posted 06-21-2001 05:41 PM            

in the presence of hydroscopic cloud condensation nuclei

After viewing countless pictures and movies of chemtrails or persistent contrails I have come to the conclusion that one principle cause of the increase in persistence of condensation trails from aircraft is due to an increase in the presence of strongly hydroscopic (water attracting) cloud condensation nuclei.

This single factor has more to due with the fact that some contrails persist and even expand out into cloud formations and complete overcast skies then any other single factor. Certainly other factors play important roles in the increased persistence of contrails but none are as significant as this one.

As has been stated to me numerous times by many observers of these phenomena, aircraft have been seen at the same altitude and the same part of the sky as other similar aircraft and one will be emitting large volumes of contrails that are very persistent and another will have no contrail at all.

This can only be explained logically by considering that the plane producing the high volume of contrails of a highly persistent nature must indeed be emitting a high volume of hydroscopic cloud condensation nuclei. Whether or not this is being done purposely is still a question in search of an answer but my conclusion is that it is being done for the purpose of weather modification at the very least.

The US Navy patented device on my research page is a good example of the type of delivery system that could be used to deliver these hydroscopic cloud condensation nuclei to the atmospheric level best suited for cloud seeding.

There is simply no other explanation in my view at this time. Climate researchers have identified elements of hydroscopic cloud condensation nuclei. In nature these elements are mostly made up of salts, and sulfur compounds caused by the decay breakdown of tiny marine animals on the surface of the oceans.

The NOAA and the WMO have contributed to funding for research into weather modification using the technique known as hydroscopic cloud seeding. This technology does not require the presence of clouds at all to be implemented. It can be done in clear sky and will cause the sky to become cloudy. If the humidity level is high this technique can even cause some rain to occur.

So many observers have reported cloud cover caused by persistent contrails I can only conclude that cloudiness must be the desired result of the program if one does exist. This might seem like a crazy notion to some of you but consider this. The Earth's annual heat radiation budget could be kept more in a natural balance if more days have overcast skies to help block the Sun. This would allow us to pollute the planet with higher amounts of greenhouse gasses and have the climate impact moved back a little. This will allow the companies who are the major cause of this pollution more profits without the liability caused by their impact being identified by the public.

Sheer speculation of course but it makes sense to me and would explain a few of my questions concerning this sudden increase in the persistence of contrails in recent history. When someone tells me that chemtrails are just water vapor I have to ask myself. Does this person have any concept of cloud formation chemistry? If they did they would know about condensation nuclei and that chemicals that cause the attraction of water into the cloud. Without the presence of these chemicals cloud condensation would not occur. Without these elements being hydroscopic (water attracting) in nature there would be no rainfall from the cloud. Without the presence of an abundant supply of hydroscopic cloud condensation nuclei the contrail would not be of a persistent nature and would not expand out into artificially created clouds.

Science and deductive reasoning suggests that the increased presence of persistent contrails is not a natural occurrence caused by an increase in air traffic at all, but suggests instead a deliberate geo-engineering program of global heat radiation management being carried out.

Michael McDonnough
www.chemtrails.org

posted 06-22-2001 03:18 AM            

I agree completely.

I don't think this is AT ALL a "crazy" working hypothesis to have arrived at after months and months of continuous DIRECT OBSERVATION of the radical atmospheric changes in progess. Not to mention the focused study of current atmospheric chemistry literature and the meticulous documentation of current "conditions" being conducted by so many who are interested in getting to the truth of this extremely complex matter.

I don't think there is any question that there has been a SIGNIFICANT escalation of hygroscopic aerosol/particulate material in our atmosphere.

I also don't think one has to be in possession of a degree in atmospheric chemistry to be able to figure out that the [highly-VISIBLE] escalation of this material, within the relatively SHORT time frame of 2-3 years, is causing some very significant disruptions in the circulation of atmospheric water vapor and therefore very significant changes in regional weather and climate patterns.

posted 06-25-2001 12:00 AM            

The group is already pretty much in gear but needs members from different hot spots. We really don't need lots of money to do this as most of the software has been written by collage students and posted around as freeware. The thing that is hard for me is spending time away from making money to live on. It is hard to split my time but I give this research all I have.

It has taken a lot of specialized study just to communicate my thoughts adequately on this subject.

posted 06-25-2001 04:29 AM            

Humankind has broken their lease agreement as planetary stewards in my judgment and are due for eviction from the land Lord.

Habitable planets are just too valuable and scarce in the cosmos to be run by a bunch of greedy self-important luciferian clowns in my judgment.

posted 06-25-2001 08:25 AM            

I did a little investigation into the +100 additive the military began to use in its JP-8 jet fuel in 1998. (Military? 1998? Sound familiar?)

This material is able to remove the gunk (technical term) which builds up in jet engines so that the gunk is no longer on the jet engine but in the atmosphere. These particulates sound like a good starting point for the hygroscopic nuclei Michael talks about.

Here's the article that goes with the picture. http://www.wrs.afrl.af.mil/infores/sstories/ss96/ss59_96.htm

posted 06-25-2001 11:56 AM            

Several Houston petroleum companies have come to my site directly after I was on the Air doing a radio talk show. Now i wonder if they were nervous that we are catching of to the true root cause.

posted 06-25-2001 01:31 PM            

This publication contains what looks like the whole run down on this additive. Judging from the brief discription on the page.

Thge guy to ask the questions this raises is identified as the inventor of the additive it'self.

S. Zabarnick, S.P. Heneghan, and M.S. Mick, U.S. Provisional Patent Application, “Stabilizing Additive for the Prevention of Oxidation and Peroxide Formation.” December 1998.

This is the guy on staff to find more details about the additive +100.

Send your email requests for answers to
mailto:ballal@udri.udayton.edu
He is Aerospace Mechanics Division
Fuels and Combustion Group Leader
Dr. Dilip R. Ballal,

I intend to field some questions to the good Dr. about the increased presence of Hydroscopic CCN in the contrails from aircraft using this new additive.

We will see what he says.

posted 06-25-2001 02:08 PM            

This is where I got the email address above.

My bet is this is going to turn out to be a smoking gun so to speak. It makes sense, if this additive cuts deposits of sulfur oxides on the engine parts they have got to go somewhere. Where?? out into the sky and into persistent contrails. Now the crap falls on us instead on depositing into the engine. Seems like they could come up with a more environmentally benign way of doing this.

This answers the sickness questions and the increased persistence of contrails due to these elements being hydroscopic as well as polluting.

posted 06-25-2001 02:20 PM            

The PDF file downloaded fine for me. Do you have high speed internet? It really helps on those. The page isn't very exciting, though. It's about how the +100 additive ruins some types of filters and causes other maintenance headaches.

When you write to Dr. Ballal, be sure to spell it hyGroscopic or he'll assume you don't know chemistry. (Us techno types care about stuff like that, Chem11.)

[Edited 1 times, lastly by 3T3L1 on 06-28-2001]

posted 06-25-2001 04:15 PM            

As far as connection speed goes I am on a T-1 line so speed is not normally an issue.

I will try again on the PDF file.
Mostly I want to know what this residual material is in +100 exhaust and how it is different in composition from normal exhaust from JP-8.