I was in Palmdale and the Chem-trail pollution was off the charts

a reply to: GBP/JPY

Are you referring to one of the following videos with the cameras monitoring the engines of Boeing 777s? If so then you do realize that the first is a spoof.



Here is another one to scare yourself with.

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Rob48

Troll. Textbook. Because nobody is really that stupid.

Clarification: it is "Turbonium" who is the troll. S/he has repeated this behavior countless times on countless threads. No matter how simply or explicitly you try to explain matters of common sense, s/he pretends not to understand, or denies the obvious. S/he is one of many here who are trying to undermine or subvert the mission of ATS: denying ignorance. How can you look yourself in the mirror, Turbo?

Because I want the truth, while others hide it, or deny it, at the same time.

A troll is someone who makes a post, merely to make an unwarranted accusation against someone he/she claims to be a troll, all the while avoiding their very crucial responsibilty is to show PROOF to support their unfounded accusation!

Undermining the forum is when you throw in mindless personal attacks for no reason but foment more flame-baiting.


I've wasted enough time on this crap, already.

Check out this link. You'll be amazing my friend. Forward it to people you want to know. If you can highlight the entire link to be able to view it. And add an extra w for the www. ww.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@lrfederalregister/documents/frcomment/08-004c002.pdf

www.cftc.gov--PDF file
a reply to: fema1

a reply to: LtFluffyCakes96

Perhaps you could quote and discuss the parts which you think are pertinent to the discussion.

Because this is a place for discussion, not a "read this" place.

a reply to: turbonium1

all the while avoiding their very crucial responsibilty is to show PROOF to support their unfounded accusation!

Ok. We're waiting for you to do so.

It's too much to quote. Also because I have posted about it before on my own thread ....[snipped]...move it to a trash bin somehow. And those handful of people actually liked the post too. So all in all it just pissed me off and never again will I waste my time like that. a reply to: Phage

a reply to: LtFluffyCakes96
Ok.

There is something called copy and paste though. For example from your source:

Not everything is a commodity, nor should something that is typically covered by some sort of property and casualty insurance suddenly become exchange tradable. Insurance companies for a number of years have provided compensation of some sort for random, but periodic events. Where the insurance industry wants to off-load their risk at the expense of

www.cftc.gov...@lrfederalregister/documents/frcomment/08-004c002.pdf

I had been inclined to dismiss all this chemtrail stuff as over anxiety about normal contrails in areas with very busy airports.

However I am just back from 2 weeks holiday in China. While China is often overcast and has significant air pollution at times, we did get some clear sky days.
The Chinese economy is growing very fast and they have an enormous number of flights. We were in cities with populations between 9 million (Xian) and 26 million (Chongqing), and visited Chengdu (pop 10million) and Beijing (pop 21 million.

All these cities had enormous airports and very busy air traffic--- but we only saw a few contrails.
So what is happening in Europe and America that is not happening there?

This site has some useful information:
www.californiaskywatch.com...

The woman featured there has done some useful analysis of drinking water quality testing within California (high quality data) and has found widespread changes, that have occurred abruptly and simultaneously at all tested sites.
The site is being renovated, but much of the material that has yet to be incorporated in to it can be found on a sister site:
www.agriculturedefensecoalition.org...
The data files for drinking water testing are very large, but I present them so that those inclined to disbelieve can have a look at some hard evidence.

a reply to: Barliman

All these cities had enormous airports and very busy air traffic

You won't see any contrails near airports unless aircraft are flying over them at high altitudes. Where there a lot of such flights where you were?

originally posted by: SaturnFX
can ops please provide a pictorial difference between a contrail and a chemtrail and how to spot the difference. I am not a atmospheric scientist or anything so my ignorance on the subject is pointed. I do know that contrails is a thing though and looks often like a high altitude mist spraying. Just wondering how you can spot the difference.

ktks

That is cleaarly not easy-- but the evidence presented by Rosalind Petersen (see above) on changes in contaminants in drinking water is at least a significant "smoking gun". Elements like aluminium and Barium should not be there unless there is deliberate aerial spraying of it.

Petersen comments that much of the "contrail-chemtrail" activity occurs in military airspace, making the option of direct sampling very difficult- if not impossible.

However I was surprised to see only 2 contrails in China in a fortnight, all spent quite close to airports in a very busy airspace. I'm sure we could use radar/satellite views available on our weather bureau sites to determine whether there is a similar absence of trails over the Russian sky.

This site provides good cover for Australia, with excellent resolution:
www.bom.gov.au...
All I can see is a couple of wispy lines running at right angles to the cloud bands, starting at about Mt Buller. These are probably simple contrails- as the are running in the orientation a plane travelling from Melbourne to Sydney would travel.

The bottom line is that anyone wanting to investigate the matter should be able to do multiple satellite comparisons across the world.

a reply to: Barliman

but the evidence presented by Rosalind Petersen

This Rosalind Peters?

"In 10 years of research, other than aluminum coated fibreglass, chaff releases by the US military, I have no proof whatsoever that the jets are releasing anything but jet fuel emissions"

a reply to: Phage

Yes - multiple flights going in all directions, between a network of airports. The only 2 contrails I saw anywhere were in the mountains north of Beijing - near

We live about 20-30 km from Tullamarine airport in Melbourne and often have a picnic at St Kilda, by Port Phillip Bay- where you can look directly at Tullamarine- and often see a small number of contrails. I would see them more often above the skies when driving from Melbourne to Canberra, Sydney or Brisbane- but rarely elsewhere.

I remember going to London in about 2007 and being stunned at the number of wide trails that almost blocked the sun out. It was nothing like my last visit in 1979-80.
It was my reasoning that contrails would be expected only when the planes approached cruising altitude-- a couple of hundred km out from the airport so what I saw from London amazed me.

Looking at my photos I realise that I missed 2 normal contrails over Xian- but as I said there were very few- despite the airports being extremely busy and large.

originally posted by: SaturnFX
can ops please provide a pictorial difference between a contrail and a chemtrail and how to spot the difference. I am not a atmospheric scientist or anything so my ignorance on the subject is pointed. I do know that contrails is a thing though and looks often like a high altitude mist spraying. Just wondering how you can spot the difference.

ktks

That's an easy one. Anyone can spot this. Contrails appear as thin lines directly behind a plane or jet that is flying over, and the lines disappear almost as soon as they appear. Chemtrails on the other hand also look like thin white lines, but they do not disappear...instead the lines begin to spread out and hang in the air for hours until the entire sky is covered with a misty, dingy white (cloud?) covering. Another way to tell (in most places no where near an airport or popular plane routes) is that contrails have a straight line. Chemtrails usually form the shape of an anarchy symbol or an X. The newest thing I have seen this last year is that there have been way less anarchy symbols and more lines that just spread out into little finger-like portrusions from them all the way down the line.

a reply to: Barliman

Your experience seems to vary from that of others.
youtu.be...
www.disclose.tv...

originally posted by: Barliman
I had been inclined to dismiss all this chemtrail stuff as over anxiety about normal contrails in areas with very busy airports.

However I am just back from 2 weeks holiday in China. While China is often overcast and has significant air pollution at times, we did get some clear sky days.
The Chinese economy is growing very fast and they have an enormous number of flights. We were in cities with populations between 9 million (Xian) and 26 million (Chongqing), and visited Chengdu (pop 10million) and Beijing (pop 21 million.

All these cities had enormous airports and very busy air traffic--- but we only saw a few contrails.
So what is happening in Europe and America that is not happening there?

This site has some useful information:
www.californiaskywatch.com...

The woman featured there has done some useful analysis of drinking water quality testing within California (high quality data) and has found widespread changes, that have occurred abruptly and simultaneously at all tested sites.
The site is being renovated, but much of the material that has yet to be incorporated in to it can be found on a sister site:
www.agriculturedefensecoalition.org...
The data files for drinking water testing are very large, but I present them so that those inclined to disbelieve can have a look at some hard evidence.

Any chance you could give an example of the abrupt changes you're talking about?

a reply to: TruthJava

Have you seen the movie "What In the World Are They Spraying?" You know the guy who made that movie? Michael Murphy? He says you're wrong.

"Persistent contrails are just natural contrails, they do not contain the high amounts of aluminum, barium, strontium, and other fall-out that matches geoengineering and numerous patents exactly. So with that being said, a persistent contrail is a contrail that last a little bit longer, and they have been seen as far back as World War Two."

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Barliman

but the evidence presented by Rosalind Petersen

This Rosalind Peters?

"In 10 years of research, other than aluminum coated fibreglass, chaff releases by the US military, I have no proof whatsoever that the jets are releasing anything but jet fuel emissions"

Correct- but you are linking to old material. She is much more forthcoming in this 2017 interview where she is talking about simultaneous spikes in contamination of multiple drinking water supplies.
www.youtube.com...

The discussion of the drinking water data starts about 24:00. When analysing the data she accounted for regional herbicide and pesticide use, and for fallout from factories. The water souces started showing simultaneous spikes in various elements in 1990.

So she has moved quite some way from her 2012 position, and in my opinion she has smoking gun evidence that should be enough for the citizens of the US to insist on comprehensive testing done by the state at the states expense, and with independent supervision.

a reply to: Barliman

Try again.
Posted in 2010.
www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: Barliman

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Barliman

but the evidence presented by Rosalind Petersen

This Rosalind Peters?

"In 10 years of research, other than aluminum coated fibreglass, chaff releases by the US military, I have no proof whatsoever that the jets are releasing anything but jet fuel emissions"

Correct- but you are linking to old material. She is much more forthcoming in this 2017 interview where she is talking about simultaneous spikes in contamination of multiple drinking water supplies.
www.youtube.com...

The discussion of the drinking water data starts about 24:00. When analysing the data she accounted for regional herbicide and pesticide use, and for fallout from factories. The water souces started showing simultaneous spikes in various elements in 1990.

So she has moved quite some way from her 2012 position, and in my opinion she has smoking gun evidence that should be enough for the citizens of the US to insist on comprehensive testing done by the state at the states expense, and with independent supervision.

You'll find the same video uploaded 6 years ago

ETA "Chemtrail Cover up" I think it was called back then