An Attempt to Debunk Chemtrails For Good

Originally posted by Matrix1111
I'm debating for the sake of truth. How about you?

A noble cause, but are you doing it objectively?

1. Weather modification is an on-going practice. Original Link: www.rense.com...

Cloud seeding is an accepted practice and has been around for decades.

2. This weather-forming region of the atmosphere lies between Earth's surface and the stratosphere, starting around 35,000 feet. Original Link: www.rense.com...

Well thats the Trophosphere

3. An active duty air force crew chief has described environmental combat missions already being flown by specially-outfitted C-130 Hercules transports. The same crew chief added that other spray missions spread (barium) chemtrails to facilitate 3D radar mapping of the entire continental United States. He also said that the air force has been spraying storm fronts "for a long time". The military's main interest, he added, is experimentation aimed at gaining control of the weather for military use. Original Link: www.rense.com...

So is he mapping the United States, or is he storm chasing?

If you are mapping the earths surface from space, using Space based radar, then adding a particulate to the atmosphere that would, effectively, break up the beam and cause false results seems a little silly, don't you think? Especially in light of...

4. TV news report states that “the military planes of the German Federal Army are manipulating our climate; this is what the weather researchers are presuming and their suspicions are confirmed… “We can state with a 97% certainty that we have on our hands chemical trails (chemtrails) comprised by fine dust containing polymers and metals, used to disrupt radar signals.” Original Link: www.chycho.com...

This has been discussed many times on ATS, and is a jumbled version of German Weather radar picking up Chaff doing what it was designed to do, namely to appear on radar and provide fake returns to anti-aircraft missiles.

5. Airline companies in America have been participating in something called Project Cloverleaf for a few years now. The earliest date anyone remembers being briefed on it is 1998. I was briefed on it in 1999. ....
Original Link: www.carnicom.com...

I had lunch today with Girls Aloud (see my avatar) before retiring for a very pleasureable and stimulating afternoon. Don't believe me? Well i'm not suprised because my claim holds no substance and can't be proved or disproved - and oddly neither can this one.

6. The Evergreen Supertanker is not just limited to fighting fire. It will be a true utilitarian aircraft with the capability to configure to different applications on short notice......
Original Link: www.evergreenaviation.com...

Yes...its a sales pitch from a company trying to sell its product to a government. What does it mean? It means they are trying to prove they are flexible in what they do. Is it actual proof of anything? No.

7. US admits chemical weapons tests BBC 10/10/02 Original Link: news.bbc.co.uk...

From 40 years ago, and doesn't mention anything about the use of aircraft whatsoever, in fact it doesn't say how the agents were dispersed at all. Weapons testing on military personnel should come as no suprise to anyone - theres documented evidence of hallucinagens, microwave weapons and other devices being used on or near to soldiers. You do know that the western powers tested nukes with groups of soldiers just outside the blast radius but within fallout zones to see what the effects would be, don't you?

8. US planes sprayed Wiltshire with Sarin London Times 10/10/02: Chris Ayres and Michael Evans Original Link: www.timesonline.co.uk...

Again, from 40 years ago. The spraying is referred to as "crop dusting", because thats the only height that such things can be effectively used from. Thats not the same as spraying from 20-30,000ft is it?

9. Mr. KUCINICH introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Science, and in addition to the Committees on Armed Services, and International Relations. Original Link: Bill Hr. 2977

He also referred to scalar, space based and other weapons? What does it prove? It proves he knew the theory. It doesn't prove anything else.

His bill was altered by the way, to contain no reference to such "exotics" in its final form.

10. U.S. Senate Bill 517 and U.S. House Bill 2995, a bill that would allow experimental weather modification by artificial methods and implement a national weather modification policy, does not include agriculture or public oversight, is on the “fast track” to be passed in 2006..
Original Link: globalresearch.ca...

The bill never became law, and is dead.

S.517 (109th): Weather Modification Research and Development Policy Authorization Act of 2005

Based on the information provided by various above links in this thread, there seems to be overwhelming evidence that Chemtrails are real --

Or, conversely, is it a random collection of summations cleverly woven together to try and "prove" something, relying on the idea that people won't actually look into the whole thing further?

Okay?

OK

[edit on 8/0808/08 by neformore]

reply to post by neformore


OMG!! You, sir or madam, just summed it up perfectly!!

Thank you.

You mean there are moderators on this board who actually believe water vapor contrails can "persist" for hours, then slowly spread out and turn a blue sky overcast?

Just like I don't need to be a toxicologist to know that fluoride is highly toxic or a structural engineer to know that lightly damaged steel-framed buildings don't neatly collapse on their footprint, it's not necessary to be a meteorologist to know that "persistent contrails", as they're euphemistically called, can't obliterate a clear sky on some days and not others -- especially in the similar arid summer days of the southwest where I live -- or we'd never see a clear sky again.

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
You mean there are moderators on this board who actually believe water vapor contrails can "persist" for hours, then slowly spread out and turn a blue sky overcast?

Clouds

Saturation (Dew) Point

Contrail

Refute the existing established science, before you promote the other theories.

Me being a moderator has....what... to do with this?

Originally posted by weedwhacker

Matrix, I'm still reviewing some of your links....rense is BS, sorry. 'Carnicom' looks like another 'spoof', since it refers to the 'mechanic's' letter....already shown to be bunk.

Well, yes, Rense has to be taken with a big "grain of salt" and Carnicom is a questionable source, as is the so-called "mechanic's letter." But they do provide some good "food for thought"... I googled "Project Cloverleaf" and got some good information about NASA's cloud formation experiments and the National Academy of Sciences' research into "dusting."

In a www.infowars.com article*, Patrick Minnus, a senior research scientist at NASA's Langley Research Center describes how cloud cover is generated from vapor trails:

Minnus said that contrails are formed in air below -39 Celsius when the air is supersaturated with ice.

Due to the physical structure of ice, the humidity level actually has to be higher, about 150 percent humidity level, than it would be for the air to be supersaturated with water.

"The exhaust (jet engine) injects a lot of water into the air," Minnus said.

"The water droplets immediately freeze and you wind up with a contrail."

Minnus said once the contrail is formed in supersaturated air, larger ice particles become nuclei and begin to grow, collecting other ice particles from the surrounding air.

As the particles get heavier, they begin to fall out of the contrail, spreading it vertically, wind shear spreads the contrail horizontally as it continues to collect ice from the atmosphere.

Minnus said in a 1998 paper called "Spreading and Growth of Contrails in a Sheared Environment" that aged contrails can form into clouds almost unidentifiable from natural cirrus clouds.

"Since these persistent contrails have long lifetimes and grow to cover large areas, they have the greatest potential for affecting regional or global climate," Minnus said in the paper.

The infowar article goes on to connect these facts with the following paper published by the National Academy of Sciences in 1992 ("Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation, and the Science Base), in which it's speculated that various types of aircraft could spread dust to combat global warming:

In the geoengineering section of the study (p.459), the paper states, "Cloud stimulation by provision of cloud condensation nuclei appears to be a feasible and low-cost option capable of being used to mitigate any quantity of CO2 equivalent per year."

The paper also says, "These possibilities appear feasible, economical and capable of mitigating the effect of as much CO2 equivalent per year as we care to pay for ... Such systems could probably be put into full effect within a year or two of a decision to do so, and mitigation effects would begin immediately."

I got more detailed information on about the "dusting" scheme here: books.nap.edu...

Several schemes depend on the effect of additional dust (or possibly soot) in the stratosphere or very low stratosphere screening out sunlight. Such dust might be delivered to the stratosphere by various means, including being fired with large rifles or rockets or being lifted by hydrogen or hot-air balloons. These possibilities appear feasible, economical, and capable of mitigating the effect of as much CO2 equivalent per year as we care to pay for. (Lifting dust, or soot, to the tropopause or the low stratosphere with aircraft may be limited, at low cost, to the mitigation of 8 to 80 Gt CO2 equivalent per year.) Such systems could probably be put into full effect within a year or two of a decision to do so, and mitigation effects would begin immediately. Because dust falls out naturally, if the delivery of dust were stopped, mitigation effects would cease within about 6 months for dust (or soot) delivered to the tropopause and within a couple of years for dust delivered to the midstratosphere.

So it's not like scientists aren't thinking about dispersing "stuff" into our skies or altering cloud cover. Congress passing laws or being presented bills to regulate weather modification and weather "weaponry" systems must mean something. And the BBC news reports about US doing Sarin dispersal tests means the technology is in existence. (Also consider Saddam's use of the system against the Kurds and Iranians.) It's not like the use of contrails for chemical/metal dispersion is a farfetched, impossilbility. Yet, that's your case. And it's really not a strong case.

*www.infowars.com...

Originally posted by neformore
Me being a moderator has....what... to do with this?

I thought the ATS motto was "Deny Ignorance." I see you're another one who thinks a Wikipedia cite is the end-all to every discussion.

Chemtrails

Chemtrails, Spraying in Our Sky

Educate Yourself, Chemtrails

KNBC-LA, "Toxic Sky"

KNBC-LA, "Toxic Sky", Part 2

VIDEO - Chemtrails: Clouds of Death





[edit on 8-8-2008 by GoldenFleece]

reply to post by OzWeatherman


theres no way to know for sure man.. NASA is not a good source for officail information in my opinion.. neither is Wikipedia.. its just too hard to know for sure.. as silly as it may sound... the fact is unless you were there making them or knew what was in em as fact theres no way to know for sure

Originally posted by Matrix1111

1. Weather modification is an on-going practice. Original Link: www.rense.com...

2. This weather-forming region of the atmosphere lies between Earth's surface and the stratosphere, starting around 35,000 feet. Original Link: www.rense.com...

Weather modification is another name for cloud seeding - the process by which moisture bearing clouds are seeded in order in induce precipitation. Apart from cumulonimbus (thunderstorms) clouds which produce precipitation only occur within the lower 10,000ft of the atmosphere.

Alleged chemtrails commonly occur at much higher altitudes and may merge with other high level clouds such as cirrus. Cirrus does not form at low levels and cannot produce ground reaching precipitation.

www.metoffice.gov.uk...

3. An active duty air force crew chief has described environmental combat missions already being flown by specially-outfitted C-130 Hercules transports. The same crew chief added that other spray missions spread (barium) chemtrails to facilitate 3D radar mapping of the entire continental United States. He also said that the air force has been spraying storm fronts "for a long time". The military's main interest, he added, is experimentation aimed at gaining control of the weather for military use. Original Link: www.rense.com...

Not seen this before so would need to investigate its authenticity further before commenting

4. TV news report states that “the military planes of the German Federal Army are manipulating our climate; this is what the weather researchers are presuming and their suspicions are confirmed… “We can state with a 97% certainty that we have on our hands chemical trails (chemtrails) comprised by fine dust containing polymers and metals, used to disrupt radar signals.” Original Link: www.chycho.com...

This is a deliberate hoax. The real newstory concerned the appearance of anomalous readings on weather radar which were later detemined to be caused by anti radar chaff deployed by military aircraft on exercise. The news story makes no mention of chemtrails nor of weather manipulation of any sort.

contrailscience.com...

(you can watch the actual new story for yourself and see how someone has disingenuously mistranslated the word dupple - chaff - for chemtrail. The German word for chemtrail is chemtrail.

Ironically, if we are to believe the story as presented to provides an easy way to identify chemtrail - just look at the radar. As someone who does so every day I can on that basis state categorically that no chemtrails are ever laid over the UK!

5. Airline companies in America have been participating in something called Project Cloverleaf for a few years now. The earliest date anyone remembers being briefed on it is 1998. I was briefed on it in 1999. The few airline employees who were briefed on Project Cloverleaf were all made to undergo background checks, and before we were briefed on it we were made to sign non-disclosure agreements, which basically state that if we tell anyone what we know we could be imprisoned. Original Link: www.carnicom.com...

Again not something I'm familiar with

6. The Evergreen Supertanker is not just limited to fighting fire. It will be a true utilitarian aircraft with the capability to configure to different applications on short notice. This multimission aircraft can support sensitive security and environmental missions. The aircraft’s exceptional drop capabilities, loiter time and size make it an ideal tool to perform challenging homeland security missions, able to neutralize chemical attacks on military installments or major population centers, and help control large, environmentally disastrous oil spills. Original Link: www.evergreenaviation.com...

Non sequitur. All activities which require very low level dispersement. What connection is there with alleged chemtrails?

7. US admits chemical weapons tests BBC 10/10/02 Original Link: news.bbc.co.uk...

Another on sequitur. Where does it say these chemical test were carried out at altitudes of 30,000ft? Where does it even say there was any airbourne deployment?

8. US planes sprayed Wiltshire with Sarin London Times 10/10/02: Chris Ayres and Michael Evans Original Link: www.timesonline.co.uk...

And again - this was low level spraying and, significantly, did not appear to produce any visible results from the ground.

9. Mr. KUCINICH introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Science, and in addition to the Committees on Armed Services, and International Relations. Original Link: Bill Hr. 2977 thomas.loc.gov...:H.R.2977.IH: (sorry, this link isn't working now. Clearskies first post in this thread has a workable link)

More non sequitur. The bill was presented to:

To preserve the cooperative, peaceful uses of space for the benefit of all humankind by permanently prohibiting the basing of weapons in space by the United States, and to require the President to take action to adopt and implement a world treaty banning space-based weapons

www.fas.org...

Whilst chemtrails were one of a number of exotic weapons listed there is nothing to suggest either that such weapons exist, nor that chemtrails as listed in the bill are currently being deployed nor that they are in any way visible. All the bill shows is that those who drafted it had heard of chemtrails. Perhaps they had access to the internet? Do you know how many tectonic and plasma weapons are used every day?

10. U.S. Senate Bill 517 and U.S. House Bill 2995, a bill that would allow experimental weather modification by artificial methods and implement a national weather modification policy, does not include agriculture or public oversight, is on the “fast track” to be passed in 2006…. Trimethyl Aluminum (TMA) and barium are just two of the toxic chemicals used in recent atmospheric heating and testing programs according to NASA. The Alaska H.A.A.R.P. atmospheric heating program may have the capability of changing the Jet Stream which could also change our weather. Original Link: globalresearch.ca...

I believe this was also rejected. A shame as I think there ought to be better controls over weather modification - much of which takes place in the USA by private companies with little consideration for the long term consequences. Which is what those bills are actually about!

www.govtrack.us...

www.govtrack.us...

(you shouldn't believe all you read in the internet!)

[edit on 8-8-2008 by Essan]

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
I thought the ATS motto was "Deny Ignorance." I see you're another one who thinks a Wikipedia cite is the end-all to every discussion.

But there...you see. Did you read the stuff I linked? Did you take it all in and understand the science?

You see, it may be on Wikipedia, but that does not make it wrong. If wikipedia was wrong, I would have linked elsewhere to sites that showed the science.

Essentially what you are trying to do is shoot down what I have posted, but you've not realised the implications of doing that. Look at, and understand the science before you look at the claims.

And, while I've taken the time to watch the videos you've posted (the last one is rampant scaremongering), there is still nothing that changes my mind, because the implication is that spraying is being carried out at massive levels, near constantly - and no one has the capacity to do that. The USAF most certainly doesn't, and in order for airlines across the world to be involved you'd be looking at a level of organisation that is as large, and run much more strictly than most major militaries.

Also - in the case of Cedar Grove, anything disperesed from planes passing overhead at that location from 20/25/30,000ft is most certainly NOT going to be coming down over Cedar Grove - it would come down anywhere between 50 to 100 miles away, allowing for dispersal by the wind at those heights.

So please, read the links I provided. Thats what they are there for. If you do you might just understand where my skepticism comes from.

[edit on 8/0808/08 by neformore]

reply to post by neformore

You think three disparate Wikipedia cites places science on your side? I think not.

I'll say it again: (seems there's agreement since the first time I said it), "You mean there are moderators on this board who actually believe water vapor contrails can "persist" for hours, then slowly spread out and turn a blue sky overcast?

reply to post by GoldenFleece


There are certainly meteorologists on this board who think that. And many hundreds of thousands not on this board who agree. In fact, find me one from the past 50 years who doesn't agree

It's very basic atmospheric science.

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
You think three disparate Wikipedia cites places science on your side? I think not.

Did you read them? Did you understand them?
Do you think that linking to scaremongering videos makes you right?

I'll say it again: (seems there's agreement since the first time I said it), "You mean there are moderators on this board who actually believe water vapor contrails can "persist" for hours, then slowly spread out and turn a blue sky overcast?

And, again, what does me being a moderator have to do with it?

I mean, we can play this spectacularly obtuse game all day Fleece, but at the end of it I'll still understand about cloud formation and the atmosphere, and you'll still be pointing up at lines in the sky.

So tell me - how do clouds form, if not by water vapour condensing?

And, aren't contrails caused by the increase in water vapour causing saturation of the air and the forming of ice crystals? And if the atmospheric conditions are right at that height, where the atmosphere may be on the verge of saturation - is it not possible for the saturation effect to chain and to continue and form a larger cloud?

So yes, its possible for contrails to "persist", and change shape, and form clouds.

It is not, however, possible for something to be sprayed at 500mph, 30,000 feet into the atmosphere as an aerosol and have any idea where its going to end up.

Are there members on this site who can't be bothered to actually look at how things work, and just assume instead?

Originally posted by neformore

A noble cause, but are you doing it objectively?

I was simply making a summation of the facts being presented in support of the Chemtrail allegations. You can debate the objectivity of the facts, but that would still just be your subjectivity. I don't have all the facts to decide one way or the other whether this is all true or not. Neither do you. So how can you insinuate your objectivity is more objective than mine? At least that's how it looks to me. Btw, I'm a fence sitter on the topic.

So far all I see are the debunkers saying it's all farfetched and impossible. I'm just saying it's a possibility.

Cloud seeding is an accepted practice and has been around for decades.

Good. Then there should be no disagreement about whether chemtrails are a possiblity.

Well thats the Trophosphere

Okay. How does that counter or add to the discussion?

So is he mapping the United States, or is he storm chasing?

I have no idea what the purpose of chemtrails are. That's not the point. The value of this link is to show that barium is an ingredient being used. The debunkers here have dismissed the very idea of anything being dispersed into the upper stratosphere, reasoning that it would never filter down to its "intented target."

This has been discussed many times on ATS, and is a jumbled version of German Weather radar picking up Chaff doing what it was designed to do, namely to appear on radar and provide fake returns to anti-aircraft missiles.

The point of the news report is that weather manipulation is banned in Germany and they had evidence that this is being done by the military there.

I had lunch today with Girls Aloud (see my avatar) before retiring for a very pleasureable and stimulating afternoon. Don't believe me? Well i'm not suprised because my claim holds no substance and can't be proved or disproved - and oddly neither can this one.

Exactly. And does that make someone 'unobjective" for believing you? More information is needed to make that conclusion. Same goes for coming to a conclusion about chemtrails. More information is needed.

Yes...its a sales pitch from a company trying to sell its product to a government. What does it mean? It means they are trying to prove they are flexible in what they do. Is it actual proof of anything? No.

Again, the point is that such technology exists for dispersing chemicals/liquids into the air.

From 40 years ago, and doesn't mention anything about the use of aircraft whatsoever, in fact it doesn't say how the agents were dispersed at all. Weapons testing on military personnel should come as no suprise to anyone - theres documented evidence of hallucinagens, microwave weapons and other devices being used on or near to soldiers. You do know that the western powers tested nukes with groups of soldiers just outside the blast radius but within fallout zones to see what the effects would be, don't you?

True. But the point is that testing bio-chemical dispersal systems, however they are dispersed, is something that has been done to humans. In other links offered in this thread, it has been shown that such tests have been done on populations without consent.

Again, from 40 years ago. The spraying is referred to as "crop dusting", because thats the only height that such things can be effectively used from. Thats not the same as spraying from 20-30,000ft is it?

And you don't think the dispersing system hasn't become more sophisticated in 40 years?

He also referred to scalar, space based and other weapons? What does it prove? It proves he knew the theory. It doesn't prove anything else.

No conclusion can be made about what this means. But in the bigger scheme of things, it shows what is possible and what the current level of discussion is being made on the subject within the Beltway.

The bill never became law, and is dead.

Why not? Quoting the link: "Trimethyl Aluminum (TMA) and barium are just two of the toxic chemicals used in recent atmospheric heating and testing programs according to NASA. The Alaska H.A.A.R.P. atmospheric heating program may have the capability of changing the Jet Stream which could also change our weather." Weather is definitely out of kilter. Shouldn't we be concerned about the side-effects of such experimentation?

Or, conversely, is it a random collection of summations cleverly woven together to try and "prove" something, relying on the idea that people won't actually look into the whole thing further?

Random? It's a collection of facts as presented by various posters here. You can only dismiss it by insinuating it's a "cleverly woven" hoax. I think coming to some conclusion one way or another about chemtrails shows you're not being objective. There's just not enough proof. But nor is there enough proof to dismiss the theory.

So where does this leave us? It makes me very suspicious that people without proof won't allow other people without proof to have their say without being ridiculed and dismissed as people not worthy of ATS' standards. Ironic, since none of us have any legs to stand on.

OK

Ok? I asked the debunkers to summarize their evidence that's been presented so far in this thread, just I had done for the pro-chemtrail theorists. I thought I had provided a service that helped the discussion move along and was keeping in the spirit of your request to follow the rules of conduct and common courtesy. I guess not.

Sorry I made the effort to re-establish a balanced, objective debate. I'll just go back to the usual hot air, rhetoric and ad-hominem arguments.





[edit on 8/8/2008 by Matrix1111]

Originally posted by neformore
I mean, we can play this spectacularly obtuse game all day Fleece, but at the end of it I'll still understand about cloud formation and the atmosphere, and you'll still be pointing up at lines in the sky.

Are you saying we don't believe in contrails, cloud formation or the atmosphere?
That's rather condescending....

It is not, however, possible for something to be sprayed at 500mph, 30,000 feet into the atmosphere as an aerosol and have any idea where its going to end up.

Maybe it's SUPPOSED to be world-wide dispersal, without a care who it hits, as long as the elite have closed, finely-filtered ventilation systems with high-tech doctors.
It will come down eventually.
With a more palatable world configuration for the Illuminati.
Cloud seeding has the capacity to add any number of chemicals to rainclouds, that would then come down on us.
All this ridicule is unnecessary.

If, we're wrong, THANK GOD, but, if we have seen evidence to the contrary, we can't play a "Well, it doesn't sound very level-headed and people will think we're nuts."
game.
We WILL eventually have enough attention, more funds and more research to prove de-population spraying.

In the meantime, do what Deson and Weedwhacker (and sometimes Oz.) have done and keep an open mind to what's going on.

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
...it's not necessary to be a meteorologist to know that "persistent contrails", as they're euphemistically called, can't obliterate a clear sky on some days and not others

If you were a meteorologist, or even just read a basic book on the weather, you'd know they can.

Sorry, but denying basic common meteorology just because you don't (or won't) understand it doesn't help your cause or your credibility.

reply to post by Matrix1111


Minnis works for NASA and apparently NASA can't be trusted on anything

But seriously, Pat Minnis is one of the leading scientists looking into the effects of what some call chemtrails and their impact on climate. It's a serious issue. Others are looking at ways of reducing the impact of so much more air traffic.

See, for example: www.livescience.com...

Of course, all work on the assumption - based on there own and their colleague's studies and observations, as well as many decades of previous data and studies - that such 'chemtrails' are just ordinary contrails.

How ironic if their colleagues are actually deliberately producing the very things Minnis and other are working so hard on finding ways of preventing?

Originally posted by Essan
If you were a meteorologist, or even just read a basic book on the weather, you'd know they can.

Yeah, yeah, it's all basic -- just ignore your senses and every bit of common sense.

Originally posted by Essan
Sorry, but denying basic common meteorology just because you don't (or won't) understand it doesn't help your cause or your credibility.

And being a "Retired US Govt Disinfo Agent" helps yours?

Originally posted by Matrix1111

Good. Then there should be no disagreement about whether chemtrails are a possiblity.

If you mean spraying of chemicals in the skies, then yes. After all, what is crop dusting?

But if you mean the persistent, spreading contrails that some claim are chemtrails then no. Any more than crop dusting means chemtrails are a possiblity.

reply to post by GoldenFleece


Ever hear of irony?

Do you really think I am (or was) a US Govt disinformation agent?

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by Matrix1111

Good. Then there should be no disagreement about whether chemtrails are a possiblity.

If you mean spraying of chemicals in the skies, then yes. After all, what is crop dusting?

But if you mean the persistent, spreading contrails that some claim are chemtrails then no. Any more than crop dusting means chemtrails are a possiblity.

And your proof that chemtrials don't exist? It's based on what reasoning? Because you think it's technologically impossible? Because because it would serve no purpose? Because it won't stay suspended? Because it will stay suspended? I don't get it. What's your proof that it's not being done?