Have These Chemtrail Formations Been Appearing In Your City Lately?

Hmmm. I wonder if this spraying is all about shielding the planet from UV and Infrared light? Is it true that the planet is dying and many millions or billions of people may die in the next several decades if nothing is done, and there is just a small chance that this spraying operation will work at all?
Is it kept hush hush so that people will not panic and that is why we have "debunkers"?
So many questions....

www.holmestead.ca...

reply to post by Stewie


I've heard the same thing, only that the light coming from the sun would actually aide in human spiritual evolution, which would mean an end to their control, so block out the sun as part of a concerted effort to keep people physically and emotionally depressed through chemtrails, drugs in the water (documented in MSM as being from people flushing their meds), genetically modified foods, heavy metals in vaccines, etc. It's all part of a concerted effort to keep humanity imprisoned.

reply to post by coyotepoet


Seriously? Seriously??

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bd2c6f45dfae.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by weedwhacker


As for chemicals at low vs high altitudes, intent, and effect, this from a 2009 article:

webcache.googleusercontent.com...:Wp4imjc2UsIJ:pubrecord.org/world/2547/aerial-herbicide-spraying-colombia/+us+role+in+herbicide&cd =1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Colombian aerosol dusting of a mix of Roundup Ultra, Cosmo-Flux and other plant-penetrating agents began seven years ago. (In 2006 alone, the United Nations reported the spraying of approximately 172,025 hectares of coca crops, producing coc aine. That equals a bit over 664 square miles.) In the meantime, untold thousands of Colombians and Ecuadorians have become sick from the blended chemical spray. Studies have shown the environmental dangers of inhalation and skin and eye saturation of the floating mist. And critically valuable maize, yucca and plantains have been destroyed in large swaths of the fertile country. For years, DynCorp International of Fort Worth, Texas, has had the lucrative US multimillion-dollar annual contract for Colombian aerial spraying operations.The company is being sued in Washington, DC, and US District Court by a class of 3,000 Ecuadorians who claim spray blown over the border from Colombia has sickened them.

Wait a minute...DynCorp? You mean the same Dyncorp that was complicit in using 8 yr old boys for Afghan sex parties according to the wikileaks cable?

www.guardian.co.uk...

What else does this article say I wonder?

Monsanto, the herbicide manufacturer, has from time to time been identified by various Internet sites as the supplier of Roundup Ultra to Colombian spraying operations. But, through spokeswoman Tamara J. Craig Schilling, Monsanto refused to say whether the company is or was a supplier for Colombian spraying. Schilling refused to disclose the differences between regular Roundup and Roundup Ultra.

Monsanto? Who have their hands in patents for aluminuium resistant plants?

forum.prisonplanet.com...

Aluminum resistant gene patent # 7582809/ Patent granted on September 1, 2009
Patent developed at the Robert W. Holley Center for Agricultural Health at Cornell University in Ithaca, NY. Leon Kochian and Jurandir Vieira de Magallhaes are the primary inventors/ researchers Patent assigned to US Department of Agriculture and Brazilian Enterprise for Agricultural Research. According to Cornell University Chronicle Online, the research project was supported in part by the McKnight Foundation Collaborative Crop Research Program, the Generation Challenge Program, the National Science Foundation and the USDA.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a contributor to both the McKnight Foundation and the Generation Challenge Program

Farmers and civil society organizations around the world are outraged by the recent discovery of further connections between the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and agribusiness titan Monsanto. Last week, a financial website published the Gates Foundation’s investment portfolio, including 500,000 shares of Monsanto stock with an estimated worth of $23.1 million purchased in the second quarter of 2010 (see the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission). This marks a substantial increase from its previous holdings, valued at just over $360,000 (see the Foundation’s 2008 990 Form). “The Foundation’s direct investment in Monsanto is problematic on two primary levels,” said Dr. Phil Bereano, University of Washington Professor Emeritus and recognized expert on genetic engineering. “First, Monsanto has a history of blatant disregard for the interests and well-being of small farmers around the world, as well as an appalling environmental track record. The strong connections to Monsanto cast serious doubt on the Foundation’s heavy funding of agricultural development in Africa and purported goal of alleviating poverty and hunger among small-scale farmers. Second, this investment represents an enormous conflict of interests.”

fortunately Bill is hedging his bets, this from wiki on the seed bank:

The Svalbard Global Seed Vault (Norwegian: Svalbard globale frøhvelv) is a secure seedbank located on the Norwegian island of Spitsbergen near the town of Longyearbyen in the remote Arctic Svalbard archipelago, about 1,300 kilometres (810 mi) from the North Pole.[1] The facility preserves a wide variety of plant seeds in an underground cavern. The seeds are duplicate samples, or "spare" copies, of seeds held in genebanks worldwide. The seed vault will provide insurance against the loss of seeds in genebanks, as well as a refuge for seeds in the case of large scale regional or global crises.

The Global Crop Diversity Trust (GCDT) has played a key role in the planning of the seed vault and is coordinating shipments of seed samples to the Vault in conjunction with the Nordic Genetic Resource Center. The Trust will provide most of the annual operating costs for the facility, and has set aside endowment funds to do so, while the Norwegian government will finance upkeep of the structure itself. With support from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and other donors, the GCDT is assisting selected genebanks in developing countries as well as the international agricultural research centers in packaging and shipping seeds to the seed vault. An International Advisory Council is being established to provide guidance and advice. It will include representatives from the FAO, the CGIAR, the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources and other institutions.

Back to the first article:

Along with Dow Chemical, Monsanto was one of several US Army suppliers of the infamous Agent Orange, the herbicide used to deforest huge areas of jungle during the Vietnam War. The chemicals were alleged by many in multiple lawsuits to have caused birth defects and cancers among a large population of natives as well as US soldiers and their families.

But certainly Roundup is not as bad as Agent Orange? Corporations wouldn't do that to us?

Contrary to government officials’ and manufacturers’ claims of non-toxicity, at least five inquiries have found that Roundup causes serious human health problems. Specifically, seven scientific investigators, studying symptoms of Ecuadorians exposed to a mix of Roundup Ultra and other additive chemicals, concluded: “A total of 24 exposed and 21 unexposed control individuals were investigated using the comet assay. The results showed a higher degree of DNA damage in the exposed group compared to the control group. These results suggest that in the formulation used during aerial spraying Glyphosate had a genotoxic effect on the exposed individuals.” Mitra’s Natural Innovation blog cites four more studies: “A group of scientists led by biochemist Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini from the University of Caen in France found that human placental cells are very sensitive to Roundup at concentrations lower than those currently used in agricultural application. “An epidemiological study of Ontario farming populations showed that exposure to Glyphosate, the key ingredient in Roundup, nearly doubled the risk of late miscarriages. Seralini and his team decided to research the effects of the herbicide on human placenta cells. Their study confirmed the toxicity of Glyphosate, as after eighteen hours of exposure at low concentrations, large proportions of human placenta began to die. Seralini suggests that this may explain the high levels of premature births and miscarriages observed among female farmers using Glyphosate…. They found that the toxic effect increases in the presence of Roundup ‘adjuvants’ or additives. These additives thus have a facilitating role, rendering Roundup twice as toxic as its isolated active ingredient, Glyphosate..

This article from Science Daily had this to say in 2008:

www.sciencedaily.com...

The global amphibian extinction is a particularly bleak example of this drastic decline. In 2004, researchers found that nearly one-third of amphibian species are threatened, and many of the non-threatened species are on the wane. Our own backyard provides a striking example, Wake said. He and his colleagues study amphibians in the Sierra Nevada, and the picture is grim there, as well. "We have these great national parks here that are about as close as you can get to absolute preserves, and there have been really startling drops in amphibian populations there, too," Wake said. Of the seven amphibian species that inhabit the peaks of the Sierra Nevada, five are threatened. Wake and his colleagues observed that, for two of these species, the Sierra Nevada Yellow-legged Frog and the Southern Yellow-legged Frog, populations over the last few years declined by 95 to 98 percent, even in highly protected areas such as Yosemite National Park. This means that each local frog population has dwindled to 2 to 5 percent of its former size. Originally, frogs living atop the highest, most remote peaks seemed to thrive, but recently, they also succumbed. There are several frog killers in the Sierra Nevada, Wake said. The first hint of frog decline in this area came in the 1990s,

It goes on to blame it partially on a worldwide (chemtrails have been reported worldwide) fungus. Some chemtrail researchers claim that, if not this particular fungus, that fungii in general are also released in the trails. A decline in the frog population in the 90's? That's when chemtrails started to appear more often. And in someplace like Sierra Nevada in a time before global warming was such a big deal? Coincidence? Wait, I'm not done, it gets better.

Another study, released in April 2005 by the University of Pittsburgh, suggests that Roundup is a danger to other life forms and non-target organisms. Biologist Rick Relyea found that Roundup is extremely lethal to amphibians. In what is considered one of the most extensive studies on the effects of pesticides on non-target organisms in a natural setting, Relyea found that Roundup caused a 70 percent decline in amphibian biodiversity and an 86 percent decline in the total mass of tadpoles. Leopard frog tadpoles and gray tree frog tadpoles were nearly eliminated.

from wiki on coca eradication:

In addition, the U.S. has also been involved in the development of the fungus Fusarium oxysporum to wipe out coca.[6][7] In 2000, the Congress of the United States approved use of Fusarium as a biological control agent to kill coca crops in Colombia (and another fungus to kill opium poppies in Afghanistan), but these plans were canceled by then-President Clinton, who was concerned that the unilateral use of a biological agent would be perceived by the rest of the world as biological warfare

Canceled canceled? Or canceled we're going to keep doing it or something similar and just not tell people canceled?

In a bonus for Big Pharma:

“In 2002, a scientific team led by Robert Belle of the National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) biological station in Roscoff, France showed that Roundup activates one of the key stages of cellular division that can potentially lead to cancer.

And while the Coca plants are sprayed at 100 ft, here is a link to a well documented .pdf talking about all sorts of things other than condensation that is put up in the air in higher altitudes.

stopaerialspraying.com...

And, since you debunkers keep clamoring for proof... (this also shows that it is not a uniquely American concern.)

www.youtube.com...

For the first time, a breakthrough video shows the spraying nozzles and turbo fan systems of a KC-10 aircraft taking part in high altitude spraying operations… What will the chemtrails skeptics say now? This never before seen video footage shows a McDonnell Douglas KC-10 aircraft. This sophisticated design of tankers was originally intended for military ‘air-to-air’ refueling operations. However, in this case, as clearly demonstrated by this whistleblower video, this KC-10 has been modified with spraying nozzles and turbo fans, which are clearly visible. The video was also posted by the Italian alternative news website www.tankerenemy.com under their Web TV segment called Cani Sciolti – Chemtrails: La falla nel sistema or Dogs on the Loose – Chemtrails: The flaw in the system. The Italian text captures shown in the video state the following: A KC-10 (military refueling tanker) participating in a high altitude aerosol-spraying clandestine operation is followed by another aircraft. This video was posted on Youtube on the 14th of July of 2010, but the trails were actually sprayed in 2008, and seen (for the first time) only now. The video might have been uploaded by a military pilot, if the user name is taken into consideration (Youtube user name of USAFFEKC10). A dog on the loose*… A flaw in the system… • -”A dog on the loose,” or “an agile dog” in the Italian language (“Un cane sciolto”… as in a canine that’s smart, agile and flexible enough to escape from a cage or his master, and refuses to become domesticated) is an informal reference made to someone who doesn’t follow the rules, a rogue individual, or someone who’s truly free and independent. Kudos to this brave air force pilot!.. Un cane sciolto!!!

So unless you have proof that those are legitimate things on the back of the plane or that the images were somehow modified, I would say that all of these things taken together "in situ" as someone insisted seem to point to proof that there are chemtrails, underneath all of the layers of disinfo.

And as for your seriously comment, that is something that I have heard and I stated it that way, not as something I was stating as fact, however, there is a lot more to the world than than reductionist materialists know (and this is coming from 20 years of seeing some crazy occult, esoteric stuff.)

So you were saying?

These KC-135's are Boeing 707:s, and they all have a tail boom that can stick out like 40 feet behind the aircraft. They are also the only 4 engine jet aircraft that you will see in the sky here

This may only apply to the Pittsburgh area as the local USAF base doesnt seem to see fit to spray chemtrails . whilst flying their daily missions. They have several KC135 tankers. We also have here the 911th Airlift Group, all C-130's, and they dont seem to be charged with discharging "chemtrails" either. There is no reason for "chemtrails" here really...

reply to post by coyotepoet

If the planet is indeed dying, it is because it and we are being poisoned mercilessly. I have absolutely NO respect and tolerance for those idiots here and elsewhere that defend the indefensible.
They have the nerve to pretend WE are delusional, when the evidence is all around us. This is the same sort of arrogance we see out of the nameless, faceless people behind Monsanto and others increasingly making this planet uninhabitable.
How can anyone defend what these corporations are doing? It makes me believe more and more that sometimes we are here arguing WITH a corporation, because the similarities seem to be more than a coincidence/

chemical trails don't exist. plane engines emit condensation the same way cars emit smoke. simple byproduct of producing energy

reply to post by coyotepoet



Oh. My. Gosh. !!!

That entire diatribe??

Perfect example of WHY this "chemtrail" nonsense gets "legs"....totally BS and crap, and irrelevant bits of information, all smashed together!! Man, deconstructiong it is going to take some time....hang on!.....

BUT, last things firstly: The bits you presented, near the end?? About the "KC-10" video??

ALREADY covered, here on ATS! Dude, the guy (an AF crew member on another KC-10, flying above and behind the one in the video, has already told everyone it was A JOKE!!!).

The guy made the video, and posted it (using the UTube screename from the link you supplied and quoted), as a JOKE!! You can hear his sarcasm....UNLESS you're like the guy in Italy (UTube screen name "tankerenemy") who took the words literally...(because English isn't his first language) AND posted it on his channel, then it was "mirrored" by others, etc. WE already discussed it, at length....and I'm too lazy to go find the thread...YOU can search for it, if you want. Use the keywords like "KC-10" and "chemtrail", in ATS Search feature, under 'thread titles'.

The KC-10, BTW??? NOT "spraying" anything!!! It is flying through thin cirrus clouds....and occasionally making NORMAL engine-produced contrails!! It is a farce, to even count that as any sort of alleged "proof"!

THAT is one reason why the "chemtrailers" just deserve scorn and laughter, honestly. People who are experienced, educated and knowledgeable know better.

reply to post by weedwhacker


I had sarcasm in my tone to but really was interested what would be said about that video, I didn't know about that other thread. Like I've said before, I don't really care about the do they or don't they dialectic and never took much notice of them prior to November. My interest is in both the micro and macro patterns that are expressed and reinforced by the fact that there is even this debate going on in the first place. I never created this thread to get into an argument, simply to express and communicate patterns. I hadn't done much research on this stuff prior to November either so I'm still in the process of sorting out truth from disinfo myself (see previous post on this.) Part of the way this is done, much like it is done by the debunkers on the other side of the process is to connect it with other things you know, other pieces of information and knowledge that have been gathered through the years, As it goes along, you tweak and adjust based on where the disinfo shakes out. This is how true learning and understanding occurs. Only the truly hopeless thinks the world begins and ends with what they already know or could prove.

And, if it wasn't spraying anything, what were those nozzles circled at the back of the plane in the video? I defer to someone who has more experience with planes than myself.

reply to post by scooterstrats


Actually they aren't the same plane at all..

The Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker is an aerial refueling military aircraft. It and the Boeing 707 airliner were developed from the Boeing 367-80 prototype.

Same company but two different planes altogether.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Stewie


Now don't get your panties in a bunch..

I have absolutely NO respect and tolerance for those idiots here and elsewhere that defend the indefensible. They have the nerve to pretend WE are delusional, when the evidence is all around us.

Your right the evidence of contrails is all around us. That is what your talking about right?

Just like to put in my two cents here, I couldn't read nine pages of all this nonsense, just the first couple of pages.

I live down here in Mexico, close to the second busiest airport in the country. Now, I know we are in the tropics here, and it's a lot hotter than where most of you guys are. However, there are LOTS of plane flights entering and leaving the local airspace every day, and I almost never see a contrail of any kind. Once in a while you will see one, they never persist for hours and hours, and usually are from a lone plane passing high overhead and not landing here.

I have been following this chem trail stuff online for a long time now. I have been out of the US for years, so I have never seen them. I have seen pictures of some wild criss cross patterns of contrails, spreading out to cover the whole sky. I do not recall EVER seeing anything like that in the first forty years of my life, in New England, and I certainly have NEVER seen anything like it in Mexico. Last time I went up there to visit, I DID see some stuff like that, and everyone I asked about it was sort of like, eh, whatever, I don't know. Not a single person mentioned chemtrails. They all seemed to think it looked kind of weird, but seemed to be lobotomized into not thinking about it in any way, which I thought in itself was pretty weird.

Just my two cents here. I am a mariner, not an aviator, but I am fairly well educated in meteorology. I know we are in the tropics, but it's still not that warm at thirty thousand feet. When you watch them in action, a regular contrail forms quite far behind the plane, apparently a thousand feet or more behind it before the condensation occurs. Cropdusters and cloud seeding planes look a lot different, with the trails coming right out of the plane. You also rarely see a contrail forming at low altitudes where you have a really clear view of the plane. I have seen pics and videos people have posted of planes spreading these trails, and they sure look more like a cropduster than a real contrail. But then, what do I know? I mean, I always wonder, since a molecule of water is a lot heavier than air, what is holding the clouds up there in the first place?

reply to post by coyotepoet


Glad you asked:

...what were those nozzles circled at the back of the plane in the video?

That's prime example of why you can't rely on these clowns, on YouTube, or elsewhere, who just "circle" things, and label them....

....On the DC-10 (the KC-10 is merely a derivative, based on the same airframe) the trailing edge flaps are attached to those points....they are large flanges, that support the hinged portion of the wing, known as "flaps"...used to increase a wing's camber, and provide additional lift (at the expense of additional drag...hence, they are variable positioned, and all the way "up" and streamlined for high speed flight regimes).

(The devices on the leading edges of the wings are called "slats"...they also operate as high-lift devices, either solely, depending on airplane design, and in tandem with the TE flaps).

Photos:

FedEx DC-10-10, Flaps fully extended. ("Flaps 50"). You can see how the brackets that hang under the wing "split", and are pivoting at their lowest point:



Bottom view, Northwest (now Delta) DC-10-30 (You can tell a "dash" 30 by the center landing gear, middle of fuselage. Two extra wheels...because of its higher gross weights, needs more "tire footprint" to spread the pavement loads, since airport ramps and runways have certain limits....) (Looks like "Flaps 35" in that pic, could be the angle). Better view of the brackets that the flaps attach to, that are called "spray nozzles" by that NOZZLE in Italy!! Oh, and the two condensation trails? Happy coincidence. See how they are forming just aft of the edge of the flaps? Humid air, and the compressibility of air....as the air flows, it is compressed, and the water vapor HAS to precipitate out...it evaporates VERY quickly, afterward:




Here's an actual USAF KC-10, from below, good shot:




Now, fun insides:
Close-up of center throttle quadrant in the cockpit, where the flap position handle is located. It's on the right...top of handle shaped like a wing airfoil (for feel and recognition). Set positions in the track "gates"....UP, "Slats Extend"...where it is there, but still at "0" flaps.....then there is what we called "dial-a-flap"...that large thumbwheel can set anything from 1, to 15...but there's a notch for 15 already. That is a variable take-off flap setting device, and performance charts used specify what to set, for weight, altitude, runway length, temperature...etc. 15 and 22 degrees are "maneuvering" intermediate positions, when slowing and preparing for the landing approach...if very light weight, 15 or 22 can be used for takeoff (rare). 35 and 50, landing settings:



(Note, when that photo was snapped, it's odd that all three engine "start levers" are in the "ON" position... must have been just for the picture....because the stabilizer trim is in FULL NOSE UP! And the speedbrake handle is at the 1/3 position...odd. We never left it like that....Stab Trim always in the green band, at about 3 to 4, if I recall...as safety precaution. But, different airline, different "SOP"s)....


Full view, KC-10 cockpit, for orientation. (Looks brand spanking new...although it's not....not by a long shot! Guessing recently been through an overhaul)...:



I could keep looking for more photos (you can too) of the other parts of the cockpit...overhead panels, Flight Engineer station,and panels, etc....to look for those "chemtrail" switches...but, won't find them!!

reply to post by CaptChaos

When you watch them in action, a regular contrail forms quite far behind the plane, apparently a thousand feet or more behind it before the condensation occurs...

Incorrect.

I'll show examples, in a moment. First, though....you may be in an area that has little overhead traffic, passing by. Again, proximity to an airport isn't how to judge contrails, and their formation. A typical airplane begins its descent from cruise altitude when still 70-90 miles away....and on departure, doesn't reach altitudes where contrails can form until about twenty minutes of flight, and climb....all the while they are moving away from the airport.

Here's a link I just found, discussing contrails, persistent contrails, and the impact of MORE airline flights in the future...as well as regional differences, due to latitude and troposphere/tropopause and stratosphere heights. These vary seasonally, and by latitude, depending on the heating of the overall atmosphere, near the surface.

www.ipcc.ch...

Now...."apparently" is off by a large factor...no where near 1000 feet behind. Keep in mind the length of the fuselage, typically....from the shortest (B-737 smallest model about 102 feet) to the longest (Airbus A380....239 feet). (Well, the Russians have the AN-225...it's 275 feet long, but you probably won't see many of those...).

See, a typical four-engined jet making contrails:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/70ecffc6ee36.jpg[/atsimg]

(Looks like an Airbus A340, to me...).

Also, best view (and where I have most experience seeing them) for contrails, is from the cockpit of another airplane nearby:



I love the comments:

Anyone who had even a basic grounding in thermodynamics and meterolology would dismiss "chemtrails" as pure, unadulterated baloney.

skinboy8 1 year ago

And.....

Kucinich didn't use the word chemtrail .

Carol Rosin and Andre Webbre who are UFO nutters who wrote the first draft used the term. Kucinich didn't realise their nutty pro Alien Greys agenda till he saw the draft.

Grommo 1 year ago

LOL!!

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


I assume that he's talking about evidence of "the agenda." I know I am,

reply to post by coyotepoet

21?

I try not to engage clowns, they are just "players". Often, they don't have convictions, they just want to play internet games.
I pity the youth, at least in the U.S.A. They don't realize they are dispensable... too busy taking pictures of themselves to pay any attention to what is going on in the world.

Originally posted by dplum517
reply to post by defcon5

 

Would you mind giving the precise link to those maps?
I mean sorry to say but those maps are a bunch of colors. That shows nothing of what is actually in the air at that time.

Sure, the link is on the post above that one, which also explains what they are. The OP had linked a Youtube video of a woman using one of those maps, and I was showing that they are noise abatement maps that are provided by county aviation authorities.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by coyotepoet


So tell me what is the agenda here?

I would love to know as would other members I would assume.

reply to post by defcon5


Thanks for the link back to that part of the thread.....cleared it up for me, not sure if it made the proper impression on those who still shout "chemtrail" at every turn....saved me a lot of head-scratching over the source of those "maps" she had laminated, and was holding up for the camera....

So, in a nutshell...this lady (forget her name, the one in the video from Mendocino, California...representing that "skywatch" group) really does NOT know what she's talking about!!!

She received that map, and somehow thinks that the "yellow circles" are evidence of "chemtrail spraying"...just a moment, I have to ......

...OK (wiping eyes...) I'm back. These maps, supplied by the county, and related to noise abatement concerns (and the inevitable fact that they have to deal with complaints, likely on a daily basis)....which showed ALL flights in the area. AND, the "yellow circles"?? Small airplanes in the landing pattern at a small municipal airport???

Hoo, boy!!!

"chemtrails".

Now, do you see just why it is a whole lot of nothing?? It is a made-up fear-mongering hoax that, unfortunately, manages to bamboozle a lot of innocent, well-meaning but utterly incompetent people, sometimes.

"incompetent" in the sense of a solid foundation and knowledge of many of the areas of science, and just plain common sense, that is required in order to understand this, and why it's nonsense......