posted 02-12-2002 01:03 PM            

I, personally, have a hard time seeing a connection between what I have observed occurring in our atmosphere for the last three years and the jettisoning of excess jet fuel. I'll resit the urge to post a few dozen pictures of chemtrails vs. fuel dumps for comparitive analysis.

Again speaking strictly for myself, I don't believe that contrails are chemtrails. I believe that these unusually persitent trails that are being methodically dispersed over urban population centers, that spread out into a giant canopy of artificially-created cloud cover, that cause illness and a great deal of psychological distress for people caught in their path, and that turn up in congressional bills under the heading 'exotic weapons', are something more than contrails.

And certainly something more than the occasional fuel dump.

posted 02-12-2002 01:30 PM            

3. There is good reason to believe that a large amount of dumped Jet-A or JP-8 jet fuel does not evaporate before it reaches the lungs of people standing in the path of the fuel dump.

posted 02-12-2002 02:38 PM            

quote:

---

MaverickGoose
ezOP
Posts: 136
(2/4/02 9:45:15 pm)
Reply
Re: Just a slight
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...When I was in college, I worked part-time at an FBO at the local airport doing line service. My primary duty was to pump Avgas 100LL and Jet-A2M into civilian planes that stopped by on their way across the country. One of the things I remembered was that I was told the Jet-A was esentially kerosene, and the AVGAS was little more than high-octane gasoline. For me, the biggest difference was that the AVGAS would evaporate if it got on your clothes, while the JET A would stick and irritate the hell out of your skin. Thankfully, that didn't happen very often.

Now, fast-forwarding to the present, I only assumed that jet fuel was jet fuel was jet fuel, and they were all kerosene-based. I am blissfully unaware nowadays.......I don't ever want to have to deal with fuel spills again!

---

posted 02-12-2002 03:02 PM            

Would the dumping of JP8+100 (or any other jet fuel variant) cause the appearance of persitent chemtrail-style plumes?

I think there are some real stumbling blocks with this approach in general, but it's pointless to bring them up unless the first question can be answered with an authoritative 'yes' or 'no'.

posted 02-12-2002 03:06 PM            

Are these good enough?

posted 02-12-2002 03:25 PM            

Case in Point: How ’bout an EA-6B Prowler from NAS Whidbey Island that was caught trailing “wingtip vortices” at no more than 10,000 feet above Mount Vernon, Washington, on February 20, 2001...??? Not smoke; not fuel being dumped; but a pair of trails that persisted almost ten minutes before they finally disappeared into the mid-winter sky.

This series of pictures has always puzzled me. Not your average chemjet is it? But then again, these days, what is ? What makes you suspect that this was a fuel dump?

posted 02-12-2002 03:47 PM            

You claimed that the photos in question were representative of a fuel dump (or so it would appear, correct me if that was not your implication).

I posted the photographer's assertion that these were not fuel dumps and asked why it was that you thought he was mistaken.

posted 02-12-2002 04:08 PM            

quote:

---

Then, on Saturday, October 16, 1999, I witnessed something that quite literally stopped me in my tracks. If I harbored any prior skepticism about the existence of “funny” contrails, they were laid to rest just before 13:30 PDT as I was about to enter the local Fidalgo Bay Coffee shop in Mount Vernon, Washington. Looking up after hearing the roar of one of NAS Whidbey’s EA-6B’s, I watched as the jet aircraft was traveling from east to west about 30° above the southern horizon. From its angular size and velocity, I could easily tell that it was flying at no more than 10,000 feet above ground level. With that in mind, what made absolutely no sense was what appeared to be a vapor condensation trail that was being left behind. It was not smoke, nor was it a fuel dump in progress. I know the difference. This fluffy plume was only beginning to dissipate some ten minutes later, also ruling out any visual effects of wing-tip vortices. (Although I did not have a camera with me that day, I was carrying my brand new Minolta STsi Maxxum four months later when I saw the same thing again.)...

...on October 23rd, I was interviewed for 20 minutes by Hilly Rose on live national radio. Having only recently become aware of “chemtrail paranoia”, himself, he had me describe to the audience what I had seen in the sky over Mount Vernon, as well as my little chat with the On-Duty Navy Officer. There was also time for me to speak about the “drunken ship captains’ party” of June 30th, where I was allowed to summarize most of what I had submitted to the newspaper a month ago.

While out on my heated back deck not more than two hours later, I received the first hint that not everyone was appreciative of my attention to detail or of my willingness to rock the boat whenever I think it is called for. About half past midnight, my eyes started burning, followed by uncontrollable watering. Before I knew it, the lenses on my glasses were covered with the saline solution of my own spattered tears. Once my sinuses began draining as well, it became increasingly clear that I was under some kind of physical attack. My first reactions were denial and disbelief, that there had to be another more “rational” explanation for what was happening to me. Those thoughts departed just as quickly while I was inside cleaning up myself. Suddenly, I heard a loud crash and ran back out to the deck. There on the floor sat my black and white Rex bunny, Peter, not far from where I had been standing a few moments before. The problem was that the rabbit had been inside his cage and somehow managed to jump upward almost two and a half feet, with enough force to pop open the top of his cage and come to land on the deck floor beside it. If I was imagining things, then so was the rabbit...

Three weeks later, it became evident that the assault was not over. Jack, my other rabbit, a three-year-old mini-Rex, died unexpectedly from a lung hemorrhage. He was a perfectly healthy animal, exhibiting absolutely no signs of distress of any kind. And yet, within a 36 hour period, he had stopped eating, huddled himself into a corner of his cage, and was dead before I could even get him to see the vet. I woke up to find Jack stiff as a board on Veterans Day. Not even a $160 necropsy would reveal what virus or bacteria brought on the pneumonia that had led to the hemorrhage...

Nine days after that on November 20th, Clifford Carnicom was being interviewed by Hilly Rose on the Saturday edition of Coast to Coast AM. Incredibly, it was a little past midnight when I was again hit in the eyes with something that began to burn, just as it had soon after I had been heard on the radio, only a month earlier. This time, however, a neighborhood 120-pound black lab mix was running around loose out back and started barking at something. Almost immediately, his barking turned into whimpering and then — silence. With Jack now gone and my having been physically attacked twice, I wasted no time in confining all of my pets to the inside of the house. By the time I had sneaked out the garage and was in the backyard myself, there was nothing and no one anywhere. Still, the local police were anything but patronizing toward me when I filed a report this time around. Fortunately, the dog showed up unharmed the next morning. But to this day, none of my critters are being allowed to live out on that deck.

---

posted 02-12-2002 04:22 PM            

BAHRAIN: November 13, 2001

A U.S. Marine Corp F/A-18C Hornet fighter-bomber dumps its extra fuel before making a carrier landing on the USS Theodore Roosevelt in the Arabian Sea following a strike mission in Afghanistan, November 11, 2001. The fighters routinely dump excess fuel before making carrier landings.

posted 02-12-2002 04:29 PM            

quote:

---

then we have by count in the past 3 hours, over 75 fuel dumps over Lake County, Calif. That's 25 per hour. Now if we multiply that figure for the past 4 days of non stop spraying, that comes to 2400 fuel dumps.

---

When I was collecting information for my Trail Research Report, while I did observe planes that I think were military leaving the classic Chemtrail, I never saw anything like the volume of CT flights that you just described. It was really a small percentage. If I had, it would have been a fantastic find when coupled with Flight Explorer observations showing these were not normal traffic.

posted 02-27-2002 10:19 AM            

quote:

---

Subject: Jet fuel
From: Laura Downey (lldowney@aol.com)
Date: 03-15-2001
...
In the absence of Nancy Odegaard, I sometimes field inquiries from archaeological sites in Arizona. Recently I was asked how to deal with a site which has been accidentally soaked in jet fuel. It was a surface site, and a fuel tank accidentally tipped over onto it, more than a year ago (I have no more details on the event). The archaeologists are aware of the potential health hazards and are taking precautions against skin contact and inhalation. They say that the main component of the fuel was kerosene. They expect most of that has evaporated by now, however some of the artifacts still carry an odor and test positive for volatile organics (I don't know how they are testing them). The artifacts are mainly ceramics, lithics, and some bone.

It seems there must be other components to the fuel, which have not evaporated. Does anyone out there have an idea what this component might be, and/or suggest a solvent preferably low toxicity) that they could try to use for removal or reduction of the residual fuel? Any other ideas?

Laura Downey
Assistant Conservator
Arizona State Museum

---

posted 02-28-2002 09:06 AM            

quote:

---

U.S. Representative Wayne T. Gilchrest (R - 1st District, MD) has begun to call for Congressional hearings to investigate the environmental impact of commercial aviation. Two environmental threats, in particular, are of interest to him: 1) toxic chemical runoff associated with aircraft deicing operations and 2) midair fuel releases from commercial aircraft.

In each case, the Congressman found it indefensible that neither the FAA, state aviation officials, airport operators nor the airlines, themselves, had any information regarding the quantities of fuel and chemical deicers released into the environment or their precise chemical composition. ...

Midair fuel releases by commercial aircraft have likewise gained public attention in Rep. Gilchrest's district. It first became an issue when, earlier this year, a World Airways flight inbound to BWI [Baltimore/Washington International Airport] dumped 14,000 gallons of jet fuel on the Arthur Slade Middle School playground in Glen Burnie, MD. This incident prompted Maryland State Delegates Michael W. Burns (R) and James E. Rzepkowski (R), both of the 32nd District, to sponsor legislation in the General Assembly to force BWI to monitor and disclose fuel dumping incidents. The airport vigorously opposed the bill as "too expensive" and "unworkable". ...

---

posted 02-28-2002 09:11 AM            

quote:

---

BWI [Baltimore/Washington International] Airport Avoids New Environmental Restrictions
PUBLICATION: The Capital (Annapolis, MD)
DATE: March 21, 1998
SECTION: Inside; Pg. A4
BYLINE: Sara Marsh
DATELINE: Annapolis, Maryland

The Capital of Annapolis, Maryland, reports that three bills that supporters say would have forced BWI Airport to be a better neighbor were voted down this week by two General Assembly committees.

According to the article, the House Commerce and Government Matters Committee overwhelmingly voted down three bills sponsored by Dels. Michael W. Burns, R-Glen Burnie, and James E. Rzepkowski, R-Glen Burnie. One bill before the committee would have required the Maryland Aviation Administration to report to the Maryland Department of the Environment and the Anne Arundel County Department of Health instances of in-flight fuel releases by any plane arriving or departing from BWI. Concern about in-flight fuel releases arose after a January [1998] incident in which a Glen Burnie mother and her son walked into a mist of falling jet fuel that had been dumped by a World Airways plane en route to Germany. Usually that fuel dissipates at high altitudes, but a valve on the plane became stuck open, allowing about 100 gallons of fuel to spray out.

---

posted 02-28-2002 06:16 PM            

quote:

---

The latest ploy involves linkage of legitimate pollution concerns over avaiation fuel dumping with the "chemtrail" hoax. Essentially, they intend to gain credibility for their hoax by allying with legitimate groups such as Citizen's Aviation Watch and/or local aviation watch groups, then to pervert legitimate concerns with their hoax beliefs.

This project is being led by xxxxxxx xxxxxxx of Texas(using the screen name 3t3L1) who has stated:

"Yes, there are many other things that could be happening in our skies, but so far we haven't been able to take irrefutable samples or to get the people involved to allow their names to be used in an exposé. What I'm suggesting is that we finally have something we can point to as a verifiable example of material being sprayed in the skies and hurting people who are standing on the ground. If we could advocate investigation into a proven aspect of chemtrails, it could subsequently open avenues into investigation of other aspects of chemtrails."
and
"I'm not saying that all chemtrails are fuel dumps. I'm saying that some chemtrails are fuel dumps. It would be worth our while to look into it because for fuel dumps we have black and white evidence on our side, not just speculation. But if you feel that we have to solve the whole chemtrail conundrum all at once, that's up to you." from: www.chemtrailcentral.com/...01065.html

xxxxxxx's advocacy of a linkage between an obvious hoax, that a portion of the thousands of planes observed making contrails daily are actually dumping fuel, is my concern. Legitimate aviation watch activists need to be aware that the "chemtrail" people are now among you and are seeking to insinuate their cause into yours, thus feeding off your credibility, while ultimately eroding it.

---

posted 03-01-2002 08:14 AM            

According to the Air Force, "JP-8 jet fuel released at low altitudes appears as a fine mist and may not volatilize before reaching the ground surface."

posted 03-01-2002 01:29 PM            

You say, "You know, Deb, because there are no publicly-available lists of commercial and military fuel dumps, it may be that it's now up to the debunkers to prove which trails are composed primarily of water (in the form of ice crystals)."

I disagree.

Let me re-assure you and all readers yet again that there's enough evidence that fuel-spills/dumping, especially of the less volatile JP-8 can and probably do reach the ground. And I think there's enough evidence that, in the proper amounts, they can and probably do pose environmental and health impacts. And I think that there's enough evidence that, under certain conditions, contrails can and do cause extensive cloud cover which can pose an impact to both weather and climate.

And I don't think that debunkers, even the more obnoxious ones, would disagree with that. Your work on fuel dumps, although critically important (at least to me), is not the issue for most people who believe in chemtrails as a deliberate effort by the [fill in the blank] to cause [fill in the blank].

Wisequakker and Chem11 see this difference. Consider the latters' post:

"Again speaking strictly for myself, I don't believe that contrails are chemtrails. I believe that these unusually persitent [sic] trails that are being methodically dispersed over urban population centers, that spread out into a giant canopy of artificially-created cloud cover, that cause illness and a great deal of psychological distress for people caught in their path, and that turn up in congressional bills under the heading 'exotic weapons', are something more than contrails" (emphases mine).

And, of course you quote Wisequakker in saying "...nor was it a fuel dump in progress. I know the difference."

What I'm getting at here is that we can leave the idea of fuel dumps as "chemtrails" out of the equation. Theoretically, of course, they are, just as any contrail could be considered a "chemtrail" because even the most innocuous one has some combustion by-products in it. They are special instances, and no one I can think of would say that they do not exist, just as you postulate.

So we're left with two scenarios, propounded by two groups. One group says that they have evidence that all the 'anomalous' contrail behavior can be explained by normal atmospheric phenomena. They explain -- over and over again -- just how the normal atmospheric phenomena can explain such 'anomalous' behavior. They comprise all the atmospheric scientists, physicists, guys who do meteorology for a living, and every aviator I know. Their hypotheses have been postulated, cross-checked, validated, and accepted by 99 percent of the people who care about such things.

The other group comprises people who have had no specialized training in meteorology, atmospheric science, fluid dynamics, heat transfer, or aviation. They admit that they have no hard evidence or correlative studies to back up their hypotheses. They base their argument on anecdotal evidence, and the reasoning that, because governments have lied (and probably still lie) on occasion, they must be lying now. Many of them reject any arguments made by people with whom they disagree, often with invective.

Now, I'm not saying who is right or wrong here. But I have never heard of any branch of science or any other logical investigative approach that requires the former group to prove their hypotheses.

Have you?

Regards,