|
|
Dick Eastman
Joined: 10 Feb 2001
Posts: 33
Location: Yakima, Washington, USA |
The "test grid" theory -- successor to CWM
 Wed Feb 28, 2001 7:23 pm
|
 |
|
Why the "test grid" theory passes critical
tests that CWM failed.
Until the full force of LTC8K6's B-17s was brought home to me, I was favoring the theory that "chemtrails" were part of a weather-modification system that creates cloud cover in order to alter near-surface atmospheric pressure and thus affect the paths of the five kinds of air masses:
Cold and dry Polar Continental (PC)
Cold and wet Polar Maritime (PM)
Warm and dry Tropic COntinental (TC)
Warm and wet Tropical Maritime (TM)
Very cold and wet Artic Maritime (AM)
and redirect ocean currents --even the Pacific currents responsible for El Nino, La Nina and the cholera-causing warm currents of waters in the Indian Ocean-- by creating surface winds to push masses of surface water here and there.
But such a grandiose theory, ascribing so much power and competence to the global elites (rich, powerful, and secretive as they are), and resting on our confidence that chemtrails are fundamentally different from contrails, simply could not be justified if the normal contrails can exhibit the same characteristics as those we have been labeling chemtrails -- i.e., LTC8K6's strong case that the thick persistent trail we see need not be chemically and functionally different from the vapor trails of B-17's or, presumably, of the "stock models" of contemporary jet engines.
But yesterday I saw something that triggered a better theory -- one that takes recent compelling criticism into account and fits all the well-established facts of this phenomenon known to me.
I was outside enjoying the fourth day of crystal-clear sky over Yakima -- old-fashioned Yakima weather, like we have not seen for years! -- when I caught sight of a long thick contrail in the southern sky with a break in it (a gap, caused by some difference in some quality of atmosphere obtaining only in that short stretch of sky in the jet's path), and following along that trail on a close parallel course was a second jet also leaving thick contrail -- exactly what for two years I had been saying was the laying of "Venetian blind" trailing that eventually closes to become cloud heat shields etc. But now I was not thinking that. And then, the second jet, following close beside the trail of the first reached the point in the first jet's trail where the break (gap) occured and, sure enough, when the spot was reached the trail of the second jet also disappeared over the same stretch, so that there were now two parallel tracks with side-by-side gaps begining and ending at the same air-patch boundaries.
The critics were right. What is strange is not the contrails (except for the volume and patterning in recent observations), but the condition of the atmosphere with respect to
condensation through which the jets pass. But when I woke up this morning it all came together.
The Test Grid Theory
The cris-cross contrails are a test grid
that is laid out in the sky in order to
see where the HAARP "cloud burner" is hitting.
We know HAARP is involved with cloud dissipation. But how does the military
conduct target practice with HAARP? How can they see that they have successfully heated the targeted spot? They need visible targets and visible results. Also, they probably want to avoid "eating" natural cloud, so they create target cloud -- the contrails we call chemtrail.
They create a grid of contrail around the target area and then they hit the grid with HAARP energies and observe (probably from space) what portion of the grid gets burned away.
If this proves to the the right theory, then we must acknowledge an intellectual debt to LTC8K6.
Dick Eastman
Yakima
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Dick Eastman on 02-28-2001] |
| |
|
|
mark sky
Joined: 14 Oct 2000
Posts: 3616
Location: SW coast of Oregon |
|
Thu Mar 01, 2001 3:38 am
|
|
|
Dick, about your theory that only certain airial condition are conducive to "contrail" formation, please have a lok at these photos, http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000248.html
I have been watching these new "contrails for two years now, and I can tell you that not all jets that "fly through this special airspace at the same time produce visible emmissions" IE, i have seen sprayers and non sprayers of the same general type of plane whithin minutes of eachother leave trails or not even the hint of a trail and then the next plane leaves a broad mark. |
| |
|
|
sedona
Joined: 13 Oct 2000
Posts: 149
Location: Sedona, AZ 86339 |
|
Thu Mar 01, 2001 6:53 am
|
|
|
Dick, my two years of watching carefully through good binoculars confirm what Mark is saying here. I have watched innumerable examples of regular aircraft and chemplanes at relatively the same altitude, separated only by minutes, under precisely the same conditions. One type (airplanes with various markings) leaves contrails without fail; the other type (invariably unmarked)leaves fat, spreading chemtrails, also unfailingly. Furthermore, a day with only regular traffic causes no physical symptoms of any kind. Heavy spraying causes the infamous flu-like symptoms, among other things, and gives a distinctly metallic taste to the atmosphere at ground level. Prolonged observations from people all over the country confirm these facts. |
| |
|
|
Dick Eastman
Joined: 10 Feb 2001
Posts: 33
Location: Yakima, Washington, USA |
|
Thu Mar 01, 2001 7:53 am
|
|
|
Ambient conditions must be favorable for old-fashioned condensation of the water vapor byproduct of burning hydrocarbon fuels in jet engines, i.e., for contrails. If the
planes are broadcasting chemical powders or droplets --then I don't know.
Your three parallel trails with breaks
occuring side by side resemble the
two trails I saw over Yakima on the 27th.
(By the way, the Seattle earthquake measured
4.2 on the Richter scale here in Yakima.)
You say of the first of the Brookings sequence that "all the bars start and stop where the spray was turned on and then off"
which is how I usually interpreted similar observations in my two years of observing
(and reporting to newsgroups rather than to websites like this one). But how do we know that it was really someone flipping the
on and off switch and not rather the plane
passing through a patch of air too warm and too dry to generate contrail given the temperature and vapor pressure of air leaving the engines?
I am far from denying that the contrails
are part of a secret project and highly
unusual, but I am saying that they do not have to be made of exotic stuff for that to be the case.
What is it about the Brookings series that makes them unusual and suspicious? I say
it is the fact that the three or four contrails were running parallel to each other, not that the gaps occur at the
same apparent location, not that they turn
to cloud, even unusual cloud afterwards.
The photos at
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000248.html
certainly cannot be explained by me. But,
again the fact that catches my attention is the first of the series showing the parallel
deployment -- what happens to those trails afterwards can be the result of any number of natural or HAARPed action.
You say that "not all jets that flying through a given airspace at the same time produce visible emmissions and that you have seen sprayer planes and non-sprayer planes, all of the same general type, cross a space within minutes of each other leave normal trails or not even the hint of a trail and then the next plane leaves a broad mark.
So have I -- but were they different kinds of planes, differently equipped planes?
Certainly that is possible, but it is also possible, despite what you have described, that they were identical planes and engines
and fuels. How do I figure?
We look at a region of blue sky and from the ground it looks tranquil. But even clear sky can be rapidly ascending, unstable, even
turbulent. (And yes it can be relatively still too.) SO perhaps the plane that left normal trail and the plane that left no trail and the plane that left a thick chemtrail, perhaps they only appear to have crossed the same parcel of air. But maybe
the ambient air was invisibly replaced by air with completely different contrail-supporting characteristics (humidity, temperature, pressure).
THe streaking smurf is beautiful. The
jeting arms remind me of mare's tails
which occur when cloud slowly decends
into faster moving air below -- yet on
the streaking smurf the tails seem to be
blowing out in jets from within.
But there can be verticle motion in the atmosphere as well as horizontal. There are
anabatic fronts where the atmosphere around a fron is rising and as it rises cooling adiabatically. As the front moves in and passes by many stages with different kinds of
cloud enter the parade -- los of unstability,
perhaps, over the Pacific near Brookings, involving convection of the warmer waters under the colder air of the polar maritime airstream -- no I really don't know what I'm talking about -- but at least get the idea that MAYBE nature can do a streaking smurf.
The color properties you mention leave me
with no answers. Same with the sundog.
Certainly the "test grid" theory explains none of that. But right now I'd say that the
grid theory plus lots of allowance for nature to be wild as it works on contrail
over several hours may possibly account for what your camera has recorded -- at least as well as the human-pest-control-fumigation theory anyway. (And I do believe in a
dangerous deviant elite with lots of hidden power and arrogance to match.)
Dick
|
| |
|
|
sedona
Joined: 13 Oct 2000
Posts: 149
Location: Sedona, AZ 86339 |
|
Thu Mar 01, 2001 8:28 am
|
|
|
Yes, Dick, they *do* have to be made with exotic stuff when the same sorts of planes at the same altitudes on the same days produce radically differing results. Think it through.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by sedona on 03-01-2001] |
| |
|
|
mark sky
Joined: 14 Oct 2000
Posts: 3616
Location: SW coast of Oregon |
|
Thu Mar 01, 2001 10:30 am
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
mark sky
Joined: 14 Oct 2000
Posts: 3616
Location: SW coast of Oregon |
|
Thu Mar 01, 2001 10:52 am
|
|
|
someone needs to get their glasses checked
they been looking up in the sky yet
they never saw the gleaming jet fly by
above or next to the spraying jet
talk a good line
perhaps the real line
we will forget
get a good set of binoculars
and call me back
i am through with talking to the deaf dumb and blind fools
you got to chose if you want to
live in the plastik land
and sell your ALMIGHTY SOUL
or take the truth in hand
one who claimes to have looked and searched
for TWO YEARS
yet comes home to dinner
without even an herb
shall go hungery at my table
cowering in the corner
with the other ubserds
whezzleing into sanity
full of blurbs
with no hope
of taking home a prize
never studying that above
that we know, as the skys
caught in a rain storm
wet from stupidity
dripping at my door
hungery and threadbear
having never looked up
for shame
to come to this site
[Edited 1 times, lastly by mark sky on 03-01-2001] |
| |
|
|
mark sky
Joined: 14 Oct 2000
Posts: 3616
Location: SW coast of Oregon |
|
Thu Mar 01, 2001 11:03 am
|
|
|
anyone can mosey in here and say they have been looking around
hell, you could come in with a seeing eye dog
and claim to have seen a chemcloud
have you never seen a chemjet
under high magnification?
have you ever watched the lines drip?
call them mares tails
and i will slap you in your face
you have got too much knowledge
to be a stranger
in this place
come again with a noughther name
i will know your scent
i will put flowers at your grave |
| |
|
|
mark sky
Joined: 14 Oct 2000
Posts: 3616
Location: SW coast of Oregon |
|
Thu Mar 01, 2001 11:29 am
|
|
|
the foundations
of your princlples
are made from airisole gas
only lies to stand for
only deciete to pass
tell us your sky is normal
feel free your lies to vent
join the bazzilions of others
in life denighing torment
just leave my skys alone
take your flu like symptoms
and smoke them in your home planets sky
there is something incompatable here
no matter how you gene splice
oh i dont know
how to break it to you
but you don't really want to know
[Edited 1 times, lastly by mark sky on 03-02-2001] |
| |
|
|
sedona
Joined: 13 Oct 2000
Posts: 149
Location: Sedona, AZ 86339 |
|
Fri Mar 02, 2001 12:48 am
|
|
|
Dick, I also have a seriously discouraged reaction to your so-called "new" "theory" here. Why are you still falling for this nonsense? Have you actually ever gone outside and LOOKED for an extended period of time? It seems not. And even if you have, you obviously harbor some strange hidden desire-agenda not to see what you are looking at. Why don't you quit uselessly trying to ***fabricate*** a theory out of threadbare debukers' remnants? Clear the windows of your own perception and spend some time out of doors with a good pair of binoculars. Afterwards you will be free from the pernicious compulsion to cobble together any theory at all on this level: your own eyes will tell you all you need to know at this primary level.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by sedona on 03-02-2001] |
| |
|
|
Dick Eastman
Joined: 10 Feb 2001
Posts: 33
Location: Yakima, Washington, USA |
|
Fri Mar 02, 2001 5:32 am
|
|
|
Well, I sure didn't get any nibbles
from the sceptics I was angling for.
If LTC8K6 had acknowledged that abnormal
contrailing could be part of the HAARP program -- who knows what opinion
dams might have given way among those
who read but do not post?
You know, not one specialist from the
25 scientific newsgroups I invited to
the clandestineweathermodification
ezboard bothered to visit, much less to
venture an opinion. (And clandestine weather modification is still a far better theory of recent so-called climate changes and of 1990's weather disasters than is "global
warming." Better evidence. Better geophysics. Better sense.)
I am a vain old fart and love
being the center of attention and
controversy. And for that reason
I am a "blind dumb fool" who
has "sold his soul," as Mark Sky
wisely intuits.
And strong second thoughts do
nag me that the "test grid"
theory is vastly insufficient to
account for all those thick trails
throughout the world over these last
several years.
But consider this:
Do you think my wishy-washy "test-grid"
theory set back public recognition of
the chemtrail problem more than does
the instantly polarizing and authority-alienating "NWO" topic has?
What official would dare be caught investigating the phenomenon when he knows
his colleagues in the Congress or the
bureaucracy associate it with their death enemy, anti-establishmentarianism?
In furthering a scientific
theory the man I try to satisfy is the
sceptic, the fussy but fair thinker like LTC8K6. Him I understand. I have no
understanding of how we who understand
the conspiracy of chemtrailing are
supposed to interrelate or what we should
be working together to achieve.
Enough said.
(You can kill this topic as far as
I am concerned, Thermit.)
Wishy-washily yours,
Dick |
| |
|
|
sedona
Joined: 13 Oct 2000
Posts: 149
Location: Sedona, AZ 86339 |
|
Fri Mar 02, 2001 7:18 am
|
|
|
Well Dick, you've told us you are using this board to play head games with debunkers. Even though you know full well this board is not an invitation to debunkers, and no one else wants it to be. You've told us you like to be the center of attention. You've told us that you think offering phony theories to your friends as a blind is as harmless as offering any sincere theory. What you haven't told us is what your problem is with simply observing the basic reality of what is going on in the skies. |
| |
|
|
David
Joined: 20 Oct 2000
Posts: 1381
|
|
Fri Mar 02, 2001 6:11 pm
|
|
|
Two days ago I seen this. Driving south, 10 a.m. pst. Sky clear, no clouds, wind calm.
Ahead of us at about a 60 degree angle above the horizon, a small dot of cloud appears. Over the next 3 min. it "grew" to the size of a poker chip at arms length, was roundish and gray/white. From the left top edge of this cloud, a small formation of "cloudlets" began to asend. Each was small, and longer than tall. About ten of these went up
and stacked one upon another with some space between them, grew to about three times the size of the Mother cloud and stayed there. After a few mins. a short chemtrail appeared on the right side of the mother cloud.
In about 45 seconds, the whole think just winked out!! Mother, kids, streak and all just disappeared without a trace.
This went on in a clear sky with no aircraft seen. I had a passenger who also witnessed this "normal" occurance. |
| |
|
|
Thermit
Joined: 08 Jul 2000
Posts: 3136
Location: Texas |
|
Fri Mar 02, 2001 6:17 pm
|
|
|
quote:
tell us your sky is normal
put the muzzle up close to your temple
and blow that stuffy feeling
from your head
"it won"t hurt"
a bit
Poetic license to kill revoked.
------------------
 |
| |
|
|
mark sky
Joined: 14 Oct 2000
Posts: 3616
Location: SW coast of Oregon |
|
Fri Mar 02, 2001 10:13 pm
|
|
|
David, i have seen these "out of the thin sky" type cloudlets forming before, just like you descibe. One place where they happen more often is a valley i go to about 20 mile inland from the coast. The air has to rise up over a mountain there and that seems to start these things coalessing. They dissapear when they get blown over the valley and reform over the next mountain. They have colors in them if you wear sunglasses in get the sun behind them. I tend to think it is siper saturated (chem) air being forced to condence by being pushed up into cooler air.
Thermit~have made corrections~sorry won't happen again. |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page
1, 2, 3 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 26, 2012 12:54 am
|
|
|
|
|
Login
