Posts Tagged ‘global warming’
6 PORKIES – AEROSOLS – THE ATMOSPHERE – THE WMO – ATMOSNAPS
Don’t forget my other pages, links and comments are one click away at the top right of the page…
“PORK PIE” = “LIE” - Cockney rhyming slang.
“Obviously your alleged credentials are fraud” – has your short-term memory passed away? ONE.
“A true person of Science would step forward and lay all questions to rest” – ditto, and I have. Check my comments here. Check
“You do nothing” – I COULD start pasting again… THREE.
“It is safe to assume that people’s claims must have basis” – assuming is the only action you do. Why not educate yourself in science? FOUR.
“I’d like nothing more than for someone to prove nothing is going on” – FIVE.
“You are by far not only a fraud but a coward as well” – GIANT PORKY NUMBER SIX.
What a great porky this one is!
The non-scientific word-association goes aerosol – hair spray – sprayers (truly inspirational!)
But never a thought to CHECKING UP what the REAL MEANING (scientific meaning) of aerosol ACTUALLY IS:
Aerosol – from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Aerosol – contamination in northeastern India and Bangladesh.
Technically, an aerosol is a suspension of fine solid particles or liquid droplets in a gas. Examples are smoke, oceanic haze, air pollution, smog and CS gas. In general conversation, aerosol usually refers to an aerosol spray can or the output of such a can.
The word aerosol derives from the fact that matter “floating” in air is a suspension (a mixture in which solid or liquid or combined solid-liquid particles are suspended in a fluid). To differentiate suspensions from true solutions, the term sol evolved – originally meant to cover dispersions of tiny (sub-microscopic) particles in a liquid.
With studies of dispersions in air, the term aerosol evolved and now embraces both liquid droplets, solid particles, and combinations of these.
Concentrated aerosols from substances such as silica, asbestos, and diesel particulate matter are sometimes found in the workplace and have been shown to result in a number of diseases including silicosis and black lung. Respirators can protect workers from harmful aerosol exposure. In the United States the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health certifies respirators through the National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory to ensure that they protect workers and the public from harmful airborne contaminants.
Effect on climate
Aerosols over the Amazon each September for four burning seasons (2005 through 2008). The aerosol scale (yellow to dark reddish-brown) indicates the relative amount of particles that absorb sunlight. Anthropogenic aerosols, particularly sulfate aerosols from fossil fuel combustion, exert a cooling influence on the climate which partly counteracts the warming induced by greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide. This effect is accounted for in many climate models. Recent research, as yet unconfirmed, suggests that aerosol diffusion of light may have increased the carbon sink in the earth’s ecosystem.
Recent studies of the Sahel drought and major increases since 1967 in rainfall over the Northern Territory, Kimberley, Pilbara and around the Nullarbor Plain have led some scientists to conclude that the aerosol haze over South and East Asia has been steadily shifting tropical rainfall in both hemispheres southward.
The latest studies of severe rainfall declines over southern Australia since 1997 have led climatologists there to consider the possibility that these Asian aerosols have shifted not only tropical but also mid-latitude systems southward.
Oxides of nitrogen (NOx) in the atmosphere are a form of pollution which can give rise to smog and act as a greenhouse gas. Their persistence in the atmosphere is affected by aerosol droplets of water.
In 1964 long chain fatty acids, either naturally produced from marine organisms dispersed into the atmosphere by wave action or man-made, were found to coat these droplets. In 2006 there was a study of the effect of the LCFA on the persistence of NOx, but the long term implications, although thought to be significant, have yet to be determined.
So AEROSOL means this:
A REALTIME study of aerosol presence (made by satellite) all over the world may be obtained here, and here is a representative image, from which you can see the satellite passes 90 minutes apart.
There is a video made over a fortnight showing the main aerosol action occurs travelling westward on a line passing through BANGLADESH and the SAHARA DESERT. It is MAN-MADE – the consequence of many hundreds of millions of humans living close to the poverty line… slash-and-burn, cooking fires, forest fires, vegetable farming decomposition, volcanoes…
No aircraft contrails are found anywhere NEAR this line…
So much for the “chemtrailers” and their “the NWO is poisoning the whole world” theory…
What is it?
It’s a mixture of invisible element and compound gases; nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide, water vapour, argon, neon, and trace amounts of other inert gaseous elements. This mixture keeps us in a healthy condition, and imbalance in this mixture can poison and/or kill us. We would all prefer to be at Standard Temperature and Pressure, which is 20 deg C (70 deg F) and 1000 millibars (14.7 lb/in2).
Standard Temperature and Pressure occur at Sea Level, but the atmosphere may reach up to 200Km or more (the INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION orbits at 400Km and you can bet there’s very little atmosphere, if any, at that height!) The following diagram is a graph of atmospheric pressure against height over sea level (altitude). The space station height is three graph-heights higher than the graph below.
There is an asymptotic fall-off of pressure with altitude which is easy to see. This, when combined with the concomitant drop in temperature lends weight to the understanding that the stratosphere cannot bear much loading of contrail ice before it saturates, and cannot absorb more.
The region just immediately higher than the tropopause (at approximately 26,000 feet to 39,000 feet) is the region where passenger aircraft fly, for reasons of safety and economy.
The pressure above the tropopause is one-fifth that at sea level, but at the high cruising speed of 550 miles per hour, there is sufficient dynamic lift for safe and stable flight.
This region is the CAUSE of the “chemtrail” controversy, for it is COLD, STABLE, and INCAPABLE of absorbing large amounts of combustion steam as water vapor. As a consequence this steam cools to microscopically-fine ice crystals, which form – TRAILS behind the aircraft.
And the following is a diagram of air dewpoint and temperature plotted against height above sea level (altitude).
If you look at the dewpoint line (on left) you can see it move continually leftward with increase in height above sea level. This powerfully indicates that with increasing height, the atmosphere is increasingly incapable of absorbing the exhaust water formed by burning kerosine in gas turbines.
Looking at the temperature (lapse rate) line on the right, you can see that it moves leftward with increase in height above sea level, until it reaches the tropopause, where it starts to edge to the right again. You can see that after the tropopause the atmosphere gets WARMER with increasing height. The concave shapes to both dewpoint and temperature here indicate some energy input – either solar ‘focusing’ from tropospheric clouds, or jet stream mixing energy – it is hard to guess.
Another couple of points. This chart was obviously made on a cold day; the sea level temperature is just sub-zero. However, two hundred metres higher, and the air temperature is five degrees higher. Bumps and dips in these two lines show where you may infer the presence of clouds.
There is much more to learn about our atmosphere than I have given here, but I can heartily recommend this link to the UK’s Met Office.
After that you can answer these questions (can’t you!).
As further confirmation I strongly recommend AtOptics
And a word to the “wise”. There is a lot of scuttlebutt going around which says “Global Warming is just a myth started by our duplicitous governments as a means of extracting additional taxes”. Well I remember a time when it was thought we were headed directly for a new ice age.
(This was just a journalistic ruse. The next Ice Age will occur approximately 16,000 years from the present.)
Since then, it is true that government funds are available for the investigation of GW to the detriment of other research, and that horrible thing “political correctness” has raised its ugly head above the horizon, but the facts are too numerous to mention that the climate is warming, but also that other facts remain unmentioned, which leaves a question of politics…
See “Global Warming is a Myth” under G in this blog.
THE WORLD METEOROLOGICAL ORGANIZATION
|One of the major purposes of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), as laid down in its Convention, is “To facilitate worldwide cooperation in the establishment of networks of stations for the making of meteorological observations as well as hydrological and other geophysical observations related to meteorology, and to promote the establishment and maintenance of centres charged with the provision of meteorological and related services”.
Accordingly, WMO Members operate, in a coordinated manner, complex networks in space, the atmosphere, on land and over oceans. In 2007, Members decided to work towards enhanced integration of both the WMO Global Observing System (GOS) and WMO co-sponsored observing systems such as the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS), Global Terrestrial Observing System (GTOS) and Global Climate Observing System (GCOS). This concept is called the WMO Integrated Global Observing Systems (WIGOS).
Currently, more than 10000 manned and automatic surface weather stations, 1000 upper-air stations, over 7000 ships, more than 100 moored and 1000 drifting buoys, hundreds of weather radars and over 3000 specially equipped commercial aircraft measure key parameters of the atmosphere, land and ocean surface every day. The space-based component of the WMO Observing System contains operational polar-orbiting and geostationary satellites and also R&D environmental satellites complementing ground-based global observations. These activities are coordinated within the Global Observing System (GOS) of the World Weather Watch (WWW) of WMO. Several WMO Programmes sponsor or participate in the operation of several global observing systems. Other global observing systems, e.g. the global hydrological networks (WHYCOS), function principally on a national or regional level.
Observation programmes such as the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) and the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) will continue to play a major role in improving the collection of required data for the development of climate forecasts and climate change detection. WMO’s Global Atmosphere Watch (GAW) provides data for scientific assessments and for early warnings of changes in the chemical composition and related physical characteristics of the atmosphere that may have adverse affects upon our environment. Through its Instruments and Methods of Observation Programme (IMOP), WMO ensures that meteorological instruments, including manual and automatic ground-based stations and space-based observing systems, are accurate and provide standardized data.
WMO monitoring and observing systems will be a core component of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS), aimed at developing a comprehensive, coordinated and sustained Earth observation system of systems to understand and address global environmental and economic challenges.
This is, of course, a silly word coined by me to introduce these pictures of Earth’s atmosphere which have been taken by some of the NASA Space Shuttle astronauts from the International Space Station.
I find them most stimulating and interesting. We spend all our time with a “flat-earther” viewpoint, looking up at clouds and failing to see them for what they truly are.
Written by JazzRoc
November 19, 2008 at 1:00 am
Tagged with adiabatic, aerosol, albedo, alleged, altitude, aluminium, aluminum, argon, arthritis, asymptotic, atmosphere, atmospheric, axis, barium, breathing difficulties, carbon dioxide, carnicom, chem trail, compound, concave, contrail, coward, credentials, dewpoint, duplicitous governments, educate, element, environmental, equator, exhaust, filaments, focusing, fraud, Gas, global warming, graph, gw, heavy haze, height, horizon, hydrogen, ice, ice age, inert, jet stream, kerosine, lapse rate, level, lines in the sky, lung disease, mesosphere, met office, metallic salts, methane, morgellons, myth, nacreous, neon, nitrogen, no more blue skies, noctilucent, not a normal cloud, oily clouds, oxygen, photosynthesis, political correctness, pressure, ptb, rense, saturates, science, scuttlebutt, sea, spraying, standard, temperature, thermosphere, tic-tac-toe, trade wind, Turbine, unnatural cloud, water vapor, webby material, whiteout
91177info – A PAGE FROM YOUTUBE – ALTN – ALUMINUM/BARIUM – ANDERS – DISCOVERY?
Don’t forget my other pages, links and comments are one click away at the top right of the page…
The chemtrail petition has the necessary signatures to get a response from the government. 600 so far but if anyone would like a personal email detailing what our government is doing or is aware of please see the top link.
the report states that the BEST DISPERSAL HEIGHT IS 80,000 FEET. Only U2s and X15s fly up there, and all they can carry is cameras and electronics. That altitude is TWICE AS HIGH as the CEILINGS of modern aircraft and is IMPOSSIBLE TO REACH WITH ANY TYPE OF TANKER. That’s why they conclude that SEEDING OCEAN CLOUDS and FEEDING IRON TO OCEAN CENTRES are the only routes immediately viable. They haven’t done those either, unfortunately. It makes RUBBISH out of your video post, doesn’t it?
Yes they do seed clouds. There are private companies that do as such and videos of companies cloud seeding on youtube. I am very happy with my video as it has added to the pool of information which thousands of researches are finding out and adding to themselves. Some information may be speculative, some may be far fetched but I believe I was the first to find these documents of the UK government actually suggesting adding chemicals to aviation fuel and making it available on youtube.
You are proposing something, on the other hand, which you REALLY know nothing about. It therefore seems “reasonable” to you to behave the way you do. Any scientist or engineer who reads what you write will shake their head. Where were you when brains were handed out? You can’t even find the relevant research materials, which are freely available on the net. You also appear unable to read. If DEFRA claims it would be difficult to do, then they haven’t done it. You don’t appear to notice that.
Yes I know I haven’t been able to give as much attention to the subject of chemtrails and find the necessary documents. I was distracted by the swine flu last year and the so called deadly pandemic we were supposed to be in. Which turned out to be a false alarm and a way for our governments to syphon off tax payers money. They lied it was a false alarm. This vid is 10 months old so maybe I should return to investigate chemtrails. After the petition at 10 Downing St which ends in March.
Truly infantile. “Look, a plane is flying overhead and there are some rocks on the ground shaped like the letter C. It’s a clue! Proof for chemtrails!”. You’ll never be taken seriously by anyone with critical faculties who can weigh evidence. You’ll just continue to talk amongst your buddies with the same psychological disposition about your escapist fantasies and waste the time of your other friends, pestering us with the latest “proof” for your delusions. Yes, I actually read the document.
You’re the one who is delusional. In fact, looking through your comments for the last six months – You’re a total fruitcake. You are also a liar and I hate liars. Now which document did you think you read? hmm?
@91177info, Stephen Salter made a submission to this committee – this:
You’ll find it on my channel and also at jazzroc. wordpress. com on my “Jet Spray” page because it’s a brilliant and cheap idea. Yes, I actually read the document. many times, many places. All this stuff is just the consideration of options, many of which are dead ducks. You lack the nous to make any sensible discrimination whatsoever. Scientific understanding, if you ever found it, might help you…
There is no government legalisation and private companies can virtually spray what they want up there as it been reported on MSM. So really you don’t have a clue what is being sprayed. Of course you would say it is just water vapour. You started your comment thread very defensive/protective and rude. You think all is well and no damage is being caused to us or our earth, fine. That’s your instinct. Mine says something is not right and there are millions of other people who feel the same.
@91177info, I actually C&P’d someone else’s comment which exactly suited this. I’m not talking about INSTINCT. I’m talking about EXPERIENCE. I KNOW there is nothing in the trails and I can PROVE there is nothing in the trails. You can neither KNOW or PROVE anything. Aviation fuel is made up to a recipe by the admixture of conditioners to a locally-made petroleum distillate, so it will be subtly different wherever the plane refuels. But there’s only one type of jetfuel and it’s for ALL planes.
beachcomber2008, Obviously you didn’t read the entire 163 pages…I can tell by what you are saying. Pull it up again and READ it this time…..then come back and debate with us.
Isn’t it quite the coincidence that Mars has quite an abundance of sulphate. Perhaps those tubes we have seen on Mars are them harvesting minerals. Great video.
Chemtrails also (amongst other chemicals) contain barium. The EPA states dose factors under 2 parts per billion is safe from harm. Rainwater collected after chemspraying has been found to have up to 6 parts per billion. Jet fuel sometimes referred to as JP-5 or JP-8 is regulated by the Department of Commerce. Good luck getting a hold of them. When no1 gives us an answer or we’re completely ignored on a subject we can only believe its something we’d not take well. Then again I’d ignore any scrambled answer they’d “come up with” at this point. Two good reasons. Vitamin D kills the flu virus. And the spray contains chemicals to help the viral envelope fuse with lung cells for easier infection.
Well done for blocking that muppet. Good info here.
Contrails, Climate Changing Clouds of Combustion spewed by 8mile high Oil burning “Smogliners” whose exhaust products acts as the nucleus for the formation of ice crystals that are Contrails ,that persist spread to form Contrail-Cirrus a days heat trapping ( as clouds tend to do) thermal blanket of exhaust cloud. This is Geo-engineering. Contrails. Climate Changing Clouds of Combustion. FairyChemTales a Big Oil spray story to cloud the Environmental Disaster of Vast Oil Burning.
Chemtrails day & night in UK the sun rarely shows and when it does they are back to cover it. EVIL GOVERNMENTS.
Help heal the planet, google ‘orgonite’. It’s a simple compound anyone can create in their backyard with fairly inexpensive, widely-available materials which balances ambient energy by turning the negative energy into positive energy, with many easily-confirmed effects. Orgonite does this continuously, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, without electricity.
Truely infantile. “Look, a plane is flying overhead and there are some rocks on the ground shaped like the letter C. It’s a clue! Proof for chemtrails!”. You’ll never be taken seriously by anyone with critical faculties who can weigh evidence. You’ll just continue to talk amongst your buddies with the same psychological disposition about your escapist fantasies and waste the time of your other friends, pestering us with the latest “proof” for your delusions. Yes, I actually read the document.
gtb393 ??? Joined April 24 2007 Channel Views 0 No Favourites No Uploads Comments 0 Channel Comments 0 Now I really do not need to ask what drew you to my vid do I?? All your appearance has done is reaffirm to the thousands of subscribers that:
A: There really is something going on.
B: You’re a SHILL.
C: You’re EVIL
D: You are not welcome here
E: You’re now on my BLOCKED list
now we can go to every official government agencies and present the document and ask for explanation…
Great find, mate. thanks for share it with the rest of us here. Jazzroc – where are you now, you old fool and lier?
BocScar is either working for the CDC or Baxter. He has several accounts jazzroc and stars15k, he has been paid to do this. He/She is using an avatar which is used by the CDC and is listed in the pdf documents that Jane Burgermeister sent me. See my website link on my profile for more info. There are other shills which have been paid to do this. But BocScar is classic and very persistent. You just have to read through the comments to see what I mean. Love to those that want it. Jason x
hey the weather up here has been weird so far, the whole month of june has been rain, i think its a new record here in this area lol.
I have a few shills as well youtube is crawling with them trying to confuse chemtrails with contrails LOL There is no argument we’re not stupid I was looking for stuff today and googled reports in the UK AND FOUND ONE AT GLOBAL RESEARCH UK
Try this site all the evidence is here in photos/maps and graphs. asp bnl gov/ Just replace the space with an . I will get back to this but the swindle flu is the main headlines lol
I never heard of jazzroc and stars15 is a 40 yr old woman. You’ll need to work harder to pass the detectives exam.
Now why on earth would you come back to this video and reply to a new comment thread which wasn’t in reply to one of yours? I have been waiting for this test for 2 weeks and actually I have just passed my detective exam because you fell for my trap. BocScar you are a shill, your icon is one used in Baxter International labs which can be seen in Jane Burgermeister’s file charges. Goodbye.
Well, dickhead, since you are from england, you HAVE to love moslems. they have taken over your bloody country. Yes, I like guns, that is one of our freedoms here in the US. And I do like women. That would obviously offend a faggot like you. blow it out your windpipe, abdul.
Actually, what you say you like doing to women tells me it is actually YOU that has faggot tendencies! Another moron that uses the same username throughout the web and his email address. You paranoid racist anal loving moron.
I am very sorry to use the terminology that graverobber35 has used. They are not words I use and I only used them in context to what he was saying to me.
Sorry , I lost my tin foil hat in the flood.
You lost a lot more than that. Your nothing more than a muslim hating gun loving womanising thug. This user said that: “mohammed was a child molester” on hardyk1′s channel. By the way always make sure the barrel of your gun isn’t blocked, not being psychic or anything
Did you even bother to read the conclusion? “It is clear from the assessment of geo-engineering options presented here that there are large uncertainties regarding the effectiveness, impacts, technical feasibility, cost and risks of all the schemes considered. As a consequence of these uncertainties, we feel that it is premature at this stage to draw firm conclusions on the feasibility of implementing the schemes discussed”. They don’t even know if geoengineering is possible!
Bother? I’m well bothered. They are getting private companies to do this. They are? testing it out now! Trying different chemicals and mixtures. With out consulting or warning the public. Why? Because we are expendable and our lives and heath doesn’t matter. It really makes me angry. I mean really fucking angry.
Did you read the report’s conclusion? They say that they don’t know if geoengineering is even possible. If they admit in the report that geoengineering might not even be possible, how can you use the report as proof that “chemtrails are real and I believe are happening now with out public consultation.”
Because they are lying, thieving, murdering bastards. They killed over a million Iraqi civilians on this plagiarised dossier: Downing Street’s dossier against Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction is accused of plagiarism. Channel Four News has learnt that the bulk of an intelligence dossier heralded by Colin Powell at the UN yesterday, was copied from three different articles – one written by a graduate student”. BocScar, Do you really think they will tell us the truth after the above quotes?
-Because they are lying, thieving, murdering bastards.- I’m talking of the DE & CC document referenced in the video. On the one hand you accept this document when it speaks of stratospheric aerosols, but on the other hand you reject it when it states that geoengineering might not even be possible. So is the DE&CC document true or a lie?
What do you think I think?
I’m not sure what you think. I’m not sure. You seem to agree with the parts of the DECC document that fit your preconceived notions, and disagree with the parts that don’t. You use this government document to “prove” they are conducting geoengineering, but ignore the part where it says that geoengineering might not be possible. I’m asking for clarification.
Going back a couple of months, people like Stars15k, o0Nighthawk0o, Shilltastic and possibly you were stating there was no evidence of such programs and chemtrails were just water vapour. Nothing was and could be sprayed in the skies. This is a government document which states such programs and is inviting private research companies to share their research and knowledge. These programs are happening right now. Stop moving the goal posts. Chemtrails are real.
-These programs are happening right now.- So according to you the government is publicly inviting research companies and publishing feasibility studies on the Internet while at the same time secretly spraying the sky in full daylight, hoping nobody will notice. The DECC document offers possible quick fix solutions to mitigate global warming and then it cautions that these solutions are dangerous and might not even be feasible.
Private companies are spraying yes. So at last you acknowledge chemtrails. Thankyou.
What are private companies spraying in the air?
You tell me. You’re paid to do this “argumentum ad hominem”
You are the one that claims private companies are spraying. I assume you know what you are talking about. So please tell me, what private companies are spraying? I really want to know.
Hold on let me look in the yellow pages.
So, I take it you don’t know. You claim private companies are conducting secret spraying operations but can’t even name one of them. How can you conclude that private companies are involved? On what are you basing your statement that private companies are involved?
We live in a Corporate world, they’re all Private companies. Even you are a corporation.
What’s your point?
Just looking for human qualities.. U failed.
This isn’t a philosophical discussion about human nature. The guy made a concrete statement that private companies are spraying the air. If he knows these companies are private then he must also know their names.
If you could just stop beating your bishop for a moment and look at the reply I have sent you.
Stating that the scientific community is researching solutions to our environmental mess is not acknowledging “chemtrails”. The word “chemtrail” implies covert programs to dumb down the population or block out the sun by deliberately using chemicals. I do not acknowledge “chemtrails” and I’ve tried to point out that neither does the DECC document.
Chemical Contrails then. Spraying or releasing chemicals via aerosol or the exhaust of aircraft fuel. They are doing exactly what it says on the tin. It is interesting you say “dumb down”?? That is very telling BocScar. I’ve been talking about Global Dimming.
I’ll ask you again. What are private companies spraying in the air?
Page 26 of the pdf states “if other parties, countries and institutions wished to develop a shared approach, DECC would be interested in sharing expertise, and in helping to develop an initial detailed scoping study”. Google these: ukca ac uk – GLOMAP – SLIMCAT/TOMCAT – CiTTyCAT – EU Aerosol IP – AEROCOM emissions/validation – EUSAAR data
They are looking to partner with the private sector to “develop an initial scoping study”. initial… study… How do you conclude from that statement that private companies are currently engaged in a global dimming campaign? These are either feasibility studies, environmental studies and one of them only tries to set research protocols for data base sharing… but never mind… Which one of those companies is currently engaged in a covert global dimming campaign?
WOW BocScar how do “YOU” know about these sites and give an answer so quickly? Can you do me a favour here? Please swear on your families life, the generations of your family which are now in the spirit world and ALL the genetic strain of your family in the future that YOU, are not involved in any way with chemtrails, chemical contrails, the military, and the government. And you are just some regular youtube user. So I BocScar swear (You fill in the rest here)
You told me about the sites… so I looked at them. These people can loosely be characterized as atmospheric researchers. I swear I am not in the service of any government or any secret society to misinform anyone about anything nor am I involved directly or indirectly in perpetrating illegal covert chemical campaigns against the atmosphere or the population. LOL Look… you make statements like “private companies are spraying”, “chemtrails are real”. I’m asking you to explain yourself because I don’t see it. Every time one asks for some kind of evidence you guys point to publicly available government documents produced by the same government you claim is secretly conducting the spraying. You claim the DECC document proves “chemtrails” but ignore its conclusion that geoengineering is not advisable and may not even be feasible.
Thankyou for swearing BocScar. All I know is what I see and what I have researched. I am an artist by trade and I paint landscapes. I love to draw clouds. I am always looking at clouds ever since I was 4 years old and my mum pointed out a face in the cloud. From then on I have always looked up at clouds and I have made faces out of what I see. Back in February during a landscape photography assignment I became aware of the chemtrails, white lines. That is when the spraying started in my area. I am a very aware person, I follow the seasons and live with nature. I love sunsets and follow the moon. I know where it will be rising with a given tree in my area. I count the swallows that come and nest here and count the new brood that leaves. I have a photographic memory and have over 200 art and photography books and know which picture is in which books. I don’t like change. BocScar, I know what contrails are. The white lines now in the sky are not normal, they really aren’t right.
Without a doubt, increased contrail formation has an environmental impact. I just challenge the notion that it is a covert government operation to block the sun or kill people. Contrails are a consequence of air travel, just like smog is a consequence of car usage. I’m just a regular guy and I have never seen any evidence of weather modification other than cloud seeding. I don’t consider atmospheric research to be geoengineering nor do I consider persistent contrails to be “chemtrails”. I’ve read the DECC document and it’s a preliminary assessment paper that concludes there are large uncertainties regarding the effectiveness, impacts, technical feasibility, cost and risks of geoengineering.
BocScar. Well said. You must be aware these sad simple believers and their voodoo video Priests of Piffle havent the faintest idea of the Planet they are on or how it works. But they do share a genuine concern for what they see outside above them. And so they and you should. A Jet exhaust made 6-8mile high layer of reflective day heat trapping cloud, Contrail-Cirrus, is a Climate Changing Cloud of Combustion. A Global unintended Geo-engineering Environmental Disaster.
Just google “Downing St dossier plagiarised”. They lied, they have committed murder. Something is NOT right here. Me thinks they will do it again.
me too, Bocscar, if hes not being paid by this industry, is totally mind wiped on all of these issues about weather modification, save your energy, Bocscar is insincere and just soapboxs for attention, good or bad. He knows it’s real he spends everyday trying to talk “WITNESS’” down from what thy’ve seen. But he has no argument at all, he just flames through disjointed arguments, a waste of time dewd
He was convincing, but easy to put right. Thanks for that info.
-if hes not being paid by this industry, is totally mind wiped - Once again the you demonstrate your ability to come to conclusions without facts. The same logic leads you to believe “they” are secretly modifying the weather in full daylight and nobody but astute YouTube videographers are clever enough to notice.
Chemtrails are obvious to children now. They have to say something now. You rather them disclose it’s part of bio weapons and psych warfare Haarp EMF weapons? Climate control is a cover story. Now run out and push this disinfo to your neighboors so they pay carbon taxes and believe Al Gore’s scam.
Thank you for this very informative video. Chemtrail particles are now beginning to be included in Science books and being taught in high schools. Some Science books are referring to it as ‘PARTICLE AIR”. See Centerpoint Learning Science 1 Essential Interactions Science Book Section 5:19 Solutions for Global Warming. Peace.
Here’s and interesting patent: Powder contrail generation United States Patent 3899144 abstract: Light scattering pigment powder particles, surface treated to minimize inparticle cohesive forces, are dispensed from a jet mill deagglomerator as separate single particles to produce a powder contrail having maximum visibility or radiation scattering ability for a given weight material.
Of coarse you realize that these are the same quacks who are intentionally poisoniong our children with vaccines and makeing males of every species sterile with plastics. And now we are letting them tinker with the only planet we have!
It actually reads that like they are already doing this and are wondering whether or not doing it on Global level will work…
don’t want to be the ‘bad guy’ here, but all this document is saying what they have ‘researched’ to be possible solutions to their made-up crisis. It’s certainly no proof of them admitting they are doing the chemtrails currently.
very well put together congrads. Geoff
Excellent work. Thank you!
great research! yep obama announced in jan or feb this year that they may ‘have-to’ fill the sky with aluminium particles to deflect the sun. theyve backed off here for four days now (touch-wood) after several weeks of constant disbursal. I am curious as to why they have been so busy over populated areas, a bit sus in light of the foreseen risk to public health.
-after several weeks of constant disbursal.- Disbursal? I someone handing out money? What exactly do you believe they are dispersing?
Anything they want, under the guise of global warming. Modern medicine is all about nano particles and aerosol dispersion.
Modern medicine is the only reason we are not being killed by Smallpox like the 500 million that died from it in the 20th century. Nutrition and modern medicine is why our lifespans have doubled. If “they” have a plan to kill us then better food and medicines are a very strange way to go about it.
GMO is not a better form of food.. Have you ever watched the commericals for medicine. HA I would rather have whatever it is then all the side effects. Also almost all of them say on rare occasion death may occure. The meds for depression, & ADD, MAKE you a zombie/ makes you want to kill your self or someone else. AND they have cures for many things that DON’T involve MMM BUT they would rather keep taking the money. BTW Check out Denver international airport Video, and the stonehenge one also.
Ya right! You would rather have the disease then suffer possible side affects of the medication. Tell yourself that the next time you need Penicillin or if you ever get cancer.
Very interesting avatar BocScar, can I ask where you got it from?
Google images. I think I typed the keyword “symbols”. I’ve always found the image geometrically interesting.
Penicillin is a natural antibiotic. Another things I also stated was that they have cures USING natural things to cure such diseases or illness.. They to have the CURE for cancer and diabates…I CAN’T SPELL sue me if anything is wrong.. LOL.. For things such as RLS, Sleeping or non sleeping issues or if my minds run in circles do to ADD. NO I WILL not take what they have made. They have moved AWAY from the things nature gives us & that is scary.
If Penicillin is a natural derivative or not is irrelevant to my comment. You said you would prefer to suffer the disease than possible side affects from the treatment. Good for you. I don’t care if you can’t spell or express yourself any more than I care if you refuse to take prescribed medication.
I will take medicine if it is Natural that is what I’m saying.. if you don’t care why did you come back an waste time typing. Anyways,,, CHEMtrails are real… Good luck with seeing that.. Peace to you
Bla bla bla… If you ever get cancer, you will take anything that will save your life, whether it’s “natural” or not.
All this time and you come back BLA BLA BLA you don’t know me.. If I ever develop cancer.. I WILL FIGHT each and every doctor and/or Organization for the REAL cure that they have hidden from Humanity… TRUST THAT… Cancer HAS A CURE…
Weed oil, laetrile (B17), MMS, lots of things.
Without inflamations, you CAN’T? get cancer. Thought you’d like to know.
If the earth is allowed to do its natural thing. Extra sun and heat/radiation will evaporate MORE water from the oceans, so creating more natural cloud cover, then natural rain. They don’t want that, they only want death to tell you the truth. They are not in harmony with the earth just their ego sociopathic conversations at the dinner table.
someones getting money to fly around in no particular route to disburse particulated dust that effect the weather. To ‘disburse’ means to ‘spread out” it isnt a term money specific. What they are disbursing is currently under investigation and double blind back testing is now being performed in several reputable universities to determine exactly whats in the air in the disbursal areas. I told u b4 Its not an issue of belief why do you debunkers always fall back on the same emotive arguments?
-double blind back testing is now being performed in several reputable universities – Links please. I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess that nowhere in any of these studies will they mention “chemtrails” or “secret government dimming operations”. These are probably typical environmental studies but you guys use them as evidence that someone is looking into your paranoid claims.
You know for a fact that they are spraying but you don’t know what they are spraying. OK. Let’s start with this: How do you know they are deliberately spraying chemicals?
What gets me when I point out/complain about this to others is that they tell me–there couldn’t possibly be a deliberate poisoning agenda, because they would be poisoning their own children/families. Don’t know what to say back.
great research! there are similar documents” not as specific” on the CFR website under the title”geo-engineering” where obamas team had recently updated the site to include planetary engineering techniques! but this blows that away! awesome work! is there a link to the original document! would love to see and spread to all!!!!
In the description…
You know what might shut down this operation? A pilots strike. Anytime you board an aircraft or are within air shot of an airliner pilot, you should educate them about chemtrails being aluminum and pathogens and neither being healthy for people. If enough pilots knew that they were killing their own sons and daughters with their flying spraying aluminum, maybe they’d strike. Airport protests also sounds like a good idea.
I just heard the second person from NC who is a patriot claim contrails ALWAYS looked the way chemtrails do. Shows how successfully the media (with the subliminals and chemtrail backgrounds) have conditioned people to believe it’s always been like this and is normal. The f*ckin media suceeded. Check out ironhorse’s vid on clipser. Arrgh
Patriot? More likely traitor and on the pay roll of the disinformational establishment. I stopped a random state senator on the street outside the statehouse and asked if he noticed the chemtrails pointing at the sky. He asked me why they’re spraying. I told him the global warming excuse AND that it’s aluminum and pathogens and more likely REALLY to murder people. He seemed genuinely interested and mildly aware, like he had noticed. People pretending they don’t see it are most likely traitors.
the real downside being that the generation “y” who are present in abundance online, havnt experienced alot of unmanipulated weather in their life. Born after 85′ and these young adults have nothing to rate the appearance of the sky against. Therefore theyre quite unconcerned with ‘them’ making clouds… easily fooled by the bogus ‘disinf’ websites that abound online. theyve been blinded. our hope is with the older generations who can remember.
This is the format of a decent video – loaded with information. Thankyou.
Yes, they do appear to spray more at night. Hands up who’s noticed the thick fog we often get overnight in the season they call ‘summer’?
dude, since february this year i’ve been seeing them. it’s warm where i live plus i camp a lot, so since february i’ve seen an incremental increase in chemtrailing.
Hey my dear and intelligent friends! I truly hope that none of you are fooled by their attempts to say they are trying to prevent climate change and its quickening pace! Mankind may be 1% at fault, but It’s not us alone AT ALL, causing the Globe to warm, its Solar Cycles, over 30000 scientists have proven this and know it, as millions of others do! The elite know they can’t reverse it, they? know many prophetic events will occur before Global Warming’s effects even reach a height! God Bless all!
Yes GODLOVESUSSOMUCH, you are right. ALL of the planets are warming – even the uninhabited ones – which proves without doubt that this is a ‘natural’ occurrance. Don’t people ever think back to their school days? THEY taught us that climate change has occurred in the past and that mankind survived it – even without paying carbon tax! LOL to the carbon tax! Thanks for continuing this truthful point, that any sane person can and will see, sadly many intelligent people hold on to what some corrupted or misinformed scientists, have stated as true science, when its not! Keep spreading the good truth bro, even that which is not sugar coated, just as God did not sugar coat the times we are in & nearing. There are troubles ahead, yet an eternally happy ending for those that seek the path of love & truth found in Christ! God Bless!
First Chemtrails is no solution for global warming. Global warming is about done anyhow. We’re running out of oil to pollute the skys with and the north pole already melted into the oceans which has a chilling effect that has been studied and shown to cause ICE AGE in an average 3 years. Ice Age is the new problem. 2nd, it’s not about whether people will survive, of course we will. But its a matter of what living conditions we’ll experience and it’s not looking good at all.
Very true I made a video about this 2 weeks ago. There are so many different reasons for why the spraying is happening and over night they could decide to spray something totally different. People are getting used to seeing white lines in the sky so if they decided to suddenly spray Agent US or Brucella people wouldn’t even know or question, they would say “That plane is low today” As the elite are safely underground.
Yooo MR 77info! That’s the truth of this sick matter right there, they don’t care and even though they are not at all ashamed of their evil agenda, they definitely do much more spraying at night, to secure that their plans will not be headed or stopped like history has shown their plans to be, and they will again…They don’t learn, at least that which is important! Also so true how they try to make these trails seem so casual, putting them in tv media advertisements, even games and movies! =)
A PAGE FROM YOUTUBE
CHEMTRAIL VIDEO COMMENTS
wow, the american media has hit a new low. no wonder there are so many stupid people who believe in chem trails, with the american population trusting everything the media throws in front of them it is no wonder that people believe in chem trails.
Chemtrails are well documented tainted airplane exhaust comtrails saturating and obliterating our skies with deadly toxins. Soda pop is an out dated term for carbonated sugar water. Why are there so many hateful naysayers trying to obscure discussion and critical research into these matters? Hmmm…
No, why are you SO STUPID as to believe that:
1. Contrails CAN’T be persistent.
2. Their contents can be collected by trays on the ground, and NOTHING else will get in the trays.
3. That the US can AFFORD to cover the Earth in Barium, Aluminum, Silver.
4. That it is POISONING you (yet NO-ONE has died).
5. That passenger planes CAN be fitted with poison sprays, yet no-one DIES, “FINGERS”, GETS INFECTED.
“Chemtrails” ARE SODA POP. Put them through a carbon filter for sure, and each mile of “chemtrail” will get you a crate of soda pop.
The stratosphere is stable and layered like an onion with layers of differing humidities. A “saturated” layer will NOT reabsorb the trail, which will slowly fall and form stratus or cirrus cloud. That is what you see…
Want some soda pop? I’m nuts for soda pop! Are you?
Yo Jazzroc–when they do go live with the mass extermination and you’re dying from Ebola, enjoy that soda (you probably like the stuff that has Aspartame in it). Meanwhile, a global network of responsible citizens is forming to confront this menace.
“Responsible citizens” are people who THINK before they ACT. In your case, you’ve a job ahead of you – to LEARN to THINK. I’d rather that people like you were supporting the NWO – you’d mess them right up!
1) We need an comprehensive global ban on these practices.
2) There needs to be an international inspection regime over all aircraft worldwide with criminal penalties for the existence of aerosol dispersal devices.
3) National security exclusions to FOIA requests need to be abrogated and immediate worldwide disclosure of these practices documented.
Document redaction should be criminalized.
Jolly good. Best use the UN for this. Haha. But apparently (so the scuttlebutt goes!) the UN is PART of the conspiracy to, er, depopulate…
Best draw up a World Citizens’ Army then. Then fly about from airport to airport enforcing…
Those that don’t can get their videocams out and film you “spraying” as you go, and SHOOT you when you land…
‘You’re quoting a research report.’
Correct. From 1992. Spraying operations began by most people’s accounts, in late 1998.
Keep in mind, this report was authorized by Congress and sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences. This report concludes that this technique of aerial spraying is the most cost effective and efficient method (of the varius options mentioned) for increasing planetary albedo in response to a “global warming” scenario.
Senior researchers, faculty, theoreticians, atmospheric scientists, department heads and CEO’s from a multitude of prestigious institutions took part in this report.
The Smithsonian, Harvard, General Motors, Cambridge, MIT, Yale, World Resources Institute, National Center for Atmospheric Research, the Secretary General of the United Nations, Oxford, Brookings Institution, Columbia University, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Carnegie-Mellon University, Princeton University, Brown University, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, and there’s more, if you look.
‘It’s the title, isn’t it? Filming a harmless event with the false implication of harm can cause needless distress and foment discord, even if you believe you’re saving the world…’
I’d like you to start a journey of discovery, that is, if you are willing. Since we agree that even if it’s water up there, and nothing harmful at all… you will now begin to see the darker side of the science of geoengineering.
Google this US patent: US5003186
Notice the patent holder? Hughes Aircraft (now Raytheon) is one of the US’s largest defense contractors in the area of Aerospace.
Read what’s in the mix, my friend…
’2. The method of claim wherein said material comprises one or more of the oxides of metals.’
You read up on Welsbach materials. That’s your homework assignment.
A method is disclosed for reducing atmospheric warming due to the greenhouse effect resulting from a greenhouse gases layer. The method comprises the step of seeding the greenhouse gas layer with a quantity of tiny particles of materials characterized by wavelength-dependent emissivity or reflectivity, in that said materials have high emissivities in the visible and far infrared wavelength regions and low emissivity in the near infrared wavelength region. Such materials can include the class of materials known as Welsbach materials. The oxides of metal, e.g., aluminum oxide, are also suitable for the purpose. The greenhouse gases layer typically extends between about seven and thirteen kilometers above the earth’s surface. The seeding of the stratosphere occurs within this layer. The particles suspended in the stratosphere as a result of the seeding provide a mechanism for converting the blackbody radiation emitted by the earth at near infrared wavelengths into radiation in the visible and far infrared wavelength so that this heat energy may be reradiated out into space, thereby reducing the global warming due to the greenhouse effect.
Very interesting. I have a few questions:
Do commercial turbofan engine injectors safely pass these refractory solids between 10 and 100 microns?
How do filamentary materials figure in all this?
Or biological materials?
You realise that a single “coating” (1 particle/sq.cm) for the US weighs 170,000 tonnes? and you’d have to renew it?
Well, 170,000 tonnes is within any major paint manfr’s brief I suppose. But DELIVERY would be HARD.
And treating the globe would be outside our capabilities.
The Aluminum-Barium argument is rendered obsolete by the YouTube clip below
Why squander fuel, occlude your skies, and poison your population, when this CHEAPER AND MORE PRACTICAL operation can be carried out in the South Atlantic and Pacific?
The clip is one of FIVE WAYS TO COOL THE EARTH – a googlevid.
The price of space mirrors and artificial trees is FAR too high, rocketed sulfur FAR too risky, only this idea and ocean phytoplankton feeding make sound practical and economic sense, can be begun TODAY, and carried out in WEEKS.
Co-opting living creatures is a million times MORE EFFECTIVE than employing technology.
I DON’T believe what any government says, ever. If it said “It’s a fine day”, I’d run out and check BOTH front AND back. And THEN I’d REMAIN NERVOUS
What SO pisses me off is that FAR TOO FEW PEOPLE think PROPERLY
Do you realise HOW WEAK a people is when it doesn’t have sufficient scientific understanding? When it CANNOT follow a LOGICAL train of thought?
When it lacks the basic life-skills to SURVIVE technological collapse?
CT supporters are HARDENED in their weakness. They FEAR science, which is in truth their ONLY salvation. They don’t know how to farm, make clothes, make things, make provisions – they barely know how to cook. If the NWO WERE to “depopulate” them, they’d murder each other at the doors of empty supermarkets
There are MANY ironies. Earlier govt attempts to protect people from germ warfare are NOW construed as “practice” attempts at depopulation.
SMALL experiments of geo-engineering are NOW considered PROOF of of govt attempts to reduce immunity. The list goes on and on….
If there is to be a conflagration (and 2012 seems about right to me!) then I REALLY DON’T WANT TO BE INVOLVED. I DO NOT WANT TO BE KILLED IN SOME GADARENE STAMPEDE!
Maybe human “civilisations” CANNOT LAST. It is ANOTHER IRONY, it seems to me, that once we lived in continual fear of NUCLEAR SPASM (THE BANG!) and now it seems it’s going to be SOCIO-ECONOMIC COLLAPSE (THE WHIMPER!) brought about, in part, by the CHEMTRAIL PARANOIA. The rest, and greater part, of course, seems to be the moral collapse of the US govt.
EVERY PILLAR of the “chemtrail” hypothesis proves on examination to be UTTERLY FALSE. It is based on BAD SCIENCE and LOOSE ASSOCIATION. It is a complete and utter CHIMAERA – a tragic waste of time – only distinguishable from WARFARE by its LACK OF DEATHS.
But it has PLENTY OF VICTIMS, and PLENTY MORE TO COME…
“911-martial-fourth planned coup-1934-1963-1972-Executive O 11647-11731-1973-Failed-passed -Trilateral Com-1974-Obama-three weeks”
Great stuff. Means bugger-all when “chemtrails” turn out to be plain old contrails and you turn out to be bottom of your class in atmospheric physics. How long have you spent in this totally useless activity? Just think how much of your life you would save if you went to school. Just think of the good things you could have been doing instead.
Sure it just so happens. Why should I believe you when all you do is spread hatred. Only you will be on here 24/7 next week and thereafter unless you change your account name again. The vulgar way you speak to others in these chat rooms I hope I never have to see you in the hospital or call your hotline
I spend a total of 2 hours a day ridiculing those who continue sick fear mongering practices. It’s just so happened that I have a week off from work. How about you? I am employed, I work 2 jobs to support my family.
1. I am an Emergency 911 operator and
2. Bio/chemical technician.
Those with the alleged IQ are being very stupid about this time unless they wake up before the next 911, martial law, a fourth planned military coup. Three planned military coups were attempted in our history as evidenced by congressional investigation in 1934, one in 1960 -1963 and that scum named Nixon planned one from 1969 to 1972, as evidenced by Executive Order 11647 and 11731 in 1972 to 1973. Failed but passed on to the Trilateral Commission in 1974. Obama completed this plan three weeks ago.
Science is made up by the money and control by the Masons, CFR, and Rockefeller foundation money. Try again with your fantasies. History is proven to be fabricated, science goes out to the Agenda set by the emerging world order. 300 microbiologists were murdered around the year 2000 to 2002….the names are available. You best wake up before our next civil war and martial law does.
@frick….I spend no hours, I know they are real. Factual Documented Scientific information….lol….:)) Oh, like the age of the universe, or the we now came from fish or better yet, Global warming? Please, I’ll read Wizard of Oz another Illuminati production for fun.
How many hours in a day do you spend ridiculing others and spreading your lies? 24/7. You’re on all the pages doing the same thing. Gosh you sure do spend a lot of time 24/7 on pages that you know are just hoopla. You must be part of the 22% of unemployed Americans. You’ve got too much time on your hands or your getting paid by Cass Sunstein and his COINTELPRO agency.
Expanding chemtrails can be seen daily now in my town. This is not even physically possible but it happens daily. Look up!
lol great comment moneymail002. ‘your overlords’ – My overlords are your overlords according to your belief system. If such overlords exist they’re in power and you are just a simple taxpayer just like the rest of us. lol So why would you think you’ve gained freedom from them? How many hours in a day do you spend convincing yourself that chemtrails are real? I wish you spent and equal number of hours reading factual documented scientific information and used some constructive critical thinking as well. Perhaps you would discover that the world isn’t such a scary place after all.
Why do people sit there and say their government IS doing this or that? All of your “proof” is based on unproven assumptions and has no validity whatsoever; it originates in this RELIGION that says the government and scientists are some sort of entirely separate social tier concerned mainly with the destruction of the rest of society. Yet for some reason you seem shocked when people with an IQ and an understanding of science above those of the average monkey refuse to believe your crap.
cointelpro? Goodness, did it ever cross your mind that perhaps these people who are commenting in regards to the propaganda TrutherD1 is spreading, are simply stating hard scientific facts to disperse the multitude of crap built up around stupid conspiracy theories?
The conspiracy is true. The crap is made up of those lying about a conspiracy theory…there is no theory. It is fact. Most all of the events today and in the past are part of this unified conspiracy. The evidence is irrefutable. If you want I can send you the references, thumbnail list, of 8 pages and a chronology that is supported by scholarily research that covers over 140 pages+ a summary. bring it on.
I know your “list”. It is pseudoscience. Your “evidence” isn’t refutable because it isn’t evidence. 8 pages of pseudoscience only has value as COMPOST. ALL your miserable “work” has been through contrailscience. com and jazzroc. wordpress, com and been torn to shreds. Such shreds are plant food. Are you a plant? Do you photosynthesize? You certainly don’t THINK.
lol….you types are all alike. You actually think that your useless diatribe is effective. There isn’t a history or economic professor that could refute the truth. They can lie, and then go to the CFR bank as they are prostitutes for the eiltes like Ayn Rand was. You just might have a point. Its easier for you people to lie and deny since you apparently have no soul. The truth however won’t be denied in due time. There is nothing you can do about that.
Oh, your overlords are getting ready to pull something. They just don’t know that they are signing their own death warrant.
Yeah. It’s been tough here in Tenerife. My God, man, it RAINED here last night! I had to pick my way round the puddles as I walked down the town with my dear little dog to buy some bread and ham for my breakfast. Then when I returned to my desk I discovered I was in “communication” (apparently) with a blind and stupid egocentric arsehole blowing out compost, and believing it to be “truth”. SCIENCE refutes your miserable and pathetic lies with ease. “History” “Economics”? LOL
Well said beachcomber2008.
YOU HAVE TO SEE THIS: ULTIMATE PROOF OF CHEMTRAIL SPRAYING! watch?v=MRUqogeAgHo watch?v=VLA0yejkeYM watch?v=qSDkdOpjiSc&feature=re lated
NASA = Admit Zero! We are not idiots, we are a collective, we are oneness, we are 11:11 we are awakened giants.
Thank you so much for the compliments! I appreciate your acknowledgement of my informative channel. By all means, you are welcome to view my channel at any time. Bye bye for now JAZZ(BANNED)ROC.
ffs… Nut cases from A to Z…
Why do people sit there and say their government isn’t doing this or that, instead of actively questioning said government? Why defend something you have no idea about..
Why propose something of which you are completely ignorant? You do. The reflection of this ignorance is the ignorance you so foolishly project upon others. It is confirmed by the lies you have already accepted. And the consequences of which, which you haven’t, because you certainly lack the means to foresee them. The bill for this life course direction will be paid in full by you – one day.
@truther..those that are going after you are more than likely cointelpro. Alex Jones gets his stuff from them and in fact works for the elites as does Ron Paul (Mason) and Naomi Wolf. They are the ones pretending to be on our side but work different roles for the globalist.
@tgambill, Thanks for the heads-up – I know you’re right. For the last few months the same guys have been responding with aggression and ridicule even of legitimate and recognized science. It quickly became obvious their whole mission here is to parrot the govt. story and ridicule and distract good people seeking honest answers.
Now, link the chemicals with mind control, ELF and GWEN Towers, and HAARP. This should really get your interest peaked when “DISCLOSURE” and “Day of Declaration” comes in July, with the Benjamin Creme and this weirdo named Maitreya. They work together. The chemtrails have Barium Oxide, Aluminum Oxide (rainbow colors) and Barium Chloride on occasion. The purpose is to destroy the immune system and in fact the chemicals have killed off the bee population. The bees account for 80% of the natural food supply. This will aid in the food genocide later to support Kissinger’ NSSM 200 Depopulation Plan to reduce the worlds population. In heavy spraying causes seizures, Pre-mature births, lung problems, etc…it is a conspiracy, fact.
show yourself shill’
@beachcomber2008, Yeah they send weather balloons once, twice a day, sometimes hourly. If conditions say no contrails ’til 10km and you see a low-level trail it would make sense to become suspicious.
All the fraudulent Rosalind’s questions have normal scientific answers. Patrick Minnis is the foremost expert on satellite atmospheric studies. Particulates made of ICE CANNOT BE POLLUTION. Viruses, fungi and bacteria, are brought down by the water in the atmosphere. William Thomas doesn’t seem to notice that complaints come from cities, which ARE places you DO get viruses, fungi and bacteria. A bollocks programme, and a bollocks post…
@beachcomber2008, Do you work for the government? What’s the harm in investigating?
investigating something for which there is already an accurate and cogent explanation is a waste of time which would have been better spent investigating something worthwhile. You and the fraudulent bitch above are worse than useless – YOU are just about as harmful as you can get without actually “chemtrailing” yourself. Do I make myself clear, DUMMY?
heavy chemtrails again today! DAILY when i can see the blue skies!
Research ”ENMOD” treaty at the U.N. site, State department website and read ”Between Two Ages”. The water supply is ”poisoned” and so now is the food supply genetically modified. This was done decades before without approval by ”representatives”.
Discovery basically avoids the real issue. Just search for “chemtrails” and check any other result than this one. LOL
Powerful stuff!, great video mate!. Check out peyote the band on my space. The track “Don’t Waste Any Time” mentions this stuff. Nice to hear this message making it into the mainstream!
@brad213 – they are creating ‘ climate change’ to unite the world into a one world government, and to acheive the ‘mother earth ‘cults agenda.
I always leave room for doubt… but I will you are right on because I have some of the evidence.
We all breathe the same air. What would anyone benefit from poisoning the oxygen within our atmosphere. Wouldnt it be easier to poison our water supplies?
scaremenga, you really are brillant aren’t u? have you checked out the unemployment rate lately? god, there’s SO MUCH work out there isn’t there! LMAO! p.s. the perfect slave believes he’s free, u are a perfect slave! chemtrails daily when i can see the blue skies!
YOU HAVE TO SEE THIS: ULTIMATE PROOF OF CHEMTRAIL SPRAYING! watch?v=MRUqogeAgHo watch?v=VLA0yejkeYM
chemtrails are there to prohibit ufos from entering our atmosphere. research the magnetic and energetic properties of chemtrails and probable
ufo propulsion systems
can you tell me more about this?
Here’s an interview with a guy who used to be on the inside of the chemtrails project, aka clover leaf? Give it a listen, make up your own mind. it won’t let me post this thing for some reason, so I’ll try it without the URL, instead just put the following into the youtube search browser. Ex government employee talks about chemtrails
i really dont know what to say. you need to slow down and think about what your saying!
Chemtrail spraying is boldly being done right over unprotected civilian populations, such as what is happening in the following video: v=uRoNDxAWQo4
Again with the go back to sleep? Isn’t the job of “Truthers” to wake those who are asleep up? LOL. Yeah, I should be asking that question. Why would they want to kill us slowly? So they can have more work to do? it would be easier to enslave us all, especially if they are as advanced as you people say they are. How do you know how much they plan to eliminate? Did they publish a “NWO Manifesto” somewhere?
WOW is right! CONtrails daily when i can see the blue skies! scaremenga and mrfatandslow PLEASE go back to sleep or just get a good copy of the 911 commission report, should keep you sheeple busy for YEARS!
WOW to all u idiots who really beleive that our government is trying to take care of you=== UR A BUNCH OF IDIOTS! It’s because of ignorant people like you that these things are going on. Use COMMON SENSE! Look in the sky. When would normal planes blow out THICK FLUFFY clouds of smoke that hang in the air for hours up to a full day? THEY DONT! &if you’ve ever seen these planes – they will blow out the chemicals and stop. If this was normal engine ejections they would continue the whole flight!
whats it like to live a life of such deep paranoid thoughts that you believe the goverment wants to kill you? enjoy your fantasy world!
“Why would the “NWO” want to destroy the population.” Are you sure you should really be asking that question? That is in fact one of their “goals” if you will. They plan to eliminate about 90% of the worlds population.
scaremenga a lot of it has to do with weather manipulation and radar obscuration. Unfortunately, what they’re using to do this is not healthy for us to be breathing.
no your a stuped fucking bastard when a jet engine burns its fuel you get vapor that comes out the back which is harmless water freezing
problem with opinions is some of them have no base or real concrete evidence, and a lot of opinions are formed by subjective, emotional thinking instead of logical thought. So most of these things you call opinions are instead theories or speculations. I just saw yesterday for the first time in my life about 30 “trails” in the sky in my area. I have a couple ideas of what they are, but I have not encountered enough evidence either way to sway me into a conspiracy opinionist.
scaremenga please go back to sleep, awesome vid KarakulBrigand! watch STESSO AEREO, SCIE DIVERSE! 4 trails only 2 persist! awesome catch! i see someone doesn’t like this one, they spammed u! lol! ANOTHER day with chemtrails here in s.e.wisconsin today, daily when i can see the blue skies! just gotta observe daily and not believe WORDS that are fed to you! ps. polarized sunglasses are a priceless tool!
LOL. I thought the mission of people like you were to wake up these “sheeple” and here you are telling me to go back to sleep, into my world of “fantasies”. I’d rather die in me sleep, metaphorically speaking, than die wide awake. That’s just me. ROFL. Don’t call me an ignorant loser either. I used to believe in chemtrails too, but evidence I found on a variety of unbiased websites, like the one with the largest datebase of aircraft photos, has obviously reversed my views. couldn’t help this, but aren’t you guys feeding me words right now? In the form of videos and flame comments? You’re no better than the people you’re “fighting against”!
Watch this vid: STESSO AEREO, SCIE DIVERSE! same plane, different trails! Four trails two persist two do not.
set up because they know once they scare everybodi into getin the swine flu shot there are gonna be plenty of deaths oh and guess what isnt that what they want to depopulate the planet so there will be less people to control in the new world order do research because im not making any of this up to scare anyone its all fact there are tons of videos on youtube that that prove me right thanks for the complement also an f ur taught to keep an open mind then open ur mind to some research
I did do some research. I was also taught that just because someone has an opposing viewpoint, doesn’t mean they are wrong. Everyone’s entitled to their opinions, just as you are. Were you taught that in school? There’s tons of videos that prove me right too. Why would the “NWO” want to destroy the population. Who wants to rule a crippled population? Even if they dominate the world, then they’ll have billions of sick *frankly* losers under their whips. How fun.
yes I have no clue wat a grid system or sumthin is maby I should look it up but if our govornment loves us so much why do they have fema camps set up all over the usa why do they have concrete cofins ur an idiot and yes they do because they dont want us riseing against the new world order there tryna creat okay in high school they teach you to obey obey obey and college is just more enslavement for the people why do people go to college get out an work at walmart if thats the case then you dont need to go to college u brainwashed dummy they also tryna kill us with there swine flu shoots why do we need mercury and swaline in out bodies cuz they tryna kill us and these are some of the ingr
I’m not brainwashed to obey; the exact opposite in fact. All of my teachers, especially my AP Euro teacher, encourages us to maintain an open mind. He links Europe’s sour past with ignorance and obedience. And if there’s anybody against total obedience, it would be me. Did I ever judge you personally? No. So there’s no purpose to call me an idiot. If swine flu shots are so bad, don’t get them. You’re not forced to. Instead of accusing, maybe you should research the grid system. contrails
I am sorry I pissed you off. What does the space preservation act actually say about chemtrails? Contrails can be persistent, if the humidity of the surrounding air is high. It’s not rocket science. If the air is dry, the contrails will sublimate quickly, turning the ice crystals into water vapour. If the air is humid, the surrounding air can’t hold more water than it already does, and the contrail is persistent.
Umm I dont have to sit in front of a computer to view chemtrails I can walk out side ansee them all over the sky like some one is spraying chemicals in an orderly fashion so to your answer ur question you are the dumb one
I’m the dumb one for saying that the government doesn’t want dumb people? Which they don’t? Why are contrails showing up in an orderly fashions? Why don’t you Google the flight grid for your local area, you’ll notice that it’s comprised of lines following “orderly fashion[s]“, it keeps air traffic in a structured matter. Better yet, why don’t you get the tail numbers of these sprayers? And then track them online? Maybe you’ll be able to see they aren’t government-sprayers, and just innocent pax.
Written by JazzRoc
November 12, 2008 at 1:00 am
Tagged with aerosol, aerosol dispersal devices, aluminium, aluminum, american media, arthritis, artificial tree, aspartame, barium, biological, blackbody radiation, breathing difficulties, carbonated soda water, carnicom, cheaper, chem trail, chem trails, conspiracy, converting, criminal penalties, critical research, deadly toxins, depopulate, document redaction, ebola, emissivity, filamentary materials, filaments, global ban, global warming, greenhouse gas, heavy haze, infected, infrared wavelengths, injectors, international inspection regime, lines in the sky, lung disease, mass extermination, metallic salts, morgellons, national security exclusions, no more blue skies, not a normal cloud, nwo, obscure discussion, ocean phytoplankton, oily clouds, operation, planetary albedo, poisoning, practical, ptb, reflectivity, refractory solids, rense, reradiated, research report, rocketed sulfur, silver, space mirror, spraying, tainted airplane exhaust contrails, theoreticians, tic-tac-toe, turbofan, unnatural cloud, videocams, webby material, welsbach materials, whiteout, youtube
CONSPIRACY THEORIES – CONTRAIL FORECAST CHARTS – CONTRAIL FORMATION – CONTRAILS CON-TRICK
Don’t forget my other pages, links and comments are one click away at the top right of the page…
Conspiracy theories find menace in contrails
A new conspiracy theory sweeping the Internet and radio talk shows has set parts of the federal government on edge.
The theory: The white lines of condensed water vapor that jets leave in the sky, called contrails, are actually a toxic substance the government deliberately sprays on an unsuspecting populace.
Federal bureaucracies have gotten thousands of phone calls, e-mails and letters in recent years from people demanding to know what is being sprayed and why. Some of the missives are threatening.
It’s impossible to tell how many supporters these ideas have attracted, but the people who believe them say they’re tired of getting the brush-off from officials. And they’re tired of health problems they blame on “spraying.”
“This is blatant. This is in your face,” says Philip Marie Sr., a retired nuclear quality engineer from Bartlett, N.H., who says the sky above his quiet town is often crisscrossed with “spray” trails.
“No one will address it,” he says. “Everyone stonewalls this thing.”
The situation Marie and others describe is straight out of The X-Files. He and others report one day looking up at the sky and realizing that they were seeing abnormal contrails: contrails that lingered and spread into wispy clouds, multiple contrails arranged in tick-tack-toe-like grids or parallel lines, contrails being laid down by white planes without registration numbers.
Believers call these tracks “chemtrails.” They say they don’t know why the chemicals are being dropped, but that doesn’t stop them from speculating. Many guess that the federal government is trying to slow global warming with compounds that reflect sunlight into the sky. Some propose more ominous theories, such as a government campaign to weed out the old and sick.
Exasperated by persistent questions, the Environmental Protection Agency, NASA, the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration joined forces last fall to publish a fact sheet explaining the science of contrail formation. A few months earlier, the Air Force had put out its own fact sheet, which tries to refute its opponents’ arguments point by point.
“If you try to pin these people down and refute things, it’s, ‘Well, you’re just part of the conspiracy,’ ” says atmospheric scientist Patrick Minnis of NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. “Logic is not exactly a real selling point for most of them.”
Nothing is “out there” except water vapor and ice crystals, say irritated scientists who study contrails. Some, such as Minnis, are outraged enough by the claims of chemtrail believers that they have trolled Internet chat rooms to correct misinformation or have gotten into arguments with callers.
“Conspiracy nonsense,” snorts Kenneth Sassen, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Utah. “These things are at 30,000 to 40,000 feet in the atmosphere. They’re tiny particles of ice. They’re not going to affect anyone.”
The cloud-forming contrails that conspiracy theorists find so ominous are “perfectly natural,” Minnis says. The odd grid and parallel-line patterns are easily explained as contrails blown together by the wind, scientists say.
CONTRAIL FORECAST CHARTS
Normal contrails DO form in fairly high humidity. When formed in 100% humidity they will NEVER disappear. If the humidity of that particular stratospheric layer is REDUCED, then in exact proportion the life of that trail will be reduced. This CAN happen; the layer can be lifted from beneath by a rising CUMULUS cloud in the troposphere. But the typical way they disappear is that LOCAL to the trail, the humidity has already been increased by the processes forming the trail: over time the increased humidity “leaks” away from the locality by gaseous diffusion, allowing the trail (of ice crystals) to sublime back into water vapor. Otherwise generally over time, layers FALL, COOL, humidity rises, trails get bigger.
CONTRAILS CON TRICK
There is a new and ominous controversy concerning aircraft contrails and their supposed ill-effects. People with little or no scientific understanding are whipping up a furore over – nothing. This tends to leave all the real ills of the world unattended, and let’s face it, those we know of already are too great and too many to be sufferable. But how much worse it is when the (already!) deluded dream up new imaginary ills! With too much on our plates already, we are forced to concern ourselves with additional spurious delusions which, if they were to be taken seriously, would diminish our capacity to adapt to change, and ultimately to survive the upcoming onslaught.
A typical passenger transport plane (medium haul) burns 30 tons of fuel and thus unloads 30 tons of ice and 20 tons of gaseous oxides (mostly carbon dioxide) into the stratosphere every trip it makes.
The troposphere contains about 80% of the atmosphere and is the part of the atmosphere in which we live, and make weather observations. In this layer, average temperatures decrease with height. This is known as adiabatic cooling, i.e. a change in temperature caused by a decrease in pressure. Even so, it is still more prone to vertical mixing by convective and turbulent transfer, than other parts of the atmosphere. These vertical motions and the abundance of water vapour make it the home of all important weather phenomena. It is turbulent and unstable because it is at its warmest at its base. The troposphere’s thermal profile is largely the result of the heating of the Earth’s surface by incoming solar radiation. Heat is then transferred up through the troposphere by a combination of convective and turbulent transfer.
This is in direct contrast with the stratosphere, where warming is the result of the direct absorption of solar radiation. It is at its coldest at its base, and is stable and non-turbulent. If you have ever observed (or been in) a house fire, and looked up at the ceiling of a room with a fire in it, there you can see that the behaviour of the air is similar: the hottest part of the fire is against the ceiling, and the layers of air beneath (at decreasing temperatures) are stratified and somewhat mysteriously stable.
The troposphere is around 16 km high at the equator, with the temperature at the tropopause around –80 °C. At the poles, the troposphere reaches a height of around 8 km, with the temperature of the tropopause around –40 °C in summer and –60 °C in winter.
Annual passenger jet aircraft fuel consumption is estimated to be 300 million tons. That may seem a lot, but it’s a CUBE with sides a hundred yards long. in actual fact.
The weight of the atmosphere is 5.25 petatonnes.
One can see (using a quick calculation) that, as a proportion of the weight of the atmosphere, the burnt fuel comprises FIVE MILLIONTHS OF A PER CENT. It would take 200,000 years to half-fill the atmosphere with aircraft exhaust emissions at their present rate!
Now, the water, the gaseous oxides and sulphates may have a hardly appreciable effect on Global Warming (they are only 3.5% of anthropogenic combustion), but are as NOTHING when compared with the Earth’s volcanoes.
There are 1,500 active volcanoes on land and maybe TEN THOUSAND active volcanoes under the sea. Beneath are a few links:
The term “active” means “constantly emitting steam, gases, magma, and ash”. It is hard to quantify the total emitted by the land volcanoes, but let us assume they average a million tons of each per year. That will give us fifteen hundred million tons of steam, fifteen hundred million tons of gases, fifteen hundred million tons of magma, fifteen hundred million tons of ash.
“Hey”, you might say, “aren’t you making free with all those hundred millions of tons?” – and I would answer you thus: “A million tons of rock makes a cone 243 feet high. So I’m suggesting that the annual volcanic production of rock is equivalent to fifteen hundred of these rock cones. See what I mean?”
To put that estimate into perspective, the largest known eruption, Tambora, put 200 million tons of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere in a single event!
Getting back to the point, it can be reasonably argued that contrails are at least FIFTEEN TIMES LESS IMPORTANT THAN VOLCANOES when it comes to having an effect on our atmosphere, whether warming it or cooling it…
So forget ALL of this bullfish about contrails/chemtrails. Yadda barium, yadda aluminum, yadda cooling, yadda dimming, yadda morgellons, yadda toxins……..You can bet your boots that anyone who advocates this idea is an ignorant dupe, with NO IDEA of the magnitude of the Earth and the events that truly moderate its climate.
Written by JazzRoc
November 10, 2008 at 1:00 am
Tagged with 300 million tons, abnormal contrail, adiabatic cooling, aerosol, air force, aluminium, aluminum, argument, arthritis, ash, atmosphere, atmospheric scientist, average temperature, barium, believer, blatant, breathing difficulties, bullfish, bureaucracies, carnicom, chem trail, chemical, condensed water vapor, conspiracy, conspiracy theories, contrails, convective, crisscrossed, cumulus, decrease in pressure, deluded, email, epa, equator, faa, federal government, filaments, furore, gaseous oxide, gases, global warming, government sprays, grid, health problem, heavy haze, high humidity, ice crystal, ill-effect, imaginary, incoming solar radiation, internet, lines in the sky, lung disease, magma, menace, metallic salts, misinformation, morgellons, NASA, no more blue skies, noaa, non-turbulent, normal contrail, not a normal cloud, oily clouds, ominous controversy, onslaught, parallel, passenger transport plane, patrick minnis, pole, ptb, radio talk show, rense, scientific understanding, spraying, stable, steam, stonewall, stratified, stratosphere, sulfur dioxide, supporter, temperature, theory, thermal profile, threatening, tic-tac-toe, tick-tack-toe, toxic substance, troposphere, turbulent, unnatural cloud, unstable, unsuspecting populace, vertical mixing, volcanoes, water vapor, weather observation, webby material, white plane, whiteout
Making an argument
Although often we make arguments to try to learn about and understand the world around us, sometimes we hope to persuade others of our ideas and convince them to try or believe them, just as they might want to do likewise with us. To achieve this we might use a good measure of rhetoric, knowingly or otherwise. The term itself dates back to Plato, who used it to differentiate philosophy from the kind of speech and writing that politicians and others used to persuade or influence opinion. Probably the most famous study of rhetoric was by Aristotle, Plato’s pupil, and over the years philosophers have investigated it to try to discover the answer to questions like: What is the best (or most effective) way to persuade people of something? Is the most convincing argument also the best choice to make? Is there any link between the two? What are the ethical implications of rhetoric? Although we might take a dim view of some of the attempts by contemporary politicians to talk their way out of difficult situations with verbal manouevrings that stretch the meaning of words beyond recognition, hoping we’ll forget what the original question was, nevertheless there are times when we need to make a decision and get others to agree with it. Since we don’t always have the luxury of sitting down to discuss matters, we might have to be less than philosophical in our arguments to get what we want. This use of rhetoric comes with the instructional manual for any relationship and is par for the course in discussions of the relative merits of sporting teams.
In a philosophical context, then, we need to bear in mind that arguments may be flawed and that rhetorical excesses can be used to make us overlook that fact. When trying to understand, strengthen or critique an idea, we can use a knowledge of common errors – deliberate or not – found in reasoning. We call these fallacies: arguments that come up frequently that go wrong in specific ways and are typically used to mislead someone into accepting a false conclusion (although sometimes they are just honest mistakes). Although fallacies were studied in the past and since, as was said previously, there has been something of a revival in recent times and today people speak of critical thinking, whereby we approach arguments and thinking in general in a critical fashion (hence the name), looking to evaluate steps in reasoning and test conclusions for ourselves.
Logical fallacies are common errors of reasoning. If an argument commits a logical fallacy, then the reasons that it offers don’t prove the argument’s conclusion. (Of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the conclusion is false, just that these particular reasons don’t show that it’s true.) There are literally dozens of logical fallacies (and dozens of fallacy web-sites out there that explain them).
Fallacies of Distraction
False Dilemma: two choices are given when in fact there are three or more options.
From Ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false.
Slippery Slope: a series of increasingly unacceptable consequences is drawn.
Complex Question: two unrelated points are conjoined as a single proposition.
Appeals to Motives in Place of Support
Appeal to Force: the reader is persuaded to agree by force.
Appeal to Pity: the reader is persuaded to agree by sympathy.
Consequences: the reader is warned of unacceptable consequences.
Prejudicial Language: value or moral goodness is attached to believing the author.
Popularity: a proposition is argued to be true because it is widely held to be true.
Changing the Subject
Attacking the Person:
(1) the person’s character is attacked.
(2) the person’s circumstances are noted.
(3) the person does not practise what is preached.
Appeal to Authority:
(1) the authority is not an expert in the field.
(2) experts in the field disagree.
(3) the authority was joking, drunk, or in some other way not being serious.
Anonymous Authority: the authority in question is not named.
Style Over Substance: the manner in which an argument (or arguer) is presented is felt to affect the truth of the conclusion.
Hasty Generalization: the sample is too small to support an inductive generalization about a population.
Unrepresentative Sample: the sample is unrepresentative of the sample as a whole.
False Analogy: the two objects or events being compared are relevantly dissimilar.
Slothful Induction: the conclusion of a strong inductive argument is denied despite the evidence to the contrary.
Fallacy of Exclusion: evidence which would change the outcome of an inductive argument is excluded from consideration.
Fallacies Involving Statistical Syllogisms
Accident: a generalization is applied when circumstances suggest that there should be an exception.
Converse Accident : an exception is applied in circumstances where a generalization should apply.
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc: because one thing follows another, it is held to cause the other.
Joint effect: one thing is held to cause another when in fact they are both the joint effects of an underlying cause.
Insignificant: one thing is held to cause another, and it does, but it is insignificant compared to other causes of the effect.
Wrong Direction: the direction between cause and effect is reversed.
Complex Cause: the cause identified is only a part of the entire cause of the effect.
Missing the Point
Begging the Question: the truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises.
Irrelevant Conclusion: an argument in defense of one conclusion instead proves a different conclusion.
Straw Man: the author attacks an argument different from (and weaker than) the opposition’s best argument.
Fallacies of Ambiguity
Amphiboly: the structure of a sentence allows two different interpretations.
Accent: the emphasis on a word or phrase suggests a meaning contrary to what the sentence actually says.
Composition: because the attributes of the parts of a whole have a certain property, it is argued that the whole has that property.
Division: because the whole has a certain property, it is argued that the parts have that property.
Affirming the Consequent: any argument of the form: If A then B, B, therefore A.
Denying the Antecedent: any argument of the form: If A then B, Not A, thus Not B.
Inconsistency: asserting that contrary or contradictory statements are both true.
Stolen Concept: using a concept while attacking a concept on which it logically depends.
•Appeal to Authority
•Appeal to History
•Appeal to Popularity
•Confusing Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
•Correlation not Causation
•Restricting the Options
You need to be able to recognise each of these fallacies, and also to explain what is wrong with arguments that commit them. Once you’ve learned what the fallacies are, pay attention and see if you can spot any of them being committed on TV, the radio, or in the press. it’s fascinating to see how the conspiracy-theorist’s minds work. They seem to be especially fond of (all of them, really):
Perhaps the most basic error in the use of empirical data is simply “misrepresenting” it. This can occur in a number of ways. One possibility is simply deliberate distortion, claiming that a data set proves something when it doesn’t. If people have an agenda, and set out to prove it, they may reach for the first bit of evidence they can find that even seems to fit their position. Closer examination may show that the evidence isn’t quite as supportive as was first claimed. Alternatively, someone confronted with potentially problematic evidence for their position may misrepresent it to make the problem go away. A similar error can be committed accidentally. Sometimes when people look at a data-set they see what they want or expect to see, rather than what is actually there. The effect of our presuppositions on our interpretation of evidence should not be underestimated. It can lead to conclusions being drawn which simply aren’t supported by the evidence. A further way in which data may be misrepresented is if it is presented selectively. A varied data set can be described focusing in on certain sections of it. The data set as a whole is thus misrepresented; it is effectively replaced by a new set comprising of unrepresentative data.
A common problem with evidence sampling is drawing conclusions from “insufficient data”. This is related to the generalisation fallacy. To prove a theory, it is not enough to observe a couple of instances that seem to support it. If we want to know what percentage of the population take holidays abroad, we can’t find out by asking five people, calculating the percentage, and applying the result to the population as a whole. We need more data. This raises the question: how much data is enough? At what point does a data-set become sufficiently large to draw conclusions from it? Of course, having enough data is not a black-or-white affair; there is no magic number of observations which, when reached, means that any conclusion drawn is adequately supported. Rather, sufficiency of data is a matter of degree; the more evidence the better. The amount of confidence that we can have in an inference grows gradually as more evidence is brought in to support it.
Simply having enough data is not enough to guarantee that a conclusion drawn is warranted; it is also important that the data is drawn from a variety of sources and obtained under a variety of different conditions. A survey of voting intentions conducted outside the local Conservative Club is not going to provide an accurate guide to who is going to win the next general election. A disproportionate number of people in the vicinity will be Conservative voters, and so the results of the survey will be skewed in favour of the Tory party. The sample is not representative. A survey to find out what proportion of the population own mobile phones would be similarly (though less obviously) flawed if it were conducted near a Sixth-Form College. The sample of the population would be skewed towards teenagers, who are more likely than average to own mobile phones, distorting the figures. Collecting data from a variety of sources is one thing; collecting it under a variety of conditions is another. A survey of what type of vehicles use local roads conducted at a variety of locations, but always at the same time of day, would not yield representative data. Conducting it during rush-hour would mean that commuter-traffic would be over-represented in the results; conducting it in the evenings might mean that public transport would under-represented in the results. Differences in what types of drivers drive at what times would need to be factored in when designing the experiment. The quality of a data-set is thus not just a matter of how much data it contains, but also of how representative that data is likely to be. To minimise the problem of “unrepresentative data”, evidence must be collected from as wide a range of sources as possible, and under as varied conditions as possible.
Appeal to Force
(Argumentum Ad Baculum or the “Might-Makes-Right” Fallacy): This argument uses force, the threat of force, or some other unpleasant backlash to make the audience accept a conclusion. It commonly appears as a last resort when evidence or rational arguments fail to convince a reader. If the debate is about whether or not 2+2=4, an opponent’s argument that he will smash your nose in if you don’t agree with his claim doesn’t change the truth of an issue. Logically, this consideration has nothing to do with the points under consideration. The fallacy is not limited to threats of violence, however. The fallacy includes threats of any unpleasant backlash–financial, professional, and so on. Example: “Superintendent, you should cut the school budget by $16,000. I need not remind you that past school boards have fired superintendents who cannot keep down costs.” While intimidation may force the superintendent to conform, it does not convince him that the choice to cut the budget was the most beneficial for the school or community. Lobbyists use this method when they remind legislators that they represent so many thousand votes in the legislators’ constituencies and threaten to throw the politician out of office if he doesn’t vote the way they want. Teachers use this method if they state that students should hold the same political or philosophical position as the teachers, or risk failing the class. Note that it is isn’t a logical fallacy, however, to assert that students must fulfill certain requirements in the course or risk failing the class!
Appeal to Popularity
The “appeal to popularity fallacy” is the fallacy of arguing that because lots of people believe something it must be true. Popular opinion is not always a good guide to truth; even ideas that are widely accepted can be false. An example is: “Pretty much everyone believes in some kind of higher power, be it God or something else. Therefore atheism is false.”
Two million people watching does not mean a video is true. Just because a lot of people believe something, does not make it true; consequently, just because a lot of people do not believe or understand something, does not make it false.
“Faced with waning public support for the military escalation in Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday that the war is worth fighting and signaled for the first time he may be willing to send more troops after months of publicly resisting a significant increase. Gates urged patience amid polls showing rising disenchantment among the public with the war effort, saying the American military presence in Afghanistan was necessary to derail terrorists.” – Associated Press, Sept 3rd, 2009.
The appeal to popularity is almost automatically controversial at times, as sometimes the right move is unclear or sophisticated. Robert Gates is choosing to go against the grain because he feels he is justified by a greater cause than appeasing popular opinion.
Be also careful of an Appeal to Unpopularity. A lot of pseudoscience claims they are being persecuted by the mainstream, and there is thus a conspiracy to keep their knowledge hidden. The number one way to avoid both of these appeals is to stick to the data and ignore the marketing. I’ll give you a hint: real science does not depend on flashy graphics or bold typeface every other word, just to get your attention because the truth can speak for itself. Go against the flow…
Science is all about defeating the Appeal to Popularity. The idea is that people are inherently flawed and easily fooled. The best way to know something is to try your damnedest to prove it wrong. If you actually prove something right, make sure you send it to numerous other scientists and see if they can prove you wrong. It’s humbling and time consuming, but it is the reason your monitor is beaming photons into your optical lobe right now. Science struggles with acceptance because the populace usually despises its cruel, sometimes boring conclusions. No gods on Olympus? Fooey! No psychic healing? Frogswallop! Besides, I don’t want to be a loner with obscure views, so I’m going to go with the flow… and if I’m wrong, then everyone’s wrong, so who cares?
Think of Mob Rule. Imagine you are a black man in the 1700’s and some racist white folk are about to lynch you for the crime of being born. Almost everywhere you turn, you find nothing but racism. You know it’s absurd, all the claims they make about you, since you know yourself better than their superficial judgments. You have facts, and evidence; they have hate, and ignorance. Now do you care? Sometimes it’s dangerous to go against the flow, there are bullies at every stage in life. The cruelty of others is endless, and thus the will to fit in is powerful. It is hard to resist the “Appeal to Popularity”. The key is to always question the facts, to buy based on reality not perception. Are you sick and your friend is suggesting some sort of weird “new age” treatment? Ask an expert, read some journals, examine some tests.
The Appeal to Popularity is usually a self-fulfilling prophecy. It usually starts off as a perception with a low sample size, and grows larger not because it is efficient at what it claims, but is effective at marketing itself, since it is essentially a feedback loop of ever increasing loudness. Your turn… Can you think of a moment where you, or someone you know of, fell for the “Appeal to Popularity”?
“Circular” arguments are arguments that assume what they’re trying to prove. If the conclusion of an argument is also one of its reasons, then the argument is circular. The problem with arguments of this kind is that they don’t get you anywhere. If you already believe the reasons offered to persuade you that the conclusion is true, then you already believe that the conclusion is true, so there’s no need to try to convince you. If, on the other hand, you don’t already believe that the conclusion is true, then you won’t believe the reasons given in support of it, so won’t be convinced by the argument. In either case, you’re left believing exactly what you believed before. The argument has accomplished nothing. An example is: “You can trust me; I wouldn’t lie to you.”
Confusing Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
“Necessary conditions” are conditions which must be fulfilled in order for an event to come about. It is impossible for an event to occur unless the necessary conditions for it are fulfilled. For example, a necessary condition of you passing your A-level Critical Thinking is that you enrol on the course. Without doing so, there’s no way that you can get the qualification. “Sufficient conditions” are conditions which, if fulfilled, guarantee that an event will come to pass. It is impossible for an event not to occur if the sufficient conditions for it are fulfilled. For example, a sufficient condition of you passing an exam is that you get enough marks. If you do that, there’s no way that you can fail. Some arguments confuse necessary and sufficient conditions. Such arguments fail to prove their conclusions. An example is: “People who don’t practise regularly always fail music exams. I’ve practised regularly though, so I’ll be all right.” Not having practised regularly may be a sufficient condition for failing a music exam, but it isn’t necessary. People who have practised regularly may fail anyway, due to nerves, perhaps, or simply a lack of talent.
Correlation not Causation
The “correlation not causation” fallacy is committed when one reasons that just because two things are found together (i.e. are correlated), there must be a direct causal connection between them. Often arguments of this kind seem compelling, but it’s important to consider other possible explanations before concluding that one thing must have caused the other. An example is: “Since you started seeing that girl your grades have gone down. She’s obviously been distracting you from your work, so you mustn’t see her anymore.”
An argument is “inconsistent” if makes two or more contradictory claims. If an argument is inconsistent, then we don’t have to accept its conclusion. This is because if claims are contradictory, then at least one of them must be false. An argument that rests on contradictory claims must therefore rest on at least one false claim, and arguments that rest on false claims prove nothing. In an argument that makes contradictory claims, whichever of those claims turns out to be false the arguer won’t have proved their conclusion. This means that it is reasonable to dismiss an inconsistent argument even without finding out which of its contradictory claims is false. Examples are: “Murder is the worst crime that there is. Life is precious; no human being should take it away. That’s why it’s important that we go to any length necessary to deter would-be killers, including arming the police to the teeth and retaining the death penalty.” This argument both affirms that no human being should take the life of another, and that we should retain the death penalty. Until this inconsistency is ironed out of the argument, it won’t be compelling. Also: “We don’t tell the government what to do, so they shouldn’t tell us what to do!” These were the words of an angry smoker interviewed on the BBC News following the introduction of a ban on smoking in enclosed public places in England. Her claim that she doesn’t tell the government what to do is instantly refuted as she proceeds to do just that.
Arguments often use specific cases to support general conclusions. For example, we might do a quick survey of Premiership footballers, note that each of the examples we’ve considered is vain and ego-centric, and conclude that they all are. (Or we might offer one example of an argument that moves from the specific to the general as evidence that others do the same.) We need to be careful with such arguments. In order for a set of evidence to support a general conclusion, the evidence must meet certain conditions. For example, it must be drawn from a sufficient number of cases, and the specific cases must be representative. The more limited or unrepresentative the evidence sample, the less convincing the argument will be. Arguments that base conclusions on insufficient evidence commit the “generalisation fallacy”. Examples are: “Smoking isn’t bad for you; my grandad smoked thirty a day for his whole life and lived to be 92.” and “Estate agents are well dodgy. When we moved house… [insert horror story about an estate agent inventing fake offers to push up the sale price].”
Restricting the Options
We are sometimes faced with a number of possible views or courses of action. By a process of elimination, we may be able to eliminate these options one-by-one until only one is left. We are then forced to accept the only remaining option. Arguments that do this, but fail to consider all of the possible options, excluding some at the outset, commit the “restricting the options” fallacy. An example is: “Many gifted children from working class backgrounds are let down by the education system in this country. Parents have a choice between paying sky-high fees to send their children to private schools, and the more affordable option of sending their children to inferior state schools. Parents who can’t afford to pay private school fees are left with state schools as the only option. This means that children with great potential are left languishing in comprehensives“. Quite apart from any problems with the blanket dismissal of all comprehensives as inferior, this argument fails to take into account all of the options available to parents. For the brightest students, scholarships are available to make private school more affordable, so there is a third option not considered above: applying for scholarships to private schools. Unless this option can be eliminated, e.g. by arguing that there are too few scholarships for all gifted children to benefit from them, along with other options such as homeschooling, the conclusion that children with great potential have no alternative but to go to comprehensives is unproven.
“Ad hominem” is Latin for “against the man”. The ad hominem fallacy is the fallacy of attacking the person offering an argument rather than the argument itself. Ad hominems can simply take the form of abuse: e.g. “Don’t listen to him, he’s a jerk”. Any attack on irrelevant biographical details of the arguer rather than on his argument counts as an ad hominem, however: e.g. “that article must be rubbish as it wasn’t published in a peer-reveiwed journal”; “his claim must be false as he has no relevant expertise”; “he says that we should get more exercise but he could stand to lose a few pounds himself”.
“Tu quoque” is Latin for “you too”. The tu quoque fallacy involves using other people’s faults as an excuse for one’s own, reasoning that because someone or everyone else does something, it’s okay for us to do it. This, of course, doesn’t follow. Sometimes other people have shortcomings, and we ought to do better than them. We can be blamed for emulating other people’s faults.
“Straw man” arguments are arguments that misrepresent a position in order to refute it. Unfortunately, adopting this strategy means that only the misrepresentation of the position is refuted; the real position is left untouched by the argument. An example is: “Christianity teaches that as long as you say ‘Sorry’ afterwards, it doesn’t matter what you do. Even the worst moral crimes can be quickly and easily erased by simply uttering a word. This is absurd. Even if a sinner does apologise for what they’ve done, the effects of their sin are often here to stay. For example, if someone repents of infanticide, that doesn’t bring the infant back to life. Christians are clearly out of touch with reality.” This argument distorts Christianity in a couple of ways. First, it caricatures repentance as simply saying the word ‘Sorry’. Second, it implies that Christianity teaches that all of the negative effects of sin are erased when one confesses, which it doesn’t. Having distorted Christianity, the argument then correctly points out that the distortion is ludicrous, and quite reasonably rejects it as “out of touch with reality”. The argument, however, completely fails to engage with what the Church actually teaches, and so its conclusion has nothing to do with real Christianity.
Appeal to Authority
An “appeal to an authority” is an argument that attempts to establish its conclusion by citing a perceived authority who claims that the conclusion is true. In all cases, appeals to authority are fallacious; no matter how well-respected someone is, it is possible for them to make a mistake. The mere fact that someone says that something is true therefore doesn’t prove that it is true. The worst kinds of appeal to authority, however, are those where the alleged authority isn’t an authority on the subject matter in question. People speaking outside of their area of expertise certainly aren’t to be trusted on matters of any importance without further investigation.
Appeal to History
There are two types of “appeal to history”. The first is committed by arguments that use past cases as a guide to the future. This is the predictive appeal to history fallacy. Just because something has been the case to date, doesn’t mean that it will continue to be the case. This is not to say that we can’t use the past as a guide to the future, merely that predictions of the future based on the past need to be treated with caution. The second type of appeal to history is committed when it is argued that because something has been done a particular way in the past, it ought to be done that way in the future. This is the normative appeal to history fallacy, the appeal to tradition. The way that things have always been done is not necessarily the best way to do them. It may be that circumstances have changed, and that what used to be best practice is no longer. Alternatively, it may be that people have been consistently getting it wrong in the past. In either case, using history as a model for future would be a mistake. An example is: at the start of the 2006 Premiership season, some might have argued, “Under Jose Mourinho, Chelsea have been unstoppable in the Premiership; the other teams might as well give up on the league now and concentrate on the Cup competitions.”
Arguments by analogy rest on a comparison between two cases. They examine a known case, and extend their findings there to an unknown case. Thus we might reason that because we find it difficult to forgive a girlfriend or boyfriend who cheated on us (a known case), it must be extremely difficult for someone to forgive a spouse who has had an affair (an unknown case). This kind of argument relies on the cases compared being similar. The argument is only as strong as that comparison. If the two cases are dissimilar in important respects, then the argument commits the “weak analogy” fallacy.
Sometimes one event can set of a chain of consequences; one thing leads to another, as the saying goes. The “slippery slope” fallacy is committed by arguments that reason that because the last link in the chain is undesirable, the first link is equally undesirable. This type of argument is not always fallacious. If the first event will necessarily lead to the undesirable chain of consequences, then there is nothing wrong with inferring that we ought to steer clear of it. However, if it is possible to have the first event without the rest, then the slippery slope fallacy is committed. An example is: “If one uses sound judgement, then it can occasionally be safe to exceed the speed limit. However, we must clamp down on speeding, because when people break the law it becomes a habit, and escalates out of control. The more one breaks the law, the less respect one has for it. If one day you break the speed limit, then the next you’ll go a little faster again, and pretty soon you’ll be driving recklessly, endangering the lives of other road-users. For this reason, we should take a zero-tolerance approach to speeding, and stop people before they reach dangerous levels.”
Appeal to Ridicule
The “appeal to ridicule” is a fallacy in which ridicule or mockery is substituted for evidence in an “argument.” This line of “reasoning” has the following form: X, which is some form of ridicule is presented (typically directed at the claim). Therefore claim C is false. This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious because mocking a claim does not show that it is false. This is especially clear in the following example: “1+1=2! That’s the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard!” It should be noted that showing that a claim is ridiculous through the use of legitimate methods (such as a non-fallacious argument) can make it reasonable to reject the claim. One form of this line of reasoning is known as a “reductio ad absurdum” (“reducing to absurdity”). In this sort of argument, the idea is to show that a contradiction (a statement that must be false) or an absurd result follows from a claim. For example: “Bill claims that a member of a minority group cannot be a racist. However, this is absurd. Think about this: white males are a minority in the world. Given Bill’s claim, it would follow that no white males could be racists. Hence, the Klan, Nazis, and white supremists are not racist organizations.” Since the claim that the Klan, Nazis, and white supremists are not racist organizations is clearly absurd, it can be concluded that the claim that a member of a minority cannot be a racist is false. Some examples of “appeal to ridicule” are: “Sure my worthy opponent claims that we should lower tuition fees, but that is just laughable.” and “Support the ERA? Sure, when the women start paying for the drinks! Hah! Hah!” and “Those wacky conservatives! They think a strong military is the key to peace!”
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
“Post hoc ergo propter hoc”, Latin for “after this, therefore because (on account) of this”, is a logical fallacy (of the questionable cause variety) which states, “Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one.” It is often shortened to simply post hoc and is also sometimes referred to as false cause, coincidental correlation or correlation not causation. It is subtly different from the fallacy cum hoc ergo propter hoc, in which the chronological ordering of a correlation is insignificant. “Post hoc” is a particularly tempting error because temporal sequence appears to be integral to causality. The fallacy lies in coming to a conclusion based solely on the order of events, rather than taking into account other factors that might rule out the connection. Most familiarly, many cases of superstitious religious beliefs and magical thinking arise from this fallacy.
Alias: Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc. Translation: “After this, therefore because of this”, Latin. Type: Non Causa Pro Causa Forms. Event C happened immediately prior to event E. Therefore, C caused E. Events of type C happen immediately prior to events of type E. Therefore, events of type C cause events of type E.
Example: “The only policy that effectively reduces public shootings is right-to-carry laws. Allowing citizens to carry concealed handguns reduces violent crime. In the 31 states that have passed right-to-carry laws since the mid-1980s, the number of multiple-victim public shootings and other violent crimes has dropped dramatically. Murders fell by 7.65%, rapes by 5.2%, aggravated assaults by 7%, and robberies by 3%. … Evidence shows that even state and local handgun control laws work. For example, in 1974 Massachusetts passed the Bartley-Fox Law, which requires a special license to carry a handgun outside the home or business. The law is supported by a mandatory prison sentence. Studies by Glenn Pierce and William Bowers of Northeastern University documented that after the law was passed handgun homicides in Massachusetts fell 50% and the number of armed robberies dropped 35%”.
Source: “The Media Campaign Against Gun Ownership”, The Phyllis Schlafly Report, Vol. 33, No. 11, June 2000. Source: “Fact Card”, Handgun Control, Inc.
Analysis of the Examples
Counter-Example: Roosters crow just before the sun rises. Therefore, roosters crowing cause the sun to rise.
Exposition: The Post Hoc Fallacy is committed whenever one reasons to a causal conclusion based solely on the supposed cause preceding its “effect”. Of course, it is a necessary condition of causation that the cause precede the effect, but it is not a sufficient condition. Thus, post hoc evidence may suggest the hypothesis of a causal relationship, which then requires further testing, but it is never sufficient evidence on its own.
Exposure: Post Hoc also manifests itself as a bias towards jumping to conclusions based upon coincidences. Superstition and magical thinking include Post Hoc thinking; for instance, when a sick person is treated by a witch doctor, or a faith healer, and becomes better afterward, superstitious people conclude that the spell or prayer was effective. Since most illnesses will go away on their own eventually, any treatment will seem effective by Post Hoc thinking. This is why it is so important to test proposed remedies carefully, rather than jumping to conclusions based upon anecdotal evidence.
Analysis of Examples:
These two examples show how the same fallacy is often exploited by opposite sides in a debate, in this case, the gun control debate. There are clear claims of causal relationships in these arguments. In the anti-gun control example, it is claimed that so-called “right-to-carry” laws “effectively reduce” public shootings and violent crime. This claim is supported by statistics on falling crime rates since the mid-1980s in states that have passed such laws. In the pro-gun control example, it is claimed that state and local gun control laws “work”, presumably meaning that the laws play a causal role in lowering handgun crime. Again, the claim is supported by statistics on falling crime rates in one state. However, the evidence in neither case is sufficient to support the causal conclusion.
For instance, violent crime in general fell in the United States in the period from the mid-1980s to the present, and – for all that we can tell from the anti-gun control argument – it may have fallen at the same or higher rates in states that did not pass “right-to-carry” laws. Since the argument does not supply us with figures for the states without such laws, we cannot do the comparison.
Similarly, the pro-gun control argument does not make it clear when Massachusett’s drop in crime occurred, except that it was “after” – “post hoc” – the handgun control law was passed. Also, comparative evidence of crime rates over the same period in states that did not pass such a law is missing. The very fact that comparative information is not supplied in each argument is suspicious, since it suggests that it would have weakened the case.
Another point raised by these examples is the use of misleadingly precise numbers, specifically, “7.65%” and “5.2%” in the anti-gun control example. Especially in social science studies, percentage precision to the second decimal place is meaningless, since it is well within the margin of error on such measurements. It is a typical tactic of pseudo-scientific argumentation to use overly-precise numbers in an attempt to impress and intimidate the audience. A real scientist would not use such bogus numbers, which casts doubt upon the status of the source in the example. The pro-gun control argument, to its credit, does not commit this fallacy. This suggests, though it doesn’t nail down, an appeal to misleading authority in the anti-gun control one.
Sibling Fallacy: Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc
Source: T. Edward Damer, Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments (Third Edition) (Wadsworth, 1995), pp. 131-132.
Julian Baggini, “Post Hoc Fallacies”, Bad Moves.
Robert Todd Carroll, “Post Hoc Fallacy”, Skeptic’s Dictionary.
Moving the goalpost
“Moving the goalpost”, also known as “raising the bar”, is an informal logically fallacious argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded. In other words, after an attempt has been made to score a goal, the goalposts are moved to exclude the attempt. This attempts to leave the impression that an argument had a fair hearing while actually reaching a preordained conclusion. Moving the goalpost can also take the form of reverse feature creep, in which features are eliminated from a product, and the goal of the project is redefined in such a way as to exclude the eliminated features. An example is: Bella Donna claims that Sybil Antwhisper, her room-mate, is not sharing the housework equitably. Sybil tells Bella to go away and itemize and record who does what household tasks. If Bella can show that she does more housework than Sybil, then Sybil will mend her ways. A week passes and Bella shows Sybil clear evidence that Sybil does not “pull her weight” around the house. Sybil (the advocate) responds: “That’s all very well, but I have more work and study commitments than you do – you should do more housework than me… it’s the total work of all kinds that matters, not just housework.” In this example the implied agreement between Bella and Sybil at the outset was that the amount of housework done by both parties should be about the same. When Sybil was confronted by the evidence however, she quickly and unilaterally “changed the terms of the debate”. She did this because the evidence was against her version of events and she was about to lose the argument on the issue as originally defined. By “moving the goalposts”, Sybil is seeking to change the terms of the dispute to avoid a defeat on the original issue in contention. The term is often used in business to imply bad faith on the part of those setting goals for others to meet, by arbitrarily making additional demands just as the initial ones are about to be met. Accusations of this form of abuse tend to occur when there are unstated assumptions that are obvious to one party but not to another. For example, killing all the fleas on a cat is very easy without the usually unstated condition that the cat remain alive and in good health.
Non sequitur in normal speech
The term “non sequitur” is often used in everyday speech and reasoning to describe a statement in which premise and conclusion are totally unrelated but which is used as if they were. An example might be: “If I buy this cell phone, all people will love me.” However, there is no actual relation between buying a cell phone and the love of all people. This kind of reasoning is often used in advertising to trigger an emotional purchase. Other examples include: “If you buy this car, your family will be safer.” (While some cars are safer than others, it is possible to decrease instead of increase your family’s overall safety.) and “If you do not buy this type of pet food, you are neglecting your dog.” (Premise and conclusion are once again unrelated; this is also an example of an appeal to emotion.) and “I hear the rain falling outside my window; therefore, the sun is not shining.” (The conclusion is a non-sequitur because the sun can shine while it is raining.)
Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle
The “fallacy of the undistributed middle” is a logical fallacy that is committed when the middle term in a categorical syllogism is not distributed. It is thus a syllogistic fallacy. More specifically it is also a form of non sequitur. It takes the following form: All Zs are Bs. Y is a B. Therefore, Y is a Z. It may or may not be the case that “all Zs are Bs,” but in either case it is irrelevant to the conclusion. What is relevant to the conclusion is whether it is true that “all Bs are Zs,” which is ignored in the argument. Note that if the terms were swapped around in either the conclusion or the first co-premise or if the first premise was rewritten to “All Zs can only be Bs” then it would no longer be a fallacy, although it could still be unsound. This also holds for the following two logical fallacies which are similar in nature to the fallacy of the undistributed middle and also non sequiturs. An example can be given as follows: Men are human. Mary is human. Therefore, Mary is a man.
Affirming the Consequent
Any argument that takes the following form is a non sequitur: If A is true, then B is true. B is true. Therefore, A is true. Even if the premises and conclusion are all true, the conclusion is not a necessary consequence of the premises. This sort of non sequitur is also called “affirming the consequent”. An example of affirming the consequent would be: If I am a human (A) then I am a mammal. (B) I am a mammal. (B) Therefore, I am a human. (A) While the conclusion may be true, it does not follow from the premises: I could be another type of mammal without also being a human. The truth of the conclusion is independent of the truth of its premises – it is a ‘non sequitur’. Affirming the consequent is essentially the same as the fallacy of the undistributed middle, but using propositions rather than set membership.
Denying the Antecedent
Denying the antecedent, another common non sequitur. is this: If A is true, then B is true. A is false. Therefore B is false. While the conclusion can indeed be false, this cannot be linked to the premise since the statement is a non sequitur. This is called denying the antecedent. An example of denying the antecedent would be: If I am in Tokyo, I am in Japan. I am not in Tokyo. Therefore, I am not in Japan. Whether or not the speaker is in Japan cannot be derived from the premise. He could either be outside Japan or anywhere in Japan except Tokyo.
Affirming a Disjunct
Affirming a disjunct is a fallacy when in the following form: A is true or B is true. B is true. Therefore, A is not true. The conclusion does not follow from the premises as it could be the case that A and B are both true. This fallacy stems from the stated definition of or in propositional logic to be inclusive. An example of affirming a disjunct would be: I am at home or I am in the city. I am at home. Therefore, I am not in the city. While the conclusion may be true, it does not follow from the premises. For all the reader knows, the declarant of the statement very well could have her home in the city, in which case the premises would be true but the conclusion false. This argument is still a fallacy even if the conclusion is true.
Denying a conjunct
Denying a conjunct is a fallacy when in the following form: It is not the case that both A is true and B is true. B is not true. Therefore, A is true. The conclusion does not follow from the premises as it could be the case that A and B are both false. An example of denying a conjunct would be: It is not the case that both I am at home and I am in the city. I am not at home. Therefore, I am in the city. While the conclusion may be true, it does not follow from the premises. For all the reader knows, the declarant of the statement very well could neither be at home nor in the city, in which case the premises would be true but the conclusion false. This argument is still a fallacy even if the conclusion is true.
Logically Fallacious Fallacies
by James W. Benham and Thomas J. Marlowe
Ad hominem arguments are the tools of scoundrels and blackguards. Therefore, they are invalid.
If you had any consideration for my feelings, you wouldn’t argue from an appeal to pity.
What would your mother say if you argued from an appeal to sentiment?
I don’t understand how anyone could argue from an appeal to incredulity.
If you argue from an appeal to force, I’ll have to beat you up.
You are far too intelligent to accept an argument based on an appeal to vanity.
Everyone knows that an argument from appeal to popular opinion is invalid.
Circular reasoning means assuming what you’re trying to prove. This form of argument is invalid becuase it’s circular.
As Aristotle said, arguments from an appeal to authority are invalid.
Post hoc ergo proptor hoc arguments often precede false conclusions. Hence, this type of argument is invalid.
Using the Argumentum ad Consequentiam makes for unpleasant discussions. Hence, it must be a logical fallacy.
The argumentum ad nauseum is invalid. The argumentum ad nauseum is invalid. The argumentum ad nauseum is invalid. If three repetitions of this principle haven’t convinced you, I’ll just have to say it again: the argumentun ad nauseum is invalid.
Ancient wisdom teaches that the argumentum ad antiquitatem is invalid.
An argument is emotional and no substitute for reasoned discussion. But proof by equivocation is a kind of argument. Thus, a proof by equivocation is no substitute for a valid proof.
If we accept slippery slope arguments, we may have to accept other forms of weak arguments. Eventually, we won’t be able to reason at all. Hence, we must reject slippery slope arguments as invalid.
A real logician would never make an argument based on the “No true Scotsman” fallacy. If anyone who claims to be logical and makes arguments based on this fallacy, you may rest assured that s/he is not a real logician.
An argument based on a logical fallacy often leads to a false conclusion. Affirming the consequent often leads to a false conclusion. Therefore, affirming the consequent is a fallacy.
The fallacy of the undistributed middle is often used by politicians, and they often try to mislead people, so undistributed middles are obviously misleading.
Reasoning by analogy is like giving a starving man a cookbook.
Non sequitur is a Latin term, so that’s a fallacy too.
And I bet the gambler’s fallacy is also invalid – I seem to be on a roll!
In a way, it makes me sad — because some of these folks are clearly intelligent and well-spoken… but haven’t been armed with even a basic grounding in scientific method or the traps of various logical fallacies. It says quite a lot about our educational system.
Barker, Stephen F. The Elements of Logic. Fifth Edition. McGraw-Hill, 1989.
Cedarblom, Jerry, and Paulsen, David W. Critical Reasoning. Third Edition. Wadsworth, 1991.
Copi, Irving M., and Cohen, Carl. Introduction to Logic. Eighth Edition. Macmillan, 1990.
Rand, Ayn Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology. Second Edition. Penguin, 1990.
•Brian Yoder’s Fallacy Zoo
•Charles Ess, Informal Fallacies
•Fallacies: The Dark Side of Debate
•The Galilean Library Guide to Fallacies
•The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Fallacy entry
•Logical Fallacies .Info
•Michael LaBossiere’s Fallacies Introduction
•Philosophy.Lander.Edu, Introduction to Logic, Informal Fallacies
•Stephen’s Guide to the Logical Fallacies
•Wheeler’s Logical Fallacies Handlist
I can’t reply on drewswebsite because he has BLOCKED me. He’s the seventieth site to do this so far.
There could be THREE OR MORE transparent layers of air of DIFFERENT HUMIDITIES, only ONE of which condenses a “VAPOR TRAIL”, within the short-haul civil aircraft band between 30 and 35 thousand feet. Layer thicknesses of differing humidities are frequently only hundreds of feet thick and ARE CONSTANTLY VARIABLE in speed, direction, temperature and humidity. Aircraft are spaced ten miles apart on the same level for a particular route, and conflicting routes are nowadays 1000ft above or below each other.
So you’ll see SOME planes laying vapor trails while others don’t – it depends WHICH transparent stratospheric layer a particular plane is flying through.
Jet exhausts are NITROGEN, STEAM, and CARBON DIOXIDE at 2000 deg C (with traces of NOX and SOX). This cools RAPIDLY in an ambient stratospheric air temp of between -40 and -80 deg C to a FINE “WHITE SMOKE” OF ICE CRYSTALS in N2 and CO2.
If the stratospheric layer it is in is SUPERSATURATED (more than 100% humid), the ice crystals accrete more ice, get heavier, and fall faster.
If the stratospheric layer it is in is SATURATED (exactly 100% humid), the ice crystals REMAIN, but SLOWLY DIFFUSE TO FILL the stratolayer. The powerful WAVE VORTEX generated by the aircraft wing continues for tens of minutes after the aircraft has passed by, slowing to a stop very slowly.
If the stratospheric layer it is in is BELOW SATURATED (less than 100% humid), the ice crystals will slowly SUBLIME back into vapor AND THE TRAIL WILL DISAPPEAR.
The layers themselves aren’t perfectly flat – they roughly conform to the ground profile AND any rising CUMULUS clouds. So even if the plane flies straight and level, it may be the layer it is in slopes gently down or up, and THE CONTRAIL EITHER APPEARS OR DISAPPEARS as it enters a NEW stratospheric layer with a DIFFERENT HUMIDITY. You have to remember these layers, though different, are ALWAYS themselves transparent.
So you can’t SEE them. You can only see which layer is really humid by a plane throwing a vapour trail in it. Typically stratospheric layers begin ABOVE the TROPOPAUSE, which is where our ground level weather STOPS. It is NOT POSSIBLE TO PREDICT FROM TABLES STRATOSPHERIC LAYER TEMPERATURES FROM GROUND LEVEL TEMPERATURES.
The stratospheric layers vary in thickness, more densely packed close to the TROPOPAUSE, thinning out to nothing much above twelve miles up. It’s very smooth and calm up there – the layers slide over each other WITHOUT MIXING. Layers with HIGH GROUND SPEEDS are called JET STREAMS.
If there are MORE vapor trails in the sky than there used to be, then the answer is that there is MORE AVIATION TRAFFIC and MORE WATER IN THE ATMOSPHERE.
At this point someone will interject “Your Theory…” and I want to plainly cut this short.
THIS IS ESTABLISHED ATMOSPHERIC PHYSICS and NOT MY THEORY.
If you wanted to PASS ANY EXAMINATION IN THIS FIELD then you HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THIS TO BE THE TRUTH.
Eurodele, at least you are TRYING to ask questions, but:
“why many jets, laying persistent contrails, would converge in time and space 100 miles from any large airport” – Easy. The speed of stratospheric layers over your head can reach 100mph. If contrails are persistent, then they could have been laid just an hour previously “over” an airport. Next time you see this phenomenon, time the movement of trails from horizon to horizon, and estimate the speed of the stratosphere
“strangely concentrated and patterned jet trails through or over which other jets can pass with normal contrail dissipation” – From FIVE miles beneath, you CANNOT TELL between “through” and “over”. This makes ALL THE DIFFERENCE if one (invisible!) layer is HUMID, and the layer above or below it (also invisible!) is DRY. Contrailscience cannot be held responsible for your failure to INTERPOLATE information…
Look, Ever, I am a normal guy looking at PURE BUNK: this last statement of yours. The proof that this last statement of yours is HORSE FEATHERS can be found by any sensible person merely by going to their LIBRARY, and READING any book they like which covers ATMOSPHERIC PHYSICS. Now you wouldn’t object to that, would you?
“I’m one of the many victims” – of an industrial economy.
“They are spraying” – IT IS MAKING AUTO FUMES, PHOTOCHEMICAL SMOG, AND INDUSTRIAL POLLUTANTS.
“I will not go out to see them because my asthma is terrible” – ASTHMA IS CAUSED BY THE ABOVE AND ALSO BY POLLEN.
“Whatever these things are” – I thought you KNEW
“they are indeed making people sick” – People have been made ill by industry for 150 years in your country.
“The quality of the air is so poor in the Bronx and lately it is worst than ever” – Your country is producing effluents at an ever-increasing rate
“I wonder why” – NO YOU DON’T. You have already come to a WRONG CONCLUSION.
“Debunkers/ experts/ authorities on/ chemtrails/80-90%/ real info/hidden propaganda” – Why did you write this and why the quotes? What hidden propaganda? There’s NOTHING hidden here – check my channel – I’m a MUSICIAN here.
“If you are a Musician, why do you get so defensive about this topic? I see that you spent a lot of time proving your point, great.” – I am defending (quite literally) – nothing. I am ATTACKING false and dangerous beliefs.
The Bard of Ely (with whom I have worked) enjoined me to support his “chemtrail” blog. When I read it I was astonished – I’d never met such rubbish in my life. I knew FROM EXPERIENCE (I’m an ex-aeronautical engineer) that the whole idea was wrong for a HOST of reasons. I thought that a small campaign of scientific advice would clear it up – more fool me! There have been 60 Google pages listing my attempts.
My main concern is with HEALING. If one suffers from the delusion that aircraft are deliberately spraying you with substances to make you ill, and you ARE living in polluted air, then any illness you get merely serves to CONFIRM your delusion. If, however, I manage to convince a person such as YOU, suffering from such a delusion, that after all, aircraft are NOT spraying you, you may PERMIT yourself recovery from what was a temporary state of illness. You also have a choice: to MOVE to cleaner air, or to AGITATE to remove the sources of pollution.
There is a third and most important point, that almost NO-ONE has any confidence in our system. This is because PAST APATHY has allowed the wrong people in. The ONLY WAY to get the government you want is to BE the government you want. Frank Zappa was right: you MUST stand for office.
The very best outcome of this “chemtrail” movement would be a NEW PARTY – neither Republican nor Democrat – which would seek to redress ALL the terrible imbalances to Nature that we have created, whilst preventing both a cultural CRASH, and a Global Warming CRISIS.
But you’ll never do it without a full understanding of SCIENCE…
New Developments of the Theory of Everything
(Nothing whatsoever to do with “chemtrails”, but I don’t care!)
Startling progress has been made towards a final physical theory of Everything (sometimes called TOE) which unifies and brings into comparison the disparate Theories of Relativity and Quantum Fields.
If true, the gaps in our knowledge will be displayed. That which we don’t know that we don’t know – we will know!
And here are more references for you to follow up:
“serve to cause confusion to the issue” – That seems to be YOUR role here as it is QUITE OBVIOUS that what comes out of a gas turbine IS what makes SODA-POP.
“attempt to make rational people who are making observations and discussing their experiences appear to be conspiracy nuts and/or uneducated” – ANY “rational” person would know to read up on technical aspects BEFORE “making observations and discussing their experiences” especially if they felt they were uninformed.
“You are using faulty logic and classic emotion based redirection (example “This rising panic ensues from an under-educated public”) as the basis of your argument” – the public IS under-educated. YOU are under-educated. YOU are KNOWINGLY using faulty logic and classic emotion based redirection when confronted with my challenge that you ARE under-educated (see the subject of EVIL below).
“These are exactly the tactics that are used to manipulate rather than uncover the truth” – for you this statement ISN’T a discovery!
“You should know that your posts are smacking of someone with an agenda” – and yours positively REEKS of one.
“government plant” – AHA! We’re sophisticated these days at
– hope you like the blog, piccies and music.
“No one mentioned anything about what the trails were” – DISINGENUOUS hypocrite! I quote – “Obvious trails, definitely converging” – “latest plane curving at same angle” – “they just keep coming” – “it’s pretty obvious” – “that’s the one” – “somebodies doing something” – “really strange spiralling effect” – “they’re just non-stop”. My, my, how “INNOCENT” you really are….
“YOU were the one to put forward a theory for what they are” – It is THE EXPLANATION made from an understanding of atmospheric physics. It isn’t a “theory”. It is established atmospheric science. Your “chemtrails” are a theory.
“YOU said the video post is “wrong” which makes no sense – my video was only making an observation that something is going on” – OF COURSE it is wrong. If I hadn’t typed in “CHEMTRAILS” I wouldn’t have pulled you up. That very WORD is a LIE with no basis.
“In additional YOU brought up the subject of evil, no one else here did” – IT IS EVIL TO KNOWINGLY MISDIRECT AND TERRORIZE OTHERS.
The stratosphere temperature at the tropopause NEVER RISES ABOVE -40 deg C.
In A FRACTION OF A SECOND the exhaust, a mixture of NITROGEN, STEAM, AND CARBON DIOXIDE cools down from 2000 deg C to -40 deg to form a WHITE SMOKE OF FINE ICE CRYSTALS in a column of N2 and CO2 gases.
In HIGH HUMIDITIES that trail will PERSIST and even GROW. In LOW HUMIDITIES the ICE will SUBLIME to invisible WATER VAPOR.
There is no-one alive that can possibly be sufficiently clued-up on this. Whether you’re a specialist or a generalist makes no difference – from now on some aspect of our developing world is going to take you completely by surprise.
There is no doubt that one day soon an off-the-shelf computer will possess a greater processing power than the Human Brain.
But in the interim we will all have created (and endured) a startingly-exponential rate of change which could easily be totally out of our control. In the generation after the next we might well have produced a computer powerful enough to help us regain control of our civilization, but in the meantime – we’ll just have to rough it.
Extreme? I find myself arguing with people who know the extremes of NOTHING. They’re hardly capable of anything. They know the extents of their boundaries, and kinda suppose that the rest of the world goes on just a bit longer…
Chemtrailers are like people who are hammering their hands with hammers and complaining about the pain. They know no extremes other than their own extremities.
THIS IS EXTREME!
“S-I-C-K ! !” “D-U-D-E ! !”
FIRST CONTRAIL (PHOTO)
“other planes left Con trails that vanished” – then the trails were left in a DRY layer.
“other planes did not have trail” – they ALWAYS leave a trail in the stratosphere, but it may be VERY SHORT.
“at various heights” – ABOVE FIVE MILES?
“other trails lingered, spread” – then the trails were left in a SATURATED layer.
“are these trails Chem or Con trails” – CONTRAILS.
“I don’t know, I’m not a bird or a scientist” – I DO know. I AM a scientist.
“length/linger/sheet/layer/haze/slide/spray pattern/within 5-10 minutes/suspicious” – just coincident with a WET layer of the stratosphere.
“not natural/condensation trails” – you’re not a bird or a scientist, remember?
“know that planes dump fuel/not sure they dump it this low” – a plane that dumps fuel is doing it in order to survive an immediate landing. Being mobile it normally goes out to sea to do it, and will be LOW DOWN. Your chances of seeing THAT are RARE indeed.
“don’t know if it is fuel or something else/fuel = chemical” – EVERYTHING is a chemical, unless it is an ELEMENT. You’re not a bird or a scientist, remember?
“This is not the first time” – that aircraft have left persistent contrails in saturated air? Flying Fortresses in 1943 certainly did!
FRACTALS IN NATURE
Fractal calculations have an ever-expanding relevance to the task of understanding Nature with the tools of Science.
first of all, the theme by thomas tallis is very good and the pictures too, i am from germany, so my english is a little bit poor.
it seems to me that you have a good knowledge about atmospheric procedures, so i want to ask you a question.
i have watched “chemtrails” for over 2 years now, and i am still not clear, if it’s chemical spraying or normal contrails.
i understand the “layers of differing humidities” principle, that can explain some “chemtrails”. so that i see here a “chemtrail” and there a normal contrail. ok but i have filmed airplanes that have no contrail at all, and beginning to spray, and make an longstanding contrail and then stop it, to make no contrail again.
the confusing thing here is for me is that this airplane made a wingwidth stripe almost direct behind the plane. so you dont’ see two or four stripes, or how much engines it had, you see only a thick stripe all over the wingspan and it stays for hours and diffuses to thick cloud, and before it had no contrail and after that, and it sprayed at the end some little short trails, as if it stop the spraying, and there nor come a little bit of it. you can literaly see how it sprays. and in the spray direct behind the plane there were colours in the trail, because of the angle to the sun.
what do you think of that, how is it possible, if an airplane had two or four engines that it can make such a trail, and then the trail stays for “ever”? thanks for your time, and sorry for my english. i am waiting for your answer.
Hi FROZEMAN – I appreciate your English, and how hard it is to write in a different language… I’m glad you liked my music video. It makes the hard work (and a lot of musical pleasure) even more worthwhile.
The plane was NOT “spraying”. “Chemtrails” don’t exist. It is ONLY contrails that exist. The phenomenon you describe is the trail of ice crystals left by an ordinary passenger jet flying through a supersaturated stratosphere. *The separate engine trails become “bound up” in the wave vortex of each wing – these may be more than fifty metres across.
Read my blog at http://jazzroc.wordpress.com, especially SCIENCE ON TRAILS. It is towards the end of the alphabetically-sorted compendium.
There, a scientist describes carefully how and why the whole body of an airplane generates a trail in a supersaturated stratosphere.
“Saturation” is a term used to describe how the air is “full” to its limit with water vapor. Ice cannot sublime into the air, and so cannot “disappear”. Trails laid in such conditions persist indefinitely.
“Supersaturation” occurs in calm clean “laminar” conditions, where the air becomes “over its limit” with water vapor, and just needs the slightest disturbance to precipitate out its overload of ice. Trails laid in such conditions get LARGER and HEAVIER and FALL….
The ICE crystals in the trail generated by the wings and body are microscopic in size and can REFRACT and DISPERSE light by INTERFERENCE, which accounts for the colors one can sometimes see.
Ordinary cirrus clouds also produce (on occasion) such coloured effects. They are called PEARLESCENT CIRRUS. There is another name for them – NACREOUS CLOUDS.
There used to be stories of a pot of gold to be found at the foot of every rainbow. Now science shows that everyone sees a different rainbow, and there is NO WAY you can approach its foot – ever.
“Chemtrails” are like this; a myth which, like a rainbow, disappears as soon as science looks at it. Let it go…
FUN IN THE SUN
It is only very rarely that I return to Blighty. I do it when I feel strong enough within myself to withstand a WEEK (well, three weeks max) of its brute power and brazen importunity.
I had a truly wonderful time whizzing through London on an Oystercard to yak with old buggers my age about software, businesses, engineering, aircraft, steam trains, (nothing about cars – hardly), beer, booze, and women. (All the women we know, by the way, talk about us, so it’s only fair to even up the ante. If they let us.)
Anyway, that aside I was aghast that once again British weather was making with the knee-freezing combination of 18 deg C and 85% humidity as I departed, mercifully freeing myself from being charged 30 pee to pee.
Back to a balmy 32 degrees, I discovered THIS idiocy had, as they say, GONE VIRAL. So – possible fun!
NOTE: Comments text arrives higgledy-piggledy according to the vagaries of YouTube, so sometimes you have to fish around to find the connections. This amuses me considerably…
Missymoo, have you just removed a concealed compliment to me, because your PROGRAMMING just kicked in?
Tch. Tch. Naughty, naughty…
“wise pensioner who knows name calling is unbecoming” just made me blush from head to foot, and now we’re BOTH blushing
Too embarassing… LOL )
Another irritating thing…
Chemtards are woolly-headed, I know, and cannot describe anything because even if their eyes are good, their brain doesn’t work
So let me tell you EXACTLY what CHAFF really is
It is ANY electrical conductor of an exactly specified LENGTH
In large amounts they REFLECT electromagnetic radiation (RADAR) with a wavelength of EXACTLY the same length
This was called WINDOW and used by the Allies in WW2 to confuse German radar air defences and prevent huge bomber losses
Then it was aluminum-coated paper, now it is zinc-plated glass fibres – which I think isn’t so nice and biodegradable
But in neither case is it harmful or poisonous – the fibre length is in the range 15-45 millimetres depending on the radar frequencies used by the enemy, and cannot be ingested by living beings
The amounts involved in a chaff release are in pounds – small beer
ANYONE using CHAFF as a scare tactic is a “terrorist”
Just as ANYONE using CHEMTRAILS as a scare tactic is a “terrorist”
The common (and mistaken) agricultural practice of PLOWING
GUARANTEES windborne dust, therefore windborne aluminum and barium
Windborne dust will SEED the condensation of water vapor
Once the water vapor becomes RAIN, then that rain will fall into a rain gauge so that some poor ignorant girl can become the victim of another slimy and vicious “chemtrail” video
Contrails are the IQ test that “chemtrailers” FAIL
beachcomber seems like a bit of a shill but not for the big pharma as expected I think for a much different organisation perhaps one they would tell u doesn’t exist. Iluminating ppl with the BS. Don’t let his desperate negative explanations get 2 you. You know the truth when it is presented, don’t let him second guess your well versed inner knowing of Truth. The trick of giving you the truth shrouded amongst lies esp regarding aluminium and barium – truth but lies moulded to deceive you.
@MissyM005 If you KNEW scientific method, missymoo, then all you have to do is
SHOW THE EVIDENCE
There’s absolutely NO POINT in telling others not to believe what I say
It is THE EVIDENCE that counts
and those white lines in the sky ARE evidence – evidence of CONTRAILS
It IS the TRUTH that aluminum and barium are in SOIL
and TRUE that soil dust puts aluminum & barium in RAINWATER
And also TRUE that that I’m a PENSIONER
You can call me the PAT CONDELL of chemtards
Who are YOU, MISSYMOO?
Quoting myself: “Windborne dust will SEED the condensation of water vapor”
And as a consequence you will find in your rain gauge ALUMINUM and BARIUM – courtesy of your local farmer
Then, if you are ignorant, you may appear on a “chemtrail” video
In the old days we had Jacques Tati, Benny Hill, Monty Python, Bill Hicks
Now “chemtrails” – a whole world of a comedy of errors
Aluminum is the MOST PLENTIFUL metal in the Earth’s crust
Not far down the list is BARIUM
You find BOTH in SOIL – CLAY is aluminum silicate
Exposed soil becomes dried and makes DUST which becomes easily WINDBORNE
The common (and mistaken) agricultural practice of PLOWING
GUARANTEES windborne dust, therefore windborne aluminum and barium
Windborne dust will SEED the condensation of water vapor
ALL plants are “aluminum resistant” because they EVOLVED in aluminum-rich conditions
Despite ALL the crap you wrote in this post, THE EPA CERTIFIED LAB SAID 0.5 MICROGRAM PER LITER IN RAIN WATER IS NORMAL. 3450 IS 6900 TIMES NORMAL YOU CEREBRAL MIDGET.
Energydrain, I WAS impressed by your little search, and must confess I KNOW the way it could be done
Forming large amounts of tungsten is very nearly impossible
Forming NIMONIC (nickel/molybdenum steel alloy) is a little easier
EVERY PART of the exhaust turbine section of a gas turbine is air-cooled from the rear face of the alloy sheet material they’re made of
Your “tube” would have to be streamlined concentric pipes of nimonic alloy
They would HAVE to be BROKEN for EVERY refit
The liar bastard in you said that jet fuel burns at 2400 degrees Celsius. The maximum temperature for (JET A-1) fuel is 980 Celsius.
The following have melting points higher than that: Copper, Iron, Manganese, Nickel, Cobalt, Titanium, Chromium, Iridium, Molybdenum, Tungsten, Carbon
@EnergySupply2008 Hey, kiddo, I’ve just been back to the FAST exhibition at Farnborough where they have a cutaway Rolls-Royce Conway engine with the combustion temperature labelled at 2,400 degrees Centigrade
Why don’t you go there and tell them (the designers and manufacturers) that they are wrong?
And I know for a fact that the delivery requirements for the Welsbach materials in Teller’s paper were 80,000 feet. It kinda stood out, you know
Melting point isn’t a good indicator. Softening point IS
And while you’re watching the documentary, you will see that the WHOLE of the work force, and the technical staff, live and work right round the plane
The wings are glued together, so there is NO WAY of picking them apart to RETROFIT “stuff”
This means EVERY ONE OF THEM, including the lady with the glue gun, would have to know the “chemtrail” equipment installed
EVERY FITTER in EVERY WORK BAY ALL OVER THE WORLD would have to know about Energydrain’s “tungsten pipes”
Yet no whistleblowers
There are whistle blowers, you just have to look for them. Two aircraft mechanics found that tubing was leading to the lighting protection rods on the wings and they had been hollowed out. When his supervisor spotted him looking too closely, he was suspended for two weeks. They threaten whistle blowers with losing their jobs and blacklisting them.
@EnergySupply2008 There’s nothing you find that I haven’t already found
Ignorant people everywhere like conspiratorial conversations and activities because it makes them feel important
Intelligent people everywhere are NOT impressed by threats or blackmail or blacklists
If there WAS any truth in any part of this it would have been gone already
So HOW DO YOU get the Welsbach materials up to 80,000 feet?
In WHAT FORM is the barium/aluminum distributed?
Stop changing the subject & answer my questions
You wrote: “There’s nothing you find that I haven’t already found”
YOU are delusional. I found rain water tests, patents, geo engineers talking about spraying 44 BILLION 92 MILLION pounds of aluminum per year and so much more that cannot be covered adequately with this 500 character limit shitty interface. I already told you, the patent calls for 32800 feet and they could spray lower if they wanted to really blast us with aluminum particles in our lungs.
It has always puzzled me…
Why do chemtards believe “chemtrails” are used to fight Global Warming, when they are known to be Global Warming DENIERS?
Why do they believe EVERYONE but them corrupt?
In my experience, clever people who study hard and pass exams in engineering do so because THEY LOVE THE SUBJECT
All my classmates did. They also loved cars, beer, music and the opposite sex
Entering some corrupt organization is the LAST thing they would do
You should watch “The Making of the 777″
This will solve your puzzlement. 2900 flights per day needed to deliver 44 BILLION 92 MILLION pounds of aluminum PER YEAR to the atmosphere. RAIN RAIN RAIN water tests showing up to 6900 times more aluminum than normal. Class is over.
Energydrain: “chemtrail patent 5,003,186 issued to HUGHES AIRCRAFT, which talks about adding the aluminum to the fuel“
was formulated by someone who WASN’T a gas turbine engineer
There are patents for a hotel on the Moon – so it must exist
Why don’t you go there?
Scotty can beam you up
You will find thousands of morons already there
Energydrain: “Tungsten melts at 3400 degrees Celsius. Care to try again you shit for brains?”
I’m terribly sorry. You ARE correct about its melting point
To confirm, could you check the price and availability of tungsten tubing?
When that’s done, we could consider you to have won the argument
Where can you get it, and how much it costs, price and availability
Shouldn’t take a moment
Just get back to me
The current price for tungsten is $297 per metric ton (2204.6 US pounds) Only 13.5 cents per pound. It is used in incandescent light bulbs, cathode-ray tubes such as TV and computer monitors, vacuum tube filaments, heating elements, and rocket engine nozzles. 2009 production was 53 tons.
Aerosols are always present in the atmosphere, otherwise there wouldn’t be any clouds at all
Aerosols are generated by the oceans, forests, tundra, and volcanoes (85%) – and the industrial and farming activities of Man (15%)
Aerosols have existed in Earth’s air for FOUR POINT FIVE BILLION YEARS
That’s a little ahead of Edward Teller and chemtards
Why aren’t we BURIED in them?
WATER transports them down to land and sea
Even when extinction-event asteroids fell, the aerosol effects were GONE in 10 years
Shit. I had to rewrite it so many times because youtube blocks me every time I write something because I talk shit to all you shills. BTW. They don’t use commercial airliners. But seriously… all spelling aside, Shit will leave your mouth. Nasty.
@stephenbowman311 Yes, YT has a shit filter
It’s a pity it doesn’t apply it to shitty vids like this one
The thing is that it doesn’t know shit about science, just as you don’t, so it is unable to discriminate diahorrhea from honey, just as you can’t
I extend my sympathies to both of you and other chemtards everywhere
It must make shopping difficult
How do they deliver Welsbach materials to 80,000 feet? Mmmmm……
@beachcomber2008 Its funny you consider this to be a shitty vid, but you look through the comments and you’ve been here for a long time. I know plenty about science. Mostly because of my BA in Biology. I just came to F with you shills for a while and talk shit. Your not here for facts anyway. You are here on your shift spewing disinfo. I don’t go shopping. Thats for the women.
@stephenbowman311 “I know plenty about science. Mostly because of my BA in Biology”
What’s a B.A. in Biology? Since when was Biology an ART?
I got my degree in the sixties before DUMBING DOWN took place
I have been, and my wife presently is, a physics teacher, and I know for a fact that Advanced level today is what Ordinary level physics was for me
So don’t bullshit me, bro’
Tell me, how do YOU think they get the Welsbach materials up to 80,000 feet?
Well, I am terribly sorry, but you have not posted anything at all scientific!
Like explaining where all the barium and aluminum comes from and why?
Where does the 100 to 200 millions tons of aluminum come from considering the total world yearly production is only 33 million tones?
In other words, the uneducated authors of this video just do not know enough to make out a viable case!
Why should any sensible person take this cause at all seriously?
The video corrects it to 10-20 megatons with an annotation and you know it. David Keith, when asked 10 megatons will gave no human health impacts, does not offer a different number.
I have already posted twice, if you go to Worldal.com you will see that world production of alumina (aluminum oxide) is 67 megatons per year, yet you insist on lies and being a scumbag that it is 33 megatons per year.
Your knowledge of chemistry is pitifully small. Aluminum metal and alumina are two entirely different compounds. Aluminum has a formula weight 27 while alumina, aluminum trioxide, has a formula weight of 102. Thus 102 grams of alumina contains 54 grams of aluminum.
Thus the world output of 67 million tones of alumina would represent some 35 million tones of aluminum, EXACTLY what I said.
That is enough of this paranoidal Chemnut rubbish for tonight! Thanks for the laugh!
YOU are a total idiot. According to you 35 million tons of aluminum is turned onto 67 million tons of aluminum oxide and there is no aluminum left over to have aluminum for other purposes.
I like the way this has “gone viral”
With little effort thousands of chemtards line up to get drubbed
So energydrain thinks there are tungsten nozzles at the back of turbofan engines
Well, the NEXT time I go flying I shall take a camera and snap away at them
I WON’T ask the captain if he can fly at 80,000 feet because I know the answer (he cannot) and I wouldn’t want him to think I’m a moron – or a CHEMTARD
Edward Teller’s idea requires aircraft to LIFT the Welsbach materials to EIGHTY THOUSAND FEET, otherwise they won’t stay up for long
Unfortunately for Edward (and chemtards) only the U2 and the X15, and maybe the B1 can get up there
That’s certainly the reason why “chemtrails” don’t exist
Chemtards point at passenger plane contrails
and that’s why sensible people KNOW chemtards are just plain stupid
Contrails are an intelligence test which chemtards fail
HUGHES AIRCRAFT chemtrail patent 5,003,186 calls for spraying at 32,800 feet and says 10-100 micron sized particles will stay aloft for up to one year. Geoengineer David Keith wants to use NANO sized particles. A nano is 1000 times smaller than a micron and estimates particles will stay aloft for 2.5 to 4 years.
mikemb123: “condensation does not require aerosols”
NO. It ALWAYS REQUIRES AN AEROSOL
AEROSOLS ARE ALMOST ALWAYS PRESENT
When they are NOT present to allow condensation, the saturated vapor becomes SUPERSATURATED
Why are the dunces in the classroom shouting from the teacher’s desk?
I guess the Chemnuts satisfy their paranoia just just posting some nonsense they took from some other dud Chemtrail nonsense video.
OK so be it !
Written by JazzRoc
November 5, 2008 at 1:00 am
Tagged with aerosol, agenda, aluminium, aluminum, ambient, apathy, arthritis, aviation traffic, bard of ely, barium, blocked, blog, book, breathing difficulties, carbon dioxide, carnicom, chem trail, chemtrail, civil aircraft, confidence, confusion, conspiracy nut, contrail, crisis, cultural crash, cumulus, delusion, different humidities, diffuse, direction, disingenuous, drewswebsite, eamination, effluent, emotion based redirection, established, established atmospheric physics, eurodele, evil, experience, explanation, faulty logic, filaments, fortress, frank zappa, frozeman, gas turbine, global warming, gold, google, government, government plant, healing, heavy haze, high ground speed, horizon, horse feathers, humidity, hypocrite, ice crystals, industrial economy, innocent, interference, jazzroc, jet exhaust, jet stream, large airport, library, lie, lines in the sky, lung disease, metallic salts, misdirect, morgellons, movement of trails, music, nitrogen, no more blue skies, not a normal cloud, NOX, observation, oily clouds, pearlescent cirrus, persistent contrails, phenomenon, piccies, ptb, pure bunk, rainbow, rational, rense, saturated, soda pop, sox, speed, spraying, steam, strato-layer, stratospheric, sublimate, sublime, supersaturated, technical aspects, temperature, terrorize, tic-tac-toe, transparent layer, tropopause, Truth, understand, uneducated, uninformed, unnatural cloud, vapor trail, variable, water in the atmosphere, wave vortex, webby material, white smoke, whiteout, wrong conclusion, your theory