An Attempt to Debunk Chemtrails For Good

reply to post by Zepherian


There is already a huge proliferation of photos and videos of alleged chemtrails on the internet.

And yet no evidence any are anything other than what to the experienced observer they appear to be: normal contrails.

It would be easy for someone to prove they cannot be contrails .... but no-one does.

Are you open to the possibility they might all be just what they appear to be? Normal contrails?

This does still not mean chemical spraying is not taking place. But if you want to carry out such spraying without people knowing, the best way is to make everyone look the other way.

reply to post by Essan


I am not open to anyone who comes and blanket debunks the entire phenomenon because I know it is real, I know that someone is spraying for whatever reason, without informed consent of the general populations. And this is a huge problem that needs to be adressed. And you sir, are nitpicking, trying to make it seem like this is not so.

And I get irritated whenever someone on the internet tries to make themselves out as "informed observers". You are not an informed observer because you are unable to accept what is true, despite plenty of evidence over various threads, besides my testimony, being thrown at you. And the beauty of the internet is we can focus on ideas and actual debate rather than on how authoritive people like to think they are. There is no hierarchy here when it comes to ideas and discussion, only moderation.

reply to post by Zepherian


I'm not blanket debunking anything Are you sure you're actually reading my posts? I'm simply pointing out that there is an awful lot of evidence that what people claim to be chemtrails are actually just normal contrails. This does not in any way mean spraying is not happening (though I've yet to see any evidence that it is)

You wish me to accept your testimony without question, and yet refute out of hand mine.

You accuse me of not being an informed observer simply because I do not reach the same conclusion you do, yet you offer no reason why you should be correct other than the fact that you 'know' it.

Your unwillingness to consider anything that does not meet your preconceptions on the subject, or to in any way try and learn or understand the processes concerned in contrail formation and why you may be wrong in your assumptions, means there's no further point in me continuing this discussion with you.



[edit on 7-8-2008 by Essan]

I am likely on 'ignore' by others....but I continue to see a 'star' on the posts of the 'chemtrail' believers, even though this is a thread STARTED by a bloke, a very intelligent bloke, from Australia.....to DEBUNK this silly notion.

Odd, that.....

reply to post by mantic


Mantic,

I agree with everything you said.

I have a eight year old daughter and I commented on the color of the sky, I said something like, "It is a shame the sky isn't blue". It was one of those hazy chemmy days. And the she said the most bizarre thing....She said "Yes it is blue." I had to argue with her and show her how the sky was actually white. And she said, "well, I meant it was not cloudy." People under 30 are starting to forget what a blue sky actually looks like.

I feel like I am in the book 1984. Every morning the chicago weather guy say."look out our weather window...another beautiful day". And in reality it is another hazy chemmy day.

In the elementary school I have noticed children have stopped coloring the sky blue in their pictures when using white paper. Because the sky is always white.

reply to post by Missing Blue Sky


MBS....I know I'll get slammed for this, but....um, you live in Chicago. I've been to Chicago a lot.

I have posted, on one of these threads, that I livein the DC area....and we have had many, many, many clear blue days. I also mentioned how I have sat outside, at a cafe, and watched airplanes fly overhead....airplanes that I KNOW are on routes to destinations I have flown to....and their contrails disappear, within less than a minute......because they ARE NOT spraying!

Then, I watch the Weather Channel....and see that a Weather Front is approaching. Guess what? If you study meteorolgy, you will learn that when weather Fronts move, they produce cloud cover.

See, our atmosphere is constantly changing. Even from one hour, to the next, it can change radically.

I hope your daughter can see the beautiful blue skies, as well....I know they will come back, even in the Chicago area. I grew up in LA....in the 1960s and 1970s, we had many days of overcast skies. Do you wish to claim that 'chemtrails' were responsible, even back then???

NO, of course not.....this is a new phenom, based on what I read online....

It is a hateful thing, this 'chemtrail' poison. Either it is real, or it is paranoia. Either way, it is hateful.

You decide.

reply to post by GoldenFleece


Evergreen Aviation says they can help with "sensitive enviromental" misssions, can carry 24,000 gallons of what ever you want dumped or sprayed, they can help "homeland security" operations too.

Their planes are white. [Go ahead and clip this into a quote and say..."OOOHHH White Planes" , (sarcastic voice)" they must be chemtrail planes...where is my tinfoil hat?"] But evergreens planes ARE white and millions of posts on the internet report white planes laying down trails.

www.evergreenaviation.com...

Their planes use joint military airports too. They can do long haul and international flights also.

Chemtrails are not from regular commercial aviation, they are a secret operation which is criminal in my opinion because it may use my tax dollars on the unethical modification of the climate. I do not accept "weather modification" as a normal activity in my world. I reject it, no matter how many posts you throw at me saying "weather modification is ok".

Yes, I speculate...wanna know why, because Chemtrails are above top secret.

Dear Frustrated Debunkers,

Why do you post at Above Top Secret...people who know chemtrails are true do not trust you.
Why not post at "Weather and Meteorological Facts and Data.com"?

Dear debunkers,

what about ufos and 7 ft tall ape monsters, do you debunk that too? Or are those posts valid and full of evidence?

I just can't figure out why it bothers you so much that those of us who see chemtrails disagree with you? Are you that much of control freaks? Or are you being PAID to be persuasive? I have not seen you persuade any of us yet, so why do you care so much?

[edit on 8/7/2008 by Missing Blue Sky]

[edit on 8/7/2008 by Missing Blue Sky]

[edit on 8/7/2008 by Missing Blue Sky]

[edit on 8/7/2008 by Missing Blue Sky]

Originally posted by wrathchild
Mr. Fleece......

If I was a evil black ops kinda guy I would find it much easier to poison the population with drinking water and food.

Dumping my evil concoction at altitudes of +30,000 feet with little or no chance of reaching the lungs of my targets would seem an expensive and small return on my efforts.

Let's talk floridation... now that's something.

Poisoning us may not e the point, it is probably not the motive for chemtrails, it is a byproduct.
Speculation of possible motives: climate change, solar dimming, cloud cover for spying or to test experimental aircraft. Cloudcover to conceal unidentified aircraft. Weather defense, weather offense.

reply to post by Missing Blue Sky


OK....what is a 'unit'? I could look it up, but I'd rather you tell us, in pounds.

A B757 has a Max Gross Take-off weight of about 250,000 pounds, depending on model.

Let's assume the Empty Weight is about 101,000 to 105,000 pounds. Now, let's add the weight of the fuel....say 80,000 pounds.

HOW MUCH 'payload' do we now have?

Here's a hint...for airline ops....Each passenger is given an 'average' weight of 170 lbs....this is the 'winter' weight, it's lower in the Summer...OK, after you finish laughing (I am NOT making this up....this is FAA approved!) Each average checked bag is given a weight of 35 lbs.

THIS is the 'PAYLOAD' that is put on the manifest, before every passenger airliner takes off.

Here's how it works....there is the Aircraft Operating Weight, which is the airplane's empty weight, plus required crew and supplies, meaning Galley weight....that is the OEW (Operating Empty Weight)

OEW plus FOB (That's Fuel on Board). These are required, and non-negotionable.

The rest, is the allowed payload. It's that simple. Once have the OEW, plus the required fuel.....the rest is Payload, up to the Maximum Taxi weight, and then the Maximum Take-off Weight.

See, we are alllowed to leave the gate above Max Take-off weight, assuming we will burn off a few thousand pounds of fuel, before take-off, thusly reaching the Max Take-Off Weight, prior to take-off.

Sorry if tis is too complicated....facts can be confusing, sorry.....

reply to post by Missing Blue Sky


I agree with you. What is the motive of the OP and other people who debunk chemtrails? What makes them so sure that there is nothing to it?
They make themselves out to be experts on the subject when in reality they don't know anything more than the rest of us.

On one end we have OzWeatherman, meteorologist in Australia that is so sure that chemtrails are nonsense that he had to attempt to "Debunk Chemtrails For Good". Then you have Scott Stevens, meteorologist in America that believes that there is something to chemtrails and it should be investigated. Who should be believe? Both are supposed experts in the field of the atmosphere and weather.

When you mention Scott Stevens well he doesn't know anything and he is just a wack job. The man has over 20 years experience in the field why is nuts because he believes chemtrails are not normal.


[edit on 7-8-2008 by Erasurehead]

Originally posted by sp00n1
reply to post by ghofer

 

i dont remember the name of the software, but there is some free program that lets you watch FAA ATC flight data from your home computer. you can track planes flying over you in real-time.

If you see a plane ¨spraying¨ and look it up on this program, the plane will not show up. The only flights that do not show up in this FAA ATC program are military planes.

A study of this is at the following link:

www.chemtrailcentral.com...

This is a research study where they studied observable flights, weather, humidity, etc: The flights that laid chemtrails were not on the public flight information. See the conclusion of the study at the very bottom of the report.

reply to post by Erasurehead


Erasure, can you provide a link to Scott Stevens??

I know, last thing I would expect is to hear form me, a possible debunker....but, contrary to many opinions, I actually have an open mind....

reply to post by Missing Blue Sky


Hate to pop in.....but there IS a website to track airplanes, in flight, in the contiguous US....it is 'FlightAware'

reply to post by weedwhacker


What was this post even about? Sorry, but you're rambling on about the take off weight of a 757... so what? Even by your math you still have several tons of payload which in a dedicated conversion could be sprayed. Several tons of particulate goes a long way. Now you multiply by however big the fleet spraying this thing is... And if planes are being commandeered from the storage sites we could literally have dozens if not hundreds of airframes up there dedicated only to chemtrails, and a lot of them would be much bigger than a 757.

Quote from Missing Blue Sky
"Poisoning us may not e the point, it is probably not the motive for chemtrails, it is a byproduct.
Speculation of possible motives: climate change, solar dimming, cloud cover for spying or to test experimental aircraft. Cloudcover to conceal unidentified aircraft. Weather defense, weather offense."


Funny you should mention that. In a lot of the photos I take, I am finding white or silvery like spheres/orbs in and around chemtrails and clouds. Sorta like this one:




That was taken the same day an in the same sequence as the others I posted to the photobucket link.



[edit on 7-8-2008 by virraszto]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Missing Blue Sky

 

Hate to pop in.....but there IS a website to track airplanes, in flight, in the contiguous US....it is 'FlightAware'

But can it track a B2? Any of the new spy planes rumoured to exist? Can it track Steve Fossett? If the answer to just one of these questions is no, why do you assume it tracks planes actually dumping crud on the population?

reply to post by Missing Blue Sky


Too bad your link is just more nonsense. I actually thought you had found something.

Go to the 'FlightAware' site....but make sure you live in the continental US, or Canada....

It's designed for pilots, so some of you may not understand some of the references. You can U2U me, and I'll translate......

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Erasurehead

 

Erasure, can you provide a link to Scott Stevens??

I know, last thing I would expect is to hear form me, a possible debunker....but, contrary to many opinions, I actually have an open mind....

Here is the link to Scott Stevens. weatherwars.info...
He has many theories on what has been going on with the weather. Look a the Chemtrails and Chemtrails2 links on the left.

Now I am not sure if what he states on his web site is true or not. I really don't know. I have met him in person and I can assure you he is not a nut job. He seemed very normal and down to earth.

Originally posted by Missing Blue Sky

Why do you post at Above Top Secret...people who know chemtrails are true do not trust you.
Why not post at "Weather and Meteorological Facts and Data.com"?

Dear debunkers,

I was beginning to wonder the same thing. Why are the debunkers here. I guess they have something to hide.

reply to post by Matrix1111


Why do chemtrail believers post here? You've already made up you minds and have no intention of changing them. You certainly show no intention of engaging in intelligent debate (such as offering supportive evidence or giving due consideration to evidence that refutes your assertions)

Shouldn't you all be posting on somewhere like Chemtrail Central?

Who's paying you to spread the hoax? Or it is more like a religious crusade.

Still, I know how Gallileo felt ....






Yet still the contrails move








Edit: I was going to call you contrail debunkers - but I guess that would be inaccurate because you've not actually made any attempt to debunk the assertion that what you're seeing is contrails

[edit on 7-8-2008 by Essan]