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

originally posted by: Irishhaf
Just woke up, have not had time to sift through the whole thread just going to drop a question and ill get back to it when I am feeling alive.

To the OP...I have flown on various large multi-engine aircraft for the USAF for nearly 20 years...which air frames do folks believe are doing this?

I am really late to the party but its normally KC-135s usually the MPRS modified R models (because drogue baskets look like sprayers LOL)or the test bed one they use for icing tests.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Irishhaf
Just woke up, have not had time to sift through the whole thread just going to drop a question and ill get back to it when I am feeling alive.

To the OP...I have flown on various large multi-engine aircraft for the USAF for nearly 20 years...which air frames do folks believe are doing this?

I am really late to the party but its normally KC-135s usually the MPRS modified R models (because drogue baskets look like sprayers LOL)or the test bed one they use for icing tests.

I've never tracked a KC 135 leaving a trail. Lots of 767s, A320s, A340s etc though

originally posted by: mrthumpy

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Irishhaf
Just woke up, have not had time to sift through the whole thread just going to drop a question and ill get back to it when I am feeling alive.

To the OP...I have flown on various large multi-engine aircraft for the USAF for nearly 20 years...which air frames do folks believe are doing this?

I am really late to the party but its normally KC-135s usually the MPRS modified R models (because drogue baskets look like sprayers LOL)or the test bed one they use for icing tests.

I've never tracked a KC 135 leaving a trail. Lots of 767s, A320s, A340s etc though

Its not about the trail they leave, though the F-108s should leave one, but the "spray equipment". Like the soft basket of the Paradrogue for the MPRS pods or the director lights on the pods or the drains behind the pre-cooler exhaust or the special boom nozzle on the test bed tanker that sprays water to study icing or the fact that they are tankers so they can carry a lot of chemicals... You know stupid things people who dont know the first thing about aircraft would make up.

originally posted by: Barliman
a reply to: Phage

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.

Why did it amaze you? You do realize upper air routes cross over London and its surrounds. The transatlantic routes into and out of Europe are extremely busy.



To see the network of upper air routes and way points go to the following website.

skyvector.com...

In the Flight Plan Box on the left type in EGLL and Click "Go". That will centre the map on London Heathrow. Make sure that the "World Hi" tab is selected from the box on the right. You will then see the upper air routes and way points. Now can you see how busy that air space is above London and the surrounds. The amount of upper air traffic is quite staggering and especially compared to 1979-80. Even back in 2007 you would be amazed at how much upper air route traffic over London and the surrounds.

Also you have to factor in the widespread use of hi-bypass turbofans compared to the late 1970s.

Metabunk Link - Hi-bypass turbofans producing more contrails

a reply to: Barliman

It also has to do with the conditions in the upper atmosphere. In tropical climates, there is less chance of having trails, where as cooler more wet areas are much more prone to seeing them. If you find that cirrus clouds are a big thing in an area, you should also find that contrails are a bit thing. They form in the same conditions.

And cirrus clouds can last all.....day......long.

Clearly, you do not have the specific data, of the two flights, which shows exactly where the planes were, at that time.

This data is for you to present, as it goes directly to support your whole argument

You could get this data, for a couple dollars.

It seems you don't want to get the data, though.

Do I have to get the data, for your argument?


What would you say, if the data showed you were wrong?

a reply to: turbonium1

I'd be surprised if anyone cares any more, because the way you conduct yourself in discussion kind of makes the effort pointless. If you want to show that everyone is wrong, go for it. Sometimes, it isn't everyone else who is wrong, ya know?

a reply to: Phage

Most of the shots of China are simple cirrus clouds with the odd contrail.

a reply to: Barliman

And you can, of course tell the difference from a "chemtrail."

Several people have claimed to have that ability.

Not that there's clear skies often in Ireland, but when there is I like to watch transatlantic flights, pull out my phone and via an app can tell where the lucky buggers are going. I'd say that 95% of those flights are producing contrails, or chemtrails to those with bionic chemical testing eyes.

Are they spraying chemtrails over Ireland, if so why? Population control? We're not exactly over populated, quite the opposite in fact. You can see the trail as far as the eye can see, so how does ones chemical plane carry so much chemical sperm?

It's more plausible that they open the toilet flap over Ireland as you have about 0% chance of hitting someone on the ground with a log.

a reply to: OnionHead

Ireland seems to be a testing ground. Well it is for this chap in Wexford! Poor delusional chemtrail activist that believes that he has evidence of "chemtrail filaments".



He's even fallen for the non-sense that the Carnicom Institute released after Carnicom "analyzed" the samples that the Irish guy sent him. Now the claim is that the elites are modifying spider webs/gossamer. The madness and paranoia continues!