.
Why milk you ask? Easy. The government has been supporting the dairy industry for decades. Now with the modern dairy farming methods we have far too much milk. The government fears a collapse in the price structure of dairy products. The best way to stave off a collapse is to remove product (milk).
But how to get rid of the milk? You can't just dump it down the drain because it will sour the mash (so to speak) of the public waste treatment plants. You can't dump it into the ocean as the beach combers and day sailors will see the white patches of water. There's no better way to dispose of it than dumping it out of a an airplane. It's hard to get caught with your pants down in this scenario. Who's going to question a series of milk trucks driving down the road. We see them almost every day. And if you get suspicious and pull one over, what a surprise, It's got milk! No cop is going to investigate any farther than that. Airports need milk too don't they?
Not to pick on Jack but in post #21 you state:

The "sawtooth" feature seems to be a new feature to cause the chemtrails to have
a more natural cirrus-like appearance when they disperse.

If it will let me post a picture, your picture matches a picture I found from 1940. The sawtooth pattern is nothing new.

http://consci.s3.amazonaws.com//images/1944-91st-bomber-contrails.jpg
From my analysis and this picture we must have been spraying the Nazis' with baby milk!

Jack White
08-10-2010, 04:35 AM
Recognizing chemtrails and contrails?

Simple.

Contrails are short and evaporate quickly.

Chemtrails are hundreds of times bigger, emanate from
spray nozzles instead of engines, turn into cirrus clouds,
and do not disappear, but form a hazy, milky sky.

The milky sky is what Dr. Teller proposed to prevent
"global warming".

Simple.

Contrails are formed when heated moisture in engine exhaust
condenses in cold air. There is little moisture left in exhaust
after fuel is burned, so contrails are small.

Chemtrails are particulate matter and chemicals which expand
in cold air, making huge clouds. There is NOT ENOUGH MOISTURE
IN JET FUEL TO FORM CHEMTRAILS. Chemtrails come from spray
nozzles, not engines.

Simple.

Jack

Sam Kent
08-10-2010, 01:21 PM
Jack do you agree that the photo I provided from 1940 shows the exact same saw tooth pattern?

Matthew Lewis
08-11-2010, 12:22 AM
Recognizing chemtrails and contrails?

Simple.

Contrails are short and evaporate quickly.
Wrong. Here's a study from nearly 70 years ago that says otherwise.
http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/1942/naca-wr-l-474.pdf
Note the top of page 5 (internally numbered page 4) which specifically mentions persistent trails. Since I've posted this study multiple times before in threads you've participated in I can only believe that you have purposely ignored it.


Chemtrails are hundreds of times bigger, emanate from
spray nozzles instead of engines, turn into cirrus clouds,
and do not disappear, but form a hazy, milky sky.

The milky sky is what Dr. Teller proposed to prevent
"global warming".

Simple.
Really? What about all this evidence showing CONTRAILS from times long before "chemtrail" believers say they started, and from before Dr. Teller proposed anything, which show and describe the same things other people say are "chemtrails"?

A post from another person on a completely unrelated forum that mentions proof from 1981 ("chemtrail" believers claim there were never persistent trails before the late 90's)

The Peterson Field Guide Series A Field Guide to the Atmosphere Houghton Mifflin Company 1981.
Has many interesting things about contrails in it.
Photograph page 132 Pl.145 V - Condensation trail from a jet plane that produces its shadow on a diffuse mass of ice crystals extending downward below the contrail and the sun.
(This shoots to hell the dark "chemtrail" BS chemtrailers try to pass and not only shows one in 1981 or earlier but also explains why the phenomenon occurs.
Photograph page 132 Pl.146 - The condensation trail of a jet plane that is growing where the moist air is supersaturated with the respect to ice. This show that the contrail is located below the thin streamers of ice.
This photo is the same as many posted by many chemtrailers that they claim can ONLY BE the result of "chemical spraying". But here we have an example from 1981 or earlier that shows these phenomenon were seen a full decade before claims of chemtrail spraying.
now for some text from page 137:
In this era of high-flying aircraft, condensation trails - contrails - are a commonly observed feature of the sky. Sometimes they are ephemeral and dissapate as quickly as they form; other times they persist and grow wide enough to cover a substantial portion of the sky with a sheet of cirrostratus. Sometimes they maintain their integrity as a line of cloud formed in the wake of the rapidly moving aircraft; at other times they develop a series of pendules from which streamers of precipitation are observed to fall.
Contrails are a fascinating subject for study, sufficiently complex to challenge the expert and sufficiently variable to intrigue the amateur observer. Properly understood they yield a wealth of information about the current state of affairs in the high atmosphere, where it is difficult to locate weather instruments. Observed systematically, as a function of time, contrail information is a valuable adjunct to forecasting the weather.
Many other examples and photos showing phenomenon claimed by chemtrailers as only being possible by nefarious ways. In text and photos from 1981 or earlier.
Basically this information shoots down most claims made by the chemtrailers. Shoots down and tramples in the earth.
The Peterson Field Guide Series was sponsored by the National Audubon Society.
Older movies showing persistent contrails ("chemtrail" believers claim there were never persistent trails before the late 90's)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065670/goofs
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066740/goofs
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044413/goofs
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057940/goofs
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068421/goofs

Newspaper articles describing spreading persistent contrails from the 40's 50's and 70's here ("chemtrail" believers again claim there were never persistent trails before the late 90's)
http://contrailscience.com/persisting-and-spreading-contrails/

Life magazine photos from the 40's and on showing persistent contrails ("chemtrail" believers claim there were never persistent trails before the late 90's)
http://contrailscience.com/life-magazine-contrail-photos/

Persistent contrails from 1940
http://contrailscience.com/fightercontrails-over-kent-1941/

Persistent contrails from 1967
http://contrailscience.com/thirty-contrails-forty-years-ago/

Pre WWII description of lingering contrails that turned to cirrus and showed rainbow colors (both things "chemtrail" believers say only happens with "chemtrails")
http://contrailscience.com/pre-wwii-contrails/

1991 photo of a pendulous contrail (or sawtooth as Jack called it in a previous post) with a short explanation of the cause
http://consci.s3.amazonaws.com//wp-content/uploads/1991-day-p47-2.jpg

Clouds before powered flight that look a lot like clouds "chemtrail" believers claim are man made
http://contrailscience.com/clouds-before-planes-cloud-studies-1905/



Contrails are formed when heated moisture in engine exhaust
condenses in cold air. There is little moisture left in exhaust
after fuel is burned, so contrails are small.

Chemtrails are particulate matter and chemicals which expand
in cold air, making huge clouds. There is NOT ENOUGH MOISTURE
IN JET FUEL TO FORM CHEMTRAILS.
Wrong.
Same study as above
http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/1942/naca-wr-l-474.pdf
Page 2 and 3 (internally numbered page 1 and 2)
"When aviation gasoline is burned in an engine, about 1.25 pounds of water is formed as vapor and discharged with the exhaust for each pound of fuel burned."
Anyone familiar with chemistry can tell you that is typical of any hydrocarbon. When burned the exhaust is composed of water and various levels of carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide depending on how completely it is burned.
Again, I must conclude that you have purposely ignored these FACTS.


Chemtrails come from spray
nozzles, not engines.

Simple.

Jack
Why do the majority of pictures on "chemtrail" sites purporting to show "chemtrails" show them coming from the engines?

Jack White
08-11-2010, 01:05 AM
Fanatical defenders seem to have a hidden agenda.

Matthew Lewis
08-11-2010, 01:21 AM
Fanatical defenders seem to have a hidden agenda.
Just a love of aviation and an abhorrence of ignorance.

Sam Kent
08-11-2010, 12:02 PM
1. Are you able to explain the picture I posted from 1940 that shows the same saw tooth pattern you claim is ‘new’?

2. Have you ever heard of ‘plane spotting’? It’s a world wide hobby where people photograph the comings and goings of aircraft. They record the tail numbers and airports where that planes fly. Here is a site that has 71 popular websites listed for this hobby.

http://www.thirtythousandfeet.com/spotting.htm (http://www.thirtythousandfeet.com/spotting.htm)

There are only so many planes built by the manufacturers. If a significant number of these planes were flying unusual (spraying) missions, they would have picked up on it in their data.

3. Now are you are going to claim that they do the spraying while hauling passengers? Well they can’t. A plane with a full load of passengers can’t carry the volume of liquid needed to spray these long paths you are seeing.

4. If they are trying to keep the spraying a secret why don’t they only spray at night?

Can anyone explain away any of these 4 points?

Charles Drago
08-11-2010, 01:17 PM
The Kent/Lewis tag-team assault on Jack White happening here mirrors the tactic evident on the EF.

They begin politely, invite civil exchange, and then quickly sink to the default "attack" mode.

The broader agenda is to assault all conspiracy hypotheses with the weapons of pseudoscience, evasion, and ridicule.

While some of their questions to Jack often may stand as valid scientific inquiry, K&L give away their shared game in many ways -- none more obvious than when they demonstrate feined ignorance.

Q. "Why don't they only spray at night?" [sic]

A. 1. Hide in plain (plane?) sight. 2. Operational necessity. 3. Support of "transparent conspiracy" strategy. 4. Some/all of the above.

Next, K&L treat us to a classic strawman fallacy:

Q. "A plane with a full load of passengers can’t carry the volume of liquid needed to spray these long paths you are seeing."

A. 1. There is no reason to believe that only commercial aircraft would be spraying. 2. The assumption that the "long paths" could be produced only by spraying large volumes of liquid is invalid due to the absence of information regarding the composition of the "paths."

I could go on and on ...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a "Matthew Lewis" character is one of the EF's primary debunkers.

Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the ether ...

Jack White is my friend. He is also a man full grown who must defend his own positions. No one on this forum is out to protect Jack from legitimate criticism.

Nonetheless, something stinks about the Kent/Lewis attacks. And I assure you, I'm not the only one who has their scent.
_______________________________________________

The following is reprinted from one of my previous posts (May 26, 2010):

Chemtrail debunkers are quick to note that long, lingering, widely spreading "contrails" occur due to various -- and presumably predictable and consistent -- combinations of altitude, temperature, relative humidity, other meteorological conditions, engine performance parameters, fuel mixtures, etc.

The familiar shorter, quickly dissipating, and therefore ostensibly benign phenomena too are dependent on similar factors.

It would stand to reason, then, that over the course of any 12-month span and absent contributing factors not present during the previous 12 months in which contrails of diverse appearance were observed and noted from a fixed location, we should see consistently diverse patterns in the skies.

Here's the problem: For the past year, daytime observations of classic "chemtrails" from my fixed observation point have all but ceased. In the previous year, the "chemtrails" were present on an almost daily basis.

To my knowledge, flight paths have not been altered (I'm under flights from Boston, Hartford, and Providence airports). I have no way of knowing if changes have been made in altitude, fuel composition, engine configuration and performance, etc.

Again to my knowledge, there has been zero meaningful fluctuation in weather patterns.

Further, my observations have not diminished in terms of quantity or quality.
So if "chemtrails" are in fact "contrails" ... Where the hell are they now?

Sam Kent
08-11-2010, 04:31 PM
Next, K&L treat us to a classic strawman fallacy:


Strawman as in “I see planes spraying chemicals 30K feet above my house.”?



The broader agenda is to assault all conspiracy hypotheses with the weapons of pseudoscience, evasion, and ridicule.


Pseudoscience?
What kind of proof is “Because I said so.”? That’s all they have as proof. That’s the same proof they used for income verification two years ago, which precipitated the mortgage crisis.
The science of contrail formation is science fact. It has been proven many times over the years.
The science of chemtrails is based on nothing more than fallacious supposition.
When you practice that kind of backyard science you have to expect bugs in the results.

Evasion?
As in not answering my question? I’ll ask it again.
Doesn’t the picture I provided from 1940 show the same ‘saw tooth’ pattern as the one Jack provided, where he claimed it’s ‘new’?
We non believers have provided evidence at every turn. Where the believers have only provided supposition.

Ridicule?
We ridicule the believers theories not the person.



Nonetheless, something stinks about the Kent/Lewis attacks. And I assure you, I'm not the only one who has their scent.



The only thing that stinks is some of the theories that Hbers have. Not the people.

Charles Drago
08-11-2010, 05:19 PM
My case, she is rested.

Matthew Lewis
08-11-2010, 10:35 PM
The Kent/Lewis tag-team assault on Jack White happening here mirrors the tactic evident on the EF.

They begin politely, invite civil exchange, and then quickly sink to the default "attack" mode.
How does asking questions, (which are ignored) and presenting evidence (also ignored) constitute an attack exactly?


The broader agenda is to assault all conspiracy hypotheses with the weapons of pseudoscience, evasion, and ridicule.

Please show where I used any pseudoscience, evasion, and/or ridicule.



While some of their questions to Jack often may stand as valid scientific inquiry, K&L give away their shared game in many ways -- none more obvious than when they demonstrate feined ignorance.

Q. "Why don't they only spray at night?" [sic]

A. 1. Hide in plain (plane?) sight. 2. Operational necessity. 3. Support of "transparent conspiracy" strategy. 4. Some/all of the above.

Next, K&L treat us to a classic strawman fallacy:

Q. "A plane with a full load of passengers can’t carry the volume of liquid needed to spray these long paths you are seeing."

A. 1. There is no reason to believe that only commercial aircraft would be spraying. 2. The assumption that the "long paths" could be produced only by spraying large volumes of liquid is invalid due to the absence of information regarding the composition of the "paths."

I could go on and on ...
Please do because I am at a loss to know hwo I was involved with either of those questions. I have never met or seen Kent before seeing his posts on this forum.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but a "Matthew Lewis" character is one of the EF's primary debunkers.
And? Is it against the rules to be a member of more than one forum? By saying "Matthew Lewis" character are you implying that is not my name? Any evidence for that?


Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the ether ...
How is it not exactly? What have I done except try to ask questions and provide evidence?


Jack White is my friend. He is also a man full grown who must defend his own positions. No one on this forum is out to protect Jack from legitimate criticism.
Yet he seems unwilling or unable to actually defend his own positions. I would LOVE for him to do so. I would LOVE to have actual discussion with him about this issue.


Nonetheless, something stinks about the Kent/Lewis attacks. And I assure you, I'm not the only one who has their scent.
Again, how have I attacked ANYONE exactly?
_______________________________________________


The following is reprinted from one of my previous posts (May 26, 2010):

Chemtrail debunkers are quick to note that long, lingering, widely spreading "contrails" occur due to various -- and presumably predictable and consistent -- combinations of altitude, temperature, relative humidity, other meteorological conditions, engine performance parameters, fuel mixtures, etc.

The familiar shorter, quickly dissipating, and therefore ostensibly benign phenomena too are dependent on similar factors.

It would stand to reason, then, that over the course of any 12-month span and absent contributing factors not present during the previous 12 months in which contrails of diverse appearance were observed and noted from a fixed location, we should see consistently diverse patterns in the skies.

Here's the problem: For the past year, daytime observations of classic "chemtrails" from my fixed observation point have all but ceased. In the previous year, the "chemtrails" were present on an almost daily basis.

To my knowledge, flight paths have not been altered (I'm under flights from Boston, Hartford, and Providence airports). I have no way of knowing if changes have been made in altitude, fuel composition, engine configuration and performance, etc.

Again to my knowledge, there has been zero meaningful fluctuation in weather patterns.

Further, my observations have not diminished in terms of quantity or quality.
So if "chemtrails" are in fact "contrails" ... Where the hell are they now?
You state yourself "to your knowledge" there have been zero meaningful fluctuation in weather patterns. Have you looked at the weather at 30,000+ feet or just that on the ground? Do you realize that the two have very little to do with each other? It is possible (although I can not say for sure) that changes in altitude, fuel composition, engine configuration and performance, etc. have been made. I don't know.

What I do know is EVERY "chemtrail" picture or video I've ever seen can be explained by the long known science behind contrails. I also know that what believers call "chemtrails" can be seen in photos, videos and descriptions in newspapers dating back to WWII and before yet "chemtrail" believers say they didn't start until the late 90's. I know that science says that contrails can and do persist given the right conditions.

I have presented evidence to show these and I am accused of attacks. This is exactly why I waited a year to make my first post on this board. I knew this forum was started by some who used to post at the Education Forum. I didn't like everything that happened there to cause and continue the rift (from both sides) and decided to wait and see what the general feeling of this board was. So far it isn't good.

My further personal evidence is that there are no contrails (persistent or not) or "chemtrails" if you must call them that, in my present location of Panama City, FL. Nor were there any the last time I lived here 5 years ago. I know that the vast majority of commercial traffic is routed around this area due to the multiple military airspaces located here used for training of fighter aircraft for Tyndall AFB and Eglin AFB. I know that military training for fighters involves briefing the known contrail formation altitudes (they can be predicted) so they can be avoided (contrails of any sort only help an enemy to spot you) If there was a mass spraying campaign why would they avoid this area? It is open to military traffic and even commercial traffic with coordination. The reason that makes the most logical sense (to me anyway but I'm open to suggestions) is that what is claimed as "chemtrails" are in fact contrails produced by primarily high flying commercial aircraft. Those aircraft are absent in this location.

Is it "possible" there is a worldwide spraying program with possibly nefarious purposes? Sure. Have I seen anything yet that can't be explained by contrail science? No.

Would you like to comment on the evidence I posted in my last post?

Sam Kent
08-12-2010, 12:30 AM
I read MLs long post on EF tonight.

It’s filled with link after link of fact filled science. Enough to choke any fence sitter.
Too bad, it will never change the mind of those hard core believers.

You know what they say. Never let the facts screw up a good hoax.


I’m worried about Jack, he hasn’t answered any more of my postings. Perhaps his internet is down again.

Magda Hassan
08-12-2010, 12:35 AM
If any one is looking to change Jack's theories about chemtrails/contrails I think you are barking up the wrong tree and to set out to do so can only end in a bad way for all concerned here. Jack is satisfied with the evidence available to him that they exist. Move along guys and talk about contrails/chemtrails (and other subjects) by all means but leave the baiting of Jack out of it. Not using his name but still directing your question/s to him doesn't change that either. Deal with the evidence, theories, suppositions, facts, hypothesis, science etc and not the person please. There are a range of theories about the subject amongst the members here as there are about other subjects so please feel free to put forward yours but know that here we are united in protecting Jack as a person who has been subject to personal attack by various persons in various forums. We will have none of that here.

Jack White
08-12-2010, 06:05 AM
If any one is looking to change Jack's theories about chemtrails/contrails I think you are barking up the wrong tree and to set out to do so can only end in a bad way for all concerned here. Jack is satisfied with the evidence available to him that they exist. Move along guys and talk about contrails/chemtrails (and other subjects) by all means but leave the baiting of Jack out of it. Not using his name but still directing your question/s to him doesn't change that either. Deal with the evidence, theories, suppositions, facts, hypothesis, science etc and not the person please. There are a range of theories about the subject amongst the members here as there are about other subjects so please feel free to put forward yours but know that here we are united in protecting Jack as a person who has been subject to personal attack by various persons in various forums. We will have none of that here.

Thanks for the defense, Magda. Study of chemtrails does not need
defending, since 1000s worldwide have studied the same evidence
and found that covert spraying is the cause of chemtrails. It is all
connected to "global warming" and was recommended by the late
Ed Teller years ago. Teller suggested that an "umbrella" of artificial
cirrus clouds to screen out sunrays was a feasible program. Some
officials and weather people admit that is what is going on. The
AF Academy offers a course in CHEMTRAILS 101. I observe them
over Fort Worth daily or weekly flying various patterns unlike
airliner traffic. Chemtrails are not something that I made up;
thousands observe them daily. They did not start appearing in
our sky until about 10 years ago, despite claims that they go
back to the 40s.

Lewis is a member of the Air Force, stationed in Georgia, as I
recall. He follows me from website to website, "baiting me" into
"debating" with him. His ONLY point of debate is that chemtrails
are "persistent contrails". His mania for persisting in this strange
behavior has only one logical explanation, in my opinion.

I am 83 and my arthritis makes getting around a pain. I went
to the funeral of my next door neighbor of 40 years today. My
grass has been suffering from TAKE ALL ROOT ROT, and I have
been fighting that fungus for up to 4 hours a day. I maintain a
historical website of more than 2000 pages. I do not need hassle
from Lewis or others, and certainly have NO time to "debate"
him. I am entitled to my opinion based on my observations and
studies without being pursued and harassed by people like Lewis.
Maintaining decorum prevents me from describing Lewis in
anatomical excremental terms.

Thanks.

Jack

Malcolm Pryce
08-12-2010, 11:12 AM
I am disappointed by the response here to Matthew Lewis's evidence.

I have no axe to grind, I am sympathetic to the people and aims of this forum, and am convinced on some issues such as JFK and 9/11.

And I have no idea who Matthew Lewis is. That said, as a fair-minded observer I have to say the information he posted is extensive, well documented, well-argued and, frankly, a damn sight more intellectually robust than most claims I read about alleged chemtrials.

He has been accused of evasion, pseudo-science and ridicule. I see no real evidence to justify these claims.

I don't want to upset people, I just want to find the truth. And I especially don't want to inadvertantly promulgate non-science and lay myself open to the charge of lacking intellectual rigour when I talk about other deep political events.

Magda Hassan
08-12-2010, 11:28 AM
Malcolm, by all means please discuss Matthew's information with him and others here. I encourage you to do so. My concern and that of others here is to do with some personal history on another forum which involved ourselves and Jack and we simply do not wish to go there again and are just making sure the boundaries are very clear.

Matthew Lewis
08-12-2010, 12:33 PM
The AF Academy offers a course in CHEMTRAILS 101.
Correction. The USAFA USED to offer a course called with a book called "chemtrails" years before people SAY they started to show up and years before William Thomas coined the phrase to mean "chemical contrails". Anyone who looks at the book (I have some screenshots of it on another computer that I may post later) can see it is for a freshman level Chemistry class. In this case it appears to be simply a coincidental name meaning something like pathways in chemistry. The book has nothing in it about contrails, "chemtrails", spraying, weather control, or whatever the current theory is.



They did not start appearing in our sky until about 10 years ago, despite claims that they go back to the 40s.
Then what about the evidence I posted showing exactly that? How is that explained? I'd really like to know.


Lewis is a member of the Air Force, stationed in Georgia, as I recall.
You prove you don't even read the posts of those you disagree with. My last post said I currently live in Panama City, FL. I have also said MANY TIMES that my opinions are my own. I am not paid or compensated in any way to post here or anywhere else. I'm believe you were trying to imply that.


He follows me from website to website,
I did not come here to follow you. I gave my reasons for coming here in my last post. I've been civil. So far I'm not impressed with the reception and frankly have been toying with the idea of leaving altogether. I wanted to give this forum the benefit of the doubt. As I said before, I did not agree with what happened on the other forum on either side. This "cheery" reception is starting to change my mind.


"baiting me" into "debating" with him.
How is asking legitimate questions and presenting evidence "baiting" anyone?


His ONLY point of debate is that chemtrails are "persistent contrails".
If the shoe fits...


His mania for persisting in this strange behavior has only one logical explanation, in my opinion.
Good thing it is only your OPINION then. As I have stated before, my interest in this subject is due to a love of aviation and an abhorrence of ignorance. I have done my own research and come to a different opinion than you. Is that not allowed?



I do not need hassle from Lewis or others, and certainly have NO time to "debate" him. I am entitled to my opinion based on my observations and studies without being pursued and harassed by people like Lewis.
How have I harassed or hassled you? I'm curious. Should I not correct something I see as wrong no matter who posted it? Have I ever said you weren't entitled to your opinion? It may only APPEAR that I have pursued you because we are posting on opposite sides of the same subject. But I have posted many places on many subjects where you are not. Don't flatter yourself Jack.

Magda Hassan
08-12-2010, 01:09 PM
Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?

I just don't think Jack is going to play ball. :playingball: He has neighbours to farewell, lawns to grow, a web site to maintain and doctors appointments to keep. But there are others here who might.

Matthew Lewis
08-12-2010, 04:42 PM
Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?

I just don't think Jack is going to play ball. :playingball: He has neighbours to farewell, lawns to grow, a web site to maintain and doctors appointments to keep. But there are others here who might.
I don't think so either. I don't expect him to as that would be out of character for him. I still don't feel that statements that are verifiably wrong either about me or about the science should go unresponded to just because he won't answer. What would a new observer think if they see some points unanswered or implications about other forum members unresponded to? At the very least questions and responses for him might stimulate discussion amongst others. I am still looking for civil discussion no matter what he (or others) may think.

Jan Klimkowski
08-12-2010, 05:12 PM
I do not know the truth about chemtrails.

However, if chemtrails are a covert operation of some sort, then much of the science and logistical implementation would be kept secret.

There are many sceptics who would say that it would be impossible for hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people to keep such a secret.

Indeed, these sceptics would suggest that the notion so many people could keep such a secret for years and years and years is a ludicrous "conspiracy theory".

However, we have a prime example from the very world of aeronautics of a Big Secret being kept by thousands of people for more than a decade.

That example is Stealth.

Matthew Lewis
08-12-2010, 05:57 PM
I do not know the truth about chemtrails.

However, if chemtrails are a covert operation of some sort, then much of the science and logistical implementation would be kept secret.

There are many sceptics who would say that it would be impossible for hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people to keep such a secret.

Indeed, these sceptics would suggest that the notion so many people could keep such a secret for years and years and years is a ludicrous "conspiracy theory".

However, we have a prime example from the very world of aeronautics of a Big Secret being kept by thousands of people for more than a decade.

That example is Stealth.
I agree that it would be kept secret if it exists. Is it possible that there is some massive spraying program? Sure. But so far, everything I've seen can be explained.

A big difference between this and stealth would be that a majority of the claimed trails come from verifiably commercial traffic. Stealth was known that it was being worked toward. What was secret was just how far we had come with it. As far back as the 50's (I've seen rumors about even in late WWII) we had some aircraft with stealth characteristics. The SR-71 and the U-2 had some stealth characteristics. It just wasn't until the F-117 and the B-2 that we had gotten it down.

Jan Klimkowski
08-12-2010, 07:56 PM
Yes - Stealth was rumoured. Just as chemtrails are rumoured.

Indeed, Stealth was often ridiculed, perhaps deliberately in a mockingbird fashion, as the "invisible plane".

As Nick Cook, former Aviation Editor for Jane's Defence Weekly, a supposed bible of the military tech world, wrote in "The Hunt for Point Zero":


...since the money for the F-117A programme - to the tune of several billion dollars - had been appropriated from the Pentagon's "black budget", ringfenced as it was from public scrutiny, that was how things remained until 1988, when the outgoing Reagan adminstration revealed just what it had hushed up for so many years.

The F-117A, the bland press release stated, had gone operational in 1983. For five years, its pilots had operated at squadron strength "in the black", roaming the desert night skies of the US Southwest, practising for the nighttime attack mission they would be required to perform in a war. The disclosure had only been made at all because the air force wanted to expand the training envelope and start flying the F-117A by day. Otherwise it would have remained buried even longer.

During the F-117A's five years of secret ops, thousands of workers had been involved in the assembly process at Burbank; hundreds more in supporting the aircraft at Tonopah. And yet, not one had breathed a word about it.

The big story in November 1988, then, related to the existence and capabilities of the Stealth fighter, a programme that rivaled the scale and daring of the Manhattan Project almost fifty years earlier. Like the bomb programme, the F-117A had been meticulously covered up, but unlike the bomb programme, the secrecy had held.


(p120, Cook)

The historical record clearly shows that after a limited hangout for political purposes by Carter in 1980, Reagan's regime deliberately took Stealth back into the black.

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj91/fal91/cunn.htm


A demonstration of just how far the Reagan administration was willing to go with keeping stealth technology secret can be seen in statements by Air Force Secretary Verne Orr in July 1981. Contradicting what Secretary of Defense Harold Brown had stated the year before and disregarding reports of several years in the technical media, Orr called the stealth bomber a "paper airplane" and "wishful thinking." He also expressed doubt that American industry could handle such a "rush program," when in fact the F-117A was developed in record time.24

(snip)

The cost of keeping the F-117A a complete secret for nearly a decade must have been enormous in both human and financial dimensions. The entire facility at Tonopah, Nevada, where the F-117As are based until they are scheduled to be moved in 1992, was constructed for the stealth fighter program. Until the F-117As arrived, the only buildings there werethose of an old World War II training facility.77 Great expense was also incurred when Lockheed personnel commuted daily to the facility from the company's plant in Burbank, California.78 These are but a few of the types of expenses involved in keeping a major program under wraps.

The extreme secrecy of the program had human costs as well. To keep the number of personnel assigned to the F-117A units as small as possible, pilots were made to carry out functions that otherwise would have been handled by a separate staff. This was likely a leading cause of fatigue among pilots flying the aircraft, which led to accidents that otherwise might have been avoided. Additional contributing factors to fatigue and accidents included radio silence orders and the constraint of flying the aircraft only during night hours to avoid detection.79 One report by a retired Air Force general indicates that the pilots of F-117As were all but ordered to die with their aircraft if it became necessary to come down in any unsecured location: "If you can't bring it home, then you auger it in ... even if you have to go in with it."80 Pilots flying in Red Flag exercises at nearby Nellis were supposed to have been "forced down" if they got too close to a stealth aircraft and refused orders to move away.

Under Reagan, the F-117A was a phantasm, protected by national security and rumour.

Matthew Lewis
08-12-2010, 08:47 PM
Yes - Stealth was rumoured. Just as chemtrails are rumoured.

Granted.
The difference that I see is that everything I have yet seen regarding "chemtrails" has a mundane explanation based on the long known science of contrails. The "chemtrail" theory rests on the assumption that contrails must always dissipate quickly and never persist and that they were never seen before 1998. I have show those are both untrue.


Here are some scans of the "chemtrails" book mentioned in an earlier post. I obtained these from another forum, godlikeproductions.com , where someone else actually did all the legwork tracking the book down. As anyone can see, it is from a CHEMISTRY 131 class also known as freshman level basic chemistry. It contains all the same subjects that any other freshman class in any other university would cover.
Cover
http://i398.photobucket.com/albums/pp65/frenat/chemtrails%20a%20chemistry%20book/usafa-1.gif
Contents page
http://i398.photobucket.com/albums/pp65/frenat/chemtrails%20a%20chemistry%20book/6pnpko.jpg
Lab manual cover
http://i398.photobucket.com/albums/pp65/frenat/chemtrails%20a%20chemistry%20book/usafa-1.gif
Again this was years before the "chemtrail" theory says these trails were seen and years before the word "chemtrail" to mean chemical contrail was coined by William Thomas. Even if the Air Force had a secret spraying program would they really teach all about it to every freshman at the academy, many of which will only stay in the Air Force for their initial 4 year commitment and get out? I think most logical people would agree that it is simply a coincidental title for an unrelated course. In my opinion, thinking otherwise is on par with assuming that because a college psychology class studied this book
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Extreme-Killing/Jack-Levin/e/9780761988571/?itm=1&USRI=murder+textbook
that the university commits mass murder.

Matthew Lewis
08-12-2010, 08:54 PM
I am disappointed by the response here to Matthew Lewis's evidence.

I have no axe to grind, I am sympathetic to the people and aims of this forum, and am convinced on some issues such as JFK and 9/11.

And I have no idea who Matthew Lewis is. That said, as a fair-minded observer I have to say the information he posted is extensive, well documented, well-argued and, frankly, a damn sight more intellectually robust than most claims I read about alleged chemtrials.

He has been accused of evasion, pseudo-science and ridicule. I see no real evidence to justify these claims.

I don't want to upset people, I just want to find the truth. And I especially don't want to inadvertantly promulgate non-science and lay myself open to the charge of lacking intellectual rigour when I talk about other deep political events.
Thank you for your support. All I'm looking for is a civil discussion.

Malcolm Pryce
08-13-2010, 01:33 PM
Surely the point that chemtrails are allegedly sprayed by commercial aircraft is fatal to the argument of the chemtrail proponents.

Yes, the Stealth project was an excellent example of the military keeping a big secret for a long time.

But it would be dwarfed by what we are asked to believe about chemtrails.

This would have to be a secret kept across numerous countries, involving thousands if not tens of thousands of civilians. How come none of the ground staff, technicians, engineers, pilots etc. have noticed or spoken out? What reason would they have to stay silent? Or are we saying they don't know? Who loads the liquid onto the plane? Doesn't it take up an awful lot of space and add weight? How come none of the pilots have spotted what must, after all, be a very strange departure from the norm?

I don't doubt the military spray stuff into the sky for various reasons. But I just can't believe in a worldwide conspiracy involving commercial airliners to surreptitiously spray us all.

Jack White
08-13-2010, 01:48 PM
Surely the point that chemtrails are allegedly sprayed by commercial aircraft is fatal to the argument of the chemtrail proponents.

Yes, the Stealth project was an excellent example of the military keeping a big secret for a long time.

But it would be dwarfed by what we are asked to believe about chemtrails.

This would have to be a secret kept across numerous countries, involving thousands if not tens of thousands of civilians. How come none of the ground staff, technicians, engineers, pilots etc. have noticed or spoken out? What reason would they have to stay silent? Or are we saying they don't know? Who loads the liquid onto the plane? Doesn't it take up an awful lot of space and add weight? How come none of the pilots have spotted what must, after all, be a very strange departure from the norm?

I don't doubt the military spray stuff into the sky for various reasons. But I just can't believe in a worldwide conspiracy involving commercial airliners to surreptitiously spray us all.

I know of nobody who studies chemtrails who suggests
that commercial airliners are used. There is NO evidence
suggesting this. Large unmarked tanker jets of the type
used for aerial refueling are used.

Attached is an alleged spray attachment, though most
chemtrails I have seen are twin sprays coming from the
wing/engine areas.

Jack

Matthew Lewis
08-13-2010, 05:15 PM
I know of nobody who studies chemtrails who suggests
that commercial airliners are used. There is NO evidence
suggesting this.

Whether you know of it or not, many do suggest that. Some "chemtrail" theorists have suggested the airlines are in on it. Many post pics and videos of aircraft with clear commercial markings or of types not used as tankers. Some have even compared the aircraft they were seeing with commercial flights referenced in programs like Flight Explorer or Flight Aware.



Large unmarked tanker jets of the type
used for aerial refueling are used.
USAF tankers have either 3 or 4 engines. What about the thousands of pics and videos showing aircraft with TWO engines? Or the pics clearly showing aircraft with commercial markings? Or the pics showing 747's or Airbus aircraft?


Attached is an alleged spray attachment, though most
chemtrails I have seen are twin sprays coming from the
wing/engine areas.

Jack
Nice pic of an airborne icing test sprayer. The Air Force has one. It sprays water to test an aircraft's ability to handle icing conditions and effectiveness of deicing equipment. Here's a pic showing it in use. Notice the spray is not very thick
http://www.aviationspectator.com/files/images/F-22-Raptor-168.jpg
With a writeup here
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/kc-135r-ait.htm

Any evidence it is used for more than that?

Sam Kent
08-13-2010, 05:38 PM
I know of nobody who studies chemtrails who suggests
that commercial airliners are used. There is NO evidence
suggesting this.

There is no evidence that non commercial aircraft are used either.




Large unmarked tanker jets of the type
used for aerial refueling are used.



Prove it. Give us one shred of evidence to prove it. So far all you have provided is conjecture and backyard observations from 35,000 feet away.



Since these planes fly over your house almost daily it should be easy for you to prove your beliefs.
Use your digital camera and take a series of stills while zooming in on the plane. That way we can see the chemtrail and the drab paint job on the plane. We don’t expect to read the tail numbers. But if you are correct then it should not have a Delta paint job.

Dawn Meredith
08-17-2010, 04:12 PM
My case, she is rested.

I echo CD's sentiments.

Dawn

Jack White
08-17-2010, 06:10 PM
Chemplane.

Sam Kent
08-17-2010, 08:32 PM
Jack you didn't!
I can't believe you posted that picture. You just shot your creditability in the leg not just the foot.
That particular picture is at least 10 years old!
It's a E-6 TACAMO dumping fuel. This model is used by the Navy for command and communications. It's a highly modified 707. the normal fuel dump ports had to be moved inboard due to the communications pods on the wing tips.

There is no way you took this photo in the last week. I know you did not specifically state you took the photo but it is implied based on my request for a series of photos. I did a google search and typed in "dumping fuel pictures". Lo and behold there is your picture right at the top of the page.

Check out these links.
http://morningmusings.rendabrumbeloe.org/2009/02/02/dumping-fuel.aspx

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/ic/e6tacamo/index.html

David Healy
08-17-2010, 09:01 PM
Fanatical defenders seem to have a hidden agenda.
Just a love of aviation and an abhorrence of ignorance.

yeah.... most lone nuts say the same... "just a love of aviation".... What we need is some lone nut originality. LMFAO!

Jack White
08-17-2010, 11:16 PM
I did a little googling. Sam Kent and Matthew Lewis
show up on most all forums I could find regarding Chemtrails.
Their passion to debunk the obvious is baffling.

Jack

Sam Kent
08-17-2010, 11:24 PM
I notice that someone using the ID of Jack White posts on a lot of forums espousing chemtrails.
Their passion to believe in something with no proof is baffling.

Matthew Lewis
08-17-2010, 11:28 PM
I did a little googling. Sam Kent and Matthew Lewis
show up on most all forums I could find regarding Chemtrails.
Their passion to debunk the obvious is baffling.

Jack
The obvious? Like posting a pic of a plane doing a fuel dump that is not a tanker, not unmarked, and not "chemtrailing"?

Is it a crime to post on a subject that I find interesting and happen to know something about the science?

But seriously Jack, whatever happened to attack the message, not the messenger?

Myra Bronstein
08-18-2010, 05:32 AM
Fanatical defenders seem to have a hidden agenda.
Just a love of aviation and an abhorrence of ignorance.

yeah.... most lone nuts say the same... "just a love of aviation".... What we need is some lone nut originality. LMFAO!

That comment can be construed as calling someone in this thread a "nut" David. Just want to bring that to your attention since it would be against the rules at DPF.

Jan Klimkowski
08-18-2010, 04:08 PM
I would ask all members to abide by Rule 14 of the DPF Rules of Engagement:


14. Our fundamental objective is for DPF to be an arena where research can be seriously discussed, and thoroughly refuted if appropriate, without name-calling or member abuse. It is acceptable to be robust and even dismissive of the arguments of other members, if analysis and evidence are provided. It is acceptable to state that a particular argument serves the agenda of the powerful, again if analysis and evidence are provided. However, since DPF is primarily intended as an arena where serious informed research can be developed and debated, it is not acceptable to describe another member as, for instance, an agent provocateur.

Huge parts of The Swamp have been destroyed, and are continuing to be destroyed, by entities there deliberately baiting serious researchers and diverting threads into abuse and blind alleys.

Let's show contempt for Their tactics.

Jack White
08-19-2010, 12:11 AM
I would ask all members to abide by Rule 14 of the DPF Rules of Engagement:


14. Our fundamental objective is for DPF to be an arena where research can be seriously discussed, and thoroughly refuted if appropriate, without name-calling or member abuse. It is acceptable to be robust and even dismissive of the arguments of other members, if analysis and evidence are provided. It is acceptable to state that a particular argument serves the agenda of the powerful, again if analysis and evidence are provided. However, since DPF is primarily intended as an arena where serious informed research can be developed and debated, it is not acceptable to describe another member as, for instance, an agent provocateur.

Huge parts of The Swamp have been destroyed, and are continuing to be destroyed, by entities there deliberately baiting serious researchers and diverting threads into abuse and blind alleys.

Let's show contempt for Their tactics.

Thanks, Jan. I have been followed here by some from
the Simkin swamp.

Jack

Ed Jewett
10-22-2010, 04:55 PM
https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=edbff0965d&view=att&th=12bd4041b511110f&attid=0.1&disp=emb&zw (http://www.infowarsshop.com/What-in-the-World-Are-They-Spraying_p_370.html#%23)
Almost daily, skies over America, and the world are continually sprayed, that disperse and cover skies for days.


I’ve spoken of these Chemtrail since 2006.

People pretend not to see this, as it is not reported by news & politicians.
So if they are blind, must we be blind also ?

I have 4 videos on this, I loan. You can also look deeply at this by simple internet searches

Here’s a new DVD with excellent, authoritative leadership in G Edward Griffith

This phenomena is world wide.

Ted Elden ©, my research: http://www.abodia.com/t/Articles/ChemTrails.htm (http://www.abodia.com/t/Articles/ChemTrails.htm)


The Chemtrail/Geo-Engineering Coverup Revealed.
http://www.infowarsshop.com/What-in-the-World-Are-They-Spraying_p_370.html

By now everyone has seen crisscrossing streaks of white clouds trailing behind jet aircraft, stretching from horizon to horizon, eventually turning the sky into a murky haze. Our innate intelligence tells us these are not mere vapor trails from jet engines, but no one yet has probed the questions: who is doing this and why. ... Here is the story of a rapidly developing industry called geo-engineering, driven by scientists, corporations, and governments intent on changing global climate, controlling weather, and altering the chemical composition of soil and water — all supposedly for the betterment of mankind. Although officials insist that these programs are only in the discussion phase, evidence is abundant that they have been underway since about 1990 — and the effect has been devastating to crops, wildlife, and human health. We are being sprayed with toxic substances without our consent and, to add insult to injury, they are lying to us about it. Do not watch this documentary if you have high blood pressure.
• Expected ship date October 22, 2010
• Runtime 95 minutes
• Produced by G. Edward Griffin, Michael Murphy and Paul Wittenberger

chemtrail - Google Search

1. Chemtrail conspiracy theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail_conspiracy_theory)
"The chemtrail conspiracy theory holds that some contrails are actually chemical or biological agents deliberately sprayed at high altitudes for a purpose ..."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail_conspiracy_theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail_conspiracy_theory)
2. Chemtrail Central (http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/)
"21 Oct 2010 ... Chemtrail news, research, images, forum and more. ... Searching for Answers in the Chemtrail Issue... Does this look normal to you? ..."
www.chemtrailcentral.com/ (http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/)
3. Chemtrails 911 - Exposing aerial crimes and aerosol operations ... (http://www.chemtrails911.com/)
"CHEMTRAILS-911, A CALL FOR HELP! Documented evidence of chemtrails: US legislation & patents, military reports, videos, photos, news articles, ..."
www.chemtrails911.com/ (http://www.chemtrails911.com/)
4. CHEMTRAIL on MySpace Music - Free Streaming MP3s, Pictures & Music ... (http://www.myspace.com/chemtrailmyspace)
"MySpace Music profile for CHEMTRAIL. Download CHEMTRAIL Rock / Experimental / Ambient music singles, watch music videos, listen to free streaming mp3s, ..."
www.myspace.com/chemtrailmyspace (http://www.myspace.com/chemtrailmyspace)
5. Chemtrails Index: Hard Truth / Wake Up America (http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/chemtrailsindex.htm)
"Who could doubt the validity of the claim that the Government is guilty of poisoning us with today's Chemtrail's after looking at their past offences of the ..."
www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/chemtrailsindex.htm (http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/chemtrailsindex.htm)
6. YouTube - Danger In The Sky - The Chemtrail Phenomenon (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdtLTyNOB0A)
"17 Jun 2008 ... Includes original footage now featured on "What In The World Are They Spraying". Chemtrails Are: Persistent lines of chemical-infused ..."
www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdtLTyNOB0A (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdtLTyNOB0A)
7. CHEMTRAIL | Home (http://www.chemtrailmusic.com/)
"Official site for the NJ instrumental rock band CHEMTRAIL. Contains show dates, audio/video content, news, and more."
www.chemtrailmusic.com/ (http://www.chemtrailmusic.com/)
8. Chemtrails, an Introduction (http://educate-yourself.org/ct/)
"15 Feb 1999 ... Mar 1, 2002.. If you are just beginning to learn about Chemtrails, the following Introductory article below will give you an overview of how ..."
educate-yourself.org/ct/ (http://educate-yourself.org/ct/)
9. CHEMTRAILS (http://www.nmsr.org/chemtrls.htm)
"21 Jan 2004 ... Presents evidence that the so-called chemtrails are nothing more than normal contrails."
www.nmsr.org/chemtrls.htm (http://www.nmsr.org/chemtrls.htm)
10. Chemtrails Hall of Shame - Documenting a global non-event (http://www.lightwatcher.com/chemtrails/hos.html)
"The Chemtrail Hall of Shame - illegal weather modification programs being conducted above the Pacific Northwest."
www.lightwatcher.com/chemtrails/hos.html (http://www.lightwatcher.com/chemtrails/hos.html)
11. Aerosol Crimes 1st Edition (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2815320198655156407)
"This documentary produced by chemtrail researcher Clifford Carnicom is a must ... Over the years aerosol/chemtrail research has provided some leads but even ..."
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2815320198655156407 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2815320198655156407)
12. Chemtrails-Contrails (http://www.carnicom.com/)
"An extensive website proving that chemtrails are a secret government conspiracy. CIA and military coverup."
www.carnicom.com/ (http://www.carnicom.com/)
13. Word Spy - chemtrail (http://www.wordspy.com/words/chemtrail.asp)
"22 Jul 2010 ... Ah, the old "chemtrail conspiracy" theory. The idea that the white lines of condensed water vapor that you see following planes, contrails, ..."
www.wordspy.com/words/chemtrail.asp (http://www.wordspy.com/words/chemtrail.asp)
14. CHEMTRAILS MATRIX HOMEPAGE (http://homepage.mac.com/carolepellatt/MATRIX/INDEXCHEMTRAILS.html)
"1 Aug 2010 ... Chemtrails, weapons,military,cloudy skies, ... chemtrails, chemtrails2, chemx. I SEE LINES Photos, Articles, Videos, & Research Materials ..."
homepage.mac.com/carolepellatt/MATRIX/INDEXCHEMTRAILS.html (http://homepage.mac.com/carolepellatt/MATRIX/INDEXCHEMTRAILS.html)
15. Chemtrails environmental modification chemtrail spraying ... (http://www.bariumblues.com/)
"Discover information on how and why poisonous aerosols are possibly related to electromagnetic radiation. Find articles, guestbook and links."
www.bariumblues.com/ (http://www.bariumblues.com/)
16. Chemtrails: What In The World Are They Spraying? (http://www.infowars.com/chemtrails-what-in-the-world-are-they-spraying/)
"8 Oct 2010 ... Steve Watson & Paul Watson | Over the past decade and more, long white trails emanating from jet planes have been seen lingering in the ..."
www.infowars.com/chemtrails-what-in-the-world-are-they-spraying/ (http://www.infowars.com/chemtrails-what-in-the-world-are-they-spraying/)
17. chemtrails - contrails - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com (http://www.skepdic.com/chemtrails.html)
"According to several paranoid conspiracy theorists (PCTs), chemtrails look like contrails but they are intentionally created by unknown people to poison us ..."
www.skepdic.com/chemtrails.html (http://www.skepdic.com/chemtrails.html)
18. NORTHLAND NEW ZEALAND CHEMTRAILS WATCH | A Place To Post ... (http://chemtrailsnorthnz.wordpress.com/)
"22 Oct 2010 ... The Chemtrail/Geo-Engineering Cover-up ... visited Cuba for a holiday in August and said she didn't see any chemtrails in the Cuban skies. ..."
chemtrailsnorthnz.wordpress.com/ (http://chemtrailsnorthnz.wordpress.com/)
19. New Chemtrail Pictures!! (or is this just a Natural Phenomenon ... (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread620906/pg1)
"17 Oct 2010 ... I have no idea if these are so-called “ChemTrails” or just a natural phenomenon. This is not the first time I have seen this kind of thing ..."
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread620906/pg1 (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread620906/pg1)
20. Aerosols and Chemtrails United Kingdom Node (http://www.chemtrailsuk.net/)
"Donate to clean up chemtrails when you win at craps by using the craps definitions and craps secrets from CasinoBonus.org, where you can make a craps bet ..."
www.chemtrailsuk.net/ (http://www.chemtrailsuk.net/)



The above received by e-mail.

Ed Jewett
10-25-2010, 06:35 PM
What in the World are They Spraying?? (http://solari.com/blog/?p=9279)

Catherine (http://solari.com/blog/?cat=26) and News & Commentary (http://solari.com/blog/?cat=4),
October 25, 2010 at 1:10 pm

I just finished watching Edward Griffin, Mike Murphy and Paul Wittenberger’s new documentary “What in the World Are They Spraying?” It is terrific.


More here:


http://solari.com/blog/?p=9279

Ed Jewett
01-25-2011, 07:52 PM
Long web page ranging on a number of topics:

Evergreen Aviation Admits to Chemtrail Contracts with USAF
Written by Joan Biakov
Friday, 14 January 2011 12:40

http://www.forbiddenknowledgetv.com/videos/meteorology/evergreen-aviation-admits-tochemtrail-contracts-with-usaf.html

8:35 video embedded there

###


http://aircrap.org/

An extensive website, loaded with articles et al ...

Jack White
01-26-2011, 12:17 AM
Long web page ranging on a number of topics:

Evergreen Aviation Admits to Chemtrail Contracts with USAF
Written by Joan Biakov
Friday, 14 January 2011 12:40

http://www.forbiddenknowledgetv.com/videos/meteorology/evergreen-aviation-admits-tochemtrail-contracts-with-usaf.html

8:35 video embedded there

###


http://aircrap.org/

An extensive website, loaded with articles et al ...

Fantastic new information!

Evergreen Aviation has been a notorious CIA false front company
ever since Vietnam!

Jack

David Guyatt
01-26-2011, 10:11 AM
I've just looked at Evergreen's website (http://www.evergreenaviation.com/) and their "Supertanker" folder (and a general but not protracted wider search) and can't find any mention about this.

Perhaps I'm being a bit blind, or perhaps they have changed their website? I don't know? But if anyone else can find it, it would be good to copy and paste it here for archive sake...

Ed Jewett
01-28-2011, 02:26 AM
I've just looked at Evergreen's website (http://www.evergreenaviation.com/) and their "Supertanker" folder (and a general but not protracted wider search) and can't find any mention about this.

Perhaps I'm being a bit blind, or perhaps they have changed their website? I don't know? But if anyone else can find it, it would be good to copy and paste it here for archive sake...


David:

This, along with the links posted, is what I was e-mailed....

"

On their own website in the "Markets" section for their
New Super Tanker, they state "Weather Modification" among
other interesting service markets.

Content copied directly from Evergreen Aviation website:

"The Evergreen Supertanker is not just limited to fighting
fire. It will be a true utilitarian aircraft with the
capability to configure to different applications on short
notice. This multimission aircraft can support sensitive
security and environmental missions. The aircraft's
exceptional drop capabilities, loiter time and size make
it an ideal tool to perform challenging homeland security
missions, able to neutralize chemical attacks on military
installments or major population centers, and help control
large, environmentally disastrous oil spills.

"In addition, the upper deck of the Boeing 747 provides
over 200 square feet of space that could be assigned as a
command and control center. EIA possesses an FAA exemption
number 1870C that permits the carriage of up to five
individuals that are not crewmembers in the upper deck.
This area is capable of providing space for command and
control components that would assist in sophisticated
mapping, incident monitoring and video/communications
downlink relay that might require additional personnel
over and above the required crew.

"MARKETS:

- Firefighting
- Oil Spill Containment
- Weather Modification
- Biochemical Decontamination"

Jack White
01-28-2011, 05:06 AM
http://aircrap.org/

Christer Forslund
02-14-2011, 08:24 PM
Chemtrails Halted for Navy Fest, U.S. Open and...Obama

http://beforeitsnews.com/story/415/566/Chemtrails_Halted_for_Navy_Fest,_U.S._Open_and...O bama.html

by Zen Gardner, 13 Feb 2011

Surprise. Military brass don't like chemtrails either. So they stopped them for 3 days in San Diego this week while they enjoyed their multi-million dollar taxpayer-funded festivities. Sort of the Oscars for the military elite you might say.
Besides, while setting up with exotic boats and planes, bringing in dignitaries and the like, you'd hate to have pesky hazy, toxic days for your guests and families. And while the elaborate air show was going on it wouldn't be convenient to be competing with other Navy/NATO/covert aerosol planes, normally seen almost daily spraying the vicinity, state, country and world, would it?
That'd just be downright silly. And with all those TV crews and phone cameras clicking away someone just might notice something a little strange, or at the least, "disturbing" to the unitiated, in front of the unsullied elite and their precious guests.
That would be messy.

Clear Days of Preparation
We just found this out noticing signs on the LA Freeway to avoid the Coronado Island area while heading south to look at the beaches. We're constantly monitoring the skies and always wondering when and why the chemtrails get turned on and off and film them quite a bit. This recent span of clear days had us rejoicing, thinking recent complaints to the media a la one of my recent chemtrail posts (http://beforeitsnews.com/story/394/953/Alert:_CBS_Outlet_Calls_for_Chemtrail_Pics--Fire_Away.html) was having an effect. (Right..)
Turns out they've been prepping for this event for the same several clear days we've been enjoying. It's been gorgeous "weather" they've so gratiously "allowed" via our controllers, and everyone's been getting some unfiltered sunshine at last - although the white sheen from years of aerosol seeding can still be seen on the clearest day and we're still not getting full sun, nor is anyone anywhere sad to say.
But here's yesterday's announcement of today's event:
Navy to celebrate 100 years of flight with huge air show
Feb. 11, San Diego - In a massive choreography of planes, boats and automobiles, more than 120,000 people are likely to gather around San Diego Bay (http://topics.signonsandiego.com/topics/San_Diego_Bay) on Saturday for an historic parade of Navy air power.
Nearly 200 current and vintage military aircraft will fly over the Coronado Bridge (http://topics.signonsandiego.com/topics/San_Diego_%E2%80%93_Coronado_Bridge) and up the belly of the bay to celebrate 100 years of naval aviation.
The Navy is bringing the party here because North Island (http://topics.signonsandiego.com/topics/North_Island) was the birthplace of naval aviation in 1911. Source (http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/feb/08/north-island-base-celebrates-100-years-flight-open/)
Hmm. Just can't seem to get away from that pesky 911.

U.S. Open Golf Tourney Clear Too
Two weeks ago we also noticed clear skies for several days, which doesn't happen often in southern California. We're a major population center and they hit us hard with chemtrails as often as they can, like other densely populated areas.
I was wondering about that one day and after driving for a while and coming upon the ocean view there was this huge blimp.
Sure enough, it was the weekend of the U.S. Open! Bingo!
The elite LOVE golf! Problem solved.
So again, "Should we turn the aerosols off, or on, for our esteemed guests?" "Well off, Jeeves, of course. Especially with all the local Illuminati in attendance and their 'golden boys of golf' to protect."
Hey, give 'em a break. We're only peons, aphids, fodder, worker bees, useless eaters, or their new institutional term:
"human resources".
By the way, who's resource are you? Think about that one.
Just wondering, Zen

P.S.
If this just sounds like a "coincidence", let me tell you about my experience in Texas last year.
(I've heard this has been witnessed by others, but got to see it clearly for myself.)
Obama came to visit Austin and then Dallas during his campaigning for whoever. Austin, an alternative hotbed, gets BOMBED with chemtrails. And the air doesn't move. I coughed horrifically there during our visit.
As I said, I photograph and film these things. It empowers me to know and document that "I see you!" but also I'm building an archive I use regularly.

Saint Obama Arrives
But sure enough, the skies cleared one day, and oddly enough it was the day of our departure from Austin for Dallas. But lo and behold, it turned out to be the day of Obama's visit. And if that's not enough, he touched down, did his little gig, and took off for Dallas...where we were going as he was arriving.
Dallas gets creamed regularly as well. Again, the air doesn't move so for me it's toxic. A doctor I saw there said this weird "early onset asthma" or something was sweeping the area and respiratory problems were off the charts.
Anyway, we start approaching Dallas. I usually see the chemtrails ahead of time and am taking pictures. Nothing. Closer. Nothing. It was a chemtrail spigot "turn off"...and sure enough, it was for Obama and his nasties. He came for the day and it meant that much to the sprayers to turn it off.
I kid you not. Think about it.

More from Zen on Chemtrails:
Landmark Meeting of Chemtrail Activists and Local EPA (http://members.beforeitsnews.com/story/415/020/Landmark_Meeting_of_Chemtrail_Activists_and_Local_ EPA.html)
Alert: CBS Outlet Calls for Chemtrail Pics--Fire Away! (http://members.beforeitsnews.com/story/394/953/Alert:_CBS_Outlet_Calls_for_Chemtrail_Pics--Fire_Away.html)
The Chemtrail Conditioning Program (http://members.beforeitsnews.com/story/329/825/The_Chemtrail_Conditioning_Program.html)
www.zengardner.com (http://www.zengardner.com/)

David Guyatt
02-15-2011, 09:44 AM
I've just looked at Evergreen's website (http://www.evergreenaviation.com/) and their "Supertanker" folder (and a general but not protracted wider search) and can't find any mention about this.

Perhaps I'm being a bit blind, or perhaps they have changed their website? I don't know? But if anyone else can find it, it would be good to copy and paste it here for archive sake...


David:

This, along with the links posted, is what I was e-mailed....


Thanks Ed. Seems I missed your above post at the time --- just read it.

Jack White
03-07-2011, 03:19 AM
I thought the forum had a thread on CHEMTRAILS, but could not
find one, so I am starting this from a post I made today elsewhere.
Matthew Lewis will show up here in just a few minutes to "debunk"
this photo, just as he does everywhere.

Chemplanes were very active over Fort Worth and Dallas today.

Jack

Ed Jewett
05-17-2011, 02:43 AM
http://www.strike-the-root.com/sites/default/files/5430499709_7aa3cf8b2d_b.jpg

photo courtesy of Radio Nederland Wereldomroep and http://www.strike-the-root.com/ Monday May 16th, 2011

Ed Jewett
11-17-2011, 06:38 AM
NANO Chemtrails (http://solari.com/blog/nano-chemtrails/)Catherine (http://solari.com/blog/category/catherine/), News & Commentary (http://solari.com/blog/category/catherine/news-commentary/) on November 16, 2011 at 11:11 am
http://solari.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/NANO-Chemtrails_325x103.jpg
By William Thomas
If you did not enjoy “traditional” chemtrails raining down on you, you are not going to like the new version, which the United States Air Force promises will feature aerial dumps of programmable “smart” molecules tens of thousands of times smaller than the particles already landing people in emergency rooms with respiratory, heart and gastrointestinal complaints.
Under development since 1995, the military’s goal is to install microprocessors incorporating gigaflops computer capability into “smart particles” the size of a single molecule.
Invisible except under the magnification of powerful microscopes, these nano-size radio-controlled chips are now being made out of mono-atomic gold particles. Networked together on the ground or assembling in the air, thousands of sensors will link into a single supercomputer no larger than a grain of sand.
Continue reading the article . . . (http://willthomasonline.net/Nano_Chemtrails.html)
The Solari Report
Dr. Gwen Scott: Aerosol Spraying-Mitigating the Harm to Your Health (http://solari.com/blog/dr-gwen-scott-aerosol-spraying-mitigating-the-harm-to-your-health/)
(24 March 11)
A Solari Report Special with Clifford Carnicom (http://solari.com/blog/a-solari-report-special-with-clifford-carnicom/)
(2 June 10)
More Questions About Chemtrails (http://solari.com/blog/more-questions-about-chemtrails/)
(20 May 10)
Solari Report Blog Commentaries
Prince Talks About Chemtrails (http://solari.com/blog/prince-talks-about-chemtrails/)
(4 July 11)
?What in the World are They Spraying?? (http://solari.com/blog/%E2%80%AAwhat-in-the-world-are-they-spraying%E2%80%AC/)
(25 Oct 10)
Unanswered Questions About Chemtrails (http://solari.com/blog/unanswered-questions-about-chemtrails/)
(15 April 10)