I am a Chemtrail Advocate . . . I believe there is an Aerosol Injection Program

[George B]

Sorry, but your #2 is totally wrong.

Open Skies treaty does not mean that any other military can just fly over the US as much as they want, without interference. Do you think aircraft from other militaries, can just take off from other countries, do some big loop over the US, no be part of air traffic control, and return back to their home country, with impunity?

Because thats how you present it, and that's totally incorrect. You spend more time conjecturing and imagining, than you do researching.

Each country that takes part, is allowed quotas for overflights, and they do not have to just accept them all either.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/openskies







Why do you depict the Open Skies Treaty, to be something other than what it really is?

No I do not . . . a treaty allows access if provisions are met . . . if the coordinators allow the flights . . . who is monitoring to see that they are or are not doing except flying the flight plan . . . if this is the mechanism by which some injection missions can be accomplished how would the public know?

 

[George B]

George - you are aware that sometimes people put out fake documents and videos for a variety of reasons? Some of them are quite sophisticated like the "[video]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_autopsy[/video]", and some fool people for a long time, like the Cottingley Fairies.

You know that I, or anyone else familiar with the theory, could easily write a "whistleblower" document that many people would find convincing.

Such "documents" (and they are usually just some text on the internet, in one case a second hand tale supposed told by a drunk pilot to impress the ladies) are pointless without corroborating evidence.

I am fully aware of what you are saying . . . I just thought the concept was something I would use if I were trying to be covert . . . limit the number of countrymen involved, etc. . .

 

[firepilot]

Look again at the low number of flights that go on. And yes, there are criteria that have to be met for on board equipment, and a host nation can even supply an airplane to be used.

These flights have to be requested too. Do you think some country is going to waste money to spray some particles over an country, on a very limited number of flights. These countries can not just go fly as many flights as they want over other countries like you alluded too.

Again, you presented a picture of something that was not at all what it is. These is not some mechanism for a country to go launch mass numbers of aircraft over another country without warning. Also, it is not a covert program either. Planes can not teleport from other countries, to US airspace, without anyone knowing. They actually would have to land in the US too, and get inspected.

How about tell us how many flights of this have been over the US?

 

[George B]

Got a source for 1) above??

http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/shieldproject.html

 

[Mick West]

http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/shieldproject.html

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/351-Debunked-The-quot-Deep-Shield-quot-Hoax

 

[Noble1965]

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/351-Debunked-The-quot-Deep-Shield-quot-Hoax

Wow, that was fast!

 

[George B]

Look again at the low number of flights that go on. And yes, there are criteria that have to be met for on board equipment, and a host nation can even supply an airplane to be used.

These flights have to be requested too. Do you think some country is going to waste money to spray some particles over an country, on a very limited number of

flights. These countries can not just go fly as many flights as they want over other countries like you alluded too.

Again, you presented a picture of something that was not at all what it is. These is not some mechanism for a country to go launch mass numbers of aircraft over another country without warning. Also, it is not a covert program either. Planes can not teleport from other countries, to US airspace, without anyone knowing. They actually would have to land in the US too, and get inspected.

How about tell us how many flights of this have been over the US?

I respectfully disagree. . . There are many, many flights everyday that the general "Public" does not know about and has no right or access to gain information about. This is just one class of such aircraft. . . . . Chemtrail Advocates feel the authorities are part of the problem. . . They intentionally or unintentionally cooperate to
withhold information . . . Nor do we know how many Injection flights are necessary
or where they are to be flown. . .

My point is, simply this treaty gives plausible legal cover and a cover story for
foreign aircraft to get access to US airspace. . . That is all. . . The number, frequency, and other details are something that can be manupulated by a very few people in the know. . . NOT the PUBLIC. . .

 

[MikeC]

Yup - it's a well known "whistleblower"

What's more since the person who "provided" this info is supposedly dead there is no reason at all to keep their identity secret any more......so what has happened to this "revelation? Why isn't the source now well known?

Identifying the source would enable corroborating information to be gathered if there was any - but AFAIK there is no attempt beign made to so so.

 

[Noble1965]

I respectfully disagree. . . There are many, many flights everyday that the general "Public" does not know about and has no right or access to gain information about. This is just one class of such aircraft. . . . . Chemtrail Advocates feel the authorities are part of the problem. . . They intentionally or unintentionally cooperate to
withhold information . . . Nor do we know how many Injection flights are necessary
or where they are to be flown. . .

My point is, simply this treaty gives plausible legal cover and a cover story for
foreign aircraft to get access to US airspace. . . That is all. . . The number, frequency, and other details are something that can be manupulated by a very few people in the know. . . NOT the PUBLIC. . .

And all this could be accomplished without the treaty...if it's a clandestine operation...why even bring up the treaty?!

 

[Mick West]

My point is, simply this treaty gives plausible legal cover and a cover story for
foreign aircraft to get access to US airspace. . . That is all. . . The number, frequency, and other details are something that can be manupulated by a very few people in the know. . . NOT the PUBLIC. . .

So ..... planes fly all the way to the US from somewhere, drop some aerosols, and then fly back.

Why?

Why not just drop them over the ocean? They would work exactly the same, and nobody would ever know.

 

[MikeC]

No I do not . . . a treaty allows access if provisions are met . . . if the coordinators allow the flights . . . who is monitoring to see that they are or are not doing except flying the flight plan . . . if this is the mechanism by which some injection missions can be accomplished how would the public know?

Possibly the public would not know IF this was the mechanism for doing something.

so what is the evidence that it actually IS a mechanism for doing something?

And how come "chemtrails" are being seen all over the world in places where this treaty does NOT apply?

 

[Noble1965]

This is just one class of such aircraft. . . . ..

What are the other "classes"?

 

[George B]

And all this could be accomplished without the treaty...if it's a clandestine operation...why even bring up the treaty?!

It is totally logical to me. . . It is simply insurance in case someone might accidently spot and question the existence of a foreign airframe in US airspace . . . No big deal. . .it is part of an international treaty. . . Move along, there is nothing to see here. . . .

 

[George B]

So ..... planes fly all the way to the US from somewhere, drop some aerosols, and then fly back.

Why?

Why not just drop them over the ocean? They would work exactly the same, and nobody would ever know.

I would say it depends on the goal or mission of that particular flight. . . Chemicals, aerosols, gases can be used to fill several missions simultaneously or individually. . . Some missions can be local, regional, national, or global or all at the same time. . .using prevailing winds, jet streams, and weather fronts. . . .

 

[Noble1965]

It is totally logical to me. . . It is simply insurance in case someone might accidently spot and question the existence of a foreign airframe in US airspace . . . No big deal. . .it is part of an international treaty. . . Move along, there is nothing to see here. . . .

It's still not evidence. You are creating a scenario..and then accepting the scenario as perfectly valid BECAUSE it's you who created it.

 

[George B]

What are the other "classes"?

All military, diplomatic flights and all blocked flights from the public databases. . . FAA and other. . . .

 

[George B]

It's still not evidence. You are creating a scenario..and then accepting the scenario as perfectly valid BECAUSE it's you who created it.

Of course. . . You got it. . . .I said . . . If I was going to do it, this is how I would do it. . .

 

[George B]

Possibly the public would not know IF this was the mechanism for doing something.

so what is the evidence that it actually IS a mechanism for doing something?

And how come "chemtrails" are being seen all over the world in places where this
treaty does NOT apply?

People are seeing primarily, or always seeing, persistent trails from high efficiency engines from high flying long haul aircraft. . . Visibility is simply coincidental. . .
I also would bet the signatories of the treaty are the countries with the highest concentrations of populations. . . And the countries where the majority of Chemtrail Advocates are being heard. . .

 

[Noble1965]

I would say it depends on the goal or mission of that particular flight. . . Chemicals, aerosols, gases can be used to fill several missions simultaneously or individually. . . Some missions can be local, regional, national, or global or all at the same time. . .using prevailing winds, jet streams, and weather fronts. . . .

There is no evidence that there are ANY such missions...the reason you beleive there must be is because of #1 in your first post. You have yet to show that there is any unusual particulate associated with any flight...anywhere...

You have yet to prove the sources aren't natural and benign.

All you have is suspicion based on belief. And you've been able to convince yourself that the way you have configured all your assumptions is the only logical explanation. That's still not enough to accuse anyone of such horrendous things...

 

[Mick West]

I would say it depends on the goal or mission of that particular flight. . . Chemicals, aerosols, gases can be used to fill several missions simultaneously or individually. . . Some missions can be local, regional, national, or global or all at the same time. . .using prevailing winds, jet streams, and weather fronts. . . .

What are the non-global missions?

 

[Mick West]

1) One of the best and rare whistleblower articles I found that discussed the Injection Program's Methods, Motives, and Objectives mentioned in it the details of how the program worked . . . indicated that no pilot did Injections over their own country nor did they prepare the Injection materials . . . this was also done by other countries . . . giving them plausible moral and ethical relief from being guilty of spraying their own countrymen.

Give that that has been shown to be a fabrication, does that change your opinion at all?

 

[George B]

There is no evidence that there are ANY such missions...the reason you beleive there must be is because of #1 in your first post. You have yet to show that there is any unusual particulate associated with any flight...anywhere...

You have yet to prove the sources aren't natural and benign.

All you have is suspicion based on belief. And you've been able to convince yourself that the way you have configured all your assumptions is the only logical explanation. That's still not enough to accuse anyone of such horrendous things...

I have heard your same statement over and over. . . I do not give up my right to express my belief in a public forum . . . And I will NOT stop because it is controversial or uncomfortable . . . If the managers of this forum choose to censor me they have a perfect right to do so . . . If someone does not try to bring the discussion forward and bring all arguments forward and understand both sides nothing will change . . .

 

[George B]

What are the non-global missions?

I have heard and read . . . Geo-engineering for global warming . . .and a poor Man's attempt to mitigate the potential effects of the Solar Maximum, primarily EMP . . . others would be military application for global 'over the horizon' surveillance, medium for offensive use. . . . or defense from . . . scalar weapons, medium for the detection of scalar weapons. . . .

 

[Jay Reynolds]

All military, diplomatic flights and all blocked flights from the public databases. . . FAA and other. . . .

Al of these are identifiable by telescope. If anyone in the chemtrails believer community wanted to they could identify them visually. But in fifteen years none ever have.

However, this work by Ken Bradley shows that ordinary commercial flights make persistent contrails, 42 flights were identified here in five videos, 100% of these planes were ordinary passenger jets:
http://www.youtube.com/user/LasVegasSkyWatch#p/u/5/FvXVvahXw4M

So, George, do you have any reason why you cannot try and replicate Bradley's work for yourself in your own area?
If not, why not?

I'd like an answer, please.
If you need instructions, I'd be happy to oblige.

 

[George B]

Give that that has been shown to be a fabrication, does that change your opinion at all?

Anything can be a fabrication that is on electronic media. . .that is always a threat. . . It comes with modern technology. . . .deceit is the only thing guaranteed in this world, everything else is optional. . . .

Trial balloons, straw men, mis- information, disinformation, are techniques used also to test the impact of certain ideas on the public or segments of the public. . . .

Is this a fraud, hoax, etc . . .quite possibly. . . But I keep saying. . . .if I were going to do an injection program. . . I would do what was suggested in this information . . .

 

[Jay Reynolds]

Wow, that was fast!

This actually took quite a bit of diggingon my part, and I directly confronted the guy and outed him at chemtrailcentral.com right after he did it, but it was many years ago. The believers made quite a big deal out of it, but most of those old-timers have given up on the subject, and so these kinds of "ghost nets" just lay about littering the sea, still catching fish....

 

[George B]

Al of these are identifiable by telescope. If anyone in the chemtrails believer community wanted to they could identify them visually. But in fifteen years none ever have.

However, this work by Ken Bradley shows that ordinary commercial flights make persistent contrails, 42 flights were identified here in five videos, 100% of these

planes were ordinary passenger jets:
http://www.youtube.com/user/LasVegasSkyWatch#p/u/5/FvXVvahXw4M

So, George, do you have any reason why you cannot try and replicate Bradley's work for yourself in your own area?
If not, why not?


I'd like an answer, please.
If you need instructions, I'd be happy to oblige.

Why would I. . . .what would I prove for the expense, time and effort. . . .??
1) I have said aerosol injection's visibility is totally coincidental . . . No way visibly will allow one to tell the difference between high efficiency jet exhausts and other. . . .
2) If I do find an unidentified aircraft. . . I can't find out anything about their mission, altitude or flight plan. . .
3) IMO the institutions or people engaged in an Injection Program are way too bright to allow themselves to be outed with such a simple observation plan. . .

 

[MikeC]

People are seeing primarily, or always seeing, persistent trails from high efficiency engines from high flying long haul aircraft. . . Visibility is simply coincidental. . .
I also would bet the signatories of the treaty are the countries with the highest concentrations of populations. . . And the countries where the majority of Chemtrail Advocates are being heard. . .

You are still begging the question - you haven't actually established that there is any programme to be covered up in the first place, but your posts all assume that there is.

Like I said a while back - suspicion is one thing, but if you keep telling us that this programme does actually exist then you are going to get the same ol' questions about "What's your evidence to support that?", and if you're going to punt up all these same ol' suspicions as evidence of something happening you are always going to get the same ol' "that isn't actually evidence" as a reply.

Try to break the circle.

 

[PCWilliams]

There are many, many flights everyday that the general "Public" does not know about and has no right or access to gain information about. This is just one class of such aircraft. . . . .

All military, diplomatic flights and all blocked flights from the public databases. . . FAA and other. . . .

Are you saying there are secret (unknown) flights in the air traffic control system that nobody knows about? Or are you talking about flight aware again?

If you're talking about real life air traffic control, ALL aircraft 18,000 feet or above, flying in/through civilian airspace, is known to air traffic control.

 

[George B]

Are you saying there are secret (unknown) flights in the air traffic control system that nobody knows about? Or are you talking about flight aware again?

If you're talking about real life air traffic control, ALL aircraft 18,000 feet or above, flying in/through civilian airspace, is known to air traffic control.

I am talking about the 'general public' . . . The people who are Not given access to the information. . . Not people in the flight control community . . . Who also would know NOTHING about the injection of aerosols either. . . Why would they??? . . .the trails aren't visible on radar unless it is a form of chaff. . . .

 

[Jay Reynolds]

Anything can be a fabrication that is on electronic media. . .that is always a threat. . . It comes with modern technology. . . .deceit is the only thing guaranteed in this world, everything else is optional. . . .

Trial balloons, straw men, mis- information, disinformation, are techniques used also to test the impact of certain ideas on the public or segments of the public. . . .

Is this a fraud, hoax, etc . . .quite possibly. . . But I keep saying. . . .if I were going to do an injection program. . . I would do what was suggested in this information . . .

George, you were shown days ago empirical data over a 50 year spread of time which shows no such aerosol geoengineering is taking place. Why keep insisting that it "could be" "may be" or even bringing it up? Move on to practical solutions instead of another decade of speculation. It really irks me that there is no "institutional memory" within the movement and that the leadership seems incapable or perhaps unwilling to reject old ideas and move on to solve this thing.
They seem to simply let you people forever get stuck in these whirlpools spinning around like aimless flotsam and jetsam.
Maybe that satifies them, eh?

 

[George B]

You are still begging the question - you haven't actually established that there is any programme to be covered up in the first place, but your posts all assume that there is.

Like I said a while back - suspicion is one thing, but if you keep telling us that this programme does actually exist then you are going to get the same ol' questions about "What's your evidence to support that?", and if you're going to punt up all these same ol' suspicions as evidence of something happening you are always going to get the same ol' "that isn't actually evidence" as a reply.

Try to break the circle.

Then you tell me what evidence you will accept. . .

 

[PCWilliams]

I am talking about the 'general public' . . . The people who are Not given access to the information. . . Not people in the flight control community . . . Who also would know NOTHING about the injection of aerosols either. . . Why would they??? . . .the trails aren't visible on radar unless it is a form of chaff. . . .

The general public has access via a FOIA request. I've never known the FAA to redact flight information in a FOIA request.

If a pilot suspects something is amiss with their aircraft or another aircraft they spot visually they would report it to air traffic control. Anything out of the ordinary is reported to ATC.

 

[Jay Reynolds]

PC, exactly how many pilots are there flying on a regular basis, say on high altitude flights, and none of them report anything? How many thousands of flights per day, al over the US and the world? George, are you sayig that a massive effort
being seen by millions of inexpert people on the round would go completely unnoticed for fifteen years by all of these pilots?
Lots of these pilots are ex-military, they are experienced albeit civilian, would they let foreign or unknown pilots just fly around doig something for fifteen years and keep quiet? Or are yougoing to add all of them into the paidshill category?

 

[George B]

George, you were shown days ago empirical data over a 50 year spread of time which shows no such aerosol geoengineering is taking place. Why keep insisting that it "could be" "may be" or even bringing it up? Move on to practical solutions instead of another decade of speculation. It really irks me that there is no "institutional memory" within the movement and that the leadership seems incapable or perhaps unwilling to reject old ideas and move on to solve this thing.
They seem to simply let you people forever get stuck in these whirlpools spinning around like aimless flotsam and jetsam.
Maybe that satifies them, eh?

1) There is no leadership that I recognize . . . Who do you think is the leadership in the Chemtrail advocacy . . .?
2) The authorities IPCC, Airlines, NASA, NOAA, etc are just as guilty for not identifying the high efficiency engines as the cause of the trail formation and aggressively publicizing this. . . .I have never heard this fact on a new program for example
3) As long as the people think the high efficiency engine persistent trails are CHEMTRAILs no one is going to demand that the industry mitigate their presence . . . And that is what I think they want . . . please don't screw around with profit margins
4) IMO Persistent Trails are a poor Man's geo-engineering, great way to try global dimming and localized temperature modulation with the same product. . . .

2

 

[George B]

The general public has access via a FOIA request. I've never known the FAA to redact flight information in a FOIA request.

If a pilot suspects something is amiss with their aircraft or another aircraft they spot visually they would report it to air traffic control. Anything out of the ordinary is reported to ATC.

Why would they report an injection flight? . . . How would they know what it is?

 

[George B]

PC, exactly how many pilots are there flying on a regular basis, say on high altitude flights, and none of them report anything? How many thousands of flights per day, al over the US and the world? George, are you sayig that a massive effort
being seen by millions of inexpert people on the round would go completely unnoticed for fifteen years by all of these pilots?
Lots of these pilots are ex-military, they are experienced albeit civilian, would they let foreign or unknown pilots just fly around doig something for fifteen years and keep quiet? Or are yougoing to add all of them into the paidshill category?

I am not saying thousand of people on the ground are seeing any geo-engineering flights. . . .they are seeing long haul high efficiency engine equipt aircraft in optimal air for the formation of persistent trails. . . .

 

[PCWilliams]

PC, exactly how many pilots are there flying on a regular basis, say on high altitude flights, and none of them report anything? How many thousands of flights per day, al over the US and the world? George, are you sayig that a massive effort
being seen by millions of inexpert people on the round would go completely unnoticed for fifteen years by all of these pilots?
Lots of these pilots are ex-military, they are experienced albeit civilian, would they let foreign or unknown pilots just fly around doig something for fifteen years and keep quiet? Or are yougoing to add all of them into the paidshill category?

Jay, the most recent numbers i could find is in the FAA Administrator’s Fact Book (http://tinyurl.com/7rbd5r2), March 2011 PDF, page 18, says 18,651,000 flights by everything but the small guys (puddle jumpers) for calendar year 2010.

I'd have to do a search for the worldwide number.

 

[George B]

What are the non-global missions?

Sorry, I miss read your question . . . Here is an inventory of the most common thoughts on missions . . .

POLL: Your number one reason CHEMTRAILs EXIST. . . .
1) Geo-engineering. . . .promote global dimming to slow global warming **21.0% (17)
6) Fertility and population reduction, soft kill experimentation or operations **19.8% (16)
4) Solar Storm, sun spots or EMP mitigation efforts* **16.0% (13)
2) Weather modification. . . Increase or decrease rain, snow, intensity of storms, etc. Peaceful **8.6% (7)
10) Media to visually block or hinder viewing celestial events, objects **8.6% (7)
5) Mind or mood control. . . .population behavioral modification **7.4% (6)
7) Biochemical, chemical or radiation weapons testing or operations **6.2% (5)
9) Media used to detect, enhance or neutralize weapons (i.e. HAARP) **6.2% (5)
3) Weather war experimentation or operations or defense from or countermeasures to same **2.5% (2)
8) Media to enhance communications or over the horizon visualization . . . Holographic Media. . . Operation Blue Beam. . **2.5% (2)
12) Wide area neutralization of biochemical attack immunizations, etc. **1.2% (1)
11) Riot control or crowd management experimentation, operations **0% (0)
Blank (View Results) (22)

Non-Blank Votes: 81

 

[Mick West]

Sorry, I miss read your question . . . Here is an inventory of the most common thoughts on missions . . .

POLL: Your number one reason CHEMTRAILs EXIST. . . .
1) Geo-engineering. . . .promote global dimming to slow global warming **21.0% (17)
6) Fertility and population reduction, soft kill experimentation or operations **19.8% (16)
4) Solar Storm, sun spots or EMP mitigation efforts* **16.0% (13)
2) Weather modification. . . Increase or decrease rain, snow, intensity of storms, etc. Peaceful **8.6% (7)
10) Media to visually block or hinder viewing celestial events, objects **8.6% (7)
5) Mind or mood control. . . .population behavioral modification **7.4% (6)
7) Biochemical, chemical or radiation weapons testing or operations **6.2% (5)
9) Media used to detect, enhance or neutralize weapons (i.e. HAARP) **6.2% (5)
3) Weather war experimentation or operations or defense from or countermeasures to same **2.5% (2)
8) Media to enhance communications or over the horizon visualization . . . Holographic Media. . . Operation Blue Beam. . **2.5% (2)
12) Wide area neutralization of biochemical attack immunizations, etc. **1.2% (1)
11) Riot control or crowd management experimentation, operations **0% (0)
Blank (View Results) (22)

Non-Blank Votes: 81

No, I mean if you were doing it, what would the non-global missions be?