Okay ... coffee out the nose ... that right there was funny!Originally Posted by Mick
Okay ... coffee out the nose ... that right there was funny!
I don't know much about Will Thomas . . . and I don't know much about the Chemtrail Advocate Sites . . . I basically avoid them unless something or someone refers me to an item here and there. . . Two years ago I was not an Advocate and was basically forced to take the Chemtrail side of a debate . . . I was willing to take either side . . . my research was basically NASA, NOAA, Wikipedia, GOA and Congressional Hearings, Public, State, Federal and International Law and Treaties . . . My real turning point was when I dove into Congressional hearings and US Law . . . Wow scared the crap out of me and I found out things I would have never thought possible . . .
For me the time I notice most is 3:14
It's not just confirmation bias, it's "priming". My mind is predisposed to notice 3.14 due to my interest in math.
I'm also greatly predisposed to notice contrails, black lines in the sky, sidewalk gum, and now, unfortunately, suspiciously attentive cats.
Like what? There's a lot of misconceptions going around based on those things. Like the government being able to perform tests on your without your knowledge, and "Chemtrails" being banned, "geoengineering" being "admitted", etc.
I'll admit, i'm primed for 9:11 on my clock due to my last job. But i do take the time to make note of what the clock says when it's NOT one of those "odd" times.For me the time I notice most is 3:14
It's not just confirmation bias, it's "priming". My mind is predisposed to notice 3.14 due to my interest in math.
I'm also greatly predisposed to notice contrails, black lines in the sky, sidewalk gum, and now, unfortunately, suspiciously attentive cats.
Since i met you guys on this forum i ALWAYS look to the sky when i step outside.
Until i have my cats x-rayed I'm exercising my right to remain silent.
I have talked to several pilots . . . the controller not so much . . . I found the pilots of multiengine commercial grade aircraft are not aware of the contrail status of their craft except in rare situations and then it means nothing to their schedule, safety, or workload . . . just a fact of getting from one place to another . . . they are only interested in the fact that their fuel is loaded and the engines are performing properly . . . they do a preflight and look to see if anything could delay or cancel their flight plans . . . They as a class of individuals are not aware of the fuel additives or intricate mechanical specifications or modifications on their craft . . . they have never been asked to reduce the number, frequency, or persistence of contrails . . .George, you do have resources much closer to the issue than the information and resources you're currently using. I'll give you two: Pilots and air traffic controllers.
Pilots would know best if there was some strange, unknown substance coming from their aircraft or there was some strange equipment strapped to their aircraft or if there was anything out of the ordinary happening with their aircraft.
Air traffic controllers talk to tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of pilots every day. If pilots suspected something was amiss, they would inform ATC, it would be recorded on ATC tapes.
Both these groups are out there and available for commentary. There are over half a million certified pilots and about 15,000 air traffic controllers.
Well the one that shocked me first and before I found anything else was the following . . .
OLD CODE: PUBLIC LAW 95-79 [P.L. 95-79] TITLE 50, CHAPTER 32, SECTION 1520 "CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE PROGRAM" The use of human subjects will be allowed for the testing of chemical and biological agents by the U.S. Department of Defense, accounting to Congressional committees with respect to the experiments and studies." The Secretary of Defense [may] conduct tests and experiments involving the use of chemical and biological [warfare] agents on civilian populations [within the United States]." SOURCE- Public Law 95-79, Title VIII, Sec. 808, July 30, 1977, 91 Stat. 334. In U.S. Statutes-at-Large, Vol. 91, page 334, you will find Public Law 95-79. Public Law 97-375, title II, Sec. 203(a)(1), Dec. 21, 1982, 96 Stat. 1882. In U.S. Statutes-at-Large, Vol. 96, page 1882, you will find Public Law 97-375.
This was only repealed in 1997 . . .
Section 1520. Repealed. Pub. L. 105-85, Div. A, Title X, Sec. 1078(G), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1916, And Pub. L. 105-277, Div. I, Title Vi, Sec. 601, Oct. 21, 1998, 112 Stat. 2681-886 . . . http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/50/32
Your #4 and #5 seem to suggest you think it's coming from secret unmarked aircraft.
So which theory are you suggesting here? A) Minor change in commercial fuel, or B) wholesale direct spraying by a secret fleet of unmarked tankers?4. Are thereunidentified Aircraft that fly daily which the public has no information about their mission,goals, flight path, altitude or purpose? . . . Yes
5. Do these unidentified Aircraft sometime leave persistentTrails? . . . Yes
Well no, why should they be thinking of their contrails, when that is a natural result of flying aircraft at those altitudes. Besides, you already said that contrails can vary and persist anyways.
And yes, they do have to know a fair amount about how the mechanical specifications of an aircraft. One can not get type rated as a captain, without a lengthy oral exam over those specifications and systems, and that is before an aircraft flight test, which will always simulate an emergency of some kind, on any particular system.
They do not just let someone have a type rating on an aircraft and put them in the left seat, unless they can show a high level of knowledge of that aircraft, its systems and those specifications/limitations on its performance.
I am guessing that you do not have any photos at all of your chemtrail planes, do you? Its been 14 years since Will Thomas starting pimping chemtrails to sell books. You would think that at some point, someone would have had a good photograph of one
Doesn't the fact that it was repealed indicate they don't want to do it? Look at the new law:
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/50/32/1520a
(with exceptions, requiring informed consent)(a) Prohibited activities
The Secretary of Defense may not conduct (directly or by contract) -
(1) any test or experiment involving the use of a chemical agent or biological agent on a civilian population; or
(2) any other testing of a chemical agent or biological agenton human subjects.
And what does that have to do with chemtrails? You think chemtrails are a chemical weapon test? Or is it just evidence of the government being bad (but totally upfront about it)?
Last edited by Mick; February 18th, 2012 at 09:52 AM.
Actually, both are possible. . . .I feel there are multiple missions and goals. . . governmental, International and commercial or private objectives. . . within the
geoengineering community if you will the use of commercial air with the high efficiency engines through policy to not to mitigate persistent contrails alone may be enough to experiment with global dimming. . . another strategy which could be simultaneous with the first is to increase the amount of sulfur compounds in the stratosphere via spiking jet fuel with enough sulfur to make a difference but not change performance characteristics. . . Would be some where around 1% of the fuel
volume . . . Still another strategy is a few modified decommissioned aircraft to dump a bolus of particulates, aerosols, or gases in areas where the prevailing winds and jet streams can disperse them. ..
Many smaller regional experimentations can be ongoing as well. . .
I am aware of how the government works. . . I worked for them for 30 years. . . I would call it covering you rear end from liability and criminal prosecution for past sins that were revealed publicly in 1994 in Congressional Hearings. . . which had details of aerial dispersal of Zinc Cadmium Sulfide over a large region of the US. . . Just to name one category of activity. . .
So you think the evidence indicates that lots of different types of operations are going on?
Seems a bit vague - basically "something" is happening, that might be connected with more people noticing contrails? Is that about it?
Do you think there is any evidence that fuel is being spiked? If so, do you think the goal is to produce more contrails, or to distributed some substance?
Do you think there's any evidence supporting the "few modified decommissioned aircraft" being responsible for the uptick in contrail sightings?
How are they covering themselves by taking something that was legal, and making it illegal, and then doing it? Surely it would be better to leave it legal?
Any number of "experimentations" could be happening all around us....involving invisibility cloaks, ghosts, shrink rays...the list is endless. The problem here is...there is as much evidence to support belief in the things I have mentioned as there is to support the beliefs about "chemtrails". Where does it end?! When is the belief in something "silly"?!
What is a decommissioned aircraft? If it is out of commission, how can it be flying?
This is like Roxy Lopez claim that the stored and disassembled aircraft in Marana, are secret chemtrail planes.
And again, the chemtrail hoax has been going on for 14+ years. Is there a single photo of a chemplane?
Last edited by firepilot; February 18th, 2012 at 10:48 AM.
That is easy . . . they knew the public was going to become aware of the released issues by Congressional testimony in 1994-1997 so they changed the law to reflect their new saintly revelation . . . they only do thing which are necessary . . .and by- the - way, it does not keep them or mercenaries from engaging in illegal activities .. . in fact, most of what there are doing is not illegal . . . and when in rare cases they have been caught the Supreme Court has held they cannot be held liable for any damage, civil or criminal . .
Last edited by George B; February 18th, 2012 at 10:50 AM. Reason: spacing
There is no evidence which would be sufficient . . . you asked me my opinion and I told you what I thought was possibly happening . . . based on the resources available, modes of behavior and past practices I suggest it is possible. . . the Open Skies Treaty makes it possible for foreign flights to frequenting our country without public knowledge along with military, diplomatic, and anyone who took the trouble to have their flight information blocked . . . a study in Houston, Tx in, I think, 2001 . . . was quite well done and the researcher identified several persistent contrail producing aircraft which were not available in the public record . . . in fact . . . they were the only aircraft to leave trails that lasted for hours. . . . The mothballed or decommissioned aircraft could be refurbished and flown in similar fashion . . .
Previously out of service and/or mothballed aircraft . . . refurbished and flown again . . . they have been used for firefighting and contraband . . . Air America in years past for example. . .
Anything is possible. How likely do you think it it?
If you were to bet $100, what odds would you want? You think an even bet would likely make you money? Or would you ask for 10:1? Would you give me favorable odds?
You think there are secret unregistered planes operating in the United States? And nobody has ever spotted one?
Yes, civil aircraft, and there are many photographs of those. They are not decommissioned, they were retired from the military and sold off. I happen to have flown some. Do you consider firefighting aircraft to be part of chemtrails? They do drop chemicals...
Again, where are photographs of aircraft? Can you find a single picture of an aircraft that you deem to be suspicious?
No . . . IMHO, visibility has very little to do with the aerosol injection process . . . it is coincidental, possibly related in some situations . . . the uptick is almost likely entirely based on the policy to not mitigate persistent trails from high efficiency engines and the combined result of an increase in long haul high altitude flights over highly populated areas . . . as well as their higher likelihood of producing persistent trails in suboptimal air and thus higher rates of cirrus cloud banks . . .
They probably have been spotted by the general public but not identified by registration or number . . . altitude way too high . . . Flight Controllers are aware of military flights, blocked flights and International Weapons Observation Flights I am sure but they don't know if they are laying down aerosols visible or invisible . . . those don't show up on radar . . . unless it is some type of Chaff . . .
I have seen some photos that look rather interesting but could not or would not venture a guess regarding their mission . . . as I have said aerosol injection need not be visible . . . and there are plenty of flights each day that the public has no information about regarding their altitude, direction, or purpose . . .
Planes can not just stay up high forever, they have to takeoff from an airport, climb out, and at the end of the flight, descend back in for landing. There are probably millions of photos on airliners.net of aircraft, including military aircraft.
You are still just guessing and speculating. You have no evidence of the existence of these aircraft, no photos of them, and no idea of airports. At least Roxy Lopez drove around Marana taking photos, of course she insists that those stored and disassembled aircraft are chemtrail planes, and that the ANG AH-64 Apaches are black helicopters.
Hard to believe in 14 years, there has not been a single chemplane photograph. Not hard to believe, than everytime a chemtrail believer put forth a pic of a plane they think is one, it never is.
Well, natural aerosol injection need not be visible either...
But where does your belief originate? If not because of the visible trails...what? Why do you think airplanes are spraying anything? You have said that when "they spray"...it may not increase the amount/concentration of whatever they are spraying...and one doesn't need to SEE anything..so, what are the symptoms? The contrail cirrus? increased air traffic? Claims about "geoengineering" you have read about online?
George, are you going to tell these nice people that you also classify fire fighting/defolients/insect control as "chemtrails"?
I ask because I'm curious...are these procedures the same as "aerosol injection" or are the classified differently...by you?
Last edited by Noble1965; February 18th, 2012 at 11:27 AM.
Of course I would want my best chance of winning . . .what I am trying to communicate is that the concept of intentional aerosolinjection is complex and covert . . . the evidence is well hidden and camouflaged. . . there is no single piece of circumstantial evidence that would or shouldconvince anyone of a conspiracy . . . however, taken in total . . . the wholepicture together . . . along with history, capability, opportunity, humannature, budget, scientific research, Congressional Testimony, Law and Treatiesand yes even whistleblowers and my own experiences within the system . . . I am convinced there is a high likelihoodthat something out there exists . . . Iwill share additional evidence as I can . . . right now I am very tired . . . Iwill engage after I rest . . .
This is my personal definition . . .
Chemtrails are: particulates, aerosols, and other substances released at altitude (usually by aircraft) and without the consent or knowledge of the vast majority of the population for purposes the people are not aware of and for goals they may or may not agree with. The trails may or may not be visible and they may or may not be visualized by radar or other technologies (i.e. lasers). When seen from the ground, at altitude or from space they may appear similar to persistent contrails. NOTE: Chemtrails in effect are indistinguishable from and are sometimes actually contrails.
Last edited by George B; February 18th, 2012 at 11:37 AM. Reason: spacing
And are you aware that aerosols and similar particles, generally DO NOT show up on radar? Its for the same reason that clouds and fog do not show up either. But that insects and birds can...
So, because water vapor and combustion gases are being released without your consent or knowledge...That suggests that it's intentional?!
Is it "intentional" that every source of combustion at ground level is doing the exact same thing?
Yes, I understand that it bothers you that it's happening at higher altitudes...but, what occurs down here can end up at altitude also. Even if someone sampled the air up there...there isn't any guarantee that whatever they find comes from airplanes. OR, is intentional.
EDIT:
Actually, it's just consent...
You have knowledge that "they" are putting combustion gases and water vapor into the air. I guess it's just the "consent" part that bothers you. I'm sure they feel really bad about not getting your permission...But, majority rules. And they have the premission of most of the people on the planet. Unless you want it in writing...maybe you should suggest that to the airlines.
Last edited by Noble1965; February 18th, 2012 at 11:52 AM.
George, if chemtrails are indistinguishable from contrails, then chemtrails are contrails.
Flight Controllers are aware of:
• Military flights? In general, agreed.
• What is a "blocked flight"? Do you mean aircraft flying block altitudes?
• International Weapons Observation Flights? What is this?
It somewhat depends on the type of radar and the mode it is in. . . For example Doppler Radar will return a signal on rain, snow, hail, Virga, high winds, and chaff. . . I believe ground clutter and temperature inversions can do some strange things as well. . . True, usually contrails, cirrus clouds, etc do not show returns; however, infrared imaging coupled with radar will demonstrate contrails. . . These composite images are often used and released to the public. . .
The answer to your question is in the second half of the following. . .Flight Controllers are aware of:
• Military flights? In general, agreed.
• What is a "blocked flight"? Do you mean aircraft flying block altitudes?
Can I track military aircraft? What about presidential movements in Air Force One? (Back to top)
FlightAware does not track military aircraft and presidential movement flights (e.g., Air Force One, Marine One, etc.) are operated by the US military.
http://flightaware.com/about/faq.rvt#military
Can I block my aircraft on FlightAware? (Back to top)
Yes, there are two ways to accomplish this:
FlightAware Selective (Un)blocking
Enroll in FlightAware's selective unblocking service for a tail number that is not already blocked.*
FlightAware can process your request with next-day service and will block your operations from the general public. Your FlightAware account(s) will continue to be able to securely view and track your aircraft. FlightAware will complete the paperwork necessary for blocking your aircraft on other flight tracking services and will provide you with everything you need to accomplish the block.
Blocking request through NBAA BARR
The NBAA (National Business Aviation Association) operates and maintains the BARR (Blocked Aircraft Registration Request) in conjunction with the FAA. This service is free although it may take 30-45 days to take effect and will not allow your user account to track your aircraft on FlightAware unless you subscribe to FlightAware's selective unblocking service.*
For us to submit your request, simply contact us to walk you through the process.
http://flightaware.com/about/faq.rvt#military
This the answer to your last question . . .Flight Controllers are aware of:
• Military flights? In general, agreed.
• What is a "blocked flight"? Do you mean aircraft flying block altitudes?
• International Weapons Observation Flights? What is this?
The Treaty on Open Skies entered into force on January 1, 2002, and currently has 34 States Parties. It establishes a program of unarmed aerial surveillance flights over the entire territory of its participants. The treaty is designed to enhance mutual understanding and confidence by giving all participants, regardless of size, a direct role in gathering information about military forces and activities of concern to them. Open Skies is one of the most wide-ranging international efforts to date promoting openness and transparency of military forces and activities. The concept of "mutual aerial observation" was initially proposed to Soviet Premier Nikolai Bulganin at the Geneva Conference of 1955 by President Dwight D. Eisenhower; however, the Soviets promptly rejected the concept and it lay dormant for several years.[citation needed] The treaty was eventually signed as an initiative of US president (and former Director of Central Intelligence) George H. W. Bush in 1989. Negotiated by the then-members of NATO and the Warsaw Pact, the agreement was signed in Helsinki, Finland, on March 24, 1992.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_Open_Skies
One can say that. . . Since most "persistent trails" are from high efficiency jet engines which through their lower exhaust temperatures and higher relative humidity produce trails in air that previously would not support persistent trails . . . the jury is still out on whether they produce more cirrus cloud banks. . . .but because they are more likely to exist there are more of them and thus a higher probability to become clouds. . .
Noble1965, low altitude spraying operations are most likely to be observed and identified by citizens and therefore are announced by the authorities so no one will break down the the doors at city hall. . . So my response is the public has most likely been notified and the altitude of release would most likely remove it from my definition as a Chemtrail . . .
A well studied contrail cirrus cloud complex occurred
over the UK in 2009. . . And according to NASA this type of complex has been observed over the US as well. . . The question to me is did these reactions also occur before the new technology was introduced. . . . http://www.met.reading.ac.uk/~sgs02r...ywood09JGR.pdf
Last edited by George B; February 18th, 2012 at 02:48 PM. Reason: Changed date
NO. You have said that. You said:
Let's be clear about this... are chetrails indistinguishable from contrails? Are chemtrails actually contrails?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks