Chemtrails?

Post Reply New Topic

No, I did not watch the posted video where the lady claimed to have rung up NASA. For all we know, she called someone else who impersonated a NASA employee.

It wouldn't be the first time that a conspiracy nutter deliberately lied to "prove" an alleged conspiracy in high places.

Scam artists use this trick routinely - Link to ArticleIt's easy to impersonate someone over the phone.

What interests me regarding contrails is when are they contrails and when are they pollution. When you look out of a airplane window at other planes the black smoke from the engines trails back for miles, yet on the ground all you see are what appears to be white contrail?

Well, not all aircraft are for passenger planes, the first video a guy speaks to a pilot from a weather modification company, cloud seeding with silver iodine.

The second video shows what could be put on a plane if you took the seats out.

As for the concentrations by the time they reach the ground, hopefully that is the case, It seems the main purpose is to combat "global warming" by creating clouds of reflective aluminum particles to block the sun, thing is though, Alzheimer,s disease which can be caused by aluminum absorbsion, is reported to be far more prevalent in recent years.

The following hearing of the environmental protection agency gives a more worrying health appraisal .

Obviously you can convert an airliner into a cargo plane, or you can just use planes (like the C5A) built as cargo planes in the first place, and then fill the payload with chemicals. And then spray these chemicals in the substratosphere.

But spraying aluminium particles by airplanes to reflect light to reverse global warming seems rather ambitious to say the least. Makes the Berlin Airlift look microscopic.

You would have to shield the whole Earth with this protective mirror you're trying to build at the top of the sky.
The Earth is 190 million square miles. How wide is a typical chemtrail? A few hundred yards? A plane flying a 1000 miles would leave a chemtrail a thousand miles long but only a tenth of a mile wide-thus (temporarily) shielding 100 square miles of the earth below. So you would need two million sorties of airliners flying a 1000 miles in each sortie to shield the whole earth. And the particles would fall back to the ground in a few weeks. So you would have to keep doing this constantly. The planes would also leave fuel exhaust (contributing to green house gases) partially offsetting the purpose of this project.

Maybe they wouldnt need to cover every inch of the earth. Surprisingly little of the earth's surface has large numbers of people living on it. If you avoided population centers you could still paint over most of the planet.

You could fly these things and only spray over the mid oceans, or over the Canadian woods, or the Amazon, or the Sahara, where there is little population. Two thirds of the planet is ocean. The third that remains includes Antarctica, and Sibera (five million square miles each). So of I were doing this I would avoid messing up the air where lots of folks live (like Jersy, China Proper, Western Europe) and stick to the large ininhabited areas (like the middle of the Ocean).

But alarmist folks see them doing this over their back yards near big cities.

There was some cause and affect.

After 9/11 the airlines and all air traffic was shut down for several days.

The skies cleared, and the ground got several degrees warmer. When planes started flying again, it cooled off.

I vote water vapor, as water expands 1100 times becoming vapor, metals and chemical do not expand at all.

What is showing up in the drinking water is something else.

Anything showing up your water is most likely of a very local source. It can either be industrial, agricultural, or natural.
Many people's wells in my area have high (by U.S. standards)levels of arsenic, nitrites,boron, and fluoride; all these come from the rock formations that contain the aquifers.
If I wanted to poison people's water, I could think of a better way to do so than by spraying things into the air.

Several errors here.

Quite true. But I have never heard of a case where cloud seeding with silver iodine is done from high altitude jet aircraft.



Do you really think that they can carry enough of a load to spray multiple states?



The notion that they are spraying out clouds of aluminum particles to block the sun is ridiculous. While that might help fight Global Warming, there has never been any indication that they are using such tactics as of now. There could be a possibility of doing it in a limited area in a research effort to try to measure how much sunlight could be reflected by such particles, but that would not be done worldwide.

For what it's worth, the more strident Global Warming alarmists seem to be highly opposed at fighting Global Warming with such measures -- they want to do it by curtailing the use of fossil fuels. I think that they have some idyllic view of the world and somehow think that we can "return" to such a state of being by outlawing the use of fossil fuels.

The bigger mistake is the claim that Alzheimer's is caused by aluminum. Years ago, the tv show 60 Minutes published a segment blaming Alzheimer's on aluminum and the public snapped it up. It didn't take very long for the speculation to be pretty much disproven but a great many people in the general public still think that aluminum causes Alzheimer's. Not only is he evidence to support the idea that aluminum causes Alzheimer's not there, it is such a low probability that there is no longer any significant research into it.

Alzheimer's, in fact, has two common features -- amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles. It's usually thought that the problem is with the amyloid plaques but it could be the neurofibrillary tangles.

Aluminum is the 3rd most plentiful element on this planet. It's extremely difficult to avoid it, which is good because aluminum exclusion studies suggest that you need it to live. It's in all soil, all water, all food.

It can be argued that aluminum metal was extremely rare before the industrial revolution, and that's true. Of course, this doesn't matter much because aluminum metal immediately oxidizes as it's surface is exposed to the atmosphere.

So, I have a hard time believing that aluminum is causing disease.

Doesn't sound like you have every been on an airplane before. I have travelled by plane nearly 45 times and never was there black smoke. You had the white condensation from flying through thin clouds and a stream of whiteness forming a bit further behind the engines when you looked towards the back. It becomes more obvious when flying on a cargo plane that actually has small windows in the back because that plane may have formerly been a stratotanker.

Sounded funny to me too.

I've flown probably 100 times. A couple times i have noticed dark smoke with engines at full power - once at san diego and once at jfk -- both of these, afaik, require the aircraft to power out over sea in their initial takeoff.

Well according to this :-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/plan-to-avert-global-warming-by-cooling-planet-artificially-could-cause-climate-chaos-9043962.html

The headline of which reads:- Plan to avert global warming by cooling planet artificially 'could cause climate chaos'

Proposal to inject tiny reflective particles into the upper atmosphere to block out sunlight could lead to droughts, warn scientists

It seems somebody is considering it at least.

(Quote removed because of the insanely crappy scheme here to interpret quotes as spams.)

There's been plenty of discussions for several years of using various schemes to reduce the amount of sunlight entering the atmosphere. I've asked Global Warming alarmists over at least a decade whether or not they would agree with such a scheme if it was proven to reduce Global Warming and none of those I asked liked it.

It is possible, but unlikely, that it has been tried over a limited area for research purposes. It has not been done on any large scale.

For what it's worth, I'm in favor of Global Warming -- I think the benefits from Global Warming will be far greater than the losses.

Seeing as how warming could lead to higher precipitation in areas such as where I live and will definitely allow agriculture to be practiced further north than it currently is, I say bring it on.

I too would be in favour of Global warming, the Earth used to be a lot warmer, Greenland for instance used to be green.
I believe rather though in the warnings of the other school of scientists who believe we are heading towards another mini iceage, whats frightening is all this Global warming people might well do something to cool down the earth which could be disastrous if the world is cooling down anyway.

water vapor dissipates rather quickly. It does not spread slowly across the sky over the course of hours turning the sky a hazy sorta greyish blue. Regular passenger planes also do not fly in intentional criss-cross patterns across the sky for hours