posted 06-05-2001 01:42 PM            

As you may know from reviewing the check-in logs, I have visited your web site regularly, although I seldom post. However, a recent exchange I noticed on your board upset me greatly, leading to this response.

One of the correspondents, a Mr. or Ms. Chem11, issued a request for help in identifying a particular device slung below a Bell 206 agriculture spray application aircraft. Figuring that my somewhat limited knowledge might be of help, I did a bit of research and found the device in question to be a Simplex Spray Application System, either a Model 7900 or (more likely) a Model 208, designed for the Bell 206 aircraft pictured. With a capacity of 230 US gal (870 lt), this subsystem will permit low-level pesticide/herbicide application for a wide variety of crops, including most cultivated in the Bossier-Haughton area.

However, as I was preparing to post the answer to this person's question, I noticed that another individual, a Mr. TopGunn, had responded quite accurately and at length to the question, taking time to actually research the tail number of the aircraft and determine the owner.

The responses to Mr. TopGunn's comments were disheartening. Instead of thanking him for his information, he was roundly reviled for his politically-incorrect views regarding contrail formation. I also noted that Mr. TopGunn, in his reply, did not make any comments about such a belief system; all he did is provide answers to some of the questions.

The reason for his "punishment" is obvious to me -- and, I am sure, to you. There are simply too many people who have too much emotion invested in the entire contrail business to even consider that anyone outside the "in-group" would have anything to add to the discussion. It is ironic that these same people, who decry the general public's lack of "open-mindedness" lack the same attributes themselves.

I had mentioned last month, in a personal communication to Mr. CydoniaQuest, that I considered you to be a decent, honest, and honorable person, determined to come to grips with a perceived problem. I still believe that is the case; I am sure you are aware of that.

But you also must be aware, despite your good fortune in recently eliminating a true psychotic from your board, you are still being handicapped. It is extremely difficult, given the controversial nature of persistent contrails, to reach the mainstream press and the bulk of Americans with your hypotheses. This difficulty is exacerbated, as I'm sure you're aware, by the fact that many "chemtrail" believers inject other belief systems into their posts, and demand that others unquestioningly accept those orthodoxies at face value.

But the difficulty in reaching a significant number of "mainstream" people is rendered almost impossible when these people, surfing your site in an effort to get more information, read instead cheap, vicious, and totally uncalled-for responses from your colleagues.

Regards,

posted 06-05-2001 02:15 PM            

quote:

---

surfing your site in an effort to get more information, read instead cheap, vicious, and totally uncalled-for responses from your colleagues.

---

This can be said of the Hoax board Mr. Kunz, but not of this board IMO


[Edited 1 times, lastly by Lulu on 06-05-2001]

posted 06-06-2001 01:25 PM            

Thank you for the comment about 'class'. My wife says the same thing, usually preceded by either 'tourist' or 'low'.... Your comments in "quotes"; mine in [brackets].

"....What, in your opinion do you feel is going on with the patterns of plumes we see?"

[Of course, this is merely my opinion, not based on what I consider 'facts' or 'data' but rather by 'lack of facts' or 'lack of data' for any other explanation. You have to understand that I don't have a particular agenda; I've said before and I'll reiterate that, as circumstances change and I get more data, I will modify my beliefs accordingly. In fact, I've already done so regarding contrails, and I'll go into that in a minute.]

[But I feel the pattern of plumes we see are simply normal contrails from normal aircraft. The fact that we see so many more of them are a result (again, in my opinion) of the tremendous increase in air traffic throughout the world, especially in the United States and the Pacific region. I admit I do not have the numbers to support this hypothesis, but I know that aircraft sales and miles have increased dramatically over the past ten years. I also believe that the increased concern with contrails stem at least partially from the fact that, given the controversy, more and more people are actually looking at the skies, and SEEING more contrails and the cirrus clouds which can be caused by the contrails. I know this is the case for me; I notice MUCH more contrails than I did two years ago, and I'm supposed to be a professional aerospace weenie!]

"Do you believe in a gridding system?"

[If you mean the criss-cross pattern of contrails, then yes -- you bet. But I believe a 'grid' is typically the result of aircraft one and two, on a scheduled route between Podunk and Squeedunk, crossing the paths of aircraft three and four, on THEIR scheduled route between Roachspit and East Jesus. If one route is north-south and the other is east west, then the contrails will cross. That gives us an "X". If there are more than one flight on each route (and there usually are, because there'll be more than one plane flying a busy route), then you will have "parallel X's" or grids. As a matter of fact, I'd be surprised if the contrails DIDN'T show a grid. With eight or ten major population areas in the US, there'll only be twenty or thirty major air routes - and we have a LOT more than twenty or thirty aircraft in the sky at the same time!]

[In a similar vein, I think (not 'know', but 'think') that many of the contrails we see that are NOT straight lines can be explained by (1) aircraft in a high-altitude holding pattern (although the holding patterns are often much lower) or by (2) course changes as the aircraft are 'handed off' from one control region to another (although this probably wastes fuel and time).]

"... do you believe the aircraft are US or foreign?"

[Yes. There are both foreign and American aircraft in our skies, and these include both military and civil aircraft. The last time I went out of town, I left on a Delta MD-11 and returned on an ANA (All Nippon Airways) 747-400. I have flown myself on Aeromexico, Qantas, KAL (Korea Airlines), and Lufthansa. Typically, the Pacific-based lines, such as ANA, JAL, Qantas, Air Singapore, etc., fly to coastal cities like LA or San Francisco, but the chances are pretty good that a fair percentage of civil aircraft over ANY part of the United States are foreign carriers.]

[And we have (although not as much as before) foreign military aircraft in the United States. Because of my home's good weather, Arizona has always been a great place for training foreign pilots - especially those from Europe with its marginal weather and crowded skies - to fly. We trained RAF pilots in the early days of World War II and (ironically) trained many Luftwaffe pilots here up to the late eighties. I am sure we have foreign military aircraft here even today - not all of which I approve. But that is a different post!]

Okay, I just read what I'd typed so far, and it looks like typical debunker propaganda (not surprising - you know me!) Now I'd like to talk about what I alluded to in the fist paragraph of my response: why the "chemtrailers" have an important agenda that NEEDS to be publicized.

Whether or not the contrails are anything more than just plain contrails, I think most people believe that the increased number of them can - and probably will - have a negative long-term effect on global climate. This is because the increased cloud cover resulting from contrails increases the 'albedo' or reflectance of the earth. This has two results. In the daytime, these clouds block some of the sun's rays from reaching the earth, resulting in possible lower temperatures. At night, these same clouds block the heat from radiating back into space, which keeps the nights warmer.

What is the net result of this? I don't know. But the very fact that the 'diurnal differential' or difference between day and night temperatures is changing (with lower daily highs and higher nightly lows) means that the very complex engine that drives our weather and climate is operating differently. This could result in seemingly-unrelated long-term changes, such as melting polar ice-caps, increases in El Niño and La Niña, a rise in the mean sea level, etc. Not being a climatologist with a Cray modeling supercomputer, I can't say what these changes would be. But we all know that there have been significant changes in weather (and probably climate, too) over the past hundred years; I sure don't want to see those changes get worse.

And it is by calling attention to the possible climatic dangers of contrails (whether inadvertent or deliberate) that the chemtrail community can open up a dialogue that will be joined by atmospheric scientists and researchers, the mainstream media - and the bulk of the American people. I admit it's not 'sexy'. It doesn't have the excitement of talking about plots and NSA cancer-needles stuck in your pickup truck's passenger seat.

But it's the 'sexy' type of conspiracy stuff that is exactly what turns people - the people that can identify and resolve the problems - off. When the average person - whether a news reporter or just an ordinary Joe or Jane like you and me - comes to this site, you know they're going to be pretty skeptical when they read people talking about reptoids or the Masonic Plot or HAARP or whatever. They're going to be even more skeptical when they see what the construe as a lack of reasoned arguments pro and con (I mean, how else can they make up their minds?). I'm not saying that stuff isn't true (although I have my doubts). What I am saying is that, from a purely pragmatic point of view, the chemtrail community probably wants to alert people to possible and serious problems stemming from the increased contrails in our skies.

And when these people who come here see what they see, they're liable to blow the entire contrail issue as something dreamed up by a bunch of whackburgs.

And neither of us wants that to happen.

Regards,

Duncan Kunz
Duncan.kunz@prodigy.net
Mesa, AZ
480-891-2525

posted 06-06-2001 08:22 PM            

The isssue is aerial spraying over civilian population centers. The DOD has already admitted to doing this.

Case closed.

The problem that lies before us now is attracting enough people's attention to raise a loud enough voice to put a stop to this illegal activity.

Controversy attracts attention. So does talent.

I, personally, am coming to the conclusion that polite conversation on this topic is ineffective.

The only results I've seen so far have been achieved by putting someone's ass to the flame.

I used to think like you do, Duncan. I've spent three years politely discussing this issue in the most in-offensive and widely acceptable terms. It didn't do much good.

While I'm sure everyone appreciates someone who doesn't believe in the topic we are discussinng planning our strategies for us,
I honestly think we are better off planning them ourselves.

You certainly don't see me on the hoaxer's board planning your next fraudelent manager's statement...

The facts will stand on their own.

posted 06-07-2001 08:56 AM            

My job requires me to be home almost all day.

I spend a great deal of time looking out of windows observing the chemplanes.

It is my only conclusion that planes are spraying a substance into our sky.

I've decided today, that when posting, should anyone try to explain it to me through 'science' I will give an automatic response every time. This response will be.

A)you honestly haven't observed first hand what most people on this board are referring to.

B)it is so shocking to you, that denial is your only option

C)for whatever reason it is your job to discredit chemtrails

I swear on this day to respond with this statement to anyone who tries to explain away the obvious areosol program going on in our skies.

posted 06-08-2001 11:33 PM            

"I, personally, am coming to the conclusion that polite discussion on this topic is ineffective"

DUH

Let me know when you get there. I am two years ahead of you. I tried the "polite" discussion month after month before I realized ~IT IS FUTILE~

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING you say or do, is going to make any difference. The debunkers have public stupidity on their side.

After a while, even a person with the best intentions ends up just plain BITTER and DISGUSTED. Maybe someday you will figure that out and understand some of us better.

Meanwhile, you just maintain your "polite" (ha ha) demeanor while you are being sprayed with poisons that are weakening, and killing you.

As for me? I just read these boards and watch the chemjocks for the entertainment value now. I suppose you gotta problem with THAT to, don't ya? Who cares. xxx me.

[edited for vulgarity by 3T3L1 on 06-09-01]

[Edited 3 times, lastly by 3T3L1 on 06-09-2001]