Operation Indigo Skyfold

a reply to: ConnectDots

But meanwhile, are you familiar with the names of Eugene Franklin Mallove, Juventina Villa Mojica, and Dorothy Stang, Environmental Scientists who released lab test results linking chemtrails to the mass death of fish, plant, and animal life?

Why yes I am...

As I discussed them here...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Try again as none of them are even remotely associated with chemtrails.

a reply to: DenyObfuscation

I suspect the murdered scientist story from Price is a work of fiction.

Well they were murdered...but not for anything related to chemtrails.

a reply to: ConnectDots

I should have caught that myself on Eugene Mallove because I know who he is.

Which is why a bit of research is helpful before posting...just a little advice.

originally posted by: ConnectDots
Do you know how we can verify whether or not he is still living?

Dr. J. Marvin Herndon's website is NuclearPlanet.com - Science About the True Nature of Earth and Universe.

Unless his biography page has simply not been updated, it's not him that was murdered.

a reply to: ConnectDots
I never even implied Herndon was murdered. I actually went so far as to say I think the murder story from Price is fiction, therefore, no one died!

My point about Herndon is that he doesn't know jack about the trails other than nonsense from YouTubers!

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: network dude


I think that the divide is between people who look at something and simply trust what their eyes and their intuition tell them, and people who look to scientific papers to prove to them what's going on.

I trust my eyes and intuition to tell me that a contrail is a white line across the sky.

my eyes and intuition cannot tell me any more about it than that - if I do think any more of it than that without further evidence then I am making stuff up.

and so is anyone else who does so.

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
I never even implied Herndon was murdered. I actually went so far as to say I think the murder story from Price is fiction, therefore, no one died!

True; my mistake.

a reply to: ConnectDots
I do hope you're successful contacting Price for an explanation. I really want to know why he said that about the murder.

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
My point about Herndon is that he doesn't know jack about the trails other than nonsense from YouTubers!

He is the author of a book Herndon's Earth and the Dark Side of Science.

a reply to: ConnectDots
How is his knowledge of meteorology?

Unrelated fun fact, combustion of fossil fuels yields about 125% water by mass. That's true even with high bypass ratio turbofans. The amount of humid air that passes through the engine that isn't combusted adds to the amount of water available for ice crystal formation. Ask Wigs about that sometime. If he even answers, it could be kind of funny.

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
Unrelated fun fact, combustion of fossil fuels yields about 125% water by mass. That's true even with high bypass ratio turbofans. The amount of humid air that passes through the engine that isn't combusted adds to the amount of water available for ice crystal formation.

And your point is?

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
Ask Wigs about that sometime.

That exudes sarcasm but it doesn't add anything to the discussion.

a reply to: ConnectDots
The answer to both questions is he claims those engines are ''Virtually incapable of producing contrails''.
The only rationale for that belief that I'm aware of is that something like 90% of the air that passes through the engine is not combusted. Well, so what? My post already explained why his belief is incorrect at best.

a reply to: DenyObfuscation

For some reason, I think he has it backwards, and they were less common in LOW bypass turbofans.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

I do copious research.

That was not a result of a lack of research; if you read my post you would know that.

a reply to: ConnectDots

I do copious research.

As we have all seen with your replies, and sources.

That was not a result of a lack of research; if you read my post you would know that.

If you say so. It just didn't seem like it.

a reply to: Zaphod58
Even so the difference between them was marginal, IIRC. Either way his rationale is nonsense at best. I have read someone for whom I have great respect concerning this topic and many others maintain that he believes Dane is sincere. Wrong but still sincere. Given what I've heard and read from Dane I simply can't believe anyone could be so involved in this topic yet remain so willfully ignorant. Oh well, not much I can do about it.

a reply to: DenyObfuscation

Oh I know it was. It just gave me an excuse to use that picture.

a reply to: Zaphod58
You know, if there were a ''.con'' domain for certain sites I might not get so worked up about things like this. If only it were crystal clear to people that what they're getting is what they're getting .

a reply to: ConnectDots

So when Dane says that the video is "clearly spraying, period" and that "any suggestion that this is a condensation trail is simply denial" within that first minute, how is that not a lie?

It looks exactly like a contrail, there is nothing on screen to suggest that what you are seeing is not a contrail, Dane offers nothing to show why it's not a contrail. He simply tells you what to believe, therefore, whether you believe in chemtrails or not, that statement, at that moment, is a lie because to anyone looking on, it clearly could be either.