See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: Inside the typical commercial jet engine, the fuel burns in the combustion chamber at up to 2000 degrees Celsius.
Source:
stanford
URL Source: http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/ ... rojects/jet-airplanes/how.html
Published: Jan 7, 2012
Author: standford.edu
Post Date: 2012-01-07 23:14:01 by lead.and.lag
Keywords: None
Views: 2426
Comments: 85
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 70.
#44. To: lead.and.lag (#0)
And the government wants us to believe a few trash can fires bought the WTC towers down.
with contrails, it's probably not a matter of what the government wants us to believe... it's more a matter of what is, and what has been since the 1920s.
NASA is In On It. Don't you understand? THEY'RE EVERYWHERE!!!!!11111111!11!! Why do you think they know so much about outer space? Because they're ALIENS!!! Even their fighter escorts were spraying!11111111111!!!!1
Geee, I guess that explains the massive uptick in the number of observed incredibly persistent trails after about 1990 - we have more B-17's in the air. Where did you say they were based at?
Interesting way of looking at things. I mean distorting things. I thought WW2 for us happened in 1941 - 1945, not 1990 - ? But anyone that wants to waste their time on chemtrails, knock yourselves out. The kikes are happy for the distraction. And, it's a sexy topic. Here's another one.
Attaboy! Slide in that extraneous irrelevant little bit of hate so that you can dirty up the thread and distract from the topic.
Here are some more. They're probably spraying barium. The bombs were a distraction, the real damage was caused by the spraying. It's all very hush-hush, top secret, etc. The Good Aliens, flying foo-fighters, tried to stop them, to no avail. Here is a link, in case you think I made that term up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foo_fighter And another. Perhaps it was shopped?
Oh, that's fine. I have never denied the existence of contrails, and even grant they are formed by non-jet engine exhaust. That however, has no bearing upon current observations taken since the early 90's nor the few samples that have been analyzed. As well are the handful of reports from Airframe Mechanics reporting unaccounted for tanks and pipe runs in aircraft. I have not now, nor barring more information, claimed to know exactly what the chemtrails are or their purpose. My only observations are in regard to the radically increased quantity observed, and photographed, beginning in about 1990 (which incidentally, just FYI, was long after WWII).
#71. To: Original_Intent (#70)
(Edited)
bigger engines, more efficient engines (which produce more water), more air traffic, the internet, and art bell have nothing to do with anything. neither does alex jones ranting for years about "chemtrails", nor does a deliberate attempt to discomboulate the american public, which seems to be more than willing to be discombobulated by egomaniacal radio personalities.
My guess is, is that this 90's business is the result of the internet. People spread it all over, and it took on a life of its own. Get a bigshot VIP CT to mention it, and it takes off from there. The increase could be the increase in air traffic. Nothing more, nothing less. Or it could be the result of more people paying attention to a phenomena that, thanks to the conspiracy theorists, while it was always there, it was attributed to .gov shenanigans instead of them being simple contrails. As for the mysterious pipes and tanks, a source for this would be nice. I used to believe in them myself, due in part to CT bigwigs mentioning them. The total lack of evidence turned me off.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#47. To: RickyJ (#44)
And the government wants us to believe...
#57. To: lead.and.lag (#47)
with contrails, it's probably not a matter of what the government wants us to believe... it's more a matter of what is, and what has been since the 1920s.
#58. To: PSUSA2, BSUSATOO, wudidiz, intotheabyss, abraxas, all (#57)
#61. To: Original_Intent (#58)
Geee, I guess that explains the massive uptick in the number of observed incredibly persistent trails after about 1990 - we have more B-17's in the air.
#65. To: PSUSA2 (#61)
But anyone that wants to waste their time on chemtrails, knock yourselves out. The kikes are happy for the distraction. And, it's a sexy topic.
#68. To: Original_Intent (#65)
#70. To: PSUSA2 (#68)
Replies to Comment # 70. My only observations are in regard to the radically increased quantity observed, and photographed, beginning in about 1990 (
#72. To: Original_Intent (#70)
That however, has no bearing upon current observations taken since the early 90's nor the few samples that have been analyzed.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 70.