See other Miscellaneous Articles
Title: Video Shot by Pilot Flying Along side several Chemtrail Planes
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Mar 13, 2010
Author: kevin604bc
Post Date: 2010-03-13 16:18:34 by wudidiz
Keywords: None
Views: 16171
Comments: 715
.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-523) not displayed.
.
.
.
#524. To: MiracleRose7 (#521)
The issue is chemtrails and contrails. Read the thread from top to bottom. You will have ensured that you acquired some new knowledge and opinions.
There IS some sort of program ongoing. What that program is we may not know for sure, but we can observe its traces. Chemtrails are a new and very real phenomena that demands an honest explanation. Yes, I remember contrails from my childhood. A jet passing overhead was rare back then and you noticed everything about it. And there is most certainly a difference in a normal contrail that dissipates relatively quickly and the chemtrails that hang on and on. Anyone who denies it is only fooling themselves.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Are you aware that they were discussing spraying sulfur into the air. Where? That would introduce sulfuric acid as you probably know. In the Northeast of the USA, this phenomena is already known and understood based upon factory gaseous release(s).... it typically causes rust and corrosion and is popularly known as acid rain. Here are a few links. http://knowledge.allianz.com/en/...tions_geoengineering.html Keith and colleagues want to investigate putting aerosols, such as sulfur, into the atmosphere to chemically unlock the greenhouse effect and allow more of the suns reflected heat to radiate back into space. http://www.theatlantic.com/magaz...gineering-the-earth/7552/ The aerosol plan is also cheap—so cheap that it completely overturns conventional analysis of how to mitigate climate change. Thomas C. Schelling, who won the 2005 Nobel Prize in economics, has pointed out how difficult it is to get vast international agreements—such as the Kyoto Protocol—to stick. But a geo-engineering strategy like sulfur aerosol “changes everything,” he says. Suddenly, instead of a situation where any one country can foil efforts to curb global warming, any one country can curb global warming all on its own. Pumping sulfur into the atmosphere is a lot easier than trying to orchestrate the actions of 200 countries—or, for that matter, 7 billion individuals—each of whom has strong incentives to cheat. But Paul Crutzen, a director at the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry in Germany, has a very different idea: He recommends injecting massive amounts of sulfur into the upper atmosphere so less sun will penetrate it. Stanford ecologist Ken Caldeira, who has investigated similar climate-modification strategies, thinks Crutzen's clout will drive this seemingly off-the-wall project forward. Efforts to manipulate the environment fall under a category known as geoengineering, which "lived in a shadowy netherworld, just beyond what was considered politically acceptable," Caldeira said. "Crutzen's paper is important because it shines a light on geoengineering, bringing it out of that netherworld." http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/08/71613 Crutzen published his proposal in the August issue of Climatic Change. He won the 1995 Nobel prize in chemistry for his work on the ozone layer. When sulfur particles are released into the Earth's atmosphere, they reflect solar radiation back into space much as large ice sheets in the Arctic do. Crutzen envisions lofting sulfur into the stratosphere on small balloon crafts, which will use artillery guns to release their smelly payload.
Hey Rose! Nice to cybersee you as they say. You are right, it is beyond silly but that doesn't stop the true believers from telling us how the government loves us and would never do anything to harm us.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Seeding is spraying chemicals such as Barium and heavy metals into the air is is not? And I have heard the use of Chem-trails also to be understood as such chemicals that they use to seed the clouds.
Thank you! Now can you explain how spraying heavy metals in the air is not the same as chemtrails? I thought they were caused by spraying chemicals into the atmosphere. What chemicals they are using and how much is the question. And what impact they have on us. I saw a picture of my dad decontaminating a fellow navy man from radiation contamination with a whisk broom. As he said those guys did not live long.
"Dagnabbit...nuthin' hotter than a chick in a uniform, willin' to defend her country...yowzah!!" The Chillbilly probably saw the Shrub in his Nomex flight suit on the carrier deck in "Mission Accomplished" and insisted on the same garment. I don't see the point of camouflaging bimbos at an exercise being conducted Stateside (CONUS). And if the deemed her to be in a dangerous place, uniforms similar to those worn by others around her would make the most sense. If I were a well hidden sniper, one look at her in the context of how others are deferential to her and the unusual choice of uniform would put her in my cross sight.
It is not Dry ice and silver iodide aree used
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Live free or No. And I don't think anyone else can either. Chemtrails and contrails are not the same things. To say otherwise is to deny what is very obvious.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. One Shot, One Kill.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
Hey, happiness is a clean kill I always say.
To sit back and make that statement in awe of the phenomena is a testament to your own ignorance. State some facts if you have time.
According to this article there are three different types of cloud seeding. Seeding is spaying chemicals into the air. Have you seen any studies showing that even the two chemicals or heavy metals that you agree may be used for seeding are harmless for humans and the atmosphere? Where did you get your facts that this is the only chemicals we are using to seed the clouds? "Carbon Dioxide (chemical used for dry ice) is a chemical compound composed of two oxygen atoms covalently bonded to a single carbon atom. It is a gas at standard temperature and pressure and exists in Earth's atmosphere in this state. CO2 is a trace gas being only 0.038% of the atmosphere. Health Issues Carbon dioxide content in fresh air (averaged between sea-level and 10 hPa level, i.e. about 30 km altitude) varies between 0.036% (360 ppm) and 0.039% (390 ppm), depending on the location. Prolonged exposure to moderate, concentrations can cause acidosis and adverse effects on calcium phosphorus metabolism resulting in increased calcium deposits in soft tissue. Carbon dioxide is toxic to the heart and causes diminished contractile force. Toxicity and its effects increase with the concentration of CO2, here given in volume percent of CO2 in the air: www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-413453?ref=feeds%2Flatest "Static cloud seeding involves spreading a chemical like silver iodide into clouds. The silver iodide provides a crystal around which moisture can condense. The moisture is already present in the clouds, but silver iodide essentially makes rain clouds more effective at dispensing their water. Dynamic cloud seeding aims to boost vertical air currents, which encourages more water to pass through the clouds, translating into more rain. Up to 100 times more ice crystals are used in dynamic cloud seeding than in the static method. The process is considered more complex than static clouding seeding because it depends on a sequence of events working properly. Dr. William R. Cotton, a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado State University, and other researchers break down dynamic cloud seeding into 11 separate stages. An unexpected outcome in one stage could ruin the entire process, making the technique less dependable than static cloud seeding. Hygroscopic cloud seeding disperses salts through flares or explosives in the lower portions of clouds. The salts grow in size as water joins with them. In his report on cloud seeding, Cotton says that hygroscopic cloud seeding holds much promise, but requires further research." Now, let's take those chemicals listed above, and look them up. After all, what goes up in the air, eventually falls back down right? Along with the chemicals mentioned above, I have listed chemicals named from other sources in relationship to cloud seeding. I have also listed chemicals being found in rain water where cloud seeding trails have been present. Let's see what we can find out about the description of the chemicals and the health risks for humans. Let's go back to Wikipedia for that information. We will start with the chemicals listed in the two sources above. The ones toward the bottom of the list are chemicals found in rainwater where trails have been present.
Fact #1. You are a lush and I don't have to prove anything to you. You can believe the government loves you and doubt what is evident to most people who don't wear blinders but it is not my job to hold your hand or make you think. Sorry if that sounds harsh but I am tired of your sarcasm and your belief that you are so much smarter than everyone else.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. We're talking 2 differnet things ehre. Seeding is differnet than chemntrails
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Live free or Not any facts. Those statements are assumptions. You will have to try again when you have some more time. Now, back to your earlier post: Seeding is differnet than chemntrails When the planes that seed put those chemicals in the atmosphere I believe they leave Chemtrails. So I am concerned about them seeding and what is being used and how it may impact me and my health. I believe that others on this thread have the same concerns. Many of the Chemtrails we see may have been from seeding the clouds. I do not believe that seeding should be done without any public input or oversight of the citizens. I believe there should be studies done and that those studies should be available to anyone who wants to see them. I believe that there should be more transparency in what is being done. I mean do you think that they will let the public know if and when they decide to put Sulfur in the air? I don't think they will let us know. They will just do it.
Why should they state (relevant) facts. They don't have any facts to state. The facts stated by people who say chemtrails are BS, are ignored. In fact, we now are government lovers that trust .gov in everything, simply because we call a spade a spade, and can show that chemtrails are bullshit. The silly geese cant even agree what "chemtrails" are for. They are trying to assign a purpose for something that doesn't even exist! How funny is that? All that wasted effort on their part. It's a shame. But they are sooooo sure of themselves that they don't need any proof. That is why they wont post proof. They don't have any.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Live free or Well, I hope you are patient because I have quite a few things pressing for my time. All of them more important than proving what is obvious to all but the willfully blind. I may get back to you on it someday but if I were you I would not hold my breath and stand on one foot.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Chemtrails are spraying chemicals into the air. Contrails are a natural condensation that occurs from planes. They are not the same. I have pictures taken from my yard of Chemtrails in their various stages throughout a four hour period. Whether it was cloud seeding which some people feel is not the same as chemtrails (I believe it is the same) and what substance was used to make the impact on sky above I do not know.
It seems that the naysayers can't tell us why the chemtrails hang on and on while contrails dissipate rather quickly and don't make a hazy mess of the sky. They deny the evidence seen by their own eyes. Willfully blind and you can't help them.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Sorry but you have agreed that there is such thing as seeding clouds and those are chemicals put into the air. So the question is while cloud seeding with a sprayer from an airplane does it leave a trail. I am certain we could easily look up pictures even from old newspaper articles and reliable sources to get our answer. The farmers have known about cloud seeding for years or so I have heard.
Except that you can't - you can only do so by denying the obvious differences in how a contrail is formed and for how long they normally persist, AND by denying the thousands to hundreds of thousands of photographs showing the different persisting characteristics of Chemtrails. As well you must deny the eyewitness testimony of intelligent, responsible, people who have seen them with their own two eyes. The entire anti-chemtrail/debunker argument relies solely and only upon on the denial of evidence.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
I thought that was hilarious! There have been only a few that have posted evidence on this thread. You aren't one of them. Even though you were invited to present your evidence, as have others, but you people have consistently and explicitly refused to do so.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Live free or I have pictures taken from my yard of Chemtrails in their various stages throughout a four hour period. Whether it was cloud seeding which some people feel is not the same as chemtrails (I believe it is the same) and what substance was used to make the impact on sky above I do not know. Earlier, I asked you to read this thread from top to bottom. I already dispelled your opinion two days ago. See below: Thank you. Your picture and YouTube presentation use a similar theme: a very high altitude jet aircraft is emitting water vapor and a relatively low flying jet aircraft has emitted water vapor. In the case of the "contrail" the water vapor quickly freezes changing the reflectivity index, so you don't see the apparent trail for very long based on the angle of the pictures to the craft and the angle of the Sun at that time. And for the lower flying jet aircraft wherein the "Chemtrail" appears to linger forever.... at the altitude flown, freezing did not occur. And there are other factors as well, air temperature, air velocity, time of day and actual chemical composition of the exhaust since air and jet fuel components need to be factored into the water vapor mixture that has been expelled. The trigger mechanism or ignition of 9/11 about the twin towers collapse was about jet aircraft pounding into the twin towers. Jet aircraft fuel is very flammable which leads us back into Chemtrails. That same combustion mixture (depending on the aircraft) gets transferred (although, very small trace amounts) into the exhausted water vapor. This leads to the variations you see in the sky. "Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." -- Ronald Reagan, circa 1977 buckeroo posted on 2010-03-14 20:16:45 ET See post just above.
Cloud seeding and/or crop dusting and/or fuel ejection (for landing purposes) have all been dispelled to the central theme or suggestion of the thread. Please read my new banner below to describe the core issue(s). You can click on it to zoom into the details.
Some people think those who believe there was government involvement in the 9/11 attacks aren't only foolish, but are domestic terrorists. So do you agree with them and believe that 9/11 truthers are all misinformed, blind, and misled, and are all terrorists at heart?
Being the fact there is official denial that they even exist makes it sort of difficult to know exactly WHY they are doing, or even exactly WHAT they are doing.
They'll just turn around and claim that it's either perfectly normal, or that it doesn't really happen, roll the dice and see which answer you get.
Oh, I am not going to bother much with people who won't believe their own eyes. Life is too short.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Apples and oranges. Stick to the topic. Edit to add: Do it, but I wont see it. This is just too stupid to continue and the thread is going on ignore.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Live free or Lets see your critical analysis interpret the difference.
You have a severe comprehension problem don't you? I just said--you even copied and pasted it--that LIFE IS TOO SHORT TO BOTHER WITH PEOPLE WHO WON'T BELIEVE THEIR OWN EYES. That certainly includes you. Be off with you.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. No, I don't ... I am holding your feet to fire as you casually make posts not addressing the specific technical details beyond just some silly assumption. Earlier you suggested ... just a few posts ago: Notice the way you are abusive. Notice the way and manner you are condescending in attitude. But, there are no facts to back up your self-opinionated posts; none, zero, zilch, nada. You are defensive. You don't know what you are talking about.
No, I am not defensive at all. I don't doubt my own eyes. Apparently you have some kind of vision problem and think your eyes are playing tricks on you or you just stay close to blind drunk. I don't know what other major malfunction you might have and don't have time to keep talking about it. This will be my last post to you on this thread so go ahead and have the last word. I think I can safely rest knowing that it will be as ignorant as the first one.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. No facts, no data, no research .... just yammering.
As well you must deny the eyewitness testimony of intelligent, responsible, people who have seen them with their own two eyes. can you look at a picture of an airplane and tell what altitude it's flying at, what the temperature is at that altitude, and what the relative humidity is at that altitude? can you look at an airplane passing over and tell, with your "own two eyes", what altitude the airplane is flying at, what the temperature is at that altitude, and what the relative humidity is at that altitude?
The humidity and temperature would be impossible (unless it's raining), but the altitude isn't that hard to approximate given the size of the aircraft in the sky, especially when viewed with binoculars. The exact altitude no, but a rough approximation is in fact possible. It's not difficult to see how high an aircraft is in relation to cloud cover, where if a certain type a cloud forms at X number of feet, and the plane is below those clouds, then it is flying at an altitude less than X. The inverse can also be said about aircraft flying above certain types of clouds, yet are visible when passing over breaks in the clouds. I've never seen chemtrails form BELOW cloud cover of ANY type, but HAVE seen contrails form from aircraft flying ABOVE or BETWEEN clouds.
The humidity and temperature would be impossible (unless it's raining), but the altitude isn't that hard to approximate given the size of the aircraft in the sky ...but you think you can tell the type of aircraft (note here that "type" refers to the technical designation of the aircraft model... as in "boeing 747") and you have the dimensions of all aircraft types memorized, so you can "tell" what altitude they flying at. you're a really talented fella. i notice you dont want to talk about photographic evidence of "chemtrails"... why is that? anyhow, you freely admit that you would have no idea of two of the most important conditions that cause contrails ---temperature and humidity--- and pardon me for being skeptical of your ability to judge altitude. so, in other words, your "eyewitness" evidence is balderdash, and photographic "evidence" is so preposterous that you dont even want to talk about it. good enough
Does this look like 'pancaking'? Does this look like 'condensation'?
Comments (565 - 715) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestWhat exactly are you guys disputing?
#525. To: Original_Intent (#507)
You may try to deny it as much as you wish but the evidence is there, and some of us are old enough to remember when it was not so. Thus we can compare the skies of our youth with the skies of today and KNOW there is a difference.
Lord Acton
#526. To: buckeroo (#520)
To: MiracleRose7
#527. To: MiracleRose7 (#508)
I guess groundresonance never read that they use this all the time in Russia to avoid rain during certain parades and other events. Of course, in this article they also point to the fact that the U.S. also does this. As I said it is beyond silliness to attempt to claim that there is no such thing going on.
Lord Acton
#528. To: PSUSA (#523)
#529. To: James Deffenbach (#527)
Hey Rose! Nice to cybersee you as they say. You are right, it is beyond silly but that doesn't stop the true believers from telling us how the government loves us and would never do anything to harm us.
#530. To: Mudboy Slim (#488)
TEXT DOLPHIN To 44144
#531. To: MiracleRose7 (#528)
Seeding is spraying chemicals such as Barium and heavy metals into the air is is not?
die kill ~~ Me
#532. To: MiracleRose7 (#529)
Now can you explain how spraying heavy metals in the air is not the same as chemtrails?
Lord Acton
#533. To: Ferret (#530)
If I were a well hidden sniper, one look at her in the context of how others are deferential to her and the unusual choice of uniform would put her in my cross sight.
#534. To: Original_Intent (#533)
"One Shot, One Kill."
TEXT DOLPHIN To 44144
#535. To: James Deffenbach (#532)
Chemtrails and contrails are not the same things. To say otherwise is to deny what is very obvious.
#536. To: PSUSA (#531)
#537. To: buckeroo (#535)
State some facts if you have time.
Lord Acton
#538. To: MiracleRose7 (#536)
die kill ~~ Me
#539. To: James Deffenbach (#537)
Fact #1. You are a lush and I don't have to prove anything to you. You can believe the government loves you and doubt what is evident to most people who don't wear blinders ...
Chemtrails and contrails are not the same things. To say otherwise is to deny what is very obvious.
Lets see your critical analysis interpret the difference.
#540. To: PSUSA (#538)
We're talking 2 differnet things ehre.
#541. To: buckeroo, all (#535)
To sit back and make that statement in awe of the phenomena is a testament to your own ignorance. State some facts if you have time.
die kill ~~ Me
#542. To: buckeroo (#539)
You will have to try again when you have some more time.
Lord Acton
#543. To: buckeroo (#539)
#544. To: MiracleRose7 (#543)
Lord Acton
#545. To: PSUSA (#541)
#546. To: PSUSA, Miraclerose7, James Deffenbach, wudidiz, FormerLurker, all (#541)
simply because we call a spade a spade, and can show that chemtrails are bullshit.
#547. To: Original_Intent (#546)
The entire anti-chemtrail/debunker argument relies solely and only upon on the denial of evidence.
die kill ~~ Me
#548. To: MiracleRose7 (#543)
Chemtrails are spraying chemicals into the air. Contrails are a natural condensation that occurs from planes. They are not the same.
#350. To: wudidiz (#344)
If I showed pictures or videos of the twin towers disintegrating on 9/11 to someone who believes they 'pancaked' due to airplanes hitting them would it make a difference?
#549. To: James Deffenbach (#544)
t seems that the naysayers can't tell us why the chemtrails hang on and on while contrails dissipate rather quickly and don't make a hazy mess of the sky. They deny the evidence seen by their own eyes. Willfully blind and you can't help them.
#550. To: MiracleRose7, PSUSA (#545)
The farmers have known about cloud seeding for years or so I have heard.
#551. To: PSUSA (#515)
(Edited)
Appear foolish? It is foolish. How twisted does this have to get?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#552. To: PSUSA (#541)
The silly geese cant even agree what "chemtrails" are for. They are trying to assign a purpose for something that doesn't even exist! How funny is that?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#553. To: James Deffenbach, MiracleRose7 (#544)
It seems that the naysayers can't tell us why the chemtrails hang on and on while contrails dissipate rather quickly and don't make a hazy mess of the sky.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#554. To: FormerLurker (#553)
They'll just turn around and claim that it's either perfectly normal, or that it doesn't really happen, roll the dice and see which answer you get.
Lord Acton
#555. To: FormerLurker (#551)
(Edited)
So do you agree with them and believe that 9/11 truthers are all misinformed, blind, and misled, and are all terrorists at heart?
die kill ~~ Me
#556. To: James Deffenbach (#554)
Oh, I am not going to bother much with people who won't believe their own eyes. Life is too short.
Chemtrails and contrails are not the same things. To say otherwise is to deny what is very obvious.
#557. To: buckeroo (#556)
Lord Acton
#558. To: James Deffenbach (#557)
You have a severe comprehension problem don't you?
I just said--you even copied and pasted it--that LIFE IS TOO SHORT TO BOTHER WITH PEOPLE WHO WON'T BELIEVE THEIR OWN EYES. That certainly includes you. Be off with you.
I may get back to you on it someday but if I were you I would not hold my breath and stand on one foot.
#559. To: buckeroo (#558)
Lord Acton
#560. To: James Deffenbach (#559)
No, I am not defensive at all. I don't doubt my own eyes.
#561. To: Original_Intent (#546)
hundreds of thousands of photographs showing the different persisting characteristics of Chemtrails.
#562. To: groundresonance, Original_Intent (#561)
can you look at an airplane passing over and tell, with your "own two eyes", what altitude the airplane is flying at, what the temperature is at that altitude, and what the relative humidity is at that altitude?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#563. To: FormerLurker (#562)
(Edited)
can you look at an airplane passing over and tell, with your "own two eyes", what altitude the airplane is flying at, what the temperature is at that altitude, and what the relative humidity is at that altitude?
#564. To: Original_Intent, PSUSA, Miraclerose7, James Deffenbach, FormerLurker, randge, GreyLmist, christine, all (#546)
evidence
“It has been said, 'time heals all wounds.' I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens, but it is never gone.” ~ Rose F. Kennedy
.
.
.