posted 01-15-2004 07:48 PM            

January 14, 2004

To all:

If you look on the website antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/apo040112.html is to be found both a dramatic picture of a "hole-punch cloud", and a discussion of the phenomenon, apparently by NASA. A reference to the phenomenon can also be found on the news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3394461.htm. The cloud formation occurred over Mobile, Alabama, and is estimated to be "several hundred meters across". It is, however, in the analysis of the phenomenon that some important points were made.

Among other things, in the NASA website's own words, "hole-punch clouds like this are still the topic of meteorological speculation." They describe "a leading hypothesis" as being "falling ice crystals", and this, they characterize as being caused by ice crystals having originated "in a higher cloud", or being "facilitated by a passing airplane exhaust".

Among other things, the idea of a "higher cloud" being involved is strongly argued against by the fact that, in the picture, no higher cloud can be seen. For that matter, since hole punches usually take place in cirrus layers, the very idea of a higher cloud taking part seems eminently unlikely.

THE BBC website speaks of “meteorological experts” feeling that “the hole formed when ice-crystals from a passing plane fell through the cloud, causing the water droplets in it to evaporate”. They quote “experts” as relating that to the process of cloud seeding.

More important, though, is the fact that the pages address the matter of hole-punch clouds in so uncertain a manner. They speak about "speculation", and refer to "a leading hypothesis". Yet, to listen to the debunkers speak, the matter will have been completely proven and decided, long ago! With characteristic guile, they would depict hole-punch clouds as unquestionably understood, and demonstrably consistent with general meteorological models. One of the "explanations", for example, indeed, the most common one, would talk of "gravity waves", between the hole-punch cloud and a higher cloud. And, on the basis solely of that, any skepticism about hole-punch clouds being anomalous was depicted as "stupid", "dumb" or "insane"! Yet NASA, which seems a paragon of authority to the “debunkers” does not even agree with their favored model. They even state directly that they are up in the air about the cause of the phenomenon. And the suggestion on the BBC site, of water vapor from a jet falling into the cloud, and stimulating the condensation and subsequent fall of ice crystals from the cloud, is in direct contradiction of the “debunkers’” determined assertion that even solid, particulate matter, released from that height, could take up to two years to reach the ground, if it ever reaches it!

Those who oppose chemtrails must not allow themselves to be frightened, intimidated or conned into failing to acknowledge the evident and true!

posted 01-21-2004 09:41 PM            

I too saw the picture of a hole punch cloud, on Rense I think it was.

My first impression was that it seemed to be a CHEMcloud that someone had cut a hole though. Wouldn't that be great if somewhere someone had figured out a way (yes, I've heard of orgone) of cutting holes in these *alleged" polymer clouds and letting through he sun.

What a great theme for a movie, eh? It's the late 21st century and the NWO has decreed that The Shield must be maintained to allow for endless pollution at the expense of sunlight. It plunges the world into semi-darkness (Hmmmm) like Britian's coal burning days. The Resistance takes up "cloud burners" and liberates sunlight for The People.