posted 11-16-2001 12:40 PM            

quote:

---

CTTUSA
Message 77665 of 77761 Reply
Re: Chemtrails vs Ordinary exhaust
By: wateinsi

If they are still there after five minutes, and the entire sky now has a line, thats Chemtrail...

---

People, please please please don't believe such ridiculous notions about contrails and their persistence. It is an often repeated bit of misinformation that contrails only last a few seconds or couple of minutes. This couldn't be farther from the truth. Contrails can easily be a half-hour in persistence, I've observed and documented this in the Trail Research Report. Contrails can also last longer given the right conditions. As I responded to this person on CTTUSA, "you've got to get your facts straight or nobody is ever going to take the Chemtrail Issue seriously. When people realize that your reasoning is flawed, what are they going to think about your conclusions?"

posted 11-16-2001 08:31 PM            

Just water, eh? Of course, that is what you people said about the STS-48 video... you folks really got caught with your pants down on that one; even the sceptics got a hoot out of the awkwardness of that particular deception.

NASA- Never A Straight Answer

posted 11-16-2001 11:00 PM            

Yeah, like the military has no right to fly, especially over Texas. Get real.

posted 11-17-2001 07:37 AM            

Now, if anyone has a problem with JP-8, then I suggest that's where you point your research. (There has been plenty of research done and ongoing about it by people more qualified than any chemtrailer.)

But first you must determine your jets, so you need Flight Explorer. And I can tell you that if our military had as many planes to accomodate all the spray reports in so many different locations, then there would be peace on earth. No one would dare mess with the USA. And you can throw NATO's jets in there too.

Let's level the playing field, shall we? Since I didn't know beans about clouds, contrails and weather in general, not to mention aviation, I had to start with the most elementary information, find the tools I needed on the net and spend some serious time over a year educating myself. I have come a long way.

And I have yet to see your research, Dave, other than observations and photos. I have plenty of observations and photos too but that's not enough. You have to get to the meat of the cause and effect that is tangible. To date, chemtrailers have provided no tangible proof of what they claim.

Here's a real elemnetary place to start-
http://asd-www.larc.nasa.gov/SCOOL/contrails.html

Be sure to print out the kids' reporting form http://asd-www.larc.nasa.gov/SCOOL/forme-ol.html as a guide and with Flight Explorer, before you know it, you'll be graduating to the more serious and scientific stuff. (Do note that the surface measurements on the form, that is temperature and humidity % are optional. That's because it doesn't mean anything regarding contrail formation.)

Oh yeah, speaking of photos, here's one I found while looking for something else. It's of my husband and his cat while he was applying siding to our house that we built ourselves. We are under high (NE-SW) and low (NW-SE) altitude flight paths. But little did I notice or care about the skies back in 1993. It was only since subscribing to FE that I determined those flight paths. Do you see the broken contrail amongst the persistent contrails? From what I've observed over my house for the last year, I can safely assume because it's not the same direction as the "cirrus activus," that it's from a plane headed north to O'Hare or south from O'Hare. Although there is no flight path heading north-south here, they do fly over frequently and cross the others creating, OMG, X's and grids. As explained on my website, commercials or any plane for that matter don't have to fly on a flight path.
http://chickiedeb.topcities.com/Daverusty2.gif

So before you question my ability to understand anything, Chem, show me your research that Thermit encouraged people to do when he completed his, or as stated in The Neutral Zone, go ahead and debunk mine. I'm just a housewife from Indiana with a limited education, unlike the other debunkers. Surely since you are so critical of me, it should be easy for you.

Just think, since you're still in Florida, that if you come this way on your way home, you can research and investigate personally the Chickie Deb and report back to your fellow chemtrailers. Now that would be some real bonafide and tangible research!

posted 11-17-2001 08:55 AM            

Re: Joshua Tree... the point I thought I made was that atmoshpheric high pressure prevents cloud formation. No clouds = no rain = desert. Yet for almost an entire month JT was under 50-100% 'cloud' cover.

Only, according to the Ranger I spoke to, this cloud cover wasn't showing up on the SAT maps. What you seem to be missing is that what occurs some thirty-odd thousand feet above the desert floor is responsible for the conditions that exist there.

I know what I saw, CD. And so do the people who are charged with looking after the Park.

posted 11-18-2001 06:22 AM            

No double standards, Chem. It's just an old photo out of hundreds that we took while building and happened to have a sky shot. (The difference between my contrail photos and yours are that since I have the right tools to identify the planes and weather conditions when the contrails are created, I understand WHY. Pretty much comparable to Thermit's FE Report, so don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.) Back when I was a chemmie, I looked through what I thought was all of them, but these were in another box. And I made an error - the photo is from 1994, not 1993.

And I don't doubt what you saw over Joshua Tree. Trouble is, you don't know the whys or wherefores of what you saw. I wouldn't build a house or fix a car without the right tools. Why would anyone investigate what's going on in the sky without the right tools?

As for Mav, in case you hadn't noticed, there's a war going on and I think he's a little busy right now. But I'm sure the next time he's in Seattle, he'd be happy to look you up.

posted 11-18-2001 09:07 AM            

Now, I'm not sure what you're getting at with this picture. I found a picture from 1991 that clealry depicts persistant trails over Yosemite. But it wasn't until circa 1998 that the phenomena started blanketing cities across America on almost daily basis.

And (in case you hadn't noticed) I'm not in Seattle anymore!

posted 11-18-2001 01:32 PM            

quote:

---

Thermit, since the board seems to be argumentative of late, could you please list what your criteria are for distinguishing a contrail from a chemtrail? Perhaps we could use that as the starting point for our discussions.

---

posted 11-18-2001 09:58 PM            

I wouldn't, especially if I lived in Texas, Lousiana, New Mexico, Florida or the West Coast. Why? Because of heavy military presence. If I were suspicious, I would certainly extend the study to how many, how often and for how long. I was suspicious until I watched for 6 months, even though I knew the truth after about 2 weeks. I gave myself 6 months to be damned sure before I went public and subjected myself to the ridicule I knew would be forthcoming and has persisted for a year now. As for the different type contrail the military jets leave than a commercial - this is just a stab, but MAYBE they are older planes and the engines are not as EFFICIENT as the commercials. Spending for anything military was curtailed by the klinton administration. That would be something to research or maybe Mav or Col. Dan would know.

Contrail persistence depends on RH and temp at a particular altitude. If you can't positively ID the altitude of the plane, how can you possibly determine that it wasn't climatically (is that a word?) subject to laying a persistent contrail? Thermit has been trying for months, as demonstrated in the original post of this thread, to get people to get their facts straight about contrails. He encouraged the use of FE in the summary of his report. But how many people have subscribed to FE and committed to a study? Raise your hands. I have offered to assist people in learning FE quickly but not one soul took me up on it. I'm sure Thermit will agree that unless you're sitting outside with a laptop, it's a chore running back and forth identifying the planes on the computer. But when you do it long enough, at the same time every day (I usually started around 7AM - 9AM) you see what's really going on. Although I still subscribe, I don't have to use FE to know what I see above my little speck in the universe. It's akin to driving back and forth to work every day, taking the same route, day after day, week after week, month after month. The commuters fly low, and coasts to coasts fly high 38-40+ and the others fly in between.

While watching a certain area of New Mexico last month, I saw something I don't see here - Lears flying at 41. FE is fun; there is something new and different in every part of the country. In March of 2000, I saw something take place on the East Coast that knocked my socks off. (I printed it out and faxed a copy to McDonough, but he never responded.) The planes weren't completely identifiable, other than what kind of plane, consecutive Flight numbers and departure time, but what is was for sure, I couldn't say. My guess is some kind of military move because they seemed to be landing in or around Special Use areas. (I'll scan the print-outs tomorrow and a post a link.) On 9/11, I watched as the skies were cleared of all commercial air traffic - now that was something to see. If you have any interest in airplanes, and I would say contrails constitute some interest, than you need to subscribe to FE.

3T3 - unfortunately, Rusty is no longer with us. The following winter he caught pneumonia, got over it and then got it again. Like every special kitty, he had a story. The day he climbed the 3 story scaffolding to be with Dave, I thought I would croak.

Chem - I didn't know you were in Florida for the winter until I read another thread. Lucky you. I thought you were just travelling cross country on an extended vaca or something. If I ever run away from home, Clearwater, here I come.

By the end of the 90's, the jet engines were changed out or retrofitted to meet the requirements of the Montreal Protocol. Bigger and more efficient planes were introduced about the same time air traffic increased. The aircraft manufacturers keep pumping them out. The older ones get retired, just like cars.

Has the increase in air traffic and therefore, the increase in contrails effected the weather? Could be, but that's exactly what Dr. Minnis has been working on -for a few years now. (secret word=DR.) We'll just have to wait and see what he and his team come up with. His section (Chapter 3) of the IPCC report makes some interesting reading. Give it a minute to load - http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/aviation/index.htm

No one or nothing is spraying you, no one or nothing is deliberately modifying the weather or innoculating us.

posted 11-18-2001 10:27 PM            

quote:

---

And if the underlying contrail from these unidentified jets was similar to those of the identified jets, but the highly peristent trails from the unidentified jets appeared to be a seperate phenomenon (from the contrails) that were sharp-edged and relatively short strips, then I would be very suspicious.

---

posted 11-18-2001 10:48 PM            

quote:

---

No one or nothing is spraying you, no one or nothing is deliberately modifying the weather or innoculating us.

---

I don't get it Deb. You are completely aware of Dyn-o-mat's weather modification demonstration off the coast of Florida. You know that the DOD released biological simulants over Salt Lake City and didn't waste any time in admitting it and shrugging off the concerns of that city's populace. I have, time and again, posted documentation of DOZENS of instances of non-consensual human experimentation involving biological and/or toxic substances deliberately released into the atmosphere by various government agencies.

And yet you insist on claiming that these thoroughly documented instances somehow never occured.

The next time you call the FBI, please inform them that they should cease their investigations into un-authorized aerial spraying, because you 'know' it isn't occurring.

Nor are you in any position to make a determination of the intent of USAF with regards to weather modification. Their own websites make it quite clear that they are intensely interested in the subject and for obvious reasons.

So why, oh why, do you make these brutally untenable claims?

posted 11-19-2001 08:47 AM            

And yet you insist on claiming that these thoroughly documented instances somehow never occured.

Chem, I don't deny those instances occured. But I'm talking about the present and what you and others like you claim to be fact in the here and now. You have failed to prove that. You and others like you continue to dig up old news as probable cause, but present no case of tangible proof that the contrails that occur day after day, all over the country are what you and others like you claim they are.

As for Dyn-o-Mat, necessity is the mother of invention. I have purchased their garden product but didn't have to use it this year because we had plenty of rain all summer. If you're going to be in Florida, you might ask around how people would feel about technology that might possibly defuse a hurricane.

And the Air Force? Why just limit your focus to them? Because they are the brain power behind technological defense for the 21st Century? How about the Navy and the ANG? In which branch of the military have you served? Let's take it a little further- just what have you contributed in some sacrifical capacity as a contribution to your country or community?

posted 11-19-2001 10:47 AM            

Now the arguement you present for Dyn-o-Gel is quite a bit different from what I've come to expect from you. And it's exactly the sort of discussion that should be taking place. But until those in authority decide that the American people have a right to know what is occuring in their skies, it won't.

And I consider the amount of time and energy I and everyone else involved in this issue have contributed to be a sacrifice for the betterment of our country and our communities.

Most of the people I talk to about the chemtrail issue understand that something is drastically awry. It's just that they don't really give a damn. They've got cell phone minutes to use and TV to watch. It's not their problem and they refuse to take personal responsiblity for ther body politic, which (as I understand it) is the definition of citizenship.

Nice work 3T3. I had missed that one... it will be interesting to see Deb's response... if she doesn't just blow off your presented evidence.

There's no way I'm going to convince CD of anything, Eyesopen. She has somehow managed to convince herself, at least partially, that 'all is well'. Sometimes I actually envy her.

Then I remember the times in my life that I chose to shut my eyes to some unpleasant truth and retreat into self-created denial. You can't get away from these sort of unpleasant realities. They are always their, gnawing at your mind. Demanding to be confronted. And if you don't, they chew you up from the inside out... leaving you angry and resentful.

Just for the sake of arguement, exactly what type of evidence would you need to 'convince' you that these slimy, ultra-persistent, illness-inducing, white-out causing trails are something other than normal and need to be addressed, Deb?

posted 11-19-2001 01:06 PM            

1. An admission from the Air Force that it has been 'testing' some sort of contrail-contained additives;

2. A properly-researched and -documented correlation between contrails and admissions to hospitals based on some sort of illness;

3. The results of a serious analysis of contrail particulates collected in situ; or

4. Some sort of lidar spectroscopy showing anomalous ingredients in contrails.

As far as I'm concerned, anything else is just idle speculation.