Author Topic: Chemtrails. The reality.  (Read 61338 times)

Offline Jason Thompson

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1596
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #15 on: June 17, 2012, 04:33:47 AM »
Jason , the trails are seemingly coming from engines, they are  actually coming from hollowed static  wicks originally manufactured for static eletricity dispersion/accumulation. They use the wicks that are positioned right above the engines on wings. This is just the beginning.

Evidence for that? And please do explain why the sight of a trail coming from a line with the engines is in any way suspect.
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain

Offline advancedboy

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 61
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #16 on: June 17, 2012, 04:49:45 AM »
The lingering is the suspect. The mismatch with transponders on flightradar24.com is a suspect. Heavy traffic on desolated areas that matches not the day/week  schedules but overcast/clear sky `schedules.` people reporting of increased Aluminium, barium, strontium levels in their blood is a suspect. Previous operations of spraying in Vietnam( operation Popeye) and over great Britain in 60ies, that now is declassified is a suspect. Exclusive chemtrail lingering over the area of the sun is a suspect. Chemtrail spraying in the way that it is always in the direction that chemtrails travel over the sun, not vice virsa is a suspect. Exclusive spraying over my small town that  has never been experienced here is suspect, considering the contraisl have never been lingering  when I was younger. And I spent a loooot of time observing airplanes. geoengineering patents  is a suspect, Monsanto patenting Al resistant seeds is suspect, etc.
Jason, I have a question to you-
 If the chemtrails were real and they were really spraying, in what way would it look different from the video shown above?
« Last Edit: June 17, 2012, 04:51:24 AM by advancedboy »

Offline Chew

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 545
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #17 on: June 17, 2012, 04:57:59 AM »
If it were a chemical being dispensed then it would be visible immediately after leaving the dispenser, like you'd see with a cropduster. Instead what you see is a delay as the exhaust cools.

Offline Jason Thompson

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1596
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #18 on: June 17, 2012, 05:10:51 AM »
Heavy traffic on desolated areas that matches not the day/week  schedules but overcast/clear sky `schedules.`

There is nothing suspect about that. The amount of time a contrail will linger for is entirely dependent on the atmospheric conditions, and most of them are above the cloud layer anyway, so of course they won't appear on cloudy overcast days.

Quote
people reporting of increased Aluminium, barium, strontium levels in their blood is a suspect.

Prove a connection.

Quote
Previous operations of spraying in Vietnam( operation Popeye) and over great Britain in 60ies, that now is declassified is a suspect.

Prove a connection. Just because chemicals have been sprayed out of aircraft doesn#'t mean they are being so now and that there is some nefarious purpose to it.

Quote
Exclusive chemtrail lingering over the area of the sun is a suspect.

In what way?

Quote
Exclusive spraying over my small town that  has never been experienced here is suspect, considering the contraisl have never been lingering  when I was younger. And I spent a loooot of time observing airplanes.

Flight traffic has increased dramatically in the past couple of decades, so of course there are more contrial now than there were then.

Quote
geoengineering patents  is a suspect, Monsanto patenting Al resistant seeds is suspect, etc.

Why is this suspect?

Quote
Jason, I have a question to you-
 If the chemtrails were real and they were really spraying, in what way would it look different from the video shown above?

It probably wouldn't. Which means the onus is on you to prove that those are chemtrails and not contrails. Just going 'look there's a trail' is not sufficient when we expect trails to form anyway.

Now I have a question for you: if you wanted to adminster some chemical to the population for whatever purpose, would dispersing it at 30,000 feet really be the best way you could think of to do it? Rather than, say, pumping it out of cars at ground level? Or adding it to the water supply that is pumped into every home and used daily? The suggestion faisl for simply being absurd.
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain

Offline advancedboy

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 61
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #19 on: June 17, 2012, 05:44:08 AM »
Here are some people talking about blood tests. The suspect is not the chemical elements in their blood, or the superbly increased amount of it. The suspect is the combination of these 3 elements. I will later post videos from people reporting exactly these 3 elements in their blood tests from other parts of the world. And Jason are you really that naive to believe that a chemical being dispersed at high altitude, implying cruise speeds of 800-870 km/h would show a trail right exactly one meter behind the airplane? Are you that weak in simple physics?
« Last Edit: June 17, 2012, 05:49:28 AM by advancedboy »

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3013
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #20 on: June 17, 2012, 05:46:09 AM »
Notice how some trails are dissipating while others are lingering for long period of time.
Because they're produced at different altitudes where the atmospheric pressure, density and water content differ greatly. So what?
Quote
Airplanes are not flying above cities at 10km , they are approaching  or leaving airports , thus being much lower than 10km,
Say what? I don't know where you live or what air travel is like there, but here in the USA, not every airplane lands at every city it encounters. We actually have flights that take off on one coast and don't land until they reach the other coast, often well over 4,000 km away. That means they have to fly over what's between, which they usually do at high altitudes to stay away from the traffic that is local to those areas.

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3013
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #21 on: June 17, 2012, 05:57:16 AM »
here are some people talking about blood tests.
If you're really concerned about toxic materials artificially introduced into the atmosphere, and everyone probably should be, you're barking up the wrong tree.

Try looking at what automobiles, trucks and coal-fired power plants spew into the air. We've gotten a lot better at scrubbing much of the really nasty stuff like smoke, ash, unburned hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. But you can't remove it all -- and people like their cars and electric appliances too much to just give them all up.

Sure, airplanes also burn petroleum, so they also have emissions. And we're running out of petroleum, so we need to find something else.

But with all the emissions very well known to enter our atmosphere from our imperfect energy technologies, as demanded by our desire for a high standard of living, the notion that this nasty stuff is being secretly and deliberately released into the air by commercial airplanes is just too weird to take seriously.


Offline Jason Thompson

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1596
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #22 on: June 17, 2012, 06:20:52 AM »
And Jason are you really that naive to believe that a chemical being dispersed at high altitude, implying cruise speeds of 800-870 km/h would show a trail right exactly one meter behind the airplane? Are you that weak in simple physics?

No. In fact it is the physics of the situation that makes it so utterly absurd. You are proposing that a chemical is sprayed out that forms a lingering trail in the upper atmosphere. Now as long as that trail is visible the contents of it are still in the upper atmosphere. Since air currents vary greatly with altitude, the dispersion and movement of the contents of that trail would carry it many miles from the location you see it over, and the dispersion would be so great that practically none of it would actually ever reach the ground, and what did would be so scanty you'd never notice it, let alone pick it up in blood tests.

On the other hand, if you pump it out of a car at ground level, the concentration in the local area would be of some use.

The chemtrail idea is so absurd because it requires extensive modification of expensive aircraft and VAST quantities of materials need to be sprayed just to get anything to ever reach the ground. It's like suggesting you can poison Hawaii by dumping toxins in the ocean off San Francisco. Are you so weak in basic physics that you don't get the concept of air currents and diffusion?
« Last Edit: June 17, 2012, 06:22:59 AM by Jason Thompson »
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain

Offline DataCable

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 138
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #23 on: June 17, 2012, 06:38:09 AM »
Jason , the trails are seemingly coming from engines, they are  actually coming from hollowed static  wicks originally manufactured for static eletricity dispersion/accumulation. They use the wicks that are positioned right above the engines on wings.
Present evidence of an aircraft with one of these chemical dispersion mechanisms installed.
Bearer of the highly coveted "I Found Venus In 9 Apollo Photos" sweatsocks.

"you data is still open for interpretation, after all a NASA employee might of wipe a booger or dropped a hair on it" - showtime

DataCable2015 A+

Offline DataCable

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 138
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #24 on: June 17, 2012, 06:51:05 AM »
people reporting of increased Aluminium, barium, strontium levels in their blood is a suspect.
Now that you mention it, my barium is feeling a little high today.

Quote
Exclusive chemtrail lingering over the area of the sun is a suspect. Chemtrail spraying in the way that it is always in the direction that chemtrails travel over the sun, not vice virsa is a suspect.
Could you please clarify this?  I don't quite follow.

Quote
If the chemtrails were real and they were really spraying, in what way would it look different from the video shown above?
Burden of Proof Shift.  This is your claim, it is your responsibility to explain why the difference in appearance of contrails constitutes evidence of covert chemical dispersion.
Bearer of the highly coveted "I Found Venus In 9 Apollo Photos" sweatsocks.

"you data is still open for interpretation, after all a NASA employee might of wipe a booger or dropped a hair on it" - showtime

DataCable2015 A+

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3013
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #25 on: June 17, 2012, 07:04:39 AM »
Jason , the trails are seemingly coming from engines, they are  actually coming from hollowed static  wicks originally manufactured for static eletricity dispersion/accumulation. They use the wicks that are positioned right above the engines on wings. This is just the beginning
Have you ever actually flown on an airplane?

Well, I have. And on occasion, when the conditions are right, and I've looked rearward out a back window, I've actually seen our contrails forming behind us. They're down in the engine exhaust streams, not up behind the static dissipation electrodes.

Offline advancedboy

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 61
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #26 on: June 17, 2012, 08:13:08 AM »
`The chemtrail idea is so absurd because it requires extensive modification of expensive aircraft and VAST quantities of materials need to be sprayed just to get anything to ever reach the ground.`
Yes, indeed. The prime suspect of modification- septic tanks. At least dealing with civillian aircraft. You can`t demand proof, as this is not court. What do you expect me to  crawl inside a  c-17 and take pictures of pipelines? I told you I will bring cummulative evidence step by step.At least you will be able to understand my doubts. You have to realise I am not your regular Richard Hoagland crowd, or consciousness awareness washed jagbodhi crowd. So be careful when simply demanding something.

Look, even Ted Gunderson is gone bonkers and into a conspiracy. Unmarked airplanes, hmm, don`t you say.


Offline Andromeda

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 746
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #27 on: June 17, 2012, 09:07:01 AM »
You can`t demand proof, as this is not court.

Yes we can.  Its our forum, and part of the rules that you back up what you say.

Quote
What do you expect me to  crawl inside a  c-17 and take pictures of pipelines?

Yeah, okay.

Quote
I told you I will bring cummulative evidence step by step.

NO.  Stop playing games.

Quote
So be careful when simply demanding something.

That sounds like a threat.

Present your evidence, provide proof of your claims.
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'" - Isaac Asimov.

Offline advancedboy

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 61
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #28 on: June 17, 2012, 09:58:26 AM »
Andromeda, define, what constitutes proof, that would be within a grasp of forum participants?


Here, here, looks like the monster had its baby years. Would the military or government harm its own people, of course not. Hmmm, ...

Offline Jason Thompson

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1596
Re: Chemtrails. The reality.
« Reply #29 on: June 17, 2012, 10:17:46 AM »
Yes, indeed. The prime suspect of modification- septic tanks.

Irrelevant, as that still doesn't address the issue of dispersion and the vast amount of material needed to spray from high altitude in order to have any appreciable quantity reach the ground.

Quote
You can`t demand proof, as this is not court. What do you expect me to  crawl inside a  c-17 and take pictures of pipelines?

No, I expect you to show us what evidence you have that has led you to the conclusion that chemicals are being sprayed into the air from aircraft. Something must have led you to that conclusion, therefore it is not unreasonable to ask what it was. If all it was was some inference then we have little to discuss.

Quote
I told you I will bring cummulative evidence step by step.

Not good enough.

Quote
You have to realise I am not your regular Richard Hoagland crowd, or consciousness awareness washed jagbodhi crowd. So be careful when simply demanding something.

Stop dancing around. If you have the evidence present it. If not, stop wasting everyone's time.
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain