Posts Tagged ‘wave vortex’
BLATHERING – BLOBLAW005 – BLUSTER – BOOBLUBE – BRITANNICA – BROKEN CONTRAILS – BUTT – CAPS
Don’t forget my other pages, links and comments are one click away at the top right of the page…
“those sky-grids” – you’re about to get the works on that from ME.
“scientific evidence proves that a great increase of planes cannot affect the upper stratosphere” – NO, IT DOESN’T AT ALL. Few aircraft fly in the UPPER stratosphere. They fly in the lower stratosphere, just above the tropopause. The stratosphere is easily affected by combustion exhaust water, because it is stable, and has only sublimation into water vapor, and the force of gravity upon the ice crystals, causing them to fall, as mechanisms for removal. Contrails spread in saturated or supersaturated conditions to cover the whole sky. What scientific evidence is this?
“you’re implying that air-layers combine suitably within an hour” – stratospheric layers don’t combine at all, but they may be filled with ice crystals as the planes’ wave vortices stir the layer contents.
“50′s, 60′s and 70′s disseminated all over Britain (millions of ppl affected)” – YOU’RE MISTAKEN AGAIN. Didn’t you know that WATER, KILLED BACTERIA, and a PHOSPHORESCENT DYE are HARMLESS? Please refer to me the records indicating that millions of people were affected. And, anyway, wasn’t this to do with finding out how to combat Russian germ warfare attack? Before you make free with the FALSEHOODS you should look up contrailscience.com and find out how your blathering stands up to reality. And for a further perspective on Man versus Nature you could look up my blog on:
I’ve debated the contrail vs. chemtrail theories with jazzroc for the past couple of months. I did present a well researched and thought out scientific argument to him. His response was to delete my comments from his weblog, and to block any comments I post.
a) you didn’t debate anything: you posted using an anonymous email address – once. That isn’t a debate. If you look in that inbox you’ll find letters from me still awaiting your response.
b) your research was poor and your science non-existent. There was nothing in your post which advanced anything. Except sophistry.
Contrails are known and measured as part of atmospheric science. It is “chemtrails” that is a theory.
What about the Bergeron-Findeisen theory? Can persistent contrails exist if the Bergeron-Findeisen theory were true?
If there ARE differing vapour pressure requirements for deposition of water onto either super-cooled droplets or ice crystals, then the Bergeron-Findeisen Theory is true, and the droplets will evaporate in favour of deposition onto the ice crystals. The evaporation will then raise the humidity, making it even more likely that the next aircraft will leave a permanent trail. Super-cooled droplets are produced aerodynamically over the wings in marginally-warmer conditions: the exhausts produce ice crystals at -40 or colder, which is the general rule over 30,000 feet.
But that makes no difference to the final outcome, which is that persistent contrails are clouds of ice crystals which cannot evaporate into the fully-saturated atmosphere which surrounds them.
Nor to the conclusions one can draw, which are:
a) that persistent trails are natural, and not the confirmation of “chemtrails”, and
b) all other “proofs” having been shown to be fraudulent, the case for “chemtrails” is non-existent.
Were you to study any physics at all, your “theory” would vanish, your “debate” disappear.
“tell not contrails” – NO YOU CANNOT. See below.
“My entire life this never happened” – It was happening BEFORE YOU WERE BORN.
“I watch planes/real contrails, and they disappear, but these chemtrails DO Not” – Your assumption is INCORRECT. Contrails CAN and DO persist in HUMID stratospheric conditions.
“only spray where the population lives” – Above every town is a RISING PLUME of HEAT and HUMIDITY. Contrails MAY persist in these plumes. Also you may care to check out satellite pictures from space, which show quite clearly that the trails form within humid atmospheric conditions.
“How stupid do they think people are?” – How stupid do you wish to remain?
“back and forth over the towns” – These are SEPARATE planes, each either COMING or GOING. No videos have ever shown a “spraying” plane circling to respray a town, because these aircraft are civil flights from one major airport to another.
“Why?” – Your answer’s above…
“targeting these areas/get the full benefit of the poisons” – JUST BULLSHIT AND BLUSTER (LIES). Just dial up a satellite view and you will see contrails wherever the atmosphere is moist. That is, randomly over land AND ocean, wherever the conditions are HUMID.
It is YOU that has been handed a line – which you cannot handle.
Don’t send me any more “information”. I am a very fast reader and have read and seen everything you’ve seen.
You have a problem with reasoning. Any reasonable educated person would listen to Carnicom for about FIVE minutes, and then switch him off. The reason he would do that is that he breaks all the rules of journalism and science. Instead of supplying EVIDENCE and PROOF he makes further assertions, breaking the “legal” chain of evidence. If you cannot see that I am sorry for you, but I’m no longer prepared to help you.
What makes you think that airborne materials MUST have come from an airplane, for instance? Do you KNOW how far vapour trail materials DRIFT? I don’t even need a calculator to tell you – from an altitude of seven miles it’s going to be AT LEAST TWO HUNDRED MILES DOWNWIND.
What makes you think that as you read this, you are NOT ingesting pathogens and metals? I can tell you that, for sure, you ARE, AND HAVE ALWAYS BEEN INGESTING THEM. YOU ALWAYS WILL.
Your body is a DYNAMIC device, evolved over 4 billion years to COPE with such stresses. It WILL eliminate those metals AND KILL those pathogens.
It’s just a question of degree…
You lack the scientific understanding to prevent you from freely believing the UNBELIEVABLE.
DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
“Namely, they persist for hours (eventually turning into a haze that doesn’t go away”
They’re in the stratosphere. That is, above five miles UP, about a fifth of atmospheric pressure, as warm as -40 deg C, maybe as cold as -80 deg, which is colder than the surface of Mars.
Passing planes laying 100lb of ICE per mile will SOON saturate the stratospheric layer they are in. Once that happens, the ice of the trail CANNOT SUBLIME ANY MORE INTO WATER VAPOUR. It MUST remain. It WILL persist for hours. The only reason it doesn’t persist for EVER, is that it is HEAVY, and FALLING.
“water doesn’t act that way” -You are WRONG. Water in the stratosphere is ICE. Not ice like in your fridge, more like finely powdered GLASS. I’ve lived in Germany, and deep in the continental land mass the temperature can fall very low in winter. I have experienced -40 deg C, and let me tell you ICE ISN’T EVEN SLIPPERY AT -40 DEG C. It is HARD and it is DRY. Say you were in a balloon at 32,000 feet and an Airbus came just by you at 575mph.
You’d be amazed at its speed, and also its colossal WAVE VORTEX, as it whirled the two trails around itself in two columns fifty yards across. The trail would sting your face like wind-whipped sand on a beach. Of course, your face would fall off with the intense cold as well…
“they are sprayed from unmarked aircraft” – WRONG AGAIN. They are marked, but the markings become invisible from the ground due to a phenomenon called “blue light scattering”. Had the plane been painted BLACK, from the ground you would see NO PLANE AT ALL
“they stop and start in a manner not consistent with normal contrail formation” – WRONG AGAIN. They start and stop PERFECTLY consistent with normal contrail formation. The trails are created in saturated or supersaturated air. The “inconsistency” is firmly in your understanding of the nature of the stratosphere.
Your mistake lies in assuming that these AIRS are DISTINGUISHABLE: they are NOT. All types of air are TRANSPARENT, get it? INVISIBLE! Hence a plane flying through dry air leaves no trail. It hits a humid area: it leaves a trail. Stop, start, stop, start. This can happen for miles: stratospheric layers frequently form ripples as a consequence of atmospheric compressibility following on downwind from upward ground projections such as ridges and mountains…
“photographed as not even coming from the engines” – That’s right. Either a) You don’t understand that the time taken for the exhaust to cool down from +1100 degrees to -40 degrees manifests itself as a GAP, or b) the plane has hit SUPERSATURATED air, when the WHOLE AIRFRAME sets a trail and the tightest vortices (wingtips, control surface ends) will cause the MOST ICE to get dumped.
“I don’t remember them as a child or teen” – I DO. I was always keen on aircraft, making them from the age of 7. Why would you? You wouldn’t be LOOKING for them. In our lifetime we’ve seen a TREMENDOUS increase in low-cost air travel, and a VERY RECENT increase in cheap videocams, and reduction in educational standards…
“the media will not talk about the issue” – They only talk about things that increase their sales. They also have good scientific advice which deters them from printing unconsidered rubbish. Living on the Spanish Canary Islands, I don’t read the media much…
“and some other reasons” – You better tell me what they are, for so far you have NOTHING…
It says IN THE ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA:
Contrail, streamer of cloud sometimes observed behind an airplane flying in clear, cold, humid air. It forms upon condensation of the water vapour produced by the combustion of fuel in the airplane engines. When the ambient relative humidity is high, the resulting ice-crystal plume may last for several hours. The trail may be distorted by the winds, and sometimes it spreads outwards to form a layer of cirrus cloud.
from “Uncinus” of “Contrailscience”
Contrails are clouds made from water vapor that condenses then freezes behind a plane engine. Since the engines are on constantly, it seems a bit odd when you see contrails with gaps in them, or even contrails that stop and start. If the engine is pumping out a constant amount of water, then why is the trail not constant? This puzzle is sometimes seized on by people who think that persistent contrails are actually “chemtrails”, or some kind of deliberate spraying operation.
But it’s actually very simple. The amount of water in the exhaust is pretty constant, but the amount of moisture in the air is not. The humidity varies with altitude in the stratosphere, and a layer of low humidity can be sandwiched between two layers of high humidity. As a plane climbs or descends through this layer, then the trail will only form in the areas of high humidity, and so look like it was “switched off” in the area of low humidity.
You can get the same effect with temperature. A warm layer of air can actually lay on top of a colder layer in what is called an “inversion” (you’ll hear this on the weather sometimes, referred to as an “inversion layer”). When a plane flies through this inversion layer, the trail can be “broken”.
It’s not just climbing or descending flights either. The boundaries between these layers is not flat, and gravity waves or rising convection currents of air can create large volumes of air that differ in temperature and/or humidity from the neighboring air, and so can break (or make) the contrail when the plane flies through them.
Don’t take my word for it though. Do a Google search for “broken contrail” and you’ll find lots of examples, and similar explanations.
NOAA – “Occasionally a jet plane, especially if ascending or descending, will pass through a much drier or more moist layer of atmosphere which may result in a broken pattern to the contrail, with it appearing in segments rather than in one continuous plume.”
AirSpace Magazine – “If the contrail stops, then starts up again, creating a broken line, chances are the airplane flew through a dry patch.”
Doc Weather – “What is happening here is that warm air rising from the ground carries vast amounts of water vapor upwards into the highest levels of the atmosphere. This water vapor exists as massive, plumes of warm, moist air ascending to very high levels. When a rising plume reaches the upper atmosphere it condenses into high ice clouds known as cirrus or feather clouds. In the case of the jet contrail (condensation trail) in the first image, the condensing cloud formed where the aircraft passed through a rising plume of moist warm air. The air on either side of the plume was not sufficiently moist to support the formation of an enduring cloud. As a result the contrail only remained visible in the warm plume.”
Now study the pictures above. The one on the left was entitled “broken contrail”, the one on the right “broken chemtrail”. If you know anything about analyzing computer jpg files, you will discover the one on the right to be FAKED (even though a telephone wire appears to pass through the “gap” in the “trail”.
Interesting, isn’t it? The “broken contrail” is honest, the “broken chemtrail” fake…
Sniker, you don’t know the WHY so don’t tell me the HOW.
It’s a case of RELATIVE humidity and DEW POINT. HOT WATER VAPOUR, which is what “steam” is, can only MAKE UP the air’s humidity to its 100% RH level as it cools down. Beyond that it MUST form droplets of water or crystals of ice, depending on the air temperature.
In either case (troposphere or stratosphere) if the air doesn’t get to its 100% RH the water will evaporate or sublime into water vapour over a short period. Stratospheric air is MORE LIKELY to be saturated or supersaturated BECAUSE it is LAMINAR, whereas the troposphere is TURBULENT, being the BOUNDARY LAYER. Hence you sometimes get PERSISTENT TRAILS in the stratosphere.
Jets DO leave WATER contrails down below in humid 95%+ conditions where they occur (tropics mostly) but they are more difficult to see, and CT guys aren’t videoing there. There is a YT CT vid which clearly shows the APU (auxiliary power unit – all passenger planes have them) laying a faint trail (in Canada!), before it makes its stupid claim.
Clifford Carnicom forswore Science with his website. From his “USAF lies to America”, to his analysis (from the ground!) of a “chemtrail”, his site is a FARRAGO OF DECEIT. If you had ever made a study of LOGIC or ANALYSIS, you’d KNOW.
“just swipe your finger on random sufaces and hold up to sun and see the metal particals!” – You live in an INDUSTRIALIZED SOCIETY. You should expect CRAP in your air. Learn to spell.
Sorry to disappoint. Here goes:
“antagonistic to empire/super-state comprising pentagon/blah/nasa, why do you think population culling is off the table” – because while it may be possible to blow away a president, and even easy to blow away a nonentity, it becomes very much harder to blow away the vast majority. Wars are a mess, and the only quick and final war would be a nuclear spasm. Poisons and diseases are slow, and have poor coverage. Logistically they are impossible. Practically they don’t work because people can move! Angry people (the ones you’ve missed!) become ferocious opponents. Ask the Germans about the Poles. Talk to Americans about the Vietnamese. To Israeli Jews about Palestinians. The Kurds about Iraqis.
“why not read history as if you were not immune to it” – I have done. It’s the only way to develop an immunity.
“you are a pawn” – I may have been a pawn, but no longer. If necessary I shall simply sail away. If anyone interferes with me I shall interfere with them.
“the industrial age drawing to a close” – Give me strength! There is more industry now than there has ever been. Knowledge hasn’t drawn to a close. Ability hasn’t drawn to a close. Necessity is the mother of invention. Take a look at the Afghans. The Pacific Ring… …China…
“new game in the offing” – Yeah, yeah. Robots blah blah. There’s a great lawnmower and a great vacuum cleaner. Get out the Gray Goo, let’s off the peeps. You haven’t a clue.
“much fewer pawns” – stop reading science fiction and take a look outside. Out, not up! Sorry about the missing caps.
Written by JazzRoc
November 14, 2008 at 1:00 am
Tagged with aerodynamically, aerosol, air, airbus, airframe, aluminium, aluminum, ambient, america, analysis, anonymous, antagonistic, apu, arthritis, assertion, atmospheric compressibility, attack, auxiliary, bacteria, balloon, barium, bergeron-findeisen, black, blathering, bloblaw005, blue light scattering, boundary layer, breathing difficulties, britain, calculator, canada, carnicom, chain of evidence, cheap videocams, chem trail, chemtrail, cirrus cloud, clear, clifford, cloud, cold, combustion, condensation, confirmation, consistent, continental land mass, contrail, contrailscience, coverage, crap, ct, debate, deposition, disease, disseminated, distinguishable, downwind, drift, droplets, dynamic, educational standards, empire, encyclopedia britannica, engine, evaporate, evidence, evolved, exhaust, falsehoods, farrago, ferocious, filaments, fraudulent, fuel, fully-saturated, germ, gravity, gray goo, harmless, heat, heavy haze, humid, humidity, ice crystals, inconsistency, increase, industrialized, ingest, invisible, journalism, laminar, land, lines in the sky, logic, logistic, lung disease, majority, man, mars, mechanism, media, metallic salts, metals, millions, morgellons, mountain, NASA, natural, nature, no more blue skies, non-existent, nonentity, not a normal cloud, nuclear spasm, ocean, oily clouds, opponent, pathogens, pentagon, perspective, phosphorescent, photographed, plane, plume, poison, power, ppl, president, projection, proof, ptb, randomly, reality, reasoning, relative, removal, rense, research, ridge, rising, russian, saturated, science, science fiction, scientific argument, scientific evidence, scientific understanding, sky-grid, slippery, sophistry, spraying, stable, stratosphere, streamer, sublimation, super-cooled, super-state, supersaturated, theories, tic-tac-toe, transparent, tropics, tropopause, turbulent, unit, unmarked, unnatural cloud, upper, USAF, vapor, war, warfare, water, wave vortex, wave vortices, webby material, whiteout, wingtips, yt
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 http://www.myspace.com/jazzroc – 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
ME DRIVING AROUND TOWN – MEN AT WORK – MILITARY – MINNIS AT WORK – MORONS STUMBLE INTO OFFICE – MUST WORK – NICSCICS “NICKED” – MAKING THE 777
Don’t forget my other pages, links and comments are one click away at the top right of the page…
ME DRIVING AROUND TOWN
Dude, the writing is on the wall, give us all a break!
Contrails ARE a man-made cirrus. The daily dumping of a MILLION TONS of ICE into the very cold and rarefied stratosphere is LIKELY to SATURATE it. The WAVE VORTEX of each passing plane is a powerful STIRRER. It would be unreasonable for you to expect blue skies as a consequence. Do you ever travel by air?
If that writing on that wall weren’t an incoherent scrawl of mistakes, myths, lies, and deceit, without a SINGLE evidential trail, I WOULD give you a ‘break’.
But there is NOTHING there…
I quote: “Let us stop the fakers & hoaxers who ruin the credibilty of certain subjects with their moronic videos who spread lies, hate & deceit, catching people in their web of delusion. We are against doom and gloomers & UBDCT’s: “uneducated basement dwelling conspiracy theorists.” It is not a crime to expose the slanderous lies these people tell, and debunk their videos with conclusive evidence, more like a social duty.”
like planes leaving long “clouds” that linger for hours and turn nice days into shitty ones, and speaking of shitty, watch you tone with me pal, you are coming off as a total asshole.
I thought you said you watched the whole 9:56 of the video. I am talking about about those black clouds at the end of the video the planes left behind. let me explain a simple fact to you, I live in Las Vegas, you might not know this, but Vegas is like a small island surrounded by desert, we have one major airport, and one major air force base, and outside of the city limits there is no other major cities for hours. its like living in a fish bowl, its easy to notice things
personally, i think they have turned the atmosphere into a huge plasma screen. it ought to get interesting around the 17th of this month when we switch to all digital delivery of television signals.
wow makenwaves, you got hit by epoxynous and jazzroc! that puts you in the bigs! keep posting, and keep watching the sky and the weather for more freak tornados, downpours, droughts, earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature.
p.s. thanks to jazzroc for bagging the soda pop line…
I am going to post a new video every Sunday night, because I have noticed Chem trails every Sunday Morning, and from this week forward, I am going to document it, and along with it I am going to post numbers and address to local and national offices that people can use to express their thoughts on the matter. its time to start asking the right people some serious questions, and don’t worry, Jazzroc will not be listed.
Contrails mon. Go to wikipedia and type in “contrail”, for a pretty good explanation of the mechanism. The planes in your vid that did not have contrails were too low for them to form. It’s thought that contrails affect the weather, but I’m not sure it’s been proven positively.
There are NO chemtrails. That’s bs from the fringe. They want you to buy their books and videos. Of course, if you’re a true believer, I’ve wasted my time typing this. Truth, reason and logic does not apply to them.
MEN AT WORK
Men at WORK…
DUST in air,
Pollens flying everywhere…
Sun, wind, air,
Distribute “poisons” everywhere.
See a trail…
‘Tis but a CLOUD,
It’s IGNORANCE that shouts so LOUD!
“pictures prior to 1998 hardly showed vapor trails” – Wrong. First seen 1943 US B17s daylight bombing of Nazi Germany from 29,000 feet. All stratospheric flights since.
“identified as military KC-135 planes” – ALL planes leave vapor trails, short to long, dependent on stratospheric humidity.
“why do they appear when humidity v. low” – THERE’S NO CONNECTION between troposphere and stratosphere. It can be (and often is) DRY down here and WET up there.
“why can’t they be tracked on flight explorer?” – KC-135s? Why can’t you track the MILITARY on flight explorer? Are you serious?
MINNIS AT WORK
www.forum.planeta.com – The difference has led to some surprises, said Patrick Minnis, a senior research scientist.
www.greenbug.synthasite.com – From those isolated contrails, unmixed as they were with the usual dozens of others, Patrick Minnis, a senior research scientist at NASA’s Langley Research Center, and his colleagues were able to gain valuable insight into how a single contrail forms. Those once-in-a-lifetime data sets are so useful that Minnis is about to analyze them again in an expanded study.
Briefly Empty Skies Offer Climate Clues
The ideal way to measure such an effect would be to look at the same piece of sky when air traffic is heavy and when it is absent, said Dr. Patrick Minnis, a senior research scientist at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va.
But the skies are never devoid of aircraft. At least that was the case until Sept. 11.
Since then, Dr. Minnis and others have been reviewing satellite images of clouds and contrails. “Near dusk on the 11th, the only contrails in the East were three streaks heading from Nebraska to Washington, almost certainly Air Force One and its escort taking President Bush from Offutt Air Force Base to the White House”, Dr. Minnis said.
Everything matched, he said: “the trajectory and timing and the fact that nothing else was flying.” The most valuable data were collected the next day. Only nine military flights crossed a region from Ohio to Virginia, an area normally cloaked in cirrus clouds from the 700 to 800 jets crossing daily, Dr. Minnis said.
With those images, his team was able to chart precisely how those nine threadlike contrails fanned out over five hours to form a shield of cirrus clouds covering 24,000 square miles.
Dr. Minnis provided other satellite views of the area on a more typical day which show a broad area of clouds fringed by fading contrails. Having an isolated view of individual contrails spreading into clouds should allow scientists to refine computer systems that scan satellite images for contrails’ effects, he said. “Ultimately,” he said, “the observations will refine computer models of the overall effect of aviation on climate”.
AGU newly elected Fellows
Patrick Minnis NASA/ LARC, Hampton, VA
AReCO in the News
NASA scientist Patrick Minnis has studied contrails and believes they may have a prominent role in global warming. A 2002 report by the British Scientific Commission agrees, concluding that “aviation-induced cirrus clouds will be a significant contributor to warming.” But Minnis says another NASA study concludes that the contrails have little effect on global warming. Further research is being done.
Contrails, the thin, white clouds that planes leave behind in the sky, are responsible for a portion of the warming recorded in the USA from 1975 to 1994, says Patrick Minnis of NASA’s Langley Research Center in Virginia. During that period, the USA’s average temperature rose by 1 degree – hardly a heat wave, but significant by climate standards.
Minnis acknowledges that it’s difficult to calculate exactly how much of the U.S. warming is attributable to contrails. It could be only a small fraction. Even so, he says, the contribution is “significant.”
A research team of American and German scientists, headed by Patrick Minnis of the NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, reports evidence that contrails cause a warming of the Earth’s atmosphere.
From those isolated contrails, unmixed as they were with the usual dozens of others, Patrick Minnis, a senior research scientist at NASA’s Langely Research Center, and his colleagues were able to gain valuable insight into how a single contrail forms. Those once-in-a-lifetime data sets are so useful that Minnis is about to analyze them again in an expanded study.
In a study published in 2004, for example, Minnis and colleagues reported that contrails are capable of increasing average surface temperatures sufficiently to account for a warming trend in the U.S. between 1975 and 1994.
But some climatologists believe Minnis and his colleagues may have overestimated the contrail warming effect.
For his part, Minnis intends to keep his eye on condensation trails and their aftereffects.
“This result shows the increased cirrus coverage, attributable to air traffic, could account for nearly all of the warming observed over the United States for nearly 20 years starting in 1975, but it is important to acknowledge contrails would add to and not replace any greenhouse gas effect,” said Patrick Minnis, senior research scientist at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va.
The study was published April 15 in the Journal of Climate.”During the same period, warming occurred in many other areas where cirrus coverage decreased or remained steady,” he added.
“This study indicates that contrails already have substantial regional effects where air traffic is heavy, such as over the United States.As air travel continues growing in other areas, the impact could become globally significant,” Minnis said.
Patrick Minnis NASA Contrail Scientist “IT COULD BE AN INFLUENCE WE REALLY HAVE TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT”
When air traffic was grounded after September 11th — NASA scientist Patrick Minnis was astonished to see contrails from just 6 fighter jets cover more than 11-thousand square miles.
“WE LEARNED THAT ONE CONTRAIL CAN PRODUCE A VERY LARGE CLOUD ALL BY ITSELF.”
Other scientists noticed that without commercial traffic show thermometer readings with the red temp range increasing from 80 to 78 … to 80 to 75) to temperature swings between daytime highs and nighttime lows widened by as much as 5 degrees. Minnis now believes contrail clouds increased surface temperatures in the United States up to one full degree between 1975 and 1994.
“IT’S JUST ONE OF A NUMBER OF AIRCRAFT EFFECTS THAT TOGETHER COULD RELEASE A SIGNIFICANT SIGNAL … “
Patrick Minnis, an atmospheric researcher with California Environmental Resources Evaluation System (CERES) and ardent chemtrails critic at NASA’s Langley Research Center, reports that cirrus cloud cover over the US is up 5 percent overall because particulates in engine exhaust are acting as cloud-forming nuclei.
in their limited airspace, says Patrick Minnis, an atmospheric scientist at NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. Contrails form and then disperse to look almost exactly like cirrus clouds.
Minnis and his co-workers tracked them to see how they spread, presenting their results at a 2002 meeting of the American Meteorological Society and incorporating the data into models.
On a global scale, Minnis’ team reported in the April Journal of Climate that from 1971 to 1995, cirrus coverage increased over the northern oceans, the United States and Western Europe, matching growth in air traffic over those regions. Eastern Asia also saw an increase. Humidity measurements incorporated into the study, Minnis says, indicate where contrails (and cirrus) were likely.
“When it comes to human impacts on climate”, Minnis says, “contrails are one of the most visible.”
On this point of fact, the program’s government expert, Pat Minnis of NASA claimied that all exhaust, commercial and military, was perfectly normal.
The Associated Press distributed a lengthy article, praising the findings of Minnis.
‘This result shows the increased cirrus coverage, attributable to air traffic, could account for nearly all of the warming observed over the United States for nearly 20 years starting in 1975, but it is important to acknowledge contrails would add to and not replace any greenhouse gas effect,’ said Patrick Minnis, senior research scientist at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va.
The study was published April 15, 2004 in the Journal of Climate. ‘During the same period, warming occurred in many other areas where cirrus coverage decreased or remained steady,’ he added.
‘It indicates that contrails should be included in climate change scenarios,’ Minnis said. Minnis determined the observed one percent per decade increase in cirrus cloud cover over the United States is likely due to air traffic-induced contrails.
Using published results from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (New York) general circulation model, Minnis and his colleagues estimated contrails and their resulting cirrus clouds would increase surface and lower atmospheric temperatures by 0.36 to 0.54 degrees Fahrenheit per decade. Weather service data reveal surface and lower atmospheric temperatures across North America rose by almost 0.5 degree Fahrenheit per decade between 1975 and 1994. www.agu.org/inside/fellows2009.html
“The jury is out on the impact of contrails,” said Patrick Minnis, an atmospheric scientist at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Langley, Virginia.
Project scrambling for funds “We’re scrambling trying to find other funding,” so far unsuccessfully, says Patrick Minnis, a NASA atmospheric scientist who is a leading figure in contrails research.
Meanwhile, scientific data are growing ominous: *Cirrus cloud cover has increased an average of 5 percent over three National Weather Service stations in Northern California since 1971, says Minnis, who is based at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va.
It is presently impossible to know how much, if at all, Minnis said. But he says that much increase in cirrus cloud cover would cause anywhere from 0.5 to 1.2 degrees Fahrenheit increase in temperature “if all things held equal.”
The amount of global aircraft emissions is expected to increase by up to six times by the year 2050, based on studies by the International Civil Aviation Organization, Minnis says.
Says Minnis: “You’re going to see more contrails because the number of airplanes is increasing”.
During the days after 9/11, when the FAA grounded all commercial flights, Smith tells us that it provided an opportunity for Dr. Patrick Minnis of NASA’s Langley Research Center to perform some research.
Minnis was able to study the affects of a single contrail’s movement from the Washington, D.C. corridor tracking it through the mid-Atlantic states.
A research team of American and German scientists, headed by Patrick Minnis of the NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, reports evidence that contrails cause a warming of the Earth’s atmosphere.
“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.”
According to AFP, Patrick Minnis, a senior researcher at Langley, stated that the man-made “cirrus clouds are already having an impact on climate, increasing temperatures on regional levels as much as two to five percent. “Hmmm …I wonder how long it will take my chemtrail debunker knuckledraggers to smear and eat their own? Think they’ll be calling Minnis a kooky conspiracy theorist anytime soon?
Travis’ results are difficult to argue with, says Patrick Minnis of NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. He and his colleagues will report their analysis of satellite images of contrails at the same conference. In a series of photos taken Sept. 12, individual cloud trails of high-flying military aircraft stand out clearly in a nearly cloud-free region west of Washington, D.C. In just a few hours, six contrails, each of which started out a few meters wide, spread to cover more than 20,000 square kilometers. The observations of these single contrails along aerial highways normally crowded with dozens of aircraft may help scientists develop better models of how contrails spread and affect climate, says Minnis.
Patrick Minnis (N.A.S.A.), Ayers, Rabi Palinkonda, and Dung Phan from Analytical Services and Materials, Inc., of Hampton, Va.
‘As air travel continues growing in other areas, the impact could become globally significant,’ Minnis said.
It indicates that contrails should be included in climate change scenarios,’ Minnis said. Minnis determined the observed one percent per decade increase in cirrus cloud cover over the United States is likely due to air traffic-induced contrails.
Using published results from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (New York) general circulation model, Minnis and his colleagues estimated contrails and their resulting cirrus clouds would increase surface and lower atmospheric temperatures by 0.36 to 0.54 degrees Fahrenheit per decade.
Weather service data reveal surface and lower atmospheric temperatures across North America rose by almost 0.5 degree Fahrenheit per decade between 1975 and 1994. Minnis worked with colleagues Kirk Ayers, Rabi Palinkonda, and Dung Phan from Analytical Services and Materials, Inc., of Hampton, Va.
As air travel continues growing in other areas, the impact could become globally significant,’ Minnis said. ‘This result shows the increased cirrus coverage, attributable to air traffic, could account for nearly all of the warming observed over the United States for nearly 20 years starting in 1975, but it is important to acknowledge contrails would add to and not replace any greenhouse gas effect,’ said Patrick Minnis, senior research scientist at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. The study was published April 15, 2004 in the Journal of Climate. ‘During the same period, warming occurred in many other areas where cirrus coverage decreased or remained steady,’ he added.
Presenting on March 2 will be Dr. Patrick Minnis of the NASA Langley Research Center.His lecture is titled “Global Warming – A Cool Appraisal.”
Currently their impact is currently small as compared to other greenhouse effects. They predict, however, that it may grow by a factor of six over the next 50 years. The researchers emphasize that these are conservative estimates, which take into account only the thicker contrails that can be readily observed.
“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.”
Air Traffic Blues – Popular Science
Patrick Minnis, the senior researcher of the NASA study, admits that the outlook is gloomy. ‘It’s not like you’re never going to have a blue-sky day, he says, but you’re certainly going to have fewer and fewer’.
AirHead : News
Dr. Patrick Minnis, a senior research scientist at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, reported that his team was able to use satellite photographs to track the nine contrails as they spread out to create a layer of cirrus clouds covering 24,000 square miles over five hours.
MORONS STUMBLE INTO OFFICE
Yes, they actually DO stumble into a government office, make unsubstantiated accusations, receive dull acknowledgment and bluff denial, and leave without leaving ANY document of any sort.
The hapless government is obviously perplexed, but too polite or stupid to ask WHY they are there, for he can see no reason for it.
He cannot see the tiny spy videocamera they have pointed at him. They are a 39 buck bargain buy. That is the reason. What’s that smell?
You are invited to contact Ross Bell (530) 225-5674 or email firstname.lastname@example.org and ask him what he thought he was doing in a government office with a spy camera and unsubstantiated accusations.
The comments (remember YouTube comments run backwards in time) will have run on in their nasty way since this WHOLE DAY of baseless accusations and unanswered practical questions:
Hi witless, I see you’re
STILL adhomming away like there’s no tomorrow
STILL avoiding ALL the practical questions
STILL losing your temper when you’re losing
That last part was never suggested in my Jay Reynolds piece called
HOW TO RUN A CONTRAIL SCARE FOR FUN AND PROFIT
which you will find on my page “HERE”, at
jazzroc. wordpress. com
You should reread it and get back up to speed
You should learn to delegate – not defecate
Genuine Bull does it better
@EnergySupply2008 Let the “evading” begin…
Why did they bring NOTHING (except of course a SPY CAMERA) to that office?
Let’s see you even START to even answer them
What was it? Ah, yes
EVADE, SPLIT & RE-EVALUATE
Get going, then…
@flickervertigo1 Also google: chemtrails and crimes against humanity.
@beachtroll2010 What exactly is your problem? How did you end up being a lousy, lowlife, lying shill, who is ruthlessly involved with trying to cover-up the illegal and murderous chemtrail spraying campaign? What happened, your parents didn’t show you any love growing up, so as a result you feel the whole world is going to suffer because of what you didn’t get as a child?
Why can’t thousands of air samplers running 24/7 find them?
How can airborne dust (containing clay, therefore aluminum) be distinguished from these particles?
Where and who are these “injured people”?
Why didn’t the “investigators” bring? this INFO into the office?
Wouldn’t it have been to their benefit to have done so?
@beachcomber2008 “Why can’t thousands of air samplers running 24/7 find them?” Do you really think a covert operation like chemtrails would allow for data on air samplers to be released to the public? Moron. Aluminum at 6900 times and 122200 times normal in rain and snow cannot be clay. Moron.
@EnergySupply2008 says, “…Aluminum at 6900 times and 122200 times normal in rain and snow…” – please post the provenance of those samples, including when and where they were collected, who collected them, the name of the lab that did the testing, and the chain of custody from the time of sampling to the present.
@EnergySupply2008 Air samplers are privately manufactured by private companies and are are privately bought by members of the public throughout the western world
You could go and buy one tomorrow
Yet NO-ONE ANYWHERE has produced EVEN A SINGLE VERIFIED CHEMICAL ANALYSIS of the filtrate sheet out of one of these machines
There IS a good reason for this: you are all INEPT
You cannot do the science, you cannot do the math
You cannot even produce a FAKE
You haven’t a ……. clue
You just THINK you think
these “chemtrail” people are accusing… who? …of serious crimes, so they are obligated to provide evidence of those crimes, adhere to the rules of evidence and the chain of custody procedures that safeguard evidence.
but the “chemtrail” people apparenly have no concern about due process, evidence, logic or justice.
why is that?
google: “rules of evidence”
google: “chain of custody”
these guys refuse to provide any evidence, but we’re supposed to believe them…
it would be so sad, wouldnt it, if we had the altitude, temp and humidity present when these pictures were taken, and those altitudes, temps and humidities were just right for forming contrails?
it looks to me like alex jones is getting ready to ditch this “chemtrail” business… otherwise, he wouldnt have posted such an inept video. i guess it could be, though, that he’ll persist with the chemtrails, operating on the theory that texans have been dumbed down far enough that they’ll vote for him despite his loony theories. another “wait and see” situation, i spose.
@Skywitness The reason so many disinformation trolls get into trouble is because the deck is stacked against them. Truth can never be stiffed forever and the disinformation trolls do not even believe what they are saying. Their lack of belief puts them at a HUGE disadvantage. In those moments when they are alone with themselves, the horror of what they are doing eats them up inside.
@EnergySupply2008 if you cant post evidence, give us one good reason to believe you. all we got is pictures… no flight data, no meteorological data, no samples with credible chain of custody… the rules of evidence have gone out the window. why should we believe you?
@EnergySupply2008 Yes it does eat them up, because somewhere in their lives there was someone who sincerely gave them love and or helped them out in their lives. They know that they are repaying decent people with hate and destruction because of all their lying in an effort to cover-up the chemtrail spraying campaign of death. No matter what they do, they can never justify their actions within themselves and as a result they suffer.
@Skywitness I have a different theory. I believe that anyone who could be so adamant that chemtrails are not real, when they clearly are, has never really had anyone love them. Their parents were neanderthals who did not show them love, therefore, they hate everybody because they never learned to love even their parents.
@flickervertigo1 Actually, Alex Jones said about three weeks ago that his chemtrail film will be out in late summer, early fall.
given the absence of proof, we have to assume that this chemtrail propaganda project is nothing more than an effort to befuddle americans… which will make them easier to herd around. let’s see some real evidence… or are you content with a system of “trial by youtube”, due process, justice and evidence are irrelevant.
@flickervertigo1 In war, one should never reveal their game plan to the enemy. Chemtrails are war on the people and? the people will prevail, good always does eventually. The evidence you seek is in the sky in plain view.
flickervertigo1 This has been flagged as spam
@EnergySupply2008 says, “The evidence you seek is in the sky in plain view.” what pressure altitude are the airplanes flying at? what is the temperature and humidity at that altitude? you have no idea about the altitude, temperature and humidity, so we have no idea whether or not contrails are possible. we seem to be pressing the limits of gullibility, here.
@flickervertigo1 You forget that you signed up with Youtube just today and came straight to this video with strong anti-chemtrails crapola. YOU cannot even be honest about what your real account name is so YOU have NO credibility here. YOU are a non-person.
@EnergySupply2008 if your lawsuits are gonna have any chance of success, you’re gonna have to come up with credible evidence. so far, you’ve been unable to provide any credible evidence. that evidence would include, of course, data showing the altitude of the airplanes, and the temperature and humidity at that altitude. none of that has anything to do with my youtube account, does it?
@EnergySupply2008 says, “this is war, and I would not reveal the evidence people are working on, because you do not give your enemy that info.” it’s so convenient for you, isnt it…?…so very convenient that you’ve absolved yourself from the responsibility of providing evidence… most likely because you can’t. do you suppose the altitude of your “chemtrail” airplanes is secret? …is the temperature and humidity of the air mass they’re flying through secret, too?
@EnergySupply2008 says, “50 years, no white lines in sky, 25 months MASSIVE white lines in the sky.” …and we’re supposed to take your word for that, just like we’re supposed to take your word for the existence of “chemtrails”… despite your unwillingess to provide evidence or data. you seem to be unable to understand the big thing here: if you could provide reliable evidence, we would have to believe your stories. but you got no evidence.
@EnergySupply2008 says, “…no less that 41 chemtrails”. how many operations happen daily at atlanta? in conditions of persistent contrails, what would be so astounding about 41 contrails in the sky at the same time?
@flickervertigo1 “in conditions of persistent contrails, what would be so astounding about 41 contrails in the sky at the same time?” Lived 50 years, NEVER saw one damn “persistant contrail” – In the past 25 months I have seen at least 7000 of them and possible as many as 20000.
@EnergySupply2008 ” If your enemy is superior, evade him. If angry, irritate him. If equally matched, fight, and if not split and reevaluate.” – Sun Tzu, the art of war [as quoted by Bud Fox in the movie "Wall Street"]
@beachtroll2010 Do you ever get ashamed of yourself for investing so much of your time in lies and deceit? Even though you think of yourself as one of the higher ranking trolls in the disinfo game, what do you expect to get for your efforts in trying to cover-up the truth of the chemtrail spraying activities?
Look how mystified the guy looks here, with his privacy intruded with a spy camera. You think it’s OK to do this because he’s THE ENEMY. But actually, you’re WRONG, and this man’s privacy is intruded upon. That makes YOU the enemy…
@beachtrollr2010 Hmmm… beachtroller has reevaluated, and is trying the bleeding heart for other’s privacy distraction. Your own words prove you to be a babbling idiot. You’ll cry like a baby over this man’s privacy, but in truth you don’t give a damn about everyone else’s privacy that is being invaded by the results of the chemtrail spraying. A lot of ailments and death have been inflicted on people because of the chemtrails that you are desperately trying to cover-up. Hypocrite.
@Skywitness Evading the tough questions is what the disinformation trolls are the very best at, that right there shows that they are NOT genuine people and cannot be trusted. If they could only see themselves as everybody else sees them then they would realize their battle is already lost. 98 percent of the people are good people. The trolls are vastly outnumbered and the situation gets worse for them every day, as more people wake up to chemtrails.
@EnergySupply2008 “Evading the tough questions”… Could you post the FULL info on these “test samples” & how they were collected? Could you post the altitude, temperature and humidity of your pictures? Where exactly, and from what, are these particles emitted? If from the engines, why aren’t the exhaust flames COLORED by these particles? If they exist, where will these particles be the day after tomorrow?
@beachcomber2008 The rain water samples were collected from a single days rain in a rain gauge. Almost all engines today are turbofan engines for fuel economy. 80 percent of the air they intake bypasses the combustion process and exits out the back. A nozzle in the back of the engine could inject the aluminum into the bypass air. It would not have time to heat the aluminum oxide and it would not burn, therefore no color. but the white aluminum oxide.
@EnergySupply2008 says, “A nozzle in the back of the engine could inject the aluminum into the bypass air.” you got any pictures of “chemtrails” that are present immediately behind the engine? …or do all your pictures show the normal lag time and distance required for the water vapor to condense?
flickervertigo1 This has been flagged as spam
@EnergySupply2008 says, “…anyone who could be so adamant that chemtrails are not real, when they clearly are, has never really had anyone love them.” …or, maybe people who are skeptical of chemtrails are concerned about justice, due process, and real evidence instead of youtube videos.
@beachcomber2008 what’s so wrong about asking for real evidence, i wonder? these people are accusing other people (too bad they cant seem to pin down exactly who’s to blame) of “crimes against humanity”… you’d think, given the seriousness of the charges, these people would come up with some evidence. *shrug*.
Perhaps you could point out exactly where you imagine the SPRAY RING might be here:
And explain how all this glowing white powder NEVER shows on the inner engine nacelle. Are they ALWAYS WASHED immediately upon landing, or is TEFLON added to the mix? Are airfield engineers given secret instructions as to how to rig this spray ring every overhaul?
@Skywitness Correct. Beachcomber2008 is the A team for the disinformation trolls. Whenever the more stupid disinformation trolls gets in trouble, Beachcomber2008 is sure to show up. I have seen it time and time again over the past year.
@beachcomber2008 There is only no proof if you do not make an honest effort to see it. My go a rounds with you in the past, demonstrate very clearly that you are a non-person because you refuse to take a look at the evidence. Deaf, dumb and blind, that is your motto.
@EnergySupply2008 so, first of all, since you have no flight data, we can assume that your “chemtrails” are most likely contrails. since you have no reliable evidence — you’re not following the rules of evidence or documenting the chain of custody of that evidence — your evidence is inadmissable. no flight data, no evidence. …and no credibility.
@flickervertigo1 If I had flight data, that would prove no aluminum is coming out of the planes? Are you really stupid? Time to call in the disinformation A team, you are not very good at what you do.
@mikemb123 This enemy is just plain dumb, they think they can explain chemtrails by calling them contrails. So the enemy is obviously not superior. Are they angry? Damn straight, because they have so much going against them. People are not as stupid as the enemy would like to believe. Thanks for keeping up the fight.
@EnergySupply2008 if you could post the altitude, temperature and humidity of your pictures, we’d be able to judge whether or not contrails were possible. but all you got is pictures… no flight data, but we’re supposed to take your word for it… “those are chemtrails”. seeing as how it’s gonna take weeks for your particles to settle out — assuming for the sake of argument particles are present — by which time those particles will be thousands of miles downwind… well, then what?
@flickervertigo1 It is NOT about altitude, temperature and humidity. 25 months ago when they began spraying my area, it was just like turning on a light switch. 50 years of blue sky followed by 25 months of some of the most horrible looking sky imaginable. To think you can get away with your agenda, you absolutely must think your enemy is stupid. There are vast numbers of people not as stupid as you would like them to be.
@flickervertigo1 I am not reluctant to provide data. Geo-engineers conference in February 2010 talking about spraying 44 BILLION 92 MILLION pounds of aluminum PER YEAR. Obama’s science adviser on record, stating in April 2009 that they are vigorously discussing spraying particles into the atmosphere. 60,000 Youtube videos showing horrific looking sky. RAIN water tests at up to 6900 times normal aluminum. Snow at up to 122,200 times normal aluminum. The fact that you are a moron evades you.
@EnergySupply2008 talking about geoengineering and doing it are two different things. please post evidence that geoengineering is taking place, now. 60,000 youtube videos could be evidence of contrails, all right… yup. please show us the chain of custody of the rainwater and snow samples, and provide evidence that those samples were collected in accordance with the rules of evidence.
Pay no attention to the endless disconnected ramblings of flickervertigo1. Flicker is another one of the numerous disinformation failures who try and trick people into believing that chemtrails are not real. This is their way of trying to cover-up the truth of the ongoing chemtrail spraying campaign.
the beauty comes in “might makes right”. you don’t need proof or evidence. all you need is a belief in “might makes right”. if it’s not a matter of law, and verifiable evidence, then what is it a matter of? must be a matter of faith. …faith in what? faith in the fucked-upness of israel? america? surely you don’t need chemtrails to have proof of that. so it’s always the same old thing… the chemtrail people can’t come up with any proof, so they resort to distractions. where’s the lawful proof of the existence of chemtrails?
@flickervertigo1 “so it’s always the same old thing, the chemtrail people can’t come up with any proof” The proof is in 60000 Youtube videos about chemtrails, RAIN and SNOW tests with up to 122200 times normal aluminum in snow, what geo-enginners are discussing, what Obama’s science adviser John Holdren says, that the white house is discussing geo-engineering. It must suck to be you with so much mounting evidence. I pity you, you sold your soul for money.
@EnergySupply2008 you dont have any “proof” that will stand up in a court of law. but that’s okay. law and rules of evidence and justice no longer count for anything. welcome to america.
flickervertigo1 This has been flagged as spam
@EnergySupply2008 says, “the proof they have would blow your socks off.” but it’s a secret, isnt it? just like the evidence we used to start those wars in afganistan and iraq. where’s the data about pressure, altitude, humidity, and temperature?
@flickervertigo1 It is NOT about pressure altitude, humidity, and temperature. THAT is just what the disinformation trolls want us to believe. It is about the 3450 micrograms per liter of aluminum in RAIN water and the 61100 micrograms per liter in snow, when the EPA certified lab said 0.5 microgram per liter is normal. It really is too bad for trolls like YOU that your argument is so damn weak.
@EnergySupply2008 if it’s not a matter of presure altitude, humidity and temperature, why did the people in world war II pay so much attention to presure altitude, humidity and temperature when they were trying to defend themselves? where’s the data? and late night radio was useful in fucking up the minds of people who had time enough to think… assuming that people who could stay up all night were marginal, and might come up with real ideas. so it became a matter of managing the collapse. the collapse would be easier to manage if the hapless citizens of america were reduced to idiocy.
there was, in the beginning of the israeli american empire after WW2, a certain amount of faith in science and logic… that degenerated pretty quick into propaganda…. because, by 1970, it had become fairly obvious that american oil production had peaked, and was on its way down. carter tried to warn us.
Late night radio, like art bell, has given the lunatic fringe a certain amount of credibility. you have to wonder about the timing. seems like alex jones has political ambitions, so he’ll have to come around, sooner or later, to common sense, which means he’ll have to abandon his chemtrails. rense could be content with his position… willing to stick with his chemtrail position to the bitter end…. and end so fucked up that his position is the least of our worries.
in the meantime, late night radio is probably the worst thing that ever happened. you can present evidence that is credible, or you can continue to be ridiculed… if you can come up with real evidence, i’m on your side. if you cant come up with real evidence, i’m not. simple.
@Everybody Google – Megatons of aluminum to rain down from global experiment – The article is about the February 2010 geo-engineering conference, held in California. From around the world GEO-ENGINEERS got together and discussed spraying up to 20 metric MEGATONS (44 BILLION 92 MILLION POUNDS) of ALUMINUM PER YEAR. Aluminum destroys plant DNA. That is a fact.
flickervertigo1 This has been flagged as spam
@EnergySupply2008 would you like to comment on alex jones stance on global warming after “avatar”, a movie that blew reality to hell, we’re supposed to rise up in arms and start shooting… who?… on evidence which consists of youtube videos. good deal …but, given america’s performance lately, maybe justice and truth are not really that important. maybe the only thing that counts is the number of people you can kill. who you gonna kill? who’s doing the chemtrail spraying? you don’t even know that.
america was apparently built on the gullibility of its citizens… i dont see any reason why america should not be destroyed by the gullibility of its citzens. one scam after another, but we no longer have the resources to sustain the nonsense. which doesnt deter sociopaths from looting as america goes down.
@Skywitness if you could discipline yourself into providing one instance of real proof, and the evidence to back it up — evidence that adhered to the accepted rules of evidence and the chain of custody of evidence– i’d be on your side. but you cant, and i’m not.
any sociopath with any ambition, and an appreciation of how far we’ve fallen, would become a looter, because there’s no sense in playing. the game isnt worth playing anymore. so you find a wrinkle to cash in on, and so what if that wrinkle further demoralizes your countrymen. things have degenerated to the point that it’s every man for himself, and if you can cash in on sheep who bleat about chemtrails, so be it.
@flickervertigo1 Open your eyes, there’s plenty of evidence of the chemtrail spraying… how many times do you have to be told this? That’s right, I forgot… you’re paid to keep your eyes closed.
@Skywitness if there’s so much evidence of chemtrail spraying, why are you unable to provide evidence that conforms to the accepted rules of evidence? google: rules of evidence. google: chain of custody.
@flickervertigo1 Here YOU go YOU piece of scum. In this video, I count no less that 41 seperate chemtrails and it is TRULY MASSIVE. Come back here and say “oh, that is just normal clouds” then everyone will have all the proof they need to know that YOU are truly scum.
@EnergySupply2008 since when is a youtube video legal proof of a crime? …especially in view of the fact that you have no other “evidence”? why are you unable to provide critical data, which would include altitude, humidity and temperature? we have to assume that you dont care about justice. if you were concerned about justice, you would provide iron-clad evidence before you started accusing people of mass murder.
@flickervertigo1 Go flicker go!… how many distracting and useless posts can you post in a minute? Don’t forget that you failed in your efforts to debunk the video of the low altitude chemtrails which were sprayed below the Cumulus clouds.
flickervertigo1 This has been flagged as spam
@Skywitness says: “Don’t forget that you failed in your efforts to debunk the video of the low altitude chemtrails which were sprayed below the Cumulus clouds.” dont forget we have no idea how high the clouds were, and we have no idea how high the planes were. we have no idea of the temps or humidity at those altitudes, and we have no idea of the winds aloft. but given all that lack of evidence, you’re wlling to accuse people of genocide. wonderful. so we’re nibbling around the edges of the usefullness of this “chemtrail” campaign, aren’t we? chemtrail enthusiasts are not nearly mighty enough to bomb chemtrail sprayers, nevermind evidence proving the existence of chemtrails. but the impotence of people who believe, without evidence, that chemtrails exist demoralizes them, makes them easier to push around. in the long run, we have to start wondering who the chemtrail people are working for.
of course, it might makes right, there’s no need of collecting real evidence. all you have to do is accuse someone of something, then bomb them… and that seems to be the US operates, these days. so… you got the right to bomb these “chemtrail” sprayers if you’re mighty enough to bomb them. simple. and fuck a bunch of justice.
for starters, it would be good to know the altitude of the clouds in your video “Low Altitude targeted Chemtrail Spray… below the Cumulus Clouds”… and it’s necessary to know the altitude of the airplanes that made the contrails. looks to me, depending on the winds aloft, the contrails could be higher than the clouds, but we don’t have enough data to figure out what’s going on there, do we?
@flickervertigo1 Nice new account there flicker that you started today…this wouldn’t be another of the numerous shill accounts that are here on YouTube, would it? LOL. Btw flicker, you sound just like the poster who goes by the name of groundresonance1. Oh my, you wouldn’t be the same person now would you? LOL..again.
flickervertigo1 This has been flagged as spam
@EnergySupply2008 please explain why you are unable to come up with proof of chemtrails. you accuse people of a project that will kill millions. why are you unable to substantiate your accusations with evidence that would hold up in a court of law?
message to truthmedia productions. Thanks for the work you are doing. however as you can see nobody is able to post comments on your videos because you refuse to take the time to block the trolls. Thats why your great videos are now failing to get more views and comments. nobody can really talk here as long as the trolls are here doing there job so I’m going to stop trying to post comments until they are blocked.
@mikemb123: judging from your lack of response, you are unable to post evidence of chemtrails forming in areas contrails could not form. you are unable to cite evidence that was collected in compliance with accepted procedures… the “chain of custody”… see wikipedia “chain of custody”. given the total lack of credible evidence, we have to assume you’re running some kind of scam.
@groundresonance1 Here’s video evidence of 2 chemtrails that were sprayed at a low altitude below the Cumulus Clouds where contrails do not form. “Low Altitude targeted Chemtrail Spray…below the Cumulus Clouds”
@Skywitness you have to know the altitude of the airplanes, the temperature and humidity at that altitude to tell whether or not contrails are possible. what is the altitude of those contrails, and what temperature and humidity is present at that altitude?
“you must work for the gov” – NO I MUSTN’T. Perhaps I’m on a beautiful sub-tropical island and my sky is BLUE.
“can’t believe the rationale” – I CAN’T BELIEVE YOURS. We live in a marvellous age of invention and design, where BEAUTIFUL passenger aircraft can take people all around our Earth at affordable prices and fabulous efficiencies, and you lot are staring up at the WET skies (an obvious and natural consequence of this) thinking you are being poisoned – by WATER.
“defence mechanism’s working overtime” – NO, YOURS IS. YOU ARE BECOMING MENTALLY UNBALANCED BY FALSE WORDS – “CHEMTRAIL”, for instance.
“what covers our skies” – IS WATER.
“phoney stars” – CLIFFORD CARNICOM?
“underground military bases” – Have been around since WW2.
“chemtrail video troll” – Another FALSE WORD.
“same comment” – SAME DELUSION.
“spend 24 h/day” – Well, you are self-deluded 24 h/day.
“Do you get paid for this shit” – “this shit” is SCIENCE and GOOD ADVICE. No, I don’t get paid by ANYONE. The only SHIT round here is your paranoia.
“Our skies go to shit” – What do YOU know? They are merely becoming WETTER.
“global level” – YOU ARE SO EASY WITH THAT IDEA. You know what? The WORLD IS FIFTY TIMES BIGGER THAN THE US. REPEAT TO YOURSELF FIFTY TIMES! COUNT UP TO FIFTY, IMAGINING THE US EACH TIME!
“play the fiddle” – THAT’S WHAT CHEMTRAILS ARE DOING WITH YOUR MIND.
“get paid” – STOP RUINING YOUR LIFE. THAT’LL BE PAYMENT ENOUGH.
Look up http://www.contrailscience.com and/or MY BLOG and go get yourself a life…
MxMxSxDx is an “inside job”
It’s not the volcanoes my friend…it’s the idea of the New World Order pumping chemicals down on our damn heads guy! Just as they fluoridate our water…sounds like you’ve been living in a jazz fantasy, you need to wake up and smell the globalisation man, over here we are moving towards total enslavement.
MxMxSxDx, If you consult my blog you’ll discover that persistent contrails have been photographed since 1940, and that “chemtrails” simply do not exist at all.
“Proof” of “chemtrails” is EXPOSED as mere confirmation of persistent contrails, the existence of which is CONSISTENTLY DENIED by “chemtrail” conspiracy theorists… but they have NEVER marshalled a SINGLE scientific argument in their defense.
So if the MEANS doesn’t exist, then “New World Order pumping chemicals down on our damn heads” is HARDLY LIKELY TO OCCUR, is it?
It’s like you saying “He is going to shoot me!” and my replying “He hasn’t got a gun“. He could still STAB you! But HE HASN’T GOT A GUN SO HE CANNOT SHOOT YOU!
And anyway, if FLUORIDE is so damn effective, why doesn’t he poison you via THAT vector?
Get a LIFE!
This is about a video purporting to be the inside of a government chemtrail aircraft made by an Italian “gentleman” calling himself nicscics. His preamble goes: “Look at the luggage drawers on the right side in the photo. Let’s consider the operations necessary to dismantle something. If you get an assembly of the interior of an aircraft for tests, you don’t have to mount the luggage drawers, because you do it after. Vice versa, when you dismantle, you remove only what you need to remove. On my opinion, it’s clear that this is not an aircraft used for some test, as many people guess, even if the furniture is similar to what is used for flight test. We can see that in an aircraft used for flight tests, there are not luggage drawers. It’s logic: this furniture is not assembled, before tests are over. But in the photo you can see this furniture, i.e. four luggage drawers. So I think that this is a dismantled airplane. Any other “information” against this hypothesis is, in my opinion, very suspicious.”
And then Tim White, Viet Nam Vet (USAF), “Concerned Citizen” writes: “The C.I.A.-N.S.A facility at Pinal Airpark-Marana, (Arizona) is the most important centre that modifies a wide range of aircraft types to conduct the chemtrail spray operations that began the entire United States in November of 1998. Prior to this, selected areas of the U.S.A. had chemtrails operations to test all the technology employed in these chemtrails spray operations and to determine parameters related to aircraft performances and atmospheric conditions. The program is conducted under different code names: “Operation clover leaf”, “Operation raindance” and so on. It is now spread in many countries in the world.
The photo shows the inside of a chemical tanker, that may be was a civil airplane, in which the original furniture was substituted by hydraulic structures, managed by an automatic and computerized system. In the photo, look at the containers probably used to stock chemical liquid compounds (trimethylaluminum) connected by means of a complicated tubes system. Look at the writings: over the black and yellow square, you can read “Sprayer!!”, below “Hazard inside”. Upon a container on the right, you can read “Lock care”.”
(The above video, titled “Inside a Chemtrail Sprayer”, remained in YouTube after I was ejected for a further six months, disappeared, and then reappeared under a different title “Chemtrails from the Inside”.)
I was startled and concerned by this, for I couldn’t see how this would come about, knowing as I do that in general, the physics of “chemtrails” would require tanks that would not be at all like these “barrels”, and wondered whether they weren’t, perhaps, a device for varying the CG of a prototype aircraft.
I happened across a YTer calling himself ToniEvola who appeared to be knowledgeable in this area, and asked him what he thought this might be. Although he thought he was talking to a “chemtrailer” he came up with this stunning revelation, which it delights me to share with you, seeing as SCIECHIMICHE are generally a stunningly professional bunch of liars.
“hi jazzroc – Please man, think with me for just a second. Use your brain and leave all the incoming external media channels apart that try to influence your brain, just for a second. (I know its probably my wasted time since I know you want to believe it’s really happening.) With commonsense ask yourself these questions:
Do the barrels contain chemicals? If so… then why did they bother to put the “hazard inside” placard only on that “cabinet”?
Also, according to nicscics, one of the “containers” reads: “Lock care”. Same question, why did they bother to put it only on that particular “container”, while all the other “containers” are identical?
I’ve been asking other simple questions that any one can answer with a little bit of effort. Thing is… do you want to answer the questions, and find yourself looking at the whole deal from a different point of view? Or do you want to dismiss everything straight away? And believe what you are forced to believe. I hope you can continue to read this as I will show you my side of the story, like you asked.
The first thing that came in mind was: new build aircraft in testing phase. The “containers” are water tanks that are filled to weigh, trim and balance the aircraft, and the avionics computer in the back monitors all the test data. I then searched on the net to find a clear copy of the photo myself.
I managed to find the one I posted here above and immediately you can notice some differences. Instead of “Lock care”, this photo clearly shows “Load bank” written on the tank. And instead of “Hazard inside” it shows “Hazmat-inside”. Also the cabinets appear to be lavatories and you can see people working in the back. But let’s keep on searching for more, since the “sprayer” part still seems odd.
Nice thing to know is what kind of plane it is. There are 2×3 seats installed on both sides of the aircraft with still space left in the middle. This means that it has to be a large wide bodied aircraft. With my experience I can clearly see that it is not an Airbus, because they use different tanks and setups. So it has to be a Boeing and that leaves only 2 wide bodies that are wide enough to seat 9-10 people on one row, the 747 and the 777. I’ve worked most of my career on 747 aircraft and I know one when I see one, so this has to be a 777. The last couple of years Boeing have built them newer, larger, and with a longer range. Plenty of testing had had to be done on them.
Here are pictures that I found, that I want you to look at. You probably won’t like to see them: From the official Boeing website, here are some photos from the first ever build Boeing 777-200LR (Longer Range). This was the aircraft that broke the record of longest non-stop flight ever:
And then please specifically take a look at these pictures that start to answer your question:
(all broken links)
You can see some familiar things on these pictures. It must be strange when a “secret, dismantled” chemtrail plane starts to look like a brand new Boeing 777 that is being prepared for test flights, don’t you think?
That leaves one thing still unanswered. What does the “hazmat-inside” placard mean? I decided to search on airliners.net for more photos. What I found was the photo that explains it all:
You can scroll down for yourself on this page to find the original photo where “suddenly” the placard is “gone”. There’s also another photo taken from the opposite side. I hope this will clear things up for you.”
WHAT A STAR!
Sadly, over time, some of these links are now broken. Shame…
MAKING THE 777
Planes are made by people. The ten thousand people at Boeing that teamed together for many years to produce their new (in 1995) 777 became adept by telling each other their troubles, and giving and receiving help as a consequence. It is a wonderful story.
Now compare these wonderful people and their actions with NICSCICS, “Straker”, and TANKERENEMY. What do YOU reckon?
Written by JazzRoc
October 29, 2008 at 1:00 am
Tagged with aerosol, aircraft performance, aluminium, aluminum, arthritis, asshole, barium, barrel, basement dwelling, boeing 777lr, breathing difficulties, carnicom, chem trail, chemical tanker, chemtrail video, chemtrails spray, clifford carnicom, clouds, cloverleaf, code name, comment, computerized system, concerned citizen, conclusive evidence, conspiracy theorists, contrail, contrails, credibility, daylight bombing, debunk, deceit, delusion, digital delivery, dismantled, dontspraymebro, downpours, droughts, earthquakes, enslavement, epoxynous, evidential trail, explanation, faker, filaments, flight explorer, fluoridate, freak tornados, furniture, globalization, gnorville, hate, hazard inside, heavy haze, hoaxer, humidity, hydraulic structures, jazzroc, lies, lines in the sky, lock care, luggage drawers, lung disease, makenwaves, man-made cirrus, mechanism, medrivingaroundtown, metallic salts, military kc-135, million tons of ice, morgellons, mother nature, new world order, nicscics, no more blue skies, not a normal cloud, oily clouds, operation, parameter, phoney, plane, plasma screen, poisoned, ptb, raindance, rense, saturate, sciechimiche, slanderous lies, social duty, spraying, stratosphere, stratospheric flight, technology, thechemtrailreport, tic-tac-toe, tim white, tonievola, trimethylaluminum, troll, troposphere, underground military base, uneducated, unnatural cloud, vapor trail, volcanic eruption, wave vortex, webby material, whiteout, wikipedia
NOMEANSNO – NOT COMING – NOT HEALTHY – NOTHING – NOTRAILS – NUTS (TO SOMEONE WHO BLOCKED ME) – OFFICIAL (VERSION) – OGRISH – OUTSIDE IN – PAINT – PENITENT (The Longest Day II)
Don’t forget my other pages, links and comments are one click away at the top right of the page…
This gentleman really means “No!” He has decided the way it is, and anything that doesn’t fit the way he sees it, is OUT.
Hey Jazzy, you seem to find me about every 6 months or so. I can’t return comments on the re:on off video so i thought I would PM you. First to set it straight, are you debunking this guy?:
I know there is more to this whole topic than meets the eye. I am professionally trained in the field of thermal transfer and am fully aware of the conditions of our atmosphere. I have a better than average grasp of physics. And am a practicing expert in philosophy.
That said, any information you have of the current global attempts at controlling/modifying the weather would be appreciated. I have gleaned from our “discussions” that you know more than you are letting on. Why do the bulk of your ilk argue in the same manner? Act open to discussion yet when the chips are down, retreat behind a veil of name calling. G
First to set it straight, are you debunking this guy?:
No. Michio is setting things straight here. A whole generation of radiation meters under-read a while back. The first time such meters went into space they read NOTHING. This was because the radiation overexposure SATURATED them. All that needs to be done is add some redundancy to the network, so that info can be moved out of the way of the storm. Satellites in earth’s shadow remain useful, and advance warning of approaching storms is already in place.
I know there is more to this whole topic than meets the eye. I am professionally trained in the field of thermal transfer and am fully aware of the conditions of our atmosphere. I have a better than average grasp of physics. And am a practicing expert in philosophy.
I don’t believe you at all. Anyone with the slightest grasp of physics knows you are barking up the wrong tree.
That said, any information you have of the current global attempts at controlling/modifying the weather would be appreciated.
There are none. Just you bunch talking up a storm.
1. Teller’s Bar/Al Welsbach materials need placing higher in the atmosphere than planes can fly.
2. It’s possible to make liquid organic metals but they are expensive, corrosive, prone to spontaneous ignition, and don’t pump easily. If burnt in a turbofan they would destroy it in seconds,
3. If burnt in a turbofan there would be no GAP in the trail between the exhaust and the trail beginning. Instead the exit flame would be colored green or white.
These three objections, coupled with the fact that a jet is a 2000 deg F FLAME rule out completely ANY chemtrailer notion. One’s enough…
I have gleaned from our “discussions” that you know more than you are letting on.
Of course I do. It’s a huge field and 500 chrs is a small space to play in.
Why do the bulk of your ilk argue in the same manner? Act open to discussion yet when the chips are down, retreat behind a veil of name calling.
It’s a product of your hypocritical rose-tinted glasses worn as part of a partisan group. The opposite of what you say is almost always the truth. I certainly find personally that any chemtrailer’s assertion is a negative pointer to the truth of any matter. Faithinscience is abusive, and stands alone. I am normally abused after my first question which receives no answer, The abuser never seems to notice what he does. It’s almost like “Tourettes syndrome”.
In atmospheric physics the behavior of aircraft has been well understood for sixty years. Hundreds of papers have been written minutely examining the contents of trails to thousandths of a percent. These days they are measured and assayed using laser interferometry from satellite or ground.
It is known that in the stratosphere a jumbo can lay down thirty-five pounds of ice for each yard of forward flight. Did you know that?
The ice laid in what is technically known as a “persistent spreading contrail” can be ten thousand times heavier than the exhausted ice. Did you know that?
Now can you put one and one together and see what your mind has been doing to you?
I did not know that, and still don’t. I can not find any corroborating evidence to support such a claim, Ice is 977 times denser than vapour – a far cry from 10,000.
If Michio Kaku is so sure about a coming solar storm, you think nothing is being done about this? You don’t know about haarp and the other 25 such devices around the globe. The inventor/developer of this technology is on the record stating its scope of use?
I am well aware of contrail science, but normal contrails do not act this way, at least they didn’t when I was younger. If the reason for the extra spreading of contrails as of late, is normal, there is serious pollution issues in the stratosphere. And we should be rallying to put an end to this waste.
You cannot find corroborating evidence because you only find “chemtrailer” lies. To avoid them you must use “Advanced Search” and include “-chemtrail” and “-aerosol” in your search terms. Then if you search for “paper stratosphere aviation combustion ice trail cirrus cloud”, for instance, you get an entirely different set of results.
We’re all sure of the approaching storm. The solar cycle is well understood. I’ve told you something is being done about this. HAARP has nothing to do with this. The Sun can be hundreds of times more powerful than HAARP. The scope of use doesn’t extend as far as countering a solar storm – nor could it ever.
You aren’t aware at all of anything. You do look silly contradicting thousands of clever hard-working people. Everything you have been talking about and believe about “chemtrails” is DIRECTLY CONTRADICTED BY REAL SCIENCE. Since when was ICE pollution? When water vapor comes out of solution in the air of the stratosphere at -40 deg F and seven miles up, it materializes as PURE ICE. The initial “pollution” of the internal combustion engine becomes diluted TEN THOUSAND TIMES. That makes it quite fresh…. As I have told you previously, EVERY word you utter points in the opposite direction to TRUTH. You waste my time. Go to a library.
This is exactly how i use the term aerosol. You are an ass. Well? Facts: you can’t back such a bs statement: “The ice laid in what is technically known as a “persistent spreading contrail” can be ten thousand times heavier than the exhausted ice.”
“Well? Facts: you can’t back such a bs statement: ‘The ice laid in what is technically known as a “persistent spreading contrail” can be ten thousand times heavier than the exhausted ice.’”
This reference I gave to you previously.
Page 17, second column second para: “The average ice water per meter along the length of the contrail is 1.6 x 10^4 gm per meter, some three to four orders of magnitude greater than the water vapor released by typical jet aircraft, also similar to previously reported values.”
Do you want more DIRECT CONTRADICTION, or is that enough for you? By the way “orders of magnitude” means “powers of ten”. FOUR orders is 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 = 10,000… Got it? Further searches along the lines I have already indicated to you will bring up further corroboration. If you have the courage to undertake it…
3 to 4 is a fair jump. would you not agree? And from a nasa science lab to boot. “ahh a thousand, ten thousand whats the diff! “
There is ample eye witness testimony, doctor reports and interviews, lab reports, professional statements, police fireman… all leaning towards a large scale effort to prepare for the solar storms. HAARP may be a small but crucial element in this effort. To think a govt agency would state something intentionally erroneous is preposterous! ***warren commish, 911 commish *cough-cough*
It stated the facts precisely. It is YOU who pretends otherwise. It’s only one of many papers which all say similar things. Some of them are in different languages. The last time I looked there were hundreds. There’s none so blind as one who does not wish to see.
You ask for an example then give a spurious reason to dismiss it. You call BS and then weasel out.
Preparation for high solar activity is normal. Your slant on it is absurd. I’m sure you’re unaware how you’re now changing the subject. Warren Commission? Far out! Go back to school. Unless you haven’t been in the first place. And write me no more.
so you agree with Michio but not me? YES
There is absolute proof of world wide under ground construction. SO?
From Gates’ Norwegian seed cave to the Denver Airport, yet you deny this????? NO
The sun is about to do something never witnessed by modern man. BALLS
The scope of the ability of haarp includes protection from such an event. BALLS
Warren commission’s magic bullet and the 911 commission’s magic passport should raise the hackles on the most conservative of skeptics. BALLS
so you agree with Michio but not me? YES
The sun is about to do something never witnessed by modern man. BALLS
This is WHAT Michio stated, so one of your answers here is wrong, or balls is an affirmative to you. Which is it?
And as for the passport laying on the street unscathed, if you buy that then you are an idiot. there is no way a passport went through that explosion and ended up unscathed a few blocks away. no way. This, M. Atta’s passport was planted.
It’s going through an active phase so it MIGHT do something never before witnessed. That doesn’t mean it will. The way you interpret these facts is the BALLS. Same goes for the passport. You cannot conceive of it so for you it is inconceivable. While you fail to interpret these events, the REAL events are passing you by…
btw your response fits 3 of these:
It would, whether or not I was a “disinformer”.
This whole approach (of yours) IS disinformation. Everything “chemtrail” is LIES AND EYE-BULGING HYPOCRISY.
You only have to visit a library to find real information.
“Truth cannot live on a diet of secrets, withering within entangled lies. Freedom cannot live on a diet of lies, surrendering to the veil of oppression. The human spirit cannot live on a diet of oppression, becoming subservient in the end to the will of evil. God, as truth incarnate, will not long let stand a world devoted to such evil. Therefore, let us have the truth and freedom our spirits require… or let us die seeking these things, for without them, we shall surely and justly perish in an evil world.”
This above statement is out of YOUR literature. It APPLIES TO YOU.
Have you noticed how your OWN information NEVER recommends you visit a library? According to your “sources” it is often a “fact” that existing sources have been “tampered with”. Does that seem plausible to you? Each book made by the million, circulated to thousands of libraries, sold privately to hundreds of thousands of people. Each reclaimed and altered?
Every day some pathetic individual tasks me about conspiracies, smogs, fuels, contrails, 9-11, with some pet theory that seems entirely original to him. It’s not original. It’s all been done, and probably in the planning stage, by people trained and qualified and with your best interests to heart, for they have to live in your world too. They have already proved their intelligence and willingness to work hard. All you have to do is the same.
In the meantime, shut up with the crap. That worked for me, it could do so for you.
Have you noticed how your OWN information NEVER recommends you visit a library?
WTF? I started this whole thing off, asking if you, or that faith dude, if you had read Dr Eastlund, or Dr Begich or William Thomas, all available in libraries. You are an asshole, your “holier than thou” attitude would get a boot in the ass in person.
Only if I don’t smack you first. I read such technical books BEFORE Eastlund, Begich and Thomas. And I avoided being a creep too. The FACTS are holier than either of us. You’re the one who can’t deal with a technical report made by the finest scientists in their field. Learn to stand on your feet.
NO, Michio stated, “around 2012 the sun’s magnetosphere WILL flip, sending out a shockwave of radiation”, not might, or may. The unknown is the effect this will have on communications and the grid. So you are giving Mr Kaku the same “know it all” attitude. As for chemtrails, you know the causal effects pertaining to contrail formation, and could you not envision a way to increase this effect? People already have. Patents exist and have been bought by the US Navy.
It won’t be doing anything it hasn’t done before “around 2012″. The reason why there will be an unknown effect of communication is that we have a higher dependency on this rather radiation-sensitive machinery known as microelectronics than we had the last time around. Any other reason you come up with will be a readout on your condition. The action of a turbofan on a low-pressure low-temperature supersaturated stratosphere could not be more extreme than it already is. Which you would understand if you have studied the subject, Which you have not. There are patents for a hotel on the Moon. Why don’t you go there? Now. While you’re there you could take a book or two… Make’em science books…
So then you do disagree with michio, man are you hard to converse with. Alter your comments and ignore facts for insults, like you are stupid, instead of saying “this is where you are wrong” type comment. I take it you did not even listen to the link of the leading physicists of our time.
The reason I am hard to converse with is that I break concepts down to their essentials where you cannot. You cannot, because you bring an agenda to the table of your own which you will support at all costs – as you have just demonstrated, for the above reasoning slipped by you as though it wasn’t there. Telling you where you are going wrong isn’t an insult. You’ll know it when I insult you. You’ll have to improve your stature first.
the navy hasn’t bought up all the moon hotel patents have they? By the time you are satisfied on this subject it will be too late. Again, insults instead of FACTS.
FYI: “…that the magnetic field of the sun undergoes a drastic change every 11,500 to 12,000 years.” That would make it modern man has never seen this occur. Of course you will bitch about the term modern man, I am referring to historic records, not evolutionary records. Oh we should check if you believe in evolution first, could be a whole can of worms with you.
Other time around? you are confusing this coming event with recorded c.m.e. events that have been witnessed. this pole shift has not been ever witnessed by a modern civilization. I am not extrapolating comments or theorizing on events, I am taking physicists words for the truth.
What i do think about is if there is proof our world leaders know about this and are doing anything to prepare/prevent or protect us from this coming solar storm. And by all accounts they are, yet you choose to insult and languish in your knowledge, acting like there is nothing in this world you don’t fully grasp. Shame.
“…that the magnetic field of the sun undergoes a drastic change every 11,500 to 12,000 years.”
Does that make the change due NOW, 500 years from NOW, or some time in-between?
I’m not about to instruct you, even if you look to me as pathetic as a goldfish that’s just flopped out of its tank. DO your own work. I had to do the same. “Modern”. LOL
See, yet again insults. Water off a ducks back, my e-asshole. You seem satiated with the power of ten in your facts, where as this one is what like 5%, Kaku and others have seen this event as happening in 2012, why do you think that could be? Our sun is acting the oddest it has since we have been observing it, yet you know better. Oh wise one!
Satiated with LOGIC, more like. You should try it some time.
there will be credible samples retrieved soon enough. You will doubt those at first as well.
one last thing: why does no one direct me to info on how the trail from a plane will thin out, width-wise, turn into virga and cover a quarter of the sky. Not one source for the science behind this, and not to mention this has only been occurring for the last 20 years or so. Pollution, perhaps. Then should this not be a wake up call to clean up our act. The tons of fuel burned daily to cart people around is mind boggling. 230 million gallons per day according to BP. Could this not be the factor increasing the so called persistent contrails?
The reasons why “no-one directed” you is that the explanation is complex. It is actually there, in the reference I gave you. In the report.
Simply speaking, it is helped by the aircraft’s wave vortex. The trails are swept up in it, turning inside out many times within it for several minutes. Vortex motion ceases some fifty miles behind the aircraft. The slight downward angle of the vortex would put that end hundreds of metres lower in the stratosphere. Trails ALWAYS fall. Also the two side-by-side trails can interfere with each other, and “link” together in what look exactly like smoke rings. This is called “the Crow Instability”.
As a consequence the underside of the trail adopts a “sawtooth” appearance. Each “tooth” is a virga. At every virga centre is a downward-moving column of air. This is where much of the ice deposition takes place. Because of the increased weight of the heavier ice particles they fall faster.
This whole process continues, falling through, until the surrounding stratospheric layer has no ice to give. As the particles fall down through the lower stratosphere they are falling into COLDER air, which supports them. The layers may be drier, so they evaporate there. (But generally the reverse is true: the layers get less capable of holding water vapor in solution as the temperature falls). It is possible that only when the ice crystals reach the warmer air beneath the tropopause, they finally evaporate. This will be normally a level surface. Hence the flat grey underside appearance you typically see. That underside will be between four and five miles high at European latitudes.
What I have written here is itself an over-simplification.
If you are really interested in knowing more, my blog offers many sources. You just have to follow the links till you get to the papers, and then look up the references the papers themselves leave. Do that for a while and you will know at least as much as I do, Maybe.
no, no, no… you are describing a natural event, the persistent contrail.
In a week or so I will put together a video SHOWING what I am talking about. One of your cohort, jesuslives57, went through this same argument. I am referring to the complete thinning out of a trail, till it is spread wide open, filling the sky! Maybe you have never seen this occur. That would explain your position. There is no reason for a normally produced contrail to act like this, without some extra factor.
See, I have read up on all of this, have research atmospheric sites and have emailed meteorologist…all with no answer for my question. Most ignore, some, like you, repeat the known information, some like jl57, deny this is from planes!
I witnessed a plane over Victoria BC two summers ago. It flew directly over the city left three circular blobs, relatively small. These expanded until the sky was overcast. I phoned to get a friend to video them but no luck. These were not any way normal.
“The average ice water per meter along the length of the contrail is 1.6 x 10^4 gms per meter, some three to four orders of magnitude greater than the water vapor released by typical jet aircraft, also similar to previously reported values.”
This FACT is what you cannot accept. Many research papers have discovered the same basic information since 1953 when contrails were first analyzed in depth. You say “There is no reason for a normally produced contrail to act like this, without some extra factor” and I am telling you the extra factor is SUPERSATURATION. You must have seen this word before. You just DON’T REALLY KNOW WHAT THIS IS. So study it. Study THE PHASES OF WATER. Use the advanced search exclusion process to find yourself some REAL TRUTH and not the lies you are accustomed to reading. You will discover SCIENCE and put away childish dreams.
why are you such an asshole? were you abused as a child? Look at the images from the 40′s of persistent contrails then look up! see the difference?
I am positive you do not know the effect I am writing about, as you are not addressing the topic.
I am professionally trained in thermodynamics, and am an adult. so you can eat your condescending attitude, shit it out and eat it again. I didn’t say I was mature. I went through some old videos, none really capture clearly what I have ONLY stated. And we must be very clear for you so you don’t dodge the point, yet again. I will post a video soon enough with your name on it, then please comment on how your non-belief in added particulate is responsible. There are doctors on record stating they treat the symptoms of exposure to these chemicals. They must be lying, ill educated morons also.
“There are doctors on record stating they treat the symptoms of exposure to these chemicals. They must be lying, ill educated morons also.”
How do you KNOW these symptoms are the result of “exposure to these chemicals”? Is that what the doctors actually stated? Were they actually a doctor, and not a fraud like Hildegarde Staninger?
What “linkage” is there here? Did someone say they saw a trail in the sky seven miles up?
If repeating hearsay and drummed-up uneducated witness testimony and the creepiness of people like Staninger doesn’t make you a lying, ill-educated moron, than I don’t know what will. Thanks for assuming that was what I was thinking. It saved me the effort.
“I am professionally trained in thermodynamics” yes, I heard you before. I don’t believe you were “trained” at all. Shown a book and videos, and asked questions, more like.
You don’t seem open enough to thinking to be educable. I obtained my training at the National Gas Turbine Establishment in its heyday, working on and designing modifications to gas turbines and test chambers.
I have my own empirical evidence of manufactured trails, relating them to you would be pointless. If Dr Hildegarde Staninger is such a moron, like me, why is the CDC conducting an investigation into Morgellon’s/unexplained dermopathy also? I guess they are full of morons too. Must be tough being so smart and trapped in that pathetic body! Well they say one is either smart or good looking, can’t have both!
I do not need to prove my education to you, but I am a refrigeration mechanic, energy transfer is a large part of the training. 5 years worth.
and needless to say top of my class. Your training should let you know that factors can be altered, there is ample proof to believe this effect is possible.
“One of your cohort, jesuslives57 went through this same argument.” And you call ME an asshole. JL57 and I haven’t ever exchanged more than a couple of dozen words. If you want to know who MY cohort is – it’s YOU. It’s a wonderful life…
“I have my own empirical evidence of manufactured trails, relating them to you would be pointless”
If empirical, it’s a first. Congratulations on your Nobel Prize.
“If Dr Hildegarde Staninger is such a moron, like me, why is the CDC conducting an investigation into Morgellon’s/unexplained dermopathy also?”
Because it is unexplained?
“9i guess they are full of morons too. Must be tough being so smart and trapped in that pathetic body! Well they say one is either smart or good looking, can’t have both!”
You must be REALLY good-looking!
“I do not need to prove my education to you, but I am a refrigeration mechanic, energy transfer is a large part of the training. 5 years worth.and needless to say top of my class.”
It’s a pity trusting the expertise and professionalism of thousands of atmospheric scientists wasn’t part of your curriculum. Perhaps if you don’t have it you cannot appreciate it.
“Your training should let you know that factors can be altered, there is ample proof to balieve this effect is possible.”
My training tells me persistent contrails exist, and things without any evidence for them need hard EVIDENCE before they are deemed to replace things which are KNOWN to exist.
If you had such evidence you would have rammed it down my throat, I’m sure. Here’s mine:
THE CLEAR INVISIBLE NATURE OF THE TRAIL “GAP” IS PROOF OF NO METALS BEING PRESENT.
NO ORGANIC MATERIALS CAN PASS THROUGH A FLAME WITHOUT COMBUSTING.
TURBOFAN ENGINES CAN PRODUCE AN ICE TRAIL 10,000 TIMES LARGER THAN THEIR ICE OF COMBUSTION.
Empirical: originating in, or based on, observation or experience. Does this mean something else to you? I gave you the smart/ugly thing, you always go the cheap’n'easy route?
I never claimed anything about a gap, typical for the angry rebuttal types is to lump all together, I suppose I think there is a problem with the water because rainbows appear in lawn sprinklers, like that dbootsthediva person. Well now you have gone from a blanket denier to a “waiter for proof”, baby steps. The nozzles are placed, not in the combustion, but out the plane body, there are plane mechanics on record stating there are 500 gallon tanks on these planes. There are patents on aerosol delivery systems, bought up by the US navy, that detail such systems.
empirical riginating in or based on observation or experience. Does this mean something else to you?
i gave you the smart/ugly thing, you always go the cheap’n'easy route?
I never claimed anything about a gap.
NO. I’m telling you the GAP proves the absence of metals.
Well now you have gone from a blanket denier to a “waiter for proof”, baby steps
It’s just my experience of waiting and being disappointed by the trite crap “revealed” to me..
the nozzles are placed, not in the combustion, but out the plane body, there are plane mechanics on record stating there are 500 gallon tanks on these planes. There are patents on aerosol delivery systems, bought up by the US navy, that detail such systems.
Apart from the fact that ANYONE could type up a shitstorm (and they do) – there’s NOTHING. The PTB have obviously had a total success there… Patents – go visit the Moon.
trusting the expertise and professionalism of thousands of atmospheric scientists
like the Canadian govt scientists that have had a gag order placed on them?
NO ORGANIC MATERIALS
who said anything about organic? The last decade has brought about monumental advances in polymers.
like the Canadian govt scientists that have had a gag order placed on them?
No. Like the REST OF THE WORLD for SIXTY YEARS.
who said anything about organic? The last decade has brought about monumental advances in polymers.
Polymers ARE organic.
That’s all very stupid. Perhaps I should apply, eh? There’s enough STUPID as there is.
“If these are CONTRAILS, then WHY are they not coming from the engines” – THEY ARE*. It takes a SPLIT SECOND for jet exhausts to cool from 1100deg C to -40deg C. That can be up to 800 feet away at operational altitude. *Except in the case of aerodynamic trails and highly-supersaturated air.
“Contrails disappear within minutes” – NO. They can disappear in SECONDS in DRY AIR, or NOT DISAPPEAR AT ALL in SATURATED AIR, or ANYTHING IN-BETWEEN.
“some are indeed contrails, but lots of them are NOT!” – If you UNDERSTAND what I have just written then you NOW KNOW THIS STATEMENT TO BE UTTERLY WRONG.
They are indeed not healthy, but both are fitness itself compared with science-hating conspiracy fruitloops.
Volcanic action is twenty times more dangerous than aviation combustion, works 24/7, and doesn’t worry me either, because I know that Life air-conditions it. Fresh air itself was once volcanic effluent.
Something sensible to worry about would be the removal of forests and phytoplankton, but you don’t do sensible, do you?
(The life’s work of dbootsthediva):
“‘secret’, ‘hidden in plain sight’ weather eng HAARP” – There’s NOTHING as HIDDEN as something which DOESN’T EXIST. HAARP is a radio establishment IN THE MIDDLE OF ALASKA - A QUARTER WAY ROUND THE GLOBE.
“In the UK it’s mainly used to create the depressing uniform dull grey sky which has now become accepted as standard ‘British weather’” – FALSE. IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THAT WAY – WELL, WAY BACK TO THE SIXTIES…
“But HAARP isn’t the only thing at work here” – IT ISN’T AT WORK HERE. IF IT WORKS AT ALL IT’S LINE-OF-SIGHT.
“orgonite cloudbuster” – NOR IS THIS. THIS IS NOT SCIENCE BUT FAKE.
“‘mackerel sky’ clouds just materialising out of nowhere” – NO. SUNLIGHT IS ADDING ENERGY TO THE BOUNDARY LAYER AIR, WHICH RISING, CONDENSES OUT SOME OF ITS WATER VAPOR AS CLOUD. THE EXPRESSION “MACKEREL SKIES” IS CENTURIES OLD…
“getting it in May 2006″ – AND BOY YOU GOT IT.
“makes HAARP effects more obvious” – YOUR LUNACY MORE OBVIOUS…
“formation of artificial clouds” – YEAH, JUST AROUND YOU…
“prevents the grey cloud layer forming completely” – IN THE WINDMILLS OF YOUR MIND…
“leaving white clouds in an obvious strange pattern” – LEAVING THEM THE WAY THEY WERE…
“There’s also a few chemtrails in the background” – OF COURSE!
“28 secs into it, did you catch a plasma EM field?” – YEP, MY $33 WEBCAM CAME WITH A CONVERSATION GENERATOR WHICH DOWNLOADS INTO PERFECT GIBBERISH
“58 secs Sensor Orb alert. and 1.01 too?” – SEE? GIBBER. GIBBER.
“Quantum Cryptography/clouds morph/smaller images/another image altogether” – GIBBER. GIBBER. GIBBER.
“tree leaves/pixels” – GIBBER. GIBBER.
“aerosol carbon coenzyme” – GIBBER “helps create” – A COSMETIC? “catalyst” – MAGIC SCIENCE WORD.
“chemtrail can expand instead of dissipating” – GIBBER!
“No stratus or cirrus cloud formations without the help of the synthetic plasma field” – ALL SINGING AND DANCING GIBBER!!!
“We are not in Kansas anymore” DOROTHY “not real clouds” – ESSENTIALLY WRONG!
“ultrafine powders & transparent liquids of multi layered metallic silica oxides varieties, bacteria, and chemicals to create different catalysts for different cryptography effects”
BAGS OF MAGIC SCIENCE WORDS!
WAIT A MINUTE. CRYPTOGRAPHY IS THE WRITING OF CODES SUCH AS THE MORSE CODE AND THE DECRYPTION OF ENIGMA!
“ive seen chemtrails here in New Zealand & the exact same thing happens with the weather, what are they doing?” – I WILL DECRYPT THIS FOR YOU: NOTHING.
The air in ANY clear blue sky ALWAYS contains WATER. It’s in the form of VAPOR. Water vapor is a CLEAR INVISIBLE GAS.
Reference to standard physical tables gives you the means to work out the ACTUAL amount of water present in a clear blue sky, and at a ground temperature of 23 deg C and a RH of 65% it works out that there’s 3,300 tons of INVISIBLE WATER VAPOR in the CLEAR air to the horizon from where you are standing.
In general, when you are looking at THE TROPOSPHERE with its blue sky with rising cumuli, it pays to remember there’s LITTLE DIFFERENCE IN WATER CONTENT between BLUE SKY and CLOUDS.
The STRATOSPHERE above ALSO contains water vapor. Its temperature just above the TROPOPAUSE is NEVER warmer than -40 deg C. Due to the INTENSE COLD and the THIN AIR, much less vapor can be held in the air, before it exhibits SATURATION or even SUPERSATURATION.
A passenger airplane at 35,000 ft and 550mph deposits its exhaust in the form of CO2 gas and ice crystals at, say, 50lb per mile. That’s about 25 lb of water per mile, laid as a “cirrus” cloud of intensely frozen ice crystals. The craft has a large wave vortex which acts as a “mixer” for the crystals and they are spread into that stratosphere’s layer.
If the RH of the layer is less than 100% then those crystals SUBLIME into water vapour, the trail DISAPPEARS, and THE LAYER’S RH RISES.
If the RH of the layer is 100%, the layer is said to be SATURATED, and the CONTRAIL PERSISTS INDEFINITELY.
If the RH of the layer is greater than 100%, the layer is said to be SUPERSATURATED, the CONTRAIL not only PERSISTS INDEFINITELY but also GAINS WEIGHT as water vapor freezes ONTO the contrail’s ice crystals. The HEAVY trail material increases its rate of descent (ice crystals are ALWAYS falling).
Now it should be OBVIOUS to you that REPEATED PASSAGES of AIRCRAFT through stratospheric layers INCREASE the RH of the layer to SATURATION, and WHEN that happens, TRAILS WILL PERSIST AND SPREAD TO FILL THE LAYER. BLUE SKIES WILL BE GONE…
SO – CHEMTRAILS ARE A FIGMENT OF YOUR IMAGINATION.
AND THEN YOU PROJECT UPON OTHERS YOUR CONFUSION, AND YOUR HATRED.
Thanks for the imaginatively-titled cloud pictures. Always gratefully received. Your land is less of a desert than Tenerife. In fact it is very beautiful.
You’re a lucky man. Or could be…
NUTS (TO SOMEONE WHO BLOCKED ME)
I didn’t say you were nuts, did I? Check. Thanks for not censoring me, some have. For evidence, follow a civil jet with a quick light plane trailing a fine net & capture bottle. Analyse it yourself. I never found results like the ones claimed on my engine test bed.
The annual (24/7) volcanic action of Earth’s 1500 active land volcanoes outdoes Man’s 300 million tons of jet fuel by 2000%. Life has converted it into fresh air for at least 3 billion years. Worry about the forests and phytoplankton. Whoops…
Contrails can remain visible for very long periods of time with the lifetime a function of the temperature, humidity, winds, and aircraft exhaust characteristics.
Contrails can form many shapes as they are dispersed by horizontal and vertical wind shear.
Sunlight refracted or reflected from contrails can produce vibrant and eye-catching colors and patterns.
Observation and scientific analysis of contrails and their duration date back to at least 1953.
The National Airspace System of the United States is oriented in an east-west and north-south grid with aircraft flying at designated 2000 foot increments of elevation (1000 feet after the introduction of Reduced Vertical Separation Minima in 2002-2004).
Contrails formed by aircraft may appear to form a grid as the winds disperse the contrails.
More contrails are seen in recent years due to the growth in the civil aviation market.
“lingering contrail is not the best description” – Oh, yes it is!
“A contrail will remain visible for longer with different humidity and temperature but thinning and creating cloud cover?” – Supersaturated air THICKENS the trail so much it falls as PENDULES. You have seen them…. As a trail IS ICE it IS CIRRUS CLOUD. As for filling a stratospheric layer, that’s EASY, the WAVE VORTEX supplies the energy. Some of that energy is STILL THERE half an hour later…. If you knew ANYTHING at all about the atmosphere (which you don’t) you’d pipe down… As it is you’re loudmouthing away, and I can’t stop you.
“Read the patent holders comments about the multiple uses of H.A.A.R.P.” – It’s used to HEAT a line-of-sight AREA of the ionosphere. It is less effective than my microwave is for warming my tea. It’s a research establishment studying aspects of the near-vacuum in the ionosphere. It cannot be aimed directly at your arse unless you’re flying at 110,000 ft over Alaska…. and if you were, you wouldn’t feel a thing…. being a radio establishment it has strategic possibilities, but catalyzing clouds over Europe, for instance, is not one of them. It has the “beam focussing power” of Mr. Magoo.
“N.A.S.A.’s comments on ozone replacement” – Go like “stop air travel and your problems will disappear (until the next volcanic eruption)”.
“U.S.A.F.’s fuel additives” – Boron hydride? Nitromethane? Pfft – a few fast fighters? Solid additives to fuels would be REALLY DANGEROUS to the planes. Liquid additives couldn’t include aluminum or barium for various technical reasons. BLOOD PRODUCTS are a JOKE – surely? *(Since this I realize you were reanimating the MYTH that there is Ethylene Dibromide in JP-8). Wrong!
“world wide spray programme” – Unachievable. THE WORLD IS FIFTY TIMES THE AREA OF THE UNITED STATES!
“German airforce admits to mass spraying“* – A MOMENTARY CHAFF RELEASE IS NOT “MASS SPRAYING”. How is your ability to be LOGICAL? *(Since then I have discovered that this was a fraudulent mis-translation of the original German. Vicious.)
“U.S. sprays radar imaging materials over Afghanistan” – Pfft. Next can please….
“reports from pilots and air traffic controllers” – EVERY ONE OF THEM SO FAR OUT OF CONTEXT AS TO BE A LIE. More fraud.
“real events happening above us daily” – A million tons of combusted kerosine = a million tons of stratospheric ice, mostly sublimed to water vapour, is what is REALLY happening daily.
“I do not deny alot of the footage and discussion on the net is ill-informed and plain wrong” – GOOD.
“William Thomas’ analysis of this subject” – HAVEN’T SEEN IT. SHALL LOOK.
“it is not as simple as you try to write it off as in your videos and comments” – OH, YES IT IS! My videos are MUSICAL. Shows how hard YOU research…
“I can provide url’s to all this information” – Oh, God. Send them.
“And a final note your formula is for carbonated water not soda pop” – Haha. True, but a damned sight closer than ANY chemtrail statement!
Hahahahaha… …you all think you’re original and it’s the same old PAP! POP?
In return for wading through WT and your urls I demand you check out my blog.
There are at least SOME TRUE THINGS stated there…..
“aluminum, anthrax*, lupus*, fungus*, silver iodide*, barium, bacteria*, titanium” – Those marked * would be incinerated by a gas turbine. A turbofan’s exhaust is as STERILE as a hospital SURGERY. The rest you will find are COMMON INGREDIENTS OF HOUSEHOLD PAINT (Well, not the barium or silver)..
“the COMBINATION of pollens, auto fumes, and urban smog can cause severe auto-immune failure, asthma, and death in the young, weak, or elderly”
I’m quoting myself here. Didn’t you read it? HERE IS YOUR ANSWER!
“Admire your passion” – that’s me – passionately pissed-off by brainless panic-mongering.
“prior to 1998 are extremely rare” – Cheap video cameras were. Persistent contrails WEREN’T.
“of military origin” – Military? THEY take pictures of EVERYTHING.
“trails are spewing directly from the plane” – EASILY HAPPENS in super-saturated air. You ought to thank your lucky stars when you see that, for it means THE AIR IS VERY CLEAN.
“FAA tells contrails appear a wing-span distance from back” – That’s a ROUGH GUIDE. That distance REALLY depends on the VELOCITY of the plane and the TEMPERATURE and HUMIDITY OF THE AMBIENT AIR.
“you consider temp as well, not only humidity” – Do you think I don’t know that?
“The avg temp easily estimated even from ground temp measurement” – NO IT IS NOT. It is a ROUGH GUIDE through the TROPOSPHERE and NO GUIDE AT ALL AFTER THE TROPOPAUSE. ABOVE THE TROPOPAUSE THE TEMPERATURE IS NEVER WARMER THAN -40 DEG C. IT CAN BE -80 DEG C.
“ground temp of 30 C or more it is hardly likely that a plane flying low enough 2 be visible by the naked eye could produce a normal contrail” – IF IT’S ABOVE THE TROPOPAUSE THAT WON’T BE A TRUE STATEMENT, WILL IT?
“let alone a lasting plume” – In SATURATED AIR in the STRATOSPHERE there is NO WAY those ICE CRYSTALS WILL DISAPPEAR. Sunlight REFLECTS OFF them. That is WHY they are WHITE.
PENITENT (The Longest Day II)
Informative hub. I learned something new.
Bard of Ely
Thanks for responding, SweetiePie!
Nice summation; well done.
Hi Bard, good article. Yes, chemitrails are real but important is detect and differe them from the common contrails. Of course, the amount of metallic matter in them is a good way for understand they are not a simple condensation.
Bard of Ely
Thanks for posting, randomlight and Fabrizio!
Very nicely put Bard although the small part about reference to “persistant contrails vs. Chemtrails” really makes no difference as the USAF is gonna say no matter what ya wannna callem, they have always been there and ain’t hurtin’ no one,,,,,RIGHT
Bard of Ely
I am sure you are right, Darol, but I put that in because I know Rosalind thought it was important and I was attempting to give as full a picture as possible!
Many a conspiracy at the top they will never tell us, thanks for the insight and I did see the show you referenced on Discovery. Good job.
Bard of Ely
Thank you! It was good that Discovery did a program on it and even though it didn’t really go very far it nevertheless was one of the first reports by the media to give any coverage to the subject!
Dear Bard, this is a rather horrifying subject. I’ve never actually heard of this before. The only chemical trails that i”ve heard of are the ones behind jet planes and of course spills of pesticides and insecticides that are sprayed by planes on the american and russian farms. Would you please write a more encyclopedic article on this on the copper wiki. My friends and i would be extremely grateful. The site is http://www.copperwiki.org Do check out some of the articles on sunscreen and eco fibres and please do send feedback when and if you get the time. thanks
Bard of Ely
Thanks for posting, Mhadavi, and I agree it is a “horrifying subject” and this is perhaps why some people go into denial about it and say everything is OK and it’s just vapour trails. This puzzles other people who are alarmed by what they can see in the sky and what they have found out. And these trails and skies covered in the artificial clouds they make is a new occurrence. If you look at photos from around the world from over ten years back there are normal skies with blue skies and white clouds ot perhaps grey ones but never skies streaked with trails and skies covered in whitish haze from such trails. It just doesn’t add up! When I left the Uk in 2004 the sky wasn’t covered in trails but when I went back in 2007 it was! Something has changed! If you add in the admitted reports of military chaff then of course people will be concerned. Whatever is going on it has, as you can see here, spawned a whole new terminology and a movement of people. If I can find time I will submit an article for that site so thank you for the suggestion!
Bard, Great post! I have been talking to people about chemtrails quite a bit. It is about awareness and getting others informed. Most people have not even a second thought to look up and see the obvious “writing in the sky”. They are getting better and better in making them look like nice, natural whispy clouds to fool the sheeple. We notice how there will be criss crosses all over the sky one day and the next couple, none. I wonder if we will ever know the truth, what they are, why, and how do they detirme where they spray. There have been many postulations of the ominous reasons to spray of which include keeping us from evolving spiritually and acheiving enlightenment. I find it an interesting speculation as most things in this world, especially instituted by the government, do carry this side effect. Looking forward to learning and sharing more…Namaste, Dre
The How To Hub
A little timeline – I am 31 years old and have grown up in Australia. As a teenager I used to see the trails and think they were cool, you know like the air force jets with the coloured smoke displays…..my perspective as an adult is ….HORROR. What kind of world are we going to leave our future generations?
Bard of Ely
Thanks for posting, Dre and Shaye! Dre, I have heard the points you have made but I thank you for posting them here for others to read. Shaye, I have a British friend who doesn’t accept that chemtrails are harmful but who thinks they are pretty. Personally I think, and a lot of people share this opinion, whether they are harmful or not, a sky with old-fashioned fluffy clouds that make ptictures in the sky for the mind’s eye is far superior aesthetically to a sky graffitied with lines and criss-crosses and finally a whitish haze of false cloud. And that is another part of it – weather forecasts nowadays often talk about haze and hazy conditions. We never used to have all this haze but had skies with clouds or without but not the mess that is so often there now. As Dre, has pointed out some days there is none of this and then the skies return to how they were meant to be.
We have them here in Oregon as well. It seems this is a world wide problem? On the days that chemtrails are being used, the planes criss-cross the sky and before you know it, instead of a beautiful blue-skyed day, you have complete overcast.
Bard of Ely
Yes, Karen, and the picture you describe is being reported over and over and over again and IF anyone manages to get any sort of response from anyone official they will say that what is being seen is normal and they are harmless contrails! How can it be harmless to cut out the light with such a cloud cover? Of course, it can’t! We never used to have skies like these! Thanks for posting!
Bard, Wow…You have opened my eyes and mind at the same time… I live in the Northeast on the coast of the US…minutes from the Bush compound – Walkers point. The airspace is littered with intenational flights heading to Boston’s Logan and various NY hubs. We also maintain one of the largest US Airforce runways at Portsmouth, NH Pease Air base (only SAC refuling now). The resulting asthma, allergies, flu-like illness, respiratory and sinus problems, nose bleed, fatigue and depression, tinnitis, sight problems and inflammation of the eyes, dizziness, skin rashes, high blood pressure and pneumonia STATISTICS would be very interesting to calculate for this region. Do you have any ideas how I may find this information out statistically? The Bull
Bard of Ely
Thanks for posting, Bull! I don’t personally know how you’d get such answers but I would thank that someone at the chemtrailtrackingusa forum would and what’s more the members would welcome such an idea – there is often the call there for ways of doing something that produces scientific data that can be given to the authorities and the debunkers so they can be asked to explain it! In other words we need to be able to talk their language back at them. Please consider joining and posting there if only for the one thread. The link is at the bottom of my article.
Very informative! I have been reading about contrails for years, but I have never heard them referred to as chemtrails before. I have noticed, though, that many of them do seem to have a lot more hang time lately. I live relatively close to a major airport, and have noticed that, on some days, there are upwards of 100 contrails in the sky, while on others there are only a few.
Bard of Ely
Thanks for your feedback, rmr! You have a mystery there whether they are harmless or not! Debunkers of the subject say the trails only persist in certain atmospheric conditions to which my question is why did such conditions not exist until in the last decade or so in which chemtrails have been reported? There are two airports on this island and plenty of planes in and out but mostly no chemtrails, however, when I went back to Cardiff in Wales last year the skies were covered in trails daily as was the airport there and it didn’t used to be like that!
Great hub Steve, and as you well know a subject close to my heart as an active campaigner for the awarenes of persistent contrails (chemtrails). We have lots and lots of PC (persistent contrails) here in Devon UK, and most ppl do not bat an eyelid at them, till I alert them to the possibility of what they actually are and how to tell them apart from real contrails. Most ppl are surprised that this subject is not covered by the media, and the intelligent ones are concerned by its conspicuous abscence, as it it not even ridiculed as a hoax in the media. I have witness chembows (as you know) sun halos and a myriad of PC’s in various formations. The freak weather we have had in economically poor areas in recent times is confirmation for me that some sort of NWO plan to eradicate “the useless eater population” is in full swing. I still do my research and blog on the matter.
Bard of Ely
Thanks for the feedback, Lou, and yes, I know you know what is going on!
You may believe that chemtrails are real, O Bard, but you are wrong. You are wrong, and you cannot prove you are right. Your “proof” is that “thousands of people say so”. These people that “say so” share many, and perhaps all, of the attributes of people that believe the Earth is flat, the Sun goes round the Earth, that God made Man “in his own image” (6,000 years ago!), and we CANNOT possibly have evolved from an ape-like creature five million years ago, that we are “imbued with a soul”, and if we “please God” we will “go to Heaven” after our body dies and rots. These people are DELUDED by their own ignorance and fear. They, on the whole, suffered through their educational period (personally I found it unpleasant even while top of the a-stream in a grammar school) and never learned to respect the opinions of people more able than they were to grasp essential scientific principles. Otherwise they would, of course, believe the word of atmospheric scientists who have for decades been telling these people that persistent contrails are a natural by-product of large-scale mass air transit.
The first queries as to why the sky turned white were made in the late fifties and early sixties, so the topic is NOT exactly a new one. Even before that collisions occurred between close-flying Flying Fortress bombers on 1000-bomber daylight bombing raids on Germany between 1943 and 1945 when they too turned the skies white with the exhausts from their 18-cylinder radial engines in particularly cold and humid conditions. If a million tons of kerosine are burned daily (yes!) in the stratosphere, which is thin and cold and easily humidified with relatively small amounts of water, then large areas of the sky are going to turn WHITE. This is the “white” of ice crystals – water! The rest is fanciful paranoia, with a small amount of LIES, DECEIT and FRAUD. For that, blame Carnicom and some ignorant and some shameless YouTubers. You should be ashamed of yourself. If you were better-educated, Bard, you would be. Your activity is harming society. I have amassed quite a lot of support literature at http://jazzroc.wordpress.com and invite your response…
Bard of Ely
Thanks for posting your opinions, Jazzroc, however, I am no further convinced by your arguments!
Perhaps after all you REALLY ought to read my wordpress blog. In it you will find confirmation of everything I have mentioned above, and directly-attributable quotes from specialist atmospheric scientists, graphs, details and photographs of almost all relevant material, specific proofs of chemtrailers’ fraudulent claims and blow-by-blow debunks of EVERY chemtrail claim. What more can one do, when confronted by a deluded and harmful person who is determined in his ignorance to do further harm? Well, advise you NOT to visit the US, I suppose. THERE they have the Patriot Act (which is not my idea of nice legislation!) What you are doing falls within the parameters of that act, and newly-trained and less sympathetic people there might well take it upon themselves to “educate” you, seeing as you are obviously determined never to do the job yourself.
Even in a British society noted for its tolerance of stupidity you might find that at some time in the near future (these are changing times!) your ignorant disregard of scientific principles, technocratic excellence and social decency will cause you to fall foul of the law. Don’t ever say I didn’t warn you…
Bard of Ely
JazzRoc, I have read your blog, and as it happens it is now probably being read by some freemasons – as I saw earlier that one has left a link to it and a recommendation in the Universal Freemason’s message board of which I am a member. I have told you that I don’t agree with you but you do not appear to be able to agree to disagree but become insulting and threatening in tone (warning me) and how you expect anyone to want to hear from you when you adopt these ways I really don’t know. However, as I have also told you, I don’t believe that this subject should all be a one-sided debate of chemtrail believers agreeing with chemtrailbelievers and on the other side the scientific debunkers all debunking – I would suggest that both sides have much to learn but they cannot do so if stuck viewpoints are held! You happen to believe in science and have a lot of faith in it and I don’t simple as that. You don’t believe in God and I do!
I happen to agree with you that there are people who are ill and blaming chemtrails may not be ill from chemtrails but from other sources. I also agree with you that the crosses are in completely different levels of the sky and only look like crosses from down below. You see I don’t totally disagree with you but on the other hand I am convinced that chemtrails are very real and that weather modification is one definite use they are being put to, but I have told you that before.
You call people “uneducated” but what does that mean? It means that they don’t happen to agree with the official version of things perhaps – I certainly don’t! Scientists can and do lie and if you want an example, fluoride is one that springs to mind and mercury amalgam being another! There are many people active in the opposition to chemtrails who are educated to university standard eg Dr Stephen McKay whom I have mentioned in the article. I happen to have a BA degree, a diploma in media, 5 A-levels and 6 O-levels and that counts as educated by most people’s standards. Education though is often indoctrination and manipulation turning out people to carry on the system and brainwashed to believe what they are told not to think for themselves!
“it is now probably being read by some freemasons” – what a horrible thought! “Universal Freemason’s message board of which I am a member” – what, another horrible thought! “insulting and threatening in tone” – without a doubt you are a fool, for you are still ever-ready to accept baseless arguments and reject the remorseless logic of mine. I advised you not to visit the US, nor Britain after 2012. Personally I’ll admit to finding it difficult to be pleasant to someone like you who is practically as dangerous as a bomb-wielding terrorist with your spreading of lies and fear. I regard you now exactly the way I regard arms dealers. You are living in a safe spot and a safe era where your wickedness is going unpunished, but that won’t last for ever. “you expect anyone to want to hear from you” – I certainly won’t lie to gain plausibility like the people YOU believe. “both sides have much to learn” – Science and the truth of Science is not a democracy. Only ONE side is utterly ignorant in this case, and it’s YOURS. You have learnt nothing and are telling lies as a consequence. “You happen to believe in science and have a lot of faith in it” – I put no FAITH in Science. That’s like putting FAITH in Mathematics. Is one FAITHFUL to LOGIC, or merely LOGICAL? “You don’t believe in God and I do!” – Which God is this? The jealous one? The one who made the Universe in six days six thousand years ago? “I am convinced that chemtrails are very real” – As real as your god, santa claus, and the tooth fairy. “weather modification is one definite use they are being put to” – Sure thing. The three million four hundred thousand tons of barium required to provide a mono-molecular coating over the whole Earth would only take eighty-five thousand tanker sorties using one and a half million tons of fuel. And, of course, next week, you’d have to repeat it, etc.
“You call people “uneducated” but what does that mean?” – It means believing “weather modification is one definite use they are being put to”. “Educated” is what I have just demonstrated to you: the ready use of mathematics and a true knowledge of the properties of the Earth to show you just what foolishness you speak. “I happen to have a BA degree, a diploma in media, 5 A-levels and 6 O-levels and that counts as educated by most people’s standards” – Hmm. And I’ve seen those standards fall year after year. By my standards you are DIM. If I were as dim as you are I’d keep my stupid mouth shut. It seems you are too dim to understand how dim you are. That IS a shame… “believe what they are told, not to think for themselves” – How ironic! Shine a light on that…ah, but your batteries are low, and your light bulb glows a faint orange… lacking scientific understanding, you cannot see how misled you have been, and how misleading and dangerous you now are.
Bard of Ely
It appears from all that that we are no longer friends seeing as you keep on insulting me and are so bigoted in your views. You do not allow others freedom of thought and opinion and are another form of the thought police. Yes, I do believe people like David Icke and Clifford Carnicom whom you condemn. I have tried to present a balance of views here by letting you have your say and included them in the article above but it clearly isn’t working and maybe this is why all the chemtrail sites block you?
The Freemason who has posted your link found it here where you posted it and that is freedom of information as it should be! Seeing as you think so lowly of me now what do you make of Beck who has released a new song called Chemtrails? I applaud him for putting the subject in the mainstream world of pop music!
I’ve never heard of chemtrails. Thanks for writing this hub. JazzRoc – If your case is correct, you’ve considerably weakened it by the way you have chosen to argue your point here.
Bard of Ely
Hi Eric! Thanks for posting!
Eric, my case is correct. If I were arguing with someone who simply misunderstood contrails I might be more polite, but there is more to it than that. You would do well to leaf through http://jazzroc.wordpress.com
Bard: “we are no longer friends” – that’s as it should be. You won’t find arms dealers in my list of friends either. “you keep on insulting me” – I keep on describing you as an ignorant person who is way above your head, and causing harm within our society by insisting that people you do not know are deliberately poisoning the whole of our society, using baseless assertions and faulty reasoning. You’ve GOT to be stupid, because I cannot see you as THAT intelligent and malevolent. “so bigoted in your views” – I see you’ve decided I’m not “programmed” (that’s the usual one) so I must be simply bigoted. It seems to me that you consider the understanding of science to be a form of bigotry. Well, we live in a scientific and technological world, and here we are using that very technology to conduct this argument. You are arguing with a man who has tested jet engines in their test beds, helped in the construction of the supersonic wind tunnel used to test the Concord’s engines, helped in the construction of the nuclear decanning plant in Windscale, helped in the construction of the world’s first ethernet network, and the world’s first modern electric city car. (And many other things, but that’s by-the-by). I know exactly how gas turbines work and exactly how their exhausts work in the stratosphere, and exactly how the stratosphere functions from my personal work experience. This isn’t a “view”. I can BUILD these things.
You turn up with your “fear of science”, read a whole bunch of foolish and baseless and totally inaccurate assumptions in a scientific field you don’t understand at all, and accuse INNOCENTS of attempted GENOCIDE. Who is the BIGOT here?
“You do not allow others freedom of thought and opinion” – This IS “freedom of thought and opinion”. How can your statement be correct? “are another form of the thought police” – Really! “I have tried to present a balance of views” – We aren’t talking about a “balance of views”. Science is not a “balance of views”. You’re either CORRECT or WRONG. “it clearly isn’t working” – It’s working fine from my perspective. You are doing EVIL and I’m trying to prevent you, albeit unsuccessfully so far. I’m trying to sting you into some feeling of remorse for what you are doing, and hoping that you might, after all, educate yourself out of your delusion.
I’m also showing others that this ludicrous topic is opposed by scientists and other educated people. It is we who are doing things in this society, we who provide the wealth and power for travel and information systems (like this one) to the benefit of everyone. We have been able to do this by years of poorly-paid study, experiment and practice. We are professionals and deserve respect for our abilities and achievements – not this ignorant and shocking diatribe to which we are subjected.
In 1981, as our small team of electronics engineers clustered around an oscilloscope in a Wood Green laboratory which was demonstrating for the first time in the world that it was possible to send information down a wire at a rate of a hundred megabits per second (and we knew we were witnessing the start of a world revolution in information), nothing would have led me to believe that twenty-seven years later I would find myself using this fabulous system to conduct arguments about contrails with dumbed-down and deluded pseudo-scientists. How IRONIC!
Bard of Ely
“I’m trying to sting you into some feeling of remorse for what you are doing, and hoping that you might, after all, educate yourself out of your delusion.” – You are trying to tell me what to do and how to think and no one has the right to do that to anyone else! Do you send your insulting opinions to all the well known authors/speakers who believe and talk about chemtrails or do you only post your one-sided opinion and rudeness on the sites of people like me and those who post chemtrail videos? And if you feel that America and the UK would find my opinions illegal, then if you are right then it only goes to show that these countries are fascist non-democratic police states, which many believe anyway.
When we first met I thought we could get on well but clearly I was wrong. I do not like arguments and this is what this is. We had a big falling out before in which I deleted you at Myspace and swore and you have detailed that in your blog. I am not going to react with anger that way this time but as you admit here we are no longer friends I will delete you at Myspace. If Kingfisher is ever a money-making success I would see that you got your share. It seems that is all we share. I am not surprised that people at YouTube and chemtrail sites complain about you if this is an example of how you act. It is not a debate about a subject but a rude verbal assault by you who will not tolerate others having their beliefs or opinions or to post these in public.
How timely. Tim Flannery, one of Australia’s top scientists has proposed that Global Warning could be slowed by injecting sulphur into the top levels of the atmosphere. He says that it could be put there by mixing it with jet fuel. This would be called “Global Dimming”.
Bard of Ely
Thanks for the link, Eric! Yes, I saw the news on this proposed insanity at Alex Jones’ site.
Debbie Peace love
Hi Bard Are you sure that Jazzroc isn’t a fox news presenter because he sure does sound like one to me. When they lose their arguments they resort to petty playgrond name calling and insults. Because they have lost the debate and cannot bring an intelligent debate to the table.
As you are aware I take a keen interest in chemtrails. Anyone who tells me they do not exist had better open their eyes and look up to the sky! You would have to be blind not to see them. Over here in the UK they make pretty pictures of chemtrails. We get the noughts and crosses obviously pilots having a game of tic tac toe. Well they have to dump whatever their dumping so they may of well have some fun. We get circles, loads of pretty pictures over here. Does not look to me as if they are planes with people on board and places to go! Why are the planes that are chemtrailing PLAIN White with NO markings! Planes usually advertise who they are up in the skies.
Why has there been a huge increase in breathing problems? Considering less people smoke. Also this new phenomenia Morgellons? Doctors are asking this question too. Also this may have something to do with the honeybee’s demise too.
Why does the mainstream media keep silent about chemtrials. If they were ordinary contrails I am sure we would have had something on the media by now trying to debunk the “Chemtrail Theorists” However, their silence is deafening. Also as many people have noticed our weather is fine until the planes come and low and behold we have rain! Oh I suppose its all coincidence. I am sorry but there are too many “Coincidences” concerning chemtrails.
Why is jazzroc so angry? If he disagrees with you on chemtrails then that is his prerogative. However, to call you all the names he has called you shows he has something to fear. I wish jazzroc could give us some facts and figures to why you are wrong because he proves nothing. Yes I understand he worked on engines big bloody deal! does not prove a thing!
IF you don’t want to believe what is right in front of your eyes. Then that is up to you. However, the best way to hide something is to put it in full view. When someone throws nasty insults and name calling. Especially to someone who is very well read on his subject. The insult thrower is shown to be what he is. A fool.
Bard of Ely
Debbie, thank you very much for posting and your support on this! To be fair to Jazzroc, though he doesn’t extend much fairness to me, he does provide a lot of info in his blog, which he has provided the link for and is worth reading, however, it doesn’t satisfy me or put my worries to rest on the subject, as I have already pointed out. It is a shame that it appears that Jazzroc has got himself excluded from sites where he could be hearing in detail from people living with illnesses they attribute to chemtrails and reports of daily coverage of their skies like get reported at chemtrailtrackingusa group for example. However, it seems that he doesn’t want to listen to what others say but just believes he is right so they must be wrong and then he wishes to impose his views on them, which I have called a bigoted approach. When they fail to accept what he says he does what he has done to me – he becomes very rude, threatening and insulting.
I think the point you raise on the media silence is a very valid one. Jazzroc would probably say the media cannot report on something that doesn’t exist but I would say the media has reported in great detail on things that don’t exist such as the weapons of mass destruction that were never found and other government lies. And if there is nothing to fear from the chemtrails then why doesn’t the media get someone who can explain it to do so? Why doesn’t Jazzroc volunteer instead of carrying on his barrage of insults and debunking posts? I would have thought the media could call upon scientific ‘experts’ to explain the matter but they do not do so! Maybe Beck’s song Chemtrails will bring the subject into the public mainstream arena where it belongs. According to Wikipedia, his song has been played on BBC R1, which maybe the first time the BBC has used the word chemtrails. I searched their site long ago and it isn’t there, although contrails are and defined as harmless.
Debbie Peace Love: “Are you sure that Jazzroc isn’t a fox news presenter” – I’m a retired engineer living fifteen miles away from the Bard in Tenerife. Are you sure you aren’t being abusive here? “open their eyes and look up to the sky” – and you’ll see contrails. If you look at the sky you’ll see the Sun go round the Earth. Now, DOES the Sun go round the Earth? “Does not look to me as if they are planes with people on board and places to go!” – You can tell all that from seven miles beneath? You should get a job in Air Traffic Control. They need you! “Why are the planes that are chemtrailing PLAIN White with NO markings” – Your first unwittingly ignorant question. It’s a physical phenomenon called “blue light scattering”. Educate yourself. Try WIKI. “Why has there been a huge increase in breathing problems considering less people smoke?” – Because there has been a huge increase in arable farming, with new crops with new pollens, industry is still increasing using exotic materials with dangerous dusts when cutting and grinding without adequate air filtration, because urban photochemical smogs are still increasing, and finally because power stations are burning less safe materials as the world’s oil supplies dwindle. The Western diet of over-processed foods with too much meat and too little fruit, coupled with high-stress levels and poor exercise regimens and contaminated water supplies doesn’t help at all. Overall, this is an already complex intermix of factors by itself, requiring a massive statistical effort to sort out – before you come along with IMAGINARY ills. “Also this new phenomenia Morgellons? Doctors are asking this question too?” – Look it up in WIKI. In Science as a whole, FACTS are established using DUPLICATION of results and PEER REVIEW of research. This HASN’T HAPPENED WITH MORGELLONS’ CLAIMS. Ergo – it’s NOT Science and NOT TRUE. “Also this may have something to do with the honeybee’s demise too.” – May it? See above. You must remember that scientists get famous for discovering things, so the pressures are there to make these discoveries. See above. “Why does the mainstream media keep silent about chemtrials?” – They have tried it on, burnt their fingers, and won’t do it again! “Also as many people have noticed our weather is fine until the planes come and low and behold we have rain!” – Or perhaps, the humid air that creates the contrails eventually causes rain? “Oh I suppose its all coincidence. I am sorry but there are too many “Coincidences” concerning chemtrails.” – There are too many “coincidences” in the minds of those that are deluded!
“Why is jazzroc so angry?” – I should cheer when ignorant “Chicken Littles” accuse innocent people of attempted mass murder, should I? “to call you all the names he has called you shows he has something to fear.” – Of course I have something to fear! STUPIDITY is a DANGEROUS thing in a technological world! “I wish jazzroc could give us some facts and figures to why you are wrong because he proves nothing.” – I doubt whether you could appreciate proof if you met it. You need a modicum of scientific understanding which you’ve already demonstrated you don’t have. However, there’s always WIKI and my blog “Yes I understand he worked on engines big bloody deal! does not prove a thing!” – A bit more than that, dear. I’m a scientist. And an artist. And a musician. “IF you don’t want to believe what is right in front of your eyes. Then that is up to you. However, the best way to hide something is to put it in full view.” – The sun – does it ACTUALLY go round the earth? “When someone throws nasty insults and name calling.” – They need to be STOPPED! Your hypocrisy is showing! Or hadn’t you noticed that CHEMTRAILS insult hard-working, decent professional people (and anyone else who has a modicum of commonsense)? “Especially to someone who is very well read on his subject. The insult thrower is shown to be what he is. A fool.” – All that glitters is not gold. You may read, but you patently do not understand. A fool is what YOU are.
Bard: “it doesn’t satisfy me or put my worries to rest on the subject” – You demand to be spoon-fed scientific understanding, but it doesn’t come that way. You must study for years for such understanding to arrive. If you DO NOT HAVE this understanding, you will NEVER be satisfied. In the interim, perhaps you could moderate your pseudo-scientific assertions….
“he could be hearing in detail from people living with illnesses they attribute to chemtrails – it seems that he doesn’t want to listen to what others say” – I thought it was I that was the insulting person. I have read what people have said, and it is obvious that there is no direct link. We ALL breathe in a mass of dusts, pollens, viruses and bacteria with every breath we take. Our bodies have a tolerance for doing this which has been EARNED by the deaths of countless millions of our predecessors over four billion years.
“I have called a bigoted approach” – The correct approach to YOUR “chemtrail” bigotry.
“he becomes very rude, threatening and insulting” – How is it that you continually forget the nature of your claim? Why can’t you see that you ARE what you claim ME to be?
“why doesn’t the media get someone who can explain it to do so?” – Because it is too difficult and boring a job for them (they would LOSE ratings)!
“the media could call upon scientific ‘experts’ to explain the matter” – I am such an expert. How successful am I?
“contrails are defined as harmless” – And of course they are. It is YOUR BEHAVIOUR that is harmful.
Bard of Ely
Jazzroc, I will let Debbie reply to you here if she so wishes. I would ask you this: if what you say are harmless contrails and harmless cloud cover resulting from them cut out the sunlight getting through do you not think it is likely to affect bee navigational ability when it has been established by SETI that sunlight is the main navigation tool for the insects? Please see: http://www.setiai.com/archives/000064.html So whether its water vapor converted to ice or toxic particles the result is surely the same – less light gets through. This can be clearly seen when sun halos form as they do now we have these trails so often in the sky!
Really, Bard, I wonder what happens when you address yourself to read something! I could answer your question from my internal understanding, but just in case there was a built-in trick I addressed myself to the text in question, and found it answered your question completely!
“if what you say are harmless contrails and harmless cloud cover resulting from them cut(ting) out the sunlight getting through do you not think it is likely to affect bee navigational ability when it has been established by SETI that sunlight is the main navigation tool for the insects?” NO. Like all navigating animals on Earth, bees are NOT reliant on the visible Sun for navigation. Any such creatures that were SOLELY reliant upon the Sun would have been rendered extinct by the first large volcanic outburst or cometary impact than obscured the Sun for a sufficiently large period. And there been quite a few of these over the preceding 500,000,000 years. Bees sense the Sun, polarized light, landscape features, magnetic fields, and use two techniques of distance measurement (the latter one “optical flow” is new to me, but entirely unsurprising). What follows is a direct quote from the article: “All of these senses are redundant. That is to say, remove any one of them and the bee will probably still be able to navigate without problems. When the sun is obscured by clouds or trees, but patches of blue sky are still visible, the honey bee is able to use polarized light as a backup navigation system. The light coming directly from the sun is unpolarised. Some of this sunlight, however, is scattered by air molecules and a pattern of polarized light is set up in the sky. This pattern consists of a roughly circular set of gradients centered around the sun. The polarization is at its most intense at a 90′ angle from the sun. By detecting the polarization angle bees are able to infer the location of the sun. Exactly how they manage to do this is still unknown.”
Did you actually READ this? It ANSWERS the question you put to me! Do you know what “redundant” means in this context?
“So whether it’s water vapour converted to ice or toxic particles the result is surely the same – less light gets through.” – Here you once again demonstrate your scientific ignorance. “Toxic particles” cannot flow through the gas-turbine injectors. Injectors are hardened steel precision-ground tubes with very small internal diameters. Flow-control valves also clog if fine solids pass through them. In fact, they must both be protected by a high-capacity low-micron filter, which, of course, would stop solids. DUSTS PUT OUT ENGINES. Passenger aircraft are built down to a price by civilian businesses. Their wings contain spars, tanks and control equipment. They are built to very tight tolerances and riveted or glued down firmly. They do not have “empty spaces” and “extra pumps and nozzles” built into them for CHEMICAL ATTACK.
“Less light gets through” – It has been demonstrated by two different scientists using two different techniques in two different parts of the Earth that incident sunlight falling on the earth has been reduced by at least 15% over the last forty years. It is attributed to the industrial revolution, not just in the west, but in the middle and far east – it’s the consequence of COMBUSTION IN GENERAL. It is known that the contribution of air travel is 3% of this.
“This can be clearly seen when sun halos form as they do now we have these trails so often in the sky!” – The Sun has formed halos in the Earth’s stratosphere for four-and-a half billion years. The ice crystals that form such a halo are PURE. Any more than the single nucleating molecule at its centre (which every water droplet or ice crystal needs to form at all) and crystal formation is interfered with, and the halo effect disappears also.
You should know this, Steve, as we FREQUENTLY see halo effects round both Sun and Moon here, but NEVER when the KALIMA dust is in the sky. Hadn’t you noticed?
Bard of Ely
Yes, I know what redundant means but was thinking that if sunlight is the main tool then this could be what has messed them up and I note that they are OK here where we do not get many trails or blanket coverage with artificial cloud. Back in the UK where I went I saw trails and white cloud covering large areas made by these trails and the bees have nearly vanished so I joined the dots.
You make an excellent point about the halos and I know that they are dependent on water vapor so dust (or particles) should not produce this effect. I have to admit what you say makes sense to me on that.
If solid particles cannot go through the engines, which makes sense to me too, how did Teller’s sunscreen proposal work or this new madness by Prof Flannery of wanting to use sulfur? To my knowledge both aluminum (Teller) and sulfur (Flannery) are solids.
I assume that these substances would be sprayed from tanks with nozzles etc that you say are not in passenger planes but whilst that may well be the case, what about military planes? Surely they can have these adaptations?
“I know what redundant means but was thinking that if sunlight is the main tool” – and there’s your paradox – “redundant” means “if an element is removed, the function of the remainder persists”.
“blanket coverage with artificial cloud” – All these clouds are cirrus. In supersaturated air the ice crystals of cirrus clouds, whether natural or man-made contrails, will gain weight and fall until they become diffuse clouds of water droplets (stratus) or if they reach the ground – fog. This fog, whatever its origination, is practically pure water. The impurities (and we’re talking fractions of a percent here) will be soot (from a gas turbine) or aluminum silicate (from the land) or methyl sulfide (from the sea). NONE of these will poison bees. The most likely killer of bees is a virus. The second most likely killer is a bacterium. The third most likely is a fungus. The fourth most likely is another strain of bees. Use your commonsense. Cities and industrial landscapes occupy about 2% of the Earth’s surface area – there may be cumulative effects for which they share a worldwide responsibility, like increasing proportions of carbon and sulfur dioxides in the air, but aircraft have only a 3% share in this. It is more likely that Nature itself is killing the bees.
It is very unfortunate (but obviously true) that these bee enemies are also arranged in the order of being the most difficult to discover. You have to remember (if you ever knew) that due to the incredible scales involved, finding a specific lethal bacterium on a bee might be like finding a single unknown person in a city, and that finding a single lethal virus on a bee (it might be INSIDE a bacterium!) might be like finding a single unique person on Earth – namely VERY much harder than finding a needle in a haystack – in fact well-nigh impossible.
“I joined the dots” – but only the dots you could see…”how did Teller’s sunscreen proposal work or this new madness by Prof Flannery of wanting to use sulfur” – Teller’s proposal was never answered. Flannery’s was to use rockets, but this engineer can tell you now that the whole proposal was flaky, and very much more likely to do harm than good. After all, what is acid rain? (Er – sulfur dioxide meets water – makes sulfuric acid!) How good is THAT for trees? “To my knowledge both aluminum (Teller) and sulphur (Flannery) are solids” – It isn’t impossible to turn both into organic liquids. Sulfur is fairly easy, aluminum difficult and expensive. (Barium is much more difficult and is so dense and reactive that specially-lined tanks and mechanical stirrers would be required!)
However on the scale of the Earth you can forget it. I’ve told you already that a single shot of barium for the Earth would require 3.4 million tons. That’s for a single pass… Can you envisage the US (and who else could it be?) shelling up for 85,000 KC105 tanker flights on a weekly basis, when its economy is about to go down the tubes? The whole idea is ridiculous. The surface area of the Earth is fifty times larger than the United States.
“what about military planes?” – It’s your best argument, but doesn’t pan out when you consider the logistics. See above.
You say you have read my blog. I can tell you’re not telling me the truth, for this is thoroughly answered there, and here I’m forced to repeat myself.
As I have said before, Steve, you cannot defeat me using scientific argument, because I know the science involved. If you really get down to basics (and of course you can’t!) I would fight you all the way and still end up the winner.
Your side knows this and has found other ways to defeat me – by blocking, by corruption, by fraud, by lying. But never by science. Blocking and corruption are beyond my powers to overcome, but occasionally I have defeated fraud. And lies are easy to deal with.
What I would like for you to do (apart from stopping making all these false assertions!) is come up with questions which really challenge me, and not questions which any book on atmospheric physics or topical science programme can answer.
And here is one for you. In my blog there is a link to a fascinating British invention which provides a safe, easy, cheap and reversible method of controlling and reducing Global Warming. What is it?
Bard of Ely
Tony, I have had a big realisation and not sure how I missed this apart from by association – I saw trails and white hazy skies and sun halos and my logic said the halos were caused by what was in the trails. However, because I was believing the trails were bad I was assuming the halos had to be too and had read how they are a sign in the Hopi system of the end of this system which added to my belief they are bad. But in doing this I was failing to see something I know – that halos form when there is water vapour, not when there is dust or particles. Therefore, looking at this now it means that the white trails and white artificial cloud cover would appear to be, as you and other non CT-believers have said, water vapour turning to ice crystals! This means that “chembows” would also be made of water. This means a lot that I have been believing was wrong!
Crumbs, Steve. Answers like this REALLY pull the rug out from under my feet! I am so accustomed to dogged argument that I don’t really know now what to say. Except, of course, that there is much more to this than what we have covered so far, and even if “chemtrails” don’t exist, then for sure most ills suffered by both Man and Nature are STILL down to Man!
My point all the way through my “campaign” against “chemtrails” is that WHILE “chemtrails” are the focus of attention, the REAL problems are NOT ADDRESSED.
Namely, people ARE suffering from lung and skin allergic reactions, and possibly dying. These people will be the young, the old, the poor, and people who have already been weakened by some other disease. Not having “media share”, they can slip away without causing a stir or attracting attention. Awful. And I’m fairly sure that’s happening, not from any particular facts I possess (except perhaps my own intense allergy to Britain’s summer months!), but from a half-century of experience in the ways of the world.
I have watched the quality of Britain’s air, water, and food drop decade by decade. And the quality of life! The fuddy-duddy “Empah” values, stiff-upper-lip, reserve, and artificial politeness PRESERVED a life quality we have LOST. Lack of stress! Peace!
I’m also concerned about CARS. In the sixties the Conservative transport minister Dr. Beeching removed half our rail network. This rail network was a web of railway that reached to every town and virtually every village in the country. It was a fabulous real estate asset because it was JOINED UP, and could hence be converted – perhaps into a clean and efficient tramway, or a road, or a canal, or an information highway. Or maybe left as part of a modern automatic railway. Well, once broken up and flogged off as packets of land no longer joined up, that which cost the Victorians SO much trouble was cast to the wind…
In the seventies there was the Oil Crisis, when the price of oil tripled overnight. “Now” I thought “there is bound to be a drive towards light and efficient people movers!” What did we build? 4 by 4′s, juggernauts as big and heavy as the monsters built in the US during the fifties! The SUPERMARKET “juggernauts” drove across our valleys in the eighties, removing trees and hedges and small-holdings in their factory-farming “techno-park” drive to produce consistently-sized, brightly-coloured, poisoned, tasteless “vegetable” (or “animal”) pap, leaving in their wake air filled with herbicides, pesticides, and pollens, and sordid concentration camps of bird and animal suffering. And then the cars. Without a decent railway or bus system or information system we were forced into cars. (Not you, Steve, I know.) Thousands of cars. MILLIONS of cars. On occasion the M25 was a stationary six-lane CAR PARK (with all engines running) for a HUNDRED MILES. What in God’s Name sort of LUNACY is THAT? Cars, poisoned air, poisoned water, denatured food, the mass-torture of birds and animals. Rudeness in public. Temporary and demeaning employment. Fraud in Banking and Insurance. Mortgage and Equity crises. Lying politicians. Foreign war. STRESS… BRITAIN!
Chemtrails are simply (apart from their nonexistence) SURPLUS TO REQUIREMENT.
The anti-GW invention is the salt-spray trimaran of Dr. Stephen Salter. Apart from turning the skies of the southern Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans somewhat leaden (and reducing the violence of storms in the area, and providing refuge for shipwrecked sailors) these devices do no harm whatsoever. Only five hundred of them are needed, and they can be switched off overnight if that were necessary.
Bard of Ely
Tony, please see the update I have added. I can admit I was wrong about a lot of it and felt I should make a public statement here explaining my reasoning. Thank you, because in the course of this I have understood how I was ignoring facts or overriding them due to my belief in the basic chemtrail conspiracy and my mistrust in scientists and official authorities. I would think that has happened with many of the other people who haven’t given you a chance or really read all you have had to say!
“This means a lot that I have been believing was wrong!” – Steve, that was a gracious (and almost unique!) apology which temporarily took my breath away. It is unusual for a “chemtrail” adherent to back down over anything. The only previous instance I can recall was – you – about a year ago. Yet, after that, you soon got into full swing again. So may we look at your phrase “a lot that I have been believing” and pick it apart a little? Can you now be believing that yes, there ARE poisons being dispensed, but they DON’T make white lines in the sky? Perhaps you now believe that no, they CAN’T be passenger planes, but they CAN be military KC105 tankers which are NOT laying visible trails? Invisible trails of WHAT might these be? Do you know how many KC105s there are – compared with the number required to carry out Edward Teller’s proposal? (ET – the original “Strangelove”!) NOT ENOUGH. Not enough tankers, not enough fuel, not enough barium.
Did you notice the satellite image of the whole of the North Atlantic Ocean in my blog that showed contrails as a grid of white lines concentrated ONLY over the middle of the ocean (where there was a huge north-south cold front!) with virtually no contrails over the land anywhere? If they were “spraying”, WHY would that occur? Did you see the “chemtrailer” version of a (on-off) “gap” in a contrail that was patently photoshopped into existence? Did you see the Sciechimiche video claiming to be the inside of a “spraying” aircraft which was “fabricated” from a photo of the interior of the Boeing 777 Long Range Prototype, which at the time contained interconnected barrels of water (in place of the seating) for directly testing the consequences of varying its centre of gravity?
I hope you COMPLETELY understand that there is NOT A SINGLE WORD OF TRUTH in ANY PART of the “chemtrail conspiracy”, and that some of the “claimants” are NOT DELUDED but actively FRAUDULENT. And “Geo-engineering” is not necessarily a dirty word…
Steve, I looked at your stop press, and it warmed my heart to see it. But it is an afterword in your Hub entitled “Are Chemtrails Real, and Contrails a Con?”, so I suppose the end results of this episode may still be deleterious, and a distraction from solving our true difficulties. I hope you will soon return to your laudable activities in the fields and woods of permaculture, wildlife, wild foods, conservation and Nature.
Bard of Ely
I will have a look at that video now! I do not claim to know how many planes the miltary has or where they hold them. I have seen the “inside a tanker” video you refer to and am well aware of the reality of that episode having been caught up in it personally online. I read a lot of the conspiracy authors and watch their lectures and the majority have included chemtrails as a reality and I find it hard to believe they are all knowingly lying, especially when I know that much of the other material covered is true. So I have to conclude they blind themselves as I have done. I have taken down my STOP CHEMTRAILS banners at Myspace because they show trails which you have convinced me are water vapour and until anyone can prove anything to the contrary I am as of now not promoting CTs as a reality. In fact when I have the time I will do a rewrite of what I have posted above here probably and stick it on Myspace. JazzRoc was he right? Yes, but nobody wanted to know!
I would much prefer to stick to things I do know about such as nature but in this case I got involved in it by seeing skies that are not as they used to be, which you have convinced me is caused by far more water being in them, and I assume this was the case when this happened before as you have detailed regarding past occurrences of persistent contrails.
I notice that you’ll find on the YouTube co-display page an article by Alex Jones concerning the Sun’s role in Global Warming, where he suggests this coming Solar Cycle will show the Sun’s brightness increasing by 50%. In the 4.6 billion years (and 200 million solar cycles) since the Sun and its solar system formed, the Sun has increased its brightness by (I think) 27%. This means that the mean brightness increase of the Sun per cycle is 0.000000135%. The Sun is not yet middle-aged in terms of its own life, and is expected to burn for another 10 billion years before it dies. It is proceeding smoothly, and showing just its usual behaviour – a tiny increase every cycle. It strains credibility to believe that THIS Solar cycle brightness increase is going to be 370 BILLION times greater…
So how can Alex Jones say this? Perhaps he isn’t a scientist, but I’ve just sat down with a calculator and rattled out the figures – and you can do it too. What sort of lunacy is this? Why does it happen these days? Where is the ACTION here? What’s the REAL agenda?
Bard of Ely
I saw that video. Alex says all sorts – a lot of it right and some of it wrong and as you say he is not a scientist which he admits! He is a good showman and a very successful alternative broadcaster and many people say all sorts of things about him good and bad. I have listened to him a lot over the years but not so much in recent months although I subscribe to his blog at Myspace, and I find myself knowing AJ supporters and others who are against him.
To answer your question why this is happening – there is the conspiracy theory that would tell you it is all part of the Illuminati Great Work of Ages plan and has been designed to be like this or maybe it’s just because a vast number of people want answers and are fed up with lies from politicians, governments, world leaders, religions, scientists, global manufacturers, and the media. Alex is one of many who provide answers so he has a ready audience. People have distrust in traditional leaders and ‘experts’ and want new ones – it’s been going this way for a long time and I would personally say a lot started in the sixties when people began looking for alternative ways and wanted to change the system. It’s when I got involved.
first off i would like to say i am new to this subject and at present not swayed either way, but i have read both sides to this argument and the continuing argument between bard and jazzroc, jazzroc by your standards i am extremely uneducated, but reading the posts here by both you and bard i am dissapointed in the way in which such an educated person argues their point, firstly it seems you pick on a sentence and then discredit it as much as possible by insulting everything it implies, it’s like reading a list of insults rather than a fair and equal argument, and no doubt you will do the same to this comment picking up on bad spelling, grammar and such saying how uneducated i am, but i am and i can admit this, also you claim to be a scientist yet your views are firmly set with no room for change, does science not show us now that the impossible is possible? does history not show us that science get’s it wrong time and time again? you are everything that is wrong with science today! science is an ever-changing and growing subject and needs open-minded people for its progression, and yes this has been a bit of a snipe at you maybe unfairly, but try looking at things from a different point of view for a change, for if there is one thing life has taught me is that there is always 2 sides to everything! and if we point blank refuse to look at one side we become lost in our own delusions.
Bard of Ely
Thanks for your thought, unknown! Perhaps JazzRoc will reply to your points?
“does science not show us now that the impossible is possible?” NO. The impossible has been shown forever to be, and to have been, impossible. The Universe is consistent to the laws we have uncovered to as far as we can see, which is to a distance of thirteen and a half billion light years. There are NO other rules operating other than the ones we have uncovered – other than the rules we HAVEN’T uncovered!
“does history not show us that science gets it wrong time and time again?” YES. And THEN it gets it RIGHT. Consider how you and your mother avoided death when you were born, and all the other aspects of your material existence which “wrong” science has got “right”, and contrived to make your life OTHER than “nasty, brutish, and short”! Consider the means by which you argue here. Consider that once I worked in a team to develop this means.
“you are everything that is wrong with science today!” Well, thanks. Had I known this, perhaps I would have have NOT designed the world’s first ethernet transceiver. Perhaps PEOPLE are what’s wrong with science. Perhaps you are a victim (already) of a dumbing-down process I saw begun in the early seventies. Perhaps you are also a victim of fiscal policy (namely the total surrender of “democratic” western governments to private banking interests). But you are NO victim of mine! I have been in opposition to every wicked and deleterious policy change I’ve seen occur since I’ve ever been able to vote. That’s almost EVERY CHANGE THAT HAS BEEN MADE. I opposed entry into the Common Market (Britain should be strong and self-sufficient and independent), I opposed the Conservative Selsdon Committee (that dumbed YOU down!), I opposed the destruction of the Engineering, Shipbuilding, Mining and Machine Tool Industries, I opposed the Falklands War, I opposed the destruction of the Coal Mines, I opposed the idea that Britain could be a Fiscal Service for the World (ridiculous!), I opposed the rapid exploitation of North Sea Gas (further destroying the mining industry), I opposed the feeding of meat to cows, I opposed the idea that GM pollinating plants merely needed a 20-yard separation (!), and I opposed entry into the Iraqi war. Then I LEFT THE COUNTRY.
I had become VERY FED UP of being ROBBED (in ALL uses of that term) CONTINUALLY over a forty-year period. Even now I am close to destitute, as employment is hard to find for a sixty-four-year-old Welshman without money or transport in a Spanish fishing resort village. But it is warm here, and I am close to my grandson, and my needs are few. I shall soon create a solar home and permaculture food garden and achieve true self-sufficiency.
“science is an ever changing and growing subject and needs open-minded people for its progression” Can’t disagree with you here! Of course, it is necessary to point out that to be “open-minded” requires that one is EDUCATED in the first place. Otherwise one merely “opens” an EMPTY mind…
“and yes this has been a bit of a snipe at you maybe un-fairly” Completely.
“but try looking at things from a different point of view for a change” Well, I’m a qualified engineer and industrial designer and practise those disciplines. Now I compose music. The idea of a “different point of view” is QUITE POPULAR with engineers, designers, musicians! It helps CREATE NEW THINGS.
“for if there is one thing life has taught me is that there is always 2 sides to everything!” Science isn’t a democratic debate. There is ONLY a CORRECT side and an INCORRECT side. Life hasn’t taught you ANYTHING, it seems…
“and if we point blank refuse to look at one side we become lost in our own delusions” No, you HOLD ONE. I’d like to point out that if I’m arguing with an American it really makes no difference – the same evil and wicked policies are maintained by both Britain and the States. If the cap fits…
ok, well you have indeed made some valid points against what i have said to you, and claiming that you are everything wrong with science today was unfair and i apologize for that comment, but to say i have been dumbed down is also a bit much, and when i talk of the impossible being possible one reference comes to mind and that is of quantum physics, but i will say thankyou for your reply and your comments and will discuss this more in due course. oh and just to clear that last part up,i am definatly not an american,i would like to say that my original comment was posted mainly for the way in which you come across, it is a little offensive in all honesty, and it bugged me, in reality i was not having ago at your abilities as a human being but more for the way that you put your point across, and somewhere in there i shall admit that i got a litte lost and sidetracked from the point i was getting at.
I accept your apology. Quantum physics does at first seem as though the impossible may be possible, but there is a fantastic SCALE effect at work here. The scale of quantum physics is so small and local (and quick!) that the distances involved in organic molecules eg., from ONE peptide bond to the NEXT in a DNA molecule, become equivalent to the distances between stars. All the “magic” is taking place in a “storm” (which is not even of microscopic size!) which on the whole averages out as – “non-magic” – nothing. I am a Star Trek fan, and believe that “beam me up Scotty” (etc.) has tended to convince non-scientists that these types of events may some day be within the reach of scientists. These programmes are FANTASIES. Their “science” (in almost all cases!) is poor. One isn’t looking at a possible future – at all. It is quite wrong to mix up a blend of fear of the US govt with fanciful ideas with radio stations (HAARP), barium stearate powders (“chemtrails”), “nanotechnology”, “mindcontrol”, aliens, and what-have-you, instead of finding the real solutions to lung and skin diseases. The solutions will be found using Science, not Fantasy. In the meanwhile “chemtrails” are a harmful distraction, an additional problem.
hey i’m from new zealand and they spray us here too. i know that they are definitely spraying something because you can’t turn a contrail on and off. we also see up to 4 planes spraying at once, they do a run across the city then turn around and spray again. i notice on days when they spray that all my flatmates seem to be more agitated and depressed. it seems to affect the wind. because our city usually is really windy and gets SE and N prevailing winds. but over the last 3 years the winds are coming from weird directions and it is hardly ever windy anymorei have also seen the rainbows in the fake clouds too i heard that there is a secret haarp installation here too
Bard of Ely
Steve, please have a look at contrailscience and JazzRoc’s blogs – the links are here to provide info. But basically you just seeing ice crystals forming the trails and fake cloud. They do not turn them on or off but are moving from one layer of the sky to another and if there is no water vapor present to crystallise as ice then you see no trail and it looks as if it’s turned off.
The rainbow effects are caused again by ice crystals – there are no forms of dust or particles metallic or otherwise that will cause this. It is likely that people are depressed and agitated by seeing the trails because if what they have heard about them as a danger and because it is something they have not seen until recently. However, there is nothing to fear apart from fear itself and the reason we see all these trails is because the sky has far more water in it and there are far far more planes up there.
I am emailing you to inform you of a strike that is being organized on July 4th 2008 against the New World Order and the spraying of chemicals in our skies. I am hoping to reach as far as I can with the message that there are good people out there who really want to change things. We all need to support each other and create a the kind of world it should be. Please spread the word of change and promote this website after all this affects us all. Please visit www.freewebs.com/changetheworldforever for more info. We need to change what is happening to our world and to our skies, for the sake of ourselves and for generations to come.
H2O is a greenhouse gas and that cannot combat global warming. I didn’t read jazzroc’s comments and can’t help wonder if he flies the planes. Pollution does block sunlight from traveling deep into earth but I think there are better ways than pollution to stop global warming WTF!
Bard of Ely
I’m not sure who said water was combatting global warming so don’t really understand the point you are making but I am sure there are far too many planes seeing as they are causing the problem we are seeing and whilst I no longer believe that the trails and artifical clouds are toxic it is still not right at all to have all these tons of ice crystals blotting out the blue skies and sunlight! And many places could desperately use the water down here! Thanks for your feedback, MD!
The point I was making is frost and mist are h2o, not chemtrails. I am not saying that I believe in one side or the other on this, if you read the blog on myspace I was talking about, it was more detailed. I do think the theory falls in line with other theories that becoming more factual. At least, it is more believable than reptilian theories!
Bard of Ely
Thanks for explaining! Well, the strange thing is I am no longer a chemtrail believer after several years but I am a reptilian believer, although not so sure about the shapeshifting! I have actually just written over 3,000 words on why I believed in chemtrails and why I no longer do for another project. There was logical thought gone into both my belief and how I finally lost that belief but the most interesting part of it all for me was that when I was a chemtrail-believer I was blocking out seeing some things, which I knew. This was not logical thought but the control over my analytical mind by the belief system I had.
I am going to have to read your conversation with jazzroc when I have more time. I have some chemistry knowledge and would be happy to look at this as logically as possible.
Bard of Ely
MD, thanks for what you posted but for the video it is just like all the others of which I have seen hundreds. They all are claiming that the trails are chemtrails and I no longer accept that so there is nothing to fear from them for myself or others who do not believe. As for finding cures for the illnesses said to be caused by chemtrails this is an impossibility if the chemtrails do not exist and are merely ice which simply messes the sky up. The illnesses and symptoms are caused by many other things and obviously need to be cured but personally I see no point blaming the trails and I no longer do so.
BTW as an example, I have had chronic sinus problems that I believed to be caused by chemtrails. I no longer believe this and have concluded that the problem is caused by my deviated septum, which two doctors said was the reason. I have found a cure – salt water dropped down my nasal passages.
No big deal about the deleted posts, I didn’t feel comfortable putting the article up there. i would’ve sent a link but the profile I found it on is set to private so I do not think I could send a link. It was a lot longer of a article but I am not intent on changing your mind. The fascinating part I thought, was the evolving DNA. I started classes this week so I am becoming too busy for this subject. If I come across any proof you haven’t heard of I will send you a myspace message with a link. Lots of things can cause asthma and sinus problems, nearby trains using diesel, car pollution, airports, pollen. See you on another topic friend!
Bard of Ely
Yes, lots of things present in the modern world can and do produce symptoms like sinus problems and asthma that get blamed on chemtrails! Yes, there are all manner of theories about DNA – depends who you agree with really! Michael Tsarion says we all have alien DNA mixed with human and that is the root cause of evil in the world. It’s a good explanation. Michael doesn’t think there are any saviours for the world condition but ourselves and I am inclined to agree with him on both counts. This is our nightmare and we have to deal with it!
hey. i hear planes at the same time every morning. I live in gwealod y garth in cardiff. we have had some really heavy downpours but i gues the rain is everywhere anyway. I have uncontrollable burny sneezing fits random spates & ive never had hayfever. Could be dust but i think i would be sneezing all of the time if was. my sleep patterns change and i feel different when i drink tap water.
Bard of Ely
I know Gwaelod y Garth very well – a beautiful place! No, rain at all here – in fact a drought! I hope the tap water doesn’t have fluoride in it like it does in many places now – a much worse threat than chemtrails, which I don’t any more believe exist! Sneezing is caused by many things and there are countless things which people are allergic to with cats, house dust mites and many types of pollen being a few. In many places people are exposed to pollens like oil seed rape that is a fairly new crop that is being cultivated on a wide scale.
If these don’t exist how come there is this chemtrail tracking site I go to that tells you when they will be here and when they won’t be here and it’s dead on 90% of the time? How would this guy know if they did not exist? I mean I think they do exist and they are up to something up there, what it is I have no clue but I have heard both sides of the argument and use common sense when I look up and I know these are different from the contrails I see on some days. Some days I see contrais and then these all over the sky. Jazzroc and his arguments are not going to sway me from these things or make it like they don’t exist, like the devil they exist and they don’t want you to know it. I am staying believing and studying these and reading about them. Some say they know some who fly and say they do spray these things and think it is for our good, some say it’s just chaff and the military does spray it to jam radar, check those out in youtube. It has been on the news in Cali as well and weather channels if you look for it, so people do know and are up on these things, not enough people but some know. BTW as for the tracking site, I would put it up but some idiot will try to get it taken down if they are with the GOVT. or looking to keep these a wrap, I think I will pass but thats NO LIE. He tells when they will be spraying, and bottom line it happens.
Bard of Ely
Please post the tracking site here! As far as I am concerened it is simple to predict when trials will occur if you know flight paths. The problem with the subject is that chemtrail believers call persistent contrails “chemtrails” and non-believers call them contrails. And it is a belief system because I am a past believer and it was very hard for JazzRoc to get me to see the logic of his arguments! I am now a non-believer. I could give you an example of predicting trails: at around 10am on Sundays in winter but not in summer a plane goes across where I live and it leaves a long lasting trail that I used to call a chemtrail. Pics I have posted of this believers call a chemtrail, as I did. But now if I see the same trail and accept it as a persistent contrail of ice crystals. Conditions have changed and we are now seeing persistent trails which we have not been used to seeing and we have been led by those propagting the chemtrail belief to call them chemtrails but they are simply long lasting trails of ice crystals I now believe.
JazzRoc is a well known DISINFORMIST. He magically appears at any discussion of atmospheric manipulation discussion and thwarts it with local fallacy pseudo-science, mostly released as countermeasures to chemtrail discussion. BEWARE!!
Bard of Ely, i still can’t believe how easily you’ve been pushed over.
Bard of Ely
As I have explained before JazzRoc is none of the things people claim he is! He is someone I know personally and have met many times and actually worked on music with as well as having enjoyed walks around the island here. But people post other opinions about him when they know nothing about him apart from the fact that he does not believe in chemtrails.
If you read what I have written you will find that my belief in the subject was already on shaky grounds when I found that the air in South Wales under “chemtrailed” skies was cleaner than usual not badly polluted. At the time I couldn’t understand this as I had been led to believe by chemtrailers that the air was being poisoned. Clearly it was not the case. I have not seen any evidence for chemtrails as a reality apart from all the videos, photos, reports etc by chemtrail believers and what I used to think were chemtrails.
I have concluded that the chemtrail belief system is a disinformation campaign itself and a very successful one.
Written by JazzRoc
October 28, 2008 at 1:00 am
Tagged with aerodynamic trail, aerosol, aerosol carbon coenzyme, alaska, aluminium, aluminum, arthritis, artificial cloud, aviation combustion, bacteria, barium, blood product, blue sky, boron hydride, boundary layer, breathing difficulties, british, carnicom, catalyst, chaff, chem trail, chemtrail, cirrus, clear invisible gas, cloud, conspiracy, contrail, cryptography, cumuli, dbootsthediva, descent, enigma, ethylene dibromide, faa, fake, falling, false, filaments, forest, fresh air, fruitloop, gibber, gibberish, globe, haarp, heavy haze, indefinitely, ionosphere, jet exhaust, line-of-sight, lines in the sky, lunacy, lung disease, mackerel, metallic salts, military, morgellons, morse, Mr. Magoo, NASA, nitromethane, no more blue skies, not a normal cloud, notrails, oily clouds, orgonite cloudbuster, pendules, persist, phytoplankton, ptb, radio establishment, rense, rh, saturated, science-hating, sensible, silica, sixties, spraying, strange pattern, stratosphere, stratospheric layer, sublime, supersaturated, temp, tic-tac-toe, troposphere, uk, understand, unnatural cloud, USAF, volcanic, volcanic effluent, wave vortex, weather, webby material, whiteout, windmill, world wide spray program