Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Fighting Errors in the Modern World => Topic started by: Caminus on October 25, 2011, 04:42:28 PM
-
Does anyone have any RELIABLE information on this phenomenon? My wife and I noticed ALOT of activity today over the skies where we live. My wife was skeptical until we had the fortunate opportunity to compare what are known as "chemtrails" with "contrails" as there were two planes in the sky simultaneously this morning; one was clearly emitting a contrail which evaporated rather quickly behind the plane while we were able to compare it to another plane at the same time laying down a very long, permanent "chemtrail". She was then able to see the vast difference between the two. There were dozens of chemtrails this morning that eventually spread throughout the day to appear as light clouds in the sky. What are they doing up there?
-
"They" are doing nothing. What you observed was a natural phenomenon. The generation and persistence of contrails is effected by many factors including altitude, relative humidity, temperature, and the richness of the fuel/air mixture contributing particulate matter to the jet's exhaust stream. These conditions differ considerably across the air column. A jet flying below 26,000 feet will seldom leave any sort of contrail behind; the water vapor in the exhaust stream will condense briefly before dispersing again below the saturation point. That explains the "normal" contrails you saw. On the other hand, it is not unusual for higher flying jets to generate contrails that spread and/or morph into full-fledged clouds. The particulate matter left behind behind in the jet's exhaust acts as cloud condensation nuclei which precipitate a domino effect of condensation in the supercooled water droplets at the top of the troposphere. The resulting clouds are then spread around by upper level winds. That explains the "spreading" contrails you saw.
Chemtrails do not exist. They are another fruitless conspiracy theory which absorbs attention that would be better spent elsewhere.
-
I certainly hope so, but do you recall seeing this in years past? I don't recall ever noticing it until fairly recently. The planes today appeared to be at nearly the same altitude, though it is impossible to say with any degree of certainty. I once saw a plane laying down a "chemtrail" in literally a dotted-line fashion, as if he were controlled whatever was being dispensed.
There were trails all over the sky today, I'm sure there are relatively equal amounts of air travel on any given day, just south of Indianapolis. Why are some days clear whereas others are filled with these trails?
-
"They" are doing nothing...Chemtrails do not exist.
Have another glass of kewl-aid and go back to sleep :sleep:
-
There were trails all over the sky today, I'm sure there are relatively equal amounts of air travel on any given day, just south of Indianapolis. Why are some days clear whereas others are filled with these trails?
Because atmospheric conditions are highly, highly variable across both time and space. For example, where I live in Denver, we had near record heat just yesterday; it was 78 degrees in October! But tonight we are under a winter storm advisory with 6-12 inches of snow expected. Frontal movements, the convective lifting of air parcels, topographical features, and literally dozens of other variables can and do cause sharp gradients of pressure, temperature, and humidity to form in the atmosphere.
Now in order for a persistent contrail to form behind a jet engine's exhaust, several conditions are usually necessary.
1) The plane must be flying above 26,000 feet.
2) The external temperature needs to be below -40 C.
3) The relative humidity of the air mass needs to be at or near the saturation point (i.e. the dew point, the point at which the air can contain no more water vapor at the given temperature).
If these conditions are all present, the genesis of a good contrail will ensue. It starts with jet's exhaust. The main combustion products of aviation fuel (which is basically just kerosene, but this analysis would be true for any hydrocarbon) are carbon dioxide and water. The water is in a gaseous state after having just left the extremely hot environment of the turbine's combustion chamber. But as it exits the engine housing, the exhaust gas rapidly expands and cools in the very cold air of the upper troposphere. This will cause the water vapor in the exhaust to condense out of the gaseous state and to form water droplets or, if the temperature is low enough, ice crystals. The process isn't automatic, however. These droplets/crystals need a surface to condense upon, or else they might remain suspended in the air in a supersaturated state. Fortunately these surfaces, called cloud condensation nuclei, are also provided by the jet's exhaust. They are present in the form of incompletely combusted carbon granules, basically microscopic particles of soot (like that black veneer that forms on your palm when you hold your hand over a candle flame). Each one of these tiny particles will find itself the accretion point for a miniscule droplet of liquid or frozen water.
This is where the relative humidity of the air comes in. If the air is relatively dry, then these water droplets will not last very long. They will evaporate into the air again, causing one of those rapidly disappearing contrails that seem to vanish a step behind the plane from whence they issue. But...if the air is moist and cannot contain any more water, then you've just made yoursellf a contrail my friend. The combustion of the jet fuel at high altitude literally dumped an excess of water into very cold, very wet air that could not hold any more moisture. It has no choice but to precipitate out as a cloud. Now think about this: The contrail you see high up in a clear sky is composed of water that was actually jet fuel one second ago. A moment earlier it was kerosene, and now you can actually drink it! How cool is that?
I know of several simple home experiments you can perform to replicate various stages of this process. For instance, if you would like to see water generated from hydrocarbons, try this. Hopefully you have a gas kitchen range. If so, then take your largest metallic stock pot and fill it with ice water. Then place the thing on the cook top and turn the heat up full blast. Within a moment or two, you should begin to see tiny droplets of vapor condensing up the sides of the vessel. This is water generated by the combustion of methane in oxygen: Virgin water, water that has never existed before. Collect a drop of it and place it on your tongue, and you've just ingested something that has not been in liquid form since the foundations of the world.
You can also replicate the condensation nuclei by creating a cloud in your bathroom. Light four or five sticks of incense in the bathroom with the door shut, and let them burn till it's nice and smokey in there. Now turn on the shower using only hot water (make sure you're not in the shower when you do this), and let the steam permeate the room. Then, with one deft maneuver, cut the hot water and switch the shower to all cold. If my calculations are correct, you should now have a contrail in your bathroom. Pretty neat, huh?
I once saw a plane laying down a "chemtrail" in literally a dotted-line fashion, as if he were controlled whatever was being dispensed.
This is an indication that the plane was flying through a region of turbulence where bubbles of moisture-laden air were breaking the equilibrium level. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equilibrium_level) If you learn how to read these things, you can use a jet's contrail as an instrument wherewith to gauge the weather at high altitudes.
-
I certainly hope so, but do you recall seeing this in years past? I don't recall ever noticing it until fairly recently. The planes today appeared to be at nearly the same altitude, though it is impossible to say with any degree of certainty. I once saw a plane laying down a "chemtrail" in literally a dotted-line fashion, as if he were controlled whatever was being dispensed.
There were trails all over the sky today, I'm sure there are relatively equal amounts of air travel on any given day, just south of Indianapolis. Why are some days clear whereas others are filled with these trails?
I'm originally from Seattle (the home of Boeing) and have absolutely no memory of ever seeing these persistent contrails. A few years after moving to Indiana in 1992 I noticed these persistent contrails and wondered why they were like that. I figured it was because the air in the mid-west was somehow different than the coastal air in the Pacific Northwest. Later, someone told me about "chemtrails".
As I said, I never saw them in my youth, nor did I see them during my travels in the Army. In fact, I never saw them until I moved permanently to Indiana, and I don't remember seeing them immediately.
Is it because of atmospheric issues? Because of differences in air pressure, temperature, and humidity? My memory is faulty? Different formulations of jet fuel? I don't know, but I do think that the answer doesn't concern my Alzheimer’s.
-
Several times we saw them in pentacle formation above Cincinnati.
Sometimes in a grid pattern.
No idea what they are, but for certain they would ruin nice, clear skies. So, de-moralisation is one aspect.
-
Man of the West, thanks for the detailed response. I would like to believe your account, but I simply don't recall this phenomenon until very recently. Certainly planes have flown above 26,000 for many years. What gets me the most is that these trails spread in the sky, lingering like clouds all day long. As the sun was setting today, I observed the clouds that were formed from the earlier trails were still lingering in the sky hours after the fact. They covered most of the sky! I find this exceedingly strange.
If the air is relatively dry, then these water droplets will not last very long.
How do you explain these persistent contrails during the summer in the middle of a 90 degree day?
-
Man of the West, thanks for the detailed response. I would like to believe your account...
What stops you from doing so is your reason, Matthew. Anyone who has ever seen a perfectly clear day become overcast/partly cloudy after they make their patterns in the sky knows darn well that it is NOT a natural phenomenon. All talk to the contrary is nonsense, however kindly or innocently offered.
-
FWIW, if the chemtrail debunkers' explanations were legitimate/reasonable, you'd actually see MANY MORE "long-lasting contrails" above major metropolitan areas than you do on those days when the conditions are as their theory suggests. If, say, 100 planes fly over a certain area at over 26000 ft (which happens every single day in many areas) when certain conditions are in effect, why are there not just as many long-lasting contrails as there are planes in the sky above 26K ft? Uh, because that explanation is absolute hogwash. Even the mind-numbing MSM has begun to do stories about this phenomenon.
Honestly, this issue is old news, IMO, even if there is still some disagreement about what is in the chemtrails (aluminum, barium, strontium), what their purpose is, etc.
In other news, Ben Bernanke announced that there is not now, nor will there ever be, any such thing as inflation...and the Obamanator will give a press conference this afternoon to announce which lucky country will be the 'beneficiary' of the next round of 'humanitarian bombing' via extra-Constitutional 'kinetic military action'... After the commercial break, we'll be going live to the Fukushima Agricultural Fair and we'll tell you how you can get your hands on one of those free airline tickets Japan is giving away to 10000 suck...er...very lucky people... Now, a word from our number-one, super-duper, mega-rific sponsor, Monsanto...
-
Does anyone have any RELIABLE information on this phenomenon? My wife and I noticed ALOT of activity today over the skies where we live. My wife was skeptical until we had the fortunate opportunity to compare what are known as "chemtrails" with "contrails" as there were two planes in the sky simultaneously this morning; one was clearly emitting a contrail which evaporated rather quickly behind the plane while we were able to compare it to another plane at the same time laying down a very long, permanent "chemtrail". She was then able to see the vast difference between the two. There were dozens of chemtrails this morning that eventually spread throughout the day to appear as light clouds in the sky. What are they doing up there?
Same thing happened to me a few months ago. I think I posted about it on Facebook that day -- I tried to take a picture; don't remember how it turned out.
When you see 2 planes on the SAME DAY, SAME ATMOSPHERE, SAME HUMIDITY LEVEL, etc. and one of them is spraying a grid pattern, while the other leaves absolutely no trace in the sky -- that forces you to realize that something is up!
-
In other news, Ben Bernanke announced that there is not now, nor will there ever be, any such thing as inflation...and the Obamanator will give a press conference this afternoon to announce which lucky country will be the 'beneficiary' of the next round of 'humanitarian bombing' via extra-Constitutional 'kinetic military action'... After the commercial break, we'll be going live to the Fukushima Agricultural Fair and we'll tell you how you can get your hands on one of those free airline tickets Japan is giving away to 10000 suck...er...very lucky people... Now, a word from our number-one, super-duper, mega-rific sponsor, Monsanto...
:roll-laugh1: :laugh1: :laugh2:
-
I would like to believe your account, but I simply don't recall this phenomenon until very recently.
People seldom recall things that have only a trifling significance for them. I don't recall the last three Buicks I saw on the road, either. You probably just weren't paying attention before. But now that you've taken an interest in this subject, you'll start noticing contrails everywhere. There is a well-known type of cognative bias that occurs when an old and ever-present sensation suddenly acquires a new signification for us: we start to notice it selectively, perhaps even exaggerating its frequency. This alone may be contributing to your increased awareness of contrails. Please continue to watch the skies, even recording your observations if you want. In a short time you'll notice that nothing unusual is going on.
How do you explain these persistent contrails during the summer in the middle of a 90 degree day?
The air in the upper troposphere is much, much colder than the surface level air, even on a blistering hot summer day. This is why there are snows on the summit of Mt. Kilimanjaro, and a semi-tropical forest on the plains below it -- on the same day.
(http://7summits.com/images/data/media/1/kilimanjaro3.jpg)
The decrease in atmospheric pressure with increasing altitude alone will cause a parcel of air to cool by 5.38 °F per 1,000 ft. This is called the adiabatic lapse rate. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapse_rate) So, let's say that the surface temperature is 90 degrees in southern Indiana, elevation approximately 400 feet. That means that the air temperature at 26,000 feet, all other things being equal, will be...
(90 °F) - (5.38 °F X ((26,000 - 400) / 1000 ft.))
or...
-47.73 °F
...which is almost 140 degrees colder.
Of course it's not quite that simple. Assuming that the air is not perfectly dry to begin with (a fairly reasonable assumption), then at some point the rate of cooling will switch from the dry adiabatic lapse rate to the moist adiabatic lapse rate, which is slightly lower; however, we would not know when that point occured without knowing the original relative humidity of the air. Also, there is the fact that surface albedo forcing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albedo) would have warmed the air directly above the ground to a greater extent than solar forcing alone would have done. But these secondary considerations aside, you get the drift. The air in the upper troposphere is much colder than the air at the surface even on a summer day, and plenty cold enough to cause contrails.
Anyone who has ever seen a perfectly clear day become overcast/partly cloudy after they make their patterns in the sky knows darn well that it is NOT a natural phenomenon. All talk to the contrary is nonsense, however kindly or innocently offered.
Do you mean to suggest that commercial airlines -- who can scarcely make a profit to begin with, who are already taking every measure to cut weight and fuel consumption -- are not only loading up their planes with hundreds of additional pounds of chemtrail dust, but deliberately flying out of their way with their increased burden to make "patterns" in the sky, and that the longsuffering passangers with their GPS-equipped smartphones never notice the detour? And for what end, to make clouds? Now that is ridiculous.
As I've already stated repeatedly in this thread, the genesis of real, honest-to-God contrails is indeed a form of unintentional cloud seeding. There have also been attempts at intentional cloud seeding to generate rain, but research suggests that those attempts haven't amounted to much; and in any case, commercial airlines have nothing to do with the matter. But even supposing, per impossibile, that the airlines were up there wasting time making clouds, absolutely nothing bad has resulted from any of this. The world is still turning, is it not? You've got a dubious murder weapon and no body. Case closed.
FWIW, if the chemtrail debunkers' explanations were legitimate/reasonable, you'd actually see MANY MORE "long-lasting contrails" above major metropolitan areas than you do on those days when the conditions are as their theory suggests. If, say, 100 planes fly over a certain area at over 26000 ft (which happens every single day in many areas) when certain conditions are in effect, why are there not just as many long-lasting contrails as there are planes in the sky above 26K ft? Uh, because that explanation is absolute hogwash.
Epic fail, Eamon. Utterly pathetic. The vast majority of the planes that you'll see flying over metropolitan areas will (obviously) be those flying into or out of the airport(s); hence flying at low altitudes, were contrails do not naturally form anyway. Once an airliner reaches its cruising altitude there is no particular reason for it to fly over a city; and since it will take the most economical flightpath toward its destination, and since most of the country is uninhabited, high altitude jets are not seen with any exaggerated frequency over urban areas, and there would be no reason to expect an especially large number of contrails to appear there. But if your theory were correct, then you might see an escalating number of chemtrails at low altitudes, since flying low over an urban corridor would be the optimum way to disperse whatever nefarious agent you allege they're afflicting upon us, hitting the densest population centers at the least cost. That assumes, of course, that these maniacally brilliant manipulators of the world puppet-theater are not too stupid to camoflage what they're doing, so that even you can figure it out. In any case, trails at low altitudes would not (ordinarily -- there are exceptions) be contrails, although there is no reason to assume that they are malign. They might result from a smoking engine, a fuel dump, or a wingtip vortex. There is no reason to assume that trails at high altitudes are anything but contrails.
When you see 2 planes on the SAME DAY, SAME ATMOSPHERE, SAME HUMIDITY LEVEL, etc. and one of them is spraying a grid pattern, while the other leaves absolutely no trace in the sky -- that forces you to realize that something is up!
No two planes are ever flying through the same atmosphere or the same atmospheric conditions. The atmosphere is an unstable fluid with sharply divergent boundary conditions; i.e., atmospheric variables differ rapidly across space and time. That is why we have such things as clouds and weather in the first place. Without such divergences, the atmosphere would be nothing but a cold, uniform haze. Have you never seen a squall line before?
(http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2011/04/24/cuмulonimbus_over_Africa_540x405.jpg)
Any two planes that you see in the sky are likely separated by thousands of feet both vertically and horizontally; flight plans and air traffic controllers see to that. This means that they are NOT flying through the same atmospheric conditions at all. For you to suggest that they are literally "in the same atmosphere" is tantamount to you looking at the picture above and exclaiming, "Hey, I see clouds and rain in one region of the sky and clear skies in another. Something is up!"
Yeah, something is up alright. It's called scientific illiteracy. Fortunately, you don't have to let this happen to you. There is an abundance of good meteorological information available on the web. Try having a look. You can start here. (http://wattsupwiththat.com/)
-
MOTW- very impressive! Where did you get all this stuff? Did you study Meteorology in school? And thanks for sharing!
:smirk:
-
MOTW- very impressive! Where did you get all this stuff? Did you study Meteorology in school? And thanks for sharing!
In a manner of speaking, yes. I studied engineering physics and "Earth Systems Sciences" (which is basically geology with an interdisciplinary outreach toward meteorology, biology, and chemistry) at the Colorado School of Mines. I've also studied philosophy up to the graduate level at CU. Not that I place much emphasis on this, but perhaps it is helpful, from time to time, to mention that I am not entirely without authority in such matters.
And you're welcome. :cool:
-
In a manner of speaking, yes. I studied engineering physics and "Earth Systems Sciences" (which is basically geology with an interdisciplinary outreach toward meteorology, biology, and chemistry) at the Colorado School of Mines. I've also studied philosophy up to the graduate level at CU. Not that I place much emphasis on this, but perhaps it is helpful, from time to time, to mention that I am not entirely without authority in such matters.
And you're welcome. :cool:
Very nice! Well its good that you share this with us. For myself, this particular subject isn't that interesting. You seem good-willed and like a good Catholic. Its good that you share your knowledge with us, even if we disagree most of the time. I hope that doesn't stop you from posting here, though I could imagine it would be discouraging. Even though I disagree with some of your positions, specifically on the conspiracy related subjects, I like reading the counter-points as well. Its good not to just read one 'side' constantly.
-
Flub :)
-
Do you mean to suggest that commercial airlines -- who can scarcely make a profit to begin with, who are already taking every measure to cut weight and fuel consumption -- are not only loading up their planes with hundreds of additional pounds of chemtrail dust, but deliberately flying out of their way with their increased burden to make "patterns" in the sky, and that the longsuffering passangers with their GPS-equipped smartphones never notice the detour? And for what end, to make clouds? Now that is ridiculous.
Where did I mention that this is being done by commercial airliners? What is ridiculous is your boxing with a shadow of your making. Boy, you CREAMED that shadow, Boss...way to go!
But even supposing, per impossibile, that the airlines were up there wasting time making clouds, absolutely nothing bad has resulted from any of this.
Again...boxing with shadows.
Epic fail, Eamon. Utterly pathetic.
Not really, as I already knew you use the sorry excuse that follows, you arrogant sack.
The vast majority of the planes that you'll see flying over metropolitan areas will (obviously) be those flying into or out of the airport(s); hence flying at low altitudes, were contrails do not naturally form anyway.
This is plain to all.
Once an airliner reaches its cruising altitude there is no particular reason for it to fly over a city
Who said anything about flying right over a city? No one. MoW, your reading comprehension is in need of some serious improvement. An airplane at 35K ft, say, would not even need to fly directly over a city in order to be visible to the inhabitants of that city and for miles in all directions. Surely you grasp this.
since it will take the most economical flightpath toward its destination, and since most of the country is uninhabited
That may be true for large chunks of the western US, but it sure as hell is NOT true east of the Mississippi. Get a new argument.
high altitude jets are not seen with any exaggerated frequency over urban areas, and there would be no reason to expect an especially large number of contrails to appear there.
Again, I said "an area", not specifying urban or rural.
But if your theory were correct, then you might see an escalating number of chemtrails at low altitudes, since flying low over an urban corridor would be the optimum way to disperse whatever nefarious agent you allege they're afflicting upon us, hitting the densest population centers at the least cost.
LOL! I never said the goal was to directly affect densely populated areas, did I? BTW, if they did what you suggest, even the most calcified boneheads would suspect something ;)
MoW, push your disinfo/pseudo-science somewhere else. You argue with points that were NEVER MADE -- and then you want arrogantly present yourself as scientifically literate! This forum is not for kewl-aiders nor shadow-boxing douche bags.
-
GV,
Ending a comment to someone with "you arrogant sack" and other names does not help your side of the arguement.
Do you call people names in face-to-face conversations or do you only resort to name-calling on the internet?
Since I know that you have experience teaching young students I am going to keep hoping for better manners from you.
-
I suppose this professional meteorologist is just scientifically illiterate...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=T6VmK5zNiCM
Seriously, one has to be a willfully-blind kewl-aid guzzler or just plain stupid to buy the absurd explanation that chemtrails are really just contrails.
-
It does little for your case to respond to his attempt to explain the phenomena by attacking him Eamon. If you're going to prove people wrong, or prove your case as right, why don't you share some of the knowledge you have? You have time enough it seems by the amount of time you took to respond to his post.
-
Nice. We posted @ 11:04, :05, and :06. I'll watch the video . Thanks Eamon.
-
GV,
Ending a comment to someone with "you arrogant sack" and other names does not help your side of the argument.
MoW thinks that he is the only scientifically literate person here and is talking down to those whose position is far more rational than the disinfo he presented. His post contained several snide remarks, especially when he was 'destroying' arguments that no one even made, so I called a spade a spade. If that bothers you, so be it.
s2s,
He attacked me, I responded. Reread his post..."epic fail...utterly pathetic...etc", basically saying that those who disagree with him are scientifically illiterate.
-
Some men just won't believe that the government is anything but benign. Even the most damning evidence (e.g., the events of 9/11) won't budge them -- they'll believe any irrational explanation, to convince themselves their world hasn't been shattered.
I'd rather face reality, personally, as would Eamon -- but unfortunately not everyone has the guts for that.
I got my "call a spade a spade" from my dad -- he's the reason my last name ends with "Mc". What do you know, Eamon is ethnically Irish as well!
The Irish have plenty of faults, but one of their common virtues is being BS-proof. God bless 'em!
The evidence for malicious spraying of chemicals and elements into the atmosphere is overwhelming.
I suppose MoTW doesn't believe in HAARP either -- and believes the official story of 9/11?
If either one of those are true, I will dismiss anything he says.
-
Chemtrails do not exist. They are another fruitless conspiracy theory which absorbs attention that would be better spent elsewhere.
:facepalm:
Come on, I've even heard a Novus Ordo priest talk about how chemtrails exist.
-
Weatherman admits Military Dumping Chemtrails
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDCLe_4ee7A
-
Here are some news items about "them" -- i.e, the Criminal Syndicate that is raping all of us right now, and has been raping the formerly-Christian West for centuries.
http://news.antiwar.com/2011/10/25/wartime-contracting-commission-classifies-findings-for-next-20-years/
Uh, why classify the files from a project whose SOLE purpose is to discover, expose, and correct government waste? Ya think they might have come across massive FRAUD? What good will it do to read such docs 20 years from now? How stupid do they think we are? Whatever happened to that investigation into the Pentagon's "missing" $2.3T, which Rumsfeld mentioned on...9/10/01?
Here... http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27307 ... you can learn how we are now in Uganda, too! Soon, it will be Syria, then Iran.
Here... https://rt.com/news/google-report-police-brutality-767/ ... you can read about increasing police brutality, or you could look into the Pigs' response to peaceful protestors in Oakland. Ironically, we are (we pretend) going into various countries because they are cracking down too hard on people...what a sick joke!
Here... http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1285/006/Banks_Have_Put_Americans_On_The_Hook_For_Trillions:_Restore_Glass-Steagall.html ... you can learn about BoA, with the complicity of the Fed, putting $75T worth of fraudulent derivatives on the back of the people. You could also look up how BO just shafted us all AGAIN... http://dailybail.com/home/new-obama-foreclosure-plan-shifts-fraud-liability-from-wall.html ...or you can read about the $16T Bernanke created (on the sly) from 2008 to 2010... http://www.unelected.org/audit-of-the-federal-reserve-reveals-16-trillion-in-secret-bailouts
Wake up, MoW. THEY are the sociopaths in almost all positions of power and the biggies are the banksters who seek to remain off radar (Rothschild et alii). They could give two squirts of rat piss for you or me. Do you think all the genetically modified food is some kind of benefit, or perhaps it is all just an accident? Forgetting chemtrails for a moment...If you think there is no "they" or that they would not commit mass murder, etc., you are completely blind and utterly ignorant of reality -- and CI is the wrong place to waste your time trying to convince the awake to go back to sleep. FWIW, I am only being hard on you because you are, in fact, intelligent and seem to be a decent guy...but the time you have left to get your head out of your ass is shorter than you think. Wake up, my friend...THEY are busily destroying all that any "Man of the West" should stand for...and they will run over you and yours as they go about their business.
[FWIW, I could link hundreds of similar stories dealing with a dozen or more areas of life -- water, food, banking, cнιℓd тrαffιcking, the military-industrial complex, 9/11, 7/7/05, Israel, the origins of AIDS and the corrupt nature of the pharmacological industry, vaccines, etc., etc., etc.]
-
Caminus specifically asked for some RELIABLE information in the original post. I will leave it to the forum to judge who has made a good-faith effort to be helpful and informative, and who has not. Now if it please the readers, I shall deal with some of the objections raised to my account, such as they are.
Where did I mention that this is being done by commercial airliners? What is ridiculous is your boxing with a shadow of your making. Boy, you CREAMED that shadow, Boss...way to go!
I’m not boxing with shadows. There has been some conversational implicature throughout this thread to the effect that we were speaking about commercial air traffic, and that is the assumption I made. If the jets to which Caminus referred in the original post had been military, or otherwise suspicious, I’m sure he would have identified them as such, as it is a salient fact which would have qualified his question and lent it an increased urgency. That he did not do so leads me to believe (as I’m sure it would lead most people to believe) that he was speaking about ordinary, commercial jets. In any case, none of this effects the core of my argument, which was rooted in physics (which knows no distinction between commercial and military).
Who said anything about flying right over a city? No one. MoW, your reading comprehension is in need of some serious improvement.
Actually, you said it. Is this not your typing?
FWIW, if the chemtrail debunkers' explanations were legitimate/reasonable, you'd actually see MANY MORE "long-lasting contrails" above major metropolitan areas than you do on those days when the conditions are as their theory suggests.
It seems that my reading comprehension is just fine, while you are unable to even remember what you wrote (or unwilling to acknowledge it). Cast aspersions if you must, but the facts are here for everybody to see.
since it will take the most economical flightpath toward its destination, and since most of the country is uninhabited
That may be true for large chunks of the western US, but it sure as hell is NOT true east of the Mississippi. Get a new argument.
The argument was that high-altitude jets, which are the only ones that usually form contrails, would not be flying over cities with any more frequency than they would be flying over any random point on the earth’s surface. This would be true no matter how densely the cities were packed; i.e., it would be true east or west of the Mississippi. It is the low-altitude jets flying into and out of airports, which do not form contrails, which are seen with increased frequency over cities, and not seen in uninhabited areas. This was written in order to refute your statement that, if I were right, one should expect to see many more contrails over urban areas than one actually does. I have shown that this expectation is false.
MoW, push your disinfo/pseudo-science somewhere else. You argue with points that were NEVER MADE -- and then you want arrogantly present yourself as scientifically literate! This forum is not for kewl-aiders nor shadow-boxing douche bags.
I’m not going to dignify that.
I suppose this professional meteorologist is just scientifically illiterate...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=T6VmK5zNiCM
One wonders how you come off criticizing other people’s reading comprehension when you can’t even absorb the contents of a thirty-seven second video. The meteorologist in that clip specifically identified those radar reflections as chaff. CHAFF!
Chaff is neither new nor controversial. It has no long-term deleterious effects on the weather or on human health. And since the military has to use it in combat, one would expect them to train with it once in a while, over friendly skies, where the results of the exercise could be studied. There is not one mention of chemtrails here.
Please everybody, watch Gladius’ vaunted video and see for yourself if he knows what he’s talking about.
Some men just won't believe that the government is anything but benign. Even the most damning evidence (e.g., the events of 9/11) won't budge them -- they'll believe any irrational explanation, to convince themselves their world hasn't been shattered.
I have called the United Government a “criminal organization that deserved deposition many times over” right here, (http://www.cathinfo.com/index.php/Truth-about-American-oil-imports-what-Middle-East) in the pages of your own forum. If you’re going to make an ad hominem attack, you should at least make sure that it sticks. (It’s a non sequitur too, by the way. And also a false dichotomy. But I have to hand it to you, packing so many logical fallacies into two sentences. That isn’t easy to do.)
I got my "call a spade a spade" from my dad -- he's the reason my last name ends with "Mc". What do you know, Eamon is ethnically Irish as well!
The Irish have plenty of faults, but one of their common virtues is being BS-proof. God bless 'em!
It must have skipped a generation with you two. Sorry, that was a little fresh; but seriously, you guys seem to have fallen for every urban legend drifting around out there.
I suppose MoTW doesn't believe in HAARP either -- and believes the official story of 9/11?
If either one of those are true, I will dismiss anything he says.
I’ve already said repeatedly that I do NOT believe the United States government had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks besides being negligent. As to HAARP, of course I “believe” in it. It’s a research facility in Alaska; it exists. And it does the kind of research that I happen to be interested in. Did you ever stop to think about how cool plasma physics is, or do you just want see cօռspιʀαcιҽs everywhere? Do you realize how many applications this research has? You are only depriving yourself of a chance to be more excited and engaged by the wonders of nature when you focus exclusively on these dour cօռspιʀαcιҽs. Go ahead and dismiss me, but I think you’re refusing the better part.
Come on, I've even heard a Novus Ordo priest talk about how chemtrails exist.
Well, hang it all, that should settle it. :laugh1:
-
I suppose this professional meteorologist is just scientifically illiterate...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=T6VmK5zNiCM
Seriously, one has to be a willfully-blind kewl-aid guzzler or just plain stupid to buy the absurd explanation that chemtrails are really just contrails.
That's interesting, it confirms what a friend of my said regarding chemtrails, that it has to do with military radar/satellite interception/disruption.
-
Wake up, MoW. THEY are the sociopaths in almost all positions of power and the biggies are the banksters who seek to remain off radar (Rothschild et alii). They could give two squirts of rat piss for you or me. Do you think all the genetically modified food is some kind of benefit, or perhaps it is all just an accident? Forgetting chemtrails for a moment...If you think there is no "they" or that they would not commit mass murder, etc., you are completely blind and utterly ignorant of reality -- and CI is the wrong place to waste your time trying to convince the awake to go back to sleep. FWIW, I am only being hard on you because you are, in fact, intelligent and seem to be a decent guy...but the time you have left to get your head out of your ass is shorter than you think. Wake up, my friend...THEY are busily destroying all that any "Man of the West" should stand for...and they will run over you and yours as they go about their business.
Thanks for your concern and your attempt at kindness. I think.
Look, for what it's worth, I do believe I understand where you're coming from, and you're right to insist upon the existence of some very real, very evil dangers lurking in the world. I would like to explore that common ground further, in the future.
-
There has been some conversational implicature throughout this thread to the effect that we were speaking about commercial air traffic, and that is the assumption I made. If the jets to which Caminus referred in the original post had been military, or otherwise suspicious, I’m sure he would have identified them as such, as it is a salient fact which would have qualified his question and lent it an increased urgency. That he did not do so leads me to believe (as I’m sure it would lead most people to believe) that he was speaking about ordinary, commercial jets. In any case, none of this effects the core of my argument, which was rooted in physics (which knows no distinction between commercial and military).
Fair enough. You acted as if I had been referring to commercial jets. I was not. However, there are claims that SOME commercial jets, usually from cheapo-style airlines, are, to some degree, also involved.
It seems that my reading comprehension is just fine, while you are unable to even remember what you wrote (or unwilling to acknowledge it).
You are correct and I apologize. My next sentence (from my post you quoted, found on the bottom of page one) is more general, speaking of "an area", which modification I made on purpose (while clearly neglecting to modify the preceding sentence). I rewrote the one sentence but failed to alter the entire thing.
Frankly, the point is not very important in that these things do not need to happen over a large city to be seen by large numbers of people -- and east of the Mississippi is heavily populated. Sure, there are many flights taking off and landing around Chicago, say, but there are also MANY flights simply passing over within a close enough radius that any contrails/chemtrails would be visible to the inhabitants thereof (and photos of chemtrails/contrails over large cities are numerous and very easy to find, making it clear that there is PLENTY of high-altitude air traffic above/within sight of major cities). In Europe, where the population is even denser and they also use chemtrails, this is even more true. IMO, we are unlikely to ever see eye to eye on this one. So be it...
The argument was that high-altitude jets, which are the only ones that usually form contrails, would not be flying over cities with any more frequency than they would be flying over any random point on the earth’s surface.
That was not my argument nor would I argue against it. This item is, as I have said, old news. Think what you want.
The meteorologist in that clip specifically identified those radar reflections as chaff. CHAFF!
He specifically mentions aluminum. Aluminum is NOT good for people or animals or the soil wherein we grow our food. FWIW, I just snagged the first video I found. There are MANY more, including some lengthy and detailed docuмentaries, but I see no point gathering any for the benefit of a man who still thinks this:
I’ve already said repeatedly that I do NOT believe the United States government had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks besides being negligent.
If I gave any offense, I apologize, MoW. Godspeed, bro :)
-
"They" are doing nothing.
Even if I grant you the mildest interpretation of the "chaff" biz, that is still SOMETHING and it is happening all over this country (and overseas). As for the rest, forget about it...we will just have to agree to disagree. I have work to do and have spent too much time on this today... Cheerio!
-
Nah , it can't be chemtrails.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSSWnXQsgOU
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYug3xDKXHQ&feature=related
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzc60zl70Gk&feature=related
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiJ_R8JVpi4&feature=related
-
Matthew,
You don't have to be a scientist (or even a literate adult) to know there is a substantial difference between contrails and chemtrails. Many people who have lived in the same areas for years know something new and strange is going on; others do not want to admit anything that might challenge their (incorrect) assumptions about the world we live in and the men who 'lead' us. The disinfo campaign knows no bounds in these times, but one million videos or scientific studies will not convince those who will not see. There are MUCH bigger fish to fry... Hold fast, bro :)
-
MoW,
As far as 9/11 goes, you might want to look into what happened to Building Seven. Take care, bro :)
-
Well, hang it all, that should settle it.
I wasn't saying that because an NO priest says they exist means that they exist. My point was, given how naive and wimpy NO priests tend to be, it speaks volume when one says they exist.
I'm guessing you don't believe in the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr. That being the case, how do you explain George Bush Sr, "Pope" Paul VI, and the United Nations all calling for one?
-
I wasn't saying that because an NO priest says they exist means that they exist. My point was, given how naive and wimpy NO priests tend to be, it speaks volume when one says they exist.
I know what you meant. I was just trying to inject some levity into a debate that has become disturblingly personal.
I'm guessing you don't believe in the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr. That being the case, how do you explain George Bush Sr, "Pope" Paul VI, and the United Nations all calling for one?
Do you really want to open that can of worms? Suffice it to say that I am not the sort of person you take me for.
Look, you really do not know all that much about my life. You don't know what I might have dealt with or thought about in the past. I'm very saddened by everybody's willingness to simply assign me to a camp, to conclude that I'm naive, a neocon, a NWO stooge, or just plain ignorant. You cluck your tongues and mutter, "There are none so blind as those who will not see," or words to that effect, and then you think you have me fixed in your mind -- all figured out. But it's not that simple.
That is not the approach that I've taken with any of you. It's plain that we disagree, but I have resisted any temptation to reduce you to a shallow stereotype of yourself and then to criticize that, as if that encompassed the whole of your being. On the contrary, I know you have good reasons for believing what you believe: personal reasons, reasons close to the heart, reasons rooted in much reflection and involvment. It is not my intention to come in and savage somebody's whole emotional sensorium, even when they are wrong. I think it wiser to show understanding, but many people do not seem to recognize when someone is trying to be their friend. I have not even resorted to polemics, except against Eamon (because he dishes it out so regularly I just assumed he could take it, too). However, except for s2srea and ora pro me (thanks you guys), I have met with nothing but scoffing on this thread.
As for your question, I think it's safe to conclude that I do not believe in what you think the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr is. You and I do not use those words to refer to the same thing. That doesn't mean that I'm oblivious to the whole subject. In this case, quite the opposite is true. But apparently it is too much of blow to others' pride to entertain the proposition that I might know a bit more about these things than they do. A case in point:
MoW,
As far as 9/11 goes, you might want to look into what happened to Building Seven. Take care, bro :)
I have "looked into it," thank you very much. I did so long ago. I reached a different conclusion than you did. It is a strange way of setting up a disjunction that Eamon employs here. He is in effect saying, "Either you have never looked into Building Seven, or I am right about the conspiracy." Heads I win, tails you lose. Without pressing the point, I will only say that those who argue in this manner are prescinding from the case at hand and making themselves the issue. "What, you don't agree that Bulding Seven was a controlled demolition" quickly becomes a shorthand for "What, you don't agree with me." This is how arguments turn into fights. And I am entirely sympathetic, by the way. In most life situations it is almost impossible to draw a fine line between arguing and fighting. Power and fiat inevitably come into the fray, and I'm okay with that. It's the way of the world, and a man who didn't fight for his position would probably lack the blood and spirit necessary to be much good for anything. But when the desired outcome is truth, we have to put our own blood aside recognizing that it has nothing to do with the matter, and embrace that pure Apollonian reason which is so foreign to our fallen natures.
Now which is easier to believe: that I have never looked into Building Seven, that I am entirely ignorant of the whole controversy surrounding it; or that maybe the matter isn't as cut and dried as you've made it out to be? Actually, I shouldn't have said "which is easier." The first is undoubtably easier to believe, but the second is right, and that is the one to which we owe our allegiance if we are to call ourselves friends of truth and charity.
-
If the jets to which Caminus referred in the original post had been military, or otherwise suspicious, I’m sure he would have identified them as such,
I don't know about anyone else, but I find it difficult to identify specific types of aircraft when they are flying overhead at 30,000 feet.
-
MoW, what is your conclusion regarding Building 7?
-
If the jets to which Caminus referred in the original post had been military, or otherwise suspicious, I’m sure he would have identified them as such,
I don't know about anyone else, but I find it difficult to identify specific types of aircraft when they are flying overhead at 30,000 feet.
Ditto.
-
If the jets to which Caminus referred in the original post had been military, or otherwise suspicious, I’m sure he would have identified them as such,
I don't know about anyone else, but I find it difficult to identify specific types of aircraft when they are flying overhead at 30,000 feet.
Ditto.
Then you would find it especially difficult to to accurately identify and discriminate between atmospheric phenomena of which you've shown no comprehension. Proof positive that you ought to learn a bit more about these subjects before making wild accusations.
-
I do understand there are diverse effects, some natural and some man-made. I don't think you've disputed that.
-
Look, you really do not know all that much about my life. You don't know what I might have dealt with or thought about in the past. I'm very saddened by everybody's willingness to simply assign me to a camp, to conclude that I'm naive, a neocon, a NWO stooge, or just plain ignorant. You cluck your tongues and mutter, "There are none so blind as those who will not see," or words to that effect, and then you think you have me fixed in your mind -- all figured out. But it's not that simple.
MoW, I did not attack your character, nor did I label you as any of the things you mentioned in your reply. I didn't call you anything, all I did was ask you if you believed in the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr and how you responded to three well-known figures calling for one.
People in this country can't seem to inhale the slightest possibility that we have a crooked government run by Freemasons. But it's not all that hard to believe. Governments in many other countries in world history have been corrupt, is IS possible. See, Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ is behind the NWO just as Masons were behind the infiltration of the Church. If you believe Masons infiltrated the Church, then you should have no problem believing that they infiltrated the government as well.
-
If the jets to which Caminus referred in the original post had been military, or otherwise suspicious, I’m sure he would have identified them as such,
I don't know about anyone else, but I find it difficult to identify specific types of aircraft when they are flying overhead at 30,000 feet.
Ditto.
Then you would find it especially difficult to to accurately identify and discriminate between atmospheric phenomena of which you've shown no comprehension. Proof positive that you ought to learn a bit more about these subjects before making wild accusations.
Actually, I do not find it difficult at all to identify what looks like contrails that take hours and hours to dissapate and criss-cross the sky. I also do not find it difficult to realize that before about ten or so years ago, I have no memory of ever seeing this atmospheric phenomena.
On the other hand, I readily admit that I do not comprehend this. I also readily admit that your explanation doesn't make sense unless the laws of nature have been recently changed. Perhaps an amendment was inserted into an omnibus spending bill or was it part of the Y2K problem?
-
Not sure if anybody has seen this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K9rXydMmfw
-
Chemtrails have been on the periphery of my worldly worries, so I paid little attention until I read that the US govt, after decades of denial, acknowledged that they were seeding barium and aluminum salts for "geo-engineering."
What was most interesting to me was that chemtrails were another instance of protracted US govt denial followed by admission (or incontrovertible evidence of government lying, e.g., the FLIR video (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5510108493532885562#docid=2962656895645965329) showing men dismounting from a tank to set fire to the Branch Davidians' home in Waco, followed by the men machine-gunning people fleeing the burning building).
I did not bother to archive the chemtrail admission, but I suspect that if you do a search for chemtrails at http://www.activistpost.com, you will find a link to the admission. If you don't find it, I don't really care and I don't really want to hear about it. I sure can't—and don't want to—encyclopedically archive the evidence of every wicked thing this wicked government does.
Hoffman and Heimbichner refer to the technique as "freeze and thaw" and "revelation of the method."
Waco
OKC
radiation testing on soldiers
LSD studies on unknowing civilians
Tuskegee syphillis study
Serratia marsescens biowarfare aerosols over the SF Bay Area (and other such biowarfare testing on unknowing innocents)
9/11
Gulf of Tonkin incident
USS Maine sinking
USS Liberty attack by the Zionists
WMD in Iraq
"et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-t7uVdID3s)" @ time stamp 3:09
-
Here are a couple links to the work of this man:
David L. Griscom vitae: B.S. in Physics, Carnegie-Mellon University 1960, Ph.D. in Physics, Brown University, 1966. Fellow, American Physical Society. Fellow, American Association for the Advancement of Science. Fellow, American Ceramic Society. Member, Geological Society of America. Research Physicist at Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), Washington, DC, 1967-2001. Fulbright-García Robles Fellow at Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 1997. Invited Professor of Research at Universités de Paris-6 & 7, Lyon-1, et St-Etienne (France) and Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2000-2004. Adjunct Professor of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Arizona, 2004-2005. Consultancy: impactGlass research international, 2005-present. Winner, one national and two international research awards and honored by Brown University with a “Distinguished Graduate School Alumnus” award. Author, 193 papers in peer-reviewed journals and books, principal author of 112 of these.
http://impactglassman.blogspot.com/2007/01/hand-waving-physics-of-911.html
http://impactglassman.blogspot.com/2010/09/911-truth-evidence-of-energetic.html
Here is a vid about the psychological reasons why some still fail to grasp/face the truth about 9/11:
http://911truth.org/article.php?story=20111019043253792
There is so much evidence that contradicts the official story that it is no longer rational to accept the nonsense of Officialdom. Accepting it means lying to oneself and, as a consequence, failing to understand the events of the last ten years (or reality as a whole). Wake up, face reality, and trust that the truth alone sets us free...
Enjoy :)
-
Thank you for those!
-
An interesting site.
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/
-
Chemtrails have been on the periphery of my worldly worries, so I paid little attention until I read that the US govt, after decades of denial, acknowledged that they were seeding barium and aluminum salts for "geo-engineering."
What was most interesting to me was that chemtrails were another instance of protracted US govt denial followed by admission (or incontrovertible evidence of government lying, e.g., the FLIR video (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5510108493532885562#docid=2962656895645965329) showing men dismounting from a tank to set fire to the Branch Davidians' home in Waco, followed by the men machine-gunning people fleeing the burning building).
I did not bother to archive the chemtrail admission, but I suspect that if you do a search for chemtrails at http://www.activistpost.com, you will find a link to the admission. If you don't find it, I don't really care and I don't really want to hear about it. I sure can't—and don't want to—encyclopedically archive the evidence of every wicked thing this wicked government does.
Hoffman and Heimbichner refer to the technique as "freeze and thaw" and "revelation of the method."
Waco
OKC
radiation testing on soldiers
LSD studies on unknowing civilians
Tuskegee syphillis study
Serratia marsescens biowarfare aerosols over the SF Bay Area (and other such biowarfare testing on unknowing innocents)
9/11
Gulf of Tonkin incident
USS Maine sinking
USS Liberty attack by the Zionists
WMD in Iraq
"et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-t7uVdID3s)" @ time stamp 3:09
As an aside;
Interesting you brought Waco up. The video I watched ten years ago or so stated that Koresh was seen in Waco shopping some time before the final encounter and could have been apprehended then. It sounds like he was to be sacrificed as a public exhibition for all to see. Another tidbit was that the FBI or whoever else was in on this , when entering a building, actually shot and killed their own ( 4 I believe) to "prove" that Koresh's compound was responsible for this reprehensible act.
-
As an aside;
Interesting you brought Waco up. The video I watched ten years ago or so stated that Koresh was seen in Waco shopping some time before the final encounter and could have been apprehended then. It sounds like he was to be sacrificed as a public exhibition for all to see. Another tidbit was that the FBI or whoever else was in on this , when entering a building, actually shot and killed their own ( 4 I believe) to "prove" that Koresh's compound was responsible for this reprehensible act.
Beyond that:
Koresh was known to jog outside their property every day;
He had been tipped off that the BATF was interested in him, so he called them, offered to come in for an interview, and was rebuffed by the ATF; and
The code name of the ATF plan was "Operation Showtime."
Yes, the attack was planned and timed to make a big show when Congress was in budget negotiations.
Though it was completely and adamantly denied at the time, testimony has leaked out in the interim that Delta Force did not just "advise" ATF, but actually participated in the attack. Incidentally, the person who first made the Delta Force presence in Waco known is a traditional Catholic convert (of Fr. Wathen) from the Special Forces, Steve Barry, the now expectedly maligned editor of The Resister—apropos discussion in the "Catholic Resistance" section.
To me, the FLIR footage is most damning. You can see the men roll off the tanks to set the fire and then you can see the soldiers machine-gunning people fleeing their burning home.
Then, like OKC, Ruby Ridge, and 9/11, the scene was further razed and the evidence hauled off and destroyed. The front door of the Davidians' home was pivotal evidence of "who shot first?"
THAT is what we are facing, deaths by immolation and gunfire—just a little bit worse than internet name-calling and tattling.